Thursday, October 15, 2009
Casino addiction behind Western Kentucky million dollar swindle
Gambling advocates often tell us about all the good casino gambling will do for the economy. It's all sunshine and lollipops until we read a story like the one that broke yesterday in the Kentucky New Era. Eighteen Christian county residents lost a million dollars to a woman who gambled nearly $770,000 away at casino Aztar in Indiana, making clear what casino gambling can do for a local economy. At least its clear to the 18 residents who got scammed. To read more go to: http://www.kentuckynewera.com/articles/2009/10/15/news/free/doc4ad60ad13e3d9193750387.txt
Tuesday, October 6, 2009
UK "Sex Week" sponsor promotes violence against women, group calls on UK to disassociate itself
LEXINGTON, KY—The sponsor of University of Kentucky's "Sex Week" sells "Bondage Fantasy" sets and handcuffs on its website, a fact that has prompted a state family advocacy group to ask how this works into one of the week's themes: protesting violence against women.
"We wonder how organizers of an event that's supposed to discourage violence against women justify promoting a group that considers handcuffs and whips 'bedroom accessories,'" said Martin Cothran, senior policy analyst with The Family Foundation. "What's next from UK, demonstrations against racism sponsored by organizations that sell white hoods?"
"For just $29.95, you can get everything you need from the sponsor of UK's 'Sex Week' to pretend you are beating up and humiliating women. If there's something about this that discourages violence against women, we'd like to know what it is. UK needs to disassociate itself from this as quickly as possible."
Among the many events at UK's "Sex Week"—which includes bellydancing lessons, "poetry slams" and “Tupperware” parties for sex toys—is a march down Lexington's Main Street that calls on male students at UK to wear women's high heel shoes as a way of protesting violence against women. "Maybe they should also wear the wrist and ankle restraints sold by the sponsor of their event," said Cothran. "That'll show 'em."
The primary sponsor of "Sex Week" is Pure Romance, Inc., which sells the "Beginner's Bondage Fantasy Set" ($29.95), as well as a whip for $14.00, handcuffs for $15.00, and the "Vanilla Bondage Set" for $12.00, which features ties that have "a loop at each end so they can easily be threaded on or off arms or legs, and are long enough to reach the leg posts of your bed."
"We wonder how organizers of an event that's supposed to discourage violence against women justify promoting a group that considers handcuffs and whips 'bedroom accessories,'" said Martin Cothran, senior policy analyst with The Family Foundation. "What's next from UK, demonstrations against racism sponsored by organizations that sell white hoods?"
"For just $29.95, you can get everything you need from the sponsor of UK's 'Sex Week' to pretend you are beating up and humiliating women. If there's something about this that discourages violence against women, we'd like to know what it is. UK needs to disassociate itself from this as quickly as possible."
Among the many events at UK's "Sex Week"—which includes bellydancing lessons, "poetry slams" and “Tupperware” parties for sex toys—is a march down Lexington's Main Street that calls on male students at UK to wear women's high heel shoes as a way of protesting violence against women. "Maybe they should also wear the wrist and ankle restraints sold by the sponsor of their event," said Cothran. "That'll show 'em."
The primary sponsor of "Sex Week" is Pure Romance, Inc., which sells the "Beginner's Bondage Fantasy Set" ($29.95), as well as a whip for $14.00, handcuffs for $15.00, and the "Vanilla Bondage Set" for $12.00, which features ties that have "a loop at each end so they can easily be threaded on or off arms or legs, and are long enough to reach the leg posts of your bed."
###
Monday, October 5, 2009
Bellydancing Toward Gomorrah
There are many things parents make sure their daughters pack when they're getting ready for college: clothes, toiletries, towels, and laundry soap. But parents sending their daughters to the University of of Kentucky might think about adding one more item to the list: a chastity belt.
This week is "Sex Week" at the university. According to the Lexington Herald-Leader, the main aim of organizers is "sexual literacy." That's right. Today's college students apparently don't know enough about sex. If you didn't get that memo, don't worry, neither did we.
