Friday, February 27, 2009

Oakland Interstate 580 Collapse Video: Government Could Not Have Fixed This Problem

On April 29, 2007, a bridge on Interstate 580 in Oakland, California collapsed after one of its supports was hit by a fuel tanker truck. Under the "give me a call and we'll take care of it" form of government that Barack Obama seems intent on creating, this bridge would still not be repaired. It's good that the only thing government did in the case of the I-580 was to let out the rebuild contract. The free market, awarded a contract by CalTrans, was left to work by itself, and the bridge was rebuilt in 17 days.

I attended a computer conference this past week, during one session of which Dr. Moshe Rubenstein (click here for one of his excellent books), emeritus

The new bridge opened 17 days after the old bridge collapsed. A socialistic government, such as the one envisioned by Barack Obama, could never hope to accomplish such a monumental task.

professor from UCLA, told the story of the rebuild of the I-580 bridge in Oakland, California in a stunning feat of free-market creativity.

In the case of the I-580 rebuild, government (CalTrans) did what it does best--find the best bid and get out of the way. It determined to give 50 days for the winning bid to complete the job. There would be a $200,000 penalty per day for completion after the 50-day limit, but there would be a $200,000 bonus for every day the project was completed sooner than 50 days. That made it so that the job could net the winning bidder a $5 million bonus.



The winning bidder went into action on April 29, 2007, the very day the bridge collapsed, which was 8 days before the government entity met to award the bid. By the time the bid was awarded on May 7th, the winning bidder already had his plan in place. His bid: $867,075. Here's how the government succeeded:
Caltrans officials were able to expedite the normally lengthy road repair process after Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger declared an emergency for the site. The move gave Caltrans the power to cut through red tape.
And here's how the free market succeeded. Because the free market has not yet been completely destroyed by well-meaning socialist overlords, the winning bidder knew that there still existed steel fabricators and welders in Pennsylvania and Arizona who had achieved excellence in their craft. He called these people and was able to have new steal beams and girders begin arriving on-site about 10 days after the accident.

The new bridge opened 17 days after the old bridge collapsed. The winning bidder achieved his $5 million bonus, and completed the rebuild even 8 days sooner than bonuses would have encouraged. This is the genius of morality in a free market. A socialistic government, such as the one envisioned by Barack Obama, could never hope to accomplish such a monumental task.




Friday, February 20, 2009

Chris Buttars' Swollen Foot Stuck in Mouth--Doctors Unable to Extricate

A racist comment about a black baby. A crusade in favor of a Christmas KGB. You probably recognize those faux pas positions as being held by Utah State Senator Chris Buttars. It couldn't possibly get any worse...could it?

Uhhh, yep; it could. Yesterday Chris Buttars compared gays and lesbians to terrorists.

Yikes!

Should he resign? I don't think so, but I wonder what those people were thinking who voted him back into office last fall. And I especially wonder what they're thinking now.

In an interview with KTVX TV channel 4, Chris Buttars's unconscionable statement went something like this:
Sen. Chris Buttars believes gays and lesbians are "the greatest threat to America going down," comparing members of the LGBT community to radical Muslims.

"I believe they will destroy the foundation of the American society," the West Jordan Republican said in a recent interview with documentary filmmaker Reed Cowan. "In my mind, it's the beginning of the end. … Sodom and Gomorrah was localized. This is worldwide."
Whaaaaaaaat!!!??

Now, if he had said that the Money Masters who are fomenting all of these bailouts and stimulus packages are the greatest threat to America, then he'd be accurate. Instead he is left to wallow in the moral squalor that he has created for himself.

If this spate of oddities isn't due to his health, as Rep. Steve Mascaro suggests, then I think it's that Chris Buttars has become a buffoon who enjoys the infamy.

I am so glad the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints came out with a statement disagreeing with Buttars's comments, because Buttars so often seems to be caricatured as a poster child for the LDS Church. He's not.

I feel for the young Utahns who are conflicted in the first place by their homosexuality. They don't need their problems compounded by being vilified as supposed terrorists by Chris Buttars. He's dead wrong, but I suppose he's got a right to say it.

What needs to happen now is for Utahns--and especially Utah Mormons--to come out of the woodwork and express their disagreement with Chris Buttars.




Thursday, February 19, 2009

Adam Smith's "Invisible Hand" for Dummies

You might not have heard of Adam Smith's Invisible Hand theory. That's okay. Of those who have heard of it, though, a fair number of them belittle the Invisible Hand, a metaphor for the process which is supposed to guide a free market economy to generally positive outcomes for everyone. They belittle the theories because they are dummies. Or because they are immoral. Or both. This short article is for them.

