Planned Parenthood- Early History - 1
cinops be gone Sunday, Aug. 17. 2008
Jonah Goldberg’s book, Liberal Fascism is classic analysis of American politics. Here is a enlightening and tragic section on Abortion, p.270-2
“Margaret Sanger, whose American Birth Control League became PLANNED PARENTHOOD, was a founding mother of the birth control movement. She is today considered a liberal saint, a founder of modern feminism, and one of the leading lights of the progressive pantheon. Gloria Feldt of Planned Parenthood proclaims, “I stand by Margaret Sanger’s side,” leading “the organization that carries on Sanger’s legacy.”
Planned Parenthood’s first black president, Faye Wattleton – Ms. Magazine’s “Woman of the Year” in 1989 – said she was proud to be “walking in the footsteps of Margaret Sanger.” Planned Parenthood gives out annual Maggie Awards to individuals and organizations who advance Sanger’s cause. Recipients are a Who’s Who of liberal icons, from the novelist John Irving to the producers of NBC’s “West Wing.” What Singer’s liberal admirers are eager to downplay is that she was a thoroughgoing racist who subscribed completely to the views of E.A. Ross and other “raceologists.” Indeed, she made many of them seem tame.
Sanger was born into a poor family of eleven children in Corning, New York, in 1879. In 1902 she received her degree as a registered nurse. In 1911 she moved to New York City, where fell in with the transatlantic bohemian avant-garde of the burgeoning fascist movement. “Our living-room,” she wrote in her autobiography, “became a gathering place where liberals, anarchists, Socialist and I.W.W.’s could meet.” A member of the Women’s Committee of the New York Socialist Party, she participated in all the usual protests and demonstrations. In 1912 she started writing what amounted to a sex-advice for the New York Call, dubbed “What Every Girl Should Know.” The overriding theme of her columns was the importance contraception.
A disciple of the anarchist Emma Goldman – another eugenicist – Sanger became the nation’s first “birth control martyr” when she was arrested for handing out condoms in 1917. In order to escape a subsequent arrest for violating obscenity laws, she went to England, where she fell under the thrall of Havelock Ellis, a sex theorist and ardent advocate of forced sterilization. She also had an affair with H.G. Wells, the self-avowed champion of “liberal fascism.” Her marriage fell apart early and one her children – whom she admitted to neglecting – died of pneumonia at age four…. Admitting she was not a “fit person for love or home or children or anything which needs attention or consideration.”
Under the banner of “reproductive freedom,” Sanger subscribed to nearly all of the eugenic views discussed above. She sought to ban reproduction of the unfit and regulate reproduction for everybody else. She scoffed at the soft approach of the “positive” eugenicists, deriding it a mere “cradle competition” between the fit and unfit. “More children from the fit, less from the unfit – that is the chief issue of birth-control,” she frankly wrote in her 1922 book, The Pivot of Civilization. (The book featured an introduction by Wells, in which he proclaimed. “We want fewer and better children …. And we cannot make the social life and the world-peace we are determined to make, with the ill-bred, ill-trained swarms or inferior children that you inflict on us.” Two civilizations were at war: that of progress and that which sought a world “swamped by the indiscriminate torrent of progeny.” to be continued
George H. Kubeck, Duplicate and translate into Spanish and Vietnamese.
Sunday, August 17, 2008
Saturday, August 16, 2008
Insights to Obama
Insights to Obama
cinops be gone Saturday, August 16, 2008
“Reagan’s universalism: …Freedom is not the sole prerogative of a chosen few; it is the universal right of all God’s children.” Reagan’s universalism was a mark of confidence in American values. In Obama’s rhetoric, by contrast, you hear a deeply romantic cosmopolitism. He says the world wont tolerate our eating to our hearts content and air-conditioning our homes as we please, and argues that we should stop caring whether immigrants learn English and instead make sure our kids learn Spanish. He has agonized like Prufrock (“Do I dare?”) over whether to wear a flag pin. *
“His presumptuous and quickly withdrawn mock presidential seal had no room for E pluribus Unum. He explained to San Francisco fat-cats that rural American bitterly “cling” to their bizarre rituals, unnecessary weapons, and ancient sky god, all because they’ve been left out of globalization. There are many problems with the worldview that these statements bring into focus. Let us concentrate on three.
“First, there’s what could be called Obama’s arrogant Manichaeism. “My rival in this race,” he said early in 2007, “is not other candidates. It’s cynicism.” Cynics are, naturally, those who disagree with Barack Obama. Again and again, he dismisses critics and criticism by castigating “divisiveness.” Then there’s his slogan “We are the ones we’ve been waiting for,” part of his persistent messianic rhetoric….
