Why Not An Electric Wakeboard Boat ?

Electric cars are starting to pop up. Everything from minimalist Zaps to sporty Tesla’s to Porsche conversions. With petrol now over $4/gallon in the US and higher elsewhere the number of electric cars is increasing rapidly. While there are many great benefits to electric cars, one major drawback that remains is how far they can go on a charge and what do you do when you run out of juice and need to recharge? Plug in for hours? Swap batteries? They’re starting to work great around town, but we have some work to do before we can reliably use them for highway trips.

Why not electric boats?

I assume one major obstacle is the small issue of electricity and water not mixing so well. This can be worked out though. In fact, the Navy powers many of their boats with electricity without water problems. Of course they also have onboard nuclear reactors to generate electricity and I’m not sure we’re far enough along with that for consumer use. However, battery and motor technology has advanced enough to make this a viable alternative and I’m sure boat builders can design a system to keep the batteries and motor both dry and adequately ventilated.

But oy vey, the advantages…

The batteries and motor are overall lighter than the equivalent power and run-time of 30 gallons of petrol and a marine engine. An electrical drive system is also comprised of many smaller components that can more easily be distributed around a hull for optimal weight distribution. It’d be possible to produce a center weighted slalom tow boat without a mid engine. Everything would be below deck and could even be a bit more forward than venerable towboats such as the Nautique 196 resulting in an even smoother wake. This also leaves room for massive ballasting to change the boats characteristics for wakeboarding or surfing.

Yes, the holy grail of perfect slalom, perfect wakeboard, and perfect surf from one boat is within reach.

Speaking of surfing, there’d be no CO fumes. Teak surfing anyone? This would not only be more environmentally friendly, but more pleasant for everyone when idling. We’d also be able to forego starting/killing the engine every time a skier or rider is down.

Unlike a car on a roadtrip, an electrical boat system would in most cases be able to tow people for an entire day on a single charge. No more trips to the marina or hauling cans when out of petrol. Of course some of us would miss catching up on the latest lake gossip at the marina, but we can still stop in for other purposes. So, plug it in overnight and it’s ready for the next day.

Electric drive is also quiet and smooth. These are both kind of strange in a car, but would be heaven in a boat. Imagine no more vibration. For Malibu fans out there I’m sure a subwoofer and transducer system can add the noise and vibration back in. Ever thought about what the engine vibration does to prop efficiency? And for those concerned about electrics ability to pull them up without dragging forever consider this, the Tesla roadster does 0-60 in 3.7 seconds.

Finally there’s cost. A very quick calculation gives us $90 for a day of petrol or $22 for a day of electricity. That’s nothing to sneeze at. Theoretically maintenance will be less as well, though I’m not sure I’d want to speculate until we’ve seen a ton more real data on battery/motor life.

So there you have it. I’m sure there are negatives that I haven’t thought of, but perhaps there are more positives as well.

Edit 2008.07.01: Boesch is selling this boat

Texas authorities aren't alone in incompetence...

Authorities in the tundra of Minnesota bungled one pretty well. Story Here.

I have no clue if this was a bungled case, a wrong prosecution, or, very likely a bit of both. It appears more than reasonable that the parents are innocent (though now victims of the state), the uncle guilty (though got away because the state bungled it), and the daughter a victim several times over (by everyone).

$4 Gas: Much Ado About Nothing ?

We're all atwitter about gas costing $4/gallon. The major network news shows this morning have all covered it. They and much of the rest of the media are hyping it as this awful terrible thing that will ruin our country. President Bush MUST open up the strategic petrol reserves to help bring prices down. We MUST increase production from our own fields.

Really?

In 1976 gas was about $1/gallon. Based on standard US inflation it should now be about $3.85/gallon. $4/gallon or even $5/gallon is well within a reasonable tolerance of inflation. Just for comparison, an in-call escort has risen at almost twice the rate of inflation - in 1976 she charged $40/hr yet today she gets $300/hr. Gas would be $7.22/gallon at that rate.

If only our Federal Government Spending had increased the same as gas. In 1976 we spent $371 billion. In 2007 we spent $2.8 trillion. If gas had risen as fast as our politicians spending it would now be almost $10/gallon.

RIP: TV Schedules, Networks, and TIVO.

It’s interesting how quickly we’re seeing the demise of the TV schedule and of traditional channelized broadcasting. I’m not a big TV person, but what little I do watch has migrated from catching a show when it’s broadcast on a cable channel to watching it over the internet when I want. Tuesday night at 9p is no longer the show time, but the time the newest episode is released. I’m more likely to watch it a day or two later than at 9p on Tuesday. And with programming available anytime from producers websites I only need my TIVO for those very few that are not web available.

I’d guess that in the very near future the only channelized TV remaining will be time relevant programming, primarily news channels and maybe live coverage of things like the US Senate.

Why Drilling Might Not Be Such A Good Idea.

There are a lot of good options on both sides of this one. I’m a bit of an environmentalist, but I’m also a pragmatist. If it makes sense to drill on-shore or off I don’t think it’s that huge of an issue as long as proper precautions are taken. There is though one very good reason I might recommend not drilling – Security.

We only have about 3% of global oil reserves. That’s not very much. What would happen if we used up ours and the folks controlling the bulk of the rest decided to wage war against us and started by cutting off our oil supplies? We’d be crippled.

The increase in gas prices is inconvenient. But that’s all it is. We might drive a bit less. We’ll plan errand runs better instead of multiple trips. We might choose a more fuel-efficient car or maybe even invest in a scooter. Maybe we won’t fly to Disneyworld for vacation. People did without gas fueled conveniences for many many hundreds of years.

There may even be some advantages. We’ve become a nation of ugly obese slobs. Maybe we’ll rent fewer movies and walk or bike more.

FLDS: Financial Costs

The Deseret News today published this article stating that the costs to the State of Texas thus far are about $14 million. That's a lot of money to most of us, just not to many politicians and law enforcement.

The article did say that the State of Texas does expect the costs to rise as more invoices come in, as more is done on the case, and they do expect to pay out several million dollars to FLDS and others in litigation.

What costs may not be included?

- Costs for caring for children already in foster care who were dislocated to make room for the FLDS children.

- Opportunity costs of Texas Government employees being side-tracked to work on this case instead of their normal jobs. What of their work didn't get done? What children truly in need of protection didn't get it? What crimes were committed because so many in law enforcement were at the YFZ ranch or working on other aspects of this case? What children already in CPS' care didn't get the care they needed because CPS was consumed with the FLDS raid?