The Invisible Hand theory is this
[The business person] generally, indeed, neither intends to promote the public interest, nor knows how much he is promoting it. ... He intends only his own security; and by directing that industry in such a manner as its produce may be of the greatest value, he intends only his own gain.

He is in this, as in many other cases, led by an invisible hand to promote an end which was no part of his intention. ... By pursuing his own interest he frequently promotes that of the society more effectually than when he really intends to promote it.
Notice that Adam Smith said that we "frequently promote[]" the interests of society in a truly free market. Not always. Because none of us are perfect. But the farther we get from perfect, the less likely the Invisible Hand will function properly.

Notice also that Adam Smith didn't describe the Invisible Hand as working in an environment of rampant fraud. It absolutely will not work in such an environment.

If the Invisible Hand isn't working, it's my fault. And it's your fault. It works under normal circumstances. But our circumstances are becoming less and less normal every day. You need to do something about it.

John Adams warned that
Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.
It is no different for the free market. Free enterprise cannot be maintained except in an environment where the populace is predominantly moral and religious. As an American society, we've just about crossed the line.

If it's not working, I can't bear to think of the alternative. Because if it's not working, the most immoral people--the same ones who will have broken the free market with their rampant immorality--will be at the pinnacles of your government.

Watch out. We're almost there.



Monday, February 16, 2009

A Truly Free Market Doesn't Do These Things!

From 4% of GDP at the turn of the 20th Century, now government controls 33% of the U.S. Gross domestic product--up from 25% just a year ago.

We have not had a free market in the United States for just about 100 years now, yet the free market is getting blamed for all the problems that are finally coming to a head. FDR did not fix the problems of the free market; he simply exacerbated the problems of socialism, policies that were already being implemented by Herbert Hoover administration.

If what we really have now is the free market, ask yourself why so many of these so-called free market institutions are asking for--and receiving--bailouts from the federal government?

The free market doesn't do these things!


How Often Have You Been a Victim of "The Nag Factor"?

Advertisers constantly attempt to manipulate consumers into wanting--and therefore buying--the advertisers' products. That often doesn't work, so, more and more, advertisers have turned to manipulating our children. This is the essence of the scientifically proven and continually refined process known as "The Nag Factor". Have you been overrun by the Orcs of Nag?

"But mom, all my friends have one!!! I just gotta, gotta, gotta have it!"

"You know, dad, if you get me that cell phone, then it will be much easier for you to know where I am, and for me to get in touch with you if something bad happens."

If you have ever given in to such demands, you have been a victim of the Nag Factor. Lucy Hughes, who is director of strategy and insight for Initiative Media, has helped develop a scientific breakdown of the the ways that children nag their parents to buy things. Nags are broken down generally into two categories: The Whiny Nag ("all my friends have one") and The Logic Nag ("I would be safer").

Hughes claims that as much as 40% of everything parents buy for their children is as a result of having been nagged into it, whether the nag was an emotional outburst or an attempt to use the potion of overpowering logic.

I was surprised, as I sat down to write this article, that 4 of my 5 kids (the other one was in bed at the time) think that they are very unsuccessful when it comes to nagging.

"Do you feel like you're successful when nagging us to buy you something?" I asked.

"No," came the immediate refrain.

"Not even sometimes?" I pressed.

"No." The response was just as immediate.

"If we were successful, then I would have an X-Box and a four-wheeler, and we'd have TV," my 11-year-old stated.

Although our victories as parents in the nagging war aren't the 100% that our kids think they are, we have been pretty successful. Here are some of our strategies.

Don't Watch TV. Television is the main battleground in the nag wars. It is from television that children get most of their ideas for what they "need". Since we don't bring broadcast television of any sort into our home, our kids don't have nearly as much ammunition in the nag wars. Instead we watch a fair amount of DVD movies, 20% of which must be documentaries. Advertising in entertainment movies exists and is very profitable, but it is much less in-your-face than is commercial advertising on TV. When we watch TV at a cousin's house or when we're at the hotel on a family trip, my head starts to ache at all the lighting-quick scene changes and psychedelic colors in commercials aimed at children.

Teach the value of money and budgeting. At present, we have no debt. A position of no debt makes it much easier to teach the children that we must save up before we buy something. Our children receive a monthly allowance, which they must figure out how to stretch out to fill the whole month. Some of them are good at this, and some are not. Out of their allowance each month, each child must give 10% as tithing to our church, as well as 10% more into their savings account.

How successful have you been at fending off the Orcs of Nag? What are some of your successful strategies?




Saturday, February 14, 2009

Republicans are Squarely to Blame for Stimulus Fiasco

Republicans are crying foul that the Democrat leadership in Congress forced blitzkrieg votes on the second most stupid economic stimulus plan in world history yesterday. They have short memories. It was their leadership only four months ago that was advocating the most stupid economic stimulus plan in history. The idea of panicking the Congressional herd into a voting stampede had its beginning just after September 11, 2001. And that is why the current fiasco is all the Republicans' fault.

