What's Up Doc?

Two Basic Truths that Govern All Behavior

2012-02-03T09:59:00.000-05:00

http://www.ubu-ministries.org/2012/02/two-basic-truths-that-govern-all.html

Here is a post I wrote today for UBU.

By the way, my ability to play guitar is returning pretty well after my nerve damage two years ago. I was ready to give up on ever being able to play again, but it seems persistence with chiropractic and adding raw dairy to my diet have helped a lot.

I think I am finally going to be well enough and settled enough to start holding public meetings again.

Doc

Oh Kita Kazoo - I Love You!

2011-12-14T14:05:00.000-05:00

Here we are this morning. It's our 27th Anniversary. For me the saying "The 3rd Time's The Charm" could never be truer. I hope that other people who find they have made dumb choices never give up on finding true love. Hard to believe...it seems like we just met, yet also like we've been together forever. I know Kita can't honestly say the same, but I have never, ever, for one single moment regretted marrying her. I love her more every day and have always felt that way. She is the best and probably only true friend I have ever had or would want to have. We have 6 great kids and 11 wonderful grandchildren. I adore them all - and especially you, my sweet honey Kita. I can't imagine how sad I would be with out you. You are the most wonderful person I could ever want to know. I could never express how grateful I am that you want to be with me. I love you.
Happy Anniversary Honey!

Americans: Undecided About God?

2011-12-12T15:22:00.000-05:00

Opinion
Americans: Undecided About God?
By ERIC WEINER
Published: December 10, 2011

THE holidays are upon us again — it sounds vaguely aggressive, as if the holidays were some sort of mugger, or overly enthusiastic lover — and so it’s time to stick a thermometer deep in our souls and take our spiritual temperature (between trips to the mall, of course).
Enlarge This Image
Esther Pearl Watson

For some of us, the season affords an opportunity to reconnect with our religious heritage. For others, myself included, it’s a time to shake our heads over the sad state of our national conversation about God, and wish there were another way.

For a nation of talkers and self-confessors, we are terrible when it comes to talking about God. The discourse has been co-opted by the True Believers, on one hand, and Angry Atheists on the other. What about the rest of us?

The rest of us, it turns out, constitute the nation’s fastest-growing religious demographic. We are the Nones, the roughly 12 percent of people who say they have no religious affiliation at all. The percentage is even higher among young people; at least a quarter are Nones.

Apparently, a growing number of Americans are running from organized religion, but by no means running from God. On average 93 percent of those surveyed say they believe in God or a higher power; this holds true for most Nones — just 7 percent of whom describe themselves as atheists, according to a survey by Trinity College.

Nones are the undecided of the religious world. We drift spiritually and dabble in everything from Sufism to Kabbalah to, yes, Catholicism and Judaism.

Why the rise of the Nones? David Campbell and Robert Putnam, of the University of Notre Dame and the Harvard Kennedy School, respectively, think politics is to blame. Their idea is that we’ve mixed politics and religion so completely that many simply opt out of both; apparently they are reluctant to claim a religious affiliation because they don’t want the political one that comes along with it.

We are more religiously polarized than ever. In my secular, urban and urbane world, God is rarely spoken of, except in mocking, derisive tones. It is acceptable to cite the latest academic study on, say, happiness or, even better, whip out a brain scan, but God? He is for suckers, and Republicans.

I used to be that way, too, until a health scare and the onset of middle age created a crisis of faith, and I ventured to the other side. I quickly discovered that I didn’t fit there, either. I am not a True Believer. I am a rationalist. I believe the Enlightenment was a very good thing, and don’t wish to return to an age of raw superstition.

We Nones may not believe in God, but we hope to one day. We have a dog in this hunt.

Nones don’t get hung up on whether a religion is “true” or not, and instead subscribe to William James’s maxim that “truth is what works.” If a certain spiritual practice makes us better people — more loving, less angry — then it is necessarily good, and by extension “true.” (We believe that G. K. Chesterton got it right when he said: “It is the test of a good religion whether you can joke about it.”)

By that measure, there is very little “good religion” out there. Put bluntly: God is not a lot of fun these days. Many of us don’t view religion so generously. All we see is an angry God. He is constantly judging and smiting, and so are his followers. No wonder so many Americans are enamored of the Dalai Lama. He laughs, often and well.

Precious few of our religious leaders laugh. They shout. God is not an exclamation point, though. He is, at his best, a semicolon, connecting people, and generating what Aldous Huxley called “human grace.” Somewhere along the way, we’ve lost sight of this.

Religion and politics, though often spoken about in the same breath, are, of course, fundamentally different. Politics is, by definition, a public activity. Though religion contains large public components, it is at core a personal affair. It is the relationship we have with ourselves or, as the British philosopher Alfred North Whitehead said, “What the individual does with his solitariness.” There lies the problem: how to talk about the private nature of religion publicly.

What is the solution? The answer, I think, lies in the sort of entrepreneurial spirit that has long defined America, including religious America.

We need a Steve Jobs of religion. Someone (or ones) who can invent not a new religion but, rather, a new way of being religious. Like Mr. Jobs’s creations, this new way would be straightforward and unencumbered and absolutely intuitive. Most important, it would be highly interactive. I imagine a religious space that celebrates doubt, encourages experimentation and allows one to utter the word God without embarrassment. A religious operating system for the Nones among us. And for all of us.

Eric Weiner is the author, most recently, of “Man Seeks God: My Flirtations with the Divine.”

Three Kinds of Mormons - What Kind is Mitt Romney?

2011-12-06T16:34:00.001-05:00

Ok, I snatched this from a post I made in 2007 about Mitt Romney's 2008 bid for the Presidency.
In addition to describing Mitt, It also outlines the basic 3 types of Mormons.
Today, In answering some other minister's question about if Mitt's Mormonism should be a factor in considering his suitablility for the Presidency, I shared some of the articles I wrote about him in 2007 - still just as relevant today. And I thought an excerpt from this post would also be of value (to someone - if anyone actually reads my blog - besides the FBI of course!). note: [Gordon Hinkley died so is no longer the LDS Prophet - now it's Thomas Monson, so please don't jump on my case for referencing Hinkley as he was the "prophet" when the post was written - thanks.)
If you want to read my other posts about Mitt, just put his name (or Mormonism) in the search engine or scroll through the posts on Religion.

I've had plenty of liars in my life, especially in Utah and of course everywhere that I find Mormons, since lying is a critical component of their "religion" which has publicly established their own doctrines of "Lying for the Lord" and "Beating the Devil at His own Game" since the beginning. (that is part of why "the Church" will excommunicate - which means you are kicked out of Heaven forever and they tell God that He is not allowed to love or bless you, your wife (or wives), children, grandchildren for all Eternity, except in some cases where in their most charitable moment "the Church" will allow your relatives to remain in Mormon captivity IF they will deny you and shun you forever.

Well, that's the Mormon way!

And that is one of many reasons to hold Mitt Romney's Mormonism against him as a candidate for President.

There are three kinds of Mormons only.

It's pretty easy to see what kind Mitt is.

There is the kind that is a "TBM" True Believing Mormon, which is what I was in my 40 years as a Mormon and that kind is very, very rare. In fact, since Kita and I are no longer in "the Church", I don't know if there really are any "real" TBM's, though it's politically essential to claim to be one.

By the way, I was officially excommunicated (kicked out) of "the Church" for telling my Bishop (when he posed the question and demanded an answer) that if I had to choose between obeying Jesus and obeying Gordon Hinkley (the current Mormon church President) that I would choose Jesus.

My wife, Kita, though never interviewed at all - was excommunicated at the same High Council Meeting (with neither of us in attendance) just for being married to me!

We just got a letter telling us that we were Kicked out of Heaven - with love! When I find it in my storage, I'm going to frame it and hang it proudly.

Well, she is glad about it too. Getting kicked out of the Mormon Church is a a real blessing and also a real achievement.
[I would like to add that when you are kicked out of Mormonism, they claim to take away, not just your membership, but also your marriage, your spiritual relationship with your children, all the blessings you have ever received, your official relationship with God - revoke the forgiveness of your sins that comes as a result of your baptism and your ability to have a relationship with the Holy Spirit - pretty serious stuff. They then publicly warn in a Stake Conference which is a quarterly meeting of 6 to 10 congregations that you are a spiritual danger and you and your children are unfit to associate with - though it is acceptable to pray for you to "return to the church".]

Too many people have found that "the Church" (I have to write it that way since they claim that they are the "only true and living church" and the "only authorized representatives of Christ and God", and the "only way to Heaven" and even though they are trying to downplay it nowadays, they still believe and quietly teach that "all other churches are of the Devil", in fact one of the things I consider most evil about Mormonism is their constant teaching that anyone who is not for Mormonism is a servant of Satan and any criticism of Mormonism is also Satanic, thus only Mormon sanctioned and mostly Mormon written literature is endorsed) - well, I know these side notes get lengthy, but you know it was delving into the details of Mormonism that led me to understand that "the Church" was actually Anti-Christ (as is most "organized" religion) and it is the failure of nearly all Mormons to study their religion in any depth at all that allows them to still be part of it, so thanks to those who bear with me on it - if there are indeed any readers out there at all - so most people find they cannot get "the Church" to remove their names from the church records because "the Church" is all about numbers.

Even after several Jewish Holocaust (yes, there were other Holocausts besides the Nazi/Jewish one) groups got "the Church" to remove Anne Frank from the church records, the Mormons re-baptized her, making her Mormon again (and counting her a "Member") at least 15 times, as they did with Adolph Hitler, though surprisingly, no group seems to be opposed to Hitler being a Mormon in good (though dead) standing.

In the Mormon Temples, that is what they do, baptize, ordain to Mormon priesthood and marry every dead person (and living ones too) that they can get the names of.

So, in Mormonism - and even though "the Church" no longer claims (though they still believe it) that one single drop of "black African" blood makes you a descendant of Cain (the supposed first murderer), thus making you unworthy of association with God's people and ineligible for entrance to (the highest) Heaven, they do still believe - and this would be a good question for Mitt Romney - that Adolph Hitler is Anne Frank's Priesthood Leader!

Hey, that brings us to the second kind of Mormon - since Mitt is obviously not a TBM.

There is the Uncertain Semi-believer. These people comprise a large bulk of active and nearly all in-active Mormons. They don't really know anything much about Mormonism, except that it claims to be "the only True Church" and that according to Mormonism, if they don't attend their meetings and pay their tithing they won't go to Heaven, will never get to associate with their family members for eternity, have polygamist sex (or any sex at all) after death, be Gods over their own worlds populated with their superior DNA and will basically be slaves to those who do attend church and pay tithing.

Very few Mormons understand that according to Mormon theology, only people (Mormon people) who have had literal face to face association (not dreams or visions) with Jesus and then deny it can go to Hell, which they term "Outer Darkness".

All the other people, bad Mormons and non-Mormons will go to one of two lesser Heavens where they will serve the "good" Mormon inhabitants (like Hitler) of the Highest "Celestial Degree" Heaven - FOREVER.

They serve from "below" as they are forever unworthy to actually enter the holy place, they never get to actually see God (their father) and only the people in the "second degree" heaven get to see Jesus if He feels like slumming for an afternoon in their pitiful "lower" heaven.

Since the Mormon Church constantly re-writes their books, scriptures and history, especially now that they are trying to convince "Christians" that they are the same as them - only "better", you really need to read from 1st editions of their histories and other literature.

The best, in my opinion, short history that dives right in to Real Mormonism is the book A Marvelous Work and a Wonder, written as a textbook for Mormon Missionaries by now dead Mormon "Apostle" LeGrand Richards when he was a Mission President (and Apostle) in the 1960's.

This book was accepted for years and years by "the Church" as a great missionary tool and is one of few books to be officially endorsed by the Presidency (essentially meaning by God and Jesus) of "the Church".

Anyway, this second kind of questionable believer, knows just enough to be afraid and even though they often hate the church (especially if they live in Utah) for it's anti-Christ, Nazi-like behavior toward them, they still have this nagging uncertainty - what if it is true, and I am in the power of the Devil?

Too many people go to their graves in this condition and live miserable lives, attending church, knowing they really don't "qualify" (which is also pointed out regularly in annual temple recommend interviews - not needing to be pointed out if you don't qualify for such an interview [attendance and tithing]) or not attending church and knowing deep inside that they are bound for eternal slavery and misery, knowing they could have enjoyed a greater glory, but they just couldn't get their asses out of bed on Sunday and fork over their paycheck to receive it.

I don't think that is Mitt either.

So there is a 3rd kind of Mormon - the Mitt kind.
This is the Mormon who is - though not believing a bit of Mormonism - a super Mormon - or if not a super Mormon, at least a full attendance, full tithe paying and temple recommend holding (you don't actually have to attend the temple, but you do have to have a current recommend) Mormon "in good standing" - for the POLITICAL ADVANTAGES.

I was a Mormon in Detroit when Mitt's dad George Romney was the Stake President there and I was quite familiar with the Romney family.

A "Stake" in Mormonism is a geographical group of congregations (usually 6 - 10). Each congregation is governed by a Bishop which is equivalent to a Pastor, who has two councilors and the "bishoprics" thus comprised are governed and answer to the Stake President and his two councilors.

So, George was Governor of Michigan, President of American Motors (Rambler, AMC) and Stake President of the Detroit Stake, (later renamed the Bloomfield Hills, Michigan Stake).

George as I recall him, was a blow-hard, bigot and hypocrite. I used to get so mad every time I attended quarterly stake conference and had to listen to him pontificate and then prove he was too good to do the work he had just exhorted the congregation to do.

As an adult, I once had a big blowout with George (by now a Regional Representative of the Twelve Apostles) when he had a tantrum over me assigning a keynote speaker position to someone other than him and giving him a smaller room to speak in at a "single adult" conference I had put together.

George assailed me in the lobby over my disrespect for him in giving him a lesser audience and less prestigious position on our speaker roster.

Since I considered him a hypocrite and a fake anyway and had spent months trying to get him to commit to participate in this church "single adult" conference anyway, I basically took his hostile energy and turned it right back on him and showed George and a small audience that I was fully capable and unafraid to "tear him a new one" - though finding a spot to tear a new asshole in a total asshole is quite a challenge - but I guess Jesus helped me cause I did an exemplary job of it and I was thrilled that I got the opportunity to tell King George what I thought of him.

My wife Kita actually went to church each Sunday in the same congregation as the Romneys and Mitt's mom Lenore (also a Michigan state senator) was her Sunday School teacher for years. She has fond memories of Lenore - so I guess that's where Mitt's soft-side comes from - his dad was a real "hell-brand", but I always disliked Lenore, I guess just because she was married to George.

Anyway, I had a passing acquaintance with Mitt and his brother Scott. I didn't know the rest. I worked with Scott for over a year as he served as the attorney processing the sale of my father's Detroit chiropractic office after his death. Scott and I spent most of our time bashing heads over his Nazi approach to selling the business. I kept insisting on removing roadblocks to the sales agreement and he kept making more and more. Our sale had gone from friendly to antagonistic because of Scott, but I have found over the years that he really was doing a good job of being a lawyer and if you really want to screw someone and make sure they can't screw you back, he is just the kind of guy you should want on your team.

Of course I was all about Jesus and the Golden Rule and being friendly and all that, so I couldn't understand his evil lawyer ways. Unfortunately, the provisions he added that I removed and all the hostility that his demands engendered, did eventually end up hurting my mom in the transaction, but I believe that Romney planted the seeds of evil and the hostile feelings in the buyers mind that ended up hurting - well, just my widowed mom - Scott made just as much and the more "minutes" (hours and hours) he spent on making things harder, the more he made.

If you understand the lawyer world of "billable hours" (minutes) you will understand this.

I remember another Mormon attorney I used here in Detroit who actually used to appologise to me for his firms insistence that he call me every week ($85 for a 5 minute phone call) just to tell me that there had been "no changes". Even though he knew we were dirt poor, and trying to get some legitimacy for my daughter Emily his apologies still cost me $85 every week and after over a year of his "help" and insistence that only an attorney could get what I needed done at all, I finally took care of the problem myself for $15!

Oh, back to Mitt.
He is a "Political" Mormon.
Anyone who has spent even a month or two in Utah (NuCal), needs no explanation about how "Church Standing" plays such an integral part in employment and social opportunity.
I used to get so frustrated in Detroit when black people would play the "black card" - it was, and too often still is the first thing out of too many black mouths when they don't get their way - oh, I just despise that - but in Utah - the nearly entirely "white" population does the same thing with the "Mormon" card - but they do it in reverse.

I mean, when you apply for a job, it is routine to ask (even though it is illegal) "Are you a member of "the Church"? If you say no - you had better be the "gee whiz kid", and sometimes even that isn't enough - or forget about it.

Utah and Mormonism has such a black and white perspective that anyone who doesn't attend the Mormon church every Sunday is automatically assigned "Devil's assistant".

People stand up in the monthly testimony meeting (well it used to be very, very common but now they discourage it - in fact they outline what a "testimony" is and how to deliver it) still and cry over how they "left the church" but now have come back, and then reveal that they missed one, ONE meeting! Oh the power of a CULT!

One good lesson from Mitt's dad, who interestingly lost his very good chance to be President by for once telling the truth, is that for Mormons, running for political office is a leg up to power and position much higher and better paying than any elected position.

It doesn't really matter if you win or lose. If you "represent" the church well in your campaign and visit Utah and suck up (in Hinkley's private office) you become a candidate for Church Office, and not some little Bishop or Stake President office - something cool and life-long like a Regional Representative of the Twelve Apostles which if in that position you are a good little soldier, you might get promoted to be an actual Apostle and if you get that promotion and outlive all the other Apostles promoted ahead of you (it's a seniority system) you get to be (and this is every Mormon's dream (to be or be married to) THE PROPHET!

Believe me, when I was a Mormon Missionary (sorry about that) in the 1970's, every missionary had the same goal for after their mission - to marry Marie Osmond and become the Prophet! Hey, it's true! We all knew we were Fore-ordained to both!

Well, the leaders in the Church, despite the fact that they are usually already multi-millionaires already - remember - big money = spirituality in Mormonism - so riches are God's stamp of approval on you, but in High Church Callings, you get an "allowance from the church" even though you don't need it, and get to be placed on several boards of directors of the church's hundreds of businesses for which you get paid millions yearly for your attendance at the annual picnic (and photo op) - for life!

This is what Mitt is really after, I think.

He knows he won't be elected President of the United States, but he has a loftier goal - to be President of the Mormon Church.

Don't believe me? Enjoy your ignorance!

Not Selling Freedom - Music Video

2011-11-16T15:06:00.000-05:00

The Untied State of America

2011-11-16T14:03:00.002-05:00

Great repost by Kita Kazoo. http://ktlwry.blogspot.com/2011/11/un-occupy-across-america-interesting.html?showComment=1321469390220#c6305939151652571113

I believe that war has been declared on the general population here in America and around the world. It would be nice to avoid violence, but violent action with FBI directed military tactics have already been set as a standard. We do need a popular uprising against local, state and federal government that is actively and arrogantly destroying America and disregarding constitutional protections and breaking laws with impunity.

This is all the result of Friedmanite Reaganomics and the corporate Imperialism that has taken over the entire world. We should all be ashamed to have let this happen and expect a high price to be paid to restore our blood-bought freedoms.

I think that citizens should be preparing for even more aggressive actions against the general population and be prepared to take more aggressive actions themselves to ensure the security of the people from the abuses of government and government agents.

The Police should revert to again being Peace Officers and protect the rights of the people and not establish themselves as enemies of peace and freedom.

Strategy for Occupy Movement

2011-11-14T12:11:00.000-05:00

I am all for peaceful resolution to any disagreement, but there are times when more aggressive action becomes unavoidable due to the total disregard for and attack on human and civil rights.

Why does it take violence to move people to action? And why do people feel they can make progress against violent law breaking aggressors with so called peaceful protest?

All the police actions against the right to freely assemble lately is very disturbing. With the success of social networking I think the suppression of civil rights could be easily curtailed.

1) To maintain the success of occupation, persons willing to occupy could be organized into groups that would schedule rotations to relieve occupiers, so that there would be consistency in numbers without overwhelming participants.

2) Some occupiers could be organized to go door to door in residential, business and campuses to enlist support and encourage drop-in occupiers and pledges to participate in a occupy rotation program.

I think that many supporters are discouraged by the idea that they must spend every day (and night) in the occupied zones, when in reality if more people spent just a day or even a few hours in solidarity it would be just as effective.

3) In addition to an established core occupy group (in rotation) a committment to secondary occupation could be organised to be "on call".

4) The "on call" protesters could be brought in for regular shows of increased numbers, but also could in the case of police attacks be called in to form an outer ring of protest, leaving police surrounded by numbers too large to resist.

5) Occupation of offices of government that are actively engaged in attempting to thwart the civil rights of the protesters.

I see these police actions as actions of war against the American people and feel that a peaceful response will not last in the face of continuing government attacks.

Those who would assert their civil rights must be prepared (with a defined plan of action) to respond in kind if necessary to defend their rights.

Government and agents of government do not deserve a peaceful response to brutal suppression.

The rights we exercise were gained by aggression. If the protectors of those rights turn against the citizenry, it is reasonable to expect aggressive action to be necessary to secure those blood bought freedoms.

A war of words is one thing, but when police begin to physically attack, gas and shoot protesters, arresting them and destroying their property as they do when they "clear" encampments, it may be time to respond in the manner dictated by the aggressors.

I feel the movement should therefore address the issue of security and implement plans to contain and defuse those who violate the Constitution and attack our citizens exercising their freedom.

It is sad that at times protest is not sufficient to get the message across and freedom must be maintained in the same manner as it was originally secured.

I have not heard it mentioned in any news reporting, but it should be suspected that government agitators have infiltrated the occupy groups to start trouble and turn public opinion against this movement. These people should be isolated and exposed.

I have noticed in news reports of foreign protests the protesters paining their signs on full body riot shields which are very effective against batons and projectiles and make breaking police lines very easy.

Protesters should not allow themselves to be contained by fencing or other means.

Tear down the walls.

Contain the aggressors.
Occupy the suppressors.

If this movement continues, it will not be long before some protesters are murdered by the government.

We should not be found unprepared. If the police wear riot gear and carry weapons, perhaps the protesters should recognize the obvious intentions and should follow suit.

When the police surround the protesters, the protesters should surround the police. The strength of numbers is on the side of the protesters - who only want to exercise their constitutionally protected freedom to assemble. They also have a constitutional right to bear arms, make citizen arrests, detain aggressors and otherwise be secure in their persons. It's the LAW.

John Boehner tries to fool America with fake history and jobs talk.

2011-09-17T01:49:00.000-04:00

The Speaker talks as if he doesn't realize it was Republicans like Nixon, Reagan, Bush and Republicans in Congress that not only created the outsourcing and restriction of American Labor and Industry, but also refuse to act in a bipartisan mode, instead dedicating themselves to failure of "the Democratic Party" via the destruction of America and abuse of the Constitution. Boehner has the temerity to say, "The responsibility for fixing this toxic environment for job creation is a bipartisan one. " What a sick joke. He obviously thinks regular people are just stupid. His party seems to relish the suffering of their neighbors especially if it benefits their political contributors. Read his whole "jobs" speech here. https://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/16/us/politics/jobs-speech-by-house-speaker-john-boehner.html?src=recg

Long but worth reading every last word.

2011-09-13T15:05:00.000-04:00

Goodbye to All That: Reflections of a GOP Operative Who Left the Cult

Saturday 3 September 2011

by: Mike Lofgren, Truthout | News Analysis

(Photo: Carolyn Tiry / Flickr [3])

Barbara Stanwyck: "We're both rotten!"
Fred MacMurray: "Yeah - only you're a little more rotten." -"Double Indemnity" (1944)
Those lines of dialogue from a classic film noir sum up the state of the two political parties in contemporary America. Both parties are rotten - how could they not be, given the complete infestation of the political system by corporate money on a scale that now requires a presidential candidate to raise upwards of a billion dollars to be competitive in the general election? Both parties are captives to corporate loot. The main reason the Democrats' health care bill will be a budget buster once it fully phases in is the Democrats' rank capitulation to corporate interests - no single-payer system, in order to mollify the insurers; and no negotiation of drug prices, a craven surrender to Big Pharma.
But both parties are not rotten in quite the same way. The Democrats have their share of machine politicians, careerists, corporate bagmen, egomaniacs and kooks. Nothing, however, quite matches the modern GOP.
To those millions of Americans who have finally begun paying attention to politics and watched with exasperation the tragicomedy of the debt ceiling extension, it may have come as a shock that the Republican Party is so full of lunatics. To be sure, the party, like any political party on earth, has always had its share of crackpots, like Robert K. Dornan or William E. Dannemeyer. But the crackpot outliers of two decades ago have become the vital center today: Steve King, Michele Bachman (now a leading presidential candidate as well), Paul Broun, Patrick McHenry, Virginia Foxx, Louie Gohmert, Allen West. The Congressional directory now reads like a casebook of lunacy.
It was this cast of characters and the pernicious ideas they represent that impelled me to end a nearly 30-year career as a professional staff member on Capitol Hill. A couple of months ago, I retired; but I could see as early as last November that the Republican Party would use the debt limit vote, an otherwise routine legislative procedure that has been used 87 times since the end of World War II, in order to concoct an entirely artificial fiscal crisis. Then, they would use that fiscal crisis to get what they wanted, by literally holding the US and global economies as hostages.
The debt ceiling extension is not the only example of this sort of political terrorism. Republicans were willing to lay off 4,000 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) employees, 70,000 private construction workers and let FAA safety inspectors work without pay, in fact, forcing them to pay for their own work-related travel - how prudent is that? - in order to strong arm some union-busting provisions into the FAA reauthorization.
Everyone knows that in a hostage situation, the reckless and amoral actor has the negotiating upper hand over the cautious and responsible actor because the latter is actually concerned about the life of the hostage, while the former does not care. This fact, which ought to be obvious, has nevertheless caused confusion among the professional pundit class, which is mostly still stuck in the Bob Dole era in terms of its orientation. For instance, Ezra Klein wrote [4] of his puzzlement over the fact that while House Republicans essentially won the debt ceiling fight, enough of them were sufficiently dissatisfied that they might still scuttle the deal. Of course they might - the attitude of many freshman Republicans to national default was "bring it on!"
It should have been evident to clear-eyed observers that the Republican Party is becoming less and less like a traditional political party in a representative democracy and becoming more like an apocalyptic cult, or one of the intensely ideological authoritarian parties of 20th century Europe. This trend has several implications, none of them pleasant.
In his "Manual of Parliamentary Practice," Thomas Jefferson wrote that it is less important that every rule and custom of a legislature be absolutely justifiable in a theoretical sense, than that they should be generally acknowledged and honored by all parties. These include unwritten rules, customs and courtesies that lubricate the legislative machinery and keep governance a relatively civilized procedure. The US Senate has more complex procedural rules than any other legislative body in the world; many of these rules are contradictory, and on any given day, the Senate parliamentarian may issue a ruling that contradicts earlier rulings on analogous cases.
The only thing that can keep the Senate functioning is collegiality and good faith. During periods of political consensus, for instance, the World War II and early post-war eras, the Senate was a "high functioning" institution: filibusters were rare and the body was legislatively productive. Now, one can no more picture the current Senate producing the original Medicare Act than the old Supreme Soviet having legislated the Bill of Rights.
Far from being a rarity, virtually every bill, every nominee for Senate confirmation and every routine procedural motion is now subject to a Republican filibuster. Under the circumstances, it is no wonder that Washington is gridlocked: legislating has now become war minus the shooting, something one could have observed 80 years ago in the Reichstag of the Weimar Republic. As Hannah Arendt observed, a disciplined minority of totalitarians can use the instruments of democratic government to undermine democracy itself.
John P. Judis sums up [5] the modern GOP this way:

"Over the last four decades, the Republican Party has transformed from a loyal opposition into an insurrectionary party that flouts the law when it is in the majority and threatens disorder when it is the minority. It is the party of Watergate and Iran-Contra, but also of the government shutdown in 1995 and the impeachment trial of 1999. If there is an earlier American precedent for today's Republican Party, it is the antebellum Southern Democrats of John Calhoun who threatened to nullify, or disregard, federal legislation they objected to and who later led the fight to secede from the union over slavery."

