Archive for the ‘Children’s Rights/Issues’ Category

A little past due love for cousin Glen

by Lloyd Marcus on Sunday, April 13th, 2014

As a 9 or 10 year old, my knowledge of the situation was limited. Therefore, I can not pass judgment on the adults. I do not know what was done or not done to rescue my cousin Glen, a little boy who was severely abused by his mom, my late aunt Bummie (a nickname). My dad threatened to report Aunt Bummie to the authorities and warned her, “Do not physically discipline my kids.”

A homosexual, Glen’s adult life was cut extremely short due to AIDS. My purpose for writing is to let the world know that Glen was here, his suffering and that I loved him.

Aunt Bummie was my mom’s older sister. Their childhood was horrendous. Their father was accidentally killed in a street shooting. Their alcoholic mother would abandon the two little girls for long periods of time. Mom and Bummie endured things kids should not have to endure.

In the 1950s when Dad broke the color barrier to become a Baltimore City firefighter, our family (mom and four younger siblings) moved out of the government projects into our own home in a black suburban community.

Aunt Bummie and her five sons by two absentee fathers remained in the projects on welfare. I enjoyed occasional sleepovers at my cousins’ government provided townhouse in the city. Aunt Bummie’s house was unkempt with holes punched in walls and broken furniture.

“Aunt Bummie, when I grow up, I’m gonna buy you new furniture.” “Thanks Peanut”, (my nickname), she replied.

I got along great with Aunt Bummie and her boys. And yet, I felt my cousins’ envy of me having a dad in our home. I felt sorry for them.

Aunt Bummie and her boys lived different than my family. Aunt Bummie did not have a job. Unlike my home, the refrigerator was off limits to her children. Food was very valuable; each boy was protective of his food when eating. I remember large generic labeled boxes of government cheese and powdered milk – cans of meat and peanut butter.

Fondly, I remember Aunt Bummie covering her table with newspapers and dumping a huge pile of fried chicken necks and backs on it for us boys to devour. I still like fried chicken necks and backs.

Even as a little boy, I felt the sadness, anger and dysfunction of their household. Aunt Bummie was extremely kind and gentle with me, but brutal towards her boys – Glen in particular, the baby. I vaguely recall overhearing my parents saying Bummie hated Glen because he reminded her the most of his father.

Their household humor was weird and violent – the five boys along with Aunt Bummie would laugh hysterically about the time she broke the baseball bat while beating Jimmie and how she bent the cooking pot while beating Glen.

Glen was the family servant. When everyone was watching TV, anyone could order Glen to go fetch something for them. The slightest non compliance from Glen would result in Aunt Bummie screaming at him, and/or beating him; not spanking, beating. My heart always went out to Glen as I watched him cry during his beatings. The lack of love. The unfairness. The cruelty.

Lawrence, the eldest, was very intelligent and responsible. He played substitute dad to his brothers.

Click to continue reading “A little past due love for cousin Glen”
Go straight to Post

President ‘God bless you, Planned Parenthood’ proclaims ‘every child should have every chance at life’

by Doug Powers on Friday, April 4th, 2014

This is article 674 of 674 in the topic Healthcare

On Monday, President Obama issued a proclamation for National Child Abuse Awareness Month:

“In the United States of America, every child should have every chance in life, every chance at happiness, and every chance at success,” Obama said in the proclamation.

Flashback to April of last year: “Thank you, Planned Parenthood, and God bless you”:

According to a Planned Parenthood report (PDF, via CNS News), in fiscal 2013/2013, 327,166 abortions were performed at PP-affiliated clinics — apparent exceptions to Monday’s proclamation.

LifeNews.com also notes that there have been more than 56 million abortions in the U.S. since the SCOTUS decision on Roe v. Wade — an anniversary President Obama commemorates every year.

Why didn’t they deserve “every chance in life”? That question should be directed to President Obama, but I have a feeling it won’t be.

Go straight to Post

The politics of death: Belgium legalizes mercy killing of children

by Jim Kouri on Tuesday, March 25th, 2014

This is article 664 of 674 in the topic Healthcare

With much of the U.S. news media ignoring a disturbing European development, Belgium’s monarch quietly signed a radical piece of legislation that makes his kingdom the first country on the planet to authorize the medical establishment to euthanize terminally ill children no matter what age.

