Think Twice In 2019

One day last week, when I had SiriusXM playing in my truck, I heard today's Music Monday song for the first time in several years. It got me to thinking - thinking about how we Americans treat each other. There's way too much arguing, and yelling and screaming over politics, sports, how our food is or is not prepared when we go out to eat, over how poorly someone else drives, and so many other things that, as my mom used to say, "don't amount to a hill of beans".  It also led to me wondering, "what if we tried doing things differently in 2019?"

Today's Music Monday is Phil Collins' "Another Day In Paradise" from his 1989 album ... But Seriously? Interestingly, both the song and the album went to #1. 

The song is about the plight of the homeless, but as I listened to it the other day, the lyrics got me to thinking about it's application to other hardships. For instance:

The woman who is a victim of domestic violence.
Just another day in paradise.
The man who's just been diagnosed with terminal stage 4 cancer.
Just another day in paradise. 
The soldier's wife whose husband just left for a year-long deployment.
Just another day in paradise.
The woman whose husband of 50 years just passed away.
Just another day in paradise.
The man who's been outta work for 6 months and is in danger of losing his home and being unable to feed his family.
Just another day in paradise.
The lonely teenager who needs a friend.
Just another day in paradise.
The one who's in the hospital running out of time waiting on a life-saving organ transplant.
Just another day in paradise.

I could go on and on with this, because nearly every one is struggling with something. So, let's put aside all the anger, selfishness, and hostility and try helping someone(s) in 2019, because what we've been doing simply ain't working. What would daily life in the U.S. look like if we did?

2019 and our chance to "think twice" and do something different that makes a difference begins tomorrow. We hear talk about "change" all the time. For once, let's make a change that actually does some good. Shall we?

The music video is embedded below or can be watched by clicking here. 

 

Happy New Year everyone!!

United HealthCare, God, and a Life-Saving Liver Transplant

In The Sheepdog's opinion, it appears United HealthCare (UHC) thinks it's no longer in the health insurance business. Instead, it's received a promotion into the business of being God. However, don't take my word for it, just ask 38-year-old mother of one, Erika Zak. UHC has put her through as much hell as cancer did.

Location of human liver - credit Wikipedia

Diagnosed with colorectal cancer, Erika endured more than 70 rounds of chemo and various other treatments which resulted in serious side effects, including damage to her liver and subsequent liver failure.

Over 100 doctors from the country's top medical centers concur that Erika's only hope for survival at this point is a life-saving liver transplant. Yet, UHC denied coverage saying, "unproven health services is not a covered benefit". Really? Despite the fact that transplants have saved thousands of lives in the U.S. for decades, UHC refers to transplant as "unproven". Science, medical technology, and thousands of transplant recipients across the country, including The Sheepdog, prove otherwise.

The Sheepdog has seen a lot in his time, but the way UHC treated this woman and played GOD with her life, stringing her along for months, may be the most cold hearted thing I've heard of an insurance company doing. I suspect others have experienced similar agony, though.

Hillary's Hero

Hillary Clinton is running for president in 2016. I thought she might challenge Obama in 2012, but she didn't. Unfortunately, I think she'll probably win, too, even though she has more baggage than a Boeing 747 flying to Europe. Americans love the Clintons. They always have, and I guess I'll never understand why.

Before you walk into the voting booth and push the button, pull the lever, etc. beside Hillary's name, allow me to show you what you will be voting for that you may not be aware of. It has nothing to do with taxes, healthcare, or guns, either. This is way more important.

Hillary's Hero - sent in by a friend via Facebook.

Ever heard of Margaret Sanger? Well, Hillary has said that she "admires" and is "really in awe" of her. So, who is Margaret Sanger?

She is the founder of Planned Parenthood (PP). You remember them, right? They've recently been in the news for a scandal involving selling tissue of aborted babies. However, there's more to know about Sanger than just that she's the founder of PP.

Sanger was a big advocate for abortion. She saw it not just as a way to end inconvenient or unwanted pregnancies but as a means to control the population of African Americans, the disabled, immigrants, and others. They were deemed as "undesirables". Compassionate she was not, and remember - Hillary admires and is in awe of her. Oh yea, one other thing - Sanger was a member of the Socialist Party, too.

