The Big Question

Maybe you are not scratching your head as vigorously as I am.  I just received this info:

Jury finds ex-polygamist leader guilty of bigamy

Updated 11:01 a.m., Wednesday, March 28, 2012

http://www.chron.com/news/article/Jury-finds-ex-polygamist-leader-guilty-of-bigamy-3439231.php

MIDLAND, Texas (AP) — A former lieutenant to polygamist sect leader Warren Jeffs was convicted Wednesday of illegally taking three wives besides his own, despite his attorney's argument that "celestial marriages" weren't forbidden by state law. A West Texas jury found Wendell Loy Nielsen guilty of three counts of bigamy. He faces up to 10 years in prison.

------------------------------------------------------------

I have blogged before on the topic of Wendell Nielsen's prosecution.  I cannot pass judgment on the extent to which he was or wasn't involved in the wedding of young teens to Warren Pedo' Jeffs.  One thing I do know, however, is that Texas is going out on a tenuous limb.  Wendell has (at least) four "bed-partners".  He would not use that term.  He would quietly refer to them as wives, even though "wives" they are not.  Perhaps one of them is legally married to him - the others cannot be - or else he would officially be a bigamist.  He has been convicted now of bigamy because he meets the two following standards: 

1.  He is legally married to one person.
2.  He calls several other women he knows, "wives".

His crime, then, is that he has uttered unacceptable, criminal words.  Oh yeah - he's also a DREADED MORMON FUNDAMENTALIST.  He will do ten years in the clink for saying "wife" (not "girl-friend").  Don't try to tell me that the First Amendment is not dead in Texas.

Is it the term "wife" which has Texas's knickers in such a twist, or is it the fear that he might have had sex with more than one person (unlike law-abiding Texans)?  So here is the -

           BIG QUESTION

Is there a lawyer out there who will take this absurd conviction and appeal it to a higher court?  Does someone other than Jonathan Turley have the urge to get Reynolds overturned?  You see, Texas did not have such a silly, overbroad bigamy statute until Mark Shurtleff went on a trip to Texas and shopped Utah's goofy ancient statute to the Texas legislature.

Should Kody Brown move to Texas?
--------------------------------------------
In other news, law enforcement agencies in British Columbia are now looking seriously at enforcing the recently upheld Canadian anti-polygamy law against the residents of Bountiful, B.C.  Let's watch and see if they remember to arrest the poor, guilty women, too.  OR - is it just a crusade against a handful of Fundamentalist Mormon husbands?  Politics make me sick sometimes.

Salmonella - Bacterial Flagellum

Salmonella Propulsion Apparatus

In an earlier post I made reference to the work of Michael Behe (professor of biochemistry at Lehigh University).  Behe challenges Darwinian theories of evolution.  He proposed the concept of "irreducible complexity".  His argument is that, when scientists stumble upon a biological mechanism of spectacular complexity AND they discover that the mechanism could not have survived or replicated without all of its components fully in place, then they must conclude that the mechanism COULD NOT have "evolved" into its current complexity.

Behe's thinking is that there are millions of mechanisms in living creatures (eyesight, blood-clotting, etc.) which could not have gradually developed.  He insists that, if we examine these complex mechanisms (like even the simple mouse-trap) we must conclude that they were designed purposefully.  He avoids trying to identify the "Designer", but it is clear that he accepts God and denounces Darwin and his evolutionist followers.

Behe has stirred up a vigorous controversy.  Some detractors insist that his irreducible complexity model is not falsifiable (and is thus mere speculation), yet they are hardly in a position to falsify it anyway.  Plus, proving the alleged occurrence of a hugely complex series of molecular biochemical evolutionary mutations is about as difficult as proving that Noah put many animals on his arc.  The following graphic shows some of the molecular structure of the base of the flagellum (whip propeller) which allows Salmonella bacteria to swim.  Remember that this critter is one cell.  The work is done by molecules and compounds.

When this machinery is assembled in this organism, the pieces and parts seem to "know" where they belong.  That is absurd, of course, because the little molecules that make up the various departments of a cell do not have a "brain".  Nevertheless, they are clearly equipped with some sort of programming code that governs their assembly and reproduction.  Where is that "data" stored?

I came across a short video which depicts the assembly process of this amazing apparatus.  Please watch it and ask yourself if you believe that this mechanism came into existence by evolutionary accident.  My opinion is that the people who argue so vociferously for the belief in evolution desperately hope that there is not a God (and all of the absoluteness that comes therewith).  CLICK on this website - -
Bacterial Flagellum - A Sheer Wonder Of Intelligent Design
                                then CLICK THE PLAY  >  ARROW
                       then watch carefully the intelligent design work of God.

If the sound on this video doesn't work, there is a volume control icon in the bottom left corner of the video window.  Click on it to remove the 'X' and un-mute.