St. Louis City Mayor Francis Slay doesn’t like questions… #SOTR

The rally downtown St. Louis today was a lopsided mass of finger pointing and otherwise worthless dribble.  Once the rally was over, we sallied over to Mayor Slay to ask him if he supported the suggestions of Dr. Flood, regarding yielding the sovereignty of the United States to the United Nations.  Here’s what he had to say to me:

My thanks to Jim Hoft for filming that bit of realism between myself and the Mayor.

Here’s another view of the exchange:

Please understand as I do, that he may have been a bit miffed to be asked a question that required him to register an actual opinion in the affirmative or negative.  This isn’t his normal routine as his job consists mostly of fundraising, visiting sites and locations to cut ribbons, and other fluffy non-confrontational stuff.  We get that.

Moms Demand Action at Anti 2nd Amendment rally #SOTR


This morning at 10:00 am Moms Demand Action rallied at Keiner Plaza to demand legislation to prevent more shootings and just stop people from owning so many guns…

There was a full slate of speakers, all staunch representatives of the anti gun movement on the left. Only one viewpoint was represented and at times it sounded as if the Democrats emailed over the talking points to ensure the rally was as one sided as possible.  Speakers called on Senators Claire McCaskill and Roy Blunt to move the presidents gun control package through quickly to protect children from guns.

None of the solutions, and I use that term loosely was even remotely related to dealing with the weapons used in the bulk of crime associated with guns, illegally obtained weapons.

The last speaker was a bit outside of what I expected – even from a leftist rally.

Via: Gateway Pundit:

Dr. Robert Flood , director of pediatric emergency at SLU, gave the keynote speech at the end of the rally. The good doctor urged supporters to call congress and turn your rights and sovereignty over to United Nations by supporting the Child Rights Act.

Dr. Flood said the Children’s Rights Amendment would counter balance the Second and 14th Amendments used by gun rights activists.

“So if common sense legislation is not passed in the upcoming weeks and months, then please work to ratify the proposed Children’s Amendment to the US Constitution.”



China Admits to the Greatest Slaughter in Human History – The Gospel Coalition

It so shocking to read this.  The numbers truly chill the soul.  The Chines government, readily admits to the facts in the article below.  And I ask you, is this what civilized nations do to the innocent among them?  With he total number of babies aborted in the United States since the passage of Roe v. Wade at just over 60 million, there’s little room to judge, but at this point in US history, there’s a tiny bit of solace in knowing that the American government didn’t force American women to make this horrible decision.

The Story: The Chinese government recently admitted that over the last four decades the country has aborted 336 million unborn children, many of them forcibly.

The Background: According to the Financial Times, on March 14 the Chinese Health Ministry reported the following statistics for its family planning practices since 1971:

— 336 million abortions performed;

— 196 million sterilizations conducted;

— 403 million intrauterine devices inserted.

China, the world’s most populous country, first instituted limits on population growth in 1971 and established its “one-child” population control program in 1979.

What It Means: The story has been shockingly underreported considering what China has admitted: Since 1971, the country has carried out the largest single slaughter of human beings in the history of the world.

To put the numbers in perspective, the 336 million deaths in China are:

• More than the entire population of the world at the time of the Crusades (c. 1100 AD).

• Equal to the entire combined populations of the United States and Australia.

• More deaths than were caused by (in millions): the Bubonic Plague in Europe (100), the Great Chinese Famine (45), the 1918 Influenza Pandemic (40), the HIV/AIDS pandemic (25), the Holocaust (13), the Soviet famine of 1932-1933 (8), the Russian famine of 1921 (3), and the American Civil War (.8).

• More than all the people killed in the 10 ten deadliest wars in human history (Based onhighest estimates (in millions): World War II (72), World War I (65), Mongol Conquest (60), An Lushan Rebellion (36), Taiping Rebellion (30), Qing Dynasty conquest of the Ming Dynasty (25), Conquests of Timur (20), Dungan Revolt (12), Russian Civil War (9), Second Congo War (5.4))

• More than all the children that will be born in the world over the next ten years.

No comparisons, however, can truly help us to understand the scale of these 336 million deaths—and that is in a single country. The magnitude of the crime is incomprehensible to the human imagination. Only God can truly fathom the depths of this depravity and only God can truly apprehend the magnitude of this loss. May he have mercy on our world for what we have done.

Joe Carter is an editor for The Gospel Coalition and the co-author of How to Argue Like Jesus: Learning Persuasion from History’s Greatest Communicator. You can follow him onTwitter.

via: China Admits to the Greatest Slaughter in Human History – The Gospel Coalition Blog.

2A Watch: 3D Printed Guns (Documentary) #SOTR

Who knew that this was possible? A gun manufactured in your home using a printer. This is a must watch documentary on 3D Printed Guns.

Published on Mar 25, 2013

Cody R Wilson has figured out how to print a semi-automatic rifle from the comfort of his own home. Now he’s putting all the information online so that others will join him.

