How would you feel if your daughter’s or sister’s boyfriend got her pregnant and then tricked her into taking an abortion-inducing pill?  You should take the question seriously, because this is exactly what happened recently to a young woman in Tampa, Florida.  The boyfriend responsible for forcing the miscarriage of his own child is now being charged with murder.

Make no mistake, though.  Unless we all take stand against this sort of behavior — starting with young men like myself — this type of sad story is likely to repeat itself with growing frequency across America as the administration, liberal courts, and special interest groups (all of whom purportedly support “women’s reproductive health”) pursue their commitment to make contraceptives and abortion drugs more widely available to women at an increasingly young age.  The recent ruling by federal judge Edward R. Korman — ordering the availability of the powerful “emergency contraceptive” pill known as Plan B to women of all ages — will enable situations like this to occur again far too easily.  Specifically, it reduces barriers for so-called boyfriends to simply walk into a pharmacy and acquire powerful, abortion-inducing drugs to use on their girlfriends, no questions asked.

Pimps and rapists have, for many years, abused the over-abundance of contraceptives — thanks in part to groups like Planned Parenthood — to prevent the pregnancies of their prostitutes.  Consequently, pimps can keep even their youngest victims “in business” without inconvenient questions being asked.  Making powerful and potentially dangerous drugs like Plan B even more widely available will only exacerbate the problem.  As CWA’s Dr. Janice Crouse writes:

Judge Korman is a sex abuser’s dream and a victim’s nightmare. Essentially, he creates a brand new avenue for pimps, sex traffickers, and sex predators hoping to hide the evidence of their exploitation. We are removing doctors’ examinations, one of the vital tools used to detect sexual abuse. Now, a young girl afraid she might be pregnant at the hands of her abuser will not have the opportunity to see a doctor who could offer help and protection. Instead, her abuser will feed her Plan B like it is candy. In Thailand, where the morning-after pill has been freely available since 1988, men are the largest purchasers. What is wrong with this picture? It is no secret why Thailand is considered the world’s hot spot for sex trafficking of minors.

As a young guy, I would hate to see a family member or friend coerced, manipulated, or misused, and I suspect you probably feel the same way. Twenty-something guys who oppose victimizing women need to take back the sex culture and remind both society and our leaders that it is unacceptable to treat the ladies we care about like prostitutes.  We must stand up to keep them from becoming victims of the ever-growing sex industry, enablers like Planned Parenthood, and abusive boyfriends.

However much we’d like to deny it, the truth is that young men in my age bracket have far too easy of a time acquiring the tools they need to commit atrocities like the forced miscarriage of an innocent child in Tampa.  Thanks to the efforts of liberal “reproductive health” advocates, you and I need not only keep an eye out for the traffickers, pimps, and rapists — the deceptive boyfriend has now acquired the tools to victimize your daughter, little sister, or friend in the same way, to turn her into his own personal plaything.

What do cupid and kids have in common?  Undies!  Yep, that’s right.  It’s hard to believe that the Children’s Tumor Foundation would associate its name with men in skivvies and women in lace — even for a million dollars.

Yet, the Children’s Tumor Foundation partners every year with the Cupids Undies “fun” run.  In Washington, D.C., this one-mile dash around the Capitol is apparently the event to be seen at, and it sells out every year.

The Cupids Undies Run national website says that while the run benefits kids, they hope they aren’t watching.  If that statement has to be on your website, surely you should reconsider the activity you are promoting.

Even more disturbing is that the run begins and ends at a bar.  The race organizers can’t possibly ignore how tawdry this appears.

It’s a bar crawl … in undies … for charity. 

Whether they are naughty or nice, the result is the same — unmentionables for charity.  But in our highly sexualized culture, I guess this “run” would be considered tame?

Learning about neurofibromatosis (NF) broke my heart.  Diseases that impact children, especially ones with no cures, are devastating to all of us.  As a mother, I could not imagine the frustration of seeing my child suffer helplessly.  Let’s be clear: Children with NF truly are heroes.  And I hope and pray a cure is around the corner!

Faced with the nature of NF, it is understandable that fundraisers want a lighthearted event that will raise oodles of money to help these kids and their families.  However, alcohol and near nudity is, more often than not, a recipe for making kids, rather than raising money for them.  Cupid’s Undies Run Founder Brendan Hanrahan should be reminded that, as our mothers always said, “Appearances still matter.”

How many times have we heard about our tax dollars paying for government workers who spend their days watching porn at work?

Which city in the United States is home to the most pornography viewers? The answer is Washington, D.C., the seat of the nation’s power players. Do you ever wonder why the Department of Justice does not enforce obscenity laws? Could the viewing habits of D.C.’s denizens influence the lack of enforcement?