- Opportunity costs of having so many attorneys doing pro-bono work for FLDS children and families? What work of theirs didn't get done in the meantime? What was the cost to their families of their being away from home to work on this?

- Costs to FLDS families in gas, hotel, and food as they drove all over Texas to visit their children?

More?

Pawlenty: No New Taxes?

I’ve generally been a supporter of Tim Pawlenty. This one kinda stinks though. This one can’t be called a fee, it’s clearly a tax, no way around that one. Perhaps they’ll call it an Old Tax since its on old money? Or maybe they can call it a Re-Clarification of a tax?

Governor Pawlenty recently signed New legislation regarding taxes on deferred compensation. Prior to this legislation the state taxed deferred compensation when it was paid. If you worked in Minnesota in 2005 you’d pay taxes to the State of Minnesota on the wages that you earned and were paid in that year. If as part of your pay you were also promised some stock options by your company and told that you could collect on that promise at some point in the future you might well decide to wait until after you retire to hold them to that promise. This way you’ll have that little bit of income for retirement and you may pay lower taxes as well since your overall income will likely be lower.

If you chose to move to a retirement community in another state you got an extra benefit. Under current law you’re responsible to pay taxes on this income when it is paid to you and to the state you currently reside when it’s paid. If you’d retired to any of the multitude of states with lower taxes than Minnesota you gained some benefit in lower taxes. If you retired to one of the states like Florida who have NO state income tax you got a big benefit in that, like other residents of Florida, you didn’t have to pay any income tax on this income.

This new Minnesota tax law changes this. This new law says that regardless of when you collect on that promise of stock options or where you live at the time, that if you were working in Minnesota when that promise was made then you have to pay taxes on it to Minnesota. Other than that I don’t like high taxes nor new taxes, this is legal and legit.

This isn’t just a new law going forward though, this new law says that it’s retroactive. They’re saying that if you were promised some stock options in 1980 when you worked for Dayton’s (remember them?) and you now live in Florida or Paris or London or anywhere, and you collect on that promise - you have to pay taxes back to Minnesota.

There are some practical problems relative to Pawlenty’s New Tax. First is that some corporations who made and keep these promises will be required by the State of Minnesota to withhold taxes correctly according to the new law. Besides considerable confusion over a number of state mandates on this regarding what constitutes having worked in Minnesota and similar issues, many companies will also have to spend considerable money and effort to revamp payroll systems to figure out when to or not withhold tax on someone who may not have even worked for the company for 2 decades.

The second problem is for the retirees. Many made decisions 5, 10, or 20 years ago based on the tax laws in place when they earned their income and when they were made promises by their employers. Many of these may face financial problems having to pay higher taxes than they’d expected. They expected to pay a certain amount of tax based on the laws in place when they earned their money. Now some may find themselves loosing homes or having to make other lifestyle changes because of this.

It’s one thing for the Pawlenty to go back on his No New Taxes pledge and add a new tax for future earnings. That’s bad enough. But for him to add a new tax retroactive to past earnings is slimy.

Even though it seems to me like it would be unconstitutional to place a new tax on old earnings retroactively, I assume that Pawlenty’s folks researched that before passing this to avoid the embarrassment of facing a constitutional challenge. Things are getting smelly.

Unlocked iPhone 3G?

After market failure with their previous marketing efforts, Apple will now be selling the new iPhone 3G through stores the same as other cell phones. EG, Apple sells the phones to ATT, O2, etc, who resells them to you and I along with a service plan. ATT discounts the cost to us of the iPhone (or any other cell phone) based on the revenue they receive on the service plan. The longer the plan we commit to the more they subsidize the hardware purchase. Unlike the previous plan, Apple will no longer share in ATT revenue, they'll just sell them the phones like everyone else.

Unlocked? Possibly. ATT long ago realized that locking phones was of little or no benefit to them and that they were loosing customers who frequently travel outside the US. For some time ATT has had a policy of unlocking phones upon request 30 days after purchase. After all, they already have us locked in to a service plan and unlocking only benefits about 1% of us anyway.

Will they do the same with iPhones?

I'll bet they will. Phone locking was always a cell carrier issue to prevent people from switching providers or in hopes of gaining roaming revenue. Mfr's (except Apple) prefer that they not be locked since locking limits their market. Service plan terms take care of the provider switching and the roaming revenue never materialized as heavy travelers like myself just carry an extra unlocked phone so that we can use our localized SIMs.

My son and a number of other international students hope they get unlocked. They all want iPhones, but Apple's unlock policy prevented them from buying them since the iPhone would effectively be a brick for the months each year they are in a different country than where they purchased them.

Who do You want to rescue You?

Listening to news reports of Boy Scouts in Iowa springing in to action to save their mates I thought about some of the persecution the Scouts have come under. I also thought about the FLDS kids and many of their parents. If you were hurt and trapped from a tornado who would you want around to rescue you? An average US teen? Boy Scout? Teen from FLDS?

There are some terrific teens in the US who are not Scouts and who are not part of the FLDS, but if I needed rescuing I'd hope for a Scout or one of the teens from the FLDS. How about you?

FLDS: When We Get Restraining Orders Against Our Own Government!

A Judge has issued a well deserved restraining order against Texas' CPS. In her order she stated: “I am not going to allow CPS or any other agency to interfere with parents in this state.”

From: http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/metro/stories/MYSA061008.1B.FLDShearing.3899a1c.html

Can't wait to see what the appeals courts says.

Cure Worse Than The Disease?

We are, overall, a law-abiding country. We believe in obeying the laws and we generally seem to believe that people who do not obey our laws should be punished. Punishment is, by the way, the primary way we encourage people to obey laws. Punishment is our ‘cure’ for the ill.

Here is where a law against polygyny runs in to a fundamental problem. We’ll assume for the moment that polygyny is illegal because it causes some kind of harm. Under most state laws the husband in a polygynous relationship is the criminal. The wives and children are usually not. Let’s assume a family of one husband, 3 wives, and 12 children. The husband works and maybe one of the wives works while the other 2 wives take care of the children and home. They are not on welfare, other than polygyny are law-abiding, and their children are healthy, educated, and well-mannered. This scenario is, BTW, fairly typical of polygynous families.

