What assimilation?

Four Wichita families filed a discrimination lawsuit Monday in federal court against St. Anne Catholic School over a policy that requires English to be spoken at all times during the school day.

The lawsuit calls for an end to St. Anne’s policy, an order barring English-only or similar policies at other diocese schools and $75,000 for court and other costs.

The families want students to be able to speak other languages if they choose during their free time — not in the classroom or during instructional times.

A diocese spokesman called the discrimination suit “unfortunate,” saying the Catholic church has a history of offering support and services to minorities and of speaking out for immigrant rights.

But one of the parents behind the suit said he’s concerned that the English-only policy could spread.

“I think if one school is granted their wish by not allowing their students to speak another language, then other schools will follow suit,” said Michael Silva.

St. Anne’s language policy has been in effect since September.

The lawsuit claims that the policy “has created and continues to promote racial and national origin discrimination.. ”

Diocese spokesman Fred Solis said he cannot agree with the discrimination claim.

“We have to disagree with the notion that the church, or the diocese or St. Anne for that matter is or has discriminated against any member of a minority group given our history, and the many ways that, even today, we go about to speak out on behalf of immigrants, minorities and the many services we offer to those groups of people,” he said.

The school, its principal, Sister Margaret Nugent, the parish and the Catholic Diocese of Wichita are named defendants in the lawsuit.

Initially, I thought that it was a little strange to ban other languages during free time. What’s the point of that?, I wondered.

And then I saw this little nugget:

The diocese has said the school enacted the policy in response to four students who were using Spanish to bully others and to put down teachers and administrators.

Ah.

The students’ first language also is English, not Spanish. So what’s the problem here? It isn’t like these students can’t understand English.

Like the school’s policy or not, here’s the kicker — it’s a private school. Any funding the school receives goes to its students, not the school itself. So that school, as far as I’m concerned, can make whatever policies they want. They can require students to speak only in Pig Latin for all I care. If you don’t like it, you’re welcome to take your children elsewhere.

And of course, it won’t matter how the rest of the student population and their families feel about the English-only policy. They could all support it, but if a few minority families change, we have to buckle under to please them. Isn’t that how it works nowadays?

Hat Tip: Moonbattery

Last month, I wrote about how political correctness has reached a new low by asking Australian Santa Clauses to say “Ha Ha Ha!” instead of the traditional “Ho Ho Ho!”. It was supposedly insulting to women and frightening for children. I wrote:

Of all the ridiculous things to say might be politically incorrect, the famous laughter of Santa Claus is beyond ridiculous. Westaff’s spokesperson said that they merely “encouraged” the Santas to use ‘Ha Ha Ha’ instead, but why would a simple suggestion cause multiple Santas to quit?

And let’s say someone does get offended. Let’s say some kid does get scared.

Who cares?!?

If someone if offended, they can get over it and themselves. If some kid gets a little bit scared by the big man in a red suit, I’m sure he or she will get over it as well without suffering any long-term damage. What do these people think is going to happen? That the five-year-old scared by Santa is going to spend the rest of his life in therapy because Santa said ‘Ho Ho Ho’ instead of ‘Ha Ha Ha’?

Have you ever heard anything more ridiculous?

If a kid was scared of Santa, the way he laughed probably wouldn’t change that. And if some chick walking down the street got “offended” because she thought Santa was calling her a ho, then she was probably looking for a situation to take advantage of.

Sadly, the first Santa Claus has been sacked for being unwilling to throw out tradition for political correctness and the “I’m Offended, Therefore I Am” crowd.

A shop has sacked its Santa Claus for saying Ho-ho-ho.

John Oakes, 70, got his marching orders after the store decreed that women might be offended because ‘ho’ is American slang for a whore. Instead, he was supposed to say Ha-ha-ha.

“They’re are trying to kill the spirit of Christmas,” said Mr Oakes, who has been a Santa for ten years.

He was also found guilty of singing Jingle Bells at the Myer department store in Cairns, Northern Australia.

He said: “The manager told me my services were no longer required. When I asked her why, she replied, ‘You said Ho-ho-ho and that’s not appropriate’. Not appropriate? How long has Santa been calling Hohoho, for goodness sake? She also said I wasn’t supposed to sing.”

Sad, isn’t it?

