Marshall Rooster Cogburn: …you can forget about your duty.
Eula Goodnight: Your own General Lee thought it was the most beautiful word in the English language.
Marshall Rooster Cogburn: What the devil do you know of General Lee?
Eula Goodnight: That he was a christian gentleman who was soundly whipped in the field by Yankees!

Rooster Cogburn 1975

As a general rule I’m opposed to playing games with history and reality. History is what it is and a lot of trouble happens when you try to fiddle with it for the sake of an agenda. That basis also is sufficient to oppose removing the confederate monuments in the south, much better, in my opinion to put up other monuments near and/or with them and explain how and why these folks thought what they thought, why they choose to fight and what the general condition of both American and world culture was so people understand how a nation’s decision to kick the slavery can down the road for 60 years led to a destructive Civil War. And given our current situation lessons on how to avoid such a war might be a pretty good idea.

But there is one more point that I think overrides all of these considerations in my mind and should be taken into account by all those self righteous virtue signaling folk trying to use this to raise their own political profile by playing the “triggered” card.

There were hundreds of thousands of Union causalities in the civil war. According to the US Parks service over 340,000 died (over 110K in battle). Furthermore another 275,000 were wounded meaning tens of thousands of US soldiers spent the rest of their lives maimed because of the various generals honored by those statues and the troops who served under them.

Yet not only didn’t those Union Soldiers begrudge the south honoring those who tried to kill them or succeeded in crippling them, but the elected representatives of the Union survivors not only felt no need to force the removal of said monuments but were perfectly happy to vote honors in those directions even though:

  1. The southern states never at any time held a congressional majority
  2. The Union vets and their children were a significant voting block that drove elections nationally for decades.
  3. After the Civil war no southerner occupied the White House until every single Civil War Vet from both sides was dead and said southerner (LBJ) only became president due to Kennedy’s assassination.

Why didn’t they care? I suspect it was because they understood that the south had lost the war and lost it big time.

Again turning to park service numbers out of a population of 5.5 non slaves the south suffered over 483,000 casualties, nearly a tenth of the entire population. Over 194,000 confederate soldiers came home wounded and when they did come home they found cities destroyed, their countryside practically picked clean by the armies that had slaughtered and maimed their military age population and found that their wealth had been drained faster than a sink unclogged by liquid plumber.

The Union vets and their children were wise enough to understand that no monument even if carved of the best marble or stone whether in a city square or on the side of a mountain could change the fact that the south in general and the southern armies in particular were thoroughly and utterly defeated.

To my mind if the children of those union soldiers, not to mention the men themselves who were targeted for death and destruction by the subjects of those figures depicted in those statues, weren’t offended enough by them to force their removal how much less of a claim do we have generations later to be so offended that those monuments must go?

Let em keep their rocks.


The last article I posted was June 12. A few days later, I was in the hospital with my 8.5-month pregnant wife. The baby needed to come early, so “baby prep” week was replaced by “baby’s here” week.

As I discussed earlier this year, this particular baby wasn’t going to be a run-of-the-mill delivery. We had three separate teams of doctors and nurses positioned to handle different aspects of the delivery, immediate tests, and transportation directly to the NICCU.  His heart had challenges. There was a hole in the wall separating the ventricles. His aorta and pulmonary artery were transpositioned. We’ve known for months that he may not survive and even if he did, he would always have obstacles.

Our cardiologist was absolutely wonderful. She barely even mentioned abortion and after realizing very quickly that it wasn’t an option, she never mentioned it again. After doing some research, I learned that it’s not uncommon for people to have abortions when their preborn child is faced with the type of circumstance our child faced. Obviously, I’m very opposed to this notion. Who are we to determine whether another human, even a preborn child, should not be allowed to live a life, even a hard one?

The delivery was long and tedious, but once he finally made his appearance everything went into double-time. My wife saw him briefly before the baby and I were whisked away through an underground tunnel to Children’s Hospital of Orange County. He had to be monitored closely, tested profusely, and examined constantly. We needed to make decisions about his immediate future. There were several possible ways to address his heart.

