STD Awareness Month: Because Catching Sexual Diseases Is Actually Heroism And Not The Expected Consequence Of Dangerous And Immoral Choices

If it is dangerous or immoral, you will find the Left defending it under its “perpetual victim” status or outright forcing it down your throat.

Abortion is one good example: murdering your own child is “freedom”. Disagree and you are a partriarchal, mysoginistic sexist. 

Homosexuality is another: take “pride” in your perverse sexual practise, especially when you parade it on a float in front of children. Disagree and you are an intolerant, bigoted religious fundamentalist who is obsessed with controlling other people’s sexuality.

But these two abominations are simply the sad and sorry extension of bad old sexual promiscuity: absolutely zero sexual restraint is “freedom”. Disagree and you are a racist, bigoted, Islamophobic, mysoginistic, intolerant…whatever.

Currently, reported cases of STD’s are off the charts in the West, especially amongst youth, which isn’t so strange in that the sexual revolutionaries have been working for near a century to encourage young people into dangerous and immoral sexual choices.

First they represented them as victims. Sure, they lived dangerously and paid the price for it in their own bodies but victim narratives sound way better when you shift all the blame away to…well anyone will do.

But victim status only gets you an audience and a means to power – then you need to reach for it. That’s why you need to turn it into a positive. Something to be honoured and shared…which is sort of how this problem got started in the first place.

Were you aware that April is “STD Awareness Month”?
Neither was I.

STD, of course, stands for “Sexually Transmitted Disease” – also known as venereal disease or STI (“Sexually Transmitted Infection”).

Seems to me that with the virally disproportionate spread of STDs among practitioners of sodomy, it would make more sense to “raise awareness” about the natural consequences of sexual promiscuity during June, which President Obama regularly dubs “LGBT Pride Month.”

Nonetheless, and speaking of pride and promiscuity, you oughta head on over to Twitter and check out the left’s latest do-nothing hashtag: #ShoutYourStatus (meaning, sexual disease). You can thank me later.

While there, you will be treated to a stupefying spread of disbelief-suspension, rationalization and justification relative to how, and why, people contract these nasty bedroom bugs in the first place.

#ShoutYourStatus is evidently the similarly twisted sister of Planned Parenthood’s profligate #ShoutYourAbortion campaign. Therein, mostly “progressive” feminists joined together to brag on social media of having their own sons and daughters dismembered alive, and then parted out for profit, or tossed in the back-alley dumpster like so much trash – all so they could avoid paying the piper and keep on truckin’ loosey-goosey.

And now, like abortion, to these same “social justice” warriors, infecting themselves and others with herpes, AIDS, gonorrhea, syphilis and the like, isn’t just OK. It’s a personal accomplishment.

What I am now doing, that is, speaking bluntly and truthfully about things of which our leftist friends prefer to deny, is labeled “slut shaming” by these self-deluded proponents of Consequence-Free-Sex™ (something that does not exist).

prudishKeep in mind that I would never use the word “slut” to describe one of God’s priceless feminine creatures. It has, instead, become en vogue among our younger feminist set, to loudly and proudly acknowledge themselves as such in order to “destigmatize” the slang term’s referent sexual promiscuity, along with said behavior’s entirely foreseeable outcome (i.e., any or all form of a wide variety of potential crotch cooties).

Political correctness is an STD.

For instance, feminist blogger Ella Dawson (@brosandprose), “shouted her status” by tweeting: “I’m not interested in playing identity politics. I’m a slut, and I have herpes. I am still a person who deserves respect.”

To Ms. Dawson, I would respond that no one “deserves” respect. Each one of us deserves, based upon our own merit, nothing short of eternal damnation. Respect is something earned, and eternal salvation, something freely given. As a daughter of God, created in His own image and likeness, she does, however, deserve to be treated respectfully – and with love and kindness.

And truth.

Still, I wonder if Ms. Dawson has considered that the first aspect of her admission, “I’m a slut,” may at least be tangentially related to the second: “I have herpes.”

Alas, it appears no. As evidenced by a subsequent tweet, the causal connection between actions and consequences yet eludes our young friend’s tenuous grasp: “A few weeks ago, I told a cute guy at a bar that I had herpes. Then I slept with him. Hehehehe.”

Yikes, I wonder if Mr. Cute Guy knows that, much like John Kasich, herpes never goes away.

Anyhow, Ms. Dawson happily tweeted on: “An STD is not a reflection of your character or a consequence of poor choices. It’s an inevitability.”


Well, I guess it is inevitable to the same extent that when one gapes directly down the barrel of a loaded Glock .45 and pulls the trigger, one inevitably divests one’s cranium of a significant share of its hitherto undisturbed gray matter.

Speaking of disturbed gray matter (and diminished quantities thereof), Ella Dawson is not alone in adopting this false, morally relative, actions-without-consequences view of the world.

