Rush Limbaugh believes he has put his finger on why many people would struggle to see that a young boy’s life is more valuable than a gorilla’s.
The conservative radio talk show host dedicated a large segment of his Tuesday program to discussing the controversy created at the Cincinnati Zoo after the staff made the decision to shoot the 400-pound gorilla, named Harambe, in order to save the boy, who had fallen into its habitat area.
Video of the incident shows Harambe both appearing to care for the boy and treating him very roughly, dragging him around the enclosure.
Limbaugh points out that the gorilla did nothing wrong: It was not his fault the young child managed to fall into the animal’s space. The boy cannot be held at fault either, so neither was to blame.
The commentator explained an unmistakable fact seen in the video is that no zookeeper was going to be able to take the boy away from the gorilla, and the longer the child stayed in the animal’s area, the more likely he would be seriously hurt or killed.
The zoo’s staff feared firing a tranquilizer dart into Harambe would likely anger the animal and take a period of time to take effect, putting the boy in even more jeopardy.
The choice, however disconcerting, was clear: put the gorilla down. Limbaugh observed that this decision should not be difficult for people to grasp, but based on the strong response online to killing the animal, it was.
The talk show host offered a reason why some people found such a moral dilemma in the choice, acknowledging it may make some “uncomfortable to hear it.”
“But in this case there are people who think that gorilla’s life mattered more. In a country with whatever million number of abortions every year, I mean, you can’t factor that out in understanding how people would have problems placing value on which life counts most here,” he said.
Limbaugh also pointed out that for many on the left, “humans are the cause of everything going wrong on earth,” from climate change to animal suffering.
“By definition, these people cannot be familiar with Genesis, and if they were, they would dissociate themselves from it,” stated Limbaugh. “They have absolutely no such training, foundation, or awareness of the primacy of humanity on planet Earth as created by God. Such a mindset does not exist with them. It’s the exact opposite. Humanity is the problem.” (For more from the author of “Limbaugh Explains Why Many Believe a Gorilla’s Life More Valuable Than a Boy’s” please click HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/maxresdefault-67.jpg7201280Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2016-06-02 02:49:252016-06-04 23:47:30Limbaugh Explains Why Many Believe a Gorilla’s Life More Valuable Than a Boy’s
The African-American woman who leads a state chapter of the ACLU has resigned, citing her own daughters’ “frightened” reaction to biological males using the women’s restroom.
The organization’s increasing focus on legislating the transgender lobby’s concerns pushed Maya Dillard Smith, interim director of the Georgia chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union, to tender her resignation.
“I have shared my personal experience of having taken my elementary school age daughters into a women’s restroom when shortly after three transgender young adults, over six feet [tall] with deep voices, entered,” she wrote.
“My children were visibly frightened, concerned about their safety and left asking lots of questions for which I, like many parents, was ill-prepared to answer,” she continued.
In a statement, she said that the ACLU has become “a special interest organization that promotes not all, but certain progressive rights.” (Read more from “State Leader Quits ACLU After Daughters Were ‘Visibly Frightened’ by Men Using Women’s Restroom” HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/toilet-942100_960_720.jpg720960Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2016-06-02 02:20:442016-06-05 00:09:24State Leader Quits ACLU After Daughters Were ‘Visibly Frightened’ by Men Using Women’s Restroom
The Hillary Clinton email investigation is entering a critical phase. The FBI has already interviewed some of Mrs. Clinton’s key aides when she was secretary of state and reports have said they will soon be interviewing Mrs. Clinton herself. At this juncture, it’s not a question anymore of whether any crimes were committed, because it has been well reported that Mrs. Clinton’s reckless use of a private email server and her gross mishandling of classified information was criminal behavior. I believe that what the FBI is really honing in on now, or should be examining, is the revolving-door State Department access that Mrs. Clinton gave her top donors and closest friends.
When the FBI interviews Mrs. Clinton and her aides, they will be able to question her about both the substance of the emails and the use of the private email and server. With respect to the substance of the emails, there has been plenty of focus on the classified ones, but there are also several that pose very serious ethical challenges.