Without the diabolical attacks of 9/11, do you think that Congress would recently have been voting for silly stimulus packages on the threat of "if we don't do something now, then it will get much worse"? Not a chance.

Mike Huckabee had this to say recently:
I learned a few tricks and tactics while I was a lieutenant governor and governor for over 13 1/2 years. And one thing is that when someone is in a hurry to pass legislation, you'd better slow it down because the reason to hurry a law is rarely urgency to help the citizens, but urgency to get it passed before people find out what the heck it really is.

A lot of legislation is like garbage and it's garbage the first day in the can, but if it sits there long enough, it really starts smelling.
He's absolutely right. It's like the snake oil salesman. If you taste the snake oil, or if you read the bill, there's more time to discover that it's just plain old crap.

The Democrats have sunk to a new moral low. George W. Bush, through

To their credit, very few Republicans voted for the phony plan. Yet, under similar circumstances in September of 2001, Republicans displayed the same panic mentality when it came time to vote for the USA Patriot Act.

his tilting at Islamic terrorist windmills made us more vulnerable to terrorism than we'd ever been up to that point. As Democrats contribute to the waterfall decline in American economic health, that vulnerability skyrockets--along with the hypocrisy.

Now, news that Nancy Pelosi compelled the House to vote quickly on the latest stimulus debacle package so that she could be on time for her trip to Europe just makes me want to vomit.

Glenn Beck chastised congress yesterday for not having possibly been able to read the "stimulus" package that they were required to vote

For Republicans who blindly supported their President then, how can they be surprised when the Democrats blindly support their president now?

on by the end of the day. That, in and of itself, is reason enough to vote against it. Yet nearly every (every?) Democrat voted for it. To their credit, very few Republicans voted for the phony plan. Yet, under similar circumstances in September of 2001, Republicans displayed the same panic mentality when it came time to vote for the USA Patriot Act. The Patriot Act, much like

The only kind of government we have today is government by contrived panic. Garbage starts to stink quickly. That all started on 9/11.

the "stimulus" bills of 2008 and 2009, caused (or will cause) far more harm than good. Then, as well as now, it was impossible for our elected representatives to have read what they were voting on. For Republicans who blindly supported their President then, how can they be surprised when the Democrats blindly support their president now?

Mike Huckabee is correct. Except to repel immediate invasion, government works best when it has time to think. The only kind of government we have today is government by contrived panic. Garbage starts to stink quickly. That all started on 9/11.




Wednesday, February 11, 2009

Governor Huntsman, I Support Civil Unions, Too--Sort Of

It all depends on what you mean by the term "civil union". I fully support the existing Utah Marriage Amendment to the constitution, as well, which doesn't allow marriage of same-sex persons or anything like unto it. It appears that that's the same thing that Utah Governor Jon Huntsman supports. Utah Conservatives need to stop worrying about a stealth campaign to destroy traditional marriage in Utah.

In some states, civil unions are the

So when Governor Huntsman talks about supporting civil unions, he can't possibly mean that he supports something akin to marriage. I suspect that would be an impeachable offense to support a violation of the Utah Constitution...wouldn't it?

same thing as domestic partnerships. In other states, civil unions are the same thing as marriage. In Utah neither domestic partnerships nor civil unions could possibly be the same thing as marriage, because of the third amendment to Article 1, Section 29 of the Utah Constitution (the Marriage Amendment), which says:
1. Marriage consists only of the legal union between a man and a woman.
2. No other domestic union, however denominated, may be recognized as a marriage or given the same or substantially equivalent legal effect.
So when Governor Huntsman talks about supporting civil unions, he can't possibly mean that he supports something akin to marriage. I suspect that would be an impeachable offense for a government official to support a violation of the Utah Constitution...wouldn't it?

In a recent interview, Governor Huntsman said he supported civil unions. According to the BYU Daily Universe:
Lisa Roskelley, spokeswoman for the governor, said he is in favor of state legislation that would extend additional rights to gays, adding that “he supports civil unions.”
As they are wont to do, Utah conservatives became immediately sure that the Governor had reneged on a

Utah conservatives are positive that the Governor has reneged on a campaign promise to support the ban of gay marriage. He hasn't.

campaign promise to support the ban of gay marriage. I don't see any big deal about what the governor said. I don't think he changed his mind.

As I wrote just a few days ago, I support rights for homosexuals--but that marriage is not a right.

