Odessa

Authorities in Texas rounded up the many of the mothers and children from Yearning for Zion, a religious sect's compound. A religious sect that advocates polygamy . . . and marrying off their teenage girls not long after they can reproduce. Typically these girls get married off to men far older than they are.

There is the crime - these girls were essentially the victims of rape. In many cases it was a minimum of statutory rape, However I could image being so incapacitated by fear if some old geezer was mounting me when I was 14, 15 or 16 that there would be no way that the sex could be considered consensual. Heap on the fact that most of the men in authority in my life would have told me I had to do it because it was the will of God.

As part of the investigation into the crimes, the women and children are whisked away from the compound - many are cajoled into leaving, some could say under false pretenses. These women left voluntarily with their children. Then the only mother child bonds that the officials leave intact are those of mothers with children under four years old. The women were not even given the chance to say goodbye to their children. Many of the women, when given the opportunity, declined to return to the compound and opted for alternate arrangements.

Has anyone said that the mothers abused their children in anyway? You may argue that they let their teenage daughters be married off, but lets not forget the fact that they themselves were likely married off at a young age and that their society was strongly patriarchal and that the men would not have listened to their wives.

The sons were not being married off at young ages (that might lessen the number of young ladies available to the elders), so where was their abuse (beyond being denied some nookie)? So why remove them from their families?

The authorities may hold themselves up self-righteously saying they have saved some young women and rescued others from enduring the indignities of "marital responsibilities" to an old fossil. But, how much psychological damage have they done by not only removing these children from the only life they've know, but keeping these children from their mothers? Two wrongs will never make a right.

A little bit of the Islamist lunatic fringe, closer to home:

Yousef al-Khattab, who runs RevolutionMuslim.com from his home in Queens, told FOX News that he also wants the U.S. to embrace Islam and Sharia Law, which prohibits alcohol and can include stoning to death or severe flogging for pre-marital sex and adultery.

link: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,347272,00.html

He may be subtle, but he is still inciting acts of violence. I hope that the government gets enough information on this bastard to put him very far away from the rest of us. I know many say to be tolerant of others, but we are going to "tolerant" out of an existence.

The Islamic countries want to be Islamic - fine. Maybe jackasses like this guy need to move there and quit trying to rob us of the freedoms we cherish. Hell, can we start a collection for a one-way only plane ticket?

I find it interesting that his profession is a cab driver. In his world he is committing a crime for being in the car with a woman not his wife or relative. I personally want to study this man's face and memorize his adopted name so that I can tell him "no thanks" if I ever have the misfortune of him stopping his cab for me . . . or maybe he just doesn't stop for single women.

This little phase may take on new meaning . . .

From the AP

A survey of sex therapists concluded the optimal amount of time for sexual intercourse was 3 to 13 minutes. The findings, to be published in the May issue of the Journal of Sexual Medicine, strike at the notion that endurance is the key to a great sex life.

Guys, before you start ripping out articles to show your wife or girlfriend, this does not take into account foreplay. If you just jump on and grunt for 10 minutes, don't expect a standing ovation or even a contented sigh.

Dr. Irwin Goldstein, editor of the Journal of Sexual Medicine, cited a four-week study of 1,500 couples in 2005 that found the median time for sexual intercourse was 7.3 minutes. (Women in the study were armed with stopwatches.)

Now ain't THAT romantic.

It's difficult for both older men and young men to make sexual intercourse last much longer, said Marianne Brandon, a clinical psychologist and director of Wellminds Wellbodies in Annapolis, Maryland.

"There are so many myths in our culture of what other people are doing sexually," Brandon said. "Most people's sex lives are not as exciting as other people think they are."

I guess the bottom line is: If you aren't keeping the bed rocking all night long, its not a big deal. And actually fellas, don't keep going thinking your impressing your girl. Trust me, there are other ways you can impress us.

A convicted killer wants a sex change operation -

From the AP

BOSTON - The new commissioner of the state's prison system said Tuesday he plans to re-examine the case of a convicted killer suing the Department of Correction to try to get a sex-change operation.
. . .

DOC Commissioner Harold Clarke, who took over the department in November, said he has not decided yet whether to continue to fight Kosilek's request. "I need to take a look at the information presented before I arrived, and with a fresh set of eyes, closely scrutinize it," Clarke said after a status hearing on Kosilek's federal lawsuit.

Robert Kosilek was sentenced to life in prison for murdering his wife, Cheryl, in 1990. Kosilek legally changed her name to Michelle in 1993 and has been living as a woman in an all-male prison in Norfolk.

Kosilek first sued the Department of Correction in 2000, claiming its refusal to pay for a sex-change operation violates her Eighth Amendment right against cruel and unusual punishment. . .