Have we — and by we, I mean those of us who are a part of western civilization in general — really become this sensitive? I’m really curious as to how and why we got here. Who can honestly look at this as a victory? Wow, way to go, Department Store Manager — you fired Santa for saying the phrase that he has been known for saying for hundreds of years. Bet it makes you feel real powerful, huh? It makes you wonder how far some people will go to destroy commonly loved pastimes and traditions, regardless of how harmless they may be.

When I first heard about this story, the Santa Clauses had stood up and protested, and tradition beat political correctness. Unfortunately, when it comes to moonbattery and political correctness, common sense can only go so far.

Pop quiz.

Let’s say you’re at Logan International Airport, the very same airport in which half of the 9-11 hijackers met on that fateful day to begin their carnage. You’re minding your own business when someone walks by holding something in their hand that looks like C4 that is hooked up to something that looks like a circuit board on the back of their hoodie by a bunch of wires. The words “Socket To Me” are written on the back of the hoodie. She’s also making a spectacle of herself while at the airport.

What would your first reaction be?

MIT’s Star Simpson did just that, for “Career Day” at school (she had been wearing the ensemble to campus for the previous few days). She was then shocked when she was promptly surrounded by airport security wielding machine guns, and then found herself in jail.

Simpson told authorities she was “surprised” she landed in jail. After all, she wrote on her Web site that she spends her free time “saving the planet from evil villains” and loves “crazy ideas.”

There is absolutely nothing artistic about scaring people in public places, even if her father, Hugh Simpson, told the Maui News in Star’s native Hawaii that he was “proud” of his daughter. Then he boasted that his daughter went to a park after she was freed on $750 bail to “stretch her arms because she had been in a small room for hours and hours.”

I hope she gets used to it because stupidity is not an excuse for criminality; an “art project” to attract prospective employers that terrorizes perfect strangers should certainly be a deterrent from Star Simpson ever landing a job.

But, apparently, MIT does not see it that way. It seems that Simpson had worn her bizarre ensemble for days before she showed up at Logan airport with it. All part of Career Day, she later told cops. No one on campus thought it prudent to tell her to take it off, especially considering that it is just days past the six-year anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

MIT needs to throw Star Simpson off campus because her “crazy ideas” - such as wearing a hoax device at the airport where two of the planes left on that dark morning when 3,000 people were murdered in this country - are unacceptable. Her parents, who did not react with any sort of responsibility for the actions of their daughter, should forfeit any cash they paid for her tuition thus far.

Until the schools are taken to task in this town for allowing stupidity, such as thinking a fake bomb attached to a sweatshirt is art appropriate for Career Day, hardworking people in this state will continue to pay the price for over-privileged out-of-towners to use our city as their personal playgrounds.

Of course, moonbats are sympathetic, calling her an artist, someone courageous was just trying to take on “corrupt” politicians. They don’t seem to realize showing up at an airport with a phony bomb is asking for trouble, especially when you are trying to draw attention to yourself.

Could it be she was seeking publicity???

No, no, that couldn’t be it. It was just an experiment for Career Day at MIT, a school that apparently thought it ok for a girl to walk around with a phony bomb for days on end. If there’s going to be another Virginia Tech massacre, it’ll probably be at MIT if someone walking around with a phony bomb on their back raises no eyebrows and causes no alarms.

And how did moonbats respond to Michele McPhee’s column in the Boston Herald exposing the attention whore for what she is?

Your just jealous because she has brains and you dont!

What is with editorialist reporter? Does she want to lick every cops buttons clean while she’s foaming at the mouth with her populist pap. I want to know if anyone has ever seen her and Ed Anger of the Weekly World News in the same room together. If you’re ever down at the Herald or WTTK you can spot her very easily she’ll be the one wearing the Lector mask.

Lookit–time for the Herald to catch a clue. Nobody’s buying your inane BS. Get over yourself and try, really try and write some news. It goes like htis: who, what, when, where and why. It does not go: BECAUSE I SAID SO. Now please explain to me exactly what journalism school Herald reporters are supposed to go to: The Helen Keller School of Journalism perhaps?

The scariest part of this whole situation is not the teenager who did a foolish thing. It is the cops and the security forces that did not know how to react to what they thought was a threatening situation. Boston authorities have twice now demonstrated that they cannot handle the responsibility given them.

