Category Archives: Morality

Oct 30 2012
9 Comments
Morality, WOMEN

Was Woman Wrong To Ask Men to Pay For Implants?

NICOLE OSTIL THINKS THERE NOTHING IMMORAL ABOUT ASKING STRANGE MEN TO PAY FOR HER BREAST IMPLANTS.

I got a shout out a few days ago from Nicole Ostil, nee Gomes, who responded to a piece I wrote not so long ago in which I criticized the 24-year-old wife and mother for going on the Internet and asking strange men to help her pay for breast implants.

“Thank you for your personal insights,” she wrote, adding, she is “actually quite flattered at all the controversy” stirred up by new media writers like yours truly.

For some reason, Nicole felt it necessary to stress to me that the web site on which she solicited her cosmetic surgery, MyFreeImplants.com, “wasn’t a new site I created.”

In fact, she said, it was her husband who first chanced upon the site. “We thought it was a joke,” she related, “and then decided that I could give it a try.”

Neither Nicole nor her husband see anything wrong with what she’s doing. After all, she said, “I don’t have to porn up.”

The young woman, a graphic designer, an aspiring model, took particular umbrage at the suggestion that her willingness to go to such extreme lengths for bigger breasts suggests a self esteem issue.

“If things are the way that you suggest,” she wrote, then “dying your hair, wearing make up, or getting your nails done means you have a bad self image.”

Finally, she closed, “I have never seen a more judgmental group of people anywhere” like the Christ followers who dared to suggest that what she is doing is unGodly. “I’m sorry,” she said, “that all of you feel the need to impose your own beliefs on others.”

My first reaction to Nicole’s response was joy. Because I believe it to be a tell-tale sign that she has been convicted by the Holy Spirit; that He is trying to save her from the snares of this fallen world, which tempts young women – particularly those blessed with beauty – to trade upon their physical attributes.

The Christians I know do not seek to impose their own beliefs on others, but to stand up for God’s law, which is set forth in His Word. They are not judgmental, condemning sinners to hell. But they speak the truth in love, calling sinners to repentance.

This particular Christian thinks there absolutely nothing wrong with a woman dying her hair, wearing make-up or having her nails manicured.

I don’t even have a problem with women who have breast implants, which I consider a “disputable matter,” in the words of the Apostle Paul, on which faithful Christians can respectfully differ.

My quarrel with Nicole – whose days are spent in college, at work and at the gym, who says that she views breast implants “as another way that I can improve myself” – is the way she has gone about “earning” the money for her surgery.

I maintain that no self-respecting wife and mom would be so desperate for larger breasts that she would ask a man other than her husband to pay for them.

Tagged , , , ,
Jul 27 2012
8 Comments
Morality, WOMEN

Woman Solicits Men Online For Breast Implants

GOMES SAYS SHE WILL DO NOTHING ‘SLEAZY’ TO GET STRANGER TO BUY HER IMPLANTS.

Nicole Gomes has no shame. The 24-year-old Sacramento woman has taken to the Internet to ask some benevolent stranger or another to buy her breast implants.

“I didn’t get the boob gene from my mom,” she explains. “And it’s not something I would be able to afford by myself.”

My first thought was that Gomes must work in the sex industry. And that the young woman figured larger breasts – in addition to her obvious computer skills – would make her a more marketable pole dancer or porn star or prostitute.

But Gomes is a graphic designer, she says. And a happily married mother of two, she also says.

I wondered if she had kept her family in the dark about her desire for a bigger bosom and the lengths to which was willing to go to get them.

Indeed, Gomes signed up with a website, MyFreeImplants.com, which hooks up women desperate for larger breasts with donors – selfless, philanthropic-minded men, no doubt – who are willing to help a girl out.

I imagined the Sacramento woman’s husband would be outraged to discover that she was offering herself online. But Gomes says her hubby was good to go with it.

Well, no God-fearing man would let his wife (or girlfriend) do such a thing. If her self-esteem was such that she just had to have breast implants to feel good about herself, a sad commentary on how much this fallen world of ours values outward appearance over inner beauty, he would find a way to pay for them himself.

