Saving Our Children's Purity, Part II

I started with Part I here, which might be helpful to read first. Because of the deeply personal nature of this post, I previewed it with Big Girl and obtained her permission to post it as it appears for you below.

**************************************

"Do you want to sit down?" I asked her as she stood by our bed.

She sighed. "Yes. This could take a while."

And so began the torrent of tears. Big Girl is going to a NET Ministries presentation with the youth group from church, and I'm going to a Moms' Night Out. So Travel Man is taking Little Girl on a date. She wants to go see Megamind.

Unfortunately, we'd told Big Girl that we probably wouldn't go see it because it's expensive to go to the movies (all four of us) and we've been kinda spendy for the last few months. So she's upset that she isn't seeing a movie she wants to see, but Travel Man is taking her sister to go see it.

But that's the tip, and it was abandoned almost immediately for the more pressing issues: that we aren't letting her have a boyfriend or a cell phone or to go on a "date" with a boy she likes.

I had to really, really think about this. Because there's something WRONG with a 12 year old having a boyfriend. (The cell phone thing, we determined pretty quickly, was a battle she knew she wasn't going to win, but she wanted to vent about it since she thinks everyone sees her as a total freak for not having one.) That, and she was tired of school. It's hard in seventh grade, suddenly there's a lot of history and writing and these are both new - at least in the quantity that they're coming in.

But, back to the boyfriend thing. It's WRONG, for sure, but I couldn't put my finger on it. On the fly, I prayed my favorite prayer to pray when I'm in trouble and need immediate input.

"HELP!!!"

It's actually quite effective.

Travel Man had handled the movie thing already, and I suddenly had my answer for the boyfriend issue.

"If you have a boyfriend now, what's left for later?"

"Huh?"

"If you start dating now, at 12, and you have a boyfriend, what's left to happen later, say, in four years?"

"I have a deeper relationship with him later."

Oh, horrid words! She has NO IDEA what that means to a 16 or 17 year old boy!! She's so innocent!

Trying not to cringe, trying not to pull punches, I finally realize that I have to let her have the information I didn't really think I'd need to share with her for years. But, let's face it: she's not me. She's not, at 12, the size of her nine year old sister. She's not bespecled, she has no acne. She isn't a "carpenter's dream." She's not so socially awkward that she sometimes hides from people she knows in public so she doesn't have to say hi to them. She is BEAUTIFUL and smart and funny and confident and outgoing and did I mention beautiful? (Protecting her innocence might be a real nightmare for my poor husband.)

When I was 12, boys ignored me. Unless it was to throw gypsy moth caterpillars at me. I liked being ignored better.

Not Big Girl. She's amazing. She's who I wanted to be at 12. And now I see God's wisdom and protection in the late-blooming nature of my whole life.

I have to tell her that the "deeper relationship" very often turns to sex. Girls lose their virginity. They have babies. Her aunt delivered a baby for a mother who was my precious Big Girl's age. The culture is a cesspool, and even though I do everything I can to protect her, and even though she obeys me without question when we're walking through the mall and I order the girls to "look down quick!" so we can run a gammet of disgusting pictures and displays in shops, stuff is there. And it seeps in. And for boys, it is FAR worse! I try to explain as best as I can without details, that the visual makes boys' and men's brains fire like mad. Her dressing modestly protects not only her, but also the boys she knows. That it's scary-hard for those boys who want to remain pure for their future wives because the cesspool is EVERYWHERE. I get frantic (partly to snap her out of her hysterics, partly because, dammit, I've been holding this in for years): I can't walk through the mall without eight six-foot by four-foot signs of women in their underwear being plastered in front of SANTA CLAUS AT THE MALL! I can't check out at Wal Mart without magazines discussing things that children should never see! I don't mention that I'm sick of pedophiles designing clothes that try to make my innocent girls look like hookers. But she starts to see a little.

I explain again:

"Honey, if you start dating now, you have a boyfriend now, in four years, if you want to show your love, what's left? Where do you go?" Now she's just staring at me, wide-eyed. "Honey, those boys are so pressured now ... "

Here I turn to my patient husband, who's been listening to me try with all my might to help her understand what I'm protecting her from without actually going too far.