Do not take my word for any of this. Google Sanger and look over what you find. You will be shocked at some of the information. Some have said that Adolf Hitler was inspired by her.

So, now that you know a little more about Margaret Sanger and PP's history, here's my question - since Sanger wanted to use abortion as a means to remove "the undesirables" from society, and Hillary admires her, doesn't it stand to reason that Hillary holds the same views that Sanger did? If so, why is she even on the dadgum presidential ballot? And why are millions of Americans gonna vote for her?

The U.S. has made much progress in race relations since the 1960's, but we've still got a long way to go. If we really believe that "Black Lives Matter" and "All Lives Matter", then why would we want Hillary Clinton as President?

On this one issue alone, it makes no dadgum sense.

Related articles:

• Black Pastors Ask Smithsonian to Remove Bust of Planned Parenthood Founder (stream.org)
• Margaret Sanger; A New Appraisal... (ukapologetics.net)

A Different Approach

It's been interesting the last few weeks listening to folks talk about this Fifty Shades of Grey movie. My fellow Christians and other groups are calling for boycotts for various reasons. From what I've heard the movie contains explicit sexual situations and promotes violence against women. Personally, I cannot speak to any of this as I have not seen the movie and have no intentions of doing so. I'm more of an action and sci-fi movie guy. For my $10-$11 movie admission I want to see shooting and stuff getting blown up.

I think the folks who are clamoring for boycotts of the movie are taking the wrong approach. During my lifetime, I've noticed that time and time again when Christians and others call out something in the entertainment industry as being bad, it peaks the public's curiosity. Next thing you know, everyone has the attitude of, "Let's see what all the fuss is about." So they go buy the controversial record or go see the movie, and the artist or producer makes millions because of it. Consider the following examples to make my point.

Moon over Miami (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

First, back in the '80s, there was a rap/hip-hop group from Miami called 2 Live Crew. Remember them and their record As Nasty As They Wanna Be?

They released their first record in 1986. At the time, their fan base mainly grew through word of mouth. Then, 1989 rolls around and they release As Nasty As They Wanna Be with the cover photo of the backs of women in thong bikinis. The lyrics to the so-called songs on the record are sexually explicit, so Christians, the American Family Association, and others went nuts. Curiosity was peaked and people wanted to know what all the fuss was about leading to the album selling over 2 million copies.

These rappers went on to release a total of 11 albums over their 12-year career with the last one being in 1998. Let that sink in for a moment - a raunchy rap group released 11 albums, selling millions of copies of them, and making millions of dollars. It is my opinion that if Christians and others had not raised so much cain about the filthy lyrics, this "band" would have not received the notoriety it did, flopped, and just went away after a couple of records. The free press they received made them rich and successful.

Second, back in the early '80s, the hair/glam metal craze swept the country. My favorite band, Motley Crue, was right in the middle of it. The band formed in 1981 and released its first record Too Fast for Love. Too Fast really did not see much success at first. It didn't break the Billboard 200 until 1983 after the band released album #2 - Shout at the Devil. Now, why was that?

Shout at the Devil (song) (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

It's simple. Shortly after Devil's release, Christians, conservatives, and other groups jumped all over Motley Crue, because in their opinion, the band was promoting satanism with it's use of pentagrams. Once again, curiosity peaked, people had to see what all the fuss was about, and all the attention led to Devil selling 4 million copies (quadruple platinum status). The Crue's career took off. Additionally, Devil's success led to more people going back and purchasing Too Fast and it shot into the Billboard 200 album chart reaching #77 and going platinum (selling over a million copies).

Motley Crue's career has now spanned 3 decades, 30 years, 9 studio albums, and they've sold over 100 million records. As I've said, they're my favorite band. I never agreed with their wild lifestyle, but I've loved much of their music. However, if you listen to their early records, Too Fast and Devil, they were really not that good. I always felt like they really didn't hit their stride until 1985's Theatre of Pain was released.

If it had not been for all the attention and controversy surrounding Shout at the Devil, I'm not convinced The Crue would have lasted more than a few albums. 30 years? No way. In my opinion, it's likely they, too, would have flamed out after a couple of records, but thanks to all the negative PR they got over Devil, they hit it big. Were they satanic? I don't think so. I think all the pentagrams, etc. were a brilliant PR stunt that left Motley Crue laughing all the way to the bank.