“Second, what about those walls? (When Obama talks of walls, he often sounds like he’s really talking about differences – differences between nations, peoples, religions, and their not-always- harmonious interests.) ,,,, Remember John Kerry’s “global test”? The over-arching principle of Democratic foreign policy seems to be that it’s better to be wrong in a group than to be right alone.
“Third, If we’re all citizens of the world, what is the point of being a citizen of anyplace else? He speaks not of America’s burdens, but of the burdens of global citizenship.
“Already Obama has made it clear that the his view of the Constitution is entirely open, and can be molded to whatever conception of justice fires the hearts and illuminates the minds of transnational progressives. He says he agrees “with Justice Breyer’s view that the Constitution – that it is not a static but rather a living document, and must be read in the context of an ever-changing world.”…
“Obama has also confessed that his foremost criterion for selecting judges will be that they have “the heart, the empathy, to recognize what it’s like to be poor or African-American or gay or disabled or old – and that’s the criteria by which I’m going to be selecting my judges.”…
* The above poignant analysis is from “National Review,” “Citizen of the World – The Obama Conceit” by Jonah Goldberg. (August 18, 2008) p. 20-21
George H. Kubeck, Duplicate and or translate into Spanish and Vietnamese.
cinops be gone Saturday, August 16, 2008
“Reagan’s universalism: …Freedom is not the sole prerogative of a chosen few; it is the universal right of all God’s children.” Reagan’s universalism was a mark of confidence in American values. In Obama’s rhetoric, by contrast, you hear a deeply romantic cosmopolitism. He says the world wont tolerate our eating to our hearts content and air-conditioning our homes as we please, and argues that we should stop caring whether immigrants learn English and instead make sure our kids learn Spanish. He has agonized like Prufrock (“Do I dare?”) over whether to wear a flag pin. *
“His presumptuous and quickly withdrawn mock presidential seal had no room for E pluribus Unum. He explained to San Francisco fat-cats that rural American bitterly “cling” to their bizarre rituals, unnecessary weapons, and ancient sky god, all because they’ve been left out of globalization. There are many problems with the worldview that these statements bring into focus. Let us concentrate on three.
“First, there’s what could be called Obama’s arrogant Manichaeism. “My rival in this race,” he said early in 2007, “is not other candidates. It’s cynicism.” Cynics are, naturally, those who disagree with Barack Obama. Again and again, he dismisses critics and criticism by castigating “divisiveness.” Then there’s his slogan “We are the ones we’ve been waiting for,” part of his persistent messianic rhetoric….
“Second, what about those walls? (When Obama talks of walls, he often sounds like he’s really talking about differences – differences between nations, peoples, religions, and their not-always- harmonious interests.) ,,,, Remember John Kerry’s “global test”? The over-arching principle of Democratic foreign policy seems to be that it’s better to be wrong in a group than to be right alone.
“Third, If we’re all citizens of the world, what is the point of being a citizen of anyplace else? He speaks not of America’s burdens, but of the burdens of global citizenship.
“Already Obama has made it clear that the his view of the Constitution is entirely open, and can be molded to whatever conception of justice fires the hearts and illuminates the minds of transnational progressives. He says he agrees “with Justice Breyer’s view that the Constitution – that it is not a static but rather a living document, and must be read in the context of an ever-changing world.”…
“Obama has also confessed that his foremost criterion for selecting judges will be that they have “the heart, the empathy, to recognize what it’s like to be poor or African-American or gay or disabled or old – and that’s the criteria by which I’m going to be selecting my judges.”…
* The above poignant analysis is from “National Review,” “Citizen of the World – The Obama Conceit” by Jonah Goldberg. (August 18, 2008) p. 20-21
George H. Kubeck, Duplicate and or translate into Spanish and Vietnamese.
Friday, August 15, 2008
10 Truths - 2- Christianity - Best
10 truths – 2 – Christianity – Best
Feast of the Assumption: cinops Friday, Aug. 15, 2008
We continue with Coral Ridge’s classic “10 Truths about Christians and Politics”
Christianity Makes the Foundation for Law and Politics: p 21-3
“Christianity brought a moral overhaul to the ancient world is most evident in the treatment before and after Christ of the “least of these,” little children. What we take for granted about cherishing the young was not always so.
