All Posts By

Penny Nance

Democrats’ attacks on Kavanaugh replacement Neomi Rao are unfair – I was nearly raped and I support her

By | Uncategorized | No Comments

Neomi Rao is President Trump’s nominee for the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, a federal court that is generally recognized as the second-most important court in the nation. Four sitting Supreme Court justices previously sat on the D.C. Circuit.

There is no question that Rao is well qualified for this position. A graduate of Yale University and the University of Chicago Law School, she clerked for Justice Clarence Thomas, served in the Office of the White House Counsel for President George W. Bush, founded the Center for the Study of the Administrative State at the Antonin Scalia Law School of George Mason University and currently heads the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs for the Trump administration.

As these last two positions, in particular, indicate, she is an expert in administrative law, with which the D.C. Circuit is deeply involved.

Click here to read the rest of this op-ed as featured on FoxNews.com.

If Nancy Pelosi doesn’t punish past congressional sexual abuse, she’ll lose credibility

By | Blog, News and Events | No Comments

Likely incoming House Speaker Nancy Pelosi meets with President Trump this morning and issues such as immigration and infrastructure, among others will be up for discussion. But when she takes the gavel next month there will be only one priority for her, and if she whiffs on it her speakership will lose authority and credibility for the rest of her term.

Literally a year ago — as the #MeToo era was erupting — the nation was waking up to news that a secret congressional “hush fund” had been used by Members of Congress to pay off accusers of sexual misconduct. Taxpayer money — yours and mine — was used to pay off these alleged victims.

Many members of Congress, in both parties, pontificated and expressed outrage. Congressman Ron DeSantis, R-Fla., introduced a bill that called for publicizing the names of those who used the hush fund to pay for these so-called “settlements.” Many in both parties co-sponsored his bill but it went nowhere and now DeSantis is gone, about to become the next governor of Florida.

Such inaction is a stain on outgoing Speaker Paul Ryan’s legacy. If incoming Speaker Pelosi does the same, it could ruin her.

If Pelosi doesn’t move immediately to disclose the names of those in Congress who used this hush fund, she will be part of the biggest sexual misconduct scandal in history. Nobody knows how many congressman and Senators are involved, and if she is a willing participant to keep all of this a secret she will forfeit credibility on every other issue.

What we know already is devastating. We know congressmen John Conyers (D-Mich.) and Blake Fahrentold (R-Tex.) used this “hush fund” to settle with alleged victims. Both men have already left Congress.

Pelosi has been as outspoken as any leader in the Democratic Party, as any feminist leader and as any celebrity when it comes protecting women from male predators. She will now have the power to take meaningful and lasting action but she said nothing about the issue during the last few months of the campaign, and has said nothing about it since the election.

Nor have we heard a word from any of the newly elected incoming Democratic freshman congressional class — many of whom are women — since the election. The same goes for the women leaders who plan to seek the Democratic nomination for president in 2020.

So far all we’ve heard and seen from congressional leaders in both parties has been lip service about training going forward. The truth is what will actually put a stop to male predators in Congress will be publicizing the names of those for whom the public paid to protect.

A woman Speaker, and her party by extension, cannot be part of an old boys club/incumbent protection scandal.

A woman Speaker who continues to sweep this scandal under the rug, and her party by extension — the party of which she’s has been a leader for many years — would render themselves a disgrace in the eyes of the American people.


A version of this oped was published by USA Today. 

 

NANCE: Judge Kavanaugh can be trusted to safeguard our First Amendment rights

By | Legal, News and Events | No Comments

President Trump should be commended for his nomination of Brett Kavanaugh, an abundantly qualified and impartial judge, to the Supreme Court. Throughout his judicial career, Kavanaugh has consistently defended Americans’ constitutional rights, including the religious liberties of all Americans, as enshrined in the First Amendment. Kavanaugh can be trusted to continue to protect this fundamental right as a justice on the nation’s highest court.

First and foremost, Judge Kavanaugh understands that judges must base their rulings on the text of the Constitution and the law, not on their own personal political beliefs or policy preferences. In a keynote address at Notre Dame Law School last year, Kavanaugh explained this obligation: “I believe very deeply in those visions of the rule of law as a law of rules, and of the judge as umpire,” he said. “By that, I mean a neutral, impartial judiciary that decides cases based on settled principles without regard to policy preferences or political allegiances or which party is on which side in a particular case.”

Click here to read the rest of this op-ed as featured on The Hill.

Conservative Women Rally to Support Judge Kavanaugh

By | Blog, Kennedy, Legal, News and Events, Religious Liberty, Sanctity of Life, SCOTUS, Vacancy | No Comments

This week many Americans were glued to our TV’s waiting to see who President Trump had chosen to replace Justice Anthony Kennedy on the Supreme Court.  For many of us, it was our first opportunity to hear directly from the man whose young daughter’s basketball team calls “Coach K.” He did not disappoint.

Judge Kavanaugh, who currently sits on the D.C. Circuit – considered the “Second Highest Court in the Land” – shared with us his story which highlighted so many values we, as Americans, hold dear, including family, faith, and hard work.

As the Senate begins the process to “advise and consent” the president’s nominee, it’s important to take a measure of the man in judging his fitness for office.

Here are some glimpses into his influences and his character:

Judge Kavanaugh in his speech last week gave thanks and praise to both of his parents who each attended law school, his father working full-time while putting himself through law school at night. But it was Kavanaugh’s mother to whom he paid a special tribute, Maryland Circuit Court Judge Martha Kavanaugh. “My introduction to law came at our dinner table,” he said. Kavanaugh called his mother a trailblazer for women in the legal profession. She pushed through barriers and overcame obstacles as one of the few female prosecutors at the time to become a trial judge. As he accepted President Trump’s nomination, Judge Kavanaugh credited his mother and her legacy. “The president introduced me tonight as Judge Kavanaugh, but to me that title will always belong to my mom.”

Judge Kavanaugh devotes time and energy to his family and his faith. He is involved in his church and spends his time serving meals with Catholic charities and tutoring. He is a leader in his field.

Throughout his tenure as a judge, Kavanaugh has worked to diversify the legal field through the people he chose to work for him. Rebecca Tailbelson, a former Kavanaugh Clerk, not only spoke about Kavanaugh as a judge but also to the quality of his character as a boss and advocate.

“Judge Kavanaugh has had a really outsized role in helping to diversify this little sliver of the legal profession, and he’s done so by hiring predominantly female – I think a majority of his law clerks have been women which is sort of unheard of at this level. And then after he hires us, he goes to bat for us in every way. It’s impossible to get that Supreme Court clerkship if you don’t have an appeals court judge like Brett Kavanaugh going to bat for you. He goes to bat for us, and then he goes to bat for us for every job after that.”

From the respect with which he honors his mother, to his devotion to raising strong daughters, and his work diversifying the legal field, Judge Kavanaugh has shown through action, not just words, his choice to esteem women.

There are just nine individuals who safeguard our Constitution, the document that has protected our God-given rights for 231 years. There could not be a more qualified candidate to sit on this esteemed bench at this time.