So, what's my point with all this? I think that when controversial stuff comes out of the entertainment industry that Christians and other conservative groups find offensive, most of the time we deal with it the wrong way. Think about it this way - when a child is told not to do something or that they can't have such-and-such, what is the the first thing they do? Exactly. They go and do just what they were just told not to. It's natural. Adults do it to. When someone, or some group, starts clamoring about how immoral or wrong something is, our natural reaction is to be curious and want to see what all the fuss is about. Well ....... STOP IT!!!!!!!

Just like 2 Live Crew and Motley Crue ended up having long, successful, and profitable careers after controversies surrounding their music, continued wailing about Fifty Shades of Grey is gonna push people to want to see the movie. Hollywood will make millions, allow it to run for weeks and weeks, and then make similar movies in the future due to the success of this one.

So, try a different approach for once - just fuhgeddaboutit and shut up. Then, it might just go away when it stops making money due to a lack of interest. Right now, all the negative attention is making Hollywood money.

Christians and conservatives are currently doing exactly what Hollywood wants them to in regards to Fifty Shades of Grey. They're being played, and just like Motley Crue did, Hollywood's laughing all the way to the bank.

Related articles

• Motley Crue to retire as a touring band New Year's Eve 2015. #MotleyCrue #Music (muzicmagazine.com)
• AFA: 'Fifty Shades of Grey' Glamorizes Abuse, Degrades Women (grumpyelder.com)
• Fifty Shades of Grey Sets Box Office Record! (kontrolgirl.com)

Our Veterans Deserve Better

People who know me personally, or have read this blog for any length of time, know that I have the utmost respect for and wholeheartedly support our veterans 100% of the time. I am grateful for and always in awe of the sacrifices they make both physically and in the amount of time they are away from their families. Many times they are away from their loved ones for anywhere from 9 or 10 months to a year. I cannot imagine what that is like.

Back when all the ruckus was going on about ObamaCare, health care, and so-called "Cadillac Health Care Plans," I felt like if anyone deserved a "Cadillac Health Care Plan" it's our military men and women. I often feel like we as a country don't do enough for those guys and gals, but that's a sermon and soapbox for another day. Today, something else is on my mind.

Earlier this week, a friend of mine took the picture below while at the VA Hospital in Nashville, TN. At the time, this banner was hanging around the main entry into the parking garage there.

When I received it, I was shocked. My first thoughts were of the vets that visit there every day for doctors appointments, labs, and other reasons. I wondered what they think of it. I suspect that many of them were offended by it. I also thought about an article that I shared here back in April that was written by Pat Buchanan - "Is America Still A Good Country ?". It seems that morals in America continue to decline. To me, what makes it worse is that we are not ashamed of it. It really seems that we have no shame, at all, anymore as a country. I wonder sometimes if there is not a connection between our lack of morals as a nation and our problems ranging from the economy, to crime, to government corruption, and I could go on and on.

Anti-ACLU-2 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

I wonder how quickly the ACLU and other groups would have raised cain if instead of the banner above, someone had hung one that had an encouraging scripture on it that could uplift the spirits of the patients visiting the VA hospital. Heck, the ACLU would have filed a lawsuit crying "violation of separation of church and state" quicker than a Democrat votes for a tax increase. You know I'm right, too.

Know, before anyone leaves a nasty comment below this post claiming, "you just hate people with 'alternative life styles'," let me unequivocally state that I don't. The Bible states that we have all sinned and fallen short of the glory of God, which includes me. We all need to be getting our act together.

History has shown time and time again that all great empires, right before they have fallen, have gone down the same road America is currently on. First, morals loosen a little. Next, a little more until one day everybody is doing whatever they want with whomever they want whenever they want and there is no moral fabric or moral values at all. Suddenly, the nation crashes and burns and people wonder "what happened ?"

The question is - is the U.S.A. gonna continue down that road to a complete absence of moral values and destruction, or are we gonna turnaround ?

Since yesterday was the 69th anniversary of D-Day, I hope we choose the latter, because our veterans deserve better. The road to complete decadence and destruction is not the one they fought and sacrificed for.

