At a family gathering recently, our daughters were discussing boys and dating. They like dancing, and particularly Salsa dancing. They attend Salsa clubs and participate in Salsa dances regularly where they meet and dance with a variety of men. In the course of the discussion, it became obvious that the majority of the guys my daughters were dating were of Mexican or Latino heritage. In fact, at least one of my daughters was getting very close to a “steady” relationship with a guy from Guatemala, and another daughter had dated a guy from Ecuador several times.
Now, at this point, I want to make it perfectly clear that I have nothing against Mexican/Latino people. I grew up in New Mexico where a high percentage of the people were of Mexican heritage. Many of them were and still are my friends. I never thought of them as being any different than me. I have never considered the color of a person’s skin to be an indicator of character any more than eye color, hair color, whether one is short or tall, or any other inconsequential feature of a person’s appearance.
However, I do have some concerns about a person’s upbringing, the culture in which they were raised, and how that culture affects their views of the world, society, marriage and family life, and the way they treat others. Because my daughters are dating men from other countries where cultures are much different, particularly relating to the way women are treated, I felt it appropriate to caution my daughters and suggest that before they get serious with these guys, they make sure they know what their view of women is, and how these guys will treat their wives and daughters – as if one could ascertain this before marrying someone. But, there are clues one could look for in a person’s behavior that would indicate how they would treat women. For example:
· How is his language? Respectful to you and others? Clean or vulgar? Etc.
· Does he ogle other women? Make crude comments about women or their bodies? Sexual jokes? Etc.
· How does he react to or relate to children? Kindly or with anger/irritation/ impatience?
· Does he welcome them or reject them? Does he develop an appropriate relationship with them?
· How does he react when he drops something or something unexpected happens?
· Does he get angry easily? Or for little or no cause?
· How does he treat animals, particularly helpless ones? Is he cruel or hateful toward them?
· How does he treat or react to the disabled, infirm, mentally incompetent, the aged, etc.?
· Is he a smoker, drinker, drug user?
· Does he take care of his possessions? Maintain his car? Etc.
· How does he drive? Safely or carelessly? Taking unnecessary risks? Speeding? Showboating? Etc.
· Most importantly, pray constantly, seeking guidance from God regarding any man you may think of getting into a serious relationship with, and listen to the whisperings of the Spirit.
To introduce my concerns, I referred to the book, “Not Without My Daughter” by Betty Mahmoody. This is a heart wrenching true story of a woman who married an Iranian man. This man had lived in the United States for several years, had studied and completed medical school in the U.S., had participated in a successful medical practice, and they had lived ‘happily’ in marriage long enough to have a daughter five years old (if I remember correctly). Ultimately she wound up being trapped in the brutal and repressive muslim culture. Her “loving” husband, so she thought, reverted to the cultural norms he grew up with as soon as he got her away from
a society that he knew would not tolerate the behaviors of those norms. She was beaten and otherwise abused by the man who “loved” her, subjugated to the role of a slave, forced to show obeisance to the muslim religion, destined for nothing more than abject servitude: providing food preparation, housekeeping, sexual, and other such services that are below the man’s “dignity”. Her daughter was taken from her and placed in training with the man’s relatives so she could learn her place in this barbaric society. When this woman tried to protest against such treatment, she was beaten severely several times and literally threatened with execution. Finally, in the face of instant death if she was caught, she managed to escape with her daughter and return to the safety of the U.S.
I thought this would be an excellent way to illustrate the point I was trying to make, but as soon as I mentioned it, I was literally ‘shouted down’ by another of my daughters who is older and married. I was accused of being racist and prejudiced, and received a barrage from all my daughters about how marvelous, wonderful, beautiful, fabulous, handsome, exciting, etc., etc., that Mexican/Latino men are. I did not have a chance to finish making my point, so I will make it here.
I emphasize again that I hold no prejudice against any person based on their lineage. I don’t care if a person is of Mexican/Latino heritage, black, Indian or other Native, red, brown, yellow, or blue with pink polka-dots and flaming orange hair (well, I don’t know about the flaming orange hair!). What I am concerned with is the character, the nature, the personality of a person. Sometimes, outward appearance can be an indicator of inward character (flaming orange hair?), but it is not a reliable indicator. Personality, or the inward character of a person, shows through behavior, through the way they treat other people – specifically women, children, the disabled or otherwise helpless or mentally deficient – and helpless animals, etc. If I hold any prejudices against people, they are based solely on the character or behavior that they have exhibited.
I know from many years of experience in life that it is near impossible to change the basic nature that has been instilled in all of us by the environment, society, and culture in which we are raised. For example, I imagine all of us could think of many things our parents did that we determined we would never do with our own kids. Yet in my case, I find myself doing those very things and raising my children in much the same way my parents raised me. I don’t think my experience in this would be much different than most of humanity. Thankfully, looking back, most of those things my parents did that I detested were wise and helped me be a better person in the long run.
This is why I wanted to caution my daughters. Though I don’t think Guatemalan or Ecuadoran cultures are near as barbaric or repressive as muslim culture, I do know that women of these cultures are not treated much better than cattle or other domestic animals. I think the manner women and children are treated in these cultures is despicable, but the fact is that a person raised in such a culture sees it as normal and may not see it as wrong.
My counsel and caution to my daughters is if they are going to date (and you ultimately marry who you date) a Mexican/Latino man, or men from any other culture with norms that conflict with their own culture, they must be very careful to do everything in their power to vet this potential marital partner (because that is exactly what he is) to assure they will not be trapped in a situation like Betty Mahmoody was. I don’t think it would be over the top for them to do an actual, in depth background check, including review of driving records, police records, credit reports, sexual predator databases, etc. Again, it is of utmost importance to pray and seek God’s guidance; He knows the man of your interest better than anyone else ever could, and He will warn you or encourage you as may be appropriate. I have no problem with them dating or marrying a man of any race (aren’t we all of the human race?) or culture as long as he will always treat my daughter with love, respect, kindness, as an equal, and in accord with correct principles as outlined in the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Unfortunately, few other cultures teach this. I want nothing but happiness for my daughters, and all my children.
Sunday, March 4, 2012
Sunday, October 18, 2009
Rituals
Rituals – every person, every family has them. We may not even realize what they are, but we have them. The way we eat our meals, take a shower, get ready for bed, what we do on the Sabbath day, etc., etc. It is the rituals that, combined, create individual and family traditions.
My wife and I have lived in the Alaska wilderness for the past 22 years. We have raised eight children here – only our eldest two daughters are old enough to have much memory of our pre-Alaska life. Life in the Alaska wilderness demands a certain life style. Extreme climate conditions (i.e. temperatures in the 30°F to 60°F below zero range) are life threatening. Though road connected, we live in an area with a very sparse population. There are no wholesale outlets, box stores, no supermarkets. The nearest supermarket is 150 miles away; the nearest wholesale outlet is 200 miles away. The nearest small town is 15 miles away, and it has a few small (as in very small) mom and pop type stores that cater to year-round local residents and to the tourists that swarm the area in the summer. Because of these conditions, groceries and supplies are not abundant, specialty items and some necessities are not available (there is no clothing store, for example), and those that are available are very expensive. Milk, for example, runs $6 to $7 per gallon, about double what it can be purchased for in Anchorage, and about quadruple what it can be purchased for in most areas of the lower 48.
A commodity that is very expensive, and getting more so all the time, is heating fuel. There are two kinds available in the area: fuel oil and propane. Its one of those situations where they are both more expensive than the other (I don’t know how that works either, but it sure seems like it!). With the high cost of such goods and services, and the not so high wages and salaries in the area, we do not have a lot of money to throw around. Because of this, we built our home to be energy efficient, to conserve heat and water. Our home is designed with a wood stove as its central heater with a fuel oil forced air furnace as a back up. The venting system is designed so the furnace pulls its return air from around the wood stove. The intent is to create a system that will actively circulate heat from the wood stove throughout the house
One ritual that I have, at least for the three-fourths of the year that we have to use supplemental heating, is building a fire in the woodstove every morning. I seem to have a knack for it. The wife and kids can build a fire, but it usually takes them several tries, lots of paper and cardboard fire starter, and sometimes they just give up because they can’t get it going. In contrast, I can usually get a fire started the first try and have the house warmed in only a few minutes. Rarely do I ever have to light a second match (I’m a good Boy Scout!) or refresh the kindling.
What I have to do regularly (in fact, as regularly as the seasons) is collect the firewood we use to heat our home. It takes about 5 cords of wood to last us the winter. I usually make the effort to do this in the last part of September or early October, and I do my best to get it in before snow flies. I use a Honda Fourtrax 300 4x4 with a small trailer to haul my cut firewood out of the forest. I bought this machine 20 years ago, and if you had told me then that it would stand up this long to the work I have used it for, I would not have believed you. It will climb a tree, and it works like a tractor. I can haul about ¼ cord of wood each trip. That is quite a load for my little rig, but it pulls it through some of the most difficult terrain you can imagine without any problem – unless there is significant snow on the ground. Much more than 8” of unpacked snow, and my little 4x4 “swims” in it and is not much good for pulling any load.
The collection of our winter wood supply has developed into one of our family traditions. Our kids always whined and complained about it, but I would drag them along to help as often as I could. Believe me, gathering our wood supply is a lot of work! I do most of the chain saw operation and hauling of the biggest logs, and I get the kids to do much of the gathering of cut logs and hauling to the rig to be loaded. I always find it satisfying. It has been said that firewood warms you three times, once when you cut it, once when you split it, and finally when you burn it.
As our children get older and get to be more our friends than our kids, we can converse with them as adults. It is amazing sometimes to learn what our children pick up on during their childhood. Its understandable that they remember and almost always adopt the family holiday traditions they grew up with for their own homes and families when they mature and are on their own. I mean, those are fun and exciting. But I was amazed when at a family gathering in the not too distant past, I mentioned something about gathering the annual wood supply, and my grown son pipes up and says he really misses that annual tradition. I was floored! I had always had the idea that the kids did not like helping to gather the wood, and only helped because I made them. When I expressed my amazement at this pronouncement, one of my daughters spoke up and said that she misses that annual activity too. Other children spoke up expressing similar feelings. Apparently, this annual Fall-time activity has made a positive and indelible impression on our children.
I don’t necessarily consider our wood gathering as fun (as I said, it is a lot of work). But I do find it satisfying, and as Fall approaches every year, I find myself antsy to get out in the woods and get at it. I think this stems from my fear of not having enough firewood to last the winter at least as much as it does from the desire to do so. As the days get rapidly shorter and nighttime temperatures get lower, I will rush home from work, quickly change clothes, gas up the chainsaw, and head out into the woods. I always try to tell my wife about where I will be. I feel better knowing that she can find me in case a bear gets me, or I have an accident, or am otherwise delayed in returning.
