Clearly Nebulous

The Littlest Casualties in the War on Drugs

A strong strance against the use of recreational drugs hasn't always made me popular. But having a father who was a Chicago police officer -- knowing that a drug user or dealer could easily mow him down -- I felt there was no way I could ever partake in good conscience.

So when I hear liberals, libertarians, or some conservatives talk about legalization, I really get my Irish up. All one has to do is hear read the stories -- not about the drug runners fighting it out with each other nor about the amounts of money being spent on the drug war -- but about the truly innocent casualties to realize what a mistake that would be.

                                                                 

I'm talking about the children of those who are trapped in the grips of drug addiction -- that is, addiction to legal prescription drugs. One can only imagine how widespread stories like this heartbreaking tale would be if we were to legalize cocaine, heroin, etc -- even marijuana.

"It is unclear how long the girls [ages 4, 3 and 18 months] had been shut in the room, but Robinson said it was probably at least several hours, adding that the children were hungry and filthy and the room was covered in feces.

[The parents] had been in the throes of drug abuse, using legally prescribed painkillers. When a neighbor came to help... [they] were passed out in their bedroom.

As darkness fell that night, the younger sisters became scared. The oldest girl used mattresses and a pile of clothes and toys to scale the wall... She got a few cupcakes from the kitchen, tossing them to her sisters before escaping the house.

The girl arrived at her neighbor’s door barefoot and carrying a flashlight.

...The neighbor went [and] freed the children and cleaned them in a bathroom. Then she took them to her house for dinner before calling police."

The parents have apparently been in jail since the incident in March and have undergone rehab and want the children back. They will probably not only get the children but also serve no more jail time, only probation. Lucky for them their 4-year-old was obviously quite intelligent and had a will to live -- otherwise the story may have had a very different, tragic ending.

God help those poor girls, and God help many more just like them if even more "prescription drugs" flood our streets.

 

This is what you get when you google "cops find children alone in apartment drugs."

 http://tinyurl.com/433ybwp 

China through the Eyes of a Mom of 6 Girls (and 1 Boy)

Most unexpectedly, I took a trip to China this past spring (thanks to a last-minute invite my husband received to join a press junket sponsored by a Chinese organization promoting good business relations with the U.S.) I have always had mixed feelings about the nation of China -- finding its modern political policies deplorable, but recognizing what an amazing cultural history it has. I knew an excursion there would be a challenge, but my personal feelings added to my apprehension.

You see, in January of this year I had discovered the organization All Girls Allowed. As a pro-life feminist I had long known about China's one-child policy, but this new group is revealing just how harmful this abhorrent program is.

Duly reported by Kathryn Jean Lopez of the National Review, AGA was founded by one of the student leaders of the 1989 Tiananmen Square protests, Chai Ling. Having been forced to abort twice, Ling is bearing witness to the coercive actions of the Chinese government and the devastating impact it is having in the lives of Chinese women and their families. She and others recently testified before Congress, in hopes that the U.S. administration would decry this wide-spread trampling of human rights.

So I prepared for my trip wanting to bring along this shirt I purchased from AGA to show my solidarity. My husband had already said (only half-jokingly) that there was a 50/50 chance one of us would get kicked out of the country if we expressed our views, so I decided against it.

 

This shirt says how at least 40 million young women are currently "missing" in China, since that is how many more young men reside there, even though there should be an approximately even ratio of males to females. However, the Chinese government itself says that the one-child policy has limited their population by hundreds of millions.

 

But I did bring along a picture of all of my children, as did my husband. We both showed the photo to as many people we could -- not to rub their noses in it, but to add to the debate in a small way. We felt our responses to their reactions could spread the notion of just how wrong this policy is.

Very often my husband was congratulated on finally getting a boy. He would say that each of his girls is a treasured gift as well. A couple of women I talked to expressed their desires to have a large family, but then very matter-of-factly stated their government's policy. They seemed so impassionately resigned that I have to admit I was stymied, not knowing what to say...

As I searched in vain for days for any pregnant women, and saw many little boys and fewer girls -- as I observed the majority of parents with only one child in tow, often escorted by grandparents, recalling the "Little Emperor Syndrome" and how it is spreading beyond the borders of China -- I grieved for all the little girls who were deemed "undesirable"  and "unworthy" and therefore "disposable."

 



I met this exuberant young woman in Tiananmen Square. She seemed so excited to meet me... but the honor was all mine. 

 

As I saw the beautiful smiling faces of so many young Chinese women, I wondered if they knew how "lucky" they were. If they feel like a treasured gift, like each of my daughters -- or merely a burden to their families. If they will remain under a regime that someday might rip their own daughters from them. Or if they will rise up to declare and reclaim their dignity and their value to their countrymen. 

I returned from my trip with so many amazing memories. And a tenacious resolve to help those smiling faces increase in number, not diminish. 

 

Make a donation to All Girls Allowed here. 

 

How to Save a Life... or Two!

It's happened again. or at least, we're hearing about it again. We honestly cannot begin to know how many times this happens and no one finds out.

Another desperate mother has murdered her newborn child... but this time she also murdered his twin. And this was not a young teenager. This was a 25-year-old. It is yet to come out exactly why this particular young woman felt so threatened by motherhood, but we have heard this story before.

Perhaps she feared her parents would throw her out of the house. Maybe they disapproved of the father of the babies. Or perhaps it was the babies' father she feared. It could be she was concerned about losing her job. Or maybe she was overwhelmed by the prospects of caring for a baby (or twins -- we don't know if she knew).

The bottom line is, whatever drove her to do this, she considered her babies to be the problem. She reached the conclusion that killing her children was either the only way or the best way out of her dilemma.

WHY?!