Concerned Women for America is honored to stand behind Judge Kavanaugh and support him during his confirmation. We have launched a $500,000 campaign called “Women for Kavanaugh.” We are devoting considerable resources to this effort and rallying our happy warriors across the nation to use their voices in support of Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation. We were active in Justice Neil Gorsuch’s confirmation and plan to be equally active for Judge K, because we trust that he will be another great justice!

CWA stands with Judge Kavanaugh, because his life and his work exemplify what we want to ensure for this generation and generations to come. This is about our children, our grandchildren, and the future of the home that we love. #ConfirmJudgeK


Editor’s Note: A version of this article was published by The Stream. Click here to read it there.

Here is why the U.S. Embassy Move is so important to American Christians

By | Blog, News and Events, Support for Israel | No Comments

On May 14, 1948, just after the provisional government of Israel proclaimed the new state of Israel, President Truman said: “This government has been informed that a Jewish state has been proclaimed in Palestine, and recognition has been requested by the provisional government thereof. The United States recognizes the provisional government as the de facto authority of the new State of Israel.”

In that moment, the United States made history as the first nation to recognize the legitimacy of the new state of Israel. And now, 70 years later, the U.S. is making history again as our great nation will legitimize the state of Israel, our ally and friend, by moving the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, Israel’s eternal capital.

American Evangelicals are responding, “It’s about time.” Moving our Embassy to Jerusalem is a promise that was made to the American people and Israel in 1995, when Congress voted almost unanimously to locate our embassy in the nation’s capital, just as we do in every other nation in the world. May 14 will be an historic moment. We are thankful to President Trump for making good on a promise that his predecessors chose to ignore.  I am honored to represent Concerned Women for America supporters as I attend this historic event.

While the move of the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem is a game changer on the world stage, it is uniquely important to American Christians.

Although imperfect, like any nation, Israel is a representation in the Middle East of the ideals and principles that we hold dear as Christians. It is much more than a political performance; it is about giving Israel the respect it deserves as a nation that is dedicated to democratic ideals.

Israel stands for human rights. Israel cares for the least of these. Israel is inclusive. Every Israeli is supported and represented, regardless of whether they are Jewish, Muslim, Arab, Christian, male or female, young or old.

Women have been an integral part of the modern state of Israel since its beginning. Golda Meir, the original “Iron Lady,” served as Minister of Labor and Foreign Minister before becoming Israel’s Prime Minister in 1969. She was Israel’s fourth Prime Minister and the third female prime minister in the world, and she led Israel during the Arab-Israeli (Yom Kippur) War.

Israel has always prioritized diversity within the Knesset, their unicameral legislative body. Minorities, including women, Arabs, and Druze, have been represented in the Knesset since its inception. Today, 33 members of the Knesset are women, and 18 members of the Knesset are Arab.

The Israeli people have proven their dedication to upholding justice and always working towards improvement.

After the fall of the Soviet Union, Israel had become a destination country for trafficked women, and prostitution became a prominent issue. Because of this, in 2001, Israel was ranked as a Tier 3 country for human trafficking on the U.S. State Department’s Trafficking in Persons Report — the worst possible ranking. The Israeli government took definitive action against sex traffickers, working to protect women and children and bring criminals to justice. For six years in a row, Israel has been ranked a Tier 1 nation in their efforts to combat human trafficking, signaling their success in fighting this gross injustice.

Although they receive little recognition on the global stage, Israel continues to go above and beyond in their service to the world. Last summer, Israel unveiled Operation Good Neighbor, the secret operations they had been conducting in Syria to keep starvation away from thousands of Syrians while also providing free medical care. The Good Neighbor is an appropriate name for Israel.

Since its beginning as a small nation in the midst of the Middle East, Israel has been committed to wide-reaching humanitarian relief and global development. Despite the animosity from much of the world, they continue to always be a helping hand, often being the first responders to natural disasters, whether it be the earthquakes in Haiti and Japan or Hurricane Katrina in the United States.

In 2016, the United Nation’s World Health Organization recognized the Israeli Army’s field hospital as “number one in the world.” The U.N. has been known for having a negative attitude towards Israel, but they could not ignore the humanitarian efforts of Israel. Their army field hospital is regularly sent abroad to provide aid at natural disaster sites. Israel was its first and, so far, it’s only “Type 3” field hospital — the highest rank that can be received.

The United States is making history with this embassy move.  Once again, we hope to see others around the world do the right thing and follow our lead.

 

Editor’s Note: A version of this article was published by FoxNews.com. Click here to read it.

Taking Aim at the Elephant in the Room: Why Republicans Should be Nervous

By | Blog, News and Events, Sanctity of Life | No Comments

Last week, President Trump begrudgingly signed into law a $1.3 trillion omnibus spending bill that runs out in September.  The Republican-controlled Congress sent the president a bill that rightfully increases support for the U.S. military but doesn’t offset spending and, thus, increases our national debt by at least $1 trillion.

The American public has little appetite for hard decisions.  Even the Republican base refuses to have an honest conversation about the long-term sustainability of entitlement spending.  At some point, we will be forced to reconcile our list of wants with real needs, and that will be a necessary but painful process.

But it’s about to get painful for Republicans immediately.

Pro-life Americans elected Donald Trump as president, and he has not disappointed.  He has followed through on promises to appoint constitutionalist judges and used every legal tool of his Administration, from personnel to regulations, to side with life.

However, he cannot do it alone. Sure, the House of Representatives took up easy-to-pass bills like the Unborn Child Protection Act, which protects children beyond five months gestation. Public opinion is strongly in favor of these commonsense limits. The majority of the Senate agrees but could not reach the 60-vote threshold.

However, Congress cannot vote for spending bills paying for abortion and maintain their pro-life credentials.

Pro-life voters elected Republicans to protect life, and if they do not, what’s the point?  We have voted, rallied, phone banked, gone door to door, and given small contributions to assure that Republicans are elected.

So here’s the deal: Concerned Women for America Legislative Action Committee will score against any future spending bills that allow our tax dollars to fund big abortion. We will not support legislators who vote for these bills. Working quietly behind the scenes has failed.  At this point, it is better to be feared than loved.

We would rather find more pro-life Democrats like Dan Lipinski than continue to be patted on the head and ignored.  The gavel is in the hands of supposedly pro-life Republicans, and it is about to be wasted if they can’t make changes with it.

The omnibus spending bill was a complete backhand to the pro-life movement.  It did not include language for conscience protections for pro-life medical professionals, a repeal of D.C.’s assisted suicide law, a ban on fetal tissue research, or a ban on detainee abortions for DHS.

And Republicans again funded Planned Parenthood, the nation’s largest abortion provider, who is on track to receive about half-a-billion dollars per year.  How is this possible?  Planned Parenthood provides one in every three abortions performed in this nation, over 321,000 per year.  The American public overwhelming opposes the entanglement of their money with the taking of innocent human life.  Polls show that 60% of Americans oppose tax dollars funding abortion.

Planned Parenthood is currently under investigation by the FBI for the buying and selling of body parts of aborted babies, yet their friends in Congress are more willing to fight than pro-life members are willing to stand firm.

