Gun Control Pawns

The recent “Student Walk Out” isn’t as grassroots and authentic as the Media says it is?  Well, what a shock!

Considering how easily manipulated or coerced children and teens are, why exactly should government policy be influenced by what children “protest” or clamor about?  Some teens are quite intelligent, but as a whole they’re not known for clear rational thinking and they have very little life experience, especially today when even college students need “safe spaces” and puppies when life is “too stressful.”  Their brains have not even finished developing.  What they think about legal matters really shouldn’t be considered.  But liberals know that marching kids around has emotional pull.  It looks good for their cause.  What handy little pawns they make!

Five Lies About the Student ‘Walkout’ for Gun Control


Thousands of students “walked out” of classrooms at schools across the country on Wednesday to protest for new gun control legislation in the wake of last month’s mass shooting at Marjory Stonemason Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida.
The mainstream media are celebrating the “walkout” as an authentic expression of outrage that demands a response from political leaders. But it is not, and there are at least five lies they are telling you about it.

Lie #1: The “walkout” is being staged by students.

In most schools, especially elementary schools, the walkout is being organized by teachers, administrators, and liberal parents. Nationwide, the walkout is being coordinated by the Women’s March, an anti-Trump organization that has a soft spot for radical antisemites like Louis Farrakhan. Big media companies, especially CNN, have been publicizing the protest.

Students are involved, but not in charge.

Lie #2: The “walkout” is voluntary.

Younger children cannot stay in classrooms by themselves, and they cannot opt out. Older children in some schools are reportedly allowed to stay behind, but many will be less likely to do so given pressure from adults and peers.

Somehow, the liberals who argue against prayer in public schools — even a generic “moment of silence” — because of fears of religious coercion are creating a coercive political environment.

Lie #3: The “walkout” is not about gun control.

Organizers are pulling a sly bait-and-switch. At my daughter’s school, for example, staff and the PTA organized a “peace and kindness assembly.” The principal told parents, via e-mail: “There will be NO mention of school shootings, guns, or violence of any kind.” But the PTA said: “Schools across the country and state are supporting their students as they show their support for greater gun control.”

They minimize objections by selling “peace” to parents, then maximize impact by pushing “gun control” in the media.

Lie #4: The “walkout” is non-partisan.

The groups involved in organizing the walkout are all left-wing and Democrat-aligned.

Few, if any, schools are bothering to provide an alternative point of view about the importance of the Second Amendment, or about arming qualified teachers and staff to intercept and deter possible attackers.

Lie #5: If you oppose the “walkout,” you support violence against children.

This is the most pernicious lie of all, and real message of the protests. The goal of the “walkout” — aside from mobilizing Democrats against gun-clinging Republicans in a midterm election year — is to shame Second Amendment supporters into silence and conformity.

It amounts to exploiting our children, as well as those 17 deaths in Florida, for political purposes.


A call to repentance?

This is the time of year when many Christians are focused on repentance.  The liturgical season of Lent is observed by Catholics, Orthodox, Episcopalians, Lutherans, Methodists and even some evangelicals.  Lent is an ancient church observance and relatively widely practiced.  One would think in a mixed group of Christians it would be acknowledged at least somewhat.

The day after Ash Wednesday, the traditional start of Lent, I attended an event for Christian homeschoolers.  The leader’s introduction speech was a bit… disappointing.

In the opening remarks, the leader started talking about how broken our world is and how troubled people are, how hurting and confused, and invoked “the recent celebration of Martin Luther King Jr. Day” as a day of “repentance and unity.”  She proceeded to quote MLK about “hate cannot drive out hate” and “only love can drive out hate.”  After going on like this for some time (and none of this had anything to do with the reason this group was meeting in the first place!), she tacked onto the end mentions of God and His love being the only solution to the world’s problems.

MLK Jr. Day had been past by about a month.  Ash Wednesday was just the day before.  It was a stretch to be turning the introduction into a speech about racial justice (without actually coming out and mentioning “racial justice”).  It was a little more understandable that she also talked a great deal about Valentine’s Day and LOVE considering that holiday had shared a date with Ash Wednesday this year.

I have heard this woman speak several times before and knew that when given a platform, she has a tendency to talk too long about her own interpretations of Scripture and throw in vague references to current events with mushy Christian sentiments that could be interpreted in various ways.  I’ve often suspected that these references were leaning liberal but they weren’t explicit enough to pin down for sure — not explicit enough for other attendees at these events, whom I know to have much stronger “conservative” leanings, to be upset with her.