Why do we continue to allow women to think that the baby is the problem? That if the baby is disposed of, the problem will just go away? Why did this young woman have to suffer in silence for months, not knowing what to do?

Ultimately I believe she is responsible for her actions, and should pay the price, giving her state of mind some consideration. But there should be justice for these nascent lives that she ended with her own hands.

Otherwise we will see many more decisions like this one in Canada where a then-19-year-old strangled her newborn son and was eventually given a suspended sentence because the judge wanted to recognize "the onerous demands [of] pregnancy and childbirth." As the author of this article points out, you're essentially allowing "fourth term abortions."

Now I know full well the demands of pregnancy and childbirth. And -- what kind of society are we when we allow infanticide to solve the challenges new mothers face?

It's not enough simply to have safe haven laws, although we certainly should make them known to all young women (and young men) as an option for getting them out of their predicaments. We also have to let women in crisis know that there is help for them.

 

 

If there is someone's wrath they fear, the answer is to get out of that relationship or out of that house. If it is losing their job that troubles them, there are lawyers willing to help them fight. If there are material needs, there are numerous agencies to assist them. And of course, there are countless couples willing to adopt their child, regardless of the circumstances.

But the most immediate thing we can do -- tell our daughters (and sons!), and friends and family members -- that if they ever find themselves in this predicament, you will be there to help them. Let them know that there is no reason to be ashamed and they can always come to you for support. That every baby is a miracle, and there are other solutions to any obstacles.

Do it today. A new life may depend on it. 

The New Egyptian "Democracy": Women and Christians Need Not Apply?!

Buried on page 14 of the Washington Post today was a story that is a bad omen for women in post-revolutionary Egypt. A march of about 300 women in Tahrir Square on International Women's Day ended when men began attacking the women, shouting at them and sexually groping them. (Apprently Egypt is second only to South Africa in the sexual molestation of women.) 

The article stated: "Gone was the spirit of equality and cooperation between the sexes that marked most of the historic mass gatherings in the square." Although a chain of men had surrounded the women to protect them, they were overpowered by those who feel that women should not have a place at the table as Egypt forges a new constitution.

But at least this story made the pages of WashPo -- there was no mention of another clash between Muslims and Christians, who make up only about 10% of the Egyptian population, that killed one Christian man. (We'll see if a story on their website today about a clash that killed 13 Christians will be fit to print tomorrow.)

UPDATE: That story did make the front page and the article extensively reported on the struggles of women and Christians in the new era in Egypt. They listened to me!

 

On March 9, there was turmoil that left 13 Christians dead. It started from a feud involving a modern Romeo and Juliet -- animosity between the families of a Muslim and Christian who have fallen in love escalated and a Christian church was torched leading to further clashes.

 

While all media were saturated with front-page stories about the protests that led to the ousting of the old regime, tales of the growing pains of the nascent "democracy" (that conservative outlets forewarned would more than likely occur in the predominantly Muslim nation) are not worthy of prominence.

Is the mainstream media afraid it would be anti-Muslim to mention the oppression? Sure, go ahead and ignore the plight of Christians as usual -- why should that change? But to relegate stories about the blatant sexual harassment and domination of women to the back pages?

We have the opportunity to lead the rest of the world in setting high expectations for the new government. Let's not fail the women of Egypt -- and all the emerging newly-led nations.

CEDAW? Pshaw!

Think living in Beverly Hills would get you sick of the celeb-centric news coverage? Try living in the D.C. area. We get all the Hollywood news and all the Hill sightings, however obscuro they may be. (What is with these towns and their star worship?)

The WashPost has this "gossip" column that gives us all the latest scoops:

No, this is not an ad -- I just wanted you to see the questionable name of this column! 

Celebrities have really been hitting the Capitol lately. What gets me is when stars who seem very intelligent and earnest get involved with what they think is a no-brainer, but actually has a lot more to it than meets the eye. The latest example: Geena Davis and her attachment to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW).

Who doesn't look at Davis and feel she is a thoughtful, trustworthy person? It's no wonder she portrayed the first female POTUS on the tv series Commander in Chief. And it didn't surprise me at all to learn that she has founded an organization, the Geena Davis Institute on Gender in Media, that really seems to be doing great work.

In fact, its tv programming arm, See Jane, "uses research, education and advocacy to engage the entertainment industry and recognize the need for gender balance... in media aimed at children 11 and under." They conducted a study that found that that in the top-grossing G-rated films, there were three male characters for every one female. I would agree that is a stat that needs to change, so more power to them.

But yesterday, the Reliable Source bestowed the nauseating portmanteau "Celebvocate"  on Davis for her appearance on the Hill to speak for the passage of CEDAW. 

Geena Davis and Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) try to shame the U.S. Congress into ratifying the CEDAW resolution by linking our country with evil-doers and the obscure. Well, as she reminded us, "I was the first woman President of the United States. So, I have some authority on this issue." Really?!

Now, of course it sounds like a great resolution. Who isn't for an end to all discrimination against women? But of course, this is the U.N. we're talking about. While the resolution has many good aspects to it -- seeking to end the barbaric practices of child marriage, dowry burnings, genital cutting, and honor killings -- it goes too far. And while all the other countries who have signed on are feeling all fuzzy-warm and good about themselves for ratifying this resolution, the U.S. Congress has been very prudent to stay away.

In an article for the National Review, "The Case Against the U.N. Women's Treaty," the author points out that American law is based on the ideal of equal opportunity while CEDAW demands equal outcomes. She also dispels all the myths that supporters of this resolution are claiming as fact. Among them, that ratification will not compel the U.S. to have to abide by the U.N. rulings about the provisions in the resolution. (If no one has to abide by the rulings, then why would they have them?)

