I want again to thank the Browns for playing the civil disobedience card and permanently changing the discussion about polygamy. For a couple of decades I have watched polygamists be universally vilified. If you bash gay people or make racial remarks, you will lose your career faster than you can say "fag" or "niggardly". Conversely, however, it is entirely fashionable and P.C. to disparage polygamists. My kids regularly report that a teacher of theirs made a snarky comment in class about polygs (with impunity). This is all because it is generally understood that polygamists marry eleven-year-olds, savage their wives and support their families entirely on welfare and food stamps.
I see a seismic shift in the polygamy discussion, and I venture to say that it is permanent. Here are the three primary areas of shift:
1. PUBLIC OPINION: Kody Brown is lovable, if awkward. His wives are convincing and real. The general public will soon side with the Browns. It will soon be fashionable to root for them and their well-being. Prosecute them at the risk of enraging tens of millions of TLC devotees.
2. LAW ENFORCEMENT: This week gave us a tepid legal showdown between the Browns and the Church Police/AG's office. The Elephant in the middle of the room is called John Geddes Lawrence, and the Church wants nothing to do with a bigamy (dumb) statute test case (which could overturn Reynolds).
3. MORMON SQUIRMING: The Church has endeavored for a century to fool all Americans into thinking that polygamy is criminal, sinful and downright disgusting. When you lie for that long, eventually at least one little kid or a smart student of the gospel will wake up and admit that the Emperor is naked and the myth is exploded. Intelligent LDS members may actually choose to watch "Sister Wives" even while jeopardizing their membership cards.
Perhaps now Fundamentalist Mormons can venture outside and go to cinemas and Wal-Marts without fear of incarceration or lynchings. Maybe now those "Holding Out Hatred" groups can close up shop and tear down their condescending billboards.
On another note, Canada (Ontario) just announced that it is repealing all laws against prostitution. Just another example of a bumbling, hypocritical law-enforcement system whose left hand has no clue what its right hand is doing.
Thursday, September 30, 2010
Maybe we will, Maybe we won't
It's all about power. A representative of Utah's AG announced yesterday that, despite its policy of not prosecuting religious polygabigamists, it has no control over whether the pretty, great City of Lehi and Utah County will proceed with a prosecution.
A couple of weeks ago, Iran released the female hiker it had detained for almost a year. There was much rejoicing. Her two male companions are still in an Iranian prison. Maybe Iran will free them, maybe it won't. Who has the power? - the hikers or Ahmedinejad? If you have power, you can flex it; and Iran has power, so it flexes it. Meanwhile the boys sit shivering in a dark Persian dungeon and wonder if they can ever be safe or happy again.
Utah's bigamy statute serves a salutary government purpose - it permits bullies like Ahmedinejad and the LDS Church to wield and flex power over those whom they consider to be beneath them. When LDS/government officials menace and bully otherwise innocent polygamists by saying, "Maybe we will prosecute, maybe we won't," then polygamists have to run and hire attorneys. They have to think about relocating to a non-bullying state like Wyoming or Mexico(?). They bite their fingernails down to their elbows. Their children cry themselves to sleep and ask their moms, "Mommy, is daddy going to jail?". That much power must feel really good, mustn't it?
One of the core principles of the original states of America is that we would not have "Titles of Nobility". Likewise, there was no provision for "second-class citizens". Today we have approximately 38,000 second-class citizens within the borders of the American Corporation. These people are left to sit and wonder if they will or won't be prosecuted by a statute that will or won't be enforced by law enforcement officials who will or won't admit that they like the statute, if only because it lets them look down their noses at the polygamists and threaten them when it looks like they might start winning a hint of public sympathy.
Maybe it's time to pray for some intervention from the Biggest Bully. Maybe He'll flex His power - Maybe He won't . . . .
A couple of weeks ago, Iran released the female hiker it had detained for almost a year. There was much rejoicing. Her two male companions are still in an Iranian prison. Maybe Iran will free them, maybe it won't. Who has the power? - the hikers or Ahmedinejad? If you have power, you can flex it; and Iran has power, so it flexes it. Meanwhile the boys sit shivering in a dark Persian dungeon and wonder if they can ever be safe or happy again.
Utah's bigamy statute serves a salutary government purpose - it permits bullies like Ahmedinejad and the LDS Church to wield and flex power over those whom they consider to be beneath them. When LDS/government officials menace and bully otherwise innocent polygamists by saying, "Maybe we will prosecute, maybe we won't," then polygamists have to run and hire attorneys. They have to think about relocating to a non-bullying state like Wyoming or Mexico(?). They bite their fingernails down to their elbows. Their children cry themselves to sleep and ask their moms, "Mommy, is daddy going to jail?". That much power must feel really good, mustn't it?
One of the core principles of the original states of America is that we would not have "Titles of Nobility". Likewise, there was no provision for "second-class citizens". Today we have approximately 38,000 second-class citizens within the borders of the American Corporation. These people are left to sit and wonder if they will or won't be prosecuted by a statute that will or won't be enforced by law enforcement officials who will or won't admit that they like the statute, if only because it lets them look down their noses at the polygamists and threaten them when it looks like they might start winning a hint of public sympathy.
Maybe it's time to pray for some intervention from the Biggest Bully. Maybe He'll flex His power - Maybe He won't . . . .
Monday, September 27, 2010
Two Sides Of The Mouth
There's an interesting paradox that puzzles me about the current criminal (bigamy) investigation into the Kody Brown family. Here's why I think it will go nowhere.
Our august A.G., Mark Shurtleff, has declared emphatically on numerous occasions that he will not prosecute consenting-adult polygamists. He has given a number of reasons why -
Insufficient witnesses and evidence.
Insufficient law-enforcement resources.
Insufficient penitentiary space.
Yes, I know you all know these excuses are bogus and are designed to quiet the media and the hater-nasties. The real reason is that the AG doesn't want to disturb the tenuous tentacles of the Reynolds decision and let the plygs invoke Lawrence, as they soon will in Texas.