Our president clearly articulated to Congress that he will not sign another funding bill like the last, and we should believe him.  The President has called for an end to the filibuster.  That is a strong suggestion but even short of that idea Mitch McConnell should require Senators to literally hold the floor if they wish to stop legislation.  House Appropriator Robert Aderholt (R-Alabama) on Alabama radio has called the current system a “phony filibuster” and he is right. The pro-life community can no longer allow Republican lawmakers to get away with bowing to the big abortion lobby.

As the leader of the nation’s largest grassroots women’s organization, as a conservative, and as a defender of life, I am embarrassed by the omnibus spending bill.  Planned Parenthood supporters in the Senate need to have to explain why they are choosing funding abortion over funding Social Security in a shutdown.

This is about light and darkness — life and death.  We will stand with life.

Editor’s Note: A version of this article was published by Townhall. Click here to read it. 

Save the Last Dance for … Political Correctness?

By | Beverly LaHaye Institute, Blog, Commentary, Defense of Family, Feminist / Women's Issues | No Comments

Sorry, young ladies in Staten Island, but because father-daughter dances are triggering and scary, you won’t be able to have a special night with your dad.

The New York Department of Education passed a policy last spring that demanded schools scrap any “gender-based” activities that do not serve an educational purpose. Apparently the father-daughter dance violates those guidelines and fell under the horrible practice of a “gender-based” activity. The school postponed the dance, which was supposed to be held this Friday, until they could figure out the legal ramifications.

It might sound like a small thing — a school dance being canceled — but it is anything but trivial. Ridding schools of a father-daughter dance points to a larger issue: the politically correct culture that we used to joke about all those years ago has become today’s actual default culture. Jokes about the ridiculous rules and regulations political correctness would usher in are our current reality, and our children are paying the price. They are living with the ramifications of a world where the mere mention of a time-honored tradition like the father-daughter dance — which is needed in today’s world more now than ever — sends adults into a tailspin.

Fathers have an enormous influence on their daughters, whether they are in their lives or not. Dads who are involved in the lives of their daughters in positive ways are key to high self-esteem, self-worth, grades, college education levels, and overall intellectual well-being.

Studies consistently show that fathers who are more involved in their daughters’ lives, who have loving relationships with them, who were supportive and had positive interactions with the girls’ mother, and who were involved in care giving during the early years, encouraged greater self-esteem in their daughters and added stability to their lives.

The influence of a father on the life of his daughter is no small deal.

For fathers who are less involved with their daughters, who are not there at all, or who exert a negative influence, their daughters have higher rates of teen pregnancy, STDs, and substance abuse.

The National Fatherhood Initiative rightly points out that there is a national father crisis in our nation, where one-in-three children do not have their biological father living in the home with them. There are huge ramifications for these children without fathers: seven times more likely to become pregnant as a teen, more likely to suffer abuse, twice as likely to drop out of high school, four times as likely to face poverty, and twice as likely to suffer from obesity.

We need fathers in the lives of their children, and we need them to be the best dads they can be. When a school pulls the rug out from under dads who are trying to do the right thing in the name of equality, it’s a slap in the face to them and to their daughters.

Even in a culture in which dads are increasingly absent, we see beautiful examples in which good men from the community or church step forward to fill the gap. A biological father isn’t the only man that can fill the role of a father at a dance or in our hearts, but the role will be filled in one way or another.  We must all work to make sure it’s filled well.

I am so grateful that my daughter has beautiful memories of getting dressed up and being showered with flowers, compliments, and attention by her proud father — my sweet husband — at her father-daughter dance. These are occasions where Dad teaches his daughter how a young man is supposed to treat her and provide her an example for how she should expect honorable men to respect her later in life. It’s an opportunity to set a high bar in showing her how it feels to be loved and honored, teaching her she deserves the best. I want that for every young woman in this country. It is something we should be fighting for instead of tearing down.

The transgender activists are foolishly attempting to eliminate gender from the equation of the natural world, where being male and female have deep meaning and unique responsibilities. Stripping males and females of their God-given, inherent gifts and talents has consequences far more reaching than postponing a father-daughter dance.

Men are constantly being told by leftists that they are not wanted, that their importance in the lives of women is overrated and, frankly, not needed.

That’s not true. We need men in this world to step up and be the men they are called to be, to be honorable and just and loving. We want them to fight for their daughters and for the women they love.  Yes, I have taught my daughter to be strong and self-reliant.  My husband, thankfully, has taught her that, as she considers a mate, life is sweeter with a man who will love her unconditionally and selflessly.  We need our daughters to know what it looks like to be respected and have a man treat them honorably. We want those fearless and courageous men to stand up for what is right and not be afraid of what the culture will say about them. The health of our daughters depends on them.

Editor’s Note: A version of this article was published by Fox News. Click here to view it.

Anita Hill is not Hollywood’s answer. Her ‘they all do it’ defense of Clinton doesn’t fly.

By | Blog, News and Events, Sexual Exploitation | No Comments

Aspiring actresses and Hollywood career women may have cheered when they heard Show Biz execs tapped Anita Hill to lead a sexual harassment commission examining issues of sexual misconduct and inequality in the entertainment industry.  As a former victim of an actual physical attack and attempted rape over 20 years ago, all I can say is, “I wish this was truly a win for women.”

Besides the obvious problem of Hollywood big wigs choosing to politicize this problem, the deeper issue is that Ms. Hill is not the advocate for whom women are looking, especially in an industry that is led by many clearly hypocritical men.  The women of Hollywood may have grown up learning about Anita Hill as a heroine, but as we’ve come – all too painfully – to learn, academia and media have painted a picture of her over the past quarter century that is conveniently divorced from reality.

Ms. Hill had the chance to stand up for numerous women who were being sexually mistreated by a powerful man. Instead she chose to defend that man and cast doubt on his accusers.  So much for every woman deserving to be believed.

During President Bill Clinton’s sexual misconduct scandals, Ms. Hill was interviewed by Tim Russert and Gwen Ifill of NBC News on Meet the Press.  They asked her directly about accusations made by Kathleen Willey, Paula Jones, and others. Her reaction would cause a great deal of shock today, and the women of entertainment need to know what she said then, because it affects how much confidence they should invest in her now.

Kathleen Willey, once an enthusiastic fundraiser for, and supporter of, Bill Clinton’s successful presidential campaigns, came to see him in the Oval Office. She was in financial trouble.  He chose this moment to assault her.  When asked about Willey’s accusations on Meet the PressMs. Hill dismissed them.

“We don’t have Ms. Willey claiming that this behavior was severe and ongoing, or pervasive enough that it became a condition of her employment. She’s not making that claim at all. And, in fact, no one has made that claim. She says in the deposition, I believe, that she was not given any particular favor at the White House because of this incident nor could she say that she suffered any disadvantage because of this incident.”

Russert pushed: “So, do we dismiss the president’s alleged behavior … because he backed off when he was told ‘no?’ It’s acceptable.”

Hill: “Well I’m not sure. I think that we have to evaluate it not on the basis of whether it’s sexual harassment, but evaluate it on the basis of what we would like to see in terms of the behavior and the moral decisions and judgments of the president.”

She then inexplicably launched into the “they all do it” defense, citing Presidents Kennedy and Johnson among others.

“I think the American public has heard so much about the sexual activities and the sex lives of these individuals, and we’ve sort of become cynical and said, ‘Well, if he did it, maybe that’s OK; they all do it.”