"Honey, it's worse now. How bad was it for you when you were a boy?"

"Awful. And now is just as bad, and I'm an old married guy."

I turn back to my wide-eyed daughter.

"Big Girl, sweetheart, those boys are so pressured into thinking that the way you express that deeper love is to give up your virginity. That is so dangerous for so many reasons, but let's remember the most important is that it puts your very soul in mortal danger. After being with someone for three, four years, you WANT to show them how much you love them. But you can't get married when you're 16."

She's already said that she wasn't going to do that. But I know better. Sadly, I know better.

"When you wait to have a real boyfriend until you're 16, then when that three or four years go by and you want your love to be deeper, then you're *ready to be married*! And that's why we don't want you to have a boyfriend. Because you need to save that special time for when you are ready, emotionally, to have a boyfriend."

At this point, she was starting to feel a little overwhelmed. She started getting silly, laughing a little, and changing the subject. I pressed her for an answer, though. "Even if you don't totally agree, do you at least *understand* our reasons now?" She did.

And, at 11:45 PM, she skipped upstairs to go back to bed.

Saving Our Children's Purity, Part I

Our family is weird by today's standards. In more ways than one.

The first oddity is our undying devotion to the Catholic Church and all she passes on to us from God. Yes, all. No, we don't think women priests are a good idea - it can't even be done. No, we don't think that contraception is okay sometimes. No, we don't think that abortion is okay in the cases of rape and incest - those babies are not guilty of anything. No, we don't think that homosexuals are able to get married. Yes, we love our priests and bishops and the Holy Father. We pray for them all, and we obey the Church, even when it's hard. That not only makes us weird in the general world out there, it also makes us weird to a lot of Catholics. That makes me a bit sad, but that's life, you know?

Next comes our strange decision to keep our kids with us at home and teach them here. Homeschooling is more accepted than it was 15 years ago, and I am so grateful for the parents who fought so hard to gain reclaim our right to be the primary educators of our own children. The Church teaches that all parents are their children's primary educators, and when I applied for the religious exemption in our state, I referred to this right in my explanation of why I'm homeschooling. It's a God-given right for me to teach my children, to have them educated how I see fit, in order that they gain Heaven.

Even though homeschooling is not frowned upon by most people any more (thanks, Tebow family!), we are still looked at askew sometimes by parents who cannot imagine having their children around them 24/7.

Me? I like my girls. I love having them around, and it's not because I want to shelter them. They're really neat people. They're funny and smart and witty and great to be around. I feel a little bad for parents who don't like being with their kids. I feel bad for the kids, too, because if your parents don't like you, who will?

But anyway, we are weird for homeschooling. We do things like have school in our PJ's sometimes, or take field trips that last a week, like when my parents took them on a field trip to Washington, DC. Or take tours of old churches as part of school. We read Shakespeare and the kids make my husband and I act out the balcony scene in Romeo & Juliet, or the scene in Juliet's tomb, with me lying on the couch while my husband pretends to stab himself and die on the living room floor. Because doing that while your third-grader cheers you both on is really not very normal. (It should be. Lemme tell you what, ladies. Try acting out that balcony scene with your husband and then try containing yourself until the kids are in bed! WHEW!)

We're also weird because we shelter our kids from a lot of things we feel they aren't ready for. Things that are now considered normal for kids to have or do. While they do have access to a computer for schoolwork, both girls have parental controls on the internet browser that limits where they can go. Neither of them are allowed on YouTube to just watch videos, even of stuff we think might be okay. (You NEVER know what those "related videos" will be!) They are not allowed to have Facebook accounts, which is not a big deal for the nine year old, but does make the 12 year old look strange to her friends.

They don't have cell phones, either. Oh, there have been times when they're away all day on a Youth Group trip or a dance rehearsal where we'll loan them a phone (Travel Man has a work cell and a personal cell). But they don't have their own. And they won't for a long time. We've said to them both that we'll start the discussion when they turn 16 and start doing things like drive and work. Until then, they'll live. Heck, I didn't have a cell phone until I was in my 20's, and I lived. I'm sure they won't implode.

