Tag Archives: children

Our “Modern” Pagan World

If you could effectively make adoption safer and easier to effect than a chemical abortion or “emergency contraception,” you could reduce the overall demand for abortions. But it is very likely there would still be some abortions, and abortion would still have its apologists.

Because in many cases, the point of abortion isn’t just to end the inconvenience, embarrassment, or danger of a pregnancy; it’s not just to avoid the grave responsibilities of parenting a child. Instead, the purpose of the abortion is to completely extinguish the child’s moral claims on her parents.

The Claims of the Unborn

But I think we are seeing something much larger than pushback against male predation. What we are seeing in the broader culture now is something that has been evident on college campuses for some time: Women are unhappy about the state of sex and romance. They feel pressured, they feel disrespected, and they are fighting back. Sadly, our culture has so exalted sexual license that the only form of sexual conduct women are permitted to protest is coercion. It should not be surprising, then, that the terms “assault” and “rape” have been expanded beyond reasonable bounds.

. . .

Feminists hate to seem to pine for love and romance, yet their responses to Grace seem to hint at the disappointment the sexual revolution has delivered.

. . .

Or is it the sexual free-for-all they hate? Perhaps the new feminist slogan should be “Down with the sexual revolution!”

What Is the Real Message of #MeToo?

We’ve seen it happen: A new assault on the sanctity of human life appears—say, infanticide being promoted in a major bioethics journal, or officials in Iceland bragging that no children with Down syndrome are born there, thanks to prenatal genetic screening—and some horrified opponents respond in horror, “That’s what the Nazis did!” It’s an easy accusation to wield, but rarely a wise one. Often, these proposals and policies have little to do with the crimes of Hitler and his minions—and a great deal to do with the eugenicist movement that preceded them.

Take the euthanasia killings of people with disabilities in the Netherlands, Belgium, and Canada. Certain analogies to Nazi horrors spring to mind: German doctors killed disabled babies between 1939 and 1945—as is happening today in the Netherlands, despite being technically illegal. And German doctors terminated disabled adults in hospitals. In the latter example, however, there are some crucial differences. Unlike legal voluntary euthanasia of disabled people in Belgium, the Netherlands, and Canada, the disabled victims of the Nazis were part of mass killing experiments at the start of the Holocaust. And since people who are accused of Nazi thinking don’t appear threatening—they don’t wear “SS” insignia on tailored black leather coats or boast funny mustaches, and they haven’t swallowed the poisonous ideology of fascism—the Nazi epithet is more likely to undermine the accuser’s credibility than persuade his audience.

So, what are we supposed to do, Wesley? Ignore history? Not at all. In fact, I think a more apt thought connection to the culture-of-death practices and proposals of today can be made to the invidious beliefs that animated eugenics—a movement still disdained by most people. This analogy is less likely to be rejected out of hand.

The Deadly Legacy of Eugenics

China was supposed to have its Great Leap Forward from 1958 to 1962, under the leadership of Chairman Mao. That didn’t work out — Mao’s policies ended up killing about 50 million people instead. China later had its genuine Great Leap Forward after the market-oriented reforms implemented by Deng Xiaoping. “To get rich is glorious,” he declared. “It doesn’t matter if it is a white cat or a black cat, as long as it catches mice.” (He was a prolific aphorist.) Deng’s program was “socialism with Chinese characteristics,” which turned out not to be socialism at all. But beginning in the late 1970s, China experienced an economic boom for the ages, with economic growth averaging 9.5 percent from 1978 to 2013. In purely material terms, life got substantially better for the average Chinese and radically better for the upper middle class and elites.

China isn’t the only country that has had a period of growth like that. The old Soviet Union had one, too, beginning in the late 1920s and lasting about 15 years. Both the Soviet experience and the Chinese experience are examples of the fact that a sufficiently brutal police state can, if it implements the right policies, transform a backward agrarian economy into a modern industrial economy, generating tremendous economic growth — once. But brutal police states get it wrong as often as they get it right, hence the sorry state of Cuba, North Vietnam, Venezuela, etc.

