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.

They’ll call me a bigot, but I prefer to see myself as a realist.  So let’s jump into it.  The Today Show’s Jenna Wolfe dropped an unexpected bombshell into the national conversation over “gay marriage.”  She announced on air (and in her blog) that, “My girlfriend, Stephanie Gosk, and I are expecting a baby girl the end of August.”

First and foremost, I am pro-life.  Let’s just put that up front.  I love babies.  Children are life changing, and I’m sure Miss Wolfe is already finding that out.

However, I’m also like that little kid who yelled, “The king has no clothes!”  If there’s something to be said and no one wants to say it for fear of hurting the feelings of others, well, you’ll find me there.  Sorry to rain on your parade, but truth is truth.

So here we go.  The headline on the Today Show’s website starts out with the word “Surreal.”  But, in truth, it should read “Unreal.”  Jenna Wolfe and her girlfriend, Stephanie Gosk, are most certainly not expecting a baby girl at the end of August, not in the biological sense, anyway.

When a man and a woman unite in a sexual union, the woman provides the unfertilized egg and the man provides the sperm.  Those two things — biologically exclusive to members of the opposite sex — merge and the miracle of life begins.

So herein lies the crux of our dilemma: Miss Wolfe and Miss Gosk are both women.  That’s not an anti-“gay” statement; that’s a true statement.  Biologically speaking, they cannot, of their own volition, produce a child.  I’m sure they’re both nice women, but they need a man in order to have a baby.

And if they need a man in order to have a baby, then who can honestly say that this is the only contribution a man can make?  Who can honestly say that Miss Gosk can replace — truly and completely replace — the father who should be present in that child’s life?  Consider, if you will, all the social science data to date that shows that children do better in a traditional mom-and-dad household.  Which parent does the child not need?  A young lady asked that very question to a state legislature recently — “Which parent do I not need?” — and no one could answer her.

It may be politically correct to celebrate the news of Miss Wolfe’s pregnancy.  It may be politically correct to celebrate Miss Gosk’s role as the child’s “other parent.”  But it is selfish, and supremely so, to deny the child — and others like her — the benefit of either a mother or a father.  Two men cannot produce a child.  Two women cannot produce a child.  And neither of those familial arrangements is fair to the overall development of a child.

Don’t get me wrong.  I’m sure Miss Gosk will be supportive and loving and caring to Miss Wolfe’s child; but she will never be — can never be — the child’s father.  And, to me, that’s just sad.

Today’s guest blogger is Christian Shelby, a volunteer with Concerned Women for America.

Every year, I look forward to the annual survey of college freshman that reveals their attitudes on a wide variety of issues and tracks the trends of nearly 50 years of accumulated data from nine million college students.  The lead author this year, psychologist Jean Twenge, summarized the 2013 findings with a stinging rebuke of today’s college freshmen, describing their “tendency toward narcissism” and noting that the trend line on narcissism has increased “30 percent over the past thirty-odd years.”

In a recent Fox News analysis of this year’s American Freshman Survey, Dr. Keith Ablow, a psychiatrist and member of the Fox News Medical A-Team, was not surprised at the findings on narcissism. He described today’s college students as “faux celebrities” who are “the equivalent of lead actors in their own fictionalized life stories.”  Dr. Ablow has written much over the past few years about what he calls “the toxic psychological impact of media and technology on children, adolescents and young adults.”  He has long noted the dramatic discrepancy between the dismal test scores of contemporary young people and their self-perceptions of being “gifted and driven to succeed.”

I found Dr. Ablow’s explanation and analysis of the American Freshman Survey fascinating as well as very, very troubling.  He blames social media and all the technology tools and games for creating false images and expectations.  He claims that social media and technology are “the psychological drugs of the 21st Century and they are getting our sons and daughters very sick, indeed.”

For instance, he is troubled by Facebook where “young people can fool themselves into thinking they have hundreds or thousands of ‘friends.’”  Worse, they have absolute control over the medium: they can “delete unflattering comments,” “block those who disagree with them,” choose only the most “flattering, sexy or funny photographs” to project just the image that they want others to see, and “publicly connect” to a wide variety of celebrities by simply clicking “like.”  He didn’t mention the indiscriminate, often quite damning, posts that some youth are putting out there for everyone, including future employers, to see.