Well, this guy is breaking the law so we have to punish him for it. What are we to do? Throw him in jail? That will sure be of benefit to the family and to society. Order him to leave 2 of his wives? That works well. Make him pay a fine? Remove the wives and kids from their home? Even community service creates the problem of taking a father away from his children while at the same time communicating to them that according to society their father is a criminal. We’ve either harmed their relationship with their parents or their relationship with society. And to what end?

Just how much harm is caused by polygyny itself that we apparently believe is so atrocious that we are willing to cause these other harms?

FLDS: What About The Other Kids ?

When Texas tossed over 400 FLDS kids in to the foster care system, what happened to other kids already in the system? Was there ample room in the system to absorb such a huge influx without impacting others? What happened to kids who were displaced to make room for the FLDS kids? What impact did this have on them?

Problems for Texas' Prosecutions?

The State of Texas faces numerous potential hurdles in their presumed upcoming prosecutions. They will likely file statutory rape charges against any men in the FLDS they suspect of having had sex with girls younger than the age of consent and I would expect a variety of ancillary charges of sexual abuse, molestation, kidnapping, etc. Defendants will likely claim that they were married to the girl and therefore the sexual relationship was not illegal. If the marriage was celestial and no state marriage license had been issued then the defendant will likely claim that they could not obtain the license because of Texas laws against polygamy, that these laws are unconstitutional, and that they could not even apply for a license due to fears of religious persecution.

NOTE: Sexual abuse is a horrendous crime and anyone guilty of it should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. The question in this case though is if it is sexual abuse when two people are married and everyone including the bride, groom, and parents are supportive of the arrangement. We must also remember that the marital lifestyle of the FLDS is actually more in line with historical practice and Biblical practice than even our wished for monogamy. EG, leaving aside our love of divorce, serial monogamy, casual sex, uncommitted polygamy, single-parent households, etc.

This case may also have implications far beyond Texas. It involves issues that could be very significant for every person in the US with regard to privacy. When may law enforcement or other government authorities enter a private home? What constitutes reasonable suspicion upon which to base a search warrant? Will this give law enforcement the ability to obtain a search warrant for any home in the US with a pregnant woman in it simply by saying that they believe the pregnant woman to be underage? To what extent can law enforcement rely on anonymous calls to intrude on citizens privacy without verifying the identity of the caller and the veracity of their story? What rights do state authorities have to remove children from parents and what level of abuse must be provable? What danger are any of us in from authorities acting on anonymous calls or other dubious tips in taking actions such as entering homes, conducting searches, or removing children?

Let’s look at some of the potential problems of this case.

Validity of First Search Warrant – This warrant was issued to search for an anonymous 16-year-old. There are questions about it’s overall validity and of the admissibility of evidence. Did authorities have any suspicion that the call was a hoax? How long did law enforcement wait from when they first learned of the caller and when they obtained a search warrant and entered the ranch to search for her? If they believed this girl were in imminent danger should they not have obtained a warrant and gone to YFZ immediately? What efforts were made to determine where in YFZ ranch she was located, which house was she in? During the time they waited did authorities make any effort to verify the identity of the caller such as tracing where phone calls originated or to verify her story in any way?

Validity of Second Search Warrant and Evidence – This warrant for an in-depth search for evidence of widespread sexual abuse is based on suspicions from the first warrant including; female hairs on an unmade bed in the temple, a 15yo who said that a 16yo was pregnant, an 18yo who had a 10mo baby with her 33yo husband, an 18yo who had a 1yo child with her 36yo husband, a 19yo who has a 1yo and 2yo, a 16yo with no children who is married to a 40yo, a 16yo who is currently pregnant, testimony of an 8yo who said a 16yo has 4 children, a confidential informant who said that beds in the temple are used for sex with underage girls, and a document seized during the first search indicating numerous marriages but no divorces thus leading to suspicion of polygyny.

The Reality Element: While 5 teen pregnancies in a population of over 700 people might seem high to those few privileged folks in the nicer suburbs of America, it’s actually a normal number for many neighborhoods and rather low for the average inner-city neighborhood.

With the exception of the supposed 16yo with 4 children all of these would likely be legal within a marriage. So, if the girls under 18 were not married then their husbands may be guilty of statutory rape, if they are married and to multiple women then they are guilty of bigamy.

The Absurdity Element: If only the FLDS had followed our socially acceptable practice of serial divorce and each man had divorced each wife before marrying the next they’d all be OK. No bigamy, no statutory rape. But stick around as a husband and help raise the kids and we’ll take your kids.

With this warrant signed Texas authorities entered the ranch at 2am, began an in-depth search, and removed every child under 18 as well as a number who claimed to be adults but who authorities suspected of being under 18.

Some potential problems:

- If any part of the first warrant is proven invalid then much or all of this second warrant may be in jeopardy.

- At least 26 of the 31 girls Texas authorities said were underage mothers or pregnant turned out to be adults. One of these was at least 27. There are serious questions about the status of at least 4 of the remaining 5. Is it reasonable that every time someone sees a pregnant girl whom they believe to be underage that an investigation ensue? Given that Texas authorities were wrong at least 84% of the time with underage identification does that leave sufficient reasonable suspicion to uphold the second warrant? How believable must reasonable suspicion be before a search warrant is issued? To what extent can law enforcement fabricate a ‘reasonable belief’ just to obtain a warrant for a witch hunt?

- Were searches of individual homes legal without individual search warrants for each? Can authorities obtain a blanket search warrant for an entire 200 unit apartment complex and every individual apartment within it based on a belief that 5 underage girls may be pregnant? Any evidence seized from individual homes may not be admissible.

- Is there any proof of premeditation on the part of the authorities to obtain this warrant prior to the first warrant being issued? Was the initial warrant simply an excuse to get on the YFZ ranch for a witch hunt?

- There is a significant credibility gap with Texas authorities having proven wrong on numerous occasions and FLDS members not being proven wrong on any occasions. Attorneys are sure to raise this with any court testimony.

- Will ‘victims’ testify? Any girl who is willingly married to her husband will likely be reluctant to testify against him with regard to any charges and without victim testimony a conviction of any sort may be difficult.

Constitutionality of Texas Change in Marriage Age – Prior to the FLDS establishing YFZ the State of Texas issued over 800 legal marriage licenses per year for girls under the age of 16 to marry and often to men twice their age. State Rep Harvey Hilderbran, who sponsored legislation in 2005 to raise the age of marriage from 14 to 16 appears to be on the record as stating that he did so specifically because of the FLDS presence. This could raise serious concerns over religious persecution as well as challenge the constitutionality of the change in age.

