Three interesting items from history

     New (or is it Old?) Evidence of Christianity in the Founding Era: David Barton of Wall Builders reported the following. Today’s critics clamor and bluster that America’s Framers were secular (i.e., that they were largely atheists, agnostics, and deists) and that they wanted a secular public square. Relying on this flawed view of history, in recent weeks they not only filed suit to prevent prayers at presidential inaugurations but also to eliminate the National Day of Prayer. Their argument is effective only if one does not know much about America’s history or its Founding Fathers. This is why WallBuilders strives to "present America’s forgotten history and heroes, with an emphasis on our moral, religious, and constitutional heritage." Among the recent documents that have come into our possession are two we thought you might find particularly interesting, especially given the current buzz about our "non-Christian" foundings. The first is by Declaration signer and U. S. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Chase. It is a legal document executed in 1794 (after the ratification of the First Amendment) when Chase was Chief Justice of the State of Maryland. Notice that a prerequisite for citizenship in that state was a "declaration of belief in the Christian religion." The second is by Declaration signer and U. S. President Thomas Jefferson. It is an 1807 federal passport (printed in both English and German), allowing the ship Herschel to proceed on its journey to London. Notice that President Jefferson dated the letter "in the year of our Lord Christ" — language quite distinctive from other Presidents but language that Jefferson chose to use. These are just a few of the thousands of official governmental documents disproving the modern allegation that America was founded as a secular nation. We hope that you enjoy these tidbits from our remarkably blessed history and that you will share this information with others who might be unfamiliar with America’s Godly heritage. (Other documents are posted at www.wallbuilders.com .)

     John Adams quote on children and freedom/morality: Mark McWhorter submitted the following Interesting quote . "Children should be educated and instructed in the principles of freedom…. If we suffer [the minds of young people] to grovel and creep in infancy, they will grovel all their lives. … The foundation of national morality must be laid in private families… How is it possible that Children can have any just Sense of the sacred Obligations of Morality or Religion if, from their earliest Infancy, they learn their Mothers live in habitual Infidelity to their fathers, and their fathers in as constant Infidelity to their Mothers? … We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other. … The only foundation of a free Constitution, is pure Virtue, and if this cannot be inspired into our People … they may change their Rulers, and the forms of Government, but they will not obtain a lasting Liberty. … A Constitution of Government once changed from Freedom, can never be restored. Liberty, once lost, is lost forever."

     Barak Obama versus George Washington: In an item headlined "Congresswoman contrasts Obama with George Washington," the Associated Press reported on 4/22/2009 that Congresswoman Michele Bachmann believes it’s a shame that President Barack Obama declared in Turkey that the U.S. is not a Christian nation. In a speech on the House floor, the Minnesota Republican also noted how Obama’s staff had Christian symbols covered up before the president spoke at Georgetown University, a Roman Catholic school. Bachman noted that the first president, George Washington, once observed in a public prayer that the United States would not be a happy nation unless Americans imitated the example of Jesus Christ. She suggested that is still good advice as Americans prepare for the National Day of Prayer on May 7.

Supreme Court to hear teen’s strip-search case

     Something else to be concerned about in public schools: Charlie Butts and Jody Brown of OneNewsNow reported on 3/27/2009 that a six-year-old case involving Arizona school officials accused of wrongfully strip-searching a 13-year-old girl goes to the U.S. Supreme Court next month. The youngster was accused by another student of bringing to school prescription-strength ibuprofen, so two female school employees conducted the strip search and found absolutely nothing. Savannah Redding says the search was both methodical and humiliating, and remains a highly emotional memory for her today. An attorney for the now 19-year-old Redding describes the incident as "the worst nightmare for any parent" who expects their child to be in class, not being forced to expose themselves to school officials. The New York Times says the case will require Supreme Court justices to consider the "thorny question" of just how much leeway school officials should have in policing zero-tolerance policies for drugs and violence. Mat Staver of Liberty Counsel tells OneNewsNow the schools ought to have some degree of leeway. "But the fact is, whenever they do these strip searches — in this case to a 13-year-old in the eighth grade — and literally do a very humiliating body-cavity search, or something akin to that, it seems to cross the line to go into areas where school officials should be regulated by the Constitution," he states. A lower court — the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals — ruled school officials had indeed violated the teenager’s constitutional protection from unreasonable searches. Judge Kim Wardlaw, writing for the majority, stated: "It does not require a constitutional scholar to conclude that a nude search of a 13-year-old child is an invasion of constitutional rights." Staver points out such rights apply even on the school campus. "You don’t lose your constitutional rights when you walk [through] the schoolhouse gate," the attorney explains, "although some of those rights may not have as strong of an application in school because of the realities of having to run and operate a school and the necessity for school discipline." The Liberty Counsel spokesman suggests other approaches be taken. One suggestion he makes is to conduct the search only in the presence of a parent or guardian. The Supreme Court will hear arguments in Safford Unified School District v. Redding on April 21.

