Polygamy - Why the Shrieking?
To caveat, I'm not talking about those freeze-dried-whack-a-loons who force underage girls into marriage with dirty old men, like that whack-job Warren Jeffs. He's a disgrace, and I have serious concerns about Colorado City, Arizona, where his community lives.
What I don't understand is why people get up in arms about communities like Centennial Park, Arizona, where many plural families make their homes. These are not rabid fanatics, frothing at the mouth and forcing their children into unwanted, illegal sexual relationships. For the most part, these families have the same hopes, dreams and aspirations as any family has - they just choose to compose their families in a manner out of the mainstream. Sort of like...oh, I don't know...gay couples?
Seriously, these folks aren't hurting anyone, and there's no indication that children raised in these loving environments are damaged in any way, just as there's no indication children raised by loving gay couples are damaged. Why do people get so shrieky about it? I understand the historical reasons for outlawing polygamy, but I don't see the issue with just decriminalizing it. That's what many advocacy groups are asking for. I mean, really, why should consenting adults be considered guilty of a felony for choosing to live in a family unit that includes more than two adults? Yes, yes, I know that critics of plural marriage complain (loudly) that the FLDS church and plural marriage places men in a position of authority of women, and thus values men more than women. I find these arguments pretty specious - the main LDS church also values men more than women, but they don't have to justify their private lives to journalists and lawmakers. What's good for the goose is good for the gander, so to speak. These women are adults. Like all adults, they should be permitted to make their own decisions, whether their choices are the ones I would make or not. I don't find subjugating myself to a man because it's "God's Will" any more appealing than taking out my own eye with a fork, but it's not my decision to make for other people. And what about people who choose polygamy for reasons other than religious ones?
If avoiding hypocrisy is a goal, then I think allowing polygamous families to live openly and enjoy rights and privileges associated with traditional marriage is the least we can do, if we allow other non-traditional families the same rights. What's the difference between supporting gay equality and supporting polygamous equality? None. So stop shrieking.
A Case for Immigration - Sossina Haile
As you know, my congressman is that asshat Tom Tancredo. Thankfully, he's decided he will not seek reelection, and has dropped out of the Presidential race, as well. Maybe in 2008 I won't get a dumbass.
Tancredo is, among other things, a bit shrill when it comes to issues of immigration. Not that I'm pro-illegal immigration. I'm not. I just think the issue, and the consequences of whatever action we take, is a lot more complex than the sound-bite people would have us believe. If we suddenly deport all of the illegal aliens, our world is not going to suddenly be puppies and roses, nor will the price of an orange suddenly skyrocket to $5.00 followed by economic collapse. If we fling open our borders, we are not going to become a larger model of Mexico, nor are we going to achieve some sort of egalitarian utopia. I don't think the expert opinion in Mexico that illegal immigration is a "labor phenomenon" rather than a "crime" is accurate - the root cause may be labor related, but it's still a crime. But the individuals who try to come here illegally are not (generally) axe murderers or pedophiles - they're people who are trying to make a better life for their families. It's complex. That's why we pay those policy wonks and elected morons in Washington the big bucks - to figure it out. (Hint: The US's consumer economy and the enormous (and growing) trade deficit with China might have something to do with it.)
In any case, I, too, have been a bit shrill lately, and so I'm going to focus today on an immigration success story. I'm not suggesting that illegal immigration is not a policy issue that should be addressed sooner rather than later. I'm saying that legal immigration is a cornerstone of the American experience, and our country is a better place for the assimilation of peoples from around the world.
Which brings me to Dr. Sossina Haile.
Dr. Haile is a professor of Material Science and Chemical Engineering at the California Institute of Technology. She and her team invented the "superprotonic" solid acid fuel cell. Like all fuel cells, they produce energy through chemical reactions and their chief emission is pure water. The significance of Dr. Haile's work is that her cells are more durable, designed to work more cheaply, and are designed to work at mid range temperatures. Dr. Haile's cells fill an important need, although additional design and research are needed to determine their commercial viability. Dr. Haile's attitude about her work is, "There's nothing better than being able to combine an intellectually exciting topic with the knowledge that it will be beneficial. To me, that's just glory."