"If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land." - 2 Chronicles 7:14 (King James Version)

Related articles

• What can we do to help veterans? (aarp.org)
• Veterans deserve quicker care -- and our full appreciation (utsandiego.com)

Absolutely Baffling

As I mentioned in Tuesday's post, I've been off the net for a while. However, I've kept up with some of the goings-on. I've noticed that the wolves have been busy and that some truly baffling things are going on. One such baffling thing was the election of Mark Sanford to the U.S. House of Representatives by the people of South Carolina.

Mark Sanford, Governor of South Carolina, seen here as a U.S. Congressman. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

It all started when Jim Demint resigned his seat in the U.S. Senate in order to go to work for the Heritage Foundation. South Carolina's Republican Governor Nikki Haley then appointed South Carolina Rep. Tim Scott to Demint's vacant U.S. Senate seat. The appointment left the U.S. House seat held by Scott vacant which led to a special election for a replacement to complete the remainder of Scott's House term.

Sanford entered the race for the vacant U.S. House seat and won the GOP primary. Next, he defeated his Democratic opponent in the general election to win a trip back to the U.S. House where he had served from 1995-2001 before becoming South Carolina governor.

Sanford is a perfect fit for Congress. He's as untruthful and untrustworthy as they come. Apparently South Carolinians have forgotten that :

• In 2009, he went missing for 6 days. He told staff he was going on a long hike on the Appalachian Trail. It turned out that the scoundrel was in Argentina with his mistress.
• Father's Day was one of the 6 days he was missing. So, it stands to reason that Sanford preferred being with his mistress and cheating on his wife over celebrating Father's Day with his children. What a dad. What an example.
• He eventually confessed to inappropriate relationships with other women, too.
• Ethics charges were filed against him alleging that taxpayer funds were spent conducting his adulteress fling.

Now, here's what I don't get - if South Carolina taxpayers can't trust him to act ethically and spend their money appropriately while in the governor's office, why did they elect him to Congress ?

Better yet, if his now ex-wife can't trust him to keep his committment to be faithful to her, how can he be trusted to preserve, protect, and defend the U.S. Constitution ?

Oh, that's right - the other members of Congress don't either, so .... it's all good.

Perhaps Sanford's Congressional campaign slogan should have been something like, "My wife can't trust me, but the voters can." No wonder the dang country's screwed up, and it's our fault. We keep voting these immoral, unethical people into office. Geez.

Absolutely baffling.

Oh, ..... one other thing - did I mention that Sanford's a Republican ? And people wonder what's wrong with the Republican Party.

Related articles

• Mark Sanford reclaims House seat in comeback (thestate.com)
• Once disgraced, Sanford victorious in SC special election (firstread.nbcnews.com)
• Sanford returns to Congress, says he’ll focus on finances (thestate.com)
• Mark Sanford to take oath in return to Congress (charlotte.news14.com)
• Comedian rips Mark Sanford: South Carolina has bottomless supply of duplicitous teabags (rawstory.com)
• Sanford beats Colbert Busch in U.S. House election (marketwatch.com)
• South Carolina joke worth crying about: Sanford wins (examiner.com)
• Lester & Charlie: Sanford & Scum (huffingtonpost.com)
• Sanford wins: South Carolina voters reject family values, honesty, integrity and responsibility (dailykos.com)
• Sanford's South American Walkabout Through the Busch (progressivepress.net)

"Is America Still a Good Country ?"

Is America still a good country?

Pat Buchanan : Nation is sharply divided on serious issues of morality (from WND.com)

“Not until I went to the churches of America and heard her pulpits aflame with righteousness did I understand the secret of her genius and power. America is great because she is good, and if America ever ceases to be good, America will cease to be great.”

So wrote Alexis de Tocqueville.

Yet, judged by the standards of those old “pulpits aflame with righteousness,” is America still a good country?

Consider the cases taken up this week by the Supreme Court.

Pat Buchanan (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

In one, the court is asked to rule on California’s Proposition 8, where voters declared marriage to be solely between a man and a woman. In the second, the court is asked to strike down the Defense of Marriage Act, which forbids federal support for same-sex marriages.

Whatever their beliefs, the justices, one trusts, will leave this to the states and people. For Roe v. Wade, where seven justices found the right to an abortion lurking in the penumbras of the Ninth Amendment, poisons our politics to this day. We don’t need a re-enactment of that civil war.

Still, what America decides about same-sex marriage will reveal much about what this generation believes to be a moral society.

