Target Bathrooms & One Mad Mom

This one has shown up on my personal Facebook wall a couple of times over this long weekend with comments like “Great article!” and “Well thought through!”  I couldn’t disagree more.  Clearly, the preacher’s wife is not the activist type and misunderstands the goals of her fellow Christian homies who do believe in boycotts.  I’m sure she’s a nice lady, and she’s sarcastic, so I’d probably like her a lot, but I just think her comments on boycotts, WWJD, lukewarmness, and what “loving” means are totally wrong.

Please give it a read:

For those of us who have different experiences and ideas, hope this is cathartic.

Target Bathrooms and the Straight, Conservative Preacher’s Wife

by Jaci Lambert on April 26, 2016 in Ministry, Mommyhood

First of all, my need to write a blog to address an issue as stupid as Target and it’s bathroom policy proves exactly two things:

  1. This country is absurd.


  1. We all get our panties and underpants and gender-neutral underclothings in such tight-wound wads that it’s a wonder any of us can even breathe.

Mrs. Lambert, some things, like our children’s innocence and safety are worth getting our knickers into a bunch.  It’s kind of biblical:

Matthew 18:6-7

And if anyone hurts the conscience of one of these little ones, that believe in me, he had better have been drowned in the depths of the sea, with a mill-stone hung about his neck. 7 Woe to the world, for the hurt done to consciences! It must needs be that such hurt should come, but woe to the man through whom it comes!

My guess is that standing by and watching it happen without fighting back is probably not such a good thing in the eyes of God.

<Snipping things that don’t have much to do with her case against the boycott.  Feel free to follow the link above for the full post.>

The backstory as I understand it: Target has come out and said that they are now going to allow people to go into whatever bathroom they “gender identify” with.  So if a man identifies as a woman, he is now welcome to use the women’s restroom and dressing rooms.  If a woman identifies as a man, she is now welcome to use the men’s restroom and dressing rooms.  And the whole country has lost their minds about it.  I understand.  There’s great concern from both sides.  The left feels the need to protect the transgendered community, and the right feels the need to protect their values. They have great concern for the safety of their children were perverts and pedophiles to take advantage of this new policy.  So in response, the conservative right has started a movement to boycott Target and the liberal left is living in renewed determination to hate the “homophobic Christian community.”

Fairly accurate, with the exception that Target doesn’t see a problem with anyone “taking advantage.”  As video after video has shown, men clearly being men have asked managers and employees if they may use the women’s restroom, and they have been told, “No problem!”  This was never really a “transgender” move.  And, by the way, not all liberals or even transgendered people think it a great move.  It’s usually the ones that have children.  Sometimes, even for liberals, there’s a bridge too far.

As the Target statements show, they want everyone to be treated equally.  They don’t care if the person has evil intentions or not.  They certainly don’t care about the innocence of children.  They want us all to be equal.  We are not.  Men and women are very, very different.  Remember when we were told we must celebrate diversity?  Now we’re all supposed to be exactly the same and just accept that our bathrooms look like a scene from the new Battlestar Galactica where we’ve all been reduced to being animals.  I mean, if nobody judges the female and male dogs defecating on the same lawn, why should we care if human men and women do it?  Oh yeah, because God gave us reason and a conscience. We’re not animals.  Huh!  Imagine that.

Since we have established the basics of the boycott, let me tell you why this straight, conservative preacher’s wife and mother of four young girls is still going to shop at Target:

Target is not any more liberal this week than it was a month ago.  Target has ALWAYS been a liberal company and if Christians took even 5 minutes to do a Google search (except if you’re boycotting liberal companies, you’ll have to use a different search engine because hello Lefty-Liberalton!) they would find this to be true.  Target has NEVER claimed to be a conservative, Bible-believing company.  Because they aren’t.  They hold hands with Starbucks, another flamingly liberal company whose CEO takes a yearly vacation solely on the dollars he earns from the coffee addiction of my very own preacher husband.

And this is where her argument starts to derail.  First of all, we’re not naïve, thanks.  This is not my first go around with the Dayton Hudson Corporation.  In fact, I probably know a lot more about their liberal leanings, because I and my pro-life clan used to fire off letters to them (back when letters were done on paper with a pen and a stamp was needed).  Does Mrs. Lambert know who the heck the Dayton Hudson Corporation was? Does she know that they stopped giving to Planned Parenthood after the boycott caught on? (And that was loooonnnnngggg before the internet made a boycott pretty darn speedy.)  So, let me clear it up.  Dayton Hudson was the founding company of Target, Mervyn’s, and a few others.  In 2000, a rebranding was done and the Target Corporation appeared.

If I was willing to spend my (errrr…husband’s) hard-earned dollars at Target a month ago (when their bathroom policy was exactly the same) then there doesn’t seem to be much reason to withhold those dollars now.  *Also note the HUNDREDS of other LGBT supportive companies Christians should be withholding business from if they’re really serious about all this boycotting jazz, including, but not limited to: Amazon, Apple, AT&T, CVS, Disney, Ebay, Facebook (say WHA?!?), Microsoft, Nike, Office Depot, Pandora, Twitter, Visa…just to name a few.

Really, Mrs. Lambert, you don’t think there’s a difference?  I really didn’t care when they took down the pink and blue aisles.  Children wouldn’t notice.  I didn’t have a problem with them making some gender neutral room décor for children, because, whatever their intention, it doesn’t really fall into the evil category.  Tents with aqua coloring are hardly an affront to God or would hurt the innocence of a child (what child wouldn’t like a tent???).  However, there’s a HUGE difference between these things and a man walking in to the restroom or changing room where my child is disrobing to some degree or another.  Granted, the Target we used to shop in has unisex dressing rooms with doors and walls that are really high and go down to the floor.  I’m fine with that.  Anyone wanting to take a peep at me or my child would have to be Spider Man to achieve it.  They built them with that added protection precisely because they were unisex dressing rooms.  But the bathrooms? Much different story.  Maybe Mrs. Lambert thinks all Targets have a “family bathroom” or single stall/sink combo like, say, most Starbucks.  Nope.  It’s men’s or women’s.

And, another thing, just for the record, I do boycott whoever is trying to shove their liberal crud down my throat.  So, yes, I boycott many, including Starbucks, because it’s a minor inconvenience I can give up to tell them to knock it off.  My gosh.  I mean, I really can forgo a mocha to stand up for decency.  Plus, in the case of Starbucks, their coffee is awful and I take my business to Peet’s (that’s awesome coffee for all of those outside of Northern California and a few places in Southern California.)  I’m sure they’re a completely liberal company (born in Berzerkeley) and the owners may give to some nasty organizations, but quite frankly, they don’t try to shove it down my throat by corporately taking a stance on controversial topics or corporately giving my money to controversial organizations.  Their big charity is clean water for third world countries, which is totally awesome and isn’t offensive to the decency of anyone.

I am a supporter of the Hobby Lobbys and the Chick-Fil-As and the Christian bakeries and all the other companies that want the freedom to stand up for what they believe in.  I think it is W.R.O.N.G. when they are forced to either close or comply for maintaining their values.  That being said, it seems a bit hypocritical not to allow other companies (Target, in this case) to do the exact same thing.  We can’t have our cake and eat it too…especially if the Christian bakeries all close.

Um, we’re not suing Target because they disagree with our beliefs.  We’re taking our business elsewhere.  If someone opposes what Hobby Lobby and Chick-Fil-A does, let them take their business elsewhere too. It wouldn’t bother me a bit!  Put your money where your mouth is.  It’s called free will and religious liberty.  The company can either cater to their base or choose to follow their own beliefs.  Either way, there are consequences to taking a stand on your beliefs.  Deal.  Christ did.  Should we do no less?  Not one Christian would have whined if the “Christian bakers” had simply been boycotted.  Why?  Because Christians tend to be (and should be) less whiny.  We’ve pretty much been promised that the world will hate us.  However, it’s a whole other thing when our country’s judicial system gets involved in our sue-happy little world.  Then our religious freedom goes bye-bye.

Target offers a family restroom for our family convenience that we tend to frequent.  Why? Because there are a bunch of us and when everyone has to pee, it’s easiest for this mommy to keep them confined in one small room, with a lock on the door, where no one can escape.  This is still an excellent option to be utilized, but there are others.

Like I said, we don’t all have that.  And, many liberals simply don’t want that.  Their insane goal is to make us all equals, remember?  We couldn’t possibly make a person feel bad by making them use a unisex bathroom where they can’t mingle (because, you know, that’s what bathrooms are for)! Unless, of course, they are a Christian.  You can make them feel as horrible as you like.  Always remember, Christians are horrible, awful, phobic people.

We can pee before we come, we can pee when we leave or we can pee in our pants if we’re that terrified of what we might find behind the restroom door.

Funny thing you say “terrified.”  You probably haven’t seen this:  Yep, there are  .3% (that’s point three percent) of people who are considered “transgendered” (remember when that only applied to those who had taken surgical steps to try and alter their sex?) and just about 20% of women have been raped, according to the CDC.  But, yeah, Target has chosen to stand with the super small minority and burden rape victims just a little more.  Bravo!

I am capable of accompanying my children to the main restroom if the family restroom isn’t available. I would like to pretend that I am an amazing mommy who ALWAYS goes to the restroom with her children 100% of the time, but in all reality there are 4 of them so we have been known to do the buddy system, and Mommy continues to shop.

I really can’t remember where she lives, but I live in California, the land of the sick and depraved.  The buddy system (which I have to employ with my boys, although I guess I wouldn’t have to anymore.  I can just stand right next to the guy using the urinal and wait. Sigh!) ain’t going to allow me any sanity to continue to shop. It’s “send them in and make sure the guys entering know mom is right there.”

