Thursday, May 22, 2008

SENSIBLE FOLKS will.............

5/27 TMW THROWS DOWN THE GAUNTLET AT
http://the-merry-widow.blogspot.com/

You all might want to check out what SHE has to say about the FLDS situation.


.........want to check SENSIBLE FOLKS out! It's brand spanking new and created to "help us all save time and money"..."tips and tricks... tested or used...by its contributers!"

It looks like a great blog and is run by some of our favorite bloggers.
I know...it looks like that piggy....... Well, couldn't we ALL use a piggy that does that!? Check out SENSIBLE FOLKS, folks!
OH! AND THERE'S SOME PRETTY DANDY CONVERSATION ABOUT THE MORMON POLYGAMY/KIDS SITUATION GOING ON IN THE COMMENTS...........COME JOIN IN! Z (but do NOT 'hog' the board........sorry, couldn't resist!!)

85 comments:

Anonymous said...

WOW! That's quite a team of sensible bloggers! :-)

nanc said...

thankx for the push, z!

The Merry Widow said...

Thank you!
And if anyone has a tip or question, there is an e-mail drop there, our blog librarian is in charge, or if you have our addy's...tell us already! LOL!

tmw

kevin said...

I found this post to be non-halal.

Z said...

Kev, it couldn't BE more non halal!!

Speaking of that, I'm hoping I can send some very frugal and delicious recipes there once in a while!?

You're VERY welcome for the push, folks! it was SIMPLE! and the only SENSIBLE thing to do, FOLKS!

Anonymous said...

Thanks, Z!

Karen Townsend said...

I'm heading on over right now.

nanc said...

sensible folks is a total pork site - 'member dat!

*8]

Anonymous said...

SENSIBLE NEWS of a DIFFERENT KIND:

TEXAS SEIZURE of POLYGAMIST SECT KIDS THROWN OUT

By MICHELLE ROBERTS, Associated Press Writer


In a ruling that could torpedo the case against the West Texas polygamist sect, a state appeals court Thursday said authorities had no right to seize more than 440 children in a raid on the splinter group's compound last month.

The Third Court of Appeals in Austin said the state failed to show the youngsters were in any immediate danger ...

It was not clear when the children — now scattered in foster homes across the state — might be returned to their parents. The ruling gave a lower-court judge 10 days to release the youngsters from custody, but the state could appeal to the Texas Supreme Court and block that.

The decision in one of the biggest child-custody cases in U.S. history was a humiliating defeat for the state Child Protective Services agency...

Sect elder Willie Jessop said the parents were elated, but added: "There will be no celebrations until some little children are getting hugs from their parents." He said his faith in the legal system will be restored "when I see the schoolyard full of children."

Every child at the Yearning For Zion Ranch in Eldorado was taken into custody more than six weeks ago after someone called a hot line claiming to be a pregnant, abused teenage wife. The girl has not been found and authorities are investigating whether the calls were a hoax...

[NOTE" We know it WAS a hoax, and ":the girl" was a 33-year-old black lunatic from Colorado with a history of making similar false allegations]

[T]the appeals court said the state acted too hastily in sweeping up all the children and taking them away on an emergency basis without going to court first.

"Even if one views the FLDS belief system as creating a danger of sexual abuse by grooming boys to be perpetrators of sexual abuse and raising girls to be victims of sexual abuse ... there is no evidence that this danger is 'immediate' or 'urgent'," the court said...

The court also said the state was wrong to consider the entire ranch as a single household and to seize all the children on the grounds that some parents in the home might be abusers.

CPS spokesman Patrick Crimmins said department attorneys had not decided whether to appeal. "We are trying to assess the impact that this may have on our case," he said...

CPS has struggled for weeks to establish the identities of the children and sort out their tangled family relationships. The youngsters are in foster homes all over the sprawling state, with some brothers or sisters separated by as much as 600 miles...

TRUNCATED by FreeThinke

Complete story may be found at:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080522/ap_on_re_us/polygamist_retreat&printer=1;_ylt=Ajwz8TIbW7FemZwak9B84mZH2ocA

Z said...

I was going to publish this but knew you would ahead of me, FT.

I still think this is a total farce and DISGUSTING decision by TX. How can they even think of risking ONE CHILD's welfare like this? I have no problem with infants being released to their mothers, but I was absolutely right in my immediate conjecture that those older ones could have been prompted and coached by their mothers ..I heard the other day that that HAD been attempted. I just can't protect liars and pedophiles to save my life.

you're still angry some caller blew the whistle when there are 14 yr old pregnant girls who aren't married in the eyes of the state and had to have sex with men they don't love and at this young age?

I couldn't agree with you on this if you typed it in solid gold and had some kind of Seal of GOodhousekeeping on it.

nanc said...

i'm thinkin' FT needs to start a blog of FT'S own...that's what i'm thinkin'...

WOULDN'T IT BE GREAT IF EVERYBODY HAD ONE?!?

*8]

Z said...

I've tried to tell him that, as has FJ, for a month now! Wouldn't it be an exciting one?!

heidianne jackson said...

thanks for the push, z. another truly great blog by a group of truly great bloggers. i heart them! and you too :)

and i agree that ft needs a blog!

heidianne jackson
http://biggirlpants.typepad.com

Anonymous said...

geeeeeeZ!

Can you, or one of your contributors enlighten me into the world of this cretin, as a lot of what he preaches sounds awfully familiar with the Socialist elites of Europe...

http://michellemalkin.com/2008/02
/09/i-have-a-plan-to-destroy-america
-by-richard-d-lamm/

Anonymous said...

Z, I'm very sorry to have to say it, but you are sounding more and more like Nancy Grace every day whenever issues involving sex come up.

I wish you would realize that this is not an issue of "child abuse" at all. That aspect of the case is entirely spurious. Rather it is an issue of a clear-cut violation of The Constitution and the Bill of Rights by an over-zealous ACTIVIST JUDGE and REDNECK POSSE out for blood–––the very sort of abuse of American Freedom and democracy you and other conservatives usually abhor.

Principle is Principle. Truth is Truth. There were NO GROUNDS WHATSOEVER for action taken by the Texas Gestapo. They were motivated entirely by PREJUDICE and unfounded SUSPICION.

Texas and the Activist Feminazi Judge have done EXACTLY what Mike Nifong and "The Durham Dirtbag," as Michael Savage calls her, did to the White Boys at UNC.

I sincerely hope the Judge, the Gestapo Raiders, and every damned Social Worker who had the gall to kidnap, imprison, perform invasive "tests" that involved poking around in body cavities, taking unauthorized DNA samples, and then giving custody of these children to total strangers often separating, then scattering brothers and sisters over a six hundred mile radius–––I hope the individuals involved in perpetrating this atrocity will be arrested, imprisoned without bail and punished to the fullest extent of the law for kidnapping, illegal search and seizure, unlawful prosecution, vandalism of private property, defamation of character, and anything else that can be thrown at them.

There are over 150 posts on this subject down the line on this gruesome subject. Many of them not made by me are nevertheless in agreement with the position I and Michael Savage have taken on this thing since it first reared its ugly head.

It depresses me that none of the excellent reasoning and factual research so abundantly displayed on this fine blog–––and now the wise, sane and perfectly just decision of the appeals court–––has made even the tiniest dent in your thinking.

I'm sorry, but this FLDS thing has TERRIFYING implications for ALL of us, if the Activist judge and the Redneck Posse is allowed to get away with the CRIMES they have committed against the US CONSTITUTION.

"Insomuch as Ye have done it unto the least of these, my brethren, Ye have also done it unto me."

~ FreeThinke

PS: This is NOT a contest of wills between us, Z. There is nothing personal about it. This is, instead, about the violation of PRINCIPLES greater than any individual on the planet. What Texas did six weeks ago to the Yearning for Zion ranch is tantamount to the tactics used by Nazi Germany.- FT

Z said...

reversepsychology, thanks for stopping by. I can't find that Lamm piece you linked!?? Sorry about that..I'm curious, but I figure it's something to do with OBAMA if it's about someone intent on destroying America!? Don't know why I can't find it.

FT, it is ALL about CHILDREN and it's difficult for me to hear your and the Texas court's denials of that, I don't care WHO you quote and HOW many people are on 'your side', or your comparing me to Nancy Grace, for goodness sake.....they're not on the childrens' side and that's ALL that matters in this case. It depresses me that YOU don't see that, frankly.
I've said countless times that it might not have been well handled, but they had no choice. And, I'll again say I don't see why infants were removed.

You don't have to agree with me! I'm not stupid, FT, I see your points and am happy you don't feel alone in your thinking! I disagree with the essence of the thing.