From granting special access to Mrs. Clinton’s campaign and Clinton Foundation donors, to assisting her son-in-law’s business contacts, there are numerous examples demonstrating quid pro quo. Here is a look at some of the emails that my organization, the Foundation for Accountability and Civic Trust, have documented in this area:
• Hillary Clinton intervenes for son-in-law Marc Mezvinsky: On Aug. 22, 2012, Mrs. Clinton acted on a request from her son-in-law, Marc Mezvinsky, for the State Department to assist one of his business contacts that also had ties to a Clinton Foundation donor. This apparent special access to the State Department was given based upon relationships with Mrs. Clinton’s family members and Clinton Foundation donors.
• Billionaire George Soros’ access to the State Department: On May 12, 2012, Neera Tanden, a longtime Clinton confidante and president of the Center for American Progress, emailed Mrs. Clinton to tell her that George Soros, billionaire activist and major Clinton Foundation donor, said he was “impressed” with the level of access he had to Mrs. Clinton at the State Department.
• Clinton Foundation and the Red Cross: Clinton Foundation donors getting preferential treatment wasn’t the only arena in which foundation and State Department business overlapped. A Jan. 19, 2010 email from Mrs. Clinton to chief of staff Cheryl Mills recommended that the State Department work with the Clinton Foundation and the Red Cross on an education initiative for Haiti. As grounds for her recommendation, she noted that the foundation and the Red Cross have “Unencumbered $.” Mrs. Clinton’s motives may have been pure, but she should have been conscious of the conflict of interest posed by actively pushing the department to work with the foundation.
• Hillary Clinton gives former chief campaign consultant special access: Mrs. Clinton’s political allies also enjoyed special access. Her longtime pollster and chief consultant on her 2008 presidential race, Mark Penn, emailed Mrs. Clinton on Feb. 22, 2010, demanding “why no one called” him to help get corporate sponsors for the Shanghai Expo, an event Mrs. Clinton was deeply involved in at the time. Mrs. Clinton thanked Mr. Penn and forwarded his email to an aide, Kris Balderston, who set up a call with Mr. Penn for the following day. Days later, Mr. Balderston reported back to Mrs. Clinton in an email listing major corporations, including Boeing, Citi and Blackstone, that had agreed to provide financial support for the Shanghai Expo.
These emails demonstrate a disturbing narrative with the way Mrs. Clinton handled State Department business. If someone wanted access to her, they needed to be a top donor to her campaigns or philanthropic efforts. This is not the kind of treatment offered to ordinary citizens.
I know FBI Director James Comey. He is a competent, ethical person, and I am confident he will do the right thing in this case. The challenge, though, is that he can only make a recommendation to the Department of Justice about whether or not to bring a case against Mrs. Clinton.
The decision to bring a case ultimately rests with the Justice Department. It’s a decision the department cannot and should not be able to make, especially after it was reported this week that Hillary Clinton received almost $75,000 in political contributions from Justice Department employees, the most given to any of the current presidential candidates by Justice staff.
Furthermore, I am not sure Attorney General Loretta Lynch has the fortitude to oppose President Obama, who has publicly said Mrs. Clinton’s behavior didn’t put our national security at risk. In fact, the Obama administration recently stated that Hillary is qualified to be president, with White House spokesman Eric Schultz saying Mrs. Clinton “comes to this race with more experience than any other non-vice president in recent campaign history.”
Secondly, in a Fox News interview earlier this year, she wasn’t forthcoming about her role in the decision to prosecute the case. When asked if she was the one who would ultimately decide whether to prosecute Mrs. Clinton, Ms. Lynch answered, “It depends.” The fact that the one person who will ultimately make the decision about an indictment evades routine questioning clearly demonstrates that this administration has shown no ability to be impartial with this investigation, as they have looked the other way at every turn. For this reason, I am renewing my call for the appointment of a special counsel in this case.
We are supposed to be a nation of laws, not citizens who feel they are entitled to disregard them. That was the foundation upon which our country was built. In the coming weeks, we will find out if those principles hold true in this case. (For more from the author of “I’m Guessing That the Days of the Clinton Crime Family Are Numbered” please click HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/maxresdefault-68.jpg7201200Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2016-06-02 01:39:182016-06-05 00:00:41I’m Guessing That the Days of the Clinton Crime Family Are Numbered
The Commonwealth of Massachusetts jumped on the transgender bathroom bandwagon Wednesday when its House of Representatives voted 116-36 to move forward with a bill that legally replaces the concept of biological sex with that of gender identity.