Here's the real (little-known) kicker:
When Rodney Holm appealed his adult bigamy conviction to the U.S. Supreme Court, the Court declined to hear the case but, before declining, it exchanged exploratory pleadings with the two parties' attorneys. At the time of Holm's "crimes", there had been no "CHILD-BIGAMY" statute, so Utah could only attack Holm with the ADULT bigamy statute (despite the complaint that his "wife" was only 16). Utah's chief prosecutrix, Flora Yoplait, insisted to the court that a direct appeal of Utah's (nutty) bigamy statute was irrelevant, because Utah categorically ONLY prosecuted polygamists who had minor partners. She argued that Holm was only charged for relations with Ruth Subbs when Stubbs was a minor. Duplait was actually very wrong! What she had overlooked was that Holm's charging documents addressed alleged sex acts during the times when Stubbs was 16, 17, 18, and 19. In effect, Florplait was LYING to the Court! It WAS NOT TRUE that Holm was not also charged for adult bigamy.
Maybe that is a hairsplit, but Utah is definitely conflicted. Not long ago, hater-nasty Tapestry harpies waved the Jim Harmston/Rachael Strong case in the faces of Utah's AGs. They stood their ground and refused to pursue the case because Strong became a plural wife at 19.
It seems that there must be opposing pressures:
One side despises the polygamists and just wants them dead and gone - OFF WITH THEIR HEADS !!!! Prosecute, Convict, Incarcerate (AND orphan all the kids!).
The other side sees the writing on the Supreme Court's wall. Arrest a harmless plyg family like Kody's, and a bright, enthusiastic lawyer will run the case all the way to the highest court in the land - which court will have to acknowledge that just because a man has a legal wife and then has sex with a different (unmarried) woman, he cannot be charged with felony bigamy (unless we still live in the dark ages).
Is the Church/State establishment so boneheaded and myopic that it cannot anticipate the NATIONAL media circus and backlash that will ensue when it puts Meri, Janelle, Christine and Robyn behind bars? One almost wonders if Ciudad Juarez would be a safer home for innocent Americans and a Constitution gasping its last breath.
Stay tuned . . . .
-------------------------------------------
WAIT - Shurtleff just called Utah's KSTU (Channel 4) to announce that he will not prosecute the Browns. . . . . . YAY !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! He did however say that he is "monitoring" the family for potential "other crimes" (WHAT? - like irritating the Church?).
Renn - "1" Naysayers - "0"
Isn't "monitoring" kind of a SOVIET concept . . . . ?
Our august A.G., Mark Shurtleff, has declared emphatically on numerous occasions that he will not prosecute consenting-adult polygamists. He has given a number of reasons why -
Insufficient witnesses and evidence.
Insufficient law-enforcement resources.
Insufficient penitentiary space.
Yes, I know you all know these excuses are bogus and are designed to quiet the media and the hater-nasties. The real reason is that the AG doesn't want to disturb the tenuous tentacles of the Reynolds decision and let the plygs invoke Lawrence, as they soon will in Texas.
Here's the real (little-known) kicker:
When Rodney Holm appealed his adult bigamy conviction to the U.S. Supreme Court, the Court declined to hear the case but, before declining, it exchanged exploratory pleadings with the two parties' attorneys. At the time of Holm's "crimes", there had been no "CHILD-BIGAMY" statute, so Utah could only attack Holm with the ADULT bigamy statute (despite the complaint that his "wife" was only 16). Utah's chief prosecutrix, Flora Yoplait, insisted to the court that a direct appeal of Utah's (nutty) bigamy statute was irrelevant, because Utah categorically ONLY prosecuted polygamists who had minor partners. She argued that Holm was only charged for relations with Ruth Subbs when Stubbs was a minor. Duplait was actually very wrong! What she had overlooked was that Holm's charging documents addressed alleged sex acts during the times when Stubbs was 16, 17, 18, and 19. In effect, Florplait was LYING to the Court! It WAS NOT TRUE that Holm was not also charged for adult bigamy.
Maybe that is a hairsplit, but Utah is definitely conflicted. Not long ago, hater-nasty Tapestry harpies waved the Jim Harmston/Rachael Strong case in the faces of Utah's AGs. They stood their ground and refused to pursue the case because Strong became a plural wife at 19.
It seems that there must be opposing pressures:
One side despises the polygamists and just wants them dead and gone - OFF WITH THEIR HEADS !!!! Prosecute, Convict, Incarcerate (AND orphan all the kids!).
The other side sees the writing on the Supreme Court's wall. Arrest a harmless plyg family like Kody's, and a bright, enthusiastic lawyer will run the case all the way to the highest court in the land - which court will have to acknowledge that just because a man has a legal wife and then has sex with a different (unmarried) woman, he cannot be charged with felony bigamy (unless we still live in the dark ages).
Is the Church/State establishment so boneheaded and myopic that it cannot anticipate the NATIONAL media circus and backlash that will ensue when it puts Meri, Janelle, Christine and Robyn behind bars? One almost wonders if Ciudad Juarez would be a safer home for innocent Americans and a Constitution gasping its last breath.
Stay tuned . . . .
-------------------------------------------
WAIT - Shurtleff just called Utah's KSTU (Channel 4) to announce that he will not prosecute the Browns. . . . . . YAY !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! He did however say that he is "monitoring" the family for potential "other crimes" (WHAT? - like irritating the Church?).
Renn - "1" Naysayers - "0"
Isn't "monitoring" kind of a SOVIET concept . . . . ?
Hornets' Nest
Lehi police investigate ‘Sister Wives’ stars for bigamy
By Erin Alberty
The Salt Lake Tribune
Published Sep 27, 2010 06:41PM
Updated 2 minutes ago Updated Sep 27, 2010 07:00PM
Police have launched a bigamy investigation into the polygamous stars of a new reality TV series.
According to police, the investigation began several weeks ago, when TLC announced the creation of “Sister Wives,” a show featuring Lehi advertising salesman Kody Brown and his four wives, Meri, Janelle, Christine and Robyn Brown.
The show premiered Sunday.
TLC spokespeople said they had not learned of the investigation before being called by a Tribune reporter and had no further comment.