maybe the bloggers will tell me to go kill myself too

     Teaching homosexuality, no parents needed–School district launches website promoting ‘gay’ pride in classrooms: Under the heading, "Brave New Schools," Drew Zahn of WorldNetDaily reported on April 20, 2009, that under the stated intent of making schools "safer" for all students, the San Francisco Unified School District has launched a website – believed to be the first of its kind – that provides resources designed to "meet the needs of gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender and questioning youth" in its schools. "April is Gay Pride Celebration!" touts the website’s home page. "Check out some of the event options in our ‘Host an Activity’ section." In addition to the "Host an Activity" section, loaded with suggestions on how teachers can celebrate Gay Pride Month in their classrooms, the website includes dozens of resources, including district policies on sexual expression and discrimination issues, curriculum for teaching on LGBTQ issues, a list of district-approved speakers and presentations, studies, and testimonials from school officials on how they’re making their schools more friendly to LGBTQ students. While the site acknowledges that some parents may object to overt teaching about homosexuality in the classroom, the school district affirms in its Q&A section, "All children deal with LGBTQ issues, possibly at home and/or at school. Children watch TV and movies that discuss, satirize, and ridicule LGBTQ people. Our obligation as educators is to confront stereotypes and address inappropriate language to make schools safe for all students and families. These discussions are not about sex, but about respect for differences." Further, the site explains in its parental notification section, "A discussion about gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender and questioning people does not constitute a discussion about human sexuality or family life education and does NOT require parent notification according to the California Education Code." Specifically, the website states, parents do not need to be notified of homosexual parents talking to students about their careers, intervention in name-calling incidents that violate the anti-slur policy, reading books that highlight LGBTQ characters or celebrating Diversity Days or Gay Pride Month at school. Carlos Garcia, superintendent of the San Francisco Unified School District, explains in his own words: "Our schools are vibrant communities which reflect the diversity of San Francisco," Garcia writes on the website. "We strive to make sure that our LGBTQ families, students and staff feel welcome, supported and celebrated. For this reason, SFUSD is offering important educational resources on this website." Editor’s note: Yes, this is San Francisco, CA, but it’s probably coming to a school near you too!

     And if your local public school does NOT provide pro-homosexual website information for students: Pete Chagnon and Jody Brown of OneNewsNow reported on 4/22/2009 that the ACLU is threatening the Knox County, Tennessee, school system with a lawsuit if it does not meet their web demands. The American Civil Liberties Union is demanding that the school system unblock "lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender" websites by April 29, 2009, or face a lawsuit. The ACLU claims the filtering software employed by Knox County — which is provided by Education Networks of America — blocks students from viewing nonsexual websites that host content they consider protected free speech. According to an ACLU press release, the default settings on the ENA software block LGBT websites such as Parents, Families, and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG); the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network (GLSEN); and Human Rights Campaign (HRC). The latter is the largest pro-homosexual lobbying group in the U.S. Knox County schools are engaging in "illegal viewpoint discrimination," claims the ACLU, by denying students access to "political and educational information about LGBT issues" on school computers. In the ACLU’s eyes, that constitutes "censorship" and denies students information for research purposes. Matt Staver, founder of Liberty Counsel, says the ACLU is throwing its weight around again. "This new threat by the ACLU against these schools in Tennessee is simply an attempt to push the homosexual agenda down the throats of every American. This in fact is blatant bullyism," says the attorney. According to Staver, the school does not have to comply with the ACLU’s demands. Many of the websites that are blocked do indeed have inappropriate content, he says. "They’re not just talking about general issues with respect to homosexuality," he explains. "They’re pushing a very sexualized agenda in their advertisement and in their content. The school is doing the right thing not to allow these websites to be made available to students in school." The Christian attorney argues that homosexual activists want to use the schools as "an incubator to sexualize the next generation." Meanwhile, the ACLU says it is "eager" to find out if any other Tennessee school districts that use the ENA filtering software are "violating students’ Constitutional rights by restricting access to LGBT sites."