If you’re a woman in the entertainment industry – or any victim of sexual misconduct or physical assault – and you’re watching this or reading the transcript, it does not inspire confidence.  Quite the opposite, especially in light of the revelations about Harvey Weinstein and others.

Hill kept going and even more inexplicably compounded the “they all do it” defense with the now unfathomable double-standard reasoning that President Clinton should get a pass because … he’s a liberal and supports so-called “women’s issues.”  Sound familiar?

This is utterly ridiculous given today’s revelations. Before he was outed as a predator, Harvey Weinstein took a back seat to no one as a liberal advocate on what Hill referred to as “women’s issues generally.”

When Ms. Hill had the opportunity to step up and defend the powerless against the most powerful man in the world, her instinct was to defend him, because his politics happened to be liberal. Well, it’ll come as no shock to every woman in Hollywood that their town is replete with countless powerful men whose politics just happen to be liberal.

It doesn’t take a great intellectual leap to posit this is why, in all their insecurity (and condescension), the Hollywood moguls picked her to lead the commission in the first place.  If these leaders truly care about the women in their industry, they’ll find someone way better to lead this effort than Anita Hill.  As it stands, with Anita Hill at the helm, this effort must be viewed as unserious.

Editor’s Note: A version of this article was published by USA Today. Click here to read it.

Passing Tax Reforms Will Benefit America’s Working Families

By | Blog, News and Events | No Comments

As an organization with a long history of advocating for working families, we are pleased to see that Congress is on the verge of passing comprehensive tax reform legislation. Reform is long overdue and will benefit all Americans.

With Senate and House leadership negotiating what will ultimately be included in a final tax reform package, we urge them to take the best aspects of each of their bills to create a pro-investment environment where businesses can grow, innovation can flourish, and more Americans can get and keep good paying jobs.  The future economic prosperity of American families – especially the middle class – depends on it.

To help accelerate economic growth across the country, it is critical for the GOP leadership to lower the corporate tax rate as they are proposing and preserve interest deductibility.  Doing so will create the right incentives for U.S. corporations to invest the billions of dollars in new investments needed to create more jobs and improve America’s infrastructure.

We are encouraged that the Senate and House both recognize the importance of lowering the corporate tax rate to around 20 percent.  With respect to interest deductibility, both chambers rightly adopted “thin cap” approaches to maintaining interest deductibility, but with some differences.  And those differences will have a significant impact on economic growth.  The House approach provides companies with maximum flexibility to deduct interest on loans used to finance capital projects.  This will allow more investment, more innovation, and create more jobs.

Getting tax reform policy right for interest deductibility is critical, especially for much-needed infrastructure improvements and expansions in this country.  For example, the ability of companies to deduct interest paid on debt is what has helped broadband service providers make the multi-billion-dollar investments necessary to create and maintain today’s robust U.S. broadband ecosystem.

To support continued expansion of broadband infrastructure and spur economic growth across the country, it is going to require significant future investment in next-generation broadband networks and technology.  Accordingly, providing incentives for companies to invest new money in future capital projects, particularly broadband service providers, is critical to help ensure America’s global competitiveness for years to come, to create millions of good-paying U.S. jobs, to help companies – large and small alike – grow their businesses, and to provide more Americans with access to the Internet.

Moreover, access to high-speed broadband is a key component to strengthening the U.S. economy and making sure our children have access to a quality education that will enable them to compete for jobs in their field of study and succeed in a modern U.S. workforce. High-speed broadband is the lifeblood to unleashing innovation in numerous industry sectors across the broadband supply chain and creating a better life for all Americans.

Both the Senate and House have advanced extraordinary reform proposals, and we strongly support the bill.  On the important issue of interest deductibility, however, we believe the House bill strikes a better balance and will not inhibit investment in capital projects unnecessarily, thereby spurring investment in ultra-fast broadband networks, as well as our roads and bridges, and energy grid and waterways, while contributing greatly to economic growth.  This will improve commerce and help America’s working families build successful lives with jobs rooted in their local communities.

We’re excited about tax reform and what it means for the American economy.  It takes bold leadership and a strong will to turn big policy ideas into reality.  Thankfully, the Republican Congress is close to doing just that.

We urge both chambers of Congress to come to an agreement and pass a comprehensive tax reform package that President Trump can support and sign into law. Now is the time to get this done. America’s working families are counting on it.

 

 

Sexual Assault: A Free Pass for Congress?

By | Blog, News and Events, Sexual Exploitation | No Comments

Another one bites the dust – this time, “Today Show” host Matt Lauer, whose firing for “inappropriate sexual behavior” in the workplace was announced Wednesday morning. This comes only a week after rival morning show host Charlie Rose of CBS was fired for the same thing.

News reports indicate this is merely the beginning for women who have bided their time, suffered in silence and dealt with sexual harassment or worse in the workplace for decades. Now they are coming forward to finally obtain justice

Matt Lauer is only the latest to be fired from his high-profile job in recent weeks in Hollywood, the news media and elsewhere.

These men were in powerful positions, as were most of the men who have been outed for their gross mistreatment of women.  Predators prey on the weak, not the strong. The cockroaches scatter when the cleansing light illuminates darkness.

NBC, CBS, PBS, Netflix, Nickelodeon, Amazon Studios, Harrah’s New Orleans Casino, MSNBC, ABC, NPR, Fox News and Vox Media are just some of the companies that have moved swiftly to terminate relationships or positions where powerful men were accused of behaving badly towards women (or men, in the case of Netflix and Kevin Spacey).

But what about the U.S. Congress?

The Associated Press reports that “Congress has paid out more than $17 million in taxpayer money over the last 20 years to resolve claims of sexual harassment, overtime pay disputes and other workplace violations filed by employees of Congress.” There were 264 settlements and awards, but the Office of Compliance in Congress did not release a breakdown showing how many involved alleged sexual misconduct, the AP reported.

According to the law that created the slush fund, accusers must go through 90 days of dispute resolution, including counseling.

This is an atrocity and the names of members of Congress reaching settlements need to be released immediately. Congressional leaders can put their members through sexual harassment training all they want, but taxpayers deserve to know who exactly they have been covering for all these years and, further, we deserve restitution.

Who have the American taxpayers been protecting all these years?

Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich.,  has been credibly accused of sexual harassment, yet he is still in power. Sen. Al Franken, D-Minn., was pictured with his hands over the breasts of a sleeping woman. He gave a half-baked apology this week, and he has no intention of giving up his seat.

Meanwhile, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.,  called Rep. Conyers an “icon” this past Sunday on “Meet the Press” on NBC and had to quickly backtrack her remarks after realizing they were terrible.

But Pelosi is used to defending men who are Democrats and were caught in compromising positions: These are former Reps. David Wu of Oregon, Eric Massa of New York and Anthony Weiner  of New York, plus former San Diego mayor Bob Filner, and the late Sen. Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts.

Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, was in a consensual relationship but deserves a mention for the stupidity for appearing in nude photos.

Even when an ultra-feminist is in charge of her party in Congress, victims didn’t get a fair shake.  Professor Jonathan Turley calls this “transactional ethics,” meaning each party protecting their own. That’s just depressing.