The author says: "A close look at the content of the treaty shows that the Senate has been wise to resist ratification for 31 years. Though CEDAW contains many worthy declarations, its key provisions are 1970s egalitarian feminism preserved in diplomatic amber. Releasing those aged provisions into 21st-century America would be strange at best, and would risk seriously compromising the privacy, well-being, and basic freedoms of Americans."

As citizens we must always be vigilant. Even if there was a resolution called "Convention to Declare the Cuteness of Puppies and Kittens" I would want to know exactly what was in that resolution. (For all we know it would call for the mutilation of all other cute baby animals to assure canine and feline prominence.) Our representatives in Congress should not let the seemingly sound name of a resolution -- or a famous trusting, beautiful face -- lead them to ratify questionable resolutions.   

 

 

Save Sakineh -- and others like her...

 

Although her stoning apparently has been suspended, Iranian mother Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani still faces a death sentence for having an "illicit relationship." She has already endured 99 lashes, and will likely be hanged. 

It is not known for certain what became of the two men involved, but since women must be proven innocent and men must be proven guilty in these cases, it almost always results in no punishment for males.

The estimate of 5000 "honor killings" worldwide each year is probably far lower than the actual number.

This article reports that apparently "honor killings" are on the rise, and not just in Muslim countries -- the majority of reported deaths occur in the U.K. (But of course, the numbers reported are far lower than the actual crimes committed.) While the author argues that the motivation is religious, not simply misogynistic, I believe that this barbaric practice is dis-using religious beliefs to justify the most heinous oppression of women. Ain't nothing more misogynist than killing a woman simply for seeking to live a normal life.

A website started by Sakineh's two sons tells her story and has a petition asking for her release. (And there is a facebook page as well.) It has attracted the attention of some celebrities, but it deserves everyone's attention on its own merit. We cannot continue to let extremists hijack a peaceful religion, and stopping the murders of innocent women is one of the most compelling reasons to speak out.

 

 

 

Miss U('ve-Gone-too-Far).S.A.

I have always loved the two major pageants, Miss America and Miss USA. And I have watched them year in and year out with my daughters. Sure it's tricky terrain -- how do you reconcile beauty contests and feminist ideals? Well, I have always felt, and have always taught my daughters, that women can be smart and beautiful and there is nothing wrong with either one.

While trying very hard not to sound catty, I voice my opinion during the broadcasts when I think that a contestant is too thin or obviously had a boob job. Because yes, there is a fine line between sultry and slutty. And I feel I know when it's been crossed.

And with this year's "fashion photo shoots" I'm afraid the Miss USA competition has crossed that line. I was uncomfortable with some of the shots that were shown during last year's competition, but these latest pictures have pushed even farther. Fish net stockings, bustiers and garters are fine for an adult crowd -- but not for my daughters. 

I don't want them to think that sex is what will get them farther in life and I don't want them to think that playing into sexual stereotypes is what garners attention. While I also don't want them to think that prancing around in a skimpy bathing suit is essential to their success, there is nothing wrong with being fit and looking good.

Just like I don't buy the arguments from law school students who think they are "laughing their way to an education" as they earn their tuition at Hooter's, I don't buy that this step was necessary to attract attention. Donald Trump has mocked the more prudent Miss America officials, pointing out that their organization is suffering in the ratings department.

So you got your publicity and it may lead to better ratings -- but at what cost to women, Mr. Trump?

A poll on Good Morning America's website indicated that over 50% of those who responded feel that the Miss USA officials have gone too far this time. I concur, and we won't be watching this time. It might be too much to hope that a sufficient dip in the ratings will show Trump & co. that we're just not buying what they're selling, but I can dream...

(And I can also dream that there will be sufficient advertising for the Miss America pageant so we can tune in to show our support for their family-friendly -- and truly women-empowering -- ideals!)

It will be hard to top watching Miss Virginia win the Miss America crown... but we'll be tuning in!

"A Woman Hit More than Once is not a Victim but a Volunteer"

Harsh woods, blaming the victim? The man who said that, Gavin de Becker, doesn't think so. His reasoning? If a woman is hit once by a man, sure, staying with him might not be totally ruled out because there is the rare instance in which he will never do it again. (However, he cautions not only is this an unlikely scenario, but it also takes a lot of work.)

But when a woman stays with a man after being hit more than once, it is a choice, he says. "Just like leaving is a choice, staying is a choice."

The statistics that de Becker (the author of The Gift of Fear -- a must-buy for every family with daughters) talked about on Oprah are frightening: Of the approximately 3000 murders of women in this country every year, over 2000 are committed by current or former boyfriends or husbands. While, tragically, some of these women had an idea they were at risk and the system failed them -- sometimes the victims never saw it coming.

The Gift of Fear is a great resource that tells women to trust their instincts to stay safe.

So de Becker has devised a means to determine if you may be in a dangerous relationship, and he wants every woman who has even the slightest doubt about her current partner to take advantage of this new test. He said:

"The MOSAIC assessment system developed by my firm is available to anyone who wants to use it, at no cost, via Oprah's website. This allows anyone to diagnose a relationship to determine if it has the combination of factors most associated with escalated violence, and spousal homicide. Spousal homicide has remained a constant in our lives, such that every four hours at least one woman is killed in America by a husband or boyfriend. That uninterrupted and sad statistic can be interrupted and changed --because spousal homicide is the single most preventable serious crime in America -- it always occurs after many warning signs, and after several people are aware of the risk."

No one knows this better now than the friends and family of Yeardley Love, a UVA college student who was killed by a former boyfriend, a star athlete from an upstanding family. Her friends knew he had been abusive, and they gave Yeardley the courage to break up with him, but they all ignored the danger signs that indicated he was capable of such lethal violence. 

 

Yeardley Love broke up with an abusive boyfriend, but he has admitted killing her in a rage.

