YOU’VE GOT TO HEAR THIS YOUNG LADY. YOU’LL SHOUT FOR JOY LIKE I DID
April 4, 2024
Read more at https://www.dailysignal.com/2024/01/12/number-of-children-living-with-2-parents-increasing-data-shows/

Newly published data from the U.S. Census Bureau indicates that the proportion of American children living in two-parent families increased to 71.1% in 2023, continuing a slight upward trajectory since 2015. The numbers appear to contradict a popular narrative in the mainstream media that American society no longer aspires to establish households with a mother and father to parent children.
As noted by Nicholas Zill, a research psychologist and a senior fellow of the Institute for Family Studies, the Census Bureau data “includes children living with a birth parent and stepparent and couples who are cohabiting without being married.”
Zill goes on to observe that the proportion of children who live with two parents has been inching upward for some time. After increasing from 67.3% to 69.4% between 2005 and 2010, the number has steadily crept upward from 69.2% in 2015 to 71.1% by the end of last year. The numbers appear to contradict widely accepted narratives offered by writers at legacy media outlets like The Atlantic, The New York Times, and a number of others about the supposedly inevitable decline in two-parent family structures.
As Zill observes, “The trends reviewed here show us that those who predicted a relentless increase in family instability or single parenthood were simply wrong. There seem to be growing numbers of young adults in all racial and ethnic groups who realize the economic, educational, and emotional benefits of marriage for themselves and their future children.”
Zill further points out two recent trends that he argues could “extend the resurgence of the traditional family—the older ages at which adults embark on parenthood nowadays and the increased numbers of recent immigrants in the U.S. population. Women and men who begin having children in their 30s and 40s are more likely to marry beforehand and stay married. Likewise, recent immigrants have shown a propensity to marry before having kids and then to remain married.”
Experts are also noting how the increasing number of children living with two parents is an indication of how the stable presence of a mother and father in the home strengthens a culture of life that leads to fewer abortions.
“The [Centers for Disease Control and Prevention] data on the number of children killed through an abortion shows things have gotten worse over the past few years with one exception,” Mary Szoch, director of the Center for Human Dignity at the Family Research Council, told The Washington Stand.
“Women who are married have had fewer abortions each year since 2018. The 2021 data shows that only 12.7% of women who underwent abortions were married. We know that the very best environment for a child to be raised in is one where there is a loving mother and father,” Szoch said. “Clearly, the positive impact of growing up in a two-parent household begins long before birth, and in many instances, it is the difference between life and death for a child.”
Originally published at WashingtonStand.com
Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2023/11/16/your-tomboy-isnt-trans-shes-a-girl/
![]()
ANONYMOUS
These days, when she gets ready for school, the hair will be done. Perhaps it will be a braid of some sort, perhaps it will be curled. Earrings will be selected. A light and subtle application of age-appropriate makeup usually follows. The only constant is that she will always put on a skirt.
It didn’t used to be this way. When younger, she was quite the tomboy. There were the fights over getting her hair cut short, fights she lost not because we’re that controlling, but because short hair has to be cut more frequently and we didn’t want to add monthly visits to the stylist to the calendar. The uniform was shorts or pants and a polo for school, nicer pants and tops for dressier occasions, and athletic gear for casual moments. Jewelry was a no-go, even the pearls and things that grandmothers like to give to be worn at church.
She never suffered from dysphoria. She always knew she was a girl. It bothered her how often she was mistaken for a boy, not connecting the dots between her preferred functional form of attire and how it was virtually indistinguishable from the clothing sported by little boys. She was horrified when a classmate exhorted her to “just get the surgery.” That was reading too much into the truth, which was that she just wanted to play, to roughhouse, and to get outside. Dresses and skirts didn’t lend themselves to such things.
While there are people across the political spectrum who recognize the realities of biology, statistically speaking, she wasn’t necessarily wrong in her proclamation. If she’d been born to this mom, this mom, or this mom, things could have turned out much differently. Thankfully, she was born to us, and we don’t hold retrograde opinions about the imaginary relationship between preferred clothing, toys, activities, and sex.
Not everyone is so enlightened, though, instead preferring to categorize children based on rigid stereotypes about how superficial things define us as boys and girls, men and women. Countless stories, like those linked above, of parents realizing their daughter was “transgender,” start with “I knew my son [sic] was trans when…” and revolve around such stereotypical markers. She didn’t like the color pink (once hated in our house, now one of her favorites), dresses, or games associated with little girls. Ergo, she must be a boy!
All one has to do to make such a logical leap is ignore the fact that prepubescent kids are, by definition, not sexual creatures and, as such, not much thinking in terms of true masculinity and femininity. They are just thinking about what interests them, not how those interests align with or diverge from their sex. It’s misguided parents who swoop in and make those assumptions.
This viewpoint is especially incomprehensible when one realizes that tomboys have long been with us. They were once staples of literature and other entertainment, from Laura Ingalls to Jo in Little Women to Pippi Longstocking. That they enjoyed clothing or activities more typical of boys wasn’t reason to attempt to muck around with their biology, and it still isn’t reason now.
If you have a daughter, you have a daughter. Her preferred clothing and activities do not define her, particularly when she’s young. Maybe she just finds pants more comfortable or likes playing in the dirt more than playing with a Barbie. If you let her grow up as a girl, those preferences may stick or they may, as in our case, shift in more traditionally feminine ways. In either case, it is not our job as parents to guide them toward self-destruction, but toward self-fulfillment and flourishing.
This author is a regular Federalist contributor.
Read more at https://www.theblaze.com/news/jonathan-isaac-unitus-launch-eventjonathan-isaac-unitus-launch-event/

NBA player Jonathan Isaac, who made headlines in 2020 when he remained standing during the national anthem even as other players kneeled, has launched an apparel company that aims to celebrate faith, family, and freedom.
“UNITUS brings people together around stylish, high-quality apparel that champions faith, family, and freedom. Together, we’re redefining greatness,” the company’s website states. “UNITUS is a movement—one that starts with U and ends with US.”
During the brand’s launch event in Orlando, Florida, on Saturday night, Isaac, who is outspoken about his Christian faith, explained that “true greatness is found in none other than Jesus Christ.” Isaac said that UNITUS has “hopes of aligning ourselves with value-aligned athletes from all sports.” He also noted that the company does not have any links to the nation of China.
Later that night, during a brief interview with TheBlaze, Isaac said that he is a “Bible-believing Christian” and noted that his actions, including “standing in the [NBA] bubble” and opting not to take the COVID-19 vaccine, have “been motivated by my desire to please Christ.”
Some of the people who showed their support by attending the UNITUS launch event included former University of Kentucky swimmer Riley Gaines, former University of Pennsylvania swimmer Paula Scanlan, and Dr. Aaron Kheriaty, who is a fellow and director of the Program in Bioethics and American Democracy at the Ethics and Public Policy Center.
Former University of Pennsylvania swimmer Lia Thomas, a biological man who made waves while competing against women, tied with Gaines for fifth place in the 200 freestyle final at the NCAA Women’s Championships in 2022, according to swimmingworldmagazine.com. Gaines has been an outspoken in opposing the practice of permitting men to compete in women’s sports. Scanlan, who was on the University of Pennsylvania swim team with Thomas, has also been speaking out about the issue.
At the UNITUS event on Saturday, Gaines told TheBlaze that Isaac had previously reached out to her and expressed his support. Gaines said that she believes people desire “an alternative to put their money towards that aligns with their values” and that Isaac and UNITUS are such an alternative.
Dr. Kheriaty called Isaac “an exemplary man,” describing the athlete as a person “of tremendous courage, and integrity, and faith.”
The pro-faith, family, and freedom ethos of the UNITUS brand stands in stark contrast to other major companies that promote woke agendas, such as Nike, which, for example, previously tapped transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney, a man who identifies as a woman, to advertise a bra and leggings.
The UNITUS website features items for sale, including hoodies, T-shirts, sweatpants, crewnecks, a cap, a track jacket, and track shorts. Isaac noted during remarks at the launch event that the company plans to expand its offerings to include “more technical sportswear,” which involves items such as a sports bra, leggings, and men’s tank top. “This upcoming season I will be debuting the UNITUS Judah 1 basketball sneaker,” Isaac noted.
Blaze Media editor in chief Matthew Peterson also attended the company’s launch event on Saturday.
“Succeed or fail, Isaac’s Unitus is one of the most significant examples we’ve seen yet of a growing commercial-cultural movement that’s rising up throughout the nation,” Peterson said in a written statement. “Mainstream media outlets are not paying attention, but most Americans are very interested. And we’re going to ramp up our coverage of it for them.”
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2023/01/05/pro-family-conservatives-must-first-be-pro-men/