A couple of years ago, a Republican committee staff director told me candidly (and proudly) what the method was to all this obstruction and disruption. Should Republicans succeed in obstructing the Senate from doing its job, it would further lower Congress's generic favorability rating among the American people. By sabotaging the reputation of an institution of government, the party that is programmatically against government would come out the relative winner.
A deeply cynical tactic, to be sure, but a psychologically insightful one that plays on the weaknesses both of the voting public and the news media. There are tens of millions of low-information voters who hardly know which party controls which branch of government, let alone which party is pursuing a particular legislative tactic. These voters' confusion over who did what allows them to form the conclusion that "they are all crooks," and that "government is no good," further leading them to think, "a plague on both your houses" and "the parties are like two kids in a school yard." This ill-informed public cynicism, in its turn, further intensifies the long-term decline in public trust in government that has been taking place since the early 1960s - a distrust that has been stoked by Republican rhetoric at every turn ("Government is the problem," declared Ronald Reagan in 1980).
The media are also complicit in this phenomenon. Ever since the bifurcation of electronic media into a more or less respectable "hard news" segment and a rabidly ideological talk radio and cable TV political propaganda arm, the "respectable" media have been terrified of any criticism for perceived bias. Hence, they hew to the practice of false evenhandedness. Paul Krugman has skewered [6] this tactic as being the "centrist cop-out." "I joked long ago," he says, "that if one party declared that the earth was flat, the headlines would read 'Views Differ on Shape of Planet.'"
Inside-the-Beltway wise guy Chris Cillizza merely proves Krugman right in his Washington Post analysis of "winners and losers" in the debt ceiling impasse. He wrote [7] that the institution of Congress was a big loser in the fracas, which is, of course, correct, but then he opined: "Lawmakers - bless their hearts - seem entirely unaware of just how bad they looked during this fight and will almost certainly spend the next few weeks (or months) congratulating themselves on their tremendous magnanimity." Note how the pundit's ironic deprecation falls like the rain on the just and unjust alike, on those who precipitated the needless crisis and those who despaired of it. He seems oblivious that one side - or a sizable faction of one side - has deliberately attempted to damage the reputation of Congress to achieve its political objectives.
This constant drizzle of "there the two parties go again!" stories out of the news bureaus, combined with the hazy confusion of low-information voters, means that the long-term Republican strategy of undermining confidence in our democratic institutions has reaped electoral dividends. The United States has nearly the lowest voter participation among Western democracies; this, again, is a consequence of the decline of trust in government institutions - if government is a racket and both parties are the same, why vote? And if the uninvolved middle declines to vote, it increases the electoral clout of a minority that is constantly being whipped into a lather by three hours daily of Rush Limbaugh or Fox News. There were only 44 million Republican voters in the 2010 mid-term elections, but they effectively canceled the political results of the election of President Obama by 69 million voters.
This tactic of inducing public distrust of government is not only cynical, it is schizophrenic. For people who profess to revere the Constitution, it is strange that they so caustically denigrate the very federal government that is the material expression of the principles embodied in that document. This is not to say that there is not some theoretical limit to the size or intrusiveness of government; I would be the first to say there are such limits, both fiscal and Constitutional. But most Republican officeholders seem strangely uninterested in the effective repeal of Fourth Amendment protections by the Patriot Act, the weakening of habeas corpus and self-incrimination protections in the public hysteria following 9/11 or the unpalatable fact that the United States has the largest incarcerated population of any country on earth. If anything, they would probably opt for more incarcerated persons, as imprisonment is a profit center for the prison privatization industry, which is itself a growth center for political contributions to these same politicians.[1] Instead, they prefer to rail against those government programs that actually help people. And when a program is too popular to attack directly, like Medicare or Social Security, they prefer to undermine it by feigning an agonized concern about the deficit. That concern, as we shall see, is largely fictitious.
Undermining Americans' belief in their own institutions of self-government remains a prime GOP electoral strategy. But if this technique falls short of producing Karl Rove's dream of 30 years of unchallengeable one-party rule (as all such techniques always fall short of achieving the angry and embittered true believer's New Jerusalem), there are other even less savory techniques upon which to fall back. Ever since Republicans captured the majority in a number of state legislatures last November, they have systematically attempted to make it more difficult to vote: by onerous voter ID requirements (in Wisconsin, Republicans have legislated photo IDs while simultaneously shutting Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) offices in Democratic constituencies while at the same time lengthening the hours of operation of DMV offices in GOP constituencies); by narrowing registration periods; and by residency requirements that may disenfranchise university students.
This legislative assault is moving in a diametrically opposed direction to 200 years of American history, when the arrow of progress pointed toward more political participation by more citizens. Republicans are among the most shrill in self-righteously lecturing other countries about the wonders of democracy; exporting democracy (albeit at the barrel of a gun) to the Middle East was a signature policy of the Bush administration. But domestically, they don't want those people voting.
You can probably guess who those people are. Above all, anyone not likely to vote Republican. As Sarah Palin would imply, the people who are not Real Americans. Racial minorities. Immigrants. Muslims. Gays. Intellectuals. Basically, anyone who doesn't look, think, or talk like the GOP base. This must account, at least to some degree, for their extraordinarily vitriolic hatred of President Obama. I have joked in the past that the main administration policy that Republicans object to is Obama's policy of being black.[2] Among the GOP base, there is constant harping about somebody else, some "other," who is deliberately, assiduously and with malice aforethought subverting the Good, the True and the Beautiful: Subversives. Commies. Socialists. Ragheads. Secular humanists. Blacks. Fags. Feminazis. The list may change with the political needs of the moment, but they always seem to need a scapegoat to hate and fear.
It is not clear to me how many GOP officeholders believe this reactionary and paranoid claptrap. I would bet that most do not. But they cynically feed the worst instincts of their fearful and angry low-information political base with a nod and a wink. During the disgraceful circus of the "birther" issue, Republican politicians subtly stoked the fires of paranoia by being suggestively equivocal - "I take the president at his word" - while never unambiguously slapping down the myth. John Huntsman was the first major GOP figure forthrightly to refute the birther calumny - albeit after release of the birth certificate.
I do not mean to place too much emphasis on racial animus in the GOP. While it surely exists, it is also a fact that Republicans think that no Democratic president could conceivably be legitimate. Republicans also regarded Bill Clinton as somehow, in some manner, twice fraudulently elected (well do I remember the elaborate conspiracy theories that Republicans traded among themselves). Had it been Hillary Clinton, rather than Barack Obama, who had been elected in 2008, I am certain we would now be hearing, in lieu of the birther myths, conspiracy theories about Vince Foster's alleged murder.
The reader may think that I am attributing Svengali-like powers to GOP operatives able to manipulate a zombie base to do their bidding. It is more complicated than that. Historical circumstances produced the raw material: the deindustrialization and financialization of America since about 1970 has spawned an increasingly downscale white middle class - without job security (or even without jobs), with pensions and health benefits evaporating and with their principal asset deflating in the collapse of the housing bubble. Their fears are not imaginary; their standard of living is shrinking.
What do the Democrats offer these people? Essentially nothing. Democratic Leadership Council-style "centrist" Democrats were among the biggest promoters of disastrous trade deals in the 1990s that outsourced jobs abroad: NAFTA, World Trade Organization, permanent most-favored-nation status for China. At the same time, the identity politics/lifestyle wing of the Democratic Party was seen as a too illegal immigrant-friendly by downscaled and outsourced whites.[3]
While Democrats temporized, or even dismissed the fears of the white working class as racist or nativist, Republicans went to work. To be sure, the business wing of the Republican Party consists of the most energetic outsourcers, wage cutters and hirers of sub-minimum wage immigrant labor to be found anywhere on the globe. But the faux-populist wing of the party, knowing the mental compartmentalization that occurs in most low-information voters, played on the fears of that same white working class to focus their anger on scapegoats that do no damage to corporations' bottom lines: instead of raising the minimum wage, let's build a wall on the Southern border (then hire a defense contractor to incompetently manage it). Instead of predatory bankers, it's evil Muslims. Or evil gays. Or evil abortionists.
How do they manage to do this? Because Democrats ceded the field. Above all, they do not understand language. Their initiatives are posed in impenetrable policy-speak: the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. The what? - can anyone even remember it? No wonder the pejorative "Obamacare" won out. Contrast that with the Republicans' Patriot Act. You're a patriot, aren't you? Does anyone at the GED level have a clue what a Stimulus Bill is supposed to be? Why didn't the White House call it the Jobs Bill and keep pounding on that theme?
You know that Social Security and Medicare are in jeopardy when even Democrats refer to them as entitlements. "Entitlement" has a negative sound in colloquial English: somebody who is "entitled" selfishly claims something he doesn't really deserve. Why not call them "earned benefits," which is what they are because we all contribute payroll taxes to fund them? That would never occur to the Democrats. Republicans don't make that mistake; they are relentlessly on message: it is never the "estate tax," it is the "death tax." Heaven forbid that the Walton family should give up one penny of its $86-billion fortune. All of that lucre is necessary to ensure that unions be kept out of Wal-Mart, that women employees not be promoted and that politicians be kept on a short leash.
It was not always thus. It would have been hard to find an uneducated farmer during the depression of the 1890s who did not have a very accurate idea about exactly which economic interests were shafting him. An unemployed worker in a breadline in 1932 would have felt little gratitude to the Rockefellers or the Mellons. But that is not the case in the present economic crisis. After a riot of unbridled greed such as the world has not seen since the conquistadors' looting expeditions and after an unprecedented broad and rapid transfer of wealth upward by Wall Street and its corporate satellites, where is the popular anger directed, at least as depicted in the media? At "Washington spending" - which has increased primarily to provide unemployment compensation, food stamps and Medicaid to those economically damaged by the previous decade's corporate saturnalia. Or the popular rage is harmlessly diverted against pseudo-issues: death panels, birtherism, gay marriage, abortion, and so on, none of which stands to dent the corporate bottom line in the slightest.
Thus far, I have concentrated on Republican tactics, rather than Republican beliefs, but the tactics themselves are important indicators of an absolutist, authoritarian mindset that is increasingly hostile to the democratic values of reason, compromise and conciliation. Rather, this mindset seeks polarizing division (Karl Rove has been very explicit that this is his principal campaign strategy), conflict and the crushing of opposition.
As for what they really believe, the Republican Party of 2011 believes in three principal tenets I have laid out below. The rest of their platform one may safely dismiss as window dressing:
1. The GOP cares solely and exclusively about its rich contributors. The party has built a whole catechism on the protection and further enrichment of America's plutocracy. Their caterwauling about deficit and debt is so much eyewash to con the public. Whatever else President Obama has accomplished (and many of his purported accomplishments are highly suspect), his $4-trillion deficit reduction package did perform the useful service of smoking out Republican hypocrisy. The GOP refused, because it could not abide so much as a one-tenth of one percent increase on the tax rates of the Walton family or the Koch brothers, much less a repeal of the carried interest rule that permits billionaire hedge fund managers to pay income tax at a lower effective rate than cops or nurses. Republicans finally settled on a deal that had far less deficit reduction - and even less spending reduction! - than Obama's offer, because of their iron resolution to protect at all costs our society's overclass.
Republicans have attempted to camouflage their amorous solicitude for billionaires with a fog of misleading rhetoric. John Boehner is fond of saying, "we won't raise anyone's taxes," as if the take-home pay of an Olive Garden waitress were inextricably bound up with whether Warren Buffett pays his capital gains as ordinary income or at a lower rate. Another chestnut is that millionaires and billionaires are "job creators." US corporations have just had their most profitable quarters in history; Apple, for one, is sitting on $76 billion in cash, more than the GDP of most countries. So, where are the jobs?
Another smokescreen is the "small business" meme, since standing up for Mom's and Pop's corner store is politically more attractive than to be seen shilling for a megacorporation. Raising taxes on the wealthy will kill small business' ability to hire; that is the GOP dirge every time Bernie Sanders or some Democrat offers an amendment to increase taxes on incomes above $1 million. But the number of small businesses that have a net annual income over a million dollars is de minimis, if not by definition impossible (as they would no longer be small businesses). And as data from the Center for Economic and Policy Research have shown, small businesses account for only 7.2 percent of total US employment, a significantly smaller share of total employment than in most Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries.
Likewise, Republicans have assiduously spread the myth that Americans are conspicuously overtaxed. But compared to other OECD countries, the effective rates of US taxation are among the lowest. In particular, they point to the top corporate income rate of 35 percent as being confiscatory Bolshevism. But again, the effective rate is much lower. Did GE pay 35 percent on 2010 profits of $14 billion? No, it paid zero.
When pressed, Republicans make up misleading statistics to "prove" that the America's fiscal burden is being borne by the rich and the rest of us are just freeloaders who don't appreciate that fact. "Half of Americans don't pay taxes" is a perennial meme. But what they leave out is that that statement refers to federal income taxes. There are millions of people who don't pay income taxes, but do contribute payroll taxes - among the most regressive forms of taxation. But according to GOP fiscal theology, payroll taxes don't count. Somehow, they have convinced themselves that since payroll taxes go into trust funds, they're not real taxes. Likewise, state and local sales taxes apparently don't count, although their effect on a poor person buying necessities like foodstuffs is far more regressive than on a millionaire.
All of these half truths and outright lies have seeped into popular culture via the corporate-owned business press. Just listen to CNBC for a few hours and you will hear most of them in one form or another. More important politically, Republicans' myths about taxation have been internalized by millions of economically downscale "values voters," who may have been attracted to the GOP for other reasons (which I will explain later), but who now accept this misinformation as dogma.
And when misinformation isn't enough to sustain popular support for the GOP's agenda, concealment is needed. One fairly innocuous provision in the Dodd-Frank financial reform bill requires public companies to make a more transparent disclosure of CEO compensation, including bonuses. Note that it would not limit the compensation, only require full disclosure. Republicans are hell-bent on repealing this provision. Of course; it would not serve Wall Street interests if the public took an unhealthy interest in the disparity of their own incomes as against that of a bank CEO. As Spencer Bachus, the Republican chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, says [8], "In Washington, the view is that the banks are to be regulated and my view is that Washington and the regulators are there to serve the banks."
2. They worship at the altar of Mars. While the me-too Democrats have set a horrible example of keeping up with the Joneses with respect to waging wars, they can never match GOP stalwarts such as John McCain or Lindsey Graham in their sheer, libidinous enthusiasm for invading other countries. McCain wanted to mix it up with Russia - a nuclear-armed state - during the latter's conflict with Georgia in 2008 (remember? - "we are all Georgians now," a slogan that did not, fortunately, catch on), while Graham has been persistently agitating for attacks on Iran and intervention in Syria. And these are not fringe elements of the party; they are the leading "defense experts," who always get tapped for the Sunday talk shows. About a month before Republicans began holding a gun to the head of the credit markets to get trillions of dollars of cuts, these same Republicans passed a defense appropriations bill that increased spending by $17 billion over the prior year's defense appropriation. To borrow Chris Hedges' formulation [9], war is the force that gives meaning to their lives.
A cynic might conclude that this militaristic enthusiasm is no more complicated than the fact that Pentagon contractors spread a lot of bribery money around Capitol Hill. That is true, but there is more to it than that. It is not necessarily even the fact that members of Congress feel they are protecting constituents' jobs. The wildly uneven concentration of defense contracts and military bases nationally means that some areas, like Washington, DC, and San Diego, are heavily dependent on Department of Defense (DOD) spending. But there are many more areas of the country whose net balance is negative: the citizenry pays more in taxes to support the Pentagon than it receives back in local contracts.
And the economic justification for Pentagon spending is even more fallacious when one considers that the $700 billion annual DOD budget creates comparatively few jobs. The days of Rosie the Riveter are long gone; most weapons projects now require very little touch labor. Instead, a disproportionate share is siphoned off into high-cost research and development (from which the civilian economy benefits little); exorbitant management expenditures, overhead and out-and-out padding; and, of course, the money that flows back into the coffers of political campaigns. A million dollars appropriated for highway construction would create two to three times as many jobs as a million dollars appropriated for Pentagon weapons procurement, so the jobs argument is ultimately specious.
Take away the cash nexus and there still remains a psychological predisposition toward war and militarism on the part of the GOP. This undoubtedly arises from a neurotic need to demonstrate toughness and dovetails perfectly with the belligerent tough-guy pose one constantly hears on right-wing talk radio. Militarism springs from the same psychological deficit that requires an endless series of enemies, both foreign and domestic.
The results of the last decade of unbridled militarism and the Democrats' cowardly refusal to reverse it[4], have been disastrous both strategically and fiscally. It has made the United States less prosperous, less secure and less free. Unfortunately, the militarism and the promiscuous intervention it gives rise to are only likely to abate when the Treasury is exhausted, just as it happened to the Dutch Republic and the British Empire.
3. Give me that old time religion. Pandering to fundamentalism is a full-time vocation in the GOP. Beginning in the 1970s, religious cranks ceased simply to be a minor public nuisance in this country and grew into the major element of the Republican rank and file. Pat Robertson's strong showing in the 1988 Iowa Caucus signaled the gradual merger of politics and religion in the party. The results are all around us: if the American people poll more like Iranians or Nigerians than Europeans or Canadians on questions of evolution versus creationism, scriptural inerrancy, the existence of angels and demons, and so forth, that result is due to the rise of the religious right, its insertion into the public sphere by the Republican Party and the consequent normalizing of formerly reactionary or quaint beliefs. Also around us is a prevailing anti-intellectualism and hostility to science; it is this group that defines "low-information voter" - or, perhaps, "misinformation voter."
The Constitution to the contrary notwithstanding, there is now a de facto religious test for the presidency: major candidates are encouraged (or coerced) to "share their feelings" about their "faith" in a revelatory speech; or, some televangelist like Rick Warren dragoons the candidates (as he did with Obama and McCain in 2008) to debate the finer points of Christology, with Warren himself, of course, as the arbiter. Politicized religion is also the sheet anchor of the culture wars. But how did the whole toxic stew of GOP beliefs - economic royalism, militarism and culture wars cum fundamentalism - come completely to displace an erstwhile civilized Eisenhower Republicanism?
It is my view that the rise of politicized religious fundamentalism (which is a subset of the decline of rational problem solving in America) may have been the key ingredient of the takeover of the Republican Party. For politicized religion provides a substrate of beliefs that rationalizes - at least in the minds of followers - all three of the GOP's main tenets.
Televangelists have long espoused the health-and-wealth/name-it-and-claim it gospel. If you are wealthy, it is a sign of God's favor. If not, too bad! But don't forget to tithe in any case. This rationale may explain why some economically downscale whites defend the prerogatives of billionaires.
The GOP's fascination with war is also connected with the fundamentalist mindset. The Old Testament abounds in tales of slaughter - God ordering the killing of the Midianite male infants and enslavement of the balance of the population, the divinely-inspired genocide of the Canaanites, the slaying of various miscreants with the jawbone of an ass - and since American religious fundamentalist seem to prefer the Old Testament to the New (particularly that portion of the New Testament known as the Sermon on the Mount), it is but a short step to approving war as a divinely inspired mission. This sort of thinking has led, inexorably, to such phenomena as Jerry Falwell once writing that God is Pro-War [10].
It is the apocalyptic frame of reference of fundamentalists, their belief in an imminent Armageddon, that psychologically conditions them to steer this country into conflict, not only on foreign fields (some evangelicals thought Saddam was the Antichrist and therefore a suitable target for cruise missiles), but also in the realm of domestic political controversy. It is hardly surprising that the most adamant proponent of the view that there was no debt ceiling problem was Michele Bachmann, the darling of the fundamentalist right. What does it matter, anyway, if the country defaults? - we shall presently abide in the bosom of the Lord.
Some liberal writers have opined that the different socio-economic perspectives separating the "business" wing of the GOP and the religious right make it an unstable coalition that could crack. I am not so sure. There is no fundamental disagreement on which direction the two factions want to take the country, merely how far in that direction they want to take it. The plutocrats would drag us back to the Gilded Age, the theocrats to the Salem witch trials. In any case, those consummate plutocrats, the Koch brothers, are pumping [11] large sums of money into Michele Bachman's presidential campaign, so one ought not make too much of a potential plutocrat-theocrat split.
Thus, the modern GOP; it hardly seems conceivable that a Republican could have written the following:

"Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes you can do these things. Among them are H. L. Hunt (you possibly know his background), a few other Texas oil millionaires and an occasional politician or business man from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid." (That was President Eisenhower, writing to his brother Edgar in 1954.)

It is this broad and ever-widening gulf between the traditional Republicanism of an Eisenhower and the quasi-totalitarian cult of a Michele Bachmann that impelled my departure from Capitol Hill. It is not in my pragmatic nature to make a heroic gesture of self-immolation, or to make lurid revelations of personal martyrdom in the manner of David Brock [12]. And I will leave a more detailed dissection of failed Republican economic policies to my fellow apostate Bruce Bartlett [13].
I left because I was appalled at the headlong rush of Republicans, like Gadarene swine, to embrace policies that are deeply damaging to this country's future; and contemptuous of the feckless, craven incompetence of Democrats in their half-hearted attempts to stop them. And, in truth, I left as an act of rational self-interest. Having gutted private-sector pensions and health benefits as a result of their embrace of outsourcing, union busting and "shareholder value," the GOP now thinks it is only fair that public-sector workers give up their pensions and benefits, too. Hence the intensification of the GOP's decades-long campaign of scorn against government workers. Under the circumstances, it is simply safer to be a current retiree rather than a prospective one.
If you think Paul Ryan and his Ayn Rand-worshipping colleagues aren't after your Social Security and Medicare, I am here to disabuse you of your naiveté.[5] They will move heaven and earth to force through tax cuts that will so starve the government of revenue that they will be "forced" to make "hard choices" - and that doesn't mean repealing those very same tax cuts, it means cutting the benefits for which you worked.
During the week that this piece was written, the debt ceiling fiasco reached its conclusion. The economy was already weak, but the GOP's disgraceful game of chicken roiled the markets even further. Foreigners could hardly believe it: Americans' own crazy political actions were destabilizing the safe-haven status of the dollar. Accordingly, during that same week, over one trillion dollars worth of assets evaporated on financial markets. Russia and China have stepped up their advocating that the dollar be replaced as the global reserve currency - a move as consequential and disastrous for US interests as any that can be imagined.
If Republicans have perfected a new form of politics that is successful electorally at the same time that it unleashes major policy disasters, it means twilight both for the democratic process and America's status as the world's leading power.
Footnotes:
[1] I am not exaggerating for effect. A law passed in 2010 by the Arizona legislature mandating arrest and incarceration of suspected illegal aliens was actually drafted by the American Legislative Exchange Council, a conservative business front group that drafts "model" legislation on behalf of its corporate sponsors. The draft legislation in question was written for the private prison lobby, which sensed a growth opportunity in imprisoning more people.
[2] I am not a supporter of Obama and object to a number of his foreign and domestic policies. But when he took office amid the greatest financial collapse in 80 years, I wanted him to succeed, so that the country I served did not fail. But already in 2009, Mitch McConnell, the Senate Republican leader, declared that his greatest legislative priority was - jobs for Americans? Rescuing the financial system? Solving the housing collapse? - no, none of those things. His top priority was to ensure that Obama should be a one-term president. Evidently Senator McConnell hates Obama more than he loves his country. Note that the mainstream media have lately been hailing McConnell as "the adult in the room," presumably because he is less visibly unstable than the Tea Party freshmen
[3] This is not a venue for immigrant bashing. It remains a fact that outsourcing jobs overseas, while insourcing sub-minimum wage immigrant labor, will exert downward pressure on US wages. The consequence will be popular anger, and failure to address that anger will result in a downward wage spiral and a breech of the social compact, not to mention a rise in nativism and other reactionary impulses. It does no good to claim that these economic consequences are an inevitable result of globalization; Germany has somehow managed to maintain a high-wage economy and a vigorous industrial base.
[4] The cowardice is not merely political. During the past ten years, I have observed that Democrats are actually growing afraid of Republicans. In a quirky and flawed, but insightful, little book, "Democracy and Populism: Fear and Hatred [14]," John Lukacs concludes that the left fears, the right hates.
[5] The GOP cult of Ayn Rand is both revealing and mystifying. On the one hand, Rand's tough guy, every-man-for-himself posturing is a natural fit because it puts a philosophical gloss on the latent sociopathy so prevalent among the hard right. On the other, Rand exclaimed at every opportunity that she was a militant atheist who felt nothing but contempt for Christianity. Apparently, the ignorance of most fundamentalist "values voters" means that GOP candidates who enthuse over Rand at the same time they thump their Bibles never have to explain this stark contradiction. And I imagine a Democratic officeholder would have a harder time explaining why he named his offspring "Marx" than a GOP incumbent would in rationalizing naming his kid "Rand."

[15]

This work by Truthout is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 3.0 United States License [15].

Mike Lofgren [17]

Opinion

Source URL: http://www.truth-out.org/goodbye-all-reflections-gop-operative-who-left-cult/1314907779

Links:
[1] http://www.truth-out.org/print/5901
[2] http://www.truth-out.org/printmail/5901
[3] http://www.flickr.com/photos/carolyntiry/4034641618/
[4] http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/wonkbook-republicans-have-won-but-can-they-stop-there/2011/07/25/gIQAFHVIYI_blog.html?fb_ref=NetworkNews
[5] http://www.tnr.com/article/john-judis/92958/obama-lincoln-debt-ceiling
[6] http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/29/opinion/krugman-the-centrist-cop-out.html?_r=4&hp
[7] http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/the-debt-ceiling-deal-winners-and-losers/2011/07/31/gIQAHl7FmI_story.html
[8] http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/banking-financial-institutions/133379-bachus-tells-local-paper-that-washington-should-qserveq-banks
[9] http://www.amazon.com/War-Force-that-Gives-Meaning/dp/1400034639/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1312410221&sr=1-1
[10] http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=36859
[11] http://motherjones.com/mojo/2011/07/michele-bachmann-koch-brothers-2012
[12] http://www.amazon.com/Blinded-Right-Ex-Conservative-David-Brock/dp/1400047285/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1312417920&sr=1-1
[13] http://www.amazon.com/New-American-Economy-Failure-Reaganomics/dp/0230615872/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1312418383&sr=1-1
[14] http://www.amazon.com/Democracy-Populism-Hatred-John-Lukacs/dp/0300107730/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1312415333&sr=1-1
[15] http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/us/
[16] http://www.truth-out.org/printmail
[17] http://www.truth-out.org/mike-lofgren/1314907653
[18] http://org2.democracyinaction.org/o/6694/p/salsa/web/common/public/signup?signup_page_KEY=2160
[19] https://members.truth-out.org/donate
[20] http://www.truth-out.org/?q=medicare-moment-gop/1306245365
[21] http://www.truth-out.org/?q=connecting-dots-gop-assault-wome

The Duped and the Dead - Married, With Infidelities

2011-07-03T16:06:00.003-04:00

I hope you enjoy this article on Non-Monogamy.
I think it is an interesting idea that we should "face reality."
Organizing our lives around the facts should be highly desirable and should be viewed as socially beneficial rather than scorned and derided - especially if that scorn is based on falsehoods about true human nature.
Wouldn't "honest" associations encourage a higher order of spiritual opportunity?
I think it would.
I wonder how many people have the courage to be honest about their animal inclinations?
Doc
PS. GGG

The NYTimes
June 30, 2011
Married, With Infidelities
By MARK OPPENHEIMER

Last month, when the New York congressman Anthony Weiner finally admitted that he had lied, that his Twitter account had not been hacked, that he in fact had sent a picture of his thinly clad undercarriage to a stranger in Seattle, I asked my wife of six years, mother of our three children, what she thought. More specifically, I asked which would upset her more: to learn that I was sending racy self-portraits to random women, Weiner-style, or to discover I was having an actual affair. She paused, scrunched up her mouth as if she had just bitten a particularly sour lemon and said: “An affair is at least a normal human thing. But tweeting a picture of your crotch is just weird.”

How do we account for that revulsion, which many shared with my wife, a revulsion that makes it hard to imagine a second act for Weiner, like Eliot Spitzer’s television career or pretty much every day in the life of Bill Clinton? One explanation is that the Weiner scandal was especially sordid: drawn out, compounded daily with new revelations, covered up with embarrassing lies that made us want to look away. But another possibility is that there was something not weird, but too familiar about Weiner. His style might not be for everyone (to put it politely), but the impulse to be something other than what we are in our daily, monogamous lives, the thrill that comes from the illicit rather than the predictable, is something I imagine many couples can identify with. With his online flirtations and soft-porn photos, he did what a lot of us might do if we were lonely and determined to not really cheat.

That is one reason it was a relief when Weiner was drummed from office. In addition to giving us some good laughs, he forced us to ask particularly uncomfortable questions, like “what am I capable of doing?” and “what have my neighbors or friends done?” His visage was insisting, night after night, that we think about how hard monogamy is, how hard marriage is and about whether we make unrealistic demands on the institution and on ourselves.

That, anyway, is what Dan Savage, America’s leading sex-advice columnist, would say. Although best known for his It Gets Better project, an archive of hopeful videos aimed at troubled gay youth, Savage has for 20 years been saying monogamy is harder than we admit and articulating a sexual ethic that he thinks honors the reality, rather than the romantic ideal, of marriage. In Savage Love, his weekly column, he inveighs against the American obsession with strict fidelity. In its place he proposes a sensibility that we might call American Gay Male, after that community’s tolerance for pornography, fetishes and a variety of partnered arrangements, from strict monogamy to wide openness.

Savage believes monogamy is right for many couples. But he believes that our discourse about it, and about sexuality more generally, is dishonest. Some people need more than one partner, he writes, just as some people need flirting, others need to be whipped, others need lovers of both sexes. We can’t help our urges, and we should not lie to our partners about them. In some marriages, talking honestly about our needs will forestall or obviate affairs; in other marriages, the conversation may lead to an affair, but with permission. In both cases, honesty is the best policy.

“I acknowledge the advantages of monogamy,” Savage told me, “when it comes to sexual safety, infections, emotional safety, paternity assurances. But people in monogamous relationships have to be willing to meet me a quarter of the way and acknowledge the drawbacks of monogamy around boredom, despair, lack of variety, sexual death and being taken for granted.”

The view that we need a little less fidelity in marriages is dangerous for a gay-marriage advocate to hold. It feeds into the stereotype of gay men as compulsively promiscuous, and it gives ammunition to all the forces, religious and otherwise, who say that gay families will never be real families and that we had better stop them before they ruin what is left of marriage. But Savage says a more flexible attitude within marriage may be just what the straight community needs. Treating monogamy, rather than honesty or joy or humor, as the main indicator of a successful marriage gives people unrealistic expectations of themselves and their partners. And that, Savage says, destroys more families than it saves.

Savage, who is 46, has been writing Savage Love since 1991 for The Stranger, an alternative weekly paper in Seattle that syndicates it to more than 50 other newspapers. Savage’s sex advice puts me in mind of a smart, tough old grandmother, randy yet stern. It’s Dr. Ruth if she were interested in bondage and threesomes. And if she were Catholic: Savage was raised in ethnic-Irish Chicago, one of four children of a cop and a homemaker. He did some time in Catholic school, and his writing bears traces of the church’s stark moral clarity, most notable in his impatience with postmodern or queer theorizing or anything that might overturn the centrality of the stable nuclear family.

Savage is not a churchgoer, but he is a cultural Catholic. Listeners to “This American Life,” which since 1996 has aired his homely monologues about his family, might recognize the kinship of those personal stories to the Catholic homilies Savage heard every Sunday of his childhood. Less a scriptural exegesis, like what you get in many a Protestant church, the priest’s homily is often short and framed as a fable or lesson: it’s an easily digested moral tale. You can hear that practiced didacticism in his radio segments about DJ, the son that he and Terry Miller, his husband, adopted as an infant, and you can hear it in the moving piece he read about his mother, who, on her deathbed, said she loved Terry “like a daughter.”

And you can hear it in the It Gets Better project, Savage’s great contribution to family values. Last September, in response to the reported suicides of several young men bullied for being, or seeming, gay, Savage prevailed on the very private Miller, whom he married in 2005 in Vancouver, to make a video about how their lives got better after high school. In the video, they talk into the camera about their courtship, becoming parents and how wonderfully accepting their families have been. “We have really great lives together,” Miller says at the end. Savage adds, “And you can have a great life, too.” Savage posted the video on Sept. 21. Within two months, there were 10,000 videos from people attesting to their own it-gets-better experience, viewed a collective 35 million times. The “It Gets Better” book, a selection of narratives, made The Times’s nonfiction best-seller list. In May, the It Gets Better campaign was featured in an advertisement for Google’s Chrome Web browser.

It Gets Better is, in the end, a paean to stable families: it is a promise to gay youth that if they can just survive the bullying, they can have spouses and children when they grow up. With Savage, the goal is always the possibility of stable, adult families, for gays and straights alike. He is capable of pro-family rants that, stripped of his habitual profanity, would be indistinguishable from Christian-right fund-raising letters.

How, then, can Savage be a monogamy skeptic? When Savage first began writing Savage Love, it was a jokey column, one in which he aimed “to treat straight sex with the same revulsion that straight advice columnists had always had for gay sex,” as Savage told me, when we met in Seattle in April. But he quickly realized that his correspondents were turning to him to save their love lives, not their sex lives.

Today, Savage Love is less a sex column than a relationship column, one point of which is to help good unions last. Sexual fulfillment matters in its own right, but mainly it matters because without it, families are more likely to break apart. It is for the sake of staying together — not merely for the sake of orgasms — that Savage coined his famous acronym, “G.G.G.”: lovers ought to be good, giving and game (put another way, skilled, generous and up for anything). And if they cannot fulfill all of each other’s desires, then it may be advisable to decide to go outside the bounds of marriage if that is what it takes to make the marriage work.

Savage’s position on monogamy is frequently caricatured. He does not believe in promiscuity; indeed, his attacks on the anonymous-sex, gay-bathhouse culture were once taken as proof of a secret conservative agenda. And he does not believe that monogamy is wrong for all couples or even for most couples. Rather, he says that a more realistic sexual ethic would prize honesty, a little flexibility and, when necessary, forgiveness over absolute monogamy. And he believes nostalgically, like any good conservative, that we might look to the past for some clues.

“The mistake that straight people made,” Savage told me, “was imposing the monogamous expectation on men. Men were never expected to be monogamous. Men had concubines, mistresses and access to prostitutes, until everybody decided marriage had to be egalitarian and fairsey.” In the feminist revolution, rather than extending to women “the same latitude and license and pressure-release valve that men had always enjoyed,” we extended to men the confines women had always endured. “And it’s been a disaster for marriage.”

In their own marriage, Savage and Miller practice being what he calls “monogamish,” allowing occasional infidelities, which they are honest about. Miller was initially opposed to the idea. “You assume as a younger person that all relationships are monogamous and between two people, that love means nothing can come between you,” said Miller, who met Savage at a club in 1995, when he was 23 and Savage was 30. “Dan has taught me to be more realistic about that kind of stuff.

“It was four or five years before it came up,” Miller said. “It’s not about having three-ways with somebody or having an open relationship. It is just sort of like, Dan has always said if you have different tastes, you have to be good, giving and game, and if you are not G.G.G. for those tastes, then you have to give your partner the out. It took me a while to get down with that.” When I asked Savage how many extramarital encounters there have been, he laughed shyly. “Double digits?” I asked. He said he wasn’t sure; later he and Miller counted, and he reported back that the number was nine. “And far from it being a destabilizing force in our relationship, it’s been a stabilizing force. It may be why we’re still together.”

While his marriage opened up gradually, Savage says that “there’s not a one-size-fits-all way” to approach nonmonogamy, especially if both partners committed to monogamy at the start. “Folks on the verge of making those monogamous commitments,” Savage told me in one of our many e-mail exchanges, “need to look at the wreckage around them — all those failed monogamous relationships out there (Schwarzenegger, Clinton, Vitter, whoever’s on the cover of US magazine this week) — and have a conversation about what it’ll mean if one or the other partner should cheat. And agree, at the very least, to getting through it, to place a higher value on the relationship itself than on one component of it, sexual exclusivity.”

Not that heeding our desires always simplifies matters. One recent writer to Savage Love thought he would enjoy seeing his wife fool around with another man, and initially did: “Almost every kinky kind was being had and enjoyed.” But when his wife had vaginal intercourse with the other man, something happened. “It was as if all the air in the room was sucked out through my soul,” he writes. Savage’s reply is pragmatic: “If there’s a sex act — say, vaginal intercourse — that holds huge symbolic importance for you or your partner, it might be best to take that act off the menu.” The answer, to Savage’s way of thinking, is smarter boundaries, not hard-line rules about monogamy.

