Showing posts with label Polygyny Haters. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Polygyny Haters. Show all posts

Wednesday, March 10, 2010

Obsessed are we? (UPDATE)

After a while, it gets to be so overwhelmingly weird, that you have to mention it. Really, even as much as I hate to point to that sick bunch of freaks.

Go ahead, count if you want, how many times I get mentioned, and then go back to the previous open thread, and count, and then go back to the open thread before that and count. Between the "Huge McNuts" and the "Huge McEgos" and the various manglings of my name, pseudonyms and so on, it's obvious that when the FLDS trials and appeals are done, I'm going to need to pay a visit to Mark David Chapman, just to see what drove him.

Mark and I are both drop outs of the same school, maybe he can spare me some time.

Any of you clowns own a copy of "The Catcher in the Rye?"

It's getting to the point where I don't want to walk home in the dark.


It does no good to try to reply to what are brain dead half reads of things I've said, or deliberately obtuse ones.

UPDATE - The Dim Ones are beginning to realize its not COMMENTS that rank a site, it's traffic, composition and length of time on site. Years ago in one of my many and varied incarnations, I was a talk show host engineer/call screener. That which provokes comment is not the same as what promotes readership/listenership/viewership. If you doubt me, listen to Rush Limbaugh. Eventually he will comment on that aspect of ratings/rankings.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Saturday, January 23, 2010

Bring it on, part II

Just to give you an idea of how obsessed these people are, and how badly they need a devil, I will refer to a blog that I really prefer that you never visit.
Sometimes though, you're not completely useless, you can always serve as a Bad Example.

Some observations. In the above thread I am mentioned numerous times. The number of inaccuracies are rampant.

First, though these are no in particular order of importance. I knew Randy Weaver, to paraphrase slightly, I am no Randy Weaver. I find him a fascinating character and I emphasize the word "character" and deliberately endow it with double meanings.

I doubt Randy Weaver remembers me by name. I helped arrange for financial transactions with Randy after Ruby Ridge as part of my job. By this time Randy had won his case, and a lot of money in the process.

My evaluation of Randy is as follows:

He is in essence a good time party boy with strong political beliefs. The evidence of my eyes and personal experience is that the constant salutation assigned to Randy; "White Supremacist," is not apropos. He was a small time gun dealer in Idaho who was targeted as an example. Had he been arrested quietly in town, no one would have died, and Randy would have been in and out of jail by now, and we'd never have known who he was. Instead, Randy was ambushed in the woods on the way to his house, and the ensuing lethal misunderstanding made him something of an Icon.

I had a chance to observe Randy over several days during about a month to two months worth of time. I had a chance to interact with him for several hours regarding business. I was able to extract personal information from him, that he is ordinarily very reluctant to give. All of this occurred in 1996. In other words, Randy trusted me and did so in a short period of time. That's part of my tool box or skill set, it's what I do.

Later Randy went to a party of all the clients of that business over a one or two month period of time. It was a "get to know you" function for that business. That business had a motivational/organizational consultant on retainer who was in attendance and who is more African than our current President. There was alcohol on hand, and someone had brought cigars.

All night long, Randy and the consultant sat together smoking and laughing and drinking. You almost wanted to say "get a ROOM." It's hard for me to see Randy as a "White Supremacist," at least, that is not his primary motivation in my experience. I personally think he was a crook of a minor variety that got off the charges because his family got shot up in a Law Enforcement gross over reaction and attempt to make an example out of him, and his family. I often use my short relationship with Randy as an illustration of public perception vs private reality.

I will say this: I knew Randy, you probably have never met the guy. I'll play my trump card of knowing him over your sound bite use of his name any day. I am not now, nor have I ever been, a racial supremacist or a Nazi. Period. I have in the past made the mistake of commenting at a Nazi site not KNOWING they were Nazi's and I got out as fast as I got in.

Two. My wife is off limits you idiots. Leave her alone. Don't even comment on her. This is a warning. Should ANYTHING you say or do spill over into the reality of her life you're in deep yogurt so to speak (one of my father's favorite pet phrases). My wife ranks as the best thing that's ever happened to me personally, outside of salvation. I regard myself as literally owing my life to her. She is an intelligent but private person. She holds NUMEROUS degrees. She speaks SEVERAL languages. One of her degrees is from a school of near Ivy League reputation. Many of the personnel working at the White House over the last 30 years graduated from the same private institution. She was in her youth, a near Olympic caliber athlete. Absolutely none of what I just said is an exaggeration. It is spot on true as well as the following: She is none of your business and doesn't want anything to do with you. She is entirely aware of what I think and do. I love her deeply. Leave her alone. I will be on you LEGALLY like a heat seeking missile if you let your casual remarks and stalking bleed over into her life. That goes for any family member. I have used none of their names except for my jailbird son. None of them have aligned themselves with me publicly. My passion is not their passion. That has nothing to do with whether they agree with me or not. Some of them do, some of them don't.

The Christian (Protestant) Reformation began in disagreement over doctrine. It is right and proper for us in the Reformation tradition to disagree over sincerely held beliefs. I am in fact in closer alignment with the father of the Reformation, Martin Luther, when it comes to my stance on polygyny. I have reached a public phase of my dispute with the denomination with whom I fellowship. I have been very disclosure oriented with regard to that dispute. It is my belief they violate their own procedures through secret meetings and secret accusations. There is no declared requirement of belief on the institution of marriage for membership in the Orthodox Presbyterian Church, and as such it would have no more declared impact on my sincerity of belief than a dispute over Baptism.