     ‘Bisexual’ teacher invites students to same-sex ceremony: Something else to be concerned about in public schools, and this isn’t in California! Charlie Butts and Marty Cooper of OneNewsNow reported on 3/26/2009 that a self-proclaimed bisexual male teacher in New York has invited his seventh-grade students and their parents to witness his commitment ceremony to another man. The New York Times reports 32-year-old Chance Nalley gave slips of paper to his entire seventh-grade class at Columbia Secondary School, inviting them to the upcoming ceremony to be held at St. Paul’s Chapel on the campus of Columbia University on April 4. Nalley teaches math, science, and engineering at the school — "whose mission statement includes a commitment to diversity," notes the Times. Nalley reportedly obtained his principal’s support before coming out to his students in the fall of 2007, when the school opened. Frank Russo of the American Family Association of New York calls the Times‘ report biased. "If a secularist teacher in a school invited his or her students over to a ritual of initiation into becoming a Christian and invited his students to attend this, I could just imagine the hullabaloo that you’d see," he contends, "and The New York Times would not report it in the same fashion as it reported this." Russo admits he struggles to understand Nalley’s motives behind the invitations. "For a teacher to invite his students — seventh graders, typically 12-years-old, possibly 13 — to attend a gay marriage is mind-boggling to me that he would do that." The family advocate is also encouraging parents not to take their children to a ceremony that he believes "honors" a gender identity disorder. The Times article showed Nalley’s students were trying to understand his sexuality. When asked if they were surprised he was "gay," a handful of students noted he was bisexual, not gay. One student added that his coming out to them "showed he trusts us." Interestingly enough, Nalley says six of his students have "come out" to him this year. Editor’s note: Is it barely possible that some proselytizing is going on here?

Miss USA judge calls beauty queen ‘C-word’

     (A few days ago, I included an item about the wonderful "tolerance" shown toward a young man who posted his objections to homosexual marriage on YouTube.  Here’s an item that demonstrates more of that wonderful "tolerance.")