For most people, sex cannot be so transactional; it is bound up with emotional need — to feel we excite our partner above all others, to believe that we have primacy in their lives. The question is whether it’s possible to act on our desires sensibly, as Savage would have it, while maintaining the special equilibrium we trust our marriages, or long-term partnerships, to preserve. Do we know our relationships well enough to go outside them?

There have always been nonmonogamous marriages. In 2001, The Journal of Family Psychology summarized earlier research, finding that “infidelity occurs in a reliable minority of American marriages.” Estimates that “between 20 and 25 percent of all Americans will have sex with someone other than their spouse while they are married” are conservative, the authors wrote. In 2010, NORC, a research center at the University of Chicago, found that, among those who had ever been married, 14 percent of women and 20 percent of men admitted to affairs.

There is no agreement over how honestly we should discuss this reality with our own spouses. Some are nostalgic for the old hypocrisy, the code of silence, the mistresses and concubines men kept discreetly on the side. Clergy members may practice a kind of selective muteness: in their premarital counseling, they often do not stress the possibility of future affairs — but once an affair occurs, they vocally urge couples to tough it out. But what if they were to say, ahead of time: “You two love each other, and you promise you won’t stray, but you might. People do. And if you do, I hope you won’t think it’s the end of the world.”

Such straight talk about the difficulty of monogamy, Savage argues, is simply good sense. People who are eager to cheat need to be honest with their partners, but people who think they would never cheat need honesty even more. “The point,” he wrote on his blog last year, “is that people — particularly those who value monogamy — need to understand why being monogamous is so much harder than they’ve been led to believe.”

How exactly does Savage think talking about monogamy’s trials make practicing it easier? In part, by reminding people to be good, giving and game. Straight talk about why we might cheat helps couples figure out ways to keep each other satisfied at home. If I promise my wife that I would never, ever, ever sleep with another woman, the conversation might end there, the two of us gazing into each other’s eyes (even if our minds might be wandering). But if I say, “I’ve been feeling sexually unfulfilled lately because I have a secret fantasy about trading dirty pictures with a woman” — well, then maybe my wife will e-mail me some of her. And so monogamy is preserved.

“If you are expected to be monogamous and have one person be all things sexually for you, then you have to be whores for each other,” Savage says. “You have to be up for anything.”

Savage’s straight-talk approach has an intuitive appeal: our culture places a huge premium on honesty, or at least on confessional, therapeutic, Oprah-fied admissions. We are told to say what is on our minds, so why not extend that principle to sex? Why not tell your spouse everything you want, even if that includes wanting another person? My sense is that this kind of radical honesty may work best for couples who already have strong marriages. Where there is love and equality and no history of betrayal, one partner asking if she can have a fling may not be so risky. Her partner either says yes, and it happens, you hope, with only the best consequences; or the partner says no, in which case their relationship endures, maybe with a little disappointment on one side, a little suspicion on the other.

That is the ideal situation. What if the revelation that a partner is thinking about others creates a shift, one that plagues the marriage? Words have consequences, and most couples, knowing that jealousy is real and can beset any of us, opt for a tacit code of reticence. Not just about sex but about all sorts of things: there are couples who can express opinions about each other’s clothing choices or cooking or taste in movies, and there are couples who cannot. I don’t mind if my wife tells me another man is hot, but it took me a long time to accept her criticism of my writing. We all have many sensitive spots, but one of the most universal is the fear of not being everything to your partner — the fear, in other words, that she might find somebody worthier. It is the fear of being alone.

Where a relationship is troubled, and one partner senses, correctly, that aloneness is an imminent threat, then the other partner asking for permission to have a fling is no neutral act. If you are scared of losing your partner, you may say yes to anything she asks, including permission for an affair that will wound you deeply. “The problem is that with many of these couples, one partner wants it, and the other says yes because she’s afraid that he will leave her,” says Janis Abrahms Spring, a psychologist and couples’ therapist whose book, “After the Affair,” is about couples badly damaged by infidelity.

Spring is inclined to a pessimism as strong as Savage’s optimism — after all, she works with couples who have ended up in counseling — but she offers a persuasive reminder that there may be no such thing as total honesty. Even when we think we are enthusiastically assenting to a partner’s request, we may not know ourselves as well as we think we do. This is true not just for monogamy but also for sexual acts within marriage. Some of Savage’s toughest critics are feminists who think he can be a bit too glib with his injunction to please our partners.

“Sometimes he can shame women for not being into things that their male partners are into, if they have male partners,” Sady Doyle, a feminist blogger, told me. “The whole good-giving-and-game thing is something I actually agree with. I don’t think you should flip out on your partner if they share something sexual with you. But I think sometimes it’s much harder for women to say, ‘I’m not into that,’ or ‘Please, I don’t want to do that, let’s do something else,’ than it is to say, ‘Sure.’ Putting all the onus on the person who doesn’t have that fetish or desire, particularly if the person who doesn’t have that desire is the woman, really reproduces a lot of old structures and means of oppression for women.”

Spring and Doyle both hint at a larger truth about men and women, which is that, generally speaking, they view sex differently. While there are plenty of women who can separate sex from love, can be happily promiscuous or could have a meaningless, one-time fling, there are — let’s face it — more men like that. The world of Savage Love will always appeal more to men, even men who truly love their partners. Cheating men are often telling the truth when they say, “She meant nothing to me.” It really was just sex. And Savage tells us that, with proper disclosure and consent, just sex can be O.K.

But for many women, and not a few men, there is no such thing as “just sex,” for their partners or for themselves. What if a woman, or a man for that matter, looks outside marriage for the other emotional satisfactions that come along with sex? Savage has less to offer that person. He does not tell people to take long-term boyfriends or girlfriends. He is skeptical that group marriages, of three or more partners, can last very long. Nor could he have much to offer the person who feels a partner ought to constrain his urges. There is a reason that sex advice is easier to give than relationship advice. Satisfying a sexual yearning is easier than satisfying a hole in your life.

In an e-mail he sent me, Savage countered that “there are plenty of women out there who have affairs just for the sex.” But he agreed that there is something male about his perspective. “Well, I’m male,” he wrote. “And women, straight women, are in relationships with men. Doesn’t it help to know what we’re really like? Women can go on marrying and pretending that their boyfriends and husbands are Mr. Darcy or some RomCom dream man. But where’s that going to get ’em? Besides divorce court?”

Savage’s honesty ethic gives couples permission to find happiness in unusual places; he believes that pretty much anything can be used to spice up a marriage, although he excludes feces, pets and incest, as well as minors, the nonconsenting, the duped and the dead. In “The Commitment,” Savage’s book about his and Miller’s decision to marry, he describes how a college student approached him after a campus talk and said, as Savage tells it, that “he got off on having birthday cakes smashed in his face.” But no one had ever obliged him. “My heart broke when he told me that the one and only time he told a girlfriend about his fetish, she promptly dumped him. Since then he had been too afraid to tell anyone else.” Savage took the young man up to his hotel room and smashed a cake in his face.

The point is: priests and rabbis don’t tell couples they might need to involve cake play in their marriages; moms and dads don’t; even best friends can be shy about saying what they like. Savage wants to make sure that no strong marriage ever fails because an ashamed husband or wife is desperately seeking cake play — or bondage, urine play or any of the other unspeakable activities that Savage has helped make speakable. If cake play is what a man needs, his G.G.G. wife should give it to him; if she can’t bring herself to, then maybe she should allow him a chocolate-frosted excursion with another woman. But for God’s sake, keep it together for the kids.

[Doc's Note - Mark, where did that inane "keep it together for the kids" come from? "Savage does not believe people should live in toxic, miserable marriages."]

If you believe Savage, there is strong precedent, in other times and in other cultures, for nonmonogamous relationships that endure. In fact, there has recently been a good deal of scholarship proving that point, including Christopher Ryan and Cacilda Jethá’s “Sex at Dawn,” one of Savage’s favorite books, and Stephanie Coontz’s definitive “Marriage, a History.” Like Savage, Coontz says she believes that “people often end up exploding a relationship that was working well because one partner strays or has an affair that doesn’t mean anything.”

But, she says, we are to some extent trapped in our culture. It is one thing for the Inuit men to have “temporary wives,” whom they take along on trips when they leave their other wives at home, and for pregnant Bari women, in Venezuela, to have sex with multiple men, all of whom are considered responsible for the eventual child. Their societies have very different ideas about marriage. “I think you can combine a high tolerance of flings with a de-emphasis on jealousy in long-term relationships,” Coontz said, “but usually that is only in societies where friendships and kin relationships are as emotionally salient as romantic partnerships.”

In the 18th century, according to Coontz, American men could mention their mistresses in letters to their wives’ brothers; they could mention contracting syphilis from a prostitute. Men understood the masculine prerogative, and they countenanced it, even at the expense of their own sisters. “That would be unthinkable today,” Coontz said. “For thousands of years it was expected of men they would have affairs and flings, but not on the terms of honesty and equality Dan envisions. I can certainly see the appeal of suggesting we try and make this an open, mutual, gender-equal arrangement. I’m a little dubious how much that is going to work.”

It was not until the 20th century that Americans evolved an understanding of marriage in which partners must meet all of each other’s needs: sexual, emotional, material. When we rely on our partners for everything, any hint of betrayal is terrifying. “That is the bind we are in,” Coontz said. “We accord so much priority to the couple relationship. It is tough under those conditions for most people to live with the insecurity of giving their partners permission to have flings.”

There is one subculture in America that practices nonmonogamy and equality between partners: the sizable group of gay men in open, or semiopen, long-term partnerships. (A study published in 2010 found 50 percent of gay male couples in the Bay Area had sexual relationships outside their union, with their partner’s knowledge and approval.) But it is unclear if gay habits, which Savage thinks can be a model, will survive the advent of gay equality. Historically, gay men have treated monogamy more casually, in part because society treated gay coupledom as unthinkable. Now, however, gay men are marrying or entering into socially sanctioned partnerships. As they are absorbed into the mainstream of connubial bliss, they may lose the strong friendship networks that gay men once substituted for nuclear families — friendship networks that, according to Coontz, can make infidelity less threatening. In other words, as they take out joint mortgages and pal around with straight parents from the PTA, they may become considerably more square about fidelity. Living in their McMansions, they, too, may decide that the walls of their marriages must be guarded at all costs.

Judith Stacey, a New York University sociologist who researched gay men’s romantic arrangements for her book “Unhitched,” argues that gay men, in general, will continue to require less monogamy. “They are men,” she said, and she believes it is easier for them — right down to the physiology of orgasm — to separate physical and emotional intimacy. Lesbians and straight women tend to be far less comfortable with nonmonogamy than gay men. But what matters is that neither monogamy nor polygamy is humankind’s sole natural state. “One size never fits all, and it isn’t just dividing between men and women and gay and straight,” she said. “Monogamy is not natural, nonmonogamy is not natural. Variation is what’s natural.”

I asked Stacey if, given the differences between men and women, she thought Savage’s vision was unrealistic for straight couples. Yes and no, she said: “I believe monogamy is actually crucial for some couples and totally irrelevant for others.” That does not mean that nonmonogamous couples are free to do as they please. Creating nonmonogamy that strengthens rather than corrodes a marriage is surely as much work as monogamy. Couples should make vows and honor them. Not all good relationships require monogamy, but they all require what she calls integrity.

“What integrity means for me is we shouldn’t impose a single vow of monogamy as a superior standard for all relationships,” Stacey said. “Intimate partners should decide the vows you want to make. Work out terms of what your commitments are, and be on same page. There are women perfectly happy to have agreements in which when you are out of town you can have a little fling on the side. And rules range from ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ to ‘I want to know’ to ‘bring it home and talk about it and excite our relationship.’ ”

Stacey and Savage each say that monogamy is the right choice for many couples; they are exalting options, not any particular option. As a straight, monogamous, married male, I happen to think this is a good thing: if there are people whose marriages work best with more flexibility, they should find the courage to choose an arrangement that works for them, society be damned. I also recognize, however, that we may choose marriage in part to escape the terror of choice. There are so many reasons to marry; we could call them all “love,” but let’s be more specific: admiring how she looks in a sundress, trusting her to improve your first drafts, knowing that when the time comes she will make the best mother ever. But another reason might be that life before her was so confusing. In all those other relationships, it was never clear when there was an exclusive commitment or who would use the L-word first or when a Saturday-night date could be assumed.

[Doc's Note: These definitions of love seem miserably shallow to me.]

Marrying has the virtue of clearing all that up: exclusive, you both use the L-word, Saturday night assumed. Simple, right?

Not long ago, I mentioned Savage to a psychotherapist who works with children. He said that the It Gets Better project had saved the lives of several of his patients. “They tell me they might have killed themselves if it weren’t for Dan Savage,” my friend said, as tears filled his eyes.

Hearing such reactions, and having been personally subjected by Savage to his earnest, ardent effusions about his wonderful husband and awesome son, it is tough to credit anyone who thinks Savage is a subversive figure. When I think of Savage, I think of his response to the mother whose ex-husband, her son’s father, was undergoing a sex change. Her son was angry, and she wondered what she should say to him. Savage said the boy was entitled to his feelings. “Children have a right to some stability and constancy from the adults in their lives,” Savage wrote. “Perhaps I’m a transphobic bigot,” but asking a father to wait “a measly 36 months” before having his penis chopped off “is a sacrifice any father should be willing to make for his 15-year-old son. Call me old-fashioned.”

Savage is old-fashioned, as bitterly hilarious as that might sound to gay-marriage opponents. After the news of the Arnold Schwarzenegger love child broke, I received an e-mail from Savage in which he expressed concern about the article I was writing. As I would expect, he framed his position in terms of respect for the family.

“I’m afraid,” he wrote, “it’s going to become: ‘This Savage person is krazy. Just look at what nonmonogamy did for Arnold! Look at the chaos that being nonmonogamous creates! Failed marriages, devastated children, scandal!’ But Arnold wasn’t in a nonmonogamous relationship. He was in a monogamous relationship. He failed at monogamy; he didn’t succeed at nonmonogamy.”

Savage does not believe people should live in toxic, miserable marriages. The Schwarzenegger family is surely beyond repair. But they are an extreme case: not all adultery produces secret families. Most of it is minor by comparison, and Savage believes that adultery can be one of those trials, like financial woes or ill health, that marriages can be expected to survive.

“Given the rates of infidelity, people who get married should have to swear a blood oath that if it’s violated, as traumatic as that would be, the greater good is the relationship,” Savage told me. “The greater good is the home created for children. If there are children present, they’ll get past it. The cultural expectation should be if there’s infidelity, the marriage is more important than fidelity.”

It gets better? It does. But it also gets very complicated. Savage is not arguing “let Arnold be Arnold.” He is imploring us to know the people we marry and to know ourselves and to plan accordingly. He believes that our actions mark us as a compassionate people, that in truth we are always ready to forgive an adulterer, except the one we are married to. He points out that the Louisiana senator, and prominent john, David Vitter — “who I hate,” he reassures me — is still in office, and that “Bill Clinton is a beloved elder statesman, and Eliot Spitzer is back on television.” We are already a nation of forgivers, even when it comes to marriage. Dan Savage thinks we should take some pride in that.

Mark Oppenheimer (mark.oppenheimer@nytimes.com) writes the Beliefs column for The Times. He is also the author of a memoir, ‘‘Wisenheimer: A Childhood Subject to Debate,’’ now in paperback. Editor: Vera Titunik (v.titunik-MagGroup@nytimes.com)

This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:

Correction: July 3, 2011

The article on Page 22 this weekend about marital infidelity misidentifies a disease contracted from prostitutes that men in the 18th century could write or talk freely about. It is syphilis, not smallpox.

Un-Vegetarianizing after 30 years.

2011-07-01T15:53:00.001-04:00

       Having always been inclined toward fairly heavy meat (and sugar) eating, when I was 27 years old, I officially became a practicing Weirdo-Vegetarian on New Year's Day.

    I did it because my then new found religiosity required I accept as "the Word of God" certain writings, some of which clearly stated that "GOD" did not want humans to eat or unnecessarily injure animals, clearly outlining what mankind's vegetarian diet should consist of and avoid.

    The fact that I only found evidence of one single person in the church, one-time leader Joseph Fielding Smith, grand-nephew of Joseph Smith, who followed this Heavenly Counsel - was a shock and began a near 40 year battle and serious social/religious dilemma for me, but I determined then that I had no choice but to comply with "GOD's" directive.

    After about a year and a half, returned from missionary service and newly married (she could make an acceptable fried baloney sandwich)...with the timing for personal action more appropriate, and after much soul-searching, I did.

    I didn't know much about "cleansing" diets then, but was the beneficiary of one and had enough stockpiled nutrients (20 years worth of B-12 for instance though other nutrients must be replenished frequently) in my system to experience a startlingly positive reaction which only reinforced my acceptance that I was following God's way of eating, which once accepted quit being a thought on which I often focused.

    I did put a lot of energy into concepting (there was little science then as "natural" pretty much meant UNPROFITABLE, until just recently) what the hard science could be to explain and control the benefits I had realized.

    After "the Cleanse", however...which possibly took a few years to complete, there were no more particular benefits to be realized with one main exception.

    That is the total (as possible) avoidance of "PROCESSED FOODS".

    Processed is pretty much poison - hence, Factory Foods, including vegetables, meat and dairy are off the list, even at restaurants to whatever degree I can avoid or minimize potential damage I do.

    I do not want to eat a factory egg.

    However, aside from "benefits", there begin to be actual detriments to a vegan diet, especially in the years after my stored mineral and vitamin resources had been depleted.

    After 20 years or so, it is not too acceptable to consider that your diet may be corrupt, especially if you originally developed it as a superior spiritual, natural health practice. (straight from the mouth of God)

    But that's what happened.

    My wife Kita made a comment about how she wondered if she would benefit from eating eggs.

    I was taken by surprise and commented that though I would support her I didn't think I'd want to kiss her after she ate one.

    My daughter Jamie really took me to task for that, and believe me, I did not mean that I would never kiss her again, just not while she was freshly egg-y.

    Then I went to Ohio to care for my dying mother.

    I wasn't gone but a few days before Kita was researching away the hours and making plans (3 years in the chewing it turns out) to get some organic, "pastured" eggs...and eat them!

    I recanted my objectionable remark and after looking at some of her research, decided that I might as well give it a try too, meat being then - out of the question.

    I have been very frustrated at my poor recovery from a damaged nerve I've been nursing for almost two years now, plus all my other high stress and it's effects on vitality.

    So, suddenly after 29 and a half years of practicing and championing Vegetarianism, I find I am suddenly no longer Vegetarian.

    What a shock!

    To me it's all about good science and amazingly, "self-acceptance" as an animal with a "natural diet, suffering from man-made anomalies.

    The quasi-spiritual journey of VEGETARIANISM becomes just a concern of personal ethical practice (especially toward yourself) in a sea of voodooistic, magic-Jesusism, etc.

    Being "Organic/Pastured" vs. "Factory" in everything meat and dairy is even more of a hassel than being Vegan!

    You can't escape trickles of factory gunk in your world but it is logical to me to consistently subsist on your species own "real" diet (we are certainly omniverous by design and natural attraction)
We did find that by avoiding processed foods, our whole family has avoided most modern medical disabilities, including carries, heart disease, etc.

    What we found is that after an honest trial with sincere effort for about 25 years as mostly raw, live food oriented vegans, and nearly 30 years as vegetarians, we were not seeing the healthy evidence of our self-care while other people who were eating crap diets had more vitality and vigor than we.

    To not be a Vegetarian anymore seems weird.

    It happened so fast.

    There was a short three-month (4 mo. for Kita) backtrack to "ovo-lacto" vegetarianism with organic, pastured products only - eggs and cultured raw milks like yogurt and kefir.

    Then two weeks ago after our dog had gotten lean and rejuvenated on 4 months of raw meat, I found us home with a whole chicken (all in soups so far) for us!

    And yesterday Kita bought actual cow meat, a portion of which we ate with eggs for breakfast and it went fine.

    Kita and I have never eaten or prepared meat together - that is strange.

   We have both developed as cooks over the last 26 years that we've been together, but we find ourselves almost picking up where we left off in meat preparation.

    Thank "god" for soup,though!

    And thankfully, my burger with eggs today went fine and without incident! (no bread, of course)

    Pretty freaky though, and yet I realized it was a natural extension of my having let go of my man-made spiritual formulaes and finding a more functional, rational and beneficial and most importantly 100& Direct, spiritual interaction.

    Magic is real, but you still have to know which button to push.

    Every gizmo from our bodies to the universe have buttons that need pushing (or avoiding) - and then the magic happens!

    It always works. Even Jesus taught how to do it!

    But...have I seen results yet??

    Yes, after a couple months on eggs and kefir, my nerve damage issues began to improve noticeably to about 30% better right now. My hair is shiny and my nose is damp. JK

    Kita claims to feel much better and energized and it's true that while I had been requiring a nap after every minor activity which consumed half to two-thirds of my days, lately I haven't even wanted to nap, though I do still feel fatigued alot and tire easily.

    To me this is still an experiment, but the science collected primarily by Weston-Price supports it (scientific evidence in the diet field has been, in the past quite rare), and I have to say that it's refreshing to see scientists consider human diet realistically.

    For example, I assumed eggs should probably be eaten raw, but actual research has shown that cooked eggs have a digetability/Bioavailability rate of over 92% while raw eggs score only 34%.

    So, fried, scrambled, boiled or baked - cooked eggs are better for you!

    Just the opposite of what my prior basic rational would have predicted!

    We are also 100% off starch right now, to starve out the "starch-eating", life compromising, colonies of bacteria that are ill-proportioned, or downright unwanted in our guts while supplying and nourishing beneficial bacterias.

    Since we as creatures are simply colonies of assorted bacteriums, it is in our interest to foster those that "accentuate the positive...and...eliminate the negative", especially since, as Sachmo says, "that's the game of life."

    Dealing with the ethics of taking life to perpetuate life really only requires simple honesty and medium intellect to know that there is always a giving up of life in substance and energy (that's why we cook on low) and to extend that to natural and surprizingly critical foodstuffs and by letting go of the hype of "spiritual" eating, it is surprizingly more of a realization than a journey... so far.

Epistemology and the End of the World - Are We Just As...

2011-06-19T12:51:00.000-04:00

This from the NYTimes:

Opinionator - A Gathering of Opinion From Around the Web
June 16, 2011, 9:07 pm
Epistemology and the End of the World
By GARY GUTTING

In the coming weeks, The Stone will feature occasional posts by Gary Gutting, a professor of philosophy at the University of Notre Dame, that apply critical thinking to information and events that have appeared in the news.

Apart from its entertainment value, Harold Camping’s ill-advised prediction of the rapture last month attracted me as a philosopher for its epistemological interest. Epistemology is the study of knowledge, its nature, scope and limits. Camping claimed to know, with certainty and precision, that on May 21, 2011, a series of huge earthquakes would devastate the Earth and be followed by the taking up (rapture) of the saved into heaven. No sensible person could have thought that he knew this. Knowledge requires justification; that is, some rationally persuasive account of why we know what we claim to know. Camping’s confused efforts at Biblical interpretation provided no justification for his prediction. Even if, by some astonishing fluke, he had turned out to be right, he still would not have known the rapture was coming.

    The recent failed prediction of the rapture has done nothing to shake the certainty of believers.

Of particular epistemological interest was the rush of Christians who believe that the rapture will occur but specify no date for it to dissociate themselves from Camping. Quoting Jesus’s saying that “of that day and hour no one knows,” they rightly saw their view as unrefuted by Camping’s failed prediction. What they did not notice is that the reasons for rejecting Camping’s prediction also call into question their claim that the rapture will occur at some unspecified future time.

What was most disturbing about Camping was his claim to be certain that the rapture would occur on May 21. Perhaps he had a subjective feeling of certainty about his prediction, but he had no good reasons to think that this feeling was reliable. Similarly, you may feel certain that you will get the job, but this does not make it (objectively) certain that you will. For that you need reasons that justify your feeling.

There are many Christians who are as subjectively certain as Camping about the rapture, except that they do not specify a date. They have a feeling of total confidence that the rapture will someday occur.   But do they, unlike Camping, have good reasons behind their feeling of certainty? Does the fact that they leave the date of the rapture unspecified somehow give them the good reason for their certainty that Camping lacked?

An entirely unspecified date has the advantage of making their prediction immune to refutation. The fact that the rapture hasn’t occurred will never prove that it won’t occur in the future. A sense that they will never be refuted may well increase the subjective certainty of those who believe in the rapture, but this does nothing to provide the good reasons needed for objective certainty. Camping, after the fact, himself moved toward making his prediction unrefutable, saying that May 21 had been an “invisible judgment day,” a spiritual rather than a physical rapture. He kept to his prediction of a final, physical end of the world on October 21, 2011, but no doubt this prediction will also be open to reinterpretation.

Believers in the rapture will likely respond that talk of good reasons and objective certainty assumes a context of empirical (scientific) truth, and ignores the fact that their beliefs are based not on science but on faith. They are certain in their belief that the rapture will occur, even though they don’t know it in the scientific sense.

But Camping too would claim that his certainty that the rapture would occur on May 21, 2011, was a matter of faith. He had no scientific justification for his prediction, so what could have grounded his certainty if not his faith? But the certainty of his faith, we all agree, was merely subjective. Objective certainty about a future event requires good reasons.

Given their faith in the Bible, believers in the rapture do offer what they see as good reasons for their view as opposed to Camping’s. They argue that the Bible clearly predicts a temporally unspecified rapture, whereas Camping’s specific date requires highly questionable numerological reasoning. But many Christians—including many of the best Biblical scholars—do not believe that the Bible predicts a historical rapture. Even those who accept the traditional doctrine of a Second Coming of Christ, preceding the end of the world, often reject the idea of a taking up of the saved into heaven, followed by a period of dreadful tribulations on Earth for those who are left behind. Among believers themselves, a historical rapture is at best a highly controversial interpretation, not an objectively established certainty.

The case against Camping was this: His subjective certainty about the rapture required objectively good reasons to expect its occurrence; he provided no such reasons, so his claim was not worthy of belief.   Christians who believe in a temporally unspecified rapture agree with this argument. But the same argument undermines their own belief in the rapture. It’s not just that “no one knows the day and hour” of the rapture. No one knows that it is going to happen at all.

DocNotes:
The "No One Knows" concept, regardless of the context in which it is brought forward should have equal impact and importance to anyone who is seeking "Truth" (the TRUTH is that truth is relative) and a personally satisfying and workable spiritual path. When does the "inquiring mind" so to speak become not much more than distraction to the life it is suppose to enrich?

What the Heck?

2011-06-06T21:27:00.000-04:00

Yes, this is suppose to be a continuation and completion of the so called "update" post...and...it is coming. Just too much for today. Hope you are great!

The Big Fix

2011-05-30T13:50:00.000-04:00

I don't have a lot of time to write at the moment. But I wanted to share one idea. Putting consumer pricing back to pre-Reagan costs would do a lot to slash the greed and fake inflation that has bankrupt most of the world.
Eliminating temp jobs that last over 30 days and requiring companies to pay full time wages and offer basic benefits without requiring union overbosses and requiring products sold to be manufactured in the country they are sold in - worldwide.
China, is in the amazing position to take over the entire world overnight and be praised for it - but they are too ignorant to see their position and too weak to advance it.
Other nations who could do something, though not on the scale of China have leaders too worried about their own personal greed to make any move at all - except to tell more lies to ensure their elections or re-elections.

Analyze - Don't Analyze

2011-03-29T13:04:00.000-04:00

March 28, 2011

Tools for Thinking

By DAVID BROOKS

A few months ago, Steven Pinker of Harvard asked a smart question: What scientific concept would improve everybody’s cognitive toolkit?
The good folks at Edge.org organized a symposium, and 164 thinkers contributed suggestions. John McWhorter, a linguist at Columbia University, wrote that people should be more aware of path dependence. This refers to the notion that often “something that seems normal or inevitable today began with a choice that made sense at a particular time in the past, but survived despite the eclipse of the justification for that choice.”
For instance, typewriters used to jam if people typed too fast, so the manufacturers designed a keyboard that would slow typists. We no longer have typewriters, but we are stuck with the letter arrangements of the qwerty keyboard.
Path dependence explains many linguistic patterns and mental categories, McWhorter continues. Many people worry about the way e-mail seems to degrade writing skills. But there is nothing about e-mail that forbids people from using the literary style of 19th-century letter writers. In the 1960s, language became less formal, and now anybody who uses the old manner is regarded as an eccentric.
Evgeny Morozov, the author of “The Net Delusion,” nominated the Einstellung Effect, the idea that we often try to solve problems by using solutions that worked in the past instead of looking at each situation on its own terms. This effect is especially powerful in foreign affairs, where each new conflict is viewed through the prism of Vietnam or Munich or the cold war or Iraq.
Daniel Kahneman of Princeton University writes about the Focusing Illusion, which holds that “nothing in life is as important as you think it is while you are thinking about it.” He continues: “Education is an important determinant of income — one of the most important — but it is less important than most people think. If everyone had the same education, the inequality of income would be reduced by less than 10 percent. When you focus on education you neglect the myriad of other factors that determine income. The differences of income among people who have the same education are huge.”
Joshua Greene, a philosopher and neuroscientist at Harvard University, has a brilliant entry on Supervenience. Imagine a picture on a computer screen of a dog sitting in a rowboat. It can be described as a picture of a dog, but at a different level it can be described as an arrangement of pixels and colors. The relationship between the two levels is asymmetric. The same image can be displayed at different sizes with different pixels. The high-level properties (dogness) supervene the low-level properties (pixels).
Supervenience, Greene continues, helps explain things like the relationship between science and the humanities. Humanists fear that scientists are taking over their territory and trying to explain everything. But new discoveries about the brain don’t explain Macbeth. The products of the mind supervene the mechanisms of the brain. The humanities can be informed by the cognitive sciences even as they supervene them.
If I were presumptuous enough to nominate a few entries, I’d suggest the Fundamental Attribution Error: Don’t try to explain by character traits behavior that is better explained by context.
I’d also nominate the distinction between emotion and arousal. There’s a general assumption that emotional people are always flying off the handle. That’s not true. We would also say that Emily Dickinson was emotionally astute. As far as I know, she did not go around screaming all the time. It would be useful if we could distinguish between the emotionality of Dickinson and the arousal of the talk-show jock.
Public life would be vastly improved if people relied more on the concept of emergence. Many contributors to the Edge symposium hit on this point.
We often try to understand problems by taking apart and studying their constituent parts. But emergent problems can’t be understood this way. Emergent systems are ones in which many different elements interact. The pattern of interaction then produces a new element that is greater than the sum of the parts, which then exercises a top-down influence on the constituent elements.
Culture is an emergent system. A group of people establishes a pattern of interaction. And once that culture exists, it influences how the individuals in it behave. An economy is an emergent system. So is political polarization, rising health care costs and a bad marriage.
Emergent systems are bottom-up and top-down simultaneously. They have to be studied differently, as wholes and as nested networks of relationships. We still try to address problems like poverty and Islamic extremism by trying to tease out individual causes. We might make more headway if we thought emergently.
We’d certainly be better off if everyone sampled the fabulous Edge symposium, which, like the best in science, is modest and daring all at once.

