DISNEY: A SPECIMEN OF 'WOKE' SUBSERVIENCE

      So, it appears that the idiots running the Disney Corporation---people who believe that homosexual love-scenes are suitable viewing for children---have decided to ban several classic features on the pretext that they are somehow 'offensive.' Children under 7 years cannot access these programs on Disney Plus without parental consent: though the rest of the filth that Disney produces is fair game for the young ones. A warning comes up before the film stating that: "This program includes negative depictions and/or mistreatment of people or cultures. These stereotypes were wrong then and are wrong now. Rather than remove this content, we want to acknowledge its harmful impact, learn from it and spark conversation to create a more inclusive future together. Disney is committed to creating stories with inspirational and aspirational themes that reflect the rich diversity of the human experience around the globe."

    Once again, the hubris and arrogance of these Corporate Elites is displayed moreso than anything else. It's not enough for these jerks to produce and distribute children's material; they take it upon themselves to lecture us little people on its suitability for viewing. Maybe if Disney spent more time producing quality films, they wouldn't have to worry about our choices in viewing so much. The executives behind the Disney decision illustrates the sort of degenerates with which we're dealing. A high percentage of their Board are there for the purposes of 'enforcing diversity' and other such nonsense. Quite a few of them, too are focused upon investor relations, which is also noteworthy. 

   Like most of the rest of Big Media, Disney's wires are pulled by bigger interests. Behind their smug posturing, most media executives are---like our current political leadership---merely the slavish pawns and toadies of vested interests more powerful than themselves. The top 10 investors (i.e. owners) of Disney are: 

    Surprise, surprise! Vanguard, Blackrock, and State Street: the 'Big Three' index funds---and all cheerful supporters of the Great Reset---have about 1/5 of Disney's pie. Actually, if we go further down the list, George Soros' name turns up too.

   We've run into the scum at Vanguard before here; as well as the loathsome Great Reset crackpot Larry Fink of Blackrock. Fink, we might recall, openly bragged about the financial pressure that Blackrock laid upon companies to obey his Great Reset schemes. He's certainly not alone among this gang. Michael Tipsord of State Farm, for example, also serves on the Board of the Deep State Brookings Institution. Brookings' major funders, incidentally, are Bill Gates, George Soros, the never-Trump RINO Koch Brothers, PepsiCo, Ebay, and the Qatari Royal Family. Tipsord was an attendee at the Davos WEF Forum in 2020 which launched the Great Reset. In an interview with WGLT public radio, Tipsord said:

   "Particularly useful was the theme of the last World Economic Forum in Davos Swizerland; 'the fourth industrial revolution.' It's being sparked by the convergence of multiple technologies such as global hyper connectivity, three-d printing, machine learning AI, medical and wearable tech, the internet of things, and advanced sensor tech. And one of the things I took away from this one in particular was the cognitive computing capabilities that are coming and the displacement of work in a different way than what it has been in the past...the next set of macro trends: urbanization, the shared and sharing economy, changing demographics and notions of family, and renting versus owning, all complicate analysis."

    What would anyone suppose that Disney would produce under this kind of influence? Honorable leaders? Disney openly admits that it's fully behind the WEF's 2030 Agenda. In fact, Abigail Disney---heir to the Walt Disney fortune---is a WEF member, and the former head of Euro Disney was a WEF CEO. 

    As loyal stooges of the Global Elite, Disney also extends its masters' ideology into the political realm. According to OpenSecrets, Disney spends around $4.6 million on 32 Beltway lobbyists, 29 of whom are revolving-door former Federal bureaucrats. Incidentally, eight of our so-called 'Representatives' have over $100,000 in Disney stocks themselves. Notice who is far and away at the top of the list:

   Also, too, it's noteworthy that three of those eight folks are Republicans who don't let their Conservative values get in the way of their financial investments. I strongly suspect that Disney Plus' 100-million member subscription base and that their current $195/share stock-market price isn't all the handiwork of Liberal Democrats either. So I think it best that we take any more Conservative outrage over Disney's corrosive social policies with a large grain of salt. 

   Meanwhile, Disney will go on: shoving its 'woke agenda' on the children and acting as a propaganda arm for the WEF. And, as usual, Conservatives will stand idly by and let it all happen. 

   

CHURCHIANS FOR BIDEN GET HUMILIATED

      Blogger Pacific Pundit had a brief article up today  about a petition being circulated by a group of Churchians to the Junta protesting inclusion of abortion funding in the so-called Covid-19 Relief Bill. While I agree with taking that provision of the Bill (along with other handouts for the Elites), I had to do a double-take reading the premises behind the petition. It reads:

    "As pro-life leaders in the evangelical community, we publicly supported President Biden's candidacy with the understanding that there would be engagement us on the issue of abortion and particularly the Hyde Amendment. The Biden team wanted to talk to us during the campaign to gain our support, and we gave it on the condition there would be active dialogue and common ground solutions on the issue of abortion. There has been no dialogue since the campaign.We feel used and betrayed and have no intention of simply watching these kinds of efforts happen from the sidelines. Many evangelicals and Catholics took risks to support Biden publicly. President Biden and Democrats need to honor their courage."