We are still waiting.

Congress should follow the lead of the private sector. Transparency is necessary. The American people can mete out justice at the voting booth if we are told the truth.

How many more women need to come forward to tell their stories before Congress will act?

This Is Why Liberal Women Are So Angry

By | Blog, News and Events, Sexual Exploitation | No Comments

Watching the pitiful story of Harvey Weinstein unfold has been horrifying. The raw power the man wielded over those whom he had authority was surreal. The very fact that he sexually assaulted and possibly raped dozens and dozens of women over decades is almost unbelievable, but the reports surfacing all over the place claim that Weinstein’s actions were an open secret.

Yet because of his position of power over women — even very successful women — he was never held accountable for his crimes.

And still he groped women; he forced them into unwanted sexual situations, and he abused his position of power to degrees that are probably still unknown.

The kicker in this story is that Weinstein cavorted at award shows, fancy dinners, and big fundraisers with the very women he assaulted. He walked with feministsat the Women’s March in January in Park City, Utah. He donated $100,000 to Planned Parenthood last year. He raised millions of dollars for Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.

He not only paid off the women he assaulted in exchange for this silence, but he paid off, in the way of substantial monetary support, pro-abortion organizations, the Democratic political party, and candidates who have branded themselves as advocates of women.

Liberal women have been told for ages that Planned Parenthood has their backs, that Hillary Clinton would fight for them and their rights, and that the Democratic Party is the only party that will protect women, that cares for them with no judgement.

But where were all of these high-profile people when the Weinstein story broke?

Hillary Clinton took days to respond. The Obamas also took several days to release a statement. Both statements said nothing about the hundreds of thousands of dollars raised for their campaigns by the movie mogul. The Democratic National Committee announced they are only donating a small portion of Weinstein’s contributions — to groups that help elect Democrats and pro-choice women to office.

Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood, has been silent. Women’s March leaders have been tepid in their response.

Feminists have sought for years to break free from the grip of powerful men who take advantage of them, unfairly abuse their control, create impossible hurdles for women to clear to become successful, and then act like everything is all unicorns and rainbows.

Speakers at the Women’s March in January were angry. Ashley Judd, the first celebrity to go on record accusing Harvey Weinstein of gross sexual harassment, was a featured speaker at the Women’s March in Washington, D.C., and she was furious as she read a speech written by a 19-year-old titled “Nasty Woman,” a reference to a line from President Trump.

Liberal feminists put their trust in the very people who covered up criminal actions committed by powerful men over and over again. They were betrayed by a political party that put power over all else.

They were so angry over even the mere thought of paying for their own birth control that they trusted an abortion giant to protect them, one that claimed they aren’t even political, and yet took a ton of money from Harvey Weinstein and threw tens of millions of dollars behind the campaign of Hillary Clinton.

No wonder they are flaming mad.

Hollywood actresses, many of whom built their careers off of Harvey Weinstein’s film, were victims of powerful men and could do nothing without serious repercussions to their careers. (And, yes, I mean “men” — plural. Some reporters have intimated that other “Weinsteins” exist in the darker corners of Hollywood. And how could they not?)

Women’s rights isn’t about abortion. It’s about women getting out from under the thumbs of men exactly like Harvey Weinstein, Hugh Hefner, and no doubt many others who preyed on them, threatened them, and forced them to do horrible acts against their wills. And these same men are the ones claiming to fight for women’s rights, all the while paying those same female actresses less than their male counterparts.

This is why liberal women are so angry. They have every right to succeed because of their own talents and will and determination, but they have been lied to, betrayed, demeaned, and abused by an army of people who told them they were their supporters and advocates.

Editor’s Note: A version of this article was published by the Daily Caller. Click here to read it.

Undocumented pregnant teen seeking an abortion in Texas could set new legal precedents

By | Blog, News and Events, Sanctity of Life | No Comments

A court case bubbling up in Texas could have huge ramifications on both immigration and abortion in our nation. A 17-year-old was caught crossing the United States-Mexican border and was transferred, as is normal procedure, to the Office of Refugee Resettlement under the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. They took custody of the girl, who is pregnant, and have been caring for her and her unborn child.

Entering the drama is the leftist American Civil Liberties Union, who has gone to court to try to force the government to allow her to obtain an abortion. On whose dime the abortion would be provided, we don’t know. Various media reports have said pro-abortion organizations have raised funds to pay for the abortion, but that’s unclear.

A judge in California threw out the case, because it wasn’t in her jurisdiction. The ACLU refiled the case in Washington, D.C. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has said that undocumented immigrants have no constitutional right to abortion and that he does not want Texas to become a “sanctuary state” for abortion. Add to the mix that Texas has parental notification laws. Several states have already filed amicus briefs in support of Texas’ stance.

I’d agree as well.

There are numerous moral and legal issues to this case that must be addressed. First, the girl is a minor, and she was unaccompanied when she crossed the border. We don’t know where her parents are or anything about her family. She is legally under the custody of HHS, who are providing her with the care she needs and is not consenting to take her to have an abortion. It is also worth noting that HHS is actually caring for two patients (the mother and the unborn child). I am told by sources inside HHS that our government has offered to take her back to her home country where she and her parents can decide what to do.

Secondly, an illegal immigrant has no legal right to an abortion in this country. (Actually, there is no legal right to abortion under the Constitution, as the ACLU has argued, but that is another story.) If a court decides this young woman can come to the United States illegally and demand to have an abortion, what’s to stop anyone following her from doing the exact same thing?

And who is going to foot the bill for these abortions? Taxpayers? No way.

Abortion is not healthcare and should not be treated as such, no matter how loudly Planned Parenthood screams that it should be. They profit tremendously off of abortions, as does the entire industry and the elected officials behind whom they throw millions of dollars. There is nothing objective about abortion coming from the ACLU and their abortion-lobby buddies.

There is no question that this teenager is in a difficult situation. Whatever the backstory is, it can’t be pretty to have ended up how she did. But the United States, especially under a demonstrably pro-life president, has no reason to aid her in obtaining an abortion.

A court ordering HHS to take the girl for an abortion is an unreasonable demand on the conscience of the organizations helping the teen right now, taking care of her and her unborn baby.

The precedent for such an action, either voluntarily or by court order, could be the opening for taxpayer-funded abortions for illegal immigrants. There are plenty of good organizations in the country that care for teens just like this young woman, without the added burden of abortion to her life.

The Harvey Weinstein Scandal: Why Are So-Called Feminists Defending This Creep?

By | Blog, News and Events, Sexual Exploitation, Uncategorized | No Comments

Harvey Weinstein should go sign up for the dating website OkCupid and make sure he gets that pink ribbon on his profile, branding him a feminist and supporter of Planned Parenthood. The media mogul is the ultimate bro-choicer, an adoring donor to the Democratic Party, defended by some of the left’s most powerful women.

Weinstein has been accused in a lengthy New York Times story of doing some truly horrendous things to women, totally unsolicited − also known as sexual harassment − over a period of nearly three decades. His alleged victims were talented young actresses and other women who had the potential to build successful careers on their own without some ugly, creepy man coercing them into giving him a massage or worse.

But this is Hollywood, and the feminists are the women who defend creeps like Weinstein.

