Tag Archives: Taxes

New study shows that children of working mothers live unhealthier lives

Story here from the Ottawa Citizen. (H/T Ben)

Excerpt:

Children whose mothers work are less likely to eat healthily or exercise as often as children with stay-at-home mums, according to a British study that is likely to raise the hackles of working mothers.

The UK Millennium Cohort Study looked at the dietary habits and physical activity of more than 12,500 children from the age of nine months to the age of five.

It found that, regardless of ethnicity, maternal education or job level, children whose mothers worked part or fulltime were less likely to eat fruits or vegetables at meals or as snacks.

They would also sit in front of the television or the computer for more than two hours a day while children of non-working mums would watch TV or be on the computer less than two hours.

The study also said these children were more likely to drink sweetened beverages such as sodas in between meals, snack on crisps and be driven to school, compared to walking or cycling.

One more reason that we should be cutting taxes and encouraging women to stay home with children if they want to do it. Children really are far more important than work or money. Work and money have value for giving donations to charity, but every child has the potential to change the world for Christ and his Kingdom. As a result, we should be enacting policies that make it easier for Mom to stay home.

Related posts

Share

Democrat plan to indoctrinate students in government-run school to worship Obama

Story from Fox News. (H/T Andrew)

Excerpt:

Obama will deliver a national address directly to students on Tuesday, which will be the first day of classes for many children across the country. The address, to be broadcast live on the White House’s Web site, was announced in a letter to school principals last week by Education Secretary Arne Duncan.

[…]But in advance of the address, the Department of Education has offered educators “classroom activities” to coincide with Obama’s message.

Students in grades pre-K-6, for example, are encouraged to “write letters to themselves about what they can do to help the president. These would be collected and redistributed at an appropriate later date by the teacher to make students accountable to their goals.”

Teachers are also given guidance to tell students to “build background knowledge about the president of the United States by reading books about presidents and Barack Obama.”

During the speech, “teachers can ask students to write down key ideas or phrases that are important or personally meaningful.”

For grades 7-12, the Department of Education suggests teachers prepare by excerpting quotes from Obama’s speeches on education for their students to contemplate — and ask as questions such as “Why does President Obama want to speak with us today? How will he inspire us? How will he challenge us?”

Activities suggested for after the speech include asking students “what resonated with you from President Obama’s speech? What lines/phrase do you remember?”

What do libertarian critics think about this?

“In general, I don’t think there’s a problem if the president uses the bully pulpit to tell kids to work hard, study hard and things like that. But there are some troubling hints in this, both educationally and politically,” said Neal McCluskey, associate director of Cato Institute’s Center for Educational Freedom.

[…]“It essentially tries to force kids to say the president and the presidency is inspiring, and that’s very problematic,” McCluskey said. “It’s very concerning that you would do that.”

Parents of public school students would also have to pay for that “indoctrination,” regardless of their political background, he said.

“That’s the fundamental problem. They could easily be funding the indoctrination of their children.”

And one more:

Frederick Hess, director of education policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank, said the suggested lesson plans cross the line between instruction and advocacy.

“I don’t think it’s appropriate for teachers to ask students to help promote the president’s preferred school reforms and policies,” Hess said. “It very much starts to set up the president as a superintendent in chief.”

[…]After reading the Department of Education lesson plans for the speech, McCluskey said he noticed several passages that should set off “alarm bells,” including language that attempts to “glorify President Obama” in the minds of young students.”It could be a blatantly political move,” he said. “Nobody knows for sure, but it gives that impression.”

McCluskey also noted that the lesson plans for young students contain suggestions to write letters to themselves on how they can help the president, but that suggestion is not in the lesson plan for middle and high schoolers — perhaps due to the likelihood of increased political ties at that age.

The Obama regime wants to force government-run schools to adopt lesson plans to be force-fed to impressionable young children, whose parents are compelled to subsidize this indoctrination by compulsory taxation. What could go wrong?

Oh well, at least his own children are exempt from this propaganda – they don’t attend public schools, you know. Neither did Obama.

Ontario Human Rights Tribunal says that in vitro fertilization is a right

Story from the Globe and Mail. (H/T Scaramouche via Blazing Cat Fur)

Excerpt:

Six months ago, Ana Ilha knew her biological clock was ticking. She just didn’t know it was ticking so fast.

But when the Ontario Health Insurance Plan would not cover fertility treatments because of the source of her problems – at 37, her eggs were running out abnormally fast, a condition called a low ovarian reserve – she decided to take action.

She and her husband, University of Ottawa professor Amir Attaran, filed a complaint with the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario on Monday. They argue OHIP’s policy is discriminatory, since it covers in vitro fertilization only in limited circumstances.

“It’s a medical condition like any other,” Ms. Ilha said. “Couples like us should not have to suffer financially in addition to suffering emotionally.”

Their case is part of a debate in Canada’s two largest provinces, and it could soon spread across the country.

In Quebec, high-profile TV personality Julie Snyder, the wife of Quebecor CEO Pierre-Karl Péladeau, urged the province to cover IVF treatments. She made a documentary about infertility and put pressure on politicians.

In April, Premier Jean Charest’s government announced that it will fund three IVF cycles for couples, making Quebec the only province to do so.

Seang Lin Tan, a fertility expert at the McGill University Health Centre in Montreal, said one in eight Canadian couples struggles with infertility.

“What’s frustrating, is that people who would be good candidates are routinely told they have to dig into their pockets,” Prof. Attaran said. “I’m fortunate, law professors get paid decently. But that’s not true for everyone.”

After a year of trying to conceive, the couple paid $6,300 for one IVF treatment at an Ottawa fertility clinic. A further $6,500 in drugs was covered by private insurance…

What this means is that ordinary working families will pay for the fertitlity treatments of aging, infertile women who put their careers before children. So what if they made that decision themselves based on their own ideology? They didn’t do anything wrong, and no harm done. Except the tens of thousands of dollars that must be taken from ordinary Canadians dying while waiting for critical care on a waiting list.

Meanwhile, men who get prostate cancer in Canada are 184% more likely to die than in the USA. But women are much better off in a single-payer system – breast cancer mortality is only 9% higher in Canada than in the USA. Everyone is equal – but some people are more equal than others.