This is a story about the rapid evolution of a technology that has forced the American legal system to play catch up. Cody Wilson, a 25 year old University of Texas Law student, is an advocate for the open source production of firearms using 3D printing technology. This makes him a highly controversial figure on both sides of the gun control issue. MOTHERBOARD sat down with Cody in Austin, Texas to talk about the constitution, the legal system, and to watch him make and test-fire a 3D-printed gun.

Comment response video coming soon. Leave a question in the comments below.

Produced By Erin Lee Carr
Edited by Chris O’Coin

Read more on MOTHERBOARD here:…

To find out more about what the ATF says about 3D-printed guns, read this:…

3D Printed Guns (Documentary) – YouTube.

Featured cartoon image via

#SOTR Guest Post: The Revolt of Intelligence Against “Marriage Equality”

The Revolt of Intelligence Against “Marriage Equality”

By J. Richard Pearcey

Author and MSNBC host S.E. Cupp made news in the run-up to CPAC 2013 by withdrawing as a speaker from the annual conservative confab. Her complaint against CPAC is that it would not allow pro-homosexual “marriage” organizations to sponsor the event.

Cupp identifies herself as a “proponent of gay rights,” and on MSBNC she said “marriage equality” is a “major issue Republicans can no longer seem to avoid.”

“CPAC’s decision to sideline GOProud and Log Cabin Republicans makes me increasingly uncomfortable,” she said. “Until the conference stops shaming some of its most valuable advocates, it’s unfortunately not an event I can take part in.”

Let me start by saying that I respect S.E. Cupp and her willingness to speak out on behalf of what she sees as true. Having said that, it is on behalf of intelligence -– “not allowing our passions to become blind,” as philosopher Albert Camus put it — that I reject the notion of “marriage equality.”

Admittedly, the phrase “marriage equality” functions as highly effective PR. After all, who wants to stand against marriage? And who could possibly protest against equality? Therefore “marriage equality” seems like a win-win.

Yet, a critical distance allows one to see beyond the PR and to realize that the kind of “equality” promoted in “marriage equality” is alien in theory, and inferior in results, to the genuinely liberating concept of “created equal” we find planted in the Declaration of Independence.

Social Construct? Traditional Value?
Consider the word “marriage.” It has a normative meaning. It refers to the diversity of male and female, one man plus one woman, united in love, service, and commitment for life. Its merit derives not from tradition or from being a “value preference,” a social construct, a belief system, or a crutch of the bourgeoisie.

Instead marriage should be respected in terms parallel to the concept of freedom and unalienable human rights endowed by the Creator. Marriage is thereby recognized as an unalienable societal structure embedded by the Creator into the architecture of creation and into the essence of human nature. People who smash marriage end up smashing themselves as well, as does anyone who defies gravity by jumping off a cliff without a parachute.

Now because the word “marriage” has a definite meaning, it can be distinguished from non-marital arrangements. The logic of “A cannot equal non-A” applies not just to legal tender and its counterfeits but also to marriage and its counterfeits.

For example, a spouse can be one’s best friend. But that does not mean marriage can be reduced to friendship. A million people might march under the civil rights banner of “Friendship Without Limits” or “Friendship Equality,” but reason and clarity of thought would protest the devaluation of marriage caused by elevating counterfeits to the same status.

Again, there is love within marriage, deep sacrificial love. But marriage is more than love. For there are different kinds of love appropriate in different kinds of contexts — your friend, your child, your dog. These distinctions protect children from abuse and incest. We should be wary of passionate slogans declaring “love without limits.”

Every human being has a God-given unalienable right to pursue marriage as a species of happiness. But no one has the creative power (much less the authority) to refashion this gift from the Creator. Changing the nature of marriage is not just above a president’s pay-grade, it’s beyond the ontic capacity of any human being.

Marriage is a rock for humanity, and a safe haven for children, precisely because it hinges upon the Creator, not upon ideological passions, nor upon decisions of state.

Equal Justice Under Relativism
The word “equality” likewise enjoys many positive connotations. Engraved on the western facade of the Supreme Court building in Washington, D.C., are the majestic words “Equal Justice Under Law.” The concept of equality is indelibly tied to civil rights for black Americans.

Historically the positive reception of equality owes a great deal to the Biblical concept that all are equal before the Creator, that God does not play favorites based on external factors such as race, class, economic power, or political connections. In this sense, God is described in the New Testament book of Acts as “no respecter of persons.”

In such a rich context, it is no surprise that joining “marriage” and “equality” together stimulates powerful positive feelings.

Yet just as marriage has a normative meaning, so does equality. The concept as used by homosexual activists is a way to inject relativism into moral discourse and social change. This is a far cry from the liberating concept of “created equal” as enunciated in the Declaration of Independence.

The Declaration serves notice to all concerned -– to presidents and kings, mobs and majorities, interest groups and activists -– “not only that people are equal, but that they are equal because they are created equal,” writes Paul Marshall of the Hudson Institute in God and the Constitution. For “if rights come from God, not the state, then the state has no authority to take them away or override them,” Marshall explains. Only in this context are human rights secure and civil rights non-arbitrary.