Coffee Cups in Hell - It's the Mormon Moment

2011-03-27T16:39:00.000-04:00

March 26, 2011

Coffee Cups in Hell

By MAUREEN DOWD

It’s the Mormon moment.
The Republican Mormons Mitt Romney and Jon Huntsman may run for president, braving more questions about whether they wear the sacred undergarment and more resistance from evangelicals who consider Mormonism an affront to Christianity.
TLC just renewed its hit “Sister Wives,” and HBO’s popular “Big Love” just had its big finale.
On Thursday, “The Book of Mormon,” by Trey Parker and Matt Stone, the scatological scamps who created “South Park,” and Robert Lopez, who co-created “Avenue Q,” opened on Broadway in a confetti burst of profanity, blasphemy, hilarity and rapturous reviews. Stone called the musical “an atheist love letter to religion.”
Aside from impersonating Jennifer Lopez and Gwyneth Paltrow at the 2000 Oscars, Stone and Parker are known for mercilessly mocking religion, celebrity, phonies and Snooki in their cartoon world with the four potty-mouthed fourth-grade boys from Colorado.
They pushed the limits at Comedy Central when they put the Prophet Muhammad in a bear suit. But as Terry Teachout wrote in The Wall Street Journal: “Making fun of Mormons in front of a Broadway crowd is like shooting trout in a demitasse cup. ... If the title of this show were ‘The Quran,’ it wouldn’t have opened.”
Stone and Parker said they were drawn to the Rodgers and Hammerstein and Disney qualities at Mormon sites in Salt Lake City. “Mormonism has this great cheesy aesthetic,” Stone told The Journal. “When you watch their videos, it’s almost as if they’re about to flash a smile at the camera and burst into song. ... Mormon cheesiness is so close to musical cheesiness.”
The Mormons in the musical are depicted just as Mormons on “South Park” were — naïve but nice.
There is one song called “Spooky Mormon Hell Dream” featuring Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer, Johnnie Cochran and a couple of Starbucks coffee cups in hell. (Mormons can’t have caffeine.)
The raunchiness is offset by traditional tropes. There’s an odd-couple pairing of two 19-year-old missionaries, Elder Price, a golden goody-goody, and Elder Cunningham, a schlubby boy with a penchant for lying; and a cultural collision between white-bread missionaries and Ugandans plagued by AIDS, warlords, maggots and female genital mutilation.
“Africa is nothing like ‘The Lion King,’ ” a befuddled Price says. “I think that movie took a lot of artistic license.”
Cunningham manages to baptize a lovely young Ugandan named Nabalungi, but he keeps calling her Neosporin, Noxzema and Neutrogena.
The sly writers send up the church for its belated admission of blacks to temple ceremonies. In 1978, beset by protests, the president of the Mormons announced that God had changed his mind about black people.
But they also send up do-gooding celebrities like Bono and Angelina when the Mormon boys sing “We Are Africa.”
Some connected with the production have been monitoring the reaction of the Mormons, but so far, the church has put out one bland statement, and some Mormons who have seen the show told reporters they were pleasantly surprised. At least it doesn’t dwell on polygamy, they said, and its ribald humor seems braced by traditional values and affection for the Mormon characters.
If you already find some aspects of Mormonism exotic and strange — including its start with crystal-gazing Joseph Smith, the buried gold tablets with hieroglyphics and an angel named Moroni — the musical won’t assuage your doubts.
Smith claimed Jesus appeared to him in upstate New York. “Did you know that Jesus lived here in the USA?” calls out a Mormon boy in the musical. Elder Cunningham offers this lyric about the crucifixion: “Jesus knew he had to man up.”
Elder Price sings, “I believe that God lives on a planet called Kolob.” In Mormon scripture, God lived on or near Kolob — the inspiration for the planet Kobol in “Battlestar Galactica,” written by Glen Larson, a Mormon.
The authoritarian Mormon church still does not have equal status for women, blacks and certainly not gays. It provided the majority of the funding for California’s Prop 8 against same-sex marriage.
The Mormon boys do a tap dance wearing glittery pink vests, singing about how to switch off feeling gay: “Go flick; it’s a nifty little Mormon trick.”
When Ugandans cannot relate to Mormon history, Cunningham blends in other myths from “Lord of the Rings” and “Star Wars,” putting the Angel Moroni on the Death Star.
In the end, the message is not against Mormonism but literalism: that whatever our different myths, metaphors and rituals, the real purpose of religion is to give us a higher purpose and a sense of compassion in the universe.
“The moral,” the writer Andrew Sullivan observed on opening night, “is that religion is both insane and necessary at the same time.”

What's up in the Middle East???

2011-03-24T20:36:00.000-04:00

I wanted to repost this article.

March 22, 2011

Tribes With Flags

By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN

David Kirkpatrick, the Cairo bureau chief for The Times, wrote an article from Libya on Monday that posed the key question, not only about Libya but about all the new revolutions brewing in the Arab world: “The question has hovered over the Libyan uprising from the moment the first tank commander defected to join his cousins protesting in the streets of Benghazi: Is the battle for Libya the clash of a brutal dictator against a democratic opposition, or is it fundamentally a tribal civil war?”
This is the question because there are two kinds of states in the Middle East: “real countries” with long histories in their territory and strong national identities (Egypt, Tunisia, Morocco, Iran); and those that might be called “tribes with flags,” or more artificial states with boundaries drawn in sharp straight lines by pens of colonial powers that have trapped inside their borders myriad tribes and sects who not only never volunteered to live together but have never fully melded into a unified family of citizens. They are Libya, Iraq, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Bahrain, Yemen, Kuwait, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates. The tribes and sects that make up these more artificial states have long been held together by the iron fist of colonial powers, kings or military dictators. They have no real “citizens” in the modern sense. Democratic rotations in power are impossible because each tribe lives by the motto “rule or die” — either my tribe or sect is in power or we’re dead.
It is no accident that the Mideast democracy rebellions began in three of the real countries — Iran, Egypt and Tunisia — where the populations are modern, with big homogenous majorities that put nation before sect or tribe and have enough mutual trust to come together like a family: “everyone against dad.” But as these revolutions have spread to the more tribal/sectarian societies, it becomes difficult to discern where the quest for democracy stops and the desire that “my tribe take over from your tribe” begins.
In Bahrain, a Sunni minority, 30 percent of the population, rules over a Shiite majority. There are many Bahraini Sunnis and Shiites — so-called sushis, fused by inter-marriage — who carry modern political identities and would accept a true democracy. But there are many other Bahrainis who see life there as a zero-sum sectarian war, including hard-liners in the ruling al-Khalifa family, who have no intention of risking the future of Bahraini Sunnis under majority-Shiite rule. That is why the guns came out there very early. It was rule or die. Iraq teaches what it takes to democratize a big tribalized Arab country once the iron-fisted leader is removed (in that case by us). It takes billions of dollars, 150,000 U.S. soldiers to referee, myriad casualties, a civil war where both sides have to test each other’s power and then a wrenching process, which we midwifed, of Iraqi sects and tribes writing their own constitution defining how to live together without an iron fist.
Enabling Iraqis to write their own social contract is the most important thing America did. It was, in fact, the most important liberal experiment in modern Arab history because it showed that even tribes with flags can, possibly, transition through sectarianism into a modern democracy. But it is still just a hope. Iraqis still have not given us the definitive answer to their key question: Is Iraq the way Iraq is because Saddam was the way Saddam was or was Saddam the way Saddam was because Iraq is the way Iraq is: a tribalized society? All the other Arab states now hosting rebellions — Yemen, Syria, Bahrain and Libya — are Iraq-like civil-wars-in-waiting. Some may get lucky and their army may play the role of the guiding hand to democracy, but don’t bet on it.
In other words, Libya is just the front-end of a series of moral and strategic dilemmas we are going to face as these Arab uprisings proceed through the tribes with flags. I want to cut President Obama some slack. This is complicated, and I respect the president’s desire to prevent a mass killing in Libya.
But we need to be more cautious. What made the Egyptian democracy movement so powerful was that they owned it. The Egyptian youth suffered hundreds of casualties in their fight for freedom. And we should be doubly cautious of intervening in places that could fall apart in our hands, à la Iraq, especially when we do not know, à la Libya, who the opposition groups really are — democracy movements led by tribes or tribes exploiting the language of democracy?
Finally, sadly, we can’t afford it. We have got to get to work on our own country. If the president is ready to take some big, hard, urgent, decisions, shouldn’t they be first about nation-building in America, not in Libya? Shouldn’t he first be forging a real energy policy that weakens all the Qaddafis and a budget policy that secures the American dream for another generation? Once those are in place, I will follow the president “from the halls of Montezuma to the shores of Tripoli.”

Revolution - The Beatles

2010-08-24T20:54:00.000-04:00

The Proper Role of Government

2010-06-19T12:25:00.003-04:00

Around 1975 I discovered this speech by Ezra T. Benson, delivered in LDS General Conference in 1968.
Mr. Benson was an apostle in the Mormon Church and later their President.
It is still the best (and shortest) lesson and true to it's title.
It is too bad the LDS seem to have never listened to his teachings.
This has been the foundation of my perspective on the Constitution, Law and Social Behavior ever since my first reading.
Rev. Gregory Lowrey

The Proper Role of Government

by
The Honorable Ezra Taft Benson
Former Secretary of Agriculture

Men in the public spotlight constantly are asked to express an
opinion on a myriad of government proposals and projects. "What do
you think of TVA?" "What is your opinion of Medicare?" "How do you
feel about Urban Renewal?" The list is endless. All too often, answers
to these questions seem to be based, not upon any solid principle, but
upon the popularity of the specific government program in question.
Seldom are men willing to oppose a popular program if they, themselves,
wish to be popular--especially if they seek public office.

Government Should Be Based Upon Sound Principles

Such an approach to vital political questions of the day can only
lead to public confusion and legislative chaos. Decisions of this nature
should be based upon and measured against certain basic principles
regarding the proper role of government. If principles are correct, then
they can be applied to any specific proposal with confidence.

Are there not, in reality, underlying, universal principles with
reference to which all issues must be resolved whether the society be
simple or complex in its mechanical organization? It seems to me we
could relieve ourselves of most of the bewilderment which so unsettles
and distracts us by subjecting each situation to the simple test of right or
wrong. Right and wrong as moral principles do not change. They are
applicable and reliable determinants whether the situations with which
we deal are simple or complicated. There is always a right and wrong to
every question which requires our solution. (Albert E. Bowen, Prophets,
Principles and National Survival, p. 21-22)

Unlike the political opportunist, the true statesman values principle above
popularity, and works to create popularity for those political principles
which are wise and just.

The Correct Role of Government

I should like to outline in clear, concise, and straight-forward
terms the political principles to which I subscribe. These are the
guidelines which determine, now and in the future, my attitudes and
actions toward all domestic proposals and projects of government.
These are the principles which, in my opinion, proclaim the proper role of
government in the domestic affairs of the nation:

[I] believe that governments were instituted of God for the benefit
of man; and that he holds men accountable for their acts in relation to
them, both in making laws and administering them, for the good and
safety of society.
[I] believe that no government can exist in peace, except such
laws are framed and held inviolate as will secure to each individual the
free exercise of conscience, the right and control of property, and the
protection of life...
[I] believe that all men are bound to sustain and uphold the
respective governments in which they reside, while protected in their
inherent and inalienable rights by the laws of such governments; and
that sedition and rebellion are unbecoming every citizen thus protected,
and should be punished accordingly; and that all governments have a
right to enact such laws as in their own judgments are best calculated to
secure the public interest; at the same time, however, holding sacred the
freedom of conscience. (D&C 134: 1-2,5.)

The Most Important Function Of Government

It is generally agreed that the most important single function of
government is to secure the rights and freedoms of individual citizens.
But, what are those rights? And what is their source? Until these
questions are answered there is little likelihood that we can correctly
determine how government can best secure them. Thomas Paine, back in
the days of the American Revolution, explained that:
Rights are not gifts from one man to another, nor from one class
of men to another...It is impossible to discover any origin of rights
otherwise than in the origin of man; it consequently follows that rights
appertain to man in right of his existence, and must therefore be equal to
every man. (P.P.N.S., p. 134.)

The great Thomas Jefferson asked:

Can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have
removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that
these liberties are of the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but
with his wrath? (Works 8:404; P.P.N.S. p. 141.)

Starting at the foundation of the pyramid, let us first consider the
origin of those freedoms we have come to know as human rights. There
are only two possible sources. Rights are either God-given as part of
the Divine Plan, or they are granted by government as part of the political
plan. Reason, necessity, tradition and religious conviction all lead me to
accept the divine origin of these rights. If we accept the premise that
human rights are granted by government, then we must be willing to
accept the corollary that they can be denied by government. I, for one,
shall never accept that premise. As the French political economist,
Frederick-Bastiat, phrased it so succinctly, "Life, liberty, and property do
not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact
that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to
make laws in the first place." (The Law, p. 6)

The Real Meaning Of The Separation Of Church And State

I support the doctrine of separation of church and state as
traditionally interpreted to prohibit the establishment of an official national
religion. But I am opposed to the doctrine of separation of church and
state as currently interpreted to divorce government from any formal
recognition of God. The current trend strikes a potentially fatal blow at
the concept of the divine origin or our rights, and unlocks the door for an
easy entry of future tyranny. If Americans should ever come to believe
that their rights and freedoms are instituted among men by politicians and
bureaucrats, then they will no longer carry the proud inheritance of their
forefathers, but will grovel before their masters seeking favors and
dispensations--a throwback to the Feudal System of the Dark Ages. We
must ever keep in mind the inspired words of Thomas Jefferson, as
found in the Declaration of Independence:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created
equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable
Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men,
deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. (P.P.N.S.,
p. 519)

Since God created man with certain unalienable rights, and man,
in turn, created government to help secure and safeguard those rights, it
follows that man is superior to the creature which he created. Man is
superior to government and should remain master over it, not the other
way around. Even the non-believer can appreciate the logic of this
relationship.

The Source of Government Power

Leaving aside, for a moment, the question of the divine origin of
rights, it is obvious that a government is nothing more or less than a
relatively small group of citizens who have been hired, in a sense, by the
rest of us to perform certain functions and discharge certain
responsibilities which have been authorized. It stands to reason that the
government itself has no innate power or privilege to do anything. Its
only source of authority and power is from the people who have created
it. This is made clear in the Preamble to the Constitution of the United
States, which reads: "WE THE PEOPLE...do ordain and establish this
Constitution for the United States of America."
The important thing to keep in mind is that the people who have
created their government can give to that government only such powers
as they, themselves, have in the first place. Obviously, they cannot give
that which they do not possess. So, the question boils down to this.
What powers properly belong to each and every person in the absence
of and prior to the establishment of any organized governmental form? A
hypothetical question? Yes, indeed! But, it is a question which is vital to
an understanding of the principles which underlie the proper function of
government.
Of course, as James Madison, sometimes called the Father of the
Constitution, said, "If men were angels, no government would be
necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal
controls on government would be necessary." (The Federalist, No. 51.)

Natural Rights

In a primitive state, there is no doubt that each man would be
justified in using force, if necessary, to defend himself against physical
harm, against theft of the fruits of his labor, and against enslavement of
another. This principle was clearly explained by Bastiat:

"Each of us has a natural right--from God--to defend his person,
his liberty, and his property. These are the three basic requirements of
life, and the preservation of any one of them is completely dependent
upon the preservation of the other two. For what are our faculties but
the extension of our individuality? And what is property but an extension
of our faculties?" (The Law, p. 6.)

Indeed, the early pioneers found that a great deal of their time and
energy was being spent doing all three--defending themselves, their
property and their liberty--in what properly was called the "Lawless
West." In order for man to prosper, he cannot afford to spend his time
constantly guarding his family, his fields, and his property against attack
and theft, so he joins together with his neighbors and hires a sheriff. At
this precise moment, government is born. The individual citizens delegate
to the sheriff their unquestionable right to protect themselves. The
sheriff now does for them only what they had a right to do for
themselves--nothing more. Quoting again form Bastiat:

"If every person has the right to defend--even by force--his
person, his liberty, and his property, then it follows that a group of men
have the right to organize and support a common force to protect these
rights constantly. Thus the principle of collective right--its reason for
existing, it lawfulness--is based on individual right. (The Law, p. 6.)

So far so good. But now we come to the moment of truth.
Suppose pioneer "A" wants another horse for his wagon. He doesn't
have the money to buy one, but since pioneer "B" has an extra horse, he
decides that he is entitled to share in his neighbor's good fortune. Is he
entitled to take his neighbor's horse? Obviously not! If his neighbor
wishes to give it or lend it, that is another question. But so long as
pioneer "B" wishes to keep his property, pioneer "A" has no just claim to
it.
If"A" has no proper power to take "B's" property, can he delegate
any such power to the sheriff? No. Even if everyone in the community
desires that "B" give his extra horse to "A", they have no right individually
or collectively to force him to do it. They cannot delegate a power they
themselves do not have. This important principle was clearly understood
and explained by John Locke nearly 300 years ago:

"For nobody can transfer to another more power than he has in
himself, and nobody has an absolute arbitrary power over himself, or
over any other, to destroy his own life, or take away the life or property
of another. (Two Treatises of Civil Government, II, 135,; P.P.N.S., p.
93.)

The Proper Function Of Government

This means, then, that the proper function of government is limited
only to those spheres of activity within which the individual citizen has
the right to act. By deriving its just powers from the governed,
government becomes primarily a mechanism for defense against bodily
harm, theft and involuntary servitude. It cannot claim the power to
redistribute the wealth or force reluctant citizens to perform acts of
charity against their will. Government is created by man. No man
possesses such power to delegate. The creature cannot exceed the
creator.
In general terms, therefore, the proper role of government
includes such defensive activities, as maintaining national military and
local police forces for protection against loss of life, loss of property,
and loss of liberty at the hands of either foreign despots or domestic
criminals.

The Powers Of A Proper Government

It also includes those powers necessarily incidental to the
protective function such as:
1. The maintenance of courts where those charged with crimes
may be tried and where disputes between citizens may be impartially
settled.
2. The establishment of a monetary system and a standard of
weights and measures so that courts may render money judgements,
taxing authorities may levy taxes, and citizens may have a uniform
standard to use in their business dealings.
My attitude toward government is succinctly expressed by the
following provision taken from the Alabama Constitution:
That the sole object and only legitimate end of government is to
protect the citizen in the enjoyment of life, liberty, and property, and
when the government assumes other functions it is usurpation and
oppression. (Art. 1, Sec. 35.)

An important test I use in passing judgement upon an act of
government is this: If it were up to me as an individual to punish my
neighbor for violating a given law, would it offend my conscience to do
so? Since my conscience will never permit me to physically punish my
fellow man unless he has done something evil, or unless he has failed to
do something which I have a moral right to require of him to do, I will
never knowingly authorize my agent, the government, to do this on my
behalf.

I realize that when I give my consent to the adoption of a law, I
specifically instruct the police--the government--to take either the life,
liberty, or property of anyone who disobeys that law. Furthermore, I tell
them that if anyone resists the enforcement of the law, they are to use
any means necessary--yes, even putting the lawbreaker to death or
putting him in jail--to overcome such resistance. These are extreme
measures but unless laws are enforced, anarchy results.
As John Locke explained many years ago:

"The end of law is not to abolish or restrain, but to preserve and
enlarge freedom. For in all the states of created beings, capable of
laws, where there is no law there is no freedom. For liberty is to be free
from restraint and violence from others, which cannot be where there is
no law; and is not, as we are told, "a liberty for every man to do what he
lists." For who could be free, when every other man's humour might
domineer over him: But a liberty to dispose and order freely as he lists
his person, actions, possessions, and his whole property within the
allowance of those laws under which he is, and therein not to be subject
to the arbitrary will of another, but freely follow his own. (Two Treatises
of Civil Government, II, 57; P.P.N.S., p. 101.)

I believe we Americans should use extreme care before lending
our support to any proposed government program. We should fully
recognize that government is no plaything. As George Washington
warned, "Government is not reason, it is not eloquence--it is force! Like
fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master!" (The Red Carpet, p.
142). It is an instrument of force and unless our conscience is clear that
we would not hesitate to put a man to death, put him in jail or forcibly
deprive him of his property for failing to obey a given law, we should
oppose it.

The Constitution Of The United States

Another standard I use in determining what law is good and what
is bad is the Constitution of the United States. I regard this inspired
document as a solemn agreement between the citizens of this nation
which every officer of government is under a sacred duty to obey. As
Washington stated so clearly in his immortal Farewell Address:

The basis of our political systems is the right of the people to
make and to alter their constitution of government--But the constitution
which at any time exists, until changed by an explicit and authentic act of
the whole people is sacredly obligatory upon all. The very idea of the
power and the right of the people to establish government presupposes
the duty of every individual to obey the established government.
(P.P.N.S., p. 542.)

I am especially mindful that the Constitution provides that the great
bulk of the legitimate activities of government are to be carried out at the
state or local level. This is the only way in which the principle of
"self-government" can be made effective. As James Madison said
before the adoption of the Constitution, "[We] rest all our political
experiments on the capacity of mankind for self-government."
(Federalist, No. 39; P.P.N.S., p. 128). Thomas Jefferson made this
interesting observation: "Sometimes it is said that man cannot be trusted
with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the
government of others? Or have we found angels in the forms of kings to
govern him? Let history answer this question." (Works, 8:3; P.P.N.S.,
p. 128.)

The Value Of Local Government

It is a firm principle that the smallest or lowest level that can
possible undertake the task is the one that should do so. First, the
community or city. If the city cannot handle it, then the county. Next, the
state; and only if no smaller unit can possibly do the job should the
federal government be considered. This is merely the application to the
field of politics of that wise and time-tested principle of never asking a
larger group to do that which can be done by a smaller group. And so
far as government is concerned, the smaller the unit and the closer it is
to the people, the easier it is to guide it, to keep it solvent and to keep our
freedom. Thomas Jefferson understood this principle very well and
explained it this way:

"The way to have good and safe government, is not to trust it all
to one, but to divide it among the many, distributing to every one exactly
the functions he is competent to. Let the national government be
entrusted with the defense of the nation, and its foreign and federal
relations; the State government with the civil rights, law, police, and
administration of what concerns the State generally; the counties with
the local concerns of the counties, and each ward direct the interests
within itself. It is by dividing and subdividing these republics from the
great national one down through all its subordinations, until it ends in the
administration of every man's farm by himself; by placing under every
one what his own eye may superintend, that all will be done for the best.
What has destroyed liberty and the rights of man in every government
which has ever existed under the sun? The generalizing and
concentrating all cares and powers into one body, (Works, 6:543;
P.P.N.S., p. 125)

It is well to remember that the states of this republic created the
Federal Government. The Federal Government did not create the states.

Things The Government Should Not Do

A category of government activity which, today, not only requires
the closest scrutiny, but which also poses a grave danger to our
continued freedom, is the activity not within the proper sphere of
government. No one has the authority to grant such powers, as welfare
programs, schemes for redistributing the wealth, and activities which
coerce people into acting in accordance with a prescribed code of social
planning. There is one simple test. Do I as an individual have a right to
use force upon my neighbor to accomplish this goal? If I do have such a
right, then I may delegate that power to my government to exercise on
my behalf. If I do not have that right as an individual, then I cannot
delegate it to government, and I cannot ask my government to perform
the act for me.
To be sure, there are times when this principle of the proper role
of government is most annoying and inconvenient. If I could only force
the ignorant to provide for themselves, or the selfish to be generous with
their wealth! But if we permit government to manufacture its own
authority out of thin air, and to create self-proclaimed powers not
delegated to it by the people, then the creature exceeds the creator and
becomes master. Beyond that point, where shall the line be drawn?
Who is to say "this far, but no further?" What clear principle will stay
the hand of government from reaching farther and yet farther into our
daily lives? We shouldn't forget the wise words of President Grover
Cleveland that "...though the people support the Government, the
Government should not support the people." (P.P.N.S., p.345.) We
should also remember, as Frederick Bastiat reminded us, that "Nothing
can ever be use from the public treasury for the benefit of one citizen or
one class unless other citizens and other classes have been forced to
send it in." (The Law, p.30; P.P.N.S., p. 350.)

The Dividing Line Between Proper And Improper Government

As Bastiat pointed out over a hundred years ago, once
government steps over this clear line between the protective or negative
role into the aggressive role of redistributing the wealth and providing
so-called "benefits" for some of its citizens, it then becomes a means for
what he accurately described as legalized plunder. It becomes a lever
of unlimited power which is the sought-after prize of unscrupulous
individuals and pressure groups, each seeking to control the machine to
fatten his own pockets or to benefit its favorite charities--all with the
other fellow's money, or course. (The Law, 1850, reprinted by the
Foundation for Economic Education, Irvington-On-Hudson, N.Y.)

The Nature Of Legal Plunder

Listen to Bastiat's explanation of this legal plunder:

"When a portion of wealth is transferred from the person who
owns it--without his consent and without compensation, and whether by
force or by fraud--to anyone who does not own it, then I say that
property is violated; that an act of plunder is committed... How is the
legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from
some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to
whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the
expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without
committing a crime... (The Law, p. 21; P.P.N.S., p. 377.)

As Bastiat observed, and as history has proven, each class or
special interest group competes with the others to throw the lever of
governmental power in their favor, or at least to immunize itself against
the effects of a previous thrust. Labor gets minimum wage, so
agriculture seeks a price support. Consumers demand price controls,
and industry gets protective tariffs. In the end, no one is much further
ahead, and everyone suffers the burdens of a gigantic bureaucracy and
a loss of personal freedom. With each group out to get its share of the
spoils, such governments historically have mushroomed into total
welfare states. Once the process begins, once the principle of the
protective function of government gives way to the aggressive or
redistributive function, then forces are set in motion that drive the nation
toward totalitarianism. "It is impossible," Bastiat correctly observed, "to
introduce into society...a greater evil than this: the conversion of the law
into an instrument of plunder." (The Law, p. 12)
Government Cannot Create Wealth

Students of history know that no government in the history of
mankind has ever created any wealth. People who work create wealth.
James R. Evans, in his inspiring book, The Glorious Quest, gives this
simple illustration of legalized plunder:

Assume, for example, that we were farmers, and that we
received a letter from the government telling us that we were going to
get a thousand dollars this year for ploughed up acreage. But rather than
the normal method of collection, we were to take this letter and collect
$69.71 from Bill Brown, at such an address, and $82.47 from Henry
Jones, $59.80 from Bill Smith, and so on down the line; that these men
would make up our farm subsidy.
Neither you nor I, nor would 99 percent of the farmers, walk up
and ring a man's doorbell, hold out a hand and say, "Give me what
you've earned even thought I have not." We simply wouldn't do it
because we would be facing directly the violation of a moral law, "Thou
shalt not steal." In short, we would be held accountable for our actions.

The free creative energy of this choice nation "created more than
50 percent of all the world's products and possessions in the short
span of 160 years. The only imperfection in the system is the imperfection
in man himself."

The last paragraph in this remarkable Evans book--which I commend to
all-- reads:

"No historian of the future will ever be able to prove that the ideas
of individual liberty practiced in the United States of America were a
failure. He may be able to prove that we were not yet worthy of them.
The choice is ours. (Charles Hallberg and Co., 116 West Grand Avenue,
Chicago, Illinois, 60610)

The Basic Error Of Marxism

According to Marxist doctrine, a human being is primarily an
economic creature. In other words, his material well being is all
important; his privacy and his freedom are strictly secondary. The Soviet
constitution reflects this philosophy in its emphasis on security,; food,
clothing, housing, medical care--the same things that might be considered
in a jail. The basic concept is that the government has full responsibility
for the welfare of the people and, in order to discharge that
responsibility, must assume control of all their activities. It is significant
that in actuality the Russian people have few of the rights supposedly
"guaranteed" to them in their constitution, while the American people
have them in abundance even though they are not guaranteed. The
reason, of course, is that material gain and economic security simply
cannot be guaranteed by any government. They are the result and
reward of hard work and industrious production. Unless the people
bake one loaf of bread for each citizen, the government cannot
guarantee that each will have one loaf to eat. Constitutions can be
written, laws can be passed and imperial decrees can be issued, but
unless the bread is produced, it can never be distributed.

The Real Cause Of American Prosperity

Why, then, do Americans bake more bread, manufacture more
shoes and assemble more TV set than Russians do? They do so
precisely because our government does not guarantee these things. If it
did, there would be so many accompanying taxes, controls, regulations
and political manipulations that the productive genius that is America's
would soon be reduced to the floundering level of waste and
inefficiency now found behind the Iron Curtain. As Henry D. Thoreau
explained:

"This government never of itself furthered any enterprise, but
by the alacrity with which it got out of its way. It does not keep the
country free. It does not settle the West. It does not educate. The
character inherent in the American people has done all that has been
accomplished; and it would have done somewhat more, if the
government had not sometime got in its way. For government is an
expedient by which men would fain succeed in letting one another alone;
and, as has been said, when it is most expedient, the governed are most
let alone by it. (Quoted by Clarence B. Carson, The American Tradition,
p. 100; P.P.N.S., p.171.)

In 1801 Thomas Jefferson, in his First Inaugural Address, said:

"With all these blessings, what more is necessary to make us a
happy and prosperous people? Still one thing more, fellow citizens--a
wise and frugal government, which shall restrain men from injuring one
another, which shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own
pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth
of labor the bread it had earned. (Works 8:3)

A Formula For Prosperity

The principle behind this American philosophy can be reduced to
a rather simple formula:
1. Economic security for all is impossible without widespread
abundance.
2. Abundance is impossible without industrious and efficient
production.
3. Such production is impossible without energetic, willing and
eager labor.
4. This not possible without incentive.
5. Of all forms of incentive--the freedom to attain a reward for
one's labors is the most sustaining for most people. Sometimes called
the profit motive, it is simply the right to plan and to earn and to enjoy the
fruits of your labor.

6. This profit motive diminishes as government controls,
regulations and taxes increase to deny the fruits of success to those
who produce.
7. Therefore, any attempt through government intervention to
redistribute the material rewards of labor can only result in the eventual
destruction of the productive base of society, without which real
abundance and security for more than the ruling elite is quite impossible.

An Example Of The Consequences Of Disregarding These
Principles

We have before us currently a sad example of what happens to
a nation which ignores these principles. Former FBI agent, Dan Smoot,
succinctly pointed out on his broadcast number 649, dated January 29,
1968 as follows:

England was killed by an idea: the idea that the weak, indolent
and profligate must be supported by the strong, industrious, and
frugal--to the degree that tax consumers will have a living standard
comparable to that of taxpayers; the idea that government exists for the
purpose of plundering those who work to give the product of their labor
to those who do not work. The economic and social cannibalism
produced by this communist-socialist idea will destroy any society which
adopts it and clings to it as a basic principle--any society.

The Power Of True Liberty From Improper Governmental
Interference

Nearly two hundred years ago, Adam Smith, the Englishman, who
understood these principles very well, published his great book, The
Wealth of Nations, which contained this statement:

The natural effort of every individual to better his own condition,
when suffered to exert itself with freedom and security, is so powerful
a principle, that it is alone, and without any assistance, not only capable
of carrying on the society to wealth and prosperity, but of surmounting a
hundred impertinent obstructions with which the folly of human laws too
often incumbers its operations; though the effect of these obstructions is
always more of less either to encroach upon its freedom, or to diminish
its security. (Vol. 2, Book 4, p. 126)

But What About The Needy?

On the surface this may sound heartless and insensitive to the
needs of those less fortunate individuals who are found in any society,
no matter how affluent. "What about the lame, the sick and the
destitute?" is an often voiced question. Most other countries in the world
have attempted to use the power of government to meet this need. Yet,
in every case, the improvement has been marginal at best and has
resulted in the long run creating more misery, more poverty, and certainly
less freedom than when government first stepped in. As Henry Grady
Weaver wrote, in his excellent book, The Mainspring of Human
Progress:

Most of the major ills of the world have been caused by
well-meaning people who ignored the principle of individual freedom,
except as applied to themselves, and who were obsessed with fanatical
zeal to improve the lot of mankind-in-the-mass through some pet formula
of their own...The harm done by ordinary criminals, murderers,
gangsters, and thieves is negligible in comparison with the agony
inflicted upon human beings by the professional "do-gooders", who
attempt to set themselves up as gods on earth and who attempt to set
themselves up as gods on earth and who would ruthlessly force their
views on all others with the abiding assurance the end justifies the
means. (p. 40-41; P.P.N.S., p. 313)

The Better Way

By comparison, America traditionally has followed Jefferson's
advice of relying on individual action and charity. The result is that the
United States has fewer cases of genuine hardship per capita than any
other country in the entire world or throughout all history. Even during
the depression of the 1930's, Americans ate and lived better than more
people in other countries do today.

What Is Wrong With A "Little" Socialism?

In reply to the argument that a little bit of socialism is good so long
as it doesn't go too far, it is tempting to say that, in like fashion, just a little
bit of theft or a little bit of cancer is all right, too! History proves that the
growth of the welfare state is difficult to check before it comes to its full
flower of dictatorship. But let us hope that this time around, the trend
can be reversed. If not, then we will see the inevitability of complete
socialism, probably within our lifetime.

