Monday, August 31, 2009

What is CNN scared of?

CNN first called my husband last week about wanting to do a live interview with him, to which he agreed. However, due to the death of Senator Ted Kennedy, the interview was postponed. In the meantime, my husband did a live radio interview with Alan Colmes, as well as a few others, in all of which he came out on top and the hosts all flustered and mad.

Suddenly, when CNN got back to my husband, they now only wanted to do a pre-recorded interview, from which they (by their own admission) wanted to take clips. My husband declined, reiterating that he was only interested in doing a live interview that would not be cut into soundbites and taken out of context. At that point, CNN backed out.

You can watch this clip of my husband talking about that.

I pity anyone who watches CNN and actually believes it. They said on air that they have confirmed that Pastor Anderson was investigated by Secret Services.

This is simply a lie. We have not been contacted by ANY government officials. I guess CNN thought it would make their story more credible if they made it sound like what my husband preached was borderline illegal when it wasn't.

How do the people at CNN take their job seriously? Why would anyone want to be a dishonest failure, no matter how much money they were paid?

Our plans this week

Originally, we were going to start school today, although in the back of my mind I had always entertained the option of starting next Tuesday instead. I like the old-fashioned idea of starting the day after Labor Day, but then again, there is always the possibility that I could get pregnant again soon, in which case a 9-month pregnancy and a 9-month school year would go together very well, rather than having to take a baby break and then do school for another month or two to finish out the school year. Hence the decision to start today.

But, that was before the events of the last two weeks. I really do not know why people are suddenly so outraged by my husband's preaching, since it has been the same since we started the church. He preached against President Bush just as harshly, a fact that the liberal media has failed to acknowledge, choosing instead to label him as a right-wing Republican (which my husband is not) and a racist (which he is also not). Personally, I am not all that bothered by the phone calls, hate mail, and death threats, and there have literally been thousands of these. I believe in what my husband is doing, and am certain that God can protect us in any situation. Always carrying a gun also helps. :) I also wanted to clarify that none of us were interrogated/interviewed/visited by Secret Services. We have never met them or talked to them. CNN made up that lie to give their story credibility, and to make it seem like my husband was doing something borderline illegal. CNN also edited Chris, the Black gentleman who goes to our church and brought his automatic rifle to an Obama demonstration (it was all over the national news a few weeks ago), to make him appear like a White supremacist. Figure that one out.

In order to give the kids a break, and to make it a fun family time, I have decided to not start school until next week, after all. This gives me a chance to tie up some loose ends around the house. I will post later this week about my final curriculum choices, what is new this school year, etc.

A new blog

Due to the recent influx of traffic to my blog, I have started a new, private blog that is open to invited readers only.

IF you have been a regular reader of this blog, and IF I feel like I know you from previous comments/emails/personal contact, and IF you would like to be invited, please leave me a comment with the email address that you would be logging in from. Your comment will not be published as to not make your email public.

I will continue to post on this blog as well, but there will no longer be personal information and/or photos.

Edited to add: I cannot invite you unless you send me your email address. Also, since Blogger will only allow a total of 100 readers on a private blog, I am just "collecting" email addresses this week and not adding many, in case there are more requests than that and I have to chose by priority.

Also, I had to rename this blog since the new, private blog took the original name. Sorry for the confusion. This is still a work in progress.

Edited to add (9/4): Thank you for the many requests to be added as readers to my blog. There were about a dozen requests that forgot to include their email address, without which it is impossible for me to send an invitation to our private blog. If you sent a request and have not yet been invited, this may be why.

Also, due to the many requests from faithful readers, I will "mirror" my personal blog somewhere else when I exceed the 100 invited readers (which I am close to) so I will not have to turn anyone down just for that reason.

Friday, August 28, 2009

Court-ordered Cesareans

In keeping with my last post - have you ever thought about what happens when an expectant mother and her physician disagree about what course of medical interventions are necessary? What if the doctor wants to do a Cesarean, and mom thinks it is unnecessary? I mean, we do KNOW that 1 in 3 women do NOT need to have major abdominal surgery in order to deliver their baby. What if the mother does not want to be sliced open and risk her life and health and that of the baby just to fit the doctor's schedule better?

Wonder no more. Just search Google for the term "court ordered cesarean sections" and you will read one bizarre case after another. While such cases are certainly the exception and not the norm, it is not because courts are not all too happy to order them, but because most Moms in labor cave in long before the issue becomes a legal matter. 90% of requests for court-ordered Cesareans are granted, and the majority of those within a matter of hours.

There have been cases of doctors being deputized by the local sheriff over the phone so the doctor would then legally be able to apprehend the mother before she could leave the hospital against medical advice. Court proceedings are usually held right in the labor room, with court-appointed attorneys representing the unborn child and no such representation for the mother.