   I thought at first that this had to be fake news, but no; it's for real. Granted, the Republican Party has a pathetic record of selling out to the Abortion Industry too; but when did the Democrats ever take a pro-life stand? There used to be some pro-life Democrats---I don't know if there are any left---but seriously: "As Evangelicals, we publicly supported Biden's candidacy?" These were people who were in the streets breaking down statues of Jesus and burning churches; and these yahoos actually thought that the Junta would work with Christians?

   

    This group calls itself Pro-Life Evangelicals for Biden and was launched in September, 2020. "Thousands of leading Pro-Life Evangelicals—including the former chair of Christianity Today, Billy Graham’s granddaughter, numerous evangelical college presidents, and mega church pastors—released a statement in September announcing the launch of Pro-Life Evangelicals for Biden," says the group's website. "These pastors cited four key principles for pro-life voters to prayerfully consider:

1. 1.Biden will do more to actually reduce abortions than Trump,

2. 2.Overturning Roe will have little impact on abortions,

3. 3.Pro-life Christians must consider their responsibility to protect life after birth as well before, and

4. 4.Trump poses a deep threat to the Christian witness."

Orange Man Bad, they may as well have said. Points 2 and 4 are false; Point 3 is true, but not relevant to the issue; and point 1 is sophistry.

On their website, they make the rather dubious claim that the number of abortions have declined under Democrats while increasing under Republicans. They attribute this to the Democrats' poverty programs, which they assume encourages poor families to have children. This is the premise behind their first point.

I would suggest that (assuming their claims are actually true) since most women who get abortions are politically Liberal, the numbers go up under Republican Administrations because they feel less hopeful about the future. All that we need recall is the hysterical behavior of Liberal women during the Trump Administration and ask if that isn't a real possibility. I would wager that the number of prescription antidepressants went up among them too.

But the whole idea of reducing abortions is stupid. It's the same logic behind these Churchian adoption agencies who recently sold out to the Gay Mafia. Pro-Life and Anti-Life do not peacefully coexist. Either one supports outlawing the murder of children, or one doesn't. One either opposes homo adoption or one doesn't. Having hundreds of children murdered in the womb each year wouldn't make us a better country than murdering thousands, as we do now. The political leadership is no less guilty for funding one baby-killing than it is for funding a million of them. The attitudes that these Evangelicals take is being an NPC at its worst.

It's sad to think that Evangelicals once were moved by stories of child-sacrifice to go as missionaries to countries populated by savages with hopes of ending these hideous practices. Now they've evolved to kneeling in front of street-savages and supporting human sacrifice.

Their second point about overturning Roe vs. Wade is just a falsehood. True: Conservatives haven't done much to stop abortion and instead shove the responsibility onto the Court. Even Republican majorities on the U.S. Supreme Court have never bothered to revisit Roe. The Corporate interests who currently actually govern the United States have encouraged abortion through the Insurance Cartels, while even the U.N. and AMA admit that infertility has become an epidemic in the U.S. and is being ignored by these same insurance interests. Roe v. Wade is not irrelevant: it is currently the law of the land and opens taxpayer funding for these abominable enterprises.

Their charge that Trump was a threat to Christianity is just ridiculous. Trump has spoken at churches; he repealed federal support for atheist and satanist groups who want to have Christian displays removed. He's also the only president since Gerald Ford who actually fought to end federal abortion funding, and actually succeeded in stripping some abortion mills of funds. Trump ended the federal policy of siding with homo activists who targeted small businesses and even issued presidential pardons for some jailed for Right of Conscience. Trump used his influence to pressure the Turkish Government to end their persecution of Christians; and offered to give asylum to a British family whose baby was ordered taken off life-support by a cruel judge, Does anybody suppose that the Junta will do any of this?

No: the Junta is going to reverse all of these policies because dolts like these 'Evangelicals for Biden' only saw Orange Man Bad for four years, and helped elevate to power the most anti-Christian Regime that America has ever produced.

The compromising, toadying, do-nothing Right has once again sold us out. Now they're complaining that the Junta doesn't respect them. What did they expect? The Junta represents a body of men who want to wipe out traditional religion and replace it with themselves as earthly gods. Now that they've seized control of the United States, the Churches should be the very ones opposing them. But, they're showing us all what their true colors really are.