The Great Leap Forward

What really happens when you couple [John] Dewey’s pragmatic and collectivist ideas with the value neutrality that grew out of Mann’s non-sectarianism? The product is a philosophy that sees the student as merely an animal who functions in a kind of stimulus/response/adaptation cycle. Education is tedious because its utilitarian nature subverts development of the ability to see the beauty that underlies much literature, history, and the natural sciences. At the same time, its collective nature devalues them as individuals. Their souls deadened, students see only an ugly world—one which they do not care to understand.

Progressive education has ultimately failed because its premises are anti-human. Mann’s and Dewey’s ideologies must bear much of the responsibility for the deplorable state of American public education.

How John Dewey Destroyed the Souls of Our Children

The sexual revolution has a well-known masculine bias. Though feminists have won real battles, the outcome of the war has never been in doubt. Unmooring sexuality from the home, from marriage, and from religion has benefited nobody more than lecherous, grasping men.

The two most consequential gains of the sexual revolution in my lifetime have been birth control and pornography, both of which have radically shaped the public square in the image of male desire. Both oral contraceptives and abortion have been cast as victories for female liberation, and to the degree that “liberation” means the weaponizing of our bodies against nature, this is true. But it is the men who have reaped the richest rewards (sex without children), without any of the tradeoff. Men, after all, need not concern themselves with the physiological effects of the pill, or with the surgeon’s knife, or with the risks of darkness and depression. It is the liberated women, not the men, who are asked to sacrifice their bodies for equality.

Likewise, pornography has been pitched as empowerment, the public affirmation of woman as a self-sufficient sexual being. If this is so, why are the kings of the mammoth porn industry so male? Why is Hugh Hefner lionized and eulogized as a social revolutionary, while the women in his sweatshops toil away, often at the cost of great social shaming and self-loathing? We haven’t even mentioned the porn industry’s influence on mainstream entertainment, expressed violently in the testimonies of women like Salma Hayek, coerced by Harvey Weinstein into filming a sexually explicit scene. And we could spend much time contemplating porn’s influence on the modern, Tinderized dating scene. Does the age of swipe-right sound like an egalitarian age to you? Or does it sound like a horny frat boy’s dreamland, a sex factory designed by a grown-up, amorous Augustus Gloop?

Purity and Prejudice

You mustn’t kill your children.

Smoke weed, snort cocaine, watch porn, but don’t kill a living human organism, for any reason, ever. Anyone who describes himself as a libertarian has been subjected to at least one game of “Would You Legalize . . . ?”

For me, the answer is mostly “Yes.”

Weed? Yes. Cocaine? Yes. Heroin? Yes. I’d legalize all the drugs. Not because I am indifferent to drug use — I have seen addiction up close and personal, closer and more personally than I ever wanted to, and I know what it does to people. I’m in favor of drug legalization for reasons deontological (I believe that people have the right to do what they will with their own bodies) and consequentialist (I believe heroin users would be better off if heroin were still made by Bayer, with modern pharmaceutical quality controls).

You mustn’t kill your children.

What about prostitution? Yes, I’d legalize that, too, mostly for the same reasons I’d legalize drugs. I don’t think prostitution is good for women or men, but I think the criminalization of prostitution makes it worse, creating more problems than it ameliorates. Again, one need not be indifferent to the issue to believe that the police power of the state is the wrong instrument to use in many cases. The state is big, stupid, and violent — violence is what government does — and adding violence to the equation is not very likely to make life better for people working as prostitutes. They endure too much violence as it is.

. . .

Some of my pro-abortion friends are very fond of the Monty Python school of reproductive theology. You know the song: “Every sperm is sacred / every sperm is great / when a sperm is wasted / God gets quite irate.” They ask: “How can you be against abortion while considering masturbation an act of mass murder? Huh? Huh?” (Abortion politics makes people stupid.) One hears a lot from them about “potential” lives.

But on the matter of abortion, we aren’t talking about “potential” anything. A sperm cell or an egg cell has your DNA. It’s part of your body. I may not think everything you do with your own body is good or wise (not every tattoo is advisable), but I’m not going to throw you in prison over it, either.

You mustn’t kill your children.

I have heard endless stupid metaphysical disputes about abortion, from legalistic disputes about “personhood” (a cowardly intellectual dodge if ever there were one) to medieval-style claims about what used to be called “ensoulment.” None of that is of any interest. What happens in abortion happens to a 1) living 2) human 3) organism. The tissue in question is living tissue, not dead tissue; it is human tissue, not rutabaga or aardvark tissue; it is arranged in an organism, not as a tumor or a fingernail clipping. It has its own DNA and it will continue on a life course — maybe majestic, maybe tragic — as it grows, because it is a living human individual at the earliest stages of its development. A “clump of cells”? Yes, which is what living human organism is at that stage in its life.