This is actually something we've had to really explain - not to other parents, usually. The ones who say anything are usually the ones who lament the day they bought a cell phone for their child. The ones who have no regrets don't usually try to persuade us; maybe we look like we just don't care what they think. But to the kids, and especially to Big Girl, who is blazing the path and has to be the first one to ask for everything.

The thing is, there is an unrestricted internet on that phone. And texting. And calls to who-knows-who. Frankly, I don't let them just call anyone on the house phone, or just start sending emails to just anyone. (As a matter of fact, the kids are white-listed on their email accounts. Each new address sent to or received from must be approved by a parent first. Permissions can also be rescinded.) But with a cell phone, that's impossible to control. Not only can I not control much who's called, I cannot control who is sending messages to my girls. And, while at 12 and 13 that's probably not a concern, I know what happens when hormonal teenagers have cell phones with video, still cameras, and an unlimited texting and messaging plan. And why take the risk of exposing them to any of that early? At this point, neither of them have enough sense to know who should have their phone numbers. I know they'd give them out to everyone they're friends with!

Now, it's super-hard to protect their purity when we go out. I'm not even talking about the mall, where we avoid an entire section to avoid Victoria's Secret's gigantic soft-p*rn window-display posters. I'm talking about walking between Spencer's and a T-shirt place where my kids have almost nowhere to look without taking the chance of them seeing something vile. I'm talking about Wal Mart's checkout line where Cosmo sits, usually without the blinders, proclaiming that it has great ideas for … well, you know. But while Cosmo is still out in front on the smut parade, even the more tame magazines display big headlines about being sexy and the gossip magazines talk brazenly about hook-ups, shack-ups, break-ups, and babies out of wedlock as though it's all peachy-keen, hunky-dory, good and healthy stuff.

And teen girls are being pressured to start dating earlier and earlier. You're a loser if you don't have a boyfriend when you're 12. If you're not getting to go out alone with that boyfriend by 13 or 14, you're just really a weirdo. Don't forget to wear that sexy outfit! Lace leggings and a miniskirt! Yippee!

*barf*

This Culture of Death is trying to dress my girls like hookers, push them into dating early, and then will throw condoms at them and tell them that they just can't help themselves because they've got hormones and stuff and gosh if you love him then why not it's just sex and everyone does that eventually get that virginity thing out of the way and have you seen Sex and the City yet?

*double barf*

Well-meaning people have asked me, "What's the big deal? To her, having a boyfriend means they sit together and like each other."

I had to think a lot about what that means. Not to her, but for real. What, in real life, does it mean to have a boyfriend? Where does it lead? What is the reason people date? Do I even WANT her dating, or do we want more of a courtship situation? There is something I don't like about it, but I couldn't quite put my finger on it.

I've been praying since my Big Girl was born about how to answer these questions - and questions about growing up and human sexuality - because I needed to be ready with good, clear answers with reasons behind them that I could explain. My answer had to be more than "No," and "Because I said so."

I was finally confronted with having to give answers recently, and I'll share those answers with you in Part II.

(UPDATE: Part II can be found here.)

Blustery Day

It's been our plan to meet as a family on Fridays during Lent to pray outside our local Planned Parenthood. It's a part of 40 Days for Life.

Today, Travel Man and I decided it would not be a good idea for us to go outside this afternoon, especially for the girls. Here's why:

So we'll be meeting in spirit instead.

Big Girl is altar serving at a funeral Mass that begins at 11, and then we'll stay at the chapel - near Christ in the tabernacle - to say a Rosary for the success of the 40 Days campaign.

Think that prayer doesn't help? Or that standing outside Planned Parenthood, merely praying, won't do anything?

Think again:

Learn more about the 40 Days for Life, and please join us, even if only in prayer.

Culture of Death Watch: Death as Entertainment

This seems to be an ongoing theme here suddenly. But, gosh, it's all around us.

Remember the old ABC Wide World of Sports opener? How it was kind of controversial that they showed that skier wiping out? (He survived, suffering only a concussion and a distinct lack of abandon in his subsequent jumps.) I remember being a little freaked out when I was a kid, but my father told me the skier was okay - he walked away!

Caution of this kind - showing sporting accidents only when the athlete survived, even if injured - is now officially gone.

