A Man's "Right To Choose?"

                    Many women are “pro- choice.” A “woman’s right to choose” is so ubiquitous a mantra, one would think it could be found in the Constitution…or perhaps the Bible.

                    In the interest of fairness, inclusiveness and equality, where is the “men’s rights” movement? Where are those folks who tout a “man’s right to choose?” Isn’t it his choice to wear a condom… or not wear one? What if a man doesn’t want his girlfriend/wife to have an abortion and she decides to have one anyway? What if she wants to “keep” her child, but he wants her to abort it?  Shouldn’t we codify and enforce the man’s “right to choose?”

                   What if he decides she needs to be slapped or spanked? Obviously, it’s his choice, and he’s not even trying to kill anyone, unlike the woman pursuing an abortion.

                   In reality, we know that the man usually doesn’t get to make any of these choices. Hell, he doesn’t even get to decide where the sofa goes. In these decisions a “tie” goes to the female. Our society doesn’t question any of this.

                  But, what if, via a religious epiphany, he becomes a devout Muslim and thereafter decides that his wife can’t work outside of the home or have anything but her eyes showing while in public?

                  In this case- and this case only- liberals, feminists and progressives in general somehow seem to think this poses a painful and difficult “tolerance conundrum.”

                  Liberalism- as it is currently conceived and defined- is a mental disorder.

City Council Asks Parents What Gender Their Four-Year-Olds "Most Identify With"

                 The Brighton and Hove, England, City Council wrote to parents of students as young as four-years-old asking them to record on a form what gender their children “most identify with” before starting school. It recently contacted the parents, urging them to support their child’s choice of “gender identity,” via a letter confirming primary school places.

                The letter, sent to thousands of parents preparing to send kids to new schools later this year,  also requested they leave the gender section of the forms blank if their child had “another gender identity” altogether. The missive continued: “We recognize that not all children and young people identify with the gender they were assigned at birth or may identify as a gender other than male or female, however the current systems (set nationally) only record gender as male or female. Please support your child to choose the gender they most identify with. Or if they have another gender identity, please leave this blank and discuss with your child’s school.”

                They recognize that not all children may identify as a gender other than male or female? At four years old, how many “other genders” do they think kids are aware of? One thing is for certain, we have to rid ourselves of that old, paternalistic national system that only recognizes male and female genders, else where would we find ourselves?!

                Though the letter is redundant and poorly written, at least it is meddling, offensive and insane. What more could you want from a City Council or school district?

                Many parents were understandably appalled by the letter. One mother stated: “Children at school should be free to develop their identity. They are not adults — let them enjoy the innocence and creativity of their childhood.” Tory MP Andrew Bridgen said: “Schools should be teaching kids to read and write, not prompting them to consider gender swaps.”

               Boy, are their priorities screwed up.

Trump Vows To Be Presidential

                 Let’s say you, like Donald Trump, are a candidate for president of the United States, and you, like Donald Trump, have hitherto acted like a buffoon at a Junior High School dance. If a reporter then asks you if you would even be able to act presidential should you get your party’s nomination to become the chief executive, do not reply like Donald Trump did. By declaring, like a nine-year-old boy, “You won’t even believe how presidential I’m going to be,” you will just have guaranteed that is the case.

Denmark To Introduce Tax On Red Meat?

                 Denmark is considering proposals to introduce a tax on red meat, after a government think tank came to the conclusion that “climate change is an ethical problem.” The Danish Council of Ethics recommended an initial tax on beef, with a nod towards extending the regulation to all red meats in the future. It also stated that, in the long term, the tax should apply to all foods at varying levels depending on their climate impact. The council voted in favor of the measures by an overwhelming majority, and the proposal will now be put forward for consideration by the government.

                Without food we will all die. In light of this fact, is it really “logical” and “ethical” to tax it? Perhaps we should levy a massive tax on all emergency medical procedures as well? And, surely, a “toilet tax” would be reasonable and ethical. Each flush puts raw sewage (and who knows what else!) into the environment and/or further taxes our treatment plants, etc. This is leaving a smelly footprint on our mother, the earth. And people complain about cigarette smoke! (But not smoke from unfiltered marijuana cigarettes, oddly enough).

                We all know about the looming water shortages. Potable fresh water will be very scarce in the coming decades. Therefore I propose we slap a $10 per 12-ounce-vessel consumption tax on it immediately. This seems a reasonable conservation measure. It’s less than a dollar an ounce!

                Moreover, we all know there is only so much oxygen to go around. What’s more, we are cutting down our rain-forests at an alarming rate, reducing the planet’s ability to regenerate this life giving gas. A hefty user tax on oxygen appears to be the only logical way forward. Every breath taken by every human on Earth should be taxed at a constant rate. The more breaths one takes, the higher the tax one pays. You use more you pay more. It’s only logical. And ethical.

                At particularly reflective moments, I wonder…what is the current tax rate on abortions? Assisted suicides?

                What? They’re effectively subsidized?!