The Reasons America Need Not Fall For Socialist Deceptions

Three factors may make a difference. First, there is sufficient
historical knowledge of the failures of socialism and of the past mistakes
of previous civilizations. Secondly, there are modern means of rapid
communications to transmit these lessons of history to a large literate
population. And thirdly, there is a growing number of dedicated men and
women who, at great personal sacrifice, are actively working to promote
a wider appreciation of these concepts. The timely joining together of
these three factors may make it entirely possible for us to reverse the
trend.

How Can Present Socialist Trends Be Reversed?

This brings up the next question: How is it possible to cut out the
various welfare-state features like cancer cells onto the body politic?
Isn't drastic surgery already necessary, and can it be performed without
endangering the patient? In answer, it is obvious that drastic measures
are called for. No half-way or compromise actions will suffice. Like all
surgery, it will not be without discomfort and perhaps even some scar
tissue for a long time to come. But it must be done if the patient is to be
saved, and it can be done without undue risk.
Obviously, not all welfare-state programs currently in force can
be dropped simultaneously without causing tremendous economic and
social upheaval. To try to do so would be like finding oneself at the
controls of a hijacked airplane and attempting to return it by simply cutting
off the engines in flight. It must be flown back, lowered in altitude,
gradually reduced in speed and brought in for a smooth landing.
Translated into practical terms, this means that the first step toward
restoring the limited concept of government should be to freeze all
welfare-state programs at their present level, making sure that no new
ones are added. The next step would be to allow all present programs
to run out their term with absolutely no renewal. The third step would
involve the gradual phasing out of those programs which are indefinite in
their term. In my opinion, the bulk of the transition could be accomplished
within a ten-year period and virtually completed within twenty years.
Congress would serve as the initiator of this phase-out program, and the
President would act as the executive in accordance with traditional
constitutional procedures.

Summary Thus Far

As I summarize what I have attempted to cover, try to visualize
the structural relationship between the six vital concepts that have made
America the envy of the world. I have reference to the foundation of the
Divine Origin of Rights; Limited Government; the pillars of Economic
Freedom and Personal Freedom, which result in Abundance; followed by
Security and the Pursuit of Happiness.
America was built upon a firm foundation and created over many
years from the bottom up. Other nations, impatient to acquire equal
abundance, security and pursuit of happiness, rush headlong into that
final phase of construction without building adequate foundations or
supporting pillars. Their efforts are futile. And, even in our country,
there are those who think that, because we now have the good things in
life, we can afford to dispense with the foundations which have made
them possible. They want to remove any recognition of God from
governmental institutions. They want to expand the scope and reach of
government which will undermine and erode our economic and personal
freedoms. The abundance which is ours, the carefree existence which
we have come to accept as a matter of course, can be toppled by these
foolish experimenters and power seekers. By the grace of God, and
with His help, we shall fence them off from the foundations of our liberty,
and then begin our task of repair and construction.
As a conclusion to this discussion, I present a declaration of
principles which have recently been prepared by a few American
patriots, and to which I wholeheartedly subscribe.

Fifteen Principles Which Make For Good And Proper
Government!

As an Independent American for constitution government I
declare that:
1. I believe that no people can maintain freedom unless their
political institutions are founded upon faith in God and belief in the
existence of moral law.
2. I believe that God has endowed men with certain unalienable
rights as set forth in the Declaration of Independence and that no
legislature and no majority, however great, may morally limit or destroy
these; that the sole function of government is to protect life, liberty, and
property and anything more than this is usurpation and oppression.
3. I believe that the Constitution of the United States was
prepared and adopted by men acting under inspiration from Almighty
God; that it is a solemn compact between the peoples of the States of
this nation which all officers of government are under duty to obey; that
the eternal moral laws expressed therein must be adhered to or
individual liberty will perish.
4. I believe it a violation of the Constitution for government to
deprive the individual of either life, liberty, or property except for these
purpose:
a. Punish crime and provide for the administration of justice;
b. Protect the right and control of private property;
c. Wage defensive war and provide for the nation's defense;
d. Compel each one who enjoys the protection of government to bear
his fair share of the burden of performing the above functions.
5. I hold that the Constitution denies government the power to take
from the individual either his life, liberty, or property except in
accordance with moral law; that the same moral law which governs the
actions of men when acting alone is also applicable when they act in
concert with others; that no citizen or group of citizens has any right to
direct their agent, the government to perform any act which would be
evil to the conscience if that citizen were performing the act himself
outside the framework of government.
6. I am hereby resolved that under no circumstances shall the
freedoms guaranteed by the Bill of Rights be infringed. In particular I am
opposed to any attempt on the part of the Federal Government to deny
the people their right to bear arms, to worship and pray when and where
they choose, or to own and control private property.
7. I consider ourselves at war with international Communism
which is committed to the destruction of our government, our right of
property, and our freedom; that it is treason as defined by the
Constitution to give aid and comfort to this implacable enemy.
8. I am unalterably opposed to Socialism, either in whole or in part,
and regard it as an unconstitutional usurpation of power and a denial of
the right of private property for government to own or operate the means
of producing and distributing goods and services in competition with
private enterprise, or to regiment owners in the legitimate use of private
property.
9. I maintain that every person who enjoys the protection of his
life, liberty should bear his fair share of the cost of government in
providing that protection; that the elementary principles of justice set
forth in the Constitution demand that all taxes imposed be uniform and
that each person's property or income be taxed at the same rate.
10. I believe in honest money, the gold and silver coinage of the
Constitution, and a circulating medium convertible into such money
without loss. I regard it as flagrant violation of the explicit provisions of
the Constitution for the Federal Government to make it a criminal offense
to use gold or silver coin as legal tender or to use irredeemable paper
money.
11. I believe that each state is sovereign in performing those
functions reserved to it by the Constitution and it is destructive of our
federal system and the right to self-government guaranteed under the
Constitution for the Federal Government to regulate or control the States
in performing their functions or to engage in performing such functions
itself.
12. I consider it a violation of the Constitution for the Federal
Government to levy taxes for the support of state or local government;
that no state or local government can accept funds from the Federal and
remain independent in performing its functions, nor can the citizens
exercise their rights of self-government under such conditions.
13. I deem it a violation of the right of private property guaranteed
under the Constitution for the Federal Government to forcibly deprive the
citizens of this nation of their property through taxation or otherwise, and
make a gift thereof to foreign governments or their citizens.
14. I believe that no treaty or agreement with other countries
should deprive our citizens of rights guaranteed them by the Constitution.
15. I consider it a direct violation of the obligation imposed upon it
by the Constitution for the Federal Government to dismantle or weaken
our military establishment below that point required for the protection of
the States against invasion, or to surrender or to surrender or commit our
men, arms, or money to the control of foreign or world organizations of
governments. [Editor's note: United Nations, NATO, NAFTA, ect...]
These things I believe to be the proper role of government.
We have strayed far afield. We must return to basic
concepts and principles--to eternal verities. There is no other
way. The storm signals are up. They are clear and ominous.
As Americans--citizens of the greatest nation under Heaven--we
face difficult days. Never, since the days of the Civil War--100 years
ago--has this choice nation faced such a crisis.
In closing I wish to refer you to the words of the patriot Thomas
Paine, whose writings helped so much to stir into a flaming spirit the
smoldering embers of patriotism during the days of the American
Revolution:

These are the times that try men's souls. The summer soldier and
the sunshine patriot will in this crisis, shrink from the service of his
country; but he that stands it NOW, deserves the love and thanks of man
and woman. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this
consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the
triumph. What we obtain too cheap, we esteem to lightly; 'tis dearness
only that gives everything its value. Heaven knows how to put a proper
price upon its goods; and it would be strange indeed, if so celestial an
article as FREEDOM should not be highly rated. (The Political Works of
Thomas Paine, p. 55.)

I intend to keep fighting. My personal attitude is one of
resolution--not resignation.
I have faith in the American people. I pray that we will never do
anything that will jeopardize in any manner our priceless heritage. If we
live and work so as to enjoy the approbation of a Divine Providence, we
cannot fail. Without that help we cannot long endure.

All Right-Thinking Americans Should Now Take Their Stand

So I urge all Americans to put their courage to the test. Be firm in
our conviction that our cause is just. Reaffirm our faith in all things for
which true Americans have always stood.
I urge all Americans to arouse themselves and stay aroused. We
must not make any further concessions to communism (socialism) at
home or abroad. We do not need to. We should oppose communism
(socialism) from our position of strength for we are not weak.
There is much to be done. The time is short. Let us begin--in
earnest--now, and may God bless our efforts, I humbly pray.

To My Chinese Readers

2010-06-17T09:27:00.004-04:00

I feel really bad about getting comments from Chinese readers that are not in English.

For example yesterday I received a comment on the previous post that after putting it though Google translator said: "Human good words, such as the sponge with water to suck firmly", which to me meant that the reader found the content good and refreshing.

It's nice to get friendly feedback and it seems the only comments I ever get are in Chinese.

I don't post them and blogger provides no way for me to write back and thank the reader for their comment.

I just discovered Google Translator today and for the first time was able to actually read one of these comments (above).

Ok, so I just found out that the comments I was so happy to get really were just spam for chinese porn. So.....................um.......................nevermind!

So I apologize to my Chinese readers for this deficiency.

I hope the issue is resolved some day.

Meanwhile, if you can translate your comments before you send them and/or include your email address I will either post them or at least offer thanks for them.

Best wishes,
Doc

Pastor’s Pulpit Endorsement Violates Federal Tax Law...Or Does It?

2010-06-11T08:23:00.008-04:00

Here's the email - My comments follow. - Rev. Lowrey

Watchdog Group Says Baptist Pastor’s Pulpit Endorsement Violates Federal Tax Law

June 10, 2010

Americans United for Separation of Church and State today filed a complaint with the Internal Revenue Service about a Rapid City, S.D., church whose pastor endorsed a gubernatorial candidate during a church service.

The Rev. H. Wayne Williams, pastor of Liberty Baptist Tabernacle, endorsed state Sen. Gordon Howie, who was seeking the Republican nomination for governor. Williams’ May 16 endorsement from the pulpit was reported in a press release by the Howie campaign and in the Rapid City Journal.

“This church is tax exempt and may not intervene in elections,” said the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United. “

In a letter to the IRS today, Lynn outlined the case against Liberty Baptist. He noted that Howie’s campaign issued a press release on May 18 trumpeting the endorsement. In that press release, Williams stated, “I have no fear of the I.R.S.”

Read the letter to the IRS (PDF)

Read the AU staff member affidavit (PDF)

Doc responds.

Here is the email I sent back to American's United.

I don't see anywhere in these two documents where it is established that the church has 501.c.3 status.

I'm sure you know that churches are automatically tax exempt and do not have to obtain 501.c.3.

Those churches that do not apply for 501.c.3 recognition are under no restrictions that could affect their exempt status.

Perhaps this church is 501.c.3. and is subject to such restrictions.

If so, I think your documents should have reflected that.

As a minister of a free church that rejects the interference of government in religious affairs and has chosen to not apply for 501.c.3 I feel it is the religious duty of ministers to speak out against corruption in the community and to show support for people of integrity who are campaigning for office.

I believe that the 501.c.3 status has been promoted to churches, by playing on their ignorance, faithlessness and greed in an effort specifically intentioned to silence the churches voice of moral warning regarding government.

Providing a moral compass is the primary duty of a shepherd for his flock.

501.c.3 as applied to religious organizations is an evil that essentially invalidates to a very large degree that mission.

Placing churches under the control of government actually violates the anti-establishment clause of the 1st amendment and 501.c.3 churches do not merit it's protections.

501.c.3 churches are indisputably government churches.

God and His creatures don't need them.

Reverend Gregory Lowrey
UBU Ministries

Want to read more about the history of 501.c.3 and it's impact.

I only see two opportunities for misunderstanding in this brief history.

1) Where it says "The First Amendment clearly places the church outside the jurisdiction of the civil government:" (avoided if you understand that "places" = affirms)

The 1st Amendment does not grant to churches exemption from government control. What it does do is formally recognize that religion and free exercise are inherent and inalienable rights that are simply beyond the legitimate grasp of government and defines those rights in the USA as inviolable and Constitutionally Protected. (unless of course a church applies for 501.c.3 status)

2) "These organizations are exempt automatically if they meet the requirements of section 501(c)(3)."

Actually, these organizations are not required to meet the requirements of 501.c.3. Only organizations who have applied for 501.c.3 recognition can be required to meet this test.

The IRS further states in IRS pub. 557 that for Churches which have not sought IRS recognition and are not 501.c.3 but are FREE CHURCHES, the IRS considers only two determining factors:

“To determine whether an organization meets the religious purposes test of section 501(c)(3), the IRS maintains two basic guidelines.
1. That the particular religious beliefs of the organization are truly and sincerely held.
2. That the practices and rituals associated with the organization’s religious belief or creed are not illegal or contrary to clearly defined public policy.
If there is a clear showing that the beliefs (or doctrines) are sincerely held by those professing them, the IRS will not question the religious nature of those beliefs.”

This is the only "Test" and the IRS is careful to describe it as "guidelines" as the IRS recognizes it does not have the authority to test the authenticity of religious exercise.

Even, part 2 of these guidelines can withstand a legal challenge if part 1 is met.

What the IRS is saying is simply that in cases where part 2 is not met, they feel they have the right to take a closer look at part 1.

They do not have that right though and even the courts have no right to consider any case unless it clearly demonstrates that the natural rights of others are being infringed such as in the fraud charges against Jim Bakker.

Government cannot claim religious exercise to be constrained by cultural context or social values - only equal rights to free exercise. (we have a few illegal laws in this regard)

The Golden Rule Wins in California Politics!

2010-06-10T09:08:00.006-04:00

California just voted for open primary elections instead of party primaries.

This means that all citizens are included in the selection of representatives to government.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/10/us/politics/10prop.html?th&emc=th

This is great news for America and the world as it opens the door to eliminate partisan politics in our national agenda.

You can help in an effort for all states to follow California's lead by signing (online) this petition to President Obama to encourage similar legislation for the benefit of all Americans.

Follow this link to read and sign the petition. (also to print it and engage your neighbors to sign by going door to door)

http://www.openprimaries.org/files/full-petition.pdf

Matthew 7:12 Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets.

(Meaning it is the LAW OF GOD and sums up ALL the [legitimate] TEACHINGS OF THE PROPHETS)

One of my favorite songs and a powerful influence on the development of my life perspective comes from the LDS hymnbook (they didn't write the lyrics, just adopted them).

When I was a teenager and young adult this hymn was sung (with fervor) nearly every Sunday in church. Sadly it is seldom used any more.

Do What Is Right,” Hymns of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, no. 237

Resolutely

1. Do what is right; the day-dawn is breaking,
Hailing a future of freedom and light.
Angels above us are silent notes taking
Of ev’ry action; then do what is right!

[Chorus]
Do what is right; let the consequence follow.
Battle for freedom in spirit and might;
And with stout hearts look ye forth till tomorrow.
God will protect you; then do what is right!

2. Do what is right; the shackles are falling.
Chains of the bondsmen no longer are bright;
Lightened by hope, soon they’ll cease to be galling.
Truth goeth onward; then do what is right!

3. Do what is right; be faithful and fearless.
Onward, press onward, the goal is in sight.
Eyes that are wet now, ere long will be tearless.
Blessings await you in doing what’s right!

Text: Anon., The Psalms of Life, Boston, 1857

Because of this hymn, I adopted early in life the personal credo "Do what's right - fuck the consequences".

"What is Right" is dictated by the "Royal Law". James 2:8 If ye fulfil the royal law according to the scripture, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself, ye do well:

Do what is right; let the consequence follow.
Battle for freedom in spirit and might;
God will protect you; then do what is right!

Why is there something instead of nothing?

2010-05-21T14:23:00.001-04:00

Here is an interesting little article.

May 20, 2010
NYTimes
The Being of Being

Why is there something instead of nothing? That is a child’s question, but it also haunts the imaginations of physicists and mathematicians. What they know is that the matter and antimatter created in the Big Bang should have canceled each other out, leaving nothing instead of the something we call the universe. Why that didn’t happen may have been partially revealed in a recent experiment in the Tevatron — a particle accelerator — at Fermilab, in Batavia, Ill.

We proceed gingerly when interpreting the results of high-energy physics experiments. The way it has been explained is that it all comes down to a very slight bias, an asymmetry, in the behavior of a subatomic particle, the neutral B-meson. As it oscillates between its matter and antimatter states, it shows a slight predilection for matter, a result predicted by Andrei Sakharov.

That preference for one state over another — becoming matter more readily than it becomes antimatter — is small, about 1 percent. But that may be enough to explain the preponderance of matter. We expect more news on this front from the Tevatron and its larger European cousin, the Large Hadron Collider.

What these physicists are searching for is a model of the universe and its origins. We are, as we know, made of stardust, of elements formed in the Big Bang and in the subsequent creation and destruction of stars. The very existence of this universal stuff called matter may depend on a slight bias in the frenetic variation of a particle we can only momentarily detect, in the hottest kilns humanity has so far created.

Bumps in the road.

2010-05-18T10:22:00.004-04:00

I wrote a close friend today that the pain he endures, that seems so overwhelming now, will likely later be recalled as a relative bump in the road along his greater life path.

It made me think about how often I am asked what our church is about and I talk about how some people just don't feel a good fit with the orthodoxy, dogma and ritual of organized religion but they still seek spiritual development and a sense of community of like-mindedness, and that is where they find their attraction to our ministry.

It seems that most often it is people who have a bumpy path in life who are attracted to our services and seek to form social and spiritual bonds with us.

The vast majority of people, of course - are more comfortable in the mutual dead ends they have accepted as their waiting for death existences.

To us they are huddled masses of fear clogging the darkest corners of life.

Unfortunately, these are our public majority and bureaucracy - an overwhelming avalanche of ignorance, fear and greed.

To them, we are wild and out of control - not doing what has always been done - not lining up and bending neatly over.

But there are some few who have eyes to see and ears to hear and a care to face reality.

Maybe that's you. Maybe you notice that you just are not a square peg and never will be without sacrificing all the parts of your character that make you a unique creation of God.

Religions generally seek to define, improve and pass judgment on God's creation - YOU!

I recall some little phrase from a child, "God made me - and God don't make crap".

The bumps in life.

That is where interesting things happen; where all the lessons are learned.

Our societies are populated by sheep who hide from truth while craving (even false) order and shiny things - dominated by vultures and snakes who consider feeding off the flock their special privilege.

It is part of our spiritual development - if we are inclined to have any - to have the teeth of the entire dead end culture snapping at our rears once we dare hop out of the pile and start to be the people we were created to be instead of the brain dead robot zombie slaves our um...."elites" of society demand.

If you are going to open your eyes; you have to expect a little grit now and then.

Thus I suppose comes the phrase, "Grin and bear it."

Only you can be true to yourself. What is the alternative?

Doc

PS - From Tyranny - Expect Corruption. It trickles down.

2010-05-13T23:35:00.002-04:00

So I got this email today from the ACLU.

I thought it might be of interest to all you Facebook users.

Dear ACLU Member,

According to news reports, Facebook has called an "all hands" meeting today to discuss its privacy policies. That's because they are facing a brewing revolt among Facebook users alarmed by the company's cavalier attitude toward protecting your privacy.

In recent months, Facebook has rolled out some very privacy-unfriendly practices, from the "privacy transition" that took away privacy controls to "instant personalization" that instantly shares your personal information with third party pages without your consent.

At every step, the ACLU has been there to push back. Why? Because the less control you have over your own personal information, the more likely that information could end up in the wrong hands—including the government's.

Sign the ACLU's petition. Tell Facebook loud and clear that you want control of your personal information.

Facebook's founder Mark Zuckerberg has claimed that "the default is social." That means Facebook starts from the assumption that your personal information will be distributed far and wide without your consent. But, tens of thousands of you have signed the ACLU petition to make it clear that you want to share with your friends, not a spying government.

Facebook is feeling the heat. It's time to hold the company's feet to the fire and take back control of our personal information.

You—not Facebook—should decide who to trust with private information about your political interests, sexual orientation, and more.

Sign the ACLU Facebook privacy petition. Make it clear you want to share with the people you choose, not the ones Facebook chooses for you.

Today's reported all-hands meeting at Facebook means we've got their attention. Let's keep the pressure on until Facebook adopts policies that respect the privacy of its users.

Sincerely,

Anthony D. Romero
Executive Director
ACLU

P.S. Visit Demand Your dotRights for tips on how to navigate the recent Facebook changes.

Obama Zombies

2010-04-26T14:26:00.004-04:00

How the Liberal Machine Brainwashed My Generation

I just read the 1st chapter in this book by Jason Mattera - you can read it HERE.

The cover and the title really captured my attention and it started out being pretty interesting, describing how the media was all hot and wet over Pres. Obama during the 2006-8 campaign and how many news agents ended up with government jobs.

After a while though Jason's style started to sound like one endless lopsided rant against everything Obama and for me at least his own lopsidedness and total "socialist, America-killing liberal behind every word" perspective kind of killed his argument that all liberals, all Democrats, all reporters and every word spoken by the President (Obama) was lopsidedly liberal and out of step with Americans and American values, needs, etc.

By the time I got to the end of the first chapter where Jason describes Obama not as the puppet of Chicago, gangster politicians as in the first few paragraphs, but rather as the puppet, bought and paid for by Apple and Google - now, according to Jason both run by former VP and pseudo environmentalist Al Gore I was ready to upload my gratitude to the folks who devised the "look inside this book" feature now common to book-selling sites, so that I didn't end up with another useless book on my shelf that only had a cool cover and title to recommend it.

So, IMO - don't judge a book by it's cover - I've included the only good parts right here for you already - enjoy.

I suppose I am a little jealous over the political use of the word zombie anyway - I mean without first gaining my permission - since I feel I have taken ownership of that word in my depiction of Utarnians as "brain-dead Mormon zombies". I really object to anyone watering down the impact of my use of zombie by misapplication to anyone who is still crying over John McCain and bra-less girl not being our current weiner and cunt idiots in chief(s) - talk about two brain-dead zombies. (they could be Utah Mormons!)

I do want to remind anyone (if indeed there is anyone) who reads this that it is only the Utah variety of Mormons that I particularly despise and consider the dingle-berries of Satan. Other Mormons I only hopelessly pity. After 40 years in this criminal cult, including serving a full time mission, being a daily temple worker and living in Utah for 13 years - I feel I have the right to an opinion - and - I hope that anyone who finds my opinion confusing or offensive will take it as an invitation to take a long hard look at Mormonism - which is IMO about as nefarious a family destroying cult as has ever abused the concept of "Christianity", the Golden Rule, and defamed the name of Jesus while pretending to be his only legitimate representative on earth.

It looks like just reading chapter one of Jason's rant has got me primed to go off on one of my own but I'm going to chop it off here and just refer anyone interested to all my previous posts about Mormonism. I promise there will be more of those, hopefully more concise, precise and all-encompassing - and less rant-ish.

Back for a moment to Jason's Obama Zombies though.

I have been as surprised as anyone I suppose, by the methods the President has used to pursue or fail to pursue the objectives he outlined in his campaign. I also wonder how many of those objectives were just suppositions in my own head and not ever really part of his agenda.

I did vote for Pres. Obama on an admittedly "take a chance for change and softening of racial tension" stand, and I'm glad that both those things have happened, even though most of the (very little) racial softening that has occurred was, I think already in progress and had little or nothing to do with...can I call him P.O.(?) - [I hate to admit to being a lazy writer - especially since I know I use 100 words to tell a 10 word tale (um...sorry about that)].

We have seen some change too, and that is a surprise - and though a lot of people are upset over it - and even I didn't expect any changes to really please me - the act of moving us out of stagnation into trying new ideas and just taking a step - any step - and getting out of the headlights of the last few administrations fascist policies just seemed good.

I was very hurt when PO teased us all with his promise to prosecute Bush/Cheney as demanded by the Pres. of the United Nations (and me) if it turned out they had committed the crimes of which they were accused. Since they unabashedly did commit those crimes in front of the whole wide world - I naively expected to see them finally on trial and surely convicted.

Well, it was only a tease to get us all worked up and distracted from PO's initial criminal exercises, including the continuation of the rape of freedom in America and murder for profit (um...profits for high society buddies and their political goons).

But, even though (he would be prince) George is rapidly fading from everyone's memory and justice will likely never be done and freedoms lost are rarely returned - except by the shedding of blood that bought them in the first place - from King George ironically, I have to admire the smooth manner of our current President nudging us gently off the cliff instead of the overt bludgeoning we have gotten used to over the past 30 or 50 or 200 years.

I guess if I ever write a book about PO, I can call it "Our President Wore Sneakers"!

Still, change is good - and we do have an opportunity to make something good out of this.

Just doing something, and seeing that we can change our world and not just be helpless victims of government is important.

If the changes made are bad ones, at least we have the hope that the "movement" will inspire "We The People" to take to the streets to get necessary adjustments back to freedom made.

And, to be sure, I think that only by taking to the streets will any restoration to freedom occur.

I don't trust any of our politicians - especially Republicans and Democrats - to me, they are all evil, sell-outs the minute they achieve Party endorsement.

Like Jesus said, "No man can serve two masters" - either you serve the People or you serve the Party!

So, I leave Jason's book to all the people who love Fox News and CNN and who sold out - and are willing to continue to sell out present and future generations for a few undeserved and unearned luxuries today.

Daily Study With Doc!

2010-01-25T13:51:00.003-05:00

Yup, could be religion, politics or something worthwhile.
http://www.ubu-ministries.org Daily @ 10 PM EST - Interactive!
Doc

24 February 2010 Update
I'm sorry that the online study has been stalled temporarily.
We will resume shortly.
Thanks for your patience.

It's Happening Now!

2009-11-12T16:48:00.002-05:00

Yes, as we speak...so to speak.

Even though we have yet to obtain a building for meetings and expanded services(especially tattooing and piercing by our students), we are offering limited services from the parsonage here in Ferndale.

I am offering healing, counseling and piercing services and am preparing to offer a weekly scripture study here.

Kita is offering tattoo services from her private studio here at the parsonage.

We are anxious to find a larger, but still very local space where we can offer more community services and hold regular meetings but in the meantime we are making do with what we have.

Our Utah ordeal this last year and a half has taken a pretty heavy toll on us, not just financially but also placed a heavy burden on our creative expression.

Speaking for myself, I could not find the inspiration to sing or practice guitar for the entire time though I did give some weekly drum lessons that allowed me a little guitar playing.

Now, I get to re-tune myself and re-remember my own music, though it annoys me that I can't remember my own songs or the covers I worked so long and hard on.

But I know I will get back in the spirit of things and will be able to retrain myself so that I will be able to perform locally in just a few weeks.

So, I hope people in the Metro Detroit area will come to hear me perform and help me get a meeting house put together.

I hear that a lot of the enthusiasm I felt in Ferndale a couple years ago has waned, but I know that can be turned around and that is where I am putting my effort now.

In the meantime, I need people who need to be healed or who need counseling. I have specialized for over 30 years in healing the un-heal-able (including mental illness) and have had great success healing cancer and seizure disorders as well as migraine, spine and joint problems, anxiety disorders - just anything and everything.

If you are sick and want to be well - come see me. Skeptics respond to my treatments as good as anyone else, so don't let lack of belief deter you.

Feel free to email me at gregory.lowrey@gmail.com to schedule a visit.

And for those who are stuck in Utah...

We kept the mission office (Happy Valley Tattoo & Piercing) open just for you...and brought a good artist down from Montana to serve you.

Rev. Steve needs you to come in and support him so we can keep the studio open for you.

He is tattooing and piercing and will offer other spiritual services on request.

We have kept the studio open at great personal expense and hope our friends in Utah will not make our efforts for them a wasted effort.

I hope to see you all soon.

Doc

Back In Michigan At Last!

2009-10-05T15:13:00.002-04:00

It's hard to keep up with all the different websites we have. I'm sorry there hasn't been a post here since June. Kita does much better with her list.

However, since we are FINALLY back in Michigan (Fun, Friendly, Freaky & Fabulous Ferndale) as we get unpacked and settled in, I should be able to get better at this.

www.ubu-ministries.org gets pretty regular attention and has links to lots of articles and news about what Kita and I are up to.

Also, I will be able to start doing some shows and participating in other public events now that we are back in Metro-Detroit.

Thanks for you patience.

Doc

Day 79 - 20 Ring, Leg Corset Piercing

2009-06-11T16:26:00.005-04:00

It took almost an hour and a half.
My client was perfect and never winced or whined.
After some healing time, I will get a picture of it all laced up.
Kita was kind enough to take pictures for me and shot video, so some kind of cool video might show up on YouTube or wherever she hosts those things.
Anyway, it was a fun piercing to do and it came out perfect (20 times in a row).
I was extra happy about that.
Doc

Oh yes, Day 79!
The days are slipping by so fast.
Kita says our MySpace Friendlist for Michigan is growing really fast and we are super excited about that.
We are getting to see a lot of Utah clients that we haven't seen in awhile and it is great to see them. The only people in Utah that we have met in the last 11 years that we actually get to enjoy our relationships with have been people we have met in our studio.
There's a couple polygamists we met that we like too. (they don't come to the studio - unless you count that one....)
We still have tons of stuff to go through from storage and are still working on our online store.
It will primarily be at www.ubu-ministries.org but I likely will put a link up here also.
Also, if you have some sick people that you would like to make well, you have 79 days before you will have to plan on seeing me in Michigan. My "healing" page is here.
Get your art going now - so you can get your tattoo before we go.

Day 88 - President Obama - Stick to the plan please!

2009-06-04T16:25:00.001-04:00

By BEN SMITH & JONATHAN MARTIN | 6/4/09 4:32 AM EDT

Updated: 6/4/09 10:08 AM EDT

: Gay rights campaigners have begun to voice their public frustration with Obama's inaction and deafening silence on what they see as the signal civil rights issue of this era. Photo: AP

President Barack Obama’s promises of change are falling short for one core Democratic constituency: gays and lesbians, whose leaders say Obama’s administration isn’t keeping up with the times.

Gay rights campaigners, most of them Democrats who supported Obama in November, have begun to voice their public frustration with Obama’s inaction, small jokes at their community’s expense and deafening silence on what they see as the signal civil rights issue of this era.

His most important campaign promises repealing the Defense of Marriage Act and the military ban on openly gay and lesbian service-members have not been fulfilled.

And the news, which emerged quietly earlier this year, that he’d supported same-sex marriage back in 1996, then changed his mind, especially rankles. As mainstream Democratic politicians such as Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) move to support same-sex marriage, gay rights advocates say that the barrier-breaking president looks increasingly odd for opposing what they see as full equality.

“Obama is out of step with his party, which is overwhelmingly in favor of marriage at this stage,” said David Mixner, a veteran gay rights activist who is among the organizers of a march on Washington for same-sex marriage scheduled for this fall. “He’s out of step with the next generation.”

Gay rights issues have been moving at breakneck speed, none faster than same-sex marriage. Most public opinion polls now show more than 40 percent of Americans support same-sex marriage, seen as a fringe issue just a few years earlier. Already, five New England states and Iowa have same-sex marriage laws on the books.

“Politicians are finding out that their voters are moving faster than they anticipated,” said Democratic pollster Celinda Lake, who called Obama’s place behind that curve “surprising, because he is the next-generational candidate.”

She noted that Obama could be concerned about alienating older voters in the Midwest who would be turned off if he came out in support of same-sex marriage.

The White House has been reluctant to spend its political capital pushing Obama’s highest-profile pro-gay positions believing, White House allies say, that it could detract from priorities like health care. And it may be even less likely to do next year, with midterms approaching.

But officials have told restive gays and lesbians to give them until the end of this month to show movement on a number of lower-profile issues they support, including restrictions on visas for people with HIV. The Pentagon also has toned down public opposition to reversing the gay ban, and the new secretary of the Army’s job will be, in part, to smooth the way for that move.

“The president remains fully committed to advancing LGBT rights. His positions on all of these issues are well-established and well-known. His staff continues to work with Congress on a variety of LGBT issues,” said Jim Messina, the deputy White House chief of staff who is the point man on gay and lesbian issues, citing White House efforts to move hate crimes legislation through the Senate. “While we recognize that some in the community are anxious, the president’s commitment has not wavered.”