You mustn’t kill your children.

Not at any age. Not at any stage of development. Not for any reason. Debate, disagree, dissent, fight, cajole, persuade, argue all you want about war and peace, taxes, the welfare state, global warming, the Palestinian question, immigration, Donald Trump, animal rights, the Second Amendment, libel laws, school choice, the literary merits of Ayn Rand. I’ll have all those fights with you and more. Smoke all the weed you like and watch all the porn you want. Keep up with the Kardashians and live like them, too, if that seems best to you. I won’t pretend it’s a good idea, but it’s a free country.

You mustn’t kill your children.

Marching for Life

Leaving Money for Children and Grandchildren

The Irrevocable Life Insurance Trust

How and Why to Set Up a Life Insurance Trust for Your Children

From the comments 4 simple and effective ways to help a young person get a jump on retirement:
“a Family Life Insurance Trust, and, Buy an Appropriate Amount of Death Benefit on Yourself, with the Family as Beneficiaries of the Trust; $1 million minimum; $4 million is customary for parents earning six figures; you put enough cash, monthly, into the trust to pay the premiums on the policies; the death benefits do not affect your estate; and, insurance proceeds go into the trust, to pay for your daughter’s retirement or your grand-children’s college or whatever the Trustees think should be paid, using HEMS (Health-Education-Maintenance-Support) criteria”

Eventually, all of us will be disowned by our grandchildren.

Australian Prime Minister John Howard once said that “a conservative is someone who doesn’t think he is morally superior to his grandfather.” But progressives hold the opinion that they are morally superior to their grandparents, while believing that their own grandchildren will somehow not feel the same way about them. That lack of humility makes it easier for them to be certain; it also makes them certain to be wrong.

If We Topple Every Statue Of An Imperfect Person They Must All Come Down

Marriage Matters

Though young people take a variety of paths into adulthood—arranging school, work, and family in a dizzying array of combinations—one path stood out as most likely to be linked to financial success for young adults. Brookings scholars Ron Haskins and Isabel Sawhill have identified the “success sequence,” through which young adults who follow three steps—getting at least a high school degree, then working full-time, and then marrying before having any children, in that order—are very unlikely to become poor. In fact, 97 percent of millennials who have followed the success sequence are not in poverty by the time they reach the ages of 28 to 34.

Sequence-following millennials are also markedly more likely to flourish financially than their peers taking different paths; 89 percent of 28-to-34 year olds who have followed the sequence stand at the middle or upper end of the income distribution, compared with just 59 percent of Millennials who missed one or two steps in the sequence. The formula even works for young adults who have faced heavier odds, such as millennials who grew up poor, or black millennials; despite questions regarding socioeconomic privilege, our research suggests that the success sequence is associated with better outcomes for everyone. For instance, only 9 percent of black millennials who have followed the three steps of the sequence, or who are on track with the sequence (which means they have at least a high school degree and worked full-time in their twenties, but have not yet married or had children) are poor, compared with a 37 percent rate of poverty for blacks who have skipped one or two steps. Likewise, only 9 percent of young men and women from lower-income families who follow the sequence are poor in their late twenties and early thirties; by comparison, 31 percent of their peers from low-income families who missed one or two steps are now poor.

Even more significantly, it appears that marriage in itself reduces millennials’ chances of being poor. Why? Young men and (especially) women who put “marriage before the baby carriage” get access to the financial benefits of a partnership—income pooling, economies of scale, support from kinship networks—with fewer of the risks of an unmarried partnership, including breakups. By contrast, millennials who have a baby outside of marriage—even in a cohabiting union—are likelier to end up as single parents or paying child support, both of which increase the odds of poverty. One study found that cohabiting parents were three times more likely to break up than were married parents by the time their first child turned five: 39 percent of cohabiting parents broke up, versus 13 percent of married parents in the first five years of their child’s life. The stability associated with marriage, then, tends to give millennials and their children much more financial security.

. . .

If young adults make bad choices about education, work, and family, all the jobs and policies in the world will not give them an equal shot at realizing the American Dream as their peers who follow the sequence to success.