If it isn't Nutraloaf, its wanting a sex change, what will these prisoners think of next . . .

In 2002, U.S. District Judge Mark Wolf ruled that prison officials had failed to adequately treat Kosilek's gender identity disorder, but he stopped short of ordering the state to allow the sex-change operation. . . . Kosilek, 58, sued again in 2005, saying the hormone treatments, laser hair removal and psychotherapy she has received since Wolf's 2002 ruling were not enough to relieve her anxiety and depression.

Awwww. Don't you feel sorry?

Even the experts don't agree. Some of the doctors "believe the surgery is medically necessary for Kosilek", others say he/she doesn't need the surgery. Kosilek twice tried to commit suicide in prison.

To me, this is not medically necessary under any circumstances. He/she's life is not in jeopardy if he doesn't completely become she - unless, of course, someone leaves some shoelaces laying around.

Again, here is another case of a prisoners rights being greater than the rights of the general public. If this smuck was doing the daily grind like the majority of us, he/she would likely be shit out of luck to have the plumbing rearranged unless he/she reached deep in his/her own pocket to pay for it. I say make the bastard work in the prison laundry until he/she can pay for it him/herself.
the tax payers are not an endless pool of resources. If given my choice, I'd rather the tax money help some person, maybe even a veteran, who might need some sort of reconstructive surgery to function better in society.

A Wisconsin teen is suing his high school because he got a zero on an art project for depicting a religious symbol.

His teacher, Julie Millin, asked him to remove the reference to the Bible, saying students were making remarks about it. He refused, and she gave him a zero on the project.

Millin showed the student a policy for the class that prohibited any violence, blood, sexual connotations or religious beliefs in artwork. The lawsuit claims Millin told the boy he had signed away his constitutional rights when he signed the policy at the beginning of the semester.

Supposedly, other classmates had drawings of demons on some of their drawings but nothing was said to them. For some people, those could be construed as religious symbols, so where is the fairness?

The boy tore the policy up in front of Millin, who kicked him out of class. Later that day, assistant principal Cale Jackson told the boy his religious expression infringed on other students' rights.

Jackson told the boy, his stepfather and his pastor at a meeting a week later that religious expression could be legally censored in class assignments. Millin stated at the meeting the cross in the drawing also infringed on other students' rights.

How exactly? This was his own artwork, turned in for an assignment. It did not need to be displayed for the teacher to look at it and make a judgment. Perhaps I might be offended by the display of demons. Does that mean those items should be removed? What about a Buddha, or Shiva?

Art class is all about expressing ones self. I can understand barring violent and sexually explicit material, but religion? Many have felt the need to express their faith. Furthermore, if Christian imagery offend these up and coming artists, they better avoid going to most art museums - that is a fact. This kind of intolerance does nothing to foster understanding. Perhaps the educational process would have been better served if the class discussed their beliefs together, rather than the students making remarks to the teacher.

Wait, that's right, our schools aren't about education and fostering independent thought. Their goal is to suppress independent thought and create the next generation of automatons.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bOBLSmiSDFQ&feature=related

Well, I guess its progress . . .

There are many who will "stand with their Muslim brother" before anyone else. That think that all Muslims are innocent and all non-Muslims are guilty of crimes against god and therefore deserve to be raped and murdered. Muslims are calling Shihira law in their adopted countries. The insanity will continue until we finally say enough is enough - but that might be too late.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=maHSOB2RFm4&feature=related

Only in America

Prisoners have filed a class-action lawsuit against Vermont, charging that a food called Nutraloaf is so disgusting it should be considered “cruel and unusual punishment.” Nutraloaf is made of cubed bread, vegetables, and powdered milk, and is served without utensils to prisoners who’ve used forks as weapons or hurled food at guards. The prisoners, however, say that Nutraloaf is clearly a punishment, and should therefore only be served after a formal disciplinary hearing. “Even in prison,” said attorney Seth Lipschutz, “you get a little bit of due process.”

I am so sick of hearing about "prisoner's rights" - Most criminals have demonstrated they don't give a shit about other people's rights and we are supposed to care about their rights. Furthermore, the Nutraloaf is only being served to those prisoners that have demonstrated that they have not learned from their incarceration and fall short of being civil. Furthermore, what about the rights of the other prisoners and the staff to not have food or utensils thrown or used on them?

Also I saw a segment on the Nutraloaf where they had a couple people on the street try it. One guy (probably a picky-eater) said it was gross at first, then said it wasn't too bad after his female companion tried it and said it wasn't bad at all and "tasted healthy". If two random people on the street said it was ok, then how cruel is it?