Some good books that deal in part with this subject are "Pushed" and "Born in the USA".

This is such a complex issue because no legislation in the world can ever ensure both the mother's autonomy to make decisions concerning her health care, and the baby's well-being. If it the government's job to make sure women take proper care for their unborn children, where would the line be drawn? What about mothers with unhealthy habits such as smoking/drinking? What about those who do not eat enough during pregnancy because they worry about their figure? What about women in the workforce who may not be getting enough rest or proper nutrition?

This leads to the logical inconsistency of rulings such as that of the Utah Supreme Court, that the state's criminal homicide statute applies to unborn children at all stages of development, yet exempts the killing of a fetus during an abortion. And while the decisions in Roe v. Wade clearly state that the unborn are not human persons, and imply no ethical duty on anyone to rescue them, contradictory legislation has been passed. A new federal law signed by President Bush on April 1, 2004, makes it a separate and distinct federal crime to end the life of a fetus—defined as “a member of the species [H]omo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb”— during a violent attack on the mother. Here again, though, prosecution is specifically excluded when a legal abortion is performed. Pregnant women in South Dakota who abuse alcohol or other drugs now face involuntary detention in treatment facilities, and a law in Wisconsin allows juvenile court judges to intervene on behalf of the unborn to detain and restrict the liberty of such mothers. In 2003, Regina McKnight, a homeless drug addict with an IQ of 72, who abused cocaine during pregnancy and whose child was stillborn, lost a bid in the United States Supreme Court to reverse her conviction. She is now serving a 12-year prison sentence for homicide.

Certainly, as a Bible-believing Christian, I have no doubts whatsoever that aborting an unborn child at any time is murder, and should be punished as such. But I find it ridiculous that the abortion crowd do not seem to see the difference between somebody who intentionally wants to kill their child and somebody who does not want to "treat" a real or perceived medical issue the way the doctor sees fit. God causes the child to grow in the womb, and He knows a lot more about it than the doctor. No doctor in the world would ever have as much loving concern for an unborn child than its mother who has been looking forward to meeting her child. There is a big difference between intentionally killing somebody and situations taking their own, natural course, between somebody who wants to harm their child and somebody who wants to protect it the way they see most fit. No mother has ever refused a Cesarean because they wanted their child to die, but because they wanted what they thought was best for him/her.

Personally, I would most certainly seek the best available medical options to ensure the health and wellbeing of my children, but that decision should ultimately be mine and mine only to make.

Following are some cases to get you thinking. There is not doubt whatsoever in my mind that if you are enjoying a low-risk pregnancy, midwife-attended home birth is the best choice because you as the mother are respected, and the decisions and responsibilities are left in your hands.


Angela Carder struggled with cancer since the age of 13. After years of remission, in 1987 she decided to get married and have a baby. From conception, Ms. Carder made it perfectly clear to her treating obstetrician at George Washington University Hospital: she wanted to be sure her own health was not compromised because of her pregnancy. Sadly, during the 25th week of her pregnancy, she was diagnosed with a lung tumor. Her doctors said that the baby was too premature to have a good chance of survival, and that she would have to wait until her 28th week. Fully knowing the increased risks to her pregnancy, they agreed on a treatment schedule of chemotherapy and radiation to prolong her life. When her condition deteriorated the next day, it never even occurred to her doctors to intervene in an attempt to save the fetus.

Ms. Carder lapsed into unconsciousness. Her parents, husband and medical team all agreed that she would not have wanted any intervention, but the hospital administrators disagreed. The hospital was concerned because the fetus was potentially viable, so it petitioned the court for an order to determine what was best for the fetus. The hasty hearing at the hospital focused only on the fetus’ chance of survival. The court ordered that she be given a Caesarean section and a staff obstetrician grudgingly agreed to perform the surgery, because her treating doctors refused. In the meantime, Ms. Carder came to and was informed of the court ordered cesarean by the staff obstetrician. When she was told that she might die from surgery, Angela Carder said over and over, “I don't want it done.” Despite this, a quickly assembled panel of the appeals court upheld the lower court’s decision, and the hospital charged forward with surgery, against the patient’s clearly expressed wishes.

The baby died within two hours of delivery, and Angela Carder lasted another two days. There is no doubt that the surgery hastened her death.