Gomes and her husband are disingenuous if they think some online benefactor is just going to mail her a check for $7,500 – so that she can move up in bra size from B to D, she says – and not expect anything in return.

That unclean money will come with an indecent proposal attached. The woman’s benefactor is going to want his pound of flesh.

Gomes says she is unwilling to do anything sleazy to get her breast implants. But she already has.

Asking a man who is not your husband to buy you bigger breasts is nothing if not sleazy.

Tagged , , ,
Jul 09 2012
6 Comments
Morality

NatGeo Sees No ‘Taboo’ in Teen Sex

15-YEAR-OLD CASSIE OSBORNE RACES TO LOSE HER VIRGINITY.

The latest episode of “Taboo” aired last night on National Geographic Channel. It explored the issue of “Teen Sex.”

One segment introduced viewers to the Kreung people of Cambodia, who build “love huts” for their teen-aged daughters to have pre-marital sex with as many teen-aged boys as they like.

Another featured 15-year-old Australian tart Cassie Osborne and her teen-aged girlfriends, wearing barely-there dresses, practicing their sexual flirtation, looking forward to becoming some young bloke’s boy toy.

And yet another took a look at Purity Balls here in the United States, in which teen-aged girls pledge to remain pure and abstain from sexual relations until they are married.

“Taboo’s” producers were uncritical of the Kreung’s love huts. “Some argue that this gives the girls a sense of empowerment,” they noted.

They uttered nary a discouraging word about come-hither Cassie and her Aussie BFFs, apparently considering their race to lose their virginity an expression of girl power.

But they ridiculed Purity Balls, which were conceived by evangelical Christians, which encourage teen-aged girls to offer their bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God.

“Some argue that pressuring a girl to participate in a Purity Ball puts her in a position,” according to “Taboo’s” producers, “where a man is always in control of her sexuality, first her father, and then her husband.”

Moreover, said Helen Fisher, a Rutgers University biological anthropologist, “There’s a great deal of data that young girls who swear off sex tend to have sex anyway. They simply just delay it for one, two or three years. Then they impulsively go out and have sex without having gotten any sex education.”

Indeed, said “Taboo’s” disembodied narrator, echoing Fisher, “Recent studies suggest that teens who pledge to stay virgins until marriage are just as likely to have premarital sex as those who make no such pledge.”

Of course, “Taboo” provided no references for the “data” Fisher mentioned; no citations of the “studies” to which it alluded.

That’s because data and studies questioning the efficacy of purity pledges, of abstinence-only programs almost always have been ginned up by agenda-driven researchers biased in favor of sex education.

The proof of that bias is that neither Fisher, nor “Taboo” acknowledged the most impartial, most authoritative study of abstinence-only programs, which was released in 2010 in the Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine.

The researchers – whom, it should be noted, were not evangelical Christians – followed  sixth and seventh graders in two groups, one of which concentrated on abstinence, the other on contraception and “safe sex.”

Two years later, the researchers checked back with the kids. Half those learning safe sex were sexually active, while only a third of those encouraged to practice abstinence were engaged in sex.

Interestingly, the abstinence teachers were values-neutral. They never mentioned religion, morality or marriage. Had they done so, I believe the  kids who remained pure after being taught abstinence would have been three-quarters or more, rather than the actual two-thirds.

Indeed, most of our teens are living down to society’s low expectations of them.

But it’s not impossible for the under-aged to control their hormones. It’s not inevitable they are going to be sexually active. And it’s not unreasonable to expect them to abstain from sex until, at the very least, they reach adulthood.

Tagged , , , , , ,
Mar 16 2012
1 Comment
Morality

Oregon Sets New Record For Assisted Suicides

THE LATE DR. PETER GOODWIN'S LEGACY IS NEARLY 600 PHYSICIAN ASSISTED SUICIDES SINCE 1997

Dr. Peter Goodwin killed himself this week. He took advantage of Oregon’s 15-year-old assisted-suicide law, which allows residents of the Beaver State to score a legal dose of drugs by obtaining a prescription from an enabling physician.

