That’s Right Nate

Long time readers of this blog will know that I am not a big fan of books.   The printed page is an outdated communication tool that belongs back in 17th Century Germany with the inventor of the printing press Steven Gutenberg.  I am opposed to my tax dollars being wasted on libraries to store these useless relics of an earlier age.   However,  the one book that I find especially dangerous is the dictionary.   This book contains the words that spell out all the smutty, vulgar, and deviant writings that we need to protect our children from.   It only requires a relatively clever child to put the dictionary words in the right order to tell a story that would make a sailor blush.  Furthermore, our founding fathers were schooled on creative spelling–the authoritarian rule of the spelling conventionalists  is a slap in the face to American values.

Fortunately, some good folks in Riverside, California complained to the Menifee Union School District and got the dictionary pulled from the schools.   Isn’t it a parent’s right to teach their children new words?  This is how government indoctrination starts.  “It’s just not age-appropriate,” said school spokeswoman Betti Cadmus,  “It’s hard to sit and read the dictionary, but we’ll be looking to find other things of a graphic nature.”

One board member told the Press-Enterprise that there are probably more objectionable terms in the dictionary.  You can count on it.   Unfortunately, a group of liberal thug parents demanded that the dictionaries be returned to the school classrooms and the school board caved.  However, I am hoping that this case will illustrate  the dangers of a dictionary for young kids.  They can not only find smut, but learn the correct way to pronounce it and its derivation.  This is not what our tax dollars should be going for.

First, a word of caution to all the father’s out there.   If your daughter gives you a permission slip to join the pom team at her school, make sure the ink hasn’t smeared before calling the school as an irate parent.   Pornography has been in the news this week so I guess that might be part of the problem.

Tom Coburn’s chief of staff, Michael Schwartz gave a speech for the Value Voters Summit last week that explained, “All pornography is homosexual pornography because all pornography turns your sexual drive inwards…Now, think about that. And if you tell an 11-year-old boy about that, do you think he’s going to want to get a copy of Playboy? I’m pretty sure he’ll lose interest. That’s the last thing he wants! You know, that’s a good comment, it’s a good point, and it’s a good thing to teach young people.”

This immediately brought a couple of questions to my mind:

1. If you read Playbody, but only the articles, will that turn you bisexual?
2. If somebody was already gay, would watching porn make them straight more efficiently than the current deprogramming methods?

However, what this really did for me is to make me feel even more sympathy for Carrie Prejean, the former Miss California USA contestant.   You see, Carrie is most famous for coming out against gay marriage at the Miss USA pageant that she totally would have won otherwise.  At the time liberals like Perez Hilton tried to make her out to be some kind of bigot, but her story is much more complex.

“I am a Christian, and I am a model. Models pose for pictures, including lingerie and swimwear photos,” explained Miss Prejean when a half dozen racy pictures of her surfaced.  Carrie looks amazingly attractive in those pictures and I can’t help, but think that many an 11 year old boy could spend a considerable amount of time studying them.  The problem is, as Michael Schwartz explained, this act will make them gay.   At which point, Miss Prejean will oppose their marriage.   I certainly don’t approve of the lifestyle, but I can’t help think that this is hypocritical when she helped to cause the gay lifestyle in the first place.