Nasty WomenJan 23, 2017
When I was a kid, I was the good girl type. Until one day, I got busted in class passing notes with cuss/crass words on them back and forth with a boy. Candidly, I didn’t know what the words he used meant… but he was cute.
When I got a little older, I knew if I said one of those “bad” words, I was doing something rebellious. Sometimes my friends and I would bust them out just to feel grown up. They were “adult words” but truth be told, they weren’t even words the adults around me used. The adults in my world had nothing to prove. The adults in my world had wide vocabularies and class. They could fully express themselves and talk about adult subject matter and still maintain refinement.
The thing about vulgarity is that for most people, the novelty wears off when we grow up. The use of these words proves nothing except possibly that we lack the creativity and class to have conversations of substance and meaning.
I fear that much the same principle applied to those that attended the misnamed “March for Women.” Given everyone appeared to be angry for different reasons and the march itself had no centralized purpose, it left a void that vulgarity filled. Sign after sign used words and images that should make us cringe. Rather than symbolizing some liberation of women, it should embarrass us. Does it represent our gender to be unable to express our specific, legitimate concerns with this administration with civility? I get that our new President hasn’t exactly set a high bar in this arena. I just find it odd that those that dislike him so much gladly follow him into the gutter.
Rather than organizing an anti-Trump rally, organizers tried to make it the summation of what it is to be a woman. The only problem with that plan is that in today’s gender-confused society, it’s very hard to describe what it is that makes one a woman. If visuals in D.C. yesterday are any explanation, womanhood comes down to the existence of a uterus and the ability to kill the next generation of girls. This left the march with conflicting messages because on the one hand, it is the uterus that defines “womanhood,” but on the other hand, even a uterus doesn’t guarantee your exclusive stake on a women’s locker room or shower room.
Ultimately, this left a march celebrating the taking of human life, sporting Cecil Richards as Grand Marshall. Pro-life women knew this all along because we were shut out of the march, even though we have uteruses too.
Organizers and attendees alike were thrilled with the turnout but I suspect, deep inside, they just wish the majority of white women had turned out for Hillary, not Trump in November. Because it is in fact women, defined somehow, that handed Trump the Presidency in the first place.
Booing God in Chesterfield
Booing God in Chesterfield
It seems that booing God and America’s distinct religious heritage has come to Virginia, the birthplace of religious freedom, even taking place just a few miles from the very place where the Statute for Religious Freedom passed into law.
Needless to say, the overtly anti-faith wing of the secular left is no longer a small segment to be ignored, but has become the dominant force on the left driving not just an anti-faith political movement, but sadly, an entire political party.
In case you didn’t see it in news coverage of this week’s Town Hall meeting in Chesterfield with local Congressman Dave Brat – oh wait, you couldn’t have since none of the multiple media stories about the event mentioned it – the crowd repeatedly booed any reference to God. From the start, where the crowd booed the pastor of the church where the event was held and booed when the name of the church was mentioned, the crowd was openly hostile to the idea of faith.
But topping it off were the resounding boos that came when Congressman Brat dared state that our rights come from God:
Of course, as rejecting the principles on which our nation was founded becomes more celebrated, the more of this we’re going to see. The secular left is unrestrained and unashamed of its hatred for God and God-fearing Americans. Obviously, there are many on the left who believe that rights are granted to us by government (i.e. man), therefore making government their god. They don’t seem to understand (or maybe they do?) why a government that has the power to grant rights also has the power to eliminate them.
Yet again, the media failed to mention any of this in its coverage. Why? Do they agree with the protestors? Or are they concerned that if Virginians were made aware of this kind of anti-faith action on the left they’d quickly reject it? Media bias is revealed just as much in what it chooses not to report as what is does report. Ignoring the anti-faith booing is yet another example.
Our response to this hostility cannot be to behave in a similar way. We know the truth, and as Thomas Jefferson said in the Statute for Religious Freedom, “that truth is great and will prevail, if left to herself; that she is the proper and sufficient antagonist to error, and has nothing to fear from the conflict.” Our response must simply be to remain informed of the truth of our religious heritage, and its importance in maintaining a civil society. And we must be willing to teach our kids, inform our friends and neighbors, and vote only for those who do not arrogantly believe that they are the source of our freedom.