                I have a beef with that. There is an ethical problem here.

                There’s something rotten in Denmark. And in modern-day “progressive thinking” in general.

               

"Pet Relief Areas" Now Mandatory At Airports

News Services

New York City-

                In yet another remarkable restroom breakthrough, dogs and other animals now have a bathroom at John F. Kennedy International Airport in New York City. The poodle and pit bull privy is replete with artificial turf and a red fire hydrant. This is just one of several “pet relief facilities” to be installed at airports across the country, in order to allow the rapidly increasing numbers of “emotional support” animals and other pets traveling with their owners to relieve themselves in a comforting and inclusive manner- and without exiting the terminal.

                A new federal regulation stipulates that all airports serving more than 10,000 passengers per year must install a pet relief area by August of 2016. That means any airport seeing more than 28 flyers a day must have a pet-friendly bathroom facility on its premises. In other words, virtually all airports.

                This- on its face- is obviously wonderful news, but why do we need a separate bathroom for dogs, cats and other critters? Male, female, both, neither, transgender, transspecie, young, old, human, dog, horse, shouldn’t we all be able to poop and pee as one? I mean, if we don’t actually watch each other, we should at least all be granted the sacred right to simultaneously eliminate in the same room, no? This is a vital component of human dignity and liberty, is it not? And, of course, when I say “human,” I actually mean all living beings.

                The right to excrete together- and do so in any bathroom one wishes- is clearly codified in the Bible, the Magna Carta, the Constitution of the United States of America, and the Emancipation Proclamation. Did not Adam and Eve help fertilize the Garden of Eden together?

                

Trump Last One Standing, Wins GOP Contest

                 Remarkably, the Republican Party instituted a progressive and utterly unique “stand-up bingo” format for their presidential nomination process this past year, whereby virtually every eligible Republican in the nation was invited to stand up and run for president. Notions of equality and inclusiveness ran amok. Talk about a big tent! The party had women candidates, black candidates, Latino candidates, governors, Congressmen, representatives of eastern states, central states, western states, southern states and northern states. Captains of industry, surgeons and beauty contest hosts were included all. The Democrats, on the other hand, fielded two old, white exceedingly liberal hags. Ironic, based on current rhetoric, isn’t it?

                Tension gradually built over time as numbers were called out and seemingly dozens at a time were forced to sit. “Oh-69” ironically wiped out most of those standing on the coasts, while “Oh-74” did in many in the Nixon wing of the GOP.

                After several numbers were called, a few observers complained that Donald Trump had obtained many more cards than any of the other candidates. This did not, however, stop Trump from claiming that the “process was rigged” against him.

                Eventually, when the number of contestants was culled to a near manageable level, there was much debate over who had the best cards and whose hands were big enough to hold them properly. After the field was reduced to just a handful of prospective nominees, many were openly talking of a “contested” game, wherein the last two, three or four standing might all be forced to sit at the same time. Observers and pundits debated over what would happen in that event. This being a winner-take-all contest, chaos would reign and rule-makers might be tempted to step in and determine the winner, essentially rendering the contest a sham.

                Therefore, many folks were on pins and needles when celebrity guest color-commentator Megyn Kelly of Fox News asked, “Does anyone have just one left?” The Donald, Cruz and Kasich could be seen still upright and furtively eyeing each other. Finally, early on the evening of May 3^rd, a Hoosier-state bingo-campaign arbiter called out “B-1.”  Cruz and Kasich sat. The Donald remained erect. The game was over.

                The Trump card(s) had prevailed. 

Transgender High School Student Wins Bathroom Rights Fight

                 A federal appeals court in Richmond, Virginia, has ruled that Gavin Grimm, a transgender high school student who was “born a female,” can sue “his” school board on discrimination grounds because it banned “him” from the boy’s bathroom. In arriving at its decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4^th Circuit deferred to the U.S. Education Department’s position that transgender (not transsexual) students should have access to the bathrooms that match their gender “identities” rather than being “forced” to use bathrooms that correspond with their actual, biological sex.

                The U.S.E.D. has said that requiring transgender students to use a bathroom reserved for their biological sex is a violation of Title IX, which prohibits sexual discrimination at federally-funded schools. That certainly is an interesting- if insane- take on an already ridiculous law. Transgender students claim that using the bathroom of their gender identity is important for them- and others- to feel comfortable. I know that most females would be uncomfortable if their schools didn’t allow “chicks” with dicks into their bathrooms. What young girl wouldn’t feel more comfortable if a 50-year-old man “identifying” as a woman was allowed to take a whiz a foot or two away from her, inside a stall or not?

                Master Grimm said that a transgender “boy” who appears male may generally raise alarms if “he” is forced to use the girl’s bathroom. Really? And “he” won’t raise any alarms if “he” uses the boy’s bathroom, even though “he” has female genitalia?  We’re not talking about a classroom here. Does Grimm not understand what a bathroom is specifically designed for? Well, “I feel humiliated and dysphoric every time I’m forced to use a separate facility,” Grimm said.