My wife will occasionally accompany me (or us, if the kids are here) to help. Though I am comfortable going solo, I always enjoy her company when she does. But, because of household requirements, she often cannot. Sometimes, when I am out making sawdust and loading wood by myself, I will hear a rustle or catch a movement out of the corner of my eye. I will look up and see my beautiful wife like a fairy waif coming through the woods to find me. This always gives me a thrill – makes my heart go pitter-patter. After she does this a time or two, I will catch myself watching for her, hoping she will come, anticipating her arrival. I love her so much. I so desperately want to have a beautiful, loving, unified, intimate, and eternal marriage relationship with her, and none else. Please, God, help us to achieve this.
Rituals – everyone has them.
My wife and I have lived in the Alaska wilderness for the past 22 years. We have raised eight children here – only our eldest two daughters are old enough to have much memory of our pre-Alaska life. Life in the Alaska wilderness demands a certain life style. Extreme climate conditions (i.e. temperatures in the 30°F to 60°F below zero range) are life threatening. Though road connected, we live in an area with a very sparse population. There are no wholesale outlets, box stores, no supermarkets. The nearest supermarket is 150 miles away; the nearest wholesale outlet is 200 miles away. The nearest small town is 15 miles away, and it has a few small (as in very small) mom and pop type stores that cater to year-round local residents and to the tourists that swarm the area in the summer. Because of these conditions, groceries and supplies are not abundant, specialty items and some necessities are not available (there is no clothing store, for example), and those that are available are very expensive. Milk, for example, runs $6 to $7 per gallon, about double what it can be purchased for in Anchorage, and about quadruple what it can be purchased for in most areas of the lower 48.
A commodity that is very expensive, and getting more so all the time, is heating fuel. There are two kinds available in the area: fuel oil and propane. Its one of those situations where they are both more expensive than the other (I don’t know how that works either, but it sure seems like it!). With the high cost of such goods and services, and the not so high wages and salaries in the area, we do not have a lot of money to throw around. Because of this, we built our home to be energy efficient, to conserve heat and water. Our home is designed with a wood stove as its central heater with a fuel oil forced air furnace as a back up. The venting system is designed so the furnace pulls its return air from around the wood stove. The intent is to create a system that will actively circulate heat from the wood stove throughout the house
One ritual that I have, at least for the three-fourths of the year that we have to use supplemental heating, is building a fire in the woodstove every morning. I seem to have a knack for it. The wife and kids can build a fire, but it usually takes them several tries, lots of paper and cardboard fire starter, and sometimes they just give up because they can’t get it going. In contrast, I can usually get a fire started the first try and have the house warmed in only a few minutes. Rarely do I ever have to light a second match (I’m a good Boy Scout!) or refresh the kindling.
What I have to do regularly (in fact, as regularly as the seasons) is collect the firewood we use to heat our home. It takes about 5 cords of wood to last us the winter. I usually make the effort to do this in the last part of September or early October, and I do my best to get it in before snow flies. I use a Honda Fourtrax 300 4x4 with a small trailer to haul my cut firewood out of the forest. I bought this machine 20 years ago, and if you had told me then that it would stand up this long to the work I have used it for, I would not have believed you. It will climb a tree, and it works like a tractor. I can haul about ¼ cord of wood each trip. That is quite a load for my little rig, but it pulls it through some of the most difficult terrain you can imagine without any problem – unless there is significant snow on the ground. Much more than 8” of unpacked snow, and my little 4x4 “swims” in it and is not much good for pulling any load.
The collection of our winter wood supply has developed into one of our family traditions. Our kids always whined and complained about it, but I would drag them along to help as often as I could. Believe me, gathering our wood supply is a lot of work! I do most of the chain saw operation and hauling of the biggest logs, and I get the kids to do much of the gathering of cut logs and hauling to the rig to be loaded. I always find it satisfying. It has been said that firewood warms you three times, once when you cut it, once when you split it, and finally when you burn it.
As our children get older and get to be more our friends than our kids, we can converse with them as adults. It is amazing sometimes to learn what our children pick up on during their childhood. Its understandable that they remember and almost always adopt the family holiday traditions they grew up with for their own homes and families when they mature and are on their own. I mean, those are fun and exciting. But I was amazed when at a family gathering in the not too distant past, I mentioned something about gathering the annual wood supply, and my grown son pipes up and says he really misses that annual tradition. I was floored! I had always had the idea that the kids did not like helping to gather the wood, and only helped because I made them. When I expressed my amazement at this pronouncement, one of my daughters spoke up and said that she misses that annual activity too. Other children spoke up expressing similar feelings. Apparently, this annual Fall-time activity has made a positive and indelible impression on our children.
I don’t necessarily consider our wood gathering as fun (as I said, it is a lot of work). But I do find it satisfying, and as Fall approaches every year, I find myself antsy to get out in the woods and get at it. I think this stems from my fear of not having enough firewood to last the winter at least as much as it does from the desire to do so. As the days get rapidly shorter and nighttime temperatures get lower, I will rush home from work, quickly change clothes, gas up the chainsaw, and head out into the woods. I always try to tell my wife about where I will be. I feel better knowing that she can find me in case a bear gets me, or I have an accident, or am otherwise delayed in returning.
My wife will occasionally accompany me (or us, if the kids are here) to help. Though I am comfortable going solo, I always enjoy her company when she does. But, because of household requirements, she often cannot. Sometimes, when I am out making sawdust and loading wood by myself, I will hear a rustle or catch a movement out of the corner of my eye. I will look up and see my beautiful wife like a fairy waif coming through the woods to find me. This always gives me a thrill – makes my heart go pitter-patter. After she does this a time or two, I will catch myself watching for her, hoping she will come, anticipating her arrival. I love her so much. I so desperately want to have a beautiful, loving, unified, intimate, and eternal marriage relationship with her, and none else. Please, God, help us to achieve this.
Rituals – everyone has them.
Sunday, March 8, 2009
B. Hussein Obama - Continued
In my most recent post, I stated, "take my word for it; this is one time that the moniker “progressive” fits, only in the sense that this monstrous bill will only “progress” (i.e. continue to grow) to astronomical proportions." I don't claim to be any sort of prophet, and that is one time I would like to see my "prophecy" prove false. But, it hasn't proven so, and it is coming to pass. Just consider: first, it was TARP at $700B, then the stimulus bill at $790B, then I think it was a $265B bail out for health care, then several other things I don't remember right off, and now a $420B budget for the current fiscal year. The latest total of all this is $3.6 TRILLION (MSNBC News and other sources). Where will it end? Answer: it won't! As long as we have a "progressive" in the White House, and "progressive" controlled Congress, this mess will just continue to get worse. The "progressives" constantly whined and moaned about President Bush doubling the national budget in the 8 years he was in office. B. Hussein Obama has doubled the national budget in SIX WEEKS! The stock market has tanked and continues a death spiral down. What little retirement savings the wife and I had in the market is worth only half of what it was worth before the election. I'm afraid we need to be ready for a long haul of this kind of Obama economic "recovery". I urge my children and everybody to prepare. I hope and pray that Obamanomics will not hit my family too hard, but what else can we expect? Everyone (except of course Obama and the tax cheating "progressive" elites) is going to suffer as a result of these misguided policies. May God help us all!!
Sunday, February 15, 2009
Pre-Quiem
Our nation is a “land of promise, which [i]s choice above all other lands, which the Lord God ha[s] preserved for a righteous people. And … whoso should possess this land of promise, from that time henceforth and forever, should serve him, the true and only God, or they should be swept off when the fulness of his wrath should come upon them. … And the fulness of his wrath cometh upon them when they are ripened in iniquity. And this cometh unto you … that ye may know the decrees of God—that ye may repent, and not continue in your iniquities until the fulness come, that ye may not bring down the fulness of the wrath of God upon you … . Behold, this is a choice land, and whatsoever nation shall possess it shall be free from bondage, and from captivity, and from all other nations under heaven, if they will but serve the God of the land, who is Jesus Christ … .”
Thus quoth the Scripture, speaking of our land, our nation, the United States of America. Can anyone deny that the U. S. is a blessed nation? As citizens of the U. S., we are blessed with the greatest prosperity, the most freedom, and greatest security relative to any other nation that exists or has existed upon the earth. Our nation has blessed the world with science, electronics and computers, cars and airplanes, food production, medicine, and on and on – you name it. Not only has the U. S. blessed the world with material goods and technology, but we have blessed the world and its peoples with charitable giving. Billions and billions of dollars in funds, goods, and services have been given by the U. S. to nations and peoples less fortunate than ourselves. Any time, anywhere disaster strikes on earth, it is always the U. S. that is first there offering help.
“Now it is not common that the voice of the people desireth anything contrary to that which is right; but it is common for the lesser part of the people to desire that which is not right; therefore this shall ye observe and make it your law—to do your business by the voice of the people. And if the time comes that the voice of the people doth choose [that which is not right], then is the time that the judgments of God will come upon you; yea, then is the time he will visit you with great destruction even as he has hitherto visited …” those throughout history who covenant to be His people and ultimately turn away from that covenant.
Have we reached this point? Ours is a Christian nation, founded upon historic and timeless Judeo-Christian principles. About 53% of the people who voted in the recent general election cast their ballots in favor of B. Hussein Obama. Similarly, a virtually unstoppable majority of “progressives” were elected to both the House and the Senate in Congress. Frankly, this scares me. If these people are “progressives”, why is it that every policy or action they have proposed to date will ultimately, if not immediately, take away or reduce our rights, stifle the national economy (not to mention the disaster to our personal economies that will result from job losses, skyrocketing prices, scarcity of goods, reduced income, increased taxes, etc., etc.), reduce our competitiveness in the world economy, hamstring our national security forces, etc., and basically put our nation down the road, full speed ahead, back to a third world status and lifestyle. In my view, these “progressive” policies are contrary to and in violation of the foundational Judeo-Christian principle upon which our nation is founded. This is not progression, it is regression.
President B. Hussein Obama talks pretty and paints beautiful pictures with his words. But there is something wrong with his pictures. If we look with our logic rather than our fears, we can see through the pretty façade to the harsh reality underneath. We need to learn to see through the lie. For example, let’s examine his statements and promises about taxes:
· Obama says 95% of Americans are going to get a tax cut. But, he also promises his “progressive” supporters that he will let President Bush’s tax cuts expire. I never heard him discuss these two concepts together, so we could see and evaluate them side-by-side. When we do evaluate them in this manner, we can see that before anyone gets a tax cut, everyone will get an across the board tax increase.
· Obama promised that the only ones that possibly would see a tax increase were those making over 250,000/yr. Who do you know that makes this kind of money? If you know someone, most likely he/she is an entrepreneur or CEO of some small business. The lie is that these are the small business owners who employ something like 90% of the rest of us who don’t make over $250K. Taxing these small businesses will stifle the economy, reducing our job opportunities and salaries. Tax increase for our employers translates to less compensation and fewer job opportunities for employees.