--------------------------------------------------------
Well, they've stirred up a hornets' nest now haven't they? Remains to be seen if the A.G. will opt for prosecution. I understand that 1,000 other polygamous families are preparing to turn themselves in for arrest for having "illegal" relationships (you know - like having a gay partner, etc.). Civil disobedience will get you everywhere.
Methinks the Mother-Corporate Church must have pulled this trigger. With its usually prudent P.R. decisions it did the very thing that will draw yet more attention to the benign TLC polygamy show.
Frankly, the way that the Browns represent their family, I almost wish I could become one of them. Their depiction of day-to-day polygamy is so gol'darned appealing that most mainstream LDS will likely defect as soon as they watch it. I can see it now . . . .
TEMPLE RECOMMEND INTERVIEW QUESTIONS:
#1. Do you follow the Brethren without question and without hesitation?
#2. Do you report anyone you know who differs with any of the Brethren's recent pronouncements?
#3. Do you watch TLC's Sister-Wives polygamy reality show? - - (if so, go straight to hell, do not pass GO, do not collect $200, and leave your temple recommend on my desk).
Sunday, September 26, 2010
GO KODY, GO TLC !!!
I just watched episode number one of TLC's new Sister Wives series. Thank-you, TLC, and thank-you, Brown family. For more intimate commentary from the Browns themselves, go to: The Polygamy File (at the Salt Lake Tribune)
This moment represents a tectonic shift in the world and for the future of bigotry. Most people shudder at the idea of polygamy, but they likely do not even know why. I suggest that it is because they have not the first clue what polygamy is. I have no idea what a monster or an alien is like, but I surely am afraid of both.
I defy anyone to harbor hatred for Kody and Meri and Janelle and Christine after watching their show. You may have no desire to become a polygamist, but you can NEVER NEVER NEVER again say that "there is no such thing as a 'happy polygamist'."
The elephant is in the middle of the room and he just farted. Can you smell it? Okay, I'll translate - -
If I have to hear one more idiot reporter chanting the "it's illegal" refrain, I will vomit. For a good example, read this channel 4 news report: "Sister Wives" Program Could Lead to Legal Trouble. If polygamy is so fricking illegal, then I'll expect Snortleff's SturmTruppen on Kody's Lehi doorstep tomorrow morning with five sets of handcuffs. You did it with Tom Green, didn't you? You showed the Greens' appearances on the Oprah show in the courtroom, didn't you? Green was charged (and convicted) with adult bigamy, wasn't he? (just like Rodney Holm!).
You can't have your bloody cake and eat it, too. Put up or shut up!
Your choice - start arresting or start decriminalizing (what Lawrence already decriminalized!)
I applaud Bill Medvecky for his wry observation that Jesus must needs be arrested (in any of the "50 States") for being married to all of those nuns.
Is polygamy illegal in the same way in which it is illegal for coaches to swear in public?
This moment represents a tectonic shift in the world and for the future of bigotry. Most people shudder at the idea of polygamy, but they likely do not even know why. I suggest that it is because they have not the first clue what polygamy is. I have no idea what a monster or an alien is like, but I surely am afraid of both.
I defy anyone to harbor hatred for Kody and Meri and Janelle and Christine after watching their show. You may have no desire to become a polygamist, but you can NEVER NEVER NEVER again say that "there is no such thing as a 'happy polygamist'."
The elephant is in the middle of the room and he just farted. Can you smell it? Okay, I'll translate - -
If I have to hear one more idiot reporter chanting the "it's illegal" refrain, I will vomit. For a good example, read this channel 4 news report: "Sister Wives" Program Could Lead to Legal Trouble. If polygamy is so fricking illegal, then I'll expect Snortleff's SturmTruppen on Kody's Lehi doorstep tomorrow morning with five sets of handcuffs. You did it with Tom Green, didn't you? You showed the Greens' appearances on the Oprah show in the courtroom, didn't you? Green was charged (and convicted) with adult bigamy, wasn't he? (just like Rodney Holm!).
You can't have your bloody cake and eat it, too. Put up or shut up!
Your choice - start arresting or start decriminalizing (what Lawrence already decriminalized!)
I applaud Bill Medvecky for his wry observation that Jesus must needs be arrested (in any of the "50 States") for being married to all of those nuns.
Is polygamy illegal in the same way in which it is illegal for coaches to swear in public?
Friday, September 24, 2010
In Your Face
Today I saw on the news that the LDS Church is introducing a new PR campaign to help American subjects become more familiar with the Corporate Church and its members. The news anchor wondered if this effort was all geared around promoting Mitt Romney to be the next President (not of the Church, but of America).
I love D&C 101 because it contains an exquisite parable about the master of the vineyard who delegates some servants to occupy a watchtower and keep watch over the vineyard. After a season, the flaky servants lose track of the purpose of the watchtower and contemplate selling it. When the master comes back, he gets pretty wroth with those servants for neglecting their mandate and letting the enemy break in.
49. Might not this money be given to the exchangers? For there is no need of these things.
50. And while they were at variance one with another they became very slothful, and they hearkened not unto the commandments of their lord.
51. And the enemy came by night, and broke down the hedge; and the servants of the nobleman arose and were affrighted, and fled; and the enemy destroyed their works, and broke down the olive-trees.
52. Now, behold, the nobleman, the lord of the vineyard, called upon his servants, and said unto them, Why! what is the cause of this great evil?
53. Ought ye not to have done even as I commanded you, and—after ye had planted the vineyard, and built the hedge round about, and set watchmen upon the walls thereof—built the tower also, and set a watchman upon the tower, and watched for my vineyard, and not have fallen asleep, lest the enemy should come upon you?
54. And behold, the watchman upon the tower would have seen the enemy while he was yet afar off; and then ye could have made ready and kept the enemy from breaking down the hedge thereof, and saved my vineyard from the hands of the destroyer.
Where am I going with this? - - - well, the Church was given the fullness of the restored Gospel. After a season, it doubted the significance of the higher principles. It mortgaged the temples, changed the scriptures, diluted the doctrines and persecuted the stalwart and humble members who clung to the original precepts. Now the nobleman is soon to return, and He cannot be pleased. Does God need PR campaigns His works to fulfill?
