by Terri LaPoint
Health Impact News
A baby’s first year is crucial to a baby’s emotional and cognitive development. It is in the earliest months of life that the foundations for basic trust, security, and relationships are laid. The parent-child relationship is the environment in which that is designed to happen.
Yet the majority of children who enter foster care are taken within their first year of life, depriving them of critical bonding time and causing permanent trauma and damage to the babies’ ability to trust. More children in this age group are not returned home and are later adopted out than any other age group.
Human babies are born with an innate emotional and psychological need for their biological parents. When the child cannot or does not receive the love and acceptance of their own mother and father, he or she is left with a gaping hole deep inside that they may struggle the rest of their lives to fill even if they are loved, wanted, and cherished by a substitute parent.
The rationale behind the existence of Child Protective Services is that the state works for “the best interest of the child,” removing children from homes that the state decides are not good for the child.
Social workers and judges alike argue that they would rather be “on the safe side” and “err on the side of the child” by removing children to prevent the chance of them being harmed by their family. Countless social worker court reports of families whose stories we have covered contain references to the “possibility of future harm” without any evidence of actual harm having taken place…. Read More
“There are always risks in challenging excessive police power, but the risks of not challenging it are more dangerous, even fatal.”—Hunter S. Thompson, Kingdom of Fear: Loathsome Secrets of a Star-Crossed Child in the Final Days of the American Century
I have known a lot of good cops, I have defended a lot of good cops, and I have been fortunate to call a number of good cops friends.
So when I say that warrior cops—hyped up on their own authority and the power of the badge—have not made America any safer or freer, I am not disrespecting any of the fine, decent, lawful police officers who take seriously their oath of office to serve and protect their fellow citizens, uphold the Constitution, and maintain the peace.
My beef is with the growing squads of warrior cops who have been given the green light to kill, shoot, taser, abuse and steal from American citizens in the so-called name of law and order.
These cops are little more than vigilantes with a badge.
Indeed, it is increasingly evident that militarized police armed with weapons of war who are allowed to operate above the law and break the laws with impunity have not made America any safer or freer.
Don’t take my word for it.
A new study by a political scientist at Princeton University concludes that militarizing police and SWAT teams “provide no detectable benefits in terms of officer safety or violent crime reduction.”
In fact, according to researcher Jonathan Mummolo, if police in America are feeling less safe, it’s because the process of transforming them into extensions of the military makes them less safe, less popular and less trust-worthy…..Read More
Liberty means to exercise human rights in any manner a person chooses so long as it does not interfere with the exercise of the rights of others. This means, above all else, keeping government out of our lives. Only this path leads to the unleashing of human energies that build civilization, provide security, generate wealth, and protect the people from systematic rights violations. In this sense, only liberty can truly ward off tyranny, the great and eternal foe of mankind.
The definition of liberty I use is the same one that was accepted by Thomas Jefferson and his generation. It is the understanding derived from the great freedom tradition, for Jefferson himself took his understanding from John Locke (1632–1704). I use the term “liberal” without irony or contempt, for the liberal tradition in the true sense, dating from the late Middle Ages until the early part of the twentieth century, was devoted to freeing society from the shackles of the state. This is an agenda I embrace, and one that I believe all should embrace.
To believe in liberty is not to believe in any particular social and economic outcome. It is to trust in the spontaneous order that emerges when the state does not intervene in human volition and human cooperation. It permits people to work out their problems for themselves, build lives for themselves, take risks and accept responsibility for the results, and make their own decisions.
Our standards of living are made possible by the blessed institution of liberty. When liberty is under attack, everything we hold dear is under attack. Governments, by their very nature, notoriously compete with liberty, even when the stated purpose for establishing a particular government is to protect liberty.
Take the United States, for example. Our country was established with the greatest ideals and respect for individual freedom ever known. Yet look at where we are today: runaway spending and uncontrollable debt; a monstrous bureaucracy regulating our every move; total disregard for private property, free markets, sound money, and personal privacy; and a foreign policy of military expansionism. The restraints placed on our government in the Constitution by the Founders did not work. Powerful special interests rule, and there seems to be no way to fight against them. While the middle class is being destroyed, the poor suffer, the justly rich are being looted, and the unjustly rich are getting richer. The wealth of the country has fallen into the hands of a few at the expense of the many. Some say this is because of a lack of regulations on Wall Street, but that is not right. The root of this issue reaches far deeper than that.