Christians can disagree on policy issues. It is not debatable when the State is moving towards an anti-Christian dictatorship and prescribes radically anti-Christian policies. 'Evangelicals for Biden' are a pack of ignorant poltroons and represent everything wrong with today's postmodern Churchianity.

WEF PIRATES CALL FOR CONTROL OF THE SEAS

      So, it seems that the Junta's emissaries to China met with a rather embarrassing reception in Beijing last week. Given the sexual orientation of many of the Junta's members, we're not sure at this point how many of them went back for a second test. Ah---the whole incident brings back memories of the Obama days.

   On the subject of swabs, the pirates at the World Economic Forum are at it again. Not satisfied with seizing the United States, Klaus Schwab and his merry-men have set their larcenous sights upon stealing the world's oceans. At Davos recently, they've decided upon a new plan to bring this about. Some academic pinhead associated with the University of California at Santa Barbara and a stooge of Tech/Media Oligarch Marc Benioff,  has given the world a 10-point program. 

1. Freeze the warming. Stopping climate change is the hardest but most important step we can take for ocean health. It is good news to have the US back in the Paris Agreement.

2. Walk the talk. We need to make these carbon neutrality commitments real. This will require massive new investment in renewable energy sources, including some more experimental solutions (such as fusion), plus potentially looking with open minds into making older low-carbon energy solutions safer and more viable (such as traditional nuclear). We need to fast-track the development of sustainable low-emission batteries to store this energy intelligently across our grids. This includes major needs for marine energy infrastructure. A future, for example, with electrified ports and low-emission ships would help eliminate the epidemic of deafening ocean noise, address environmental injustices associated with pollution in ports, make oil spills a thing of the past, and significantly reduce oil spills.

3. Blue revolution. The 'green revolution' – a massive ramping up of food production on land in the 1950s – has belatedly reached the sea...The green revolution was sloppily executed, and the first baby steps of the blue revolution have included similar stumbles: chemical pollution, genetic pollution and habitat destruction. But the blue revolution can still clean up its act. Farming in the right places, with the right species, and the right practices could make aquaculture a win for environmental health.

4. 30 x 30. Parks protect some of our most important chunks of nature on land – our Yellowstones and Serengetis. We are vastly behind setting up parks in the sea. We need to follow through on calls to protect 30% of our oceans by 2030.

5. The other 70%. An ocean industrial revolution is beginning. Human industry is growing at exponential rates in the sea. Even if we succeed in protecting 30% of the ocean, we must still intelligently zone and manage this accelerated anthropogenic growth in the majority of our unprotected ocean. 

6. Big cracks in the sea. Most of the ocean belongs to us all. This includes the two-thirds of the ocean in the high seas that lies beyond all nations’ ocean borders and the marine regions surrounding Antarctica. Protection of biodiversity and equitable sharing of resources has slipped through antiquated governance gaps in these international ocean spaces.

7. End plastic pollution. Plastic pollution is the ocean’s new cancer. We need to ban unnecessary plastics and tax other single use plastics, finally making them valuable materials we want to recover and helping to pay for the full cost of their environmental impacts. We need research and tech to prevent plastics from leaking into the sea, to overhaul our recycling systems, and to design economically viable alternatives to plastics.

8. Land. We can help the ocean by first setting a few things right on land...Precision agriculture that optimizes fertilizer use, coupled with other farming reform practices can help.

9. Wired ocean. We need more ocean data. This includes new tech to detect illegal fishing and connect sustainable fishers to consumers. We need tech to help endangered wildlife co-exist with ocean industry and fleets of environmental sensors above and below the water to better study our rapidly changing ocean.

10. Ocean equity. To build a healthy ocean, we must ensure all people have a fair stake in its success and that they are no longer unevenly harmed by ocean health risks. The fate of the ocean will affect people in all communities. Thus, we need people from all communities in ocean science, management, and policy.

     It needs to be stressed, of course, that nobody elected this dork or his bosses, Schwab and Benioff, to do anything. The arrogance and hubris of these WEF slime is truly amazing. He admits in #9 that the oceans need further research to understand how they operate---and spends nine more paragraphs telling us how experts like himself should be dictators over the seas and how they're used.

    The WEF Oligarchs have been asserting---with no proof whatsoever---that "unless we act now, the oceans could become extinct in x-number of years!" They are especially obsessed with plastic waste, which they imagine will destroy all marine life. All of their predictions of imminent ecological disaster have been proven hoaxes for the last 50 years, but this doesn't stop anybody from falling for the new ones. 

     All of these proposals---just coincidentally we're sure---would redound to great profit for agribusiness and shipping monopolies. Especially the part about blockading 30% of the entire waterways and heavily regulating the other 70%. It should be obvious even to NPC's who believe all of this 'green' nonsense that only the big port controllers and fisheries will be allowed to operate within these zones. Not to mention the smuggling and human-trafficking operations these same Elites are widely believed to conduct on the side. 