The Church chafed over "Big Love" since it glamorized polygamists. This Sunday we'll see the pilot of TLC's "Sister Wives" series about the Kody Brown family. I quote Salt Lake Tribune's Vince Horiuchi:
"Likely, this is the kind of portrait of polygamy that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints hates. It’s a vision of plural marriage (which is illegal) that seemingly works in some cases and a reminder of a past the church wants to bury.
Yet if there is a reason to watch “Sister Wives,” it’s less for the drama in the household than for the charm and likability of the Brown family."
I have a vision of a large number of puffy men in dark blue suits in the great and spacious building (50 E. North Temple) popping blood vessels over this one. A couple of years ago, a Utah reporter went to Canada and photographed some of Winston Blackmore's children. The children were smiling, adorable, idyllic, endearing, charming and well-behaved. The reporter immediately received numerous stinging rebukes from readers who felt that it was simply intolerable for a newspaper to allow fundamentalist children to be presented in such a favorable light. I've read a number of blog commenters and noticed that they too are having unprecedented difficulty coming up with sane or sensible criticisms of TLC's polygamy reality show . . . .
"How can TLC stoop to present something so awful and so illegal?"
"Kody has awkward facial hair."
"They have to be on welfare."
"The women have big butts."
"Shame on TLC for putting this crap on TV!"
"The show is sleepy."
"We can't seem to stamp out this new and everlasting covenant."
"Isn't polygamy supposed to be illegal?"
"Polygamy is not a part of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints' history."
"Polygamists want the "right" to make polygamy mandatory in their society."
"The law's the law. These felons need to be arrested."
"Women in general are the victims of this system."
"Let's just call TLC 'THE WEIRDO CHANNEL'."
"This plural marriage is a direct abomination of God's love."
"I just don’t want to pay for all of this man’s children."
"This is the most outrageous show I've ever heard of... nobody will watch."
"All Mormons are republicans, so I guess this disgusting lifestyle is just fine with them."
"The other wives are nothing more than mistresses."
"Oh, UGH. These people make my skin crawl."
So, dear readers, I challenge you to come up with a better criticism of the "Sister Wives" series. Actually, no, don't bother - you can't. Polygamy might be uncommon, but it is no less normal (and sometimes boring) than monogamy.
Five cheers to the Browns for risking their normalcy to present a perfectly truthful view of a plural family; and, to the Church which so desperately yearns to distance itself from one of its core, founding doctrines, I say, "IN YOUR FACE!" "Try arguing with reality!!!"
I love D&C 101 because it contains an exquisite parable about the master of the vineyard who delegates some servants to occupy a watchtower and keep watch over the vineyard. After a season, the flaky servants lose track of the purpose of the watchtower and contemplate selling it. When the master comes back, he gets pretty wroth with those servants for neglecting their mandate and letting the enemy break in.
49. Might not this money be given to the exchangers? For there is no need of these things.
50. And while they were at variance one with another they became very slothful, and they hearkened not unto the commandments of their lord.
51. And the enemy came by night, and broke down the hedge; and the servants of the nobleman arose and were affrighted, and fled; and the enemy destroyed their works, and broke down the olive-trees.
52. Now, behold, the nobleman, the lord of the vineyard, called upon his servants, and said unto them, Why! what is the cause of this great evil?
53. Ought ye not to have done even as I commanded you, and—after ye had planted the vineyard, and built the hedge round about, and set watchmen upon the walls thereof—built the tower also, and set a watchman upon the tower, and watched for my vineyard, and not have fallen asleep, lest the enemy should come upon you?
54. And behold, the watchman upon the tower would have seen the enemy while he was yet afar off; and then ye could have made ready and kept the enemy from breaking down the hedge thereof, and saved my vineyard from the hands of the destroyer.
Where am I going with this? - - - well, the Church was given the fullness of the restored Gospel. After a season, it doubted the significance of the higher principles. It mortgaged the temples, changed the scriptures, diluted the doctrines and persecuted the stalwart and humble members who clung to the original precepts. Now the nobleman is soon to return, and He cannot be pleased. Does God need PR campaigns His works to fulfill?
The Church chafed over "Big Love" since it glamorized polygamists. This Sunday we'll see the pilot of TLC's "Sister Wives" series about the Kody Brown family. I quote Salt Lake Tribune's Vince Horiuchi:
"Likely, this is the kind of portrait of polygamy that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints hates. It’s a vision of plural marriage (which is illegal) that seemingly works in some cases and a reminder of a past the church wants to bury.
Yet if there is a reason to watch “Sister Wives,” it’s less for the drama in the household than for the charm and likability of the Brown family."
I have a vision of a large number of puffy men in dark blue suits in the great and spacious building (50 E. North Temple) popping blood vessels over this one. A couple of years ago, a Utah reporter went to Canada and photographed some of Winston Blackmore's children. The children were smiling, adorable, idyllic, endearing, charming and well-behaved. The reporter immediately received numerous stinging rebukes from readers who felt that it was simply intolerable for a newspaper to allow fundamentalist children to be presented in such a favorable light. I've read a number of blog commenters and noticed that they too are having unprecedented difficulty coming up with sane or sensible criticisms of TLC's polygamy reality show . . . .
"How can TLC stoop to present something so awful and so illegal?"
"Kody has awkward facial hair."
"They have to be on welfare."
"The women have big butts."
"Shame on TLC for putting this crap on TV!"
"The show is sleepy."
"We can't seem to stamp out this new and everlasting covenant."
"Isn't polygamy supposed to be illegal?"
"Polygamy is not a part of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints' history."
"Polygamists want the "right" to make polygamy mandatory in their society."
"The law's the law. These felons need to be arrested."
"Women in general are the victims of this system."
"Let's just call TLC 'THE WEIRDO CHANNEL'."
"This plural marriage is a direct abomination of God's love."
"I just don’t want to pay for all of this man’s children."
"This is the most outrageous show I've ever heard of... nobody will watch."
"All Mormons are republicans, so I guess this disgusting lifestyle is just fine with them."
"The other wives are nothing more than mistresses."
"Oh, UGH. These people make my skin crawl."