The source of this information is PornHub, a XXX website. The New York Daily News carried the story about the study and noted that the rate of online pornography watched in D.C. is 14.18 videos per person in a year. While that may not sound like a lot to some, consider that the D.C. rate is nearly twice the rate of the second highest porn viewing state, Hawaii, where it is 7.57 per person.

We know that not everyone watches pornography, so that means the people actually watching online pornography in Washington are watching a lot more videos than 14.18 each. Who is watching them, and are they doing so at work? Does it influence their work?

How many times have we heard about our tax dollars paying for government workers who spend their days watching porn at work? One Washington Times article lists these agencies that have employees with porn problems: Pentagon, Secret Service, Transportation Security Administration, U.S. State Department, Department of Homeland Security, Securities and Exchange Commission, and the Missile Defense Agency. The article quotes a cyber-security expert who warns, “Many pornographic websites are infected and criminals and foreign intelligence services such as Russia’s use them to gain access and harvest data.”

You would think that national security nugget would be a good enough reason for prosecuting obscenity producers and purveyors, but evidently it is not.

In 2011, Attorney General Eric Holder shut down the Obscenity Prosecution Task Force, which was established under Pres. George W. Bush’s Administration. A Politico article quoted Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) in reaction to this move:

“Attorney General Holder told the Judiciary Committee last year that this task force was the centerpiece of the strategy to combat adult obscenity,” Sen. Hatch told POLITICO in a statement Friday. “Rather than initiate a single new case since President Obama took office, however, the only development in this area has been the dismantling of the task force. As the toxic waste of obscenity continues to spread and harm everyone it touches, it appears the Obama Administration is giving up without a fight.”

According to the PornHub statistics, obscenity blankets Washington. The lack of adult obscenity prosecutions is harming everyone. While the Department of Justice focuses on prosecuting cases of child pornography, those who are watching adult pornography may turn to child pornography when the adult material no longer excites them. If adult pornography prosecutions are non-existent, a gateway to child pornography is left in place to ensnare new viewers.

So, while some of D.C.’s denizens turn a blind eye to punishing the producers and distributors of obscenity, others are glued to their porn-filled computer screens. The key to why obscenity, while illegal, thrives in D.C., and beyond may be one mouse click away on screens hidden behind closed doors and cubicle walls in offices throughout Washington.

This is a scary time to be a woman, but not for the reasons liberals want you to think.  In a pro-Obama ad that PolitiFact calls a “Pants on Fire” lie, the Democratic National Committee (DNC) is telling voters across the country that, “It’s a scary time to be a woman,” because Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney and other conservatives support overturning Roe v. Wade, passing a bill that would limit abortions, and repealing the health care mandate requiring even religious insurance companies to provide contraception.  Be afraid, women; be very afraid.  Employing this oft-used tactic, the ad tries to paint conservatives as extremists who are against a women’s “choice.”

But conservatives are NOT the ones who are anti-women.  Here are the very scary facts:

• Obama’s health care “reform” actually hurts women, increasing their health care costs by $900 per year, in the form of 21 new taxes.
• Women find it harder and harder to pay for college with tuition rising 8.3% per year, despite the president’s pledge to relieve student debt.  His policies have been totally ineffective and don’t address the problem of skyrocketing tuition.
• More women are out of work, with employment down by 2.9% among women since the beginning of the recession.  There are now 83,000 fewer jobs for women than when Obama took office.
• Under Obama’s watch, the number of women slipping in poverty has shot up to 7.5 million.
• Obama’s own administration pays male staffers 18% more then its female staffers.
• Planned Parenthood says they received nearly $500 million from the federal government in their most recent annual report.  Remember that Planned Parenthood performs 1 in 4 abortions in America and actively covers up the risk of abortions for women, including “breast cancer, depression, mental illness, and suicide.”  And that’s not to mention all the other sick and twisted things they do (like aiding and abetting sex traffickers and helping to cover up statutory rape).

And liberals think they’re helping women?  The truth is that President Obama and the Left can’t even talk about their record on women’s issues without incriminating themselves.  Therefore, they are compelled to slander conservatives who are out to make life better for women, protect unborn life, and preserve religious liberty.  Their strategy is ridiculous, but somehow the Left expects to pull the wool over America’s eyes. The DNC ad got it right on only one count — this really is “a scary time to be a woman.”