· President B. Hussein Obama promises to impose a windfall profits tax on oil industry and big businesses. This one makes me laugh that people can’t see right through it. Who is it that pulls into a gas station and fills the tank of their car? Pays for lube and oil change? Uses plastics or anything else that is a product of the petroleum industry. We do. There is no such thing as a tax on business. Any tax imposed on business is passed straight to the customers. Windfall profit taxes are taxes on you and me, further reducing our ability to provide necessities of life for our families and ourselves. Obama’s tax plan will only make businesses into tax collectors.
· President Obama and his “progressive” cohorts have pushed through a massive economic stimulus bill. His promise is that this $790 billion (that’s billion, with a “b”) stimulus package will create jobs, provide an influx of cash that will resurrect the economy, and heal the Dead Sea (Not really! That’s my take on the miracles he’s promising). What is the stimulus bill really? It is a massive pork and glut giveaway spending bill that primarily rewards his “progressive” backers and cronies. And, take my word for it; this is one time that the moniker “progressive” fits, only in the sense that this monstrous bill will only “progress” (i.e. continue to grow) to astronomical proportions. How does this relate to taxes? Well, who is ultimately going to pay for all this? You and I are, the taxpayers of the nation. In one fell swoop, Obama has saddled me and my family with more debt that we have ever had, even cumulatively, since my family has existed. I’m sorry, but this is not acceptable. And, it will not stimulate the economy, but will do just the opposite.
Certainly, these are not the only examples I could dredge up. Almost everything Obama has said is a lie couched in pretty language. And, it is not only taxes that will be subject to this type of manipulation. Watch the rights enshrined in the Constitution, the freedom of speech, the right to keep and bear arms, etc. And the justice system and the courts are likely to be skewed so far left, by appointment of “progressive” judges, that our rights to a fair and impartial trial will be largely compromised. I may address some of these issues in subsequent blogs.
People, we need to wake up! Look beyond the persuasive rhetoric. Learn to see the lie.
May God help us!
Thus quoth the Scripture, speaking of our land, our nation, the United States of America. Can anyone deny that the U. S. is a blessed nation? As citizens of the U. S., we are blessed with the greatest prosperity, the most freedom, and greatest security relative to any other nation that exists or has existed upon the earth. Our nation has blessed the world with science, electronics and computers, cars and airplanes, food production, medicine, and on and on – you name it. Not only has the U. S. blessed the world with material goods and technology, but we have blessed the world and its peoples with charitable giving. Billions and billions of dollars in funds, goods, and services have been given by the U. S. to nations and peoples less fortunate than ourselves. Any time, anywhere disaster strikes on earth, it is always the U. S. that is first there offering help.
“Now it is not common that the voice of the people desireth anything contrary to that which is right; but it is common for the lesser part of the people to desire that which is not right; therefore this shall ye observe and make it your law—to do your business by the voice of the people. And if the time comes that the voice of the people doth choose [that which is not right], then is the time that the judgments of God will come upon you; yea, then is the time he will visit you with great destruction even as he has hitherto visited …” those throughout history who covenant to be His people and ultimately turn away from that covenant.
Have we reached this point? Ours is a Christian nation, founded upon historic and timeless Judeo-Christian principles. About 53% of the people who voted in the recent general election cast their ballots in favor of B. Hussein Obama. Similarly, a virtually unstoppable majority of “progressives” were elected to both the House and the Senate in Congress. Frankly, this scares me. If these people are “progressives”, why is it that every policy or action they have proposed to date will ultimately, if not immediately, take away or reduce our rights, stifle the national economy (not to mention the disaster to our personal economies that will result from job losses, skyrocketing prices, scarcity of goods, reduced income, increased taxes, etc., etc.), reduce our competitiveness in the world economy, hamstring our national security forces, etc., and basically put our nation down the road, full speed ahead, back to a third world status and lifestyle. In my view, these “progressive” policies are contrary to and in violation of the foundational Judeo-Christian principle upon which our nation is founded. This is not progression, it is regression.
President B. Hussein Obama talks pretty and paints beautiful pictures with his words. But there is something wrong with his pictures. If we look with our logic rather than our fears, we can see through the pretty façade to the harsh reality underneath. We need to learn to see through the lie. For example, let’s examine his statements and promises about taxes:
· Obama says 95% of Americans are going to get a tax cut. But, he also promises his “progressive” supporters that he will let President Bush’s tax cuts expire. I never heard him discuss these two concepts together, so we could see and evaluate them side-by-side. When we do evaluate them in this manner, we can see that before anyone gets a tax cut, everyone will get an across the board tax increase.
· Obama promised that the only ones that possibly would see a tax increase were those making over 250,000/yr. Who do you know that makes this kind of money? If you know someone, most likely he/she is an entrepreneur or CEO of some small business. The lie is that these are the small business owners who employ something like 90% of the rest of us who don’t make over $250K. Taxing these small businesses will stifle the economy, reducing our job opportunities and salaries. Tax increase for our employers translates to less compensation and fewer job opportunities for employees.
· President B. Hussein Obama promises to impose a windfall profits tax on oil industry and big businesses. This one makes me laugh that people can’t see right through it. Who is it that pulls into a gas station and fills the tank of their car? Pays for lube and oil change? Uses plastics or anything else that is a product of the petroleum industry. We do. There is no such thing as a tax on business. Any tax imposed on business is passed straight to the customers. Windfall profit taxes are taxes on you and me, further reducing our ability to provide necessities of life for our families and ourselves. Obama’s tax plan will only make businesses into tax collectors.
· President Obama and his “progressive” cohorts have pushed through a massive economic stimulus bill. His promise is that this $790 billion (that’s billion, with a “b”) stimulus package will create jobs, provide an influx of cash that will resurrect the economy, and heal the Dead Sea (Not really! That’s my take on the miracles he’s promising). What is the stimulus bill really? It is a massive pork and glut giveaway spending bill that primarily rewards his “progressive” backers and cronies. And, take my word for it; this is one time that the moniker “progressive” fits, only in the sense that this monstrous bill will only “progress” (i.e. continue to grow) to astronomical proportions. How does this relate to taxes? Well, who is ultimately going to pay for all this? You and I are, the taxpayers of the nation. In one fell swoop, Obama has saddled me and my family with more debt that we have ever had, even cumulatively, since my family has existed. I’m sorry, but this is not acceptable. And, it will not stimulate the economy, but will do just the opposite.
Certainly, these are not the only examples I could dredge up. Almost everything Obama has said is a lie couched in pretty language. And, it is not only taxes that will be subject to this type of manipulation. Watch the rights enshrined in the Constitution, the freedom of speech, the right to keep and bear arms, etc. And the justice system and the courts are likely to be skewed so far left, by appointment of “progressive” judges, that our rights to a fair and impartial trial will be largely compromised. I may address some of these issues in subsequent blogs.
People, we need to wake up! Look beyond the persuasive rhetoric. Learn to see the lie.
May God help us!
Monday, July 7, 2008
Heller with a Gun*
*(My apologies to Louis L'Amour)
“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”
So reads the Second Amendment of the Bill of Rights of the Constitution of the United States. Every school age child that has advanced to, oh say, the second grade has been taught (or should have been taught but may not have been considering our “politically correct” society) these words. I cannot remember the first time I read them, but I’m sure it must have been in a school setting – it seems like I have always been familiar with them and the other rights expounded in the Constitution. What I cannot remember is ever having any confusion or misunderstanding about what they mean. The point is that any school child with a second grade education and even halfway decent reading skills can read these plain words and understand what they mean.
This doesn’t seem to be the case with those progressive members of our society and government (you know who they are, i.e. the ones that know so much better how you should live your life than you do). Mayor Adian Fenty and other “progressive” politicos in Washington, DC, recently took a case questioning the plain meaning of the Second Amendment to the Supreme Court of the United States.
As I understand them, the basics of the case are these:
Dick Heller is a “special police officer” who works in security at the Federal Judicial Center. His duties require him to carry a handgun while on duty. Because D.C. is such a violent, crime-laden city, Mr. Heller desired to keep his weapon at home to provide a means of defense for himself and his family. He applied for a license to do so, but because D.C.’s laws completely ban the possession of handguns and require long guns (rifles and shotguns) to be “unloaded and dissembled or bound by a trigger lock or similar device”, his application was denied. It is a crime in D.C. to even carry a gun from room to room in your own house.
I surely am not the only one that can see the irony and absolute hypocrisy of this situation. Mr. Heller is required to carry a handgun while on duty protecting government employees at the Judicial Center, but he is prohibited from even having a handgun or any other functional weapon that he can use to protect himself and his family in his own home. Likewise, Mayor Fenty and other “important” city and government officials have armed bodyguards to protect them, but the regular citizen cannot even protect himself.
Well, when the city denied Mr. Heller a license, he sued. The case ultimately was heard by the Supreme Court, and a decision was issued on June 26. By a 5-4 decision, the court determined that “[t]he Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.” Well, … duh! I mean, I am extremely thankful the court got it right. But, did we really have to have nine very expensive, black robed, juris doctorate, Supreme Court justices tell us this? As I indicated previously, I know several moderately intelligent second graders that could have read the plain language of the Second Amendment and told us this. And at significantly less expense!
The problem is there are too many “progressive” would be conspirators that would love to take away our Second Amendment rights. As long as we have the Second Amendment, our rights and freedoms are secure. If we ever lose the right to “keep and bear arms”, we will no longer be the “We the People”, the sovereign of our nation that are governed by our own consent. Rather we will be subjects, ruled by the whim and decree of the political elite. I pray this will never happen!
I do thank God that the Supreme Court got it right. But, I am concerned about a couple of things. First, it was a 5-4 decision. Just one vote the other way, and the Second Amendment would be history. That we have four supposedly very intelligent, experienced Supreme Court justices, who are sworn the uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States, that would blatantly attempt to rewrite the Second Amendment out of the Constitution, in what I think is a direct violation of their oath of office, is extremely frightening to me. This just illustrates how very important it is that we elect good men to office that will appoint judges to the Supreme Court who will interpret the Constitution only in accord with what it says and means, rather than reinterpret the Constitution in accord with what they want it to say and mean.
Second, the Supreme Court did not go far enough. The Court left open the possibility that other laws that restrict our Second Amendment rights could be found constitutional. This could include gun licensing laws, gun registration, existing laws against concealed carry, laws restricting purchase and transport of firearms, etc. Each of these laws in some manner “infringe” upon my right and your right to “keep and bear arms”. To the extent they do, they are clearly unconstitutional no matter what the courts determine.