So, dear readers, I challenge you to come up with a better criticism of the "Sister Wives" series. Actually, no, don't bother - you can't. Polygamy might be uncommon, but it is no less normal (and sometimes boring) than monogamy.
Five cheers to the Browns for risking their normalcy to present a perfectly truthful view of a plural family; and, to the Church which so desperately yearns to distance itself from one of its core, founding doctrines, I say, "IN YOUR FACE!" "Try arguing with reality!!!"
Saturday, September 18, 2010
Hubris
My thoughts today are about hubris. Hubris is apparently a Greek word relating to extreme insolence or excessive arrogance. In my mind it has come to apply to a person who has lost his or her grasp on judiciousness, self-restraint and adherence to correct principles. I impute hubris to those people who take up a cause which they know is an attack on others, yet they feel that to execute the attack is more important than the direct and collateral fallout which may be inflicted on their target. I knew a man once who hated me so much that he could hardly sleep at nights. His ex-wife later told me that he tossed and turned at bedtime as he struggled to develop new ways to persecute me. I believe he was/is possessed. When an influence is "stronger than you are", it must be coming from an external source - a spirit which is striving to possess and control you.
I knew an anti-polygamist once who said, "I can never be at peace until those polygamists stop." It seems there are a good number of people who feel the same way. I promise them no peace. I am reminded of that movie, FALLEN, with Denzel Washington and John Goodman. A central theme of the movie is that there is an evil spirit which moves from one human to another, completely possessing each one. In the movie, only one person at a time is possessed. I fear that in real life the demonic possession is infectious and replicating. Look at the dozens of people in Utah, Arizona and Texas (and perhaps now Canada) who cannot rest until they have brought harm upon one or more polygamists. If they could congregate all 38,000 polygamists in a detention camp, would they shoot or gas them? Or would they just confiscate all the children and put the adults to work in a slave labor camp?
A few months back, a blogger named TX BluesMan took me to task for insisting that Warren Jeffs' rape-as-an-accomplice charge was bogus and unconstitutional. I deferred to his/her superior legal expertise, but I remained perplexed at his/her unflinching attack on people's freedom to arrange their families as they see fit (see Roe v. Wade 1973). It seems now that TX BluesMan and Rattily Balonis have both had to bite some serious bullet. See the post from Modern Pharisee on this subject. You'd think people would watch enough movies to learn that, when the bad, angry, hubristic folk get too carried away in their spite and arrogance, they eventually crash and burn and have to slink off in shame and humiliation.
I happen to think that abortion is never acceptable. I bet we kill two million innocent babies every year in the great Corporate United States. I do not feel driven, however, to spend my life and energies harassing and hounding their murdering mothers or the medical personnel who mutilate the fetuses. Do you think that is because I can't campaign for office on such a platform - or I can't get rich authoring a tell-all book on my painful experiences with abortionists? God has not called me on such a mission, and I don't believe He has called Barbarous Warthog or John Crackhounder on a mission to destroy the FLDS, either.
The FLDS are not perfect. Lord knows - the Amish are not perfect, either. Is that any reason for us to storm in and eradicate their societies? Is cultural genocide one of the important roles of government? To illustrate again the bizarre extent to which some arrogant public officials will go, I point your attention once again to the upcoming trial of an FLDS member - NO, not Wendell's, I mean Merril's.
Merril Jessop's trial is coming in a few weeks. He was merely indicted for performing an "illegal ceremony". That would be kind of akin to writing an "unlawful poem" or wearing a criminal logo on your T-shirt. Truth is - in countries like Latvia and Lithuania, the hammer and sickle emblem is prohibited. This is not Latvia or Lithuania; this is the Corporation of the United States, which nation still uses some parts of the original Constitution. Merril is being prosecuted for saying certain words in a certain room with certain other people present. Unless he was leaking classified national secrets to the Red Chinese, can someone tell me how what he did can possibly be construed to be a crime? (BluesMan feel free to chime in here.) Is the charge important enough to jeopardize his health and well-being and the association of his large, loving family?
I love my daughters and I pray they won't marry until their brains start working better. A hundred years ago, young marriages were normal. Nowadays we think differently, but what exactly did Merril do that was criminal? Merril was never authorized by the state of Texas to solemnize legal weddings, so he cannot have even attempted to do so. What he did can only be considered free speech, free association and protected private expressions in the privacy of someone's residence. Maybe CPS (with its wildly lower standards) can intervene and complain that the conduct constituted some form of child abuse, but it has ostensibly dropped any such charges.
Like I said before, I am sure that a marriage between a cat and a dog is not legal and is void ab initio. If I wed my cat to my dog in my living room, can the SturmTruppen come and arrest me for solemnizing an illegal wedding ceremony? If this is what our nation has come to, I should move to Switzerland. At least there, there is less likelihood that my guns will be confiscated.
So much about our deeply socialistic government is about mothering us. We have created a nanny state. Problem is, Nanny is vicious and greedy and has fangs. Why is Obama calling (yesterday) for free education through college age? Does he want to indoctrinate a whole new generation of Balonises, Wisans, Lintbags, Walthers, Harferbrains, Hooligans, Mengels, Browbeaters, Hunshakers, Filschers, Snotleffs, Herberts and Perrys?
Polygamy is a sexy topic to campaign on. That doesn't mean it is right to exploit a harmless minority for political or financial gain.
Hubris comes before the fall. Let my people go!
I knew an anti-polygamist once who said, "I can never be at peace until those polygamists stop." It seems there are a good number of people who feel the same way. I promise them no peace. I am reminded of that movie, FALLEN, with Denzel Washington and John Goodman. A central theme of the movie is that there is an evil spirit which moves from one human to another, completely possessing each one. In the movie, only one person at a time is possessed. I fear that in real life the demonic possession is infectious and replicating. Look at the dozens of people in Utah, Arizona and Texas (and perhaps now Canada) who cannot rest until they have brought harm upon one or more polygamists. If they could congregate all 38,000 polygamists in a detention camp, would they shoot or gas them? Or would they just confiscate all the children and put the adults to work in a slave labor camp?