In 1 B.C. a Roman traveler to Alexandria, Egypt sent a warm note home to his wife. It was a tender letter with one chilling exception:
‘I send you my warmest greetings. I want you to know that we are still in Alexandria. And please don’t worry if all the others come home, but I remain in Alexandria. I beg you and entreat you to take care of the child and, if I receive my pay soon, I will send it up to you. If you have the baby before I return, if it’s a boy, let it live; if it is a girl, expose it. You sent a message with Aphrodisias, “Don’t forget me.” How can I forget you? I beg you, then, not to worry.’
This blunt and matter of fact direction to discard a baby girl offers stark and troubling insight into the moral character of the ancient Roman world, where infanticide was common. 19th century Irish historian W.E.H. Lecky called infanticide “one of the deepest stains of the ancient civilization.” It was so much a part of Roman culture that the myth of the founding of Rome recounts the abandonment of two infants, Romulus and Remus. Thrown into the Tiber River in the 8th century B.C., they were said to have survived by being nursed by wolves.
Opposition to Infanticide:
“Not only the exposure of infants a very common practice, it was justified by law and advocated by philosophers,” including both Plato and Aristotle. The Roman tradition of paterfamilias gave the father total authority to decide the fate of his children – including whether a new born was to be exposed to die outside the cit walls, or allowed to live.”
Early Christians followed the example of Jesus, who loved and blessed the children, as recorded in Matthew 19:14. They firmly opposed abortion and infanticide. Two early church documents that were widely read, the Didache and the Epistle of Barnabas, both prohibited infanticide. Eventually, these Christian views became Roman law. Emperor Valentinian, who had been lobbied by Bishop Basil of Caesarea, outlawed infanticide in 374 A.D. and in 529, Emperor Justinian emancipated all “exposed” children who had been forced into slavery.
Slavery was widespread in the ancient world, but it was not opposed by church fathers with the same firmness as infanticide. Still, Paul made it clear that in Christ, “there is neither slave nor free … for you are all one in Christ Jesus” (Galatians 3:28). By the fourth century, legal reform to benefit slaves were adopted under the first Christian emperor, Constantine…. Constantine, for example, also ended the practice of branding criminals on the forehead because, he said, “The human countenance formed after the image of heavenly beauty, should not be defaced.
In the 6th century, Emperor Justinian reorganized the Roman legal code and essentially “enacted orthodox Christianity into law,” … Justinian’s Code “introduced into law a regard, hitherto unknown, for social justice, public morality, and humanity.”
George H. Kubeck, Duplicate and translate into Spanish and Vietnamese.
Feast of the Assumption: cinops Friday, Aug. 15, 2008
We continue with Coral Ridge’s classic “10 Truths about Christians and Politics”
Christianity Makes the Foundation for Law and Politics: p 21-3
“Christianity brought a moral overhaul to the ancient world is most evident in the treatment before and after Christ of the “least of these,” little children. What we take for granted about cherishing the young was not always so.
In 1 B.C. a Roman traveler to Alexandria, Egypt sent a warm note home to his wife. It was a tender letter with one chilling exception:
‘I send you my warmest greetings. I want you to know that we are still in Alexandria. And please don’t worry if all the others come home, but I remain in Alexandria. I beg you and entreat you to take care of the child and, if I receive my pay soon, I will send it up to you. If you have the baby before I return, if it’s a boy, let it live; if it is a girl, expose it. You sent a message with Aphrodisias, “Don’t forget me.” How can I forget you? I beg you, then, not to worry.’
This blunt and matter of fact direction to discard a baby girl offers stark and troubling insight into the moral character of the ancient Roman world, where infanticide was common. 19th century Irish historian W.E.H. Lecky called infanticide “one of the deepest stains of the ancient civilization.” It was so much a part of Roman culture that the myth of the founding of Rome recounts the abandonment of two infants, Romulus and Remus. Thrown into the Tiber River in the 8th century B.C., they were said to have survived by being nursed by wolves.
Opposition to Infanticide:
“Not only the exposure of infants a very common practice, it was justified by law and advocated by philosophers,” including both Plato and Aristotle. The Roman tradition of paterfamilias gave the father total authority to decide the fate of his children – including whether a new born was to be exposed to die outside the cit walls, or allowed to live.”
Early Christians followed the example of Jesus, who loved and blessed the children, as recorded in Matthew 19:14. They firmly opposed abortion and infanticide. Two early church documents that were widely read, the Didache and the Epistle of Barnabas, both prohibited infanticide. Eventually, these Christian views became Roman law. Emperor Valentinian, who had been lobbied by Bishop Basil of Caesarea, outlawed infanticide in 374 A.D. and in 529, Emperor Justinian emancipated all “exposed” children who had been forced into slavery.