The next day, an unexpected option became available. Dr. Vaughn A. Starnes, made famous for performing the life-saving operation on Jimmy Kimmel’s son, took a look at the test results and accepted our son to get the “all-in-one” operation (my term, as I don’t recall the names of the various procedures performed). This meant that the doctor could fix his valves, the hole in his heart, and switch the aorta and pulmonary artery in one operation. Not only would this allow fewer operations, but would give him the best chance of a relatively “normal” life.

There were major risks. To do the operation, his heart would be stopped, all of the blood would be drained, and his body temperature would need to be dropped to preservation levels. In essence, he would have to be made physically lifeless for hours while repairs were made. Then, he’d have a large hole in his chest that would remain open for a few days while swelling went down.

As a parent, it all sounded extremely terrifying. We discussed it, then prayed, then made our decision. Little Jacob was in a helicopter and on his way to Children’s Hospital of Los Angeles within the hour.

After a month living in East Hollywood tag-teaming it with my wife and the wonderful nursing staff there, we finally brought our son home. He’s like any normal newborn other than the large scar on his chest and an affinity for being held even more than most newborns. We couldn’t be more thankful.

We’re all faced with tough choices when our children are at risk. If they can be saved pain and challenges through abortion, many may see that as sad but better than the alternative. I can tell you from experience that being with little Jacob, watching him smile, and knowing he’s God’s creation affirms our decision. I couldn’t imagine life without him, now. I hope those in similar situations can experience the same blessings we’ve received.

By John Ruberry

Around this time yesterday during a white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia one woman was killed and 19 others were injured when they were rammed and run over by a person driving a Dodge Challenger.

James Alex Fields Jr, 20, was allegedly the behind the wheel of that muscle car. He’s been arrested on numerous charges and presumably the case against him is very strong. According to multiple media reports Fields is a white supremacist and an admirer of Adolf Hitler. He was also prescribed anti-psychotic drugs. But that doesn’t mean Fields doesn’t know the difference between right and wrong.

In my opinion Fields is the archetypal contemporary member of the Ku Klux Klan or the American Nazi Party–a disturbed, and yes, dangerous person who has, as the British say, “toys in the attic.”

Multiple media sources are calling the racist rally, formally known as Unite the Right, a white nationalist event.

Every year, however, the Nation of Islam, which espouses black separatism, holds a Saviour’s Day event, usually in Chicago, to celebrate the birthday of the NOI’s founder, Wallace Fard Muhammad, who claimed that black people are divine and whites are wicked. According to Muhammad, whites were created by an evil scientist named Yakub. But because blacks are part of the victim class, according to establishment media mores, Saviour’s Day can never be a black nationalist rally. You can laugh off the Nation of Islam, which has about 50,000 followers, but one of its members, the since-executed John Allen Muhammad, was one of the Beltway Snipers who murdered 17 people–whites and blacks–in 2002. The other killer was John Lee Malvo, a teenaged illegal immigrant from Jamaica. One of the duo’s motives for the murders was to extort money in order to open a community for homeless black youths to be trained as terrorists in Canada.

Many Muslim groups condemn the National of Islam as a heretic sect.

Despite his surname, John Muhammad’s NOI membership was downplayed, even ignored by the mainstream media in its coverage of the attacks and the subsequent trials. He was not labeled a black nationalist. In 1995 Muhammad was part of the security of the Nation of Islam’s Million Man March, although the NOI leader, Louis Farrakhan, denies it.

None of us is all good–the potential to commit evil exists in all of us in different degrees. And of course no race or ethnic group is all good or all evil.

Yet here we are, well within the 21st century, and I have to point that out. Sad.

John Ruberry regularly blogs at Marathon Pundit.

I speak to Joe Wetterling President of the Catholic Writers guild about the Dominican Institute at the 2917 Catholic Marketing Network.

The website of the Dominican Institute is here

The Rest of my Catholic Marketing Network posts are here.