Earlier today, a luger from the country of Georgia died in an accident. (Warning: Images of the accident are in the video on the link, but it will not play automatically.) He came around the last curve of the track, lost control, and hit a steel beam at nearly 90 MPH. God rest his soul, he was worked on at the track and on the way to the hospital, where he died from his injuries.

The images shown at the ESPN story linked above are nothing, though, compared with what I was greeted with when our family - including our 11 and 8 year old daughters - tuned in to the Olympics at 7:30 PM EST. First story up, naturally, is about the death. But not content with showing the already-disturbing-enough photos of him going over the wall towards the beams, NBC made the decision to show the actual video footage - not once, not twice, but at least THREE TIMES - and then follow that up with pictures of the EMT's working on him, blood and all.

And so the death of another human being - a real person with real family and friends - becomes entertainment for gawkers.

But that mentality isn't really all that new, is it?

I could not let NBC just do this without saying something. And everyone who is offended (which, I hope, is everyone who watched) should tell them so, too. DO NOT BE SILENT.

Here's my email to the NBC Olympics department:

I want to make an official complaint about your opening coverage of the Olympic Games on Friday, February 12, beginning at 7:30 PM EST. I tuned in with my family, which includes our two young daughters who are 11 and 8, only to be greeted by multiple showings of the death of Georgian luger Nodar Kumaritashvili. The decision to not just discuss the death, which is certainly newsworthy, but to actually show video footage of his accident and the attempts to resuscitate him were simply beyond the pale. First of all, and most importantly, the man who died is someone's son, brother, cousin, friend ... a real live person with real live family members who very well could have seen the video. Secondly, there are millions of families who tune into the Olympics to watch family-friendly entertainment. What parent wants their children exposed to such horrific scenes? What parent wishes to see it himself?

I am utterly disgusted that you chose to air this footage not once, but at least three times, right at the beginning of the program when families are most likely watching together. And honestly, airing it at all shows not only a total lack of taste but a complete lack of regard for Kumaritashvili and his family and friends.

Whoever was the final decision-maker for airing this footage needs to be reprimanded or fired for displaying such a complete lack of judgement. I sincerely hope that you not only discipline whoever made the decision, but also offer some kind of apology to your viewers, as well as his family and friends.

Sincerely,

Christine ***********

************, VA

Want to make a complaint to NBC about the Olympic opening coverage? Send them an e-mail. If no one complains, they won't stop there. That kind of coverage will continue, and can only get worse.

[image sources: gladiators, Christian martyrs]

Culture of Death Watch: All Life is Devalued

When life is devalued in one part of the spectrum - i.e., before birth - it is eventually devalued in all parts of the spectrum. Child abuse increases. Violence against women increases. Calls for "compassionate" killings, usually called "assisted suicides," increase. Who we see as human and deserving of respect decreases.

I'll tell you something about this link. It's very disturbing. The local news called it "gruesome," but that is probably an understatement. It's sickening. Really and truly sickening.

Seems that for fun, a group of six people, including a seventeen year old girl, tortured and killed a mentally disabled Pennsylvania woman.

[WARNING!!! CONTENT IS NOT APPROPRIATE FOR CHILDREN, AND IS VERY DISTURBING!!!!]

What's fascinating is that the more we pay lip service to valuing life, the less life is actually valued. This is touched upon a bit by the previous post I made, in which I linked to the Anchoress' post about low birthrates and the global economic slowdown. And it's difficult to believe for most people, but really, it's a contraceptive mentality that brings us to this point.

Why would I say such a strange thing? Well, let's look at it this way. Keep in mind that this is very rough, and a better understanding can be gained by a thorough reading of Humanae Vitae and other writings from the Church that explain things in more detail.

First of all, instead of widespread use of contraception - and especially the Pill - creating an environment where all children are wanted children, it has created a serious disconnect in the link between sex and procreation. Instead of children being viewed as wanted, they are viewed as intrusions more often than they were before. Sex and having babies have a very loose connection these days - it only results in a baby if you WANT it to - and so people wind up seeing a child as someone who was not necessarily wanted. Certainly, this does not speak to all situations. We all know that there are families who have used contraception and decided to stop in order to have children, but women who are surprised by a pregnancy are treating sex as a separate thing from creation very often. Most women who have abortions were using some kind of birth control at the time they fell pregnant. The resulting baby was an intruder, someone they did not want for one reason or another, and is disposed of. And so we got Roe v. Wade.