Probably she belongs to a denomination that does not observe Lent, but speaking to a Christian group and talking far more about MLK than God or Scripture is odd.  And calling MLK Day a “day of repentance” really gives her away..

My tolerance for this sort of thing has greatly diminished in the past few years.  The sad thing is that in a way what she said is true — depending on how you interpret it.  We are called to repentance for how we might have wronged others and to reconciliation with our fellow man.  But she left out the most important call to repentance and reconciliation: to God.  Also important is the need to focus on one’s personal failings and responsibility, things one could actually work to make amends for and to change, not some real or imagined wrongs committed by one’s ancestors or race in the distant past or even present.  Nothing that MLK Day is about has anything to do with ME personally.  I have never personally wronged any person of color.

I resent this sort of “Christian” manipulation: Well, don’t you want to love as God tells you to?  Ok, now feel bad about “racial inequality.”  And DO something about it.  Yeah?  Like what exactly?  As far as I can tell, these sorts of little speeches serve no purpose other than to induce “white guilt” and make us “understand.”  How this helps anybody I really can’t see.

I really don’t want to hate anyone.  If others would just leave my people alone and not try to destroy the country/world for my children’s future.  And if they didn’t hate me first, that would really help.

The Solution to Violence in Schools?

With the most recent school shooting in Florida, all the “gun-control” arguments will be rehashed on the news and by celebrities and politicians.  Maybe some proposed laws will be put forth.  Lots of crocodile-teary-eyed liberals yelling about republicans, especially Trump, and the NRA having “blood on their hands!”  Lots of exaggerating about the problem and prevalence of “gun violence” and “school shootings” in our country.  (See this article for a debunking of some of the claims: No, there have not been 18 school shootings so far in 2018)

Sigh.  Here we go again.

It is a tragedy that kids were killed.  What the shooter did was horrible and evil.  The grieving families deserve our prayers.  But how can anyone be genuinely surprised?  Or honestly, even feel much of anything?  The constant tragic, compassion-triggering news cycle has had the effect of making me un-shockable and compassion-numb.  Before anyone starts wondering if I’m secretly a psychopath, let me assure you that in real life I often truly feel for people I know and care about, even people I don’t know sometimes.  Their pain causes me pain.  I cry with them and for them.  But people I don’t know?  Not so much.  My ability to feel compassion over distant events and people has been exhausted by mainstream media manipulation and selective reporting and twisting of events to serve their narrative.  If you can’t trust the story-teller, you can’t trust the story.

While “gun-control” will be the focus of the day (or week, or month), with well-deserved side-notes about mental illness and psychotropic drugs, and maybe even a mention or two about “problems in our culture,” no one will point out the surest way to stop all school shootings.  All sensible and honest people know that even if you made all guns illegal, it wouldn’t prevent crazy and/or evil people from acquiring them and shooting up schools.  Murder is already illegal.  Schools are already “gun-free zones.”  The shooter at the Florida school had already been expelled and banned from campus.  Laws don’t discourage or prevent people from committing crimes as much as we wish they did.

President Trump seems to get that and appears to be referencing all those predictable attempts to “fix” the problem with gun laws.  From a statement he gave following the Florida Shooting (my emphasis):

Later this month, I will be meeting with the nation’s governors and attorney generals, where making our schools and our children safer will be our top priority. It is not enough to simply take actions that make us feel like we are making a difference. We must actually make that difference.

Since out-lawing guns won’t do it, what is the surest way to stop all school shootings? Abolish schools.  It would be more effective than “common-sense gun laws.”  That might sound insane to people who think the public school system is necessary and good, but it makes a lot of sense if you understand that the public school system is NOT necessary or good, and is probably impossible to “fix” (just look at the decades of legal attempts and massive amounts of money dumped into the schools with no positive effect).  It is ineffective at truly educating students.  It is out-dated and doesn’t train them to succeed in the current world or job market.  It is often just a tool of indoctrination for the liberal agenda.  And it’s a damned dangerous place to send your kids, even if they’re never victims of a school shooting.

As Vox Day so aptly puts it: Homeschool or Die.  After quoting a victim’s mother who blames Trump for the shooting, he has this to say:

While one has to make allowances for a distraught mother (assuming she is not a crisis actor, which is far from a certain assumption), the idea that the President of the USA can do anything to prevent people from shooting up schools is absurd. Why not simply have him ban poverty, drugs, and teenage pregnancy while he’s at it? It’s not like there is a law against murder or anything, right?

