Nothing Essential About Essence

I wrote a column three years ago titled, “Black Women No Longer Have Their Essence.” My point was that Essence, the pre-eminent magazine for Black women, had become irrelevant and an embarrassment to the Black community.

Unfortunately, Essence has continued its decent into irrelevancy.

For 20 years, Essence has sponsored an annual party during the July 4th holiday known as the Essence Music Festival (EMF). According to their website, the EMF, “known as the party with a purpose, is an annual music festival which started in 1995 as a one-time event to celebrate the 25th anniversary of Essence, a magazine aimed primarily towards African-American women. It is the largest event celebrating African-American culture and music in the United States.”

According to media accounts, “…In 2008, for the first time since its 1995 inception, the festival was not produced by the original producer team. Instead, Essence Communications, owner of the festival and the Essence magazine, contracted Rehage Entertainment Inc. A new main stage facelift was designed by production designer Stefan Beese.” Essence Communications and Essence Magazine are no longer Black-owned, they are owned by Time Inc.

Maybe this would explain why EMF contracted with Rehage Entertainment Inc. and Stefan Beese to produce the event and to build a new stage. They couldn’t find a Black firm capable of taking on these contracts? If they need some referrals, I would be glad to send them a list of Black people who could do the job, if they are truly interested in the “empowerment” of the Black community as they claim.

There was also no diversity in the programming. Of their 86 “empowerment” speakers during their various daytime panels, all were media personalities, journalist, or liberal politicians. There were maybe three people who one could argue were businessmen, but that’s a stretch. As far as I can tell, there were no Republicans invited to participate, as though Essence has no Black female Republican readers?

One panel was about the hair texture of Jay Z and Beyoncé’s baby. Yes, you heard me right; Essence had a whole panel to discuss a child’s nappy hair. One news account said, “Essence Magazine recently hosted an Empowerment Beauty of Confidence panel to comment on the backlash [over the child’s hair]. Essence asked Cynthia Bailey, Kim Kimble, Chenoa Maxwell, Tomiko Frasier Hines, Soledad O’Brien and Wendy Raquel Robinson to comment on the backlash.”

There were no empowerment panels on the women who work in the White House for Obama being paid less than their male counterparts; there were no empowerment panels on why Obama never interviewed a Black female lawyer for the two Supreme Court nominations he made to the Court; there were no empowerment panels on the number of Black kids languishing in the foster care system while Obama wants to throw billions of dollars to support children coming to this country illegally.

In essence, Essence’s continued march towards irrelevancy has nothing to do with them being White-owned. They were well down that road before they were sold. One could make the argument that the articles in Essence have become less substantive after Time Inc. assumed leadership, not that substance was ever their hallmark. How can you talk about “empowerment” without talking about Lynn Hutchings, a State Representative in the Wyoming legislature? She is the first Black female Republican to serve in the state’s history.

How can you talk about “empowerment” without talking about J’Tia Taylor, who has a Ph.D in nuclear engineering from the University of Illinois; she started college at the age of 15. How can you talk about “empowerment” without talking about Ambassador Bonnie Jenkins, the State Department’s Coordinator for Threat Reduction Programs? Ambassador Jenkins has a Ph.D. in international relations from the University of Virginia, an LL.M. in international and comparative law from the Georgetown University Law Center, an M.P.A. from the State University of New York at Albany, a J.D. from Albany Law School; and a B.A. from Amherst College. She also attended The Hague Academy for International Law.

You have such accomplished women – Democrats and Republicans – yet Essence is talking about the texture of a child’s hair.

RELATED ARTICLE: Blacks Should Be Thankful There Was An America To Come To

Black outrage over Obama’s actions spreads to Chicago [VIDEO]

Last week we shared the video of the black woman in Houston who was infuriated by the potential resettlement of illegal immigrant children in her neighborhood. The outrage is spreading to Obama’s hometown of Chicago, where gang violence is effectively turning the black community into a genocidal combat zone — but cries and concerns have fallen upon deaf ears, at least where the first black president is concerned.

Hat tip to our conservative warrior in the ‘Hood, Rebel Pundit, who writes, “On Friday evening residents from Chicago’s Southside held a protest in front of the Chicago Police Department against the intolerable violence plaguing their communities and sounded off on President Obama for paying favor to illegal aliens crossing the southern border.”

“Residents also called for the resignation of Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel and Police Superintendent Garry McCarthy for their failure to effectively handle the city’s violence epidemic. The president’s handling of the illegal invasion in Texas prompted residents to call him out for ignoring the current state of Chicago, where 120 people have been shot and at least 26 killed so far this July.”

As we just reported today, 748 illegal immigrants have been secretly dropped off in Chicago. Hundreds have already been dispersed to families — illegals or not — and sponsors.

Rebel Pundit writes, “The recent shooting of Jasmine Curry, a pregnant mother of five on Chicago’s Dan Ryan Expressway, prompted the residents to organize the demonstration. Curry’s father, Pierre Curry, attended the event and addressed and spoke of the pain he has endured after losing his first-born daughter after losing a son as well, less than one year ago. Curry said, “I’d like to tell the young peoples [sic] out here, especially young African-Americans, I’d like to tell the world, Mr. President, congress, senate, aldermen, governor, the mayor–losing a child is something else, losing something that God gave to you, and some fool in the street took it, he didn’t have a right to take my son or my daughter from her five kids. And if anybody knows something, anything, man up,” he then asked for prayers before breaking into tears.”

“Barack will go down as the worst president ever elected, Bill Clinton was the African-American President,” one resident said, in response to the president’s performance on the job, “President Barack needs to pay attention to Chicago, if he can not pay attention to Chicago and the African-American community, he needs to resign.”

Another compared the current state of Black-American life to that during slavery, saying, “Today, if you look at the time that we were brought here as slaves 400 years ago, we got the same results today.”

And so again I ask those faux leaders in the black community, especially Rep. Marcia Fudge Chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus — the “conscience of the Congress” — just whose side is your self-declared messiah Obama on?

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on AllenBWest.com.