100 Day Countdown - Day 100

2009-05-24T22:57:00.000-04:00

100 Day Countdown - Day 100
Day one is the day we suddenly vanish from Zion.
(By Zion, I mean the wrong side of the rotting edge of the anal sphincter of hell)
I know any of the people we know in Utah understand, as they pretty much feel the same about it. Except for the mountains and a very few friendly people, Utah is just an ugly public spectacle of Disney meets Mayberry, meets Con-Artist, Folk Magic, Old Time, Elitist, Extremest Religion and it's private government.
(I'd like it with Larry, Moe, Curly and Shemp as Brigham Young and his cohorts - I go for Curly as Brigham and Larry as Joseph Smith).
Well, anyway, there are some really sweet people also "stuck" in Utah and we really hope for their eventual escape to the real world.
We will help if we can.
Reality has it's perils to be sure, but so does brain dead zombie-ism.
In an effort to resist ragging on Utah, just let me repeat that if Jesus' "build on a firm foundation" lesson is true, Utah must be recognised as a so called "civilization" that is built on an ARTIFICIAL foundation. Utah is artificially sustained. Life does not survive in Utah unaided.
That aid comes with a price.
You must become a brain-dead zombie.
So, I hurt for the many very nice people I know in Utah - I hope for your relocation.
Indeed, the mountains are beautiful.
There are places in the real world where life springs out of the earth, unbidden, needing no encouragement or assistance from man.
There are places that are naturally designed to encourage and support life.
There are places where diversity, equality, individuality - are cherished and appreciated, in spite of and at times to celebrate social, religious and ethnic differences.
Moses spent 7 years in the desert being spiritually refined.
Joseph spent 14 years in the desert, but that was raising goats to trade for women.
It seems the only woman I want in Utah is the one I brought with me from Michigan.
So, what will I bring back from my 11 years in the desert?
What gifts will I bring from the land of the dead?
If God (who-ever or what-ever you consider that to be) decided (or randomly acted) to drop in and help Michigan - what, how, who?
We have paid a high price for our education through 50 years of Mormonism (including 15 years in the most radical version) and the last 11 years of living in "the pearl in the LDS oyster", Utah County - home of Brigham Young University, Happy Valley - the most Mormon, the purest and sweetest (and safest, so you can send your kids to BYU - you know, to mate.) part of the Mormon pie.
As you could easily surmise, non-brain dead, Mormon zombies are not well appreciated in Happy Valley, where the local motto is "come on vacation; go home on probation".
So, anyway, I for one, am going to be very happy to be back in Detroit.
(By Detroit, I mean Ferndale)

Wow - what was that?

Howdy, Howdy!

2009-05-09T20:10:00.002-04:00

Well, I changed my domain back to this page so I can have a "personal" site again.

There is a list of all my other websites in the right hand menu.

I am working alot on the UBU Ministry page, so I don't know how often I will be posting here, but I want to try to write regularly and clean up my archives a bit.

Anyway, I hope you find something worth your time here.

Doc

Return to Sender

2008-03-31T18:51:00.004-04:00

AGAIN!!!!
Yes, we have switched back to blogger again.

Our ministry has changed it's name to UBU Ministries - homepage http://www.ubu-ministries.org

Healing and counseling have always been important services of the ministry.
If you want to access my health articles you can go here http://www.gregorylowrey.com

Aquiring spiritual/personal emblems in the form of tattoos and piercings are spiritual services that have also been in high demand.
We are grateful to be voted #1 year after year by our community.
We have a website devoted to our body art services at http://www.tat2me.com

Music is another important part of our ministry. If you would like to listen to some of my songs (and a cover or two) you can visit http://www.myspace.com/docloco

One part of the ministry that I wish didn't exist is our victimization at the hands of local (Utah County and American Fork City) government (and the lack of interest in our civil rights by the Utah FBI and US Attorney, Utah Atty General, etc.) which has been commonly referred to as the Happy Valley Tattoo Massacre'.
While the criminal charges against me and Shandi have both been dropped, the matter of intolerance and harassment is still far from resolved.
There are articles on this site about it, but all the court records and a full description of the many issues at hand are located on a site dedicated to just this issue - The Happy Valley Tattoo Massacre'.

I guess you can surmise that I was not elected President in 2008. My political views are primarily located on this site and at the ministry webpage.

Best wishes,
Doc

Happy Valley Tattoo Massacre' (Part 3)

2008-01-14T17:36:00.000-05:00

The Happy Valley Tattoo Massacre’
Overview

On January 3rd, 2008, the American Fork, Utah Police Department served a search and seizure warrant on Happy Valley Tattoo & Piercing, a service division of Whole Life Ministries on a complaint that the ministry had displayed photographs of pierced genitals to two minors.

The raid required 6 police officers who inspected every inch of the studio for over an hour including adjacent parsonage and storage areas.

Artist portfolios, tattoo art "flash" books, drawings and paintings were seized though not described in the warrant.

The police have engaged in and ongoing assault of harassment and intimidation against several staff members repeatedly threatening them with prison and unnecessarily interfering with their opportunity to offer services.

Photographs of genital piercings, at the heart of the present dispute, kept in a separate photo album clearly marked in big red letters as "Adult" body piercings, fit the description on the Utah Attorney Generals website as material not obscene or pornographic, but rather are of sociological value to minors and though restricted by the ministry to adults only, according to the definition of the Utah AG, are appropriate to be viewed by anyone of any age as would a National Geographic Magazine which is an example the AG uses.

The charge first detailed that the alleged inappropriate display was by the giving over the counter a book of photographs to two 14 year old girls in the day or two after Christmas 2007, the story later changing to 6 minors (3 boys/3 girls) not being given the book to look at but rather viewing it as it sat on a bookshelf in the public reception area on one unspecified day sometime during the two months before Christmas, later changing to 4 minors on one unspecified day during the two months before Christmas.

Minors are prohibited from entering the studio without parents or legal guardians as posted on both front studio doors (until Jan 6, 2008 – now posted once) and traffic is very limited this time of year (all fall).

Staff members do not recall 2 minors asking to see or looking at such materials and do only recall one group of minors around Halloween who did not look at any books but demanded service without a parent to consent for one girl who had received a lip piercing the previous April with her mother's consent.

She now wanted a second lip piercing and when denied, wanted the piercer to meet her at a local Albertson's Grocery and do the piercing in the bathroom.

When that request was also denied, the teens wanted to purchase a needle and jewelry so they could do the piercing themselves at home.

When that request was denied, the kids threw a fit and had to be told to leave.

This appears to be the group of 6 kids the police refer to.

The teens at first identified Dr. Lowrey as one of the two persons who supposedly handed them the book to look at, but as he was 1,000 miles away from Sept to late Dec, the police instead chose to disregard the identification of old, white hair and white beard and substitute a student at the studio who was 22 years old at the time.

The child had access to the photo albums which were previously kept in a public area while she was in the company of her mother, having from April to December to advise her friends of it's content.

She also could access similar photos by the thousands in the many online piercing galleries that do not screen for minor access and thus could easily describe typical genital piercings even if she had not had access to the studio’s piercing book.

As all staff members are pictured online on the studio website http://tat2me.com and were all prominently featured in cable television advertising that ran from September through November 2007, it would not be hard for people who had never even been in the studio to make positive identifications of staff members.

The children were in violation of studio policy and while neither children nor studio violated any actual laws, the children did attempt to induce our staff to violate the law and the police are using the incident backwards to persecute and illegally prosecute staff members when they actually were going out of their way to protect the interests of the community in general and the parents of these (can I say snot nosed brats?) in particular.

Today, Dr. Lowrey was served a summons to appear in court in American Fork, February 22, 2008 on charges of Unlawful Tattooing of a Minor (2 counts) from an incident last May 2007 where two 17 year old boys by fraud and deceit, obtained tattoos in spite of providing ID that showed they were a few weeks (3/6) on the wrong side of their birthdays.

Dr. Lowrey was in Detroit, Michigan at the time of the incident but is being charged as the Owner of the studio and he contends that this current charge is simply harassment in retaliation for his sticking up for his staff and the law.

Police reports prove that the boys tricked (scammed) the receptionist and declared themselves to be adults of legal age to receive services several times in writing on the studio release form.

Both boys were charged with communications fraud to which they plead guilty and paid a fine.

The receptionist was violated by the government when she was charged, as she was a victim and the police investigation proves that she was not complicit and was deceived into providing prohibited services she would under normal conditions refuse.

The receptionist, both artists and Dr. Lowrey are thus exonerated by state law Utah State Code 76-10-2201-(4), which law is adopted intact by American Fork City as the City Ordinance.

Since this is the law that the American Fork Police are attempting to prosecute under, I would think they would read clause (4) as well as 1,2,3 & 5 especially as clause 4 specifically invalidates 1-3 & 5 as regards this incident.

American Fork has already falsely charged, prosecuted and convicted (by intimidating her into pleading guilty when she was a victim not an offender) the receptionist and now is engaging in more false prosecution.

The American Fork Police have repeatedly claimed that they decided to not prosecute Dr. Lowrey and the two artists on these charges, but when Dr. Lowrey advised Lt. Falslev of his intention to not fire his Assistant Manager (since she did every thing right and nothing wrong) and to advise her to demand a jury trial if she was charged as Lt. Falslev kept threatening, the Lt. began to threaten Dr. Lowrey with a renewal of interest in the previous charges, indicating that if Dr. Lowrey did not scapegoat his staff member (suggesting firing her would be sufficient, in addition to their charging her) that Dr. Lowrey and the artists could be charged on the old issues and in fact could be expecting charges in the next few days.

On January 14, 2008, due to Dr. Lowrey's protest over the further victimization of his assistant manager (Shandi Child) over the new charges of display to a minor, the city has elected to resurrect their investigation and charge Dr. Lowrey in the incident from the previous May where his innocence has already been proved by the American Fork Police and the Court in their own investigation and charges against the boys.

Dr. Lowrey also claims his and his staff’s rights were violated over an incident occurring between these two incidents, when police refused to charge with assault an adult female who threw a cell phone at another assistant manager when she could not get the service she desired in the time frame she wanted.

This is simply an effort by local government to practice religion against religion discrimination by charging the victims of these crimes in an effort drive the church and it's spiritual tattoo and piercing services out of town because the predominant religion disapproves of such practices and the “member mafia” assumes the prerogative to drive out by any means including illegal means and invented charges, anyone who believes differently than them.

Rather than tell local parents that their children need to obey posted restrictions on their entry to the studio without parents or legal guardians or to receive services without parents or guardians the police prefer to fabricate unsupportable violations against the church in an effort to harass and intimidate us until we move out of town, which is the solution they repeatedly and snidely suggest.

The ACLU is considering taking on the case and the FBI is launching an investigation as are the Utah Attorney General and the Utah POST. (State Police Officer Training Department)

Previous posts on this blog detail these events.

Sunday's Message, er.......Monday

2008-01-14T13:02:00.000-05:00

Jesus said, "Don't be a Dick." Matthew 22: 36-40

It may be true that the law cannot make a man love me, but it can keep him from lynching me, and I think that's pretty important.
Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

The Saturday before last I emailed over 50 National and International newspapers about our experience. I have not gotten a single reply beyond a few immediate receipt of email confirmations.

That really confuses me, but it looks like there is interest developing in government and legal agencies and since I am still not in jail, I do have the opportunity to attend to all the many other research, emails and phone calls that this intrusion has engendered - not like I didn't already have more than I could get to.

I think I have found legal assistance but am waiting for actual confirmation and the government claims to be investigating but I am still waiting for the investigators.

So, now I still have to research American Fork and Utah County ordinances, which have been known to run counter to State and Federal Law as in the Utah County Law that over-rides the state parental consent law and denies parents the right to consent to tattoo and some piercing services for their minor children, but gives that right to give consent for such services for the same minor children to any Medical Doctor - still preserving the rights of parents to consent to boob and butt jobs for minor children of any age.

Of course, Medical Doctors have it fixed so they are pretty much totally unregulated by government, but who expected the government to mandate them to take over parenting responsibilities?

Certainly, the idea in Utah County (they are so sneaky) is to appear permissive, while actually being more restrictive, and illegally dictating morality.

It is not too hard to elicit the response (if you ask the question) that parents who would consent to a tattoo or tongue piercing (prohibited here by the Health Code for minors, but not adults - er.....so what's the health issue??) um.......well if they would agree to that they just don't deserve to make choices about their own children.

Can't those (immoral, stupid) parents just be happy with plastic surgery for their children instead?

Well, anyway, this is the week that all the investigations are supposed to start and so today I get to start making phone calls to the media since email doesn't seem to get the job done.

I think it kind of sucks when you have to badger law enforcement to enforce the law, but I hope that once the ball is rolling I won't have to be a-cranking 24/7 and can get some of my planned work done.

I do want to say though that I think it is disgusting when local "news" routinely ignores news that might tarnish the public image of the majority religion.

I do understand that newspapers, radio and television primarily exist to sell advertising and in Utah, stories that darken the image of "the church" can make media advertising directors worry over potential loss of revenue.

That, I guess is just another day of life under fascism.

On a lighter note:
Yup there is still a good side to life, even for me...Kita and I have been devoting our Sundays to finishing the remodeling work, pounding and painting at the studio.

The reception area is mostly done and Kita has been painting some great window art. I am sure that the locals are hating the painting of an Oni but already loving the Geisha.

I suppose most people know a geisha is a fancy prostitute but for those who don't know how to google, here is some info on Oni's - which basically are now considered protectors.

Depictions of oni vary widely but usually portray them as hideous, gigantic creatures with sharp claws, wild hair, and two long horns growing from their heads. Their skin may be any number of colors, but red and blue are particularly common.

In more recent times, oni have lost some of their original wickedness and sometimes take on a more protective function. Men in oni costumes often lead Japanese parades to ward off any bad luck, for example. Japanese buildings sometimes include oni-faced roof tiles called onigawara , which are thought to ward away bad luck, much as gargoyles in Western tradition.

The tokusatsu production Kamen Rider Hibiki builded up on the image of the Oni as protectors of humans from other malevolent creatures and demons in Japanese folklore; in this case, however, they are not purely supernatural beings but empowered humans who are said to have "shed their humanity."

Many Japanese idioms and proverbs also make reference to oni. For example, the expression oya-ni ninu ko-wa oni-no ko means literally "a child that does not resemble its parents is the child of an oni," but it is used idiomatically to refer to the fact that all children naturally take after their parents, and in the odd case that a child appears not to do so, it might be because the child's true biological parents are not the ones who are raising the child. Depending on the context in which it is used, it can have connotations of "children who do not act like their parents are not true human beings (because real human children always take after their parents)," and may be used by a parent to chastise a misbehaving child. Variants of this expression include oya-ni ninu ko-wa onigo and oya-ni ninu ko-wa onikko.

Well, everyone is showing up for work, so I need to have our morning meeting and get on the phone.

Just remember - Don't be a Dick! It's the whole message of Jesus in four little words.

Doc

I will try to post again today on the continuing story of the Happy Valley Tattoo Massacre'.

The Man With Blue Skin

2008-01-12T12:00:00.007-05:00

Meet the Man With Blue Skin

When Paul Karason, now 57, developed a case of dermatitis 14 years ago, he decided to use a treatment called colloidal silver.

The treatment ... turned his skin blue, and he’s been living with it that way for over a decade.

Colloidal silver is made by extracting silver from metal. ... Karason both drank the silver and rubbed it on his skin.

...Karason [contracted] argyria, an irreversible blue-gray discoloration of your skin, nails and gums [that has been linked to use of poor quality] colloidal silver.

Karason has not sought medical attention for his skin discoloration, and he says he’s still drinking smaller amounts of the silver.

...Karason says his face turned blue after using a silver extract to treat dermatitis

Fourteen years ago, Karason developed a bad case of dermatitis, which results in swollen, reddened and itchy skin. He started self-medicating, using a treatment called colloidal silver, which is made by extracting silver from metal.

Click here to hear the blue man tell his story (VIDEO)

Karason, who recently moved from Oregon to Madera, Calif., said it hasn't been easy living with blue skin.

Karason made the move in hopes of fitting in a little better.

"I hope that they just accept me," he said, "And I think that will happen here. Where I was, I rather doubt it would have. This is different kind of community here."

Karason's girlfriend, Jackie Northrup, said she doesn't even notice his skin color any more.

"The only time now I really think about it or notice it is if we're out in public and people start staring," she said.

So far, Karason hasn't sought any medical attention for his condition. When he was asked if he's still drinking the colloidal silver, he said yes, but much less.

Dr. Mercola's Comments:

Colloidal silver has many antibacterial properties and is commonly used in hospitals to treat wounds and burns. It has even reached the mainstream in the form of a silver bandage line from Curad. According to the bandage company:

“Laboratory testing showed that silver reduced bacterial growth like Staph. aureaus, E. coli, E. hirae and Pseudomonas aeruginosa -- a powerful germ that does not respond to many antibacterials -- in the dressing for 24 hours.”

Even washing machines are now, for better or worse, using silver ions to kill bacteria.

Meanwhile, silver-coated urinary catheters are used to help reduce urinary tract infections (UTIs) -- studies showed they reduced the incidence of UTI by 47 percent -- and historically, colloidal silver has been used internally as a natural antibiotic.

However, while it certainly has some benefits, Paul Karason’s skin discoloration is an important reminder that even natural treatments can carry side effects, and taking large amounts of any supplement, even a natural one, has the potential to throw your body out of balance.

Colloidal silver has also become very popular on the Internet, and you must be very careful to avoid counterfeit, sub-par, or contaminated versions.

Because there are risks involved, I’d encourage anyone thinking of using colloidal silver to do so only under the care of a knowledgeable natural health clinician.

And as for Karason’s first problem, the dermatitis that prompted him to use the silver, getting some safe sun exposure on your skin is an ideal way to clear up this skin problem.

Remember also that most of the infections you acquire are not the result of some pernicious germ that is out to get you. Rather, most frequently it is because your immune system was impaired because you violated one or more of the following three basic health principles:

Getting enough sleep.

Having good tools to cope properly with stress. Emotional Freedom Technique (EFT) has proven to be an extremely effective stress-relief technique for many patients in my clinic. You can view the free EFT manual for more information.

Eating a healthy diet, tailored to your nutritional type, with little or no sugar or grains.

If you follow these three tips, your risk of infection, and need for an antibiotic (natural or otherwise), will be greatly decreased.

Dr. Lowrey's Comments:

A properly prepared colloid of silver will not cause any of the problems mentioned - including NOT turning your skin gray or blue.

This man disclosed in a lengthy television interview that he intentionally turned his skin blue, by ingesting large quantitites of low grade silver solution (not really colloidal) and additionally rubbing it daily into his skin to enhance the effect.

The negative effects (including blueness) are a result of poor quality silver and are extremely rare.

As was already pointed out, this "treatment" really would have had no effect on dermatitis and the use of any product because it is novel or a fad is just dumb.

The Public as well as Practitioners (and Marketers) need to do their research before practicing or making recommendations on anything.

While I think this guy was basically just being an attention seeker, his odd thinking cannot change the fact that "true" colloidal silver, used properly and for a proper purpose is highly effective.

If you get your silver from UBU Ministries or make your own (follow my link to a quality silver generator) you will not have any of these problems and will enjoy all the benefits of this important trace element.

The Happy Valley Tattoo Massacre (Part 2)

2008-01-12T11:54:00.000-05:00

Rev. Dr. Gregory Lowrey

Healer, Counselor – CEO

Whole Life Ministries

the raid...

So now the complaint has been made and the American Fork Police are doing whatever it is they do as they prepare to raid Happy Valley Tattoo.

On Thursday morning, January 3^rd, 2008 Dr. Lowrey was sitting on the couch in the reception area of Happy Valley Tattoo & Piercing which is in the front portion of the Whole Life Ministries building, drinking morning coffee and writing on his laptop.

Three men in sports jackets came to the front door and peered through. They looked like salesmen to Doc and when they noticed the “closed” sign and checked the posted hours they left.

Doc and Kita continued to prepare for their day.

The studio had been closed Thursdays for several months while Doc and Kita were in Michigan, but now it had become a day that they performed services together without other artists or assistants.

The studio opened on time at 12 pm and right away a patron appeared to request a tattoo, some oriental symbols representing part of his spiritual quest in life. Paperwork completed, Kita went to work performing the tattoo service, while Doc went back to writing.

Just as the tattoo was wrapping up, at about 1pm, the “salesmen” from earlier returned, this time entering the studio and walking up to the front desk.

There were only two men this time and Doc considered that they might be managers from the loan company next door dropping in to say hi and inquire about services.

From the couch by the window, Doc spoke; “Hi there, are you here for a tattoo or piercing today?”

The taller of the two men (discovered days later to be Police Chief Lance Call – the guy who doesn’t return phone calls) replied, “Not either, really.”

The other man (Head of Detectives, Lt. Darrin Falslev) turned and walked over to Doc, extending a piece of paper as he arrived in front of him.

“I’m here to serve this search warrant.” He said.

Doc recoiled slightly, his hands retreating from his computer and the extended paper in the officer’s hand.

“You know of course that this is a church.” “I don’t think you can walk in and just serve a warrant like this.”, Doc replied.

“We can and we are.” Responded the Lt., dropping the warrant on top of Doc’s now closed computer.

Dr. Lowrey quickly read over the two page document, noting the description of the order to search that read: “Items to be searched for include: Books containing photographs of male and female genital with piercings and tattoos, as well as any loose photos of the same nature.”

Still slightly overcome by surprise, Doc replied that it looked like they could make their search and stood up to take the officers, now obviously not salesmen, over to where the books they were looking for were kept behind the front counter.

Lt. Falslev was surprised too. “Doc, I thought you were out of town till February?” he asked.

“Well, I was supposed to be, but had to return early.” “We have been here almost three weeks now”, said Doc. “What exactly is the problem?”

The officer asked if a few other police officers could be invited in to help the search go faster and Doc agreed.

During the several minutes while the other officers were being fetched a client came in seeking service.

Doc spoke to her for a few minutes and then turned her over to Kita, who would be doing her service.

Kita gave her a tattoo art book to look at for the art she was seeking – a string of 5 hearts down her cheek.

Chief Call, Lt. Falslev and one or two more male officers and two female officers, one blond and one brunette, entered the studio.

Lt. Falslev began to recount the charge that two 14 year old girls had come into the studio a day or two after Christmas and some girl behind the front counter had handed them a piercing photo portfolio containing pictures of male and female genitals to look at.

Doc responded that we don’t show those materials to minors as he took Lt. Falslev around the counter and showed him the bookcase containing portfolios and other art.

Doc pulled out three of his own piercing portfolios - one marked in big red letters “ADULT body piercing photos” and one brand new portfolio just put together a few days earlier by his assistant manager and body piercer Shandi, which contained examples of her piercing work including one or two genital piercings.

Lt. Falslev indicated that two of the books appeared to contain the material he was seeking and that the other piercing portfolios and artist’s portfolios containing photos of tattoos and drawings for tattoos were not needed.

The other officers were kind of standing around in the front area and the blond female officer had taken the seat on the couch that Doc had just vacated.

The woman looking for the heart tattoo seemed undeterred by the ongoing raid even when the art book she was looking at was taken right from her hands by one of the officers for inspection.

The Lt. suggested to the group that the books he had in hand were probably all they needed, but the blond female officer from the couch wanted to look at all the binders from the bookcase which the brunette female officer began to collect up and stack on the front counter for her, another male officer assisting in passing them to the couch.

While those three officers made themselves busy looking at lettering books and books full of traditional tattoo designs, the first two policemen, Chief Call now taking over, began asking Doc to open drawers in the front office area for them to inspect for “loose photos”.

No photos were found and books left by staff members on top of file cabinets under the counter proved to be on spiritual topics rather than the dirty books the officers at first presumed.

Doc suggested to the client that if she wanted to wait, she could take a seat until the police were done, but that it was not practical to help her more until then.

Kita went to sit in her work area and the client sat down in the reception area while the police continued their search.

Lt. Falslev and Chief Call now had Doc take them to each private artist work area and open for them each drawer in the artist’s private work stations.

Again, no loose photos of any character were found, nor were there any other objectionable materials, simply art and tattoo equipment and supplies and in the piercing station, piercing tools and supplies.

Chief Call now directed Dr. Lowrey to show him the rest of the building, starting in the furnace room and moving to the bathroom and back to the kitchen, garage and other areas of the attached apartment where Dr. and Mrs. Lowrey are living while they finish remodeling the studio.

When remodeling is complete the apartment will make a clinic for healing and counseling services and a general ministry meeting area in addition to a small living space.

The separate entrance will allow clinic and other patrons to enter through a separate part of the building from the studio as that has been a minor issue for some people seeking more traditional ministry services such as counseling and healing.

The chief did not seem to find anything of interest in the parsonage portion of the building and he and Dr. Lowrey returned to the studio area where the other officers were mostly standing around, except for the one blond female officer who was still sitting on the couch looking at tattoo books.

Doc was asked about the drawers under the jewelry display case and the piercing jewelry catalogs on top of it. Doc opened each drawer, once each for Chief Call and Lt. Falslev to look for photos or books with photos. The drawers only contained jewelry and other supplies, a few outdated jewelry catalogs and the cash drawer.

Now the whole building had been searched and nothing had turned up except the portfolios that had been produced in the beginning of the raid.

The blond girl officer now started asking to have art, drawings and paintings taken off the walls in the artist’s private stations to add to her growing pile of material being seized.

Kita was emotionally overwhelmed as one of her original religious paintings was branded obscene and taken down and turned over to the police.

The officers now had decided to seize all of the artist’s personal portfolios as well as most of the “idea books” that patrons browse while considering what tattoo they desire.

They also decided to seize any art of any kind that depicted any minor degree of nudity as well as quantities of art that had no nudity at all.

Kita saw these seizures as crippling to the studio and couldn’t help but ask the officers why they were doing this to us.

Lt. Falselv and Chief Call were happy to answer her.

Lt. Falslev began telling us as though it was a proven fact, that we had provided pornographic materials to minors and our protests that none of our materials were pornographic just seemed to increase his counter protests that they were and his insistence that they had been “shown” by our staff to minors just the week previous.

Doc said something about how minors are not shown the book clearly marked adult, and that minors never want to look at it anyway as they seem to consistently consider adult piercings gross and icky.

Falslev voiced his contrary opinion adding that it was our responsibility to make sure no minors entered the studio unattended.

We countered that we had posted on both glass front doors our policy that minors must be accompanied by a parent or legal guardian but that we were often unable to discern who was a minor and who was not, identification not being required until services were contracted.

Both Chief Call and Lt. Falslev then began a lecture telling us that it was “against the law” for us to allow minors in the studio and that we were violating the law on a regular basis by doing so.

They both seemed to feel that we should be able to tell how old each person was and demanded that we permanently position someone by the front door to check the identification of every person as they attempted to enter.

I said that would be a bizarre way to operate a church and again said that it was our own policy and not the law that made prohibitions on minor’s access to browse in the studio and that I couldn’t see us sitting someone at the door like that.

I also told the officers that we were not required to check the identification of browsers, only of people who were contracting services and that it would be unreasonable to do so or to ask us to especially since it was their opinion and not the law that would require it of us.

When I voiced my complaint of the disrespect we get from the community and local government here and how the parents pass the idea to their children that our rights and policies are not worthy of the respect they demand for their own, Chief Call snidely and contemptuously said, “If you aren’t happy about the disrespect you get from the government and community, why do you live in Utah?”

I told Chief Call, though he never did introduce himself and it wasn’t till days later that I found out that the tall, rude cop was actually the Chief who never returns phone calls, that it was none of his business why I live in Utah, that I had as much right to live there and practice my religion and art and live unmolested, enjoying my civil and religious rights as anyone else.

During the raid, we were told a couple more times by Lt. Falslev and Chief Call that we should a) move out of Utah, or b) go back to Detroit.

Then we got another lecture about how if we were smart, we would prohibit minors completely and not offer services even with parental consent, a suggestion we often get from other people who own tattoo studios and find dealing with minors more bother than it’s worth.

I replied that services to minors was a miniscule portion of our activity.

We generally serve one or two minors per month and that it would make life much easier for us if we did just as the officers and others recommended, especially as, not all, but certainly most of the minors here in Utah seem to be much more rude and disrespectful than we have ever encountered anywhere before.

However, we have always felt, in spite of how annoying too many minors seem to be, that it was a public service that we perform for the benefit primarily of the parents, that if their child is set on getting a piercing that there is a clean, friendly studio practicing professional standards that cared about the health and relationships of children and families that would be there to provide those services rather than just having kids out behind the school gym piercing one another as so often happens.

Were it not for our feelings of responsibility to local parents, being parents of six children (5 of them girls) ourselves, we would not have anything to do with minors in the studio who are interested in tattoo or piercing services.

Of course there are other ministry services that minors are as much candidates for as adults and for which there are no legal prohibitions and for those church services, it would be likely that minors would have access to the studio anyway.

The two cops (Falslev and Call) then instructed us that we had to make sure minors did not come in the studio unaccompanied and that it was our legal responsibility to ensure they did not or we would be held legally liable, suggesting that we add to our no minors sign another sign (I despise signs) that threatened minors with prosecution should they disregard the other signs we had up.

They told us that if we put up a sign, as we did temporarily, that said “Violators Will Be Prosecuted”, that then the police would have something they could enforce and that they would charge minors if they had been warned that prosecution was the penalty for disrespect.

My protests about my unwillingness to threaten children were treated contemptuously at best and we were told that we had to comply or face prosecution ourselves.

After several more instructions on how we should lay out the studio, placing the piercing station as far back in the building as possible, etc. and how we should conduct our policies and allegations that our staff do not follow our policies when we are out of town, the police rounded up the pile of books and art they had collected, gave us a receipt and left, first telling us that the city and county attorneys would be looking at the materials in order to decide what charges they would prefer against us and that everything not needed would be returned, giving us the impression that we would see our art back in just a day or two.

Kita was so shaken that she asked the client who had sat waiting through the entire raid, that she was not really up to doing her best art, and could the girl come back in an hour or the next day to receive her face tattoo, but the client felt she had driven too far to come back later and wanted her service right then – so Kita complied, and did a great job in spite of her stress.

I locked the door and made a closed today sign to stick up and watched through the day as 8 prospective clients came, read the sign and drove away.

I looked at the Utah Attorney General’s website about pornography and found that according to the website, nothing in our studio, even the pictures of male and female genitals qualified as prohibited material and that they would be considered educational in nature “having value” to children and no different than looking at a sociological text or a copy of National Geographic – and perfectly legal.

The AG’s website also reminded me that the studio was a place that minors legally had a right to be and this really made my new “violators will be prosecuted” sign weigh on my mind.

On reflection we considered that our religious and civil rights had been violated, especially as the AG outlines how in the case of selling XXX films to minors which is certainly far beyond anything we were doing, the State would contact the seller, investigate to ascertain if any laws were in fact being violated and then give the store 30 days to come up to standards, that failing, then charging them with a misdemeanor violation.

In American Fork of course we were not given the courtesy of an informal investigation and assessment and negotiation, the police here prefer the sneak attack, based soley on the presumed word of one 14 year old girl, her information passed to the police through her angry father who didn’t really care about her disrespect and disregard for his rules and ours as much as he cared about kicking us out of town.

I called and left a message with the Utah ACLU and heard back later in the evening from the director who after about 20 minutes discussion agreed that we had a likely enough case for her to discuss it with one of her staff lawyers, which she would do and then get back to me.

Soon to come….part 3 (later today or tomorrow)

Utah County Attorney Jeffrey R. Buhman 801-851-8026

American Fork City Attorney Tucker Hansen 801-224-2273

American Fork City 801-763-3000

American Fork Police Administration 801-763-3020

Chief Lance Call – Lt. Darrin Falslev

The Happy Valley Tattoo Massacre'

2008-01-11T02:30:00.000-05:00

Rev. Dr. Gregory Lowrey

Healer, Counselor – CEO

Whole Life Ministries

It was a spring afternoon, April 2007.

A young, estranged mother travels from Missouri to visit her daughter in Utah.

The daughter lives with her father.

The Daughter hangs out with the “misfit” crowd. Geeks and weirdos, abused and abusing – some too tall and skinny, some short and fat, some too smart, some too dumb – all dark and depressed and sliding downhill in social normalcy.

Now she needs a badge of courage, honor and nonconformity.