In case you haven’t heard, apparently, despite nearly a year’s worth of scoffing denials by the retailer’s officials, Target isn’t doing so well.
Paint me shocked!
Plummeting sales and stock can be blamed on the weather only so many times before any thinking person starts to suspect that perhaps there’s more here than we’re being told.
Now comes a story in the Wall Street Journal where sources with Target claim that the announcement about a policy allowing men in women’s restrooms in the name of tolerance was never actually approved by the boss. It was just a blog post that got a little out of hand. And, oh, the CEO now claims he wouldn’t have approved the announcement because he thought, well, just maybe, there might be a backlash.
Of course, the CEO and others, along with the media and even many market “experts” claimed for the past year that there has been no backlash and that Target’s plummeting sales and stocks are due to the weather or other unusual market forces. Weather and market forces that weren’t, however, having any effect on Target’s biggest competitor, Walmart. Odd.
And that $20 million plan to add private restrooms to stores had nothing at all to do with the backlash that wasn’t really happening. Just move along…
Now, I’m not a big fan of “boycotts” in general, and measuring their impact is pretty near impossible. But you have to admit that when 1.5 million people say they aren’t going to shop someplace anymore, it might have a bit of an impact. And that doesn’t include those who may have decided to not shop there but never signed any petition or pledge. Regardless, the fact that the retailer’s sales have dropped in every quarter since the announcement can’t be simple coincidence. Apparently, now, a year later, officials are starting to admit it.
Target’s biggest worry? Those who figured out they never needed Target in the first place, and discovered online shopping at Amazon. Not sure there’s a blog post correction that can fix that.
It’s “March Madness” all over again, appropriately playing out in the Tar Heel state – only this time without the basketball.
On March 23 of last year, in response to an outlandish ordinance passed by the City of Charlotte, North Carolina’s state legislature passed House Bill 2, daring to affirm what had always been the case – that in public facilities, men should use the men’s restrooms and women should use women’s. (Novel concept, eh?) And of course as we all know, protests soon-after ensued. Lawsuits were filed. And perhaps most notably of all, the NCAA and the ACC threatened to pull their basketball tournaments from the state if it did not repeal the law – a threat they made good on.
Well according to some North Carolina lawmakers, two can play this game.
In fact, some state legislators are seeking to challenge the NCAA and ACC’s tax-exempt status in response to their retaliatory removal.
According to The Associated Press, “The House members filed a bill Monday directing Senate and House leaders to file IRS complaints against the sports organizations. They would allege the groups are lobbying beyond what their charters allow through "economic retaliation" if House Bill 2 is not repealed.”
My, my, how the tables are turning. The other team picked up the ball, with time still on the clock.
Recall that it was these groups who warned North Carolina that its decision to protect women and children in bathrooms could cost the state millions. I doubt at the time the NCAA and ACC considered that their decisions could come with an equally steep price tag. The tax liability for organizations that large surely must reach into the millions.
I can’t say that I think this kind of economic warfare is a very constructive outlet for civil discourse. However, I do think that if the NCAA and ACC are going to “fire a shot across the bow”, they shouldn’t feel surprised or mistreated when the other side fires back. And no matter how many people love watching the basketball games they sponsor (myself included), the NCAA and ACC are not above the law, and they certainly don’t get to make them. May this be a poignant reminder to them of that reality.
I try, really try, to understand the issues we deal with from the perspective of those on the “other side.” Sometimes, some have valid, logical arguments, with which I simply disagree. Other times, I find it impossible to even comprehend their position.
Now and then, I find their position not just incomprehensible, but unconscionable.
Recently, it was revealed that a woman in Chesterfield county “self-aborted” her unborn baby in the later stages of her pregnancy – the third trimester. She then buried the child in her back yard. The autopsy found that the woman had used a combination of drugs and “penetrating injuries to the head” of that nearly fully developed baby to kill them.
The ACLU’s response? Anger that the police would dare charge the woman with a crime.
“No woman should fear arrest or jail for ending her own pregnancy…it appears that this is another example of overreach…in an attempt to shame and punish [the woman] for her circumstances.”