Serious Food for Thought: Great Video on the Ever-Controversial Issue of IMMIGRATION

Hope all is well as we all thank GOD that the World Cup finally came to a close yesterday…LOL! And, like I said in Saturday’s e-mail, a professional soccer match can go for a full “90” minutes – go into 2 Extra Periods – without a single GOOOOOOOAAAAAALLLLLL being scored. And, I should have stayed with that exact scenario that I wrote about two days ago – as that is exactly what happened in yesterday’s Championship Match – with Pope Benedict XVI Emeritus” Germany squad outlasting Pope Francis’ Argentina team – 1- nil. It would have been great if both popes would have been in attendance as we would never, ever see that again in our life times – 2 “live” popes with their two respective country teams playing against each other on a world stage like the World Cup…Some Food for thought…what a “kick in the grass”…

And, speaking about “Food for Thought” and world stages – let’s take a good look at this 6 minute video that I bring you today by Mr. Roy Beck (no relation to Glenn). I don’t know much about him other than he is a former International Journalist of public policy books and he serves as the President of the non-partisan Numbers USA Education Research Foundation. He knows his numbers and he knows his facts. This particular presentation truly makes one think about what is going on in our world today – especially with the hottest topic in our beloved United States of America – the ever-controversial issue of Immigration as it relates to Poverty & Population…

Friends: This is one topic that is so sensitive, so delicate and so critical – and, one that needs to be taken care of in a most urgent manner. Not many like to comment about it because there are so many differing opinions. It does take boldness to write about it because everybody has a different experience and take on it. This is a topic that should have been taken care of by two-term President, Barack Obama, from the moment that he put his “left” hand on our Holy Bible and was sworn in as our 44th President of the United States. So, after almost 6 years into his ever-rocky presidency, he finally has come around to “taking a quick look” at this world-wide Immigration issue that, along with “12” other scandals and controversies that have mired his presidency – King Obama should once again be dethroned from his throne…

This is Obama’s “Katrina” and this is not a strong hurricane that blew in over night – but, rather, it is a Category 6 Storm that has been brewing at our borders for many years and one that Obama should have put emphasis and priority on over 5 years ago when he promised this non-sense about “Hope & Change”. Did the Almighty One mean “We hope that there is change”??? Obviously, he got a tremendous amount of the Hispanic votes in both elections (74% of Catholic Hispanics voted for him), because he promised these beloved migrants that he would take care of them once he took office. And, once again, Obama spoke a good game, but, like a pitcher with no arms – he has yet to deliver for them and now it is catching up on the Almighty One. It appears that the word “Impeachment” was dropped from Webster’s dictionary & the Constitution of the United States when King Obama took over our country in 2009, as if it were any other President who has faltered as much – he would have been impeached a dozen times already… a “faker’s dozen”.

So, without taking sides like many have with this issue, I urge that you take a good, hard look at this video presentation by Mr. Roy Beck as it truly makes a ton of sense the way that he breaks it all down for us. Yes, he illustrates this entire international scenario with hundreds of colorful gum balls. Chew on that for a second and see what each gum ball represents. Again, I bring it to you as some serious “Food for Thought” because this is a critical issue that can easily escalate into a worldly disaster, with our beloved United States of America taking the brunt of this Cat 6 storm, that even has winds of over 150 MPH gusting in the White House.

I personally feel that the most important comment that is made in this video presentation is what Mr. Beck says at the very end: “The only place that 99.9% of these people can be helped is where they live. Let’s help them there”.

And, that, my friends, is where the “root of all evil” lies and where I think we need to focus our attention on – where they live. That is where we must help them, if you will. We must go to the root of this problem and nip it in the bud right where this cancer begins…and all signs show that it all stems from these Central American countries who are wreaking havoc on their own kind. These corrupt and ruthless governments are the ones who are forcing these young, undocumented children to leave because of the hardship and violence that they are inflicting on them – and if you have any type of human compassion – it’s got to hurt you deep inside. It is beyond excruciating…

In my heart of hearts, I believe that if the United States would spend more time and resources on working with these countries (who are the ones who are doing everything “illegal” from the get-go by embracing and endorsing the intrinsic evils of drug trafficking, human trafficking and violence through gang warfare) – we would be able to eliminate these problems and not have to face the “consequences” of turning a blind eye and a deaf ear on these issues. We have to do a better job internationally in putting a stop to these illegal activities that are taking place right there in Central America. If we continue to ignore this problem and think it is going to go away like the “Curse of Common Core” – we are fooling ourselves and it will blow up in our faces. And, that is exactly what is about to happen today…This all falls under the President of the United States’ Foreign Policy…

If we treat this critical humanitarian issue with compassion, mercy and love as Jesus in Matthew: 25 teaches us – with a good sprinkle of discipline, “tough love” and a thorough approach of “common sense law and order” by securing our borders for the sake of safety for all parties involved – then, and only then, are we ever going to get somewhere. If we don’t secure our borders immediately and take this all to prayer in a most fervent manner – we will continue to see this problem escalate until something of inhumane atrocity takes place. A mini American version of the Holocaust…

I am all about compassion, ministering to the least of my brothers and sisters and being my “Brother’s Keeper” (the foundation for our Christian on a Mission ministry) – but, until we take care of our own country and our own people – I personally don’t think that the United States should have the responsibility of having to minister to people coming from other countries who are doing so by illegal means. Illegal can never be good. That is why we call it “illegal”. It means “breaking the law”. So, let’s abide by the law and let’s work “Two-gether” on making this complicated process all legal. Let’s work on making it all loving. Let’s work on making it all work so that everybody benefits and it is a win-win for the United States & Central America.

Also, since these laws are being broken in the United States of America – the U.S. should be the one who legally and professionally mandates what can and cannot occur at its borders. That only makes sense. This is our country. These are our borders. These are our laws. And, let’s not forget to make sure that we go to the “root” of this problem and take care of this issue at its foundation and stress to these countries that they are better off keeping these courageous people in their own countries who are willing to travel for 4 days in the desert while risking their lives in order to live in the “free” United States of America. One day, these passionate migrants can become assets in their respective countries and because of their courage, boldness and willingness to go to the extreme – may become heroes in their own countries and benefit them.

After all is said and done, we are all “Children of GOD” and nobody is better or more privileged than the other – regardless of race, religion, country of origin or economic background – but, this is our beloved country and we Americans have to take care of our home land – while, at the same time – being compassionate and loving towards those who are willing to put their lives on the line to try to be a part of this country that we are all so blessed to be living in. As a Cuban immigrant from 1961, myself, I am more than humbled and honored to live, work and serve in my beloved country. I am blessed. I bleed red, white and blue (Cuban & American colors), and love the United States with all my being. And, since my family and I had to flee the Communist rule of a dictator like Fidel Castro 53 years ago – I know first-hand what these migrants are going through today and what it is like having to leave their beloved country in order to seek freedom and a better life. Because of my own personal experience, I have that much more compassion for anybody in this world who faces those odds so my perspective may be a bit different than somebody who was born and raised right here in Palm Beach Gardens and may think that I am being a bit too lenient…Don’t judge anybody until you have to walk in his shoes – especially if it is 3 days and 3 nights in a dangerous desert…

In closing, if you don’t feel the same way I do about my commentaries on this topic – that’s fine. We are all entitled to our opinions and feelings. But, please at least take it to prayer. I may not feel the same way you do, so I take it to prayer. The more prayer our country can get, the better off we will all be. That is what I learned many years ago – when MAN cannot find a solution for HUMAN problems – simply take it to prayer and speak to the One who created us all in His image and likeness. He brought us all into this world and He created North & Central America and He is the only one who has the solution to this very delicate problem…After all, His only begotten son, Jesus, was an immigrant, Himself…and Christianity has no borders…Let us pray…

Is Greed Good? by Mark Skousen

A Free Capitalist Society Moderates the Passions.