This could have far reaching impact. The first search warrant was based on an adult having sex with a 15-year-old girl whom he was supposedly married to and on the warrant states that it is illegal for a 15-year-old to marry. This law being declared unconstitutional could throw water on the first search warrant. This will, I believe, directly invalidate any cases based on girls marrying between the ages of 13 and 16. Finally, this could be one major element in establishing a pattern of religious persecution that can not only be used as a partial defense of not having applied for marriage licenses but also in future lawsuits against the State of Texas.

Constitutionality of Polygamy Laws – Is a prohibition on bigamy, polygamy or polygyny constitutional? The US Supreme Court has already ruled against Texas with regard to Sodomy laws in Lawrence v Texas and in his dissent of that opinion Justice Scalia raised the very issue that this opens up the potential that a prohibition of bigamy, like sodomy, is not a legitimate state interest and thus a prohibition of bigamy is unconstitutional.

Given the vast problems in our ‘monogamous’ society of serial monogamy, serial divorce, teen sex, teen pregnancies, HIV/AIDS/STD outbreaks, single-parent welfare homes, and crimes committed by children raised in single-parent homes, the State of Texas may have an extremely difficult time arguing that there is a legitimate state interest in prohibiting a polygynous arrangement where none of these problems appears to exist.

The upshot of it all. Could the FLDS be more cunning than we ever imagined? Within months of SCOTUS’ decision in Lawrence v Texas the FLDS were setting up shop in Texas. My guess is that we may find that the FLDS were careful within the State of Texas not to violate any laws except polygyny and that they’ve been conducting themselves in a way to force the State of Texas to defend their prohibition on bigamy as a legitimate state interest in order to prosecute the FLDS for anything.

Stay tuned, this will get interesting.

FLDS: Good day and bad day...

It is truly great news that the FLDS children will be returning to their parents! It is sad and angering that the parents were held hostage by their own government in order to get their children back. Sign an agreement to abrogate their own civil rights or don't get their children back. Talk about choice...

After what the Sheriff claimed was 4 years of investigation with an inside informant, over 2 months of intense investigation after the raid, search, and confiscation of materials from the ranch, and after over 2 months of questioning of children, often without their parents or an appropriate legal guardian present, there is zero evidence of abuse of any kind for the vast majority of the families. In only 2 families is there any evidence of any kind of abuse and that evidence is shaky.

What we do have evidence of is a lot of lying by Texas authorities regarding what evidence they had, how many underage children were pregnant or had already born children, ...

More later...

FLDS: The Woman Who Started It All

No comments.

http://www.sltrib.com/ci_9439383

Original FLDS warrant denied?

According to a story here, the original request for a warrant was denied due to insufficient evidence. Some quick searching on Judge Johnny Griffin reveals that he has taken a moderate approach towards the FLDS even as his apparent friend, Schleicher County Sheriff David Doran, was getting antsy about them.

Editors!

Cops going off half cocked !

Only in Minnesota. Well, unfortunately not. Seems some local cops decided to do some celebrating with their service revolvers. It's good to know we're making some strong efforts to hire people with good character to be cops. These neighbors were far more charitable than I think I would have been.

http://www.startribune.com/local/19417229.html

FLDS: Pots and Kettles and Who's Calling Who What?

A couple of years ago I met individually with a number of child welfare workers for some research. These are the people who decide if a child should be removed from a home, who write up recommendations for the court regarding the child’s future, who work with parents on creating a better home environment, and who inform courts if parents are fit to be parents or not. One thing that really struck me was the family life of these folks themselves. One very interesting thing that struck me was that those married with children were outnumbered by those single with children. Single because they were either divorced or had never even married the other parent. And these are the people telling others how to create a good home?

This was not even remotely scientific, but it would be interesting, if someone hasn’t already, to study this issue and find out just who we are relying on to determine who is fit to be a parent. Maybe next year.

As an old song says “If you can’t even run your own life, I’ll be damned if you’ll run mine.”

On a related note, just who is the state saying is or is not a fit parent? Apparently Texas’ CPS is OK with a polygynous relationship where some guy makes a baby with a teen girl and then runs off. There are some pretty reliable statistics to indicate that this kid is extremely likely to become a teen mom or dad themselves (and they are also likely to become a criminal). I can’t find any records of CPS raiding these homes, even though there are thousands more of them throughout the state. Even when CPS does get involved in these it’s rare that they remove children from the home. Yet, in a polygynous relationship where dad sticks around to help raise all of his kids and where evidence indicates that extremely few, if any, will turn out to be criminals, CPS deems it necessary to confiscate the kids.

FLDS: Texas Authorities Snake Bit?

I’ve found it rather interesting that the topic of polygyny has not been mentioned in any of the service plans or, to the best of my knowledge, in any of the custody hearings. There is certainly the possibility that CPS, given the vagueness of the service plans, intends to make it a part of each individual case. Perhaps as part of a ‘safe home environment’.

Another possibility though is that the State of Texas may be snake bit after their disagreement with Mr. Lawrence and his partner. Might they be thinking that going after the polygynists for polygyny in a legal court could wind up with a prohibition on polygyny being declared unconstitutional? Lawrence vs Texas certainly establishes a stage for that. In fact Justice Scalia, in his dissent made this point specifically. Stay tuned.

Airlines: We're all treated fairly?

Recently I’ve been doing a good amount of flying, much of it back and forth across the Atlantic. As I checked in for a flight yesterday I was charged for excess baggage weight. I knew that I would be and for the most part I’m fine with it. It’s a reasonable charge. Extra weight causes a plane to burn extra fuel and reduces the amount of revenue they can earn carrying other packages. This is simply the cost for me of some of the extra stuff I’ve had to carry.

Checking in ahead of me was a woman who weighed at least 250 lbs and likely over 300. From the looks of it her luggage was right at the 50 lb max as well. She was not charged for any extra weight. I weigh 160 lbs and had a 62 lb bag. Even without her luggage she weighed considerably more than me and my luggage. While this has never seemed fair, I’ve had more pressing issues than to worry about it too much.