A few months back, a blogger named TX BluesMan took me to task for insisting that Warren Jeffs' rape-as-an-accomplice charge was bogus and unconstitutional. I deferred to his/her superior legal expertise, but I remained perplexed at his/her unflinching attack on people's freedom to arrange their families as they see fit (see Roe v. Wade 1973). It seems now that TX BluesMan and Rattily Balonis have both had to bite some serious bullet. See the post from Modern Pharisee on this subject. You'd think people would watch enough movies to learn that, when the bad, angry, hubristic folk get too carried away in their spite and arrogance, they eventually crash and burn and have to slink off in shame and humiliation.
I happen to think that abortion is never acceptable. I bet we kill two million innocent babies every year in the great Corporate United States. I do not feel driven, however, to spend my life and energies harassing and hounding their murdering mothers or the medical personnel who mutilate the fetuses. Do you think that is because I can't campaign for office on such a platform - or I can't get rich authoring a tell-all book on my painful experiences with abortionists? God has not called me on such a mission, and I don't believe He has called Barbarous Warthog or John Crackhounder on a mission to destroy the FLDS, either.
The FLDS are not perfect. Lord knows - the Amish are not perfect, either. Is that any reason for us to storm in and eradicate their societies? Is cultural genocide one of the important roles of government? To illustrate again the bizarre extent to which some arrogant public officials will go, I point your attention once again to the upcoming trial of an FLDS member - NO, not Wendell's, I mean Merril's.
Merril Jessop's trial is coming in a few weeks. He was merely indicted for performing an "illegal ceremony". That would be kind of akin to writing an "unlawful poem" or wearing a criminal logo on your T-shirt. Truth is - in countries like Latvia and Lithuania, the hammer and sickle emblem is prohibited. This is not Latvia or Lithuania; this is the Corporation of the United States, which nation still uses some parts of the original Constitution. Merril is being prosecuted for saying certain words in a certain room with certain other people present. Unless he was leaking classified national secrets to the Red Chinese, can someone tell me how what he did can possibly be construed to be a crime? (BluesMan feel free to chime in here.) Is the charge important enough to jeopardize his health and well-being and the association of his large, loving family?
I love my daughters and I pray they won't marry until their brains start working better. A hundred years ago, young marriages were normal. Nowadays we think differently, but what exactly did Merril do that was criminal? Merril was never authorized by the state of Texas to solemnize legal weddings, so he cannot have even attempted to do so. What he did can only be considered free speech, free association and protected private expressions in the privacy of someone's residence. Maybe CPS (with its wildly lower standards) can intervene and complain that the conduct constituted some form of child abuse, but it has ostensibly dropped any such charges.
Like I said before, I am sure that a marriage between a cat and a dog is not legal and is void ab initio. If I wed my cat to my dog in my living room, can the SturmTruppen come and arrest me for solemnizing an illegal wedding ceremony? If this is what our nation has come to, I should move to Switzerland. At least there, there is less likelihood that my guns will be confiscated.
So much about our deeply socialistic government is about mothering us. We have created a nanny state. Problem is, Nanny is vicious and greedy and has fangs. Why is Obama calling (yesterday) for free education through college age? Does he want to indoctrinate a whole new generation of Balonises, Wisans, Lintbags, Walthers, Harferbrains, Hooligans, Mengels, Browbeaters, Hunshakers, Filschers, Snotleffs, Herberts and Perrys?
Polygamy is a sexy topic to campaign on. That doesn't mean it is right to exploit a harmless minority for political or financial gain.
Hubris comes before the fall. Let my people go!
Wednesday, September 15, 2010
My Two Bits
Time for Renn's two bits:
I have noticed a couple of other websites/blogs opining that a judge's recent decision to allow Allen Steed's rape trial to proceed is a victory for the State of Utah, and that a conviction is likely. One site says, "Who wants to bet?"
I will bet my wives that no trial of Allen Steed will happen. Why? Because the star witness, Elissa Wall, will never again dare to get on the witness stand. Oh, yes, she has been pretty glib on TV news interviews, but those interviewers didn't ask the tough questions.
Elissa Wall's entire case was choreographed by some not-so-clandestine figures behind the scenes. Sadly, there is also so much dirt behind those scenes that their house of cards is at risk of tumbling. A conviction of Allen Steed was never what they wanted. It would be a thin victory even now; a victory whose potential cost to them would be catastrophic.
As I suggested in my last post, this circus has been almost entirely about politics. People in powerful positions are posturing for political gain. Having Elissa Wall crack under moderately probing questioning would be about as beneficial to those political exploits as having Reszinda Swinetown get on the stand and admit that her YFZ Ranch phone call was scripted and orchestrated by the same band of dark characters.
So, when Rozslutta gets on the stand to admit the hoax, I'll believe that Elissa will get up on the stand and stand up for the truth, too.
I have noticed a couple of other websites/blogs opining that a judge's recent decision to allow Allen Steed's rape trial to proceed is a victory for the State of Utah, and that a conviction is likely. One site says, "Who wants to bet?"
I will bet my wives that no trial of Allen Steed will happen. Why? Because the star witness, Elissa Wall, will never again dare to get on the witness stand. Oh, yes, she has been pretty glib on TV news interviews, but those interviewers didn't ask the tough questions.
Elissa Wall's entire case was choreographed by some not-so-clandestine figures behind the scenes. Sadly, there is also so much dirt behind those scenes that their house of cards is at risk of tumbling. A conviction of Allen Steed was never what they wanted. It would be a thin victory even now; a victory whose potential cost to them would be catastrophic.
As I suggested in my last post, this circus has been almost entirely about politics. People in powerful positions are posturing for political gain. Having Elissa Wall crack under moderately probing questioning would be about as beneficial to those political exploits as having Reszinda Swinetown get on the stand and admit that her YFZ Ranch phone call was scripted and orchestrated by the same band of dark characters.
So, when Rozslutta gets on the stand to admit the hoax, I'll believe that Elissa will get up on the stand and stand up for the truth, too.