It’s bad enough that groups like the ACLU and their friends in the abortion industry are perfectly comfortable with fully developed unborn babies being killed days or even hours before birth, a position with which a large majority of Americans disagrees. Americans object to abortion after the mid-point of pregnancy when they believe it’s being “performed” in something at least resembling a medical facility. Oh, and it’s downright barbaric. In Virginia, abortions after the first trimester must be done in a hospital because killing a baby that is nearly fully developed is complicated and somewhat dangerous – for the mother that is. It’s downright deadly for the baby.
The medical examiner in this case couldn't determine what the woman used to “penetrate” the head of her unborn child enough to kill it. I wonder, was the child kicking when she did it? Could she feel her child moving around as she killed them? Had she never heard of adoption? If her circumstances were so dire, why wait until the last days or weeks of the pregnancy? For a few hundred bucks Planned Parenthood would have gladly taken the baby’s life months earlier.
If you’ve seen a sonogram of a baby in the third trimester you know. You see the humanity. You recognize the dignity and the worth. As a pro-life community, we believe that dignity and worth don’t suddenly materialize at some random point on the continuum of life that is undeterminable. It’s there from the moment of conception because it comes from our Creator, not from our judgment. But while some may not believe that, many become uncomfortable with taking the life of unborn children at some random point during pregnancy when through sonogram you can see the child’s face, see their features; they move, they smile, they live. At what point does our humanity require us to say no?
For the ACLU, sadly, that point doesn’t exist. Don’t want the child? Kill them. Don’t worry about when, where or how, just do it.
Like I said, unconscionable.
"It's Abortion, Stupid."
"It's Abortion, Stupid."
Remember the days when liberal democrats and their media allies unmercifully attacked conservatives anytime social issues were mentioned in a campaign? Such things were a “distraction” from “kitchen table” issues that matter, they claimed. Candidates should speak only of economic issues and stop talking about “divisive” social issues. “It’s the economy, stupid,” was the mantra.
What a difference one Supreme Court appointment makes.
If you hadn’t noticed, as the campaigns for statewide office in Virginia – particularly governor – continue to ramp up, abortion is becoming one of, if not the primary, issue. For secular progressives that have complete control of the Democrat party these days, the freedom to take the lives of unborn children is the linchpin of their entire agenda. And protecting that freedom up to birth (and for some of them beyond birth) is the one and only issue of importance. That, and making sure the government continues to force you to fund Planned Parenthood. And with the specter of a potentially revamped U.S. Supreme Court that actually reads the Constitution, no issue is more important.
So, you can imagine the hysteria in the $1 billion abortion industry when all three Republican candidates for Governor last weekend expressed support for repealing theRoe v. Wade decision that invented the right to abortion! Apparent front-runner Ed Gillespie was the primary target of the industry and it’s media allies, with the Washington Post fretting in its headline, “Gillespie: ‘I would like to see abortion be banned.’”
Que the outrage.
Let’s face it, with the complete failure of Terry McAuliffe as Governor and the takeover of the Democrat party in Virginia by the Bernie Sanders wing, they can’t talk economics. Consequently, social issues are all they have, with abortion being front and center. As a result, the secular left is counting on Planned Parenthood and its vast war chest of campaign money to save the day for Democrats in the Commonwealth. If Republicans running for everything from school board to governor think they are going to be able to dodge the issue this time around, they have another thing coming.
So it was good to see all three Republican candidates for governor make their position on Roe v. Wade clear. Earlier this week, Republican candidates for Lt. Governor Bryce Reeves and Glenn Davis were asked at a candidate forum hosted by The Family Foundation in Richmond what their priorities would be to reduce the abortion rate in Virginia (Jill Vogel, also running for LG, planned to attend but was not able to be there due to last minute meetings in DC.). Each expressed thoughtful ideas on the issue.
But let’s face it, even if at some point in the next decade that decision is reversed, the issue simply returns to each state to decide what will be legal and what won’t.
In the meantime, how we can continue to reduce the abortion rate in Virginia – which has dropped more than 30 percent in the last five years! – is paramount. Restoring reasonable abortion center health and safety standards gutted by Governor McAuliffe is a start. Prohibiting abortion after the mid-point of pregnancy when science indicates unborn child feel pain is another step in the right direction. Reducing the regulations that make adoption cost prohibitive for so many families is yet another. But those things are only going to happen if pro-life Virginians awaken from their slumber and make sure a pro-life governor is elected in November.