Guess who was sitting in the seat next to me on the flight? Guess who couldn’t fit in just her own seat but flowed over in to my space? This wasn’t the first time I’ve had someone flow over in to my seat and on most airlines the flight attendants are sympathetic and try to make arrangements that will be more comfortable for both. Unfortunately this was a completely full flight so there was nothing they could do though one did apologize to me. The good news was that it was only a 1 hour flight and not 9 hours.

I paid more to fly less weight than she did to fly more weight and I got considerably less seat room than she did as well.

FLDS: Texas CPS !!

A quick cursory look through some statutory rape cases in Texas seems to indicate a pattern of going only after racial or religious minorities. Prior to the potential charges of statutory rape against the men in the FLDS compound, the State of Texas appears to have previously concentrated on African Americans. Either the Texas Authorities have a prejudice problem or whites in Texas don't commit statutory rape. If anyone has any better information on this issue, for or against, please stop by my office.

Also, for anyone not already concerned about the power of government intrusion I invite you to read a novel. "Custody of the State" is by Craig Parshall. Craig btw is the husband of Janet Parshall of Janet Parshall's America radio program. They are both great people and I highly recommend Janet's radio show.

FLDS: Where'd the boys go?

The FLDS site now includes a chart of the gender and ages of those taken in the raid.

http://www.captivefldschildren.org/Counts.php

Since this represents all of the children (or supposed children) in the YFZ ranch it is interesting to note the relative numbers of males and females. In the younger generation there are slightly more males, but in the teens there is an abnormally low number of males to the number of females than can realistically be explained by natural childbirth. What happened to the males? More lost boys?

What a week.

Last Sunday a friend’s parents were in an auto accident and her mom was killed. I don’t usually refer to a crash as an accident, but this one appears to have been. Having researched a number of crashes and talked to many highway patrol, county sheriffs, and city cops it is clear that the vast majority of crashes are not accidents – they are caused by driver inattention. They are not caused by speeding. They are not caused by mechanical failures of the vehicle. They are caused by inattention. A crash caused by inattention is NOT an accident. Some of these weren’t paying attention because they were drunk, most though were not drunk. They were simply stupid. They were stone cold sober but not paying attention to what they were doing.

Back to my friend. Her parents were friends of mine as well and it obviously came as a shock to a large number of us. Something that was really interesting to me is that over the past week it was my friend’s husband who seemed the most shook up. My friend’s dad was clearly sad, but handling things as well as can be expected. They’d been married for 37 years and were just beginning their retirement. They truly loved being together and had looked forward to an active retirement. My friend was sad over the loss of her mother and the grandmother of her 3 young children but she was mostly concerned about her dad and how he would manage. My friend’s husband? He was about as close to his mother-in-law as anyone I’ve ever known and while he was sad about loosing her, he too was concerned about his father-in-law but he was also hugely concerned about his wife and about his children’s loss of their grandmother. Just an interesting observation.

The saddest sight of the week for me was my friend’s father sitting by the coffin saying his final good-bye to his wife before they closed it for the funeral. I’ve never been one to get very choked up about things, but that sight got me.

Bad days for vice

Today came word that J. Palfrey, the DC Madam, appears to have committed suicide after being found guilty, not of prostitution, but of using the mail service to, well, mail things. Had the money she mailed been earned making porn films or telling old folks that they needed to send in $50 for a bottle of miracle water all would have been fine, but since the money was believed (she was never convicted of prostitution) to have come from prostitution (of consensual adults), well... Hers is the second apparent suicide from this same investigation as a woman who worked for her and was also a University professor apparently killed herself as well when her extra job was revealed.

Conspiracy theorists waisted no time claiming that Palfrey had not committed suicide but was killed to keep her from revealing names as part of a sentencing plea deal. She had over 15,000 customers in a 10 year period and many are believed to be fairly high ranking government and related folk.



This follows by a day the story of Susan LaFevre who, when she was 19 in 1974, got busted for Heroin and was sentenced to 10-20 years. This after she'd been told a guilty plea would likely result in 1 year probation since this was her first offense. Well, after a year in jail she managed to escape, moved to California, reformed her life, and over the past 32 years got married and had a number of children. By all accounts she did reform herself and has led a production life ever since. The authorities are saying that she now needs to serve at least 9 years of her original sentence though may get a few more tacked on for her little escape. Is this the best thing for society or her children?

FLDS: Truth in Advertising

Some things just don’t smell right. Today the FLDS website (http://www.fldstruth.org) began filling in their Q&A section. This included:

Q: Are women forced into marriage?

A: No. The young girls are taught all their lives that marriage is a sacred choice that they must make. They are taught to keep their bodies covered and live a life of cleanliness and purity according to the teachings of our Savior.

I don’t doubt that this is a truthful answer, but is it an honest answer? Is this truly a choice? Is a girl completely free to say that she doesn’t want to marry some guy who’s been chosen for her? Is the choice really one between marrying the chosen groom or being put out of the community and separated from family and everyone they’ve ever known for the rest of their life? Technically that’s a choice, just not much of one. Are girls taught all their lives that when the time comes they MUST make the choice that is given them? Are they taught all of their lives that if they don’t ‘make the choice’ to marry the chosen groom that they will spend eternity in hell?

Q: Even if a young woman had the desire to leave the ranch, would she be allowed to leave with all her children?

A: If any one in our communities desire to leave, there is no one that will stand in the way. We have had women who have decided to leave that have taken their children. We have had women who have decided to leave their children with their loving fathers and the mothers who wanted to stay with him. We are taught to think for ourselves and make our own choices.

As above, are there caveats to ‘free to leave’? Is it perhaps free to leave, but if they do they will never see their family again, they will never see any of the only people they’ve ever known in their lives again? What kind of choice is that? And though the official position may be that people are free to leave, how many individuals might act differently? What might an individual husband do if his wife takes off with their kids? In what ways will he threaten her?

Now, to put all of this in a bit of perspective. For most people who grew up prior to the 20^th century, including all of those in our Christian Bible, the choices offered within the FLDS were likely the norm. Parents chose spouses for their children; sometimes purely on their own, sometimes with input from a tribal or other spiritual leader, sometimes with input from the bride and groom, sometimes without. This doesn’t necessarily make it right or wrong, but the FLDS is far from an aberration.

Also, given all of the problems in our society, I can certainly understand a group wanting to stay as separate from it as possible. On more than a few occasions I’ve thought how nice it would be to gather together a bunch of like-minded folks and form our own community. A community where we have similar beliefs with regard to how we raise our children and what we teach them about drugs, sex, personal and corporate responsibility, obesity, integrity, and a host of other issues.