     The author of these proposals is one Douglas McCauley, a professor of Marine Biology at UCSB. He was formerly a bureaucrat in Obama's National Fish and Wildlife Service. After only two years there---and barely longer out of graduating with a Ph.D---McCauley suddenly found himself a cause celebre in Academia, Inc.. Within just three years, between 2011-2014, he was on the lecture circuit at UC Berkeley, Stanford, and Princeton. In 2014, he landed a professorship at UCSB. Then, in 2016, Tech oligarch Marc Benioff dropped a fat payoff donation in McCauley's lap---which he subsequently used to establish the Benioff Ocean Initiative. 

    Aside from the obvious Conflict of Interest here, anyone familiar with the internal machinations of postmodern Academia has to arch their eyebrows a bit at McCauley's meteoric rise. It's not that unusual for a Ph.D to graduate and get a position with the U.S. Government. It is however a bit phenomenal to climb from there to heading a fully-funded department and getting 85 articles published; along with hobnobbing with high officials at the U.N. and WEF in less than 10 years---especially for a White male these days. Something about McCauley's rapid promotion (in spite of his obvious incompetence) smells fishy; and not just because we're near the ocean. 

   When we look at the Board of Directors of the Benioff Ocean Initiative, whose website somewhat revealingly reads ,"Tell us what’s broken in your ocean. Ideas welcome from anyone, anywhere.We get the best minds in marine biology to solve your problem.We put down a million dollars to make the solution real," we find scattered among the usual crop of academic parasites a few names with financial connections.

   One of these is Lynne Benioff, Marc's domestic partner.

        The Benioff Family has an estimated net worth of around $9 billion. They own Big Media fake-news outlet, Time Magazine, and the Big Tech conglomerate Salesforce. Marc Benioff himself is a fanatical devotee of Klaus Schwab and was a featured star at the WEF's infamous Great Reset Forum. He currently holds a position on the WEF's Board of Trustees. 

     Though born Jewish, the Benioffs claim their spiritual inspiration comes from crackpot Indian guru Mata Amritananamayi. Politically, the Benioffs are solidly with the Whacko Left. Benioff led attempted Big Tech boycotts of states opposing homo 'marriage', and gave millions to fund the anti-2nd Amendment March for Our Lives. According to Open Secrets, the Benioffs are major donors to the DNC. Salesforce spends about $2-3 annually on 22 Beltway lobbyists; 19 of whom are revolving-door former federal officials. 

     Robert Bradley is another name which turns up. 

      According to his online C.V., "Robert Bradley is currently retired. Prior to retirement, Mr. Bradley spent 30 years handling the tax, investment and financial matters for wealthy families." That should almost be enough to raise 'red flags' right there; however we read that, "Most recently, he was the Chief Executive Officer of Ekahi Aloha LLC, a single-family office headquartered in the San Francisco bay area. Prior to his work at Ekahi Aloha LLC, Mr. Bradley was the Chief Operating Officer for Skywalker Properties Ltd LLC, a commercial real estate company based in San Francisco...Mr. Bradley serves on the Advisory Boards for the Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute and the Benioff Ocean Initiative." 

    Skywalker Properties manages the 3,000-acre Skywalker Ranch, owned by Hollywood big-shot George Lucas. The property is closed to the public, but according to Wikipedia, "The Ranch contains a barn with animals, vineyards, a garden with fruits and vegetables used in the on-site restaurant, an outdoor swimming pool and fitness center with racquetball courts, the man-made "Ewok Lake", a hilltop observatory, a 300-seat theater called "The Stag" as well as theater screening rooms, and parking that is mostly concealed underground to preserve the natural landscape. The Main House has a company research library under a stained-glass dome. Skywalker Ranch has its own fire station. Skywalker Ranch is intended to be more of a "filmmaker's retreat" than a headquarters for Lucas's business operations." An archetypical Left-Wing Hollywood whacko, Lucas also runs a philanthropic front called The George Lucas Educational Foundation, of which Robert Bradley is a Board Member. Lucas' actual corporate headquarters are at the Letterman Digital Arts Center, a 17-acre campus in San Francisco's Presidio District. Skywalker Properties manages that, too.

    Ekahi Aloha is a financial services company of which the Benioffs are a client. Marc Benioff is said to have an interest in all things Hawaiian, and even bought a five-acre estate there. In 2006, he began construction on a huge mansion on Hawaii's largest island. 

    Wait a second---wasn't Douglas McCauley, the head of the UCSB marine institute a federal official in Hawaii about that time? Isn't it a strange coincidence how all of these people keep turning up in the same places? 

    Though not directly represented on the Marine Institute's Board (that we know of), the once venerable and now disgustingly politically-correct Coca-Cola Company recently dropped another cool $11 million into McCauley's racket institute. 