I do, however, agree with the Court regarding felons and the mentally incompetent being restricted from firearm possession. How can I agree with this considering that, it seems, some individuals’ Second Amendment rights are being infringed? Simple. By committing serious crimes (i.e. felonies) against the United States or its citizens (remember, we are the sovereign of our nation), a criminal (i.e. a felon) forfeits his rights as a citizen. This forfeiture can be total, i.e. as in capital punishment where the felon is deprived even of the right to life, or near total as in being imprisoned and isolated from society for an extended period of time. Very few rights are available to prisoners in such a situation. After a felon has served his time and is released, some of his basic Constitutional rights are restored, but not his Second Amendment rights. I feel this is a just response to serious crimes.
I have not agreed with several things President Bush has done, but I thank God that he was able to appoint Justices John Robert and Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court. I hope and pray our next president (please, not B. Hussein Obama!) will appoint good men of like character and convictions as Justices Robert and Alito to the Supreme Court. Because of them, Mr. Heller will have his gun!
“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”
So reads the Second Amendment of the Bill of Rights of the Constitution of the United States. Every school age child that has advanced to, oh say, the second grade has been taught (or should have been taught but may not have been considering our “politically correct” society) these words. I cannot remember the first time I read them, but I’m sure it must have been in a school setting – it seems like I have always been familiar with them and the other rights expounded in the Constitution. What I cannot remember is ever having any confusion or misunderstanding about what they mean. The point is that any school child with a second grade education and even halfway decent reading skills can read these plain words and understand what they mean.
This doesn’t seem to be the case with those progressive members of our society and government (you know who they are, i.e. the ones that know so much better how you should live your life than you do). Mayor Adian Fenty and other “progressive” politicos in Washington, DC, recently took a case questioning the plain meaning of the Second Amendment to the Supreme Court of the United States.
As I understand them, the basics of the case are these:
Dick Heller is a “special police officer” who works in security at the Federal Judicial Center. His duties require him to carry a handgun while on duty. Because D.C. is such a violent, crime-laden city, Mr. Heller desired to keep his weapon at home to provide a means of defense for himself and his family. He applied for a license to do so, but because D.C.’s laws completely ban the possession of handguns and require long guns (rifles and shotguns) to be “unloaded and dissembled or bound by a trigger lock or similar device”, his application was denied. It is a crime in D.C. to even carry a gun from room to room in your own house.
I surely am not the only one that can see the irony and absolute hypocrisy of this situation. Mr. Heller is required to carry a handgun while on duty protecting government employees at the Judicial Center, but he is prohibited from even having a handgun or any other functional weapon that he can use to protect himself and his family in his own home. Likewise, Mayor Fenty and other “important” city and government officials have armed bodyguards to protect them, but the regular citizen cannot even protect himself.
Well, when the city denied Mr. Heller a license, he sued. The case ultimately was heard by the Supreme Court, and a decision was issued on June 26. By a 5-4 decision, the court determined that “[t]he Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.” Well, … duh! I mean, I am extremely thankful the court got it right. But, did we really have to have nine very expensive, black robed, juris doctorate, Supreme Court justices tell us this? As I indicated previously, I know several moderately intelligent second graders that could have read the plain language of the Second Amendment and told us this. And at significantly less expense!
The problem is there are too many “progressive” would be conspirators that would love to take away our Second Amendment rights. As long as we have the Second Amendment, our rights and freedoms are secure. If we ever lose the right to “keep and bear arms”, we will no longer be the “We the People”, the sovereign of our nation that are governed by our own consent. Rather we will be subjects, ruled by the whim and decree of the political elite. I pray this will never happen!
I do thank God that the Supreme Court got it right. But, I am concerned about a couple of things. First, it was a 5-4 decision. Just one vote the other way, and the Second Amendment would be history. That we have four supposedly very intelligent, experienced Supreme Court justices, who are sworn the uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States, that would blatantly attempt to rewrite the Second Amendment out of the Constitution, in what I think is a direct violation of their oath of office, is extremely frightening to me. This just illustrates how very important it is that we elect good men to office that will appoint judges to the Supreme Court who will interpret the Constitution only in accord with what it says and means, rather than reinterpret the Constitution in accord with what they want it to say and mean.
Second, the Supreme Court did not go far enough. The Court left open the possibility that other laws that restrict our Second Amendment rights could be found constitutional. This could include gun licensing laws, gun registration, existing laws against concealed carry, laws restricting purchase and transport of firearms, etc. Each of these laws in some manner “infringe” upon my right and your right to “keep and bear arms”. To the extent they do, they are clearly unconstitutional no matter what the courts determine.
I do, however, agree with the Court regarding felons and the mentally incompetent being restricted from firearm possession. How can I agree with this considering that, it seems, some individuals’ Second Amendment rights are being infringed? Simple. By committing serious crimes (i.e. felonies) against the United States or its citizens (remember, we are the sovereign of our nation), a criminal (i.e. a felon) forfeits his rights as a citizen. This forfeiture can be total, i.e. as in capital punishment where the felon is deprived even of the right to life, or near total as in being imprisoned and isolated from society for an extended period of time. Very few rights are available to prisoners in such a situation. After a felon has served his time and is released, some of his basic Constitutional rights are restored, but not his Second Amendment rights. I feel this is a just response to serious crimes.
I have not agreed with several things President Bush has done, but I thank God that he was able to appoint Justices John Robert and Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court. I hope and pray our next president (please, not B. Hussein Obama!) will appoint good men of like character and convictions as Justices Robert and Alito to the Supreme Court. Because of them, Mr. Heller will have his gun!
Saturday, June 7, 2008
They Got It Right!
I noted this past week a couple of news articles reporting that the Texas Supreme Court has ruled that all the children captured in the invasion of the Yearning for Zion Ranch must be returned to their families. I honor the Texas Supreme Court for getting it right. It is the first glimmer of common sense I have seen in this entire situation. I emphasize again, I do not condone coercing young pubescent girls into premature marriage. Warren Jeffs was convicted of being an accomplice to rape and is currently serving time for actions related to this. But, if there are things like this going on, they should be addressed legally on an individual, case-by-case basis. It would have been totally inappropriate to arrest the entire membership of the FLDS Church because of crimes alleged to have been committed by Warren Jeffs. But, that is essentially what happened at the YZR compound. The entire YZR compound was invaded, all the YZR families were disrupted, all the children (even nursing babies) were captured and removed from parental custody, and it was all precipitated because of a single hoax phone call. I still can’t believe this happened in the United States of America. I hope there will be justice for the people of the YZRanch, some kind of pay back to the Texas agencies involved in this atrocity. Bless the Texas Supreme Court.
Monday, June 2, 2008
The hypocrisy is astounding!
I have been extremely troubled these past few weeks as I have read the plethora of reports regarding the invasion of the Yearning for Zion Ranch in Texas. Not that I feel the religious practices by the fundamentalist sect at the YZR compound was right or the correct religion. If one can stomach the reports from the mainstream (why do I detest that word) media and glean any truth from them, two main aspects of this situation emerge that I want to comment on.
First, a founding principle of our nation and a basic principle of Judeo/Christian doctrine is the precept of freedom of religion, i.e. the citizens of our country are (or should be) allowed the freedom to worship according to the dictates of their own conscience, how, where, or what they may. This principle is rapidly being eroded by man-made strictures imposed by our government and society. And, whether the generic Christian world (meaning all those good “Christian” folks that are so willing to point fingers at others but can’t see their own problems (Rev. Wright, Father Pflager, Jesse Jackson, Mike Huckabee, et al?)) wants to acknowledge it or not, polygamy is a correct principle of Christian doctrine. Review for example: Genesis 16, Abraham; Genesis 29-30, Jacob; 1 Samuel 1, Hannah (see verse 2); and of course the story of King David (who had many wives and in this sinned only in the case of Bathsheba and Uriah); etc. These are some examples that I could remember that are recorded in the scriptures mainly because they establish the lineage of or relate to the prophets and kings. However, the scriptures contain other examples of polygamy, a tenet that has been widely practiced by adherents of the Judeo/Christian religions throughout history, and is still common in many societies today. The best example that this is a correct practice and in accord with the principles of Christianity is the teaching of Christ himself. The parable of the ten virgins (Matthew 25) is clearly based on the principle of plural marriage, and Christ would not be teaching incorrect Christian doctrine.
I must note that my wife vehemently rejects, apparently, the principle of plural marriage. She feels the prophets were lecherous old men that included polygamy in the scriptures as a cover for their own lustful actions. Me? I feel her feelings border on blasphemy – not because I favor polygamy, but because I’m afraid she verges on denying the prophets and, consequently, the Gospel of Jesus Christ. To make it perfectly clear, I do not support polygamy in this day and age, not because it is an incorrect principle (its not), but because it is currently against the law of the land, and because it seems that God has not authorized its practice in this age. For these reasons, I feel the practice of polygamy by the sect at the YZR was and is wrong.
The other aspect of the religious practices of the YZR sect that disturbs me is the apparent coercion (forcing?) of young pubescent women into plural marriage relationships. Evidently this was being done not by threat or physical force, but by persuading these girls that their eternal salvation would be in jeopardy if they did not enter into these relationships. Marriage is a sacred relationship that should be entered into only by a man and a woman of their own free will and choice. Girls 12 to 17 years of age may be physically mature enough to mate and bear children. But they are not mentally, emotionally, or spiritually mature enough to make informed decisions about marriage based on at least embryonic love (not some older guy’s lust), or to make the serious life-long commitment that is required to enter into marriage and assume the weighty burden of bearing and rearing children. That girls of this age group were (are?) being coerced (forced?) into polygamous relationships with men old enough to be their fathers, or even with younger men nearer their own age (although my understanding is that many of the younger men were run out of the YZR to reduce the competition for the affections of these young girls), is totally abhorrent to me. And, I think, an abomination in the eyes of God. If this was (is?) the practice at the YZR, then I think it constitutes statutory rape and should be dealt with by the law of the land.
On the other hand, delving deeper into the activities of the YZR sect, one will find an industrious people, clean living, and hard working. They took care of their own. They were not a burden on your and my tax dollars. They produced their own food, made their own clothes, built their own homes. They even quarried the stone and produced their own cement to construct their temple and other community structures. The members of the sect are not idle people. Their family values appear to be exemplary. They are chaste; premarital sexual experience of any kind is unacceptable. Husbands and wives are married (though there may be more than one wife). Fathers and mothers seem to be united in supporting and providing for their children, and they are not absentee parents. All the children I’ve seen in the multitude of reports appear to be clean and well cared for. These are traits and characteristics of the sect that we have rarely seen in the MSM. Why? I think it is because these things do not fit the deviant picture the MSM is trying to paint of these people. One trait the MSM has had a hard time distorting (because it shows up in all the pictures) is the simple, modest, and chaste way the women dress, their bodies covered from ankle to wrist to neck in unadorned dresses, modest in style and color. Likewise, the men dress in sturdy, utile garments made to withstand the rigors of industrious activity. I admire these characteristics.
I must insert another personal note. My son points out that these modest dresses the women of the YZR wear may not be just an indication of a chaste lifestyle and convictions, but could very well be symbols of subjugation. A valid consideration.