I can also understand people wanting to choose a spouse for their daughter (or son). I haven’t been through having a child marry yet, but many of my friends have and many of us have seen disaster waiting at the alter. There is an abundance of wisdom and insight that is gained after years of marriage that younger folks simply do not have. The groom is an absolute dream romantically, is good looking, and is overall a nice guy. But, he has the work ethic and morals of a noodle – no disrespect to rigatoni intended.

OK, back on topic. I don’t particularly like being lied to or misled and here I felt misled by the FLDS. I still believe that based on what we know so far that the Texas Authorities were wrong in their response. I still believe that they way over-reacted. I still believe that it would have been much better to have not removed anyone from the YFZ ranch but instead to have begun an investigation and removed only those people who had clearly violated the law or who were clearly in danger of real abuse.

As much as we in America like things to be black and white, as much as we like everything to come down to good guys and bad guys, that’s not always the case. In this one both sides appear to have their issues.

FLDS: Religious Persecution ?

Teen brides marrying older men isn’t exactly old history for Texas where yesterday the Houston Chronicle noted: ‘State Rep. Harvey Hilderbran became alarmed by reports from Eldorado, former sect members and the Utah attorney general. In 2005 he pushed into law a bill that raised the legal age of consent to marry in Texas from 14 to 16.’

In 2001 and 2002, the years just prior to the FLDS moving in, the State of Texas issued legal marriage licenses each year to over 800 girls under the age of 16 and many were for these women to marry older men:

	Marriage Licenses Issued by The State of Texas (By Age of Bride and Groom) Annual Average: 2001 - 2002
Groom:	0-24	25-29	30's	40's	50's	60's
Bride:
14	144	16	2	2
15	598	44	8	2
16	1452	128	24	6	2	2
17	2756	158	50	6

Aside from the FLDS the State of Texas certainly doesn’t appear to have any problems with young girls marrying or with them marrying older men. Each and every year between 1966 and 2005 the State of Texas issued more marriage licenses to girls under 18 to marry men twice their age (Example: 178 in 1970, 51 in 2001) than all of the girls they’ve claimed have ever been abused in the FLDS community.

Even in 2006 with it’s new minimum marriage age of 16 the State of Texas issued marriage licenses to 3 14-year-old girls and 25 15-year-old girls. Presumably these were before the law took effect.

There are currently an estimated 58,000 children in Texas who were born to girls under 16. About 60% to single teen moms. How many of them do you believe will have a better life than those growing up in the FLDS?

FLDS: The Important Question

It’s all well and good to get historical perspective, and it’s important, but now we get to the question that is of paramount importance – have we done the right thing? What are we saving these kids from? Or more importantly, what are we saving them to? Will their life be better after being ripped from their parents, placed in foster homes, moved around from foster home to shelter to foster home, and setup for a life in our ‘normal’ world?

What impact does it have on a 4, 7, 10, or 17-year-old child to be ripped from their parents and told that their parents are being investigated by ‘the authorities’? That their parents are criminals? Parents who have likely been very loving and caring? If their parents are completely 100% innocent of breaking any law have we helped these kids?

Even if their parents are guilty of polygyny are we making any of their lives any better? Even, and many will be aghast at this thought, if their parents are guilty of telling a 14-year-old to marry a 40-year-old who already has 2 other wives?

My first concern is foster care itself. It is an important and valuable system, but is not even remotely perfect. There are some absolutely great foster parents in the US whom I have a great deal of respect for. Congresswoman Michelle Bachman and her husband, whom I have known for almost 2 decades (though sometimes don’t see quite eye to eye), are absolute saints when it comes to Foster Parents. And they’re far from the only ones.

There are also a lot who are found to be very poor parents and sometimes abusers.

Most studies indicate that about 25% of kids in foster care, whether in private homes or institutional group homes, are abused. Is having hundreds of kids suddenly thrown at an already overloaded system likely to improve that any? Current reports indicate that out of the 437 kids in Texas custody there are between 5 and 20 who are either already parents or pregnant. That’s at best 5% - assuming all 20 were under the legal age. Now, which environment do you believe is better for these children – the one where 25% are likely to be truly abused or the one where 1% ( or even 2% or 5% or 10%) are likely to be married off prior to 18 to a husband who will very likely stick with them for life? Many people are calling this latter situation rape but think for a minute about the two scenario’s.

We criticize them for polygyny, but is this really worse than our society of serial polygyny? Is growing up in polygyny really worse than growing up with parents who divorce, remarry someone else, and then divorce again - all the while spewing hatred towards their former spouses – the parent of their children? Is the FLDS really worse than the unwed teen mothers who abound in so much of our society? In the FLDS a teen mom has a husband that in all likelihood, according to evidence and testimony, loves her and cares for her and their children? How many of the 437 ripped from their parents will become latchkey kids who come home from school to no parents and nothing but Grand Theft Auto to entertain them?

We’re aghast at these kids having one father and multiple moms, yet how many kids in our ‘normal’ society don’t have a father at all because he’s in prison, off with another woman, or simply gone because while he wanted to make a baby he doesn’t want any part in raising one? How many of these non-FLDS kids end up thrown in to group homes or scuttled around between relatives because mom is a drug addict?

If these kids become part of our mainstream ‘normal’ society will they follow the rest of our teens with 25% getting an STD? How many will become alcoholics or drug addicts? Will any get drunk and kill someone in a drunken driving accident? Will they achieve the same level of obesity we have? How many will face bullying in school similar to that which caused incidents such as we witnessed at Columbine? How many will become bullies?

Almost 5% of 15-19 year old girls in our ‘normal’ society give birth. Would you like to take a guess how many of these women have husbands and how many of their kids will grow up with a father? How many of these children will grow up to be just as responsible as their own parents? How many will grow up to be criminals?

The number of girls in our ‘normal’ society who get pregnant is considerably higher than 5% though. How many of these 437 kids will follow in our practice of getting abortions to avoid an undesired pregnancy?

It takes a rather extreme amount of gall and ignorance to think that we’re helping anyone by pulling these kids from their homes without overwhelming evidence that real true abuse is happening and knowledge that they will clearly be better in institutional group homes or foster homes in our ‘normal’ society than in their cloistered environment.