I am grateful people took action and the thing that was terrible is HOW THEY DID IT. BUT, this is completely unprecedented, the size and scope of this was enormous and they erred on the side of protecting the children. This isn't any more NAZI than I am.

heidianne jackson said...

z, i'm gonna have to agree with ft on this one.

the evidence of child abuse? none. some say "well teenagers were getting married to older men" - again there is no proof of anyone being forced to do anything of the sort.

in fact, the phone number used to make the anonymous report was traced back to an obama campaign worker. coincidence? i think not.

anyhow - in the state of texas, (and most other states including california) parents can give permission for their underaged daughters to marry or go live with a guy. what's the difference between that and what happened here?

these people were not actually polygamists because they weren't married to everyone. and while i find it distasteful, there is no law against swapping wives and/or having multiple sexual partners.

these children were not abused. so what if you don't think they should be raised in "that environment" it is the right of the parents to decide how best to raise their children so long as they are not abusing them.

the court and law enforcement (include child protective services) had no grounds, whatsoever, to take any of the actions they have so far taken in this ordeal. it's a travesty and an abomination and should be corrected to the best of the ability to do so immediately.

to do otherwise is not a hair's breadth of difference between infringing on these parents rights for living their lives as they see fit and infringing on the rights of others for spanking or punishing their children. it's all activism and it's all wrong.

heidianne jackson
http://biggirlpants.typepad.com

Z said...

I just can't agree,
this is enough for me to feel they did the right thing originally.

As I've said, it was badly managed, but if they hadn't gone in, I'd have no trust in our country in watching over our kids, Heidianne. Badly run, frightening implications, I agree with ALL OF THAT!!!

But, if there's ONE child being raped in there? I'm for going in.

The Merry Widow said...

I have already stated my view of it.
And if Jesus said, "Whoever causes the least of these(small children)to stumble, it were better that a millstone be hung around their neck and they be cast into the deepest part of the sea."
That is my final court of authority.
These children are the end result of generations of stumbling, a millstone would be merciful.
And, you forget te throw away boys that were dumped, all unprepared, upon a society that they were taught to fear. THAT IS ABUSIVE, sir and madam.

tmw

CJ said...

Well here we go again? Since as a result of their illegal action they now have evidence of 31 underage pregnancies, let them prosecute the perpetrators for those specific violations of the law. The action itself was, however, indefensible, and by it they may even have lost the legal ground they need to prosecute he genuine abuses. It was against the Constitution, and those here who think it's OK to raid a whole community on such flimsy allegations don't have a clue about what our Founders hoped to protect us from, and it's going to come against all of us soon if we don't fight it down. All it is going to take is false allegations of any kind against anybody.

Z said...

it seems to be whether we protect the children or protect our freedoms. How awful a choice.

Anonymous said...

Having posted before on this FLDS case that it should be adjudicated on a case by case basis, surely it can be agreed upon, that it was a complicated situation, in that these people live communally.

The question is, where does discipline end and abuse begin? The way I see it, is that these girls are born and bred to provide sex, and chidren to contribute to the numbers of followers.

Not to mention, mature men who have no qualms, and no doubt enjoyment in forcing themselves on female children, who are taught they have no choice and must comply. Moreover, a constant supply of availability of more young girls.

Since the boys seem to be persona non grata, the indication is that intimacy and sexual pleasure must be only for the the older men who 'like it' with young girls. What a set up. For God's sake it sounds like their rules come from the Koran.


If girls, once they hit puberty, are considered "ready", regardless of age, they are being abused. Or to put it more bluntly they're slaves, and breed cows. That's what they are.

There is a new case about a father who kept his daughter locked in the basement for many years, in untenable conditions. She was at his mercy. But, hey, according to some folks here, he's her father, and has that right!

In the FLDS matter, in essence these parents have done the same thing, if the accusations are true, and since we know young girls have given birth it seems there is truth to the allegations.

Now, those of you who feel this was mishandled, and I agree it was outside the norm of search and seizure,what would you have done, knowing minor girls were sex slaves and nothing more than breeders, at the mercy of men who conveniently call this a religion. Nothing?

FT: Z, Nancy Grace? Pleeaasse! But, I forget, you don't want this to descend into something personal.

Pris

heidianne jackson said...

z, if we don't protect our freedoms our children will not be ours to protect. they will be nothing more than little indoctrinated automatons much like the children of the ussr. no thoughts for themselves. no understanding of wrong or right. and if a parent tries to teach them anything of god or what our country was really supposed to be or real history, well then the parents will be summarily removed.

that is the slippery slope we are heading down and the actions by the government in this case have done nothing more than to pour oil on hill.

tmw, i am fully aware of the scripture you quote and fully aware that it is not the goverment's job to decide what is and is not a befitting action. it is god's job. and it is his vengeance, not caesar's that will be imposed with impugnity.

do you not think god has enough grace to judge the "throw away boys" on their heart and the teachings they were given? i do.

the government of today would have arrested abraham if they found out he had intended to burn his son as an offering to god. his behaviour, in terms of today's sentiments, would be considered abusive. but was it?

no. it was submission to god's will.

i have no doubt that these people are doing what they believe to be god's will. are you the person to judge whether they are doing wrong in god's eyes?

i know i am not.

heidianne jackson
http://biggirlpants.typepad.com

Z said...

Heidianne! it's illegal!
All that they're doing is illegal. Man can't say that they're married IN SPIRIT, as they say. We have to have laws or people will marry donkeys! Don't you agree with that?

As for God's will; unfortunately, we have to live in the world, too. And I believe he wouldn't want children being raped and having kids. We have to be good stewards, no?

Priscilla, I think the FLDS case is similar to the Austrian who had children by his daughter. She was held in captivity and forced to do his will, not His will.

Oh, you're all so smart and this is terrific. As Dennis Prager (who just said he would run for VP and asks that we contact McCain headquarters, by the way!) always says he wants CLARITY more than AGREEMENT, and I couldn't say it better (obviously!)

I'm thrilled there are differences of opinion here and that they're all so well presented.

of course, all of you who disagree with MEEE are going to be deleted in ten minutes, but.......(heh heh!!) KEEP IT UP. I am so enjoying this.

The Merry Widow said...

HJ-I do not blame the boys, I blame THE MEN!
The boys are to be pitied and helped to become full citizens. They are victims also!
Just as the girls are, and which is more sacred? Jesus Words, or the Constitution?

tmw

Z said...

HERE's BREAKING NEWS that might have some bearing on the conversation!

wahoooo!!

Anonymous said...

Heidianne, parental authority over American children is at risk and indeed being undermined every day as parents willingly send them to public school.

I want to know why we see no outrage over that? I see passivity regarding our children, as a rule.

Indoctrination is also alive and well in our public schools. historical revisionism, sexual proclivities of every kind, extremist environmentalism, politicization of the classroom no matter how young the students, etc.

This is in effect for millions of children, countrywide.

No one believes in parental authority more than I, and I am constantly amazed at how parents have given over that authority to public schools with nary a whimper.

However, in an extreme case such as the FLDS case, which is rare indeed, there is this demand for freedom of parental authority, no matter how egregeous the acts in question are.

Well, I am willing to judge. To imply that anything goes because God will judge, is to abdicate any or all responsibility for the most helpless amongst us.

God is not a micro-manager, and we were given the gift of intelligence for a reason. Not to sit around, see young lives utterly destroyed, and do nothing.

It wouldn't hurt either, to say a prayer for those children who are at the mercy of those who would destroy their lives forever.

Pris

Anonymous said...

Z....

The Richard D Lamm article....

Heres another place to access it..

Story entitled - How to destroy a Country....

http://www.bfbwwiii.blogspot.com/

The Merry Widow said...

Pris-My late husband and I decided before we were married, that if G*D blessed us with children, they would NOT be subjected to governmental schools. Period!
It has been the home schoolers who have sounded the alarm, it has been Home School Legal Defense Association who has led the charge in the courts and in Congress to defend AND expand the rights of parents over their children's education and upbringing!
There is an outcry, and it has been on the part of parents who do not trust the government to do their job.
So there is an outcry, and there are warriors on tat field of battle...but the lamestreammedia refuses to even hint at our involvement.
Even after my husband died, I continued to homeschool, because they didn't need to be faced with what is going on in the public schools along with dealing with their Father's death.
I do have an idea what's going on, and am horrified. But just because I don't trumpet what I know, doesn't mean I'm sitting it out either!

mw

Anonymous said...

Thank GOD for YOU, Heidianne! BRAVO! And Bless you–––certainly not because you agreed with ME, but because you are RIGHT.

Both CJ and Norwegianwood, who are old friends both of Z's and mine, and several others had a great deal to say on this when it was featured a few weeks here at GeeeZ.

Heidianne got it EXACTLY right––– nailed perfectly. If we don't protect our freedoms FIRST, we will very soon have NOTHING at all TO protect.

And I'm sorry, but no matter what the STATE (that perennial usurper of rights and freedoms) has to say, and no matter how anyone FEELS on the subject, a post-pubescent girl is NOT––I repeat NOT––a "child." It was perfectly "normal" not very long ago for girls of that age to marry and start bearing children–––and still is throughout much of the world.

If anyone want to argue this further (I hope not!), it would be a good idea to review the 150-odd posts made on this subject earlier in Z's archives. There is MUCH of great value to read and digest there.

FreeThinke

Z said...