Goodwin happened to be one of the first physicians to voice support for Oregon’s euphemistically titled “Death With Dignity Act,” which took effect in late 1997.

“I don’t think we would have aid in dying in Oregon without Dr. Goodwin,” said Barbara Coombs Lee, who worked closely with the former family physician to get the law the passed.

Indeed, the late Dr. Goodwin’s legacy is nearly 600 assisted suicides over the past decade and a half, including the record 71 souls who took their own lives in 2011, according to a report this month by the Oregon Public Health Division.

In an interview with National Public Radio, Coombs Lee, who heads an outfit, Compassion and Choices, which helps patients and doctors learn how to use Oregon’s assisted suicide law, complained that it’s unfair to say that a person who takes his or her own life committed “suicide” if their death is imminent and inevitable.

“Would we say that the people who jumped from the World Trade Center committed suicide?” she asked. “I wouldn’t, because the fire was in their face and they chose a different kind of death.”

That’s the kind of specious reasoning that provides the dubious intellectual and ethical underpinnings of Oregon’s assisted suicide law. It is on a par with the argument of abortion-rights advocates that taking the life of a pre-born child is not infanticide because the child has not emerged from his or her mother’s womb.

What particularly troubles about Oregon’s assisted suicide law is that it is almost as easy for a person to obtain a lethal dose of drugs – Dr. Goodwin reportedly swallowed a fast-acting barbiturate prescribed by his doctor – as it is in Californiato obtain a doctor’s prescription for “medicinal” marijuana.

There is little doubt that some of those who took advantage of Oregon’s assisted suicide law really weren’t six months away from the grave. There also is little doubt that some of those who took their lives suffered from depression or other mental issues.

Yet, the Public Health Division’s annual report revealed that only one of the 71 individuals who died by physician assisted suicide last year was referred to a psychiatrist or psychologist for formal evaluation. Moreover, doctors who prescribed fatal doses of drugs were present for the deaths of only six of those who took their own lives.

One needn’t be a pro-life Christian to find Oregon’s assistant suicide law morally repugnant. There is no “dignity” in artificially hastening the death of those diagnosed as terminally ill.

Tagged , ,
Feb 17 2012
Leave a comment
Constitutional Rights, Marriage, Morality, Politics

Christie Punts on Same-Sex Marriage

JERSEY GOVERNOR HIDES BEHIND VOTERS

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie pulled a Nicole Scherzinger today.

The former Pussy Cat Doll front woman, a judge on “The X Factor,” a singing competition airing on FOX, was at the center of the most controversial moment during the reality show’s first season when she could not bring herself to choose between two contestants, tearfully punting the decision to the viewing public.

Christie, a Republican, pulled the political equivalent when he vetoed a bill that would have allowed homosexual couples to lawfully wed in Garden State while, at the same time, calling upon Jersey’s Democrat-legislature to put a referendum on same-sex marriage on the state’s November ballot.

“I am adhering to what I’ve said since this bill was first introduced,” Christie stated, in his veto message. “An issue of this magnitude and importance, which requires a constitutional amendment, should be left to the people of New Jersey to decide.”

Please.

Christie is dressing himself up as a populist, who seeks only to do the people’s will. But the reality is the governor is trying to serve two masters – the homosexual lobby and the Christian evangelical community.

His wishy-washyness certainly hasn’t won him the favor of Jersey gays and lesbians.

The governor’s veto, said Jersey Assemblyman Tim Eustace, one of two openly homosexual members of the state’s Legislature, “makes it clear, in uncertain terms, that he doesn’t think my family, and thousands of others, are equal in the eyes of the law.”

The Garden State’s social conservatives can’t be especially pleased with the governor either.

Not when his veto statement declared that he is “adamant that same-sex couples in a civil union deserve the very same rights and benefits enjoyed by married couples – as well as the strict enforcement of those rights and benefits.”