Marriage Matters

My Daughter Had an Abortion, What Do I Do?

[F]rom my perspective as a parent: if in the future my son and his girlfriend were in this situation, I would hope and pray he would come to me for help and advice. If he didn’t and decided to let his child be aborted and I learned of it after-the-fact, I would be devastated as well.

I would wonder what I could have done, as a parent, to prevent this or to teach him better. I would consume a large amount of guilt and blame, that my child didn’t feel he could come to me with his troubles. I would also grieve the loss of my first grandchild. And yes, my immediate reaction would be to confront him.

But would I suggest the same to you?

In the end I think that keeping abortion private and hidden is wrong. It’s precisely that secretive attitude that fuels the “my body, my choice” mentality. It denies the plain fact that abortion affects more than just the pregnant mother — abortion affects grandparents, fathers, siblings, any future children, and of course the personhood of the unborn child. Deciding to take a life is not a private decision and should not be treated as such. In my opinion, staying silent to avoid conflict is the same as approval.

My abortions directly affected how I parent and what I teach my son about sexuality. My abortions also directly affected my parents when I robbed them of grandchildren, but more importantly, I battled serious depression and self-destructive behavior for many years after abortion.

For that reason alone you need to let your daughter know that you and your wife are there for her. She may need emotional and mental support, and if she continues to hide her abortion she may not seek the help she needs.

. . .

Rachel’s Vineyard is the absolute best organization equipped at helping women and family members cope with the loss and grief of abortion. Look into it for yourself and your daughter. Abortion is a deep scar that fundamentally wounds women. Your daughter needs to know that she is unconditionally loved.

I found a receipt for an abortion in my daughter’s trash. What should I do?

Rachel’s Vineyard

Children of Divorce

Two new books written by Catholic authors—”Primal Loss: The Now-Adult Children of Divorce Speak” by Leila Miller, and “Marriage and Equality: How Natural Marriage Upholds the Ideal of Equality for Children” by Jennifer Johnson—explore the inner turmoil of children of divorce, the lifetime consequences of divorce, and the unique pastoral challenges divorce presents for children, whether young or adult.

. . .

CWR: What surprised you most about the book contributors’ answers? Are there any unintended threads running through the book?

Leila Miller: What surprised me most was the raw pain, even and especially after so many years, and the fear of their true feelings being discovered. It was shocking to me! The pattern of the children protecting the feelings of the adults, sticking to the narrative they’d been given, and then acting out (or inward) in destructive ways as a way of coping with the explosion of their families—it was repeated again and again in their stories. Several of the contributors, upon reading the finished book, expressed shock that they were not the only ones who experienced the same feelings and patterns of behavior. In fact, some of them were surprised to see that certain entries were not their own! That is how similar many of their interior stories are.

Another surprising thing was that the devastation did not depend on the age of the child at the time of the divorce. Whether contributors’ parents had split when they were infants, small children, teens, or adults (even in their 30s!), the devastation, confusion, and sense of upheaval was profound. Also, whether the parents’ marriage had been abusive or low-conflict had no real bearing on their pain. We are told that “good divorce” is not damaging to children, and yet my contributors say otherwise.

The victims of divorce speak

Primal Loss: The Now-Adult Children of Divorce Speak,” by Leila Miller

Sordid Links

[R]esources within states are increasingly being directed to cities and state services are being centralized in them. This was certainly my experience growing up in Rutland, Vt., where it seemed like all the state’s money was spent on the Interstate 89 corridor between Burlington and Montpelier—to say nothing of now living in Boston, with the same spending complaints from rural Massachusetts. (Of course, I now appreciate that it may be a better use of state resources to spent $20 million rehabilitating a bridge between Boston and Cambridge that sees millions of trips a year as opposed to a bridge in Zoar, Mass., that sees a few hundred trips a year.)

Much worse for these places is the ongoing economic centralization of this country. Local businesses are absorbed by regional ones, which get bought by national ones, which get taken over by global ones. While supposedly delivering benefits from economic efficiency, this process limits innovation and competition while depriving communities of the benefits of ownership and exacerbating regional inequality.

