- The Washington Times - Monday, August 8, 2005

Noble victims

“[T]he [National Museum of the American Indian] is perfectly clear what its goals are: it ‘seeks to help Native people revive and sustain their cultural heritage’ by presenting an idealized vision of their ‘Universes.’ …

“In addition to scenic tableaux and related artifacts, the spaces are decorated with depictions of tribal myths and such spiritually uplifting homilies as ‘Every time elders talk, they tell us we are given responsibility to look after Mother Earth’ — that sort of thing. Eventually, all of these images and exaltations tend to merge into one big pantheistic hymn of glorification. The American Indian, it would appear, from the Arctic Circle to Tierra del Fuego, is unlike any other homo sapiens on the planet in terms of the purity of his spirit, the natural harmony of his life, his cooperative and peaceful demeanor, the vibrancy of his art, his … well, you get the idea. …

“Wallowing in ‘victim’ mode, the Museum has swept aside the vast tribal differences, all the rough edges of Indian life. Indeed, their entire history is both homogenized and sanitized to produce the archetypal Noble Savage. It is a sad irony that the NMAI, in its efforts to allow the Indian to speak of his own past, has managed to produce this de-natured version of what were once flesh-and-blood people.”

—Peter Pettus, writing on “Native mythologies,” in the New Criterion online at www. newcriterion.com

Scout’s honor

“On [July 30], President Bush addressed a Jamboree of more than 30,000 Boy Scouts in Virginia.

“He stated, ‘Through the generations, scouts have made America a stronger and better nation.’

“Those critical of the Boy Scouts of America argue that the Boy Scouts’ exclusion of gays, atheists and females makes America more divided and divisive. One side wishes to strengthen the Boy Scouts; the other wishes to destroy the Boy Scouts by forcing politically correct changes upon it.”

—Wendy McElroy, writing on ” Is The Boy Scouts of America Public or Private?” Wednesday at www.ifeminists.net

Unplanned’ babies

“If you read enough of their literature you will find that so-called ‘family planning” organizations, which back full abortion protections, believe that high numbers of ‘unintended’ pregnancies represent a health crisis.

“According to the Alan Guttmacher Institute, which studies abortion, reproductive and sexual health statistics, roughly 50 percent of all pregnancies in the United States are unintentional. Forty-seven percent of those ‘accidents’ end in abortion, and the institute sees a cause-and-effect. …

“This is common alarmist rhetoric among pro-choice advocates. But does it make sense?

“Take my wife and me, for example. We have four children that neither of us intended, which represented 100 percent of our pregnancies. By Guttmacher’s reasoning, we were lucky that those pregnancies didn’t cause abortions instead of children. … I guess we really bucked the odds.

“My wife’s pregnancies were caused by our intentional sex, yet somehow we knew the possible consequences of our actions, despite our lack of planning. … Do most people have their sexual encounters without understanding that it can cause reproduction?”

—Paul Chesser, writing on “Unintentionally Illogical,” Wednesday in the American Spectator Online at www.spectator.org

LOAD COMMENTS ()

 

Click to Read More

Click to Hide