Only a paranoid idiot could have thought that the device looked like a bomb. The girl’s mistake was not realizing that Logan security is provided by paranoid gestapo.

Okay I get it. This column is performance art. You’re trying to reflect the proudly belligerent ignorance of popular American thought. By pretending to be a shrill, reactionary moron and pretending you advocate the shooting death of this woman, you’re subtly subverting the raw paranoid hysteria that gave us incidents like this, and the Mooninite fiasco. Well played, sir or madam. I almost believed you actually WERE the stupid, sheltered harpy who “wrote” this piece. Nice art project.

I’m getting kind of tired of the country’s most cowardly people wetting their pants and reducing our civil liberties because they’re afraid of terrorists. The best was to deal with terrorists is to get them, just like we did Osama bin Laden. Oh. That’s right, mission unaccomplished. We lose something like 50,000 people a year in traffic accidents, and the worst restrictions on our personal freedoms from that are having to pay more for safer cars and to wear seat belts. But with terrorists, instead we let the whiny namby-pambys and momma’s boys (and girls) act our their unreasonable fears and “change our world.” Cripes people, buck up and realize that the fear-mongers are doing precisely what terrorists want!

And on and on and on.

It isn’t fear mongering for police to take something like this seriously. She may well have simply been a stupid kid, but what is the alternative? What if she hadn’t just been some stupid kid and really did have a bomb, but police just looked at her and thought, “Oh, that’s just some kid being stupid?”

Simpson got into MIT, so obviously she’s an intelligent girl. I highly doubt that she had no idea what kind of reaction this would cause, and injecting fear into people just for the hell of it is inexcusable. She deserved to go to jail, and if MIT had any kind of common sense at all, they’d expel her. But, in all likelihood, she’ll return to the college as a celebrated “artist” without facing any repercussions for her actions whatsoever.

Hat Tip: Moonbattery

In the interest of forcing diversity down students’ throats, Ohio State University has banned jokes, in a slightly chilling “Diversity Statement”:

Diversity is a cornerstone of community at The Ohio State University. The Office of University Housing defines the concept as an inclusive mixture of all the differences that make the individuals at The Ohio State University unique. Through exposure, critical thinking, appreciation and interactions within our residence halls and larger university communities our goal is to empower students, staff, faculty and friends. In this, we attempt to learn from the wide array of human similarities and differences in an increasingly diverse world.

Our goals are to:

Increase sensitivity to differences through exposure, dialogue, and personal reflection

Address thoughtlessness that may limit our efforts

Maintain a talented and qualified staff with a commitment and conviction toward diversity.

One of the most important components of your college education is learning to respect and appreciate the lifestyles, values, ideas, cultures, and backgrounds of others you encounter. The residence hall communities at The Ohio State University are rich in the diversity of the communities. As a student in our community, you are asked to be respectful of these differences:

Do not joke about differences related to race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender, ability,
socioeconomic background, etc.

Do not use obscene words or gestures. Oftentimes these are unwelcome and offensive to students in your community.

Listen to other students living in your floor community. If a person indicates that a behavior or action is offensive, you should stop the behavior immediately.

Actively challenge the stereotypes you have of others. Use your time to consider the new experiences you are having at The Ohio State University, instead of relying upon the past evaluations you have had of others.

When in doubt about the impact of your words or actions, simply ask.

It is the responsibility of any student in the residence halls to report incidents of racial or other discrimination or harassment to residence hall staff.

See, diversity and tolerance are the most important things in the world, even if it means stifling First Amendment rights!

For this, FIRE (the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education) has just awarded OSU the Speech Code of the Month:

FIRE announces its Speech Code of the Month for September 2007: The Ohio State University.

The Office of University Housing at Ohio State, a public university, maintains a Diversity Statement that severely restricts what students in Ohio State’s residence halls can and cannot say.

The Diversity Statement also contains another, quite cryptic, prohibition: “Words, actions, and behaviors that inflict or threaten infliction of bodily or emotional harm, whether done intentionally or with reckless disregard, are not permitted.” Could anyone at Ohio State actually explain what this prohibition means? How exactly does one threaten to inflict emotional harm? Would that mean shouting, “Hey you! Get out of here or I’m going to hurt your feelings…”? The problem with a prohibition like this one is that it is unconstitutionally vague. The Supreme Court has held that to avoid vagueness, a regulation must “give the person of ordinary intelligence a reasonable opportunity to know what is prohibited, so that he may act accordingly.” Grayned v. City of Rockford, 408 U.S. 104, 108 (1972). It is safe to say that no reasonable person can figure out exactly what this sentence prohibits.

