The Dirty Little Secret In The Socialized Medicine Bill (HR3200)

Chuck Norris has a little gem in Town Hall today. He found a little secret embedded in the socialized medicine bill (HR3200).

Check it out:

It’s outlined in sections 440 and 1904 of the House bill (Page 838), under the heading “home visitation programs for families with young children and families expecting children.” The programs (provided via grants to states) would educate parents on child behavior and parenting skills. The bill says that the government agents, “well-trained and competent staff,” would “provide parents with knowledge of age-appropriate child development in cognitive, language, social, emotional, and motor domains … modeling, consulting, and coaching on parenting practices,” and “skills to interact with their child to enhance age-appropriate development.”

Now, the first question that comes to my mind is: “Why would a health care reform bill have a provision like this?”

Read on:

Are we to assume the state’s mediators would understand every parent’s social or religious core values on parenting? Or would they teach some secular-progressive and religiously neutered version of parental values and wisdom? And if they were to consult and coach those who expect babies, would they ever decide circumstances to be not beneficial for the children and encourage abortions?

It is to impose values on parents and their children. In short, it is a government take-over of the nursery.

Since there are those hard-core leftists out there who will try to claim that this program is voluntary, read this:

To the contrary, the bill points to specific targeted groups and problems, on Page 840: The state “shall identify and prioritize serving communities that are in high need of such services, especially communities with a high proportion of low-income families.”

In essence, the authors of this socialized medicine bill are stating that low-income parents are most likely not good parents and thus will have the intervention of government in their homes, whether they want it or not.

You can access the complete article on-line here:

Dirty Secret No. 1 In Obamacare
Chuck Norris
TownHall.com
August 11, 2009

Chuck Norris: Barack Obama And The “J” Word

When I was growing up in the 1970′s and going to elementary school in Prince George’s County, Maryland, I very much enjoyed studying the history of the American Revolution. It was always a very big deal for us and we used to have “festivals” celebrating the founding of the United States and celebrating the ideas that the Founders wrote about.

That doesn’t seem to happen much anymore. Somewhere along the line, our educational system began to “forget” about where we came from. And, if you don’t know where you came from, you cannot get to where you’re going.

How many of us still believe as the Founders did? I mean, really believe. How many of us even know what the Founders believed?

That number is getting smaller and smaller even thought our population is getting bigger and bigger.

John Adams once said, “Our constitution is only fit for a moral and religious people. It is wholly unsuited to the governance of any other kind.”

Perhaps that quote merely sounded like Christian bravado over the years, but today, we may be witnessing the true meaning of those words.

The Constitution was originally written so that people of all faiths could come to the New World and worship according their own conscious. But the deeper meaning is that they were free from having any particular religion forced upon them by the state. John Adams envisioned such a nation growing in North America.

What neither he nor any other Founder envisioned was that atheistic movements would spring up and threaten to drown out the faithful from the public scene. The reason that Adams said that our Constitution was “wholly unsuited to the governance of any other kind” was because the Constitution contained no controls over those who would reject morality and decency in favor of hedonism and self-indulgence.

For example, the Consitution contains no reference to the crime of murder. Why? Because the Founders knew that the good and moral people of the several states would enforce a “murder is a crime” civic code. That one is simple to explain.

But, the Constitution also contains language that guarantees certain liberties like free speech. Does that mean that you are free to go over to your neighbor’s house and begin yelling obscenities at your neighbor’s children because they are praying where you can see them? Again, the Founders would never have considered this to be a problem and were certain that local communities were filled with people who would find such a prospect horrifying. But, now you can see the grey area where, over the past hundred years or so, the non-faithful have been working in and exploiting legal loopholes.

This is, I believe, precisely why John Adams said what he said. It wasn’t meant as a compliment to the faithful, it was meant as a warning of what could happen if the faithful ever lost their public voice.

Chuck Norris, writing for Town Hall notes a few things:

Under Article VI, Section 3 of the new Constitution, denominational tests for public office were prohibited, but the idea that Judeo-Christian ideas and practices must be kept separate from government would have struck our Founders as ridiculous because the very basis for the Founders’ ideas were rights that were endowed upon all of us by our Creator.

It was everywhere in public life back in the late 1700′s. Even Benjamin Rush advocated diversity long before it became a left-wing political buzzword:

“Such is my veneration for every religion that reveals the attributes of the Deity, or a future state of rewards and punishments, that I had rather see the opinions of Confucius or Mohammed inculcated upon our youth, than see them grow up wholly devoid of a system of religious principles. But the religion I mean to recommend in this place is that of the New Testament.”

Well, maybe not so much Mohammed, but clearly, Rush saw the dangers of allowing atheism to overshadow faith.