The organizers of "Sex Week" are apparently under the impression that our culture is prudish about sex. We should all try to remember that the next time we're treated to a television commercial for "masculine enhancement"--or the next time we find ourselves unconsciously humming the chorus to "Viva Viagra!"
But the organizers of "Sex Week" have a solution to this problem that is not really a problem: Tupperware parties for sex toys and performances of the Vagina Monologues.
That's right. And then there is Jonas Hans, UK assistant professor of Family Studies, and faculty adviser of "Sex Week," who is apparently UK's answer to Dr. Ruth: "Sexuality," he tells Alessi, "is something much broader than just sex. We love the tease of talking about sex," added the grim Dr. Hans, "but we don't like to talk about it openly and honestly and seriously." Yes, we must get more serious about sex, which is why Sex Week features ...
Bellydancing classes.
This scientific approach to the subject of sex involves getting "in tune with your body’s fluidity and sensuality" through "belly-flaunting and hip-moving." Or you can attend the "Poetry slam," where you can participate in "sexually and sensually-charged creativity flows."
Why is it that you get the idea that the people who put these things on wear tie dye t-shirts and beads, burn incense, and give their children names like "Rainbow," "Moon Beam," and "Sunflower"?
And then there is the event in which men (and I use that term here loosely) will walk down Main Street in women's heels to protest violence against women. No doubt the spectacle will drive the gorillas who actually perpetrate such violence weeping repentantly into the streets--that is, if they don't fall over laughing.
I mean, if you're going to trivialize sex, you might as well trivialize violence against women too.
This week is "Sex Week" at the university. According to the Lexington Herald-Leader, the main aim of organizers is "sexual literacy." That's right. Today's college students apparently don't know enough about sex. If you didn't get that memo, don't worry, neither did we.
The organizers of "Sex Week" are apparently under the impression that our culture is prudish about sex. We should all try to remember that the next time we're treated to a television commercial for "masculine enhancement"--or the next time we find ourselves unconsciously humming the chorus to "Viva Viagra!"
But the organizers of "Sex Week" have a solution to this problem that is not really a problem: Tupperware parties for sex toys and performances of the Vagina Monologues.
That's right. And then there is Jonas Hans, UK assistant professor of Family Studies, and faculty adviser of "Sex Week," who is apparently UK's answer to Dr. Ruth: "Sexuality," he tells Alessi, "is something much broader than just sex. We love the tease of talking about sex," added the grim Dr. Hans, "but we don't like to talk about it openly and honestly and seriously." Yes, we must get more serious about sex, which is why Sex Week features ...
Bellydancing classes.
This scientific approach to the subject of sex involves getting "in tune with your body’s fluidity and sensuality" through "belly-flaunting and hip-moving." Or you can attend the "Poetry slam," where you can participate in "sexually and sensually-charged creativity flows."
Why is it that you get the idea that the people who put these things on wear tie dye t-shirts and beads, burn incense, and give their children names like "Rainbow," "Moon Beam," and "Sunflower"?
And then there is the event in which men (and I use that term here loosely) will walk down Main Street in women's heels to protest violence against women. No doubt the spectacle will drive the gorillas who actually perpetrate such violence weeping repentantly into the streets--that is, if they don't fall over laughing.
I mean, if you're going to trivialize sex, you might as well trivialize violence against women too.
In fact, why not have marchers wear the wrist and ankle restraints and whip that are part of the "Beginner's Bondage Fantasy" set sold by Pure Romance, Inc., the main sponsor of UK's "Sex Week"?
That'll show 'em.
But let's give the organizers of "Sex Week" some credit here. After all, they will be showing a film on sex researcher Alfred Kinsey, an actual scientist who in the 40s and 50s gave the leaders of the sexual revolution the statistics they needed to bring down traditional social norms and sexual restraints.
Of course there's not much of a chance the film will tell UK students about the fact that 25 percent of Kinsey's data sample was made up of prison convicts and male prostitutes.