FT. I'm delighted you find Heidianne "RIGHT", I think the world of her and her intelligence and her blog (biggirlpants on my blogroll, you'll enjoy her indepth pieces very much, I'm sure. I do!), and I'm so grateful she didn't need me to share her views but felt comfortable enough to air them and to accept mine so graciously.
I'm honored that she respects my opinion, too.

And, FT? Frankly, pardon me for saying it this way, but I don't give a s*&#$ what other cultures do with young female children. Other cultures cut genitals and force the bottom lip to stick out 6", too. We don't do that here legally. That's what makes us America.

Please, nobody's called the conversation over here at my blog but you; I hope others do continue the talk. I was enjoying it.

thanks.

CJ said...

Hi Pris,
You guys who are upset at what goes on at the FLDS compound and ask "What would you have done knowing [what goes on there]?" as if it were so urgent to act immediately, don't seem to be taking into account that this situation is ongoing. It's been going on for years, and it's not unknown what goes on there. Many have left the sect and told their stories. The question is WHY ON EARTH DID THEY ACT AT THIS POINT WITH NO LEGAL GROUNDS FOR IT when they should have been working to set them up for a legal action that will STICK. You don't just round up hundreds of kids on the phone-call sayso of some woman you can't even find. It shouldn't be impossible to get facts, to know exactly who does what to whom and then act RATIONALLY for heaven's sake to arrest and prosecute particular individuals you have GOOD reason to believe are in violation of the laws. It might take some time to set it up, perhaps using a former member or something like that, but you CANNOT act as they DID act in this case without real EVIDENCE and PARTICULAR SUSPECTS.

CJ said...

Z, it isn't ALL illegal at all! You don't know who impregnated whom and you can't indict the entire sect and hold ALL the mothers and fathers guilty and steal ALL their children because there are 31 teenagers who are bearing or have borne children. That is not how the law operates.

Z said...

cj, as I conjectured when it happened and which has come to have been the actual reality; mothers were priming their children, coaching them of what to say. At first, the mothers stayed with the children, about 2 weeks, but the authorities found the evidence was being tampered with. The children deserve better than that. Their truth needs to be heard, not tainted by rationalizing the things going on in there. It's what caused them to have to be separated.

Nobody's saying it went perfectly well; I believe this was the largest group of children in this kind of danger ever. Considering that, child services (and they're all under staffed and under funded)didn't do badly. I would return the infants, that's all.

There is no government witch hunt on any group. This was about protecting the children. When we have all the evidence, if we ever do, if the truth's ever known, then we can pick it apart, right?
If ONE young girl was impregnated by a grown man, this had to be done, in my opinion.

Are you more upset at how it was done or that it was done at all?
Have you heard the women who've come out of there and the brainwashing they talk about there to girls and boys?

I do see everyone's points, I see your point and have sympathy for it, I don't disagree totally with anyone, I just have to come down on the side of 14 yr old girls who're pregnant out of their own will! With our media and our "GOTCHA" society we have today, what else COULD Child Protective Services have done?

What if they went in and found orgies, for goodness sake, and CHild Protective Serv. hadn't done anything! Imagine?
Maybe it's overreaction because of our hideously nasty and happy-to-find-you-guilty media? I don't know.

Anonymous said...

Pris, I was with you 100%, until you started supporting the right of government to act like "Nazis" when it seems to support YOUR ideas of what is and is not good for people–––particularly other people's children.

America is supposed to be all about Freedom of Choice, and freedom to pursue happiness any way we choose, unless it involves the classic crimes I just listed in my last post.

And I must say again that "children" per se were not involved in this case. It was the ENEMEDIA that promoted that notion with fierce energy to feed the public's ever-growing demand for cheap sensationalism.

As is their wont the ENEMEDIA has couched things in terms deliberately designed to set us at each other's throats.

Have you taken a good look at the young women in that sect who've recently been seen on television? They all look wholesome, well-fed, squeaky clean, serene, well-mannered and very pretty in an old-fashioned Gibson-Girl sort of way. Frankly, it's refreshing to see young women who are NOT trying to emulate Britney Spears and other brash, immoral, tasteless, ill-clad, badly behaved, vulgar hoydens of the day.

If we really want to rush in and IMPRISON anyone because we don't like their lifestyle or their image, we should START with people like BILL MAHER and everyone involved in MTV. And ALL the Gangstah Rappers and their promoters and producers and FANS, of course.

But why stop there? Surely a bald-faced LIARS like Oliver Stone and Francis Ford Coppola should be deprived of THEIR freedom, and their movies should be BANNED. And on and on and on and on and on!

There is can be no compromising with the Constitution–––no matter WHAT. Once we go down that path, everything our soldiers fought for in all past wars will be LOST and their sacrifice with have been made in VAIN.

HAPPY MEMORIAL DAY!

Our fighting men "fought and bled for FREEDOM's cause–––not for a Nanny State on ANY level.

~ FreeThinke

CJ said...

How I wish this nation WERE governed by Christian principles. That would mean the FLDS sect couldn't even exist and that would be just fine with me. But we aren't the Kingdom of God, we're a motley nation of every kind of belief and that's always been our strength (until Islam started getting so popular unfortunately), so we can't rule it by Biblical principles to that extent.

But I would also like to know just how lives are "destroyed" by bearing children in an environment that is family to them? There are some who want to leave and they should be helped to leave, and there are agencies in fact who work to help them do just that. I know they help resettle mothers and children; I hope they also do some good for the boys who are kicked out. Otherwise there are members who are happy there and what gives anybody the right to tell them they have to live our way when they want to live their way? Frankly I don't see a great improvement in the prospects for their future if they live outside such a place. I really don't. But being a Christian I'm going to assess their prospects on the basis of whether they are saved or not, and inside or out none of them are saved. If a Christian organization wanted to rescue them to bring the gospel to them as well as resettle them in better circumstances I'd be all for that, but not by force.

Back to the legalities: You have to prove the violation of a particular law by particular persons. Isn't that how the law works? If the whole sect is illegal by any known law, fine, but that's not ever been suggested, and in that case they'd have to shut it all down and they aren't even trying to do that. All they did was take the children away from people who have not been proved to be criminals at all.

CJ said...

Z, you said "Are you more upset at how it was done or that it was done at all? Have you heard the women who've come out of there and the brainwashing they talk about there to girls and boys?"

I'm totally upset at HOW it was done. They had no LEGAL CAUSE. They did it completely outside all our legal safeguards, in violation of our Constitution.

And yes I'm aware of those who have escaped and in fact it seems to me I'm the one here who keeps bringing them up as evidence that what goes on there is known, showing that the way they raided the place was stupidly illegal when they should have been putting together a real case in advance based on such testimonies. I've bookmarked many individual testimonies about such groups.

Listen, the whole Mormon church is a big brainwashing factory, not just the FLDS sect. And you could say the same for Islam. If your kids are taken into custody on someone's accusation of you as a child molestor or abuser because you homeschool and teach them the principles of the Bible, you'd BETTER coach the kids in what to say because it has been shown in the past that the authorities can manipulate them to testify against you. What makes the FLDS desire to do that wrong then?

". . . I don't disagree totally with anyone, I just have to come down on the side of 14 yr old girls who're pregnant out of their own will! With our media and our "GOTCHA" society we have today, what else COULD Child Protective Services have done?"

They could have acted LEGALLY. What was LEGAL about what they did???

CJ said...

Z, you said:"I don't disagree totally with anyone, I just have to come down on the side of 14 yr old girls who're pregnant out of their own will!"

Is the issue whether it was against their will or not? I didn't think that was the issue. I thought the issue was whether it is EVER legal even to marry a fourteen-year old. But if it's about their own will in the matter, where are you getting that they are pregnant against their will? All I've heard is that they consider it an honor to become mothers at an early age. Not all the members feel violated and want to leave; some of them think it's just great the way it is.

Z said...

reversepsychology; Thanks for posting that, I'm sorry to have put you thru the trouble because I've seen that before. It's AMAZING, isn't it? We're just ticking them off, one by one..or all at ONE time, actually.

I think this should be on the COVER of every single national newspaper in the country AND on the network and cable news every night for a month. In my dreams.

Do you think we're going to ever wake up? I just don't see it happening! If you counteract ONE of those, you're called either a bigot, a racist, a religious nut, an unthinking greedy conservative...or all of the above.

What do you think it'll take? And do you think America will survive what it will take?

Get a load of this!: I just heard Rep. Maxine Waters of California, say:

"And guess what this member* would be all about? This member would be all about socializing — er, uh. [Pauses for several moments] …. would be about … [pause] … basically … taking over, and the government running all of your companies.”

This was to the oil companies of America. Nationalize or socialize? Are you ready for THAT? Did you hear that on the news? NO, but I heard the TAPE this afternoon! NO denying it! Let's HOPE somebody picks it up on the evening news. We know the lying mainstream media won't, but maybe that 'liar' FOX will PLAY THE TAPE, huh? And show how much they "LIE"?
If CNN and MSNBC and the networks don't play it, WHO IS THE LIAR?

Anonymous said...