The “Gender Identity Public Accommodations Bill,” or H.4343, seeks to further push for transgender “anti-discrimination” laws in three separate parts.
First, it would amend multiple areas of Massachusetts law to replace the word “sex,” with “gender identity.” Secondly, it would mandate that “[a]ny public accommodation…shall grant all persons admission to and the full enjoyment of such public accommodation or other entity consistent with the person’s gender identity,” while finally ordering the the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination to amend rules and policies to comply with the redefinition of sex to gender identity.
“We are doing the work the founders of our nation intended for us to do,” said co-sponsor Byron Rushing of the bill prior to its passage. “This is a great day for us and we should be very proud.”
“This is a historic day for Massachusetts,” reads a statement from pro-transgender group Freedom Massachusetts. “The wave of legislative activity #TransBillMA has seen in the last two months is the culmination of a decade-long fight to fully protect transgender people from discrimination in the Bay State.”
Others, however, were not so convinced of the law’s merit.
“This legislation takes rights away from 99.9% of the population,” said Rep. James Lyons of Andover (R), who voted against the measure. “Every parent that I have spoken with including a parent of a transgender child understands that this bill eliminates long held expectation of privacy and protection for children.”
“This is a collision of rights. Rights in conflict,” continued Lyons in his emailed statement to Conservative Review. “I have yet to see how changing the law to remove what is currently on the books helps anyone.”
Final vote on passage was delayed by a nearly five-hour round of debate over at least 36 proposed amendments which some likened to a Senate filibuster. The amendments in question included, among several others, provisions to which would have excepted facilities primarily used by minors, such as public school bathrooms and locker rooms, one that would have required proof of medical transition for individuals to use facilities that do not coincide with their biological sex, and one which would have exempted multiple use facilities, “where there is an expectation of privacy” among occupants, from the bill.
Only one of the amendments, a technical rewrite of section 2 of the bill, was adopted.
When debate on the bill began in the early afternoon, Lyons gave an impassioned speech on the House floor against the bill to a response of thunderous applause from the gallery, arguing that it was unnecessary due to the fact that transgender individuals are already protected from discrimination under current law.
“Based on my review, this is a medical issue. How does allowing the use of the bathrooms and locker facilities solve a medical issue and furthermore how does this law achieve the goal of eliminating discrimination?” reiterated Lyons in his statement to CR. “It appears both United States Supreme Court and the Massachusetts Supreme Court have provided guidance that transgender people are protected under existing statutes. MCAD is enforcing current laws. GLAAD states that transgender people are protected. So what is the issue? The issue is should we as legislators eliminate privacy rights and protection for our children.”
The bill, which has already passed in the Massachusetts Senate, now heads to Governor Charlie Baker’s desk, where it will likely receive his signature for final passage.
“We’ve certainly listened to a variety of points of view from many sides and have said, from the beginning, that we don’t want people to be discriminated against,” said the governor in an interview with the Boston Globe on Tuesday. “If the House bill were to pass in its current form, yeah, I would sign it.”
But while the Bay State has passed legislation in line with the recent cultural and legislative push to legally replace biological sex with experienced gender identity, other states are fighting back against it.
Currently, a total of 13 states across the country have banded together in filing a federal lawsuit against the Obama Administration’s recent 25-page letter that all but mandates transgender bathrooms in public schools nationwide.
“Our local schools are now in the crosshairs of the Obama administration, which maintains it will punish those schools who do not comply with its orders. These schools are facing the potential loss of school funding for simply following common sense policies that protect their students,” stated Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton at the announcement of the lawsuit last week.
Furthermore, in a statement released Tuesday, Texas Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick (R) announced that his office would be sending a letter to school districts throughout the state instructing them not to comply with the federal bathroom mandate.
“The President’s threat of withholding federal funds is just a threat. By standing together we will demonstrate Texas will not be threatened or blackmailed by a policy that doesn’t make sense and puts our girls and women at risk.”
Following the announcement of the Administration’s proposed guidelines in May, Patrick accused the President of extortion due to the implied threats that public schools which do not comply could lose federal funding.