However, I will now simply accompany my kids into the main restroom when we’re at Target because IF they ever come across a transgender person in the women’s restroom, they might be confused.  And let’s be honest, they might be a little scared.  But if Target’s bathroom policy works as it’s intended to, they probably will never know the physical gender of the person washing their hands at the sink next to them.  (Please Note: I am NOT in support of every Tom, Dick and Harry waltzing their way into the women’s restroom just because they FEEEEEL like it.  I assure you that if I have even the slightest check that something is amiss or that the person in the restroom is there to do anything other than empty their bladder or touch up their lipstick, the police will be my new BFF.)

You’re not seeing the problem.  You can’t stop it.  You just said you send them by themselves sometimes.  It only takes once for something to go awry, and the “Transgender Bathroom Policy” just made it oh so much easier for those with ill intent to accomplish their goal.  I mean, a girl was just raped in the bathroom on my kid’s college campus not too long back.  Quite frankly, it happens way too often.  Yeah, nobody saw the man go in there, but you don’t think it’s going to happen more and more when there’s no reason to question why a guy is in the women’s room?  Talk about naive.  It’s all fun and games until it happens to you or your family.

Transgender people have never hurt my children.  But believe it or not, a whole bunch of church people have.  (Oh, yes, I said that.  Hand slap.  See how that honesty bit gets me in trouble?)  What does that mean?  It means that ANYONE is capable of hurting my children.  ANY.ONE.  And it’s my job to keep them safe.  In the restroom, in the parking lot, everywhere.  But what if they did see a transgender person in the restroom?  Would the world really end?  No.  Because I would then have the opportunity to explain to my children, who don’t have any choice but to grow up in this messy world, that there are some people who feel like they are different and like they don’t belong anywhere.  We could talk about what Jesus would do and how He would expect us to love them and how we would feel if we didn’t belong anywhere.

Let’s just go back to the innocence issue again. Yes, the whole transgender issue has already hurt your children, and the “gay marriage” issue before that, and no fault divorce, birth control,  etc., etc., etc.  The kids in our country have consistently been hurt. Yeah, bad things are going to happen and innocence will be lost at some point, but our main job as parents is to fight like hell so that doesn’t happen.  That’s kind of what’s wrong with this country.  We (the royal we) have just written it off as “Well, that’s the world for you!” rather than trying to take our world back for God.  Did the saints really just throw their hands up and say “Nothing we can do!”  Yeah, not so much.  I would think the least we could do for the children of our country is to skip shopping at Target’s Dollar Aisle until they come to their senses.

The perverts and the pedophiles don’t care about Target’s policy.  Sure it’s one less obstacle in their way, but you really think a store policy is going to keep them from what they desire?  Probably not.  They can find children unattended in all kinds of places (including the Target toy department, if we’re being honest.)  And right now, they’d be stupid to step foot in a Target restroom while everybody is up in arms.

They’ve already used this issue to step into the women’s restroom, honey!  Turn on the news.  Yes, this does make it a whole lot easier.  I don’t just care if they get caught, I care that people never become victims in the first place.  Like I said, it’s all fun and games until it happens to you and your family.  And again, it’s about preserving innocence in some place that’s supposed to be private.

But if they do, if the perverts and pedophiles decide to hang out in the women’s restroom, Target will have Hell to pay for their decision.  That’s on them.

Yeah, sorry, you don’t get to wash your hands of this because the dollar aisle is appealing.  If you sit and do nothing, it is most certainly also on you.  Please think about that from now on when you see a story about some sort of pervert.  The very fact that you’re saying “No big deal!” and that people are somehow hypocritical for boycotting is helping Target’s cause to further the LGBT agenda, which is, frankly, quite uncharitable to the LGTB crew as well as to the innocent.  Your fingerprints are all over every crime that has been or will be committed.  God’s not just going to ask us what we did.  He’s also going to ask us what we didn’t do.  Know how I know that?

Ezekiel 3:18-21

18 When I threaten I the sinner with doom of death, it is for thee to give him word, and warn him, as he loves his life, to have done with sinning. If not, he shall die as he deserves, but for his undoing thyself shalt be called to account. 19 If thou warn him, and leave his rebellious sinning he will not, die he shall as he deserves, and thou go free. 20 Or if the upright man leaves his innocence, and I take him unawares in his wrong-doing, dies he for want of warning? Die he shall, his good deeds all forgotten, but thou for his undoing shalt be called to account. 21 Thine to warn the upright man against the marring of his innocence; and he, sin avoiding, shall owe his life to thy remonstrance; thy duty is done.

Mrs. Lambert suggests:

Women and children need to be paying attention to their surroundings just like when they’re at the park and when they’re at the grocery store after 10pm and when they’re at church (shoot, I can’t even help myself).  Pay attention to your surroundings because perverts and pedophiles like other places besides Target.

Again, duh.  My kids are armed in some fashion.  I’ve told them on more than one occasion, “Don’t be a victim!”  While I worry about them becoming physical victims, I also worry about them becoming spiritual victims of the society in which we live.  You’re seeing things in only one dimension.  Once a child’s innocence has been stolen, there’s no going back.  Sadly, it’s happening earlier and earlier these days.

THE BIG ONE: This boycott is doing more damage to the Christian cause than it’s helping.  Don’t get me wrong, I believe in standing up for our rights and in what we believe in.  But this isn’t a “right.”  This is a privately owned company setting a policy in place.  They are free to do that in America.  Whether we agree with it or not.  And we are free to take our business elsewhere.  But with a public temper tantrum?  For the sake of what?  Of proving a point?

As I’ve already pointed out, some boycotts do work.  It’s not about a public temper tantrum, unless you consider the Revolutionary War a temper tantrum.  How about not being so darn condescending?  If you’re going to go down this route, you should just take a seat every time someone does something immoral.  Maybe you do, maybe you don’t.  If you do, how is it that you feel free to judge anyone else for taking a stand?  If you don’t, well then, you missed more than one part of the life of Christ and the Apostles.

Don’t you see that the other side, the side that doesn’t know Jesus, the side that looks to Christians as the hands and feet of a Savior, don’t you understand that all they see is fighting?  Is hatred?

Don’t you see Christianity in this country is slipping away because too many Christians have just become complacent?  Did you miss the part in the bible about Christ and the money changers?  How about His talk of millstones? How about the command to shake the dust? (Maybe you didn’t know it, but that was an insult to the culture they were in.  Shaking shoes in that part of the world is a big insult.) Yeah, Our Savior spoke out against sin, protected the weak, and never said “It’s enough to be nice!”

I understand both sides.  I really do. But do you really think this boycott is going to grow your church next Sunday.  Do you think this display of “Jesus” is going to make the lost think “Oh yes, I want what they have.  They are such a loving bunch.”  I don’t think so.

I’m not really sure that you do understand my side.  In fact, I’m quite sure you do not.  So, does this mean your husband should never stand with the Truth because it’s going to hurt attendance?  You know what kills the Church?  Lukewarmness.

Maybe continuing to shop at Target isn’t about laying down to the left but about responding differently to those who are different.  Instead of a boycott couldn’t they know us by our love?

Love doesn’t mean rubber stamping evil to be nice.  That is a very false notion.  Like I said, this isn’t the loving move for the LGBT community nor the innocent.  You perceive a boycott as unloving, but maybe it’s unloving to keep supporting bad policy.

Wouldn’t that be a different, BETTER way to handle this situation, an unexpected response?  Wouldn’t responding in love turn the head of the critic?  Wouldn’t there be a better chance that he might say, “Oh.  They aren’t throwing stones at me.  Maybe they do have something different to offer.”

Please, please, please watch the video I posted above.  Watch it all the way until the end when the man who is “transgendered” says this is a bad policy.  He is a parent.  Like I said, liberals can be a bit different when it comes to their children.  Wouldn’t the best thing to say be the truth?  “We love you, but we believe that this is a bad policy for women and children, and it’s not great for you either.  God created you with full knowledge of your inner self, and He doesn’t make mistakes.  You cannot separate your soul and your sex.”  Why is it people don’t believe you can speak the truth and still be loving?

Jesus specifically said in John 13 that “they” would know we were His by our love for each other.  You don’t really think He intended that we exclude “them” from that love, do you?  He never said they would know us by our boycotts, by your stubborn stance for policy and procedure.  Somehow that sounds a whole lot like the Pharisees He fought against, not the messy people with whom he purposely spent His time. And I just really think that if He were here, if Jesus were walking the Earth today, He would be standing outside that Target bathroom…not to freak your children out…but to tell that transgender teen who is so confused and alone that He loves him, that He died for him, that He has more to offer him than anything he will find here on Earth.  I think He would much rather be inside Target with people who are broken and messy than outside of Target signing petitions to make the outcast feel a little more shunned.  Also, with all the Christians gone, it seems like Target might just be the best mission field in all of Suburbia.

But what do I know.  I’m just a straight, conservative preacher’s wife.

Sigh. Remember, again, Christ and the money changers and the millstones?  Can you not see the difference between how Christ treated the sinful but contrite, and how he treated the Pharisees and money changers?  It’s a tired canard to compare Pharisees to Christians speaking out.  Christ NEVER said you cannot judge.  He said not to be a hypocrite and to take the plank out of your own eye FIRST! So, Mrs. Lambert, I think I need to point out that you’re judging when you judge others for judging.  LOL!  Yes, we can judge, and no, Christ likely wouldn’t have a problem with us standing against evil.  In fact, it’s biblical to do so:

Psalm 94:14-16

For the Lord will not cast off his people: neither will he forsake his own inheritance  For judgment shall return unto righteousness, and all the upright in heart shall follow it. Who shall rise up for me against the evildoers? or who shall stand with me against the workers of iniquity?