This mindset is progressivism personified.

Next up? #ShoutYoureNotTetheredToReality.

I decided to weigh in. “STIs are the natural consequence of sin,” I tweeted. “God’s perfect abstinence until man-wife marriage plan prevents 100% of STIs.”

“Dr. P,” with the Twitter handle, @Cataracthealer (evidently an actual M.D.), quickly rejoined, “Many people don’t want to be married, but also don’t want to be celibate.”

To which I responded, “Correct. Which is disobedience to God (aka, sin). ‘The wages of sin is death.’ Hence, herpes, AIDS, etc.”

Obama CelebratesHe then asked, legitimately, I might add, “How about the non-sinners who get the diseases from the sinners? For Example: Ryan White or faithful wife of whoring hubby, etc.?”

Putting aside for a moment that there is no such thing as a “non-sinner,” I nonetheless replied, “Indeed, horrible situations each, wherein one party is victimized by the sins of another. Yet sin remains the root cause.”

Indeed, I would be remiss if I did not concede that, while a significant minority such instances may represent, there are times when, via drug transfusion or due to a wayward spouse, innocent people can, and do, become infected with STDs through no fault of their own.

Still, the vast majority of infections occur as the natural outcome of bad choices – of sin.

Choices like those made by “BadGrrrlMeat” (@lachristagreco), who, like Ms. Dawson, boasted of having contracted herpes. She responded to my original tweet with, “Sinning is the best. I’m a proud sinner!”

Which immediately reminded me of Philippians 3:10: “Their end is destruction, their god is their belly, and they glory in their shame, with minds set on earthly things.”

Oh, how the Word of God is Truth.

“Don’t get me wrong,” I closed. “I’m not judging. I’m a sinner as bad as any other. Yet truth is truth. Truth, who is Christ, saved me.”

And I pray that Truth might save “ELD” (@eld3393), who asked the Twittersphere, “I kicked off #STIAwarenessMonth by sharing my herpes+ story w/ 7th grade human sexuality classes. How are you celebrating?”

Celebrating herpes? Seventh graders?

#ShoutYourStatus, world!

The world celebrates sin.

The world needs saving.


“All Leftist “Caring” Has A Hidden Agenda”

Michael Faraday’s story (below) is in many ways my own, though I am much younger and I was delivered by Jesus from my leftist cultural indoctrination earlier.

The moral of this story is the title: All leftist “caring” has a hidden agenda.

Whether it’s the poor, women, homosexuals, refugees or, hilariously, Muslims (not the Muslim victims of Islam but the Muslim perpetuators of Islam’s greatest evils), there is always an agenda at work and frankly it’s always the same one: power.

While some of these groups are legitimately victims (at times and rarely collectively, not entirely and perpetually as per Leftist mythology), they are foremost victims of Leftists “caring” about how useful these idiots will be in launching them into positions of power in society.

From there it’s a sick symbiotic relationship where the informed Marxists treat these groups like perpetual victims, promising to improve their plight, while these groups forever embrace their hopeless destiny in exchange for promises and handouts from the Marxists.

If you grew up in the West, there’s a good chance that this in some ways reflects your story too:

First of all, forget the ‘60s. This situation has been brewing for over 100 years. I was born into a working-class socialist family in New Zealand in 1960. Democratic socialism had been established by popular reforms in the 1930s. By the late ‘50s, almost every working-class child in New Zealand was raised socialist.

But we didn’t call it socialism. We called it “workers’ rights.” In my family, my older siblings and I were the third generation of socialists. We never chose socialism, we inherited it. In the late ‘60s, the younger middle-class joined us.

It is especially in the British Commonwealth that millions have been raised by leftists, who were raised by leftists, who were raised by leftists, and so on. Some leftist families have been so for more than a century. They consider themselves leftist royalty.

For the millions raised as leftists, it is not an ideology; it is a culture. Since childhood, they have lived and breathed it every day in the home. They know nothing else. Like any culture, it is a way of speaking, thinking and acting, with its own narratives and rituals. Narratives are held sacred, repeated, reinforced and, over time, added to. That which challenges sacred narratives, even reality itself, is met with confusion and hostility. As with any aggressive, intolerant culture, if you enter it, it enters you.

Contrary to opinion, leftism isn’t just about hate. Leftists are more complex than that. From my time as a red diaper leftist, I can tell you that a whole range of emotions are involved. Hate, anger, fear, bitterness, jealousy, envy, rage, greed, pride, smugness and paranoia (not technically an emotion, but it is widespread among leftists).

With such a parade of negative emotions, it is no surprise that so many leftists suffer from chronic depression, often from a young age. Even if they lose the anger, they still retain the attitude: that the government must fix everyone’s problems, regardless of cost and that there is an enormous right-wing conspiracy that is just around the corner.