Slavery was widespread in the ancient world, but it was not opposed by church fathers with the same firmness as infanticide. Still, Paul made it clear that in Christ, “there is neither slave nor free … for you are all one in Christ Jesus” (Galatians 3:28). By the fourth century, legal reform to benefit slaves were adopted under the first Christian emperor, Constantine…. Constantine, for example, also ended the practice of branding criminals on the forehead because, he said, “The human countenance formed after the image of heavenly beauty, should not be defaced.
In the 6th century, Emperor Justinian reorganized the Roman legal code and essentially “enacted orthodox Christianity into law,” … Justinian’s Code “introduced into law a regard, hitherto unknown, for social justice, public morality, and humanity.”
George H. Kubeck, Duplicate and translate into Spanish and Vietnamese.
Thursday, August 14, 2008
The Battle for Marriage
The Battle for Marriage
cinops be gone Thursday, August 14, 2008
This battle is as real as any in wartime. The American culture of death advocates want to change the definition of marriage. What’s next, pornography and adultery? Proposition 8 – the California Constitutional Amendment that marriage is between a man and a woman is a do die ballot measure.
CatholicsforProtectMarriage.com. led by the Knights of Columbus, California Catholic Conference and Catholics for the Common Good has been established as the official Catholic grassroots effort dedicated to passing Proposition 8. All individuals and organizations are invited to join.
On the marriage issue in California, it is about 35% Yes and 35% No. It is the 30% of the population that you have to persuade. Ron Prentice, chairman of the ‘protectmarriage.com’ has four positive arguments.
1.) I DON’T WANT SCHOOLS TO TEACH ELEMENTARY SCHOOL CHILDREN THAT GAY MARRIAGE IS OK. THIS IS A PARENTAL DECISION.
2.) FOUR JUDGES SHOULD NOT BE CAPABLE TO CHANGE THE DEFINITION
OF MARRIAGE FOR ALL SOCIETY. IT WAS A 4 TO 3 DECISION ON THE
ON THE CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT.
3.) CHILDREN NEED A MOM AND DAD. THIS COMMON ARGUMENT WILL
PERSUADE YOUNG VOTERS WHO HAVE EXPERIENCED DIVORCE.
4.) SAME-SEX MARRIAGE SHOULD BE A MATTER FOR VOTERS TO DECIDE
AND NOT BE IMPOSED BY THE COURTS.
Be not confrontational. It’s about our children and grandchildren.
IN HOLLAND, WHERE THERE IS LEGALIZED-SAME-SEX MARRIAGE FOR YEARS, REAL MARRIAGE HAS LOST ITS SPECIALNESS. THERE IS NO REAL COMMITMENT. THERE IS A HUGE OUT-OF-WEDLOCK BIRTH RATE. WHAT A TRAGEDY FOR THE CHILDREN!
Protect Marriage needs to raise a minimum of 22 million dollars. The opposition is vast and will outspend us 3 to 1. For more information on who the opposition is check out Google, ‘cinops be gone.’
What will it take to win? It is a battle of the spirit. The spirit of the world is on the side of same-sex marriage. God is on our side. America with legalized same-sex marriage is not America anymore! Your prayers will make the difference. But also your financial contributions and two hours of precinct work and telephoning will decide.
George H. Kubeck, Duplicate and translate into Spanish and Vietnamese.
cinops be gone Thursday, August 14, 2008
This battle is as real as any in wartime. The American culture of death advocates want to change the definition of marriage. What’s next, pornography and adultery? Proposition 8 – the California Constitutional Amendment that marriage is between a man and a woman is a do die ballot measure.
CatholicsforProtectMarriage.com. led by the Knights of Columbus, California Catholic Conference and Catholics for the Common Good has been established as the official Catholic grassroots effort dedicated to passing Proposition 8. All individuals and organizations are invited to join.
On the marriage issue in California, it is about 35% Yes and 35% No. It is the 30% of the population that you have to persuade. Ron Prentice, chairman of the ‘protectmarriage.com’ has four positive arguments.
1.) I DON’T WANT SCHOOLS TO TEACH ELEMENTARY SCHOOL CHILDREN THAT GAY MARRIAGE IS OK. THIS IS A PARENTAL DECISION.
2.) FOUR JUDGES SHOULD NOT BE CAPABLE TO CHANGE THE DEFINITION
OF MARRIAGE FOR ALL SOCIETY. IT WAS A 4 TO 3 DECISION ON THE
ON THE CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT.