This blog is a venture in capitalism that depends primarily on readers. You can help finance this by picking up my new book Hail Mary the Perfect Protestant (and Catholic) prayer is now available at Amazon

A portion of every sale will go to WQPH 89.3 Catholic Radio) or show your approval by Hitting DaTipJar




Olimometer 2.52

and if you really want to help for the long term consider subscribing and get my book as a premium


Choose a Subscription level



And as I’ve said before if you can’t spare the cash we will be happy to accept your prayers.

It’s easy to get lost in this world even while pursuing a clear objective. Running into so many trees you lose perspective regarding the forest as a whole; unwillingly embodying the old joke about how when you’re up to your neck in alligators difficulty ensues remembering the original objective was draining the swamp. It happens.

At such times it helps referring not to what you should be doing, but why you should be doing it. Clarity comes from purpose; purpose is rooted in core beliefs. With this in mind, time to look at the oft neglected cornerstone that should be at the heart of what we do in this odd little realm of blogs and social media.

Some years ago, back when I harbored hallucinations of joining cyberspace’s high rollers, I came up with what I called the four tenets of the blogging evangel. They were:

  1. The ability to broadcast an opinion neither elevates nor validates said opinion.
  2. Blog from and for the heart, not the wallet.
  3. Answer your email every time all the time.
  4. Never become what you profess to oppose. Never.

These are quite self-explanatory, methinks. Especially in noting how following them permanently relegated me to the blogosphere’s, and social media’s, far sidelines. But I digress. To brusquely summarize, the eighty-fifth post/status update/tweet today yelling about how Obama is a poooyhead and/or Trump is a meanypants, all while offering rip and read analysis from the same ripped and read mainstream news story everyone else has ripped and read, doesn’t add anything to the public discourse. Neither did the other eighty-four. Try finding something worth your, and the reader’s, time. Something that matters. Something that gives something more than bait with which to lure sycophants into boosting your visibility within the echo chamber. Have a reason worth considering.

Here’s mine.

I’ve been a Christian since 1975, and a passionate fan/supporter of Jesus Music/contemporary Christian music/whatever you want to call it since then. I spent several years from the late 1980s through the mid 1990s as a journalist covering the music scene, this time period including numerous interviews with, and feature stories written about, many of the genre’s top artists, all published in the era’s leading magazines.

I drifted away from the scene in the mid 1990s, disillusioned by several people involved in it at different levels and also extremely unhappy with myself and how I had occasionally acted. I came back to the music, and into a walk with Christ that was something more than lip service, in 2005 at a concert featuring several of the ’80s-’90s bands I had loved back in the day. I later interviewed many of the artists from that era and published my work in book form; info at http://godsnotdeadbook.com I also have an online radio show, with info for same at http://cephashour.com

The bands and artists I loved – Larry Norman, Undercover, The 77s, Daniel Amos, The Choir, and dozens more – were bold both musically and lyrically. They addressed subjects like failed relationships, death, suicide, racism, sexual perversion, and other topics usually considered too hot for discussion within Christian circles. They did so understanding and accepting it would permanently put them on the outer fringe of Christian music; minimal airplay, far fewer concert opportunities, a lot fewer Christian bookstores carrying their records. But they did it anyway, because it was their calling.

I don’t listen to much current music of any genre; don’t have as much patience or time as once was the case to seek out the latest and greatest. I’m sure there’s some terrific new Christian rock and pop out there. But I will always hold on to my beloved classic Christian rock. It truly is the soundtrack of my life, and it has been a faithful companion in my walk with Christ. It remains vital and fresh. It can, and does, still bless people. Promoting it, getting and keeping it out there, is my purpose in the online world. It is my fundamental.

What’s yours?

Sheldon Cooper:  I came to file a complaint. Somebody has made me feel uncomfortable in the workplace by using language of an inappropriate and sexual nature.
Ms. Davis: And who was that?
Sheldon Cooper:   You, you dirty birdie. I thought about the things you said to me yesterday, and I realized I’m deeply offended. Now, be a dear and get me one of those complaint forms.

The Big Bang Theory:  The Egg Salad Equivalency 2013

At Salon.com a rather late realization has set in:

Dang — looks like those women-only “Wonder Woman” screenings were illegal

Turns out that when men whined about being banned from the screenings, they had a legal point

Salon was shocked SHOCKED to find out that under the laws of liberal Austin Texas, discrimination is discrimination is discrimination.