Ephesians 6:11-20

11 You must wear all the weapons in God’s armoury, if you would find strength to resist the cunning of the devil. 12 It is not against flesh and blood that we enter the lists; we have to do with princedoms and powers, with those who have mastery of the world in these dark days, with malign influences in an order higher than ours. 13 Take up all God’s armour, then; so you will be able to stand your ground when the evil time comes, and be found still on your feet, when all the task is over. 14 Stand fast, your loins girt with truth, the breastplate of justice fitted on, 15 and your feet shod in readiness to publish the gospel of peace.[1] 16 With all this, take up the shield of faith, with which you will be able to quench all the fire-tipped arrows of your wicked enemy; 17 make the helmet of salvation your own, and the sword of the spirit, God’s word.[2] 18 Use every kind of prayer and supplication; pray at all times in the spirit;[3] keep awake to that end with all perseverance; offer your supplication for all the saints. 19 Pray for me too, that I may be given words to speak my mind boldly, in making known the gospel revelation, 20 for which I am an ambassador in chains; that I may have boldness to speak as I ought

Ephesians 5: 11-13

11 As for the thankless deeds men do in the dark, you must not take any part in them; rather, your conduct must be a rebuke to them; 12 their secret actions are too shameful even to bear speaking of. 13 It is the light that rebukes such things and shews them up for what they are; only light shews up.

Titus 1: 9-11

9 He must hold firmly to the truths which have tradition for their warrant; able, therefore, to encourage sound doctrine, and to shew the wayward their error. 10 There are many rebellious spirits abroad, who talk of their own fantasies and lead men’s minds astray; those especially who hold by circumcision; 11 and they must be silenced. They will bring ruin on entire households by false teaching, with an eye to their own base profits.

Matthew 12: 34

34 Brood of vipers, how could you speak to good effect, wicked as you are? It is from the heart’s overflow that the mouth speaks; 35 a good man utters good words from his store of goodness, the wicked man, from his store of wickedness, can utter nothing but what is evil. (Here’s a perfect example of “WWJD?”)

Acts 13:9-10

9 Then Saul, whose other name is Paul, filled with the Holy Spirit, fastened his eyes on him,[2] 10 and said; Child of the devil, versed in all trickery and cunning, enemy of all honest dealing, wilt thou never have done with trying to twist the straight paths of the Lord? (A warm hug from Paul!)

1 Corinthians 5: 1-3

1 Why, there are reports of incontinence among you, and such incontinence as is not practised even among the heathen; a man taking to himself his father’s wife. 2 And you, it seems, have been contumacious over it, instead of deploring it, and expelling the man who has been guilty of such a deed from your company. 3 For myself, though I am not with you in person, I am with you in spirit; and, so present with you, I have already passed sentence on the man who has acted thus.

Galatians 2:11

11 Afterwards, when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him openly; he stood self-condemned.

And the final words from the preacher’s wife:

*A Final Note: Everyone, let’s keep open minds.  I wish we could all step back and take a moment to walk in someone else’s shoes.  But for real.  Both sides need to set their stubborn pride down and breathe.  This is the reason Lamaze was even created.

I’m starting to feel like she thinks we’re all about twelve.

To the left: please listen to yourselves.  You throw out the word “tolerance” like it is your love child, conceived and birthed in some spectacular fashion.  You carry it around like your trophy, your greatest contribution, but as soon as someone voices a differing belief (most notably for religious reasons) you turn around and use your tolerance trophy to bludgeon them into a bloody pulp.  Then your stance for tolerance is no longer credible.  Because you can’t demand tolerance and never truly offer it in return.  It’s not tolerance if you always agree with those you tolerate.

Tolerance is completely over-rated.  We’re supposed to tolerate an annoyance, not sin. Maybe you should give a good read.

To the right: I know you’re freaking out.  I know you don’t feel heard.  I can hear every single one of your arguments running through my head like a broken record.  I live in your world and I agree with many of your things.  But please be careful.  You’re allowed to stand up for yourselves, but watch the attitude in which you do it. I know some of the left can be abusive to you and what you believe, but don’t return abuse with abuse.

Uh, hang standing up for ourselves?!?  See what I mean about you not quite getting it?  I’m a Catholic.  We’re a Church of martyrs, but we don’t run around yelling “I’m a martyr!  I’m a martyr!”  Like I said, we know how the world will treat us and expect it .  Now, that doesn’t mean we simply sit on our hands as has been shown above.  We are to stand up for the weak, innocent, morality, decency and the laws of God!  THIS is what this is about.

I had a Christian, someone I actually know, call into question the salvation of people who continue to shop at Target.  Legitimately.  And I quote, “if you’re really a born again Christian you will not even cast your shadow on their front door.”

Psh, girlfriend!  People say all sorts of silly things.  No need to put down the whole lot of Christians as over-reacting because someone made a judgment call out of their purview.  It’s a red-herring to the Target boycott situation.

 And 27 people just went to Hell because after reading that they don’t want your Christ.  They don’t want Him if this is how He treats people.  So PLEASE!!!!!!  This is about more than being right or wrong!!!!

Yes. It. Is.

This is about how we handle ourselves!  This is about REAL LIVING PEOPLE IN NEED OF THE JESUS THAT WE KNOW (or say we know).  All I’m asking is that you show kindness when making your decision.  I don’t care one way or another if you ever step foot through the doors of Target again, but for the love of all that is holy (seriously) PLEASE be kind.  And offer mercy.  And grace.  And love.  That is not the same thing as having your beliefs trampled on.  Just walk it out in love.  REALLY step back and ask yourself how you think Jesus would handle this whole thing.  And then walk accordingly.  But remember who you represent, because that includes me.  And I know too many people who are too important to lose over something as eternally insignificant as Target and their bathroom policy.

This, of course, is what I think is the underlying problem with this whole piece.  Mrs. Lambert thinks that showing people love and mercy simply means being pleasant.  I don’t even think she really means it, but this has been the running thread of this post.  There’s so much more to it than that. It’s about truth. Sometimes it means being tough.  Sometimes it means fighting like hell.  As I regularly say, I don’t go with pleasant or tolerant when my child is about to touch a hot stove.  Am I not loving when I scream at my child in an effort to keep him/her from harm?  Of course I am.  I’m totally willing to sacrifice pleasantries to protect him/her.  Maybe, just maybe, the “transgendered community” might actually pause to ask themselves why Christians feel so strongly about it.  Regardless, innocence gets the priority.  If you’re willing to go the tolerant route to the deficit of the innocent, can’t really help you.  America is standing right in front of a big, hot stove and is about to put their collective hands on the burner.  I’m going to make a bit of a fuss and I would hope my fellow Christians would do likewise!

I’ll leave you with this final thought:

Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions. ~G.K. Chesterton


Cesspool of Hatred or Fount of Catholic Zeal?

I’d like to juxtapose some statements of Fr. Thomas Rosica to some from Pope Francis found in these two articles.


It seems rather funny that these two articles hit the internet a day apart.  They could not be more different from each other.  Let’s imagine a conversation between Pope Francis and Fr. Rosica, using their own quotes and points directly from these two articles.  (Parenthetical interjections mine, mine, mine.)

Fr. Rosica: Many of my non-Christian and non-believing friends have remarked to me that we ‘Catholics’ have turned the Internet into a cesspool of hatred, venom and vitriol, all in the name of defending the faith!”  (Note it is the non-believing non-Christian friends he’s citing.)

Pope Francis: It is better to be annoying and a nuisance than lukewarm in proclaiming Jesus Christ. If we annoy people, blessed be the Lord.  We can ask the Holy Spirit to give us all this apostolic fervor and to give us the grace to be annoying when things are too quiet in the Church.

Fr. Rosica: The character assassination on the Internet by those claiming to be Catholic and Christian has turned it into a graveyard of corpses strewn all around.  Often times the obsessed, scrupulous, self-appointed, nostalgia-hankering virtual guardians of faith or of liturgical practices are very disturbed, broken and angry individuals, who never found a platform or pulpit in real life and so resort to the Internet and become trolling pontiffs and holy executioners! In reality they are deeply troubled, sad and angry people.   (Planks and splinters are coming to mind here.  Anyone else?  I just want to hold up a big mirror here.)

Pope Francis: There are those who are well mannered, who do everything well, but are unable to bring people to the Church through proclamation and apostolic zeal. Apostolic zeal implies an element of madness, which is healthy and spiritual.  It can only be understood in an atmosphere of love and is not an enthusiasm for power and possession. (And that’s really, really the difference for those of us who “never found a platform or pulpit.”  We really didn’t want this job.  It found us when we looked at what our children had to face, what was happening to the faithful around us, those being offered on the altar of political correctness, etc.)

Paul, in preaching of the Lord, was a nuisance, but he had deep within him that most Christian of attitudes, apostolic zeal. He was not a man of compromise, no! The truth, forward! The proclamation of Jesus Christ, forward!  St. Paul’s fate was one with many crosses, but he keeps going, he looks to the Lord and keeps going.  He is a man who, with his preaching, his work, his attitude irritates others, because testifying to Jesus Christ and the proclamation of Jesus Christ makes us uncomfortable.  It threatens our comfort zones, even Christian comfort zones, right? It irritates us. The Lord always wants us to move forward, forward, forward, not to take refuge in a quiet life or in cozy structures. (Right, we could just duck and cover and hide in our little Catholic bunkers but we would be abandoning the cross.)

Fr. Rosica:  The Internet, can be an international weapon of mass destruction, crossing time zones, borders and space. It is an immense battleground that needs many field hospitals set up to bind wounds and reconcile warring parties.  Christians ought to be a constant encouragement to communion and, even in those cases where they must firmly condemn evil, they should never try to rupture relationships and communication.  (Who says the goal is to try to rupture relationships?)