The Bill became law on March 2, 2014, by a government that ignored the opposition of millions of citizens including Christian groups. Belgium’s King Philippe even ignored a petition signed by hundreds of thousands of Europeans which was delivered to Philippe last week urging him not to sign the Bill.

Adding insult to injury, the Belgian king signed the euthanasia legislation into law on a Sunday — the Sabbath day for Christians — after it was passed by the country’s parliament in February.

The Euthanasia Bill passed in Belgium’s legislature with a vote of 86-44 while 12 members abstained. The members of parliament even ignored the a unified plea from more than 160 Belgian pediatric physicians who vehemently oppose the new law.

“Belgium only added more bloods on its hands with this child-killing law. Belgium followed the example of Holland when in 2002 it legalized euthanasia for adults,” said Ruth Kerrison, a police detective and mother of a handicapped daughter.

According to estimates, in 2011 there were more than 900 cases of euthanasia in Belgium in 2011 – a 4,620 per cent rise since the practice was legalized in 2002.

Christian groups seeking to protect infants, toddlers and children have also claimed there were cases of patients who did not suffer from a terminal illness who have also been euthanized pointing to a case involving two deaf twins.

When 2008 vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin warned Americans about “death panels” during the debate over Obamacare, she was ridiculed by not only Democrats but also by many members of the news media.

However, it’s a documented fact that many political leaders would favor euthanasia of children — who cannot vote — if it would save money on healthcare costs and allow them to use the money for other parts of their agenda, according to political strategist Mike Baker.

“There are many in Washington who would love to replicate Europe’s socialist healthcare system that allows politicians and bureaucrats to make life and death decisions. If they get their true objective — a single-payer program — they will no doubt have Obama or whom ever is in the White House sign an executive order,” said Baker.

And Ruth Kerrison wonders why the same people who favor euthanasia of mentally-challenged — and innocent — children are opposed to executing murders and terrorists?

Go straight to Post

Unsettled science: The dramatic childhood obesity decline that wasn’t

by Doug Powers on Tuesday, March 18th, 2014

This is article 29 of 30 in the topic Science

Three weeks ago, headlines like this one from the New York Times were all over the place:

null

The MSM was giddy to report about a big victory for kids’ health last month thanks in part to Michelle Obama’s magic formula: Make school lunches crappy while Elmo chants “yes we can” and just watch the pounds peel away:

The CDC has an excellent present for Michelle Obama’s Let’s Move! campaign during the program’s fourth anniversary: a new report that says childhood obesity is declining for younger kids — by a lot.

The New York Times calls the decline “stunning,” and here’s why: for children ages 2 to 5, the rate of obesity has dropped from 14 percent in 2004 to about 8 percent in 2012. That’s a drop of 43 percent in childhood obesity.

It turns out that the claim of a dramatic drop in childhood obesity is kind of like Al Gore’s favorite hockey stick graph in reverse.

Via Reuters, the anti-obesity science is not settled:

If the news last month that the prevalence of obesity among American preschoolers had plunged 43 percent in a decade sounded too good to be true, that’s because it probably was, researchers say.

When the study was published in late February in the Journal of the American Medical Association, no one had a ready explanation for that astounding finding by researchers at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Indeed, it seemed to catch the experts by surprise.

Anti-obesity campaigners credited everything from changes to the federal nutrition program for low-income women and children to the elimination of trans-fats from fast food, more physical activity in child-care programs and declining consumption of sugary drinks.

First Lady Michelle Obama and others seized on the finding as a sign that efforts to combat the national obesity epidemic were paying off.
[...]
In fact, based on the researchers’ own data, the obesity rate may have even risen rather than declined.

Before reporting the original study, the MSM followed their usual fact check methodology: If you want it to be true, it is.

The Media Research Center writes of how the MSM was of course quick to jump on the “victory for Michelle Obama’s ‘Let’s Move’” bandwagon. I’m sure they’ll report about the bogus study with just as much excitement (crickets).

The good news is that since Obama has been in office, there’s been a 65 percent decline in MSM obesity, which lends great credence to the health benefits of water-carrying.

