They’ll Get You Through Your Children
By Mack Rights
“We’ll get you through your children!”- Allen Ginsburg- gay radical beatnik poet.
“Don’t think they won’t!”- Me.
A while back, I wrote a piece called “Are your kids being turned into Feminists at Public Schools?” In it I wrote the following two paragraphs. I highlighted the part I want to remark on in bold:
Common Core is a self-preserving cultural parasite that needs willing adherents to be elected in order to continue to infect the minds of innocent children. As a result, it teaches more than just reading, writing and arithmetic, which it barely teaches at all. It teaches ideology, and of course, its ideology is of the left. It is the government control of “liberalizing” your child in order to make them more conducive to being slaves on the government plantation. Its goal is to transfer loyalty from the family onto the government that seeks to replace the need for family with clever new government programs manned by expensive and mindless government-unionized drones.
First though, it must delegitimize the need for family. They’re already arguing that allowing parents to read to children before bed is unfair to the children who don’t have parents that read to them before bed. Looking a bit further down that slippery slope, one sees that children with two parents will have an unfair advantage over children with fewer. Therefore, no child should be raised in a two-parent home, but all children should be raised in a state-run orphanage. Only then can we have true equality. Sound like science fiction? – So did landing on the moon at one point in history. So did the formation of the Hitler Youth at one time in history. History repeats itself over and over- except the part about landing on the moon. Obama has grounded all our space ships and turned NASA into a creative writing outfit to generate fantasies about how the Muslim world contributed to the scientific world- you know, because a sandaled camel jockey spends a lot of time looking at stars in between terrorist attacks.
Only a few days after I wrote that, Obama’s Secretary of Education Arne Duncan proposed “public boarding schools for our kids.” Whose kids? Arne’s kids and my kids, or does Arne think he shares ownership of my kids and your kids? I’m sure those questions will be answered later of course. As Sylvia Van Peebles of the Examiner writes:
Have you heard the one about Arne Duncan‘s proposed public boarding schools? Actually, it’s not a new idea. Authoritarian governments have always known that it is important to mold the young in their ideology. The first Premier of the Soviet Union, Vladimir Lenin, thought of it decades ago. He said, “Give me four years to teach the children and the seed I have sown will never be uprooted. Give us the child for 8 years and it will be a Bolshevik forever.” We saw the results of that.
At his conference, Arne Duncan said: “I think all of our schools should be community centers. Our schools should be open 12, 13, 14 hours a day with a wide variety of after-school programming.” Unfortunately, Buffalo School Board member Carl Paladino was also named as someone who’d apparently floated the idea of public boarding schools in the past- maybe to suggest that the idea is bipartisan. Whatever, the idea still rots with the stench of two-week old corpse that was left for dead and sodomized repeatedly by a roving gang of necrophile Hillary-Clinton-loving jackbooted street urchins.
Public Boarding Schools may sound great when it comes to the children that should be taken from their guardians for their safety, but where do you stop, and who decides the rules? Eventually, they will come for more and more kids, and once they’re taken away from the parents, there’s really no saving them. They become the state’s children. This is really just an idea that leads to setting up a system of public juvenile detention centers that the government calls public boarding schools to make them sound fluffy and wonderful.
The system will demand money, and then more students in order to justify the demands for more money. Government unions never say: “Things are great. We don’t need any more money from the taxpayer.” The ideal targeted student will thus evolve with time. They’ll start with street urchins, and pretty soon, they’re taking children from home schooling parents for lack of government indoctrination. It will inevitably go from taking children with no apparent parenting to taking children with too much parenting- total mission creep.
But if that’s the goal from the beginning, then that’s not mission creep at all. It’s just mission evolution. And the libs love evolution. If the goal is to turn children into adults who will mindlessly vote for Democrats, this evolution has to be the goal. You just get there in baby steps, arguing for the monstrous system’s creation based on fulfilling the need of some unfortunate children- “We’ve got to do it for the children.” Once the system’s set up, the meaning of “unfortunate children” can eventually be altered over and over so as to eventually refer to all children, especially the ones that don’t have the benefit being forced to attend a “public boarding school” with unionized government workers lording over them 24 hours a day. And that’s how it starts.
But to look at what’s going on presently, look no further than at what the Boy Scouts are doing. A while back, they announced a ban on water gun fights and water balloons. This is the inevitability set into place once the Scouts gave up their rebellious willingness to stand athwart the godless onslaught of the progressive mob of leather-clad dominatrix punishers of little boys. They let in gay scouts, who are more likely to be too sensitive to allow the boys around them to actually be boys. The acceptance of the fact that “boys will be boys” is no longer acceptable. These boys need to be taught to be excited about earning their interior-decorating badges and their hair-braiding badges.
In other words, these normal boys need to be more accommodative of the gay boys. It’s not about teaching the gay boys to be boys, but rather about teaching the normal boys to be acceptable to gay boys. Yay, diversity. Nothing like taking the boy out of boyhood in order to squash his future transition into manhood. Convince him he’s actually a girl, and he’ll never be a man. Instead, his parents will be shelling out for surgery to remove his little boyhood, and by that, I mean his penis. Wait, they won’t need to. Obamacare or the mayor of Rochester will take care of that surgery. They love trannies.
Here’s a question: Didn’t the PG (pre-Gay) Boy Scout organization actually seek to help boys to keep “morally straight?” Of course it did. But now, these boys are no longer allowed to be trusted with the ability to differentiate between the moral soundness of pointing a water gun and pointing a real gun at another boy. What kind of scam is this organization trying to pull?