I only suggested that we stop talking about this, because everything that's being said now was ALREADY said and REPEATED OFTEN several weeks ago on this same excellent blog.

Heidianne is new to the discussion, and I appreciated her views and the way she stated them.

You all can go on all weekend, but as far as I can see no one who was involved in this discussion from the beginning has budged a quarter inch from where he started, including me, so what is the use of just repeating ourselves?

If anyone has something NEW and entirely DIFFERENT to say it would be wonderful, but as it looks right now, we're in gridlock. Therefore, I'll agree to disagree and let it go. At least till we hear more concrete, objective reporting on this case.

Let me just add this: If you go on a government-funded "FISHING EXPEDITION" and stick with it long enough, sooner or later you're bound to catch SOMETHING. But it's strictly ILLEGAL––even for policemen––to fish in someone's PRIVATE POND without first being INVITED to do so. If you haven't been INVITED, you are TRESSPASSING.

FreeThinke

Anonymous said...

Do you really WANT a government that is empowered to break into your house and rummage through all your drawers and closets anytime they feel thee urge just because they think they MIGHT find something that would incriminate you?

PLEASE!

FT

Z said...

That's the difference between you and me, FT. And maybe it's where my blog differs from what you're used to.
I don't think we have to change minds here, I said earlier, I believe in CLARITY, air your views. Everybody's welcome. The more information, the more opinions, the better. This isn't a test and it's not a tug of war; Anyway, I don't want that here.

I won't even acknowledge your remark about people going through my drawers. In ANY sense of the expression! (Smile)

The Merry Widow said...

It's about time, FT. You ruined a perfectly apolitical post with rants.
Frankly, I'd like to see more about music(the post with the child enjoying herself)or other subjects.
Thank you!

tmw

Anonymous said...

He preached upon "breadth" till it argued him narrow––
The broad are too broad to define:
And of “truth” until it proclaimed him a liar—
The truth never flaunted a sign.

Simplicity fled from his counterfeit presence
As gold the pyrites would shun.
What confusion would cover the innocent Jesus
To meet so enabled a man!

Emily Dickinson (1830-1886)

Submitted by FreeThinke

Anonymous said...

Hi MW,
I think what you are doing is wonderful. I did not intend to indict all parents at all.

Homeschooling has a good track record, and I imagine that your children are thriving.

What I would love to see is an activist response, a large movement against the public school situation. I see vouchers as a viable way to send the message that we as a people will not tolerate the lowering standards that today's children are subject to.

I am concerned that there are rumblings of making homeschooling illegal. That will have to be fought too. There seems to be no end to the assault on traditional America.

I would like you to know that I salute those warriors you speak of. I have read of the court fights that occasionally arise.

Now, I'm getting a little long in the tooth, but try to do what I can by contributing to organizations who are fighting the culture war we are immersed in.

I am familiar with Faith in the Family, and contribute to them, but will check out the Home School Legal Defense Assoc., Thanks for the info.

And yes the media is always in the tank for anything that smacks of "progressive" thinking. If one can call that thinking.

Keep up the good work.

Pris

Elmers Brother said...

HSLDA represents parents of homeschoolers (with legal representation) and Patrick Henry College (founded specifically for homeschoolers) is an offshoot of it...


their debate team is very good

from Wikipedia

Debate is one of Patrick Henry College's primary extracurricular activities. The college is active in the National Educational Debate Association (NEDA), where students have consistently won many of the top awards at tournaments around the country. The school is also active in the much larger invitational National Parliamentary Tournament of Excellence (NPTE), though they have not been as successful on the national circuit. However, another large national tournament that Patrick Henry College is involved in is the National Parliamentary Debate Association, which is America's largest college debate organization. Patrick Henry College also won the first place team trophy in the novice division at one regional tournament in 2003, against schools such as Purdue, University of South Carolina, Ball State, and Notre Dame.

Students also compete in the American Collegiate Moot Court Association (ACMA), and had the winning teams at both the 2005 and 2006 ACMA National Tournaments. Moot court is a form of debate competition designed to simulate appellate arguments before the U.S. Supreme Court, in which teams of two students function as co-counsels and stand before a panel of judges to argue legal matters. Patrick Henry College won the ACMA National Tournaments back-to-back years in 2004 and 2005.[60][61] In 2005, Patrick Henry College not only won first overall but also won second, third, and fifth place, a feat that had never before been accomplished in ACMA history.[60][61] In 2006, the college took home the most trophies out of any school for the fifth straight year.[60] In a much publicized event during the 2004-2005 academic year, Patrick Henry College's moot court team defeated that of Oxford University's Balliol College in two separate competitions — one held in England using British law, and the other in Virginia using American law.

Anonymous said...

That's FABULOUS news, Elbro. I wonder how you could find it, however, without being directly involved in some way?

It's a cinch the enemedia will try very hard to ignore and hope to bury this kind of news.

The very best stuff has always come from individuals with strong convictions, passion, good strategy and determination.

I can't think of an instance when anything really significant has come from the top down–––except maybe with superb leadership on the battlefield.

There isn't a novel, a poem or a symphony worth it's salt that was ever put together by a committee.

Our Declaration of Independence and Constitution is probably a notable exception, but even that was born in the minds of a very few individuals with vision, ambition and the courage to implement it.

Once upon a time "homeschooling" of an informal sort in the pre-school years was the NORM for intelligent, middle class parents properly concerned for their children's future. Most of the kids I grew up with had learned to read and write, add and subtract, and recognize each of the continents on the globe before they went to Kindergarten.

Today, you are lucky to be able to do that much by the time you graduate from Jr. High.

In those days the schools were NEIGHBORHOOD schools and parents worked WITH the school through PTA meetings. Before "busing" our elementary educational system was effective and pleasant to experience.

There was nothing political about it, except we were well informed about the evils of Communism and the horrors of the Third Reich before we finished fifth grade, and our system was unashamedly touted as the best in the world.

TV was in its infancy then, and we didn't pay much attention to it. That helped too. My parents read aloud to each other for evening entertainment, and discussed the books they were reading at the breakfast table. Can you imagine anything like that happening today?

HAVE A GREAT MEMORIAL DAY WEEKEND!

Anonymous said...

Funny how much more insidious an organized and socialized approach to child abuse seems than a neglectful and careless individualized one. What is happening in America's inner cities to young girls is a thousand times farther reaching and more damaging to our society than anything being done in this Texas religious compound.

Z said...

FJ, I had that exact thought, too.
To quibble (rightfully or wrongfully) about the FLDS thing is almost a smokescreen for ignoring what's going on on a MUCH more massive scale throughout America, not just inner cities, in my opinion, though it's worse there.
Girls from good families are getting STDs and having unwanted pregnancies. They're drugging and drinking, huffing, hooking up, you name it; words we never knew five years ago! And, man, if anybody'd suggested teens would be doing this stuff? NO WAY! But,yes...

Maybe that's why we rail at institutionalized behavior like this; you'd think kids could be safe in a situation like this, but proof shows differently, no matter what's been said here. The facts are there.

There has to be a happy medium, too, between women who look like Little House on the Prairie Stepford wives, apparently not allowed or undesirous of cutting their hair, wearing the same hairdoes, no embellishments on their clothing, long sleeves, long skirts, (do the men insist? is that why women who've won their freedom say they're brainwashed?) ...and our young women who have pierced tongues, show everything they've got, makeup like ghouls and straggly dirty hair, huh? and who are having sex at 12... obviously, these are extremes, but let's face it, the second 'look' and behavior I describe is pretty mainstream if you know anything about high school kids (or middle school) these days.

thanks, FJ...you're right.

Anonymous said...

FJ, the POPULAR CULTURE is more damaging to us all than anything I can think of. The ever more degraded pop culture has been the vanguard of all forces cheapening, coarsening, "dumbing-down" and vulgarizing American life.

What used to be merely silly nonsense has become more and more of a menace.

Where once we encouraged each other to look upward and outward–––to aspire to higher thought, finer culture, broader outlook, more refined, humane, charitable behavior–––now our gaze stops at crotch level and our thoughts go no higher.

This is every bit as true for the pious as it is for the heathen. Whether we favor unabashed libertinism or puritanical chastity we are without doubt a morbidly SEX-OBSESSED society.

Too bad! There are so many other things that might take up our time and bring greater rewards.

~ Freethinke

Z said...

Patrick Henry College. "Give me LIBERTY or give me death"...
Great name for a homeschooling college. What fantastic results! Thanks!

And, yes, I'm sure the msm will bury these results as best they can.

It's like the msm buries the fact that Germans pay SO much for healthcare! Our media has never divulged the truth lest our Americans think WE can't afford free healthcare, either.

They keep lying to make us sheep to lies, making choices in reaction to the lies THEY want us to believe, choices THEY want us to make.

If anybody more Americans heard about this college's great success, America's schools and teachers would have to wake up, huh? No more put downs to those "whacky Christians who homeschool"?

I wonder what the stats are on that. How many are Christians and how many homeschoolers are not? Do you know, Elbro?

Z said...

