That looks like the Minneapolis's' fire chief's brother or sister
Posted on 12/05/2006 11:04:34 PM PST by West Coast Conservative
The kid, like any other kid would be a more well-rounded person in later life if it was immersed in both the male and female influences. The male society has already been neutered to a larger extent, thanks in large part to the radical feminist movement that preceeded the sexual revolution of the 1960's. Turn a TV on these days, and it's not hard to see that guys either sound effeminate or act effeminate. This country will be in a long struggle for as long as it's moral compass continues to be out of whack. It'll take a movement much like a nationwide church revival to knock the moral compass back in the right direction. Until that time comes, this country will continue in a slow downward spiral.
I think you need to ask a different questions:
How many have a mom and dad (really present)
How many have just a mom
How many have just a dad
How many have two moms
How many have two dads
I am not trying to be a lib here. Look at my other posts.
I work for three people:
A single man (no kids - straight, divorced)
A mom with dad (beautiful baby boy)
A dad with dad (yup - 2 men with a beautiful baby girl)
I think you're going to see a generational change here. There are too many people who are encountering these events.
No she didn't, she created her own -- she's pregnant, not adopting. Any potential mom and dad who want a kid can either have one themselves, or adopt one of the millions of kids without moms and dads. Her gain is not at the loss of any other potential parent.
That said, IMO the biological father loses out because he doesn't get to raise his offspring; and the child loses out because s/he won't have a father (although grandfather Dick will stand in admirably I'm sure). But your statement just doesn't make sense, because she didn't "take" anything from anybody.
That's true, and it can provide a huge benefit in the child's life. I don't doubt that Dick Cheney will provide plenty of male influence in that child's life.
Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind
I haven't had a TV in the house since 1975, but I know what you mean. It drives me crazy that there aren't many decent male role models in the media.
> It'll take a movement much like a nationwide church revival to knock the moral compass back in the right direction.
While I agree that most religions provide good moral guidance, I don't think I want that done on a nationwide basis, because that would unavoidably get entangled with the government, and I don't want the government having anything to do with religion (mine or anyone else's).
Instead, I would like to see the various disparate parts of the country develop more responsible attitudes based on the folks in those areas (yeah, I'm a believer in states' rights and old-style federalism). Certainly religion has a strong place there, but it shouldn't be a national religion.
"...nor abusers of themselves with mankind."
__________________________________
ABUSERS = PERVERTS.
So sicko.
Yeah, I agree. But I will add that this country needs to get back to the roots of the Founding Father's. America has strayed too far off course for far too long as far as morals and values go.
I consider myself a devout Christian, but I do realize there is going to be a natural give-and-take.
Cross file this one under:
-News of the weird
-Clever uses for turkey basters
I agree. The writings of the Founders are full of good guidance, and I wish it were more widely known and taught. Our present culture has little regard for its roots.
> I consider myself a devout Christian, but I do realize there is going to be a natural give-and-take.
The Christian and Deist beliefs of the Founders would serve well as examples today. There are also a lot of non-Christians who have good moral grounding and can provide sustenance to the recovery of our national moral situation.
It's more difficult without a state-imposed or state-sponsored religion, but it's better if done with regard for the huge range of legitimate beliefs in America.
IMO the toughest task is respecting legitimate differences, without also allowing the crackpots and weirdos to run the show by default, which is some of how we got to where we are now.
Unintended irony!
Clever, yes, but hardly novel. I recall discussions of the turkey baster method in the 1960's. It's been the canonical "self-insemination" method for as long as I've been aware of the topic.
Nyuk nyuk nyuk nyuk nyuk...wonder who's the femme here?
That looks like the Minneapolis's' fire chief's brother or sister
I agree with every word of that post
:(
I agree this is going to get some bad publicity unfortunately at the end of the day she is a grown women and what she does at that age should not affect her father but the anti Cheney camp (on both sides) will have a field day.
The Cheney family are class and do not shove anything down ones throat only support and love their children equally like me most people on FR probably do not agree with Mary Cheney's life style and choices but respect the way the family has handled this over the years.
Indeed again may not agree with this situation but there are worse ones for children.
Yes and no because I fear more fall out on this one
Mary's very lovely. Beyond that it's none of my business. ;-)
(That's not to say I can't speculate on the prospects of "Hot Republican Girl-on-Girl Action" at the next convention.)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.