“He says he’s going to withhold funding if schools do not follow the policy,” Patrick said a few days after the Administration’s mandate was issued. “Well, in Texas, he can keep his 30 pieces of silver. We will not yield to blackmail from the president of the United States.”
“So Barack Obama, if schools don’t knuckle down to force girls showering with boys and force 8-year-old girls to have to endure boys coming into their bathroom — he’s taking money from the poorest of the poor. The president of the United States will be ending the free breakfast and free lunch program — that’s what he’s saying.”
A conference committee will convene in the coming weeks to reconcile the differences between the differences between the House and Senate versions of the Massachusetts bill. (For more from the author of “Massachusetts House Overwhelmingly Passes Bill to Abolish Biological Sex” please click HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/274475502_1280x720.jpg7201280Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2016-06-02 01:22:032016-06-04 23:37:56Massachusetts House Overwhelmingly Passes Bill to Abolish Biological Sex
Tim Allen knows all too well that former President Bill Clinton has a wandering eye. As Western Journalism reported, Allen claimed Clinton was “eyeballing” his wife the entire time the trio were talking the first time they met.
But now, it seems, someone may need to keep a close watch over Clinton while he’s at his wife’s campaign rallies.
A photo has surfaced on social media which purportedly shows the former president in a full-on embrace and kiss with an equally elderly woman. The caption reads “Bill Clinton kissing my grandma’s friend…Uh.”
The photo comes just a week or so after allegations surfaced Donald Trump had been accused of kissing women on the mouth. As Western Journalism reported, hosts of ABC’s The View equated an unwanted kiss by Trump with sexual harassment, a criminal activity.
While Trump hasn’t suffered through impeachment hearings over his philandering, the former president certainly has, and a string of women have accused him of rape and sexual harassment. Which is one of the reasons many Hillary Clinton’s critics say there’s no place for the former president and his wife in the White House.
Trump has already started attacking the Clintons over Bill’s sexual misdeeds. Trump said in January, “She’s got one of the great women abusers of all time sitting in her house, waiting for her to come home for dinner.”
Hillary’s cover-ups, alleged payoffs and settlements with accusers, and Bill’s sexual sins will most likely be themes Trump will continue to use all the way up until the general election for president in November.
And with the latest photo of the former president kissing his way to a return to the White House, Trump may not have to look far for ammunition to use against the Hillary Clinton campaign for president. (For more from the author of “Bill Was Just Caught on Camera Doing Something That Will Make Hillary Furious” please click HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/292201955_1280x720.jpg7201280Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2016-05-31 00:30:462016-06-04 23:42:15Bill Was Just Caught on Camera Doing Something That Will Make Hillary Furious
Shortly after the failed al-Qaida “underwear bomber” plot to massacre 290 passengers on a Christmas Day flight to Detroit, President Obama scolded the nation’s intelligence community for failing to “connect the dots” . . .
But Obama’s words were not only dispiriting to Haney and many of his DHS colleagues, they were filled with wicked irony.
Just before the Christmas Day attack, Haney had been ordered by his superiors at DHS to delete or modify several hundred records of individuals tied to designated Islamic terror groups from the important federal database, the Treasury Enforcement Communications System (TECS).
These types of records, Haney explained, are the “dots” that enable DHS Customs and Border Protection officers to see patterns that could pose a threat to the nation’s security . . .
As Haney explains in his new, revelatory book “See Something, Say Nothing: A Homeland Security Officer Exposes the Government’s Submission to Jihad,” the order to scrub the records came even after the trial of an Islamic charity exposed the vast Muslim Brotherhood network in the U.S. and its stated aim, according to FBI evidence, to “destroy Western Civilization from within.” (Read more from “DHS Agent: Obama Erased My Intel, Then Scolded Me” HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/8403802474_f593ae3964_b.jpg6831024Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2016-05-30 23:26:182016-06-05 00:14:01DHS Agent: Obama Erased My Intel, Then Scolded Me
Former Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney has been relentless in his attacks on the integrity of Donald Trump.
A article in Politico quotes Romney saying, “I know that some people are offended that someone who lost and is the former nominee continues to speak, but that’s how I can sleep at night.”