FT...this is largely because the Left has made is so acceptable to talk about things we NEVER said out loud even five years ago. The Left's debauched TV themes, etc., have created a world where everyone thinks all anybody's doing is having sex or trying to figure out HOW to 'get some' (and that's just the girls).

We never said BREAST out loud, now we say the vagina. Jane Fonda said the "C" word on Television a few times because she felt it FINE as it was "IN A TITLE...I DIDN"T SAY IT!" Imagine? Doesn't matter who HEARS things today, we've just GOT to have the freedom to SAY THINGS, or we're repressed!!? We didn't talk about erectile dysfunction, now you have to have country western stars SINGING to us about it during every commercial. WHY? We have celeb after celeb having kids out of wedlock, we have Ellen Degenerate getting married this summer and the whole audience BURSTING into applause upon the announcement!

We have Bachelor shows where it's the young women trying DESPERATELY to get asked to marry the guy when they've spent maybe a week together and most of it's been competition with other desperate young girls. what an example THAT sets. It's sickening!
We've turned it to where the girl will do ANYTHING for his attention! USed to be the lovely idea that men courted and wooed and won the young girl over. Cherished her! NOW? CHERISH? They can get them to do ANYTHING sexually within minutes from what I hear, just drop the pants...THAT's cherishing and respecting young girls, huh?

UGH. It's early on the West Coast, and I"m already aggravated!!!

GOOD MORNING, everyone. Gloomy weather here, too. and cool.

Papa Frank said...

The idea that ties both of these discussions together to me is the issue of individuality. For SOME individuals the public school system is far and away the best situation for them. For SOME individuals home schooling is ideal for them. In the situation in Texas SOME of those children needed to be removed and placed in a different situation. SOME were in essence kidnapped by the state and torn from a loving family by force. This is the REAL problem. When we deal with groups as a single unit we will ALWAYS respond in error. That is what made that particular situation wrong and even criminal is that these American individuals were treated in the same exact way that other people groups have been and were denied their individual rights at the beckoning of an anonymous phone call and paranoia. I completely love you Z and TMW but it is scary to me to hear you turn your backs on the rights of individuals. You claim it is worth it if they saved someone from being raped but how many of these children were kidnapped from a loving and caring environment? Also, it is just as likely that the homes in which they have been placed are also harboring rapists and abusers. Perhaps some of these kids were taken from safety and placed in danger. Remember that when you praise their being taken.

Z said...

Jason, nobody 'praises' that they were taken. At least I don't. I believe that the initial action had to be this strong because if one child was in a situation like that, they all had to be checked, that's all.
I guess I less turn my back against individuals and their rights than I can turn my back to a child who might be in trouble, which I know you'd agree with.

I SO understand your point, but I feel that that huge an amount of children was such an enormous undertaking for Children's Protective Services that they just had to do something and they made this call. It's probably unprecedented across our land, come to think of it! The future of individuals in America, unless they're doing something like what was suspected inside, isn't at risk. When it is, I think I'll know it. I think we all will.

Imagine, as I'd said above, what would have happened if they had NOT done this and even more children were in such horrid situations?...what our media would have done? This might have been a motivation for such a quick and huge sweep.
This is a different and nauseating time, in my opinion; we're more into GOTCHA than we are "Let's wait and see if we're doing the right thing here". With the risk of children in danger and the risk of being exposed on CNN and all over the world if the media had found out about this allegation call and they had NOT done something like this, make the GOTCHA have to win. That's wrong.
But, really, if there was another child who would have had sex that night with someone becuase she was left behind, then what?

Tell me, Jason, I respect your point of view: What would you have done if you thought girls inside might have been in trouble? And, don't forget, with hindsight we learn the mothers who WERE ALLOWED to be with the children for those first two weeks WERE coaching their answers. That's why they were taken from their mothers! Did you know that?

So, what do the authorities do? And how do they do it, and when? I'm curious. I don't think this was done well, necessarily, I wonder how we could have handled it better. Thanks.

Papa Frank said...

I believe that the authorities should have done what they do elsewhere in every state in the nation. They should have taken information they received on a particular individual and investigated and made a decision on that particular individual. That may have caused a domino effect where they were then led to others that were engaging in illegal activities. That is how justice is done in this country -- on an individual basis. There are hundreds and probably thousands of children being abused and raped this very day in this country. This spot in Texas was not the lone bastion of abuse to children in our country. These people were singled out and lumped together because of their religious belief and their separatist attitude and monastic living style. PERIOD. Not because there was a great case for abuse inside this compound. We do not round up all middle eastern men in an airport and remove their families from them on a suspicion. We do not round up all Italian catholics in NYC and hold their families while we investigate mafia crimes. This is an example of prosecuting a stereotype and not prosecuting people. As far as mothers coaching their children I would say that is a completely understandable reaction to the horror of having children ripped from your home with NO NOTICE, NO PAPERWORK, NO LEGAL FOUNDATION. I would protect my own children and the children of others with my own life. If there were children there being abused then I would applaud the authorities stepping in and questioning those they suspected and acting on those specific cases harshly. It does not matter that the kids were being coached as people who abuse children coach them all over every day. Yet people are still prosecuted when there is legal evidence of wrongdoing. The courts are not ignorant of this tactic of abusers and ignorant of ways of breaking through the curtain of lies. I absolutely think that authorities should have gone in and investigated but the nazi-style raid should never be tolerated on our soil.

Z said...

thanks, Jason. But they didn't have information on only one individual. That's a big problem.
And I don't think coaching was something we should ignore; it could have obscured and hidden really terrible behavior. Though it's a normal reaction for mothers to coach, doesn't that show there was something going on? If there was nothing, who'd have had to tell kids to answer in a certain way?

While people ought to be able to live in a compound if they wish, religious or otherwise, I think that makes them more suspect, as awful as that is, and unfair. it just makes people suspicious, it's a human frailty to mistrust what one can't see. The oddities of Mennonites and Amish aren't QUITE so odd because at least they're not hiding behind walls.

Well, we can agree to disagree and I sure do value your input and opinions. It will be interesting to see what the final story is on this. Perhaps it'll end up showing they're lucky they did go in and protect the children; perhaps it'll end up that this was a total travesty and we'll learn from it and come up with coping mechanisms for approaching a problem on a scale as large as this in a much better way.

One thing we know with certainty is that no children are being molested in that compound right now. Or I hope so, anyway.

Papa Frank said...

I certainly agree to disagree on this and only have the highest of respect for you and your opinions as well. My greatest fear is that this will be the future of other people groups and that I will be a part of at least one of them. The excuses they offer will be the same ones they will use when they round up conservative Christians in the future. They will claim it is for the welfare of the children or society in general. Be very careful what actions you support as those same people and same actions may one day be used against you. When that time comes, God help us all.

Z said...

Jason, I just can't believe we'll come to that. While I'm realistic enough to know things are very bad in this country suddenly, I pray that can't happen, but I take seriously your concern and warnings. Thanks, friend.

The Merry Widow said...

Jason-We know where all this is leading.
Unfortunately, the Constitution is a human construct, and as such, it cannot stand forever.
200+ years is a good run for a nation, but the Constitution has become a piece of paper, a covenience or a nusiance, depending on the circumstances.
It is waved patriotically during elections, then sat on or spit on in between. Or "interpreted" according to judicial fiat.
Or ignored with regulations.
Christians, and eventually Jews, are the only permissible biases allowed.
Most parents tune out the horror stories their children bring home from public school, because their lives are so messy they can't see the problems, or they are so overwhelmed with debt and work they don't have time or energy to deal with the Hell our schools have become.
I know about it, because I'm almost the only parent around that listens!
And I hear about it all; teens sniffing salt to win a wagerso they have money to buy drugs. the girls that grab and chase the guys(more than you know), the push to smoke, or do drugs or have sex by the other students.
When people lose their self-control and self-discipline, the society tries to enforce good behavior by fiat...never has worked! Never will!
We are living in a society that cannot punish wrongdoers, enforce law(because they might offend someone, or it might be taken racially).
The Constitution was written for a G*Dly people, we threw HIM out, we are paying the price.
2 Timothy 3, evil times.

tmw

Unknown said...

Hey all, This is a fascintating thread. What I have to add does not deal with the details of the case, but the general principles involved. I assume that girls were being abused in the compounds.

This begs the question of how we define "being abused." Do we have any standards by which we can make such a judgement? If we use entirely individualistic values, no. But if we use our cultural heritage we can clearly see that polygamy is wrong. Our secular and religious traditions putting the soul above the body, give grounds for honoring the mind / soul above the body. Impregnating 14 year olds is not good.

The worry that the state will become too powerful is valid. However, we the founding founding fathers did not set up a system of anarchy. They set up a system of collective self-governance. We should not say just because we fear the state we shall have no standards.

Here is the deal, we have a culture and diversity is real. Our success has come from our serious culture. Mexico's culture, for example, has a serious strain of violence. The police and gangsters are in cahoots. They impregnate women at a young age. If you do not guide your culture, very nasty behaviors can become normative.

