September 27, 2001
My Personal Review of Enterprise

Just my two cents, I was impressed, it has a lot of potential, Jonathon Archer has a lot more balls than even Kirk :) ... but was anyone else upset/annoyed by the gratuitous sex scenes? The decontamination scene of T'Pol and Tucker and the alien dancers? (Well, the dancers weren’t so bad, but focusing on their anatomy was what made me tell my son to close his eyes and just listen). Not to mention showing all the guys packages (talk about tighty whities!)

My son sometimes watches Trek with me (kept asking where Picard was) and I had to keep telling him to close his eyes or disregard some parts of conversation. I mean .. I look to Trek for entertaining AND intelligent TV .... and some of the scripting didn't impress me. I love the story, but I just feel that there are better ways to carry it off without making it so obvious that you want you audience to be 18-34 yr old males who need T&A to make a show worth watching.
September 18, 2001
A recipe for happy children (from a homeschool e-list that I am on):

Preserving Children

1 large grassy field
3 to 6 small children
2 to 3 small dogs
flowers (assorted)
narrow strip of brook
deep blue sky (large)
hot sun

Mix the children with the dogs and empty onto field, stirring
constantly. Sprinkle the field with flowers, pour brook over pebbles.
Cover all with deep blue sky and bake in hot sun. When children are well
browned they may be removed and set away in cool bathtub.

"Try not to become a man of success but rather to become
a man of value."
- Albert Einstein
September 6, 2001
I'm just a busy bee today (copied without permission from

Letter From a Homeschooling Mom
by Laura Haire

Dear Mr. Rockwell,

My children started school last week – at the kitchen table. With the beginning of a new school year come the same questions that I have had every year for the past eleven years of homeschooling. Why is there such strong opposition to the growing homeschool movement? Why do parents who homeschool their children need to seek legal support and constantly defend their rights? Why do parents who home school their children have a fear that Social Services might storm in one day, on an unsubstantiated accusation from a nosey neighbor, and take their children away?

Homeschooling has proven to be an excellent method of educating children. Standardized tests, college-entrance exams, national spelling and geography bees, all show that parents can not only teach their children at home, but also gain results exceeding the national average.

Not only are homeschooled children excelling academically, but they are doing it at the expense of their own families. Homeschooling parents still pay taxes to support the public education system, as well as providing the means to educate their own children at home. They often do this with the income of only one parent. This, however, is a sacrifice that they are willing to make. This is a devotion that you will not find in the government school system.

In his essay, The Law, Fredrick Bastiet wrote, "You say: ‘There are persons who lack education,’ and you turn to the law. But the law is not, in itself, a torch of learning which shines its light abroad. The law extends over a society where some persons have knowledge and others do not; where some citizens need to learn, and others can teach. In this matter of education, the law has only two alternatives: It can permit this transaction of teaching-and-learning to operate freely and without the use of force, or it can force human wills in this matter by taking from some of them enough to pay the teachers who are appointed by government to instruct others, without charge. But in this second case, the law commits legal plunder by violating liberty and property."

Shouldn’t the government, instead, have to defend itself for forcing the American public to hand over their hard-earned money to support a failed school system? Is this why there is such opposition? Or, could it be that the opponents of homeschooling realize that they are losing the battle in brainwashing homeschoolers and their parents into believing the lies about the glories of the government found in government-approved textbooks touted by government-approved instructors?

I have searched the Constitution and have not found in it anywhere, the right of government to intrude in the educating of children. I did, however, find the concept of "Free education for all children in public schools," in The Communist Manifesto.

Laura (a stay-at-home mom)

Ok, this is downright scary. Harper Collins wants to re-publish The Chronicles of Narnia without it's Christian themes.The Chronicles of Narnia is one of the greatest series ever written. It's the only series that I have read, and re-read, and re-read again. And I plan on reading it to my son and having him read it on his own. It's enough that Harper Collins re-issued the books out of order (I'm sorry, they really do make more enjoyable reading when they were in their original published format and NOT in chronological order, the only way you can find them now unless you go to a used bookstore like Powell's). .... But I digress.

This was on MSNBC and I just came across it: The folly of censoring C.S. Lewis --Publisher ponders purging Narnia of its mysticism "Plans are afoot to purge Christian content from the seven Narnia stories. These children’s tales written by C.S. Lewis, one of the most important writers of the century, are apparently too Christian for Harper Collins publishers." ....... *sigh* what is this world *coming* to???????????

I wonder if there is some way to forcefully protest this. Has HarperCollins lost its collective mind?
According to the article:
Presumably the Harper publishers do not know many Christians and are not Christians themselves. Hence they figure that since there are no Christians in their world, there aren’t really many left any more. Ignorance mixed with bigotry and greed drives the New York publishing world to folly.....Eradicate religion from Narnia and you destroy all the charm and the power of the stories. You might just well issue them as comic books. Hopefully, those who detest bigotry, arrogance, greed and violation of a writer’s work will leave the Harper corruption of C.S. Lewis stories rotting on the book shelves.

Here's an interesting article on why men are the losers of the sexual revolution.
Columnist Jeffrey Hart recently argued that women were the losers of the sexual revolution. He has a point. By making themselves available outside of marriage, women have undermined the institution of marriage. The problem with Hart's analysis is that he assumes that men want sex and women want marriage. But what if men want marriage, too? Aren't they also losers of the sexual revolution? ...
Eventually, guys may get over their reluctance to enter into long-term relationships with women who have been in bed with their friends or friends of their friends. When I ask men I know who are in their 30s and 40s why they have not married, they do not answer that female promiscuity makes it unnecessary. They say that they are reluctant to propose to easy women.

One man put it this way: "I would be uncomfortable in social gatherings where 15 percent of the people had been in bed with my wife."

The sexual revolution has provided men with easy sex, but not with families and wives who don't walk out on them. Feminists may have destroyed the chastity of women, but they certainly destroyed the security of marriage.
Back to Top