Washington, D.C. - 1986

A 19-year-old college student was admitted to labor and delivery at 1:45 a.m. experiencing normal contractions; her membranes had ruptured two days earlier at noon. By 11:00 a.m. she was 7 cm dilated but had made no further progress by 10:30 that evening. Because an external electronic fetal monitor was attached, she had to lie in bed, on her left side, for extended periods of time. When she asked to be allowed to walk around to help with her natural delivery, she was advised that hospital regulations and city statutes required her to remain in bed on the monitoring device. The chief of obstetrics examined the patient at noon the following day and reported that there was no evidence of infection or other abnormality. Later that evening the resident in charge wanted to administer pitocin to help speed up the delivery, but he would not do so without her consent to a cesarean delivery should he deem it advisable She refused and requested that she be allowed to continue her natural childbirth in accordance with her Muslim religious principles. Shortly thereafter the physician telephoned a local judge, who convened a hearing at the hospital to determine whether to order the section. The judge appointed attorneys for the parents and the fetus; the hospital’s attorney was also present. The parents were not given an opportunity to confer with their attorney before the hearing, nor were they able to secure the services of a medical expert to counter the testimony of the hospital’s physician. A fourth-year obstetrics and gynecology resident testified that he thought the fetus was in danger of infection because of the length of time since the patient’s membranes had ruptured. On cross-examination, he admitted that there was no objective evidence of any fetal distress. Nevertheless, at 1:05 a.m. the judge ordered surgical intervention. The parents attempted to appeal the ruling but at 2:08 a. m. two appellate justices affirmed the judge’s order. The cesarean delivery was immediately performed; no infection or injury to the fetus was discovered.


January 1996

After having a Cesarean Section with her third birth, Laura Pemberton, a born-again Christian who believes in the blessing of children, wanted to attempts a VBAC with her fourth child. There was no physician in the city where she lived that was willing to take her on, so she decided to have a midwife-attended home birth instead.

Please click here to read what happened after that. The news report fails to mention that when Mrs. Pemberton was transported back to the hospital against her will, the sheriff who "arrested" her tied her legs together on the gurney because she was dilated to 7 cm at this point and he was worried that she might give birth naturally before they had a chance to cut her open.

It should also be mentioned that after this experience, Mrs. Pemberton moved to a different state, where she has had four unattended home births since then, one including twins.


March 2009

Samantha Burton (mother of two young children) had developed signs of miscarriage early in her pregnancy, and was ordered to permanent bed rest by the hospital. She objected, stating that with two children to support, permanent bed rest wasn't possible. When she asked to be discharged or transfered to another hospital, the hospital REFUSED the request because "it was not in the best interest of the fetus," essentially committing Ms. Burton involuntarily to their care.

The move was upheld by the Circuit Court of Leon County who, in addition to committing her against her will, ordered her to undergo any and all medical treatments deemed necessary by the "treating physician of her unborn fetus" to save her fetus, holding that "the ultimate welfare of the fetus overrode Ms. Burton's constitutional right to make medical decisions for herself."

After three days of forced medical confinement, doctors performed an emergency Cesarean section on Ms. Burton and discovered her fetus had already died in utero. She was released shortly after the surgery.

Read more here.

Sunday, August 23, 2009

Another perverted male OB/GYN

The following is an excerpt from a lawsuit brought against Scott Pierce, an OB/GYN, by a lady who was attended by him during her birth.


[Begin excerpt]

Labor & Delivery Process

17. At 4 a.m. on March 1, 2008, Plaintiff’s contractions were eight minutes apart. She and her husband Larry proceeded to the Emergency Department at Rush medical Cetner. Upon arrival, Plaintiff met Meagan Hansen, M.D. (hereinafter referred to as “Dr. Hansen”), the resident assigned to her. Dr. Hansen called Defendant Pierce, the obstetrician, who had agreed to deliver Plaintiff’s baby in Dr. Weitzner’s absence.

18. Dr. Hansen checked the Plaintiff and told her she was dilated to four centimeters. Dr. Hansen recommended that the Plaintiff get an epidural immediately.

19. Dr. Hansen contacted Defendant Pierce at approximately 4:00 – 4:15 a.m.

20. Plaintiff could hear Dr. Hansen’s side of the conversation with Defendant Pierce. She could tell Defendant Pierce was argumentative with Dr. Hansen when she told him that Plaintiff was dilated four to five centimeters. Defendant Pierce wanted to know if it was four or five centimeters. Dr. Hansen rechecked Plaintiff and told Defendant Pierce it was closer to four centimeters.

21. Defendant Pierce apparently wants patients to call him first before proceeding to the emergency room at Rush Medical Center, which is not a Rush hospital policy.

22. Plaintiff was moved to labor and delivery when she had dilated to six centimeters. She was being attended to by Rhonda Stankiewicz, R.N. (hereinafter referred to as “Nurse Stankiewicz”) and Dr. Hansen. Both Nurse Stankiewicz and Dr. Hansen agreed that the time was right for an epidural. Nurse Stankiewicz called anesthesia for the epidural.