Individualists will say that the polygmamists have individual rights. Actually, with their religious backgrounds, these Texans may produce great people. But our laws apply to ALL people. What if you decide that you will not judge harems or gangs that run prostitution rings? What if a pimp decides to marry his prostitutes or Muslims want child care support for all their wives?

Despite what multiculturalists say, we have a culture. We need to guide our culture. Our immigration laws do not recognize the potential dangers of cultural diversity. But we need to recognize that we are not just an anything goes nation. We have a culture and must protect and guid it. To do this we must be culturists. We must understand that we DO have a culture to protect. Separatist cultures that impregnate their children and have multiple wives may be okay in Afhanistan, but not here.

www.culturism.us

CJ said...

OK, Culturist John, that's an interesting way of looking at it. So how would you deal with this FLDS situation? You seem to be saying that they shouldn't even exist at all. Perhaps you are right. I certainly feel that way about Islam, and truthfully, even Catholicism and Mormonism. Yes, even these latter two have effects on the culture that turns us away from the strict Protestant roots of the founding generation. What are your thoughts about how to deal with this FLDS situation? What would you have us do?

Unknown said...

cj,

As I said, I do not know the details of the FLDS case. Being as the government did it, I'm sure it could have been handled better.

But I would arrest and prosecute polygamists and bigamists. I also think it very important that we enforce our statuatory rape laws.

Culture even pervades subjects that seem remote such as law. But welfare, for example, can only work in a culture where people are ashamed to take it. When everyone proudly takes it, the system will go broke.

In the case where no one enforces statuatory rape laws or polygamy laws you also get bad unwanted consequences. The Mexican culture, for example, does not mind having people marry at 13, 14, or 15. If you rely on the family to complain about such matters, you will get no prosecution. Then you end up, as I said, with a third world economy.

Neither Mexicans nor FLDS nor Muslims who have multiple wives will question their own culture. Because of multiculturalists we feel we don't have a core culture to teach them. But culturists realize that we do.

Enforcing such laws, via arrest, will not lead to NAZI style abuse of individual rights. It will do no harm to youth to wait until the age of 18. Such laws enforced with the overt explanation that you have to feed your mind and get a job before having babies, will teach a valuable lesson. This is just as saying nothing and giving welfare to pregnant teens teaches a valuable lesson.

Individual rights only exist in a country that believes in them and can afford them. If we undercut the cultural underpinnings of our society, education will suffer. As with Latinos, having over 10% of your teens pregnant is not conducive to widespread success. Going out on a limb, in bad economies policemen are more likely to take bribes. This harms individual rights.

Multiculturalism tells us we have no culture. Culturism recognizes that we do. And we, the nation that had Prohibition, need to have the gumption to crack down on statuatory rape, polygamy and bigamy. Individual right may have been violated in the FLDS case. I would be all by one. But with procedural safeguards, I'd arrest the men doing this to the girls.

www.culturism.us

Z said...

Culturalist John, (funny that my friend cj has your initials!),

This comment blew my mind. What you said about welfare is SO true; it only worked when people were too proud to take it. My Armenian family members were in dire straits when they arrived in this country and NOBODY ever took welfare; one child had to go into an orphanage when my great grandmother died because she was so young and my greatgrandfather had 3 other children to feed, but she didn't stay there long at all and this was the only time they sought government help. They became quite successful, learned the language, hired tons of Americans in their shops throughout Troy, NY. Imagine? NO welfare. Matter of fact, THEY helped their relatives throughout WWII with sugar, flour, coffee, etc., as their business was grocery stores. So, it kept THEM from gov't aid, too.

I am SO sick of people in this country saying we are MULTICULTURAL instaed of MULTIETHNIC..there's such a huge difference. Every time I think of it I think of the Thanksgiving paiting by Norman Rockwell. We DO have a culture and it's a wonderful one. Cultures used to come here and speak their own language AT HOME (as mine did for years), not on the streets as they do NOW, and they even had little areas where the shops, churches, etc., were ethnic, but they mostly melded...at least they felt PRIDE in becoming Americans, they celebrated America, they even felt a little dumb for speaking with an accent (Romanian/Hungarian friends of mine, nationalized citizens, still feel awkward about their accents and I constantly remind them we Americans should be lucky enough to know other languages like they do ours!)

It was part of our culture to protect children as best as we could, to have parents encourage them to wait till 18 OR a college education before they wed. I never thought of the weakening of these 'laws' as something weakening our country, I felt it but didn't put it in words like you have, but I SURE do agree with you.

Thanks so much.

Anonymous said...

TERMS to PONDER

pa·ro·chi·al

Pronunciation: \pə-ˈrō-kē-əl\

Function:adjective

Etymology: Middle English parochiall, from Anglo-French parochial, from Late Latin parochialis,from parochia parish — more at parish

Date:14th century

1 : of or relating to a church parish

2 : of or relating to a parish as a unit of local government

3 : confined or restricted as if within the borders of a parish : limited in range or scope (as to a narrow area or region) : provincial, narrow


pa·ro·chi·al·ism

Pronunciation: \-kē-ə-ˌli-zəm\

Function: noun

Date: 1847

: the quality or state of being parochial; especially : selfish pettiness or narrowness (as of interests, opinions, or views)


cosmopolitan

Function: adjective

Date: 1798

1 : having worldwide rather than limited or provincial scope or bearing

2 : having wide international sophistication

3 : composed of persons, constituents, or elements from all or many parts of the world


4 : found in most parts of the world and under varied ecological conditions, a cosmopolitan herb>

— cos·mo·pol·i·tan·ism \-tə-ˌni-zəm\ noun


mul·ti·cul·tur·al

Pronunciation: \ˌməl-tē-ˈkəlch-rəl, -ˌtī-, -ˈkəl-chə-\

Function: adjective

Date: 1941

: of, relating to, reflecting, or adapted to diverse cultures, a multicultural society multiculturaleducation, a multicultural menu

— mul·ti·cul·tur·al·ism \-rə-ˌli-zəm\ noun
— mul·ti·cul·tur·al·ist \-rə-list\ noun or adjective
— mul·ti·cul·tur·al·ly \-rə-lē\ adverb

Submitted for study, consideration, evaluation and discussion by FT

Unknown said...

Z, thanks for the telling examples. For your enthusiasm, I'd be happy to send you a complimentary copy of my book, if you'd read it. Go to www.culturism.us and find the contact info if interested.

Anonymous, may I add the following??

Culturism n. 1. The philosophy, art and science that values, manages and protects majority cultures. 2. A philosophy which holds that majority cultures have a right to define, protect and promote themselves. 3. The study of culturism.

I think this a positive alternative to parochialism. In fact the words we have for valuing our culture are negative; Nativist, zenophobic and ethnocentric are the common slurs. Culturism and culturist are positive words that say you think Western culture is important.

Your definition of multiculturalism is old. But I hold that multiculturalism fails because it does not really take diversity seriously. If you are going to celebrate diversity, you have to celebrate polygamy, child brides, cliterectomy and honor killings. If opposing these is parachial, then parochial is a good thing.

We will always have diversity in our nation. But when we stess this over our unity we have a danger of African style tribalism leading to danger.

Cosmopolitanism is an old world that also fails to recognize the importance of cultural diversity. Western culture believes in democracy, freedom of speech, relative separation of Church and State, and women's rights. These are not universal beliefs. China nor Iran believe in most of them. Only the Western nations fully embrace them. The desire to be cosmopolitan listen to the UN and invoke "human rights" undermines our sovereignty.

We have a particular culture. It is not the default of the world. Saudi Arabia and China define and protect their cultures; they are culturist. We have a right to define and protect ours too. This, in fact, is a duty. It is not written in the stars that we cannot be beaten by Islam or not break into African style tribal chaos.

www.culturism.us

CJ said...

I agree completely, CJ (Culturist John). Unfortunately the FLDS have figured out how to get around the polygamy laws by not legally marrying any but their first "wife" and only "spiritually" marrying the rest. The laws that no doubt do apply, however, are against sex with an underage girl. The problem in this case is that they bungled it all legally by taking away hundreds of children on a mere accusation by an unknown person instead of pursuing known violators of the law as they should have done. I'll check out your site. I'd really like to know how we can do anything to preserve our culture at this late date. I suspect it's impossible unfortunately.

CJ said...

Back to my usual theme song briefly: Christians should be aware that we are in the very last of the very last days before Christ returns. The apostasy predicted in the Bible -- that is, the falling away of the churches from true Christian doctrine to "doctrines of demons" -- is in full swing, often under the very noses of true Christians without being identified for what it is. American culture has been deteriorating for decades now while the churches have done little to slow the process. I personally think Christians should minimize involvement in politics at this time except to pray that God would restrain the evil, and focus on prayer for the awakening, enlightening and spiritual strengthening of the true churches. Otherwise we're going to be capsized in the flood of evil that is coming on the earth, and totally useless for helping others find their way to Christ.