And so we have devalued human life before birth. If you want a baby, you can have one, but if you don't, then you don't have to. Children become commodities instead of blessings. They are things to have instead of people to welcome into your life.

It doesn't take a large stretch to move that devaluation to babies and children. Child abuse and abandonment has increased since Roe. More children live below the poverty line than before that decision, and women are treated with less respect. With the easy availability of both contraception and abortion - the latter is available through all nine months of pregnancy - it makes it much easier for men to "love 'em and leave 'em." And, when left, if a woman does not have an abortion, she's more likely to live with her child in poverty. That's what being a single mother is about, you know. It usually means you live under the poverty line. The feel-good success stories are feel-good because they're the exception, not the rule.

With the devaluation of women and children, we have moved on to the other end of the spectrum of life: the elderly. If someone is ill, why not assist them with their suicide and help them "die with dignity"? The problem is, there is little dignity in being dehydrated to death over a two-week period. And what dignity are we giving a person when we put them down like an animal, anyway? Real dignity doesn't shy away from difficulties. Real dignity shines forth even when those difficulties seem overwhelming and unsurmountable. This is the face of real dignity in the face of death:

Watch CBS News Videos Online

And, you know, when we're already "helping" the dying to go faster, why not focus on quality of life for everyone? The handicapped, mental or physical, certainly can't be capable of really living life, can they? Enjoying it to the fullest? Poor people, they need help, too. Those with brain injuries ... they're not themselves. They're vegetables.

Or are they?

But still, we've already gone so far in devaluing life in general, and so, sadly, this story is not really that much of a surprise. A shock, of course. We should be shocked at this. But, the way our society treats human life in general - of the unborn, the sick, the dying, the handicapped - surprise is not an emotion I felt when I read this.

What we need to be careful of is when outrage ceases to be among the emotions, though.

Thank God, there will always be those who are outraged. The question is, how long will we be in the majority?

Low Birthrates Hurt Us All

I had an online disagreement with someone on the very article The Anchoress begins this post with. Once upon a time, I, too, thought that responsible contraception was a good thing. Now I see the wisdom of Holy Mother Church. The entire post is worth reading, but I wanted to point out just one little part of this post; consider it a way to whet your appetite.

Global Recession & Low Birthrate:

"... It’s not just the Vatican talking about birthrates. Check out Japan:

A line that straight downhill is spooky: it cries out for a cause. It is such a steep slope that it appears there was a national decision, after some initial indecision before the 1970s, to stop having babies.

Can a civilization exhaust itself? Turn so inward and self-indulgent? Is there some hidden virus or amoeba acting to suppress the desire to breed? Maybe an adequate diet—in exact opposition to theory—causes that suppression.

It isn’t just Japan. It’s Italy, Sweden, Germany, Austria, and on and on. Even the “developing” countries show signs of the same disease: the better they get (materially) the less they breed. So far, the US is holding its own and still getting to business. Nobody knows why. ..."

Culture of Death Watch

And people wonder about the death spiral of population in some countries. This is beyond strange.

Robot Romance: Inventor Le Trung takes his 'fembot' girlfriend to Christmas dinner

This is really sad, too. His parents have seemingly given up on their son being normal, I guess:

Le has built up huge debts working on his fembot and is still trying to find a technology company to sponsor his research.

But in the meantime he has had to move back in with his parents and they will all be spending the festive period and New Year together.

'My family found it a bit odd at first, but now they all love Aiko,' said Le.

'My mum and dad chat away to her. It helps by talking to her, as it improves her vocabulary.'

The caption on the picture reads, "Love machine: Trung is so serious about Aiko he bought her Christmas presents."

This Makes Me Want to Cry...

Aggie Catholics has an interview with an abortion doctor (should I use "scare quotes" around that?) focusing on the 40 Days for Life. There are portions that are eye-opening, and anyone who sees contraception as okay, but abortion as not okay, needs to check this out.