If Christie, a Roman Catholic, actually feels that way, he should have just manned up and signed the Jersey same-sex marriage bill.

He would have lost the political support of this Christian evangelical. But at least I would have respected him for standing on principle.

Tagged , , , ,
Feb 15 2012
1 Comment
Media, Morality, Popular Culture, Sports

SI Swimsuit Issue is Soft Core Porn

SI DOING DIRTY WORK OF SEX INDUSTRY.

The Sports Illustrated swimsuit issue has just hit newsstands. Its glossy cover lasciviously displays teen-aged model Kate Upton in what People magazine described as an “itty-bitty bikini.”

SI’s editors insist that its annual swimsuit issue – which always ranks as its best-seller – is tastefully done. But the reality is that SI is peddling soft core pornography. Its models are only slightly less sexualized than those that appear in Playboy.

In fact, SI is in many respects worst than Playboy.

Hugh Hefner’s skin magazine makes no pretense to be anything other than pornographic, notwithstanding the articles that fill the pages between the magazine’s nude photo spreads.

SI pretends that its swimsuit issue has something to do with sports. But closest connection covergirl Uptonhas to sports is that she is rumored to be dating New York Jets quarterback Mark Sanchez.

Yes, the magazine does include several actual female athletes, including Alex Morgan, a member of theU.S.women’s soccer team, Natalie Coughlin, an Olympic swimmer, and Natalie Gulbis, the LPGA tour player.

The three legit sportswomen did not pose in itty-bitty swimsuits like Upton. No they were photographed nude, with only coats of body paint affording them any modesty.

What particularly disturbs is that, unlike most other soft core porn – be it in magazines, at the video store or on pay-per-view television – SI’s swimsuit issue is readily accessible to under-age boys.

For at least some of those boys, the sexualized image of teen-aged Kate in her itty-bitty bikini will stimulate an even more prurient sexual appetite: For hard-core pornography. For topless bars and all-nude strip clubs. For escort services and sex-for-hire.

SI is exploiting young women like Upton, while cultivating unhealthy sexual appetites in its young male readers.

The magazine is doing the dirty work of the sex industry.

Tagged , ,
Feb 14 2012
Leave a comment
Marriage, Media, Morality

Promoting Adultery on Valentine’s Day

WEB SITE SLOGAN: “LIFE IS SHORT. HAVE AN AFFAIR.”

This is what passes for editorial judgment at USA Today, the self-described “nation’s newspaper:” A splashy front page Valentine’s Day story amorally informing readers that web sites catering to “‘discreet’ encounters” are thriving.

A “‘discreet’ encounter,” for those of us of who prefer straight talk to euphemism, is an extramarital affair. For much of the past 3,500 years, since Moses descended Mount Sinai with the Ten Commandments, it has generally been considered forbidden fruit.

Not so much anymore, according to USA Today, which shamelessly featured the founder and CEO of Ashley Madison, a Toronto-based web site that unabashedly aids and abets  adulterous liaisons.

“The day after Valentine’s Day is one of our biggest days of the year,” boasted Noel Biderman, who launched his site 10 years ago, under the slogan: “Life is short. Have an affair.”

Biderman explained that, on Valentine’s Day, “People are disappointed by their spouses’ lack of effort and they feel especially undervalued when there is a societal expectation of romance.”

So Ashley Madison steps in and assists the disappointed, undervalued spouse in hooking up with some stranger; in violating his or her sacred marriage vow.

What particularly galls is that Biderman insisted that he actually is saving, rather than destroying, marriages. He maintained that an adulterous affair actually is a “marriage preservation device” and suggested that his web site performs some sort of public service by facilitating adulterous affairs.

In the time of Moses, Biderman would have been stoned – and deservedly so.

Alas, in our social nihilistic times, that wily serpent rates a front page story in USA Today.