Twitter, too, has problems, according to Dr. Ablow.  Teens and young adults can have “followers” and “fans,” enhancing their “faux celebrity.”  Computer games create the illusion of “being something that they are not.”  Likewise, reality television fosters “self-involvement and self-love” that, though fictionalized, can seem real and/or normal.

Dr. Ablow ties all these influences on our teens with the political correctness of handing out trophies to losing athletic teams and inflating academic grades.  Add manic dancing, too-loud music, drugs like Adderall, and gigantic energy drinks into the mix and it’s no wonder we have a generation of youth with major psychological problems.

Warning the public that “false pride can never be sustained,” Dr. Ablow laments all the “young people who are higher on drugs than ever, drunker than ever, smoking more, tattooed more, and pierced more and having more and more sex, earlier and earlier and earlier, raising babies before they can do it well, because it makes them feel special, for awhile.”

Sadly, he concludes, “They’re doing anything to distract themselves from the fact that they feel empty inside and unworthy.”  He thinks that we’ll see epidemics of depression, suicide, and even homicide as all the “real self-loathing and hatred of others that lies beneath all this narcissism rises to the surface.”

Yes, he uses the word, “EPIDEMIC!” [emphasis mine].  And he expects that this epidemic will “dwarf the toll of any epidemic we have ever known.”  His warning is sobering: “By the time we see the scope and destructiveness of this enemy clearly, we will also realize, as the saying goes, that it is us.”

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/01/08/are-raising-generation-deluded-narcissists

As the United States is about to go over its own fiscal cliff, EU nations are facing up to the realities of big government and bad policies. Carolyn Moynihan, deputy editor of MercatorNet, wrote recently about how Italians are turning to home for support in an increasingly inhospitable public culture.  In fact, two Italian market research organizations — Coldiretti and Censis — report that one-third of adult Italians (more than 60% of young adults — up from only 48% in 1990) live back home with their parents.  This sad development is especially affecting the 18- to 29-year-olds who haven’t been able to find work or can’t afford their own place on the low salaries of available jobs.

The Italians refer to the generation that had moved in with mom and dad as “big babies” or “mama’s boys” because they are not leaving the nest. The young adults, though, explain that they wish they could have their own places and be independent, but the unemployment rate for 20-somethings in Italy hovers at over 30 percent, and many of those with jobs are settling for part-time or low-pay jobs they wouldn’t have even considered in better economic times. Even well-trained, well-educated young adults are struggling to find good-paying jobs. One survey reported that fully a quarter of 30 to 40-year-olds in Italy still live with their parents. Sadly, such are the realities during a financial crisis where unemployment is rising and prices for basic commodities like food and fuel are too high.

Of course, Italy is not alone in facing the consequences of the fiscal crisis and bureaucratic expansion. A harsh reality is that “re-distributing the wealth” doesn’t stretch money very far.

The silver lining to the fiscal crisis is that hard financial times strengthen the family as a place of solace and succor to provide balance to the difficult times and financial crises. As the public aspects of people’s lives become unbearable, they retreat to their private and personal space — home and family — where they find relief from the stress.  In fact, the Coldiretti and Censis report was titled: “The economic crisis – living together, living better,” a title that recognizes the benefits of a family haven when there is no place else to turn, a place of solidarity and support, and a place of refuge where family members can repair and renew their spirits before they return to the demanding challenges they face in their professional and/or public lives.

Researchers are learning that the concepts of “home and family” have grown musty from misuse and lack of appreciation in the fast-track marketplace.  In New Zealand, the University of Waikato is sponsoring an upcoming conference to explore the “public-private nexus” of “home and identity.”  They are working with foundations to explore ways to bring academics and public policy experts into the discussion about the importance of home.

Other researchers are acknowledging the lack of understanding about the pivotal role of home.  Others decry the attention to “home” without a corresponding acknowledgement of the role of “family” in strengthening nations.  Still others want researchers and policymakers to appreciate the role and contribution of men to home and family.

As I’ve written in my latest book, Marriage Matters, the married mom-and-dad family — in addition to being important for the well-being of men and women and, especially, children — is the foundation of societies and nations.  Marriage has been recognized as a special institution across cultures and throughout history.  Perhaps these desperate economic times will remind us of the importance of marriage and family.