Here's a snippet:

Q: Your website describes abortion as an "important medical procedure." Can you expand on that?

Well, it's a philosophical question. But to us, ethically, having an early abortion and taking birth control pills are the same procedure, because certain types of birth control prevent the development of a fertilized egg and leads to miscarriage.

If you consider a fertilized egg a pregnancy, which religious people do, then taking certain birth control pills is just as much an abortion as anything else. It's somewhat interesting that many people who would demonstrate against an abortion service think nothing of taking birth control pills. Ethically, you cannot differentiate between the two.

Second, in a certain patient population, an early abortion is a safer, better birth-control method than even taking birth control pills. So, from a medical point of view, there is no scientific or ethical argument that you could come up with against early pregnancy termination. As long as humans have recreational sex they will need abortion. As long as some pregnancies are abnormal, we will need abortion. You can't get around it.

Honestly, it makes me want to cry. It makes me a bit physically sick.

On the other hand, our new pastor, Father K., will be participating in the 40 Days campaign - personally - on two occasions that he asked to be "our parish's" days.

Please, please pray for Father K. (and all priests). Satan hates our priests, and especially hates ones as dedicated to the Magisterium as Father K. is. The spiritual attacks on our priests are horrible, and I'm sure none of us want to experience those for ourselves. I'm certain that many of the priests who are criticized for being dissidents have suffered great attacks that they simply were not ready for.

Pray for our priests! (Here is an image of the card, front and back, with a beautiful prayer. Won't you consider praying this prayer at the end of your Rosary, along with the Saint Michael prayer?)

Follow Up: My Complaint to Ben & Jerry's

I used their online email form to submit the following complaint:

I was sorry to see that you decided to promote gay "marriage" by re-naming your Chubby Hubby ice cream "Hubby Hubby" and displaying a picture of two men in tuxedos. This kind of activity is not one I wish to assist with my money, nor do I wish to need to explain even the chosen graphics for your promotion. As a result, from this point on, I will not purchase any more Ben & Jerry's ice cream.

If I get any response*, I'll let you know. In the meantime, why not tell them what you think, too?

(*I did find it interesting that the "Complaint" link, when you click about "general concern" leads you to a page where they say they won't be responding to you. Very nice, very progressive.)

Related links:

• Fox News story: Ben & Jerry's Debuts 'Hubby Hubby' for Gay Marriage
• Ben & Jerry's general information on "Hubby Hubby"
• Press release from Ben & Jerry's
• Freedom to Marry (the group benefitting from Ben & Jerry's)
• Catholic teaching on the Sacrament of Marriage and why gay "marriage" cannot exist
• Not particularly religious? Here's a way to understand the benefits of traditional marriage without getting into the religous/faith side of things.

[image source]

I Will Never Buy Ben & Jerry's Again

Ever.

Ben & Jerry's Changes 'Chubby Hubby' to 'Hubby Hubby' in Support of Gay Marriage

In Those Days There Was No King in Israel, But Every One Did That Which Seemed Right to Himself.

Lutherans to Allow Sexually Active Gays to Serve as Clergy

This is just stunning. Stunning! Exactly which part of the laws against such behavior in the Bible do they not understand?

I'm so, so, so glad to be Catholic. I'm so glad we have 2000 years of unbroken leadership and sound doctrine that doesn't change with social whims.

[blog post title source]





Please browse my eBay items. Thank you.

I Think I Just Threw Up in my Mouth a Little...

From The Corner:

'My First Abortion Party' - Mark Hemingway

Wow.

Source.

Cross posted at the Soccer Mom Blog.

Grieving Jackson Fans 'Commit Suicide' - Yahoo! News UK

Okay, let's start by saying that this is probably bunk (about the suicides), but I wanted to point out a quote from a so-called "minister."  First the link:

Grieving Jackson Fans 'Commit Suicide' - Yahoo! News UK

Now the quote:

Jesse Jackson, a friend of the singer, has recorded a YouTube film on the site urging fans not to "self destruct".

He said: "This is a time when hearts are heavy. There is great pain but great cause to celebrate Michael's life.

"It made Michael happy saying 'We Are The World'. Don't self destruct.