![]()
DELANO SQUIRES
Those conservatives who want to shape the nascent pro-family movement emerging on the right must be willing to embrace a controversial — and countercultural — reality: Healthy families require strong, stable, and secure men. That means Republicans interested in crafting pro-family policy must focus on the well-being of America’s boys and men.
Democrats have spent decades supporting policies that make men and fathers economically and socially obsolete. They’ve promoted the notion that families and societies flourish when women are empowered, even to the detriment of men. For instance, they see the fact that women outnumber men in the college-educated labor force as a win for gender equality.
It’s not all progress, however, from the perspective of modern feminists. So-called access to abortion, a major plank in the women’s empowerment agenda, was dealt a serious blow when the Supreme Court’s Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision struck down Roe v. Wade and returned the issue of abortion to the states.
This seismic shift, combined with the economic challenges brought on by Covid-19 shutdowns and parental discontent with public schools, has opened the door for some conservatives to seek to rebrand Republicans as the party of families.
The initial push for this political pivot came from Republicans in the U.S. Senate. The most recent iteration of Utah Sen. Mitt Romney’s proposed Family Security Act would provide between $250 and $350 a month per child, based on age. Florida Sen. Marco Rubio’s Provide for Life Act would expand the child tax credit, enable parental leave, expand support for pro-life crisis pregnancy centers, and fund mentoring services for low-income mothers. Conservative social commentators have also made the case that limited government and support for families are compatible policy goals.
Whatever the merits of these efforts, the success of pro-family policies will depend on more than bipartisan support in Congress. The social and economic outcomes conservatives want to see must start with the understanding that men and women are not generic, interchangeable parts in the machinery of family life.
Men have played the role of provider throughout human history, though in recent decades that role has been shared. Still, no culture teaches that it’s a woman’s responsibility to take care of an adult male and the children they have together. This is why women generally seek men who earn more than they do. One analysis of U.S. Census data found that female physicians married men in the same field. Male doctors, however, often married nurses and teachers.
This is not an argument against women in the workplace. It’s an appeal for conservatives to recognize that disregarding the natural order in the name of “women’s empowerment,” whether through public policy or cultural norms, will make it harder for Americans to form strong, stable families.
Conservative politicians and pundits need to become comfortable talking about what boys and men need in terms of education, economic opportunity, religion, social norms, and relationships.
Their political speeches, op-eds, and podcast appearances need a renewed emphasis on vocational education that is aspirational, not framed in terms of a fallback option for young men who are unable — or unwilling — to attend college. Conservatives need to speak with a similar sense of clarity and concern when it comes to men, sex, and family formation.
Every conservative bill, statute, policy, or regulation that directly affects families should include some version of the following statements:
These self-evident truths should function as the “iron triangle” of social conservatism. Men need something they are willing to both live and die for. The responsibilities that come with a family give them both.
Critics on the left — as well as some on the right — will undoubtedly accuse conservatives focusing on men of promoting a regressive return to the rigid sex roles of the 1950s. What they fail to realize is that the sexual revolution and 60 years of liberal social policy did not destroy patriarchy — they distorted it by minimizing the importance of men while maximizing the influence male-dominated institutions have in every area of American family life.
“Bureaucratic patriarchy” was introduced through the war on poverty’s expansion of the welfare state and policy incentives that provided aid and basic necessities for unmarried mothers. It has grown because of the symbiotic relationship between elected officials seeking votes, social service administrators overseeing the poverty economy, and single mothers who need financial support.
Conservatives have a hard time criticizing “corporate patriarchy,” by contrast, because it promotes financial independence for women and exploits conservative deference to the private sector. A recent video from the pro-life organization Live Action satirizes an unfortunate reality brought about by the right’s allegiance to corporations: Many businesses would rather fund abortions than paid maternity leave for their female employees. Perhaps business executives are simply taking cues from Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen, who said, “eliminating the right of women to make decisions about when and whether to have children would have very damaging effects on the economy and would set women back decades.”
The advent of “trans patriarchy” further complicates the pro-life, pro-family movement because men who believe they are women are committed to erasing biological sex altogether. In addition to attacking the foundation of human existence itself, this deformed version of patriarchy also seeks to usurp the family’s role as the primary shaper of children’s values.
Many conservatives fail to see how the daycare-to-demisexual pipeline was built over time by politicians increasing funding for childcare and schools, corporations offering generous benefits in exchange for employee loyalty, and gender ideologues who want access to shape the next generation of children.
The actors involved in all three deformed patriarchies are cruel taskmasters because they take a utilitarian view of women and children. A man who accepts his God-given responsibilities has a completely different orientation toward his family. His relationship with his wife is a covenant, not a contract. His children are the fruit of that union and the linchpin to multi-generational prosperity. They’re not mere “consequences” of sex and burdens to be overcome for the sake of economic productivity.
In a sense, some form of patriarchy is inevitable. The question conservative policymakers need to answer is which form they believe produces the best outcomes for men, women, and children. This is why clear thinking about families must be preceded by honest reflection on the different natures of men and women and how they can be harnessed to fortify American households. That is why now is the perfect time for conservatives to lean into the connection between strong men and stable families.
Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2022/12/28/if-your-kids-are-unhappy-take-them-to-church/

![]()
MARY ROSE KULCZAK
It seems like every time I turn around, an editor assigns me a story related to the mental health crises of our children. Most of the health experts I speak to correlate Covid lockdowns and our children’s fragile state. Closing schools played a major role in this phenomenon, but what if other crucial factors are being overlooked?
Another story, seemingly unrelated to the mental health crisis, is making the rounds in the corporate press. Church attendance is on a rapid decline. The “nones,” survey respondents who say they have no religious affiliation, are the fastest-growing group in the United States every year. We now have a generation of adults that grew up not attending worship services weekly, and they are raising their children in a similar fashion.
The “nones” seem to prefer a parenting style that says: “We’re fine without church and worship and religious instruction and institutions, thank you very much.” But they are not fine. Their children are not coping and managing the day-to-day stresses and inconveniences thrown at them. They are fragile and increasingly so.
The “nones” will tell you it is because we need to better embrace children’s differences and preferences (like their pronouns) while empowering them with positive affirmations and encouraging personal acceptance through self-esteem workshops. We clutter their calendars with sports, theater, STEM clubs, and dance classes. If none of that pans out, we allow our kids to self-medicate with hours spent on social media.
Parents will do all of this, but won’t take their families to church. Yet research shows that children who attend weekly worship services have higher GPAs, score higher on standardized tests, and are less likely to be held back a grade. They also are more likely to achieve a bachelor’s degree in college.
So why aren’t parents taking their children to weekly worship?
When surveyed, parents often respond that their children and teens do not want to attend worship. This democratic approach to family decision-making only seems to apply to church attendance, however. For other important decisions like wearing a seatbelt or vaccinations, parents balk at giving their children voting privileges. A child’s vote carries more weight when it aligns with a parent’s desire to stay home in pajamas on a Sunday morning.
Why should church attendance be considered a powerful tool for parents to boost their children’s mental health? We can look to the research for the answer.
In a 2018 study, Harvard’s T.H. Chan School of Public Health found some surprising benefits to children and adolescents who attend weekly worship. It turns out that children and teens who attend church grow up to be young adults with higher rates of reported happiness and life satisfaction. They were less likely to suffer from anxiety and depression, less likely to use illicit drugs, and less likely to engage in early sex and contract sexually transmitted infections.
In addition, these same young adults were more likely to embrace volunteering and reported feeling a sense of mission and purpose than their non-church-attending counterparts.
With all of these positive outcomes for children who attend weekly worship, should we be surprised that children who do not have a similar structure in their lives experience an inverse phenomenon? Is it any wonder that anxiety and depression among children and teens are on the rise when every day, their still-forming brains are bombarded with information about doom and destruction while they drown in a sea of gender confusion and racial animus?
We think we can combat all the negativity by telling children: “You are perfect! You are awesome! You keep being you!” We put these pithy platitudes on T-shirts and backpacks and stickers with unicorns and rainbows. At the end of a bad day, our kids know that this is no substitute for the real deal.
Each of us knows these sentiments are superficial. We are poor, miserable sinners in need of forgiveness. Where do we go with all our baggage when the church is not an option? We go to therapists and pharmacists, but trends show that the last place parents want to go is the place actually offering a solution.
What could families find at church that they won’t find anywhere else? Hopefully, something that is woefully lacking in the world around them: the truth.
Newsflash, kids! You are not perfect! You know that mean thing you did to your classmate in the cafeteria? That was a sin. And that nasty thought you had about that person? That was a sin. And the snide comment you made to your mom when you were hangry? Yep. Are you starting to see a pattern here?
Good news: you’ve come to the right place! Jesus came for sinners. As a matter of fact, the church is filled with them. Each week, they come to hear the message that even though we are sinful human beings, Jesus died for those sins. When we confess those nasty thoughts and horrible things we did, we can receive forgiveness — a clean slate!
Will we mess up again on Monday? Of course. But that’s why we can look forward to church. Can we try harder to be better people? Kinder people? Yes, we can. Does our forgiveness depend upon what we do and how we perform each week? Nope. You are forgiven because God loves you that much, so much that he sent his son to take the punishment that should have been yours and mine.
Imagine what a burden could be lifted from our children if they had a place to go each week that offered them that grace. How much better could they cope with a bad day, knowing that each moment offers a fresh start? How much more resilient could our children become?
Parents, we put our children at a disadvantage when we do not give them the very thing they need for their mental and spiritual health. It is time to put a new priority on the family calendar every Sunday. If we won’t do it for ourselves (and we should), let’s do it for our children. The next generation depends on it.
Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2022/11/29/if-marriage-can-mean-anything-it-will-soon-mean-nothing/