I am sure you are aware of the Nazi, book burning like censorship going on at facebook.
Just now they censored 3 articles in a row that I posted. Logged me out, and locked my account!!!
What are they so afraid of? Perhaps the truth, because before the Internet they did a pretty good job of hiding it from us.
Look at the articles below and see if you think that they somehow broke the nebulous , undefined, “community standards”.
I would really like to see criminal prosecutions of the heads of Facebook, Amazon, and Google, for starters…
Here are some screen shots:
Freaking (real) nazi pukes. I want to see jail sentences.
USC title 18 sections 241 & 242:
Of course they do not enforce this law, because if they did 90 percent plus of congress could be put in jail for passing laws that clearly violate our rights! ( I have never seen anyone suggest that we apply it to the psychopaths known as congress, but it does apply to them)
The 3 articles that FaceBook does not want posted or you to see:
A government which will turn its tanks upon its people, for any reason, is a government with a taste of blood and a thirst for power and must either be smartly rebuked, or blindly obeyed in deadly fear.”—John Salter
Police in a small Georgia town tasered a 5-foot-2, 87-year-old woman who was using a kitchen knife to cut dandelions for use in a recipe. Police claim they had no choice but to taser the old woman, who does not speak English but was smiling at police to indicate she was friendly, because she failed to comply with orders to put down the knife.
Police in California are being sued for using excessive force against a deaf 76-year-old woman who was allegedly jaywalking and failed to halt when police yelled at her. According to the lawsuit, police searched the woman and her grocery bags. She was then slammed to the ground, had a foot or knee placed behind her neck or back, handcuffed, arrested and cited for jaywalking and resisting arrest….. Read More
Let me play devil’s advocate, for a minute, by pointing out my concerns about the statement: “law abiding gun owners” made on the above “about” page: (FWIW every gun group , and owner, almost without exception, accepts this anti liberty “group-think” slogan , so I am not picking on MGC in particular.)
This is the text that I have a concern with:
1.) “While professed pro-gun legislators have a majority in both chambers, Missouri lags behind many other states in protecting the rights of law abiding gun owners.”
Why do people that claim to be educated in the concept of liberty, assert that if someone is not “law abiding” (such as maybe being a christian in some countries) that somehow your right to self defense disappears? Do any of these people think before they type? Doesn’t this imply that law breaking gun owners have no rights? (It’s foundational in Western law that everyone has rights, all of the time. Even “lawbreakers”)
If these group thinkers carry their logic forward they would also use terms like “law abiding parents”, where they believe that if a parent breaks a law, that they would forever lose their right to be a parent or to conceive children. Aren’t they saying the exact same nutty thing about gun owners? I guess a law breaking food shopper would perhaps be banned by law for life from entering a grocery stores. Think outside of your normalcy bias and group think and you will clearly see how nutty all of these assertions are to anyone that believes in inalienable rights.
: a pattern of thought characterized by self-deception, forced manufacture of consent, and conformity to group values and ethics
Let’s continue, if a gun owner is not law abiding, to the extent that he is incarcerated, his weapons, are kept from him, by the fact that he can’t bring them into the prison. However the day this person gets out, even if a convicted 1st degree murder, he get’s access to his guns back that very same day. At least that is the way this country worked, and was supposed to work, until the US Congress, instituted the Nazi gun Control Act in the US and renamed it the “1968 Gun Control Act”. Americans up to that point understood that the right can ever be taken away (or regulated for that matter) as that is the very definition of a right. Close to 100 years of government monopoly schooling has produced individuals that have no clue as to what their rights are, or the proper function of government, according to the founders and our founding documents. That is how over the top, disgusting slave-speak like: “law abiding gun owners” get into the lexicon. Isn’t this an oxymoron of the highest level? What does following the law have to do with a right, since a legitimate law can not take a right away)
2.) “In 2015 year alone, numerous states signed Constitutional Carry into law and made progress in advancing Stand-Your-Ground law – yet both of these bills died again this year in Jefferson City.”