"We fall down sometimes, we get back up. That's the right thing to do. In Michael's name let's live together as brothers and sisters and not die apart as fools."

Does anyone seriously think that Jesse Jackson is a Christian minister when he talks this way?  "In Michael's name"? 

"In Michael's name:"?

Talk about the canonization of celebrities.

Live Action Films: Undercover #7

Still can't post to the Catholic Soccer Mom blog.  VERY odd.  Until Blogger fixes this weird problem (I'm not the only one having it), I'm going to post this here.  It's from Live Action Films, and it's the seventh video in this series.

This was the sixth video, in case you missed it:

More on Live Action Films' Mona Lisa Project:

Planned Parenthood clinics across the country are contributing to the abuse of young girls.

The Mona Lisa Project videos document Planned Parenthood's willingness to repeatedly violate mandatory reporting laws for statutory rape that protect children.

Our series of hidden camera investigations, collected by a team led by Lila Rose in summer 2008, provide the public the inside story about the abortion industry and its abuses across the nation. Despite a consistent pattern of lawlessness and abuse, Planned Parenthood receives over $330 million from taxpayers each year. The tax-exempt "nonprofit" netted $100 million in net income last year including revenue of over $100 million directly from performing 305,000 abortions.

We hope that our project will lead to prosecution and reforms at Planned Parenthood so that their business practices will be forced to comply with governing laws that protect young girls.

LEARN MORE: The Mona Lisa Project

One more thing you'll want to see on their homepage: an interactive map that shows violations they've documented from around the country.  Here's a screenshot, but please click over and see it for yourself.

Prognostication in Film

I was going to do this at the Soccer Mom blog, but I can't seem to get to it for some reason.  Strange.

Anyhoo...

Last night, Travel Man and I watched Network, on a recommendation from The Anchoress.  She was commenting on the absolute circus going on around Michael Jackson's death.  I mean, the UN passed a resolution that requires the US to pay a certain percentage of our GDP to them, the Sentate approved a legal advisor to the administration that believes that international law should be considered when interpreting the United States Constitution, and the House of Representatives passed a massive bill that even the administration hasn't read completely.  (It went from 900 to 1200 pages overnight, then from 1200 to 1500 in an afternoon.  And I'm looking for the video of an administration official on Fox and Friends this morning; she admitted that she'd read "large portions" of the bill.  The question was "Have you read the whole 1000+ page bill?"  Her answer - several times - was, "I've read large portions of it," or, "I've read large swaths of it.")  This bill will effectively increase everyone's energy costs with cap-and-trade taxes.  (I'd give you more links than this, but I CANNOT FIND much of anything, especially on the UN resoltion.)

And what is the media doing for at least two solid days?  Hanging out in Gary, Indiana, by Michael Jackson's boyhood home.  Hanging out near his ranch.  Gawking at people in Harlem having candle-lit vigils of sorts by theaters.  Giving us live feeds from the hospital where people are crowding in the parking lots because they're so heartbroken over Jackson's death.  

Because we know how important all this is in relation to what's going on.

Mind you, I don't mind the mention of it, or even an update, but the live-feeds and interviews with every person who knew him or imitated him or listened to a record of his...it's ridiculous.  Jonah Goldberg summed things up nicely.

This was a complete coincidence, but this week's lesson in The Great Adventure Bible Study was about 1Samuel, and in it, we see Israel asking for a king.  They didn't ask for him for any reason except that they wanted to be just like everyone else.  Even when Samuel tells them the trouble a king will bring them, their answer is, "YAY!  GIVE US A KING!"  

During the DVD lesson we watched before Mass yesterday, Dr. Jeff Cavins commented about kings.  You see, the Lord God was King of Israel at this point in history.  Samuel knew that, and was more than a bit perturbed by Israel's "follow the crowd" mentality.  And today, Christians acknowledge Jesus Christ (the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity) as King of kings.  Catholics have a feast day just to proclaim this fact: Christ the King.  So during his discussion of this passage, Dr. Cavins said, "Michael Jackson is not a king.  Elvis is not a king," and then went on to discuss what seems to be this need we have for royalty.  What's neat is that the Catholic Church has this kind of hierarchy built right in; we even call our bishops "princes of the Church."  