STELLA MORABITO
VISIT ON TWITTER@STELLA_MORABITO
If you’re paying attention, you can see that the Senate’s recent 62-37 vote for cloture on HR 8404 puts us one step closer to abolishing state recognition of marriage entirely. That’s where this train is headed.
This will happen the same way such things always happen — through a demonization campaign that frames skeptics as bigots who are guilty of discrimination. That’s how you get Democrat-pliable Republicans such as Mitt Romney and craven Supreme Court justices like Anthony Kennedy to sign on. That’s how you manufacture a public opinion cascade, warning average Americans that they’ll be pummeled with lawsuits and ostracism if they dare think out loud.
And that’s how Democrats in Congress are likely in the not-too-distant future — via HR 8404 — to make the case that marriage actually comes with privileges that discriminate against the unmarried. Disagree? You’re a bigot who deserves to be socially ostracized! Self-censorship in the face of such accusations will pave the way, as always.
Once they’ve gotten to that point via HR 8404 and Republicans who supported the measure, congressional Democrats will doubtless push us to agree that marriage is a discriminatory institution. We’ll start seeing more anti-marriage initiatives supported by singles, millennials, Julias, and gen Z, all well-groomed for the moment by teacher’s unions, academia, and media.
They’ll fall for the pitch that we can all just write up domestic partnership contracts instead. “Marriage” would then become nothing but a legal relationship (a contract) between two (or more) people for any purpose at all. Bureaucrats would broker those contracts. This proposal is all mapped out in Sunstein and Thaler’s 2008 book “Nudge.” It’s also been promoted for decades by internationally acclaimed feminist legal scholar Martha Fineman who writes that a system of contracts replacing marriage will help the state “regulate all social interactions.”
Under a system that abolishes state recognition of marriage, the family could no longer exist autonomously or unmolested by the state. How could it if the state no longer recognizes marriage as the foundation of the family unit? The government would have no requirement to recognize religious rites of marriage as valid. Thus, it would meddle more deeply in religion and religious communities that recognize bonds of kinship through blood ties.
The atomization resulting from this will have repercussions that go beyond the bill’s guarantee to treat any difference of opinion as a federal crime. If we continue on this path, the government will no longer have to recognize any biological relationships. It need not recognize any legal right you might have as the parent of your biological child. Why should it? It would have already abolished its recognition of the union that produced the child.

Some of this process has already been completed through gender-neutral language in documents like passports, birth certificates, or the rules of the 117th Congress that do not recognize the words “mother,” “father,” “son,” or “daughter.”
Much groundwork has also been laid by surrogacy and abortion laws that treat children as chattel to buy, sell, and dispose of at will. And why would the state have to recognize any other relationships resulting from marriage if it no longer recognizes marriage? It could ignore your blood relationships to brother, sister, aunt, uncle, or any familial bond. In this scenario, you’d likely need a license to raise your own child, an old communist goal that the so-called Respect for Marriage Act conjures up.
When all there is are bureaucratized domestic partnership arrangements, the government would no longer need to recognize spousal privilege and thereby could legally coerce spouses to testify against one another in court. It could also abolish the default path of survivorship through which your inheritance goes to your spouse or next of kin. Instead, the state would be free to redistribute your nest egg at will in its great bureaucratic wisdom.
Indeed, there is no reason to doubt that the Respect for Marriage Act serves as a midwife to the radical left’s long-held goal of abolishing state recognition of marriage. It will allow the government to regulate our relationships, rendering each of us naked before its power.
We are each being set up for a pre-arranged marriage with Big Government operating as our abusive spouse.
The path to human atomization is the natural arc of all totalitarian systems in the making. They must always first isolate people in order to control them through terror, as Hannah Arendt noted in her work “The Origins of Totalitarianism.” Tyrants always mask their intentions by borrowing from tradition, using words like “respect for marriage,” “love,” or “equality” as they march us all into virtual solitary confinement.

There’s nothing new about this trajectory. It’s a long-standing vision of all totalitarian systems, which first came into the open with the Communist Manifesto’s proclamation, “Abolish the family!” Communists referred to traditional religion as “the opiate of the people” while setting up communism as a pseudo-religion that demanded unquestioning loyalty. The resulting dependency then truly becomes the fentanyl of the people.
Such deceptions are why Schumer and company talk about marriage as though the government has some sort of litmus test for “love.” But anyone with half a brain knows that love’s got nothing to do with a functioning state’s interest in marriage. Marriage is an institution that exists to allow for a structured society and for the protection of children.
Of course, we easily forget such facts while living in a nation that increasingly promotes infanticide, assisted suicide, recreational drug use, child pornography, and other ways to torture and kill our children. In fact, virtually all of their policy positions are tailor-made for family breakdown, community breakdown, and for hostility toward religious communities.
But maybe you like feeling lonely and alienated, like the idea of a childless and hopeless future, and are all for the state regulating your personal relationships and conversations. Well, then, you’ll like the “Respect” for Marriage Act.
But the destruction of bonds of affection and loyalty in the private spheres of life makes sense from the point of view of statists. Those loyalties get in the way of their ambitions for power and social engineering. They are invested in isolating us so that we become dependent upon them.
Read more at https://www.westernjournal.com/twitter-users-notice-big-mistake-bidens-made-stockings-white-house-fireplace/
First lady Jill Biden revealed the 2021 White House Christmas decorations on Monday, and the State Dining Room was adorned with stockings above the mantel. But there was one blatant problem with the decor.
According to Daily Mail reporter Emily Goodin, the stockings were meant to represent the Bidens’ grandchildren, with each one having the name of a different grandchild.
However, Twitter users quickly noticed a glaring omission from the mantle. Only six stockings hung above the fireplace despite the fact that President Joe Biden has seven grandchildren.
According to Marie Claire, Biden has three granddaughters from his son Hunter: Naomi, Finnegan and Maisy.
He has two more grandchildren from his late son, Beau: Natalie and Robert, who goes by Hunter after his uncle.
So who is Biden’s seventh grandchild? That would be Hunter Biden’s son with adult entertainer Lunden Alexis Roberts. The boy was born in 2018 and Hunter was proven to be the father in 2020, according to Marie Claire.
So that makes a total of seven grandchildren, one more than the number of stockings on the mantle.
Multiple people pointed out the omission on Twitter, including reporter Amber Athey of The Spectator.


Despite this seemingly obvious exclusion, the establishment media refused to report on it. (At The Western Journal, we fight to bring you the news other outlets will not. You can support us in the fight for truth by subscribing.)
Many social media users also speculated that Hunter Biden’s child with Roberts was the one grandchild who was left out.
In the photo above, some letters can be seen on the stockings. The beginnings of the names “Naomi,” “Finnegan” and “Natalie” appear to be written.
Since all the names cannot be seen, it is hard to confirm that Roberts’ child is the one left out. However, that does not make the Biden family look much better.
If the family left out Hunter’s son with Roberts, they were essentially ignoring him because they view him as an embarrassment. If it was a different grandchild who was left out, the family simply forgot one of their grandchildren.



In either case, the Bidens’ mistake is humiliating.
Nothing says Christmas like leaving out a family member.
Grant Atkinson, Associate Reporter
Grant is a graduate of Virginia Tech with a bachelor’s degree in journalism. He has five years of writing experience with various outlets and enjoys covering politics and sports.
Read more at https://www.christianpost.com/news/budget-bill-creates-harmful-penalties-for-marriage-republicans.html/