Dr. Haile is also a legal immigrant.
She and her birth family left Ethiopia in the mid 1970's after the coup, and settled in Minnesota. Dr. Haile's degrees are from MIT and the University of California, Berkley.
Quite a string of accomplishments for anyone to have. But Dr. Haile isn't just anyone - she's a foreign born woman of color, living here in the U.S. and trying to make the world a better place. I don't know if Dr. Haile is a citizen of our great country, but I think she's a great American. Glory, indeed.
Conversations with Karma - Paris Hilton
Paris Hilton: Hello?
Karma: Hello, Paris. This is Karma.
PH: Karma? Karma who? How did you get this number?
K: Karma. The eastern idea that you will receive your punishment or reward for your deeds. You know...what comes around goes around, people get what they deserve? Karma. And I have everyone's number.
PH: That's hot.
K: Um...okay. Listen, I'm calling to let you know that your granddad Barron has decided to give 97% of the family fortune to charity.
PH: What?!
K: Yeah. He's decided to donate $2.231 billion to the Conrad N. Hilton Foundation to fund clean water in Africa, education for blind children, and housing for the mentally ill.
PH: But, but...what will I live on?
K: Well, that still leaves $69 million of his personal wealth. Surely you and the rest of the family can find a way to live on $69 million.
PH: What do you mean, the rest of the family? We're talking about me. And why do those Africans and blind children need so much? Don't they know how much a Louis Vuitton bag costs?
K: They probably don't. I think they're more interested in having enough to eat and avoiding amoebic dysentery. I thought you had earned over $15 million in your own right in the last few years. Surely you can live off of that. Or you could, you know, get a job.
PH: This is no time for jokes!
K: I'm not really joking. Millions of people do it, you know.
PH: I don't have time for a job. I have to call my publicist. And my lawyer. And my astrologer.
K: Yeah. Good luck with that.
*click*
What the Fuck is Wrong With These People? - NAMBLA Edition
This is from the Wikipedia article, because I can't bring myself to link the NAMBLA website:
"The North American Man/Boy Love Association (NAMBLA) is a New York City and San Francisco based unincorporated organization in the United States that advocates the legalization of sexual relations between adult males and under-age boys. It has resolved to 'end the oppression of men and boys who have freely chosen mutually consenting relationships."
We will now pause so the Hot Chicks and Smart Men can lose their last meal.
Seriously? Seriously? What the fuck is wrong with these people?
Don't get me wrong - I have no interest in the sex lives of mutually consenting adults. Straight, gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, one-on-one, two-on-one, two-on-two, S&M, whatever gets you going - knock yourself out. Other people's sex lives reside in the "Who Cares" file. Because they're adults, and they have the right to do what they want, as long as they don't hurt anyone else.
These people, though. This is just so fucked up on so many levels - I don't even know where to begin.
How about the idea that a pre-pubescent child can reasonably be expected to engage in a "mutual consenting" sexual relationship? Or how about the idea that these poor, misunderstood darlings are "oppressed" because of their so-called sexual preference? (Hint: Homosexuality and Pedophilia are NOT the same thing.) Or my personal favorite - the idea that these fucktards call for "the adoption of laws that both protect children from unwanted sexual experiences and at the same time leave them free to determine the content of their own sexual experiences." Because that's what pedophiles really want - to protect children from unwanted sexual experiences. They also claim they don't "provide encouragement, referrals or assistance for people seeking sexual contacts" and that they do not "engage in any activities that violate the law [or] advocate that anyone else should." Yeah, I'm sure that's true. Because, really, upholding sexual predation laws is something the North American Man/Boy Love Association really stands for. They also "work toward making a better tomorrow by educating the public about the benefits of early anal penetration for young developing boys.”
We will now pause so the Hot Chicks and Smart Men can engage in the dry heaves.