“Unbridled avarice is not in the least the equivalent of capitalism, still less its ‘spirit’.” — Max Weber[1]

Recently greed has become a popular term of endearment. There’s even a TV game show by that name. In 1987, Oliver Stone released a popular movie called Wall Street, in which Gordon Gekko, the fictional dealmaker extraordinaire, declares, “Greed is good.”

In the 1990s, as capitalism, technology, and the financial markets advanced, some free-market economists defended Gekko’s speech, arguing that the pursuit of greed is beneficial and an integral feature of market capitalism. It motivates individuals to work harder, to create new and better products. As Bernard Mandeville wrote in The Fable of the Bees (1714), the private vices of greed, avarice, and luxury lead to abundant wealth.

On the other hand, critics of capitalism, from Thorstein Veblen to John Kenneth Galbraith, have long argued that capitalism unleashes greed, creating greater inequality, alienation, and deception in society. Capitalism is, in short, morally corrupting, both for the individual and business.

Which view is more accurate?

Part of the problem is in the definition of the word. If greed simply means enthusiastically pursuing one’s self-interest, there is no harm in it and a great deal of good. Unfortunately, greed carries excessive baggage beyond honest initiative. Webster’s Dictionary defines greed as “excessive desire for acquiring or having.” A greedy person “wants to eat and drink too much” or “desires more than one needs or deserves.” This conjures up passages of conspicuous consumption from Veblen’s Theory of the Leisure Class, or scenes of the miserly banker foreclosing on the poor in Frank Capra’s film It’s a Wonderful Life. Is that what capitalism leads to?

Greed is no virtue in the financial markets. Too many inexperienced, gullible investors get caught up in the latest hot market, only to buy in at the top. As J. Paul Getty warns, “The big profits go to the intelligent, careful and patient investor, not to the reckless and overeager speculator.”[2]

Montesquieu to the Rescue

In researching my forthcoming book, The Making of Modern Economics (M. E. Sharpe Publishers), I have uncovered several economic thinkers who make an important contribution to this issue. Charles de Montesquieu (1689-1755) was the first major figure during the Enlightenment to maintain that commercial activity restrains greed and other passions. In his classic work, The Spirit of the Laws (1748), Montesquieu expressed the novel view that the business of moneymaking serves as a countervailing bridle against the violent passions of war and abusive political power. “Commerce cures destructive prejudices,” he declared. “It polishes and softens barbarous mores . . . . The natural effect of commerce is to lead to peace.”[3] Commerce improves society: “The spirit of commerce brings with it the spirit of frugality, of economy, of moderation, of work, of wisdom, of tranquility, of order, and of regularity.”[4]

Adam Smith (1723-90) held similar views. He wrote eloquently of the public benefits of pursuing one’s private self-interest, but he was no apologist for unbridled greed. Smith disapproved of private gain if it meant defrauding or deceiving someone in business. To quote Smith: “But man has almost constant occasion for the help of his brethren . . . . He will be more likely to prevail if he can interest their self-love in his favour . . . . Give me that which I want, and you shall have this which you want, is the meaning of every such offer.”[5] In other words, all legitimate exchanges must benefit both the buyer and the seller, not one at the expense of the other. Smith’s model of natural liberty reflects this essential attribute: “Every man, as long as he does not violate the laws of justice, is left perfectly free to pursue his own interest his own way, and to bring both his industry and capital into competition with those of any other man, or order of men.”[6]

Smith favored enlightened self-interest and even self-restraint. Indeed, he firmly believed that a free commercial society moderated the passions and prevented a descent into a Hobbesian jungle, a theme echoing Montesquieu. He taught that commerce encourages people to defer gratification and to become educated, industrious, and self-disciplined. It is the fear of losing customers “which retrains his frauds and corrects his negligence.’[7]

Finally, Smith supported social institutions—the competitive marketplace, religious communities, and the law—to foster self-control, self-discipline, and benevolence.[8]

In sum, no system can eliminate greed, fraud, or violence. Socialism and communitarian organizations promise paradise, but seldom deliver. Oddly enough, it may be a freely competitive capitalist economy that can best foster self-discipline and control of the passions.

ABOUT MARK SKOUSEN

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is courtesy of FEE and Shutterstock.


Notes

  1. Quoted in Jerry Z. Muller, Adam Smith in His Time and Ours (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1993), p. 194.
  2. J. Paul Getty, How to Be Rich (New York: Jove Books, 1965), p. 154. This book is required reading for all investors.
  3. Charles de Montesquieu, The Spirit of the Laws (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989), p. 338.
  4. Quoted in Albert O. Hirschman, The Passions and the Interests (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1997), p. 71. I highly recommend this book on pre-Smithian views of capitalism.
  5. Adam Smith, The Wealth of Nations (New York: Modern Library, 1965), p. 14.
  6. Ibid., p. 651. Italics added.
  7. Ibid., p. 129.
  8. Muller, p. 2.

Walter Williams speaks at the Foundation for Economic Education

Prof. Williams delivered the following to an audience in Irvington, New York, on June 28, 2014. Williams’ lecture is one in a series designed to share ideas, honor FEE’s rich tradition, and say goodbye to the Irvington property.

Let us begin with a discussion of a working definition of markets. Markets are simply millions upon millions, and internationally billions upon billions, of individual decision-makers, engaged in the pursuit of what they determine to be their best interests. We say that the market is free if it is characterized by peaceable, voluntary exchange, private property rights, rule of law, and limited government intervention and control. While some people denounce free markets as immoral, the reality is exactly the opposite. Free markets are more moral than any other system of resource allocation. Let’s talk about the moral superiority of free markets.

Suppose you hire me to mow your lawn and afterwards you pay me $30. The money you pay me might be thought of as a certificate of performance—proof that I served you. With these certificates of performance (money) in hand, I go to my grocer and demand 3 pounds of steak and a six-pack of beer that my fellow man produced. In effect, the grocer says, “Williams, you’re asking that your fellow man, as ranchers and brewers, serve you. What did you do in turn to serve your fellow man?” I say, “I mowed my fellow man’s lawn.” The grocer says, “Prove it!” That’s when I hand over my certificates of performance—the $30.