Republican senators warned this week that the U.S. House of Representatives’ $3.5 trillion budget bill championed by congressional Democrats creates “harmful penalties for marriage” that will make families more dependent on the federal government.
In a Thursday letter to Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and Senate Finance Committee Chairman Ron Wyden, 35 Republican senators, led by Sen. Mitt Romney, R-Utah, expressed their concerns about the package.
“We were disappointed to learn that in some instances the House of Representatives’ reconciliation bill creates harmful penalties for marriage,” they wrote. “Discouraging marriage is not in our country’s best interest and sends the wrong message to our families.”
In August, the House passed a $3.5 trillion budget resolution that expands social safety net programs, including childcare, free community college, paid leave and programs that combat climate change. Meanwhile, the Senate passed a $1.2 trillion infrastructure package. On Thursday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., delayed voting on the Senate’s $1.2 trillion even though moderates sought a vote. President Joe Biden signed a continuing resolution to avoid a government shutdown and give Congress nine more weeks to negotiate 2022 appropriations bills.
The Republican senators defined a marriage penalty as “when a household’s overall tax bill increases due to a couple marrying and filing taxes jointly.” They also mentioned that federal programs such as Medicaid, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families and Section 8 housing reduce or eliminate benefits when a couple gets married.
“Federal policy should be designed to foster strong marriages, which are the foundation of strong families and strong communities,” the letter added. “Unfortunately, despite its original rollout as part of the ‘American Families Plan,’ the current draft of the reconciliation bill takes an existing marriage penalty in the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) and makes it significantly worse.”
The senators provided an example of how the reconciliation bill penalizes married couples.
“For example, a couple in 2019 with two children where one parent earns $12,000 and the other $30,000 could pay $1,578 more in taxes — or nearly 4% of their yearly earnings,” the senators argued.
“The reconciliation bill could make the same family significantly worse off. It could nearly double the marriage penalty, costing the same parents $2,713 if they choose to marry.”
The lawmakers concluded that because “marriage is a vital social good,” it is “misguided and unfair for the government to build bigger barriers for couples to marry.”
The letter comes as the marriage rate in the United States has hit a new low. According to the Institute for Family Studies, 33 out of every 1,000 unmarried adults in 2019 got married. By contrast, that figure stood at 35 out of 1,000 in 2010 and a much higher 86 per 1,000 in 1970.
Republicans have consistently argued that federal programs have had an impact on the marriage rate. Last year, Republicans on the U.S. Senate Joint Economic Committee published a report titled “The Demise of the Happy Two-Parent Home,” which attributes the decline in marriages to the increased availability and use of federal welfare programs.
“Public ‘anti-poverty’ programs often exacerbated the problem of family instability by making single parenthood a more viable option and by discouraging marriage among those receiving benefits,” the report stated. “A safety net marginally reduces the costs of single parenthood, nonmarital childbearing, and divorce. It also can create a significant tax on marriage because the addition of a spouse with income typically reduces safety net benefits, and if he has only modest earnings or unsteady employment, the trade-off may not be worthwhile.”
The report argued that through the safety net, “a single mother can achieve about two-thirds of the standard of living she could get from marrying a sole breadwinner at that compensation level.”
“The safety net would put her about one-third higher, with no additional income, than the 10th percentile of male compensation,” the report reads.
Additionally, the report explained that “children raised by married parents do better on an array of outcomes.” Specifically, they have “stronger relationships with their parents, particularly with their fathers,” are “much less likely to experience physical, emotional, or sexual abuse” or “engage in delinquent behavior,” have “better health … and exhibit less aggression.”
Increased educational attainment and higher wages as adults, and a lower likelihood of living in poverty were also cited as benefits enjoyed by children of married couples.
The report provided empirical evidence attempting to demonstrate that the expansion of the social safety net in the 1960s led to a drop in the number of married people and the number of children born to unwed parents. Data found that the share of married American women dropped from 71% in 1962 to 42% in 2019. The percentage of children born to unmarried mothers rose from 5% in 1960 to 40% in 2019.
While the share of American children living in two-parent households has declined dramatically since the 1960s, one recent study from the Institute for Family Studies showed that the phenomenon of increased illegitimacy may have begun to reverse itself. The study found that in 2020, 70.4% of children under 18 lived with both parents, a slight increase from 69.1% in 2000 and 69.4% in 2010. At the same time, the percentage of American children residing in two-parent households remains far below the 87.7% recorded in 1960.
Ryan Foley is a reporter for The Christian Post. He can be reached at: ryan.foley@christianpost.com
Dana Loesch | NOVEMBER 20, 2020My parents and in-laws haven’t seen their grandkids in nearly a year. Because we live states apart, the most time we spend together is during the holidays and a week in the summer. Due to the lockdown this year, the grandparents have only been able to see our kids during video calls.
It could be worse; some dear friends of ours buried a parent during the lockdown with no guests or funeral, and the grandchildren had to stay away. Family bonds do more than just unite people with the same origin or name, however. Those bonds hold us up and together during times of struggle and grief.
These painful life events can shape our perspectives for the remainder of our time on Earth. I learned a lot about dealing with grief when I attended family funerals growing up. When my grandmother passed away years ago, my cousins and I stood solemnly together as we watched our aunts and uncles say their final graveside goodbyes.
When our uncles walked my grandpa to her casket, we witnessed this quiet, strong man cry for the first time in our lives. I would not have been able to watch it without the rest of my family there. He didn’t just cry; his sobs shook his thin, 6’3” frame and threw him off balance. He leaned on the casket to help support his weight, and we gave him a moment before swarming him for comfort.
The sight was a shock that swept us into a new reality: We, the grandkids, wouldn’t be “the grandkids” in our family’s hierarchy much longer. Each generation took one step up that imaginary staircase with the death of our grandparents. Our kids assumed the step below us where we once stood. The presence of family makes that meeting with mortality easier to process.
I had just given birth to my second child when my grandfather passed away, living long enough to learn that his second great-grandson was on this Earth, miles away from him, but healthy. I didn’t get to attend his funeral because it was too soon after childbirth, the day I brought my baby home.
That night, I rocked my son to sleep in the solitude and darkness of his nursery and cried until there was nothing left in my soul to expend. That heavy sort of grief is meant to be borne by more than one. It took a long while to get past that.
That’s the closest experience I have to compare when I read about grief during lockdowns. This is why my heart truly breaks over stories from others who were forced by lockdowns and restrictions to endure this with their loved ones.
The emotional dam of a non-political, grief-stricken friend burst forth on Facebook after she read about politicians defending protest gatherings while she and her sister had to bury their father alone, just themselves, on a cold, clear March day earlier this year. The pain seems endless, and the lockdowns have predictably caused immense unintended consequences:
This is all to control the spread of a virus that science can’t yet predict. So-called experts told us “15 days to flatten the curve,” but many months later, they say we’re “in an elongated wave.” They still have no idea about immunity. Another study came out showing masks don’t actually reduce coronavirus infection rates. Dr. Anthony Fauci told us in the beginning not to wear masks:
Later, Fauci admitted he lied when he told people masks weren’t essential. Politicians and “experts” shouldn’t be surprised when their actions like these make reasonable people lose faith in their leadership and unwilling to follow their rules.
Many of us comforted ourselves through the dark, lonely spring and desolate summer with visions of family gatherings over the holidays. Now we’re told to skip those too or just have a “virtual Thanksgiving.” If you can’t do that, limit guests, make everyone wear masks, stay away from each other, and have everyone bring their own food — unless your name rhymes with Schmavin Twosome, that is:
California Medical Association officials were among the guests seated next to Gov. Gavin Newsom at a top California political operative’s opulent birthday dinner at the French Laundry restaurant this month.
CEO Dustin Corcoran and top CMA lobbyist Janus Norman both joined the dinner at the French Laundry, an elite Napa fine dining restaurant, to celebrate the 50th birthday of lobbyist and longtime Newsom adviser Jason Kinney, a representative of the powerful interest group confirmed Wednesday morning.
The rest of us would get fined for doing this.
Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker dodged a reporter’s question about his family’s Thanksgiving plans — they traveled to their second home in Florida — and it made the rounds on social media. Pritzker had to return to do damage control: “I was taken aback by yesterday’s question about my family’s holiday plans, in part because my wife and I were in the process of making the very hard decision that we may need to celebrate Thanksgiving apart from one another for the first time ever, and it was weighing heavily on my mind.”
He was “taken aback” that reporters, during a press conference about COVID-19 Thanksgiving plans, asked him if he was going to follow his own lockdown orders — especially knowing that Pritzker’s wife violated the last lockdown by fleeing to their multimillion-dollar equestrian estate in Florida?
We would be fined for this, but these Democratic governors are exempt from coronavirus and lockdown concerns, apparently. It’s not just governors, however. Don’t forget House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and the shuttered salon.
Before her was Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot and her lockdown salon trip. Washington, D.C., Mayor Muriel Bowser locked down residents while she attended Biden rallies. New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo refused to wear a mask and self-quarantine.
California lawmakers lived it up in Maui during lockdown on the excuse of a “conference” (We all have to Zoom, why can’t they?). New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio went to the gym while you were locked down at home. The Daily Caller compiled a list of hypocritical lawmakers violating lockdown, and you can find an additional great thread here.
We have all sacrificed, some more than others, and we are tired of the double standard. We are sick of bureaucrats leading us around, treating us like children instead of the employers whose tax dollars form their paychecks.
Americans are weary of speculation presented as science. We are tired of being told that our businesses are nonessential, that worker lives are nonessential, and that our kids and their wellbeing are nonessential. We are sick of hearing that any deviation from the mandates passed down to us by politicians who refuse to follow the rules means sentencing our neighbors to death.
I rejected that outright:
I wrote about this accusation in April, noting that the intent of our elitist overlords is murky. Who are they to decide which workers are essential? By the politicians’ own rhetoric, those “essential” workers are actually “expendable,” since they are most susceptible to the same virus the electeds use to scare the rest of us into our homes.
For those maligning business owners as murderous monsters because they simply want to pay their bills consider this — certain businesses were declared essential: Food delivery is essential but cancer treatment isn’t. So you’re fine with risking the lives of delivery drivers to avoid picking up your pizza yourself? Is it acceptable to risk the lives of restaurant staff because you don’t want to make your own food? Is it acceptable to risk the lives and health stability of cancer patients as well as the livelihood of medical staff being furloughed around the country to demonstrate a devotion to saving lives? If you want to discuss murkiness of intent, this is it. By declaring that some people are essential, haven’t you already decided that some lives are expendable?
This is an awful virus. Unlike a military battle, this is a foe that will never be vanquished. We can vaccinate against it and build up our immunities, but just as with chickenpox, polio, and other illnesses before this virus, there is no cure, only prevention and acclimation. Overreaction is a lesser enemy, and moderation is an ally. There is a difference between reasonable concern and “Chicken Little” hysteria.
The hysteria is exhausting. We are tired of being told that contracting the virus means instant death when it emphatically does not — it has a 99.98 percent survivability rate. We are tired of being told that because some can’t venture out, no one should. Nothing in life is perfectly safe, including freedom. But freedom is a lot safer than the statist systems so many leftists champion.
As a daughter who doesn’t have much of her family left, whose kids are growing up faster than she can even capture with her phone camera, I am not going to miss out on life. I am not going to let my parents age out of this world while lying to my own heart that it’s OK if I missed an entire year or more with them. I am not going to tell my children that it’s alright if they don’t see their family anymore because we have to hide in our homes.
More than anything else, I am sick of being told I don’t have the right of risk when risk is part of freedom. I will not be lectured by people who say that eating in a restaurant with health protocols is riskier than shutting down the largest economy in the world. I won’t be bullied by bureaucrats who say it’s risker to reopen schools than to force an entire generation into lockdown for nearly a year, stunting them in every way but loneliness. I will not be shamed by lawmakers who don’t follow their own rules. I won’t be preached at by pundits too purposefully obtuse to see nuance over their partisanship.
I am going to host my parents for Thanksgiving, and I hope to host my in-laws for Christmas. I will continue living as a free and responsible American with liberties for which my family has taken bullets and mine shards, until the day comes that our government wants to stage a modernized version of 1776 by trying to end that perfectly wonderful freedom.
As Teddy Roosevelt said, “For those who fight for it, life has a flavor the sheltered will never know.” Freedom is beautiful and scary. It’s up to each of us to maintain it.
Dana Loesch is a nationally syndicated talk radio host of “The Dana Show” with Radio America and a best-selling author.
URL of the original posting site: https://www.westernjournal.com/years-common-core-betsy-devos-announces-devastating-results/
Years after Common Core made its debut in many state education systems, the disastrous long-term results of the program are finally being seen. The revelation came as part of the Department of Education’s 2019 National Assessment of Educational Progress report.
“Every American family needs to open The Nation’s Report Card this year and think about what it means for their child and for our country’s future,” Education Secretary Betsy DeVos said in a media release. “The results are, frankly, devastating.”
“This country is in a student achievement crisis, and over the past decade it has continued to worsen, especially for our most vulnerable students,” she added.
The NAEP is a test administered in alternating years to students in the fourth and eighth grades. The government-mandated assessment covers both math and reading proficiency. The students’ reading assessment paints a grim picture of educational readiness, with tested fourth and eighth graders failing to best the previous test’s results. This year’s results were only marginally better than those from 1992.
The mathematics scores show the most damning results — an upward trend until the year 2015, when the momentum seemed to grind to a halt. Although there were double-digit gains since the ’90s, fourth graders only managed to score a single point above their previous tests. Eighth graders failed to meet that low standard, sinking below their predecessors from two years before.
“This must be America’s wake-up call,” DeVos said. “We cannot abide these poor results any longer. We can neither excuse them away nor simply throw more money at the problem.”
The dip doesn’t seem to be without cause, either. By 2015, most states had implemented some form of Common Core standards, according to the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Studies have linked Common Core to declining test scores and generally poor student performance.
This failure in U.S. schools comes at a time when Chinese students appear to be blowing American children out of the water. Results from the Program for International Student Assessment, which tests students internationally on their proficiency in math, science and reading, show that China ranks a full 21 spots ahead of the United States.
The 21st century needs to remain an American century. Letting the Chinese take the global lead would have disastrous results across the world. If we expect our future engineers, scientists, and mathematicians to compete in an increasingly globalized world, it’s clear that Common Core needs to be abandoned.