Meeting Defendant Pierce

23. At approximately 8:10 a.m., Defendant Pierce arrived. He approached the Plaintiff, who read his name and saw the Rush Medical Center logo on his jacket. Plaintiff believed Defendant Pierce was an employee of Rush Medical Center. He immediately stated, “Did you call anyone before you came in?” Plaintiff perceived that he was very angry. Plaintiff responded that her instructions from Dr. Weitzner were to come down to the Emergency Room if she went into labor since Dr. Weitzner was out of town for the weekend. Dr. Weitzner had not instructed her to call first. Defendant Pierce responded with words to the effect of, “By law someone has to cover for the doctor. And people need to plan. You should know better since this is your fifth child. You should have come in sooner at ten to fifteen minute contractions rather than eight minutes.” Defendant Pierce complained that he had to arrive in a matter of minutes but it had been over four hours since he was first called. His drive took approximately eighteen minutes.

24. At all relevant times Plaintiff believed Defendant Pierce was employed by Rush Medical Center because of his jacket with the Rush logo. Plaintiff believe that she was in good hands because Rush described their medical services in advertisements as follows: “It’s how medicine should be.”

25. Over the next two to two and a half hours, Defendant Pierce would not let the patient have an epidural or any other pain medication. He told Plaintiff and her husband that the baby would be born in ten minutes, which he knew or should have known was false, given Plaintiff’s degree of dilation. Even after the baby was not born in ten minutes, Defendant Pierce still didn’t let her have an epidural or any other pain medication, just letting her suffer all that time unnecessarily.

26. Dependant Pierce repositioned the Plaintiff in the stirrups so that her toes were turned in (pigeon toed) and her buttocks were no longer on the table. This positioning required Plaintiff to support herself with her arms. Despite her repeated requests to be repositioned because her right leg was cramping, and she had two herniated disks in her back, Defendant Pierce refused and made her remain in this position until he left the room after the delivery.

27. Defendant Pierce would not answer any of the Plaintiff’s questions and would interrupt her repeated saying “Shut up, close your mouth, and push.”

28. At one point during the delivery, Plaintiff was in the middle of a very strong contraction when Defendant Pierce decided to perform a vaginal exam. Plaintiff specifically stated, “No. Stop!” Defendant Pierce refused and performed a very rough vaginal exam causing Plaintiff extreme pain.

29. Defendant Pierce proceeded to ask for a “hook” and break Plaintiff’s water bag. Defendant Pierce told Dr. Hansen that the water bag broke spontaneously, without admitting that he artificially ruptured Plaintiff’s membranes with a hook. Defendant Pierce again stated that the baby was going to be here in ten minutes.

Predicted Hemorrhage

30. Defendant Pierce told the Plaintiff that she was probably going to hemorrhage and that the blood had better be ordered. At that time, the chances that the baby was going to be born in ten minutes were zero. The chances that Plaintiff was going to hemorrhage were not increased, as she was not a grand multipara.

31. Plaintiff was extremely frightened by the statements. Defendant Pierce specifically stated that both she and her unborn baby might die. Plaintiff had experienced a stillbirth several years before which was very traumatic for her and her husband.

32. After the room was prepared for delivery, Defendant Pierce took a seat on a stool between Plaintiff’s legs at her perineum and requested that Dr. Hansen sit next to him. Defendant Pierce began cross-examining Dr. Hansen in an extremely rude and aggressive manner that Plaintiff found distressing.

Cell Phone Calls About Abortion During Delivery

33. Defendant Pierce then took a phone call from a resident on his cell phone. Defendant Pierce proceeded to talk at great length during his phone call about an abortion he was going to be performing that day. Defendant Pierce scolded the resident on the other end of the call for taking heart tones on a baby that the resident was about to abort. The conversation was overheard by everyone in the room, because Defendant Pierce spoke in a very loud voice.

34. Plaintiff was shocked by Defendant Pierce’s statements and continued to feel fearful for her life and that of her unborn child.

35. Despite Plaintiff’s request to see the fetal monitor so she could control her pushing, Defendant Pierce would not allow her to see it. When Nurse Stankiewicz tried to turn the monitor so the Plaintiff could see, Defendant Pierce yelled at her to stop. He said, “Do not help her.”

36. Defendant Pierce repeatedly said words to the effect of, “there is only one voice in this room and it is mine.” No one else was permitted to speak. When the Plaintiff tried to ask questions she was again told to, “shut up, shut your mouth and push.”

37. Defendant Pierce, by keeping the Plaintiff in the stirrups for at least 1 ½ hours, greatly increased her risk of deep vein thrombosis, in addition to greatly increasing her physical pain.

38. Despite Defendant Pierce’s representations that the Plaintiff was dilated to eight centimeters at 8:15 a.m. when he left the room one hour after that, Dr. Hansen checked Plaintiff and said she was barely dilated to eight centimeters at that point.