A system that requires that I serve my fellow man in order to have a claim on what he produces is far more moral than government resource allocation. The government can, in effect say, justifying it with one reason or another, “Williams, you don’t have to serve your fellow man in order to have a claim on what he produces. Through the tax code, we’ll take what he produces and give it to you.” Of course, if I were to privately take what my fellow man produced, we’d call it theft. The only difference is when the government does it, that theft is legal but nonetheless theft—which is defined as taking of one person’s rightful property to give to another.

The essence of free markets is good-good exchanges, or what I like to think of as seduction. Exchanges of this sort are featured by the proposition: “I’ll do something good for you if you do something good for me.” Game theorists recognize this as a positive-sum game—a transaction where both parties, in their own estimation, are better off as a result. When I go to my grocer and offer him the following proposition: If you do something good for me—give me that gallon of milk—I’ll do something good for you—give you three dollars. As a result, I am better off because I valued the milk more than I valued the three dollars and he is better off because he valued the three dollars more than he valued the gallon of milk.

Of course there’s another type of exchange not typically, voluntarily entered into, namely good-bad exchanges, or what we might call rape. An example of that kind of exchange would be where I approached my grocer with a pistol, telling him that if he didn’t do something good for me (give me that gallon of milk) I’d do something bad to him: blow his brains out. Clearly, I would be better off, but he would be worse off. Game theorists call that a zero-sum game. That’s the case where in order for one person to be better off, of necessity the other must be worse off. Zero-sum games are transactions mostly initiated by thieves and governments, both are involved in what is euphemistically called income redistribution. The only difference is one does it under the color of the law and the other doesn’t.

The wonders of greed

What human motivation is responsible for getting the most wonderful things done? I would say greed. When I use the term greed, I do not mean cheating, stealing, fraud, and other acts of dishonesty, I mean people seeking to get the most for themselves. Unfortunately, many people are naive enough to believe that it compassion, concern, and “feeling another’s pain” are the superior human motivations. As such we fall easy prey to charlatans, quacks, and hustlers.

Since it’s not considered polite, and surely not politically correct to come out and actually say that greed gets wonderful things done, let me go through a few of the millions of examples of the wonders of greed. It’s a wonderful thing that most of us own cars. Is there anyone who believes that the reason we have cars is because Detroit assembly line workers care about us? It’s also wonderful that Texas cattle ranchers make the sacrifices of time and effort caring for steer so that New Yorkers can have beef on their supermarket shelves. It is also wonderful that Idaho potato growers arise early to do back-breaking work in the hot sun to ensure that New Yorkers also have potatoes on their supermarket shelves. Again, is there anyone who believes that ranchers and potato growers, who make these sacrifices, do so because they care about New Yorkers? They might hate New Yorkers. New Yorkers have beef and potatoes because Texas cattle ranchers and Idaho potato growers care about themselves and they want more for themselves. How much steak and potatoes would New Yorkers have if it all depended on human love and kindness? I would feel sorry for New Yorkers. Reasoning this way bothers some people because they are more concerned with the motives behind a set of actions rather than the results.

This is what Adam Smith, the father of economics, meant in The Wealth of Nations when he said, “It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker, that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interests.” In other words, the public good is promoted best by people pursuing their own private interests.

Parity of the market

There is another feature of the free market that often goes unappreciated. That is a sort of parity of the marketplace. The market is an extreme form of democracy: one man, one vote. While the rich have many more dollars than I have, my one dollar is just as valuable as a rich man’s one dollar.  One might assert that common people do not have access to Rolls Royces and yachts. You would be wrong. Microsoft’s Bill Gates is super-rich and can afford to ride in a Rolls Royce and go yachting; but so can the common man—just not for as long. He can rent a Rolls or a yacht for a day, half-day or an hour. This is something often forgotten: People can bid on quantity as well as price.

The fruits of the free market are the best thing that ever happened to the common man. The rich have always had access to entertainment, often in the comfort of their palaces and mansions. The rich have never had to experience the drudgery of having to beat out carpets, iron their clothing or slave over a hot stove all day in order to have a decent dinner. They could afford to hire people. Mass production and marketing have made radios and televisions, vacuum cleaners, wash-and-wear clothing and microwave ovens available and well within the means of the common man; thus sparing him of the boredom and drudgery of the past. Today, the common man has the power to enjoy much (and more) of what only the rich could afford yesteryear.

What about those who became wealthy producing these comforts available to the common man? Henry Ford benefitted immensely from mass producing automobiles but the benefits received by the common man, from being able to buy a car, dwarfs anything Ford received. Individuals who founded companies that produced penicillin, polio, and typhoid vaccines may have become very wealthy—but again, it was the common man who was the major beneficiary. In more recent times, computers and software products have benefitted our health, safety, and quality of life in ways that dwarf whatever wealth received by their creators.

Capitalism is relatively new in human history. Prior to the rise of capitalism, the way people amassed great wealth was by looting, plundering and enslaving their fellow man. Capitalism made it possible to become wealthy by serving one’s fellow man. Capitalists seek to discover what people want and then produce and market it as efficiently as possible. Here’s a question that we should ponder in light of anti-market demagoguery: Are people who by their actions created unprecedented convenience, longer life expectancy, and made more fun available for the ordinary person—and became wealthy in the process—deserving of all the scorn and ridicule heaped upon them by intellectuals and politicians? Are the wealthy really obliged to “give something back?” After all, for example, what more do the wealthy discoverers and producers of, say, life-saving antibiotics owe us? They’ve already saved lives and made us healthier.

Despite the miracles of capitalism, it doesn’t do well in popularity polls. One of the reasons is that capitalism is always evaluated against the nonexistent, unrealizable utopias of socialism or communism. Any earthly system, when compared to a Utopia, will pale in comparison. But for the ordinary person, capitalism, with all of its warts, is superior to any system yet devised to deal with our everyday needs and desires.

Rights versus wishes

Often people speak of rights to housing, medical care, food, and other goods and services deemed necessary for the sustenance of life. That vision leads to gross violations of most standards of morality. In standard usage of the term, a right, sometimes called negative rights, is something that exists simultaneously among people. A right confers no obligation on another. For example, the right to free speech is something we all possess simultaneously. My right to free speech imposes no obligation upon another except that of non-interference. Similarly, I have a right to travel freely. That right imposes no obligation upon another except that of non-interference.