The public watched in horror as a spate of recent videos showed teenage girls attacking people in fast food restaurants – pulling hair, kicking, punching, and stomping their victims while spewing vile epithets at bystanders who tried to interfere.  What we haven’t seen so openly is the growing epidemic of one-on-one violence that girls are perpetrating in dating relationships.

According to Stop Abusive and Violent Environments (SAVE), “Surveys now show high school girls are more likely than boys to engage in physical violence with their dating partners.”  SAVE spokesman Philip W. Cook says, “Teenage girls are as likely as boys to slap, hit, and kick their partners.  Violence by anyone only increases the risk of being injured in return.  We need a consistent message about dating violence that is based on factual information and … rooted in reality.”

The Centers for Disease Control’s (CDC) “2009 Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance Survey” spells out that reality by noting that males are now more at risk than females; the latest data show that 10 percent of teenage males report dating violence, as compared with nine percent of teenage females.  The situation is even worse among young adults.  A study published in the American Journal of Public Health reveals that in 71 percent of the cases of one-way violence, females were the aggressors, while males were the initiators only 29 percent of the time.

SAVE also reveals that a 2010 Department of Justice report, “Delinquency Cases in Juvenile Court, 2007,” indicates, “Juvenile courts handled 448,900 cases involving females in 2007, more than twice the 1985 number.”  SAVE adds that “for assaults and other offenses against persons, the female offender rate soared by 233 percent over the same period.”  In addition to physical violence, female assaults include sexual violence.  A Cleveland survey of 6th and 7th graders concludes, “Boys were more likely to be victims of sexual violence than girls.”

Sadly, female aggression, like male aggression, can have lethal consequences.  SAVE reports at least two recent cases in which teenage girls have fatally wounded their dating partners.  Further, the girls who perpetrate violence are far more likely to later become a victim of subsequence violence.

This relatively new incidence of women following bad cultural behavior is yet another way we are reaping the whirlwind of family breakdown.  Those who declare that family structure doesn’t matter need to see these cases as the human toll, writ large from the social science data describing very predictable outcomes for children at risk when there is no stable mom-and-dad family providing the home environment, where children absorb morals and values that are essential to becoming productive citizens, rather than juvenile delinquents.

“Women in politics” is the topic on the minds of “men” in the chattering class these days.

First, all ten people watching Chris Matthews’ show last week on MSNBC would have been witness to a scene comparable to that of a gaggle of petty middle school girls.  Matthews played GOP Senate candidate Christine O’Donnell’s latest television ad and joked around with guests Alex Wagner of Politics Daily and MSNBC political analyst Richard Wolffe that O’Donnell was cute and her mannerisms (and those of Sarah Palin) were “attractive as he–,” but basically she had nothing going on upstairs.

He then joyfully ran a recent CNN clip of O’Donnell analyzing the political ramifications of Obama vetoing his own health care law close to the 2012 elections.  She said it could leave him vulnerable to — and has already seen ads in support of — a Hillary Clinton run in 2012.  Of course, Matthews and his panel laughed this off, saying that she must be making this up.

Big Journalism calls out Matthews and his lack of Googling: “Breitbart.tv, CBS, Politico, and even Gawker seemed to find the ads on what’s known as the ‘Internet,’ but the subject is strangely absent on the search engine on MSNBC, so I guess we can excuse Chris this once because it appears that MSNBC would not cover it. ”

We “conservative cuties” profoundly disagree with Chris Matthews, and it just kills him.  Why?  Perhaps the young Republican he asked to the prom said “no” and he’s never recovered — or maybe he’s just a troglodyte. 

Secondly, Tom Junod of Esquire feels perfectly comfortable saying that “The Democratic Party is boring.  And its women are either old or unattractive.”  I may agree with the boring part, but the rest is just catty.  Come to think of it, both guys are being catty.  So “boys,” put your claws away and just report the news please.

Yes, the comments by New York Jets players were juvenile and inappropriate.  And yes, Ines Sainz, the TVAzteca reporter at the center of the “women in locker rooms” controversy, is the Erin Brackovich of professional sports by American media standards.  What rankles me are reports — not only by Sainz, but other female sports reporters — that they routinely ignore similar, although not as blatant, comments and behavior from players.  “It’s just a part of the job,” they say.  Since when is a hostile work environment part of anyone’s job?

Of course, a locker room is almost by definition a hostile work environment — for reporters both male and female who really do not belong in there.  Because Sports, Inc. and Big Media ignore this reality, this has naturally been an issue for women in sports journalism ever since locker rooms were opened to female reporters in 1985.  Just ask the New England Patriots, who were embroiled in a locker room sexual harassment scandal in the early 1990’s.  Given employment law on sexual harassment and hostile work environments, it’s hard to comprehend this still happening in the NFL and professional sports.