39. Despite Plaintiff’s statements to Defendant Pierce that her other children had been delivered when she was dilated to ten centimeters; he continued to insist she push, saying words to the effect of, “eight, nine, ten had nothing to do with it.”

40. Defendant Pierce continued with his cell phone calls, calling people “assholes” and telling someone to “kiss my ass.” He made comments such as “that stupid woman, she has no business being pregnant.”

41. Despite Plaintiff begging him to wait for the contraction to end, stating, “I’m in the middle of a contraction,” Defendant Pierce inserted a catheter during one of Plaintiff’s contractions, which was extremely painful for Plaintiff.

Threats of a Cesarean Section

42. Defendant Pierce told Plaintiff, “this baby is coming out or it’s not” putting Plaintiff in fear of either fetal distress or a cesarean. Defendant Pierce kept asking Nurse Stankiewicz “did you order enough blood? Because she is going to hemorrhage.” Plaintiff found this terrifying. Dr. Hansen stated words to the effect of, “she probably won’t need blood.” Defendant Pierce responded with words to the effect of, “she will hemorrhage.”

43. Finally, at approximately 10:23 a.m., on March 1, 2008, Plaintiff experienced an uncontrolled delivery which caused a three centimeter right periurethral laceration. Defendant Pierce caught the baby by her arm and leg almost dropping her. Defendant Pierce held the baby up by one arm and leg for everyone to see.

44. Plaintiff asked to hold the baby. Defendant Pierce said, “no.” When Plaintiff’s husband asked to hold the baby, Defendant Pierce said, “No, the mother always holds the baby first.”

Post Delivery Laceration Repair

45. Defendant Pierce asked for a 25 gauge needle to inject the local anesthetic. A 25 gauge needle is not even stocked on the obstetrics floor. The head nurse brought the needle to Defendant but stated that such a needle was not used in obstetrics and was only used to do spinal taps.

46. Defendant Pierce proceeded to stitch the Plaintiff without adequate anesthesia. Each stitch was excruciatingly painful, Defendant Pierce requested that Plaintiff’s husband hold the Plaintiff down because she was squirming in pain. Not knowing what else to do, Plaintiff’s husband held her down.

47. The Plaintiff repeatedly asked for pain medication during and after the delivery and the laceration repair. Defendant Pierce repeatedly denied the Plaintiff any pain medication. Defendant Pierce was very rough when he cleaned Plaintiff after the stitching, jabbing her with a sponge.

48. After Defendant Pierce left the room, Nurse Stankiewicz finally gave Plaintiff some pain medication which had been ordered by Dr. Hansen

49. When Plaintiff was wheeled out of the delivery room several people had gathered outside of her door because they had been alarmed by her screaming. Plaintiff had never screamed during the delivery of her other four children nor had she ever experienced the excruciating pain and abuse inflicted on her by Defendant Pierce.

“Pain is the Best Teacher”

50. Defendant Pierce told Nurse LeJeune Dixon-Pickett that the Plaintiff deserved to feel pain because she had not called before coming in and that sometimes “pain is the best teacher.”

51. Defendant Pierce never visited the Plaintiff during her entire postpartum hospital stay, in violation of hospital policy.

[End Excerpt]

Thursday, August 20, 2009

Our Trip to Long Beach, CA

My husband and I celebrated our 9-year wedding anniversary last Thursday, for which we went to Long Beach, CA. He had to go there for business anyway, so we all just kind of tagged along. Long Beach is a picturesque little city on the Pacific Coast, just west of L.A.

We left after church on Wednesday night and drove about four hours of the way to Indian Wells, where we spent the night at a beautiful resort. This place had the most amazing landscaping, and about a dozen gardeners working on it at any given time. Our room was huge, really more a suite, with two queen beds in one room and a sofa that folded out into a double bed in the other. I think the room was almost as big as our first apartment.

BTW, if you are traveling, Priceline has the BEST deals with "name your own price". My husband books hotel rooms every week for himself and his employees because his work involves a lot of traveling, so he knows the system inside and out. We paid less for our room at the resort than it would have cost if we went to Motel 6 and booked a room over the counter.

On Thursday morning, we enjoyed a special breakfast at the resort's restaurant with only the three little kids while Solomon and Isaac were back in the room reading. As much of a private date as is possible with little children.

I watched the kids by the pool while my husband was dealing with his business. Then we drove the rest of the way to Long Beach, where we stayed at the Hyatt right on the bay. Right near there is the Lakeshore Learning Outlet store, and I stopped by there for about an hour on Thursday evening. The deals were amazing, and I only left because the store was closing, and even then they more or less had to drag me out.

