Woman describes “escape” from polygamy

Can you say “sensationalism”? I have been following this event unfolding over the past few days: this polygamous group in Texas. Now, I see this “news” article: Woman describes “escape” from polygamy. Where is the counter story? Where is the woman describing her positive experiences in this type of relationships. I am not saying this is my preferred lifestyle, but to each his own. More importantly, whatever became of religious tolerance? Doesn’t the US claim to be built on religious tolerance. I mean, I know it’s a crock, but bear with me on this. It seems to me that only tolerated religions are the ones they choose to tolerate. Hardly a worthwhile goal. The Aboriginals in Australia (and most indigenous peoples worldwide) have had to deal with the same control issues and lack of sovereignty. I am sure I could come up with quite a list of other stupid Christian customs and morés, but that doesn’t stop the government from saying we have to tolerate these things. If as a country the US is going to claim something, then stand by your convictions. Have some integrity…for a change. I hear a lot of talk, but I see little action.

As important to this story is the supposed instigator of the police action: a 15-year-old forced into an abusive marriage.  Chances are this “informant” will never be found because she doesn’t exist.  Just like the police plants during RNC protests in New York City, these plants are meant only to expedite the rath of the powers that be. It makes me sick.

Sex, Politics, and Death

The story is that a married Wisconsin man slipped his pregnant girlfriend some mifepristone (RU-486) to induce a miscarriage at 14 weeks.  Of course it is unconscionable that someone should slip someone else a drug of any nature, whether this or roofies, it is as unconscionable that a society would make males responsible for supporting an unwanted child against his will.

I understand that a woman should have the right to choose to abort a fetus or carry it to term, but this cannot be a unilateral decision.  Rather, if it is unilateral, she should then accept the responsibility to support this child.  If the child is wanted by both parties at the onset, of course they should both be required to support it. The other scenario occurs when he wants it and she doesn’t. She can abort, and he has no recourse.  This is as it should be.

I don’t have the time to write at length, but when I hear stories like this, it really gets my blood boiling.