The former Republican nominee went on to relay a conversation he had with his son, where he was asked, “When the grandkids ask ‘What did you do to stop Donald Trump?’ what are you going to say?’”
Despite his opposition to Trump, Romney has confirmed he will not run for president as a third-party candidate. “I made it clear I’m not running,” he said.
He also stated he will not vote for Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton in the November general election.
According to an NBC news article from March, Romney, speaking on Meet The Press, called Trump “anything but presidential.” He vowed he would vote; however, his vote would be cast for a candidate who he believes is a real conservative and someone people can be proud of, adding, “and I may write in a name if I can’t find such a person.”
In a speech Romney delivered to a crowd at the University of Utah, he said, “Let me put it plainly, if we Republicans choose Donald Trump as our nominee, the prospects for a safe and prosperous future are greatly diminished.
“First, the economy: If Donald Trump’s plans were ever implemented, the country would sink into a prolonged recession,” he said. Romney pointed Trumps plan to impose a 35 percent tariff-like penalty which he says would only serve to instigate trade wars, increase consumer prices and kill export jobs.
Romney reminded the listeners of some of Trump’s failed business ideas, such as Trump Airlines, Trump University and Trump Magazine, to name a few. “A business genius, he is not,” he said. (For more from the author of “Mitt Romney Explains His Reasons for Opposing Donald Trump for President” please click HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/Mitt_Romney_at_2012_CPAC-1.jpg14671884Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2016-05-30 02:18:252016-06-04 23:40:52Mitt Romney Explains His Reasons for Opposing Donald Trump for President
On May 13, the Obama administration sent a letter to public schools on the topic of transgender students and where they use the restroom. But the directive, issued as “significant guidance,” didn’t just apply to the bathrooms. It also entered the space of locker rooms, showers, dorms, overnight hotels, and other places you might not expect. Watch the video to see The Daily Signal break down where exactly the Obama administration’s bathroom directive applies, and where it doesn’t.
(For more from the author of “What Obama’s Bathroom Directive Really Does” please click HERE)
Rep. Rick Allen, Georgia Republican, created quit a stir on Capitol Hill when he pulled out a Bible passage and began reading, as a way of showing fellow Republicans they ought to be ashamed for backing a spending bill that included language upholding a President Obama-backed ban on government contracts absent LGBT equal rights’ protections.
Specifically, Allen read a passage about the sin of homosexuality – and his fellow Republicans reportedly responded by walking from the room in disgust.
“It was f—ing ridiculous,” said one Republican lawmaker, who had been in the room at the time of the reading and who had supported the LGBT measure backed by Obama, the Hill reported.
Allen read the passage during the GOP’s regular policy meeting in the basement of the Capitol, with apparent attempt to shame those lawmakers who, just hours earlier, had passed the spending bill containing the LGBT protections.
“A lot of members were clearly uncomfortable and upset,” an aide to one Republican leader said, the Hill reported. (Read more from “Bible Reading by Republican Spurs GOP Walkout” HERE)
Actor Elijah Wood is clarifying comments he made to a London newspaper this week suggesting that sexual abuse of child actors is more common than people think. After the interview drew international attention, Wood released a statement saying that he wasn’t talking about his own personal experience.
Let me be clear: This subject of child abuse is an important one that should be discussed and properly investigated. But as I made absolutely clear to the writer, I have no firsthand experience or observation of the topic, so I cannot speak with any authority beyond articles I have read and films I have seen.
Even though Wood wasn’t talking about himself, there are other child actors who didn’t escape Tinseltown unscathed. One former child star, Corey Feldman, has come out in support of Wood’s comments that “there is darkness in the underbelly” of Hollywood where there are “a lot of vipers” and “people who have only their own interests in mind.”
Feldman, who starred in “The Goonies,” “Stand by Me,” and the A&E reality series “The Two Coreys,” knows what Wood is talking about. In the past, he has described how he was preyed upon by men in the industry. His co-star, late actor Corey Haim who died in 2010 of a drug addiction, was just 11 when a man raped him on a movie set.
Speaking to The Hollywood Reporter, Feldman talked about how he missed his friend, opened up about the “dark side” of Michael Jackson that led to their estrangement, and warned of the “growing, not shrinking” dangers of predators in Hollywood “where adults have more direct and inappropriate connection with children than probably anywhere else in the world.”