“Laws” do not give us our rights. The second amendment recognizes the fact that we had and still have a pre existing right of self defense. We need no “laws” to tell us this. Further “Laws” can do nothing but restrict this right. People that speak and act like this, are again very clearly illustrating that they do not even understand the basic concept of a right. This is scary, when the more educated of us, are still missing the philosophical elephants in the room.
The solution IMHO, the only real one that will get us off of the hamster wheel of trying to enact legislation is to educate the public as to what their rights are. Passing legislation is nothing more than licking your masters boot, for a few permissions, as government can not grant rights.
Think about it, and I welcome your comments below.
Lastly please contact this group with your thoughts, and if their answers convince you that they are philosophically on firm ground, then buy a membership, and support them.
While I despise the machiavellian compromises, that they are making, perhaps it is necessary, but that does not mean that we should not have a less myopic, longer term goal and methodology planned out.(Like educating the public about their rights perhaps)
I plan on purchasing a membership, even if we may have a difference of opinion. These are not the times for a house divided. Not at all, and after all they are keeping the wolf from the door for the time being, as expedient as the method may be.
If it’s not “their fault” then I wonder who the hell is at fault? Could it be that teaching majors are filled to the brim with the dumbest, by far, students on campus? Could it be that they got a very poor education because they themselves attended government schools filled with low IQ teachers?
I know of which I speak. I have taken several education courses that are required by people in that major and I was flabbergasted each time by the apparent low IQ of the people taking the course. Government needs to get the hell out of the way and let the free market, dictate who is going to teach. What a conflict of interest to have the state make that choice. Not to mention that the state has implemented both the first and tenth planks of the communist manifesto to create our schools.
Can you imagine a country of citizens, educated in the free market by teachers that are gifted, and intelligent, rather than the low IQ crowd that helps the government indoctrinate your children with all sorts of falsehoods and lies? The founders told us that we would only be free if we had an educated electorate. Do you think that these government schools that are designed to dumb us down are a big part of us losing our freedoms?
If you doubt this dumbing down, I challenge you to take this 8th grade graduation exam from 1895 Kansas:
Almost 2,400 North Carolina elementary school teachers have failed the math portion of their licensing exams, which puts their careers in jeopardy, since the state hired Pearson publishing company to give the exam in 2013, according to a report presented to the state Board of Education Wednesday.
Failure rates have spiked as schools around the state struggle to find teachers for the youngest children. Education officials are now echoing what frustrated teachers have been saying: The problem may lie with the exams rather than the educators.
Teachers in Florida and Indiana have also seen mass failures when their states adopted Pearson testing, according to news reports from those states. Concern about the validity of the Pearson licensing exams is so pervasive that it was discussed at this year’s National Education Association conference, said North Carolina Association of Educators President Mark Jewell.
“I hope this doesn’t lead to a mass exodus of new teachers and exacerbate our shortages,” he said…… Read More
Really surprised that I am considering not breaking this fast as 14 days was my, what I thought at the time, rather unrealistic, goal. I just decided not to thaw, and cook the roast beef brisket, to put up in the freezer because the smell of food like that for hours and hours would likely set off cravings.
The only downside is the lack of energy, but I think that is temporary. Our bodies are very insulin resistant because of years of overdosing on carbohydrates, and it takes a few fasts to get the body to repair the damage and start working correctly.
There is a recurring thought in my head. That is the comparison of what could be thought of as the “inconvenience” of fasting, compared to the downright living-hell of going through chemo. As few as two, 5 day fasts a year dramatically cut one’s cancer risks across the board. But teaching people to fast does not make your doctor or big pharma any money, so you see where that goes….. They would rather have you undergo chemo than fasting. It sounds like a criminal enterprise to me. Perhaps proof that the AMA medical monopoly is really a thinly veiled eugenics movement, at least on the chronic care side of the house.
I usually do not not post pictures of myself on the web, much less a selfie of me with my shirt off. But I Just had to make the point of how diet, nutritional supplementation, and life style can make unbelievable changes in your health. If you knew me 5 years ago you would not think that this is the same person.
What are your thoughts on this topic? Comment below if you want to flesh some of these thoughts out with me.