Such revelations might interrupt someone's sensually-charged creativity flow.
But while Dr. Hans' goal is to get serious about sex, the other, seemingly conflicting goal of "Sex Week" is to enhance the romantic appeal of sex. Now in a culture in which university students are confronted with preachy condom demonstrations, HIV tests, and sermons from "health education coordinators" (I'm thinking Ben Stein should play this role in the movie version), why would sex lack any romantic appeal?
On second thought, maybe the chastity belts won't be needed. It could be that "Sex Week" organizers will succeed in making sex either so sterile or so trivial that no one will want to bother with it any more.
Martin Cothran is senior policy analyst with The Family Foundation of Kentucky.
Thursday, September 3, 2009
When Judges play God
In 2008, American Atheists filed a lawsuit against the state claiming they suffered sleeping disorders and "mental pain and anguish" because the Kentucky Office of Homeland Security recognized "the safety and security of the Commonwealth cannot be achieved apart from reliance upon Almighty God."
Well, they can finally get some rest. Last Wednesday, Franklin Circuit Judge Thomas Wingate struck down the part about relying on God, which leaves legislators and the rest of us wondering who we should now rely on.
"This is the very reason the Establishment Clause was created: to protect the minority from the oppression of the majority," Wingate wrote in his 18-page opinion.
Even if this was true, who is to protect the majority from the tyranny of the minority?
The trouble with Wingate's ruling is that it has no basis in our history. According to our founding political document, the Declaration of Independence, our nation is predicated on the idea that law comes from God. Law does not originate in people. Nor does it reside with special groups who clothe themselves in black robes, even if they might confuse themselves with the Almighty.
Like the Office of Homeland Security, the Declaration states, "With a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor." So if it was good enough for Thomas Jefferson and the other 55 signers to firmly rely on God, why is it so wrong with Kentucky acknowledging that our protection comes from God as well?
To be consistent, atheists and sympathetic judges ought to take on the preamble to the Kentucky Constitution and the Latin motto which was enacted in 2002. Then again, consistency seems to be in short supply these days. The official Latin motto is "Deo gratiam habeamus." It means "Let us be grateful to God" and finds its basis in the Preamble of the State Constitution which says, "We, the people of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, grateful to Almighty God for the civil, political and religious liberties we enjoy, and invoking the continuance of these blessings, do ordain and establish this Constitution."
Wingate justifies his ruling by applying the First Amendment to this case, but such application is foreign to our history. The First Amendment was enacted to keep Congress from imposing a national church. It was not originally applied to states; some had state-sponsored churches into the early 19th century. It was not until the 1947 Everson ruling that the First Amendment was applied to individual states.
Sponsor of the Homeland Security provision, State. Rep. Tom Riner (D-Louisville), responded to the charge that the language establishes a religion. "They make the argument ... that it has to do with a religion, and promoting a religion," Riner said. "God is not a religion. God is God."
At a very basic level, Wingate's actions violate the separation of powers and usurp legislative authority. Legislators legislate. Judges are supposed to apply the law. Legislators hammer out public policy openly and consider public input. Judges render decisions privately with or without regard to public input. By striking down the legislature's action without a firm basis in history or precedent, Wingate shifted the balance of power in his favor as other unaccountable judges have done for decades. This judicial activism is an undemocratic way of going about the Commonwealth's business. By the way, when was the last time the legislature told a court it was wrong?
There are 32 references to God in state statutes and the constitution. The question is: who should decide how and when we acknowledge God – the people through their legislators, or judges who sometimes confuse themselves with God?
Well, they can finally get some rest. Last Wednesday, Franklin Circuit Judge Thomas Wingate struck down the part about relying on God, which leaves legislators and the rest of us wondering who we should now rely on.
"This is the very reason the Establishment Clause was created: to protect the minority from the oppression of the majority," Wingate wrote in his 18-page opinion.
Even if this was true, who is to protect the majority from the tyranny of the minority?
