kjm1102's Blog

“Forgetting” a sleeping infant, who is strapped in an infant car seat, in a closed car while you socialize with your friend is just a misdemeanor if you are the “loving” mother. (Utah)

If you are the son and you leave your aged parents in a closed car (one of which opened the door and got out) to earn a living, it is murder. (New York)

I can only think of a few reasons for this disparity in treatment for the “responsible” family member.

We, as a society, value the worth of the elderly above that of the infant.  No, that can’t be it; we throw our infirm and elderly in to “homes” and care centers, and “it’s for the children “ is the cry heard nation wide if any group or organization wants to get something or condemn something.

1. We value the need for socialization above the need to earn a living. No, that can’t be it; we are expected to dedicate all our time and energy to our careers, even our families understand that.
2.  We expect the infant to tend to their own survival when no one else does. Even I know that the makers of infant car seats have put in enough safeguards to keep the child from self extraction.
3.  We hold the elderly too incompetent to work the doors of the car.  Obviously not because the mother did open the door and get out of the car.
4. We feel that mothers love too much to harm their families. Well tell that to the Texas children drowned by good old’ mom, the Smith boys whose mom deliberately sunk the car with them strapped inside.  Remember the mom who tossed her children out of the upper stories of the Shilo in downtown SLC? How about the “loving” moms who let their “boyfriends” physically and sexually abuse their children?  No I don’t think this is it either.
5. We don’t think that women are as responsible as men for the care of family members.  Yeah, I think we are getting close.  Women not as responsible as men; seems in line with the way the law operates. E.g. she slaps him and he grabs her arms to stop the assault and he goes to jail because he is responsible to not let her get bruised even if he gets pummeled.

For some reason that I can’t get my head around this, we (this society) has determined that women are in some way “better”, “nicer”, “less inclined to do harm” than men.  I just don’t get it. 

Only women kill the totally defenseless (per THE CENTER FOR BIO-ETHICAL REFORM)( http://www.abortionno.org/Resources/fastfacts.html<
/a> )   worldwide there are 42, 000,000 abortions per year; that is about 115,000 daily. In 1996 there were 1,370,000 abortions that year and about 3,700 daily in the USA alone.  I can’t find numbers even close to this for men, outside of war and even Iraq and Afghanistan together (with both male and female warriors) don’t come close to those numbers.

I know this is very long but please stick with it!!

I got this post from a friend who winters in the Phoenix area.  I find it very interesting!  I wonder why we in Utah don't demand to do the same? 

"Since Arizona’s local law enforcement began enforcing illegal immigration laws and an employer sanctions law went into effect, illegal immigrants have been fleeing the state in large numbers. The effects have been far-ranging. Commuters are reporting fewer vehicles on the freeways, shortening their rush-hour commutes. What had become a serious transportation problem in Arizona is losing its urgency. English Learner Language (ELL) students started dropping out of school. This helped end a confrontation between the state legislature and a liberal federal judge who had ordered the state to spend more money on ELL classes.
Fewer illegal immigrants are using hospital emergency rooms, so waiting times have decreased. ”Although the rest of the country is in an economic slump, unemployment is going down in Arizona, from 4.5% in January to 4.1% in March. Day laborers loitering outside of Home Depot and other stores have mostly disappeared, ending months of confrontation between illegal immigrant sympathizers and protesters. Desert lands near the border are returning to their pristine condition and the wildlife is coming back. Identity theft and car thefts are decreasing. No one showed up on May 1 to march in immigrant rallies.
”With illegal immigrants leaving, the state will see huge savings as fewer illegal immigrants use social welfare programs and the cost of arresting, prosecuting, incarcerating and deporting them decreases. Arizona is facing one of the worst budget deficits ever, looming as high as $2 billion in 2009, but the situation may resolve itself.
”Sheriff Joe Arpaio and Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas are leading the local law enforcement efforts in Arizona against illegal immigration. Arizona is also home to State Representative Russell Pearce, who is responsible for spearheading possibly more laws against illegal immigration than any other state representative in the country. It is also home to Chris Simcox, President of the Minutemen Civil Defense Corps. Other counties around the state are beginning to follow the lead of Maricopa County, signing agreements with I.C.E. to permit their law enforcement agencies to arrest illegal immigrants. Cochise County Attorney Ed Rheinheimer intends to prosecute illegal immigrants for trespassing on public lands. Mesa mayor Keno Hawker recently wrote an op-ed in the East Valley Tribune praising Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s sweeps of illegal immigrants. Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik bypassed the Pima County Supervisors when they refused to authorize him to add two Border Patrol agents to his border crime unit, and added them anyways.
”Although Arizona’s Democrat Governor Janet Napolitano has vetoed most illegal immigration bills since 2002 when she entered office, Arizonans have bypassed her by sending initiatives directly to the ballot. In 2004, voters passed four illegal immigration measures with over 70% yes margins. A law targeting drop-houses was signed into law earlier this month. An even stricter employer sanctions measure is currently underway to be on the ballot this fall.
Arizona’s illegal immigrants are fleeing to sanctuary cities like San Francisco and states with less enforcement and laws prohibiting illegal immigration like Nebraska, Iowa, and Maryland. Since one out of every 10 illegal immigrants is a felon, the result is felons are disproportionately moving to these places.
”Granted there are benefits that immigrants bring to our country. But those benefits are outweighed by the negatives when the immigrants cross illegally. There are too many rules, laws, traditions, and practices in society that conflict with illegal immigrants trying to make a living. Arizona's experiment may end up resolving the illegal immigration problem satisfactorily for all, because once the fiscal expense of illegal immigrants is brought down, revising the laws to permit more immigrants to enter the country legally will become more attractive and realistic."