Tagged , , , ,
Oct 06 2009
1 Comment
General, Morality, Popular Culture, Public Policy, Science

Nobel winner not sold on results of embryonic stem cell research

Elizabeth Blackburn returned to the national headlines yesterday after she and two other American scientists won this year’s Nobel Prize in Medicine for their joint discovery of an enzyme that plays a key role in normal cell function, as well as in cell aging and most cancers.

Dr. Blackburn, a professor of biology and physiology at the University of California, San Francisco, last made national news back in 2004 when she was ousted from former President George W. Bush’s advisory Council on Bioethics.

Some 170 researchers signed an open letter to the Republican president protesting that Dr. Blackburn’s dismissal was politically motivated; insisting that she was kicked to the curb because her views on embryonic stem cell research did not comport with those of the Bush administration.

But while advocates of embryonic stem cell research tried to adapt Dr. Blackburn as their scientific poster gal, she really didn’t share their blind faith that embryonic stem cells were going to cure practically every disease known to humanity – from AIDS to Zellweger syndrome.

 “Scientists,” she remarked back in 2006, “need to be willing and available to inform public debate on stem cells. We need to ensure that accurate science is provided for the discussion. We mustn’t over-interpret what has been achieved to date. In truth, we don’t actually have enough information to choose a path forward.”

Unfortunately, advocates of embryonic stem cell research – which involve the usage and destruction of viable human embryos – play fast and loose with the science to advance their cause. They have routinely over-interpreted what embryonic stem cell research has achieved; they have overstated the efficacy of the morally-offensive research.

At the same time, the promise of adult stem cell research – which does not entail the destruction of human embryos – has been gross understated. Indeed, last time I checked, not one human patient has ever been cured of a disease by use of embryonic stem cells. Meanwhile, adult stem cells have been used to successfully treat thousands of patients.

That the scientific community continues to promote embryonic stem cell research over adult stem cell research seems illogical. That is, until you take into account the political motivation of scientists whose advocacy of embryonic stem cell research has less to do with sound science than with contempt for those who support the right to life for embryos.

Aug 25 2009
Leave a comment
Morality

Madoff’s mistress

Sheryl Weinstein is a whore. And she doesn’t care if the whole world knows it.

That’s why she authored a tell-all book about her adulterous affair with convicted felon Bernie Madoff, who was sentenced this past spring to 150 years in prison for defrauding investors of some $65 billion. That’s why she went on ABC’s “Good Morning America” to confirm that the man she now describes as a “beast” was “a good kisser.”

Weinstein, who met Madoff, the beast, more than two decades ago while working for the Jewish charity Hadassah, is no doubt familiar with the Jewish scriptures.

Perhaps she should reread the Psalms, which lament: “O God, You know my foolishness; and my sins are not hidden from you… Because for Your sake I have borne reproach; shame has covered my face.”

Weinstein apparently is without shame. Otherwise she would not have subjected her husband of 37 years to the insult of a kiss-and-tell book to the injury of her nearly two-year sex affair with “Mr. Winky Dinky” – her pet name for Madoff.

Weinstein justifies her shamelessness on grounds that she somehow is getting back at the felonious Madoff. “He shouldn’t have stolen money from somebody you have a relationship with,” she explained.

In other words, if Bernie the beast hadn’t had sex with Weinstein, it would have been okay that he stole the money she and her cuckolded husband entrusted to him. But, since they were having an adulterous affair, she felt especially betrayed.

From my vantage point, Weinstein almost is on a par with Madoff on the morality scale. Yes, he defrauded hundreds of unwitting investors out of billions of dollars. But who knows what she might have been capable of if she had a similar opportunity?

After all, at Madoff’s sentencing earlier this summer, when she first declared him a “beast,” Weinstein denied that their relationship had been anything other than professional.

Not long afterward, when St. Martin’s Press came calling with a reported multimillion-dollar book offer, Weinstein put out like a latter day Jezebel, suddenly remembering her not-so-professional sexual trysts with Bernie the beast.

Sheryl Weinstein is anything but a sympathetic figure. Like any other shameless adulteress, she should be shunned.

%d bloggers like this: