This Slap at a Feminist Senator and Her Daughter Seems Rather Petty to Me

“As ye sow, so shall ye reap.”

As a member of the Secularist Party, a.k.a. Democrat, Ms. McCaskill and her associates have been so efficient at driving God out of public venues, that it is now illegal for a public school to have benedictions at school sponsored events, prayers for the players at school sponsored sporting events and in many instances this has carried over to preventing the celebration of Christian holidays.

In their zeal to drive God from the American Public Square, perhaps it is about time that they be shown the consequences of their actions. It is unfortunate that Ms. McCaskill’s daughter is the one who must suffer for her mother’s political actions, but the school and the Archbishop were will within their rights, and well justified in this decision.

Perhaps Mx. McCaskill will not be as anxious to support the next secularist piece of legislation or the next legislative assault on the life of the unborn to come before her.

This is not “petty.” This is the chickens coming home to roost. This is the rude awakening that McCaskill deserves for her past actions. It is justice. In India it is called “karma.”

Claire McCaskill wishes to live in a secularist society, so let her.

Right or wrong, it’s their ball, their rules, their court. (the church) Slap their wrist and move on with the MEN’S agenda. Let the feminists take care of their own. I understand you may be trying to gain the moral highground. I believe the symbolism of that effort is lost on the misandrists.
Strange, it is the church and feminism that represent the rock and the hard-place we find ourselves betwixt, and we’re supposed to choose the lesser of two evils. While not particularly religious, I choose the church; for now.

Be carefull what You wish for Senator McCascill .

Hmmm…Perhaps a woman who has done honor to her marriage vows, raised
children to adulthood, subsequently gone on to a sucessful business without
“special” incentives or protections, employed dozens, suported her ENTIRE
community evenly, all the while holding fast to the tenets behind the founders that provide a superior education than can be expected in public school due to unending political intervention?

I wonder what kind of odds an “inspirational graduation speaker”, to impressionable high school girls, would beat to achieve THAT kind of roll status? Surely higher than a mere dime-a dozen (or whatever it costs to buy one these days) senator.

“….and here one student’s mother has beaten out odds of 10,000 to 1 to become a US Senator:

What odds? You get sponsored by a raft of crooks with deep pockets who know that they will control everything you do, and that pays for a team of liars who run a campaign for you. There are maybe two or three other captives with the same total lack of credentials and honesty who run against you and a whole swag of people who couldn’t put a coherent sentence together get to put their mark on a ballot paper – and you’re in!

Glenn,

Some folks don’t feel it is reasonable to allow folks who support murder of children to speak at graduations. Why would any moral leader permit evil to officiate? Whether she is a senator or a chimney sweep is immaterial.

St. Louis Archbishop Raymond Burke resigned as chair of the Cardinal Glennon Children’s Foundation a couple of weeks ago because the foundation (which has many secular folks involved) insisted on having Sheyl Crow play at the annual fundraiser. Crow is a big time abortion activist.
see: http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/religion/story/CAD5F6CE2B94342E862572C800744A2F?OpenDocument

Freedom of speech is not license to demand the podium at any private event, or even at a public event when the speaker promotes hate, murder, racism, or sexism. To permit the speech is condonation of the speaker’s agenda.

Perhaps you might think differently if Eve Ensler or Kim Gandy were the commencement speaker at your son’s graduation? If more people stood by reasonable convictions, we might be able to save this sinking country.

To all people of faith who oppose abortion who read this article: When marriage is important, abortion is not necessary. If you want to greatly reduce abortion, you must realize that the men’s movement has been the legitimate marriage movement for the past forty years.

You must extricate yourself from feminist beliefs teaching that marriage is “optional” or “dangerous”. You must expel radical feminism from your religion. You must take up the issue of marriage with the same vigor you have opposed abortion all these years. When this is done, not many folks will want abortion. The political support will wane and abortion will fade into the past, right along with the radical feminists who brought on the abortion and divorce revolutions.

PS: Claire McCaskill as also a big supporter of Gay Marriage.

As state auditor, McCaskill failed to report on the Missouri Division of Social Services numbers in her annual report. She hid the them in an unpublished report, which was supposedly available on request. But when I asked for one, they could not find it.

In contrast, her predecessor, Republican Margaret Kelly, found in her 1991 audit that the State had collected 28-million in child support arrears, while handing out 58-million in welfare benefits to “unentitled recipients”. The state was participating actively in welfare fraud. To make things worse, the state was collecting it back from men who already had child support orders — forcing them to pay child support twice — which put many men in jail for criminal nonsupport.

It was a huge fiasco here in Missouri, which resulted in major protests of our county prosecutor. It would have culminated in a class action suit had Frank Susman, the head of the firm that was going to do the suit on behalf of victimized men, did not shut it down. The case was all prepared and ready to go, but since it would have impacted feminists, Susman shut it down. Please note that Susman argued in support of partial birth abortions in front of the U.S. Supreme Court recently.

These things are all form one interlocking piece. So, Glenn, I suggest you focus on men’s issues rather than buttressing radical feminists who happen to become senators.

For political readers: McCaskill beat Senator Jim Talent last year by hiding her feminist roots. She campaigned smoothly but liberally on social issues. Talent lost because his voters were very unhappy with his handling of social issues. Talent strongly supported PROWA and VAWA. We was mushy on other social issues.

This is why Republicans are losing elections. The war is certainly hurting them, but social issues are the other major blow that pundits and analysts are ignoring. Republicans blew social issues badly, and voters are angry with them about this too. It doesn’t take much of a smooth-talking Democrat to come out on top of the situation. So, a multiracial man who appeared out of nowhere by the name of Obama looks pretty good compared to the lot of Republicans who do nothing more than talk endlessly about the war.

Republicans cannot win with balance. By putting all their eggs in one basket, they are assuring themselves of yet another drubbing in 2008.

The Catholic Church, like all Christian denominations, have sold their soul to feminism, primarily in an attempt to retain the congregation, but at least the Catholic Church is still willing to take a stand in some highly select areas. Good for them. We need a lot more of this, especially, as Dave points out, with what they have done to marriage.

The last thing we need is to pressure what little oppostion remains into succumbing further to the evils of murder and feminism. Yes, the Catholic Church is full of sinners, including priests. But just because they, or all of us, are sinners does not invalidate morality, or at least striving to teach and differentiate between right and wrong, including the murder of babies.

Regardless of what she claims, Claire McCasKILLbabies is not Catholic, she is a feminist. One cannot be both. But she knows that her daughter received a far superior education than what she would have got from a dumbed-down, race, gender, and sex obssessed, PC public school. But that won’t stop her from pushing an agenda where that which wasn’t good enough for her daughter should be good enough for your children and mine.

Re: Comments of DcFather:-

Why did the noble senadora send her daughter to a Catholic school?

Because she want’s to have her cake and eat it?

There’s feminism for you!