Yet a glance at the writing on the rural-urban divide suggests that most of the people thinking about these things haven’t read their Santayana or even looked out the window recently. In Commonwealth magazine, Larry DiCara and Matt Waskiewicz suggested buying more food from Massachusetts’ farms, sending more urbanites to western Massachusetts as tourists, and establishing regular rail service between Boston and Springfield so people from the former can go live in the latter but continue to commute.

There’s nothing particularly bad about any of these ideas in and of themselves, but they have a glaring flaw as a solution to rural economic woes: They wouldn’t work. Vermont, upstate New York, northern New Hampshire, and Maine have been promoting themselves as tourism, agriculture, and bedroom communities for decades, to no avail (except coastal southern Maine, which is close enough to Boston to serve as a suburban bedroom community). The fact is, increases in agricultural productivity would mean that more purchases from in-state farms wouldn’t necessarily result in more jobs. Tourism-related jobs are seasonal, low paying and dead end.

Killing the City Won’t Save the Small Town

Cities are population sinks. Historian William McNeil explains the basics. Urbanization, from its origins, has tended relentlessly to convert children from productive assets into objects of luxury consumption. All of the archaic economic incentives related to fertility are inverted.

Modernity’s Fertility Problem

1. Ask yourself, how often do you use/enjoy your stuff. A good rule of thumb is that if it hasn’t been used in 6 months to a year – get rid of it. This includes items such as clothing, kitchenware, clothes, toys, etc. Of course, there will be some exceptions such as holidays decorations, etc., but those items can add up as well.

How to De-clutter Physically and Financially

Lee Smith was one of the first homeless people to pitch a tent near 26th and Wood streets in West Oakland. Now, four years later, he has 100 neighbors, including two pregnant women.

The place looks like a Third World shantytown, a village for the city’s poorest on the fringes of its bustling center. It’s one of about 100 such sprawling encampments in Oakland, and they’re not going away anytime soon.

They’re likely to get even bigger.

Homeless camps becoming entrenched in Oakland

Heterodox Academy (HxA) has just released a major update to its Guide to Colleges–the only resource available for college-bound high school students who seek exposure to a diversity of viewpoints and a culture of free and open discussion.
. . .
In our revised and improved Guide to Colleges, the top universities are: The University of Chicago, The College of William and Mary, the University of Tennessee at Knoxville and George Mason University.

Heterodox Academy Releases Updated Guide to Colleges

1. Recruit all the time. Always be in interview mode. Talk to prospective candidates even if you don’t have a place for them.

A manager’s 8 secrets to better hiring

What is American society getting from the roughly 3 percent of GDP that we spend making sure that alimony and child support cashflows are established and maintained? Professor Adamsons says that research psychologists can’t find any effect on American children’s well-being whether or not child support was being paid from one parent to the other.

Child support payments don’t contribute to children’s well-being; fatherless children tend to be obese

Parenting

The greatest threat to children today? Their parents. An exaggeration? Let’s see. Parents are the premier guardians of their children, and the gateway to their souls and bodies. Do our children appear spiritually, morally and physically healthy, well on their way to fruitful and God-pleasing maturity?

Following a terrorist attack at a recent pop music concert in England, I did a bit of research on the music parents buy for their young children and the concerts to which they take their children. I found lyrics that are so obscene that I dare not quote them here. I found videos of onstage “dancing” at these concerts that can only be described as simulations of sex acts. This is what parents are permitting, paying for and even sharing with their children.

The senses are the gateway to the soul. What passes through the five senses enters the memory and imagination, affecting the intellect, the will and the heart. What the children understand to be true, good and beautiful is profoundly shaped by their early sensory experiences, especially those endorsed by the authority of their parents. What happens to children who are taught by their parents to sing of group sex while watching live “soft pornography” onstage at a concert?

. . .

There is a battle on for the souls of our children. It seems to me now that the world, the flesh and the devil are winning. It is time for all of us, parents, families, friends, schools and parishes, to fight back.

Parenting in the pop culture: Prepping our children for Heaven or Hell?

Children and Technology

If electronic devices are addictive for adults, what must be happening to our children?

. . .

If your small children use these devices, you may well have noticed how they demand to use the phone at all hours of the day, they get angry if you don’t give it to them, or they lose control when we ask them to give it back.