For these reasons, The Ohio State University is our September 2007 Speech Code of the Month.

So, out of curiosity, how does one know when a joke is considered hurtful? Are blonde jokes out? Are all those great Gators vs. Buckeyes videos gone? This gives plenty of students license to point the finger at someone for whatever they want; but when someone can get in trouble for saying something “hurtful”, there’s too much doubt that can come into play. It becomes a he said-she said situation. Unless students are forced to carry around recording devices 24 hours a day, how can you really prove someone was making a — gasp! — offensive joke? And what if someone misinterprets a phrase or a joke? And what will the punishment be for making said offensive jokes?

Here’s an even bigger question: where is that bastion of free speech, the ACLU? My guess is they’re probably agreeing with OSU on this one. After all, it’s done in the name of tolerance and diversity, so it’s perfectly fine to trample on the free speech rights of OSU students.

I’m sure that OSU administrators have good intentions. I doubt they’re sitting in their offices, cackling that they’re going to make 1984 a reality. But all the same… the road to hell is still paved with good intentions.

Hat Tip: Moonbattery

It must be wonderful to be included as a “minority” liberal — you know, a minority race, gender, sexuality, religion, whatever. You’re free to force all of those “majority” people to bend over backwards to accomodate you in the name of “tolerance” and “diversity”, regardless of how they feel or what they think about it. I mean, I’m a woman — that makes me special. Let’s say that a room that I work has too much blue in it, and naturally, rooms that I work in need to fairly represent my womanhood. Therefore, the head of my office should re-decorate the entire building to more accurately represent women and make women feel more comfortable. Even though no one in the office has complained, they’re really just suffering in silence, and if what I want isn’t done, it’s clearly because all of the men in my office are sexist. And because of that, I also think that all of the men in my office should have to go through gender equality and appreciation seminars.

See how much fun it is?? Because I’m a minority, I can make “the man” do whatever I want!! This is so awesome!

Did I saw awesome? I meant to say pathetic — forcing everyone around you to swallow your crap whether they believe in or agree with it or not.

We now have a shining new example of this in San Diego Fire Chief Tracy Garman, an open lesbian who brags to 365gay.com that she lives with her partner and is one of only a handful of openly lesbian fire chiefs in the country. She decided that four firefighters should be forced to participate in the city’s Gay Pride parade, when usually it is on a volunteer basis only.

Now, all four of those firefighters are taking legal action against their superiors, and for good reason (emphasis mine):

Four San Diego firefighters charge their superiors forced them to ride in San Diego’s Gay Pride parade.

“You could not even look at the crowd without getting some kind of sexual gesture. If any crew member were to hang up pictures at the station of what we saw, we would be disciplined.” So said one of four San Diego firefighters who say their superiors forced them, in full uniform and on their city fire truck, to attend the July 21 San Diego “Gay Pride” parade, according to an Aug. 6 press release from the Ann Arbor, Michigan-based Thomas More Law Center.

The Center is representing the firefighters in their legal claims against the city of San Diego.

According to the Center’s press release, the four firefighters’ superiors told them on July 20 that they would have to ride in the parade. In the past, firefighters who attended the parade “generally did so on a volunteer basis,” said the press release. When the four firefighters protested, their superiors told them they must ride in the parade or face disciplinary action.

San Diego Fire Chief Tracy Jarman has said the parade is a “fun event and all employees are encouraged to participate.” San Diego’s Republican mayor, Jerry Sanders, appointed Jarman fire chief in June 2006. According to 365Gay.com, Jarman “lives with her domestic partner” and is “one of only a handful of openly lesbian fire chiefs in the country.”

“What happened to these dedicated public servants was inexcusable,” said Charles LiMandri, the Center’s West Coast director, who is representing the firefighters. “The City should have known from past experience the kind of offensive activities that go on at this event. This was a clear case of sexual harassment in violation of state and federal law as well as the City’s own code of conduct.”