If we judged our identity based on certain ‘Catholic’ websites and blogs, we would be known as the people who are against everyone and everything! If anything, we should be known as the people who are for something, something positive that can transform lives and engage and impact the culture. (Now, see, that would be the problem we have with Fr. Rosica and friends’ tactics.  We don’t see them as transformative, engaging and impactful in a positive way.  We see them as permissive, enabling, and harmful.  We’re the ones out there trying to tell people they don’t have to embrace sin. We’re on the forefront trying to stop the destruction of youth, morally and physically, and we are using modern technology to do it.  This is what scares the old guard.  We are making progress!)

Pope Francis:  St. Paul was a fiery individual who was always in trouble, not in trouble for troubles’ sake, but for Jesus because proclaiming Jesus is the consequence.  The Church has so much need of this, not only in distant lands, in the young churches, among people who do not know Jesus Christ, but here in the cities, in our cities, they need this proclamation of Jesus Christ.

So let us ask the Holy Spirit for this grace of apostolic zeal, let’s be Christians with apostolic zeal, onwards, as the Lord says to Paul, take courage! (Amen, Holy Father!  Amen!)

Imaginary conversation done. Isn’t it weird how those just fit together?

I think Fr. Rosica and friends had high hopes for the internet, but then realized that they were going to get some pushback when people didn’t like them twisting the Faith.  (FYI, Fr. Martin. SJ almost immediately posted this Fr. Rosica talk to his social media accounts to share with everyone what a “cesspool of hatred” the Catholic blogosphere is.  You to admit that Fr. Rosica is a little more lyrical than Fr. Martin when it comes to the ad hominems.  “Cesspool of hatred” is so much more poetic than the “haters” Fr. Martin used.) The internet is the one place where the faithful can call the liberals on their spin.   We can bypass and run around them.  In the history of the Church, the laity has never had so much input.   He’s quite right that it can cross time zones and borders (not sure about space – maybe a little too poetic).

Fr. Rosica does lob some pretty lofty grenades at Catholic bloggers, yet he never seems to stop and ask himself what his role in all of this might be.  Bloggers are the ones waging a war.  Bloggers are the ones against everyone and everything.   Bloggers have archaic notions. Bloggers are hateful, venomous and vitriolic, sad people, etc., etc., etc.   As usual, he does a bang up job of being rather contrary, does he not?  He’s really just saying, “I can fire off some artillery and be completely justified.  The laity that disagrees with me, they must just sit on their hands sporting duct tape over their lips, or else they are mean and pathetic!”  I don’t think the bloggers are the ones saying, “You can’t take people to task!” and then turning around to take people to task themselves.  I don’t think we mind or feel martyred when people tell us we’re great big meanies. Frankly, we couldn’t care less.  I think “Bring it!” would characterize us. What drives us nuts, however, is the lack of honest debate.  There is no debate unless you consider “You’re vitriolic!” as debate, in which case you probably flunked Debate 101.

I can’t speak for all Catholic bloggers, but I can safely assume most have the goal to support the faithful and the Faith under attack.  It is most definitely a war.  I have no problem with that depiction nor one of a field hospital.  The question is, who are the enemy combatants (aka – the ones fighting for their own agenda which is contrary to the Church)? Who are the doctors and nurses? Who are the ones fighting the unjust aggressor?  And just what is the best medicine?  Disinfecting wounds is rarely a pleasant thing.  Usually, a tremendous amount of pain comes before the healing.

So, the clergy really needs to ask themselves how to handle the laity challenging them?  Is it good to constantly whine about it, or should you jump into the conversation?  Is it good to say “Hey, I’m just going to sue you because what you said was wrong?” (ahem, Fr. Rosica!) or would it be a little more beneficial to rebut the accusations point by point? I thought dialogue was the word of the day?  I thought you were supposed to meet people where they were?  Well, here they are!   That is the problem with Fr. Rosica.  He’ll bend over backwards for one part of society, and then feels free to backhand another. It just so happens that the ones he backhands are the ones who advocate for following the Faith. He doesn’t want to have a discussion of the issues.  He simply tells everyone how full of venom they are and blocks them on social media.  They’re talking some serious issues, yet all he can do is peddle ad hominems.   He can continue to try and silence the portion of the Catholic blogosphere that disagrees with him, but I’m reasonably sure they aren’t going anywhere.  #meetthelaity

Catholic Schools: Be Like This!

Hey Catholic schools around the U.S., please take note.  THIS is how you do it.   Please read this.  I’ll be chopping a bunch out.  In short, teacher teaches facts in a Catholic school and lawyer alumna whines about it.

First, Catholic schools, you teach truth. You don’t candy coat it and make what you want it to be.  You tell it.  Gavin Ahern did just that.  Now I know this is hard if you are a school run by the Jesuits but this one, thankfully, is only named after one and seems to have been saved from Jesuit insanity.  Peg Perl, however, did go to a Jesuit school when she left Xavier College Prep and it shows.

Next, Catholic schools, when your teachers do what they’re supposed to do, teach the Truth according to the Catholic Church, defend them in their efforts to the hilt.  Be like this:

From Xavier College Preparatory:

Xavier College Preparatory is a Roman Catholic educational institution, fully committed to a belief in God according to the tenets of the Roman Catholic faith. That faith forms the very foundation of the mission: “to prepare young women with the knowledge, skills, and integrity to meet the challenges of a changing global society in a positive and productive manner.” Without our commitment to our faith, we cannot hope to achieve this vital Catholic mission.

As an educational institution, Xavier recognizes that certain issues may be the subject of vigorous intellectual, spiritual, and moral debate. We encourage our faculty and students to explore these often controversial issues, and to participate in this healthy and constructive process as Xavier strives to educate students not only academically, but also spiritually and morally within the context of our faith.

Among the most important, most fundamental spiritual and moral truths that Xavier imparts to its students is respect for the sanctity of human life, in all forms and at all stages. We teach our students to care for human life, to defend human life, and to speak out about the sanctity of every human life wherever it is threatened, from the first moment of conception until natural death.

We acknowledge the emotions that discussion on such matters can often evoke, and recognize that disagreements may result, even among members of the Xavier community. Nevertheless, Xavier will not allow the threat of controversy to intimidate our teachers, counselors, and administrators from discussing these important controversial issues, nor silence us in our duty to impart the values of our faith to the young women entrusted to our care.


Don’t let some silly little lawyer from an ambiguously named little club, the Colorado Ethics Watch, intimidate you. (Are they watching ethics to litigate them out of people or do they support ethics?  With this stupid move, I’d have to say the former is probably where dear Peg is headed.)  I urge you all to sign the petition against Peg Perl’s lame petition.   It’s already garnered close to a couple of thousand in two days and more Arizonan’s than Perl’s petition but let’s put Perl’s petition into the miserable failure books, OK?

So, for all those parents out there whining about Gavin Ahern teaching the truth according to reality and to the Catholic teachings, why don’t you please just pull your kids out of the school?  I’m sure you can find some other prep school that will get them into a ripping university that will cater to your liberal theology.  There are plenty of parents, faculty, and teachers at Xavier Prep who are happy to have authentic Catholicism taught by Mr. Ahern as exemplified in the comments of the above petition.  Sounds like he’s also very skilled at teaching critical thinking.  You’re obviously not there because you want your kids to get a fabulous Catholic education.  Well, guess what?  That’s exactly what Catholic schools are designed to do, so either stop railing against it or get the heck out.  With their excellent record, I’m sure they’ve got a waiting list.

Peg, you are just yet another example of a Georgetown loser.  Go to Georgetown and then you end up trying make the Faith wrap all around your cozy beliefs rather than conform your will to God’s.  I wish I could say it wasn’t typical of a Jesuit school graduate but it is.  It really sounds like you could have benefited from Mr. Ahern’s theology class.

So, to pick it apart, here’s a few things that I’m going to comment on from the Phoenix New Times article:

Online petitioners are demanding that a local Catholic school teacher be removed from the classroom for what they call “racist and sexist hate speech.”

OK, right off the bat, Peg Perl never actually states what was racist or sexist.  It seems in her mind it’s racist because it talked about abortion in the African-American community and it’s sexist because, simply, she is a pro-abortion woman and Gavin Ahern is not.  Ridiculous? Of course it is.

The petition, which has garnered more than 2,500 signatures (and counting) over the past couple of days, alleges that an instructor at Phoenix’s Xavier College Preparatory, a private Roman Catholic high school for girls, distributed anti-abortion propaganda in class that makes inflammatory claims about abortion and African-Americans.

Uh, let’s clarify this.  It didn’t make inflammatory claims about the African-American community.  It made factual claims on abortion in the African-American communities.  If anyone would like to see the information Rev. Dr. Clenard Childress puts out, please go to and look at the wealth of information about the toll abortion has taken on the African-American community.  Yes, indeed Margaret Sanger would be proud.  In fact, really, go look at it because something good should come out of Peg Perl’s stupidity.  I want to see lots of click-throughs on that link, people.  In fact, making a donation would really tick off Peg and friends.

A photo of the flier in question accompanies the petition. It features a skull-and-crossbones emblem, and the words “Black Genocide,” along with racially tinged statistics about black women and abortion.

What in the heck does racial tinged statistics mean?  It’s statistics from an African-American on African-Americans using Planned Parenthood’s own stats.   What else is it supposed to be about?  Oh, got it.  We’re just not supposed to talk about the genocide of the African-American community, because, you know, they’re African-American and it’s racist just to even discuss them?  Please. 

“Maybe the Klan Didn’t Invent Abortion,” the pamphlet reads in part. “[B]ut you have to believe they are pretty happy with the results.”

You do understand how the KKK views African-Americans, don’t you?  Of course they’re happy!!!  They either want black people to disappear off the face of the earth or to make them slaves again.  They don’t see them as human beings.