Z said...

cj, they didn't have any specific names. Then what do you do? Do nothing and run the risk of more rape or whatever was going on. I agree with you on this, by the way. NOBODY on this site, I'm QUITE sure, was ever advocating a sweep separation of 440 children from their mothers just to be punishing or judgmental; they were doing it because one case was brought to their attention and they knew not WHICH ONE...or which TEN, or which 'who knows how many'?

Culturalist John...you make amazingly good points.

I just have to add that any definition of PAROCHIAL sounds like just what we need around here. You are SO right in saying terms which celebrate our culture and our protection of it have been mostly made to be pejorative. This is Marxism at its best, a point on which I am quite sure FT would agree. "turn the tables...make good look bad". Right out of the Marxist textbooks.

Excellent input, Culturalist...We have great input here, I'm glad you've joined in!

cj, I don't believe we should do only one or the other. I believe you're so right in encouraging TONS of prayer for our country, but I always fall back on the Old Testament and how God rarely acted alone. He didn't take a war and wiggle his nose and make his team win...he used PEOPLE. They were His stewards and that's what I think all Christians and Jews, frankly, need to be right now.

I keep thinking how many times the O.T. says "..and they did evil in the eyes of the Lord.." Boy, and they thought THAT in THOSE days was evil? phew.

CJ said...

"cj, they didn't have any specific names. Then what do you do? Do nothing and run the risk of more rape or whatever was going on."

GOOD GRIEF, Z, "WHATEVER WAS GOING ON" HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR YEARS AND YEARS AND IT'S NO SECRET!!! WHAT ON EARTH MADE THIS PARTICULAR MOMENT SO URGENT THAT THEY WOULD THROW THE LAW OUT THE WINDOW TO ACT ON IT????????? THEY DID THIS ILLEGALLY!!!!! AND THE GIRLS SAY IT IS AN "HONOR" TO BEAR CHILDREN TOO; THIS ISN'T LIKE A COMPLAINT OF RAPE. AAAAAAGH! AND YOU DON'T EVEN KNOW WHO IS A VICTIM AND WHO IS A PERP.

I really don't get how you guys are so willing to justify this totally illegal action just because YOU personally now know about what goes on there! Yes, I know you keep saying you agree with those of us who keep objecting to the illegality, but you also keep acting like they had no choice, what you are saying in this post too, and that pretty much says you DON'T agree with us.

"I agree with you on this, by the way. NOBODY on this site, I'm QUITE sure, was ever advocating a sweep separation of 440 children from their mothers just to be punishing or judgmental;"

And nobody on the other side said that's what we thought you thought!!! You just keep saying how girls are being impregnated as a justification for what they did as if it couldn't be helped. 31 girls have been impregnated over how many years and they can't even collect enough evidence to identify the right people to arrest but you think that acting right now this very minute before another one has to go through it is the right thing to do? Even though they all think it's just hunky dory and they aren't presenting themselves as victims? I don't get it!

"they were doing it because one case was brought to their attention and they knew not WHICH ONE...or which TEN, or which 'who knows how many'?"

The point is that you CANNOT DO IT THAT WAY, Z, YOU JUST CAN'T.

It CANNOT be impossible to figure out a way to pin down the actual offenders. It's the MEN they should be after anyway. If there are victims to be rescued then there are criminals to be arrested. If there is any law that judges the whole FLDS sect to be criminal, fine, and I'm all for it (and I'd go for branding them contra-culturist at this point), then OCCUPY the place like a conquering army, arrest the perps and disband the sect, but this whole business of taking away children without any evidence just because you heard from a totally unreliable source that *someone* was being abused and you can't even find the complainant is CRAZY BAD POLICE WORK that violates everything I thought our laws try to uphold.

Yikes! I will now shut up!

Z said...

"this isn't a complaint of rape"??

I'm stunned.

And I wonder who might have heard it. And I wonder how many of those 'young women' now are the product of or have also had sexual relationships and children with men they resented.

CJ said...

Point is, Z, YOU DON'T KNOW and you can't speak for them.

Anonymous said...

Three strikes and I'm out.

This is not a debate it is a series obdurate and redundant diatribes. I'm very sorry I posted the (GOOD) news that a higher court threw the Texas FLDS case out where it belonged.

Dealing with subject matter of this sort in a rational manner or with the faintest trace of humor is simply not possible.

It's been a terrible waste of time and energy.

Good night, and good bye..

FT

Z said...

FT, if it had stayed only humorous and rational, nothing would have been deleted. You know that so well.

CJ said...

I'm not sure whose "diatribe" FT was objecting to, but it could be my own I suppose, since I got rather noisy last post, but I honestly really truly do not get what our opponents are saying. I do not get the emotion on the other side about the possibility that another pseudo-married teenager might have to go to bed with her "husband" before justice can be served on her behalf. The emotion seems to be focused on that single possibility. I keep thinking you're projecting the usual American experience on these people, assuming they feel the way you would feel in that situation or something like that.

"this isn't a complaint of rape"??

You DO think there is a complaint of rape somewhere in this story, Z? Where has such a complaint been made and by whom? All we've heard is that they believe it's an honor to be "married" the way they are and to bear children. Please, where is the complaint?

"I'm stunned."

Yes, I know, but I can't fathom why.

"And I wonder who might have heard it."

Heard what? The complaint of rape? Where is the complaint? A few have left. They did complain. We aren't hearing that from those who stayed.

"And I wonder how many of those 'young women' now are the product of or have also had sexual relationships and children with men they resented."

Who knows? It is actually possible that they don't resent it, most of them anyway, or possibly even all of them. Truly. Perhaps those who have run away are the exception. That doesn't make it right or legal, but it does remove the emotional appeal from your side of this argument.

Honestly, I do ... not ... get ... it. They are in violation of OUR laws, not THEIR laws. They think things are just right they way they are. WE are the ones who want to hold them to OUR standard and OUR laws, and I believe that's right to do, just not the WAY the authorities went about it.

nanc said...

wow! that's mom spelled upside down. this post sure got off topic - good to see you have your share of adhd posters, z! welcome to my used-2-b blogworld - it's great exercise, yes?

Z said...

Actually, I encouraged it, nanc! (See the post!) It got good...I enjoy a rousing discussion!

CJ said...

TMW threw down the gauntlet all right. I just now went to her blog and read what she wrote, and it's as irrational and nuts as anything I've ever seen.

"Certain folks just don't get it.
What I am talking about, is the drumbeat of the perceived illegality of Texas authorities going into the fdls compound and removing the children and teens.
Now I do agree that it was an extreme measure, and might have been handled better, BUT, my question is;
What part of against the law, or ILLEGAL, don't you understand?
Polygamy is ILLEGAL in this country, whether by immigrants from mohammadin ruled countries, or by home grown cults.
Even putting a veneer on it and calling them "spiritual" marriages does not change the facts."

BUT IT DOES MAKE A DIFFERENCE IN REGARD TO LAW. Polygamy is against the law but if they aren't committing polygamy against the law, how are you going to arrest them for polygamy?? What part of ILLEGAL don't YOU understand?? if they arrested them for polygamy then they arrested them illegally, because they never even named polygamy, but they did not arrest them for polygamy so why are you bringing it up again? Since when is the law allowed to arrest people on a trumped-up charge in order to get them for some other unnamed violation of some other law?

The "spiritual" marriage is a transparent fraud but if we do not have laws that address it, or by which we can legally call it polygamy anyway, then we cannot arrest them for polygamy. AND AGAIN THEY DID NOT ARREST THEM FOR POLYGAMY!!

"These men who are members have raised up their daughters to become concubines. PERIOD!"

Right, so you want the State to prosecute them on your personal say-so, right? Or the say-so of some unnamed complainant, which is what happened. Apparently you support state vigilante type action. No more Constitution, no more law, just TMW's certainty about what is going on there based on a few newspaper reports.

Show me a law that will allow us to disband such a group for violations of the spirit of our Christian culture and I'll happily join you in supporting any government action based on it, but that is not remotely in the ballpark of what happened with the FLDS.

"To me that is sick and abusive.
And smacks too much of mohammadism...after all, in mohammadism, if a woman attains Paradise, she gets to stand in a corner for Eternity until her 'master' calls her out for sex. In fdls, women are expected to bear 'spirit-children' for their husband(among MANY wives) for Eternity...you know something? satan uses the same shop-worn tactics over and over, you would think that humans would wise up to his tricks! But throw sex into the mix and you hook all the men...but I digress."

What on earth is this woman blathering about and what does it have to do with taking hundreds of children away from people who have not been charged with any crime?

"Now I understand from reading the Bible, that Christianity will in the future become illegal. But condoning ILLEGAL practices(there are no go areas in some American cities that no doubt practice polygamy)by ignoring them is detrimental toward Western Civilization."

That is certainly true. All kinds of things detrimental to Western Civilization are going down these days and tolerating polygamy is definitely one of them. And that's where I think all the liberal/Marxist laws are going anyway, toward the justification of more and more things detrimental to Western Civilization, including the toleration of Sharia law yet. There is now a movement -- based on the logic of gay marriage -- to make polygamy legal too.

