Lately, I have been stressing the importance of preserving the sanctity of the traditional family – mother, father and children. There is not one example throughout the history of the world of a society prospering without an intact family unit. Susie can't have two moms nor can Jimmy have two dads.
Liberals would argue that is not the case and that society must "evolve" with the times we now live in. Nothing can be further from the truth. As a matter of fact, one need look no further than the words of MSNBC talk show host, Melissa Perry, a radical feminist of irrational proportions.
MSNBC has been running a series of promotional ads featuring their various TV hosts. Here is what Perry said in her most recent ad (I am not making this up)"
"We have never invested as much in public education as we should have because we've always had a kind of private notion of children: Your kid is yours and totally your responsibility. We haven't had a very collective notion of these are our children. So part of it is we have to break through our kind of private idea that kids belong to their parents, or kids belong to their families, and recognize that kids belong to whole communities. Once it's everybody's responsibility and not just the households, then we start making better investments."
I want you to re-read carefully what she said. I have quoted her verbatim. I am still in shock that anyone with half a brain would make such a radical statement.
When asked to defend her comments, Perry said: "This isn't about me wanting to take your kids, and this isn't even about whether children are property. This is about whether we as a society, expressing our collective will through our public institutions, including our government, have a right to impinge on individual freedoms in order to advance a common good. And that is exactly the fight that we have been having for a couple hundred years."
I will give anyone a dollar if they can explain to me what she just said.
So, please allow me to correct the record on one of Perry's main premises – "that we have never invested as much in public education as we should have."
According to the latest OECD Education at a Glance Report, the U.S. spends more on education per student than every other country in the world. So, her very premise is based on a lie, but then again, isn't the essence of liberalism based on a lie that others know what's best for you and your life?
So, let me give you a real world example of liberalism gone amuck. What I saw on MSNBC sent chills down my spine – that a parent would abuse their own child on national TV to promote an insidious political agenda is totally disgusting. You must see this video (http://www.mediaite.com/tv/msnbc-host-asks-her-daughter-if-she-would-marry-a-girl-when-she-grows-up/)
Krystal Ball, another MSNBC talk show host and feminist, aired a video of her and her 5-year- old daughter, Ella. Ball asks Ella if she knows what marriage is and she says she does not. Then the daughter says marriage is between a man and a woman – that's when her mother begins to indoctrinate her daughter about homosexual marriage. I was mortified that a parent would do this to her own daughter – on national TV. Social services should remove Ella from this house because her mother is without question an unfit parent.
So, this is the type of world that Melissa Perry wants to create, one where someone like Ball could take another person's child and brainwash them into believing that homosexual marriage is OK. What parent has this type of conversation with a 5 year old?
Is this what Perry means when she says, "kids belong to whole communities." They know they cannot win the argument with logic, so they must brainwash innocent children to perpetuate their radical liberalism. This is why we need to keep government out of our lives to the greatest extent possible.
What Ball did to her daughter may not be child abuse legally, but morally, it is definitely abuse and I am amazed that even liberals of goodwill have not criticized her for such abuse.
I challenge Perry to describe to the American people what her world looks like if our kids belong to whole communities. Is she OK with me teaching her 14-year-old daughter, Parker, that homosexuality is wrong? Whose values should be taught to these kids? So, is it OK for Ball's 5- year-old to begin experimenting with kissing boys and girls or touching her classmates in intimate places?
I see what the problem is. You are having an adult conversation with a 5-year- old, so she may as well enjoy the fruits of being an adult. Why else would you be having this conversation with her?
(Raynard Jackson is president & CEO of Raynard Jackson & Associates, LLC., a Washington, D.C.-based public relations/government affairs firm. He can be reached via www.raynardjackson.com. Follow him on Twitter at raynard1223.)