Update:

Heh: “No child’s fat left behind.”

Go straight to Post

Predators sentenced for sex crimes against 15-year-old girl

by Jim Kouri on Monday, January 27th, 2014

This is article 306 of 319 in the topic Criminal Activity

A Virginia man and woman will be spending 11-years and 14-years in federal prison, respectively, for convictions stemming from criminal charges that they prostituted a teenager within the Washington, D.C., metropolitan area, according to a judge’s pronouncement on Friday.

Stephanie Olean Chapman, whose last known address was in Alexandria, Va., and Ronnie Pierre Holmes, no known address, were sentenced Friday to federal prison followed by five years of supervised release by United States District Judge Liam O’Grady.

The 30-year-old Holmes pleaded guilty on June 25, 2013, to a criminal charge of conspiracy to commit sex trafficking of a child, specifically a 15-year-old girl.

Meanwhile, the 28-year-old Chapman was convicted by a federal jury on Oct. 17, 2013 of conspiracy to commit sex trafficking of a child, sex trafficking of a child, and interstate transportation of a minor for the purposes of prostitution.

According to court documents and evidence presented during Chapman’s trial, between Feb. 27, 2013 and Mar. 12, 2013, Chapman and her boyfriend, Holmes, met a 15-year-old girl and talked her into working as a prostitute for them.

During that time, the trial revealed, Chapman and Holmes took sexually suggestive photographs of the girl and distributed the photographs among potential customers. They also posted the photographs on the Internet website Backpage.com.

The two felons would then drive the young girl to meet with customers and have sex with them at locations in Virginia, Maryland, and the District of Columbia. Chapman and Holmes would then take half of the money paid to the girl after she engaged in sex with customers for money, according to reports.

“The sexual exploitation of children in this country should be looked at as a heinous crime since the physical and psychological damage are often irreversible,” said former sex crimes detective, Charlotte Ann Gibson.

Go straight to Post

Obama’s Cash for Universal Preschool Clunker Plan

by Michelle Malkin on Thursday, December 12th, 2013

This is article 231 of 242 in the topic Education

Obama’s Cash for Universal Preschool Clunker Plan
by Michelle Malkin
Creators Syndicate
Copyright 2013

It’s elementary: When Democrats find themselves in political trouble, they reach for your wallets. After squandering billions on an ineffectual stimulus, failed green energy boondoggles and the disastrous Unaffordable Care Act, the Obama White House wants to dump $75 billion more into “free” preschool for all. That’ll solve everything.

Government-funded universal pre-K is a moldy oldie of the progressive left, recycled perennially by Democratic presidential speechwriters in need of State of the Union address padding. But this time, the Fed Ed crowd is redoubling its efforts with support from big-business statists and academic shills.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, once a bitter campaign target of the White House, is now Team Obama’s biggest cheerleader on expanding preschool funding. And Austan Goolsbee, a former top Obama economic adviser and University of Chicago prof, took to the pages of The Wall Street Journal this week to crusade for more public “investments” in early childhood education. At “$10,000 per child,” Goolsbee argued, universal pre-K is a “bargain.”

Why anyone would take the financial advice of Austan Goolsbee is beyond me. I’ll remind you that this is the same Austan Goolsbee who vigorously championed extending credit to the uncreditworthy. In a 2007 op-ed for The New York Times, he derided prescient critics who called subprime mortgages “irresponsible.” Goolsbee instead preferred to describe the doomed financial instruments as “innovations in the mortgage market” to expand the pool of homebuyers. We don’t need economics Ph.D.’s to see how that worked out.

Goolsbee, like his Fed Ed allies on both the left and right, cites the well-worn Perry Preschool Project in Michigan to support Obama’s top-down push for subsidizing preschool for all. But that pilot program, run at a cost of $19,000 per child, took place more than a half-century ago. A more comprehensive and updated review of the literature by the Brookings Institution’s Russ Whitehurst released last month found that the vaunted academic benefits of full-time pre-K are, in fact, negligible.