Traditionalist America has always held homosexuality to be unnatural and immoral, ruinous to body and soul alike, and where prevalent – as in Weimar, Germany – the mark of a sick society.

This belief outrages millions. Yet it is as old as mankind and was held universally in the Christian West until this century. Moreover, it is grounded in biblical truth, tradition, natural law and Catholic doctrine.

Before 1973, the American Psychiatric Association regarded homosexuality as a mental disorder. Most states treated it as a crime.

The new morality argues thus:

For a significant slice of the population, homosexuality is natural and normal. They were born this way. And to deny homosexuals the freedom to engage in consensual sexual relations, or the right to marry, is bigotry as odious as was discrimination against black Americans.

Yet, though gospel to many, this belief has only the most shallow of religious, moral and philosophical roots. It seems grounded in a post-1960s ideology that holds that all freely chosen lifestyles are equal, and to discriminate against any is the true social sin.

Needless to say, the traditional morality and the new morality are irreconcilable.

But if the new morality – that homosexuality is normal and same-sex marriage morally equal to traditional marriage – is true and valid, Frank Kameny was a prophet and Christianity is indictable for 2,000 years of ostracism, persecution and suffering imposed on homosexuals.

Or perhaps we believe that moral truth evolves – that, for example, adultery may be immoral for one generation, but not so for the next.

The issue here goes beyond what the Court decides.

For even should the advocates of same-sex marriage prevail, their victory will not be accepted by believers in the traditional morality, but simply be seen as but another step in America’s descent down a slippery slope to hell.

Indeed, for millions of Americans, this society – which has eradicated Christianity from its public institutions and enshrined secularism in its place, which considers abortion a woman’s right, which is blasé about 53 million unborn children destroyed since Roe, which puts homosexual liaisons on the same moral plane as matrimony – is a society that has lost its moral bearings and is rapidly losing its mind.

Which raises a serious separate issue.

If we Americans cannot even agree on what is right and wrong and moral and immoral, how do we stay together in one national family? If one half of the nation sees the other as morally depraved, while the latter sees the former as saturated in bigotry, sexism and homophobia, how do we remain one united nation and one people?

Today, half of America thinks the country some of us grew up in was bigoted, racist, homophobic and sexist, while the other half sees this morally “evolving” nation as a society openly inviting the fate of Sodom and Gomorrah and that is hardly worth preserving.

A common faith and moral code once held this country together. But if we no longer stand on the same moral ground, after we have made a conscious decision to become the most racially, ethnically, culturally diverse people on earth, what in the world holds us together?

The Constitution, the Bill of Rights?

How can they, when we bitterly disagree on what they say?

By throwing out the old morality and embracing a new morality on abortion and same-sex marriage, America tossed her sheet anchor into the sea. And from the turbulent waters we have entered – our illegitimacy rate is above 40 percent, and no Western nation has a birth rate that will keep its native-born alive in anything like the present numbers – America and the West may have set sail on a voyage from which there is no return.

** The Sheepdog's note - while I have disagreed at times with Pat Buchanan, his article above, written and published last week, provides much for all of us to think about and ponder. 

Related articles

• Is America still a good country? (wnd.com)
• Suicide of a Superpower: Pat Buchanan on the Death of Western Civilization [Video] (lissakr11humane.com)
• Pat Buchanan: Infantile Conservatism (conservativeread.com)

The University of Sodom and Gomorrah

Late last week, I learned via an e-mail from PatriotUpdate.com that my alma mater, The University of Tennessee (in Knoxville) would be holding it's first ever "Sex Week" in April. You can read the entire shocking report by clicking here.

English: Ayres Hall, The University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

As a UT alumnus, who happens to be a Christian Conservative, I was appalled at what I read in the report. It bothered me that my alma mater was holding this week of immorality, but I was also ticked that it was being paid for with taxpayer funding and student fees. I suspect the students had no voice in approving or disapproving their fees being used for this crap. I'm sure there are many in the student body who disapprove.

So, a couple of days ago, I forwarded the e-mail below to the Tennessee State Senators and State Representatives who represent the Knoxville area. I also copied the UT President.

Dear Knoxville-area State Representatives and State Senators,

I grew up in Knoxville, but now live in Mt. Juliet, TN. In December 1992, I earned a Bachelor of Science in Business Administration from the University of Tennessee with a major in accounting.  In 1997, I completed the requirements for the CPA designation.