   With this much Corporate Cash flowing in from Left-Wing donors with both financial and political incentives, does anyone seriously believe that McCauley is conducting unbiased and objective research? The Conflicts of Interest apparent here are so blatant that any attempt to turn over any regulation of the World's seas to this group must be opposed categorically. 

  Unfortunately, the United States has no leadership willing to stand up to the WEF crooks. We did, but it was Orange Man Bad among the Ameroboobs, and now we have a Junta utterly subservient to the WEF agenda. It's going to be up to other world leaders to protect the sovereignty of the world's oceans from now on. 

THE DOWNFALL OF THE AMERICAN CHRISTIAN

   Well, this morning the news was a bit discouraging for the Junta. They were actually forced to withdraw a nomination for OMB Director; and seeing the CPAC events in Florida actually caused the tepid governors of Texas and Mississippi to start granting freedom to the citizens again. But then, this story shows up.

   "Michigan-based Bethany Christian Services announced Monday that it will begin placing children in LGBTQ families nationwide...the international agency will begin training all its employees including those at locations that have not worked with gay couples." 

   Yes, we can always count on the Right to capitulate. At least American Conservatives are fattening Jeff Bezos' wallet hoarding commodities again. Those Seuss books will be as valuable as toilet paper and hand-sanitizer someday. 

   

     Bethany Christian Services has been surrendering to the homos since 2019, when some Christian-haters brought lawsuits against them. Chris Palusky, Bethany's CEO, wrote an apology explaining the reasons behind their decision. 

“ 'Giving Up.' These words jump off the cover of the November 2019 edition of World Magazine. The white flag image that accompanies the headline isn’t subtle—it’s designed to give readers the impression that Bethany Christian Services capitulated under government pressure to place children in foster care with same-sex couples. It implies that we’ve surrendered our sincerely held convictions that come from our faith in Christ...This magazine cover and accompanying article paint an inaccurate picture of a tough decision Bethany made after a long period of prayer and Christ-centered deliberation. It also undermines Bethany’s 75-year commitment to put vulnerable children first."

At first glance, this sounds about like what every other sellout on the Right says. But then, Palusky goes a little deeper: "When, in Michigan, Bethany’s foster care program faced imminent closure following the settlement agreement reached by the state in Dumont v. Gordon, it would have significantly impacted the thousands of kids in our care. We’d been down this road before. In Philadelphia, the city temporarily stopped Bethany’s ability to place children with foster families. Kids had to go somewhere else than Bethany foster homes, and it broke our hearts."

This incident in Philadelphia occurred in 2018. The thugs running the City of Philadelphia closed both Bethany and Catholic Social Services. CSS sued. Now, instead of joining the suit, Bethany capitulated to the City even before the case was heard in Court. It's gone all the way up to the U.S. Supreme Court. The Trump Administration filed a brief on behalf of CSS last November: but it was 'Orange Man Bad' and the Junta has switched sides.The City of Philadelphia agreed to let CSS continue until a court settles the matter.

So, as it turns out, Bethany would have been allowed to operate---at least until Jack Roberts stabs the country in the back again. And who knows? The Supreme Court may even vote in CSS' favor. But it really never should have come to this point. It happens that Pennsylvania has had a Republican Majority in their State Legislature for some time now. Yet there was (and has been) no legislation guaranteeing the rights of conscience to agencies like CSS. In fact, homo adoption has been legal in Pennsylvania since 2002, signed into law by Republican Governor Mark Schweiker.

The Michigan case, Dumont v. Gordon occurred in 2019, at the instigation of two lesbians and Michigan's fanatically anti-Christian Attorney-General, Dana Nessel. According to Heritage:

"Legislatures in several states—including Texas, Virginia, South Dakota, North Dakota, Mississippi, Alabama, and, recently, Oklahoma, Kansas, and Tennessee—have passed laws to exempt faith-based agencies from requirements that would compel them to choose between serving vulnerable children and families and following their faith.

Ibid., p. 2, and Russell Moore, “Newly Passed Adoption Bill a Win for Tennessee’s Children,” The Tennessean, January 16, 2020, https://www.tennessean.com/story/opinion/2020/01/16/tennessee-general-assembly-adoption-agency-bill/4485497002/ (accessed January 16, 2020).

  "Michigan also passed a similar law. However, the current governor is no longer enforcing it and, in March 2019, the state attorney general signed a settlement agreement with the ACLU to stop the state from working with faith-based adoption agencies that place children only with a married mother and father."