Whitehurst is a developmental psychologist by training who has spent the majority of his career designing and evaluating programs intended to enhance the cognitive development of young children. He warns that universal preschool boosters “ignore research showing negative impacts on children who receive child care supported through the federal child development block grant program.” Moreover, his research shows, the Nanny Staters have downplayed evidence that “the universal pre-k programs in Georgia and Oklahoma, which are closest to what the Obama administration has proposed, have had, at best, only small impacts on later academic achievement.”

A. Barton Hinkle of the Richmond Times-Dispatch points to even more reason for skepticism by way of a 2010 Department of Health and Human Services report about a congressionally mandated study of approximately 5,000 3- and 4-year-olds who were randomly assigned to either a control group or a group that had access to the federal Head Start program. It found that “at the end of kindergarten and first grade … the Head Start children and the control group children were at the same level on many of the measures studied.”

Let’s set all of this junk science aside for the moment. There’s a bigger elephant in the room.

Click to continue reading “Obama’s Cash for Universal Preschool Clunker Plan”
Go straight to Post

We Need Zero Tolerance for “Zero Tolerance”

by Alan Caruba on Sunday, October 13th, 2013

This is article 220 of 242 in the topic Education

When I was a youngster a prize possession of every boy was a set of toy cowboy six-shooters and, if you were especially blessed, a belt and holsters as well. In the pre-television days we all went to the Saturday matinees to see our heroes and to learn what it meant to be a man.

The ultimate icon was John Wayne and, for me, one of his finest films was his last, “The Shootist.” In that film after he instructed a boy on how to shoot, he responded to a question of why he had become known for his skills, “I won’t be wronged. I won’t be insulted. I won’t be laid a-hand on. I don’t do these things to other people and I require the same from them.” The fundamental morality of why he defended himself was self-explanatory.

My generation grew up with many cowboy heroes. By the time television arrived in the 1950s they became a staple of shows featuring Gene Autry, Roy Rogers, William Boyd as Hopalong Cassidy, and Clayton Moore as the Lone Ranger, a character from radio. Television gave us James Arness in Gunsmoke. There were others. I can’t think of a major Hollywood actor who did not portray a cowboy in films.

The Westerns were miniature morality plays. There were the good guys in white hats and the bad guys in black hats. What passes for films and television these days is often far removed from any moral content or intent. Much of it is just an excuse for exaggerated cartoonish violence.

This a long way of addressing a trend in our schools that is so wrong that it needs to be examined in a serious way. I am speaking of the increasing trend of suspending children for even saying the word “gun” or pointing a finger at a classmate in the fashion of a gun. It is essentially an insane, indefensible attack on Second Amendment rights to own a gun. The schools—teachers and administration—are engaging in their usual liberal indoctrination and, as usual taking it to the extreme.

Last month, in Osceola County, Florida, an 8-year-old was kicked out of class for playing cops with his friends at Harmony Community School and using his finger to similar a handgun. He was suspended for a day. He had never been in detention or suspended before…for pointing his finger!

Also in September, a seventh-grade student from Virginia Beach, Virginia, may be suspended for the rest of the school year for shooting an airsoft gun with a friend in the yard of his home while they waited for the bus to come. Khalid Carabello, 12, and his friend Aidan, were suspended for “possession, handling and use of a firearm.” It was a TOY. He was on the property of his own HOME.

I suggest this isn’t just a matter of two schools using bad judgment and failing to apply the most minimal common sense. This is a national trend and it has to stop. There has to be zero tolerance for “zero tolerance.”

Others agree and the first week of October was designated the National Week of Action Against School Pushout.

Click to continue reading “We Need Zero Tolerance for “Zero Tolerance””
Go straight to Post

Study: Anti-bullying Programs Increase Bullying

by Selwyn Duke on Sunday, October 13th, 2013

This is article 35 of 36 in the topic Government Programs

Bratty Little Girl in PurpleWell, bully for anti-bullying programs. After spending countless millions instituting them nationwide, a university study has concluded that it isn’t just that they don’t work.

They actually increase bullying.

The head researcher of the study, University of Texas at Arlington criminologist Seokjin Jeong, did not start out as a critic of anti-bullying programs, mind you; on the contrary, he expected to find that they’d mitigated the nation’s bullying problem. Much to his dismay, however, he learned that students in schools boasting anti-bullying programs were more likely to be bullied than those attending schools without such programs. CBSLocal.com reports on his explanations for the findings, writing:

Jeong says they [anti-bullying-program videos] may actually teach students different bullying techniques — and even educate about new ways to bully through social media and texting.