Contrast those rights to the supposed right to medical care or decent housing whether one can afford them or not. Through government actions, those supposed rights do impose obligations upon others. Government has no resources of its very own. The money coming from federal, state and local governments to pay for those “rights” does not come from politicians reaching into their own pockets. Moreover, there is no Santa Claus or Tooth Fairy who provides the money. The recognition that government has no resources of it very own forces one to recognize that the only way government can give one person a dollar is to first take it from someone else. A government-granted right to medical care, housing or anything else imposes an obligation on another, namely one American have less of something else—diminished rights to his earnings. That is, if one person has a right to something he did not earn, it requires another to not have a right to something he did earn. Let’s apply this bogus concept of rights—some might call it positive rights—to free speech and the right to travel freely. In that case, my free speech rights would require others to supply me with an auditorium, microphone and audience. My right to travel would require that others provide me with airplane tickets and hotel accommodations. Most Americans, I would imagine, would tell me, “Williams, yes you have rights to free speech and travel rights, but I’m not obligated to pay for them!”

As human beings we all have certain unalienable rights, as so eloquently stated in our Declaration of Independence. Of the rights we possess, we have a right to delegate to government. For example, we all have a right to defend ourselves against predators. Since we possess that right, we can delegate it to government. In other words, we can say to government, “We have the right to defend ourselves but for a more orderly society, we delegate to you the authority to defend us.” By contrast, I do not possess the right to take the property of one person to give to another. Since I do not possess such a right, I cannot delegate it to government. If you’re a Christian or simply a moral human being, you should be against these so-called rights. After all, when God gave Moses the Eighth Commandment—”Thou shalt not steal”—I’m sure that he didn’t mean thou shalt not steal unless there was a majority vote in Congress. Moreover, I’m sure that if you were to have a heart-to-heart talk with God and ask him, “God, is it okay to be a recipient of stolen property?” I’m guessing He would say that being a recipient of stolen property is a sin as well. I strongly believe in helping our fellow man in need. Doing so by reaching into one’s own pockets to help him is praiseworthy and laudable. Reaching into someone else’s pockets to do so is despicable and worthy of condemnation.

The common good

If the common good or social justice has any operational meaning at all, it means that there is a system of governance where the purpose of laws is to prevent one person from violating another person’s right to acquire, keep and dispose of property in any manner so long as he does not violate another’s similarly held rights. In other words, laws should be written to prevent force and fraud. Laws that force one person to serve the purposes of another are immoral.

Today, our government has become increasingly destructive of the ends it was created to serve. Americans have become increasingly hostile and alien to the liberties envisioned by the Framers. We have disregarded the inscription that graces the wall at the U.S. Department of Justice warning, “Where the law ends tyranny begins.” Benjamin Franklin said, “A frequent reference to the fundamental principles is absolutely necessary to preserve the blessings of liberty, and keep a free government.” That’s the job that the Foundation for Economic Education has done so well over the decades.

America, the Bullied

Perhaps it is because as a child, I witnessed Zaggy torturing chubby Butterball every morning at the school bus stop. Consequently, I have an extremely low tolerance for Leftists bullying Americans into submission and getting away with it.

Fear caused Butterball to endure daily humiliating facial slaps, punches and extortion of his lunch money. Frustrated for Butterball, I asked, “Why don’t you hit Zaggy back?” Butterball replied, “He will beat me up”. My retort, “He is beating you up every day!”

One morning to the delight of us kids, Butterball, while crying his eyes out, went wild on Zaggy. Nothing seriously violent, but Zaggy was the one crying and afraid.

My fellow Americans, we are being bullied like never before by Leftists which include Obama and the MSM. We are being forced not only to tolerate, but embrace their liberal far-left radical socialist/progressive agenda. Their agenda is particularly hostile towards Christians, the unborn, American traditions and exceptional-ism. Noncompliance or opposing points of view are not tolerated; either total submission or suffer total destruction.

For example.

Christian twins, Jason and David Benham had their Home & Garden Television (HGTV) show, “Flip it Forward” canceled when the Left learned that the brother’s faith based views were not in step with the Left’s mandated thinking. Even though the twins proclaimed their love for all people and vowed never to discriminate, it still was not good enough for the Left. Every American is required to agree or suffer the consequences.

David Benham’s heartfelt statement: “We love all people. I love homosexuals. I love Islam, Muslims, and my brother and I would never discriminate. Never have we – never would we.”

Despite HGTV canceling the TV show and withdrawing its financial support, the Benham brothers are still moving forward, renovating the homes for the families who would have been featured on their TV show.

Like many Americans, my black brother is a low-info voter. He is not politically engaged and gets his news from the MSM. Consequently, he was not up to speed on the Hobby Lobby case. He was shocked to learn that the case was really about the Obama Administration attempting to bully the business into betraying its Christian faith. He was stunned learning that Hobby Lobby provides 16 of the 20 contraceptives mandated in Obamacare, only refusing to fund the four that kill babies. He replied, “Wow!”

I explained to my brother how the Left is scamming the public. The Left has launched a campaign to disguise its attack on religious freedom; claiming that Christians who refuse to be bullied into betraying their faith are engaged in a war on women. 

In the Left’s relentless efforts to “bully” a 175 year old order of Catholic nuns into betraying their faith, the National Organization for Women (NOW) which is an extreme Leftist group placed the Little Sisters of the Poor on its Dirty 100 list.

It is chillingly evil to call sweet humble elderly nuns who provide loving care for seniors in the late stages of life, “dirty”. Nothing could better illustrate the sick and depraved mindset of this vile organization. Like harden mercenaries, Leftist operatives take no prisoners. Furthering their agenda trumps common sense, compassion and decency.

Even blacks, whom the Left claims to champion, end up on the Left’s excrement list when they get too uppity. A Leftist major union bullied the United Negro College Fund, scolding and placing it on a blacklist for accepting a $25 million donation from the conservative leaning Koch brothers. Now get this folks, $18 million will provide scholarships for 3,000 black youths.

Is this the behavior of true advocates for black empowerment or plantation overlords committed to keeping blacks under their thumb of dependency?

Master connivers, deceivers and manipulators, the Left portray themselves as victims of intolerance while they bully us into submission under the radar; emboldened under Obama.

Leftist “thought police” enforcement has not yet progressed to physical detainment. However, anyone deemed pro-life, too conservative, politically incorrect and too Christian risk losing everything; job, career or property.

We are living in a very scary time in America.

So how do we defeat Leftist bullies? Like battered chubby kid Butterball, we decide enough is enough. We go politically wild on them, sending them packing, crying and afraid.

Miami Hispanic Editor: Obama to blame for Illegal invasion

Appearing on News Max TV, Democrat strategist, Bridget Todd and managing editor of The Shark Tank, Javier Manjarres debate the president’s latest inaction on immigration plus discuss who is truly to blame for the current crisis at the border.

Manjarres also tangled with Democratic strategist Bridget Todd on the unwillingness of politicians to address the illegal immigration crisis for what it is.

