Posted by
travis christensen on Sunday, June 01, 2008 3:12:21 PM
3 Thinks to worry about
Scary think #1:
On April 3, 2008, the Texas authorities used a military level of force to raid a compound of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints; they searched everyone’s houses and they took everyone’s kids.
On April 18 the judge ruled that all 416 children seized would be kept in protective custody...for what has turned out to be an indeterminate time.
The phone call that initiated the raid seems to have been a hoax.
A May 22 ruling by an appeals court ruled that there was no evidence of the children being in immediate danger, and therefore no justification for seizing them or keeping them in state custody.
As far as I am aware only two people have been charged with any crime, and one of those charges related to impeding a police investigation.
Despite the ruling of the appeals court, only a handful of children have been returned to their mothers, and the state seems to have no intention of returning the remainder of the children until forced to do so.
What does this amount to?
On the basis of questionable evidence, that state took 416 children from their families: not from a cult, not from a compound, they took individual children from individual families. In many cases they did so even when the individual family was not practicing polygamy or under-age marriage. The raids and searches produced virtually nothing which could be pursued as a crime. The case has proven to be flawed, and was pursued under the thinnest of legal veneers, but even after the ruling of the appeals court the state seems to pursuing it’s own agenda rather than the ruling of the judiciary.
This is government out of control and a grave insult to civil rights. In most cases this would be recognized as an illegal and inhumane action, but the majority of Americans have supported this seizure of children on the basis that the FLDS are pedophiles and polygamists. This leads us to the next point.
Scary think #2
The American public receives it’s information from the media. The media has given overwhelming support to this seizure of children and has fostered in the American public the impression that the FLDS is nothing but pedophiles and polygamists. The reporting has been skewed and has given the public a false impression of the illegality of FLDS actions.
1)It is my understanding that polygamy is only illegal if a person obtains through fraud more than one legal license of marriage. Being married to more than one person is legal as long as the marriages are based only upon religious ceremony and not more than one state marriage license has been issued. Therefore, polygamy as it has been reported is not automatically illegal, and reports of polygamy are immaterial to indicating illegal actions.
2)It is my understanding that in Texas a 17 year old can consent to sex with an adult. Therefore, reports of pregnant 17 year olds are completely immaterial.
3)It is my understanding that in Texas a 16 year old can marry with parental consent. Therefore, reports of pregnant 16 years olds have to be qualified. If there is a legitimate state marriage license it is not illegal for a 16 year old to be married and pregnant.
The conclusion is that the media will report any issue in any way that they want to and we will believe them. We were shocked when we heard of all these teenage girls pregnant in polygamous marriages, but it was not explained by the mass media that under Texas law the vast majority of these marriages and pregnancies seem to be legal. This was an action that effectively increased the power of Child Protective Services, a type of social service, one of the many arms of the government which believes that it should have more power over our lives and the lives of our children than we do, and one of the organisms through which liberals exercise social power by establishing an entrenched buerocracy. What we have seen in Texas is a victory for expansion of government in the name of a liberal organization and a liberal World-view, and we accepted this because we were misled by the media.
Scary Think #3
May 22, 2008, the House Judiciary Committee grilled some oil executives to find out why gas costs so much. I find this to be absurd because it is an example of government approaching an economic issue in the manner of a criminal proceeding.
One of the executives from Exxon laid the blame for these high prices at the foot of the Congress, claiming that excessive government regulation has kept the oil industry drilling and building refineries domestically. (This is probably true, but the oil companies are making record profits and in the present time probably have no interest in domestic expansion)
Predictably, the New York Times article of these proceedings did not mention any culpability regarding the Congress or environmental regulation. It did however, mention a statement by Rep. Waters of California, which suggested that the government should nationalize the oil industry if prices rose high enough.
I find this statement extremely disturbing, and I find the way it was reported by the Times ot be extremely disturbing.
I have heard the audio recording of these statements. Simply, the Exxon executive blamed the Congress for over-regulation, and stated that in the future $5 a gallon might be considered a cheap price for gas. The response of the Congresswoman was simply that if this happened she would be in favor of the government taking over the oil industry.
The way that it was reported was that nationalizing might be necessary if "outsize profits and exorbitant gasoline prices continued." No mention of government culpability, just the impressing that the oil companies are criminally liable for overcharging.
I despise slanted reporting, but I despise even more the sentiments of Rep. Waters and the mentality behind them. America is not supposed to be in the business of seizing control of private industry. We are a capitalist nation and abuses are supposed to be regulated; we are not a communist nation in which all capital industries are to be held by the government in the name of the people. Yet, here we have an elected official stating that it would be in the public interest for the government to nationalize an industry when the right conditions are met.
You know what this reminds me of? The concept of the "reign of terror." This is a classic concept of totalitarian governments and states that when the state of society reaches a high enough level of desperation that the people will willingly give up their freedoms for safety and order. Classically, the "reign of terror" has referred to a period of anarchy or a communist scare, but this is 21st century America: our "reign of terror" can very well be taking place right now, at the gas pump, and if the price goes high enough I believe the American people will concede to anything to make it come back down. The concepts of free market and personal property mean less and less as the price of gas goes higher and higher.
Even more troubling, what if the Exxon executive was telling the truth? What if the high price of gasoline is largely the fault of our government? Does this mean that at some level, by some parties, there has been a plan to intentionally drive up the price of gasoline? This is a definite yes in some cases: green-minded people must find the current situation ideal, because the higher the price of gas the less of it is used, and the more likely it is that we will devote effort to gasoline alternatives.
Could there be others who were willing for gas to become increasingly expensive because it would eventually allow them to take over oil companies? To believe so would seem the height of paranoia, but how else do you explain what has happened? After the energy crisis of the seventies you would have expected America to develop a coherent energy policy, and that today we would have abundant domestic oil production and abundant alternative energy sources. This has not been the case and by degrees we have arrived at a situation where the price of oil is at record highs and can be expected to go higher. The government response has been to blame the oil companies, and to threaten to nationalize the industry.
Conclusion: In the month of May we have seen an illegal seizure of 416 children, a threat by a Congresswoman to nationalize the oil industry, and in both cases the media is the propaganda tool to sell the public on diminishing their rights and increasing the power of government.
I hope June is better.