     While I do not want to give any endorsement to beauty pageants, I do think that this item is another interesting illustration of the kind of INTOLERANCE exhibited by the left, who is always telling conservatives that they need to be more "tolerant." On April 21, 2009, Chelsea Schilling of WorldNetDaily reported that at this year’s Miss USA pageant, Carrie Prejean, Miss California, was asked the one question she dreaded most, "Vermont recently became the fourth state to legalize same-sex marriage; do you think every state should follow suit?" Her answer, which suddenly has made her the center of both praise and scorn, included the words, "In my country, in my family, I think that I believe that a marriage should be between a man and a woman. No offense to anybody out there, but that’s how I was raised and that’s how I think it should be – between a man and a woman." Prejean received some boos from the audience. As the contestants watched from backstage, the room was silent. "A lot of people were shocked," Miss Vermont told Fox News. "We were all kind of giving each other those eyes, we couldn’t believe it." Blogger and celebrity "judge" Mario Armando Lavandeira, also known by alias Perez Hilton, a self-described "queen of all media," who openly homosexual and known for his flamboyant and outrageous behavior, immediately tore into Prejean in a YouTube video he made right after the contest’s conclusion, calling her a "dumb b-tch" and claiming she had given "the worst answer in pageant history." He admitted to giving Prejean a zero score. In a follow-up interview on MSNBC, the flamboyant judge was asked if he had apologized for his reaction, but instead he added to it. "I don’t apologize," Hilton said on air. "Over the course of the past 24 hours, the more I’ve thought about it, the more – you know what? – No, I’m going to stand by what I said just like she’s standing by what she said. And I called her the ‘b’ word, and hey, I was thinking the ‘c’ word." Prejean, a student at San Diego Christian College, was first runner-up, primarily due to Hilton’s vote. Keith Lewis, executive director of Miss California USA/Teen USA, wrote a supportive letter to Hilton, condemning Prejean. "As co-executive director of Miss CA USA and one of the leaders of the Miss CA family, I am personally saddened and hurt that Miss CA USA 2009 believes marriage rights belong only to a man and a woman," he wrote. "Although I believe all religions should be able to ordain what unions they see fit, I do not believe our government should be able to discriminate against anyone. Religious beliefs have no place in politics in the Miss CA family." Despite providing a response that ultimately cost her the crown, Prejean stood by her answer. "I knew at that moment after I answered the question, I knew, I was not going to win because of my answer, because I had spoken from my heart, from my beliefs and for my God," she told NBC’s "Today" this morning. "I wouldn’t have answered it differently. The way I answered may have been offensive. With that question specifically, it’s not about being politically correct. For me it was being biblically correct." A legal analyst told Fox News Prejean may have grounds for a discrimination lawsuit. "It’s her religious beliefs which prompted her to say ‘I don’t believe in same-sex marriages,’" analyst Mercedes Colwin said. "So she was espousing her beliefs," and has reason to sue for violation of Title VII, which prohibits discrimination based on religion. Hilton’s comments have drawn sharp reaction, even from those who might also disagree with Prejean’s answer. "I am an openly gay man and a supporter of same sex marriage and I wish Perez Hilton would shut up," writes syndicated talk show host Charles Karel Bouley in a column on Huffington Post. "This is a person who is famous for smearing snarky and crude things over celebrity photos and following Brittney’s every move. He lives for controversy and is only famous for it." Editor’s note: According to modern political correctness, you can’t say anything "offensive" to homosexuals, but you can say or do anything and everything that’s offensive to Christians.

two interesting items for your consideration

     Just another reason to keep your high schoolers safe at home: In an article headlined "High schools rife with hazing, Maine study finds," Associated Press Writer David Sharp reported on Thu., Apr. 16, that the authors of an ambitious survey of hazing in colleges and universities have turned their attention to high schools and discovered that many freshmen arrive on campus with experience — with 47 percent reporting getting hazed in high school. As in college, high school hazing pervaded groups from sports teams to the yearbook staff and performing arts, according to professors Elizabeth Allan and Mary Madden of the University of Maine’s College of Education and Human Development. The hazing included activities from silly stunts to drinking games, with 8 percent of the students drinking to the point of getting sick or passing out, they said. Just like college students, high schoolers are susceptible to getting swept up in group activities and doing things they might not otherwise do, the authors said. "That group dynamic can lead to the escalation where you have the hazing that’s been reported in the news, some horrendous incidents," Madden said. Among them: a "powder puff" event in which several seniors at a suburban Chicago high school were suspended or charged with roughing up junior girls, and junior varsity football players being sodomized by teammates at their New York high school. "We’re still having hazing incidents in this country in high schools. They’re getting more brutal. They’re getting more sexual. And they’re being pushed down into middle schools," said Elliot Hopkins of the National Federation of State High School Associations. Hazing-related activities included being required to associate only with the peer group (28 percent), singing or chanting in public (21 percent), verbal abuse (19 percent), sleep deprivation (12 percent), and getting a tattoo or piercing (12 percent), they said. Twelve percent of the survey’s respondents participated in a drinking game, and 8 percent drank until getting sick or losing consciousness, they said. Hopkins said he is particularly worried that activities are becoming more sexually charged in cases of cheerleaders being forced to undress and shave in front of their peers, or boys and girls being forced to simulate sex acts to join a group. At its worst, hazing can lead to sexual assault, as happened with a highly publicized incident involving a football team from Long Island, N.Y., he said. In that case, several junior varsity players were sodomized with sticks, pine cones and golf balls at preseason training camp in Pennsylvania. Four students were charged, five football coaches fired and the team’s football season canceled. The psychological harm from hazing can follow into students’ relationships, marriages, parenting and workplace, Pollard said. "It’s not just ‘boys being boys.’ It teaches impressionable young adults about power, control, humiliation and how you treat other individuals," he said. "The coercion can be subtle, but it’s powerful," Allan said. "You have these really nice people who are generally reasonable kids making sound decisions for the most part. And then all of a sudden they’re swept up in his group dynamic — it contributes to impairing judgment."