Thursday, September 9, 2010
Supreme Hypocrisy
Just a couple of weeks ago, the Utah Supreme Court issued its opinion in the UEP Trust case. Attorneys for the FLDS argued that Judge Desleaze Lintbag had acted improperly when she reformed (with help from the Hooligans) the FLDS trust (she gutted the trust's religious intents and turned it into an unrecognizable secular trust). Rather than tackling this complaint in substance, the Court chose to dodge the issue and utilize the excuse offered to it by the State's lawyers. The excuse was that, by virtue of the assertion that the FLDS had allegedly waited "too long" to challenge the trust reformation, a legal doctrine known as "Laches" went into effect (let us not forget that on every occasion when an FLDS member appeared in a courtroom to protest the travesty, his family was besieged or he was whisked off to months of unlawful detention in a Florence, Arizona, prison [for not knowing the whereabouts of Warren Jeffs]). Laches says that you need to bring your case in a timely manner, or else a lot of water will flow under the proverbial bridge, and it can eventually become too difficult of harmful for the Court to unravel or rewind all of the undesirable consequences of the delay. In my view, the FLDS need to challenge this thinking because it appears to be a lame excuse when the ongoing and potential harm to a community is so far-reaching and devastating (not-to-mention mean spirited).
The State's office of the Attorney General is the keeper of the legal mandate, the paragon of true legal principles - the guardian of the precious rights of the citizens. So here is the State's legal theory:
"When you have a complaint against a party, you must address it expeditiously. You have to bring the matter before the court. You have to give the other party its fair day in court. You have to bring your case swiftly. You have to state what your complaint is and argue it in a timely manner. If you don't have a legitimate case, you have to fess up and acknowledge it openly. If you have witnesses who have lied and fabricated testimony, you have to admit it and accept defeat. You can't just drag your heels indefinitely and hope that some sympathetic court will entertain your arguments years down the road. You have to seek a 'speedy trial'."
So here are the words of the State's deputy AG, Craig Barlow:
“It is not my decision about retrial, that is Mr. Belnap’s in Washington County and I wouldn’t comment until a final decision has been made and none has.”
“We do not believe that a retrial is necessary before he can be extradited. No.”
“The timing [of any retrial, if there is one] is something that is going to be decided probably by Judge Christiansen and possibly Judge Shumate. Our position is pendency of the Utah charges on potential retrial are not a legal bar to extradition to Texas on the current charges filed there.”
“We don’t need him here right now and we think the great state of Texas ought to have an opportunity to try Mr. Jeffs for the crimes he has been alleged to have committed in Texas.”
Let me translate:
"We hate Warren Jeffs. The fact that his conviction was overturned was the most crushing defeat in Utah's legal history. We must find a way to get this guy. We want to let Texas get its bloodthirsty teeth into him. We want to keep him behind bars at all costs. We know we cannot ever re-try him because the charges are bogus and our witnesses perjured their brains out. We just want to pretend that we sincerely want another "crack" at him so that we can drag things out and let our constituents think that we will successfully hang these allegations over his head for years and years - let's say 75 years, after Texas is all done with him."
Laches-Schmaches, Pendency-Schmendency !!!!!
Am I the only one who sees the hypocrisy?
The State's office of the Attorney General is the keeper of the legal mandate, the paragon of true legal principles - the guardian of the precious rights of the citizens. So here is the State's legal theory:
"When you have a complaint against a party, you must address it expeditiously. You have to bring the matter before the court. You have to give the other party its fair day in court. You have to bring your case swiftly. You have to state what your complaint is and argue it in a timely manner. If you don't have a legitimate case, you have to fess up and acknowledge it openly. If you have witnesses who have lied and fabricated testimony, you have to admit it and accept defeat. You can't just drag your heels indefinitely and hope that some sympathetic court will entertain your arguments years down the road. You have to seek a 'speedy trial'."
So here are the words of the State's deputy AG, Craig Barlow:
“It is not my decision about retrial, that is Mr. Belnap’s in Washington County and I wouldn’t comment until a final decision has been made and none has.”
“We do not believe that a retrial is necessary before he can be extradited. No.”
“The timing [of any retrial, if there is one] is something that is going to be decided probably by Judge Christiansen and possibly Judge Shumate. Our position is pendency of the Utah charges on potential retrial are not a legal bar to extradition to Texas on the current charges filed there.”
“We don’t need him here right now and we think the great state of Texas ought to have an opportunity to try Mr. Jeffs for the crimes he has been alleged to have committed in Texas.”
Let me translate:
"We hate Warren Jeffs. The fact that his conviction was overturned was the most crushing defeat in Utah's legal history. We must find a way to get this guy. We want to let Texas get its bloodthirsty teeth into him. We want to keep him behind bars at all costs. We know we cannot ever re-try him because the charges are bogus and our witnesses perjured their brains out. We just want to pretend that we sincerely want another "crack" at him so that we can drag things out and let our constituents think that we will successfully hang these allegations over his head for years and years - let's say 75 years, after Texas is all done with him."
Laches-Schmaches, Pendency-Schmendency !!!!!
Am I the only one who sees the hypocrisy?
Wednesday, September 1, 2010
No Happy Polygamists
NEWSFLASH !!!
There are no happy polygamists.
At a conference (NOVA, I think) last week, Utah deputy Attorney General Turd Korgensen gave a speech with his little buddy, Snarolyn Jessop. Between the two of them, they formally announced that there are no happy polygamists. I'm so mad that I wasn't there, because I could have introduced them to one - me!
The Salt Lake Tribune's polygamy "beat" reporter, Brooke Adams, posted on this event in her blog here.
The Utah Attorney General's office has maintained a tenuous love-hate relationship with Rocky Mountain polygs. I think "love-hate" and "tenuous" because, despite the "Primer" and the "Safety Net" and all of the private and public dialogue, the role of the AG is to "enforce the law". WHAT LAW? - you know, the one that says you are a felon if you believe in D&C 132.