The tract also claims that “According to BlackGenocide…more black children are killed today by abortion than are born,” and “every day about 1400 black babies are killed by legalized abortion.”

And?  If you want to dispute the facts, go right ahead.  Right now, you’re just pointing them out.

<snipping a lot>

Perl says a daughter of a fellow alumna, who is a student at Xavier, brought the handout home from school last week, explaining that it had been distributed by one of her teachers. Unsure how to handle it, her friend was venting online to their private group.

Some in the group who are local to Phoenix were afraid to speak out because their children attend Xavier, Perl says. That gave her the idea for a petition.

Please. Stop the drama.  Real adults don’t persecute peoples’ children because they disagree with them.  It almost sounds like this little club of complainers is composed of the 1993 cheerleading squad who might have been the typical bullies.  Teachers like Mr. Ahern like a good conversation.  They thrive on logic and rhetoric.  They don’t shy away from controversy and crawl into their safe spaces.  They say “Let’s look at this together!” and try to see all of the sides and facets of the argument.  Wouldn’t you want this type of approach taught to your kids?  It doesn’t simply teach them to put their fingers in their ears and say “Lalalalalalala!”  It teaches them to take in an argument and look at all of the sides to it.  That sounds a bit like maturity!

“This is not just about Planned Parenthood or an abortion issue,” Perl explains. “I think it’s generally about the racist and sexist overtones of what [this teacher] is doing, in a position of authority and in an academic setting.”

Going all Obama on us, are we, Peg?  Never mind backing up such silly statements with those pesky things called facts.  Let’s just throw out racist and sexist and see if we can make that stick.

Her petition alleges that Gavin Ahern, who teaches theology at the academy, distributed the literature in question. It alleges other incidents of Ahern’s “misogynistic rhetoric” and calls on Xavier to “remove Mr. Ahern from the classroom immediately and take whatever steps are necessary to permanently remove him from the Xavier community.”

Again, back it up, Peg!  Quite frankly, for once, I’d like to see someone sue you on Mr. Ahern’s behalf for defamation of character.  I’m so tired of this liberal tactic of seeing who can whine the loudest and avoid the most facts.  You are now trying to damage someone’s career and livelihood and I hope you get a big smack down for it.  I’m not really a litigious person but this is getting quite out of hand in this country and the good guys better start fighting back.

One has got to wonder if Peg thinks that all Catholic teaching is misogynistic or just the stuff with which she disagrees.  Did she happen to notice Mr. Ahern chose to teach at an ALL GIRLS SCHOOL?  Yeah, totally sounds like someone who hates women.  Get a grip, Peg.  It’s not Ahern who’s the misogynist. It’s you who’s the misandrist.

 New Times attempted to speak with Ahern at his home in North Phoenix about the petition and the “Black Genocide” literature. He accepted a business card but declined to answer questions.

“I’m not going to comment,” he said.

Good for him.  Newsflash:  Catholic schools teaching Catholicism isn’t news!

On Xavier’s site, Ahern is listed as the “moderator” for the Right to Life Club and other student groups. His LinkedIn page states that he has taught theology at Xavier since August 2002 and also works as a sales rep for a specialty advertising company.

Imagine that.  Gavin Ahern has taught at Xavier Prep for 14 years and nobody noticed what a misogynist he was in all that time.  Hmmm…

The arguments promulgated in the flier Ahern allegedly distributed have been around for decades, according to a Washington Post article from last year, which addressed similar comments espoused by then-Republican presidential hopeful Ben Carson.

Post fact checkers found that while Carson’s claim hinged on whether “one considers an abortion to be a death,” it contained a “kernel of truth”: specifically, that black women and, for that matter, Latinas, “underwent more abortions in 2011 — the most recent year for which data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is available — than the number of people who died as a result of each group’s respective primary cause of death.”

Psh!  It’s science, people.  Scientists do not deny that the joining of the egg and the sperm creates a new life.  It’s a completely separate organism.  They simply disagree on whether that life has value and rights equal to the parents.  DNA tells us whether or not this new life is African-American, Latina, Caucasian, etc.  It is human, it is a life, and Catholics (you know, the religion guiding Xavier Prep) belies that all life from the moment of conception holds intrinsic value.  Not really sure where the author of the article is wandering off to here.

The Post article notes further that “[r]esearchers at the CDC and the Guttmacher Institute, an abortion-rights think tank, have identified poverty, health insurance coverage rates, and inconsistent and sometimes nonexistent contraception access and use as three primary causes of elevated abortion rates among black and Latina women.”

Of course, those aren’t the sort of facts included in your average anti-abortion tract.

Um, hello???  Pro-lifers routinely quote Guttmacher?  Now, do you know just who the Guttmacher Institute is? Oh yeah, it’s the research arm of Planned Parenthood.  No bias there.  It is a fact that Planned Parenthood builds 78% of its facilities in low-income, minority neighborhoods has absolutely nothing to do with it all.  They’re going to blame anyone but themselves for targeting minorities.  Getting rid of minorities and the poor was the reason Margaret Sanger founded Planned Parenthood!  Now there’s something you never find in a pro-abortion tract!

Though the Roman Catholic Church is zealously pro-life, Perl thinks distributing the literature does not befit her alma mater. 

Riiiiiiiight, because her Catholic alma mater should think just like she does, not how the Catholic Church thinks.  In short, it doesn’t benefit her self-centered self!

“Single-sex education is supposed to be empowering for women,” says Perl, adding that the anti-abortion tract “is not in keeping at all with the goals and mission of the school, and the education of young women.”

Oh really?  I think that being a Catholic is supposed to be empowering for all.  Let’s look at the mission and philosophy statement of the school shall we, Peg?

Mission Statement

 Xavier College Preparatory is a Catholic community that strives to prepare young women with the knowledge, skills, and integrity to meet the challenges of a changing global society in a positive and productive manner.


 We, the community of Xavier College Preparatory, are committed to a belief in God according to the tenets of the Catholic faith enlightened by the Second Vatican Council. In that spirit, we believe in providing opportunities for all to contribute to the community of faith.

We fully believe in the ideals of democracy, integrity, tolerance, and respect in harmony with the love of God, of self, and humankind, and we affirm the fundamental roles of parents and families as primary instruments of faith and education.

We also believe in conscientiously reviewing and improving our college preparatory curriculum, educational goals, and performance objectives, in order to sustain a learning process that encourages personal growth, faith development and community involvement for the young women entrusted to our care.

Now, Peg, how about you tell us how pro-life information contradicts the mission and philosophy of the school?  I’d have to say that YOU are the one in contradiction with the mission and philosophy of the school.   I’d hate to see what you’d do if you found out the school even suggested that abstinence was the rule of the Church for single people.  Your head would probably spin.  Oooh!  What would you do if they taught that contraception was wrong???  You might want to start a few more petitions because I’m pretty sure this school has it going on in the area of teachings on sexuality from the Catholic perspective with teachers like Mr. Ahern.  Oh, and just one more for the road, Peg– THEOLOGY OF THE BODY!

Dear readers, please don’t forget to sign the petition and share it when you’re done.  A good thumping might make one think twice about launching into a petition tizzy again.










The Low Bar of Loyola Marymount

I was looking more at Loyola Marymount since I’ve had a lot of responses to the blog posts on them.  I also confess they’re the proverbial accident at which I can’t help but look.  I perused their website.  You know that little navigation bar at the top?  I clicked on buttons until I finally found one that had anything remotely to do with the Faith under “student life” and that was “campus ministry.” Finally made it to the final “about” button and this is what they list:

“The Jesuit education we provide is a diverse academic community rich in opportunities for intellectual engagement and real-world experience.  We enroll an academically ambitious, multicultural, and socioeconomically diverse student body.  We recruit, retain and support a diverse faculty committed to excellence in teaching, research, scholarship and creativity.”

Diverse, diverse, multi-cultural, blah, blah, blah.  How about more on the Faith.  I think they should just remove the Catholic thing all together. 

That’s all for Catholicism folks.  Those two little sections.  Maybe I missed some other areas but they were buried.  Not a top issue for them.

Of course, splashed on the front page is Bill Clinton, their commencement speaker this year.  Yes, that Bill Clinton.  You know, the pro-abortion, pro-gay marriage, serial philanderer Bill Clinton.  Awesome pick, LMU.  Could you ever find a guy closer to that good old “Ignatian Spirituality” than Bill Clinton? (Notice the quotations? Yes, it’s sarcasm, in case any of the 3% of faithful, Catholic Jesuits who are trying to preserve authentic Ignatian Spirituality were worried)

What was really disturbing, found again under “student life”, was a link that caught my attention.  LMU CARES: Living the Lion’s Code.  Lion’s Code?  How cool.  So I checked out and here’s what I saw on a scrolling slide show.  Here’s some screen captures of the whole gory thing.




“Stand in faith?”  Where’s the faith in that?

And I found this lovely little tip sheet:

Well thank heavens they didn’t bog these kids down with all that Church teaching on respect, dignity, human sexuality, etc.  This is a far better approach.  “Don’t rape people!”  You know, because “Just say ‘no’” worked so well.  Let’s definitely not mention “Theology of the Body”, chastity, or consequences (other than jail time and expulsion) for their actions.  Don’t mention it at all.  And, please, keep bringing in the moral paragons like Bill Clinton.  What better example can you find of how not to be a rapist? Oh, wait…

Let’s take in the messages on these pictures.  I truly hope these were stock pics and these young men aren’t attached to this crud forever.  These pictures portray anything but respect and honor for a woman.  Let me explain to you boys: not raping someone does not equal respect and honor.  It equals not being quite the brutal animals some are.  Can we set a little higher standard than that?  How about being men and women of self-control and self-mastery?  Whoa!  There’s a thought.