My husband had to work all day Friday for his fire alarm business and took the van, but I had the stroller and because we were right on the pier, we spent the entire day down by the water. First, we had a leisurely breakfast at a local cafe, and then walked down to the bay and got tickets for a whale-watching cruise. In 3 1/2 hours, we saw tons of dolphins, sea lions, seals, a sun fish, and one blue whale that we followed around for 45 minutes. The blue whale is the largest living animal, and seeing one in real life was awesome. Just going out on a ship in the ocean would have been neat even if we hadn't seen any animals.

Rebecca fell asleep before we boarded the ship, and the humming of the engine kept her asleep for most of it. Miriam also dozed off for about an hour.

When we got back on dry ground, we got THE BEST fish & chips at a place on the pier, and ate it while watching the ships coming and going.

We went back to the hotel to regroup and the kids went swimming in the pool for a while, before we all headed out again to go to the part of the beach that was sandy, about a 1/4 mile walk away along the shore. It was beautiful. The kids played in the water while Becky, again, was asleep in the stroller. I think the ocean air made her sleepy. I bought the kids ice cream cones and a funnel cake for myself, but they ate that one, too. :)

On the way back to the hotel we picked up a late dinner of some really great ribs, mashed potatoes, baked beans, and cinnamon apples.

We left for home late morning on Saturday.

Wednesday, August 19, 2009

Court Documents in PDF Format

For those of you who are interested in my husband's case in the border patrol incident, you can read up on all of the legal correspondence on his blog.

More personal blog posts to be published shortly.

Sunday, August 16, 2009

Mom tased during routine traffic stop

A police officer in the Syracuse, New York, area Tasered a 37-year-old mom repeatedly in front of her children during a routine traffic stop—and then arrested the mom, leaving the children alone in their family minivan for 40 minutes in freezing weather.

The incident took place in Onondaga County, New York, on January 31, but dashcam video of the incident only recently came to light.

According to a report at, what started out as a routine traffic stop escalated quickly when 37-year-old Audra Harmon challenged officer Sean Andrews assertion that she had been talking on her cell phone when he pulled her over. Harmon disputed that fact, as well as the officers claim that she had been speeding—doing 50 mph in a 45 zone.

An article at describes the situation:

Harmon had been driving home with her 15-year-old son, whom she had just picked up from wrestling practice, and 5-year-old daughter. She said she was resting her right hand on her cheek as she pulled behind a sheriffs deputy to make a right turn onto the road where she lived. After she made the turn, the deputy pulled off the road to let her pass, then pulled out behind her with his lights flashing and siren blaring.
When Harmon got out of her minivan to show Officer Andrews that she wasnt in possession of a cell phone, and to ask to see video footage of her allegedly talking on the cell phone she didnt possess, the officer ordered her to get back in her car.

And then he pulled out his taser and said Im under arrest, Harmon said. I got back in the car and he said he wanted me back out of the car now. And I said Why am I under arrest? He then yanked me out of the car pulled his taser out and the first shot jolted me

According to, Harmon was charged with disorderly conduct, resisting arrest and going 50 in a 45 mph zone. The district attorneys office dismissed the charges a month later—after watching the videotape, said her lawyer, Terrance Hoffmann.

Amazingly, the officer had justified Harmons arrest by saying she had obstructed traffic by getting out of her minivan.

As MSNBC points out, when Harmon was arrested, her children, aged five and 15, were left by the side of the road for forty minutes.

Harmon is suing the Onondaga County sheriffs office. Officer Andrews has been taken off street patrol and reassigned until an internal affairs investigation is completed, the sheriffs office said.

This guy is nothing but another perverted freak on a power trip. Does anyone actually believe that this "cop" was in a life-and-death situation and had to use the taser as a last resort to save his own life? Or did he not rather just want to punish the lady for "giving him attitude" and questioning his "authority".

What is this world coming to when men in uniform throw a lady on the floor, taser her, step on her and arrest her in front of her children all in the name of public safety? Who was the aggressor? Who was the victim? Does nobody else see how WRONG and PERVERTED this is? Guys like this are the reason why people hate cops, and no, they are not just a "bad apple" or an exception, they are the rule. Check out this YouTube channel and get a dose of reality.

With any luck, this guy will get killed in a car accident while he is out trolling around in his squad car. It might save a Mom's life. Shame on his mother for raising such a worthless excuse for a human being. Yes, I did just say all that. And let me remind you that if you do not enjoy reading my blog, you never need to visit here again, and you will not be missed.

I have never liked Whole Foods as much...

... as I did after reading an editorial entitled "The Whole Foods Alternative to ObamaCare" in the Wall Street Journal written by Whole Foods' founder and CEO John Mackey. In it, he outlined eight reforms to lower health care costs.

Apparently, the article has some of their liberal customers all up in arms, but I thought it was great. In fact, next time I shop there, I will be sure to make a point to tell the cashier how much I enjoyed reading it. I think I might even send them customer feedback via their website.