The dramatic trailer for the pro-life feature film “Unplanned” was released on Thursday. In the film, Ashley Bratcher plays Planned Parenthood clinic director Abby Johnson, who renounces abortion after witnessing the procedure firsthand.
Advertisement – story continues below
“Everything that they told us is a lie,” Johnson says in the emotional trailer.
Johnson is also warned that she made an enemy of “one of the most powerful organizations on the planet.” The film is set to be released on over 800 screens nationwide, beginning on March 29. “Unplanned” will be distributed by Pure Flix, which also theatrically distributed “God’s Not Dead,” according to The Hollywood Reporter.
Advertisement – story continues below
Last week, Democrats in New York passed new legislation that will allow late-term abortions up to the moment of birth. Democrats in Virginia unsuccessfully tried to pass similar legislation this week, and Virginia’s governor is now under fire for allegedly supporting infanticide. In an interview on WTOP Wednesday morning, Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam implied that post-birth abortion — otherwise known as infanticide — may be deliberated with doctors under the proposed legislation.
“If a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen. The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable,” Northam prefaced.
“The infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother.”
These are the monsters that Lindell hopes to oppose by funding “Unplanned,” but unfortunately, liberals may try to attack his business in retaliation. Lindell will need conservatives’ support to compensate for liberal push back as he takes the fight against abortion to Hollywood.
ABOUT THE REPORTER:
Reported By Benjamin Arie | September 1, 2018 atURL of the original posting site: https://www.westernjournal.com/ct/black-pastor-enrages-left-funeral/

Rev. Jasper Williams Jr. gives eulogy at Aretha Franklin’s funeral at Greater Grace Temple on August 31, 2018 in Detroit, Michigan. (Angela Weiss / AFP / Getty Images)
Rev. Jasper Williams Jr. was personally chosen by Franklin to speak at her funeral, which took place in Detroit on Friday. During a 50-minute long eulogy, the fiery minister scolded black culture for losing its way and specifically called out the “Black Lives Matter” movement.
Williams was a friend of Franklin’s father and fellow pastor C.L. Franklin. His surprisingly conservative message sent many liberals into a huff, and the media and outlets like Twitter quickly lit up with indignation.
“Where is your soul, black man? As I look in your house, there are no fathers in the home no more,” Williams declared during the ceremony, according to the Associated Press.
Calling out the black community for abandoning family values was one of his major themes, with the connection between fatherless homes and crime at the forefront.
“(A)s proud, beautiful and fine as our black women are, one thing a black woman cannot do, a black woman cannot raise a black boy to be a man,” he warned.
The pastor chosen by Franklin pointed out that it took a “provider” father and “nurturer” mother to raise children, particularly boys. That conservative view, of course, flies in the face of “progressive” messaging that promotes single parenthood and rejects traditional gender roles.
Williams was just getting warmed up. As the star-studded audience looked on, he took on another of the left’s sacred cows: Black Lives Matter.
“It amazes me how it is when the police kills one of us we’re ready to protest, march, destroy innocent property,” the African American minister stated.
He pointed out how black-on-black violence in places like Chicago and Detroit has been largely ignored by the very groups it impacts the most.
“We’re ready to loot, steal whatever we want, but when we kill 100 of us, nobody says anything, nobody does anything,” he continued, falling into a heartfelt rhythm.
“Black on black crime, we’re all doing time, we’re locked up in our mind, there’s got to be a better way, we must stop this today,” he declared.
If there was any doubt that he was criticizing the Black Lives Matter movement for failing to take responsibility for African American problems, his next sentences cleared it up.
“No, black lives do not matter,” Williams said. “Black lives will not matter, black lives ought not matter, black lives should not matter, black lives must not matter until black people start respecting black lives and stop killing ourselves.”
Predictably, that message didn’t sit well with liberals.
“Social media critics called his eulogy ‘a disaster’ and questioned why he was chosen as the one to honor Franklin,” reported the AP.
Some social media users quickly called Williams “ignorant” — but he appears to have reality on his side.
“Department of Justice statistics showed that between 1980 and 2008, 52 percent of all homicides were committed by black males,” as we previously reported based on publicly available data. Remember, African Americans are only 13 percent of the U.S. population, and black males only about 6 percent.
“With the police shooting of black men taking the center media stage, current statistics show that at current rates it would take 40 years for police to kill as many black men as were killed by other black men in 2012 alone,” our report found.
“The evidence does not support the conclusion that American police are waging a racist war against blacks,” a recent Manhattan Institute report explained. “The Black Lives Matter movement has been a counterproductive distraction from the real violence problem facing black communities: violence from criminals, not the police.”
It’s the same story with Williams’ message about black families. The left may hate it, but the facts back him up. Even Barack Obama has pointed this out.
“More than half of all black children live in single-parent households, a number that has doubled — doubled — since we were children,” Obama said on Father’s Day at a Chicago church in 2008.
“(C)hildren who grow up without a father are five times more likely to live in poverty and commit crime; nine times more likely to drop out of schools and 20 times more likely to end up in prison.” Again, that was Barack Obama — and stop the presses, he was right.
One of Aretha Frankin’s last wishes was for her family friend and pastor to deliver her eulogy. This message was so important that he put it front and center where key members of the black community could hear it. Maybe we should give that a little respect.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR:
It’s easy to get caught up in our day to day routines, forgetting that the people who surround us have their own stories and struggles.
But by doing this, we could be missing out on opportunities to lend a helping hand to someone in need. It only takes a second to be a little more observant, and the results could make a huge impact.
A story shared by an Alabama woman is the perfect example of why this is important.
Angela O’Neal Jacks was shopping at her local Dollar Tree in Gardendale, Alabama, on July 31, 2018, when she noticed a man shopping for school supplies with three children.