“Let’s be very clear,” he said. “The U.S. gives out resident alien cards. Resident alien cards, these are illegal aliens, bottom line. At the end of the day, we’ll fix the immigration policy and disasters there may be if we enforce the laws. If we enforce the laws, there’s no issues of immigration.”

Read more at The Shark Tank. 

[youtube]http://youtu.be/EsSj4-5wpBQ[/youtube]

World Leaders: Please Stop The Kinsey Institute

Hat tip to Dr. Judith Reisman for pointing us to the following effort to Stop the Kinsey Institute:

On April 23, 2014 the Kinsey Institute for Research in Sex, Gender and Reproduction was granted special consultative status with the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations (ECOSOC).

This decision was based in part on misleading testimony regarding the nature of their work provided by a Kinsey Institute representative to the United Nations Committee on Nongovernmental Organizations.

From their fraudulent sex research, to their collaboration with pedophiles to publish their sex experiments on children, to their promotion of risky sexual behaviors as healthy and normal, which has formed the basis of dangerous sexuality education programs worldwide, the Kinsey Institute has caused incalculable harm to children, adults and families. For this reason the UN’s decision to grant ECOSOC status to the Kinsey Institute has outraged parents, government and civic leaders, lawmakers, researchers, and victims of sexual crimes around the world who understand how harmful the Kinsey Institute’s work has been, especially for the world’s children.

The goal of the Stop Kinsey Coalition is to educate world leaders and citizens about the past and present actions, goals and aims of the Kinsey Institute, and to demonstrate why the Kinsey Institute merits condemnation and censure rather than the legitimacy, prestige and access that UN consultative status affords them and which enables them to perpetuate their harmful work on a much larger world stage.

Summary of the Kinsey Institute’s Work

For more than a half century, most developed nations have been undergoing a “sexual revolution.”  This radical shift in traditional sexual norms, values and expectations has led to the liberalization of laws regulating sexual behavior.  This in turn has caused a dramatic increase in heterosexual and homosexual promiscuity contributing to the breakdown of the family and other social problems.

Many of these dramatic changes in sexual norms and laws can be traced back to the fraudulent sex “research” and sexual ideologies of Dr. Alfred Kinsey, founder of the Kinsey Institute.  Kinsey has been called the “father of the sexual rights revolution” because many sexual rights advocacy organizations rely on his ideologies to support their positions.

The Kinsey Institute’s philosophy that “children are sexual from birth,” has been used by pedophiles to justify sexual crimes against children.  The Institute’s sexual ideologies also form the basis of harmful sex education programs commonly known as “comprehensive sexuality education (CSE).”

These CSE programs are being aggressively promoted in UN documents, meetings and reports  as the solution to many world problems, including poverty, violence against women, teen pregnancy, the AIDS pandemic, and much more.  In fact, the Bali Youth Declaration and the more recent Colombo Youth Declaration promote access to CSE as a human right and also advance many other alleged sexual rights that are based on Kinsey’s sexual philosophies.

CSE programs are mostly sexual indoctrination programs designed to liberalize the sexual attitudes of the rising generation to accept and even celebrate heterosexual and homosexual promiscuity.  CSE programs also prepare youth to become sexual rights advocates to further liberalize laws that regulate sexual behaviors in their countries.

The main organizations behind the Kinsey-based sexual rights movement and CSE programs are International Planned Parenthood (IPPF), the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States (SIECUS), Advocates for Youth, the World Organization of Girl Guides and Girl Scouts, and the Young Women’s Christian Association (YWCA).  More recently, UNESCO and the World Health Organization have released sexuality education guidelines heavily influenced by IPPF and SIECUS and reflecting Kinsey ideology.  The aforementioned NGO organizations, especially International Planned Parenthood, usually hide their agenda to sexualize children under euphemistic language disguised as solutions to world problems.  In addition to promoting sexual rights for children, these organizations also aggressively promote abortion and LGBT rights under the banner of “sexual and reproductive health rights” or SRHR.  Kinsey-based sexuality and sex education programs are intended to change cultures and norms in harmful ways—just as has occurred in the United States and a number of other Western countries.  One of the key methods of sexual rights advocates is to establish adolescent and child rights to confidentiality and privacy, so that they can reach them with their sexual ideologies without the knowledge or consent of parents.

We have extensively documented the harmful activities and objectives of the Kinsey Institute, IPPF, and the other sexual rights advocacy organizations that promote the Comprehensive Sexuality Education agenda in several policy briefs posted at www.StoptheKinseyInstittute.org.

Governments need to understand that the sexualization of the children in their countries leads to big profits for many of these organizations. They make billions of dollars annually by providing sexuality education (often disguised as family life skills or HIV prevention education), contraceptives, abortion, HIV and other STI testing, treatment and associated care, and much more.

With its recently granted UN ECOSOC status, the Kinsey Institute and its allies will have even more influence and greater access and prestige to advance their harmful sexual rights ideologies, especially in developing countries, unless they are exposed and stopped.

Our website has a list of questions that the Kinsey Institute should have been required to answer before ever being considered for consultative status by the UN Committee on NGOs. The Kinsey Institute should still be required by the UN to answer these questions to help expose the harmful nature of its work.  Governments can also require the Institute to answer these questions as a condition of allowing them to work in their respective countries.

Nations would do well to carefully monitor any activities of the Kinsey Institute and their allied groups in their countries.

Note: Please beware of the Kinsey Institute’s new mobile phone app called “The Kinsey Reporter,” described in detail in the policy brief on our website entitled “The Kinsey Institute Exposed.”  This app will be used to try to show widespread promiscuity in countries and use that as a basis to call for the liberalization of sex-related laws by claiming that current laws need to be updated to reflect “reality.”  More information on this phone app as well as extensive information on the problems with the Kinsey Institute can be found at in our policy brief posted at www.StoptheKinseyInstitute.org 

For more information visit our website at www.StopTheKinseyInstitute.org

Please see our summary below of the harmful nature of the Kinsey Institute’s work.  Please also visit our website to view the extensive documentation we present in our policy brief: The Kinsey Institute Exposed:  A Warning to Parents & Governments Throughout the World

“Genesis” The Movie

In the Forbes article “Jesus Christ Superhero: Survivor’s Mark Burnett Turns Bible Stories Into Blockbusters” Zack O’Malley Greenburg writes, “His [Mark Burnett] biggest [TV] hit in recent years has been a very different sort of show: The Bible. Produced by Burnett and [his wife and business partner Roma] Downey, the History Channel series drew an average of over 10 million viewers per show in the U.S. during its ten-episode run in 2013 (and performed similarly worldwide, beating out the NHL’s opening night in hockey-crazed Canada). Its Easter Sunday finale outdrew the first episode of Game of Thrones and the finale of The Walking Dead.”