Have no fear, the federal government is here! Wait… that isn’t right.

I’m no damsel in distress, and neither are you. The days of a masked hero helping those in need are, so it seems, nonexistent. But that is exactly what’s unfolding before our very eyes.

The government wants to tell “we the people” how to live. Citizens, if you think politics won’t directly affect you, think again.  New York City’s mayor decided to ban sugary drink sizes to 16 ounces, putting a limit on buying soda in order to thin out an obese New York populace.  Michelle “The Lunch Lady” Obama has implemented an Orwellian lunch program to regulate what American children can and cannot eat, and health (for the mother, not for the abortion-targeted baby) mandates are being shoved down citizens’ throats despite how deeply they offend citizens’ religious convictions.

And it doesn’t stop there.  As if forcing you to pay for abortions weren’t enough, Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius blatantly ignored — and arrogantly violated — federal law by using her Cabinet position to tell Americans to vote for President Obama.

Where are the outraged media elites?  Where’s the lone, masked hero who fights against those who abuse their power?  As you’ve heard, time and time again, this election is one of the most important elections of our life time.  We cannot allow our government to keep implementing laws that go against “we the people.”

Americans, listen up!  If you want a government that will cater to your every need, you’re living in the wrong country.  This country — the one built on freedom and liberty, bought by the blood and sweat of our ancestors, and lusted after by the rest of the world — is not a country of equal handouts, but of equal opportunity to work hard to achieve our ambitions.  Yet, that is not what we are seeing.  Instead, we have an administration that has implemented more federal control over American citizens’ everyday lives, and what are Americans doing about it?  Nothing!

It’s the American citizens’ choice, but I urge you to take a good, hard look.  It’s time to bring our country back to its founding.  Ben Franklin once said, “It is a republic, if we can keep it.”  So, I ask, can we?

Concerned Women for America (CWA) is doing what it takes to keep our government accountable to the taxpayers.  CWA’s She Votes 2012 project is working to make sure Americans are registered to vote in this extremely important election.  Are you ready?  Are you registered?  With voter registration ending on October 8 in most states, now is not the time to idly wonder.  Click here now to see if you’re registered. … And if you aren’t, stay on the site and do something about it.

Visiting New York’s National September 11 Memorial a few weeks ago, I was enormously touched by one small but radically bold design choice by the memorial committee.  Inscribed next to the name of each of the eleven pregnant mothers who died in the attacks on the World Trade Center was the phrase, “and her unborn child.”

Since the memorial’s mission is to “reaffirm respect for life,” this decision is entirely appropriate.  Making such a beautiful statement is not only refreshing in a society that so frequently dismisses the humanity of the unborn, but communicates an indispensable message to a watching world — every life is precious.  Indeed, remembering every single victim killed in the attacks — including the unborn — is the ultimate form of defiance against the pointless violence of our enemies. While the terrorists who attacked New York, the Pentagon, and Flight 93 were anxious to kill men, women, and children, the 9/11 memorial testifies that Americans as a whole are just as zealous to commemorate every human life lost.

Counting these precious unborn children among those who died on 9/11 elucidates in crystal-clear terms that America is principled in the belief that every person is valuable, no matter their size or age.

As a pro-life advocate, you would presume my head was swirling with a variety of thoughts including, “Is the commemorating family pro-life or pro-abortion?” or, “Does Mayor Michael Bloomberg realize his commitment to ‘reaffirm life’ is contradictory to his pro-abortion stance?” or, “What about the children who were born not knowing their parents lost in the attacks?” But no.

As I stood alongside the footprint of the South Twin Tower, staring down at the names of the victims and the recognition of their unborn children, I had only one overwhelming sentiment. I thanked God that I live in a country whose Biblically-based value of life and liberty permeates the core of every one of us.

A new study published in Psychology Today helps explain why some students who should not be successful end up doing quite well in their chosen fields. Two psychologists — Timothy Judge and Charlice Hurst ­­— partnered with the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth to study 12,000 people for more than two decades.  Some of their findings were typical: teens from well-educated families who made good grades were more successful than blue-collar kids who didn’t do well in school.  Other findings were unexpected.  Some blue-collar students who had good grades ended up making 30-60 percent more than the privileged students.