Planned Parenthood is counting on its media allies to enrage pro-abortion voters by attacking pro-life candidates so those voters will turn out in droves. Those pro-life candidates that stand up to that hysteria and unashamedly make the case for life deserve our support. Without it, you can count on another four years of Planned Parenthood owning the executive mansion.
The Family Foundation Action is a non-partisan, non-profit 501(c)(4) organization and paid for this informational communication. Not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee.
Family Foundation Announces Impending Legal Action
- McAuliffe Administration Notified Today -
RICHMOND–The Family Foundation of Virginia today announced that the administration of Governor Terry McAuliffe has been notified of impending legal action regarding violations of state law by the Department and Board of Health during the abortion center health and safety standards regulatory process.
“Over and over again during the nearly three-year process of amending the standards, the administration and Board violated the Administrative Process Act, the state law that provides the framework for regulatory action, the administrative code, and the Governor’s own Executive Order 17 regarding the regulatory review process,” said Victoria Cobb, President of The Family Foundation. “Regardless of one’s belief about the need for basic health and safety standards for abortion centers – or of any regulation for that matter – we all have to agree that a regulatory body cannot act outside the law when it wields extraordinary power over business, commerce and health care. We have the Administrative Process Act for that reason, to provide legal boundaries and process for unelected regulatory bodies, to provide transparency and public input throughout the regulatory process, and to be able to hold these agencies accountable when they go beyond the scope of their authority.”
Details of the administrative appeal were not released, but will be made available when the action is filed in Henrico Circuit Court within the next thirty days. The Family Foundation is paying the legal fees for one appellant in the appeal, Itzel Melendez, from Richmond. At a Richmond press conference today, Mrs. Melendez said, “In the past, I had occasion to visit an abortion center for the purpose of obtaining an abortion. I am participating in this case because I am concerned that without basic health and safety standards, abortion centers will operate in a way that could put my health at risk if I ever decided in the future that I needed their services. The standards that were in place were there to protect women like me from harm. Without them, I am no longer confident that my health would be protected.”
Cobb did reference one of the examples of where the pro-family organization believes the administration broke the law. She stated, “The agency violated the Administrative Process Act by amending entirely separate and unrelated regulatory sections that had not been included in the regulations’ “Proposed” phase. Several regulatory sections amended by the Board were not included in the “Proposed Regulation Agency Background Document” posted in townhall.gov, and these regulatory sections dealt with matters the public did not have an opportunity to comment on in accordance with the requirements of the law.
“In addition, several regulatory sections the Board amended were not even in the agency’s “Final Regulation Agency Background Document” posted in townhall.gov, let alone its “Proposed Regulation Agency Background Document”. The Code of Virginia requires that the notice requirement contain “(i) a statement of the date, time and place of the hearing at which the regulation is to be considered; (ii) a brief statement as to the regulation under consideration; [and] (iii) reference to the legal authority of the agency to act; ….” Yet, that never occurred for all of the regulatory topics for the sections that were not included in the agency’s “Proposed” regulations. This is an important matter of transparency – providing to the public a clear list what areas of regulation are intended to be reviewed and amended. The public and the entities being regulated should know from the beginning what areas of regulation the agency intends to change. By avoiding disclosing all the areas the Department and Board intended to amend they violated both the letter and spirit of the law.
“In this case, the Department and Board initially indicated they would review and amend only six areas of the regulations, and instead ended up changing more than 20. The public had no ability to weigh in on these changes until after the Board had already voted.”
Cobb said, “There is a specific, detailed, and yes sometimes cumbersome regulatory process that, whether we like it or not, is the law of Virginia. Without a framework, and without criteria and accountability for regulatory agencies, one can only imagine the damage that could be done in any arena by regulatory bodies.”
“The Family Foundation fully supports the actions taken by these appellants,” added Cobb. “It is unfortunate that the McAuliffe administration has in its ideological zeal consistently ignored or violated state law throughout this process, but it must be held accountable for those actions. The regulatory process has rules that must be followed. Again, this appeal is about that legal process and this administration’s ignorance of or disdain for that process.”
Appellants in the case who appeared at today’s press conference were Virginia Board of Health members Megan Getter and Henry Kuhlman, and Itzel Melendez of Richmond. The attorney representing Mrs. Melendez is Dan Carrell of Carrell, Blanton Ferris and Associates, Richmond.