While most people read about such things and cringe, there is a movement today to normalize pedophilia. That’s right. After the passing of same-sex marriage (and even before), pedophiles came out of the dark corners where they usually hid and demanded that their “sexual orientation” be recognized too. Pedophilia rights became a small but vocal movement on the Internet. Media latched on to this normalization of deviancy and began publishing columns sympathetic to pedophiles.
The New York Times, for example, published an op-ed saying that anti-pedophilia laws are unfair to pedophiles. “One can live with pedophilia and not act on it,” said Margo Kaplan, an entrepreneurial assistant law professor at Rutgers University. Tragically, the op-ed says, the roughly one percent of “people who are sexually attracted to children must hide their disorder from everyone they know—or risk losing educational and job opportunities, and face the prospect of harassment and even violence.”
This push for pedophilia tolerance soared to a whole new level when Salon published an article last year by Todd Nickerson, a self-reported pedophile who asked for people to be tolerant of his sexual “preference.”
I’ve been stuck with the most unfortunate of sexual orientations, a preference for a group of people who are legally, morally and psychologically unable to reciprocate my feelings and desires. It’s a curse of the first order, a completely unworkable sexuality, and it’s mine.
Throughout the post, Nickerson describes his “sexual orientation” as an “alternate sexuality” and an “affliction.” He doesn’t seem to know quite how to categorize it, but one thing he does want is acceptance and tolerance. He says there are many pedophiles who have never touched a child, but they need and want to have the courage to come forward and “claim this affliction with the understanding that they only want to use their pedo powers for good.” This, he says, should be “commended, not hated and feared.”
For better or worse—mostly worse—we have this sexuality, and unlike with most sexualities, there is no ethical way we can fully actualize our sexual longings.
So, please, be understanding and supportive. It’s really all we ask of you. Treat us like people with a massive handicap we must overcome, not as a monster. If we are going to make it in the world without offending, we need your help. Listening to me was a start.
While Nickerson merely asks for tolerance, others of his ilk want more, demanding that their sexual orientation be recognized as legitimate. Even Nickerson, despite his plea for tolerance, still “normalizes” his sexual attraction to children by describing it as his “sexuality” (not his deviancy) and a mere “preference” (not sick fetish) for a group of people who can’t respond to him in kind (not innocent children). His feelings are treated as legitimate simply because they’re his feelings. The concept of sin or immoral thoughts and passions never enters the discussion.
This is how we slouch our way into Gomorrah. We first blur the lines between normalcy and deviancy as we focus on feelings not truth; then we demand tolerance for those suffering such an “affliction”; next we redefine it into something it’s not; then we demand acceptance and tolerance; and finally we become convinced that this deviancy deserves rights even if those “rights” violate the actual rights of others.
While many who are concerned about the safety and welfare of children praised Wood for shining a light into the dark corners of Hollywood, that light might quickly fade as the broader culture is drifting toward more tolerance of all sexual predilections, no matter how abnormal, simply because of people’s feelings.
Subjectivity has replaced objectivity, leading us toward the tyranny of relativism — a dystopian existence where the will of the strongest rules over everyone else, forcing us to abandon all common sense, logic, and morality for whatever the most powerful deems acceptable and valid.
Once a society abandons all standards of objective truth, replacing reason, natural law, and morality with subjective feelings, we are awash in chaos. Up is down, bitter is sweet, and good is evil. No society can be sustained when reason has been abandoned for madness. Sadly, this is the course America is on.
People like Nickerson and others who want their feelings affirmed and accepted as legitimate are seeking comfort instead of truth. They would do well to remember the words of C.S. Lewis, who wrote, “If you look for truth, you may find comfort in the end; if you look for comfort you will not get either comfort or truth, only soft soap and wishful thinking to begin, and in the end, despair.” (For more from the author of “As Elijah Wood Exposes Pedophilia in Hollywood, society Is Moving to Embrace It” please click HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/5976224637_062856bcbc_b.jpg6831024Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2016-05-29 21:30:462016-06-04 23:49:53As Elijah Wood Exposes Pedophilia in Hollywood, society Is Moving to Embrace It