The trouble with Wingate's ruling is that it has no basis in our history. According to our founding political document, the Declaration of Independence, our nation is predicated on the idea that law comes from God. Law does not originate in people. Nor does it reside with special groups who clothe themselves in black robes, even if they might confuse themselves with the Almighty.
Like the Office of Homeland Security, the Declaration states, "With a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor." So if it was good enough for Thomas Jefferson and the other 55 signers to firmly rely on God, why is it so wrong with Kentucky acknowledging that our protection comes from God as well?
To be consistent, atheists and sympathetic judges ought to take on the preamble to the Kentucky Constitution and the Latin motto which was enacted in 2002. Then again, consistency seems to be in short supply these days. The official Latin motto is "Deo gratiam habeamus." It means "Let us be grateful to God" and finds its basis in the Preamble of the State Constitution which says, "We, the people of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, grateful to Almighty God for the civil, political and religious liberties we enjoy, and invoking the continuance of these blessings, do ordain and establish this Constitution."
Wingate justifies his ruling by applying the First Amendment to this case, but such application is foreign to our history. The First Amendment was enacted to keep Congress from imposing a national church. It was not originally applied to states; some had state-sponsored churches into the early 19th century. It was not until the 1947 Everson ruling that the First Amendment was applied to individual states.
Sponsor of the Homeland Security provision, State. Rep. Tom Riner (D-Louisville), responded to the charge that the language establishes a religion. "They make the argument ... that it has to do with a religion, and promoting a religion," Riner said. "God is not a religion. God is God."
At a very basic level, Wingate's actions violate the separation of powers and usurp legislative authority. Legislators legislate. Judges are supposed to apply the law. Legislators hammer out public policy openly and consider public input. Judges render decisions privately with or without regard to public input. By striking down the legislature's action without a firm basis in history or precedent, Wingate shifted the balance of power in his favor as other unaccountable judges have done for decades. This judicial activism is an undemocratic way of going about the Commonwealth's business. By the way, when was the last time the legislature told a court it was wrong?
There are 32 references to God in state statutes and the constitution. The question is: who should decide how and when we acknowledge God – the people through their legislators, or judges who sometimes confuse themselves with God?
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
Another report from one of our higher reeducation camps (a. k. a. our colleges and universities)
Mary Grabar describes her experience as an adjunct English professor trying to teach, like, English--which is now apparently declasse in our higher re-education camps:
I’m an adjunct English professor. When the subject of adjunct faculty comes up, the predictable calls for unionization and “social justice” are often voiced by my tenured colleagues enjoying light teaching loads and by administrators enjoying comfortable salaries overseeing “multicultural” programs. But I know that I would not be among their intended beneficiaries were they made aware of my political views.Read the rest here.
It’s not that I sought to be political when I returned to school in the 1990s to earn my Ph.D. I soon discovered, however, that political neutrality—even in literary studies—is suspect. In the academic world, the belief that great literature conveys universal, timeless themes is generally taken as evidence of an imperialistic outlook. The same holds for history, where the reliance on factual evidence and focus on major events are deemed offensive to women and those from non-Western cultures.
My fellow graduate students tailored their programs for the job market: studying African-American and gay writers, and applying the trendy postmodern, deconstructivist literary theories. Since 2002, when I earned my Ph.D. in English, the field has gotten even stranger, with such additions to the ideological postcolonial, African-American, and critical theory courses as “fat studies” and “trauma studies.” An upperclassman can enroll in “Introduction to Visual Rhetoric”—and then presumably in “Advanced Visual Rhetoric.” But how does my study of Plato and Cicero prepare me to teach these classes? ...
Monday, August 24, 2009
University of Kentucky scores a "C" on its core curriculum in national report
For Immediate Release
August 24, 2009
The University of Kentucky received a grade of "C" from a national organization that monitors what colleges and universities teach. In its report, "What Will They Learn?" the American Council of Trustees and Alumni gave it a mediocre rating on its general education requirements, and specifically criticized its natural science requirement because it could be met my taking courses which didn't teach natural or physical sciences.
