Like it? Tweet it! SHARE IT!

All hail! 
March is Women’s History Month. There are a number of reasons why we celebrate Women’s History Month, but one reason is simply because of the sheer number of women. Women are everywhere. My grandmother was a woman. My mother was a woman. My wife, Nellie, is a woman. Two of our four children are women. And four of our six grandchildren are women. Women, as well as men, date back to the early history of our planet. Before there were official weddings, men and women paired off in antiquity. In the earlier days it should be noted there were oftentimes one man and several women. Abraham had a wife and a concubine. Jacob had several wives. David and Solomon had many wives. Somewhere in those earlier years men became dominant and exercised complete control over their women.  

Just as an aside, however, if men are more important than women, why do women have more freedom in the way they dress and the way they wear their hair? If I, as a man, were to wear a red, purple or green suit, I would definitely stand out in a crowd and some people would be quite critical. Yet women wear suits of many colors all the time and it is considered normal. Women wear their hair long and straight or curled and it is, also, considered normal. Men sometimes do the same but not normally. Why is that?  The answer is “custom.” 
Customs play a great part in our lives, as well they should, but customs have also gotten in the way of progress for men and women throughout the years, and more especially for women.  

For example, following custom: 
1. Women were forbidden to speak in public in many regions of the world in ancient times.     
2. Women were limited in the jobs available to them in the workforce.
3. Women were not allowed to vote or hold public office in America until 1920.
4. Women were barred from membership in civic clubs until recent years.     
5. Most major Protestant Christian churches did not ordain women until the 1950s. The Roman 

Catholic Church still does not ordain women, but I predict they will in the near future.  
It has been a long hard battle for women, and the struggle is still continuing. It has taken time for women to have the same equality as men. But now we find women speaking out all over the world. Yes, times they are “changing.” Today it is customary for married couples to be one man and one woman, and polygamy in the United States is illegal. In addition, today we are more and more recognizing the legality of pairs of the same sex.  

Today the United Methodist Bishop for Southern California is a dynamic woman, Bishop Minerva Carcano. The CEO of General Motors, Mary Barra, is a woman. And the next president of the United States will very likely be a woman, Hilary Clinton. 

Viva women! Viva humankind in every niche of planet Earth! Now let us, women and men alike, unite in our efforts to make peace on Earth a reality. Right now the hawks in America are ready again to go to war! Let it not be so!


Inhuman concept
Re: Arizona’s Senate Bill 1062
Well, it appears that capitalism trumps one’s First Amendment right to freedom of religion, at least in this particular case (as it should). When you’re open for business to the general public you must serve all members of the general public; that’s the law. If you don’t want to serve homosexuals then convert your public license to a private club.  The public will choose your business because you are the best at what you do, so why hamstring it in favor of your so-called spiritually motivated bigoted views? For crying out loud, you knew they were coming so bake the cake. 

Now to the real issue at hand:

A homosexual person is one who is sexually attracted to others of the same sex. Except for a genetic variation of nature, they are virtually identical to their heterosexual counterparts. They feel the very same kind of attraction to the same sex as heterosexuals feel about the opposite sex.

Now, granted, there are those people who freely choose this behavior as a form of “lifestyle” but that accounts for a very small population of homosexuals. In fact, if one is not genetically predisposed toward this behavior then, by definition, they are not truly homosexual but rather some deviant variation of perverted behavior.

Some would argue that the Bible condemns homosexuality but I believe (through the persistence of science) this behavior will be proven to result from natural genetic variation.

One can draw on the example of the developmentally challenged (no offense intended toward either group) who by no action of their own are born comparatively slow or deficient in mental, physical, or emotional growth. Homosexual people are therefore entitled to engage in sexual behavior consistent with their genetic makeup so long as it is between consenting adults and by extension should be allowed to marry as well.

To deny them this right would be the same as denying heterosexuals their right to consensual sex. Some would argue that sexuality is strictly for the purpose of reproduction, yet the animal kingdom has many variations of species that also cannot reproduce.
Human beings are sexual beings as was intended by their creator and to suggest that a genetic variation of nature somehow makes homosexuals less human is indeed an inhuman concept.


A column titled “Disaster Waiting to Happen” appearing in our March 20 edition contained some incorrect information. In 2013, Assemblyman Chris Holden, D-Pasadena, did not vote on six bills related to fracking, three of which called for moratoriums on the controversial procedure. The article also misattributes an erroneous comment made regarding Holden’s voting record on fracking. The article was briefly taken down from our Web site until the corrections could be made. It has since been reposted.  

DIGG | del.icio.us | REDDIT

Like it? Tweet it!

Related Articles


For whatever reason, some time ago it became editorial policy to NOT post "THE COUNT" at the PW online edition. Was it so the PW staff could protect all those potential young recruits who don't read the dead-tree version from making a more informed decision when they are approached by some officially lying recruiter?

As it is, does THE COUNT also include the following? It may become very instructive to any potential recruits to realize that, in America's modern wars, we are certainly not the good guys.

Up to the beginning of this year, at least 1,892 of America's serving "heroes" have come to the conclusion that being a war-crimes villain is truly intolerable.



posted by DanD on 3/29/14 @ 09:38 p.m.
Post A Comment

Requires free registration.

(Forgotten your password?")