As Lauren Tousignant of the NY Post writes, “Wendall writes that a Scouter said of the rule, ‘A Scout is kind. What part of pointing a firearm [simulated or otherwise] at someone is kind?’” Go read what that kid said again. Luckily, this kid went unnamed, because we all now know that he is gay. It’s not kind to squirt your friend with a squirt gun.
That boy doesn’t know how to be a boy. The squirt gun is just a diversion so your friend doesn’t see all your other friends about to ambush him with twenty giant water balloons. Oh, man. I can’t believe I wrote that. I apologize to anyone who is offended by that- because if you’re offended by that, you are a too stupid to fit into normal society and therefore you suffer from numerous psychoses that make it even harder for you to fit in. I’ll pray for you, but understand: the world doesn’t need to change to accommodate you. You need to change. You’re messed up in the head. Seriously, you’ve got to get that head checked out. You ain’t right.
It’s not surprising then that, in the following couple of days, the leader of the Boy Scouts, Robert Gates, announced that the Scouts would eventually allow gay adults to be scout leaders because he didn’t want to go to court to stand up for parents’ First Amendment rights of religion, to speech and to assemble with those whom you’d like to assemble. What Robert Gates really means to say: “Screw the First Amendment. The gays are going to sue us. We need to give up and bend over now. We need to take it like men who weren’t allowed to be boys.”
Without the ability to differentiate between the morality of shooting your friend with a squirt gun or a real gun, how are these boys going to know the moral difference between shaking his hand or hugging him naked? Will the Boy Scouts be held financially liable for boys who come back from camp with AIDS? Or will parents be obligated to sign a waiver of liability for all STDs that children get from other boys or gay adults at camp? It’s a new world. We parents have to be open minded enough to let our children experiment with all kinds of sex, even if it means they die from the diseases they get in the process. Oh, but don’t let them get squirted with a squirt gun. Phew, dodged a bullet there. I mean we dodged a squirt of water that may be loaded with germs.
But why? Why? Why are people so stupid?- You ask. A recent Gallup poll- if the numbers are really true- shows that Americans “greatly overestimate the percentage of gays and lesbians in the US.” While less than 2% of the population identifies as gay, the average guess of Americans is that 23% of Americans are gay. My only explanation for this misunderstanding, other than that the gay mob is so loud that it’s created the impression that it’s much bigger than it really is, is that people misunderstood the question. Rather than answering the question, “What percentage of Americans are homosexual?” they might have answered the question, “What percentage of Americans do you think are gay?” Adding the percentage of Americans who consider themselves liberal (about 20%) to the number that are homosexual (about 2%) almost gets us to 23%, ignoring the obvious overlap. I mean, who doesn’t think the liberals are all gay? It’s not like you have to commit homosexual acts to be considered gay. You’re born gay- right? Not every person who was born gay commits homosexual sins- some become priests. Whatever, it’s just a theory.
So maybe you blame the heavily homosexual editorial board of the liberal NY Times for creating this myth. In talking about the Big Gay Agenda victory over once heavily Catholic Ireland, which just outlawed the belief that marriage is between a man and a woman, the NY Times Editorial board called the “importance of mothers and fathers an absurdity.” It’s not hard to imagine the NY Times getting behind Arne Duncan’s Public Boarding School scheme to bring children into an alternative lifestyle- one that isn’t such a drag as growing up in a home where two parents actually love and give a crap about you.
But what’s the point? It’s apparent that they’ve already got most of the children. At a pro-marriage speech at UC Santa Barbara, the “open-minded” gay activists stood up and shouted down the speaker with foul signs and demonic slogans. As reported by Dave Ubanski at The Blaze:
The students wore black shirts adorned with pink balloons; the balloons featured the word “Queer” inside them. Some of their signs read, “There is a Future in Sodomy,” “Anal Is the Most Inclusive Form of F******” and “God Loves F***.”
If you don’t believe it, there are photos at the link. This is what happens to children who are forced to open their minds so much that their brains fall out- they turn into brown shirt fascists.
Meanwhile, in New York State, animal “rights” nuts are arguing in court that chimps deserve “personhood” status that would grant them rights. Now, these are not the same people that argue that a baby who hasn’t yet moved out of his mother’s womb deserves personhood status. These are the kind of people that argue for the elimination of the age of consent so children and adolescents can partake in “pleasures of sex and sodomy with adults.” And of course the pope, who’s considering the argument that nature deserves rights, might eventually be in their camp as well. But that’s another story. The real question is, what happens when chimpanzees are given rights? Do those rights include the right to have sex with animal lovers? If not, why not?
If you look closely enough at any liberal whine-initiated movement, it ultimately all boils down to liberals wanting some form of sinful sexual pleasure without consequences. Even Democrat Presidential Candidate Bernie Sanders wrote an essay about what men and women fantasize about- hint: it’s nothing normal. While most liberals would be satisfied for a while with the state’s granting them access to children, some of these monkey sodomizing liberals are on a quest for monkey action. If Chimps do get personhood, will they be allowed to attend the Obama administration’s archipelago of public boarding schools, where children will be sleeping in the same buildings as their oftentimes perverted instructors? How can you deny Chimps with personhood status the same rights as children who no longer need to live in their mother’s womb and who’ve been successfully disarmed of squirt guns?