  The Governor of Michigan, Gretchen Whitmer and AG Dana Nessel have been running Michigan as a de facto dictatorship; especially under the Scam-demic and subsequent election fraud. The spineless Republican-controlled Legislature has done nothing to prevent these abuses. Palusky disingenuously remarks that: "The reality is that the government runs the foster care system, and we cannot serve children in foster care without contracting with the state. So we faced a choice: continue caring for hurting children who need a safe family, or close our foster care program completely because we disagree with government requirements."

But as the Heritage article noted, at least nine U.S. State governments protect organizations like Bethany from being persecuted for their faith. Where in the Bible does it command one to set up corporate headquarters in Michigan? Look at the example of several companies involved in the firearms industry. They are leaving anti-2nd Amendment states and incorporating in jurisdictions which still have some respect for the Constitution. Instead of capitulating to Whitmer's Regime, wouldn't it have made sense to move the firm to a better state? Incidentally, the Dumont case is still on appeal, and Bethany has made no attempt to join in any way.

Herein lies another important point. The cruelty of turning over foster-care to the tender mercies of the Welfare-Industrial Complex has trapped many Christian organizations into situations where they must choose between their mission and their moral convictions. But have we seen any attempts from Conservative politicians to end reliance on the State? Or, have any of these charitable groups taken steps to free themselves? Or is that Government money just too good to pass up?

In fact, Dana Nessel made that very point in her Summary of the Dumont Settlement Agreement: "The Michigan Department of Health and Human Services (MDHHS) contracts with agencies for foster care case management and adoption services, for which a significant portion of funding comes from the federal Title IV-E program. As a condition of receiving these federal funds, the United States Department of Health and Human Services requires that states’ Title IV-E funded programs prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. 45 CFR 75.300(c)."

Wait a moment...didn't we have a Conservative Christian Republican in charge of HHS in 2019? Yes, we supposedly did:

    Alex Azar: a long-time Deep State prick; a bosom-buddy of the Bush Family; former head of globalist pharmaceutical cartel, Eli Lilly; Azar was suggested to Trump to head HHS by Azar's good friend, Mike Pence. Like Pence, Azar both sold out on homo rights and betrayed Trump in the interests of the Junta. He was also a major player---along with Fauci, Kushner, and Brix---in crafting the disastrous Operation Warp Speed and advising Trump with disinformation on the Scam-demic. Naturally, Azar wasn't about to offend the Left by siding with Christians.

But Palusky's position---evidently mirroring that of the Conservative leadership around him is radically flawed because the foster-kids forced into homo homes are not going into safe and stable families as he asserts. Bethany is placing damaged kids into damaged homes. Christianity teaches us about the value of a single human life. Bethany, on the other hand, is trying to play the percentages: "A vast majority of foster care families that work with Bethany come from the Church, and more than 99% adhere to a biblical view on marriage," Palusky writes. So what? Doesn't the other 1% matter to God? And let's not delude ourselves into believing that number will stay at 1%. Now that every homo 'couple' in America knows that Bethany doesn't dare say 'no' to them, there will be a solid uptick in applications.

"Faith in Jesus is at the core of our mission," a Bethany spokesman chimed in today, "But we are not claiming a doctrinal position on which Christians of mutual goodwill might disagree...our mission is to find a safe, stable environment for children."

By the Obama Administration's own numbers, domestic violence is far higher in homo relationships than traditional ones. The Center for Disease Control also found a higher than average correlation between homosexuality and child abuse. Studies have shown repeatedly that it is dangerous for young people to engage in this kind of lifestyle. Along with the violence and mental illness, homosexuals are disproportionately prone to substance abuse---even by the low standards of a nation of drug addicts like the modern United States. Homosexuals are twice as likely to die by suicide before the age of 25 than any other demographic. That is a safe and stable lifestyle?

Palusky either hasn't thought this through, or he had already decided on abandoning his Christian Faith for the New Normal of Neo-Marxism. I strongly suspect the latter; but leaving him aside, let us consider the other Christians who work for or support Bethany's policy. These Christians should ask themselves one important question: Do you really believe that capitulating to the Left on this issue will be the last demand they make upon you? Think about that question very carefully. Palusky claims 'Christian love' as his motivation; yet he's making deals with people who are quite open about their hatred for Christ and everything to do with Him.

It's sad, but somewhere along the line, Bethany Christian Services' leadership saw the true state of American Society today: weak, effete, degenerate, decayed. They saw that Conservative Christianity in America is just another marketing angle; and that all that talk about 'Brotherhood' and 'Principle' goes out the window when confronted by Evil. They learned to be realists; observing that Good never pays and that the smart boys get along by going along. If faith in Jesus really was at the core of their mission as they say, they would have put up a fight and trusted God like the Catholic Charities have done. The Church knows full well that---should the traitors on the U.S. Supreme Court side against them---that they will have to cease operations. But the Church also knows Persecution and that it happens for a purpose.