Anita Dunn, a close associate of President Obama who became his communications director for a time at the White House, has been reported to have counseled Weinstein after the allegations broke in the media.

Even more troubling is that celebrity women’s advocate attorney Lisa Bloom is representing Weinstein. This is a woman who has represented victims in high-profile sexual harassment cases. Throwing that legacy away, she agreed to represent Weinstein, whom she said she has counseled that “times have changed” and he “needs to evolve into a higher standard.” Really?

Bloom’s reasoning regarding Weinstein gets better, though: “He has acknowledged mistakes he has made. He is reading books and going to therapy. He is an old dinosaur learning new ways. He wants to reach out to any of the women who may have issues with him to talk to them in a respectful, peaceful way, with me present if that is acceptable to them.”

I hope Bloom has a better answer for the women who Weinstein is accused of sexually harassing and forcing to look at him half-clothed or with no clothes at all, with tears in their eyes, as he emotionally blackmailed them for sex.

But this is Hollywood. This is Hugh Hefner’s world. This is the liberal paradise of promoting equal rights and justice for women, yet defending the men who use them for their own satisfaction, discarding them for younger versions every year, and then complaining about it years later when the women finally have the courage to say “enough!”

This is not true feminism. Supporting men who tear down women for their own use, supporting free access to taxpayer-funded abortion so men can cover up their own conduct, and mistreating women for decades is nothing for women to get behind.

These powerful women, these self-proclaimed feminists, are only hurting women when they stand up for and promote men who proudly use their own power to harass and demean women.


Editor’s Note: A version of this article was published by Fox News. Click here to read it.

Yes, Hugh Hefner was a pioneer — in the objectification of women and the lie of the Playboy lifestyle

By | Blog, News and Events, Sexual Exploitation | No Comments

While many in the press are hailing Hugh Hefner as a pioneer in his day — championing abortion rights and breaking the shackles of an oppressive sexual culture — the man represented a lifestyle and business that was in no way, shape, or form helpful to women.

It is no surprise celebrities are tripping over themselves to praise the man who gave them a platform to become famous for stripping down to nothing. He will be buried next to Marilyn Monroe, the woman whose nude photograph he published in his first issue of Playboy.

Hefner indeed was a pioneer. He was the force behind the mainstream objectification of women, someone who paid them to take their clothes off and convinced them it was empowering to do so, using the same arguments pornographers use for the same goals.

The harmful effects of pornography are no longer secret. Pornography is violent and has been proven to lead to aggression against women — no surprise since the vast majority of the victims of violence in pornography are women.

Porn is everywhere and easily accessible which is different from the days when boys hid coveted copies of Hefner’s magazine under their beds. An astounding 90 percent of boys and 60 percent of girls have been exposed in some way to pornography before they turn 18. Over half of men look at porn frequently and, sadly, 50 percent of religious men say they are addicted to pornography.

In 2013 traffic to porn sites received more traffic than Netflix, Amazon, and Twitter combined.  According to WebRoot, porn increased marital infidelity by 300 percent, and a study published in Science magazine showed a direct correlation between consuming porn in marriage and a higher divorce rate. Hefner said he never cheated while married, but he confessed that “I had a lot of girlfriends, but it’s not the same as cheating.” And the breakdown of the American family continues.

Holly Madison, who lived in the Playboy Mansion, starred in a television show about her time there and was Hefner’s #1 girlfriend for a time, reveals she contemplated suicide while she lived with Hefner and his girlfriends. The glamourous life was a total lie.

Holly was only one of the many women who bought into Hefner’s lies and suffered the consequences of being bought and paid for.

While I never met Hefner myself, it is beyond my ability to comprehend how Hollywood views a man who walked around in pajamas all day, paid women for sex, brought the objectification of women into the mainstream culture, and became wealthy by creating a magazine for lonely men as some kind of a hero.

Girls, please. We deserve better than this.


Editor’s Note: A version of this article was published by Fox News. Click here to read it.

Planned Parenthood hooks up with OkCupid. Guess what this cynical partnership is really about?

By | Blog, News and Events, Planned Parenthood, Sanctity of Life | No Comments

It’s about time that Planned Parenthood got involved in the dating market. They have already reaped the benefits of profiting off of the sex toy industry, the genitalia-designed candy industry, and, of course, they make boatloads of money every year as the abortion industry’s leading provider. They have been missing out for years by not jumping headfirst into the online dating world.

But that has finally changed. The dating website OkCupid, which has admitted in the past to doing social experiments on their users, has partnered with Planned Parenthood.  Those who want to find a date on the website will have to answer this question: “Should the government defund Planned Parenthood?” If they answer in the negative, then a cute pink badge will appear on their profile photo along with the hashtag #IStandWithPP.

The partnership’s goal is to solve the problem of finding true feminists on the dating website. Because only true feminists support the right to end innocent lives in the womb. Whoops! Off-topic.

The meetings that preceded this partnership must have been entertaining. It probably went something like this: groups of young women lamenting over drinks about the lack of feminist men, or women perhaps, on online dating, and someone coming up with the brilliant suggestion to screen dating applicants on their support for the nation’s largest abortion provider. Brilliant.

It’s only sad that this idea hadn’t come sooner, because young women could have avoided the losers online who only wanted to hook up with them, maybe pay for their abortion, and move on to the next young thing.

Because, really, that’s what this partnership is about, finding those men who want to use women for unencumbered sex and walk away, no matter the consequences.

The better and more revealing question for OkCupid would be: “Would you support a woman you get pregnant and step up as a father, taking responsibility for the results of your actions?” Or, since 86 percent of most single Americans say they want to get married, what about, “Are you hoping to find a woman to love, marry and remain faithful to you for your entire life?” Those hashtags could have been way more enticing, like #realmen.

The Bro-Choice movement that began in 2013 −  yes, it’s a real thing − out of a Sarah Silverman idea, who probably loves OkCupid for this new partnership, because now they can figure out which girls have such low expectations and low self-esteem that they will require nothing from them.

Bro-choicer Ben Sherman railed against Texas legislation in 2013 that would ban late-term abortions in the state: “Your sex life is at stake. Can you think of anything that kills the vibe faster than a woman fearing a back-alley abortion? Making abortion essentially inaccessible in Texas will add an anxiety to sex that will drastically undercut its joys. And don’t be surprised if casual sex outside of relationships becomes far more difficult to come by,” (emphasis his).

Oh no! Less casual sex, more responsibility, less late-term abortion; better bring in Planned Parenthood to fix that problem!

Knowing Planned Parenthood, this partnership with OkCupid is probably the first of many relationships for the abortion giant. They could easily help further divide the nation by getting involved in partnerships with cell phone companies (have the abortion giant on speed dial just in case of pregnancy), and crayon companies (“pink” is now called “Planned Parenthood Pink”).

The opportunities to embarrass themselves are endless. As for women who want real men − men who take responsibility for their actions and protect women, instead of selfish (you insert the word) that exploit them − watch out for that pink badge. Those aren’t the men who will cherish women. Women deserve better.


Editor’s Note: A version of this article was published by Fox News. Click here to read it.