                That’s funny, that’s the same feeling most people have when they are forced to share a bathroom with a member of the opposite sex…who none-the-less claim to be of their gender.

                I am dysphoric whenever I think about the future of mankind.

                (Sorry, I mean womankind. No, I mean un-kinds…uh, that’s not it either. I mean some, no, every kind).

                Grimm? Indeed.

Virginia Governor To Allow Ex-Cons To Vote

                 Democratic Virginia governor Terry McAuliffe will allow more than 200,000 ex-cons residing in the state to register to vote in the upcoming presidential election. This is arguably the broadest and most aggressive action ever taken by a state to immediately restore voting rights to those previously held as felons, though the announcement was greeted with a collective yawn. This executive decision will have the biggest impact on African-American residents, one-in-four of whom were previously barred from voting due to prior felony convictions. This is tantamount to a Republican governor decreeing that the votes of  NASCAR-loving bass-fishermen, National Review subscribers and NRA members will be counted twice. Oh, except for none of these groups consists primarily of felons, and the media would demand said governor be impeached, neutered and sent to a re-education camp.

                It is not a coincidence that McAuliffe is a Democrat. This audacious act could likely be the difference between Democrats winning and losing in the Old Dominion. Criminals will vote in droves for one of their own. Talk about stealing elections!

                Virginia’s state motto? Sic semper tyrannis, which means “Thus always to tyrants.”

                It might just as well be Gratias tibi, Hillary! (“You’re welcome, Hillary!”).

Labour Pains In Britain

                Naz Shah is a British lawmaker whose Labour Party membership was put on hold Wednesday due to her suggestion that Israel should be moved to the United States. This unique idea was apparently just one of a number of anti-Semitic posts Shah recently put on Facebook.

                Former London Mayor Ken Livingstone has now also been suspended from the Labour party. According to the BBC, Livingstone defended Shah in part by saying that Hitler was “supporting Zionism” when his policy was that Jews should be moved to Israel.

                Apparently, Ms. Shah was also “supporting Zionism” in her own way. Hell, anybody who wants to rid their land of Jews by shipping them somewhere else can claim to be “supporting Zionism.”

                 Party leader Jeremy Corbyn has denied that Labour harbors anti-Semites. Asked if there was a crisis in the party, he replied, “It’s not a crisis. There’s no crisis. Where there is any racism in the party it will be dealt with, it will be rooted out.” That’s a sentiment that would surely make that renowned Zionist-supporter himself- Adolph Hitler- proud.

                Despite frequent missteps by the Tory party, it appears the loyal opposition is determined to stay just that.

                Calling Monty Python.

Harvard "Debaters" Suggest Whites Kill Themselves

Cambridge, Mass. –

                The quality of debate heard on the storied Harvard University campus has deteriorated dramatically in recent years. In earlier years, the campus was blessed with restless, free and brilliant minds the likes of those possessed by John Adams and his son John Quincy Adams, both of whom went on to become president of the United States. Many of the American founders attended various schools that would go on to comprise what would come to be called the “Ivy League.” At the time, colleges such as Princeton, Columbia and Harvard expected students to arrive on campus already familiar with the classical works of Western thought and literature and with a working knowledge of Latin and Greek. Partly as a result of this, the founders gave the world a miraculous gift: a living, breathing example of government of the people, by the people and for the people, with freedom of speech (and therefore thought and expression) as the foundation. Robust, but serious and principled speech was the order of the day. Debate, rhetoric and oratory were all utilized to elevate the human condition.

                Over the years Harvard was attended by Rutherford B. Hayes, Theodore Roosevelt, FDR, and JFK. Later on came George W. Bush, Mitt Romney, Al Gore, Bill O’Reilly and Benjamin Netanyahu. More recently the hallowed grounds have been trod on by Bill Gates, Matt Damon, Ashley Judd, Natalie Portman, Mark Zuckerberg and Barack Hussein Obama. Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg and Benjamin Netanyahu didn’t graduate as all three left school early. (This didn’t seem to handicap them, as all three of them went on to be fabulously successful).

                Though he never attended the school, Benjamin Franklin received an honorary degree from Harvard in 1753.

                And now it’s come to this: According to a couple of “student debater/activists” participating in a recent debate with other students on the Harvard campus, white lives do not, in fact, matter. Moreover, the two students from the University of West Georgia actually suggested it would be best if white people killed themselves because of their “white privilege.”

                Well, that would certainly limit the debate. It was unclear if they meant all white people on earth, or just white Americans, perhaps leaving that to a future debate, should there be any white folks left to partake of one.

                The Founding Fathers possessed two characteristics that distinguished them from others of their time—and from most men (and women) of any time: wisdom and virtue.

            Colleges and Universities of today encourage neither. The high esteem in which wisdom and virtue were once held has now been lavished on victimhood and entitlement. This is profoundly unwise as neither are a virtue.

            That wishing an entire race would commit suicide could be seen as part of a legitimate “debate” illustrates the utter collapse of higher education.