Some of my favorite quotes:

"A careful reading of both the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution will not reveal any intrinsic right to health care, food or shelter. That’s because there isn’t any. This “right” has never existed in America."

"All countries with socialized medicine ration health care by forcing their citizens to wait in lines to receive scarce treatments. Although Canada has a population smaller than California, 830,000 Canadians are currently waiting to be admitted to a hospital or to get treatment, according to a report last month in Investor’s Business Daily. In England, the waiting list is 1.8 million."

"Rather than increase government spending and control, we need to address the root causes of poor health. This begins with the realization that every American adult is responsible for his or her own health." "We should take that responsibility very seriously and use our freedom to make wise lifestyle choices that will protect our health."

Monday, August 10, 2009

Better parent by Sunday?

As I was out running errands today, I saw this billboard:

Intrigued, I pulled the website up on my cell phone. As I had suspected, it was some apostate excuse for a church.

"If you have kids" means that ANYONE with children understands "why some animals eat there [sic] own". Our kids can be really annoying, and I like getting a break from them as much as any other busy mom. But I can definitely say that I have never had the desire to eat them. Which technically would involve killing them first. These people sound like sick freaks. Sick freaks who are not very good at basic spelling. It is amazing how few people know the difference between their, there, and they're.

Why would anyone want to learn about parenting from sickos who hate their own children? This is the pastor who started "Cornerstone Chandler", he looks like a real fairy himself. Or a predator. Or both.

Looking at the above picture, I am guessing that the boy is about six and the girl about three years old. If "disrespectful behavior and/or defiant attitudes" and "power struggles" at such a young age have reached a level where they are sending both parents and children "over the edge", they must have a whole bunch of lousy parents and bratty kids in this "church". On a side note: 16 weeks is a far cry from "by Sunday", especially since the course doesn't even start until Sunday. Maybe they mean that once you start the series, your parenting will become worse and worse, and you will only be a good parent up until then? Who knows.

I am almost certain that none of the following verses will be used at any time during this "Bible study":

Pro 13:24 He that spareth his rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes.

Pro 22:15 Foolishness is bound in the heart of a child; but the rod of correction shall drive it far from him.

Pro 23:13,14 Withhold not correction from the child: for if thou beatest him with the rod, he shall not die. Thou shalt beat him with the rod, and shalt deliver his soul from hell.

Pro 29:15 The rod and reproof give wisdom: but a child left to himself bringeth his mother to shame.

Just had to get that off my chest.

Sunday, August 9, 2009

Another Q & A

You mentioned that you're doing canning, i recently read that canning lids and rings contain BPA. What are your thoughts on this? Are you going to be taking any precautions?

Thank you for sending me a link to that article, which I found very interesting. It was something I had recently started wondering about after reading that the lining of metal cans contains BPA. I'm thinking that I will use the canned goods that I already have, because the food did not really come into contact with the lining much if at all, just as the article suggested.

In the future, I will order my canning supplies from Weck, who offers all glass canning jars and lids. They are a German company, and I grew up with my grandma canning in these.


#1. I am a babysitter (or, more like a momma's helper, because she is always there when I am there) and I was wondering what you think of babysitting, because it isn't the same as daycare. I know that some babysitters are terrible, but I think that I am pretty good, because I have strong maternal instincts, give lots of hugs, and I voluntarily read her bible stories before she goes to bed, and she is only 16 months old.

#2. I'm 18, and I would like to be involved in a fundamentalist Christian church, but I feel like I'm being pressured by my parents to go to college, get a high paying job, and basically just go against what I want to do (I want to marry my boyfriend and have children). What is the best way to address this to my parents, because I know I should alway honor my mother and father.

#1. Personally, I do not think that there is anything wrong with a mother's helper who helps with the kids, chores, housework, etc. while mom is there. In fact, I had somebody like that for a couple of years when our three oldest were all little. She was a good friend of mine who was newly married and had no children of her own yet, and she would either play with the kids while I worked around the house, or vice versa. She would cook, go grocery shopping, help with the laundry, or whatever needed to be done most that day. She came over a couple of days every week, and it was great. If the kids wanted to play with me, they could, and if they were more entertained by her, they had that option, and it freed me up to get other things done. I was there the whole time, and did not have to worry about the kids' safety for one second. Eventually, my friend had a baby of her own, and we moved away right around the same time. The kids still remember her fondly.

#2 I think it is great that you want to get married and have children, and I think it is what the God wants young ladies to do. (1Timothy 5:14: I will therefore that the younger women marry, bear children, guide the house, give none occasion to the adversary to speak reproachfully.) Women going to college and entering the work force has been sold to us as "liberation", but really, the ultimate goal of those who pushed it through was to break down the family unit, have children being indoctrinated in government schools, and to tax twice as many people (because moms who stay home do not get paid, and therefore do not pay taxes).