Over the last several years, a number of things occurring at UT have concerned me as an alumnus and a Tennessean, including dozens of male athletes having run-ins with the law, the mens basketball team’s scandal, and several other things. Each incident has left the university with a black eye and its alumni embarrassed. These incidents have shown a lack of discipline and character within the athletic program and the UT administration turned a blind eye to all of it. As I explain below, these problems have now infected the rest of the student body in a manner that pales in comparison to the aforementioned problems within the athletic department. Something needs to be done.   

In my opinion, UT has a deep-rooted, university-wide problem in the form of a lack of any moral compass. For example, last fall, the big news from UT was the “butt chugging incident” where a UT student was hospitalized for alcohol poisoning leading to one of the campus fraternities being suspended. In my opinion, none of the punishment handed out for this incident was severe enough, and it’s likely some criminal penalties should have been handed out, too. If experimenting with ways to get drunk quicker is what the kids at UT are spending their time doing and learning nowadays, then apparently their course work is not pushing them hard enough.  

However, what really has me concerned about UT as an alumnus and taxpaying Tennessean is a news report I saw the other day. Apparently, UT will soon be holding its first annual “Sex Week.” If you are not familiar with it, you can read all the details at this link. The report is what has necessitated this letter.

The report says “Sex Week” events will include a scavenger hunt for a “golden condom,” a drag show, a workshop about oral sex, promotion of homosexuality, and other immoral sexual behavior that is so shameful that I would be embarrassed to even type it out here. Furthermore, the week’s activities are being hosted by a so-called “lesbian bondage expert” and the whole thing is being paid for by student fees, university money, and university grants. In other words, these activities are being paid for by taxpayer money. I find that completely unacceptable.

Additionally in the linked article above, a UT student named Brianna Rader, supposedly one of the founders of “Sex Week,” stated, “This is one way people can get a better sense of what others in Tennessee and this region of the country are about.” Really ? Is this really what we want Tennessee to be known for ? I think not. I’m not sure where Miss Rader is from, but I can assure you she is mistaken if she thinks the promotion of immoral, deviant sexual behavior is what Tennesseans want. As a UT alum and native of East Tennessee, I take serious offense to her characterizing my alma mater and the region of the country I grew up in as approving of such. Rader also stated that the UT administration is “overwhelmingly supportive of Sex Week.” The administration should be setting the example for the students, but in this case they are enabling the immorality. I have never been so ashamed and embarrassed to be a UT alum in all my life.

Furthermore, if such a “Sex Week” had been held while I was attending UT and paid for by student fees and taxpayer money, I would have transferred to another university at the end of the semester it occurred in. Student fees and tuition are supposed to be spent to educate the student and help them work toward obtaining their degree and preparing them for their career, not promoting immoral sexual behavior. I have also spoken to a number of other UT alumni in the Nashville area about this, and they feel the same way.

I am not only a UT alumnus and Knoxville native, but I am a Christian, too. The bible teaches that the immoral behavior being promoted during “Sex Week” is sinful. Based upon what the article said, it appears that no topic is off limits during this event which makes me wonder if the university will soon be to changing its name to “The University of Sodom and Gomorrah.” Speaking of Sodom and Gomorrah, I wonder how quickly and how loudly the ACLU and others would have cried “foul” if instead UT had held a “Bible Week” paid for by student fees and university funds ?

If UT students have so much time on their hands that they can participate in “butt chugging” and “Sex Week,” then UT is not adequately preparing them for their careers. They are not receiving the education and skills they will need to tackle the problems that confront our state and our country currently and in the future. In other words, the UT president and the rest of the administration is not getting the job done we taxpayers pay them to do. Therefore, it is time to fire the entire administration and replace them with people who will prepare the students for such challenges.

I have four nephews and two nieces who will be going to college one day. In fact, my wife and I have started college funds for each of them in order to help pay their way. The “Sex Week” embarrassment is the last straw for me. When it comes time for my nephews and nieces to pick a college, I will exert all the influence I can to make sure that none of them attend college in Knoxville.

I hope that people in authority at UT will reconsider and stop “Sex Week.” However, if they choose not to, then I trust that you, the elected State Representatives and State Senators for the Knoxville area, will step in and stop this misuse and immoral waste of taxpayer money. If UT has a funding surplus to the extent that it can spend it on “Sex Week,” then funding to the school needs to be cut substantially.

