Back in 2017, a 14-year-old girl signed a record deal. Just days after her 18th birthday, she set up a profile on a porn site and made a huge amount of money in just a few hours. How can people not find this to be extremely disturbing? Is it not obvious that the wheels were in motion for her to be selling her naked body online when she was far too young to be legally doing that? Most girls who turn 18 in March are seniors in high school. Should our culture be celebrating the “right” of high school girls to be selling naked pictures and videos to adult men who may be decades older than she is?
Monday – Harvey Weinstein is a raindrop in the ocean
Wednesday – Treating face masks like ceremonial religious garb
Friday – Reducing interactions with the police
Following up on Thursday’s newsletter, two things can be true at once: Wright would be alive today had he not been a violent felon, and the police officer who mistook her gun for a Taser showed egregious incompetence and should be prosecuted for criminal negligence. Neither fact negates the other.
Conservatives are right to be concerned with the liberal bias of Big Tech. I have criticized silly censorship policies of both Facebook and Twitter, as well as the moderation practices of the local newspaper’s comment section. But if we insert the federal government into social media moderation policies, we could be creating a much bigger problem down the road.
First, alternatives exist. While some conservatives were alarmed at Twitter’s decision to forbid the National Archives from preserving Donald Trump’s posts there, we are talking about the federal government here. There is no barrier to an entity with a $4.8 trillion budget from building a website to preserve the posts for the historical record. An archive of the President’s posts on Twitter will be preserved.
Here is a policy proposal: Decriminalize the murder of children up to one year old. After all, infants are not fully self-aware yet and if they can be euthanized painlessly there is no reason to burden parents who decide they do not want to continue raising a child. Denying parents this choice would be needlessly authoritarian. Who are we to tell parents that they must be responsible for this thing for another 18 years or more? We should allow parents to make their own choices about their reproduction.
Note: That was sarcasm.
For decades, it was illegal for someone to buy cigarettes until the age of 18. Many states (including Arkansas) have passed legislation to make it illegal to sell cigarettes to anyone under the age of 21. A teenager cannot walk into the supermarket or drug store and legally purchase cold medicine. The age of consent in Arkansas is 18 years old. So why should anyone under the age of 18 be permitted to take hormones to radically alter their body chemistry or (even worse) have their genitals surgically mutilated?
Monday – Transgender “health care” and emotional blackmail
Wednesday – Protecting the innocent is not authoritarian
Friday – Tread carefully on social media censorship
The letter to the editor defending Kamala Harris misses the mark by a lot. First of all, it makes no logical sense to discount the Washington Post as a source because you do not like a particular writer’s opinions. There is not one thing he reported about what Kamala Harris said that is not true, so dismissing him reeks of desperation. Here is a direct link to the CNN report he referenced.
Yes, Kamala Harris absolutely did undermine public trust in public health officials. She claimed they would be muzzled, suppressed and sidelined. So to claim that Harris “uttered not one sentence” questioning anyone other than Trump is simply not true.
The Bloomington City Council has begun the process of distributing grants to local social service agencies. It is virtually guaranteed that Planned Parenthood will apply for a handout.