The truth is that there is only one solution to the problem of school shootings: homeschool.

Although not putting boys on psychotropic medications would probably help.

The way schools handle boys and frequently put them on medications (like Ritalin and an assortment of anti-depressants and anti-pyschotics) has been suggested as a possible factor leading up to school shootings.  But schools are bad for all children and cause plenty of problems that are less obvious than the “going off the deep end” school shooter type (which most likely have multiple contributing factors).  Unfortunately, so many parents still don’t understand this.

I was recently horrified to witness a conversation between several Christian parents.  It went something like this:

Parent 1: Look at this example in the news about a teacher being beaten up by a student.  This terrible student behavior, disrespect for adults and lack of Christian morals in schools and in our culture is part of the reason we choose to homeschool our kids.

Parent 2: Oh, that’s just a rare extreme example given to stir things up.  Those sorts of things don’t happen here.  My kids are in the public school system and have great teachers!  They’re doing really well and growing up to be good Christian kids.  They have plenty of nice friends.  I’m sure they’re not being exposed to anything bad.  I’ve never heard anything from the kids about anything bad here [continues defending the public schools for some time & several other parents chime in with similar arguments].

My mental response: Ha! yeah… even if your kids end up with good teachers (and counting on that is like playing russian roulette), you have no idea what the other students are exposing your kids to and the teachers will never know.  And your kids might never tell you either.  Or they will, but it will be too late.

Just because you think your kids are having a good experience doesn’t mean that school isn’t a physically and morally dangerous place for kids to be.  I know a few things about the particular school system in which Parent 2 is placing so much trust.  Yes, it’s ok compared to some places and probably not as SJW infested as many, but I personally know several people working in the elementary schools whom I would not trust with my children, people who are gay, gender-confused, leading immoral lives and/or very supportive of these sorts of lifestyles.  I do not have children in this school system, and I know these things.  Why does no one else notice?  Or care?

Need another example of why you should take your kids out?  Jonathon van Maren writes for Lifesite News:

If the progressive Left can claim one cultural victory that is nearly total, it is their infiltration and conquest of the public education system. Public schools across the Western world—especially Canada, the United States, and Great Britain—now serve as purveyors of post-modern ideology, replete with “social justice” classes and sex education that is designed to mainstream a wide variety of alternative lifestyles. The latest news on this front is out of the UK…

“Announcing an ‘LGBT-inclusive’ update to all of its products, education giant Pearson has launched a guide to pushing ‘social justice’ activism in every part of the school curriculum…  

Organised by subject, the guide lists suggestions to ensure LGBT visibility across the curriculum, for example recommending teachers set questions which reference homosexual relationships in maths and science, and introduce terminology specific to the lifestyles of sexual minorities in foreign language lessons. One example given is to begin a question with: ‘Two women would like to have a baby together, and the doctor recommends they use In Vitro Fertilisation (IVF)’ …

In history lessons, pupils should “study the links between different social justice movements”, while art teachers are urged to “explore the way that art has been, and is being, used to effect social and political change, including LGBT equality, race equality and tackling climate change”…

There has been some backlash, of course—not that it will be heeded: UKIP education spokesman David Kurten stated that… “Maths should be about maths, it should not be about sexualizing children,” he told Breitbart London, warning the new textbooks will make it significantly more difficult for parents “to protect their children from the malign influence of left-wing identity politics.”


We can all expect the curriculums of public schools to change and evolve as fast as the LGBT Alphabet Soup is—and we can all expect parental protestations to be ignored.

If you don’t want your children to be indoctrinated, take them out of the public school system. It’s the only choice you’ve got.

An increasing number of parents are making that choice, and turning to homeschooling, perhaps for many of them for these reasons.  According to the National Home Education Research Institute:

  • There are about 2.3 million home-educated students in the United States (as of spring 2016). This is up from one estimate that there were about 2 million children (in grades K to 12) home educated during the spring of 2010 in the United States (Ray, 2011). It appears the homeschool population is continuing to grow (at an estimated 2% to 8% per annum over the past few years).

  • Homeschooling – that is, parent-led home-based education; home education – is an age-old traditional educational practice that a decade ago appeared to be cutting-edge and “alternative” but is now bordering on “mainstream” in the United States. It may be the fastest-growing form of education in the United States. Home-based education has also been growing around the world in many other nations (e.g., Australia, Canada, France, Hungary, Japan, Kenya, Russia, Mexico, South Korea, Thailand, and the United Kingdom).