“Sex Week” is unacceptable and the ones with the authority to approve it should be held accountable. The UT student body, UT alumni, and the taxpayers of the state of Tennessee deserve better.

Sincerely,

Johnny Black

Carmack Statue -- Tennessee State Capitol Building Nashville (TN) 2011 (Photo credit: Ron Cogswell)

I have heard back from a couple of the elected officials I contacted. They basically said they would look into it. I hope they were not just pacifying me and live up to their word. If you are a Tennessee taxpayer or UT alumnus, I would like to encourage you to speak up and voice your displeasure, too. I have listed the e-mail addresses of the the elected officials I contacted, as well as that of the UT President below to make it convenient for you to copy and paste them into an e-mail.

Rep. Joe Armstrong - rep.joe.armstrong@capitol.tn.gov

Rep. Harry Brooks - rep.harry.brooks@capitol.tn.gov

Rep. Bill Dunn - rep.bill.dunn@capitol.tn.gov

Rep. Gloria Johnson - rep.gloria.johnson@capitol.tn.gov

Rep. Steve Hall - rep.steve.hall@capitol.tn.gov
Rep. Ryan Haynes - rep.ryan.haynes@capitol.tn.gov
Rep. Roger Kane - rep.roger.kane@capitol.tn.gov

Sen. Randy McNally - sen.randy.mcnally@capitol.tn.gov
Sen. Becky Massey - sen.becky.massey@capitol.tn.gov
Sen. Stacey Campfield - sen.stacey.campfield@capitol.tn.gov

UT President Joe DiPietro - jdipietro@tennessee.edu

I'm sure I will take some heat over this blog post from the Libs who desire for the morals of this country to continue to degrade. Bring it on, I say, but please note - as long as the Good Lord continues to bless me with a pulse and the strength to draw a breath, I will stand for what's right even if I'm the only one doing it. I answer to Him and Him alone (Exekiel 33:1-9 (NIV)).

Related articles

• What in Hell Is Going on in Sodom and Gomorrah ? (godgutsandoldglory.wordpress.com)
• Lawmakers Want University Defunded over Sex Week (radio.foxnews.com)
• America's Universities of Sodom and Gomorrah (godfatherpolitics.com)
• Letter: Legislators' stance on Sex Week right (knoxnews.com)

Transplants and Knuckleheads

Last Saturday, former Vice-President Dick Cheney received a heart transplant after spending nearly two years on the waiting list. Cheney's original heart had been severely damaged by multiple heart attacks leading to him receiving an AICD, or automatic inplantable cardioverter defibrillator, several years ago. An AICD is a device that regulates a heart disease patient's heart rythym. It can deliver a shock to a patient's heart if they suffer a severe, life-threatening, abnormal heart rythym. Unfortunately, I know about them all to well having carried one around in my chest for nearly seven years leading up to my heart transplant. Cheney and I now have two things in common - we've both had AICDs and heart transplants.

Dick Cheney, Vice President of the United States. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

During the course of the last week, I've read multiple articles, news reports, and opinion pieces on the internet concerning Cheney's transplant. Many of them have been ugly, mean-spirited, and spewn hatred at Cheney because he received a "second chance" at life. Others have offered encouragement and congratulations to Cheney and his family. I join the rank of this group in congratulating V-P Cheney and offering my best wishes and prayers for a quick and complete recovery. Cheney is a blessed man getting to spend more time with his wife, kids, and grandkids, as well as having more time to enjoy his hobbies. While I haven't always agreed with Mr. Cheney politically, I am truly happy for him. I hope he makes the most of his new life.

Cheney's transplant has spurned a new conversation about organ and tissue donation and transplants in this country. To be honest, I think that's a good thing. More press breeds more awareness. Awareness is good. It seems that the discussion is revolving around three main points :

1. Should Cheney, at 71 years-old, have been given a transplant due to the fact that donated organs are so scarce ?
2. Shouldn't the heart Cheney received have gone to a younger person more likely to get the most out of this scarce resource because they would likely live longer ?
3. Was Cheney given special consideration because of his wealth, reputation, and position ?