I see no reason why UT can't do the same.  The whole purpose of 50 individual states is to give the population of each state the right to self determination and defining of culture. So, why can't UT decide that its nice people who believe in following the "laws of the land" expect that ALL within their state do the same? This expectation starts with having a legal right to be here in the first place.  Ergo, if a person can't meet the basic citizen/visitor requirement all the other laws are ineffectual.

As for the "trauma" of splitting families (children born on US soil, and citizen spouses), I am sorry but that is part of the consequence of the crime. Those spouses who marries an illegal, just as the spouse of a crack dealer, runs the risk of loosing the privilege of free association with their spouse based upon their spouse's behavior.  The children ARE US CITIZENS and as such are privileged to remain in the USA and partake of the advantages offered here. If they are of age to choose (just as in a divorce custody situation) they may choose to go with their parent back to the home land.  This also holds true for the citizen spouse; the USA does not hold them here if they want to go the homeland of their spouse.

So those of you with bleeding-hearts start bleeding for your fellow country man/woman and those who are trying to join us here by following the path set forth by our government. As it is now, those that disrespect this country are being rewarded by access to the privileges of this country and those who do respect it are being shut out by virtue of their virtue. 

It's amazing how common sense works 100% of the time.

It is disheartening to think that the American Idol judges give the public a better selection of candidates from which to choose than the media/parties offer the registered voters.

I know there is no one in the current crop of 3 that I will approve with my vote. They are too much like each other and none of them voice support for the US Constitution, which one of them will raise their hand and “swear” to uphold.

No I will vote, because their or other things on the ballot, but unless a “3rd party” puts forth a candidate that, at the very least talks like they have READ the US Constitution, I won’t be voting for president this November. 

I would love to vote for someone who has a chance of winning, but I just can’t give my approval/my vote to anyone who, by virtue of their campaign rhetoric, voting record and the like, either don’t know or don’t care about what is and is not constitutional.

I also have problems giving my approval/my vote to someone who is so hypocritical as to be willing to place their hand on a work they hold sacred, swear an oath (pledge of promise/covenant or commitment) to whatever deity to which they ascribe to uphold the constitution they have not shown to know, understand or consider in their campaign. 

I understand that much is said in campaigns that are not strictly true, but to make a SOLEMN PROMISE they have no intention of trying to keep in front of or to their deity as well as to the people of this country, is far too false for me to be part of. Even if only by on small tick on a voting ballot.

I know many think voting “3rd party” is “throwing your vote away.” I don’t!

The media, I think, is a bit frightened of “3rd parties” because there is a campaign to discredit what Michael Medved calls “Losertarians.” They should fear “3rd parties” if they want the status quo to continue! 

We have not had a fiscal conservative offered up since Ronald Reagan. It is sad to say, but in my recollection, it has been since John F. Kennedy (I was not a personal enough friend to call him “Jack”) who even talked about the limitations of the federal government as set forth in the constitution.

The people, a few fanatics at first but now growing larger at what should to the “big 2” be an alarming rate, are saying “up with this we will not put”, “if our vote is all you will listen to than it is my vote you will not have!” and giving their support to a “3rd party.”

It is understandable that the Progressives enjoy this situation; it gives them the position of outward power they want. That power will end as soon as one of the major parties/media figures out where the votes went.  At that time they will try to put forth an acceptable candidate, a good and honest public SERVANT.  When they do, there will be unprecedented support from all over the country just as both Davids (Archuleta & Cook) received Tuesday night.

I can only hope this happens before it is too late to repair this country, before those that have had enough reread the Declaration of Independence and say “it’s that time again”.

Lets  compare notes shall we? 

In Florida, teacher Stephanie Ragusa  is accused of having sex with an underaged male student  and she is arrested, boded out and instructed to have no association or sex with the child.  When she is later caught having sex with the child in the child's home she is arrested.  There is no mention of the child being removed from his home, his parents losing the custody of any of his siblings.  She is in jail pending court action.

In Texas a mentally unstable female calls and accuses one male of having sex with an underaged female and they use a military assault to remove all the women and children from their gated community.  Then they remove the women from the children.  Then they test all the women and children for a DNA match up.  Then they distribute the children to "foster" or other government sponsored  care.  One adult female gives birth while being held as one of the children and her child (in utero at time of the "rescue") is made a ward of the State (to be taken from the mother) upon drawing breath.

It may be just me, but in one case, Florida the police are in charge and the accused is removed from society until the legally cleared to return. 

In Texas, it seems the CPS is in charge telling the police what to do; so, the mothers and children (and some young adults) are removed from their society and the families are disrupted.and the accused are Leif in the community unmolested by legal authority.

It is as if there is a bounty on Caucasian children and Texas has found  its source.