“The point here is the mainstream intelligentsia of journalists, people like you in New York and L.A., maybe don’t understand the fabric of the nation,” he [Burnett] continues, with the confidence of a true believer. “This nation was built under the Bible and free enterprise.  … Because of Touched by an Angel, which is a very middle-of-the-country show; Survivor, a very middle-of-the-country show; Shark Tank, a very middle-of-the-country show, I think we understand our viewers.”

Faith in God is under attack in America. The Genesis Movie is a wonderful boost to faith. I call on the faithful men and women to help complete this movie and get it launched.

Click here for Genesis 3D Movie Updates!

[youtube]http://youtu.be/iAzUrHhmJZg[/youtube]

 

GENESIS MOVIE TRAILER:

[youtube]http://youtu.be/H1rKmD-MAco[/youtube]

 

How Intelligent are Americans?

The segments when Jay Leno would take to the street to ask Americans questions about things that one would expect them to know and those when Jesse Watters of the O’Reilly Factor on Fox News does the same thing invariably suggest that those interviewed are appallingly stupid. But how representative are they of the population?

The voters who reelected President Obama despite a first term that included all his policies that put the nation at jeopardy apparently made no connection between those facts and his competence. Voters who stayed home demonstrated indifference.

On July 3, following the latest U.S. Department of Labor June unemployment report, the Job Creators Network responded by noting that “We have more than 3.5 million young adults between 20-24 who don’t have a job, don’t attend school, and don’t have any degree better than a high school diploma—and astonishingly low literacy rates.” The official rate of unemployment was cited at 6.1%, but the Network calculated the real unemployment rate for June at 12.1%. Suffice to say that government data is so politically skewed that it is useless.

In contrast to the view that Americans don’t understand what is actually occurring Rasmussen Reports on July 3rd released the results of its latest poll. “Optimism in the future job market in America is down this month, as fewer Americans believe the unemployment rate will go down over the next year.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 23% of American Adults think, a year from today, unemployment will be lower than it is today. That’s the lowest level of optimism since December 2011. Thirty-two percent (32%) think unemployment will be higher in a year, a new high for the 2014. Just as many (35%) think it will stay about the same. Ten percent (10%) are not sure.” The reality has not escaped just under a quarter of the likely voters polled and two-thirds have a dim view of the year ahead.

cartoon - liberals-brain

For a larger view click on the image. Info-graphic courtesy of The Peoples Cube.

A new Reason-Rupe study and survey of 2,000 Americans between the ages of 18 and 29 finds 66 percent of millennials believe government is inefficient and wasteful – a substantial increase since 2009, when just 42 percent of millennials said government was inefficient and wasteful.

This suggests that there is a difference between the kind of intelligence measured in IQ tests and the kind Americans apply to the world around them and to their own lives. I was the director of publications for the New Jersey Institute of Technology in the 1970s and it was evident to me that having a PhD degree was no guarantee of the latter kind of intelligence, often called common sense.

We have seen this in the way so many “experts” with degrees continue to assert that the Earth is warming (now called climate change) when it has been in a cooling cycle of some seventeen years. Recent polls indicate the public no longer assigns any credit to global warming/climate change. Then why do we continue to read about this in the nation’s media? Perhaps because so many who decide what we read and see are the product of the nation’s schools that continue to indoctrinate students to believe the warming lies and the way “climate change” is now being blamed for everything.

There is evidence, too, that our schools have been short-changing Americans for decades. America is now ranked below many other nations with IQ scores are compared. This is documented in Charlotte Thompson Iserbyt’s book, “The Deliberate Dumbing Down of America.” In March 2013 Joshua Holland noted that “In 2011, Newsweek asked one thousand Americans to take the standard U.S. Citizenship test and thirty-eight percent of them failed. One in three couldn’t name the Vice President.”

Those of my generation that attended school in the 1940s and 50s have little doubt that we received a far better education than those entering in the 1960s and since. Global intelligence quotients (IQs) ratings based on universal tests routinely rank the U.S. as just barely in the top twenty, outranked by nations that include Japan, South Korea, Germany, the United Kingdom and Mongolia! U.S. competence in mathematics and science lags too often and too much.

What is at stake is how prepared and how competent Americans are in order to select the political leadership the nation requires in order to be competitive and to respond to its domestic and foreign relations problems. At this writing, the low esteem in which Americans hold the President and Congress suggests they “have gotten the government they deserve” because that’s how democracy works.

Is that stupidity or indifference? I suspect it speaks more to a variety of factors that include education, the news and entertainment media culture, and the way modern communication technologies may be causing Americans to focus only on their personal circle of family, friends and coworkers to the exclusion of the larger issues and trends around them.

It might also reflect the incredible patience Americans show their elected leadership, often taking years before demanding and getting the changes needed to improve the economy and tend to other national priorities. As illegal immigration demonstrates, nothing has been done to address it since the last amnesty in the 1980s and, clearly, Americans do not want to repeat that mistake again.

Are Americans stupid? Some are. To my mind they number among the 30% of the extreme left that can always be depended upon to support Obama and liberal legislation such as Obamacare and other measures to expand the federal government. Add to them those who have currently grant him 47% approval. That number is beginning to decline.

Overall, however, I believe that most Americans are intelligent enough to know that something has been terribly wrong in a nation that permitted the 2008 financial crisis to occur (the government played a major role) and in the present White House that has failed for six and a half years to take the right steps to put the economy back on the road to recovery.

To that extent, I wait impatiently for the results of the forthcoming November midterm elections. Stupid Americans will vote for more of the same. Intelligent ones will vote for change.

© Alan Caruba, 2014

Our “Friendly” Neighbors Mexico and Guatemala have declared War on U.S.

In early 2011 representatives from El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras met in Tegucigalpa, Honduras for the purpose of assisting their emigrants to make it to the U.S. ILLEGALLY.

illegal honduras

Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto and Guatemalan president Otto Perez Molina.

On Monday, July 7, 2014 Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto and Guatemalan president Otto Perez Molina held a joint press conference in Playas de Catazaja, Mexico, to officially announce an agreement to make it easier for those making the illegal journey to the United States from Central America, to cross into Mexico.

The Southern Border Program to Improve Passage, will provide for more border checkpoints along Mexico’s border with Guatemala, and offer more protection and even emergency medical care to those making their way north. The illegal aliens will receive a so-called Regional Visitor’s Card, according to El Universal.

Officially, the program will grant the cards to only illegal aliens from Guatemala and Belize, allowing them to remain in Mexico’s southern states for 72 hours.

It is obvious our southern neighbors have declared war on us and their armies are poverty level people they all too happy to be rid of.