3.) CHILDREN NEED A MOM AND DAD. THIS COMMON ARGUMENT WILL
PERSUADE YOUNG VOTERS WHO HAVE EXPERIENCED DIVORCE.
4.) SAME-SEX MARRIAGE SHOULD BE A MATTER FOR VOTERS TO DECIDE
AND NOT BE IMPOSED BY THE COURTS.
Be not confrontational. It’s about our children and grandchildren.
IN HOLLAND, WHERE THERE IS LEGALIZED-SAME-SEX MARRIAGE FOR YEARS, REAL MARRIAGE HAS LOST ITS SPECIALNESS. THERE IS NO REAL COMMITMENT. THERE IS A HUGE OUT-OF-WEDLOCK BIRTH RATE. WHAT A TRAGEDY FOR THE CHILDREN!
Protect Marriage needs to raise a minimum of 22 million dollars. The opposition is vast and will outspend us 3 to 1. For more information on who the opposition is check out Google, ‘cinops be gone.’
What will it take to win? It is a battle of the spirit. The spirit of the world is on the side of same-sex marriage. God is on our side. America with legalized same-sex marriage is not America anymore! Your prayers will make the difference. But also your financial contributions and two hours of precinct work and telephoning will decide.
George H. Kubeck, Duplicate and translate into Spanish and Vietnamese.
Monday, August 11, 2008
The Case against Loretta Sanchez - 2
The Case against Loretta Sanchez – 2
cinops be gone Monday, August 11, 2008
This is the second in a series of letters. Loretta’s financial supporters are a motley crew. They include NOW, NARAL, Planned Parenthood, ACLU, the gay-agenda advocates, and the porn industry. Do these organizations represent Anaheim, Garden Grove and Santa Ana in the Congress of the United States? Of course not! It’s time for a change.
These organizations represent the culture of death ideology as enunciated in Pope John Paul’s encyclical titled, “The Gospel of Life.” I return again to the two A’s, the two E’s, and the two SS. Abortion on demand, Assisted-Suicide, Euthanasia, Embryonic Stem-Cell research, and same-sex marriage. Is this who we are as a people in Orange County?
I do have a few words to say about the ACLU. Loretta is probably a member. The ACLU is the most dangerous anti-Christian organization in
America. Christians who are members have got to get their heads screwed on right. For example, the ACLU wants to do away with Christmas, the season that we celebrate the birthday of Jesus Christ. The ACLU reminds me of the Jacobin anarchists who did away with Sundays during the French Revolution and created a new calendar. One of the things that the ACLU learned from left-wing socialists is the talent to be masters of deceit.
Sadly, Catholic-label-fraud politicians are numerous throughout America, particular in California and Massachusetts. They are really stool pigeons for the culture of death ideology. Their minds are blinded. They vote the party line of the left-wing extremists who have taken over the once great Democratic Party.
Today’s news story (Sunday, August 10, 2008) from the “Orange County Register” is particularly revolting. On page 8 – “Gay Rights backers win war of words.” It looks like Catholic-label-fraud politician and attorney general Jerry Brown got his way to change the title of the Proposition 8 ballot measure. Please check blog - letter dated Thursday, May 31st, 2008, titled WAR DECLARED!
Henceforth with this letter, all Catholic-in-name-only politicians will be identified more accurately - CATHOLIC-LABEL-FRAUD POLITICIANS. They are the ones who legalized same-sex marriage in Canada a few years ago. Even Obama in his campaign for the presidency was looking for Catholic politicians to support him and he ended up with a slew of Catholic-label-fraud politicians and writers. Check blog letters dated June 17, 19, 21, 22, and 24. Obama Controversy.
Once you get reelected with the culture of death money, the Catholic-label-fraud politicians like Loretta Sanchez will be like a robot and vote the elitist party line. From the Scorecard of Catholics in Congress * Catholic Advocate A project of the Morley Institute for Church and Culture recorded these votes on Loretta and her sister Linda Sanchez. Both voted against the following:
Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act-passage (110th)
Marriage Amendment Act (109th)
The above was to prevent UNETHICAL stem cell research; and to protect marriage. Are you proud of your congresswoman voting like the above?
George H. Kubeck, Duplicate and translate into Spanish and Vietnamese.
cinops be gone Monday, August 11, 2008
This is the second in a series of letters. Loretta’s financial supporters are a motley crew. They include NOW, NARAL, Planned Parenthood, ACLU, the gay-agenda advocates, and the porn industry. Do these organizations represent Anaheim, Garden Grove and Santa Ana in the Congress of the United States? Of course not! It’s time for a change.