The victim narrative of the Left is very infectious. You are always the victim and you are always owed something. The wealthy are always evil, while you are always good and wholesome. Converts are often more intense than those born into it. My father, raised a leftist, eventually mellowed and began to question some leftist beliefs. My mother, not raised a leftist, but having become one, never mellowed.

The victim narrative was in every conversation.

The class struggle/oppressed victim narrative is part of daily life on the Left. As a child, I would listen to adults talking. With friends and co-workers, with mothers chatting over tea, it was part of every conversation. They would talk about the weather, their kids, television, but before parting, one of them would always say something relating to the greedy oppression of the rich — and the other had to agree. To not agree was social suicide.

While there were differences between working-class and middle-class leftists, certain attitudes were universal:

When a leftist has never worked, they feel very generous toward anyone who claims to need help, who fits the narrative. They are generous with their emotions.

 When they do get their first real job, they are often shocked by the amount of taxes withheld and have a moment of doubt. But this moment of doubt gives non-leftists an opening. So the young leftist, terrified he/she will be changed, quickly walls off this doubt in their mind and refuses to touch it, until it fades.

Economics are not usually considered part of a culture, but for red-diaper leftists, their attitude to economics is cultural. It is part of the core, sacred narrative. They usually have a child-like view of economics, which they often have inherited from their parents. This is probably why the doubt triggered by their first tax shock is so easily forgotten for leftists. The child-like view is comfortable and familiar. Once amnesia sets in and comfort returns, discussions of economic reality are seen as right-wing propaganda.

Leftists hear big numbers and picture Scrooge McDuck’s money bin, not infrastructure, maintenance, specialized equipment, transportation, training, payrolls, etc. 

For leftists, industry has so much money. Businesses make huge profits. The price of everything is too high. The government has billions. They want to keep it all for themselves and their rich friends. So leftists believe that these evil people must be made to spend the money on things the leftists themselves choose. 

Leftists combine child-like naïveté and paranoid aggression in all of their narratives. It is a remarkable and very damaging pairing. The child-like naïveté protects the narrative from facts while the paranoid aggression protects the mind from doubt. For red-diaper babies, this thinking competes with their normal emotional and intellectual development, causing an internal struggle that can go either way.

In the same family, one child may be a mellow, half-hearted leftist while another is a dedicated communist. The one who feels the greatest need to please the parents will probably be the dedicated communist. The Left, on the surface, may look to some like a movement of young misfits, but it is old, huge and culturally entrenched, not just in Europe, but also in most of the English-speaking nations. Leftism is a family history, a cultural mindset and a way of life for millions of households. It is a set of core sacred narratives and daily conversations.

Children inherit leftism as a belief system, knowing nothing else. By the time that they are old enough to hear other points of view, they are indoctrinated. It has become their moral compass.

Leftism encourages and is driven by the most negative, damaging emotions. It harnesses together childish emotions and paranoid thought processes. Its narratives are a filter that reality has to try to struggle through, often failing.

The child-like thinking solves all problems without pesky details and facts interfering, leading to delusions of intellectual brilliance.

It is actually very hard to give up being a leftist, even when you want to. I know people whose families have been murdered by communists and they are still leftists. It is not enough to see the problems. If you are a red-diaper baby, it’s all you know. You have been indoctrinated (with the media’s help) that the so-called Right is greedy and evil and the religious are hypocritical and delusional. Even if you have doubts, there is nowhere else to go, not without literally changing your mind.

I saw the cracks early. My parents had a fanatical hatred of the middle class and never spoke to them, if possible. In my teens I realized my father hated the wealthy because he wasn’t one. That didn’t stop me being a leftist. It made me want to be a better leftist than my parents. I began to see that class struggle was becoming a scam to get more free stuff. I still sought a perfect form of communism. I met upper middle class leftists and was appalled by their arrogance and snobbery. I traveled the world and did not find any form of communism that did not depend on capitalism to save it from collapse.

Returning home, I had daily conversations with a Jewish doctor who was pro-life. Every day we discussed morals and faith. I began to understand the concept of faith, moral absolutes and self-sacrifice; all new to me. A few weeks later, God spoke to me.

I tried to be a Christian and a moderate leftist. I wasn’t alone. Moderate leftists do not think of themselves as leftists. They think of themselves as balanced and reasonable. I worked with refugees and they told me about the torture, slavery and mass murder of the communist “freedom fighters.” This killed any lingering sentiment regarding communism.

I married a refugee and she tried to stab me. I also found that the refugees had very dark secrets. My feel-good multiculturalism slowly died. I began to see the strength of Judeo-Christian civilization. I saw the dishonesty and viciousness of the Marxist-Feminists, who had taken over the Left. The feminism my mother had stuffed down my throat every day had died. When I argued with leftists, their near-psychotic rage shocked me. I felt I was talking to lunatics.