So, we have a sect that is somewhat off the “beaten path” of “mainstream” Christian doctrine, living a lifestyle in accord with their understanding of Christian doctrine. Though I do not agree with the practice of polygamy or the coercion of teenage girls into marriage, I have a hard time finding where their practices deviate substantially from Biblical standards. But, their lifestyle is offensive to some of our good Christian folk. For this we send in an invasion force consisting of SWAT teams, armored vehicles, hundreds of law enforcement officers, and who knows what all military firepower, equipment, and troops. Families are disrupted, children are taken by force from peaceful homes, ripped from the bosoms of their mothers and fathers by armed military and law enforcement personnel. God! I thought the Holocaust was past!
I think this is the height of hypocrisy!
Go to Reverend Wright’s church, Father Pflager’s church, Jesse Jackson’s church, or just about any big inner city “mainstream” generic Christian church. What will you find? A large segment, if not a majority, of the 12 to 17 year old girls hanging out of halter tops, with short skirts, or other similarly provocative attire. You will find that casual “hook-ups” are normal for these girls. Not only will most of them not be virgins, but they will be promiscuous. Many of them will be doped up, strung out, unwed mothers, living off welfare and other handouts from your and my taxes. Most of them can’t or won’t work for a living. Abortions for these girls who find themselves “knocked up” will be funded by our taxes and will be considered just another form of birth control. You will find many children resulting from these “hook-ups” living in fatherless homes, abused and neglected. Many of these children will be totally abandoned and living on the streets. These children will be growing up without moral guidance, and will only continue the spiral into degradation of family, moral, and spiritual values. Crime, immoral behavior, drug abuse, poverty, and “sin” diseases will be rampant among these people.
Go into any big city school district, or almost any school district that obtains significant funding from federal tax dollars. What will you find? You will find your 12 to 17 year old daughters in classrooms learning not only how to have sex, but how to do it and “get away with it”. You will again find that casual “hook-ups” are the norm, many such occurring in empty classrooms, stairwells, locker rooms, etc. If a girl winds up pregnant, she can go to the school nurse and an abortion will be arranged without notifying the parents or obtaining their authorization. The smart ones will go to the nurse before she gets involved in the “action”, and she can get free condoms or other birth control paraphernalia, again without parental notification or approval. Education in our schools must be amoral, which is just another way of saying without morals. Our children are forbidden to pray or mention God, but they are openly taught the doctrines of atheism.
Without much effort, I could go on and on. But you get the picture. It makes me sick!
On one hand, we have a people that are industrious, clean living, chaste, healthy lifestyle, little or no crime, caring for their own, not being a burden on society. But, they live in a manner that transgresses an obscure law against polygamy that most people don’t even know exists, a law that has been invoked or enforced only rarely since it was enacted consequent to the Mormon persecutions of the mid-1800’s. And their religion coerces young teenage girls into polygamous marriage relationships, but at least they were married before they were bedded (unlike much of the rest of society). If these actions are illegal, then they should be dealt with individually, on a case-by-case basis, one situation at a time. There was no justification for an invasion, which, it appears, was based on a hoax phone call in the first place.
On the other hand, we have the inner cities, the schools, churches, and similar organizations that breed (pardon the term) immorality, crime, disease, gangs, broken families, dependence on society’s handouts, and every other depravity you can think of. Where are the SWAT teams, the troops, and the armed invasion to go in and clean out these cesspools? What is wrong with this picture?
The hypocrisy is astounding! Is it any wonder our nation is in decline?
First, a founding principle of our nation and a basic principle of Judeo/Christian doctrine is the precept of freedom of religion, i.e. the citizens of our country are (or should be) allowed the freedom to worship according to the dictates of their own conscience, how, where, or what they may. This principle is rapidly being eroded by man-made strictures imposed by our government and society. And, whether the generic Christian world (meaning all those good “Christian” folks that are so willing to point fingers at others but can’t see their own problems (Rev. Wright, Father Pflager, Jesse Jackson, Mike Huckabee, et al?)) wants to acknowledge it or not, polygamy is a correct principle of Christian doctrine. Review for example: Genesis 16, Abraham; Genesis 29-30, Jacob; 1 Samuel 1, Hannah (see verse 2); and of course the story of King David (who had many wives and in this sinned only in the case of Bathsheba and Uriah); etc. These are some examples that I could remember that are recorded in the scriptures mainly because they establish the lineage of or relate to the prophets and kings. However, the scriptures contain other examples of polygamy, a tenet that has been widely practiced by adherents of the Judeo/Christian religions throughout history, and is still common in many societies today. The best example that this is a correct practice and in accord with the principles of Christianity is the teaching of Christ himself. The parable of the ten virgins (Matthew 25) is clearly based on the principle of plural marriage, and Christ would not be teaching incorrect Christian doctrine.
I must note that my wife vehemently rejects, apparently, the principle of plural marriage. She feels the prophets were lecherous old men that included polygamy in the scriptures as a cover for their own lustful actions. Me? I feel her feelings border on blasphemy – not because I favor polygamy, but because I’m afraid she verges on denying the prophets and, consequently, the Gospel of Jesus Christ. To make it perfectly clear, I do not support polygamy in this day and age, not because it is an incorrect principle (its not), but because it is currently against the law of the land, and because it seems that God has not authorized its practice in this age. For these reasons, I feel the practice of polygamy by the sect at the YZR was and is wrong.
The other aspect of the religious practices of the YZR sect that disturbs me is the apparent coercion (forcing?) of young pubescent women into plural marriage relationships. Evidently this was being done not by threat or physical force, but by persuading these girls that their eternal salvation would be in jeopardy if they did not enter into these relationships. Marriage is a sacred relationship that should be entered into only by a man and a woman of their own free will and choice. Girls 12 to 17 years of age may be physically mature enough to mate and bear children. But they are not mentally, emotionally, or spiritually mature enough to make informed decisions about marriage based on at least embryonic love (not some older guy’s lust), or to make the serious life-long commitment that is required to enter into marriage and assume the weighty burden of bearing and rearing children. That girls of this age group were (are?) being coerced (forced?) into polygamous relationships with men old enough to be their fathers, or even with younger men nearer their own age (although my understanding is that many of the younger men were run out of the YZR to reduce the competition for the affections of these young girls), is totally abhorrent to me. And, I think, an abomination in the eyes of God. If this was (is?) the practice at the YZR, then I think it constitutes statutory rape and should be dealt with by the law of the land.
On the other hand, delving deeper into the activities of the YZR sect, one will find an industrious people, clean living, and hard working. They took care of their own. They were not a burden on your and my tax dollars. They produced their own food, made their own clothes, built their own homes. They even quarried the stone and produced their own cement to construct their temple and other community structures. The members of the sect are not idle people. Their family values appear to be exemplary. They are chaste; premarital sexual experience of any kind is unacceptable. Husbands and wives are married (though there may be more than one wife). Fathers and mothers seem to be united in supporting and providing for their children, and they are not absentee parents. All the children I’ve seen in the multitude of reports appear to be clean and well cared for. These are traits and characteristics of the sect that we have rarely seen in the MSM. Why? I think it is because these things do not fit the deviant picture the MSM is trying to paint of these people. One trait the MSM has had a hard time distorting (because it shows up in all the pictures) is the simple, modest, and chaste way the women dress, their bodies covered from ankle to wrist to neck in unadorned dresses, modest in style and color. Likewise, the men dress in sturdy, utile garments made to withstand the rigors of industrious activity. I admire these characteristics.
I must insert another personal note. My son points out that these modest dresses the women of the YZR wear may not be just an indication of a chaste lifestyle and convictions, but could very well be symbols of subjugation. A valid consideration.
So, we have a sect that is somewhat off the “beaten path” of “mainstream” Christian doctrine, living a lifestyle in accord with their understanding of Christian doctrine. Though I do not agree with the practice of polygamy or the coercion of teenage girls into marriage, I have a hard time finding where their practices deviate substantially from Biblical standards. But, their lifestyle is offensive to some of our good Christian folk. For this we send in an invasion force consisting of SWAT teams, armored vehicles, hundreds of law enforcement officers, and who knows what all military firepower, equipment, and troops. Families are disrupted, children are taken by force from peaceful homes, ripped from the bosoms of their mothers and fathers by armed military and law enforcement personnel. God! I thought the Holocaust was past!
I think this is the height of hypocrisy!
Go to Reverend Wright’s church, Father Pflager’s church, Jesse Jackson’s church, or just about any big inner city “mainstream” generic Christian church. What will you find? A large segment, if not a majority, of the 12 to 17 year old girls hanging out of halter tops, with short skirts, or other similarly provocative attire. You will find that casual “hook-ups” are normal for these girls. Not only will most of them not be virgins, but they will be promiscuous. Many of them will be doped up, strung out, unwed mothers, living off welfare and other handouts from your and my taxes. Most of them can’t or won’t work for a living. Abortions for these girls who find themselves “knocked up” will be funded by our taxes and will be considered just another form of birth control. You will find many children resulting from these “hook-ups” living in fatherless homes, abused and neglected. Many of these children will be totally abandoned and living on the streets. These children will be growing up without moral guidance, and will only continue the spiral into degradation of family, moral, and spiritual values. Crime, immoral behavior, drug abuse, poverty, and “sin” diseases will be rampant among these people.
Go into any big city school district, or almost any school district that obtains significant funding from federal tax dollars. What will you find? You will find your 12 to 17 year old daughters in classrooms learning not only how to have sex, but how to do it and “get away with it”. You will again find that casual “hook-ups” are the norm, many such occurring in empty classrooms, stairwells, locker rooms, etc. If a girl winds up pregnant, she can go to the school nurse and an abortion will be arranged without notifying the parents or obtaining their authorization. The smart ones will go to the nurse before she gets involved in the “action”, and she can get free condoms or other birth control paraphernalia, again without parental notification or approval. Education in our schools must be amoral, which is just another way of saying without morals. Our children are forbidden to pray or mention God, but they are openly taught the doctrines of atheism.
Without much effort, I could go on and on. But you get the picture. It makes me sick!
On one hand, we have a people that are industrious, clean living, chaste, healthy lifestyle, little or no crime, caring for their own, not being a burden on society. But, they live in a manner that transgresses an obscure law against polygamy that most people don’t even know exists, a law that has been invoked or enforced only rarely since it was enacted consequent to the Mormon persecutions of the mid-1800’s. And their religion coerces young teenage girls into polygamous marriage relationships, but at least they were married before they were bedded (unlike much of the rest of society). If these actions are illegal, then they should be dealt with individually, on a case-by-case basis, one situation at a time. There was no justification for an invasion, which, it appears, was based on a hoax phone call in the first place.
On the other hand, we have the inner cities, the schools, churches, and similar organizations that breed (pardon the term) immorality, crime, disease, gangs, broken families, dependence on society’s handouts, and every other depravity you can think of. Where are the SWAT teams, the troops, and the armed invasion to go in and clean out these cesspools? What is wrong with this picture?