     What Our Kids Are Missing Out On Dept.: Barb Frank of the Imperfect Homeschooler called attention to this item with the remark, "Having students watch a movie is a time-honored activity of substitute teachers. Pity this substitute, who mistakenly thought she’d found the right movie for the geography class, with disastrous results." The Denver News reported on April 3, 2009, reported that a geography class at East High School almost got an anatomy lesson by mistake when a porn film was accidentally played in class. According to the school, the mix-up happened Thursday when the regular teacher was out of town and a substitute teacher was trying to find a movie the class was supposed to watch. "A substitute teacher was having difficulty opening a computer presentation that was supposed to be shown to the class. While opening what was thought to be the correct file, a pornographic movie started to show on the screen of the computer. The movie was on the computer screen for just a few seconds," Principal John Youngquist said in a letter sent to all parents. Approximately six students may have seen the computer screen while the porn film was playing, he said. The movie was never projected overhead to the entire class, Youngquist said. The Denver Public School District is investigating, said district spokeswoman Lourdes Souss. She did not know what disciplinary action will be taken, if any. She also did not know if the regular teacher — who was out of town for a conference — is back at work Friday. Editor’s note: One has to wonder what the pornography was doing on the computer in the first place!

two homeschool-related movies

     Home schooler’s feature film opens in theaters: Pete Chagnon of OneNewsNow reported on 4/15/2009 that a movie made by a home-school teenager has been released on 94 screens nationwide. John Moore is the 19-year-old writer and director of The Widow’s Might, a light-hearted family comedy that centers on a widow who is faced with the loss of her property due to heavy taxation. Moore explains the premise of the 101-minute film. "[T]his home-school family finds out about [the widow’s dilemma] — and of course they think that that’s ridiculous," says Moore. "So they go to the mayor and attempt to get him to be reasonable. Of course he’s not; he’s trying to do what he feels is best for the city. "So there is kind of a battle of wills there," he continues, "and eventually the family decides that they should produce a film in an attempt to spread the word about the widow’s plight." Moore’s film won the $101,000 "Best of Film Festival" award at the 2009 San Antonio Independent Christian Film Festival and will now be shown at 94 Carmike Cinemas across the nation. He shares that distribution of the film began when he received an unexpected call from independent filmmaker Jerry Dalton, who requested a screener copy of The Widow’s Might. "And he calls back and says, ‘I can get this film into the theaters for you — would you be interested?’ And it was just so out of nowhere that God would bless the project like that," exclaims Moore. The Widow’s Might opens this week (April 13-18) in theaters. A movie trailer, behind-the-scenes clips, and a list of showings can be found at WidowsMightTheMovie.com .

     Homeschoolers release ‘Roe v. Wade’ movie: Pete Chagnon of OneNewsNow on 4/20/2009 reported that a new movie is highlighting an important aspect of a conservative liberal arts college based in the Washington, DC, area. Come What May was recently released on DVD and follows two students at Patrick Henry College who seek to overturn Roe v. Wade in the school’s moot court competition. Mike Farris, chancellor at PHC, says the movie is based on an actual event. "The story has been radically changed for the theatrical purposes, but the essence of it is true. We had young people who were required to argue principles that were contrary to their convictions, and they stood up for what was right," he explains. "And we’ll see whether the young person does the same or not. But I play myself as the moot court coach at Patrick Henry College." Farris points out that PHC enrolls a lot of homeschool kids, but the college is not exclusively for homeschoolers. He adds that the school is there for Christians who want to be trained in leadership. Patrick Henry College, located in Purcellville, Virginia — approximately 50 east of the nation’s capital — offers legal, political, and journalism coursework as well as a wide variety of liberal arts.