It's understandable that no one wants to think that a guy like that could be a potential killer. But better to let the professionals make that call. The president of UVA made an impassioned speech in which he encouraged all the students on campus to report to him personally if they fear for themselves or another student's safety. We can only hope that colleges across the country will follow suit.

But one father wants everyone to know that this can happen to even younger women. Gary Cuccia's daughter, Demi, was killed by a former boyfriend at the age of 16. He is advocating that awareness about the signs of an abusive relationship be taught in junior high.

In an appearance on Good Morning America he warned that one in three teens have been abused by a boyfriend or girlfriend, one in ten physically. He encourages parents to talk to their daughters about "one strike and he's out." And that abuse can include controlling behavior like isolation -- trying to make her dump her friends, activities, or hobbies -- focusing only on him.

Girls need to tell their parents if they're receiving harassing calls or text messages on their cell phones or are being harassed on social networks. Sometimes, all it will take is a male figure to step in and make sure the offender gets the message that he is to stop all contact. But if that doesn't work, parents shouldn't be afraid to call the authorities.

Personally I don't think enough is being done to stop this sort of behavior -- getting to the root of why a young man becomes so obsessive. But that's a discussion for another day...

Lastly, tell your daughters -- and encourage them to tell their friends -- about resources and websites like these that steer them toward healthy relationships. Their lives could depend on it.

 

Pro-Abortion Groups Ignore Women's Suffering in China

In an editorial by Kathleen Parker on November 11 regarding coerced abortions and sterilizations in China, we learn deeply disturbing details regarding the lengths the Chinese government goes to in order to enforce their one-child policy. The information was smuggled out by activists, at their own peril.

The activists have confirmed our fears: If a woman in China who does not have a "birth permit" is discovered to be pregnant, she "has to surrender her unborn child to government enforcers, no matter what the stage of fetal development. " This means she is dragged into a clinic, onto a table and her child is killed in her womb and extracted --apparently even if she were in active labor, moments from delivery.

The editorial relates accounts of how -- even though killing a baby is illegal -- perfectly healthy late-term infants who survive an abortion are left to die, sometimes taking a couple of days in a trash can to do so.

Even though not every abortion in China is "forced," one can only imagine just how many of the estimated 13 million abortions in China every year are in essence coerced, if not in actuality. That's right -- every year a number larger than the population of Greece is aborted. (But of course, when CNN reports this, the most important aspect of the story is that there is not enough contraception or sex education, not the tragedy of why 13 million children die largely due to its country's ineptitude. Yeah, contraception and education would get that number down to "only" 10 million, easy!)

The Chinese government foresees that this policy will be in place for decades to come.

Of course, many other problems result from this one-child policy that detrimentally affect Chinese women, and other Asian countries. The preference of having a son has led to a disproportion of 37 million fewer women, which has caused the sex slavery trade to increase at an alarming rate. (I imagine that number would be even higher if China hadn't relaxed the policy in some counties for families to have a second child if the first is a girl.)

Almost lost amongst the sad statistics is that 500 women each day (yes, I had to go back and check because I still can't believe it) 500 women each day commit suicide in China. Almost 15,000 a month... 180,000 a year... The highest rate in the world can be attributed at least partly (how big a part one can only speculate) by the policy, activists say.

So where is the outrage from "women's rights" groups here in America? You know the ones who say that abortion is not a good thing, but should remain a woman's "choice"? What do they have to say when it's not a choice? What do they say when women are forced against their will, literally taken into bodily custody and coerced into this "procedure"?

My search found one sentence. Followed by a big "But..." (You know, one of those statements that totally delegitimizes the previous sentence, as if the second is important, the first... not so much.)

In a Spring 2008 newsletter Planned Parenthood said:

"We were shocked and repulsed by the 'one-child' policy of China that forced women to have abortions against their will. But, here in America, there are constant attempts to pass laws that would force women to have children against their will."

That's right, stopping physical violence inflicted upon unknown millions of women who must endure the murder of their very wanted children before their eyes... Not as important as denying the preborn their right to live in an affluent nation that would welcome every single one of our aborted children into the arms of a couple waiting to adopt, or could provide a mother with the support to raise her child... ahem. 

Every other search I tried, for NOW and NARAL e.g., turned up nothing, though I imagine somewhere they said something equally benign and self-serving.

But of course these organizations are only concerned about having more abortions in the world, not fewer. They want countries with restrictions to change their laws so more abortions can be performed, and they want the U.S. to pay for them.

They're too busy working to bring more abortions to women who don't really want them. They don't have time to worry about stopping abortions performed on women who really don't want them.

The women of China and their preborn children are waiting. We must stop ignoring their desperate cries for help.

Help Save the Rifqas so There's No More Noors

Word came out today that Noor Almaleki died from the injuries she sustained when her father ran her down. The man was enraged that his daughter had become too "westernized." So he carried out what his kind (meaning those who think radically like him, and not everyone of his faith) call an "honor killing."

Where is the honor in destroying the life of someone you hold so dear simply because they don't think exactly like you do? Wouldn't the more honorable path be accepting our children, even if we fear the consequences of some of their choices? Sure, you must do the best you can to protect them from harm. But they are not your property. They are not you. They must live their own lives.

Noor Almaleki

Isn't it about time we stood up and strongly expressed that this is NOT acceptable? This happpens more often than we hear about in the US, and we are far behind Europe in dealing with it. What are we worried about? Appearing "culturally insensitive"? If we don't help the young women like Rifqa Bary in America, there will be more and more victims like Noor Almaleki.