Despite all this, it is hard to totally leave leftist thinking because it surrounds you. It has become mainstream. It’s like trying to bail a boat with holes in the bottom. It takes a persistent intellectual effort to leave it behind. But there is another reason why it takes time to dig out the leftist brain parasite. A powerful lie lives there. It is the most powerful lie they have. It is that the Left “cares.” You must fully embrace the fact that this is a lie. All leftist “caring” has a hidden agenda.

Hysterical Leftist Predictions About Peak Oil, Food Shortages, Global Cooling Were All Wrong – Climate Change Is Next On That List

I’m not saying the climate doesn’t change – I’m saying that in spite of all our scientific knowledge, we still don’t understand the plethora of interconnected global systems and cycles that impact the climate.

The world is a complex place, just like the human body, and we would be foolish to believe we know and understand it all when time and time against scientists and doctors alike are proven wrong.

The climate is likely changing – it’s just that I don’t believe the terror-mongering of Leftists who seem to make new dire predictions every decade these days only to be proven wrong a decade or two later.

Their answer is always more government, more taxes, less freedom, and more conformity to Leftist rules and call me crazy but that has never led to the utopian society they have long promised.

Consider Gary DeMar’s reflections of this hysterical Leftist predictive history:

Global Warming/Climate Change advocates claim that the debate is over. The science is settled. Debating the “science” behind the certainty of man-made Climate Change is like debating whether the earth is flat or round. So say supposedly 97 percent of all scientists. Rubbish.

A similar no-debate claim was made in the 1970s about peak oil — that there was a limited supply and we had nearly reached the limit. Keep this prediction in mind every time you hear some scientist tell us what the future will hold regarding this claim or that claim.

Like today’s Climate Change prognosticators, former President Jimmy Carter, using the science of his day in 1977, claimed that in 35 years the world would run out of oil.

In 2008, Salon magazine wrote that Carter’s “speech holds up pretty darn well today.” Here’s a very short video of Jimmy Carter making a similar predictive claim:

Now we’re swimming in the stuff. There’s so much oil being pumped out of the ground that the price of gasoline is less than a dollar in some places. If state, local, and federal taxes are taken out, and accounting for inflation, it borders on being cheaper than it’s ever been.

It’s not just about oil. Almost everything these prognosticators have claimed have turned out to be wrong — very wrong.

Paul Ehrlich made more apocalyptic predictions that scientists took seriously. Ehrlich makes today’s Global Warming Chicken Littles seem like Pollyanna. “The battle to feed all of humanity is over,” Ehrlich wrote. “In the 1970s and 1980s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now.”1

In the first edition of his book The Population Bomb, Ehrlich stated:

“There is not enough food today. How much there will be tomorrow is open to debate. If the optimists are correct, today’s level of misery will be perpetuated for perhaps two decades into the future. If the pessimists are correct, massive famines will occur soon, possibly in the early 1970’s, certainly by the early 1980’s. So far most of the evidence seems to be on the side of the pessimists, and we should plan on the assumption that they are correct. After all, some two billion people aren’t being properly fed in 1968!”2

In 1969, Ehrlich continued with his predictions, stating, “By 1985 enough millions will have died to reduce the earth’s population to some acceptable level, like 1.5 billion people.” The same year, he predicted in an article entitled “Eco-Catastrophe!” that by 1980 the United States would see life expectancy drop to 42 years because of pesticides, and by 1999 its population would plummet to 22.6 million.

The facts tell a different story.

“All you can see is growing wealth around the world, increased caloric intake, increased life expectancy, increased per-capita wealth,” says Jerry Taylor, director of natural resource studies for the Cato Institute, a Washington research center that opposes most government intervention.

“We are increasingly conquering death around the world,” Taylor adds. “A century ago, human life expectancy was about 30 years. Now it’s 60 or 70 years. People are not starving to death. They are getting better food and they are living longer.”3

In the mid-seventies, with the release of his book The End of Affluence,4 Ehrlich outlined a Hollywood-style disaster scenario where he foresaw the President dissolving Congress “during the food riots of the 1980s,” followed by the United States suffering a nuclear attack for its mass use of insecticides. Like Malthus before him, in 1969 Ehrlich did not see much of a future for England. “I would take even money that England will not exist in the year 2000.”5

In 1976, he went beyond predicting food scarcity and took it upon himself to make unfounded pronouncements about natural resources. “Before 1985, mankind will enter a genuine age of scarcity . . . in which the accessible supplies of many key minerals will be facing depletion.”6

Economist Julian Simon won a bet with Paul Ehrlich on whether the price of five strategic metals which Ehrlich chose (copper, chrome, nickel, tin, tungsten) would rise or fall in a ten-year period from 1980 to 1990. All five metals went down in price. Ehrlich lost the bet.7