Over at some colleges they are making similar discovers at a cost greater than a complementary Wonder Woman DVD

A University of Texas student claims in a lawsuit that UT President Gregory L. Fenves misapplied the school’s sexual assault policy and suspended him for five semesters even though his accuser agreed to have sex after a sorority formal in spring 2016.

And the costs aren’t limited to colleges either:

“Rolling Stone has settled a lawsuit with the University of Virginia fraternity whose members were falsely accused of raping a female student in a Nov. 2014 article, The Daily Caller has learned. A source involved at the national level with the fraternity, Phi Kappa Psi, tells TheDC that Rolling Stone will pay $1.65 million to settle the defamation suit.”

What’s really funny about this is these results were completely predictable because of laws our friends on the left spent decades getting in place:

According to Dan Eaton, an attorney and ethics professor at San Diego University, the engineer certainly has grounds for a case on two fronts. “First, federal labor law bars even non-union employers like Google from punishing an employee for communicating with fellow employees about improving working conditions,” Eaton writes.

And second, because the memo was a statement of political views, Eaton says Google may have violated California law which “prohibits employers from threatening to fire employees to get them to adopt or refrain from adopting a particular political course of action.”

An international corporation with armies of both lawyers, Google knew all this. They decided to take their chances with state and federal law anyway rather than stick up for one of their employees and risk public backlash. That’s an incredibly telling decision from a company that has mastered everything from artificial intelligence to self-driving cars.

The piece ends with the idea that google is more afraid of liberal anger than expensive lawsuits, but once those expensive lawsuits start coming, followed by the discrimination lawsuits from conservatives who are denied positions, and other lawsuits concerning “hostile work environments” which our friends on the left have so graciously provided us with, the worm will start turning quickly, particularly for publicly held companies who have to explain to their shareholders why keeping the perpetually outraged left is more important than their bottom line.

As for those who think Google’s size making them safe from this kind of thing.  I’m old enough to remember when AOL was the net and the net was AOL.  Google should take note.

After all if front groups that are essentially fax machines with a post office boxes and a few people tweeting can  scare a company, how much so group consisting of actual people in quantity who both vote and shop?

Perhaps Google should ask Mizzou?

by baldilocks

I had to be very careful with my search terms when looking for this image.

For the second part of this series, consider the uproar surrounding Dana Loesch’s NRA-produced video challenge to the New York Times, where she says this:

“We the people” have had it. We’ve had it with your narratives, your propaganda, your fake news. We’ve had it with your constant protection of your democrat overlords, your refusal to acknowledge any truth that upsets the fragile construct that you believe is real life. And we’ve had it with your pretentious, tone-deaf assertion that you are in any way truth or fact-based journalism.

Consider this the shot across your proverbial bow. We are going to fisk the The New York Times and find out just what “deep and rich” means to this old gray hag, this untrustworthy, dishonest rag that has subsisted on the welfare of mediocrity for one, two, three, more decades. We’re going to laser-focus on your so-called “honest pursuit of truth.”

In short, we’re coming for you.

Emphasis mine, for an important reason.

As Amy Alkon points out, ‘fisk’ is an old-school conservative blog term. For all you grammarians out there, it’s verb and it can be transitive or intransitive.

Here’s a simple definition and a short etymology. See also: Robert Fisk.

To criticize and refute (a published article or argument), especially in point-by-point or line-by-line fashion on a blog.

Many who are unaware of the coinage inserted their own word into the breach (no pun intended): fist, a word which has had its own recent redefinition, a sexual one from another insular subculture–gay men.

So it was that this particular Cat 5 storm was set in motion, where people are aghast that someone would want to “fist” the New York Times. CNN’s Mark Herling has even dropped a dime on Loesch — presumably to the FBI –for “threatening Americans and institutions.” I’ll leave off from any jokes about rebuttals.

As an effective spokeswoman for gun rights and for the NRA, Loesch is a perennial target for those who would see those rights infringed and is adept at pushing back. But the most telling parts of this latest storm need to be spelled out.