The hypocrisy is astounding! Is it any wonder our nation is in decline?
Monday, April 16, 2007
The NRA
The National Rifle Association just concluded its 136th Annual Meeting in St. Louis, Missouri. As a life-long supporter (as in agreeing with the NRA’s purpose to preserve our right to “keep and bear arms”, and as an NRA member in my teens and early twenties, and again for the past decade or so) I have long desired to attend the Annual Meetings. But, unfortunately, to date I have been unable to do so. I am truly appreciative of the coverage of the Annual Meetings provided by Cam and Company on NRANews.com. It’s the “next best thing” to being there.
I don’t get the opportunity to shoot as much as I used to in high school, college, and early in my marriage. But, I still have my guns (more now than ever – its amazing how they accumulate over the years), and I am still fervent in my right to keep and bear them.
I grew up in the foothills of Mount Taylor in northwestern New Mexico. Guns were just part of my family’s existence. I didn’t get to shoot much in my early youth. My Dad used guns mainly for varmint control around our home, and for killing the pigs we butchered every year to supplement our food supply. The only safety lesson I can remember my Dad giving me was a simple, but profound statement. He told me, “Son, don’t ever point a gun at something you don’t intend to shoot.” I have remembered that lesson my entire life. I learned of its veracity in my early teens. As I recall, my Mother and I were home alone. There was Dad’s old Remington bolt action .22 rifle on the gun rack. I thought it would be a good idea to go shooting – never mind that I don’t remember ever having fired a gun before that. I got the rifle down, found a few shells, and headed for the door. My mother saw what I was up to and questioned my intent considering that my Dad had not authorized this activity. “Aw, he won’t mind,” I told her. And being the patient and understanding Mother she was, and knowing that my Dad probably wouldn’t mind (but he also probably wouldn’t have let me do it without him being there), she cautioned me to be safe and let me go.
Excited by this new freedom, I found a couple of tin cans, and set them up in a likely spot. Backing away a few yards, I tried my luck, firing off a few rounds. I quickly got bored with not hitting anything but dirt – I didn’t hit close enough to those cans to wiggle them or even splatter them with dust. Then I saw a small bird sitting on a branch across the creek, several yards again farther away than the cans. Knowing I couldn’t hit a thing, I decided to shoot at that bird. I pointed the rifle (I hesitate to say I “aimed” it) and fired a round. I was astounded when the bird dropped like a stone out of the tree. Not yet accepting that I could have hit it, I went rushing across the creek to see what had happened. It was dead, a bloody furrow plowed through its breast by the bullet I had fired. I was crushed! The shock of knowing I had taken its life brought me to tears. From that day to this, I have always been very careful to follow my Dad’s admonition. I have never again pointed a gun at something I didn’t intend to shoot, and I have never pointed one at a human being (and pray that I never have to).
I bought my first gun, an Erma, .22 semi auto Luger action pistol in 1968 from a hardware store in Socorro, New Mexico. I was a young freshman at New Mexico Tech. A couple of my school buddies were shooters and took me shooting several times with them. I got tired of borrowing their weapons. Scraping together some very scarce dollars from my college finances, I went down to the store. The guns were displayed in a case near the front counter. Electric saws and drills were displayed in the next case over; hammers and handsaws were hanging from a pegboard backer behind the case. The Erma was not one of the best guns displayed, but it was one of the less expensive (and on my budget, I couldn’t afford much). The thing that really sold me on it was the cool Luger action and looks – I had always admired and wanted a Luger. I paid a grand total of $70 for that gun, handed the cash to the attendant and walked out with the gun. It was not the best-made gun, but it was surprisingly accurate, generally reliable (it jammed fairly often), shot well, and was fun to shoot. I still have that gun, and my children are now shooting it more than I.
The point: Just try buying any kind of gun in those circumstances today. The Second Amendment of our Constitution says that my “right … to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” The fact that I can no longer go into the local hardware shop, lay my money on the counter, and walk out with the gun of my choice is unquestionably an infringement of my right to keep and bear arms. Now, I recognize there has to be some means of preventing criminals from purchasing guns with that same ease. But, the criminals are the ones that have violated our laws – they are the ones who should suffer diminished rights, not the honest, law-abiding citizens.
That brings me back to the NRA. I thank God for the NRA because without it, I’m not sure our right to keep and bear arms would still exist. Powerful forces throughout the world (the U.N.?) and even within our nation (McCarthy, Bloomberg, Schumer, Kennedy, etc., etc., ad nauseam) are at work trying to take this right from me and from you. So far, the NRA and the masses of law-abiding, freedom-loving citizens have stood as a brick wall to prevent the agenda of these gun ban forces from advancing more than it has.
There are some cracks and leaks in that wall. For example, the Clinton gun ban of the 1990’s was a major breech, which thankfully has been sealed by the sunset of that law (McCarthy’s H.R. 1022 will reopen that breech if passed), the Gun Control Act of 1968, Brady Handgun Violence Act, etc. The NRA continues to resist further encroachment by anti gun forces and has had some significant success in recent years.
One position the NRA advocates that I don’t understand or agree with. The NRA is pushing for all states to enact “shall issue” right-to-carry concealed weapons laws. I guess this is the best kind of right-to-carry law to have, if there has to be one. But, my Constitution says that my right to “bear arms, shall not be infringed.” “Bear” in this case is not a large beast, but means to carry, to have in possession, to have on one’s person. There is nothing in the Second Amendment that says I have the right to bear arms unless I am carrying them concealed. The Second Amendment is my concealed carry permit. Any law, including the right-to-carry laws advocated by the NRA, that in any way restricts or “infringes” upon my right to “bear” arms, including a requirement to register and obtain a permit (i.e. requiring me to ask permission) to carry concealed, is in violation of the Constitution and is void ab initio. Am I the only one that can see this? And, isn’t obtaining a concealed carry permit a backhanded form of gun registration (which the NRA supposedly strongly opposes)? I don’t understand why the NRA continues to pursue this course. I have corresponded twice with the NRA asking them to explain this but have received no reply. Though I am a strong supporter of the NRA, if I find an organization that does not pursue this course, but that fights for my gun rights as plainly stated in the Second Amendment, I will be inclined to leave the NRA and add my support to that organization.
I don’t get the opportunity to shoot as much as I used to in high school, college, and early in my marriage. But, I still have my guns (more now than ever – its amazing how they accumulate over the years), and I am still fervent in my right to keep and bear them.
I grew up in the foothills of Mount Taylor in northwestern New Mexico. Guns were just part of my family’s existence. I didn’t get to shoot much in my early youth. My Dad used guns mainly for varmint control around our home, and for killing the pigs we butchered every year to supplement our food supply. The only safety lesson I can remember my Dad giving me was a simple, but profound statement. He told me, “Son, don’t ever point a gun at something you don’t intend to shoot.” I have remembered that lesson my entire life. I learned of its veracity in my early teens. As I recall, my Mother and I were home alone. There was Dad’s old Remington bolt action .22 rifle on the gun rack. I thought it would be a good idea to go shooting – never mind that I don’t remember ever having fired a gun before that. I got the rifle down, found a few shells, and headed for the door. My mother saw what I was up to and questioned my intent considering that my Dad had not authorized this activity. “Aw, he won’t mind,” I told her. And being the patient and understanding Mother she was, and knowing that my Dad probably wouldn’t mind (but he also probably wouldn’t have let me do it without him being there), she cautioned me to be safe and let me go.
Excited by this new freedom, I found a couple of tin cans, and set them up in a likely spot. Backing away a few yards, I tried my luck, firing off a few rounds. I quickly got bored with not hitting anything but dirt – I didn’t hit close enough to those cans to wiggle them or even splatter them with dust. Then I saw a small bird sitting on a branch across the creek, several yards again farther away than the cans. Knowing I couldn’t hit a thing, I decided to shoot at that bird. I pointed the rifle (I hesitate to say I “aimed” it) and fired a round. I was astounded when the bird dropped like a stone out of the tree. Not yet accepting that I could have hit it, I went rushing across the creek to see what had happened. It was dead, a bloody furrow plowed through its breast by the bullet I had fired. I was crushed! The shock of knowing I had taken its life brought me to tears. From that day to this, I have always been very careful to follow my Dad’s admonition. I have never again pointed a gun at something I didn’t intend to shoot, and I have never pointed one at a human being (and pray that I never have to).
I bought my first gun, an Erma, .22 semi auto Luger action pistol in 1968 from a hardware store in Socorro, New Mexico. I was a young freshman at New Mexico Tech. A couple of my school buddies were shooters and took me shooting several times with them. I got tired of borrowing their weapons. Scraping together some very scarce dollars from my college finances, I went down to the store. The guns were displayed in a case near the front counter. Electric saws and drills were displayed in the next case over; hammers and handsaws were hanging from a pegboard backer behind the case. The Erma was not one of the best guns displayed, but it was one of the less expensive (and on my budget, I couldn’t afford much). The thing that really sold me on it was the cool Luger action and looks – I had always admired and wanted a Luger. I paid a grand total of $70 for that gun, handed the cash to the attendant and walked out with the gun. It was not the best-made gun, but it was surprisingly accurate, generally reliable (it jammed fairly often), shot well, and was fun to shoot. I still have that gun, and my children are now shooting it more than I.
The point: Just try buying any kind of gun in those circumstances today. The Second Amendment of our Constitution says that my “right … to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” The fact that I can no longer go into the local hardware shop, lay my money on the counter, and walk out with the gun of my choice is unquestionably an infringement of my right to keep and bear arms. Now, I recognize there has to be some means of preventing criminals from purchasing guns with that same ease. But, the criminals are the ones that have violated our laws – they are the ones who should suffer diminished rights, not the honest, law-abiding citizens.
That brings me back to the NRA. I thank God for the NRA because without it, I’m not sure our right to keep and bear arms would still exist. Powerful forces throughout the world (the U.N.?) and even within our nation (McCarthy, Bloomberg, Schumer, Kennedy, etc., etc., ad nauseam) are at work trying to take this right from me and from you. So far, the NRA and the masses of law-abiding, freedom-loving citizens have stood as a brick wall to prevent the agenda of these gun ban forces from advancing more than it has.
There are some cracks and leaks in that wall. For example, the Clinton gun ban of the 1990’s was a major breech, which thankfully has been sealed by the sunset of that law (McCarthy’s H.R. 1022 will reopen that breech if passed), the Gun Control Act of 1968, Brady Handgun Violence Act, etc. The NRA continues to resist further encroachment by anti gun forces and has had some significant success in recent years.