Jeong said students with ill intentions “…are able to learn, there are new techniques [and gain] new skills.” He says students might see examples in videos and then want to try it.

According to Jeong, some programs even teach students how to bully without leaving evidence behind.

In other words, the programs could perhaps be called Building a Better Bully 101.

But this comes as no surprise. It much reminds me of a boy I knew who had been diagnosed with “ADHD” and given a book on ADHD children’s behavior. It was a book his mother would soon take away because, as she told me, he was starting to imitate the proverbial “ADHD-afflicted” boy in the book. Then I remember the man who explained the effects of the sex education he received at age 11, saying, “The first thing I did was run home and b*** the girl next door.” Perhaps this is why an illegitimacy rate that was four percent in the 1940s has, after decades of Kinsey-fraud sex education, exploded to 42 percent (and rising) today.

In fairness, it’s not clear from the CBS article whether bullying actually increased in districts that instituted anti-bullying programs or if the incidence of it merely was greater than in districts that never took such measures in the first place; if the latter, the phenomenon’s explanation may simply be that localities more plagued by bullying are more likely to institute anti-bullying programs. Whatever the case, however, there’s much wrong with this approach.

First, it’s no secret that such programs are often used as Trojan horses for the homosexual agenda. After all, while children are bullied for a host of reasons, these programs frequently place inordinate focus on students bullied because of their real or perceived sexual bent. And how do anti-bullying programs seek to eliminate this? Often by teaching kids that homosexuality — and “transgenderism” and whatever else has been assigned the latest psychobabble neologism — are just as legitimate as normal sexuality. This is why homosexual activists such as Dan Savage can cruise the lucrative anti-bullying talk circuit. (Ironic, too, since Savage is himself a bully who calls anyone opposing his agenda “bigots” and “homophobes.” He likely knows full well that many on the other side have substantive disagreements, but he also knows that such hurled stones can bully others into submission.) Yet even anti-bullying programs’ explicit and more innocent underlying philosophy — the notion that arming students with “knowledge” can remedy bullying — is flawed.

1 2 3
Go straight to Post

Creepy Oregon educrat preaches government authority over kids from “prenatal to graduate school”

by Michelle Malkin on Friday, October 11th, 2013

This is article 219 of 242 in the topic Education

images

We are all familiar with the progressive “cradle-to-grave” agenda. But now, at least one Oregon educrat is publicly pushing his grubby government hands even further into our children’s lives.

Out: K-12. In: P20. As in “prenatal” to age 20, from womb through graduate school.

Here’s video of Oregon deputy state schools superintendent Rob Saxton explaining Big Brother’s expanded purview, courtesy of Oregon blogger/YouTube user Jason Schimdt of Don’t Tread On Farms:

Transcript via Daylight Disinfectant:

“One of the things we have begun putting in place is the P20 System, and “P” stands for prenatal, and “20″ stands for graduate school. So we’re trying to think about this system of education no longer as these pieces of a system, right like prenatal and very early childhood, um … 3 to 4 years old … kindergarden through grade 5 … grade 6 through 8th … grades 9 through 12 … and then community college or college, and then graduate graduate school … We should be thinking about education from the time that a woman … um … enters … um … is pregnant [sic], so prenatal, and just like: what their nutrition looks like, what their exercise looks like, what kind of education we can provide working around the child …”

In case you think the video is edited to take his remark out of context, you can read more about Saxton’s P20W propaganda in the mainstream Klamath Falls Herald and News here.

This, dear readers, is what happens when moms and dads surrender their fundamental duty as their own children’s primary educational providers.

If you are not willing to face gag orders, risk arrest, and raise hell to stop the usurpers, you get what you deserve.

