Posted on 01/13/2013 10:42:53 AM PST by TurboZamboni
Many of the same tactics used to weaken the Christian influence also worked to weaken the family. They introduced the ideas of divorce made easy instead of working out the problems or turning to Scripture. They taught situation ethics in schools where kids learned to blame their parents for all of their problems and then resent them for it. In the 1960s and 70s, the openness of sexual promiscuity flooded the families. Adultery and pre-marital sex permeated through the Church like yeast in a batch of dough. Even Christian leaders fell to the temptations that were hurled at them, causing them to fall in disgrace. The number of pregnancies to unwed mothers also spiked as did the use of illegal drugs.
The socialists infiltrated the public schools early on and began changing what was being taught. Today, kids aren’t taught anything about family values. Instead, they are being taught how to subvert the authority of their parents and do their own thing. Planned Parenthood even teaches teenage girls how to get an abortion and work around parental notification laws.
(Excerpt) Read more at politicaloutcast.com ...
All is going according to plan!
And if we call Obama the food stamp president, that is racist.
If anyone wants to cut back food stamps, then liberals will say that you want kids to go hungry, that you are actually in favor of people starving in the streets.
Liberals have set up these debates on issues so that they win the debate.
If you oppose food stamps, you want people to go hungry.
If you oppose the global warming hysteria, you are in favor of dirty air and dirty water and pollution.
If you oppose abortion on demand, you want to see women impaled on coat hangars.
If you oppose policies such as Dream Acts or amnesty for illegals, then you are xenophobic and anti-immigrant, even against legal immigrants.
If you oppose affirmative action, then you are racist. And so it goes.........................
And then there’s that obesity problem Moochelle is always whining about.
Pet peeve. A child is not elegible to apply for food stamps, only an adult. So a household gets food stamps. Citing the number of kids is a statist’s attempt to garner sympathy.
Free and reduced lunches for school age children (breakfast and lunch)is available to these same children. They're fed twice a day (in some cases three times a day in some school systems). They are even fed during the summers while school is out of session.
I've observed students getting a free lunch and then selling it for less to a non-free/reduced lunch student, and pocketing the money for snacks after school.
Why do we keep the food stamp allocation at the same level for families with school age children, as we do for those without children in school? It seems we should adjust the food stamp allocation to reflect that the child is getting two and sometimes three meals five days a week, while in school.
Sounds like double dipping to me.
The real story here is who is having children in the United States today (and who isn’t). Much more alarming than how much money is p!ssed away on the world’s fattest “poor people”.
I think it was formerly Somali Hiyrsan Ali (made the movie “Fitna” with Geert Wilders) who said it was a dream of her father to come to America, because he wanted to live somewhere that even the poor people were fat.
A hand out isn’t a hand up.
“because he wanted to live somewhere that even the poor people were fat.”
Now the next generation of Somalis dream of coming here so they can get a free cell phone...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.