These organizations represent the culture of death ideology as enunciated in Pope John Paul’s encyclical titled, “The Gospel of Life.” I return again to the two A’s, the two E’s, and the two SS. Abortion on demand, Assisted-Suicide, Euthanasia, Embryonic Stem-Cell research, and same-sex marriage. Is this who we are as a people in Orange County?
I do have a few words to say about the ACLU. Loretta is probably a member. The ACLU is the most dangerous anti-Christian organization in
America. Christians who are members have got to get their heads screwed on right. For example, the ACLU wants to do away with Christmas, the season that we celebrate the birthday of Jesus Christ. The ACLU reminds me of the Jacobin anarchists who did away with Sundays during the French Revolution and created a new calendar. One of the things that the ACLU learned from left-wing socialists is the talent to be masters of deceit.
Sadly, Catholic-label-fraud politicians are numerous throughout America, particular in California and Massachusetts. They are really stool pigeons for the culture of death ideology. Their minds are blinded. They vote the party line of the left-wing extremists who have taken over the once great Democratic Party.
Today’s news story (Sunday, August 10, 2008) from the “Orange County Register” is particularly revolting. On page 8 – “Gay Rights backers win war of words.” It looks like Catholic-label-fraud politician and attorney general Jerry Brown got his way to change the title of the Proposition 8 ballot measure. Please check blog - letter dated Thursday, May 31st, 2008, titled WAR DECLARED!
Henceforth with this letter, all Catholic-in-name-only politicians will be identified more accurately - CATHOLIC-LABEL-FRAUD POLITICIANS. They are the ones who legalized same-sex marriage in Canada a few years ago. Even Obama in his campaign for the presidency was looking for Catholic politicians to support him and he ended up with a slew of Catholic-label-fraud politicians and writers. Check blog letters dated June 17, 19, 21, 22, and 24. Obama Controversy.
Once you get reelected with the culture of death money, the Catholic-label-fraud politicians like Loretta Sanchez will be like a robot and vote the elitist party line. From the Scorecard of Catholics in Congress * Catholic Advocate A project of the Morley Institute for Church and Culture recorded these votes on Loretta and her sister Linda Sanchez. Both voted against the following:
Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act-passage (110th)
Marriage Amendment Act (109th)
The above was to prevent UNETHICAL stem cell research; and to protect marriage. Are you proud of your congresswoman voting like the above?
George H. Kubeck, Duplicate and translate into Spanish and Vietnamese.
Sunday, August 10, 2008
The Rules of Eng. -8- The Homosexual Relationship
The Rules of Engagement - 8 - The Homosexual Relationship
cinops be gone Sunday, August 10, 2008
I received this insightful e-mail on CA Supreme Court’s destructive decision.
“One: No civilization or culture in the history of humankind has ever given equal status to homosexual unions.
Two: There is no incontrovertible proof of a genetic disposition to homosexuality.
Three: Civil Rights are a subset of natural rights – protecting the freedom of people who have no choice about their gender or race.
Four: The radical activists have a visceral hatred for what they see as “heterosexual oppression” and their strategy is to destroy the traditional family and substitute it with government control.
Five: If you are a traditional family man or woman and late “come out” as gay or lesbian, the world celebrates your “discovery.” But woe to the gay man or lesbian woman who wants to change – any therapist encouraging such change is subject to professional sanction!
Six: Gay/Lesbian radicals must actively recruit through schools and the media in order to swell their ranks of adherents. They often talk of the fluidity of gender and contrast the “gender assigned at birth” with the chosen lifestyle of later years. Granting Civil Rights to current chosen behavior flies in the face of the universal principles that secure real liberty.
Seven: We are creating generations of confused, narcissistic, and self-destructive people. It one thing not to prosecute adult behavior – it is quite another to promote identities and lifestyles that ultimately destroy our future.
Eight: We must decide what actions were going to permit, prohibit and promote as a nation. Where do we draw the line? How young is too young for “marriage”? How many partners? The California “Supremes” have undermined the unique place of heterosexual monogamy – we now have no standard except the one we “feel” at the moment….
Here is Insight Nine: The deeper subversion behind the Supremes’ decision is the destruction of any religious foundations to morality and another blow to the Judeo-Christian consensus that it is the bedrock of law for 400 + yrs. in the West.
Throughout history, consenting adults have privately chosen to depart from social norms. When the exceptions become the rules, the collapse of civilization is inevitable.