  • That some online critics pretend that they’ve never heard of the verb “to fisk,”
  • That other online critics actually have never heard of it, and
  • That members of both sets of critics are quick to jump to sexual innuendo-type conclusions, projecting their own deviant mindset onto others, notably in this case, a heterosexual, married woman. All weapons are fair in the destruction of an enemy’s reputation — except guns, of course.

The most important factor, however, is that MSM entities like the New York Time are being called out by Loesch and by many others … our host, for example.

The MSM goal is to drown out that message in all the fisk/fist outrage and that goal has been reached.

Or has it?

Part Three’s topic: Googlegate. Maybe. By Saturday — my next day to post — it’s a safe bet that there will be a more current Social Media Hurricane.

Part One is here.

Attention: See Da Tech Guy’s pinned post!

Juliette Akinyi Ochieng blogs at baldilocks. (Her older blog is located here.) Her first novel, Tale of the Tigers: Love is Not a Game, was published in 2012. Her second novel tentatively titled Arlen’s Harem, will be done one day soon! Follow her on Twitter and on Gab.ai.

To say I was disgusted by this AP story is an understatement but I’d like to remind everyone who shares this disgust with where we are what made this possible:

It was made possible when Democrats in the 90’s insisted that “civil unions” would not lead to gay marriage and Republicans Insisted there was no need for a constitutional amendment on marriage (they were lying)

It was made possible by a single vote in the Massachusetts Supreme Court that had been stacked with ultra liberals by folks like Bill Weld.

It was made possible by an ambitious republican pol who after being willing to throw his pro-life credentials off the bus to be elected was willing to quietly accept this ridiculous ruling without fighting back for fear it would harm his presidential election and fundraising chances.

It was made possible by a Democrat party so rightly afraid that the first black president might lose re-election without LGBT dollars that their vice president dragged him kicking and screaming out of the “closet” of support.

And finally it was made possible because Black Pastors and black churches all over the country, given the choice of following Christ or following Obama after he came out in favor of Gay Marriage overwhelmingly choose Obama.

What do all of these things have in common? The desire to gain or retain political power over the desire for truth.

All of this took less than one generation. That’s all the time it takes to lose a culture when people are too cowardly to fight for it.


The Layoff bleg continues. with e days to go we’re stuck at $1515 away from the goal to make August dedicated to the blog, the new radio show and events.

This blog is a venture in capitalism that depends primarily on readers. You can help finance this by picking up my new book Hail Mary the Perfect Protestant (and Catholic) prayer is now available at Amazon

A portion of every sale will go to WQPH 89.3 Catholic Radio) or show your approval by Hitting DaTipJar




Olimometer 2.52

and if you really want to help for the long term consider subscribing and get my book as a premium


Choose a Subscription level



And as I’ve said before if you can’t spare the cash we will be happy to accept your prayers.

Avarice, ambition, revenge and licentiousness would break the strongest cords of our Constitution, as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other

John Adams

Over the last several days we’ve heard about many developments concerning the Clinton Lynch story,  one of the critical moments in last year’s election cycle.

The bit about the media trying to bury the story wasn’t good, hearing about alias’ used by the Attorney General, the top law enforcement officer in the country, to hide her questionable actions and the fact that these meetings were planed and coordinated is pretty bad.

But for my money the most critical part of the story is this bit (via legal insurrection) concerns not the revelations but the FOIA request itself: (all emphasis mine)

On July 1, 2016 – just days before our FOIA request – a DOJ email chain under the subject line, “FBI just called,” indicates that the “FBI . . . is looking for guidance” in responding to media inquiries about news reports that the FBI had prevented the press from taking pictures of the Clinton Lynch meeting. The discussion then went off email to several phone calls (of which we are not able to obtain records). An hour later, Carolyn Pokomy of the Office of the Attorney General stated, “I will let Rybicki know.” Jim Rybicki was the Chief of Staff and Senior Counselor to FBI Director Jim Comey. The information that was to be provided to Rybicki is redacted.

Also of note several of the documents contain redactions that are requested “per FBI.”