In Ancient Rome, some Barbarians had broken into the country and were putting Christians to death. The orator Tertullian spoke on this subject: 'the Lord says to Peter, Satan asked that he might sift you as grain; but I have prayed for you that your faith fail not; that is, that the devil should not have power granted him sufficient to endanger his faith. Whence it is manifest that both things belong to God, the shaking of faith as well as the shielding of it, when both are sought from Him — the shaking by the devil, the shielding by the Son. And certainly, when the Son of God has faith's protection absolutely committed to Him, beseeching it of the Father, from whom He receives all power in heaven and on earth: how entirely out of the question is it that the devil should have the assailing of it in his own power! But when we say to our Father, Lead us not into temptation we acknowledge that that comes to pass by His Will whom we beseech to exempt us from it. For this is what follows, But deliver us from the evil one, that is, do not lead us into temptation by giving us up to the evil one, for then are we delivered from the power of the devil, when we are not handed over to him to be tempted. Nor would the devil's legion have had power over the herd of swine unless they had got it from God; so far are they from having power over the sheep of God'.

And he says again:

'For if persecution proceeds from God in no way will it be our duty to flee from what has God as its author; for what proceeds from God ought not on the one hand to be avoided, and it cannot be evaded on the other...So, if persecution is in every way a good, we on valid grounds lay it down that what is good ought not to be shunned by us, because it is a sin to refuse what is good. Besides that, what has been looked upon by God can no longer indeed be avoided. Therefore those who think that they should flee,[i.e. capitulate] either reproach God with doing what is evil; or they count themselves stronger than God: so they think, who imagine it possible to escape when it is God's pleasure that such events should occur.'

And again:

    'Besides, he who bids us shine as sons of light, does not bid us hide away out of sight as sons of darkness. He commands us to stand steadfast, certainly not to act an opposite part by fleeing; and to be girt, not to play the fugitive or oppose the Gospel. He points out weapons, too, which persons who intend to run away would not require. And among these he notes the shield too, that you may be able to quench the darts of the devil, when doubtless you resist him, and sustain his assaults in their utmost force. Accordingly John also teaches that we must lay down our lives for the brethren; much more, then, we must do it for the Lord. Finally, mindful of his own Revelation, in which he had heard the doom of the fearful, he warns us that fear must be put away. There is no fear, says he, in love; but perfect love casts out fear; because fear has torment — the fire of the lake, no doubt. He that fears is not perfect in love — to wit, the Love of God. Who will fear, but he who has not loved? Yes; and if you ask counsel of the Spirit, what does He approve more than that utterance of the Spirit? For, indeed, it incites all almost to go and offer themselves in martyrdom, not to flee from it; so that we also make mention of it. If you are exposed to public infamy, says he, it is for your good; for he who is not exposed to dishonor among men is sure to be so before the Lord. Do not be ashamed; righteousness brings you forth into the public gaze. Why should you be ashamed of gaining glory? The opportunity is given you when you are before the eyes of men. So also elsewhere: seek not to die on bridal beds, nor in miscarriages, nor in soft fevers, but to die the martyr's death, that He may be glorified who has suffered for you.'

    And finally with regard to Christians in leadership positions like those at Bethany, he says; 

    'With the leaders turning their backs, who of the common rank will hope to persuade men to stand firm in the battle? Most assuredly a good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep, according to the word of Moses, when the Lord Christ had not as yet been revealed, but was already shadowed forth in himself: If you destroy this people, he says, destroy me also along with it. But Christ, confirming these foreshadowings Himself, adds: The bad shepherd is he who, on seeing the wolf, flees, and leaves the sheep to be torn in pieces... Thus Zechariah threatens: Arise, O sword, against the shepherds, and pluck out the sheep; and I will turn my hand against the shepherds. And against them both Ezekiel and Jeremiah declaim with kindred threatening, for their not only wickedly eating of the Sheep — they feeding themselves rather than those committed to their charge — but also scattering the flock, and giving it over, shepherdless, a prey to all the beasts of the field. And this never happens more than when in persecution the Church is abandoned by the clergy.'

    It certainly wouldn't hurt a lot of our modern Churchians to reflect upon the sacrifices Christians once made to uphold our Faith; or for that matter, the sacrifices American Patriots once made to uphold our Right to worship as we please. The leadership of Bethany Christian Services needs to hang their heads in shame. Surrender to the New Normal is failure spiritually and a betrayal of Christians everywhere. Hiding behind the excuse that it's for the children doesn't make it right. Children are going to suffer under this corrupt and decadent Regime no matter what Bethany does. The only course of action is to call a spade a spade, and refuse to cooperate or collaborate with it. 