 

Let the Dogma Live Loudly

By | Blog, News and Events, Religious Liberty | No Comments

There are many issues on which Congress needs to quickly act – spending, disaster relief, the debt ceiling, health care, taxes – yet one key issue that bubbles under the surface is the long-term concern of nominating and confirming judges to federal benches. While many groups unfairly demand litmus tests for judges, one senator recently slammed an accomplished mother of seven, who happens to also be a Christian, imposing an unconstitutional religious requirement on her during a confirmation hearing.

Ironically, a talking point of liberals is that political parties need to do a better job of recruiting women to run for office or to assume public positions of influence. The Women’s March in January made this one of their big goals (well, that and taxpayer-funded abortion).

Yet, when conservative women do rise through the ranks, sacrificing family time, soccer games, and dinner dates, they get publicly slammed for their beliefs.

Why are smart, thoughtful, accomplished, faith-filled women who are also conservative such a threat to liberals?

Mother of seven and Notre Dame law professor, Amy Coney Barrett, was nominated to the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals by President Trump, which means she needs to be confirmed by the U.S. Senate. To Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., that means a prime opportunity to ridicule a woman who happens to adhere to her faith and be a nominee to a higher court.

This was her entire quote:

“Whatever a religion is, it has its own dogma. The law is totally different. And I think in your case, professor, when you read your speeches, the conclusion one draws is that the dogma lives loudly within you, and that’s of concern when you come to big issues that large numbers of people have fought for for years in this country.”

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., also claims to be a Catholic. She is an ardent abortion supporter who has been publicly called out by Catholic bishops for doing a horrible job of representing Catholicism. She’s also a friend of Sen. Feinstein. So, according to Sen. Feinstein, women of faith like Nancy Pelosi can be elevated to positions of authority, just not women who actually adhere to their faith.

An editorial in the Los Angeles Times even said that the senator crossed the line in her questioning of Barrett: “But she went too far in raising doubts about whether Barrett would allow her religious views to affect her rulings as a judge (particularly about abortion rights, Feinstein’s priority when it comes to judicial nominations).”

Rev. John Jenkins, the president of the University of Notre Dame, sent a letter to Sen. Feinstein in defense of Amy Barrett, essentially saying that the line of questioning was frightening: “It is chilling to hear from a United States Senator that this might now disqualify someone from service as a federal judge. I ask you and your colleagues to respect those in whom ‘dogma lives loudly’ − which is a condition we call faith.”

This line of questioning that Sen. Feinstein and her Democratic colleagues went down with Amy Barrett was shameful. Would they have done the same thing if the nominee was Jewish or Muslim?

Faith isn’t meant to be kept within the walls of a church or a synagogue. Faith − true faith − grips the heart and embodies the person who has accepted that great gift and has chosen to live it out in day-to-day life. Demanding faith be left at the door of one’s place of work is decidedly un-American, yet that is exactly what Sen. Feinstein did.

For Sen. Feinstein and others like her who are adamantly pro-abortion, the view that this supposed right of women needs to be upheld no matter what is a religion unto itself. And it is that religion that the senator deems a must-have for nominees to the judiciary.

Amy Barrett deserves to be confirmed. We need many more nominees like her who uphold the law, are constitutionalists, and adhere to their Christian faith.


Editor’s Note: A version of this article was published by The Washington Examiner. Click here to read it.

Feminists went all-out Mean Girls on Melania and Ivanka Trump

By | Uncategorized | No Comments

Feminists went all-out Mean Girls on Melania and Ivanka Trump, when a Newsweek piece called them out for — wait for it — wearing high heels.

I love a good pair of stilettos, block heels, wedge, you name it, but according to Nina Burleigh over at Newsweek, heels symbolize everything that is wrong with the Trump women. That’s quite a bridge to cross following any kind of logic, none of which exists in the piece.

In fact, it’s downright legit shoe shaming.

According to Ms. Burleigh, whom I picture as a sensible shoes kind of girl, stilettos are not in fashion.  That’s probably news to Jimmy Choo, Christian Louboutin, or any of the other top designers on 5thAvenue.  But so what either way?  If the Trump women enjoy wearing shoes that make them feel good, why berate them for their choices?

High heels were around long before Ms. Burleigh decided to go all puritanical on us.  Her article suggested that those dirty shoes appeared earliest on the feet of Italian prostitutes in the 17th century.  Actually, no, Persian horseback riders first used high heels in the ninth century to help keep their feet from slipping out of the stirrups. The Bata Shoe Museum in Toronto even showcases a 17th century Persian high heel.

And in the 1600s, King Louis XVI decided that red high heels would be a status symbol of nobility (plus, he was on the shorter side so the height helped him out).

While stiletto pumps are not for everyone and do require a certain amount of grace and stability on behalf of the women who dare to don a pair, many women wear them because they make women feel good and look good.  They can bring a certain air of power to women.  While the famous stiletto designer Christian Louboutin has been quoted saying that his work is geared towards pleasing men, women adore those red-soled heels.  Why? Because they look good, and women feel dressed up wearing them.  In fact, according to the Huffington Post, historically, in times of economic downturn, sales of bothlipstick and high heels go up.

So why does any of this have to be political in nature?  Imagine if a conservative writer wrote this piece about any shoe choice of Michelle Obama.  It would be the front-page headline.  Do feminists truly have nothing else to write about these days?

Even liberal women like Hillary Clinton, Cecile Richards, and Nancy Pelosi all wear high heels.  Ms. Burleigh would not dare to casually mention them in the same article as Italian prostitutes.  As much as Ms. Burleigh wants stilettos to reflect character, they do not, but being nasty about those wearing them does

This is just a catty way for a liberal woman to take a swipe at women who not only wear, but profit from, high heels.  Maybe she would change her mind if she tried on a lovely pair of Ivanka Trump shoes.  They not only look nice but are actually pretty comfortable.

Ironically, I first read the Newsweek piece while sitting in my podiatrist’s office.  I wasn’t there because of my stiletto habit, but rather one that stemmed from running (in running shoes).  Left-leaning women and women right of center have serious policy conflicts.  Fashion, Tom Ford aside, is wonderfully neutral.  Let’s keep it that way.

Google Is Holding Women Back

By | Blog, News and Events | No Comments

It is not a surprise to anyone that there is a dearth of women employed in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics) jobs.  Recently, my sixteen-year-old son attended a week-long engineering summer camp.  Upon his return, he said that out of about 25 kids, only three were girls.  The question is, “Why?”  Is it nature or nurture, or some combination of the two?  The discussion of this rages everywhere except, apparently, in the place it most honestly should be addressed: Google.

This issue was highlighted by two recent events: Google’s firing of James Damore, the author of an internal Google memo that went viral, titled, “Google’s Ideological Echo Chamber,” in which he critiqued Google’s diversity programs. The second is the story of a brewing lawsuit by women at Google alleging pay discrimination.

Damore was fired on the grounds that the memo touted women’s biological attributes as something that keeps them from being successful in tech fields. He has been accused of being against diversity and perpetuating gender stereotypes.

A closer examination of the 10-page memo revealed little more than a mixed statement, albeit long, of opinions and facts. Is it controversial? Perhaps some of it, but so what?