The various Presbyterian Denominations are not AUTHORITARIAN in their Governance like the Roman Catholic Church for instance. Right or wrong, there is no mechanism for dispute of what constitutes Orthodoxy for the rank and file parishioner in the RCC. This is quite different in the OPC. Hence, I contend that I have been wrongfully withheld membership and am now wrongfully barred from the church by it's leadership. I am however obedient in that I have not attended since directed not to attend.

I expect to lose the conflict. I have always expected to lose the conflict should it ever have become public, as it now has. I have always harbored the faint hope that I might be accepted as a member with the understanding that the denomination I was in, did not agree with me. This looming loss provides for me, certain options that I would not have as a member of the church. None of those "options" should be seen as me contemplating or threatening or encouraging an illegal act.

Last, I do not now nor have I ever had a Criminal Record. I have never violated any law except for traffic regulations. I have never seen the inside of a court room as a defendant except in the civil matter of my first marriage (divorce) or as a defendant in a traffic violation. I have never been arrested. I have seen the inside of a jail ONCE in California because that is where they kept their fingerprint scanner. I have had my fingerprints taken on numerous occasions as part of passing criminal background checks. I have successfully passed those criminal background checks in Florida, Idaho, Montana, Vermont and California. I am on file as licensed in Montana and Vermont under the exact and same name I used here as part of the address of my blog. I have twice in my life been a registered lobbyist.

Rozita Swinton is on the doorstep of transitioning from public figure, to private figure. Her court appearance this coming Wednesday is her last regularly scheduled one intended to tie up loose ends from her 2007 guilty plea in her false reporting crime in Castle Rock in 2005. I doubt anything earth shattering will come out of it. Unless someone discovers something NEW about her in connection with some other investigation or unless Texas ACTUALLY decides to charge her with something, she's off the table pretty much. Her name will get mentioned here from time to time, as it is relevant but the FLDS know enough about her now, and her past connections and they'll pursue her, or they won't. In the final analysis, it's not my ox that got gored.

Don't suppose, you toads, that you can lay a finger on me, or my wife without trouble raining on you so hard that you will need the Super Dome for a hat. All the trouble I will cause for you will be of the entirely legal variety and done to you by an attorney, in court.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Friday, November 13, 2009

"True Believers..."

Found at the Wasatch Intercept.
" 'All lies and jest, still the man hears what he wants to hear and he disregards the rest' - The Boxer, Paul Simon."
An apt lead in:
"What I see in play is some kind of morbid curiosity. For some reason, that eludes me, some people in this country are eager, desperate even, to believe lurid tales of organized abuse rings, masquerading under the guise of religion, holding children hostage as sex slaves today, right here within the boarders of the good 'ol USA.

This is by no means an intellectual exercise for this group of 'true believers', they believe it with their hearts, and any skeptic will quickly be accused of being either a child abuser or a child abuse enabler.

This 'true believer' phenomenon certainly did not begin with this particular group. In the 1980's, a book called 'Michelle Remembers' was released. In it's aftermath, a large number of apparently unconnected individuals, across both North America and Europe, began coming forward with accounts 'recovered memories' of satanic ritual abuse. Evangelical Christian traveling speakers Bob Larson and Jerry Johnston were drawing huge audiences, then Geraldo Rivera fanned the flames even more with a primetime special, treating it all as real. But was there any evidence?"
Remind you at all of the fanatical types surrounding YFZ with stories of horrible events?
"When I actually start publicizing this blog, so that people will actually start reading it, hopefully I can get some insightful comments as to why they so passionately want to believe. Could it just be that some have a pathological need for a scapegoat to hate, or that they find some personal validation in believing the worst of those who seem strange or different from themselves, or could it go even deeper than that? For now, I remain perplexed."
Oops, too late.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Wednesday, May 14, 2008

Anti Polygyny fervor jumps the border.

Polygynists are hated.  Make no mistake about it.  The rabid fervor to "get them" stretches across our border, to Canada.  

The Salt Lake Tribune - "Many residents in this parallel community, which includes about 500 American citizens, share those same beliefs - that you take many wives and live a communal lifestyle - but prosecutors have not moved in to take action.

    Yet.

British Columbia's Attorney General Wally Oppal told The Associated Press he plans to arrest someone on a polygamy charge or ask the courts to weigh in on Bountiful's legal standing within the month.
 
    'Something must be done," he said. 'I personally feel, and our government feels, that it would be inappropriate to do nothing.'"

But wait, Canada has already recognized Polygamy, for the purposes of using divorce law to divide up families.

May 31, 2006

"Multiple-wife marriages have been legally recognized in Canada to award spousal support and inheritance payments.

The former Liberal government long maintained that polygamy is criminal in Canada but documents obtained by Sun Media under Access to Information show that polygamous marriages have been recognized 'for limited purposes' to enforce the financial obligations of husbands.

Religious organizations say same-sex marriage opened the door to decriminalizing polygamy, and worry that formal recognitions of plural marriages will weaken the government's ability to defend the anti-polygamy law if it faces a constitutional challenge on religious grounds. A polygamist from Bountiful, British Columbia has warned he will fight for his constitutional right to have plural wives on religious grounds."

There is no longer a link to the article online.  You have to buy it.  There is a supporting PDF document located here.

So exactly what is Canada doing?  Is Wally Oppal playing to the crowd or is he aware of this precedent in his own country?
More →

Sphere: Related Content