Gettysburg: Teaching the American Fighting Tradition

In recognizing the 150th anniversary of the Battle of Gettysburg, Americans would do well to remember Abraham Lincoln’s words in the Gettysburg Address to honor the sacrifice of the men who fought there.

The 20th Maine Volunteer Infantry Regiment made an incredible stand at Little Round Top, culminating in a dramatic downhill charge that arguably saved both the Union left flank and perhaps the entire battle for the boys in blue. On the flip side, one looks in awe at the ground that had to be covered, under heavy cannon fire, by Confederate soldiers under Maj. Gen. George Pickett in the ill-fated charge into the Union center. For those who travel to the sacred ground at Gettysburg, it is hard not to admire those who fought on both sides.

Modern classrooms ignore the history of military conflict to an appalling degree. Students only learn that the Civil War was about abolitionists, WWI was about the League of Nations, and WWII was all about throwing Japanese citizens into internment camps. This is a shame and a detriment to future generations of Americans.

Never mind that slavery was largely extinguished by rough men in American uniforms, the League of Nations was defeated by Congress and failed to achieve even narrow goals, and that Japanese internment was created by liberal Democrat Franklin D. Roosevelt and fought by a conservative Republican governor of Colorado, Ralph L. Carr.

It was in large part the early nineteenth century way of teaching about the American Revolution that inspired the patriotism and the will of Northern soldiers to fight and die for the Union. Also, the devotion of leaders to inculcate the values of patriotism and American exceptionalism through speeches to the American people inspired many to fight for their country. This emphasis is sadly evaporating in modern public school classrooms in exchange for stifling political correctness; it is diminished by politicians that fail to, or intentionally avoid, speaking of the great values and people that made this nation great.

Read more here.

Next up in America, polygamy?

The movement to legalize multi-partner marriage got a huge boost with this week’s ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court that the federal government must give benefits to same-sex married partners, according to advocates of polygamy.

“We polyamorists are grateful to our brothers and sisters for blazing the marriage equality trail,” Anita Wagner Illig told U.S. News and World Report.

“I would absolutely want to seek multi-partner marriage — it would eliminate a common challenge polyamorists face when two are legally married and others in their group relationships aren’t part of that marriage,” she said.

Illig, head of the group Practical Polyamory, argued it’s a matter of equality – the concept cited by the U.S. court in its decision.

“A favorable outcome for marriage equality is a favorable outcome for multi-partner marriage, because the opposition cannot argue lack of precedent for legalizing marriage for other forms of non-traditional relationships,” she said.

The comments come on the heels of the left-wing of the U.S. Supreme Court deciding that the federal definition of marriage as one man and one woman failed the Constitution’s equality requirement.

Talk show host Glenn Beck immediately forecast that polygamy “wouldn’t be far behind.”

Read more here.

A Change of a Definition and YOU Lose Your Guns

The Rio Norte Line

Scott signs bill to bar mentally ill from guns

Now, all they have to do is change the definition of “mentally ill” and they can take your guns – no due process necessary.  See how it works?  And you were ALL FOR IT when they said we can’t allow “crazy” people to own weapons.  How long before they declare YOU crazy?

View original post

‘What Would Tyranny Look Like in America? Look Around’

Police confiscate guns from flooded town

The town flooded, and the police came in, evacuated the population … and then confiscated the residents’ guns out of their empty houses.

The residents of High River, Alberta, population nearly 13,000, are still awaiting authorities’ permission to return to their homes. Dozens have been engaged in a standoff with the Royal Canadian Mounted Police at a checkpoint at the edge of town since floodwaters prompted a forced evacuation last week.

Several news sources report tensions are high since news broke police have also been gathering residents’ firearms.

“I find that absolutely incredible that they have the right to go into a person’s belongings out of their home,” resident Brenda Lackey told the Calgary Herald. “When people find out about this, there’s going to be untold hell to pay.”

“This is the reason the U.S. has the right to bear arms,” said Charles Timpano at the checkpoint, where he and others have gathered to demand reentry into High River.

See more here.

Professor forced us to wear ‘gay’ ribbons

Several students are demanding a Tennessee community college psychology professor be disciplined for persistently pushing her pro-”gay” views on her students and even forcing students to identify themselves as in favor of the LGBT agenda in a mandatory project.

The Alliance Defense Fund is representing the students who objected to the classroom tactics of Columbia State Community College professor Linda Brunton. The students say any views opposed to Brunton’s were not welcome, and any opposition to the homosexual agenda was considered to be the thinking of “uneducated bigots” who “attack homosexuals with hate.”

But one assignment in particular triggered the protests.

“She assigned the class to wear rainbow coalition ribbons in support of homosexual behavior for at least a day on campus and wherever they went off campus. Students then had to write a reaction paper from wearing those ribbons and how they were allegedly discriminated against while wearing the ribbons,” Alliance Defense Fund attorney David Hacker told WND. “Several students contacted us, just objecting to this. It’s a very clear case of a government official, a state college professor, compelling students to speak in a way they disagree with.”

Hacker said it’s fine for teachers to have students consider ideas from different perspectives, but Brunton clearly crossed the line.

“Colleges and professors can require students to play devil’s advocate in a paper or argue a position in class that they don’t necessarily agree with, as long as it’s an academic exercise,” Hacker said.

“Once the professor here, Ms. Brunton, required the students to advocate a message outside the classroom, that’s compelled speech and it’s clearly unconstitutional.”

Before seeking a legal remedy, the students brought their concerns to Brunton. But Hacker said those efforts went nowhere.

Read more here.