A Dollar Tree store is seen on July 28, 2014 in Miami, Florida. Dollar Tree announced it will buy Family Dollar Stores for about $8.5 billion in cash and stock. (Photo by Joe Raedle/Getty Images)
He was checking over a school supply list with the kids and was apologizing that they had to shop at a discount store to get some of the items, but the kids continued to be “cheerful and nothing but thankful.”
Angela decided to give a little friendly advice by telling the man that he could purchase better quality pencil boxes for the same price at a different store.
The stranger was thankful for the information and shared that the children had just lost their mother three weeks prior. He was their uncle and had taken the kids in when no one else stepped up to take care of them.
The military man had no idea just how expensive back-to-school items were going to be; he just knew he needed to take care of his late sister’s kids.
“(He) said they had needed complete wardrobes, backpacks, supplies etc. He was overwhelmed and also upset about the Dollar Tree, but was doing the best he could,” she wrote.
Angela was about to take his list and give him more money-saving tips when an elderly couple approached them.
They said, “Sir, we have overheard your conversation. We were wondering if you would put all of this back and meet us at Wal-mart? We’d like to purchase all of their supplies, clothes, shoes and backpacks.”
“We’d like to thank you for your service to our country and to these kids,” they continued.
The man and three kids were extremely grateful. Angela said there were “tears everywhere.”
In the middle of thank you’s and tears, one of the children piped up and said, “Can we get an MP3 player, too?”
Angela’s heart melted and she quickly responded, “You sure can, sweetheart.”
She told Liftable (a brand of Western Journal) that as a mother of four, she knew how disheartening it can be to not own something most other kids at school do. “They had just lost their mother. I wanted to bring a little joy,” she said.
Angela also wrote a Facebook post detailing the precious interaction hoping that it inspires others to take a second to notice those around them and be ready to lend a helping hand.
Meeting this sacrificial man and learning more about his story served as a sweet reminder for her.
She told Liftable, “It reminds me that we never know what someone else is going through and that we should be ready to help those in need in whatever way we are able.”
|
|
|
Reported By John Solomon and Alison Spann | 10/17/17 06:00 AM ED
Reported URL of the original posting site: https://www.westernjournalism.com/corporate-tax-cut-will-raise-middle-class-wages/?
Advertisement – story continues below
The tax cut would lower the current rate of 35 percent to 20 percent. Based on “conservative estimates,” this decrease would boost the average household income by $4,000, the paper said. But more “moderate estimates” reveal increases of $9,000 per family.
“Put simply, capital deepening, which brings additional returns to the owners of capital, brings substantial returns to workers as well,” said the paper, which studied evidence from other countries that have lowered their corporate tax rates.
But Democrats have disapproved of Trump’s proposed tax cut from the start. They believe it will not benefit ordinary families, but only business themselves.
The new study will allow Republicans to offer a rebuttal.
Hassett, the chair of the White House Council of Economic Advisers, insists that American families would benefit the most from significantly lower corporate tax rates, more so than the companies themselves.
Advertisement – story continues below
“America’s broken corporate tax system creates incentives for firms to hold their money outside of our borders,” Hassett told reporters on Sunday, according to the Washington Examiner. “When firms hold their money overseas rather than invest them in America, they’re holding down the productivity of the American economy and the wages of American workers.”
The United States has one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world, leading many companies to keep their profits abroad in lower-tax countries to avoid significant tax hits back home.
By cutting the tax rate, the idea is that companies would then invest more within the United States. This would cause a boost in productivity throughout the country.
This productivity would then boost wages, according to Hassett’s study.
“More assets like machines let workers produce more, and when workers can produce more, businesses can afford to pay their workers more,” Hassett said, as reported by The Hill.
But some economists and tax policy experts have voiced their concerns about the tax cut directly benefiting workers. Although they agree this would attract companies to invest more in the United States economy, they cannot predict how much money will bring back home. There is also concern over what corporations will do with their tax savings.
Trump announced his tax proposal during a September a speech in Indianapolis. Calling it a “revolutionary change,” he said it would boost wages to “levels that you haven’t seen in many years,” according to The New York Times. 
Reported URL of the original posting site: https://www.westernjournalism.com/boy-scouts-want-let-girls-girl-scouts-mad/?
Advertisement – story continues below

In a unanimous vote, the Boy Scouts board of directors in Texas opted for the historic change to the organization, which has mostly served young men and boys since its inception more than a century ago.
However, there is notably one organization that is not happy with the decision by the BSA.
The Girl Scouts have publicly spoken out against the initiative, suggesting it would strain the relationship between the two groups and accusing the BSA of simply looking to boost revenue.
“I formally request that your organization stay focused on serving the 90 percent of American boys not currently participating in Boy Scouts … and not consider expanding to recruit girls,” Girl Scouts of the USA President Kathy Hopinkah Hannan wrote in a scathing letter to Randall Stephenson, the Boy Scouts of America president.
Advertisement – story continues below
Still, the boy scouts believe the move is important.
“We believe it is critical to evolve how our programs meet the needs of families interested in positive and lifelong experiences for their children,” said Michael Surbaugh, the current chief executive of the Boy Scouts, according to NBC News.
According the revised plan, Cub Scout dens, which are the organization’s smallest units, will be single-gender — either all girls or all boys. The larger Cub Scout packs will be given the option to remain single gender or allow both boys and girls to join. The program set for older girls is planned to begin in 2019 and will allow girls to earn the envied rank of Eagle Scout.
“The historic decision comes after years of receiving requests from families and girls,” said Boy Scouts of America in a statement, according to CNN. “(T)he organization evaluated the results of numerous research efforts, gaining input from current members and leaders, as well as parents and girls who’ve never been involved in Scouting — to understand how to offer families an important additional choice in meeting the character development needs of all their children.”
“Families today are busier and more diverse than ever. Most are dual-earners and there are more single-parent households than ever before, making convenient programs that serve the whole family more appealing,” the statement continued.
The BSA was founded in 1910 and The Girl Scouts was founded not long after in 1912. Both are among many youth organizations it the U.S. that have experienced a sharp decline in membership in recent years.
Girls will be allowed to join the Boy Scouts as soon as next year.

Reported URL of the original posting site: https://conservativetribune.com/kaep-photo-wants-kept-secret/?
Advertisement – story continues below

Other players who have joined the protest trend have echoed those sentiments, and while some of them may truly believe it and think they aren’t being disrespectful or un-American, the reality is that many Americans do indeed find their actions to be quite disrespectful and offensive.
You see, while the bi-racial Kaepernick rails against the perceived oppression of minorities in America by a “white supremacist” system, he himself doesn’t appear to have been all that “oppressed” and held back from opportunity by “white people,” but was in fact raised and presented with a multitude of opportunity by white people, namely his adoptive white mother and father.


![]() |
|||||||
|
|||||||
![]() |
|||||||
|
|||||||

Wednesday, February 17, 2016, HUTCHINSON, KS
Twins – one with severe health issues – hold hands in the womb
Brittani and Ian McIntire were told one of their unborn twins will not survive. The boy twin has a hole in his heart and an abnormal brain, KWCH reports. At each doctor appointment, the couple received more bad news, until recently, when the image was captured by sonogram. Brittani recalled, “We didn’t really see much, she said there’s his hand and there’s her hand and it looks like they’re holding hands.”
The boy twin, whom the couple calls Mason, is on the left, and has his tiny hand wrapped around the growing finger of his sister, Madilyn. Brittani said, “Most twins when she’s trying to take pictures and stuff, they’re kicking each other and hitting each other, and she said with our twins, it seems like she was very protective over him.”
Brittani added, “It’s just nice with everything going on I know I’m holding him, I’m carrying him but I just want to be there for him and not knowing and she’s the only one who can actually be there and holding onto him through it, and so it’s comforting to know that if he does pass, he won’t be alone.”