Soon.

Bold, free – cool.

But in spite of her coolness and 14 year old maturity, she is still just an angry, confused teenage girl.

And a rebel.

And a bit of a snot!

The 14 year old asks mother for a piercing.

She wants a piercing her friends uptight parents won’t let them get - a ring through her lip.

In the non-Utah world it is a half-snake bite. A ring on each side makes a snake bite.

Mother understands why a 14 year old girl in Utah without her mother feels like she needs a fang-bite, fang-bit symbol, not slipped so easily on and off your finger like a CTR ring, but pierced with a 14 gauge needle right through your mouth and cold steel jewelry installed with hard steel pliers.

Mother gathers driver’s license and birth certificate together and drives her 14 year old to a professional piercer for some good mother – daughter bonding.

Voted #1 year after year in the Provo Daily Herald’s “People’s Choice Awards” and nestled in the curve on State Rd. in American Fork, Utah sits Happy Valley Tattoo & Piercing.

Happy Valley is owned and operated by world famous husband and wife artists Doc Loco and Kita Kazoo.

Happy Valley Tattoo is in a church.

This is a different kind of tattoo studio!

Happy Valley Tattoo & Piercing performs as two of many community services, tattoo and body piercing, both of which the owners and artists consider a deeply spiritual practice - even if sometimes it takes a client awhile, perhaps years, to realize the spiritual nature of their personal act of self expression, the spirituality of the act and the effect it has on wearer and viewer is undiminished.

Happy Valley Tattoo is the name of one of the service departments and schools of Whole Life Ministries.

Artist and Reverend Dr. Gregory Lowrey and his famous artist wife, Kita Kazoo are the ministers who provide spiritual services, including tattooing and piercing along with their healing, counseling, painting, music and authoring services.

They also conduct a church art school accepting only the most promising, ethically minded and dedicated young artists – many living on the fringe of acceptance in repressive Utah, to be apprentices and learn to support themselves and their families by learning and practicing professional standards in art, tattoo, piercing, health, business and community relations through the practice of personal service, dedication to purpose, personal integrity and constant practice of the golden rule.

Their clean, modern studio reflects the cutting edge of an industry that the Lowrey’s have been practicing as ministers and artists for almost 20 years and is home to 6 artists who occupy the five modern art work stations.

Only Doc Loco has no place to call his own.

His world is his laptop and his cell phone – making an office where ever he is needed.

Docs 20,000 tattoos and thousands of piercing services have been completed, his 6 children raised and his work is now full time in the other services, healing, counseling, writing and performing transformative music for the ministry as well as a few love songs for Kita Kazoo.

But this isn’t so much about Dr. Lowrey (aka doc loco) or Kita Kazoo – not today anyway.

It is about a wonderful piercing apprentice, devoted wife and mother, accomplished belly dancer (a real fun and talented person) and assistant manager and one of Doc’s great students and wonderful people – Shandi Child, a Utah Native, now living in Utah County.

Shandi graduated with a Medical Assistant degree and worked in a midwifery clinic. She found the work satisfying in many regards, but the business practices to be stifling.

Shandi had a strange dream of a career in body piercing.

Unusual for a good Mormon girl in Utah.

Doc Loco was looking for a Registered Nurse to train to work as a part time piercing apprentice.

After a year of searching no RN’s were applying.

A client of Kita’s knew just the perfect and wonderful person – bright, honest, delightful personality, high sense of ethics and a real desire to be in just that business – Shandi.

Shandi proved to be all her friend had promised and was soon on her way to becoming a professional body modification specialist – a body piercer.

For several months she spent three or more days every week in the evenings after work at the studio, (20 hours a week was mandatory – extra was recommended) watching Doc perform eyebrow piercings, naval piercings, lip and cheek, tongue and nose, finger, nipple and genital piercings – hundreds of piercings of all kinds and for every kind of people at the studio in the old Pleasant Grove City Jail.

The people we were piercing were very nice mostly.

About 95% LDS; about half active – all taking the plunge into representing themselves by an act of self-actualization, an act of freedom and an exercise in faith and trust in the high quality, precision technique and the personal concern for a job done right that is the hallmark of Happy Valley Tattoo and their students.

Shandi’s husband Paul, now a tattoo apprentice Intern at Happy Valley and other friends and relatives stepped up to be Shandi’s piercing models, to let her learn, practice and hone her new skills in their flesh.

Soon Shandi was ready for her Internship and quickly was moved into additional training for a position of Assistant Manager, helping Doc run the business.

Piercer Managers are better, according to Doc, because their services take just a few minutes which makes them more available, more often, to the public and staff than tattoo artists, who often are stuck in a service for an hour or more at a time and must devote time between clients to drawing art for services.

Shandi is a prize.

Every student at Happy Valley Tattoo & Piercing is a special prize, says Doc.

They are all very special and wonderful, honest and good people and artists.

The best of Utah.

Shandi is a graduate piercer.

She is a great piercer, a dedicated staff member, team player and friend.

Any company would be thrilled to have her on their staff.

Shandi was afraid of management.

Doc said it would stretch her.

Shandi was afraid, but could see the wisdom in overcoming her fears and learning to be affirmative and confident.

Shandi is on her way to becoming a 4^th generation Master Piercer and has learned to run many of the operational phases of business – the dreaded book keeping training is taught a small bite at a time, over a long period of time, but the service portion is already top notch and customer service skills are dearly bought but worth every sleepless, stress filled night as people are often on their worst behavior when they make their first visit to a tattoo studio.

This particular April, in 2007, (remember the lip piercing part of the story?), Doc and Kita are in Detroit, Michigan not due back in Utah till June 07 and Shandi is on duty as Assistant Manager and Body Piercer.

In the door walks, mother and daughter.

Identification is produced and photocopied, jewelry is selected, money is paid, paperwork is completed and after care instructions are given.

The piercing begins.

A new Utah law requires mom to watch.

Parents enjoy watching tattoos on their children, but they don’t like to watch piercings.

In Utah county, minors can’t get tattoos, so at Happy Valley, parents only come in for piercings and a lip piercing was being done today.

Perhaps it was a late 14^th birthday present.

Doc has provided photographic portfolios of his piercing work, a chronicle of 20 years, poking holes and jewelry through people of every age and interest.

These books he tells clients, are very important to reassure prospective clients of the technical precision and aesthetic concern employed in piercing by him or under his direction and training and also to show that it didn’t hurt so bad that they couldn’t take the time to take a picture.

Smiling faces of very normal, nice looking neighbors beam from nearly every page along with a clinical close up of of a perfectly placed piercing.

It is a privilege of the practice of the golden rule to help your neighbor, and viewing a picture of your piercing and a your happy, friendly smile helps calm a lot of nerves in many people who want the piercing, but fear the procedure.

The Mother and daughter in question peruse the piercing portfolios.

The daughter’s supposed familiarity with some of the pictures of genital piercings in the artist piercing portfolio suggest that mom wasn’t too concerned when her daughter ignored the warning “ADULT” in big red letters on the “adult’ piercing album.

Page after page of clinical photographs of pierced nipples and genitals – both male and female – apparently were an eye-opener for the girl.

Doesn’t she have the internet?

Or a sociology textbook?

Anyway, apparently, mom thought it was fine.

Dad apparently, does not approve.

This difference in perspective is probably why they no longer live together.

Mom is about to piss off dad, and guess who is going to get tagged to pay for it.

If you said the tattoo studio, you win a nickel!

Well, the daughter gets her lip piercing.

It’s perfect – she is now officially cool.

So is mom.

So is Shandi.

Months go by; May, June – Doc and Kita come back for the summer to see a granddaughter born at the American Fork Hospital and to attend to students and business concerns for the ministry. Dr. and Mrs. Lowrey are back for June, July and August and then head back to Michigan where more students and a search for a building for a new ministry office and art studio are waiting.

September, October…

It’s been six months since the girl got her piercing.

She has bragged to her friends about her cool, mature, radical and rebellious experience.

Perhaps she wishes she could live with her mom, a normal issue for girls at 14 who are separated from their mothers – her dad is square.

The "new" mom, if there is one, isn't her mom.

It is not difficult to imagine that over the months she has also bragged about the pictures of male and female genitals she likely saw in the piercing portfolio.

Friends are impressed – girl’s status is elevated.

One day around Halloween 2007 the girl and several teen friends drop in the studio.

The police can't say if it was 2 girls in the days following christmas or 6 kids, three boys, three girls, or maybe just 4 kids, some of them girls who came into the studio sometime in November or December...um...just can't tie down the month...(is this sounding dumb enough yet?)

There are two signs on the doors that proclaim “minors must be accompanied by parent or legal guardian”.

She and her pals are just too cool for signs and too mature for some dopy studio policy.

She is just too cool for her life.

The girl is happy to see her piercer at work – Shandi.

She wants Shandi to pierce the other side of her mouth – to complete her snake bite.

Mom is gone home to Missouri and Dad won’t consent, so she wants Shandi to just do the piercing based on her mother’s previous consent.

She doesn’t accept Shandi’s recital of studio policy, state and county law that require a parent or legal guardian each and every time for services to minors.

The girl throws a fit.

A brilliant 14 year old idea forms.

If Shandi would come to Albertsons Grocery store, a mere block and a half away, she could pierce the girl in the Albertsons Bathroom and no one would know.

Shandi declined.

Now the kids tell Shandi they want her to sell them a piercing needle and some jewelry so they can do the piercing themselves at home.

Shandi declines, again it is against studio policy to sell supplies to the public regardless of age or occupation.

We only supply our own artists.

The girl and her friends threw a tantrum and were asked to leave.

These are the only “group” of minors that the staff can recall coming in the studio all fall.

They did not look at piercing portfolios at all but rather were hanging out at the jewelry case trying to get Shandi to give a piercing in violation of the law and studio policy, which she refused to do.

I call that kind of kid a “snot nosed kid”.

Probably the child of a snot nosed adult!

November and December pass.

The slow season is so slow it puts meat in Doc’s claim that in Utah the tattoo business has two seasons – slow….and slower.

On average, only one or two people come in the studio per hour.

No one is buying services, just looking for the cheapest price.

Every prospect leaves without spending money.

All the artists are broke.

They are good artists, and great people – the best; but artists struggle harder somehow than regular people to learn about money and it’s mysteries.

These artists are learning that payment comes from personal service and high quality.

Unfortunately broke artists have a hard time thinking and resolving about these kind of issues.

They worry about rent and groceries.

Artist depression can be extra sad and unproductive.

Doc and Kita are supposed to be back in town in mid-February but business is so unnaturally slow that they feel they must get back to Utah, even two months early, or they won’t even have a business to come back to come February.

The much needed rest – filled with 18 hour days, training students and dealing with government work, writing and counseling, hunting for buildings and then the Utah studio not making enough to sustain itself made full time work and not much rest for Doc and Kita while in Michigan through the fall – September – mid December.

Now, after almost three weeks back in Utah, which felt like three days – there was so much to do, they finally settled back in enough to resume services and remodeling left uncompleted way last March.

But on January 3^rd, on a Thursday when Doc and Kita were working alone – the Raid happened!

The Happy Valley Tattoo Massacre’ had begun.

Over the Christmas holiday friends on school break meet together often and perhaps news of the friends visit to the tattoo studio months before leaked out.

The girl’s father was not happy.

Father heard or was told about all the naked body parts the girl had seen in the photo book.

What a way to divert hostility from yourself for violating your fathers rules (I’m presuming he made a rule that prohibited visits to the tattoo studio) switching it neatly to the sweet and unsuspecting tattoo people – and of course, it would serve them right for not breaking the law for her by giving her prohibited services or selling her supplies back in October – and making her look stupid and much less cool in front of her friends!

To make a better story and to cover their anger over Shandi’s refusal to perform the illegal piercing, the teens decided it was payback time.

The girl had enjoyed months and months of bragging to her friends about her first experience and the cool adult pictures she got to see with her mom while they were browsing for her piercing.

All the friends now enjoyed a second hand familiarity with those books also.

It is easy to tell the cops that it is a first hand familiarity though.

Of course these kind of piercings are also available to be viewed on hundreds of websites devoted to body piercing where the only requirement for genital piercing galleries is that the model be over 18 and have signed a model release.

There is no age control for viewing such websites and the traffic is tremendous.

If teens want to look at genital piercings they don’t need to bother themselves to sneak down to the tattoo studio.

Nevertheless, Dad made the call, voiced his complaint.

That dirty, evil place is a corrupter of children, a desecrater of the holy temples of their young bodies.

They already hate church!

You police have to close them down.

What am I paying taxes for anyway, so you can pick your noses and play canasta at the courthouse?

While I am trying to figure the answer to that question you can ponder this real life cartoon as the member mafia, redneck cops (but they’ve watched COPS, so it’s ok) prepare to burst into the frame.

Thanks to anyone who has called any of the numbers I left on past posts. I have to find an attorney for Shandi and us too I guess, tomorrow somehow, especially since Shandi has been threatened with a year in prison over this teenage, bad marriage bullshit from which she is emerging as the prime victim.

While you wait for the rest of this story and the great back-story demonstrating more fascist dumb cop behavior and even more of the ongoing persecution of the victim by this local Hatfield and McCoy government, just realize that the American Fork Police, Chief Lance Call and his Head of Detectives, Lt. Darrin Falslev are involved in a continuing harassment and psycho-cop intimidation (likely learned in a weekend seminar) primarily targeting a sweet and defenseless and wonderful young woman.

Instead of telling this complaining father that his kid doesn’t respect him, his religion or anyone else and that he should look to himself for the source of his problems and not scapegoat the tattoo studio or the wonderful young wife, mother and artist that works there, they are victimizing a wonderful young family and the church that is helping them realize their life goals and develop their god given talents in a positive, pro community manner.

Interestingly, at first, I was identified as the man who was in the studio when the kids supposedly looked at the “pictures” but since I was 1,000 miles away at the time, the police are “letting me off the hook” and claiming that the old, white haired guy was really the 22 year old husband of the girl body piercer.

This young couple is being emotionally raped by the American Fork Police just so they can say to the complaining father and to the community that they eliminated the problem – by eliminating the person.

What a creepy way to run a city.

American Fork, be ashamed.

Be very ashamed.

I am protesting this abuse of this poor girl to everyone I can.

I am looking for an attorney.

I need a free one.

You are free to protest too.

It is still the land of the free and the home of the brave if you stand up and make it that way.

That’s what I’m doing.

I’m going to wear myself out preserving your freedoms.

Are you?

Utah Police Violate Church Pt. 2

2008-01-05T13:44:00.000-05:00

Rev. Dr. Gregory Lowrey

Healer, Counselor, CEO

In Part 2 of this report, I will try to summarize Part 1 and include a summary history of the efforts of American Fork City to harass Whole Life Ministries since we moved to American Fork, Utah in March 2007.

Since writing part 1, I have been in contact with several private and government agencies regarding this matter and have found support at the County, State and Federal levels of Government while locally; American Fork Government is typically giving me the cold shoulder.

I have been gratified to receive very positive assistance already from members of the community and have been offered assistance from Utah’s Southern Baptist Convention, Utah American Civil Liberties Union, Utah Attorney General and the Utah Department of Public Safety POST (Utah Peace Officer Standards And Training).

The Utah Attorney General’s Office has recommended I file a complaint with the FBI for Civil Rights Violation and the Utah County Attorney, Jeff Buhman spoke at length with me recommending I phone Police Chief Lance Call and demand the return of our improperly seized property.

Mr. Buhman insists that he had no knowledge of the alleged complaint or ensuing raid and that Lt. Falslev was in error (lied) when he told us that our property would be taken to both the County and then the City Attorney's to view expressly to help them decide whether or not to press charges against us.

I phoned Chief Call, but he and Lt. Falslev (head of the Detective Division) who was the officer who led the raid on our studio had both taken Friday off and I was told they would not be back in the station till Monday.

The last time I phoned Chief Call - which was about the misconduct of one of his officers in responding to an assault at our church, he never called back but two weeks later he had the Lt. in charge of the patrol division call me in his stead.

I was quite impressed with Lt. Liddiard during our conversation, but I was also very disturbed by Chief Call's lack of interest or follow up and as with my other experiences with the American Fork Police, the reports Lt. Liddiard promised to send to me in Michigan never arrived.

Anyway, Monday I will try again and will demand our property be returned, and I will continue with my other new errands, making complaints to the FBI and POST and others.

I am so fed up with American Fork City's nasty attempts to intimidate us with threats of prosecution when we have broken no laws and their harassment and snide behavior.

I know that there are "citizens" also who are going out of their way to make life difficult for us and we have had to deal with our patrons being harassed by our neighbor's landlord - who is not even on site, but comes down to threaten everyone - ever since we moved in.

History of Our Ministry

Before I begin this summary, I would like to address a few issues that I am sure will arise in reader’s minds regarding our ministry and our history of offering tattoo and piercing services to the community as a spiritual service.

Whole Life Ministries has evolved over the years since establishing a formal ministry, beginning as People For Peace in Detroit, Michigan in the mid-1980’s.

While serving in the United States Navy (1971-1973) during the Vietnam Conflict for which I was a volunteer, I experienced a religious awakening. This awakening was accompanied by extreme personal trauma as I discovered the lack of substance and moral mission in my life.

I had attended the Mormon church since my mother’s conversion when I was five years old and while I did absorb a lot more than I realized, I had not been formally indoctrinated into religion.

My father was extremely patriotic and though agnostic still had a very strong commitment to Christian service and personal honesty and moral behavior, though he saw himself as a more moral mix of Frank Sinatra and Hugh Hefner. (so I had great music to listen to and everyone's favorite magazine to read)

In spite of his semi-racy outlook, Dad was not a “swinger” and was extremely devoted to his wife and family and his commitment to fidelity.

I don't know if it's his fault that I like the way girls look, but I'm not complaining.

In spite of my “hippie” allegiance during the 60’s, I remained active in the Boy Scouts, being the first boy in 30 years to earn his Eagle Scout Badge in the Mormon Detroit Ward Boy Scout Troop 335, where later as an adult I also served as Scoutmaster and President of the Young Men’s Mutual Improvement Association (YMMIA), Church Librarian and Adult Sunday School Teacher.

As I had no guidance in my sudden quest to discover my purpose in life, it was fairly tumultuous and perhaps a bit strange.

I had experienced the new evangelical “Jesus Freak” movement as a teenager and while I didn’t join in, I did attend many meetings with friends who were temporarily converted to that version of Christianity and was exposed to and even regularly carried and studied a pocket edition of the four Gospels.

My other relatives were Methodists, Southern Baptists and Corner Church attendees and 13 years of holiday arguments over religion (and how my family was going to hell) as all my relatives (on my Mom's side) gathered at her parents for two weeks at a time twice a year, and that, coupled with my meager understanding of Mormonism formed my basic understanding of religion at that time.

As is often the case, when searching for meaning in life, I found myself sunk to the depths of despair, surely exacerbated by waking each day in the Navy with a great hangover.

I went to live in a cabin high in the mountains of British Columbia where I studied “hippie” Buddhism, Nostradamus, Mother Shipton and the Urantia Book while contemplating what locals took to be UFO’s which I could observe as huge round orange lights landing in droves behind the next mountain peak from my cabin.

None of these studies satisfied my quest for guidance and meaning in my life and as I had already given up on the Christianity I was familiar with, I went back to the Navy.

I was assigned to work for the Mormon Chaplain at the recruit training center north of Chicago and while there, he encouraged me to read, for the first time, the Book of Mormon.

I had a very strong spiritual experience on completion of the BoM and made the attribution from that "burning in the bosom" that I had been taught to apply both by my mother and the book’s own “promise” which is that it was a "witness" that the BoM and by extrapolation the "Church" was true.

I became a TBM (True Believing Mormon) and was very surprised when in spite of my past irreligious lifestyle I was “called to serve” as a full time missionary for the LDS/Mormon Church in Las Vegas, Nevada where I was very successful, breaking all mission records for teaching, baptizing and dinner appointments. (sorry about that)

It was during that LDS mission that I first encountered the insincerity and deceitfulness in LDS leaders that would trouble me, as a Mormon, for many years, driving me into a vicious cycle of inactivity and reactivation.

Eventually, I was “led” to live in Utah and found the home I had purchased put me in the same church congregation as many church leaders, including Ezra T. Benson who was then the President of the LDS Church.

I served in the ward Elder’s Presidency and my wife and I attended the Salt Lake City Temple every morning for the 5:30 am temple session where I was a permanent “veil worker” and in two weekly temple “sealing groups”.

I had many experiences of a profoundly spiritual nature as a Mormon including an intimate and unusual experience in the Salt Lake Temple involving every General Authority of the Church and culminating with a short personal visit with President Benson where he chose to give me an impromptu blessing.

I was very surprised when portions of this experience brought me to a certainty that the authority to speak for God did not any longer exist in the LDS church.

Because of the overwhelming nature of my "witness" of the BoM, it had not occurred to me that the Church could be a fraud from the beginning.

I was again brought to the depths of despair as years of study and activity seemed now for nothing and my surety about my spiritual path was compromised.

As I was dealing with the fallout from my new perspective, I was again spiritually “led” to Mormon Fundamentalism where my quest to find the “authority of God on earth” was re-ignited as I spent the next 14 years as an active member in both the LDS Church and the AUB (the polygamous fundamentalist group Apostolic United Brethren).

The AUB taught at the time that the LDS church was still accepted by God by virtue of the "lesser" priesthood (The AUB being the only repository of the "higher" Priesthood) and that members should attend until they were excommunicated. So with my family, I attended both sets of meetings, paid tithing to both groups, was re-baptized, re-ordained and sealed in the AUB “temple” to my wife and six children and and served in the Elder's quorem in the Church and taught the AUB adult Sunday School class where my students included the “prophet” Owen Allred and his “apostles”.

The AUB was also quite overwhelming and disturbing. Still, I felt I had been led there by God and so I tried to seek the spirit of God even though “the group” was a cesspool of evil and political chicanery.

As Utah prepared for the 2002 Winter Olympics, the LDS church attempted to clear their membership of all persons who the media might interview who might cast an undesirable light on the image the church was promoting.

When my LDS bishop inquired as to who I would follow, Jesus or Church President Gordon Hinkley in event of disagreement in teachings between the two, I chose Jesus and was summarily excommunicated for that choice – my wife being excommunicated along with me just for being married to me.

Soon after, I began to see that my AUB “prophet” and his “apostles” were as deceitful and immoral as most of their followers were and I felt my quest to find “authority” had finally been satisfied as I concluded it to be immoral to place any human between oneself and one’s God.

It is very humbling to find after years and years of intensive study and church/spiritual activity that you have been a dupe, but that was my ultimate realization – Joseph Smith and the church he founded were both a grand fraud.

One of the areas where I divided early on with the LDS church was on the concept of service.

The church encourages people to give money to the Bishop and let the church do the charity work, inviting members to participate by formal invitation while discouraging individual charity services.

My studies of Jesus had led me to the conclusion that while I should support this program, I should more importantly take opportunities to serve my neighbors personally and to perform personal acts of charity without having to be directed by man.

As a young man my father taught me to volunteer and not to hesitate to dig in and get dirty when help was needed.

This concept of personal service and the golden rule is what led to the formation of People For Peace and Whole Life Ministries.

At first I was trying to help establish physical peace and while the Government was passing laws demanding peace and placing firepower worldwide to enforce it I found myself of just the opposite posture.

You cannot make a law and say, “Ok – there is peace now – if you don’t practice peace, we will annihilate you!” but that is just what Ronald Reagan and George Shultz were attempting to do.

I prepared a plan to end the cold war, which President Reagan refused twice before I sent it along to then USSR President Mikhail Gorbachev who apparently liked my plan as he executed it just a few months later and the cold war was ended.

I expected that my ministry would take some form of national or international service but found instead that I was mostly a lone and unknown man just being a good neighbor, husband and father and continuing to study the practice of the “golden rule”.

I worked many sales jobs and performed healing services in my off work hours for patients who were referred to me.

During our first time living in Utah at the time that I found all my formal religion to have failed me, I suffered a traumatic emotional breakdown and was unable to work for a long period.

It was then that neighbors convinced my wife, a wonderful artist, to tattoo them and I eventually followed in the study of tattooing.

We couldn’t afford to keep our home and moved to Yuma, Arizona where I figured that no matter how bad our money situation got, our family would not freeze and could find plenty of my favorite foods, oranges and dates, regardless of our lack of income.

When we got to Yuma, we set up a tattoo studio at home but before the week was out my wife was invited to apprentice with acclaimed master tattoo artist Dan Brown, who had been trained by world renowned tattoo artist Lyle Tuttle.

After a few months Dan less formally took me under his wing and after a year invited me to tattoo at his studio, which invitation I declined, preferring to open my own private studio in my home.

While I was learning but not practicing tattooing I worked the “front end” for my wife Kita while she served as the lone tattooist for 30,000 Marines from the Marine Air Station, I had plenty of opportunity to study the history of tattoo from Dan's tattoo library.

At first tattooing seemed a harmless diversion, just as many people first see it today, but as I became more intimate with the history of the art and the clients in the studio I became aware that tattooing and piercing, branding etc. were all very ancient and spiritual practices utilized by every culture in all times from every part of the earth.

I began to see that my own tattoos were of much more a spiritual and self-affirming character than I had previously considered and that all body arts were spiritual in nature whether the wearer had realized it or not.

In 1992 Kita and I opened our own tattoo studio in the Metro Detroit area – Royal Oak Tattoo.

My involvement was supposed to be temporary, but our skills and Kita’s artistry became quickly in great demand and soon my idea of a separate ministry and healing office were forced to change as we found ourselves operating a bustling five artist studio within the first 6 months of opening and I was back to seeing patients at home after work which continued until 1997 when my AUB “prophet” requested we move back to Utah.

An unembodied voice speaking to me in the celestial room of the Toronto Temple simply said "Move to Lehi." and so in August of 1998 we went off again to Utah, selling our Michigan studio, Royal Oak Tattoo, to our last apprentice there.

The LDS church had not yet come against tattooing or piercing and as I taught priesthood lessons in the Troy, Michigan Ward I often passed around interesting photos from my work which had become a division of our ministry and my monthly trips to serve as veil worker in the Toronto, Canada Temple were not a problem for those who found a tattooed and pierced hand reaching through the veil to test their knowledge of ritual as I represented God in the temple drama.

When we got back to Utah though, while the AUB President defended our tattooing – and he endured quite a lot of harassment over supporting us in that way, the local LDS ward in Lehi, where we lived, seemed to be too bothered by it, so we didn’t tattoo and instead opened a full time healing clinic, Kita running a discount health product supply for my patients and we quickly found our clinic to became a full time charity service.

We kept expecting that our service would guarantee our livelihood, but when money from the sale of our Michigan studio ran out after three years of subsidizing our Utah venture, we felt we had no other option but to engage the talents God had given us and opened Happy Valley Tattoo and Piercing in Orem, Utah.

We found that even though we built out a separate office in the studio for patients, few wanted to receive their charity services in a tattoo studio and gradually, tattoo and piercing services took over as our primary service.

We also began taking in promising young artists who appeared to share our ethical values, or wanted to, training them in the arts of tattoo and piercing and teaching them how to survive in the business world, a skill most artists enjoy little of and which dooms most to a life of poverty working non art jobs and changing jobs often.

In spite of being voted Best Tattoo Studio year after year in the local People’s Choice Awards, we found it necessary to move several times over the ensuing years to find accommodations we could afford which eventually brought us to American Fork last March 1^st.

As three of our six children, now ready to have families of their own decided to move back to Metro Detroit, we decided to also take students there and open a ministry office, clinic and studio in Michigan that would allow us to spend regular time with our children and grandchildren as well as to enjoy the higher demand for services that would subsidize and thus ease some of the financial precariousness of our Utah ministry.

Michigan also seemed a much more fertile field for teaching the golden rule and the neighborliness that we feel is so important to redeeming our broken neighborhoods in America.

Traveling back and forth approximately every three months or so from Michigan to Utah this last year and a half has been very difficult and has been compounded by problems we began to experience in American Fork almost immediately after we arrived back in Michigan in the spring of 2007.

To be continued...

Want to call for or against us?

City of American Fork 1-801–763-3000

Police Chief – Lance Call 1-801–763-3020

AMERICAN FORK, UTAH – POLICE INVADE CHURCH THAT TATTOOS

2008-01-04T14:57:00.000-05:00

On January 3, 2008 at approximately 1pm the head of the Detectives Division of the American Fork, Utah Police and another unknown police officer, both in plain clothes, walked into Whole Life Ministries via the public services office – Happy Valley Tattoo & Piercing, at 275 E. State Rd. in American Fork presenting a search warrant to the Reverend and CEO Dr. Gregory Lowrey.

Dr. Lowrey informed the officers that they were in a church and that he didn’t believe they could serve a warrant or be in the office in an official capacity without an invitation.

Lt. Falslev told Dr. Lowrey that they could and would search the office and invited four other plainclothes officers waiting outside to come in to assist.

Reverend Lowrey felt he had no method to prohibit the ensuing search and seizure of artist portfolios, original art and art reproductions in portfolios from the office by no less than six officers of the law.

The warrant was issued by the Utah County Attorney Jeffrey R. Buhman 801-851-8026 and the American Fork City Attorney Tucker Hansen 801-224-2273 on allegation that on some unstated day, sometime after Christmas 2007 a un-named female staff member at Happy Valley Tattoo allowed two 14 year old girls to view a body piercing portfolio containing one or more genital piercing photographs.

According to the police, the girls immediately ran home and told their father who then made the complaint for the Ministry to be charged (presumably) with Indecent Public Displays of pornography to minors.

Of course, the police didn’t think to ask the father why his daughters were visiting a “tattoo studio” and looking at piercing photos, especially when there is ample notice that minors are prohibited without the company of their parents.

Nor did the city and county attorneys or police detectives consider that the alleged statements of the alleged minors were hearsay and that the clinical display of piercings does not constitute pornography.

Nor did they consider that any adult could have browsed or simply presumed the presence of such materials and fabricated the complaint.

Nor did the city and county attorneys or police consider the possibility of simply informing the ministry of the complaint and seeking a solution that did not involve a knee-jerk approach and the threat of prosecution.

Instead the local government saw an opportunity to attack something they just don’t like without first validating the complaint enough to know on what day the alleged incident occurred.

In the nearly 20 years of offering tattoo and piercing services to the public we have never had a single complaint against us - until we moved last March to American Fork.

We feel our reputation has been attacked and that our reputation is something we are proud of and wish to maintain intact and we do not intend to be slandered or denied our constitutional and constitutionally protected religious rights and freedoms.

We have always made great efforts to conduct ourselves in a manner that would make the community feel we were a valued asset, but in Utah it is difficult to be taken at face value.

In my opinion, this is essentially a pogrom of the Mormon Good-ol'-Boy Government of American Fork intending to deny us our Constitutionally protected religious freedoms because we aren't Mormon.

And in traditional, Utah - Screw Your Neighbor - Good-ol'-Boy fashion, many Mormons will do anything they choose to deny to others the rights they claim for themselves, regardless of how they violate the laws in their illegal, bigoted activities.

Artist portfolios are kept in a bookcase behind the front counter and must be asked for to be perused.

While there is a piercing portfolio marked “Adult” that exclusively contains adult piercing examples, one artist apparently had one or two genital piercing examples in another general portfolio and it is not known even to the police which portfolio the girls supposedly were allowed to view.

The police had so little information and such a questionable story that I really think it likely they made it up just to harass us.

Staff members do not hand out artist portfolios to minors unless they have their parents or legal guardians present.

Browsers do not have their identification checked and staff members rely on the honesty of patrons unless they have reason to suspect they are in the office in violation of studio policy.

There has always been a sign on the entrance door stating our policy of prohibiting entrance to minors without a parent or legal guardian.

Minors (and adults) who disregard this policy are asked to leave.

There is a daily head count kept of how many people actually come through the door and it is not too many this time of year, perhaps 10 to 20 people in an 8 hour period.

All staff members agree that there were no minor girls, attended or unattended, in the office on any days following the holiday.

I was in the studio on all of those days and no one came in that didn't purchase services - with the exception of one couple who were turned away because they brought their baby with them.

There simply were no "teen girls".

In the spring and summer, the staff routinely turns away minors who attempt to receive services using false identification cards.