Please note that I have not quoted religious documents or party platforms. There is no need - thoughtful people will see through the agendas and vote to amend the California Constitution in November. Get involved in making sure that the Constitution recognizes the inherent value of rightly-defined marriage – monogamous lifetime union between 1 man and 1 woman.” Yes on Proposition 8.
George H. Kubeck, Duplicate and or translate into Spanish and Vietnamese.
cinops be gone Sunday, August 10, 2008
I received this insightful e-mail on CA Supreme Court’s destructive decision.
“One: No civilization or culture in the history of humankind has ever given equal status to homosexual unions.
Two: There is no incontrovertible proof of a genetic disposition to homosexuality.
Three: Civil Rights are a subset of natural rights – protecting the freedom of people who have no choice about their gender or race.
Four: The radical activists have a visceral hatred for what they see as “heterosexual oppression” and their strategy is to destroy the traditional family and substitute it with government control.
Five: If you are a traditional family man or woman and late “come out” as gay or lesbian, the world celebrates your “discovery.” But woe to the gay man or lesbian woman who wants to change – any therapist encouraging such change is subject to professional sanction!
Six: Gay/Lesbian radicals must actively recruit through schools and the media in order to swell their ranks of adherents. They often talk of the fluidity of gender and contrast the “gender assigned at birth” with the chosen lifestyle of later years. Granting Civil Rights to current chosen behavior flies in the face of the universal principles that secure real liberty.
Seven: We are creating generations of confused, narcissistic, and self-destructive people. It one thing not to prosecute adult behavior – it is quite another to promote identities and lifestyles that ultimately destroy our future.
Eight: We must decide what actions were going to permit, prohibit and promote as a nation. Where do we draw the line? How young is too young for “marriage”? How many partners? The California “Supremes” have undermined the unique place of heterosexual monogamy – we now have no standard except the one we “feel” at the moment….
Here is Insight Nine: The deeper subversion behind the Supremes’ decision is the destruction of any religious foundations to morality and another blow to the Judeo-Christian consensus that it is the bedrock of law for 400 + yrs. in the West.
Throughout history, consenting adults have privately chosen to depart from social norms. When the exceptions become the rules, the collapse of civilization is inevitable.
Please note that I have not quoted religious documents or party platforms. There is no need - thoughtful people will see through the agendas and vote to amend the California Constitution in November. Get involved in making sure that the Constitution recognizes the inherent value of rightly-defined marriage – monogamous lifetime union between 1 man and 1 woman.” Yes on Proposition 8.
George H. Kubeck, Duplicate and or translate into Spanish and Vietnamese.
Saturday, August 9, 2008
The Case against Loretta Sanchez - 1
The Case against Loretta Sanchez - 1
cinops be gone Saturday, Aug. 9, 2008
This is the first in a series of letters. While directed towards Catholic voters it is for all the American electorate. I believe that even a non-partisan book or pamphlet can be written in opposition to Loretta Sanchez in the 47th Congressional District in Orange County. Other writers are free to access “cinops be gone.” There are dozen of letters on this blog relating to the topic.
The cities of Anaheim, Garden Grove and Santa Ana are right in the heart of conservative Orange County. They deserve better. By conservative I mean tradition, truth and wisdom, and natural law. Sanchez’s voting record in some areas is good but overall on fundamental values it is destructive and evil.
My standard for a Catholic lay person is that of Pope John Paul II and his American disciples, St. Louis Archbishops Raymond Burke and Denver’s Charles Chaput. One strives for a mind &heart that is straightforward, honest and truthful.
First of all, what is going to bring out a lot of voters in her district is Proposition 8 – the Marriage Amendment. We need from that district at least a 65% vote for marriage. This is to help us overcome San Francisco values majorities in other areas of California. This turn-out will help defeat Loretta and replace her with Rosie Avila. Loretta is against the Marriage Amendment. This is an insult to all voters including the many Latin American families in her district. Rosie Avila is right for America and in particular for the 47th Congressional District.
Let us try to recall how Sanchez got elected, five times. The first time it was through voter fraud. The other times it was through money, money, money and a good marketing campaign. I understand that she has won by the usual 45,000 votes with 37% turnout in the district. There are about 72,000 registered Republican voters. We focus on the 30% of all voters who are undecided.