A friend reassured me about Rifqa, telling me about this story by a court-appointed attorney -- a Christian who was also involved in the Terri Schindler (Schiavo) case.  We all know that teenagers can be melodramatic (believe me, I know) but I just think that extreme caution should be taken in this case. I heard that it had been definitively determined that she will first go into the care of the state of Ohio. That is a good step. The lawyer's observations hold out some reassurance, but I still fear for her.

Rifqa Bary

Why is it when a girl says that her dad will kill her if he finds out she's pregnant, most places go to the ends of the earth to protect her, but a girl says the same about becoming a Christian, and we march her back into the lion's den? I think it will be interesting to see if the people who know Noor's father say that they never thought he would do something like this. I'm sure folks who know Rifqa's dad say the same...

I do think we need to protect the rights of Muslim parents. I remember clearly a story years back about a brother and sister taken away from their parents bec the father was suspected of abuse, on very flimsy evidence. The foster family ignored the children's practices of faith -- it was totally wrong.

It is unwise to jump to immediate conclusions -- keep in mind the very type of scenarios that might affect Christians in a similar way, e. g. homeschoolers. There are many stories where children are taken away for the wrong reasons, or parents rights are usurped, and the wheels of justice turn slowly.

But I still fear for young Muslim women across our nation, and across the globe. Even low estimates say that these types of killings occur at least 5000 times a year worldwide. They should not be happening at all in our own backyard, and if they do, we should not shy from bringing the perpetrators to justice.

Polanski is an Unrepentant Pig

Harsh words? Hardly.

First it must be said, Roman Polanski did endure unspeakable tragedies in his life. Forced into the Krakow ghetto under Nazi persecution, he and his father survived, but his mother died at Auschwitz. And years later, both his wife, Sharon Tate, and their unborn child were brutally murdered in an incomprehensible rampage. 

AND the miscarriage of justice for his own unspeakable act, and the sympathetic support he is receiving from a certain sector, are just as incomprehensible to me.

For those who may have heard some vague account, it should be made clear --  Polanski was charged at the age of 44 with forcible rape by use of drugs, perversion, sodomy, lewd and lascivious acts upon and furnishing a controlled substance to a 13-year-old girl. He got a 13-year-old girl drunk, gave her half a quaalude (the "date rape" drug of the time) to further sedate her, and then raped her. (I think everyone who has taken interest in this case should know exactly what he did, so all the lurid details are recounted by the victim here.)

I would also add something I have not seen in most of the recent accounts of this case. He allegedly was disgusted when he asked if the 13-year-old girl was on birth control, and she said no. So he stopped regular intercourse and sodomized her so that he wouldn't risk getting her pregnant. How thoughtful. What genius.

The charges were dismissed under the terms of his plea bargain. The transcript shows that the sole reason the prosecutors agreed to the arrangement was that the 13-year-old girl and her parents were desperate to avoid the publicity of a trial. Polanski pleaded guilty to the lesser charge of engaging in unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor, and expected to be given probation. The maximum sentence he could have faced was 50 years, although prosecutors had said at the time that the typical sentence was 16 months to three years in prison.

Now, there has been a determination of wrong-doing by the now-deceased judge originally assigned to the case, who it seemed was dazzled by the limelight, and may have been set on handing down an unusually harsh sentence. (Of course, this would have been compared to the above-mentioned "typical sentence" -- which was far too lenient in my opinion.)

So fearing he faced the rest of his life in jail, Polanski fled. Now I don't have a total run-down of his appeals in this case, but I have found no story recounting that his lawyers tried at the time to have the judge dismissed in order to receive a more fair sentencing. It seems at various times all they have sought is probation, dismissal of all charges, or clemency.

Polanski unfathomably believes that the time he served -- about 45 days in jail -- was enough punishment for what he did. Actually, he probably thinks it was too much. He has never expressed any kind of remorse.  And in his autobiography, he defiantly claimed that the 13-year-old girl was a willing participant. To this day the woman who was 13 at the time, although she has said she wants an end to all this and that he should not serve any jail time, categorically denies it was consensual.

And still there are throngs that cry for clemency. They believe he was a victim of a stage mom and an ambitious Lolita intent on fame, a judge looking for his own distinction, and (most laughably) a puritanical American society that just doesn't understand the looser mores of Europeans. He is an artistic genius, they say -- so that means we should excuse his criminal behavior?!

Even though psychiatric evaluations back then determined he was not a pedophile and not a danger, I beg to differ. He soon afterward had an affair with a 15-year old Nastassja Kinski, so this cannot be called a one-time indiscretion. (And who knows if there were other victims who never stepped forward?) Though maybe he wasn't a hard-core predator, he certainly did not see anything wrong with sexual relations with minors.

So yes, he may have directed some impressive movies -- I begrudgingly watched The Pianist because I wanted to see Adrien Brody's performance. I had to separate the director from the criminal, and I have to say it was an outstanding movie. But when I watched the Oscars, and Polanski won -- well, I was not standing up and emphatically applauding like Scorcese and his ilk.

So while Polanski's victim had to face inconceivable circumstances -- first his attack, the grand jury testimony, and then decades later an occasional return to this horrific spotlight -- her attacker fled and lived a life of luxury in France. Though thankfully she seems to have come to peace with what happened to her, that does not mean that Polanski should avert his long overdue punishment. 

Not directing a masterpiece -- nor enduring terrible tragedies in life -- excuses despicable acts.

Remember What Lisa and Euna were Fighting

The scenes of Lisa Ling and Euna Lee being reunited with their families are heartwarming. It is hard not to be moved seeing these women return to American soil, knowing that they faced what may have been a death sentence, considering the harsh conditions in North Korean work camps.

It was clearly not an easy diplomatic decision. More harm than good may have been done in the bigger picture by giving a crazy despot an air of legitimacy. But seeing the images of Lee hugging her 4-year-old, it seems the right course was taken.

