You just can't make this stuff up. (I know. I've tried.)
So as most of you probably know, last month authorities raided a polygamist sect in Eldorado, Texas, which has been making front-page news for weeks, for a variety of reasons. (One person I know is fascinated by the prairie-style dresses the women and children were wearing.) Now it comes out there are a number of other religious sects practicing polygamy, and they are nervous. Ya think?
Isn't polygamy illegal? And, perhaps, more importantly, where do these men (it's always men) find the time and energy for 21 wives? (Forget about the three dozen children some of these guys have.) Most men, or at least the ones I know or read about, have trouble keeping one wife and one mistress or "girlfriend" happy and/or satisfied. (And no, they are not the same thing.)
Speaking of which... I was sure that New York Congressman Vito Fossella (R), who was recently arrested for drunk driving (with a blood alcohol level twice the legal limit) after running a red light in Alexandria, VA, would be resigning day (though technically the day is not over). Not because he violated the law, which he did, but because Rep. Fossella, a "family man" with a wife and three kiddies back in Staten Island, had been living in sin and fathered an illegitimate child, now three years of age, in Virginia -- a relationship that while abhorrent to many (though apparently not to his fellow Republicans) was not illegal as he was not married to the other woman. (That would have been bigamy, which supposedly is illegal, though it makes for good TV. Just ask the producers of "Big Love.")
For an amusing take on this story, I highly recommend Gail Collins' column on the subject -- great post-Mother's Day reading.
Meanwhile, in the midst of all this Sturm und Drang, CBS, in its infinite wisdom, announces its new show entitled "Swingtown," a "drama" that aims "to combine the raucous abandon of 'Boogie Nights,'... [a] tongue-in-cheek take on the 1970s porn industry, and the sweetness of 'The Wonder Years,'" according to the New York Times's Jacques Steinberg. Apparently, it is okay to make television shows about polygamy (see above) and wife-swapping and ménage à trois and orgies (especially if set in the long-ago, freewheeling, pre-AIDS 1970s, in suburban Chicago). Just remember, kids, it's only make believe!
The hypocrisy of our times is breathtaking, though sad to say, none of this surprises me.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
5 comments:
"Tongue-in-cheek," indeed. These things just write themselves.
I actually didn't notice that. Thanks for pointing it out.
Which cheek, I wonder... ; )
What do liberals have against polygamy? I know why I don't like it, but what can the liberal argument be against it now that "whatever floats your boat" is a constitutional principle as far as the Left is concerned.
Also, I think this is the wrong use of hypocrisy. Vito Fossella does not believe that polygamy or sleeping around and concieving out of wedlock children are good things, but he merely votes against them to get elected.
He knows quite well they are bad things but is attracted to another woman and as a Congressman believed himself to be less likely to get caught (and the kid is 3 years old so he was pretty spot on with that view).
The key here is that people can believe something is bad and still want to do it. This is not "hypocrisy" it is the sins that the flesh is heir to.
The only way I can explain this concept to modern liberals is as follows. Rob Reiner believes in healthy living, excercise and eating right and is constantly pusing for government advocacy of these things. Same with Ted Kennedy. They are both ginormous mangones who have never left a buffet table unmolested. They are not hypocrites, they are just weak.
That is quite an interesting take, JJV. Whatever happened to personal responsibility, self control, and practicing what you preach? Yeah, I know the flesh can be weak, but a few Hail Marys and public apologies don't make saying one thing -- and damning others for their weaknesses -- and then doing quite another (i.e., showing you too are weak) OK. Btw, what do you have against liberals? And when did "liberal," meaning "favorable to progress or reform" become a bad word/thing?
A fat straw man is still a straw man. You left out Michael Moore, by the way.
Post a Comment