What was the difference?

The successful blue-collar kids had personal beliefs that set them apart: emotional stability, internal locus of control, self-efficacy, and self-esteem.  These traits enabled those students to shape their future; that is, they were decisive in choosing a particular course of action or in quitting certain other paths they deemed undesirable.

Another psychologist found that students who lacked the personal beliefs isolated by Judge and Hurst were indecisive persons.  In other words, being a decisive person can be an important trait for career success.  Joseph Badaracco, an ethics professor at Harvard, identified what he called an inability to make “right vs. right” decisions as a “fatal strategic flaw.”

The bottom line?  Those who can focus on one strategy, rather than continually trying to choose between options or approaches to take in solving a problem, are more likely to finish a task or a job and, thus, be more successful.  So, make up your mind, move forward, and get the job done.  Indecision is deadly and non-productive; being decisive is essential to moving ahead.

Hillary Clinton created a firestorm back in 1992 when she remarked in an interview that she guessed she could have just stayed home and baked cookies.  Fast forward to 2012 and Hilary Rosen — who has visited the White House more than 35 times — attacks Ann Romney, mother of five boys, for “never work[ing] a day in her life.”  Just when we thought the left couldn’t get more insensitive and condescending toward conservative women and derisive of the concept of motherhood, the Democrats’ narrative about a supposed GOP “war on women” gets exposed to reveal the long-standing, patronizing, and extremely abusive feminist “war on conservative women.”

All it takes is a quick look at all the magazine features about “women of the year” or “outstanding women” to discover that the media elites and leftist women in politics and punditry have zero knowledge of the accomplishments of conservative women; nor do they understand or appreciate the contributions to society and the future of the nation by those women who “choose” to nurture and raise their own children.

Rosen’s put-down of Ann Romney also reveals an appalling lack of understanding about the work involved in raising your own children.  I am a career woman who chose to stay home with my children when they were young; those years flew by and were just a blip that hardly registered on my career path.  But, for me and for my children, those were incredibly productive and important years; both they and I are still reaping the benefits of that investment of my time, talents and energies.  It is very short-sighted of Hilary Rosen and others of her ilk to poke fun at those of us who put our husbands and children at the top of our priorities.  Anyone who looks at the fractured families that are so prevalent today will recognize that the nation and individual families are paying an exorbitant price for making family and children’s well-being an afterthought in women’s lives.

I also have to add that, for me, those stay-at-home years were the hardest work I have ever done.  Mothering would be much easier if, during the day, someone else cleans up all the messes, fixes all the meals, does all the laundry, picks up all the toys, handles the squabbles, and is on call for nine hours straight!

But, I feel sorry for working moms; they miss out on the joy of each new discovery their children make.  I didn’t want someone else to have those daily moments of pleasure.  I didn’t want someone else’s values and attitudes shaping my children’s outlook and attitudes toward life.  I didn’t want someone else training and nurturing my children and determining their future prospects and influencing their day-to-day development.

Yes, I understand that, for some women, staying home is not an option, but many are merely sacrificing their time with their children for a nicer house or car, a luxury that would otherwise be out of reach, or a splashy vacation or other perk of modern life that seems necessary at the time.

I am fully aware of — and experienced and survived — the significant financial and career sacrifices families make to live on only one income during their children’s formative years.  I am even more aware of the hefty sacrifices that many of those families make when it comes to their children’s well-being and the mom’s emotional fulfillment.  That latter consideration is certainly part of the reason for the underlying venom in leftist women’s disdain for stay-at-home mothers.

Pick up any women’s magazine today, and you’ll find stories of exhausted women who have no interest or time for themselves, their families, for sex or for homemaking — gorgeous kitchens with the latest in refrigerators and stoves are unused as family members pick up fast food on their way to somewhere besides home.  Read any newspaper, and you’ll see accounts of wealthy kids who are in trouble and kids from tony neighborhoods who are runaways or throwaway teens.  When my children were pre-teens, the dean of my husband’s university college laughingly told us, while making conversation during a cocktail party, that his son had dropped out of high school to “find himself.”  Here was a man with a Ph.D. and a long list of academic accomplishments whose son dropped out of high school.