"That a school attempting to be a 'Top Twenty Research School' would have a weak general education requirement in science is pretty pitiful," said Martin Cothran, senior policy analyst with The Family Foundation of Kentucky.
"No credit given for Natural or Physical Science," said the report of UK, "because the Natural Sciences requirement may be satisfied by courses from anthropology, political science, and psychology; and the College Laboratory or Field Work Experience requirement includes courses from the social sciences."
While crediting UK for its requirements in composition, language, and math, the report docked the state's flagship educational institution for week requirements in literature, U. S. government/history, economics, and science.
The report evaluated whether 100 major institutions require seven key subjects. "What we found is alarming," said the report's authors. "Even as our students need broad-based skills and knowledge to succeed in the global marketplace, our colleges and universities are failing to deliver."
The report comes during the same month that UK earned a lower ranking in the U. S. News and World Report national university rankings for the third straight year, falling from 112 in 2007, to 122nd in 2008, to 128th in 2009.
August 24, 2009
The University of Kentucky received a grade of "C" from a national organization that monitors what colleges and universities teach. In its report, "What Will They Learn?" the American Council of Trustees and Alumni gave it a mediocre rating on its general education requirements, and specifically criticized its natural science requirement because it could be met my taking courses which didn't teach natural or physical sciences.
"That a school attempting to be a 'Top Twenty Research School' would have a weak general education requirement in science is pretty pitiful," said Martin Cothran, senior policy analyst with The Family Foundation of Kentucky.
"No credit given for Natural or Physical Science," said the report of UK, "because the Natural Sciences requirement may be satisfied by courses from anthropology, political science, and psychology; and the College Laboratory or Field Work Experience requirement includes courses from the social sciences."
While crediting UK for its requirements in composition, language, and math, the report docked the state's flagship educational institution for week requirements in literature, U. S. government/history, economics, and science.
The report evaluated whether 100 major institutions require seven key subjects. "What we found is alarming," said the report's authors. "Even as our students need broad-based skills and knowledge to succeed in the global marketplace, our colleges and universities are failing to deliver."
The report comes during the same month that UK earned a lower ranking in the U. S. News and World Report national university rankings for the third straight year, falling from 112 in 2007, to 122nd in 2008, to 128th in 2009.
###
Friday, August 21, 2009
UK drops for 3rd straight year in national rankings
For Immediate Release
August 21, 2009
Contact: Martin Cothran
Phone: 859-329-1919
The University of Kentucky dropped in the U. S. News and World Report ranking for the third time in three years according to the magazine's newly released national rankings. "The three-year slide is bad enough," said Martin Cothran, senior policy analyst for the Family Foundation of Kentucky. "This report points out some problems the University of Kentucky needs to address."
The university went from 112th in the nation in 2007 to 122nd in 2008. This year it dropped further to 128th in the nation. Cothran pointed to a simple comparison with other SEC schools (excluding Vanderbilt), a comparison many Kentuckians would find familiar, that showed where the university needed to put its attention:
August 21, 2009
Contact: Martin Cothran
Phone: 859-329-1919
The University of Kentucky dropped in the U. S. News and World Report ranking for the third time in three years according to the magazine's newly released national rankings. "The three-year slide is bad enough," said Martin Cothran, senior policy analyst for the Family Foundation of Kentucky. "This report points out some problems the University of Kentucky needs to address."
The university went from 112th in the nation in 2007 to 122nd in 2008. This year it dropped further to 128th in the nation. Cothran pointed to a simple comparison with other SEC schools (excluding Vanderbilt), a comparison many Kentuckians would find familiar, that showed where the university needed to put its attention:
- Diversity Index Rank: Worst
- Average Freshman Retention Rate Rank: Lowest
- Average Alumni Giving: 2nd lowest
- Fall 2008 Acceptance Rate: 2nd highest
- Average high school GPA: 2nd worst
- Cost of room & board: Worst
- Classes with fewer than 20 students: 2nd lowest
- Classes with 50 students or more: 3rd highest
- 6-year graduation rate: 2nd lowest
###
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