If these young men respected and honored their “partners”, they wouldn’t put them in a situation to use birth control which is detrimental to their health, birth control that is going to fail, convince them to engage in activity that has a good shot at putting them in an unintended pregnancy situation.  And, as Catholics who have a clue (clues are not being doled out at LMU), they wouldn’t aid and abet damaging someone’s mortal soul. That would be respect and honor.

Now, before some college kid drops by to say “We live in the real world you old lady!”, don’t.  You have no idea how real my world is. I’d love, love, love to live in a faithful Catholic bubble but I don’t have that luxury.  That said, I know tons of people who are my age (which is going to look a lot younger when you get here) and a lot your age who didn’t or aren’t sleeping together before marriage who also live in the “real world.”  Why?  For starters, they were taught that true respect and honor meant more than not raping someone.  Next, they were taught Catholicism!  What a novel idea.  While the idea is catching on in the secular world, the disease-free, baggage-free, emotionally mature folks are almost always the one who practice some sort of faith.  They’re the ones playing the long game for eternal salvation and they understand true love is wanting your “partner” to get to heaven, not simply to give you pleasure.  They value sex, sexuality, and the dignity of each individual.  Their reward for this attitude in marriage is a deeper bond with their spouse and more enjoyment of sex because it wasn’t “done to death” and trivialized with several partners.  It was seen as something sacred and beautiful, not a hobby.  It holds the “wow!” factor and is treated as such.  

Those Catholic values that you’ve been cheated out of at LMU are just the opposite of what you’ve been taught.  You’ve been taught that they are oppressive when they are really the most freeing thing you’ll ever know.  But, hey, let’s use Bill Clinton as a role model of someone who understands healthy relationships.  Then you can all go out, ignore the Faith and, as he said, “Set the world on fire!” That should pretty much result with the an out of control flame leaving scorched earth and devastation in its wake.  Good luck with that!


Mom’s Response to a Loyola Marymount Student

The following is a comment sent by a Loyola Marymount student with my responses interspersed.  Original comment can be found here in the comment section:

Oh buddy…

So here I am, a student at lmu…and I read this…

I don’t know where you come from, but this is utter nonsense…let’s break it down shalt we?

First off and formost…and let’s just get it out of the way as it needs to be addressed.

The people of the lgbt community are still just people, and ask and demand for equality and respect like an one else.

For someone to say I don’t believe in your gender, does not make it so. I dont believe in war, yet here we are doing it perpetually in the name of oh so many fruitless ideals…

Is this really what they teach at Jesuit schools these days?  You’ve completely proven my point about them.   Catholicism is kind of overlooked there.

So, in response, we owe each and every individual on this planet respect as a child of God.  This doesn’t we mean we agree with every single ridiculous notion they proffer.  If you were to ask any devout Catholic if people who want to label themselves with the alphabet are beautifully and wonderfully made, we would answer yes.  Sadly, we realize that better than they.  Whether or not we believe in something does not change its reality. 

For someone to say “Hey, there are only two genders!” is science as God made it.  It’s not some fundamentalist notion.  It’s hard, empirical science.  It’s in DNA. There are x and y chromosomes and they unite to make something wondrously unique and beautiful.  It doesn’t change.  It’s not fluid depending on your notion. It’s a reality that cannot be changed at its core, no matter how people try.  Why people constantly try and rail against God’s creation is beyond me and it’s REALLY beyond me how this notion can be so prevalent at a Catholic school.

I digress…

This person ( who has had polarizing issues in the past) has not evolved with rest of the world. Is it hate crime to say you essentially don’t exist…

This isn’t the first time I’ve heard this bleeding heart cry.  Nobody is saying somebody didn’t exist.  It’s just silly to keep repeating this ad naseaum.  It’s a red-herring.  It makes a heart wrenching tale which is completely inaccurate.  Just because you disagree with someone (and this time it’s on the wonderful world of science that God created) doesn’t mean you don’t exist.  It means someone is scientifically right and someone is scientifically wrong.  And for Catholics, it means someone is morally right and someone is morally wrong.

Perhaps not, but we aren’t the deciders of that.  The person who it is said to gets to make that judgement. 

Clearly you have not read much of this blog.  Yes, there is actually a tangible reality.  It does exist and we can decide whether or not something is in keeping with this.  We can also judge (oh it’s such a mean ol’ word).  Can we judge someone’s immortal soul?  Nope. There are things, like culpability, that are beyond our purview but can we morally and in good conscience judge peoples’ actions?  Absolutely.  If anyone tells you otherwise, run far, far away because this is anything but Catholic.  We should be using our judgment all day long.

There was even a conversation about this incident, and there was still hate issues about it.

If I tell my child that the stove is hot and they shouldn’t touch it, is that hate?  Try to move beyond the touchy-feely crud spewed in the world today and realize that truth is the loving way to go.

To trash the school for liberal indoctrination is a fallacy. Our conerstone is the promotion of social justice through the world.

You have to know justice before you can actually promote it.  Justice isn’t running round telling people fanciful tales to make them feel better.  The catechism is a beautiful thing.  Let’s look at it, shall we?

1928 Society ensures social justice when it provides the conditions that allow associations or individuals to obtain what is their due, according to their nature and their vocation. Social justice is linked to the common good and the exercise of authority.

According to their nature and vocation.  What does that mean in the eyes of the Church?  Well, let’s look at nature.  That’s really what’s being twisted at good old LMU.


362 The human person, created in the image of God, is a being at once corporeal and spiritual. The biblical account expresses this reality in symbolic language when it affirms that “then the LORD God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.”229 Man, whole and entire, is therefore willed by God.

363 In Sacred Scripture the term “soul” often refers to human life or the entire human person.230 But “soul” also refers to the innermost aspect of man, that which is of greatest value in him,231 that by which he is most especially in God’s image: “soul” signifies the spiritual principle in man.

364 The human body shares in the dignity of “the image of God”: it is a human body precisely because it is animated by a spiritual soul, and it is the whole human person that is intended to become, in the body of Christ, a temple of the Spirit:232

Man, though made of body and soul, is a unity. Through his very bodily condition he sums up in himself the elements of the material world. Through him they are thus brought to their highest perfection and can raise their voice in praise freely given to the Creator. For this reason man may not despise his bodily life. Rather he is obliged to regard his body as good and to hold it in honor since God has created it and will raise it up on the last day. 233

365 The unity of soul and body is so profound that one has to consider the soul to be the “form” of the body:234 i.e., it is because of its spiritual soul that the body made of matter becomes a living, human body; spirit and matter, in man, are not two natures united, but rather their union forms a single nature.

366 The Church teaches that every spiritual soul is created immediately by God – it is not “produced” by the parents – and also that it is immortal: it does not perish when it separates from the body at death, and it will be reunited with the body at the final Resurrection.235

367 Sometimes the soul is distinguished from the spirit: St. Paul for instance prays that God may sanctify his people “wholly”, with “spirit and soul and body” kept sound and blameless at the Lord’s coming.236 The Church teaches that this distinction does not introduce a duality into the soul.237 “Spirit” signifies that from creation man is ordered to a supernatural end and that his soul can gratuitously be raised beyond all it deserves to communion with God.238

368 The spiritual tradition of the Church also emphasizes the heart, in the biblical sense of the depths of one’s being, where the person decides for or against God.239

Sadly, sadly, sadly, people are trying to separate and change their natures. I have to tell you, my young LMU student, that the very next line is probably going to confuse you. If you really just stop and give it a read, you will hopefully see the beauty in what’s been lost at LMU for far too long:


Equality and difference willed by God

369 Man and woman have been created, which is to say, willed by God: on the one hand, in perfect equality as human persons; on the other, in their respective beings as man and woman. “Being man” or “being woman” is a reality which is good and willed by God: man and woman possess an inalienable dignity which comes to them immediately from God their Creator.240 Man and woman are both with one and the same dignity “in the image of God”. In their “being-man” and “being-woman”, they reflect the Creator’s wisdom and goodness.

You see, the dignity comes from God, it is not something we invented.  God knew what he was doing.  Do you doubt that?

Respect should be given to all people lgbt or not, religous or not, bible thumper fundementalist, or atheists like myself.

Oh, so you do doubt that!  LOL!  Ok, this makes things a bit more sense now.  I’ve already dealt with the difference between respect due for the dignity of the human person vs. the respect due for the silly notions of people.  I can see that you do not understand Catholicism, which is really sad considering the fact that you attend a Catholic school.  I don’t expect everyone attending a Catholic school to be Catholic and I welcome those that are not.  That said, I do expect a Catholic school to teach Catholicism or drop their pretenses.  That’s why Catholic schools exist and, believe it or not, my young atheist, there are Catholic teachings on that.  I would think that, just logically, you and your supposed logic-based non-religion could see that small sensibility.

When you create a dialog that undermines the identity of a person, you treat them like a second class citizen…it’s simply wrong,and the lmu community will rise up against hate rehtoric and hyperbole. Because it’s the right thing to do.

Please read this about 10 times.  The only person undermining the identity of a person was the complainant.  The staff member was the one acknowledging and teaching about the true nature of the complainant.  It’s kind of silly to think that when a faculty member takes the time out to engage the students in conversation about the reality of science and the Catholic teachings surrounding it,they are somehow perceived as the one who is treating someone like a second-class citizen.  You know how people treat other people like second-class citizens?  They ignore them.  This faculty member chose not to ignore them, but to explain Catholicism to them like these young students were actually thinking beings with a thought in their head.  Clearly she was wrong but she made the attempt to treat them with REAL respect and dignity.

It’s not silencing or brainwashing or Satan’s liberal logic or whatever you want to call it…

Yeah, it kind of is.