It is clear that there were multiple records within the FBI responsive to our request and that discussions regarding the surreptitious meeting between then AG Lynch and the husband of the subject of an ongoing FBI criminal investigation reached the highest levels of the FBI.

However, on October 21, 2016, the Comey FBI replied to our legal demands that “No records responsive to your request were located.”  This is in direct contravention to the law, and we are preparing further legal action to force the FBI to come clean and turn over ALL documents related to this matter to us in a timely manner.

Think about this statement from folks at Powerline again (all emphasis mine)

There are only two possibilities here: either someone at the FBI destroyed documents relating to the Bureau’s communications about the Lynch/Clinton meeting, or someone at the FBI lied in response to ACLJ’s FOIA request. Federal agencies have personnel dedicated to responding to FOIA requests, and presumably the people who carry out this relatively mundane task would not lie or destroy documents without instructions from the top.

There was a time when that presumption was a given, not anymore.  This case clearly demonstrates the only reason why the FOIA, a law specifically designed to promote open government was obeyed was:

  1.  Barack Obama’s Term was over
  2.  Hillary Clinton was not elected
  3.  James Comey was fired

There is no point in having laws like FOIA, or any other unless the people charged with carrying them out are honest and honorable enough to obey them no matter who’s in power unfortunately we now have two cultures in this nation.  One of them believes in the Judeo-christian moral code and the other believes the ends justifies the means.

Once that presumption that the laws will be obeyed by those who are charged with carrying them out is gone, the social contract between the government and those who are governed is gone, and when gone it’s nearly impossible to get it back.

This is the legacy that the Clintons and Barack Obama and their allies in the Democrat Party who have embraced the culture of ends and means have left America and it’s a legacy that our nation will be paying for generations.


The Layoff bleg continues. with 4 days to go we’re $1515 away from the goal to make August dedicated to the blog, the new radio show (shows?) and events.

This blog is a venture in capitalism that depends primarily on readers. You can help finance this by picking up my new book Hail Mary the Perfect Protestant (and Catholic) prayer is now available at Amazon

A portion of every sale will go to WQPH 89.3 Catholic Radio) or show your approval by Hitting DaTipJar




Olimometer 2.52

and if you really want to help for the long term consider subscribing and get my book as a premium


Choose a Subscription level



And as I’ve said before if you can’t spare the cash we will be happy to accept your prayers.

Sheldon Cooper:But you do bring up an interesting point. I don’t have to break new ground here, I’m sure much of the research already exists.
Leonard Hofstadter: No! no, my point is, if you want to learn how to make friends, then just go out to a coffee shop or a museum. Meet people. Talk to them. Take an interest in their lives.
Sheldon Cooper: That’s insane on the face of it. Come on.
Leonard Hofstadter: Where are we going?
Sheldon Cooper: You’re driving me to the mall. I’m going to acquire a book that summarizes the current theories in the field of friendmaking.

The Big Bang Theory The Friendship Algorithm 2009

This piece at Stacy McCain’s site concerning Emma Lindsay has really stuck with me:

She dated a series of boyfriends until she was in her mid-20s, at which point she decided she was actually bisexual, spent three years dating lesbians and, as she has said, convinced herself she was a victim of “the heteronormative brainwashing of society.” However, Ms. Lindsay’s lesbian relationships turned out the same way as her earlier relationships with men — i.e., failure — and, after a two-year romantic hiatus, she decided to subject herself once more to the insidious forces of patriarchy. What is her likelihood of heterosexual success, at age 32, if she always failed with men when she was younger? Or to look at it from a different angle, why would a man be interested in a woman who has not only been rejected by all her previous boyfriends, but has also been deemed an unsuitable partner by lesbians?

This latest shift seems about the desire for a child and has left her with a problem the quest is not going well because apparently the people she is meeting just aren’t as considerate as she is:

When I date people, I devote a lot of effort to making their lives better. When I’m with women, I read about health issues that effect lesbian demographics (higher rates of breast cancer, obesity, and depression.) When I’m with men, I read about health issues that effect straight men (coronary issues, blood pressure, and emotional issues esp. around anger.) When I date people of color, I research POC health/discrimination/etc. issues, especially issues around dating white people (mental/health effects of internalized racism, institutionalized racism, the types of micro-aggressions I may be likely to commit.) When I date people with less money, I pay for shit. When I date people who are messy, I organize their shit (even though I’m also really messy.) When I date people with physical limitations, I massage their shit (weird Emma past: I went to massage school.)

