Soccer Mom: Unplugged

Page 6 of the Army Times May 8th edition carries a FastTrack blurb about HR 5037.  Commonly referred to as the "Respect for America's Fallen Heroes Act",  this bill is a direct response to the inbreds at Westboro Baptist Church led by Pastor (and family patriarch) Fred Phelps.  These folks like to picket the funerals, memorial services and burials of U.S. servicemembers to remind the nation that it is not wild-eyed insurgents with cell phone operated IEDs that kill our folks in uniform,  rather it is the wrath of an angry God who dislikes the nation's tolerance for homosexuality and adultery. 

An aside:  I'm as religious right as anybody else, to be sure,  I consider homosexuality a choice (there's been no gay gene discovered) that is contrary to the basic purposes of God. Adultery falls into the same category and it undermines the family, the fundamental and very first institution ever established.  However, condemning a behavior and condemning a person are two wholly different acts.  Believe me, I'm a mother,  I have to make this distinction every day.  And certainly, the loving God I know has been more apt to allow me to suffer the natural consequences of my actions than to impose punishment for my acts on a stranger simply because he wears a camo flak jacket.  Just my opinion. 

What really caught my eye was the photo that accompanied the 2 paragraph writeup.  Generally, Phelps is lucky to draw a crowd of 6 to 8 supporters at one of his protests.  In this picture it appears that there are more reporters covering the morons than there are morons.  Must've been a slow news day...

Ordinarily, I applaud the initiative and courage of teens who jump into the public forum and share their ideas or fight for a cause.  Even when I don't agree.  This time, I think it has gone a little too far.  The ACLU has gotten involved, aiding a young man who wants to convince his local school district that a "no-shorts rule" is unfair.  His argument:  If girls can wear skirts, boys should be able to sport shorts.  I don't argue with his point - it's valid enough.  But where I draw the line is at him dressing in drag everyday (supported by the ACLU) to draw attention to his cause. 

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,182730,00.html

If girls in midriff baring shirts, too-short skirts and other revealing clothes are sent home because their clothes are deemed a distraction in the school environment, it certainly can't add to his classmates ability to concentrate when little Johnny is seated next to them in a pink chiffon number he picked off the shelf at Kohl's.

Couldn't he just wear a t-shirt with male legs shackled or something to advertise his fight with the school district(or print  up and distribute flyers).  Next thing you know boys will be getting vasectomies just to show that they also deserve a "choice". LOL!

This is one for the gimme-a-break file.