First it was the inevitability of Global Cooling, then it was the inevitability of Peak Oil, and now it’s the inevitability of climate disaster if the government doesn’t step in and save Planet Earth. Of course, it’s going to cost a boatload of money, but it will be worth it!
Quoted in Thomas Sowell, The Vision of the Anointed: Self-Congratulations as a Basis for Social Policy (New York: Basic Books, 1995), 67. [↩]

Paul R. Ehrlich, The Population Bomb (Binghamton, NY: Sierra Club, 1969), 36B37). [↩]

Jeff Nesmith, “6 Billion and Growing Fast,” The Atlanta Journal/Constitution (October 10, 1999), D3. [↩]

Paul R. Ehrlich, The End of Affluence: A Blueprint for Your Future (New York: Ballantine Books, 1974). [↩]

Quoted in Michael Fumento, “Doomsayer Paul Ehrlich Strikes Out Again,” Investor’s Business Daily (December 16, 1997). [↩]

Quoted in Fumento, “Doomsayer Paul Ehrlich Strikes Out Again.” [↩]

For an account of the wager, see John Tierney, “Betting the Planet,” New York Times Magazine (December 2, 1990), 52. Copper is being replaced in the communication’s industry by “fiber optics.” Two hair-thin fiber optic strands can carry 24,000 telephone calls. It would take 48,000 copper wires to carry the same number of calls. [↩]

#NBASoBlack: Time To Boycott The NBA?

The double standards applied by Leftists (Marxists) is hilarious and there are plenty of articles coming out exposing the blatant hypocrisy of Hollywoodites calling for a snub of the Oscars over the absence of black nominees.

Here is a great one:

Jada Pinka and Spike Lee are calling on their fellow-black friends to boycott the Academy Awards because there were no black nominees. It’s not that blacks have not not been nominated in the past. Here’s a list from Wikipedia. Most people would be surprised at the number of black actors and actresses nominated and blacks who have won an Academy Award.

“Denzel Washington has the most nominations for an African-American Actor: Best Actor (4 nominations) and Best Supporting Actor (2 nominations).”

Will Smith was nominated in 2001 for Ali and 2006 for Pursuit of Happyness.

Jamie Foxx was the First African-American actor to receive two acting nominations in the same year. He won Best Actor for Ray and for Best Supporting Actor for Collateral, a film that Jada Pinkett Smith, wife of Will Smith, starred in.

Were there some worthy Oscar performances in 2015? I thought Chiwetel Ejiofor did a fantastic job in The Martian. I did not see Will Smith’s performance in Concussion.

In 2002, the best actress was Halle Berry and best actor Denzel Washington.

Actually, I haven’t watched the Academy Awards for decades. It’s been that long since I’ve become disenchanted with the rubbish that comes out of Hollywood and the hypocrisy of so many leftist Hollywood actors and actresses. I’m upset that two nominations were given to the transgender flick Carol. So much of Hollywood is agenda-driven.

Liberals talk about how bad it is to objectify women, and yet films are filled with objectified women. Liberal Hollywood types support more gun control but have their own armed security and perform in films with hordes of gun violence scenes.

Demographics might have something to do with the interest level among black movie goers: “According to a 2014 study (PDF), 25% of frequent moviegoers were Hispanic, 10% were African-American.” (H/T: CNN) If any group should be ticked off it’s the Hispanics.

The Academy itself is mostly white males. I don’t know what the Academy makeup was when Berry and Washington won. Will there now be Affirmative Action nominees? Will the Academy be pressured to nominate blacks because of fear of boycotts?

This fight is a Hollywood problem, but it’s typical of how things are done in the United States: Identity first, public pressure second, talent third, and character fourth or at all.

Life’s not fair. We live in a right-handed world. When is the last time you saw a left-handed catcher in baseball? (I’ve only seen one.) Try to find a left-handed catcher’s mitt.

Scissors are made for righties. Left-handed baseball players rarely if ever play third or second base or shortstop. And yet left-handed pitchers are sought after.

The world is also made for tall people. A child’s first trip to an amusement park is often met with sadness because he or she is not tall enough to ride some of the more exhilarating attractions.

Growing up in the suburbs of Pittsburgh, there was a large swimming pool facility. The lifeguards were always telling short kids to stay out of the deep end. The only way you could get in was prove you could swim the length of the pool. Tall kids didn’t have to do it. Rank discrimination!

When I was in school, we always had to line up shortest to tallest. I think about how my life would be different if I had been 5’ 6” like my father rather than 6’ 1”. Being short is a plus for gymnasts and jockeys.

Try playing basketball today if you’re 6 feet tall. You might make the high school team, but the pros are likely not to take you unless you’re as good as Tyrone “Muggsy” Bogues (5’ 3”) or Anthony “Spud” Webb – 5’7″.