There are many things over which the government shouldn’t have so much control or influence.   Education is one of them.  Choosing to homeschool could mean saving your child’s soul, and possibly life.


I’ll take “misogynist” for $849,231.25

As it was apropos of absolutely nothing at all [/sarc] a link over at Kotaku in Action caught my eye.

Judge recommends university pay $850,000 to student it punished after exonerating him of rape claims

A federal judge recommended the private [NM: I believe it’s actually state] university in Virginia pay a male student $849,231.25 in attorneys fees and litigation costs, after the court determined a year ago that JMU ran a shoddy appeals process against “John Doe” when he initially prevailed in a sexual-misconduct proceeding.

The female student who accused Doe had appealed the finding in his favor, using the mandatory double-jeopardy provision in the Obama administration’s 2011 “Dear Colleague” letter on Title IX.

The appeal board then issued a “new sanction” against Doe – a lengthy suspension – without explaining why.

Since I have recently learned the hard way that even the tiniest expression of doubt towards someone who claims to have been raped or assaulted means that you lose your membership in the human race, undoubtedly this is a horrific miscarriage of justice.  If the girl said she’s been assaulted, then she must have been.  Listen and believe! And pay the price when it turns out she lied.  It’s better than being accused of being a misogynist.

This Is Why You NEVER Apologize

You’d think the right thing to do is apologize to someone who got hurt.  It’s a good, Christian thing to do.  Simcha Fisher gets to crow after getting a better apology out of Christendom College following her ghastly posts on the alleged rape epidemic caused by teenagers not being able to hold hands.  Still, it’s not nice to assume that just because there’s serious problems with Fisher’s account that we should assume that these women are lying.  What harm is there to apologize for not doing better?  We can always do better.

But the lesson is there down in the comments:

Any idea then, why he apologized, if they didn’t really fail some of their students?

Apologies are admissions of guilt; it doesn’t matter if you really did anything or not.  Now they’ve got you.  Now they’re calling for the president of the college to resign.  And when he resigns what then?  There’ll be some other demand and another and another.  Until it’s not the same college anymore.  Or it doesn’t exist at all.

A little thing to note: Simcha Fisher is such a good journalist that she links to a rape victim whom she refers to as an “anonymous blogger,” an anonymous blogger whose #MeToo post is signed with her name.  (Archive link just in case.)  That’s some tiptop reporting there, Simcha.

She’s smelled blood in the water and probably the increased traffic from stirring up a controversy.  It’s not over yet:

We are currently working on corroborating seven other stories of sexual assault of Christendom students, including students who are currently enrolled at Christendom. These reports were grossly mishandled by the administration that is still in office.

I wonder… why this college?  Has she been doing this other small, Catholic colleges and I just missed it?  I didn’t see anything about it.  So what’s so special about this particular college that it warrants all this time and attention and “investigative” bloggerism?

#MeToo Comes to Catholic Education

Simcha Fisher has two rather long articles talking about three rapes/sexual assaults which allegedly happened to students of Christendom College, a small Catholic college in Virginia.

Part 1
Part 2

It’s best if you take the time to read it as I’m not going to go through them bit by bit but rather focus on some points that they raised in my mind.

The tone and focus of the articles puts a definite spin of blame on the college’s draconian anti-PDA rules and sex-segregated dorms. The rules caused the women to be raped because she had to go off campus to be raped– I mean hold hands with her boyfriend. Obviously the policy should change. This college can then become like other colleges and the women can be raped in their dorm rooms instead of in cars. Because women never get raped on campuses where they’re allowed to hold hands and sit next to each other. The implication that keeping kids from kissing in the cafeteria causes this is beyond stupid.

The articles also faults the college for not have done anything about a rape which occurred off campus and which the victim didn’t bother to report to anyone until long after they could do anything about it. The rape occurred in a national park and was under federal law enforcement jurisdiction. The park LE told the victim there was pretty much nothing they could do. So if the feds can’t do anything, what do you expect the college to do? Take the girl’s word with no evidence and throw the guy out?

A great deal is made out of Christendom not having a policy in their student handbook on how sexual assault is dealt with. This is decidedly naive of the college’s part. Did they foolishly assume that since they were Catholic that it could be understood that students weren’t supposed to be going around committing mortal sins on other students? What does rather put the college’s actions in a bad light is a comment on Christendom’s “apology” posted later which claims the school expels students for having sex period. If, as the article implies (and this coming from Simcha Fisher is a big IF), members of the college staff did believe that the one girl was pulling a “regret” instead of it being rape, then both she and the alleged rapist should have been expelled anyway. But again we’re stuck on the problem of how on earth they could prove what did or didn’t happen.