This is by far the most disturbing Confederate flag associated crime I have heard yet. One person was killed and five family members were injured in Columbus Ohio. Three male victims were stabbed and a female victim was shot in the neck.
The family flies a large Confederate flag on their porch and reports claim they may have been targeted because of their race. Both of the attackers were black and the family is white.
From NBC4i.com :
Police said two men, 36-year-old Clement Dwight Cooper and 32-year-old Michael Antonio Long had been burglarizing the home when they were surprised by the residents returning home from work.
One of the residents, Tim Bowls said he saw a shadow on the basement steps, thinking it was his brother, but it wasn’t.
“Pointed a gun at him and told him to lay down, then proceeded to beat him with the gun, stabbed him several times and tied him up with an orange extension cord,” said his Aunt Kim. She asked NBC4 not to use her last name. While the two suspects were attacking Bowls his father, mother and brother also came home from work.
“One of them pointed a shotgun up at them and big Tim started wrestling him for the gun so they shot him and then all hell broke loose,” said Kim.
She said six people were fighting in the stairwell and basement, when the mother was shot at close range.
“Jill was shot in the face and neck,” she said.
The Aunt said the family was afraid for about girls sleeping upstairs.
“There were two girls and three small children asleep upstairs they could have killed them.”
They heard the gunshots and call 9-1-1.
“They shot my mother, please, please someone,” said one of the girls.
Columbus police said five family members were injured and taken to two hospitals. Investigators said they found one of the suspects, Cooper dead in the basement.
Investigators are waiting for an autopsy report from the Franklin County Coroner that will reveal how Cooper died. The family is out of the hospital and staying with relatives while they recuperate.
“They are hurting very bad they were beaten pretty bad we are upset, I mean somebody comes in your house you feel violated,” said Kim.
Violent attacks like these are happening far too often. The term “race war” was once only used by racial extremist, now it is becoming more of a reality. Thank God, this family was armed or else the situation could have been even worse. When simply being proud of your heritage can get you killed, something needs to change.
How ironic that as children all across the nation prepares to take part in various Christmas season events that they, in far too many cases, will not be allowed to actually celebrate Christmas. But to be honest, it is far more serious than just celebrating Christmas. Each day millions of students are sent by their parents off to build a solid academic base as well as learn about our American values in school. Those values and principles are built upon Judeo-Christian beliefs. In 2013 there were over 400 biblical principle attacks on children who wanted to read a Bible before or after school or even during lunch break and were denied.
When your child returns from the Christmas holidays will he or she still have to learn and embrace the teaching of Islam in the classroom, but have the teaching of biblical history overruled? What happens when the topics your child may be learning are ideals and values that marginalize how you have raised them and articulate an agenda that compromises your family’s religious beliefs? This is not something that can be overlooked simply because the child is heading home for a Christmas break.
Actually this serves as the best time to discuss and share what your beliefs are and reinforce the reasons why you will stand up for them when your child returns to school in the New Year. Don’t accept the erroneous church and state separation argument that liberal school officials try to jam down the throat of Christian parents. Your child has U.S. Constitutional rights and they must be protected.
In 2014, it has become an unfortunate circumstance in far too many communities across America that conservatives and parents of faith find themselves locked out of a parental support system like the school’s parents’ organization. Instead of assisting the parents by standing up for their interests and the interests of their kids, the parent organizational members give them cold to lukewarm support.
So it really is upon you;

America has a culture that rises up from the deep foundational values that guided the founding fathers. We understand that it is America’s heritage found in small towns, big cities and rural communities that give birth to parental heroes whose actions become larger than life. These are the parents that pray over their decisions at their kitchen table, or in the living room or perhaps during the church service. As a responsible parent they take a stand on principle rather than they should turn over their role and responsibility to the offending teacher, principal, submitting to the will of a partial anti-Christian school administrator or local school board member. They are not like others who take the easy route and conveniently swallow their principles and their values.
Take a page from Samuel Adams, who was one of America’s Revolutionary Heroes and a Founding Father. Adams’s father was a church deacon and was deeply influenced by him. Adams spoke of lukewarm supporters saying,
“If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.”
Let liberty and your children and America’s future generations be your guide and your prayer as you celebrate this Christmas season. There is no tranquility in servitude to political correctness, so take off the politically correct chains of convenience that are used to shackle your children. Praise the birth of the Son of God and fight to protect your child and their future in the New Year as their Hero!