And who knows? Now that Kim has rubbed elbows, maybe he'll desire to do it again. Assuming that Americans now know to stay far away, there won't be any more hostages held for trumped-up charges. He won't have any cards to deal -- he'll have to make concessions to get back to the table. Only time will tell. 

But what has been lost in this story -- and I assume that Lee and Ling will remind us -- is why those women were on that border. As I wrote in June, these two brave souls were trying to expose the human trafficking that North Korea turns a blind eye to.

They wanted to expose the horrors faced by young women who don't have a voice. No former U.S. president can step in on their behalf to rescue them.

There is an organization that works toward the abolition of child sex slavery and exploitation that I support. It's called Love 146 and their website is at www.love146.com

Watch this video, and if you are moved -- make a donation. If you are as moved as I was, make it a monthly pledge.

Sticking Up for Hillary?!

Egads! I'm with Hillary on this one.

I've been laughing at both HRC and BO all along. While they have pretended to have made all nice, you just know that there is a bitterness pervading their working relationship.

I've laughed at Hillary, knowing that she envisioned something bordering on a "co-presidency" -- at least on foreign matters. Does she honestly think that BO is going to let her run the show outside our borders?

And I've laughed at BO, knowing that he thought that since he's the President, she'll have to do as he says. Does he honestly think that he -- or anyone -- can tell Hillary what to do?

I just hope that it comes out someday, some way -- who had what info on whom. But I digress...

I've admired that HRC for the most part has not been engaging in the USA-flagellation that BO so easily falls into -- on just about every trip to any foreign land. (Sure, once in a while he stands up for our ideals, but there always seems to be some caveat that involves admitting some fault.) And I've actually been wondering where she has been lately -- has BO been trying to suppress her? Has she not been willing to follow his marching orders?

While I'm not ready to jump on the HRC bandwagon, I'm beginning to think it's about time to cut her some slack -- if only because she's willing to stand up to Obama.

Then yesterday there was a story that when the State Department issues its next report on global human trafficking, it will include the US in its assessment.

The question was raised at a news conference by someone who actually seemed concerned only about the coyotes who bring in illegal immigrants and securing our borders. Deep concerns indeed.

But when speaking of human trafficking, there is another kind, of course. The trafficking of young women and girls (and boys) for the sex trade. Even deeper concerns. Unfortunately they are often only associated with certain Asian nations.

But there have been cases on our southern border that involved women being held against their will and forced into prostitution. I wish I could recall the details of a story I saw on one of the prime time news shows that told how women were being held captive along the border in Texas. They were dragged into cleared areas under bushes and assaulted repeatedly. I was able to find this story -- so we know it can happen here.

Now many a conservative will have a natural reaction to consider this step preposterous. That we as a nation shouldn't be judged alongside the likes of Thailand. But I think I have to side with Hillary.

I do not fear that ultimately it will make us look like bad guys. To the contrary. As in the case above, we as a nation ardently fight this kind of debasement of human rights. The sex slave trade may still have a rare occurrence across our border, but we as a nation are not turning a blind eye to it as so many other nations do.

I predict this report will show the US as a shining example of how to fight this evil. And it will put to shame those countries who unapologetically accept it, as if nothing can be done.

To learn more about how you can help women and girls forced into the sex slave trade abroad, go to www.love146.com . 

Ling and Lee: Let's Remember Why They are There

Some of those in conservative circles predicted chirping crickets from the liberals regarding the incarceration of Laura Ling and Euna Lee by the North Korean government. They made snide remarks that the libs cared more about foreign terrorists being pampered by the U.S. than two Americans being sentenced to 12 years of hard labor for unspecified crimes.

Thankfully, this is not true, and it seems that there is bipartisan support for the immediate release of these two women. But the question will be, how will the current administration handle the situation? As Gotham Chopra wrote on the Huffington Post:

"Considering the unprecedented stakes and circumstances surrounding their case, Laura and Euna's predicament is fast evolving into a tricky political situation for President Barack Obama who has made clear his steadfast belief that smart diplomacy can be a panacea for almost all problems facing nations around the planet. It would appear now more than at any prior time in his presidency, Mr. Obama's covenant will be tested."

Of course, Chopra went on to say that America has no standing because of how we have treated prisoners at Guantanamo -- as if there is any kind of comparison. This is no time for posturing. We must show that we, as a nation, will not stand for this outrageous treatment of these women.

There has been talk that Obama is thinking of sending Al Gore to negotiate their release. Seems fitting, since it was a report for his network that the two women were working on. But when I think of how poor a communicator he is to anyone who doesn't also view the world through "green-colored glasses," I sincerely fear for these two women if their fate is in his hands. No joke.

I'm thinking whoever pleads their case is going to have to get tough. And will probably have to turn to China for help. We can only hope that China -- in the interest of staying off the top of the human rights violators list -- can help us out.

I fear that in the end it will probably involve at least some kind of butt-kissing of NK, and when they are freed, oh isn't that Kim just the nicest, most reasonable guy? I think the Ling and Lee families have shown great restraint in their pleas. They have apologized on behalf of their loved ones, and said that it must have been an accidental infraction, showing great humility and undue respect.

If I were in their shoes, I'd want to scream from the hilltops what an unbelievably incomprehensible injustice this whole scenario is and that I was coming after Kim personally!

But while the world awaits to see what the furute holds for these women, and while the pundits trade jabs as to what will or will not work -- let us not forget the tragedy that the two journalists were trying to expose. The fact that they were reporting a story about human trafficking seems to be an afterthought in most news stories.

And when we hear "human trafficking" it's all too easy to appease our minds with images of people in trucks being secreted away, stuck in a strange land unable to get back home. That would be terrible enough. But what we are talking about here is young women -- children -- being forced into prostitution. Forced to live a hellish life, away from their loved ones with no idea how long they will be considered "useful", and what will become of them once they're not.