Harry Jaffa of the Claremont Institute makes a similar point in Equality and Liberty, saying the “men who founded our system of government were not moral or political relativists. . . . In affirming that all men are created equal they expressed their conviction that human freedom depends upon the recognition of an order that man himself does not create.”

As a bedrock of freedom for human beings who are “created equal,” marriage is a communal order of male-female diversity within a liberating unity. It is a blessing of liberty, and protected as such, because it is not subject to relativistic tinkering, media tinglings or “new normals.”

The Endgame: A Lesbian Confession
Because the “equality” of “marriage equality” functions as a code word for relativism, the impact of the movement for homosexual “marriage” as a civil right is the opposite of what it is portrayed to be. The endgame is not to make marriage equally available to all, but to make it equally unavailable to all.

Masha Gessen, a lesbian and a journalist, spoke frankly about this at a conference in Sydney, Australia, last summer. “It’s a no-brainer that we should have the right to marry,” she said. “But I also think equally that it’s a no-brainer that the institution of marriage should not exist.”

This admission “causes my brain some trouble,” Gessen says, “and part of why it causes me trouble is that fighting for gay marriage generally involves lying about what we are going to do with marriage when we get there — because we lie that the institution of marriage is not going to change, and that is a lie.”

How will it change? Gessen explains: “I have three kids who have five parents, more or less. . . . I would like to live in a legal system that is capable of reflecting that reality. And I don’t think that’s compatible with the institution of marriage.”

“Marriage equality” becomes “marriage elasticity,” with the ultimate goal of “marriage extinction.”

S.E. Cupp says she does not think she’ll be able to speak at CPAC “until this issue is reconciled and figured out.” But the solution to counterfeits is not reconciliation but recognition, and then refusal to acquiesce to ideological passions.

The banner of “marriage equality” is frayed and torn asunder, with bits blowing in the wind, strips jagged and littering streets. Marriage, however, lives and breathes. As do those who salute her.

About the author:
J. Richard Pearcey is editor and publisher of The Pearcey Report, as well as associate director of the Francis Schaeffer Center for Worldview and Culture and scholar for worldview studies at Houston Baptist University. This article appeared originally in American Thinker and was published at The Pearcey Report March 18, 2013.


#SOTR Wednesday Headlines: Gay is NOT the New Black Edition


Good Morning folks. I’m using the term loosely as I’ve just spent hours off and on last night arguing with pin heads about the Proposition 8 case that is up before the Supreme Court. Seriously. Right off the bat, gays and their supporters like to equate sexual behavior with innate characteristics. Ask any black person and they are quick to tell you that being gay is nothing like being black. I should know, since HELLO! I’m black. I cannot change being black. Can’t decide one morning if it suits me to just stop being black. Yet that is exactly what gays have been doing for decades. One minute they are a total lesbian, the next they’re married to a man and loving it.

Forgive me if I just don’t want to hear that crap anymore. Additionally, it’s not tolerant to call me a bigot for disagreeing on the homosexual marriage issue. If I’m supposed to tolerate your penchant for forcing your views on America, you should at the very least acknowledge that I have a right to my views as well. Or is that the point? I don’t have a right to my views because if I have a right to oppose gays – then they can’t have total domination; which is why we are embroiled in this fight.

Listening to the oral arguments and the questions from the Supreme Court justices to counsel, I was happy to hear a serious and respectful tone in full consideration of the bungling that burdened our nation with Roe v. Wade. If the conservative justices bungle this one, there will be a serious backlash. And children will suffer, not because America will end, but because the very definition of what a marriage is will be obliterated. The justices seem cognizant of this.

At one point, it was shared that 44,000 children live with same-sex couples in California. Really? That’s our chief consideration? The gays are playing the child card? Whenever it seems they just cant sink any lower, the homosexual lobby shows just how flexible, flexible is. The true measure of who we are as a nation is not measured by how quickly we bend to the will of a very vocal narcissistic minority. No, that measure is found in how we temper freedom of choice with the delicate balance of societal norms and mores. There are some issues that we simply cannot compromise on. Codifying deviant sexual behavior into the Constitution is one highly incendiary example.

So, I’m done ranting about this right here, right now. But it’s going to come up again, and my views will not change. I truly wish the very best for any American struggling with sexual sin. The very best thing that I can do for you, that we can all do for all 3-6% of you, is to refuse to condone your behavior.

Here are the headlines:

2A Watch: Dishonest Solutions by @NRANews Commentators

Screen Shot 2013-03-25 at 7.28.16 PM

Here’s Episode 2 of the new NRA News Commentators series starring Colion Noir.  It’s good.  Think about this as you click play: What do you have when you take the guns out of gun violence?

Why are all of the “solutions” proposed by gun control advocates so clearly not going to prevent any more mass shootings?  When will Americans of all political persuasions begin to stand up and demand solutions that don’t punish law abiding citizens?

Mr. Noir examines this and more in this hard hitting video.