It’s about respect. And that person was disrespectful to my lgbt brothers and sisters…and yes he can say it, but that doesn’t mean his opinion will be well received.

Why was “that person” disrespectful?  Because she presented and opinion contrary to someone else’s?  Please.  This is what a snowflake society we’ve become.  And, just to ask, by the way, have you actually read the account of the faculty member in question?  Really didn’t sound like she went in guns a-blazing.  She did run down the corridors yelling “Abomination!”   Geez!  Even I wouldn’t think that helpful.  She had a conversation.  How about the respect for freedom of religion and free speech?  

I stand with equality.

Funny because you don’t seem to think that the faculty member in question has an equal say.  Don’t you think Catholic morality should actually be seen as a little more than equal at a Catholic school?  It wasn’t a Jewish, atheist, or pan-whatever school.  It was a Catholic school. 

I stand for minorities,

Um, it sounds like this poor woman is a minority.  The BIRT (Bias Incident Response Team aka Thought Police) probably took care of the rest of those pesky Catholics who actually follow the teachings of the Church.  Really?  Have you read 1984?  You might want to pick up a copy.

I stand for lgbt, and against rehtoric and hyperbole that make people feel like less than they are.

LOL!  As long as they agree with you!  Don’t you think for a moment, using your Spock-like, atheist logic, that this woman was made to feel like less than she was?  I mean, gosh, BIRT was called in.  She’s being investigated by the police for having a different opinion and her job is threatened. She must be evil! Talk about hyperbole!  This whole incident was hyperbolic.

Can you say the same?

The real question is, would I want to say the same?  Do I stand for LGBTQWERG…?  Of course not.  I stand for reality and the nature God created, like faithful Catholics do. Men and women are fearfully and wonderfully made and are called to (back to the Catechism) embrace their nature and vocation.  It’s called Truth.  Only there  will we find true love, dignity and respect.  Outside of that is a cruel hoax which many people will find out about way too late.

Guest Blogger on LMU

I’m going to reprint Ginnyfree’s observations (with permission).  I disagree that this is “nuff said!”  I think we could do volumes more on the lunacy at LMU and most Jesuit schools.  Thanks, Ginnyfree.

Okay. I’ve got a little time to chat, so I’ll start by answering Mad Mom’s question about who actually is BIRT. She’s already explained that they are a part of the campus life of Marymount and that they are charged with processing incidents of bias that the newer anti-discrimination policies are attempting to limit. In the “incident” regarding the employee who simply stated Church teaching to others who seemed interested in listening, we discover that there really was two versions of the alleged “incident,” at that those who are charged by the college to investigate such things are pretty much biased in favor of the LGBTQ community of persons who are a part of campus life and Marymount. It is they who are twisting the truth of what actually happened to make it seem as if there really was a hate crime. Of course they do. They have to because that is what they were organized to find and deal with, so they interpret actual interactions with rainbow colored glasses. They’ve be given the task of finding those persons who actually hate gays and would hurt them and by gosh, by golly, they are going to give it the Old College Try and will find a few even if they have to make it up. OOOOOOPS!

Now, wanting to be charitable, I looked up the current dictates in the college’s policy manual that provide BIRT team members with their authority to do what it is they do for the school and since it is relevant, I will add it here:

“Equal Opportunity & Non-Discrimination
The University seeks to ensure a positive living, learning and working environment for all LMU community members. Specifically, this policy prohibits unwelcome, harassing conduct on the basis of race, religious creed (including religious dress and grooming practices), color, national origin (including language and language use restrictions), ancestry, disability (mental and physical) including HIV and AIDS, legally protected medical condition (cancer-related or genetic characteristics), denial of Family and Medical Care Leave, marital status, sex (including pregnancy, childbirth, breastfeeding or related medical condition), gender, gender identity, gender expression, age 40 or over, military or veteran status, sexual orientation, genetic information or any other bases protected by federal (including but not limited to Title VI and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990), state or local law. The University does not discriminate on these bases, or any other basis protected by law, in the administration of any of its education or admissions policies, scholarship or loan programs, athletics, and other school-administered policies and programs, or in its employment policies and practices. All University policies, practices, and procedures are administered in a manner consistent with LMU’s Jesuit identity and character.”

Okay, so by their actions, the BIRT team has successfully limited the ability of the College to actually discuss Catholicism in an authentic way outside of the classrooms anywhere on campus within earshot of any person who may take offense at what is being said. It is the BIRT team who will process any incident that gets reported to them in which a person is offended by the actions or words of another and that is NOT according to any Catholic standard, but rather of a standard of compliance with an agenda that seeks to silence the Church in the public square everywhere, and not simply on the well groom lawns of our colleges and universities as is outlined in the paragraph above. They’ve in effect, made preaching a crime on their campus if there is anyone who may be offended by preaching against the LBGTQ agenda within earshot.  I guess, since the college has approved this and moved forward with it, it will get worse.

What is also very troubling to me is the very last sentence of the paragraph I’ve quoted, the part about these policies being considered a part of the school’s Jesuit identity and character. Last time I checked these words couldn’t be reconciled to these that actually pretty much describe EXACTLY the authentic and more importantly authorized Jesuit identity and character:”He is a member of a Society founded chiefly for this purpose: to strive especially for the defence and propagation of the faith and for the progress of souls in Christian life and doctrine, by means of public preaching, lectures and any other ministration whatsoever of the Word of God, and further by means of retreats, the education of children and unlettered persons in Christianity, and the spiritual consolation of Christ’s faithful through hearing confessions and administering the other sacraments.” That paragraph is part of a Papal Bull, which the other paragraph has rendered bull of another sort. The Pope said they are supposed to preach under the banner of Christ all sound doctrine, but the BIRT team will be listening!

Okay. Nuff said. God bless. Ginnyfree.

Loyola Marymount and the Thought Police

OK, I haven’t delved into this story since so many sane people already have, but I just can’t take it anymore!  Not going to quote much, so read it yourself:

First of all, I think we can all agree (or we at least have to face the facts) that the AVERAGE college student/millennial’s maturity has been severely stunted.  I really can’t figure out why.  Maybe Gen X tried to make life a little too comfortable for their kids?  Haven’t we heard a million times that we should make the lives of future generations better than our own?  Maybe that was the problem.  Society removed a few too many obstacles and now these kids are just bored and lost.  Whatever the reason, they are just plain immature.

Because of their stunted maturity, I’d like to suggest that these kids totally qualify under Matthew 18:6-7 and that the vast majority of the faculty of Loyola Marymount (a Jeusit college – a shocker, I know) might want to go find their milltones, because you’re going to have to pay up for what you’ve promoted at your school.  It may have started in their childhood with their parents, or possibly the twelve years of Catholic schooling they received before they ever got to you, but you’ve added insult to injury, and everyone who molded these students is going to face a reckoning.

And if anyone hurts the conscience of one of these little ones, that believe in me, he had better have been drowned in the depths of the sea, with a mill-stone hung about his neck. 7 Woe to the world, for the hurt done to consciences! It must needs be that such hurt should come, but woe to the man through whom it comes!

Do you think Loyola Marymount remembered it was the “Year of Mercy” before they started to investigate and have the police investigate their own staff member for a hate crime???  Probably not.  Mercy only goes one way with these people.  The ONLY person who has shown any mercy in this story is the employee who bothered to share a shred of truth with the students on that campus.  Thank you, unnamed employee.  You appeared to have known that this was going to be an issue, yet you trudged forth anyway. Your reward will be great in heaven. 

So let’s look at some facts here:

  • Loyola Marymount doesn’t actually believe in science, so if you’re thinking of science as a degree, I’d rule that one out. There are only two genders.  It’s totally biological and it’s in our DNA and cannot be separated nor changed.
  • Loyola Marymount has a Bias Incident Response Team which, apparently, is called in to weed out faithful Catholics. What is BIRT you may ask? 


BIRT’s Charge

The purpose of BIRT is to manage institutional communication and university-wide responses to incidents where bias may be a factor. Duties include making recommendations to the president on proposed responses, developing university communication protocols, and reviewing bias incident reports.


Excerpt from LMU’s Non-Discrimination Policy Concerning Biased Incidents

The university does not tolerate hate crimes or bias-motivated incidents and will respond to them with appropriate sanctions, which may include: for students, expultion [sic – too bad a Catholic university can’t be bothered with something as basic as proper spelling!], suspension, or exclusion from the campus; for faculty and staff, disciplinary action up to and including termination. Students, faculty, or staff who experience or witness any form of hate crime or bias-motiavted [sic – ditto on spelling properly] incident should immediately report it to the Department of Public Safety.


One of the students reported an employee for espousing the teachings of the Catholic Church on a Catholic campus?!?  Color me Catholic, but aren’t we supposed to be biased TOWARD Catholicism?!?!?!  We do consider it Truth, after all.  Well, at least some of us do.  Not entirely sure about most of the Jesuits. 

  • Which brings me to the fact that Loyola Marymount considers teaching Catholicism and science to be a hate crime. 

Seriously, the words “thought police” now have some actual meaning outside of the dystopian novel “1984.”  By the way, if you haven’t already and you want to have your kids really see what’s going on in today’s world, you might want to have them read it. 

Remember when universities were promoted as “a place for the free exchange of ideas?”  “Free” has been abused to the hilt.  There is no more looking at opposing views, trying to understand them, and figuring out ways to debate them.  Universities (especially Jesuit ones) no longer want opposing view even discussed.  Nope.  Cannot even be uttered.  Those with opposing views are marginalized, ostracized, and now, prosecuted.  Doesn’t get more Orwellian than that.

  • Loyola Marymount chooses to completely ignore Pope Francis’ comments on the little game they’re trying to play. 

Here’s a nice compilation:  Ouch!  What do you say, Loyola Marymount?  Going to call out the BIRT on him too?