***

More coverage:

Watchdog Wire:

Saxton, laying out several goals of the project (including teaching students to read by the third grade) states that he used to think the challenge was a “hair-on-fire emergency” from kindergarten to the end of third grade. Now, however, he realizes that the time period is actually prenatal to the end of third grade. He says that, from birth, the Department of Education can work with parents to teach pre-reading skills, and that early childhood schooling like Kindergarten should be less like “day care” and more like education. Saxton also alludes to a large amount of funding provided to work on this effort. The source of this money is currently unknown.

The website “Stop Common Core In Oregon” has done a write-up on the history and impact of P20W, including how the data collected on students can be accessed by almost anyone affiliated, directly or indirectly, with the school district, for any reason provided that they “[need] to review an education record in order to fulfill [their] professional responsibility.”

P20W is not exclusively an Oregon program. This is an experimental part of the national Common Core State Standards program, and could be in the beginning stages of implementation in states across the country. WatchdogWire encourages readers from other states to research P20W in their own state and report on the findings.

From Stop Common Core in Oregon:

What is the SLDS?

The State Longitudinal Database System, is a comprehensive database compiled on each child. This data is not aggregate data, it is linked specifically to the child.

Click to continue reading “Creepy Oregon educrat preaches government authority over kids from “prenatal to graduate school””
Go straight to Post

Flashback 2008: The seduction of Hannah Montana

by Michelle Malkin on Tuesday, August 27th, 2013

This is article 97 of 111 in the topic Hollywood

The Disney girls gone bad of Hollywood are not created in a vacuum. They have many, many enablers. Before focusing on corporations like MTV, though, we need first to look at the closest adults who surround these damaged youths. I did just that in 2008, when all the warning signs were flashing around then-15-year-old Miley Cyrus.

A related good read: How do we help Miley?

***

The seduction of Hannah Montana
by Michelle Malkin
Creators Syndicate
April 29, 2008

First Britney. Then Lindsay. And now: Miley Cyrus. Do they ever learn?

By “they,” I don’t mean the girls. I mean their parents. Where are they? What the hell are they thinking?

I don’t know how many times I’ve asked those questions over the years as a parade of young Hollywood starlets has burst onto the scene with wholesome charm, achieved dizzying fame and fortune, and then crashed back to Earth half-naked with corrupted souls and drug-glazed eyes.

Are parents without scruples more likely to sacrifice their daughters to the wolves of the entertainment industry? Or does show business sap all the common sense out of mothers and fathers who should know better? Either way, they are guilty of child abandonment.

Cyrus, for those of you without girls in the house, is the 15-year-old singer/actress with a runaway hit TV show (“Hannah Montana”), lucrative concert tour, and a Disney empire valued at nearly $1 billion. (Fortunately, my 7-year-old daughter is more fanatical about horses than cable pop stars.) The Mickey Mouse company is now in full meltdown mode over Cyrus’s latest photo shoot gone awry.

1avf.jpg The photographer was famed celebrity snapper Annie Leibovitz. The magazine is Vanity Fair. Why those two names didn’t set off alarm bells the size of Texas for the Cyrus adults is beyond me. Leibovitz has a reputation for talking subjects into titillating poses under the guise of “art.” She put Demi Moore naked and pregnant on the cover of Vanity Fair.

1avf002.jpg She also put rising glamour girls Keira Knightly and Scarlett Johansson on the magazine’s cover unclothed; Johansson’s back side was completely exposed. Another promising young actress, Rachel McAdams, had the dignity, class, and self-posession to refuse to appear in the photo spread. When she arrived on set and discovered what the editors were up to, she walked out and fired her representative.

So where were Miley’s parents during the photo shoot? Dad hung out for a while posing for some of the photos (which featured bare-midriffed Miley draped across his knee); Vanity Fair quickly posted some video footage of those scenes to somehow “prove” that Miley wasn’t manipulated:

But according to the NYPost, Billy Ray left the set before the controversial nude photo was taken–and somehow, Miley’s grandmother and teacher who were left to supervise her had no clue about what was going on, either:

Miley’s parents did leave the shoot and were not present for the final shot, nor did they see any digital images of the shot in question,” a Miley spokeswoman told The Post yesterday.

Her grandmother and her teacher were left to supervise, according to People magazine.

“Annie convinced them it was going to be artistic,” a source told People.

Click to continue reading “Flashback 2008: The seduction of Hannah Montana”
Go straight to Post