One position the NRA advocates that I don’t understand or agree with. The NRA is pushing for all states to enact “shall issue” right-to-carry concealed weapons laws. I guess this is the best kind of right-to-carry law to have, if there has to be one. But, my Constitution says that my right to “bear arms, shall not be infringed.” “Bear” in this case is not a large beast, but means to carry, to have in possession, to have on one’s person. There is nothing in the Second Amendment that says I have the right to bear arms unless I am carrying them concealed. The Second Amendment is my concealed carry permit. Any law, including the right-to-carry laws advocated by the NRA, that in any way restricts or “infringes” upon my right to “bear” arms, including a requirement to register and obtain a permit (i.e. requiring me to ask permission) to carry concealed, is in violation of the Constitution and is void ab initio. Am I the only one that can see this? And, isn’t obtaining a concealed carry permit a backhanded form of gun registration (which the NRA supposedly strongly opposes)? I don’t understand why the NRA continues to pursue this course. I have corresponded twice with the NRA asking them to explain this but have received no reply. Though I am a strong supporter of the NRA, if I find an organization that does not pursue this course, but that fights for my gun rights as plainly stated in the Second Amendment, I will be inclined to leave the NRA and add my support to that organization.
Sunday, February 25, 2007
Bear Tales
“Hey, look!” my daughter yelled, excitedly pointing out the window. “It’s a bear!”
The whole family rushed over to crowd around the window. Sure enough, a good-sized black bear had wandered into our driveway, not more than 25’ from our cabin. It was beautiful – jet-black glossy fur, with stubby, rounded ears that gave it that cuddly “teddy bear” look. It acted like it owned the place. After looking around a bit, it must have decided the place was too populated, considering that we all still had our noses plastered to the window staring at it, and it nonchalantly wandered off to find some other place with a little more privacy.
Though bears, or at least grizzlies, are considered an endangered species in the continental U.S., anyone who has spent any time in Alaska (i.e. more than a few days on a canned tour looking at the scenery) knows that bears are common, because they very well could have encountered one.
Just this past summer, one of my other daughters was fishing on a popular Alaska salmon stream with her boyfriend. It was getting on toward 11:00 PM, late enough that it was the dusk of an Alaskan summer night (it doesn’t get dark during Alaska summers), when they heard a nearby splash. Looking up in the dim light, they discovered that the next fisherman a few feet upriver was a grizzly. Fortunately, the bear was having better luck than my daughter, or it may have decided to “borrow” the fish she had on a stringer.
Such “close encounters of the bear kind” are not uncommon in Alaska. Fortunately, the vast majority of such encounters are benign – the bear retreats one way and the human retreats the opposite direction with varying degrees of haste – and no harm is done to either. There are exceptions. Usually the exceptions are to the detriment of the bear, as in when a hunter blows it away. But, on rare occasion, a bear will turn the tables.
Remember “Grizzly Man”?
Timothy Treadwell was a self proclaimed “eco-warrior” that, from 1990 to 2003, lived during summer months among the grizzly bears common on the Alaska Peninsula and in Katmai National Park. His exploits were documented in the 2005 film by Werner Herzog titled Grizzly Man. Treadwell convinced himself that he could commune with bears, that he understood the bears and that they understood him and would not hurt him. He was repeatedly warned about such risky assumptions by friends, area residents, and National Park Service personnel. Though bears can be generally tolerant of humans, as dramatic-ally demonstrated by Mr. Treadwell’s survival amongst them for 13 years, they are the dominant and most fearsome predator on the North American continent. And, as most Alaskans expected (and other reasonable people as well), the bears eventually got the best of Mr. Treadwell. Maybe the fishing was poor, or there were not enough berries, or who knows what, but on October 5, 2003, a large grizzly attacked, killed, and ate Mr. Treadwell and his lady friend who was sharing camp with him. (Wickpedia article, “Timothy Treadwell”; Anchorage Daily News, various articles, primarily October 6-10, 2003)
The Grizzly Man saga is a dramatic example of man/bear encounters and is well known only because it was widely publicized. But it is hardly the most dramatic, and it is far from the only example. For example:
- Several years ago, a female geologist was working in the Brooks Range for her employer. Shortly after she was dropped off by helicopter in a remote location, she was attacked by a black bear. She did as she had been instructed and played dead. But this bear did not leave as it was supposed to do (I guess it had not read the instructions), but it proceeded to eat her – while she was alive! Somehow she managed to key the mike of her two-way radio and called for help. It was several minutes before the helicopter was able to get back to her and drive off the bear. She survived, but the bear had eaten her arms and much of her legs. (Bear Tales by Larry Kanut)
- A bear in the Copper River area broke into a couple’s home while they were there. They had no weapons at hand and were forced to flee. The bear pursued. In an effort to escape, they climbed on top of their cabin and removed the means of ascent so the bear couldn’t follow. However, bears can be pretty smart. After circling his “treed” prey for a while, it began climbing a slender sapling a few feet away from the back of the cabin. The man, seeing the bear was not to be dissuaded, jumped off the opposite side and ran to the nearest neighbor (in the Alaska bush, that usually is some distance away) for help. The bear, meanwhile, climbed the sapling, keeping his weight on the side toward the cabin. The sapling bent with the weight, and when it was high enough and the sapling bent far enough, the bear simply let go and dropped onto the cabin roof where the woman was. She jumped off and fled, but by the time the man returned with a weapon, she had been killed and eaten by the bear. (I must note that with this situation, there was speculation that foul play was involved, and though the woman was eaten by a bear, she may have met her demise in other circumstances. I don’t think anything was ever proven.) (Local news releases, personal knowledge)
If you desire to read about such gruesome experiences, Larry Kaniut has researched and written about many of them in the Bear Tales series.
The general understanding (as if man can understand bears, or thinks he can (i.e. Grizzly Man)) is that bears will attack only if they feel threatened, they are protecting their young, or guarding their food supply. Once the threat is removed, the idea is that the bear will leave. Hence, the concept that playing dead is a good bear defense – if the bear thinks you are dead, it feels the threat has been removed and will leave you alone. Though I claim no expertise other than a couple of decades of living in bush Alaska, my observation has been that this is generally (emphasis on generally) true with grizzlies. They tend to be more likely to attack a person or animal that invades its territory or that it feels to be a threat. Playing dead is generally a good defense against a grizzly attack. Of course, as Grizzly Man attests, there are disastrous exceptions.
A black bear, on the other hand, is much less likely to attack, but if it does attack, it intends to eat you (again, these are general statements). Consequently, playing dead is not a good defense against a black bear attack. Playing dead makes a black bear think, “Aha! Dinner is served”, and it will begin to eat. This is precisely what happened to the geologist in the Brooks Range. The best defense against a black bear attack is to make the bear think you are bigger and stronger than it is so it will abort an attack, or if it does engage with you, don’t stop fighting back.
The point is that, whether grizzly or black, bears are unpredictable and always dangerous. It is an idiot or a fool that will go out into bear country without some kind of weapon, preferably deadly force. I usually carry a Ruger Blackhawk .44 magnum. This is not the best bear protection (a more powerful rifle would be better), but it definitely has enough power to stop a bear, if the user has enough skill, and it is much easier to carry in difficult terrain. I can usually hit what I aim at with this weapon, but I have never had to use it to prevent a bear attack. Believe me, I pray that I will never have to find out if I am skillful enough in that circumstance.
I live about a mile from my place of employment in bush Alaska and enjoy walking to and from work each day. In addition, I often have opportunity to be out wandering around my employer’s land holdings doing some aspect of my work (it’s a tough job, but someone has to do it). Now, you have to understand that in this remote area, when you step outside, you are literally in the “wilds” of Alaska (remember the bear at my front door?). Though we see bears seldom enough that it is still exciting to see one, we find their sign quite often. This past summer when I was out doing some of my work(?), I found myself in an area of thick, second growth brush and saplings. Mixed in this were areas of dense growth of short, branchy bushes that were just covered with small red berries (I’m not sure what kind they are). As I got into the thicker parts of this growth, I noticed a pile of several day old bear scat. It was red and composed mostly of partially digested berries, obviously originating from the bushes all around me. Actually, it was more of a “splat” than a pile because when bears pig out on berries to fatten up for hibernation, the highly fruity diet gives them a touch of diarrhea. Since finding this stuff is fairly common, I didn’t think much about it. Then I noticed another splat some distance away, and then another, and another. This heightened my awareness, but I still wasn’t concerned because this stuff was several days old. Going on a little farther, I notice an odd smell. Another step or two, and I came upon not one, but two such splats that, though not steaming fresh, were fresh enough to still be soft, wet, and stinky. They were obviously fresh enough to have been passed within the past hour. This got my attention, the hair on the back of my neck stood up, and I began to feel like I was being watched (ever had that feeling?). Because I walk to work so often, and do a lot of walking in the area of my work, I get lacksidasical about carrying my weapon (an idiot or a fool?) and did not have it with me. I decided I better get out of that berry patch forthwith. Though I did not see a bear, I found a lot of sign, and I was stupid for being there without defense.
*****
I have a son, two daughters, two sons-in-law, and my grandchildren that are living in various communities satellite to Salt Lake City, the major population center in Utah. These family members are there for higher education or employment. I love Utah. I obtained my higher education there, and in fact, my son is attending my alma mater. With the influence of the Mormons and other good Christian folk, I think Utah is a good, conservative place to live and raise children. Social statistics bear this out: relatively low crime rate, low rates of cancer and other “sin” diseases (i.e. those related to tobacco and alcohol use, immorality, illegal drugs, etc.), more stable marriages and families, etc. This is not to say that Utah doesn’t have its problems.
Remember Trolley Square?
Just a few weeks ago, we were shocked when a disillusioned Bosnian youth with a .38 handgun and a shotgun walked into Trolley Square mall in downtown Salt Lake City and calmly began killing people. At least six people died (including the Bosnian youth) and several others were seriously wounded. Who knows what was eating this guy, or why he would decide to randomly waste a bunch of people? The scary thing is that all of my children have, I am sure, at various times visited Trolley Square. Any of them could have been there that fateful evening. And had they been there, they would have been defenseless against this guy. Why? Because weapons are prohibited in the mall. This Bosnian youth entered the mall through a door with a prominent “No Guns Allowed” sign posted (worked well, didn’t it?).
I would be foolish to venture into the Alaskan wild without a weapon to defend myself from bears or other wild animals that might attack for whatever reason. Yet, because of various laws and restrictions, my children are prohibited from carrying weapons to protect themselves in the jungles of “civilization”. Frankly, I would much rather have my children face a bear in the Alaska bush than one of these “animals” that calmly and deliberately decides to kill someone. Bears attack to defend themselves, their young, or their food supply. These two-legged animals attack and kill just for the fun(?) of it. Which is more dangerous? Why is it wise to carry protection against the bears but illegal to carry protection against such calculating killers?
Rep. Carolyn McCarthy and other, uh, “less informed” government representatives, bureaucrats, and anti-gun individuals throughout the nation are advocating various gun bans and restrictions (see for example H.R. 1022, mayor Michael Bloomberg’s coalition against guns, etc., etc.). I resent this! Why are these people so desperate to take away my right and ability to protect myself from huge, vicious animals that might think I would make a good meal? More importantly, why are they trying to rob my children of their right and ability to protect themselves from two-legged animals that would do things to them that could be worse than getting eaten?