The FLDS flap feeds into that by building up sympathy for the cult because of the illegality of the government action against them. You don't give a rat's ass about the law apparently, but there is no way to defend Western Civilization except through law, and right now our laws are being eroded to the point that we might as well declare the West dead anyway, and the confusion in the action against the FLDS just nails the coffin shut.

I do think you have mashed potatoes for brains on this issue. The whole point is that they have not been found to be in violation of any law so your constant refrain that their behavior is "illegal" is UNFOUNDED. They have not been accused of any particular crime against any particular law. I wish they had been, but they weren't and perhaps as our laws now stand they cannot be. You cannot call their behavior "illegal" if there is no law you can show that they have violated, or if you cannot show that existing laws were applied according to law either.

"Now, do we defend Western Civilization? Or do we toss it to the wolves that come to the West and want to practice that which is illegal?"

It is YOU who are throwing Western Civilization to the wolves with your irrational attitude to law. Again you keep bleating about illegality when NO ILLEGALITY HAS BEEN SHOWN AND NO ARRESTS HAVE BEEN MADE BASED ON ANY KNOWN LAW. Do you want laws against polygamy to stick? Then they have to exist and they have to be applied legally. If they can be legally applied against the fraud of "spirital" marriage, great, but I doubt that the law as presently defined, and in a culture that now tolerates every form of unmarried sex is going to serve the purpose you seem to have in mind.

"Ask yourself this question; "Is Western Civilization and Christianity worth defending?"

You do not defend Western Civilization by violating the Constitution of the United States which came out of the very best of Western law. You are just feeding all the forces that want to bring down the West.

"If yes, then stand up to ILLEGAL MARRIAGES, pseudo or otherwise."

FINE. Let's have laws against them, TMW. Again, what law has been violated concerning MARRIAGE by the FLDS? Are you thinking at all? What on earth do you mean by "stand up to" anyway? And WHO is supposed to be doing the standing up? Let's have clearer laws. The law probably needs to recognize the fraud of spiritual marriage so that polygamy can be prosecuted, BUT THAT IS NOT NOW THE CASE. You could serve the cause better by going to Texas and working toward clarifying such laws, instead of continuing to bleat about an illegality that has not been shown to exist and on which the State did not act anyway!

They acted on an allegation of abuse, not on a charge of polygamy.

"If no, pay the price of your multi-culti, wishy-washy dhimmitude!"

You are so confused it's pathetic. Dhimmitude is reflected by pointing out that the government acted illegally? If we don't hold government to Western standards then dhimmis we certainly WILL be. And it's coming anyway.

"And when the time comes to take a stand for Christ and HIM crucified and risen on the third day, I will gladly pay the price of my ILLEGALITY by martyrdom!
You on the otherhand can face your Creator and hear the words of Jesus echo in your ears..."Depart from ME, you who practice iniquity, I NEVER KNEW YOU!"

Who are you talking about? The FLDS are the ones in violation of God's law and they will certainly answer to God for their action. I haven't seen you riding in to rescue their children.

I think I'm ending up agreeing with FT on more than one thing after reading that blog of TMW's.

CJ said...

Correction. I keep saying they "arrested" them, but they didn't arrest anybody and that's a big part of the problem. I should have been referring to the action they took against them, the raid on them, the taking of their children and so on, rather than using the word "arrest."

Anonymous said...

Dover Beach

THE sea is calm to-night.
The tide is full, the moon lies fair
Upon the Straits;—on the French coast, the light
Gleams and is gone; the cliffs of England stand,
Glimmering and vast, out in the tranquil bay.
Come to the window, sweet is the night air!
Only, from the long line of spray
Where the ebb meets the moon-blanch'd sand,
Listen! you hear the grating roar
Of pebbles which the waves draw back, and fling,
At their return, up the high strand,
Begin, and cease, and then again begin,
With tremulous cadence slow, and bring
The eternal note of sadness in.

Sophocles long ago
Heard it on the Aegean, and it brought
Into his mind the turbid ebb and flow
Of human misery; we
Find also in the sound a thought,
Hearing it by this distant northern sea.

The sea of faith
Was once, too, at the full, and round earth's shore
Lay like the folds of a bright girdle furl'd;
But now I only hear
Its melancholy, long, withdrawing roar,
Retreating to the breath
Of the night-wind down the vast edges drear
And naked shingles of the world.

Ah, love, let us be true
To one another! for the world, which seems
To lie before us like a land of dreams,
So various, so beautiful, so new,
Hath really neither joy, nor love, nor light,
Nor certitude, nor peace, nor help for pain;
And we are here as on a darkling plain
Swept with confused alarms of struggle and flight,
Where ignorant armies clash by night.

Matthew Arnold (1822-1888)

Anonymous said...

If you can find it, please read a short story by DOROTHY CANFIELD FISHER called SEX EDUCATION.

I t appeared in a High School English Anthology back in the early-to-mid-fifties. Nothing salacious. A very gentle story about the gradual acquisition of WISDOM and PERSPECTIVE in a series of retrospective views about a single incident that took place early in the protagonist's life.

Very illuminating. It has much to say to the trigger-happy hysterics who wish to dictate public policy regarding sexual behavior.

CJ said...

Dear Anonymous,
The history of this nation includes much law "dictating sexual behavior," which has been eroding in the last few decades thanks largely to Marxist influence. The program of dismantling the laws against various forms of sexual expression was part of the platform of the American Communist Party in the early 20th century to begin with, and came to fruition in the 60s.

You might ask yourself why they were so interested in this form of "progressive" politics. Could it have something to do with their design of destroying the West?

Sexual license does not exalt a nation. A nation that wants to remain prosperous and safe, in fact, MUST dictate sexual behavior because it's a big part of God's law, and the nation that flouts God's law brings judgment against itself, which is already happening. God's wrath has been building for some time against us and is increasing rapidly.

TMW is right at least about this much, we still have laws against polygamy. And we SHOULD have such laws. Besides this we have laws dictating the age at which marriage is acceptable in our culture. We still have them but the political climate is growing against them too.

Unfortunately neither of these laws WAS APPLIED in the case of the FLDS raid, and perhaps cannot be applied given the technicalities of the cult's practices. The result of the illegal raid on the FLDS may be that even the last of these laws will become obsolete. You would apparently applaud such a result though it would certainly bring more divine judgment against this nation.

CJ said...

Oh, and let me ask: Does "dictating sexual behavior" include dictating whether or not an adult is free to engage in sexual behavior with a minor?

CJ said...

NEWS FLASH.
So the children are going home, as of today, because of a final ruling on the illegitimacy of the whole operation.

'"On the record before us, removal of the children was not warranted," the justices said in their ruling issued in Austin.'

And that is,l finally, the right decision. "The record before us" is the point. They did not have the necessary evidence to do justice in this case.

And everybody who is making polygamy the object of the legal action in this case has missed the entire point and taken the discussion down rabbit trail after rabbit trail, since polygamy as such has NOT ONCE been legally implicated in this whole operation.

Perhaps it should have been. I'd love to see them find a LEGAL way to bring this cult to justice. I wonder what the odds of that are after this fiasco? As I asked at the beginning, since their practices are no secret and have been ongoing over years and decades, why NOW, and why on this flimsy excuse for action? I could begin to think there is a conspiracy to botch such cases as this in order to undermine our legal system even further on behalf of Cultural Marxism, to "liberate" even MORE "sexual freedom" into acceptable political status.

The people who have been reacting emotionally reacting to this, to the abuse factor, with their horror at the idea of young girls being impregnated by older men, are likewise contributing to this same outcome. FT and NW kept arguing that such arrangements are as old as time and they ARE, so there's no place for such reactions based only on culturally-conditioned distaste, at least not in a legal case. BUT as Culturist John and others have brought out, OUR CULTURE DOES OPPOSE this kind of arrangement. I'm grateful for that clarity finally in the midst of this emotion-directed discussion. A rational society can't punish people based only on an offended sense of propriety and you also can't let them off the hook because you happen to have the opposite reaction and are opposed to our cultural standards and laws that restrict marriage and sexuality, but that's been the general tone of this whole argument so far. Our laws should protect our culture and if they don't, we are in deep trouble.

The final verdict in this case is the only reasonable lawful verdict that could have been given in the context, and I'm glad it finally came down, but the culture is the loser in the end no matter how you look at it.

CJ said...

It's been kind of dawning on me that the way they get around the Constitution in a case like this is through the agencies known as Social Services or Child Protective Services. Not the usual legal machinery that goes into operation when a specific law is held to be violated. They can't figure out how to get them on polygamy so they jump on a chance to get them for child abuse. It seems that CPS may in some cases (based on some subjective sense of "emergency" or the like?) just circumvent the law that would ordinarily require real evidence? I don't know, this just occurred to me. I guess I need more information.

CJ said...

Here is the program where Albert Mohler (president of the Southern Baptist Association) discusses the decision made that the taking of the FLDS children was not justified. There's a very brief discussion of the gay marriage law near the beginning.

http://www.albertmohler.com/radio_show.php?cdate=2008-05-30