After watching, hearing, and reading what all the pundits and others have said for the last week, I decided it's time for The Sheepdog to weigh in on the subject. Some are gonna agree with me, and some are gonna be as mad as a hornet. Then again, isn't that a normal everyday occurrence here on The Sheepdog ? Why should today be any different ? Right ?

I'll deal with the first and second point concurrently. The answer to whether Cheney should have been given a heart transplant at his age is a resounding, "Yes !" Why shouldn't he be ? If he was the best match for that heart, and was the next in line for it, then absolutely he should get it. He had done his time on the list - nearly two years ! As far as the argument that it should have gone to a younger person, there are two things wrong with that argument. First, it's age discrimination. The U.S. has made great strides in ending discrimination over the years. Age discrimination is prohibited in employment practices and other things, why would we want to take a step backwards and allow it in organ transplants ? Furthermore, there's no guarantee that a younger person would get more "mileage" out of the donated heart than Cheney. Transplants can be delicate and tricky. Great strides have been made in transplant medicine, but sometimes patients still die shortly after transplant. In fact, the latest statistics show that only 3 out of every 4 heart recipients reach their 5-year transplant anniversary. There are no guarantees. Personally, I think the odds are good that Cheney will get several good years out of his new heart. As a former Vice-President, you know he's gonna get some of the best medical care in the country. In addition, someone else might not have taken care of themselves and the new heart not last as long as with Cheney. Who knows ?

Another point that has been ingrained in this whole age issue is the fact that some believe that a younger person's life is more valuable than that of someone older. It's an idea that has been around for years and years that in my opinion is immoral. All life is extremely valuable. None is more valuable than any other. How do you even value a person's life anyway ? What amount of money does is take to bring someone back from the dead ? Give me a number. C'mon. Try. The fact is you can't put a price on human life. It's priceless. No amount of money can create it, and no amount of money can save it. The other question I'd ask these folks is, what if Cheney were your father or grandfather ? You'd want him to receive that new heart then. Wouldn't ya ?

The third point / question that has been asked and discussed is whether or not Cheney received special consideration because of his wealth and who he is. The answer is a resounding, "NO !" Think about it for a moment. It's simple. If wealth, power, and position had much influence on whether a person receives an organ transplant or not, do you really think Cheney would have waited nearly two years for a life-saving heart transplant ? The answer is no. If wealth and position was a large contributing factor to who does or does not receive an organ transplant, Cheney would have received one very shortly after he was listed. Furthermore, I'd be dead because I wouldn't have received my transplant due to having no wealth or powerful position. C'mon man. Don't be a knucklehead - it's just common sense.

There is a simple solution to all the questions and discussion about whether V-P Cheney should have received a heart transplant. The questions only exist because donated organs are scarce. If all Americans would register as organ and tissue donors, not only would Americans stop dying while on the waiting list, but we would have enough donated organs and tissues to go around, and it wouldn't matter if you were 71 or 21, the donor organ you needed would be available when you needed it.

So, the next time you hear someone talking about Cheney's heart transplant and whether an "old man" should receive one, ask them this, "Are you registered as an organ and tissue donor ?" If they say yes, thank them for doing so. However, if they say no, then tell them it's like voting - if you don't do it, then you have no right to complain. If everyone would register, more lives would be saved, and we wouldn't have to have the discussion about who should or shouldn't get a transplant.

In the meantime, keep V-P Cheney, his family, and his donor family in your prayers. They've all got a long road ahead of them.

Related articles

• Dick Cheney undergoes heart transplant (bazaardaily.com)
• Ex-US Vice-President Dick Cheney has heart transplant (mervsheppard.blogspot.com)
• Dick Cheney Recovering From Heart Transplant (inquisitr.com)
• Dick Cheney's Heart Transplant At 71 Spurs Age Debate (mervsheppard.blogspot.com)
• Cheney Gets Heart Transplant - The Daily Beast (tribuneofthepeople.com)
• Eric Topol: Cheney heart transplant raises ethical questions (medcitynews.com)
• Dick Cheney had heart transplant, aide says (abclocal.go.com)
• Ethicist Needs Ethics Transplant (bobsnewheart.wordpress.com)
• Dick Cheney Gets New Heart, Lease on Life (gawker.com)
• Dick Cheney Recovering After Heart Transplant (collegecandy.com)