Blacks dominate the sprints and jumping events in track and field. Big guys, black and white, dominate the throwing events. The high school record holder in the shot put is black and very big. His record may never be broken.

The NBA is dominated by tall black men. “According to racial equality activist Richard Lapchick, the NBA in 2011 was composed of 83 percent non-white players, including 78 percent black, four percent Latino, and one percent Asian; 17 percent of the players were white. The league had the highest percentage of black players of any major professional sports leagues in the United States and Canada.” It’s about the same for the NFL.

Try being a model if you don’t have “the look.”

You’re probably not going to make it in the music business if you don’t look good. There are exceptions, however. In the end, talent is the key, but it’s not always enough for some markets. Remember this from Simon Cowell and ‘Britain’s Got Talent’?

“Simon Cowell sneered and the huge audience at the ‘Britain’s Got Talent’ show made the sort of faces associated with a bad smell. The object of their disaffection was contestant No. 43212, a plain, middle-aged woman from Scotland with bushy eyebrows and a dress and hairdo that might have been stylish when Dwight Eisenhower was president.

“The woman, who seemed somewhat unnerved by the bright lights and the big crowd in the concert hall where the show was recorded, said she was Susan Boyle. She said she was 47 years old, unemployed, and lived alone with her cat, Pebbles. She had never gone on a date and had never been kissed, she added in a thick brogue.”

It was her abilities that wowed the judges and the audience. If you haven’t seen and heard this, then you’re in for a treat.

The Failed Marxist Logic Of Tax-Free Tampons

Not only are the bunch of the protesters fighting for this disgusting and vulgar (no, having a menstrual cycle isn’t vulgar but wearing white pants and allowing memorial blood to soak your pants in protest is – a typical leftist-style protest) but their logic is a complete and utter failure.

The story goes that the usual government taxes on goods and services are apparently sexist because women’s sanitary products are “necessitated by biology.”

The solution in the minds of these uber-feminist Marxist-types?

No taxes, of course.

After all, free stuff is a right, especially if you are an entitled leftist.

I wonder when they’ll be fighting for tax free food and water, given these are actually necessitated by biology.

Sanitary items are actually closer in nature to clothing, which is socially and even legally necessitate but certainly not biologically – you don’t actually need either. Yes, I am saying that nudity and free-flowing menstruation won’t cause you to die but we don’t want either out in society.

But if this is really about equality as these types always claim (really double speak for special privileges and greater power for Marxist types), then we should expect to see them calling for taxes to be dropped from all sorts of products that relate to specific groups of people.

Babies need nappies, so ditch that tax!

So do old people sometimes!

What about dental work because decaying teeth is a biological trap from which no one escapes?

If my body starts failing in other ways, whether gout, heart attack, aching arches or diabetes, why should I pay taxes on the fixes?

But leftists have a keen habit of selective, double standards and this is just another example of their dangerous religion at work, dividing society into groups and insisting some deserve special privileges because the others are hateful, oppressive enemies (in this case, all men everywhere!)

Contrast this with Christ Jesus who unites people in love for God and for humanity.

In summary, this is not a victory for women, it’s a victory for leftists! A victory from which very few people benefit and in the long run, none.

Men and women dressed as bloodied tampons is not a common sight in the streets of Paris, but over the past few weeks, activists have been congregating to protest against the French tax on feminine hygiene products.

Why, they asked, should women pay extra for essential healthcare items?

Members of feminist collective Georgette Sand, which spearheaded the campaign for the ‘tampon tax’ to be abolished, carried a clothesline swathed with blood-stained underwear.

And their protests worked. After initially rejecting an amendment to abolish the tax, French MPs on Friday voted to make life fairer for half the population by lowering the VAT on pads and tampons from 20 per cent to 5.5 per cent.

The government had previously been opposed to the proposal, saying it would cost $60 million, but on Friday announced it had “found the money” to back the measure.

Prime Minister Manuel Valls described the move as a “step in the right direction”, while Finance Minister Michel Sapin said the reduction was “in the interest of half of humanity”.

Georgette Sand hailed the amendment as a “victory”, and called on manufacturers and retailers to pass the reduction on to consumers.

France’s move to drop the tax on feminine hygiene products has renewed calls for the Australian Government to follow suit and stop taxing women for their basic biology.

Greens co-deputy leader Larissa Waters praised France’s leadership and called for the Government to reconsider its decision earlier this year not to remove the GST from feminine hygiene products. It must be removed, she told the ABC, because it “increases financial gender inequality”.

“Other health items that both women and men buy, like sunscreen and condoms, are exempt – why should it be any different for essential health items that only women need?”

In May, a CommunityRun petition urging then-treasurer Joe Hockey to remove the GST from menstrual products garnered more than 100,000 signatures and reignited the long-running tampon tax debate.