Adult and youth community members seem to feel that since "the LDS Church" claims that tattoos and piercings are a "desecration" and that all churches besides the Mormon Church are led by "the Devil", that disrespecting our rights and violating our policies are just fine.

Some Mormons here actually believe they are serving (their) God by breaking the law and violating our rights. Others simply don't care about rights or rules as long as they get what they want.

Well parents in Utah - don't shoot the messenger - many of your kids don't give a crap about your religion; they don't believe Gordon Hinkley is a Prophet; they don't respect you or your rules and they are likely following your bad example of bigotry and hypocrisy.

It is often impossible to ascertain someone’s age simply by appearance and there are likely many occasions where minors violate the posted policy restricting their entry.

To obtain service however, Government issued photo identification must be hand copied, then be validated in writing by two staff members and photocopied for a permanent record.

So while the occasional older-looking minor might slip into the studio, it is nearly impossible for them to fake their way through to receive service.

During the search one officer who appeared to be second in charge snidely asked, why, if a lack of respect for their personal and religious rights was such an affront, did the Lowrey’s choose to remain in Utah?

Reverend Lowrey replied that they had as much right to be in Utah and conduct their legal operations as anyone else - unmolested by a disrespectful public.

The Law protects those rights even though those entrusted to enforce the law often don't.

There was nothing in any of our materials that a minor could not be exposed to in any Jr. High School Art or Biology Textbook, Public Library, Art Gallery, Medical Office or Church that represented the unclothed human form in a clinical or artistic manner.

Photos in the Adult Piercing Portfolio depict the piercing process and genitalia with jewelry inserted as an example of services we render to adults and are neither sexual nor erotic in nature.

By the standards of the Utah Attorney General as examined on the official website, these photographs are instructional in nature and are no different than might be found in a sociological textbook or magazine such as National Geographic and appear according to Utah Law – decidedly not pornographic and would not be legally prohibited from minors anyway.

There are no photographs or art representations of the human form that depict sex acts or are designed to promote or appeal to prurient interest.

Studio prohibitions regarding minors as browsers are voluntary efforts by the ministry to serve the interests of the community and are not required by law.

The search and seizure warrant detailed “Items to be searched for include: Books containing photographs of male and female genital with piercings and tattoos, as well as any loose photos of the same nature.”

However the officers also seized personal, original artwork, some of a distinctly religious nature from the private work areas of several artists.

While there were two portfolios that did contain “photographs of male and female genital with piercings” there were none that contained genitals with tattoos and there were no loose photos of that nature.

Yet 11 books were seized - 9 of them “flash books” containing hundreds of drawings of a large variety of typical tattoo art, essentially non-sexual in nature and containing no photographs whatever.

These items; drawings and paintings and tattoo art “flash” books were not authorized in the search warrant and did not reflect “male and female genital with piercings and tattoos.” as the warrant described.

The artist’s personal portfolios are integral to prospective clients selecting their services and the taking of these portfolios which contained none of the material described in the warrant appears to me to indicate an effort to stifle opportunity.

The officers also searched the personal work stations of each staff member though none of them were in any public area, opening and searching every drawer and cabinet also searching the ministry’s service area and the parsonage even though it was obvious from the complaint that materials being sought were in the “public” reception area and not in the artist’s private work areas or the parsonage or other portions of the building.

I believe our church has been targeted by local Mormons and local Government.

I believe they engage in an active effort to undermine and slander our ministry and harass and prosecute us falsely (or threaten to prosecute us) with the end in mind to harass us till we leave town.

In three separate incidents in less than a year (today’s included) American Fork law enforcement has refused to apply the law equally in our behalf.

The police have attempted to prosecute us when we have been victims and have refused to prosecute those who have violated our civil rights.

The American Fork Police have blatantly lied about the application of law and refuse to provide police reports to the Ministry CEO

On one occasion officers refused to respond to an ongoing assault in the Ministry office because the CEO, who was involved by phone in the actual incident, was making the report from out of town.

On each occasion, these police officers have insisted that the dishonest, disrespectful and criminal behavior of American Fork locals was the Ministry’s fault simply because we perform tattoo and piercing services.

Our policies regulating the admission of minors to only those accompanied by their parents or legal guardians, which also prohibit babies and small children, are clearly posted.

The officers have, on each occasion - in person and by telephone, insisted that if the Ministry did not appreciate the disrespect and victimization at the hands of the government and the local citizenry that their solution should be - to “leave Utah”.

The officers have all maintained that the Ministry is engaged in what they term a “high risk” service and that attempts by local teens and sometimes even by their parents to exercise coercion, fraud and deceit to obtain services not allowed by law are seen as the fault of the Ministry rather than of those who show as much disrespect for State and local laws as they do for us.

On one occasion, Reverend Lowrey was told by Lt. Falslev that if he was not happy about being victimized that he “should engage in a low risk business like the guy who sells fruit across the street.” Reverend Lowrey went across the street and asked “the guy” about his experience and was told that he also was a constant victim of fraud and theft.

The problem is not with the Ministry offering legally approved services to the public in a responsible manner.

It is the public disrespect for our services which have for over 7 thousand years been exercised as a spiritual practice in all cultures.

The majority (Mormon) religion in Utah has recently taken upon itself to aggressively and slanderously attack these services as a “desecration” to the human body and an affront to “God” to such a degree that many Mormon Church leaders deny spiritual services, including temple marriage and communion for their own members who have tattoos and piercings, thus effectively denying their access to the Mormon Heaven because as of the year 2000, their God only approves of one piercing in each ear (for women only) and no tattoos for anyone.

The Mormon "God" apparently allows tattooed permanent make-up and apparently makes no distinction between propriety for male vs. female in that department as well as approving plastic surgery, for which Utah has the highest number of plastic surgeons in the country.

As this county is about 97% Mormon, this kind of slander is especially effective and the criminality of the “good Mormons” of American Fork have cost honest, hardworking members of the community their jobs and have jeopardized the livelihoods and damaged the reputations of many Mormon and Non-Mormon individuals and families.

Even the Attorney General points out that abstaining from engaging those services that are found offensive is the appropriate practice, but locals seem to feel that their personal disdain legitimizes their dishonest efforts.

I consider this behavior hypocritical, disgusting and a reprehensible violation of the both the Constitutions of the United States and Utah and worst of all of the “Christianity” this community supposedly holds so dear and claims to exclusively represent.

As if Utah didn’t have enough to be ashamed of already!

Holiday From the FBI !!

2008-01-03T13:19:00.000-05:00

I'm having a great experience back here in Utah!
But instead of telling you how we are being harrassed by the community here, I'm going to share this interesting article I found in my email today.
I do this trusting that Ann has checked her facts and admit that it is not unusual for people in the media and/or government to simply make things up - they certainly make up enough false crap about me!
But I support anyone's right to celebrate in any manner that does not impose on any one else's personal rights and I don't recall anyone I have ever met that mentioned being a person who celebrates Kwanzaa to reflect any anti-white or similar sentiments in their celebration though I have heard a lot, especially in the early days of Kwanzaa about how Christmas was promoted and celebrated as an unusually "white" (caucasian) holiday - and I think that is how it was depicted in the past - so I would be against that as I believe such celebrations belong to everyone - just as the Irish welcome everyone and anyone of any race, color, creed or national origin to join in St. Patrick's Day celebrations.
I have never been advised or seen or heard it advertised that "white's" are uninvited from celebrating Kwanzaa.
But I thought the article was interesting - so here it is.

Kwanzaa: Holiday From the FBI

by Ann Coulter

Posted: 01/02/2008

Is it just me, or does Kwanzaa seem to come earlier and earlier each year? The same goes for the Iowa caucuses -- the early scheduling of which forced me to run an attack on a synthetic candidate, rather than a synthetic holiday, last week.

I've seen so few mentions of Kwanzaa this year, I was going to declare my campaign a success, but I see that President Bush issued another absurd Kwanzaa message this year, referring to millions of African-Americans gathering to celebrate Kwanzaa.

I believe more African-Americans spent this season reflecting on the birth of Christ than some phony non-Christian holiday invented a few decades ago by an FBI stooge. Kwanzaa is a holiday for white liberals, not blacks.

It is a fact that Kwanzaa was invented in 1966 by a black radical FBI stooge, Ron Karenga, aka Dr. Maulana Karenga. Karenga was a founder of United Slaves, a violent nationalist rival to the Black Panthers and a dupe of the FBI.

In what was probably ultimately a foolish gamble, during the madness of the '60s the FBI encouraged the most extreme black nationalist organizations in order to discredit and split the left. The more preposterous the organization, the better. Using that criterion, Karenga's United Slaves was perfect. In the annals of the American '60s, Karenga was the Father Gapon, stooge of the czarist police.

Despite modern perceptions that blend all the black activists of the '60s, the Black Panthers did not hate whites. They did not seek armed revolution. Those were the precepts of Karenga's United Slaves. United Slaves were proto-fascists, walking around in dashikis, gunning down Black Panthers and adopting invented "African" names. (That was a big help to the black community: How many boys named "Jamal" currently sit on death row?)

Whether Karenga was a willing dupe, or just a dupe, remains unclear. Curiously, in a 1995 interview with Ethnic NewsWatch, Karenga matter-of-factly explained that the forces out to get O.J. Simpson for the "framed" murder of two whites included: "the FBI, the CIA, the State Department, Interpol, the Chicago Police Department" and so on. Karenga should know about FBI infiltration. (He further noted that the evidence against O.J. "was not strong enough to prohibit or eliminate unreasonable doubt" -- an interesting standard of proof.)

In the category of the-gentleman-doth-protest-too-much, back in the '70s, Karenga was quick to criticize rumors that black radicals were government-supported. When Nigerian newspapers claimed that some American black radicals were CIA operatives, Karenga publicly denounced the idea, saying, "Africans must stop generalizing about the loyalties and motives of Afro-Americans, including the widespread suspicion of black Americans being CIA agents."

Now we know that the FBI fueled the bloody rivalry between the Panthers and United Slaves. In one barbarous outburst, Karenga's United Slaves shot to death Black Panthers Al "Bunchy" Carter and Deputy Minister John Huggins on the UCLA campus. Karenga himself served time, a useful stepping-stone for his current position as a black studies professor at California State University at Long Beach.

(Sing to "Jingle Bells")

Kwanzaa bells, dashikis sell

Whitey has to pay;

Burning, shooting, oh what fun

On this made-up holiday!

Kwanzaa itself is a lunatic blend of schmaltzy '60s rhetoric, black racism and Marxism. Indeed, the seven "principles" of Kwanzaa praise collectivism in every possible arena of life -- economics, work, personality, even litter removal. ("Kuumba: Everyone should strive to improve the community and make it more beautiful.") It takes a village to raise a police snitch.

When Karenga was asked to distinguish Kawaida, the philosophy underlying Kwanzaa, from "classical Marxism," he essentially explained that under Kawaida, we also hate whites. While taking the "best of early Chinese and Cuban socialism" -- which one assumes would exclude the forced abortions, imprisonment of homosexuals and forced labor -- Kawaida practitioners believe one's racial identity "determines life conditions, life chances and self-understanding." There's an inclusive philosophy for you.

Coincidentally, the seven principles of Kwanzaa are the very same seven principles of the Symbionese Liberation Army, another charming invention of the Worst Generation. In 1974, Patricia Hearst, kidnap victim-cum-SLA revolutionary, posed next to the banner of her alleged captors, a seven-headed cobra. Each snake head stood for one of the SLA's revolutionary principles: Umoja, Kujichagulia, Ujima, Ujamaa, Nia, Kuumba and Imani -- the exact same seven "principles" of Kwanzaa.

With his Kwanzaa greetings, President Bush is saluting the intellectual sibling of the Symbionese Liberation Army, killer of housewives and police. He is saluting the founder of United Slaves, who were such lunatics that they shot Panthers for not being sufficiently insane -- all with the FBI as their covert ally.

It's as if David Duke invented a holiday called "Anglika," and the president of the United States issued a presidential proclamation honoring the synthetic, racist holiday. People might well stand up and take notice if that happened.

Kwanzaa was the result of a '60s psychosis grafted onto the black community. Liberals have become so mesmerized by multicultural nonsense that they have forgotten the real history of Kwanzaa and Karenga's United Slaves -- the violence, the Marxism, the insanity. Most absurdly, for leftists anyway, is that they have forgotten the FBI's tacit encouragement of this murderous black nationalist cult founded by the father of Kwanzaa.

Now the "holiday" concocted by an FBI dupe is honored in a presidential proclamation and public schools across the nation. In Oregon public schools this year, Kwanzaa -- but not Christmas -- appeared on the official calendar.

Bush called Kwanzaa a holiday that promotes "unity" and "faith." Faith in what? Liberals' unbounded capacity to respect any faith but Christianity?

A movement that started approximately 2,000 years before Kwanzaa leaps well beyond mere "unity" and "faith" to proclaim that we are all equal before God. "There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus" (Galatians 3:28). It was practitioners of that faith who were at the forefront of the abolitionist and civil rights movements. But that's all been washed down the memory hole, along with the true origins of Kwanzaa.

Public Comment on Mitt Romney's Mormonism

2007-12-31T18:45:00.000-05:00

Here is the link for the NYTimes report on Mitt Romney's "Mormonism" speech.
I am recommending reading the copious comments.
Mitt's supporters comments are excessively shallow and stupid. (like Alma's comment to this very posting - see comments below)
Most of the other comments make a lot of sense though.
Mitt is like his supporters - shallow and stupid - and insincere.
I mean - he would like to be President - but not for anyone but himself and his butt-kissers.

By the way, I have been watching the second season of Tom Hank's "Big Love" HBO series on modern - day Utah Polygamy.
It is so addictive and amazingly accurate though there is no way to show all the variety in modern polygamy.
The group I was associated with for 14 years (and have one daughter still involved with) is composed mostly of "City Polygamists" who often look a lot like "regular" Mormons in the community. They do have several outlying "compounds" however where things are not quite as dismal as in "Big Love" but basically quite similar.
This group - the AUB (Apostolic United Brethren) has (estimated) in excess of 60,000 members in the inter-mountain USA and Mexico and Canada.
The favorite group of polygamy watchers is the FLDS who live mostly down in Southern Utah in their own closed border communities of Colorado City, AZ and Hurricane, UT. They are the ones who follow you around with trucks and guns and who's "Prophet" is being prosecuted now for marrying teenage girls to geezers.
But there are a bunch of other groups you never hear of and some you do.
The most secretive, closed and richest - The Kingston Group.
The most scary and extremely murderous - The LeBaron Group.
And of course, as in "Big Love", there are many thousands of "Independents" - those who usually get their "priesthood" from some "group" and then go off on their own - which is consistent with Mormon doctrine that once you have received the "higher" Melchizedek Priesthood, you basically have it all. There is no authority higher and it is the same priesthood (according to Mormonism) that God holds. So while you may have a different "calling", such as Bishop or President, there is no higher priesthood.
Independents, then believe they have every right to "become an authority unto themselves".
Well known Independent Tom Green is in the Utah State Pen. right now for bigamy, which he did not commit. He was not prosecuted for polygamy since Utah only proscribed Polygamy in their "Territorial" Constitution which ban expired when Utah became a state.
There is no actual law against Polygamy in Utah, but in Utah they will use any old law to get you if they want to "get" you. They make up the law as they go here, kiss ass to the Mormon Church and ignore any law that would protect you if "they" (ppl like Mitt Romney) don't like you.
If you haven't seen "Big Love" you should head for the video store.
Somehow the writers got some "real Utah" into it and the production values are top notch.

Well, I guess this is my New Year's Eve posting.
I hope you all keep it safe tonight.

Ok, this is Utah!

2007-12-30T23:13:00.000-05:00

From Police Magazine

December 28 2007

Norse God Worshipping Prison Inmate Sues Utah DOC

A Utah prison inmate is suing the state Department of Corrections claiming that its policies prevent him from practicing his religion.

Michael Polk, who is serving time for aggravated assault and robbery, filed the suit in federal court accusing the DOC of denying him items that he needs to practice the Asatru religion, which is the worship of Nordic gods like Odin, Thor, Tyr, and Heimdal.

Polk's complaint says that he has followed the Asatru faith since 2005. It argues that in order to perform its rites, Polk must have a Thor's hammer, a prayer cloth, a mead horn, a drum made of wood and boar skin, a rune staff, and a sword. The complaint adds that the sword can be made of cardboard.

The plaintiff says that he asked the prison chaplain for the items that would allow him to perform the rites, but his request was refused. Later prison officials allowed him to have a small Thor's hammer pendant. The other objects were denied.

"You may purchase a towel from the commissary for an altar cloth. You may purchase the book or books of your religion and maintain them in your cell," Prison warden Steven Turley wrote in a letter to Polk.

Polk is not the only Utah inmate to file a suit against the DOC that claims the state denied him the right to practice the rites of his religion. In 2002, the state supreme court rejected an inmate's claim that the state was violating his rights by refusing to let him drink blood or partake of a sacrament supplied by a female vampire.

Doc's Note:
Wasting the Gooberments time and money. Favorite pastime of ppl in prison. Wait till you read my ideas on prison reform!

Christmas Eve at Work in Utah!

2007-12-24T17:20:00.000-05:00

Well, everyone that works for us at Happy Valley Tattoo thought they needed a three-day weekend over Christmas.
Since Kita and I had to come out here over a month before schedule we feel like we are here to work - plus we don't have any invitations to anywhere out here - so we are working, just the two of us at the studio today.
And it's fun.
I've done a few piercings and Kita just finished a cute tattoo, we have some goodies out for customers and we have about 4 hours more here today.
We spend so much of our time nowadays in training and working on the new association and generally dealing with the gooberment and writing about social issues and health and stuff that it is easy to forget how much fun it is to just tattoo and pierce and deal with customers.
We have played Christmas music at the studio every day since we got here (last Wed) and just got to the point where we can't take any more.
Thought we might make it through the rest of the day but we are switching to something - anything - else.
It looks like the blizzard they forecast is just showing up here, I'm sitting by 20 feet of window and it's like a big screen tv of white and windy - lots of cars out though and as usual (for Utah especially) the SUV's blowing down the road like it's sunny and dry. (I wish they would get a clue and SLOW DOWN)
We took the advice off the TV and did our errands before work and since it's suppose to be cold and snowing all week we got extra so we are ready to be stuck at home.
Lucky for us it's a short walk to the Grocery and Video store.
Well, I have to hurry and take the dogs out so their poop don't freeze half way out.
That would be a problem!
Merry Xmas and all the other Holidays you celebrate.
I am going to go back to writing about social issues and lay off the idiot party candidates for a bit so I hope you find something more worth reading here in the next few days and weeks.
I don't really aspire to be President but I'm not hearing anyone else that is more qualified - that's scary I know! So remember, if you write me in next November, I'll set you free.
If you aren't sure I mean it, just ask me - I'll tell you.
And by the way - that Kita Kazoo - she rocks!
And she's a hot babe - lucky me, eh!
What a surprize that it would take a couple like us to bring dignity back to the White House and Freedom back to America and Americans.
Do you want freedom?
Do you really care?
Do you care that your Gooberment is trying to scare you into never going outside or trusting your neighbors - or helping them?
Oh well, Happy Holidays!
And, thanks to all the wonderful people who came in to the studio to visit us today.
We both enjoyed giving you services and we all had a lot of fun.
Doc

Merry Doc-McScrooge-Mass

2007-12-24T01:17:00.000-05:00

And Princess Kazoo says:
Watch this Doc Loco X-Mass Flash Presentation.
And:
Happy Holidays to All.

Well, except mean people and creepy politicians.

Oh, it's official - Even the Mormons say Mitt is a Phony

2007-12-24T00:50:00.000-05:00

So Mitt has to backpedal on his claims to be backed by the NRA, watching his Dad march with Martin Luther King, flip-flopping on key issues, from abortion rights to gun control and gay rights.
"It's the fine-tuning that's created the problem. It's always that one extra step that causes him the trouble," said Tobe Berkovitz, a longtime Romney observer and the interim dean of Boston University's College of Communication. "You can't just say that African-Americans were accepted into the church and I was happy, you have to say you pulled over and you cried."
The latter was a reference to another statement Romney made on "Meet the Press," in which he tried to convey his emotion after learning in 1978 his Mormon church had given full privileges to blacks.
Romney recalled his exact location when he heard the news - the Fresh Pond traffic rotary in Cambridge - but he misspoke when he said he thought he was in law school at the time. In fact, he had graduated from Harvard Law School three years earlier. Read a full Salt Lake Tribune article here http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_7779853

Now, Mitt who just weeks ago claimed to believe in his Mormon Faith and the Faith of his Fathers seems to forget that his "Faith" includes the mandate that Mormon Church Presidents, also called "The Prophet" are not only considered God's ONLY authorized representative on Earth, but that they are required and expected to have regular "in person" visits with God, Jesus and other long dead prophets.
Mitt claims that he is not aware of God speaking to any man since Moses at the burning bush, even there failing to recall that the burning bush incident was preliminary to the receipt of the Ten Commandments which he received directly from the hand of "God" twice (the first set was hurled down on the partying Israelites and broken so Moses had to go back for another set) - and worse of all, Mormonism's "Joseph Smith's 1st Vision" actually claimed a visitation where God and Jesus (his other son - not his favorite son the Devil) appeared in person to 14 year old Joseph Smith telling him to join none of the churches then extant as they were "all corrupt" and basically the churches of the devil and that Joseph would be the "restorer" of the one and only true church, which he claims in 1820.
It makes me wonder if Mitt, who's father was made a Regional Representative of the 12 Apostles after he lost his bid for President slept through the family scripture studies and "family home evenings" his famous dad was bragging on as my Stake President in Michigan during my teens (and Mitt's). Read the Tribune article here. http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_7780619
Why am I picking on Mitt?
Well, it just needs to be done. Mitt is a poser and a phony.
His "defense of his religion" speech in Texas with Pres. Bush Senior, though it basically said nothing at all about anything at all did show that Mitt has the "look" and the connections and certainly the money, including a lot of $ from the Mormon Church and individual Mormons who thought that finally God was going to put a Mormon in the White House so that the country could be run by God (um....through the President of the USA, through the President of the LDS Church - all denials aside).
Such blatant dishonesty and scum sucking, brown nosing behavior just pisses me off.
Anyone who has spent some time in Utah knows the Utah Type that Mitt is.
Utah is full of phony, con artist posers popped out of the same mold and exactly like Mitt.
He even has the "Utah" look - Barbie and Ken and about as smart too.
But even though I particularly detest Mitt, I can't forget that the other candidates are sell out politicians too and can't be trusted.
Don't vote for "Party" politicians.
They are corrupt just by their partyism.
After all, they are suppose to not be partyists but patriots.

Mitt Romney's Mormonism

2007-12-14T16:36:00.000-05:00

Firstly, I do not believe for a moment that a single word of Mitt's speech was written by him. It sounded like another product of Brigham Young University, where all the Mormon General Conference "talks" are ghost authored.

It was a nice sounding speech about liberty and freedom which acknowledged "God" and proclaimed the Founding Fathers as God's instruments and noted that Religion was essential to freedom.

But it was not a nice speech - just nice sounding.

It's been pointed out that Mitt attempted to paint secularism as "religion" which it is not and that he excluded all religions but "Christians and Jews", while attacking Islam and promoted the display of Christian and Jewish (well just a candlestick) displays on Government property.

I don't understand why religious displays can't be left off Government property and displayed on the properties of the various religious practitioners.

The Constitution protects and describes it's respect for what it basically calls a Natural right to believe and practice religion according to the dictates of individual conscience - barring only the prevention of others to do the same.

This is of course what Government sponsored religious displays do - exclude the religious beliefs and practices of some while endorsing those of others.

Only those who would dispense with religious freedom - other than their own personal brand - would endorse such displays.

Why is it so important to those who pretend to a God inspired Constitution to force their particular rituals and beliefs on Everyone in the community by Governmental endorsement in the "public square"?

Such a practice is anti-Constitutional and a slap in the fact to the God they pretend to believe in.

To them I say "Equality My Ass!" What a bunch of ignorant, bigoted, hypocrites!

But, since Mitt was using this great opportunity to answer the question of his Mormonism making him less qualified to be President, even though his Mormonism has not been an issue, why did he not address those supposed concerns?

The reason, and speaking as someone who had been a Mormon for 40 years is that Mormonism maintains and has always maintained a "shadow government" that runs Utah today and intends, if they can ever get into power, to run America and the World.

Mormons "in good standing" must take supposedly "solemn" vows in the Temple to put Mormonism ahead of everything else in life.

They also are taught and formally solemnly agree that all governments are instruments of Satan and that only a government run by Mormon Priesthood is accepted by God.

All good Mormons must agree to be puppets of the President of the Mormon Church who proclaims himself the one and only mouthpiece of God on earth.

All good Mormons are required to believe that Mormonism is the only avenue to God, Heaven, Goodness, etc. and that all other religions or personal belief systems are inherently evil and inspired by "The Devil".

This can all be verified by reading Mormon Founder "Joseph Smith's Testimony" in the back of the Mormon Scriptures - The Pearl of Great Price - available to read at http://lds.org under the scriptures tab.

So is Mitt a true believer and thus an anti-American religious subversive?

Or is Mitt a liar who is using his religion to dupe the country into believeing he is really a good guy?

And if Mitt has already spent more of his personal millions on his political campaign than it would cost to provide health care to millions of poor people in the United States, why has he not chosen to do that with his money instead?

I get so pissed when I see all the candidates smiling and laughing and glad-handing each other and spending millions and millions of dollars on their bid for election when every day the people they pretend to want to represent are starving and dying from preventable causes - especially could those causes be prevented if these candidates would put their money and fund raising powers to work for the people instead of for their own greedy, dishonest selves.

Isn't it interesting, that Mitt's home state, where he grew up and his mother was a state senator and his father was governor and a major business leader and previous presidential candidate himself would rather have Guliani as their candidate than homeboy Mitt?

Well, I guess it should be obvious that I believe all the party candidates to be liars and self-serving pricks - I just have a special disgust for Mitt since I know his religion so well after being fucked over by them for so many years of my life.

One of my daughters is still a victim of Mormonism (the worst kind) as is my poor mother and my sisters and their families and my wife's family (even those who claim to hate Mormonism, but don't know in their heart that it is a lie) but thank God (the one of your choice) that my wife and five of my children and myself are free from that evil cult of evil.

Mitt is an evil liar IMO and his identification to Ronald Regan, another Teflon coated liar who did just the opposite of what he promised, took us from a billion dollar debt to a trillion dollar debt and believed in using Murder as the favored means of promoting Peace (oh my fucking God!) should be enough to simply exclude him and his Hollywood looks from any consideration.

Mitt is a poser and a fake - and so are all the other partyists.

Parties Divide Us. Division Never Was Unity.
If you believe in the UNITED STATES - you cannot at the same time believe in partyism.
Get honest America!

And what about that Alan Keyes?

2007-12-12T17:58:00.001-05:00

Oh my Holy Crap!
Where in the hell did Alan Keyes come from?
In my mind he is actually someone who made sense and had anything worth saying in today's so called debate.
One thing that he certainly did that was Presidential was to STAND UP FOR HIMSELF when he was obviously being slighted.
And why was he being basically "left out" of the debate anyway?
Even the favorite candidate of republican youth - Ron Paul - looked old and stupid next to Alan Keyes.
And Keyes actually said things that need to be said, including what he would actually do.
All the other candidates just gave the same "laundry list" of what American should be like, but as usual had no actual plan or personal action to offer.
I was stunned.
I never heard of Keyes before today.
Where the hell did he come from?
True, I havn't been doing any research on "Party" candidates since I think they are all sell outs anyway, but I have seen all the "White" guys on tv. Even that white black democrat guy Obama who has nothing to say either.
But this Keyes guy.
Why havn't I seen him on the news or heard about him?
I don't want to go on gushing about him since I only met him today, but I was impressed!
I will have to do some research now though, since I am going to have to vote for someone - and I don't know if it's really right for me to vote for myself - even though I know that until today it was obvious to me that I am the only candidate qualified to protect America.
I was so impressed that Alan called a spade a spade (though they were all white).
He appeared like someone that has clear vision and the courage to say what he thinks.
And he also seems to understand America and the Constitution - so far being the only one from either party that does or even cares to.
I congratulate him on his courage and honesty and intelligence - three things up to now completely lacking in this "cluster fuck to the White House"!
I wonder why Huckabee didn't have the balls to ask Mitt if he really believed his Mormon Faith that Alan Keyes is a "less valiant" spirit who had to be born through the "loins of Cain" so all of God's favorite "white" children would know not to trust him or marry him? I mean, Romney's God say's Keyes is only good to be a "slave" to those more worthy (white) for "time and all eternity".
Why didn't anyone say or ask about that?
Oh Mitt, we all find Mormonism embarrassing.
The God of Mormonism is an embarrassment to anyone with a brain - which today we saw, Ron Paul has part of a brain, and Alan Keyes, as far as I could see - so far - actually is the only candidate from either party (red/blue) that has a fully functioning one.
How refreshing to hear him.
Having gone to Alan's website (from Provo, Utah???) I see that while I agree wholeheartedly with him on many issues, I violently disagree with what I consider hypocritical views promoting inequality and demands for his brand of religion rather than the certain inailiable rights he propounded today.
While today he chastised those who consider some people less equal than others, his "pledge", found on his web page in several areas does just what he today preached against.
He believes in a "homosexual agenda" which I find preposterous and would seek to deny equality to those who have different ideas about personal spirituality than he does.
Today, he was a breath of fresh air in an otherwise inane "debate", but in the end, he seems to be another Red sellout who wants to make America dance to his version of religion rather than support each persons inaliable right to worship or not according to the dictates of their own conscience.
Can't vote for him.
I guess I'll have to vote for myself after all.
I believe in freedom for all and equality for all.
Like most politicians, he talks the talk (kinda) but doesn't walk the walk regarding those who don't fit his personal preferences.
Vote for me - I'll set you free!
Doc Loco supports this message.
Sincerely,
Doc Loco
aka Gregory Lowrey

Oh that Mitt Romney is just a sleazy little shit!

2007-12-12T17:34:00.001-05:00

Right. I mean IMO, of course.
So Mitt says that he is proud of his Faith - meaning his Religion.
And he pretends to believe in it.
So when Huckabee asks the question he already knows the answer to "Don't the Mormons teach that Jesus and Satan are brothers?" why does Mitt dodge the question by saying a persons faith should not be part of a campaign.
And, when Huckabee tries to bait Mitt that way, isn't that just kind of sleazy too?
I mean, he just pulled what was supposed to be a huge coup with his Ex-Presidentially assisted A&M University speech about "his faith" - though he never actually talked about it.
So why can't he just be "proud" and say that yes he believes that Jesus and the Devil are brothers?
It has been a primary teaching of his "Faith" for nearly 200 years now.
It's not a new thing.
The teaching is found in the Mormon Scriptures called the Pearl of Great Price, adopted by the entire church as "The Word Of God" and included in their other book of Scripture the Doctrine and Covenants. (at the back)
This is the book that was supposedly translated by "The gift and power of God" by Mormon Founder Joseph Smith from papyrus scrolls reputed to be personally written by Moses and Abraham (there are two books included) and important Mormon doctrines are dependent on the PofGP, especially the doctrine of the "war in heaven".
Really, Satan was God's FAVORITE son, but he wanted to take glory unto himself for saving all of mankind on God's earth in progress, but Jesus you see - a less favored son, won the right to be mankind's Redeemer, by extending "free agency" to man (Satan was going to force us to be good) and more important - He was going to give the glory to God rather than take credit for himself as Satan wanted to do.
According to Mormon Faith, 1/3 of all of God's children supported Satan's plan and with him engaged a War in Heaven (a war of allegiance) and were all (with Satan) kicked out of Heaven for which "The Heaven's Wept".
Man, this is a great story.
Why didn't Mitt take the opportunity, if he is so "faithful" to be a good "Every Member a Missionary" and say "Heck yeah - I do believe that Jesus was the less cool brother of Satan - but Jesus knew how to one-up the Devil by brown-nosing God - Holy Crap Man, I love my Faith and (didn't he really say this the other day?) the "faith of my fathers".
Oh, Mitt - you sleazy, little liar.
You don't believe in Mormonism - you are embarrassed by Your Faith!
Mitt, IMO - you are another sleazy Mormon Prick!
You are a son of Satan and a lover of lies.