But back to Network.

The movie was really fascinating.  I'd never watched it before, but have wanted to for years now.  And it is absolutely prescient!  I suppose if I'd have watched this when it came out (fat chance: I was six) or even a few years ago, I would have scoffed that the news would be such a thing.  

But no more.

What is really amazing is how far into this vision we already are.  How much the news, especially with a 24 hour news cycle, has become bread and circuses.  It's entertainment!  It's exciting!  It FASCINATING!  And in an ever-increasing push to gain more ratings, more viewers, a bigger market share, the news is looking less like this:

And more like this (WANRING: language alert!!):

You doubt?  Really?  How about this:

Now, I like Glenn Beck, but he is (or, at least, has become) a milder version of Howard Beale.  And watching Network has only put me off the news channels a little bit more than they were doing on their own, what with the days-on-end coverage about the death of a pop singer and the constant fiddling while Rome burns mentality.

It's all bread and circuses, and good luck finding out what's actually happening in the world.

(WANRING: language alert!!)

(WANRING: language alert!!)

I Shouldn't Even Need to Say It, But...

My first reaction to Tiller's murder was, "Oh, my God!  How horrible!"

Pray for his soul.  Pray for his murderer.  No matter how awful Tiller's actions (and trust me, butchering babies right up until the ninth month of pregnancy is pretty bad), he did not deserve to be murdered in cold blood.

May God have mercy on his soul.

Thoughts on ND

Just how far back did Notre Dame's honorary degree for President Obama set back the Catholic Church's work to establish a Culture of Life in America?

How seriously will pro-abortion politicians take us (meaning Pro Life Catholics) now that Notre Dame has said that it's okay to be pro-abortion as long as you're in favor of universal healthcare and taxing the rich?

I think we'll be dismissed, and this will only serve to work to break down proper obedience within the Church.  The valedictorian of Notre Dame said - on video - that it's fine to honor President Obama because of his stances on the poor, health care, etc.  We can ignore the whole killing unborn (and newly born through botched abortion) thing.  Or that he wants to distribute birth control on our dime.  Or pay for abortions with tax money.  Or prevent doctors, nurses, and pharmacists from following their consciences and refusing to give birth control or perform abortions.

Never mind that stuff.  He's for free healthcare!

This act will cause others to think that following the direction of one's bishop is optional.  That it's not a contradiction for a Catholic institution to honor someone who is stridently pro-abortion.  I think this will further damage souls in that they will ignore the Church's plea to live chastely and to treasure life.

Notre Dame's decision affects more than graduation day.  And that's why it's a scandal.

[image source]

Notre Dame's Response (Students, That Is)

I am sure I can find it if I look, but anyone who knows the time of graduation (and perhaps the time the president is to speak), please leave it in the com boxes.  I'd like to be sure to pray a Rosary while he's speaking.

Special Olympian Tells It Like It Is

Found via The Corner, from the AP:

ANN ARBOR, Mich. (AP) - The top bowler for the Special Olympics looks forward to meeting President Barack Obama in an alley.

"He bowled a 129. I bowl a 300. I could beat that score easily," Michigan's Kolan McConiughey (KO-lahn Mc-KAHNA-he) told The Associated Press in an interview Friday.

The athletic-minded president made an offhand remark Thursday on "The Tonight Show" comparing his weak bowling to "the Special Olympics or something." He quickly apologized and told the Special Olympics chairman he wants to have some of its athletes visit the White House to bowl or play basketball.

McConiughey, who is mentally disabled, is just the bowler for the job. He's bowled five perfect games since 2005.

The 35-year-old McConiughey has been bowling since he was 8 or 9. His advice for Obama? Practice every day.

You tell him, Kolan!

(And, in case you are reading the rest of the posts dealing with this despicable comment of the president, I don't think that his offhand, "Oh, I didn't mean it to be bad or anything," is enough.  What, does he call short busses "tart carts," too?  Nice people don't make jokes at the expense of the retarded.  Actually, nice people don't make jokes at the expense of anyone else.  I maintain that this comment is just a symptom of his utter disregard for the dignity of human life in general.)