Her efforts have all come down to two choices in her quest for motherhood:

As far as I can tell, I have 2 options. Option 1 is “trapping” some guy into having kids with me because he lacks the self awareness to plan for it himself. This would also involve taking his last name, doing most of the housework while contributing 50% to the earnings, and faking my orgasms so he doesn’t have to feel emasculated by his lack of sexual prowess.

Option 2 is having kids by myself.

It would involve some sacrifices, like probably not living in San Francisco. However, every time I go on a date with some man-child, I become more and more convinced that those sacrifices are probably the less bad option.

Stacy sums up this conclusion here:

Her proposed “Option 2” — pay for donor sperm, “becoming a single mother by choice” — is a childish threat: “If you don’t play by my rules, I’m going to take my uterus and go home.” To which the world’s male population will generally react with a shrug of indifference.

“Damaged goods,” they’ll say, and if Emma Lindsay were an isolated exception, a lone kook howling at the moon, perhaps I’d shrug, too. Yet the fact is that Ms. Lindsay is part of a tide of human wreckage washing up on the shores of our sin-sick society, the flotsam and jetsam created by the disintegration of America’s formerly Christian culture.

While I agree this entire situation reeks of the disintegration of America’s Christian Culture I think Stacy is missing a key point concerning Miss Lindsay’s screed a consideration that is completely ignored in her calculations.

The good of her child.

You can look high and low, but in all her critiques of the various men she is considering none of said critiques include:  Would this man be a good father?  Would he put our child first?  Would this man be a good role model for our child?

Nor does she seem to be all that concerned about what she would bring to the table.  She talks about having to give up San Francisco and alludes to other unnamed sacrifices but nowhere is the realization that once you have children your life and your commitment belongs to them.  Their well-being, their education, feeding them, clothing them, steering them along the right path.  All of this considerations would seem to be job one.

Where is all her research on what makes a healthy and happy child who will grow up to be a responsible member of adult society?

In the days of my youth, these considerations went without saying, today with the sex act completely divorced from its actual function of procreation it seems her MIT education has not prepared her to ask this completely obvious question.

There is good news however for Miss Lindsay.  She has access to an excellent resource on this subject, as evidenced from an earlier piece of hers concerning the moment the general public discovered her writing:

Then, the day after, I got 75 thousand views, and I called my parents.

“Are you ok?” they asked, “How are the trolls? Are you getting trolled?” Then, “Why did you never tell us about this? You know you can tell us anything.”

She  has (or at least at the time of that writing did have) two parents who are apparently there for her.  I’d suggest sitting down with these parents and having a long talk with them on the subject.  They will almost certainly give the best advice they can on this decision and can do so with practical examples from both their and her own experiences.  And while I may or may not agree with what said advice might be, I’m certain it will flow from their unconditional love for their daughter.

Me I’d sum things up in two sentences:  The secret to a successful marriage is putting up with each other foibles during the 95% of the time when nothing too exciting (good or bad) is going on.

As for Parenthood; The secret to being a good parent is loving your child enough to be willing to enforce an unpleasant rule or speak an uncomfortable truth even when it hurts.

No Charge


The Layoff bleg continues. with 5 days to go we’re $1515 away from the goal to make August dedicated to the blog, the new radio show (shows?) and events.

This blog is a venture in capitalism that depends primarily on readers. You can help finance this by picking up my new book Hail Mary the Perfect Protestant (and Catholic) prayer is now available at Amazon

A portion of every sale will go to WQPH 89.3 Catholic Radio) or show your approval by Hitting DaTipJar




Olimometer 2.52

and if you really want to help for the long term consider subscribing and get my book as a premium


Choose a Subscription level



And as I’ve said before if you can’t spare the cash we will be happy to accept your prayers.