These are daughters. Girls who should be in school learning, singing songs, and playing games. Not being sold and abused like a slab of meat.

While awaiting word on the outcome of the nightmare that Ling and Lee face, let us remember the young women who don't have vice-presidents willing to step in on their behalf to rescue them.

I learned about an organization that works toward the abolition of child sex slavery and exploitation thanks to Stephen Baldwin. (It's his designated charity for his appearance on "I'm a Celebrity...")

It's Love 146 at www.love146.com

Watch this video, and if you are moved -- make a donation. If you are as moved as I was, make it a monthly pledge.

Supremely Stupid Searches

As if, as a parent, I don't have enough to worry about in sending my children to public school.

There are issues of violence and drugs in schools, though things are pretty quiet round these parts. Still, there has been an occasional incident of fighting, or girls subjected to inappropriate physical contact. In the latter case, it shouldn't have to be the school administration I have to worry about. And definitely not with the blessings of the Supreme Court.

Now my husband and I are all for a school administration having the authority to keep the school safe. In too many houses of learning across the land, teachers' and principals' hands have been tied in their efforts to maintain order in their classrooms. Out-of-control students and litigious parents have only made the situation worse.

We have made it clear to our own children that we expect them to cooperate with their teachers, as they have a hard enough job and they don't need to deal with any tom-foolery. We have made it clear to their teachers that they should call us if any disruptive behavior appears, so it can be nipped in the bud. Thankfully, this has very rarely been any kind of issue.

But in light of the case which will soon be decided by the Supreme Court, we had a very different conversation with our daughters the other night. The highest court in the land will be ruling on a case in which a young girl was subjected to basically a strip search by a school nurse trying to determine if she had concealed a couple of Advils in her underwear. She was forced to remove her clothing and then shake out her undergarments. There were no pills found.

It seems ridiculous to me that this has made it all the way to the Supreme Court, and in every story I have seen or read about this case, the obvious solution has never been mentioned.

The school has argued that it needs to keep the other students safe. From two pain relief pills? I don't care if the girl actually did have the medication. I don't care if they suspected she had crack cocaine, or an automatic weapon, or heck, even a nuclear bomb hidden on her person.

Subjecting that poor girl to a strip search was not only out of bounds, it did nothing to keep the student body safe. If there was an actual concern here, all they had to do was keep the girl away from the rest of the students until -- depending upon the suspected offense -- the student's parents or law enforcement was brought in.

If there was still any suspicion of danger -- remove the student from the school grounds. Why are we arguing whether or not a school can compel a student to remove her clothing? Why haven't government officials been able to come up with this no-brainer solution? Why haven't the great legal minds that have all been reviewing this case come up with this other indisputable recourse?

Because they are too busy proving how clever they are? Because they are more concerned about prevailing in a legal case than they are in the emotional well-being of the students?

So my husband and I informed our children that if this type of incident ever happens to them, they have our explicit permission to say no, and to demand to have us contacted. And if they bring in a police officer without us present, they also have the right to ask for us to be brought in, and/or a lawyer.

We have told them that, while the safety of a school is important, their dignity is tantamount. Supremely simple.

So You Want to Save Darfur...

The other day I came across this article challenging the Hollywood community and their "Save Darfur" campaign: http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/rhumphries/2009/02/26/what-hollywood-gets-wrong-about-darfur-by-rusty-humphries/

The author, Rusty Humphries, tells the recent history of Sudan concisely, adds some heartbreaking anecdotes of his time in the region of Darfur, and illustrates how George Clooney and the rest of the Hollywood crowd are getting it all wrong. 

However, Humphries does not offer much of an alternative -- but that is understandable. Sudan, and many other countries on the continent of Africa, are in such a mess there are no easy answers. Perhaps we should offer humanitarian aid. Does Somalia aid under Bill Clinton and Black Hawk Down remind us of the pitfalls? And is the current administration going to support a full-out invasion? Not likely, even if Obama had the stomach for a new warfront, the U.S. would probably be looked at as imperialists, and a whole new morass would result.

The stories of suffering in Darfur are gut-wrenching. I feel compelled to do something. What can one person actually do? Well, I'm not sure about the big picture, but I found one small way to try and make a difference.

There have been many stories of how rape is now used as warfare in these conflicts. In the case of Darfur, many women experience this most violent act when they simply gather firewood. Now there is an alternative that has made a real impact for women facing the dilemma of whether to take the chance of possibly being violated so they can boil water and cook meals for their families.

Solar Cookers International provides these women with another means for boiling and cooking. Not only has the incidences of rape greatly decreased in areas where these solar cookers have been introduced, but also, not having to tend a fire allows the women more time to care for their families. Another plus is that the women are being trained to make and distribute the cookers, giving them a source of income.

A small donation provides a family with two cookers and other supplies, plus the training to use them. Check it out at: www.solarcookers.org or www.jewishworldwatch.org/refugeerelief/solarcookerproject.html

Suffer the (Female) Children

Pro-abortion forces that are so transfixed on preserving the status quo that they overlook statutory rape in our own country might want to avert their hyper-focus to help combat a truly inhumane custom practiced in other nations that was shown in disturbing photos in the Washington Post today.

The tragedy of female genital mutilation (FGM) was captured in horrifying pictures that should be burned into the brain of anyone who wants to protect women worldwide from oppressive practices and rituals based in ignorance and male domination.

Often forgotten is that the battles fought in Afghanistan and Iraq have led to an expanding emancipation of women, and the fight must continue against a pending backlash. Ancient incomprehensible "traditions" -- based on false interpretations by certain Muslim clerics and perpetuated merely because "that's how it's always been" -- are leaving young women scarred for life both physically and mentally.