The thinly-veiled hatred of us plygs could not have been more evident than in Deputy Smorgensen's rant last week. He acted like a sarcastic, insolent bully, not unlike those Arizona jailer thugs who brutalized Warren for being "religious". When the "good ol' boys" are in power, they tend to flex it. He universally vilified men in plural marriages. He mocked the FLDS community. Of Eliarsa Wall's falsehood-riddled tabloid rag book, Snarkenson said it was "marvelous". He said that Fundamentalist people have lost the ability to think for themselves (look at me - somebody else dictates every word I write in this blog). He said that Carolyn had changed his life (WHAT !!! = taught him how to stand up in front of hundreds of people and twist the truth for political and/or financial gain?).
Just like her prevaricating predecessor, Hyena Erickson, Jessflop has trumpeted the battle-cry that all polygamous women are brainwashed into thinking they are happy when they are not. Isn't thinking you are happy the very definition of happiness? I guess her rather anecdotal observation could be plausible if she had personally interviewed the tens of thousands of polygamous wives and learned that not one is happy.
A man once told me that he was sure that ALL Indians walk in single file - after all, the one he saw walking was walking in single file.
This stupid crap argument that polygamy is inherently harmful is an insult to the intelligence of even middle school kids. You cannot arrest "polygamy" and sentence it to prison time any more than you can convict a dagger for murder.
Stupid people do stupid things. Idiot people try to argue that polygamy should simply not be permitted. Well, damn it! - based on its miserable record of failure, MONOGAMY should be prohibited. Try arguing that homosexuality is inherently harmful to society. Many people feel that pornography is harmful to individuals and communities, but America has NO INTENTION of outlawing it. Immorality, fornication and adultery are easily implicated as causes for bad marriages and divorces, but nobody EVER tries to argue that they should be criminalized (even before Lawrence [2003]).
It's really all about politics, and I've decided that politics is dirty. These AG folk have sold their souls to the devil or the Church or both. They don't care about the state's sincere minority citizens. They strike dirty secret deals in backrooms with other crony, opportunistic lawyers. For them the end justifies the means. They elicit false testimony and cover their tracks when the lies threaten to blow up in their faces.
Bruce R. McConkie once wrote that the day of the Lord's second coming is foreknown and fixed. Nothing on mankind's part can hasten or delay it. (I cracked up because, not long after that) Spencer W. Kimball wrote that the timing of the Lord's return is hinged entirely on our conduct - if we are righteous, He will come quickly; if we are wicked, He will punish us by postponing (confusing, huh ??).
I'm tempted to wonder if Lord Obama (along with Reid, Pelosi, Geithner, Bernanke, Greenspan and Volcker) is rapidly accelerating the dramatic Second Coming, at which point these politician frauds will be faced with some uncomfortable choices and accountability. My recommendation - MAKE BETTER CHOICES NOW !!! Things will go better for you at the last day.
There are no happy polygamists.
At a conference (NOVA, I think) last week, Utah deputy Attorney General Turd Korgensen gave a speech with his little buddy, Snarolyn Jessop. Between the two of them, they formally announced that there are no happy polygamists. I'm so mad that I wasn't there, because I could have introduced them to one - me!
The Salt Lake Tribune's polygamy "beat" reporter, Brooke Adams, posted on this event in her blog here.
The Utah Attorney General's office has maintained a tenuous love-hate relationship with Rocky Mountain polygs. I think "love-hate" and "tenuous" because, despite the "Primer" and the "Safety Net" and all of the private and public dialogue, the role of the AG is to "enforce the law". WHAT LAW? - you know, the one that says you are a felon if you believe in D&C 132.
The thinly-veiled hatred of us plygs could not have been more evident than in Deputy Smorgensen's rant last week. He acted like a sarcastic, insolent bully, not unlike those Arizona jailer thugs who brutalized Warren for being "religious". When the "good ol' boys" are in power, they tend to flex it. He universally vilified men in plural marriages. He mocked the FLDS community. Of Eliarsa Wall's falsehood-riddled tabloid rag book, Snarkenson said it was "marvelous". He said that Fundamentalist people have lost the ability to think for themselves (look at me - somebody else dictates every word I write in this blog). He said that Carolyn had changed his life (WHAT !!! = taught him how to stand up in front of hundreds of people and twist the truth for political and/or financial gain?).
Just like her prevaricating predecessor, Hyena Erickson, Jessflop has trumpeted the battle-cry that all polygamous women are brainwashed into thinking they are happy when they are not. Isn't thinking you are happy the very definition of happiness? I guess her rather anecdotal observation could be plausible if she had personally interviewed the tens of thousands of polygamous wives and learned that not one is happy.
A man once told me that he was sure that ALL Indians walk in single file - after all, the one he saw walking was walking in single file.
This stupid crap argument that polygamy is inherently harmful is an insult to the intelligence of even middle school kids. You cannot arrest "polygamy" and sentence it to prison time any more than you can convict a dagger for murder.
Stupid people do stupid things. Idiot people try to argue that polygamy should simply not be permitted. Well, damn it! - based on its miserable record of failure, MONOGAMY should be prohibited. Try arguing that homosexuality is inherently harmful to society. Many people feel that pornography is harmful to individuals and communities, but America has NO INTENTION of outlawing it. Immorality, fornication and adultery are easily implicated as causes for bad marriages and divorces, but nobody EVER tries to argue that they should be criminalized (even before Lawrence [2003]).
It's really all about politics, and I've decided that politics is dirty. These AG folk have sold their souls to the devil or the Church or both. They don't care about the state's sincere minority citizens. They strike dirty secret deals in backrooms with other crony, opportunistic lawyers. For them the end justifies the means. They elicit false testimony and cover their tracks when the lies threaten to blow up in their faces.
Bruce R. McConkie once wrote that the day of the Lord's second coming is foreknown and fixed. Nothing on mankind's part can hasten or delay it. (I cracked up because, not long after that) Spencer W. Kimball wrote that the timing of the Lord's return is hinged entirely on our conduct - if we are righteous, He will come quickly; if we are wicked, He will punish us by postponing (confusing, huh ??).
I'm tempted to wonder if Lord Obama (along with Reid, Pelosi, Geithner, Bernanke, Greenspan and Volcker) is rapidly accelerating the dramatic Second Coming, at which point these politician frauds will be faced with some uncomfortable choices and accountability. My recommendation - MAKE BETTER CHOICES NOW !!! Things will go better for you at the last day.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
