Strange - I think reporters do not know how to describe the twin towns of Colorado City and Hildale. Some refer to them as the "polygamous town". What is a 'polygamous town'? - a town which is married to more than one spouse? Is San Francisco a "homosexual town"? - a town that mates with a different town of the same gender.
I saw a news report the other day which noted that 87% of "black" Americans support the re-election of president Barack Obama. Why is that? Is it because black people feel that our country is better led by a person whose skin is black? Is it because Barack Obama is a socialist, and black people gravitate towards socialism? Who knows?
Here's another interesting factoid. You do not own your vehicle. "Wait !!!", you say, "I have a Certificate of Title!". Well, a certificate of title is not THE title. It is a piece of paper that certifies that there is a title, and you do not have it. The REAL title is the MSO (Manufacturer's Statement of Origin). Read the following from the Government's Border Protection website:
"What
documents are considered valid proof of ownership for Customs and
Border Protection (CBP) purposes when exporting a vehicle / car from the
U.S. which does not have a title?
If
the vehicle or car you intend to export does not have a title, a
manufacturer's statement of origin (MSO) is considered valid proof of
ownership."
--------------------------
When you buy a new car, the dealership sends the MSO to the State. The state keeps the MSO and continues to own the vehicle. You are merely the renter of the car, as evidenced by the annual rental payment you must make in the form of a registration fee.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
In other news, there will soon be a hearing to address whether Kody Brown's challenge of Utah's bigamy statute is now moot because Utah County has decided not to prosecute the Browns for their plural purporting and cohabiting. This is an interesting twist. My sense is that Waddoups will rule that the Browns still have standing to challenge the law because the law still menaces them and they were harmed by a long-lingering threat of investigation and prosecution. I believe that Waddoups will decide that the law clashes with the 2003 Lawrence decision and is now void.
HOWEVER . . . . . . .
If the next Attorney General (presumably Bishop John Swallow) elects (or is commanded by the Mother Church) to appeal Waddoups' decision to the 10th Circuit in Denver, the panel may choose to disagree with Waddoups (as it did with Ted Stewart in the Bronson v. Swensen case) and assert that, absent an arrest and a trial, the Browns suffered no "harm" and thus have no standing to bring the challenge.
Just like Obaminacare, folks, this is all political. Powerful people want us polyg's to be outlaws at all costs. It's easier to abuse people if their faces are on a 'Wanted' poster.
Excuse my cynicism again, but there appears to be nothing new under the monogamous (?) sun. I'm still waiting for Canada to arrest Winston Blackmore and James Oler. I'll probably turn blue from holding my breath.
Utah has a Safety Net for polygamists - put in place to rescue a disenfranchised population. The Safety Net and its sponsors have announced a policy of not seeking the decriminalization of plural relationships. After all, why would you jeopardize your public funding and agenda by arguing for a disenfranchised population to stop being disenfranchised?
Strange!