Given the world we live in who can blame the FLDS for wanting to separate themselves from it?

If we are going to go after people we need to do it for the right reasons and most importantly we need to make sure that our actions do not create a worse situation than already exists.

Oh, the beds in the temple mentioned earlier? According to several people, including harsh critics of the FLDS, this was very unlikely to have ever been used for sex. These were most likely for people who were not feeling well to lay down during very long church services or after fasting.

FLDS: Genuine Concerns

Beyond their marital practices there are some very genuine concerns with the FLDS.

The Lost Boys. Natural birth rates do produce more girls than boys (for every 53 girls born there are about 47 boys). By marrying age the ratio is skewed even more due to wars and higher risk taking by males. So, if everyone is to be married then we’d naturally have about 12% of marriages polygynous - there simply are not enough males to go around. Add to this a belief by some that a higher number of males prefer to remain single than females and you have a requirement for even more polygynous marriages. None of these natural causes though provide a high enough female to male ratio for every man to have multiple wives, let alone the 3 wives that the FLDS teaches are required to reach the highest levels of heaven. Enter the problem of the lost boys. An estimated one-third or more of teen and adult men are expelled from the FLDS to create the desired ratio. A number of excuses are provided for this, usually that they have committed some sin. This practice, especially when the one kicked out is very young or is married and forced to leave his wife and family, is absolutely abhorrent.

Allowing polygyny from natural ratio’s is one thing. This is another. And it’s truly an atrocity. It’s also interesting to note that during the late 19^th century when the entire Mormon church was practicing polygyny in Utah, there were very likely many more men than women so it would be difficult to argue that polygyny was naturally necessary.

Real Abuse. I am not going to jump to a conclusion that sex between a husband and wife, regardless of their ages and of their marriage being legal or celestial, is abuse or rape. Even if we determine that she was coerced in to the marriage at 14 - if she and her children now want to remain with her husband I would likely support that as a better outcome for all than having the children ripped from their family and placed in foster care.

What I’m talking about here is men or women molesting or raping girls and boys who they are not married to in any fashion – legal or celestial. Sadly, I’m sure that it happens within the FLDS just as it does in every part of society. Whether it’s worse or not I don’t think any of us knows.

Even many of the staunchest critics, including most who left the FLDS, say that childhood within the community, through mid-teens anyway, is pretty good. Parents are overall very loving and caring. There are a number who say that discipline could be rather strict or that the mothers sometimes treated their own children better than the children of sister-wives or than husbands and wives argued and disagreed. Then again, how many of us didn’t complain about the discipline we received from our parents or witness arguments? If we’re judging the tree by it’s fruit though we’d have a difficult time criticizing the FLDS too much. According to everyone who’s come in contact with them over the past several weeks the FLDS kids are well adjusted and on the whole extremely disciplined and polite. Perhaps we could take some parenting lessons from them.

There are more serious complaints though. Warren Jeffs nephew says that he was sexually molested by his uncle and school principle Warren. Mary Macklin is a former FLDS member who has accused her father of molesting her and her husband of molesting her children. I don’t disbelieve either of these or the other similar stories of abuse within the FLDS (or Catholic church or Baptist, Muslim, or Atheist). Unfortunately, you are likely to find similar abuse in almost any group of 12,000 people. The people who do these things need to be prosecuted and these are cases where children should be removed from a home, hopefully to be placed with relatives or family friends though, not in institutions.

Freedom of Choice. Do people in the FLDS have freedom of choice? If someone wants to leave the FLDS can they freely do so? How free is anyone, male or female, to decide that they do not want to marry a person who has been chosen for them? Do they have some place to go if they do leave?

What rights do parents have to raise their children as they see fit? Do parents have the right to educate their children at home or is public school compulsory? Do parents have the right to teach their kids about Creationism or Darwinism or Evolution? To teach them that they should wait until marriage to have sex? To teach them that homosexuality is normal or wrong? At what point does the state step in and say that taking a 14-year-old to church against his will is abuse because the church teaches that homosexuality is wrong or that [something liberal]? What rights do parents have to discipline their children?

At what point do we say that the state will do a better job of raising our children than parents? There are certainly instances where it is necessary for the government to step in and remove children from truly abusive situations. At what point though do we cross a threshold where we’ve lowered the bar so low that we’re doing more harm to the children and society than the harm done by the parents?

Remember that people choosing their own spouse instead of their parents choosing for them is an extremely new concept in human history – and by many measures it’s not working out so well. A Jewish friend of mine with a tradition of arranged marriage once told me that while most people fall in love, get married, fall out of love, get divorced – we marry and then fall in love.

How do you insure the safety and freedom of people within a community such as the FLDS while at the same time respecting their right to practice their religion as they see fit? More on this later…

Texas Raid

Hooray for the authorities down in Texas for saving 416 kids from imminent danger! Polygyny, arranged marriages, child brides, teen parents, beds in the temple. Something must be done. And it has.

I’m no fan of polygyny, I personally consider even 18 too young to marry in our day, and there is no shortage of Mormon teachings with which I disagree. However, was uprooting 416 kids from their parents and throwing them in to group homes the right response?

It’s important that we put this entire situation in context. We need to understand the historical perspective, the current situation, and what to do to avoid a catastrophe like this in the future.

Background: Who are the FLDS?

The Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints? They are the original Mormons.

The Mormon church ‘officially’ renounced founder Joseph Smith’s teachings on polygyny in 1890 so that Utah could become a state. Polygyny however continued to be fairly widespread among the Mormon faithful. In 1905 a stronger and real stance against Joseph Smith’s and Brigham Young’s Polygyny teachings caused a split - some of those adhering to Smith’s teachings remained and just kept a low profile but most left and formed their own groups. The FLDS is the largest of these surviving groups and the one generally believed to most closely adhere to Joseph Smith’s original teachings, not just with regard to polygyny, but other areas as well. There are believed to be somewhere around 12,000 FLDS members today.

They believe in the Bible (the original LDS translation) and in Jesus Christ as Savior. They believe that Joseph Smith was a prophet of God and that God gave them the Book of Mormon through Joseph Smith. Similar to the Pope for Catholics they have a single head of the church referred to as ‘The Prophet’. The current prophet, Warren Jeffs, is at this time serving a prison sentence for aiding in the statutory rape of a minor for his part in the marriage of a 19 year old man to a 15 year old girl.