by Mark Horne // http://lastresistance.com/2862/un-declares-another-worldwide-war-on-biblical-ethics/
The UN is doing something evil. It must be a day that ends in “Y.”
Having already acted as a willing tool of the US State Department Eugenics policy, pretending to endorse the freedom of mothers to murder babies or not (i.e. “abortion rights), while in fact openly bribing and coercing population reduction, this latest move by the United Nations is not that big a deal relatively. It is just one more monstrosity on top of many other monstrosities. Still it is worth noting, since it will surely be used for propaganda purposes in the United States. Fox News reports:
“Amid a surge of anti-gay violence and repression in several countries, the United Nations’ human rights office on Friday launched its first global outreach campaign to promote tolerance and greater equality for lesbians, gays, transgender people and bisexuals. Called Free & Equal, it’s an unprecedented effort by the Office of the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights to change public attitudes around the world on issues that have bitterly divided the U.N.’s own member states.”
In my opinion, this will ultimately prove to be a good thing if the UN pushes this. It will prove to the global world that, no matter how much money and power we possess in the Western world, and no matter what lovely promises we make, that we are a force for evil that needs to be resisted.
In fact, the UN is openly circumventing the will of its constituents and doing the will of a rich minority to brainwash the poor majority:
“Radcliffe said funding for Free & Equal is being provided by outside contributors, and is not reliant on U.N. funds, thus skirting any possible opposition from U.N. members who oppose gay-rights activism.”
Remember, even in Kenya, a country where residents regard President Obama as a kind of Superhero, the Kenyan President, Uhuru Kenyatta, rebuffed Obama’s advocacy of perversion.
What is obvious from the UN campaign is that the organization does not want to spread the idea of libertarian freedom. Nothing in the UN campaign argues that it doesn’t matter to the civil power what sins consenting adults commit in private only between themselves. That may not be the position God wants civil governments to hold, but it would give these countries a plausible reason to stop prosecuting (or persecuting) homosexuals, without being forced to change all their ethical and religious beliefs.
But no, the UN is insisting that Kenyans and Senagalese and South Africans all the rest change their moralities. They must regard sexual preference as an “orientation” and therefore regard its practice as a kind of “civil right.” Rather than simply decriminalization, the UN is going to push for hate crimes laws, re-education, and the entire gamut of social engineering.
The result: the UN is going to intensify animosity and violence against homosexuals. They would rather see that happen than promote any kind of libertarian freedom.
One aspect of the moral blindness of the UN can be seen in their claims about anti-homosexual violence in South Africa:
“South Africa, in contrast, does not criminalize homosexuality and allows same-sex marriage, yet is plagued by extensive anti-gay violence, including frequent rapes of lesbians.”
I’m sure this odious crime is committed all the time against lesbians because lesbians are women and South Africa is notorious for frequent rapes of women. But is there extensive outside funding available for a campaign against rape in general? Nope. They just care about the homosexuals. The UN is taking a country rife with sexual violence of all sorts and using the part that fits their agenda.
This is the final battle, and it is one in which the United States, the real power behind the United Nations, is a force for evil in the world.
Posted by Survival Mom http://joeforamerica.com/2013/06/8-vital-skills-to-teach-your-children-that-will-trump-an-ivy-league-education/
A few weeks ago I was in a particularly depressed mood. That’s not the norm for me, but this time it was completely justified. I was pondering my children’s futures.
College prices have sky-rocketed, far surpassing wage increases. My daughter will be ready for college in five years. Will we be able to afford a college education for her or even pay a percentage of it? And, if she does go to college, what will she major in that will provide a reliable career in a world whose future is increasingly unreliable?
Perhaps my kids should learn a trade that would provide a rock-solid income, but what would that be? As a mom, I want their futures to be as secure as possible, giving them a chance of achieving their dreams and a comfortable lifestyle.
As you might imagine, it was right around this point that my thinking got pretty muddled. Is there a career that’s EMP-proof? A job that will provide their families with an income even if the dollar goes belly up and America, as we know it, declines forever?
I’m still not sure what path they should take, and of course they have a say in their future plans! However, my brain lit upon something that gave me hope as I contemplated a dismal future.
What’s more important than a college degree?
The future job market may be bleak for professions from A to Z, but people will always, always, look for and need leaders. People who have the skills, confidence, and personality to stand up and lead. Isn’t that what our world is crying out for right now? Leadership?
My son could easily become an electrician, capable of wiring a building, knowing electrical code, and also able to give direction, focus, and encouragement to his peers and family. Perhaps my daughter will become a florist, but why can’t she also live her life with goals and a vision and inspire others to do the same? It’s those leadership qualities and skills that may very well trump another person’s Ivy League education.
I believe the future belongs to those who possess leadership skills and are willing to step out and lead. Leadership, though, is mostly taught and nurtured. Skills such as decisiveness, ambition, the ability to motivate and inspire are not taught in the public school. I spent 9 years in the classroom as a public school teacher and another 4 as a school district trainer. Trust me. There is nothing in the public school curriculum that teaches leadership skills. If your child is to become a leader in a tumultuous and unpredictable future, you will have to teach him or her yourself.
What skills and qualities should you begin focusing on? Here are a few:
From an early age, give your children practice speaking to and with adults. At restaurants, insist that they place their own orders with the waitress. Stand back and let them approach the librarian or store clerk with their questions. Be willing to sit and just listen to your child as they put their thoughts and emotions into words. Enroll them in activities that will require them to make speeches orpresentations or communicate with the general public. Many adults shrink away from this themselves, but it’s impossible to be a leader without effective communication skills.
Even if there is no need for your child to earn money, getting a job is an excellent way to learn how to communicate with all sorts of people. My first job was at J.C. Penney and I had to work in the children’s clothing department. I learned how to strike up conversations with customers, ask my boss for help when I needed it, and not crawl into a hole when the store manager showed up! All lifelong skills!
All children have fantasies and dreams for their futures. Encourage them to talk about what they want to be when they grow up, what they want to do, to build, to create. Nothing meaningful on this earth has ever been accomplished without, first, a vision. Our world has been greatly enhanced by people like Steve Jobs and Thomas Edison. They let their imaginations run wild, and apparently, so did their parents!
Once your child has a vision for something, help him or her break it down into smaller parts. Setting and achieving goals is an enormous confidence builder but too many people, including most adults, have no idea of the power of goal-setting. Start with a small goal, perhaps earning a certain amount of money or achieving some specific goal in a school subject. Write out the goal and what has to be done in order to complete it. This teaches kids to know what they want and what has to be done to get it.
We live in a world where too few people have courage. They are too willing to behave like sheep and kowtow to the latest version of political correctness. A real leader stands up for what he or she believes in the face of ridicule, prejudice, and rejection. As well, it takes courage to finish a difficult task and overcome obstacles of every kind. Facing peer pressure is another chance to be courageous and do the right thing.
Confidence comes with competence. Require your kids to always to their best and to not make excuses. However, don’t expect them to succeed in something without thorough instruction. That applies to school subjects, athletic endeavors, and even household chores. I used to get frustrated at my son’s attempts to load the dishwasher until I realized that I had never actually taught him how to do it! Don’t demand a high level of competency without making sure your child understands exactly how to accomplish the task. Once they are competent and experience repeated successes, just watch their confidence soar!
We all need a pat on the back, a word of encouragement, or a note of appreciation. Let your child see from your own actions what it means to encourage others and give them opportunities to do the same. Perhaps they could write a kind note to a friend who lost a pet or send a get-well card to a relative. Our culture encourages isolation and selfishness, but this will teach your kids a more rewarding way of interacting with others.
People will never trust a leader who they know to be dishonest. Honesty brings with it respect and admiration. Reward truthfulness and integrity every time you notice it.
I have a friend who decided what her daughter should wear each day until the girl was at least 11 years old. Yes, she was always perfectly coordinated, but without meaning to, I’m sure, her mother was teaching her to doubt her own decisions. Part of learning to make smart decisions is bearing the consequences of poor ones. When my kid spend all their money foolishly, I don’t slip them a ten when they see something else they want! Let your kids make decisions. Talk about what they give up if they make Decision A versus Decision B. It’s important to take into consideration the consequences of their decisions and learn to not rush into something without giving it plenty of thought.
You and I have no way of knowing what careers will be “hot” in ten or twenty years, but in a way, that doesn’t matter. Young adults facing the future with the confidence that comes with these leadership qualities and skills are ready to tackle anything and succeed, even without that Ivy League education.
Uwe and Hannelore Romeike are Christians and the parents of six children. When their kids attended the German public schools, they were bullied and harassed because of being Christians. The parents began looking into the schools and what their kids were being taught. They found a number of objectionable and inappropriate things in the textbooks that they didn’t want their kids learning.
They strongly believed that their children would receive a better education grounded in biblical principles by being schooled at home rather than having their children indoctrinated by the German schools. Uwe said:
“We knew that homeschooling would not be an easy journey.”
However, the German government had made homeschooling illegal and actively pursued Christian families who tried to homeschool their children. In 2008, the Romeike family was ripped apart when government officials stepped in and forcibly removed the kids from the home. The parents were fined thousands of euros.
Their only hope was to seek political asylum in a country that allowed Christians to homeschool, so they applied to the US for asylum. A US immigration judge ruled in 2010 that the family did face persecution from the German government and granted the Romeike family political asylum. The family moved and settled in Tennessee.
Remember at last month when President Obama issued his Religious Freedom Day proclamation? He said:
“Today, we also remember that religious liberty is not just an American right; it is a universal human right to be protected here at home and across the globe. This freedom is an essential part of human dignity, and without it our world cannot know lasting peace.”
“As we observe Religious Freedom Day, let us remember the legacy of faith and independence we have inherited, and let us honor it by forever upholding our right to exercise our beliefs free from prejudice or persecution…”
Here’s how he lives up to his statement.
US Attorney General Eric Holder and the Department of Homeland Security are fighting the political asylum status. Holder claims that the family’s fundamental rights have not been violated by Germany’s law forbidding families from homeschooling. They have asked the courts to withdraw the family’s political asylum and have them deported back to Germany.
The Home School legal Defense Association (HSLDA) is representing the Romeikes family and fighting to have them stay in the US. They say that:
“The U.S. law of asylum allows a refugee to stay in the United States permanently if he can show that he is being persecuted for one of several specific reasons. Among these are persecution for religious reasons and persecution of a ‘particular social group.’”
“In most asylum cases, there is some guesswork necessary to figure out the government’s true motive—but not in this case. The Supreme Court of Germany declared that the purpose of the German ban on homeschooling was to ‘counteract the development of religious and philosophically motivated parallel societies.’”
“This sounds elegant, perhaps, but at its core it is a frightening concept. This means that the German government wants to prohibit people who think differently from the government (on religious or philosophical grounds) from growing and developing into a force in society.”
“The Romeikes’ case is before the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. The case for the government is officially in the name of the Attorney General of the United States. The case is called Romeike v. Holder. Thus, the brief filed by the U.S. Department of Justice is filed on behalf of the attorney general himself—although we can be reasonably certain he has not personally read it. Nonetheless, it is a statement of the position of our government at a very high level.”
“We argued that Germany is a party to many human rights treaties that contain specific provisions that protect the right of parents to provide an education that is different from the government schools. Parents have the explicit right to give their children an education according to their own philosophy.”
“While the United States government argued many things in their brief, there are three specific arguments that you should know about.”
“First, they argued that there was no violation of anyone’s protected rights in a law that entirely bans homeschooling. There would only be a problem if Germany banned homeschooling for some but permitted it for others.”
“A second argument is revealing. The U.S. government contended that the Romeikes’ case failed to show that there was any discrimination based on religion because, among other reasons, the Romeikes did not prove that all homeschoolers were religious, and that not all Christians believed they had to homeschool.”
“This argument demonstrates another form of dangerous “group think” by our own government. The central problem here is that the U.S. government does not understand that religious freedom is an individual right. One need not be a part of any church or other religious group to be able to make a religious freedom claim. Specifically, one doesn’t have to follow the dictates of a church to claim religious freedom—one should be able to follow the dictates of God Himself.”
“One final argument from Romeikes deserves our attention. One of the grounds for asylum is if persecution is aimed at a “particular social group.” The definition of a “particular social group” requires a showing of an “immutable” characteristic that cannot change or should not be required to be changed. We contend that German homeschoolers are a particular social group who are being persecuted by their government.”
If they are returned to Germany, the couple could be facing more large fines, jail time and the loss of their children. If this is not a violation of the family’s fundamental rights, then I don’t know what is. Perhaps more importantly to all homeschoolers in America is that if Holder wins this case, there is the possibility that it could serve as a legal precedent for Obama’s efforts to outlaw homeschooling here in the US.
What gets me really hot under the collar on this case is that Holder and the DHS are allowing nearly a million illegal aliens to remain in the US, still illegally, while trying to deport a family who only wants to homeschool their children. When Obama penned that proclamation last month, he was lying out both sides of his mouth and had no intention of doing anything for any Christian. He’ll leap tall buildings to defend the rights of Muslim and gays, but he’ll turn his back and walk away from Christians. The hypocrisy of the Obama administration is enough to make me want to vomit.
You must be logged in to post a comment.