One main reason for my opposition to Loretta is that she is a Catholic label politician. Do you remember the union label song? Imagine products being sold to you and labeled made by unionized workers and they are not. Loretta uses the Catholic label to get reelected. But she is a Catholic label fraud. Americans don’t like frauds. She is a fraud using the Catholic label to get reelected. IT’S TIME FOR A HEALTHY CHANGE.
UNTIL WE HAVE VOTED OUT OF OFFICE CATHOLIC-IN-NAME-ONLY POLITICIANS, WE CAN NEVER ACHIEVE THE NEW EVANGELIZATION OF POPE JOHN PAUL II. Reference from “cinops be gone” The Role of the Laity, Oct. 23/07
“The new evangelization that can make the 21st century springtime of the Gospel is a task for the entire people of God, but will depend in a decisive way on the lay faithful being fully aware of their baptismal vocation for bringing the good news of Jesus Christ to their culture and society… mission of the lay faithful… to give a glad and prompt response to the Holy Spirit and the voice of Christ….”
We are dealing with a Nancy Pelosi clone in Orange County. Loretta is not as bright as Nancy but decidedly destructive to our American values and tradition.
For Pelosi abortion is, “I have a sort of serenity about the issue.” This is diabolical
LORETTA SANCHEZ HAS VOTED FOR PARTIAL-BIRTH ABORTIONS 3 TIMES.
HER OPPONENT IS ROSIE AVILA. ROSIE IS FOR THE UNBORN AND MARRIAGE.
George H. Kubeck, Duplicate and translate into Spanish and Vietnamese.
cinops be gone Saturday, Aug. 9, 2008
This is the first in a series of letters. While directed towards Catholic voters it is for all the American electorate. I believe that even a non-partisan book or pamphlet can be written in opposition to Loretta Sanchez in the 47th Congressional District in Orange County. Other writers are free to access “cinops be gone.” There are dozen of letters on this blog relating to the topic.
The cities of Anaheim, Garden Grove and Santa Ana are right in the heart of conservative Orange County. They deserve better. By conservative I mean tradition, truth and wisdom, and natural law. Sanchez’s voting record in some areas is good but overall on fundamental values it is destructive and evil.
My standard for a Catholic lay person is that of Pope John Paul II and his American disciples, St. Louis Archbishops Raymond Burke and Denver’s Charles Chaput. One strives for a mind &heart that is straightforward, honest and truthful.
First of all, what is going to bring out a lot of voters in her district is Proposition 8 – the Marriage Amendment. We need from that district at least a 65% vote for marriage. This is to help us overcome San Francisco values majorities in other areas of California. This turn-out will help defeat Loretta and replace her with Rosie Avila. Loretta is against the Marriage Amendment. This is an insult to all voters including the many Latin American families in her district. Rosie Avila is right for America and in particular for the 47th Congressional District.
Let us try to recall how Sanchez got elected, five times. The first time it was through voter fraud. The other times it was through money, money, money and a good marketing campaign. I understand that she has won by the usual 45,000 votes with 37% turnout in the district. There are about 72,000 registered Republican voters. We focus on the 30% of all voters who are undecided.
One main reason for my opposition to Loretta is that she is a Catholic label politician. Do you remember the union label song? Imagine products being sold to you and labeled made by unionized workers and they are not. Loretta uses the Catholic label to get reelected. But she is a Catholic label fraud. Americans don’t like frauds. She is a fraud using the Catholic label to get reelected. IT’S TIME FOR A HEALTHY CHANGE.
UNTIL WE HAVE VOTED OUT OF OFFICE CATHOLIC-IN-NAME-ONLY POLITICIANS, WE CAN NEVER ACHIEVE THE NEW EVANGELIZATION OF POPE JOHN PAUL II. Reference from “cinops be gone” The Role of the Laity, Oct. 23/07
“The new evangelization that can make the 21st century springtime of the Gospel is a task for the entire people of God, but will depend in a decisive way on the lay faithful being fully aware of their baptismal vocation for bringing the good news of Jesus Christ to their culture and society… mission of the lay faithful… to give a glad and prompt response to the Holy Spirit and the voice of Christ….”
We are dealing with a Nancy Pelosi clone in Orange County. Loretta is not as bright as Nancy but decidedly destructive to our American values and tradition.
For Pelosi abortion is, “I have a sort of serenity about the issue.” This is diabolical
LORETTA SANCHEZ HAS VOTED FOR PARTIAL-BIRTH ABORTIONS 3 TIMES.
HER OPPONENT IS ROSIE AVILA. ROSIE IS FOR THE UNBORN AND MARRIAGE.
George H. Kubeck, Duplicate and translate into Spanish and Vietnamese.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)