Ireland admitted that she did everything she could to avoid becoming a believer in pro-life...

Yet she has still changed her former "pro-choice" views as a result of her conversion to Christianity.

 

"I called Planned Parenthood and begged them to give me their best argument and all they could come up with that it is really just a clump of cells and if you get it early enough it doesn’t even look like a baby. Well, we’re all clumps of cells and the unborn does not look like a baby the same way the baby does not look like a teenager, a teenager does not look like a senior citizen. That unborn baby looks exactly the way human beings are supposed to look at that stage of development. It doesn’t suddenly become a human being at a certain point in time," Ireland argued. "I’ve also asked leading scientists across our country to please show me some shred of evidence that the unborn is not a human being. I didn’t want to be pro-life, but this is not a woman’s rights issue but a human rights issue." available at http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,518087,00.html

 

You go Kathy...

This really happened...

"A person not employed by the insured entered the store with a rifle and ammunition. Several

of insured's employee's helped him to set up a target against a basement door which opened

onto a public street. They took turns firing at the target. One of the bullets penetrated the door

and killed a passer-by."

Grand Union Co. v. General Accident Fire & Life Assurance Corp., 254 A.D. 274, 4 N.Y.S.2d 704,affirmed 279 N.Y. 638, 18 N.E.2d 38 (1938).

 

The best stories in the world are found in legal cases. If I miss anything after leaving the practice of law, it will be the wild stories that are sprinkled throughout the drudgery of it all...

Fully Automatic Handgun

You can check it out here. http://shock.military.com/Shock/videos.do?displayContent=188154&ESRC=dod.nl

 

Seriously, though, I have to ask - what's the point? Really.

"Honesty is great," Hilton said. "However, in an interview this morning, she said that the audience and the judges expected her to be politically correct. Yes. I do expect Miss USA to be politically correct."

This from a recent interview of Mr. Hilton on the "Larry King Live" Show.

 

Translation: "Regardless of what a person believes, success should depend only upon that person's ability to tell people what they want to hear."

 

Wow.

 

I'll take a politically incorrect individual with integrity any day over an individual who simply parrots what another wants to hear for fear of censure or for personal gain.

 

Mr. Hilton went on to explain:

“Do we want a Miss USA that's politically insensitive, that's politically offensive? No,” Hilton said. “So I didn't disagree with her not believing in the right for gays and lesbians to good evening equal under the law. I disagree with how she answered the question because Miss USA should be all inclusive. She should be my Miss USA and when she answered that question that way, it was instantly divisive and alienating to gays and lesbians and friends and supporters.”

 

Really? It seems to me that the divisiveness here stems from requiring everyone to conform to a radical viewpoint rather than seeking open and honest dialogue about how people really feel and why they really feel that way.

 

Mr. Hilton went on to invite Miss. California out for coffeee to explain his views to her and to disabuse her of her own viewpoint. Ironic, eh? Her viewpoint is not acceptable, yet she should provide Mr. Hilton with an intimate setting in which to further express his own.

 

Memo to Mr. Hilton: openly censuring and hurling vitriolic remarks at an individual is NOT an effective way to open a dialogue - but that's just the point, isn't it? Mr. Hilton is not interested in dialogue. Facism seems a better fit for him.

 

I recognize the Larry King is not known for asking the "tough" questions, but c'mon Larry! How could you let this guy off on this point? If you are going to extend the credibility to interview on your show, you ought to at least have the personal and journalistic credibility to call Mr. Hilton on his blatant, intolerant hypocrisy.

 

You can read more about the Larry King interview here: http://www.cultureandmediainstitute.org/articles/2009/20090421084915.aspx

 

Oh, and BTW, Mr. Hilton, Miss. California was neither insensitive nor offensive. Fact of the matter is, the truth hurts anytime it cuts against a personal position. If Mr. Hilton was so sure about himself and his position, why the anger? Why the foul references? Bully for Miss. California. She's the one who took the high road here, and the evidence continues to show it.

 

Planned Fraud?

In city after city across the U.S., a group of young California students, led by a very young looking twenty year old, are exposing just exactly what kind of "planning" planned parnthood is engaged in.

Time after time, while posing as a 14 year old impregnated by a 30+ year old man, Lila has been explicitly counseled to lie about the age of the "father" to avoid legal ramifications, including being told to lie to a judge to legally avoid any requirement of parental consent or parental notification prior to receiving an abortion.

The site is worth checking out. Spread the word.

http://www.liveactionfilms.org/


BTW: your tax dollars are paying for this wonderful "planning."

Intolerant?

I really don't have time to elaborate, but in a country where those who support maintaining the definition of marriage as between a man and a woman are increasingly labeled as intolerant, recent events surrounding Miss. California's response to the "same sex marriage" question from Mr. Hilton are a good, anecdotal illustration of wherein the real intolerance lies - vitrulent intolerance at that.

Whatever you do, Miss. California, please do not qualify your statement or your position. You have nothing to be ashamed of.

Why do we "judge" a book by its cover?

I watched the youtube clip of Suzanne Boyle from "Britain's got Talent". I was surprised at how the judges and the audience notably were "against" her before she sang. This was even stated by the judge. Because of her looks she is suppose to be hated or mocked! How sad! She is a child of God. She has feelings. Thankfully she was "successful" so that she did not walk off the stage with tears and a worst self esteem. This is the reason why I do not watch these types of shows. You can never draw bees with vinegar only with honey. What if these shows had a different approach? Maybe those "Suzanne Boyles" would be more, because they would feel supported soon as they came on stage NOT attacked OR "the enemy" just by how they look.

She has a beautiful voice. I hope she succeeds and still remembers who she is. : )

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9lp0IWv8QZY&feature=related

Working on Gomorrah

Apparently the Vermont Senate (from that state that recently passed legislation that redefined marriage to include unions between persons of the same sex) just passed legislation that would make "consensual" "sexting" by teenagers no longer a criminal offense.

Because the penalties for youth who send pornographic pictures of themselves via cell phones are apparently too harsh, the Vermont Senate has determined that the act should not be criminal at all.

Hey, why shouldn't two "consenting" 13 to 19 year olds feel perfectly free to snap and send portraits of their privates to each other?

In related news, Vermont is considering a permanent name change to Sodom & Gomorrah...

A Tax Thought on Tax Day...

While I don't necessarily agree with the CATO Institute's push for a flat or sales tax based system (the "all of Europe" is doing it so we should too argument is actually insulting to anyone of even average intelligence, as are the somewhat misleading policy reasons offered for a flat or sales tax), I am in total agreement with this one truth implied in the clip: our U.S. Tax system ought not to be used as a vehicle for implementing federal policy. As a matter of fact, if we really wanted to simplify the tax code, while maintaining our current system of taxing on a sliding scale, all we have to do is simply quit taxing based on policy directives. Period.

A Bit of Foreign Policy Perspective

"As I was sitting in church waiting for the start of the service, my grandpa came walking towards me pointing his finger.  No matter how old I get, and no matter how long he's been out of the U.S. Navy, that's still an intimidating sight.  As he approached me, his voice quivered as he said, "We saved that continent twice...how dare my president apologize for this country's arrogance."  My grandpa is right.  Americans need not apologize to the world for their arrogance; rather, Americans should apologize to their forefathers for the arrogance of their president."

From Peter Heck.

 

Full article available at: http://www.onenewsnow.com/Perspectives/Default.aspx?id=488996