While on parade, the firefighters “were subjected to vile sexual taunts from homosexuals lining the parade route,” said the press release. “Show me your hose,” “you can put out my fire,” “you’re making me hot,” “give me mouth-to-mouth,”“blow my hose,” were some of the comments those along the parade route hurled at the firefighters. When the firefighters did not respond, “some in the crowd turned hostile and started shouting, ‘F—k you firemen’ and others began ‘flipping them off,’” said the press release.

Some bystanders committed lewd acts, directed at the firefighters, such as exposing their genitals, grabbing the crotch, and blowing kisses. The firefighters, however, were not physically assaulted.

Last year, Chief Jarman told Gay and Lesbian Times that she has always kept her personal and private lives separate. She said she told Sanders she wanted to make the department more diverse – but, she said, “it’s not just the Gay community. I think we need to do a better job of recruiting across the board so that we reflect the community.”

Ah, tolerance.

Isn’t it great to live in a country where firefighters are made to become more tolerant of diversity by being forced to attend a Gay Pride parade where they were subjected to this kind of vile behavior?

I mean, man. Chief Jarman must be a shining little beacon of what it means to be accepting of other people’s ideals, morals, and values.

Hat Tip: Moonbattery

Why don’t we just go ahead and re-name Europe Eurabia? The islamicized moonbattery that is taking over is getting out of control.

Fresh off the 7/7 terrorist attacks, Newlands Primary School in Wakefield, West Yorkshire has decided that, while practicing penmanship, students should write pro-Islam statements such as “I bear witness that there is no god but Allah” and “Allah is the greatest”. Why the teacher chose pro-Islam statements when there are no Muslims in her classroom is a mystery, I’m sure:

ANGRY parents have blasted a teacher for telling ten-year-olds to copy a Muslim prayer saying “There is no God but Allah”.

Helen Green is said to have picked the Muslim call to prayer as HAND-WRITING practice. It includes the lines “Allah is the greatest” and “I bear witness that there is no God but Allah”.

Pupil Billy Darbyshire’s stepmum Hayley Clayton said: “The explanation was that the children were learning about Islam in RE. “But this was like he was taking an oath. A Muslim child would never be asked to write a Bible passage. Why didn’t she choose a passage from a normal story book to teach handwriting?”

Hayley, 23, said Mrs Green — deputy head of Newlands Primary School in Wakefield, West Yorks — had acknowledged it was a “sensitive issue” because three of the 7/7 suicide bombers came from Leeds, 15 miles away. She added: “If it’s sensitive why choose that prayer?”

Billy’s angry dad Martin, 32, said there were no Muslims in the ten-year-old’s class. He added: “I am not religious but it offended me. It must have been worse for children whose parents do have different beliefs.”

Wakefield Council officials said they believed the prayer had been written for RE.

It’s only a matter of time before this starts here in America. Remember California’s mandatory Islam immersion course?

It’s funny. If the teacher had used Christian phrases rather than Muslim ones, moonbat liberals would be howling, and this would be all over the news.

Hat Tip: Moonbattery

As if we needed any more reminders that Europe is plunging dangerously deeper and deeper into depravity and moonbattery, the German Federal Health Education Center (a subsidiary of the German government’s Ministry for Family Affairs) released a booklet proving that it can, and will get worse.

The German government is encouraging parents to engage in incest, pedophilia, and molestation (emphasis mine):

Booklets from a subsidiary of the German government’s Ministry for Family Affairs encourage parents to sexually massage their children as young as 1 to 3 years of age. Two 40-page booklets entitled “Love, Body and Playing Doctor” by the German Federal Health Education Center (Bundeszentrale für gesundheitliche Aufklärung - BZgA) are aimed at parents - the first addressing children from 1-3 and the other children from 4-6 years of age.

“Fathers do not devote enough attention to the clitoris and vagina of their daughters. Their caresses too seldom pertain to these regions, while this is the only way the girls can develop a sense of pride in their sex,” reads the booklet regarding 1-3 year olds. The authors rationalize, “The child touches all parts of their father’s body, sometimes arousing him. The father should do the same.”

Another product of the BZgA is a song book aimed at children of four and slightly older which includes several songs espousing masturbation. The song-book entitled “Nose, belly and bum” includes one song with the following lyrics: “When I touch my body, I discover what I have. I have a vagina, because I am a girl. Vagina is not only for peeing. When I touch it, I feel a pleasant tingle.”