Congress says they need to amend a 2008 law about children involved in trafficking to be able to deal with non trafficked kids which is preposterous. Simply issue orders to put them on buses and send them back since this has nothing to with being trafficked… NOW!

Read more at here.

Reason-Rupe Poll: ‘Millennials Aren’t Liberals, They’re Social Liberals and Fiscal Centrists’

“Since 2004 millennials have been voting increasingly Democratic in presidential elections” says Reason-Rupe polling director Emily Ekins. “But, despite all this, millennials are no more likely than Americans over 30 to say they are Democrats. Instead they are three times as likely to say they are independent and half as likely to say they are Republican.”

This is new information from the most recent Reason-Rupe poll that took a magnifying glass to the millennial generation’s voting habits and thoughts about politics.

“Millennials aren’t liberals, they’re social liberals and their fiscal centrists and their social attitudes are what is largely defining their political identities and driving their voting behavior,” says Ekins.

Watch the video to hear Ekins delve deeper into these results:

[youtube]http://youtu.be/a8G45FR58R4[/youtube]

 

EDITORS NOTE: The featured photo is courtesy of Forbes.

“Medical” Marijuana: The History, the Strategy and the Profiteers

Who is behind the legalization of smoked pot as a medicine and why? Teresa Miller, a Florida resident, has decided to answer this key question.

To help understand what  is behind the Florida Amendment 2 initiative, Miller created a website with information, research, and articles on medical marijuana and its consequences. Miller provides thoughts and ideas for individuals to help educate themselves, friends, family and peers.

Visit Miller’s website at:  www.No2Pot.org.

Miller created the below video. It predicts the outcomes of passage of Florida Amendment 2 and who will profit – the lawyers who are pushing for its passage. Among them Morgan and Morgan. It also shows the impact on neighboring Southern states, something no other media outlet has reported on.

Please watch and share this well researched video by citizen journalist Teresa Miller:

[youtube]http://youtu.be/CpH2MZXzumM[/youtube]

 

RELATED ARTICLE: Welfare Cash for Weed in Colorado

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image of marijuana buds is courtesy of TheCollegeInvestor.com.

Making Gay Okay — and Criticizing It Taboo: An Interview with Robert Reilly on his book on the rationalizing of homosexual behavior

Last month Robert R. Reilly published a new book “Making Gay Okay: How Rationalizing Homosexual Behaviour is Changing Everything.” “Despite its high-interest subject matter, it met with a media blackout. Neither The New York Times or The Wall Street Journal or even more conservative publications wanted to review the book – not even to tear it to shreds, as some partisan websites have done,” notes Alvino-Mario Fantini from MercatorNet.com.

making gay okIn Making Gay Okay Reilly asks, “Why are Americans being forced to consider homosexual acts as morally acceptable? Why has the US Supreme Court accepted the validity of same-sex “marriage”, which, until a decade ago, was unheard of in the history of Western or any other civilization? Where has the “gay rights” movement come from, and how has it so easily conquered America?”

The answers are in the dynamics of the rationalization of sexual misbehavior. The power of rationalization the means by which one mentally transforms wrong into right drives the gay rights movement, gives it its revolutionary character, and makes its advocates indefatigable. The homosexual cause moved naturally from a plea for tolerance to cultural conquest because the security of its rationalization requires universal acceptance. In other words, we all must say that the bad is good.

Fantini interviews Reilly about his book. Fantini’s first question:

What is the connection between sexuality, contraception, and same-sex marriage?

Once you separate sex from diapers through contraception, you’re on a slippery slope. In the U.S. legal system, we went from a Supreme Court case that first allowed contraception only for married couples, to a case that then allowed contraception for all adults, to another case which legalized contraception for everyone, including minors and children. In tandem to that, in Roe v. Wade the court said: If your contraceptive has failed, you oughtn’t be penalized by the child that is then so conceived and you may, therefore, eliminate it. The capstone came with the U.S. v. Windsor decision a little more than a year ago in which the Supreme Court said that sodomy basically can serve as the basis for marriage.

Click here to read the full interview with Robert Reilly.

“Plato teaches that societies take on the features and tastes of the persons most prominent in them. Reilly shows how America’s ruling class is shaping our society according to its taste for homosexuality and its distaste for natural families. If you want to know the philosophical and legal background of the revolution that is being imposed upon America and its consequences read this book.” — Angelo M. Codevilla , PhD Professor Emeritus, Boston University; Author, The Character of Nations.

George Orwell wrote, “The more a society drifts from truth, the more it will hate those who speak it.”

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image titled “Unreality Balloons” is courtesy of Life Site News.

Woman Business Owner Challenging HHS Contraceptive Coverage Gets Relief from 6th Circuit Court of Appeals

Karen Mersino, one of 14 female owners of for-profit companies challenging the HHS Mandate, is finally free to continue offering health insurance to her employees that does not cover contraceptives and abortion causing drugs. Reacting to the 6th Circuit Court’s order, she commented, “It’s a real win for religious freedom.”

Mersinos-300x192

Rod and Karen Mersino

The Thomas More Law Center (TMLC), a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, which represents Karen Mersino, her husband Rod, and their business, Mersino Management Company, announced that yesterday the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, issued an injunction halting enforcement of the HHS Mandate.   The 6th Circuit acted in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in Hobby Lobby and without opposition from the Department of Justice.

Click Here to Read the Order

Erin Mersino, TMLC Senior Trial Counsel, stated, “In the aftermath of the Hobby Lobbydecision, we were able to gain concurrence for immediate relief from the illegal aims of the HHS Mandate that violate our clients’ sincerely held religious beliefs.”

The initial challenge to the HHS Mandate, which forced employers to provide health insurance which included co-pay free coverage for abortion causing drugs and devices or pay crippling IRS fines, was filed by TMLC in March 2013. In all, TMLC represents 10 for-profit companies totaling 30 plaintiffs in challenges to the HHS Mandate.  TMLC is also challenging the HHS Mandate on behalf of 6 non-profit entities.

The Mersinos provide their employees with health care coverage which is superior to coverage generally available in the Michigan market. Based on their deeply held religious beliefs, however, the Mersinos have never offered insurance which included coverage for contraception, sterilization, abortion, or abortion causing drugs and devices. They believe, in accordance with the teachings of the Catholic Church, that these procedures involve gravely immoral practices and the intentional destruction of innocent human life.

All of the Mersinos’ corporate offices display a document that reflects their core value: “Honor God in all we do by serving our customers and employees with honesty and integrity.”

TMLC’s Erin Mersino, reflected, “It has been an honor to represent Karen and Rod Mersino- two individuals who truly live out their faith everyday through the integrity with which they treat others, through their numerous charitable works, and through their overwhelmingly selfless devotion to their community and Church.”