“People who get periods don’t buy pads and tampons for pleasure, so why are we forced to fork out an extra 10 per cent every two, three, four weeks?” petition founder Subeta Vimalarajah said.

“Taxing Australians for getting their period isn’t just sexist, it’s fundamentally unfair.”

Appearing on the ABC’s Q&A program, Mr Hockey agreed the GST “probably should” be removed from tampons, but in August ruled it out after a meeting with state and federal treasurers “failed to come to a unanimous agreement”.

Following a request from the Federal Opposition, the Parliamentary Budget Office (PBO) in June estimated removing the tax on tampons would cost the budget $480 million over 10 years, or $70 million over the first two years of its operation from mid-2017.

Government ‘not doing enough to address gender inequality’

Senator Waters, whose August petition to axe the tampon tax also collected more than 100,000 signatures, said the Government was still not doing enough to address gender inequality.

“There was no mention of the tampon tax in the COAG communique last week, showing the Coalition Government is failing to work to address this issue of blatant gender inequality,” she said.

When contacted by the ABC, the Federal Treasury said the GST on tampons was “a matter for the states and territories to comment on”.

Despite their sympathies, however, it seems the state governments — specifically Western Australia and New South Wales — are leading the push to keep the tax in place.

WA Treasurer Mike Nahan, who opposed removing the GST from feminine hygiene products at the August meeting, said the ongoing debate on the matter highlighted the complexity of the tax.

“The GST treatment of goods and services is not dependent upon whether they are considered to be essential or not, with a number of everyday items subject to GST, including electricity and gas services, baby nappies, toilet paper and toothbrushes,” Dr Nahan told the ABC.
“The nuances in the application of GST can appear confusing and unfair, and are often caused by the extent of exemptions in the GST base.

“Minimising exemptions from the GST and ensuring that it applies to as broad a base as possible helps to keep the GST rate lower than it would otherwise be.”

Dr Nahan said the GST was intended to be a broad-based consumption tax, with revenue distributed to the states as part of a wider range of reforms.

“Western Australia considers broader reform of the GST distribution process… to be our main priority,” he said.

When contacted by the ABC, NSW Treasurer Gladys Berejiklian reiterated a statement she made in August in which she opposed abolishing the tampon tax.

“Whilst I’m sympathetic to the sentiment, I don’t support it,” Ms Berejiklian said.

“We can’t tinker with the GST with one-offs.

“We need to address these issues holistically.”

Axing the tax around the world

Activist groups around the world have staged numerous campaigns over the years calling on governments to “axe the tax” on tampons, which in many countries are considered non-essential or luxury items.

Women wearing white pants gathered outside London’s Palace of Westminster in November to “free-bleed” in protest of the European Union’s 5 per cent “luxury tax” on tampons.

“People are so quick to tell people that the tampon tax is something we shouldn’t be upset about … But then they get upset when I show them the reality of the necessity of sanitary items,” protester Charlie Edge wrote on Facebook.

“Maybe bleeding on their doorstep will get the Tories to do something about this?”

Canada removed the GST on sanitary napkins, sanitary belts and menstrual cups in July after several online petitions calling for an end to the tax amassed thousands of signatures.

“This is a victory for all women. It shows what a group of determined women and citizens can do,” said New Democratic Party MP Irene Mathyssen, who sponsored a private member’s bill on the matter.

“The women who made this an issue, their voices have finally been heard.”

Gun Violence Is A Product Of Leftist Ideology

The left want power over everything and for that to happen, they need a reason to deny people freedoms that the West alone has long cultivated.

Cultural Marxism was their plan and it is bearing much rotten fruit, whether it’s perverse and unhealthy sexual practises, broken families, passive men who refuse responsibility or forceful women who demand the authority and position designed to men.

For decades they have sown confusion about morality, sex, family, and truth and we now live in a society so messed up that the more dangerous the behaviour, the greater it is celebrated under the banner of “diversity”.

Take the example of violence and specifically gun violence in America. Most of it is at the hands of men and while men have always been prone to resorting to anger and violence, I’m going to put it out there that cultivating passivity in a generation after generation of young men through easy access to sex and entertainment, all the while siphoning off their social responsibilities to women, doesn’t do anything to alleviate their anger and propensity to violence.

As a one-time product of this disastrous contemporary Western rights of passage, I can say that as a young man it made me confused, frustrated, and depressed.

The left appeal directly to the weaknesses of people and with young men, it’s to passivity, ease of lifestyle, and lust. That’s why, like many Western youth, I spent mine looking to get drunk, hunting for girls to have sex with, and avoiding any responsibility that might push me to grow as a human being.