Here is a link to the story and the unforgettable photos of a 7-year-old girl before, during, and after she is tricked into entering the home of a practitioner of this barbaric act. She thinks she is going to a party, but instead is robbed of her innocence. Image number 7 will haunt you.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/12/28/AR2008122802005.html?nav=hcmodule

Any pro-life feminist will tell you that FGM, pornography, "honor killings," and abortion are just some of the ways that patriarchal societies try to oppress women and their life-giving abilities in order to dominate and control.

If NOW and NARAL and their ilk spent half as much time combatting this unspeakable act as they do trying to preserve other unspeakable acts (like partial-birth abortion), they might help put an end to the physical and mental suffering of these helpless young women.

 

Fighting the Enemy Within... Cyberspace

So, first post in a while. I have been busy since my mother-in-law has joined our household. It's going very well so far, so wish me the best with that...

Back to Oprah. I was going to post about her first week on the air this season, about how I thought it was pretty typical, nothing too remarkable. But then she blew that week out of the water with her show that aired on September 16th.

It was a show that reminds you that Oprah is more than just fodder for tabloids, or a new age nut to ridicule. The power she has is a bit scary at times, but when put to proper use...

O opened the show with an illustration of how truly dangerous and pervasive the internet can be. She showed a map of the US, and a single point on Washington, D.C. which represented a single upload of child pornography by a pedophile on a given day not too long ago. She then showed how many times, across the country, that image was uploaded by other creeps in a matter of hours.

The map lit up like a giant Christmas tree -- point after point represented each of the heinous individuals delighting in the horrific exploitation of a child.

This was just one day, with one image.

Her guests then went on to relate the grand scope of this problem in our country. The statistics are nauseating. The acts the pedophiles are performing on younger and younger victims are unbelievable. The worst part is that experts estimate that less than one half of one percent of predators are even investigated. They are too quick and too savvy and too MANY.

The good news in all this is that a law enforcement officer has developed a software system that has proven highly effective in catching these perverted animals. The only problem is the funding that is needed to bring this system to law enforcement squads across our nation, and to provide the manpower to use the system to stop these monsters and bring them to justice.

Here is the link to the Oprah website's instructions on how to write your congressmen and women an email to urge them to support this funding on a national level with the PROTECT our Children Act.

http://www.oprah.com/article/oprahshow/20080911_tows_predators

With all that is going on in the country right now, let's not allow this to get lost in the shuffle.

UPDATE

So, after I posted this, I did a little checking -- even something like this is not without controversy. The members of congress who first came up with this bill are refusing to have it stand alone. The sponsors would only let it pass if it is included in a package of unrelated bills that addresses less vital concerns such as the interstate commerce of non-human primates.

I had already sent my letter via the Oprah site, and I'm ok with that -- not happy about this development, but hopefully legislation will still go through. I just may write my congressmen again and ask that they push it through on its own...

UPDATE II

The act passed in both houses of congress! And I just heard that last December the House passed the Securing Adolescents from Exploitation Online Act, also know as the SAFE Act.  This legislation increases the penalties for Internet service providers (ISPs) that host child pornography on their servers. I did not find any record of it passing in the Senate. A new cause, Oprah?

Polygamist women aren't brain-washed...

You can't be brain-washed if you never knew any better. At least that's what I hope Lisa Ling meant when she said that she wouldn't call the women in Texas brainwashed.

From the day they are born these poor young women only know what they see in their daily lives. There are no televisions, no movies --even their textbooks have been censored. To them, total submission and oppression is normal. They can't even conceive of the notion of choosing a life path, choosing a husband, or choosing full-time motherhood.

Elissa Wall, the young woman who ran away and testified against Warren Jeffs leading to his conviction, told how she assisted the Texas authorities in the raid on the FLDS compound. She explained how one of the ways she helped was by acting as a "translator," since the sect has its own way of expressing themselves.

The good news was that Elissa felt that the authorities were very caring and cautious in how they handled the removal of the children. The bad news of course is that mothers and children had to separated -- for their own good of course, but tragic nonetheless.

The biggest shame was that it took a 911 call claiming abuse for anything to happen. Elissa described what was happening in the sect community during the trial, and yet nothing was done. Girls as young as 13 were being forced into arranged marriages, sometimes to first cousins. They were told it had been prophesied and it was their duty to obey.

They enter a marriage knowing absolutely nothing about their own anatomy, let alone sex. They are not forewarned by their mothers, other than being told that their husband will guide them through their "marital relations." (How do the young men find out? Missed-opportunity-to-ask-a-question #101 on this show!)

And so Elissa explained that when her marriage was finally consummated, she was shaking and sobbing and begging and pleading for her husband to stop. I can't help but think that every older woman at that compound had a similar experience. And they think it is normal. They allow their daughters to go through the horrific incident as if that is what a merciful God would expect.

And O sat there, sucking her lozenge, saying mm-hmm, repeating what the guests had said, reading from the prompter – oh, and making a joke about the escapees going to a hair salon,

Where is the outrage?

It's bad enough when O had the three grown women who insisted they were happy sharing one husband, and O did not say a word of protest. Not judgmental -- no, not she! But this was children we were talking about. Young women being forced into repeated acquaintance rape, basically. Why was O not demanding that more raids take place across the country?

To be fair, I think O did display a level of tacit disapproval. But when all you're doing is presenting fact after appalling fact, it begins to seem like all we're doing is being voyeurs.

I want to know -- what can we do about his?! Yes, people are entitled to religious beliefs -- sadly even misogynistic, unGodly beliefs. But when children are being harmed, how can we just sit back and act as if it's all just a personal preference?

Good reporting, Lisa. Now finish the job. Help bring about justice.