According to the Polish daily newspaper Rzeczpospolita, the BZgA booklet is an obligatory read in nine German regions. It is used for training nursery, kindergarten and elementary school teachers. Ironically it is recommended by many organizations officially fighting pedophilia, such as the German Kunderschutzbund. BZgA sends out millions of copies of the booklet every year.

I’m curious. How does molesting your three-year-old teach her to have pride in her “sex”? Correct me if I’m wrong, but don’t most children who have suffered from molestation feel deep shame?

The scary thing is that these booklets are being used in German schools, encouraging incestuous molestation and teaching four-year-olds about masturbation.

Is this the kind of age-appropriate sex ed that Barack Obama would support? Teaching four-year-old girls that when they touch their vagina, they feel a “pleasant tingle”?

The really sad thing is that German parents have no choice but to subject their children to this depravity, thus robbing them of their innocence. Germany outlawed homeschooling in 1933. Families can always immigrate to another country where it isn’t considered OK to touch and massage your two-year-old daughter’s clitoris and vagina, but that doesn’t take away the moonbattery.

This is the worst kind of abuse. And I am in absolute shock that Germany would force this upon innocent children. Well, I guess I really shouldn’t be so shocked, because I’m sure that a few years back, it started with some politician deciding that four-year-olds needed “age appropriate sex ed”. It’s what we call a slippery slope. You give someone an inch, and they take a mile. It starts with “age appropriate sex ed” at first, right? And then, a little at a time, it gets worse and worse until suddenly, we arrive at this.

This is, of course, how we find countries get overtaken by moonbattery.

Are you taking notes, Mr. Obama?

Hat Tip: Moonbattery

This is how the Goracle’s global warming movement has always worked. Agree, or suffer the consequences. This is just the first time someone has made the mistake of admitting it publicly (emphasis mine):

During a Capitol Hill hearing yesterday, Sen. James M. Inhofe, Oklahoma Republican and ranking member of the Environment and Public Works Committee, confronted EPA Administrator Stephen L. Johnson about the strongly-worded letter written July 13 by Michael T. Eckhart, president of the American Council on Renewable Energy (ACORE) that was sent to Marlo Lewis, senior fellow of the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI).

“It is my intention to destroy your career as a liar,” Mr. Eckhart wrote. “If you produce one more editorial against climate change, I will launch a campaign against your professional integrity. I will call you a liar and charlatan to the Harvard community of which you and I are members. I will call you out as a man who has been bought by Corporate America. Go ahead, guy. Take me on.”

“Statements like this are of concern to me. I am a believer in cooperation and collaboration across all sectors,” Mr. Johnson assured. “This is an area I will look into for the record.”

When Mr. Johnson confirmed that EPA is a member of ACORE, Mr. Inhofe asked if “it is appropriate to be a part of an organization that is headed up by a person who makes this statement.”

Late yesterday, Mr. Inhofe announced he will send letters to the departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Energy, and EPA, urging them to “reconsider their membership of ACORE.”

In a written response sent to Inside the Beltway last week, Mr. Eckhart apologized to “all the public who were offended” by his choice of words. He said he intended his letter to be a “private communication” in the context of “personal combat and jousting.”

However, this column earlier this week published another letter Mr. Eckhart sent in September to CEI President Fred Smith, saying “my children will have a lesser life because you are being paid by oil companies to spread a false story.”

He said he would give CEI, which advocates “sound science,” 90 days to reverse its “position” on global warming, “or I will take every action I can think of to shut you down,” including filing complaints with the Internal Revenue Service “on the basis that CEI is really a lobbyist for the energy industry.”

Funny thing is, Mr. Lewis and CEI weren’t disputing that climate change exists. He just has a different opinion what causes it.

And this was the reaction from the president of ACORE, a tax-payer funded organization which over 400 organizations pay into, including the EPA and the federal Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, and Energy.

What I don’t understand is how these “scientists” are so damn sure. Since when is science so cut and dry? When has a scientist ever been 100% sure of anything?

But people like the Goracle and this Michael Eckert aren’t drinking the global warming Kool-Aid for the science. Notice how the only way to combat global warming is by putting the economy of the United States in the toilet? Notice how the United States is the country which must sacrifice the most in order to “Save the Planet”?

I don’t think so.

Thankfully, I don’t work for a government agency or department, so I don’t have to worry about Mr. Eckert trying to destroy my career or having to think a certain way.