At the end of the day, there is a gender gap in tech. The vast majority of people on both sides of the political spectrum want to see it reduced. Ivanka Trump and Secretary of Education, Betsy DeVos, have made it clear that supporting women in STEM fields is a priority of theirs. It makes sense – female voices in matters of medicine, computer science, and engineering are crucial to creating effective service for half of the American population. (When, oh when, is a woman going to take a crack are redesigning mammograms? But I digress.)

The illusive question: “How do we bring more women into the STEM?” There is not a simple answer to that question, and there will surely not be any conclusions if major companies freely fire their employees just for sharing their opinion in answer to that very question.

Google spent over $265 million in the past few years to try to fix their “diversity” problem and recruit more minorities, including women. The result? Absolutely no change in the percentage of women employed at the company. Something didn’t go well. Maybe it’s because the company has been systematically underpaying women. They are currently embroiled in a lawsuit filed by the U.S. Department of Labor on this very issue, and 60 women may take legal action for discrimination.

This controversy aside, it is inexcusable (and illegal) that someone should be fired from their job because they stated their opinion and specifically disagreed with the arbiters of political correctness. This is viewpoint discrimination, and it was ruled as a violation of the First Amendment by the Supreme Court in Rutan v. Republican Party of Illinois in 1990.

But here is an idea, maybe better pay would increase the number of female employees as well as job satisfaction. Instead, Google has set a frightening precedent by firing Damore and revealed an even more pressing question: “Why should we be afraid of this conversation?”  This is a necessary discussion and one that strong, confident women are not and should not be afraid to address and discuss.

Google has done a disservice to themselves by firing Damore for exactly that which he was critiquing them: “a culture of shaming and misrepresentation.” Why is the culture of Google so restrictive and authoritarian that no ideological dissent can be allowed?

But far more detrimental, Google has done a disservice to women by shutting down an important dialogue about ideas such as nature vs. nurture and everything else that goes into the cause of a gender gap in tech.

Do they view women as snowflakes incapable of taking in other’s opinions, digesting them logically, and refuting them gracefully? Are we so fragile that controversial opinions surrounding the gender gap must be shut down and those voicing them fired?

As a woman, I am not offended by Damore’s memo. However, I am offended by Google feeling the need to shield us from an opinion that they believe we are apparently too weak to handle.

How paternalistic.  Articles regarding pay inequity at Google make one wonder if all this diversity “training” isn’t smoke and mirrors to distract from the real issues.  If, indeed, the company with all their big talk about diversity is simply not paying women equally, then we may have uncovered the crux of the issue.  Ping pong tables, massages on site, and even childcare can’t make up for a good paycheck.  All their moralizing is tedious and pretentious.

This entire sordid story is, however, instructive to the bigger picture.  Honest dialogue is important so that this crucial question can be answered, and the next generation of women can increase their presence in the STEM fields in an organic manner. There is one thing all women can agree on — women want to advance their careers because of hard work and achievement, not because of pity handouts. Silicon valley could take the hundreds of millions sunk into sensitivity training, increase pay, and achieve far more diversity in their work force.  Just pay women what they deserve, and fire sexual predators who behave as if they are in a frat house instead of work.  It doesn’t seem that complicated. Shutting down debate isn’t the answer.

Editor’s Note: A version of this article was published at The Daily Caller.

 

Do Transgender Rights Trump Women’s Rights? The Left Needs to Decide

By | Blog, Defense of Family, News and Events | No Comments

As the Left have attempted to stake their claim as the only group who represents and cares about women, they have also managed to simultaneously stab these same women in the back, betraying the very essence of their femininity and steamrolling over the uniqueness of the sexes in order to elevate their own agendas.

The debate over the role of transgendered individuals (people who identify as one gender but have the anatomy of another), has risen again in recent weeks, with President Trump’s declaration that transgendered individuals will no longer be able to serve in the military. It will no doubt continue to be a hot debate as the culture wars rage on. The issue of gender dysphoria is real and painful and we must have love and compassion for them.

But I fear they are being politically and monetarily used as the Left, always looking for a new group to exploit, opens new fronts in the culture wars.  Feminists should wonder, however, that if we reconstruct male and female to sixty-three and growing definitions, who is protected and who is hurt? Does this new idea of no binary definition of gender displace and demean the hard fought and won accomplishments of women?

I think yes. Consider the issue of women’s sports. When men are allowed to compete as women, women lose no matter how hard they work.

Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 was crafted to ensure that female athletes were not left out of sports and created a level playing field which encouraged excellence in competition. Congress and feminists understood that boys and girls are physiologically different and that boys vs. boys and girls v. girls was fair because of basic biological and hormonal differences.

Title IX has nothing to do with character, power, or intelligence.

Fast forward to 2016, when a boy identifying as a girl qualified for the Alaska State Championships in the 200-meter dash, displacing a female athlete for third place. The senior competed against girls as young as freshmen. Hardly fair.

In June of this year, a boy identifying as a girl was allowed to compete on the female high school track team in Connecticut and was lauded for placing first in two races. His time would have placed him last in the same races in the boys division.

Colleges offer sports scholarships for both genders based on high school accomplishments. But now, these scholarships have the potential to be monopolized by boys in both male and female categories.

Last month, it was announced that for the first time since all combat roles were opened to women in December of 2015, there are two female candidates in the Navy SEAL and Special Warfare Combatant-Craft Crewman program (SWCC) programs.

This watershed moment for women in the military has the merit to stand alone, but instead, the news story went on to undercut the success of these two women by saying that, in fact, the first woman to join an elite Navy force could be a transgender woman who came out in 2016.

Sports titles have been stripped from women, and military achievements by women are being given to men, but surely women can maintain their right to privacy and their respect as child-bearers, right? Wrong.

The women’s bathroom is no longer a secure place for women and children to go for privacy. Security is not so narrow as to imply only physical safety, it also encompasses emotional safety. The women’s bathroom is a place where women are vulnerable. To have a man present, no matter his self-perception, compromises that vulnerability. Talk about a need for safe spaces.

As if this is not enough, the Huffington Post highlighted a transgender individual holding a sign that read, “Periods are not just for women” while flaunting blood-stained pants between spread legs. If not so horrifying and disrespectful, it would be comical. Of course, periods are just for women and most of us have more dignity than to flaunt them for a political stunt.

By using a woman’s menstrual cycle, which indicates her unique role as a foundational creator and nurturer of life, these activists betray women and use her for cheap political props. This is an attack on a woman’s amazing biological ability to bear and give birth to children.

This is gender appropriation – stealing something precious that distinctly belongs to women, demeaning it, and distorting its purpose. Historically, women have fought to defend and protect their position and authority within society. Our spaces and institutions have value and therefore deserve respect and protection from encroachment of the entitled Left.  The emperor has no clothes and our pretending otherwise only degrades women.

President Trump to Reverse Transgender Military Policy

By | Defense of Family, News and Events, Press Releases | No Comments
Washington, D.C. – Today President Trump tweeted that after meeting with his Generals and military experts that transgender individuals would no longer be serving in any capacity in the U.S. Military. This reverses a policy which had previously been instated by the Defense Department under the previous administration in which the United States Federal Government was projected to pay millions of dollars in gender-reassignment surgeries.

Read More