Now, maybe your child is looking at things on the phone and playing with it 5 to 15 minutes per day and does not get angry if you ask for the phone back, or doesn’t demand to use it at various moments and in various contexts throughout the day. If that’s the case, then maybe this post isn’t necessary for you, because it seems that both you and your child manage it well. But if at some point you’ve asked yourself how you can help your child “disconnect” from these devices, I have some steps that can help you.

Your first reaction might be to think that the easiest solution is to cut things short, take the smartphone away from your children, and forbid them to ever use it again. For practical purposes, this can be effective, but really, children aren’t going to understand the suddenness of this decision (“Why could I play with Mom’s phone all I wanted yesterday, and today it’s bad?”), and they could experience withdrawal symptoms that could be difficult to bear (both for the children and for the rest of the family).

The truth is, there’s no way to explain to young children who are practically addicted to a device the need to cut off or limit its use in such a way that they will accept it willingly without throwing a temper tantrum or getting angry. So the main goal is just to make the situation a bit easier.

10 Easy ways to wean a small child off a smartphone or tablet

Culture of Death in Europe

Islam is a religion, not a race, and, what is more, it is thoroughly multiracial, with all races represented in its ranks. To oppose ISIS and seek appropriate measures to prevent the spread of its influence and power is no more racist or ‘Islamophobic’ than opposition to the terrorism of the IRA in the 1970s was racist or ‘celtophobic.’ Opposition to barbarism and the terrorism it practices is a mark of civilization, not racism.

. . .

Europeans have embraced the culture of death, contracepting themselves out of existence. Europe is not suffering from a population explosion but a population implosion. With a shrinking and aging population, unwilling to reproduce itself, immigration becomes a necessity. One cannot have a sustainable economy, still less a continually expanding economy, if the number of producers and consumers is shrinking. A culture which seeks self-gratification instead of the self-sacrifice needed to raise children is doomed to self-destruction. It has no future. It has no future for the plain and simple reason that it has no children. In this sense, it can truly be said that the future belongs to those who forsake selfishness for the selflessness of parenthood. The meek really do inherit the earth!

. . .

As one who subscribes to–nay, as one who submits to—the Permanent Things, I would say that the “West” is not synonymous with the Permanent Things, nor do the Permanent Things depend on the survival of the “West” for their permanence. On the contrary, the “West” is dying because it has turned its back on the Permanent Things.

The Permanent Things are grounded in a reverence for God and for the Church that He established, and also in a reverence for the traditional family which is the bedrock of all healthy culture and the seed with which it plants itself into the future. When the love for God is gone and the family has been abandoned, there is no future. The secular fundamentalist “West” is decaying because it is decadent, and it is dying because it has embraced the culture of death.

What will be left when the secularist “West” is dead will be the Permanent Things. Christianity is alive and well, and thriving and growing, in Africa, Asia, China–and yes, even in resurrected embryonic form in Europe and other parts of the “West.” Europe and the “West” might be committing collective suicide, but Christendom is always new, as it is always old, because it is the Permanent Thing.

Is the West Lost Forever?

Regretful Parents

The push to normalize regretful parents, even to the point of wishing away existing children, reveals the way in which our society has chosen to overlook the intrinsic value of every human life. This mentality is carried to its logical extension by the pro-abortion-rights movement, which views life as dispensable and children as commodities, and which shows a breakdown in social norms….

‘Regretful Mothers’ Misunderstand Both Motherhood and Love

Lost Children: Abortion and Miscarriage

Having lost three children to miscarriage, one of my biggest fears is that my children will be forgotten. I am not looking for me or my miscarriages to be remembered—I am looking for my children to be remembered.

In many ways, this is really an impossible request. No one has ever met my children, and other than an indecipherable eight-week ultrasound of our first, I don’t even have pictures to share. But their souls graced this earth, if only for a short time, and as their mother I yearn for others to carry my children in their hearts.

I do know other people miss our children. My husband and I are not the only ones with empty arms. Their grandparents, aunts, and uncles are missing baby snuggles; their cousins are missing playmates; and their church is missing baptisms. But as their mother I carry the weight of their memory every day, and ultimately, I fear they will be forgotten.

I am blessed beyond measure when my children are remembered. Following my third miscarriage, we were blessed by an outpouring of love and support from friends and family. One day I answered the door to find a good friend holding five flowers. As she handed them to me, she simply said, “A flower for each member of your family.” As heartbroken as I was following the loss, my heart was full. My children had been remembered.