Now, those choices are my fault and I take full responsibility for them but I’m in the minority. The left has been doing overtime to ensure that men not only do these things but also feel entitled to do so. Their entire social policy is literally demonic in that they encourage people who do everything that satisfies what scripture calls “the flesh,” which is in direct opposition to pleasing the Spirit of God.

It cannot be made any clearer that the left, cultural Marxists, “progressives”, or whatever tricky title they go by are antichrist to the very core of their ideology.

These cultural Marxists want a culture full of worthless, irresponsible men who are passive, aggressive and violent because it gives them a good façade to take control of our society, specifically control of families, the leadership of which was designated by God to men, not women and definitely not government.

It’s just another reason why these Marxists love divorce and family breakdown, because it opens the way for government to usurp the position of husbands and fathers as penniless single mothers find themselves dependent upon handouts.

Getting down to it, the out of control gun violence is the precise rotten fruit that their atheistic, humanist, flesh-centred, self-worshipping ideology produces.

Getting rid of guns will only consolidate their power even further which, in case anyone hadn’t guessed, the left have been planning for God alone knows how long.

Have a good read of D. W. Wilber’s excellent article and take the caution:

There is a very simple explanation as to why the country seems to be experiencing the gun violence of recent years. It basically comes down to one simple explanation, Liberals. Though I’m sure they’ll take exception to that, the reality is that we live in a society that has lost all sense of morality over the last sixty-odd years, leading to a societal breakdown. Brought to us by liberal politicians, liberal educators, and liberals in the entertainment industry.

As a child of the late sixties and early seventies, I grew up during the era of “free love,” “flower power,” “make love not war,” and “down with the pigs.” I witnessed firsthand what has been called traditional American values being tossed aside. Championed no less by liberals on the left wing of the American political spectrum.

It was liberals who preached to us that capitalism was corrupt and communism wasn’t all that bad. T-shirts with the image of Che Guevara were flying off the shelves during that era, and one can still find his image on posters and T-shirts nowadays. Even though the truth of what a brutal and despicable person he was is well-known and out there for anyone to see, as long as they choose to.

Che, the hero of the left was a brutal murderer who killed people he didn’t like just for sport. But to the ‘counter-culture crew’ he was just a ‘revolutionary,’ fighting against the corruption and evil of big business. Just as the truth about Che is ignored by liberals, so is the true nature of the Cuban regime of the Castro brothers.

Fidel has also been admired as a revolutionary, while he has brutalized the Cuban people now for decades. But hearing liberals talk, Che and the Castro boys represented ‘the people’ against ‘the man’ who oppressed and exploited everyone. More liberal theology. Heck, why not just open an embassy!

It was liberals who devalued human life by insisting on abortion on demand. Now we recently have discovered that the abortion industry is nothing more than a ‘baby bodies for profit’ enterprise. Not really about a woman’s right to choose at all.

Since the most innocent among us, the unborn, have found their lives devalued and only their lifeless bodies of any worth, we have seen on the streets of American cities a devaluing of all lives, with rampant violence, death and destruction. Thank you once again liberals.

While the old television programs like Ozzie and Harriet, Father Knows Best and Leave it to Beaver might have been a fantasized vision of reality in America, glossing over many of the societal issues of that day and time, there was nothing wrong with the ideals they portrayed. Unless being viewed through the eyes of liberals.

Instead of programs promoting traditional family values we are “treated” to the misfits on MTV’s ‘The Real World’ and ‘Jersey Shore.’ It seems that holding the standards of traditional morality and decency is now viewed as archaic and out of the mainstream. If you believe that way then you’re obviously a hater. At least that is what the liberals tell us all the time.

At one point in the not too distant past “Firearms Safety” and “Marksmanship” were part of the curriculum in many American high schools. Young people growing up were taught to respect firearms, taught how to properly care for them, and also taught that a great deal of responsibility came with handling a firearm. Lessons that only youths who mostly live in rural areas and who are raised by hunters and other sportsmen receive anymore.

But thanks to the liberals the lessons of responsible gun ownership and safety are no longer taught in American schools. Most youths nowadays receive their weapons training playing video games, or watching many of the violent movies Hollywood produces each year.

Where a joystick you control kills your enemies in a most visual way, with body parts flying off in all directions. Good guys or bad guys, it doesn’t really matter. The amount of carnage one can produce is how one scores points.

A far cry from the pinball machines of my youth, or the Roy Rogers westerns where bad guys got shot and you knew they were dead, but you didn’t need to see their innards to confirm it.

Yes, thank you once again liberals for reducing America to a place where traditional family values are scorned. And now a place where dysfunctional lifestyles are admired. Where respect and safety with firearms, along with character and honor is no longer taught in our schools, but in fact is deemed as evil or outmoded.

And a place where the value of human life has been reduced to how much money can be made off of the pieces of a dead baby.–the-answer-is-simple-n2044965/page/full