CNN reveals obvious bias in ‘TEA party’ report

     You can put this in the "already something you know but it’s nice to have validation of it" column. Chad Groening of OneNewsNow reported on 4/17/2009 that a conservative media watchdog organization says CNN has once again demonstrated its liberal bias in its coverage of a recent "TEA party" event in Chicago. On Wednesday, CNN correspondent Susan Roesgen was interviewing a Chicago TEA party ("Taxed Enough Already") participant when she evidently did not approve of what he was saying about President Obama’s tax policies, talked over him as he responded to her question, and began to editorialize. Roesgen: "I think you get the general tenor of this [rally]. It’s anti-government, anti-CNN — since this is highly promoted by the right-wing conservative network Fox. And since I can’t really hear much more — and I think this is not really family viewing — I’ll toss it back to you, Kyra." Kyra Phillips (studio anchor): "Alright. I know Susan Rosegen is having a hard time hearing me, but wow, that is the prime example of what we’re following across the country." Julia Seymour is an assistant editor/analyst for the Business and Media Institute of the Media Research Center (MRC). "It’s just awful reporting," she says of CNN’s handling of the Chicago rally. "It would be easier to tolerate if CNN had bothered to do the stories leading up to the event. But CNN wasn’t even talking about the TEA parties until April 14 — despite previous protests that had happened in February and two months [of people] organizing these events." Seymour says Roesgen reacted very differently when she covered an anti-Bush protest several years ago. "She was not rude to those protestors," the MRC spokeswoman recalls. "So clearly I think there was more here — and she has shown herself and her true colors." The MRC analyst remarks that the liberal media has switched from the mode of constantly attacking the administration of George W. Bush to automatically and repeatedly deflecting criticism of government action and undermining the opposition to Barack Obama. Editor’s note: Many homeschooling families participated in the TEA parties, so you might be interested in knowing how the mainstream media perceives you. In fact, the Obama administration might even consider you a right-wing extremist group that has the potential for terrorist acts!

Government views opponents of abortion, illegal immigration as possible threats

     If you follow conservative news and columnists, you may have already seen this (it’s even been in some of the mainstream media because the initial report I saw came from the Associated Press), but IT IS REALLY SCARY!

     Based upon information from the Associated Press (NOT a "right-wing" news organization by any stretch of the imagination) OneNewsNow reported on 4/15/2009 that the Obama Administration’s Department of Homeland Security officials have issued a report which links people with pro-life, anti-illegal immigration views, and veterans of war with "right-wing extremist" groups. In an intelligence assessment issued to law enforcement last week, Homeland Security officials said there was no specific information about an attack in the works by right-wing extremists. But the agency warns that an extended economic downturn with real estate foreclosures, unemployment, and an inability to obtain credit could foster an environment for extremists to recruit members who may not have been supportive of these causes in the past. The latest assessment started making its way into the mainstream press after conservative blogs got wind of the analysis. In the unclassified report — "Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment" — the agency warns that imposing new restrictions on firearms and returning military veterans who have difficulties assimilating back into their communities could lead to terror groups or individuals attempting to carry out attacks. The returning war veterans have skills and experience that are appealing to right-wing groups looking to carry out an attack, according to the report. The report says right-wing extremism in the United states can be broadly divided into those groups, movements, and adherents that are primarily "hate-oriented" and those that are mainly anti-government, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority or rejecting government authority entirely. According to the Homeland Security document, right-wing extremism "may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as abortion or immigration." The report goes on to say that "many right-wing extremists are antagonistic toward the new presidential administration and its perceived stance on a range of issues, including immigration and citizenship, the expansion of social programs to minorities, and restrictions on firearms ownership and use." The Homeland Security report also makes reference to the rise of right-wing extremism in the 1990s and says factors which enhanced the movement were opposition to things such as abortion and same-sex "marriage." Editor’s note: It sounds to me as if the Obama administration is setting up criteria to identify anyone who does not agree with it as "rightwing, extremists who pose a terrorist threat. I wonder if and when they will include homeschooling in their profile? Michelle Malkin had an interesting comment on this. "If you can redefine dissenting opinion as ‘hate,’ you can brand your political opponents as ‘extremists’ — and you can marginalize electoral threats. ‘Antigovernment’? ‘Pro-enforcement’? ‘Disgruntled’? Feeling taxed enough already and ‘recruiting’ and ‘radicalizing’ your friends and neighbors through ‘chatter on the Internet’? We are all right-wing extremists now. Welcome to the club." The Obama administration is getting scarier and scarier as the weeks pass by!