And then there’s Pope Benedict.  They don’t just ignore him, they rail against him.  They really don’t want anyone to see his explanation on gender and nature.  He’s definitely hateful and, BTW, he was part of the Hitler Youth. Who are they going to call out for him?  BIRT might be a little to light weight. (emphasis mine):

While up to now we regarded a false understanding of the nature of human freedom as one cause of the crisis of the family, it is now becoming clear that the very notion of being – of what being human really means – is being called into question. He quotes the famous saying of Simone de Beauvoir: “one is not born a woman, one becomes so” (on ne naît pas femme, on le devient). These words lay the foundation for what is put forward today under the term “gender” as a new philosophy of sexuality. According to this philosophy, sex is no longer a given element of nature, that man has to accept and personally make sense of: it is a social role that we choose for ourselves, while in the past it was chosen for us by society. The profound falsehood of this theory and of the anthropological revolution contained within it is obvious. People dispute the idea that they have a nature, given by their bodily identity, that serves as a defining element of the human being. They deny their nature and decide that it is not something previously given to them, but that they make it for themselves. According to the biblical creation account, being created by God as male and female pertains to the essence of the human creature. This duality is an essential aspect of what being human is all about, as ordained by God. This very duality as something previously given is what is now disputed. The words of the creation account: “male and female he created them” (Gen 1:27) no longer apply. No, what applies now is this: it was not God who created them male and female – hitherto society did this, now we decide for ourselves. Man and woman as created realities, as the nature of the human being, no longer exist. Man calls his nature into question. From now on he is merely spirit and will. The manipulation of nature, which we deplore today where our environment is concerned, now becomes man’s fundamental choice where he himself is concerned. From now on there is only the abstract human being, who chooses for himself what his nature is to be. Man and woman in their created state as complementary versions of what it means to be human are disputed. But if there is no pre-ordained duality of man and woman in creation, then neither is the family any longer a reality established by creation. Likewise, the child has lost the place he had occupied hitherto and the dignity pertaining to him. Bernheim shows that now, perforce, from being a subject of rights, the child has become an object to which people have a right and which they have a right to obtain. When the freedom to be creative becomes the freedom to create oneself, then necessarily the Maker himself is denied and ultimately man too is stripped of his dignity as a creature of God, as the image of God at the core of his being. The defence of the family is about man himself. And it becomes clear that when God is denied, human dignity also disappears. Whoever defends God is defending man.


Does anyone find it ironic that you find more “free thinking” people at a faithful Catholic university than at a liberal university who considers them to be “oppressive”, “narrow-minded”, “hateful”, and “judgmental”? I love watching the kids come out of these schools where they supposedly teach nothing but hate.  I’ve seen people walk up to these students and practically spit in their face about some point of the faith, yet they will respond with a “Let’s talk about that,” which either shocks and amazes the person or sends their head spinning.  They don’t actually know how to have a conversation.  They only know how to hatefully espouse their opinion.  Listening, studying, and understanding another person is a foreign concept.  All they can do is say, “hate, hate, hate, hate.”  Again, rather ironic.  Where’s the love and mercy there?  There isn’t any.  True love and mercy is not found in these liberal, Jesuit schools.  They have utterly failed their students.  They sacrificed compassion a long time ago for the sake of political correctness.

The scariest part about this whole story?  This:

Carleo said, “‘[Y]ou can have your opinion’ as long as it doesn’t ‘deny my existence,’

Since the unnamed employee obviously thought she was having a conversation with somebody, it’s not about denying anyone’s existence.  This is about Carleo and club denying freedom of speech and religion.  Carleo is saying that the unnamed employee cannot have an opinion if it contradicts the one? Apparently the supposed ROMAN CATHOLIC Loyola Marymount University wholeheartedly agrees!

Sad and pathetic, but I’ve come to expect that from a school run by Jesuits. 



The Hand That Rocks the Cradle…

If you haven’t already seen this, I’m thinking that a whole lot of moms (or sane people in general) are going to become “Mad Moms!”

I’d like to thank Katherine Timpf for bringing this to our attention so we can all rant about this little lady who is apparently the product of the “Let’s give a trophy to everyone who participated!” generation (only now she wants to ditch the participation requirement) before this insane idea becomes the movement du jour and we start paying MORE people for doing nothing.  Sorry, we are not all equal.

First of all, I think moms should be home with their kids if at all possible.  Totally not possible for everyone.  Got it.  No need to send me nasty messages either for or against working moms.  My mom had to work and I’m very thankful that I was able to stay home with my children and put my efforts into forming their minds so they didn’t turn out like Ms. Foye.

Let’s take a look at Ms. Timpf’s story on this “me-centered” chick, Meghann Foye:

She calls it “meternity” leave.


I probably could end it right there and moms of the world would let out a collective “What the heck is wrong with whoever “she” is?!?!?”

A 38-year-old woman is arguing that even though she does not have any kids, she is still like, totally entitled to maternity leave. 

And let me just respond for those sane moms of the world and those who appreciate them: No way!  No how! No, you are not entitled to a vacation because you haven’t taken on the awesome responsibility of forming the mind, body, and soul of a human being you brought into this world while maintaining a job to care for your family.  In fact, I think you should be required to babysit, overnight for all of the moms you’ve just insulted.  Probably won’t do much for your entitlement issues but it would be vindicating to see you crying in your coffee after handling the night feedings and diaper changes.  Someone could use a little dose of reality.

The woman, Meghann Foye, recently came out with a book titled Meternity — the fictional story of a woman who fakes a pregnancy to get maternity leave. In an interview with the New York Post, Foye explained that even though the story in her book is fictional, it is rooted in her very real belief that childless women should get maternity leave, too.

Yep. Foye told the Post that she was 31 years old and working as a magazine editor when she started feeling like it wasn’t fair that the people who had kids got to, like, leave early to pick up those kids and take off time to have them. 

So for those wondering if this egocentric little princess is insane, if she hasn’t already cleared that up for you, her next comment will.

The more I thought about it, the more I came to believe in the value of a ‘meternity’ leave — which is, to me, a sabbatical-like break that allows women and, to a lesser degree, men to shift their focus to the part of their lives that doesn’t revolve around their jobs,” Foye said. 

What the what???  Maybe she doesn’t understand the definition of sabbatical?  Let me clue you in, Ms Foye.  Maternity leave isn’t a time for study or travel.  It’s a time to 1) heal from feeling like you were run over by a semi 2) adjust to acute sleep deprivation and try to keep your sanity through it 3) adjust your hormones to somewhat normal again 4) wait hand and foot on a helpless human being at all hours of the day and 5) figure out how you are going to do all of the above when you have to go back to work in a relatively few weeks.  Most of us have trouble with 1-4 even when we don’t work.  Giving birth is not a walk on the beach.  Should that have to be said?!?! As made clear by her comments, Ms Foye had NEVER been through that before she made such an insane analogy.  After you’ve given birth, Ms Foye, why don’t you come back and tell us about your “sabbatical.” You know, because it’s just like a vacation at the Caribbean resort.

And here’s Ms. Timpf injecting just a little sanity:

Hey, lady? That “part of their lives that doesn’t revolve around their jobs,” is a child. It’s not a portrait-painting aspiration, it’s another person, and there is nothing “me” about it. I may be childless, but I’ve seen enough episodes of 16 and Pregnant to know that women often have to give up many of their own interests when they have kids.

Apparently you actually noticed you had a mother, Ms. Timpf.  Thank you!

But Foye doesn’t seem to get that:

 “There’s something about saying ‘I need to go pick up my child’ as a reason to leave the office on time that has far more gravitas than, say, ‘My best friend just got ghosted by her OkCupid date and needs a margarita’ — but both sides are valid,” she continued.

Oh yeah. Those two things are exactly alike- except they’re not. At all.

And back to someone who has a little bit of sanity (if I had to guess, one of these ladies was raised by a mother and the other a nanny or maybe boarding school?):

 Uh… Foye? Picking up a child so he or she will not be left stranded is more important than drinking in the middle of the day with your emotionally inept gal pal. It would be one thing if all the moms were allowed to get midday margaritas just because they were moms — but they’re not allowed to leave work for that either. You want what moms get? Then become a mom. The rules are the same for everyone! That’s not an injustice; it’s the definition of fairness.”

Oh, I wouldn’t wish Ms. Foye inflicted on any child.  She should stick to her spray-tanned, well-manicured bar scene.  There’s not a chance in the world that this woman is prepared to handle motherhood with a me-centric attitude like that. She wouldn’t last a day in my world.

For all the moms that would like to knock some sense into this girl, this one’s for you.  Hope your Mother’s Day is blessed!

       William Ross Wallace (1819-1881)




      BLESSINGS on the hand of women!

        Angels guard its strength and grace.

      In the palace, cottage, hovel,

          Oh, no matter where the place;

      Would that never storms assailed it,

          Rainbows ever gently curled,

      For the hand that rocks the cradle

          Is the hand that rules the world.


      Infancy’s the tender fountain,

          Power may with beauty flow,

      Mothers first to guide the streamlets,

          From them souls unresting grow—

      Grow on for the good or evil,

          Sunshine streamed or evil hurled,

      For the hand that rocks the cradle

          Is the hand that rules the world.


      Woman, how divine your mission,

          Here upon our natal sod;

      Keep—oh, keep the young heart open

          Always to the breath of God!

      All true trophies of the ages

          Are from mother-love impearled,

      For the hand that rocks the cradle

          Is the hand that rules the world.


      Blessings on the hand of women!

          Fathers, sons, and daughters cry,

      And the sacred song is mingled

          With the worship in the sky—

      Mingles where no tempest darkens,

          Rainbows evermore are hurled;

      For the hand that rocks the cradle

          Is the hand that rules the world.