. . .

We need awareness so you can join us in remembering our babies.

Please Help Me Remember The Children I Have Lost To Miscarriage

When I had my first miscarriage, I was shocked. It hadn’t occurred to me that my healthy body could fail me in this way. Compounding this was the fact that I knew very few women who had miscarried. I felt like an anomaly, like the sad end of a statistic. When I miscarried a second time, the shock was less, but the assault on my sense of womanhood was greater. Why couldn’t I carry a baby to full term? What was wrong with me?

During this period of self-doubt, women came forward and I got the quick and necessary education women in my club get. Before my miscarriages, no one told me miscarriage was par for the course when bringing children into the world. Now I know that 10 to 25 percent of pregnancies end in miscarriage, some women miscarry without even realizing it, and miscarriages usually happen because of a chromosomal abnormality. Armed with an awareness of how common miscarriage is, I stopped feeling like an anomalous outlier. But without this, I was left with just enough ignorance to feel insecure and like a failure.

What happens when we don’t talk about miscarriage

And if you have had an abortion, also name those aborted children. And ask your lost children to pray for us.

Culture of Death Continued….

I hear people talk sometimes about what a blessing being a foster parent is. I know many devoted advocates who encourage their friends and their relatives to sign up to become foster parents because it’s so needed and it’s such a wonderful ministry.

I don’t want to damage their work, but I need to be honest. I can’t tell people, “You should foster!” and I will never (again) try to persuade someone to foster who doesn’t feel led to do so.

Sometimes I think we foster parents are too self-righteous in our role, and become almost arrogant in our calling to foster and assume that God has already called everyone to foster, but everyone else is disobedient. I’ve been guilty of that attitude before. I am so sorry for that.

. . .

People talk about the blessings that come with fostering. Yes, we have been blessed. We have been blessed to survive for this long. I know there are blessings that I can’t see, and there will be good that comes from this that I never know.

But, right now, from my vantage point, all I see is crazy brokenness. I see families getting ripped apart and tremendous pain for everyone. I see ordinary people like myself trying to help kids from such difficult backgrounds, but being totally unequipped to do so and being provided with almost no support. I see the brokenness I have exposed my children to and the heartache we all feel from every side of this. At this moment I see the pain, the hurt, the loss.

So, why do I do it? I do it because God asked me to. I do it because in his word he told me there would be a cost to following him. I do it because God is greater than the broken foster care system and God commands the seas in ways I can’t possibly imagine. I do it because I trust in God with all my heart, and although my understanding in this moment is that this path is not worth it for anyone, God tells me not to lean on my understanding, but to trust him. I do it because someone has to, and he has asked me to, and I surrendered my heart to Jesus and his will, not my will.

But I can’t tell my friends to foster. I can’t advocate for fostering like some awesome people I know do. All I can say is if you are considering fostering, “Ask God.” If he tells you to do it, then do it, because if it is his plan, then it is worth it. I know some families are hearing the call now and will embark on their personal journey. But, I’m not going to dress it up and make it sound pretty. It’s ugly. It’s really ugly.

If You Want To Be A Foster Parent, You Need To Know The Truth

Homeschooling

Homeschooling has grown 62 percent in the past decade, and in the era of Common Core and transgender bathroom dictates, that growth has only accelerated. This past school year, homeschooling grew in Florida at its biggest rate in a decade: “We see all the emails from parents: ‘I just don’t want my kids exposed to Common Core,'” Karen Harmon, chairwoman of a Florida homeschool support group, told The Florida Times-Union. “Their thought process is that it’s dumbing down the school systems and making all students average, but a lot of parents want their child to excel.”

That trend is playing out across the country. Local newspapers and homeschool leaders from West Virginia to Alabama and North Carolina to Texas report a surge in homeschooling interest and enrollment in just the past year or two.

. . .

At a recent forum at The Heritage Foundation to promote her new book, “They’re Your Kids,” homeschooler, radio host, and actress Sam Sorbo said, “Education is the beginning and end of everything.” She said the United States spends $600 billion on public K-12 education each year and the system has experienced nine major reforms in 27 years, yet still our student achievement has stagnated, at best. Many fed-up parents who desire academic challenges for their children are choosing homeschooling.

Pressed By Common Core And LGBT Agenda, More Families Homeschool