Thankfully, law enforcement is not amused. The FBI infiltrated NAMBLA, which resulted in the arrests of three men who were attempting to travel internationally for the purposes of illicit sex. The agent's name was Robert Hamer, and he's my new hero. Other members of NAMBLA have been convicted of various crimes, but the organization itself has never been convicted, mostly because they're defended by the ACLU. We wouldn't want to limit their right to free expression, after all. Especially since they're so oppressed, the freaks.
You know, I'm a big fan of the Bill of Rights. I was a defender of the Constitution for many years. I've always thought everyone should have their free speech protected under the 1st Amendment. Yay, Free Speech! That's me. But these sick bastards give me pause. Seriously, who thinks this is acceptable, even under the provisions of the 1st Amendment? Yes, yes, the slippery slope and all that. I understand intellectually.
In this case, I'm finding that I don't really give a shit about what the fuck is wrong with these people. I simply cannot think of a karmic punishment that fits the crime. So my thought is that whatever is wrong with them, a bullet between the eyes will pretty much take care of it. Not that I'm advocating shooting them in the head, or anything. Heavens, no. I'm simply exercising my 1st Amendment rights. Yeah, that's it.
I'm Keeping my Eye on This One...
I say "appears to be" because I don't know the man personally. It's tough to make those kinds of judgement calls without any direct experience - look at John McCain. But consider:
- U.S. Naval Academy Graduate
- Awarded the Navy Cross, the Silver Star, two Bronze Stars, and two Purple Hearts during service in Vietnam.
- Served as President Reagan's Secretary of the Navy in the 1980's, and resigned on a matter of principle.
- Wrote detailed objections to our current strategy in the Middle East, including incredibly accurate predictions as to the eventual outcome.
- Currently serving as the junior senator from Virginia, where he is apparently attempting to compensate members of the Armed Forces appropriately for their incredible sacrifices during our current military engagement in the Middle East. He's introduced legislation to improve educational benefits and protect the bonuses earned by wounded service members. That's considerably more than my asshat senator appears to be doing.
And he also writes really good books.
Senator Webb hasn't been in the Senate long enough to determine what his lasting legacy will be, although in general I approve of his voting record. He's currently involved in keeping the Senate session open to prevent the President from making recess appointments.
He's definitely someone to keep an eye on. I read today that the rumor mill has him on the Democratic short list for VP. I think I'd prefer to have him on the short list for the big chair, but at this point I'll take what I can get.
Back to Work
Yesterday was a pretty good day. We exchanged gifts with my MIL on Christmas Eve, so the only thing we had to do yesterday is make the stuffing and the sweet potato casserole before we went to my aunt and uncle's house for the holiday meal. Unfortunately, my Hot Mom and my Hot Sister and their Smart Men got snowed out, and were unable to make it for the dinner.
We'll be opening the rest of the gifts with my Hot Mom and Smart Boy on New Year's Eve, since the boy spent Christmas Eve and Christmas Day with his father.
One of the desserts we made for the gathering is "Pumpkin Rolls." They turned out so well, I decided to share the recipe. They're most delicious. Enjoy!
PUMPKIN ROLLS
Pre-heat oven to 375
FILLING:
(Make first and set aside)
2 cups powered sugar
2- 8oz. packages of cream cheese
8 Tbl. melted butter
1 tsp. vanilla
CAKE:
9 eggs – beat for 5 minutes
3 cups of sugar – mix with eggs
1- 16oz. can of pumpkin
3 Tbl. – Lemon juice
2 ¼ cups Flour
3 tsp. Baking soda
6 tsp. Cinnamon
3 tsp. Ginger
1½ tsp. Salt
Mix beaten eggs, sugar, pumpkin and lemon juice, then add dry ingredients.
Spread 1/3 of the batter in a well greased jelly roll pan – 15x10x1
Bake 15 minutes @ 375 degrees
Gently -turn on damp towel and roll jelly roll style. Let stand for 5-10 minutes in refrigerator. Unroll when cool and spread with filling. Re-roll.
Makes 3 pumpkin rolls. Freezes very well.