Hat tip: Moonbattery

And since only black people can be victims of racism, this only affect black women:

Black women who feel they’ve been victims of racial discrimination are more likely than their peers to develop breast cancer, a large study suggests.

The study, which followed 59,000 African-American women for six years, found that those who reported more incidents of racial discrimination had a higher risk of breast cancer.

The relationship was stronger among women younger than 50, researchers found. This finding is particularly interesting, they note, in light of the fact that, unlike the case with older women, breast cancer is more common among young black women than young white women.

It’s possible that racial discrimination plays some role, according to the researchers, led by Dr. Teletia R. Taylor of Howard University in Washington, D.C.

They report their findings in the American Journal of Epidemiology.

Past studies have suggested that over time, perceived racial discrimination can take a toll on a person’s health. A possible explanation is that unjust treatment serves as a source of chronic stress, which itself has been linked to poorer physical health.

In the current study, women were asked how often they faced “everyday” discrimination, like receiving poorer service than other people at stores, or feeling that people are “afraid” of them or act superior to them.

They were also asked whether they’d ever been treated unjustly on the job, in trying to get housing, or by the police — all considered examples of “major” discrimination.

Overall, Taylor’s team found, women who said they frequently ran up against everyday types of discrimination had a higher risk of developing breast cancer. The same pattern was seen with major discrimination; women who reported on-the-job discrimination, for example, had a 32 percent higher risk of breast cancer than women who reported no such prejudice.

Women who said they’d faced discrimination on the job, in housing and from the police were 48 percent more likely to develop the disease than those who reported no incidents of major discrimination.

More studies, according to Taylor’s team, are needed to confirm these findings, and to uncover the reasons for the connection between racism and breast cancer.

SOURCE: American Journal of Epidemiology, July 1, 2007.

First of all, how can this study be legitimate if they only studied black women? I know, according to civil rights “leaders” like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, black people are the only ones who are victims of racism. But what about racism against Hispanics? Asians? Native Americans? Middle-Easterns? Or — dare I say it — whites?!

Second, I love the hypocrisy at work here — racial discrimination builds up over time, causing higher instances of breast cancer, but there were higher instances of breast cancer in the younger women, under 50 — not the older. But… I thought… it was racial discrimination building up over time! So, therefore, shouldn’t older women have higher instances of breast cancer?

But, well, that wouldn’t work because older women already have higher instances of breast cancer.

As they say, more studies are needed. Your taxpayer dollars at work, folks!!

Hat Tip: Moonbattery

That is apparently the new curriculum for German students 14 and up. Controversy is understandably brewing, and this of course is being taught in the name of “tolerance” and, as the WaPo puts it, “by practicing homosexual wooing techniques… break down age-old schoolyard prejudices”.

They say you can’t understand someone until you walk a mile in his shoes. Perhaps with this in mind, Germany’s Regional Institute for School and Media has introduced a series of exercises in which students pick up same-sex partners. Pupils 14 years old and up will participate by practicing homosexual wooing techniques — and in the process, officials hope, break down age-old schoolyard prejudices.

In the United States, conservative groups such as the Citizens for Community Values are on the record against so-called “homosexuality education” programs. In a 2004 report, the group says such programs are “nothing more than a deceptive ploy designed to preach safety while actually encouraging sexual behaviors.” The Cincinnati-based CCV has not commented specifically on this latest German innovation, but it’s a safe bet that it would oppose any programs on the gay pickup scene in American schools.

But is it likely this program will be adopted by any schools here? Not without a little tweaking, of course. I suggest that this program be expanded to include straight students as well. After all, adolescents — especially boys — of every sexual orientation and proclivity need help picking up a mate. If the program is to be true to its mission of teaching understanding and tolerance, it should ensure that no child is left behind.

It is not right to force children to do these things — become a Muslim in an immersion course, learn how to pick up gay men. I don’t understand why parents tolerate this to begin with. If I had children and they came home telling me they were learning how to pick up gay men, I would be livid. I would not rest until whoever pioneered that program was fired.

When it comes down to it, schools have no right to push these kinds of propaganda and agendas. Schools are supposed to be a place where children go to learn, not be brainwashed. The more we inflict this kind of liberal moonbattery on our children, the more worried I become. What kind of adults are we raising?

Hat tip: Moonbattery.