What was it both Barbara Bush and Jacqueline Kennedy said?  If you fail at being a mother to your children, nothing else matters.

One day, not too long ago, the finger of God touched my heart in a strange way.  I stopped in at the barn where I keep my show horse, and while visiting with my trainer and other friends, I noticed a family I had not seen there before.  Their son was going up and down the aisle where the horses are stalled, attempting to get their attention, while the dad was watching carefully.  It was obvious that they were not as used to horses as I was, so I left my friends, walked over to the young man’s dad, and asked what the boy’s name was.

John is ten years old and had an obvious delight in these beautiful animals staring at him.  I gently took him over to a horse I knew would be perfectly calm to pet.  I had raised her from birth myself, although she is now a fancy show horse owned by a great rider.  ”John,” I said, “pet this one; she likes you.”  He squealed with joy as Star put her soft muzzle on his forehead and smacked a good lick of his hair.  ”Nothing like a little equine love,” I thought.

John stuck his hand towards the horse, but I warned him that the horse might think his finger was a carrot and urged him to be careful.  He looked at me with eyes full of joy and laughed out loud as he exclaimed, “Carrot!”  By the time I had to leave, John’s hair — or as we horse lovers like to say, “forelock” — was wet from Star’s loving kisses.  I hoped his mom wouldn’t mind that night; there is nothing better than that barn smell as far as I am concerned.

Yes, it was one of those joyous moments, and one I needed, as life sometimes throws you curve balls you think are just too big for you to handle.  Then God allowed me to meet John, a little boy with Down syndrome, who reminded me of the joys set before us every day — the little things that are so important — and the fact that when storms come, you can always delight in the everyday joys of life around you and praise the God who created it all.

I left that barn renewed, and I can still hear the joy of this precious young man in his delightful discovery of horses, the strong yet wise animal God put on earth to be a delight to those who can see and feel them.  Thank you, John, for being here.  Thank you for being the instrument of God’s love to me.  And many thanks to your parents, who chose life so that we could all be blessed.

Our guest blogger is Janne Myrdal, who serves as State Director of Concerned Women for America of North Dakota. To learn more about Down syndrome and the pro-life resources available on this issue, visit Downsyndromebrochure.com, a project of Concerned Women for America.

The mail arrived and it is that time of year again – the time when stores sell Halloween costumes that sexualize girls and glorify pimps and homicidal maniacs for boys. Oh joy; it’s time to flip through the costume catalog.

This year for infant girls (6-12 months and 12-18 months) there is an adorable (and age-appropriate) “Inky Black Kitty” costume which covers their arms and legs and looks like a cat. Right next to it though, is the “Cat Tutu” costume. Do cats and tutus usually go together? Anyway, this costume, for infant girls (anywhere from 6-18 months) consists of black tights, a bright pink tutu and a spaghetti strap black top. Oh, and to make sure it looks like a “cat tutu” there are some nifty
bright pink cat ears attached to a headband.

The toddler “Cuddly Lion” costume, the “Cheetah Cat” costume and the “Little Leopard” costume really must be seen to be believed. Remember when you view
the pictures that these are costumes for TODDLER girls! It begs the question, where were the parents of these children when the photos were taken? And, what kind
of parent would dress their toddler girl like this?

For the infant and toddler boys, they are all covered head to toe. In fact, boy costumes should probably cost double the amount of the girl costumes as they use twice
as much fabric.

Even with twice as much fabric, the choices are abhorrent for older boys too. On the “horror, gothic” page of the Party
City website there appear these delightful costume choices for the boys: zombies of many professions and hobbies, evil and psycho clowns (although the
difference is nuanced), a psychopathic killer, tortured souls (one “dark,” one “malevolent”), Chucky and Michael Myers and of course evil jesters, to name but
a few.

The “Mac Daddy” pimp costume falls under the “retro” heading. What parent wouldn’t want their son portraying a man who beats and rapes women and makes money from other men beating and raping women? If the boy has a tween sister, she could dress up as “Major Flirt” and “Mac Daddy” could turn her out. Really, the fun choices are endless.

Yes, sadly, it is that time of year again…