More:

[S]igners of the Constitution included Abraham Baldwin, a minister. Others had studied religion but never were ordained. And again, most signers of the Constitution were also Protestants. Two, Charles Carroll and Thomas Fitzsimons, were Roman Catholics. … Like George Washington, I don’t believe we can maintain morality and civility apart from a religious foundation: “Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. … Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.”

One of the problems we are facing here in modern times is that groups like the ACLU have twisted the First Amendment around so that “Freedom of religion” now means to them “Freedom from religion.” They like to point to the part of the First Amendment that says: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,” but seem to conveniently forget the rest of that line which statess, “or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” The Founders envisioned people having the right to worship in public, something that atheists claim is “offensive.” In other words, the ACLU and their anti-religious allies are seeking to force us all to act like atheists.

So, why hasn’t our new president shown any regard for any religion except Islam? Chuck Norris isn’t afraid to ask the following question:

Is Obama afraid of the word “Jesus”?

The Founders weren’t. And we shouldn’t be either. Feel free to express your religious convictions anywhere you please. If the ACLU tries to stop you, remind them of the part of the First Amendment that states “or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.“

You can access the complete column on-line here:

Is Obama Afraid Of The J-Word?
Chuck Norris
TownHall.com
April 7, 2009

The Hypocritcal Violence Of Homosexuals And Lesbians

I’ve posted on this matter before, but the Gay and Lesbian Movement is getting even more violent. So much so, that no one can ignore it any longer.

Both Chuck Norris and Doug Giles have written essays on this topic and I’d like to excerpt both of them for your perusal.

First from Doug Giles at Town Hall:

Can you imagine what would happen if a gang of angry male Christian activists started shouting down and shoving around some nice old lesbian during a religious rally right after ripping her rainbow pride flag from her hands and waffle stomping it? How much television coverage do you think that spat of stupidity would spawn? What kind of outrage do you think the gays would gin up over such an inexcusable and pathetic act? I’ll tell you what would happen: We would see an irate Elton John hold a special Candle in the Wind concert on the old lesbian’s behalf, Lance Bass would host a telethon, Ellen would weep, Brad and Angelina would adopt another baby and Rosie would shave the right side of her head again and again until justice was served and those chunks of corn were convicted and sent to prison.

But, we aren’t seeing that happen to the leaders of the violent mob that actually attacked Phyllis Burgess, an elderly Christain woman, in Palm Springs.

And this:

Say some dyed-in-the-wool, belligerent backwoods snake handlers sporting crosses, vicious anti-gay fliers and blarin’ Dueling Banjos on a boom box infiltrated a gay soiree, disrupted the event, disbursed their literature into the crowd, performed some hetero sex acts and then threatened those in attendance? Do you think the gay bloggers would blog it and the MSM report on it and both sectors call for the rednecks’ necks?

But we are not seeing any action being taken against the violent mob of gays and lesbians that committed just such an attack on a Christian Church in Lansing, Michigan.

Where are the people on the left who are constantly preaching “tolerance” for those who have differing viewpoints? Why are these leftists not coming out and denouncing the storm-trooper tactics of their political brothers and sisters?

Because the left is intolerant and has no business whatsoever lecturing anyone else on what tolerance means.

Chuck Norris writes the following:

What’s surprising (or maybe not so) is that, even though 70 percent of African-Americans voted in favor of Proposition 8, protests against black churches are virtually nonexistent. And everyone knows exactly why: Because such actions would be viewed as racist. Yet these opponents of Prop 8 can vehemently protest and shout obscenities in front of Mormon temples, without ever being accused of religious bigotry? There’s a clear double standard in our society. Where are the hate-crime cops when religious conservatives need them? Of course, activists say they are merely utilizing their political freedoms and rights, but, the fact is, I see a lot of sore losers who are intolerant of any outcome but the one they desire. Some are acting like toddlers who throw a temper tantrum until they get their way. Are they fighting for their rights or at last showing true colors of intolerance against anyone who believes contrary to them?

But here is what is really going through the minds of all those “peaceful” demonstators:

The enraged vehemence and actions being displayed by many Prop 8 opponents are the same underhand tactics bullies use in neighborhoods and school playgrounds. They reflect the ways that mobs conducted themselves in the underworld. They are methods gangs use to control their turf. They are the wiles that the KGB used to suppress their enemies. But this is the United States of America, where voting is supposed to be free from restrictions or repercussions. Revenge or retribution is not the American way. Is militant antagonism and vengeful aggression really the best Americans can offer to other Americans who oppose them?

For those who believe in the hypocritical leanings of the left, militant violence is the only way they know since they seem to have completely rejected civilized discourse.

You can access both columns on-line here:

If Democracy Doesn’t Work, Try Anarchy
Chuck Norris
World Net Daily
November 17, 2008

Radical Homosexuals Trample A Cross, Harass A Granny, Crash A Church, And Threaten Joe The Plumber’s Life
Doug Giles
TownHall.com
November 15, 2008