“Victim blaming” in the current zeitgeist is one of the worst sins possible to commit, but the accounts the women give are not so perfect that you can’t find fault with them.

Being assaulted or raped is a terrible, psychologically damaging thing to happen to a person. The women talk about being unable to attend class because their rapist will be in the room. So why would they come back to the campus the next year when they could have escaped? When they could have stayed home and not spent thousands of dollars in tuition for the pleasure of being trapped on what looks like a rather small campus with a rapist?

I have come across other accounts where women claim to have been “raped” where they allege the man forced them to preform oral sex on him. There is a serious problem with this. The victim in these cases has to… perform an action. She has to do something as opposed to being pinned down and having something forced on her. Now, she is being threatened but, if I remember from my theology classes right, this kind of action is still voluntary in the weak sense. Just because you’re in fear of bodily harm doesn’t absolve you of all guilt in performing an immoral act. If someone put a gun to my head and said they’d kill me if I didn’t murder someone else, I don’t get a free pass to murder them just because I was in fear of my life. This is all unpleasantly ironic given the references in the article to St Maria Goretti who was stabbed to death fighting off a guy trying to rape her.

The implication I take from the article is one that I’m sure the authors would be horrified by and which I do not like at all:

Women have no agency.

Zip, zero, nada. They can’t do anything and it’s not their fault anyway. This college was supposed to have somehow, magically made the world completely safe for them. They couldn’t fight back against their rapists. They didn’t even understand what the word “rape” meant.  You even see this in a couple of the comments: these women behaved the way they did because they were taught to behave like that.  They have pushed every responsibility onto someone else.  The college, the policies, the culture, anything.

If you were raped or sexually assaulted, I’m very sorry this happened to you.  But sometimes you can’t blame anyone else except the rapist.  It isn’t possible to create a completely safe world.  We can try with all our might and it will not happen.  Catholics of all people should understand this.  We live in a fallen world.  Could this college have responded better?  With the obviously slanted take the Fishers give the articles, it’s hard to say for certain.  Maybe.  Can the college change to prevent future rapes?  Most likely: NO.  I’m tempted to say: yes, if they become a single sex institution, but if this were an all girls school, the girls would still go off campus and get raped.  Because people are bad and there will always be bad people.  Women need to remember this and recognize that they too have a part in keeping themselves safe.

Time to ditch modern universities

If Universities no longer actually educate, but have become institutions of “academic narcissism,” why are we still paying to attend them or send our kids there?  Places of indoctrination, lacking in critical thinking, aren’t exactly a good deal for the thousands people pay them.  University no longer equals place of higher learning.  These places are long overdue for being abandoned and replaced.

If you need another reason to ditch the contemporary college model, then there’s this type of student behavior, most recently demonstrated at Evergreen College but rampant on many (if not most) college campuses.

Students said they were protesting institutional racism.

A group of protesters sent the following statement in a news release to The Olympian last week: “What started out as anti-black comments on social media has turned into the dismissal of the rights of students and femmes of color, physical violence by police, and false sentencing of students protesting. Black trans disabled students are actively being sought out and confronted by campus police constantly, police are refusing to explain their actions and harassment. Students will not stand for this anymore, as students of color have never felt comfortable on campus and have not been treated equally.”

Tensions reached a new high after the public airing of an email exchange between school employees over a planned Day of Absence event.

The Day of Absence, based on a play by the same name, dates back to the 1970s at Evergreen. The day is part of two days of race and equity-related events, and in previous years minority students voluntarily left for an off-campus discussion.

This year that event was swapped: White students were asked to leave and minority students remained on campus. But the event had space for 200 students – only a fraction of the roughly 4,800 overall student body, Powers said.

Rashida Love, director of the First People’s Multicultural Advising Services program, sent an email asking for some white students to volunteer not to be on campus for the event, to leave the college more open for students of color, Powers said.

Professor Bret Weinstein then sent back an email saying that asking white students to stay off campus is an “act of oppression in and of itself,” the Journal reported.

Some students have since protested Weinstein, calling him racist and asking the administration to fire him.

The protesters’ statement is so over the top it makes me wonder if it’s for real: “Black trans disabled students are actively being sought out and confronted by campus police constantly.”  For real?  People get trolled and made fun of with stuff like this.  Did these dumb students really say that in all seriousness?!

Of course the professor that objected to their asking all white students to leave for the day is being called a racist.

Definitely time to seek education elsewhere.