YouTube community tells kid to kill himself

     This is really SAD!!!

     On April 11, 2009 Drew Zahn of WorldNetDaily reported that a self-described Christian 12-year-old boy, using the YouTube member name ChristianU2uber, who dared post his views on homosexuality and same-sex marriage on the popular Internet video site, YouTube, has since been ridiculed and insulted by tens of thousands of comments that attack the boy, his sexuality, and his faith. "Kill Christianity, and then kill yourself," responded a YouTube community member identified as greenacidfusion. A commenter calling himself WizzyBoy 520 added, "How do you know the Bible isn’t full of lies? You, just like everyone who is against gay marriage, is a mentally retarded bigot. No exceptions. Now go to h—." Thousands of others have simply slammed the boy by calling him a "homo" or making comments like the one from chao129: "You are against gay marriage because you are a fag in denial." The boy identifies himself only by the name Scott. His 13 videos have become a YouTube sensation, approaching 1 million hits over the last four weeks, making ChristianU2ber the thirteenth most-viewed YouTube contributor in the "Gurus" channel over the past month. With his popularity, however, have come tens of thousands of comments from the YouTube community, the vast majority of them insulting. His video "Gay Marriage – Is It Right or Wrong?" generated over 11,000 comments by press time, mostly critical, many laced with profanity. ChristianU2ber claims on his YouTube channel, "I am a Christian, and I love to upload videos that teach you what Christianity is all about." When he addressed the issue of homosexual marriage, however, the backlash grew so furious and profane that even outspoken atheists on YouTube have come to ChristianU2ber’s defense. "I can’t believe it. I’m watching these video responses, these comments to ChristianU2uber, who is a 12-year-old, and you people are trying to blast him to oblivion," says self-described atheist TOMMYfromtheBRONX in a YouTube video of his own. "Does everyone have to act 12 years old, just because he’s 12 years old?" TOMMY continues, "Of course I don’t believe and agree with what he has to say, but I was saying the same thing he is when I was 12. Instead of mocking and ridiculing this kid, why don’t we show him the other side and let him judge for himself?" Another YouTuber identified as godlessmessiah writes,"When a person makes an insulting claim, they are more than worthy of ridicule. But when the person making the claim is a child who obviously doesn’t know better, the last thing we (as atheists) should ever do is what people are doing in this case." Subjecting himself again to the stream of criticism, ChristianU2uber crafted a response to what he called "hateful comments" made about his videos. "Before you put another mean comment on one of my videos, I just want you to stop and take a second to listen to yourself," says ChristianU2uber. "A lot of people are putting bad words and really mean comments on my videos, and I really don’t like it; it makes me sad. I work hard because on YouTube I want to be informative and I want to teach people that there is a God and to make this world a better place." He concludes, "Just settle down a little bit. Please? For me?" At press time, the most recent response to ChristianU2uber’s plea for civility came from a poster identified as goatchad: "I stopped and took a second to listen to myself," wrote goatchad, "But it just made me realize what a complete c— you are. Please die." Editor’s note: Where is all that wonderful "tolerance" that the leftists and liberals keep telling conservatives that we need to have?

The Little Dears

     The May, 2009, issue of the Reader’s Digest had the following anecdote on page 101, submitted by Leny Slootweg. "Following a tough day of homeschooling her children, my friend was in the kitchen muttering to herself when her 14-year-old son walked in. ‘What’s going on?’ he asked. ‘I’m having a parent-teacher conference,’ she growled." Funny, but those who have been homeschooling for a long time have heard that joke for years–there’s even a t-shirt which says something like, "Shh. I’m not talking to myself. I’m having a parent-teacher conference." Also in the May, 2009, issue of Reader’s Digest, there is a pretty good article on pages 118-125 by Judith Newman entitled "Porn Has Gone Interactive–And Your Kids Are at Risk. From ‘Sexting’ to Video Chats, How to Fight Back."