As I am guessing that your parents aren't ***forcing*** you go to college etc, you can just kindly keep insisting that you really would rather not, even if you have it settled in your mind that you definitley won't (see Daniel 1:8). Maybe you could show them why you want to get married from the Bible, and pray for God to change their hearts.


Do you and your husband have a state issued marriage license? and Does your husband perform marriage ceremonies for couple only with a marriage license or only without or either way?

Yes, we do have a state issued marriage license. My husband has only performed one wedding so far, and there was a marriage license. Not sure if he requires that, though, if a couple would rather not have one. In such a case, the marriage would not be legally recognized, and either "spouse" could leave at any time without having to go through a divorce. I have heard of one such case, and it was really rather sad because of the children involved and there being little legal recourse for the person left behind.

Personally, however, I do not think that it is the government's job to issue marriage licenses. I know the controversy surrounding this issue, and the reasons why some people refuse to have a marriage license, and while I agree with them, it's a battle I chose not to pick. But more power to anyone who disagrees with me on that, I certainly see their point.


Just curious, are you also against adoption for childless couples?

No, I think adoption of orphans and abandoned children is great. God has adopted us into his family. I am, however, against the government foster system and taking children away from their parents because some case worker deems them unfit. I could never with a clear conscience become accomplice to the wicked foster system by adopting through them.

I am in no way denying the fact that there are abusive parents out there who certainly need to be brought to justice. But too much of this is the government abusing their power and persecuting people because they disagree with them on how children ought to be raised.


Are you against sugar substitutes? If so, why?

Simply put, you can't have your cake (or sugar) and eat it, too. After researching the subject, I am firmly convinced that ALL artificial sugar substitutes are very detrimental to human health. A wealth of information is available online regarding this issue.

For those addicted to sugar, I still think that being overweight is a better alternative than getting cancer from the artificial sweeteners. But the root problem is that we are used to consuming mass amounts of sugar and other simple carbs. Instead of replacing them with sugar substitutes, we should just be cutting them out of our diets altogether. For example, there really is no reason to drink sodas at all. Juice and carbonated water can be substituted as a natural alternative, but ideally, we would get our "sweet fix" from fruits and occasionally sweets made with honey, fruit syrup, dried fruit, or fruit purees.

FoxNews report on Aspertame:

And a couple of clips from Dr. Mercola on Splenda:


Are you one of those people that will withhold lifesving medical treatment from your child(ren) because it's God's will?

No, I am not. Are you one of those people who is scared of catastrophic consequences in the absence of invasive medicine because you do not take the time and effort to keep your children healthy? Jesus was right when he said that they that be whole need not a physician but they that are sick. I put my energy into keeping my children healthy, not worrying about every "what if" life may hold. On the extremely rare occasions that I felt they needed to be seen by a physician, I took them there, and will continue to do so.

Saturday, August 8, 2009

I'm back! (well, almost)

First off, for all those who were wondering how my husband's hearing this past Wednesday went, you can read about that here. In brief, the hearing to dismiss the charges was yet again postponed because of the actions of the prosecuting attorney. It has now been scheduled for Aug. 21.

We are still enjoying our summer break. This year, we are starting school late, on August 31st, or maybe even the Tuesday of the week after that (Sept. 8). I want to teach all three boys at the same time in all subjects except for math and language arts, and have not quite settled on what to use. Right now I am considering Konos, My Father's World, Considering God's Creation, or Galloping the Globe. The two oldest are also learning Spanish, and Solomon is learning piano. Both Isaac and Solomon had asked about learning violin, and I am looking into that possibility. I signed all three boys up for a homeschool P.E. group, which I think they are really going to enjoy. My goal this year is to have a more relaxed homeschool approach and to give us all time to "stop and smell the roses". All three boys are 1-2 grades ahead of their peers, and I am worried they might lose their steam if they keep on trucking through school and childhood.

The last three days, we were in Tuscon with my husband, who was finishing up on a huge install at a Home Depot there. While he was working, we did all the fun tourist stuff and kicked back at the hotel at night. There is something about not having to do dishes or laundry for three days that is really relaxing. Especially when Starbucks enters that equation, or having room service bring you a hot cinnamon roll at midnight. Tucson also still has two Hancock's Fabrics, and that alone would be worth a trip down there. They had a huge sale on patterns, $1 for any Simplicity pattern, and I bought like 25 or 30 and have all kinds of fun sewing projects swirling around in my head now.

I have been working on various blog posts in my spare time, i.e. when I am not too busy taking a summer break, and will be back in the blogosphere in full force again really soon. In the meantime, you can keep up with me on Facebook.