If this is a result of ignorance, then may God preserve us from such ignorance. It is up to us, the People, who comprise the Sovereign of our nation, to educate them about the reality of life. But if this effort to rob us of our sacred rights originates from a “power ego”, a desire to dominate and control, then may God have mercy on them as they face the consequences of their actions.
The whole family rushed over to crowd around the window. Sure enough, a good-sized black bear had wandered into our driveway, not more than 25’ from our cabin. It was beautiful – jet-black glossy fur, with stubby, rounded ears that gave it that cuddly “teddy bear” look. It acted like it owned the place. After looking around a bit, it must have decided the place was too populated, considering that we all still had our noses plastered to the window staring at it, and it nonchalantly wandered off to find some other place with a little more privacy.
Though bears, or at least grizzlies, are considered an endangered species in the continental U.S., anyone who has spent any time in Alaska (i.e. more than a few days on a canned tour looking at the scenery) knows that bears are common, because they very well could have encountered one.
Just this past summer, one of my other daughters was fishing on a popular Alaska salmon stream with her boyfriend. It was getting on toward 11:00 PM, late enough that it was the dusk of an Alaskan summer night (it doesn’t get dark during Alaska summers), when they heard a nearby splash. Looking up in the dim light, they discovered that the next fisherman a few feet upriver was a grizzly. Fortunately, the bear was having better luck than my daughter, or it may have decided to “borrow” the fish she had on a stringer.
Such “close encounters of the bear kind” are not uncommon in Alaska. Fortunately, the vast majority of such encounters are benign – the bear retreats one way and the human retreats the opposite direction with varying degrees of haste – and no harm is done to either. There are exceptions. Usually the exceptions are to the detriment of the bear, as in when a hunter blows it away. But, on rare occasion, a bear will turn the tables.
Remember “Grizzly Man”?
Timothy Treadwell was a self proclaimed “eco-warrior” that, from 1990 to 2003, lived during summer months among the grizzly bears common on the Alaska Peninsula and in Katmai National Park. His exploits were documented in the 2005 film by Werner Herzog titled Grizzly Man. Treadwell convinced himself that he could commune with bears, that he understood the bears and that they understood him and would not hurt him. He was repeatedly warned about such risky assumptions by friends, area residents, and National Park Service personnel. Though bears can be generally tolerant of humans, as dramatic-ally demonstrated by Mr. Treadwell’s survival amongst them for 13 years, they are the dominant and most fearsome predator on the North American continent. And, as most Alaskans expected (and other reasonable people as well), the bears eventually got the best of Mr. Treadwell. Maybe the fishing was poor, or there were not enough berries, or who knows what, but on October 5, 2003, a large grizzly attacked, killed, and ate Mr. Treadwell and his lady friend who was sharing camp with him. (Wickpedia article, “Timothy Treadwell”; Anchorage Daily News, various articles, primarily October 6-10, 2003)
The Grizzly Man saga is a dramatic example of man/bear encounters and is well known only because it was widely publicized. But it is hardly the most dramatic, and it is far from the only example. For example:
- Several years ago, a female geologist was working in the Brooks Range for her employer. Shortly after she was dropped off by helicopter in a remote location, she was attacked by a black bear. She did as she had been instructed and played dead. But this bear did not leave as it was supposed to do (I guess it had not read the instructions), but it proceeded to eat her – while she was alive! Somehow she managed to key the mike of her two-way radio and called for help. It was several minutes before the helicopter was able to get back to her and drive off the bear. She survived, but the bear had eaten her arms and much of her legs. (Bear Tales by Larry Kanut)
- A bear in the Copper River area broke into a couple’s home while they were there. They had no weapons at hand and were forced to flee. The bear pursued. In an effort to escape, they climbed on top of their cabin and removed the means of ascent so the bear couldn’t follow. However, bears can be pretty smart. After circling his “treed” prey for a while, it began climbing a slender sapling a few feet away from the back of the cabin. The man, seeing the bear was not to be dissuaded, jumped off the opposite side and ran to the nearest neighbor (in the Alaska bush, that usually is some distance away) for help. The bear, meanwhile, climbed the sapling, keeping his weight on the side toward the cabin. The sapling bent with the weight, and when it was high enough and the sapling bent far enough, the bear simply let go and dropped onto the cabin roof where the woman was. She jumped off and fled, but by the time the man returned with a weapon, she had been killed and eaten by the bear. (I must note that with this situation, there was speculation that foul play was involved, and though the woman was eaten by a bear, she may have met her demise in other circumstances. I don’t think anything was ever proven.) (Local news releases, personal knowledge)
If you desire to read about such gruesome experiences, Larry Kaniut has researched and written about many of them in the Bear Tales series.
The general understanding (as if man can understand bears, or thinks he can (i.e. Grizzly Man)) is that bears will attack only if they feel threatened, they are protecting their young, or guarding their food supply. Once the threat is removed, the idea is that the bear will leave. Hence, the concept that playing dead is a good bear defense – if the bear thinks you are dead, it feels the threat has been removed and will leave you alone. Though I claim no expertise other than a couple of decades of living in bush Alaska, my observation has been that this is generally (emphasis on generally) true with grizzlies. They tend to be more likely to attack a person or animal that invades its territory or that it feels to be a threat. Playing dead is generally a good defense against a grizzly attack. Of course, as Grizzly Man attests, there are disastrous exceptions.
A black bear, on the other hand, is much less likely to attack, but if it does attack, it intends to eat you (again, these are general statements). Consequently, playing dead is not a good defense against a black bear attack. Playing dead makes a black bear think, “Aha! Dinner is served”, and it will begin to eat. This is precisely what happened to the geologist in the Brooks Range. The best defense against a black bear attack is to make the bear think you are bigger and stronger than it is so it will abort an attack, or if it does engage with you, don’t stop fighting back.
The point is that, whether grizzly or black, bears are unpredictable and always dangerous. It is an idiot or a fool that will go out into bear country without some kind of weapon, preferably deadly force. I usually carry a Ruger Blackhawk .44 magnum. This is not the best bear protection (a more powerful rifle would be better), but it definitely has enough power to stop a bear, if the user has enough skill, and it is much easier to carry in difficult terrain. I can usually hit what I aim at with this weapon, but I have never had to use it to prevent a bear attack. Believe me, I pray that I will never have to find out if I am skillful enough in that circumstance.
I live about a mile from my place of employment in bush Alaska and enjoy walking to and from work each day. In addition, I often have opportunity to be out wandering around my employer’s land holdings doing some aspect of my work (it’s a tough job, but someone has to do it). Now, you have to understand that in this remote area, when you step outside, you are literally in the “wilds” of Alaska (remember the bear at my front door?). Though we see bears seldom enough that it is still exciting to see one, we find their sign quite often. This past summer when I was out doing some of my work(?), I found myself in an area of thick, second growth brush and saplings. Mixed in this were areas of dense growth of short, branchy bushes that were just covered with small red berries (I’m not sure what kind they are). As I got into the thicker parts of this growth, I noticed a pile of several day old bear scat. It was red and composed mostly of partially digested berries, obviously originating from the bushes all around me. Actually, it was more of a “splat” than a pile because when bears pig out on berries to fatten up for hibernation, the highly fruity diet gives them a touch of diarrhea. Since finding this stuff is fairly common, I didn’t think much about it. Then I noticed another splat some distance away, and then another, and another. This heightened my awareness, but I still wasn’t concerned because this stuff was several days old. Going on a little farther, I notice an odd smell. Another step or two, and I came upon not one, but two such splats that, though not steaming fresh, were fresh enough to still be soft, wet, and stinky. They were obviously fresh enough to have been passed within the past hour. This got my attention, the hair on the back of my neck stood up, and I began to feel like I was being watched (ever had that feeling?). Because I walk to work so often, and do a lot of walking in the area of my work, I get lacksidasical about carrying my weapon (an idiot or a fool?) and did not have it with me. I decided I better get out of that berry patch forthwith. Though I did not see a bear, I found a lot of sign, and I was stupid for being there without defense.
*****
I have a son, two daughters, two sons-in-law, and my grandchildren that are living in various communities satellite to Salt Lake City, the major population center in Utah. These family members are there for higher education or employment. I love Utah. I obtained my higher education there, and in fact, my son is attending my alma mater. With the influence of the Mormons and other good Christian folk, I think Utah is a good, conservative place to live and raise children. Social statistics bear this out: relatively low crime rate, low rates of cancer and other “sin” diseases (i.e. those related to tobacco and alcohol use, immorality, illegal drugs, etc.), more stable marriages and families, etc. This is not to say that Utah doesn’t have its problems.
Remember Trolley Square?
Just a few weeks ago, we were shocked when a disillusioned Bosnian youth with a .38 handgun and a shotgun walked into Trolley Square mall in downtown Salt Lake City and calmly began killing people. At least six people died (including the Bosnian youth) and several others were seriously wounded. Who knows what was eating this guy, or why he would decide to randomly waste a bunch of people? The scary thing is that all of my children have, I am sure, at various times visited Trolley Square. Any of them could have been there that fateful evening. And had they been there, they would have been defenseless against this guy. Why? Because weapons are prohibited in the mall. This Bosnian youth entered the mall through a door with a prominent “No Guns Allowed” sign posted (worked well, didn’t it?).
I would be foolish to venture into the Alaskan wild without a weapon to defend myself from bears or other wild animals that might attack for whatever reason. Yet, because of various laws and restrictions, my children are prohibited from carrying weapons to protect themselves in the jungles of “civilization”. Frankly, I would much rather have my children face a bear in the Alaska bush than one of these “animals” that calmly and deliberately decides to kill someone. Bears attack to defend themselves, their young, or their food supply. These two-legged animals attack and kill just for the fun(?) of it. Which is more dangerous? Why is it wise to carry protection against the bears but illegal to carry protection against such calculating killers?
Rep. Carolyn McCarthy and other, uh, “less informed” government representatives, bureaucrats, and anti-gun individuals throughout the nation are advocating various gun bans and restrictions (see for example H.R. 1022, mayor Michael Bloomberg’s coalition against guns, etc., etc.). I resent this! Why are these people so desperate to take away my right and ability to protect myself from huge, vicious animals that might think I would make a good meal? More importantly, why are they trying to rob my children of their right and ability to protect themselves from two-legged animals that would do things to them that could be worse than getting eaten?
If this is a result of ignorance, then may God preserve us from such ignorance. It is up to us, the People, who comprise the Sovereign of our nation, to educate them about the reality of life. But if this effort to rob us of our sacred rights originates from a “power ego”, a desire to dominate and control, then may God have mercy on them as they face the consequences of their actions.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)