Hasn’t the NFL learned yet that mixing the sexes in intimate situations is a recipe for trouble?  Even our armed forces, with a far more solid authority structure and more discipline than the NFL, have the common sense to not mix the sexes in shower facilities.  The current situation of allowing reporters of either sex into locker rooms is not only outrageous but disrespectful all the way around.

• It disrespects female reporters who must join their male colleagues in the locker rooms or risk losing their jobs.  Their dignity and professionalism demand they be given a level playing field with their male colleagues, without unnecessarily placing them in such awkward situations.
• It disrespects players who have their privacy invaded by strangers.  
• It disrespects the players’ wives and marital vows.
• And it should bring shame on ball clubs that expect consistently high standards of professional conduct from rather young and often immature men when they are forced to bare all in front of the opposite sex.  Don’t these teams have enough legal trouble with their players already without inviting sexual harassment and hostile work environment claims?

There is no reason for anyone not affiliated with the team to be in the locker room while players are changing clothes.  There are some that say the locker room is the only place to get good, spontaneous, off-the-record comments from players, but I beg to disagree.  If reporters are barred from locker rooms, publicity-loving players will seek them out elsewhere.  There is no reason for anyone to chase them into the showers. 

Like I have said before, I think House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-California) knew a lot about former Congressman Eric Massa’s (D-New York) antics long before it became public, and she decided to do nothing.  She kept the status quo and refused to “drain the swamp” that she so adamantly protested against when elected Speaker. 

The Washington Examiner reported yesterday that Speaker Pelosi may be called to testify in front of the House Ethics committee on what her office knew about the complaints made by Massa’s staffers. 

Pelosi is already saying that her staff knew but never told her.  What a copout.  You’re the Speaker of the House, and you blame a huge scandal on your staff?  That’s not what a leader does. 

I was also critical of the way the Republicans handled allegations of ex-Rep. Mark Foley’s (R-Florida) sexual misconduct with young boys.  The Ethics Committee released a report saying that Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Illinois) was told in passing about it and that his staff knew.

The Speaker of the House and his/her staff should respond immediately to serious allegations.  If this was a private company, antics like those of Foley and Massa would have been dealt with immediately.  Raunchy movies like Animal House appear more ethical than our U.S. Congress.

“What did Pelosi know and when did she know it?” is the question on everyone’s lips in Washington today.  Well … that and the meaning of a new sexual term that (thanks to MSNBC’s Morning Joe) sent us all running for the Urban Dictionary this morning.  Both of these are legitimate questions but I will discuss only one in this pro-family forum.  Today’s Washington Post reports that Speaker Pelosi’s office was notified in October about Congressman Eric Massa’s unprofessional and perhaps illegal behavior.  

Congressman Massa resigned on Monday in response to allegations of impropriety with very young Capitol Hill staffers.  Despite his bizarre rantings on television and Pelosi’s silly claim on Sunday that Massa’s battle with cancer somehow is to blame, this is very serious.  Apparently the Democrats learned nothing from the Mark Foley debacle in 2006.  I said then that the Republican Speaker should resign and I stand by those statements.  Capitol Hill is not a frat house and unethical behavior toward staff should not be tolerated.  The fact the Foley was targeting interns makes his scandal even more disgusting but, make no mistake, twenty-something staff need to be protected too. 

Immediately after college I was honored to serve on the staff of a Republican Member from Georgia.  For a 21-year-old, a sitting Member of Congress is a rock star.  We laughed at all his jokes and believed everything he said.   I may have been more naïve than some, but I was not alone in the “hero worship” that staff gives to sitting Members.  This relationship is usually healthy for idealistic staffers but in the cases in which Members of Congress of either party use their status to use “sexually explicit language” or to “grope” staff there needs to be disciplinary action taken immediately.  This tolerance of bad Congressional behavior is not new but it is offensive. 

Corporations go to great lengths to protect against lawsuits for sexual harassment but Congress seems to have missed the memo.  Animal house Congressional office antics died with Charlie Wilson. 

Republican or Democrat, man or woman, Members of Congress need not only to live by the same rules as everyone else, but I would argue they should set a higher standard.   Moms don’t send their kids off to Washington to get that kind of education.   Nancy Pelosi is the CEO of the House of Representatives.  Her job is to run her chamber with integrity and she blew it. 

As it stands today American mothers will have to think twice about encouraging their children to do a stint on Capitol Hill as either intern or staff.  That is truly a shame.   The American people deserve better leadership and we want to know more about Pelosi’s handling of the Massa mess.  What did she know and when did she know it?