PURITANS GETTING BENT AND KIDS' MINDS GETTING WARPED

      Last night was a major media event across the Prozac Nation. The Whacko Left Wing staged the Golden Globe Awards to keep up the illusion that there is still talent in Hollywood. The last legitimate U.S. President spoke at CPAC to hordes who claim to support him after standing by and letting the Election be stolen. 

     On a more important subject, blogger Insanity Bytes posted a pair of articles detailing the kinds of institutionalized child abuse going in some 'Conservative' parts of the West Coast. Our frontline heroes in the public schools are circulating some further incendiary literature:

      I'm fairly certain that autoeroticism is something that most teenagers can figure out without any input from the perverts at Jefferson County Public Health; but that's beside the point here. There are a few other rather crude sexual practices explicitly being described; and it is noteworthy that the very Politically-Correct authors made certain not to imply that heterosexual acts were not exclusively being done. Whether the scum who produced this circular will admit this or not, this 'public service message' is really designed to introduce young people some of these strange sexual practices, while at the same time implying that they are perfectly normal; and that everybody is doing them. 

   Sexuality is---or is supposed to be---a private matter. It's not civilized behavior for men to behave like cattle and simply jump on the first object of their desire in front of the whole herd. Nor is it civilized to broadcast perverted sexual imagery for everyone to peep at. Things like public indecency and voyeurism were outlawed by dead White males a long time ago. The Romans instituted laws against excessive grooming, which evolved into Statutory Rape laws. In other words, they set the precedent for protecting families as the sole sexual educators of their own offspring. 

   In our Postmodern dystopia, however, our young people are caught between the cross-currents of rampant paedohysteria and encouragement of unbridled licentiousness. In fact, that is reflected in our culture at large. America is simultaneously the most sex-negative and the most sex-obsessed society in the West. Here a man can lose his job for flirting with a co-worker while deviants of the lowest order can stage Pride Parades in front of small children. The impression that these contradictions and hypocrisy imparts upon children's minds is that heterosexuality is something dangerous and predatory; while sexual deviance is true love, or at least a lot of fun. 

  We didn't sink to this level culturally overnight. But at some point in the recent past, Ameroboobs with families decided to abdicate the sexual education of their offspring to the Schools and Social Workers. Americans today hate being stressed with such delicate tasks. And so, they sat on their hands and allowed the Whacko Left Wing take over child-rearing duties. So-called 'Conservatives' know what is happening, but they go along with it anyway. IB writes that: "There was a tiny bit of pushback, a smattering of people have been writing letters, objecting, bringing it up at the commissioners meetings, but they’ve just doubled down, they made statements that they fully support this stuff and have no intention of having any sort of dialog or addressing anyone’s concerns."

     Why should they care? When did any 'Conservative' in Oregon start demanding investigations into radicalization of their public schools? Was there ever any talk from Conservative politicians about why we kept funding these sewers? Seriously: can anyone name one political figure since Reagan who even made educational reform an issue?

    Homeschooling is legal in Oregon; in fact the laws are not nearly as repressive as many other states. Conservatives chatter about the 'virtues of home schooling' all the time: yet out of an estimated 600,000 students in Oregon, only about 22,000 are homeschooled (about 3%). 

    So why is anybody surprised by what Jefferson County is doing? What did 'Conservatives' think was going to happen? It's not like Conservatives are a minority in Jefferson County:

    President Trump won the county by a margin of 26% in 2020. Yet, aside from voting for Conservatives, it doesn't appear that the Right takes any other involvement in society; since the Whacko Left Wing freely runs over them. 

    I hate to seem indifferent to such a serious issue; but I've also experienced decades of indifference when warning people that it would come to this (and BTW, it's going to get worse). While I certainly applaud the efforts of bloggers like Insanity Bytes and Citizen Tom for exposing and protesting these crimes against our school-age children; I happen to know that both of these writers are grandparents. It strikes me as very telling that actual parents don't seem to be involved in any of this outcry. While I am in the parental-age bracket, I don't have children; but when I do, the little ones will never darken the door of a public school and that's something I've believed for years. (I've actually told women I've been in relationships with that that point is non-negotiable). But those parents with kids: where are they? 

   Here's a tidbit from the U.S. Census Bureau: "In 1960, the proportion of children living in mother-only families was eight percent, but by 1996 that proportion had tripled, to 24 percent. Since then, it has fluctuated between 22 and 24 percent, and was at 23 percent in 2015. Between 1990 and 2015, the share of children living in father-only families has fluctuated between three and five percent, and was at four percent in 2015." So, in about 30% of families today, one parent is trying to do the work of two.

     Barely one-half of American families are 'traditional.' That's still a majority, however---enough to bring out-of-control schools and social workers to heel. But they haven't done a thing. 

     The bottom line here is that this only going to stop when parents decide to get off the couch and stop it. But sadly, that seems unlikely to happen because most Conservatives simply no longer have the will to resist.