[Edit 5/21/08: A couple of people have pointed out to me that the FLDS did not officially split from the Mormon church until around 1932, not 1905 as I said above.]

Perspective: Some History

Most people today, when they hear about men with multiple wives, arranged marriages, and teen girls getting married, are quick to label those involved as abnormal or perverts. Let’s take a look in the family closet.

Polygyny. “Polygyny is wrong. Of course it is…” Really? We may not like it, or agree with it, or understand it, but is it inherently wrong? Many Christian leaders scream that allowing homosexual marriage will lead to the worse sin of polygyny. Would this be the same polygyny featured throughout the Old Testament? The same one that the God of the Old Testament gave explicit rules for how to practice and how not to? The same one where God told David that if all the wives he’d already given him were not enough that he’d have given him more? When did God change his mind?

Like it or not polygyny is never condemned in the Bible and in fact is both directly and indirectly condoned. It is not a part of the Greco-Roman culture we’ve inherited in the western world, but it is not anti-Biblical. Perhaps more on this later.

Teen Brides. For the first 50 to 100 centuries (or more depending on when you believe humans first inhabited the earth), up through about the 3^rd or 4^th century after Christ, the average age of first marriage for women was about 14 with most marrying between 13 and 17. It rose to around 16 over the next 2 or 3 centuries as marriage was delayed for some due to changing economic conditions. About 2 centuries ago, with major shifts in numerous areas of society, it jumped up a bit more and for much of the 19th and 20th centuries bounced around between about 19 and 22. In just the past couple of decades though, with more women devoting time to post-graduate degrees and careers, its risen rather dramatically to around 24.

The minimum acceptable age has never really changed though. It’s remained steady at about 12 or 13 throughout all of history until our own generation. Until maybe the 1970’s nobody would have batted an eye at a 14-year-old marrying. As recently as 1970 (yes, that is recent for some of us) 4% of marriage licenses issued by the State of Texas itself were to girls younger than 16 including 3,602 15-year-old girls, 1,460 14-year-old girls, and 55 girls under 14. Their husbands included 2 50-somethings, 7 40-somethings, and 41 in their 30’s. And this was after years of decline in marriages by those under 16.

Interestingly, from looking at legislative testimony, the reason the minimum age began to be raised in the past few decades does not appear to have been so much for the protection of young girls, but because we no longer had a society and culture that supported newly married couples as previous cultures had. This was compounded by women entering the workforce and the two-earner family becoming more of a norm (and for some a requirement?) Those marrying at the traditionally younger ages were more and more finding the going very tough.

In the end however, while we may have reduced the number of 14 and 15 year olds getting married, just as many are having sex and producing babies. Now they just do it without the benefits of marriage. That sure has worked well hasn’t it?

Arranged Marriage. As recently as the late 19^th century people would think you absolutely nuts to suggest that two people should choose to marry based solely on their choice of each other. Stephanie Coontz said it best in her 'Marriage, a History' something like marriage is too important to leave up to something as fickle as love and romance. Arranged marriage has actually been the norm throughout all of history until just the past century. With the high divorce, single-mother, and teen pregnancy rates, and the problems that come with them, there are a growing number of people thinking a return to arranged marriages might not be a bad idea.

Now, while historically marriages were officially arranged, it was not always a do or die scenario. Anecdotal evidence indicates that many parents strove to arrange marriages that were at least somewhat agreeable to their children. It is also clear, from Biblical and other historical accounts, that women were not treated like chattel, as some would have us believe, but were often independent and highly regarded.

Persecution: Who?

So we stand aghast at the polygyny, teen brides, arranged marriages, dress, and other elements of FLDS lifestyle. We scream that these people are all perverted. Yet historically, they’re more normal than we are.

For many of us who study history, even as rank amateurs, the FLDS doesn’t seem all that strange. They actually seem quite familiar. Their lifestyle, not just with regard to sex and marriage, but many other areas such as living in a tight-knit homogeneous community, is actually very much like that of the Hebrews throughout the old and new testaments or Christians during the first millennium after Christ. We in modern society are the odd ones out. Polygyny, arranged marriages of teen girls, close-knit homogeneous and supportive tribal community. Our Jewish and Christian forefathers, FLDS, or both?

So, what we consider controversial or perverted today was normal from the beginning of the world until just very recently.

For Christians, Jews, and anyone else who worships the God of the Bible and believes in the Old Testament perhaps some editing is in order before criticizing the FLDS on these issues.

First we need to cut out all of the verses giving laws for polygynous marriages such as Exodus 21:10 which states that if a man takes another wife that he may not reduce the food, clothing, or sexual rights of his current wife or Deu 21 where God states how a man is to treat his children if he has 2 wives. Lev 18:18 and others may need to go as well.

2 Sam 12:8 needs the axe because we certainly can’t have a verse with God telling David, through Samuel, that if the multiple wives he’d already given him were not enough, he would have given him more. Last I checked God didn’t actively support things that are sinful.

Finally we must remove the entire book of Song of Solomon. This is after all a love sonnet, and a rather erotic one at that, from a man to his bride. Most scholars I’ve read generally believe it to be a 40-something Solomon to his 13-year-old and 60^th bride most likely in an arranged marriage.

Some will point out that Solomon was convicted of sin for his marriages. Indeed he was, but this was specifically related to some foreign women he’d married later in life who he’d been specifically warned not to marry. He was never condemned in any way for multiple wives, the age of marriage of any of them, or for agreeing to an arranged marriage. Nor for that matter, was anyone else in the Bible ever condemned for any of these.

Oh, what about Mary and Joseph? Was Jesus raised by a pervert? In all likelihood Joseph was in his 20’s or 30’s and Mary was about 13 or 14. For that matter was David a pervert? Solomon? Want to take a guess how old Moses and Zipporah were when they got married? Tell me, if Abraham, Moses, David, Solomon, Joseph, or any number of other Biblical patriarchs who married girls half their age or had multiple wives showed up at your church would they be welcomed? Or would they be turned over to the authorities as perverts?

Perhaps the question for us Bible believers then is do we believe in this Bible of ours or not? Unless we edit our Bibles how can any of us who believe in the Old Testament be too critical of the FLDS for these things?

I’m not suggesting that we should return to polygynous men marrying 14-year-old girls in arranged marriages, but I do think we need to be cautious about how judgmental we are of others. The FLDS may in fact be more Biblical than us.