Conservatives in Utah (and I'm sure other states) feel like

Utah Conservatives are afraid of a homosexual stealth campaign to destroy traditional marriage in Utah. They might be right. But why should that matter? Rights are rights.

they have to have a wide buffer in front of the "marriage" battle line, because they're sure that advocacy of homosexual rights is merely a stealth campaign, the ultimate conquest of which is legalizing homosexual marriage. They might be right. But why should that matter? Rights are rights. The point is, homosexuals deserve to have rights with relationship to each other, but they will not generally make good parents. That's why I support civil unions (i.e. domestic partnerships) but not homosexual marriage. It's that simple.

We already have

We already have a buffer buttressing traditional marriage in Utah. The Marriage Amendment isn't going to be abolished anytime soon.

a buffer buttressing traditional marriage in Utah. It's not very wide, but it--the Marriage Amendment--is extremely tall. In both methods for amending the Utah Constitution, two-thirds of both houses of the legislature have to vote in favor of the amendment, and then they pass it on to the Utah voters for a majority approval. That ain't gonna happen for a long time.

So I think that Utah Conservatives should relax just a bit. Give gays and lesbians the rights they deserve, and feel confident that their stealth campaign--if it exists at all--will fail.

They might just make a lot of new friends.




Monday, February 09, 2009

Bush/Gore 2000: What I Missed in My Short-Sightedness

The biggest mistake I made during the 2000 election was to not notice what was going on in Florida, because to me by that point it didn't matter. Since I felt there's wasn't a toilet-paper square's worth of difference between Bush and Gore, I spent time laughing with most of the rest of Americans about dimpled chads and butterfly ballots. I should have at least cared enough that justice be done in Florida. I didn't. It wasn't. I'm sorry.

The year 2000 was when I developed my theory of two speeding cars. It doesn't matter if the Bush car is going 90 MPH toward a cliff and the Gore car is going 100 MPH--both of them will crash and burn when they hit the bottom. When my candidate, Alan Keyes, was aced out of the election by an Establishment-compliant media, I stopped caring.

I shouldn't have. I learned about my mistake as I recently watched the documentary Unprecedented, which describes what went on in Florida in the 2000 election. I wish I had paid more attention then.

If Al Gore had become president, would we still have been attacked on 9/11? Probably. Would we have reacted in the same shameful way that we did in Iraq? I'm not sure. But Unprecedented makes a very good case that Al Gore should have been the 43rd president. However, mistakes by the Gore campaign, coupled with the Bush campaign juggernaut, conspired to install George W. Bush on the ever-more-gilded American throne.

While watching Unprecedented, I saw what a real butterfly ballot looked like. The ballots as printed posed a distinct disadvantage to Al Gore. Many of these ballots were not counted because of "overvoting", where someone voted for more than one candidate for

The only thing I think went right was the 5-4 Supreme Court decision that the Florida Supreme Court had arbitrarily set aside dates by which recounts must be completed.

president--probably after noticing their mistake. Thousands of such overvotes were not counted even though Al Gore's name had been written in the write-in spot at the bottom of the ballot.

It was easy to laugh at a dimpled chad back then. Chads weren't dimpled because voters were stupid, as we were led back then to believe. They were dimpled because previous confetti from the voting machines had not been cleaned out of the machines.

Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris was also the George W. Bush campaign manager for the state of Florida. Harris declared the recount to be over, and she was the one that awarded the victory to her candidate.

The state of Florida paid $4 million to a company called Database Technologies

Mistakes by the Gore campaign, coupled with the Bush campaign juggernaut, conspired to install George W. Bush on the ever-more-gilded American throne.

to identify voters who were not legally allowed to vote because of previous felony convictions. Florida required Database Technology to use loose matching algorithms, which caused thousands of extra people--non-felons--to be struck from the voter rolls.

The most bizarre development in the whole fiasco was the way the Gore campaign reacted. Instead of asking for a recount in the entire state, Gore asked for a recount in only those four counties where both improprieties had occurred and where his campaign stood to gain the most. When Secretary of State/Campaign Manager Harris declared the victory for Bush, Gore almost immediately acquiesced, leaving thousands of protesters and Gore supporters in the lurch.

The only thing I think went right was the 5-4 Supreme Court decision that the Florida Supreme Court had arbitrarily set aside dates by which recounts must be completed, which were specified in Florida law. It turned out to be bad law, but it was law nonetheless, and the U.S. Supreme Court had no other choice but to see that it was upheld.

To me, and to America, it wouldn't probably have made a hill of beans' difference whether Al Gore had gotten elected president in 2000, because he's an Establishment man just like the other guy. Except for the fact that from a fairness and justice perspective the election was stolen from him.

I wish I had been paying more attention to this travesty. I will from now on, no matter how bad both candidates stink.




Saturday, February 07, 2009

In Case You Think Marxism is Cool, Maybe You Should Know Something About Karl Marx Himself

Even today, students of Karl Marx seem to be enthralled by his supposed wisdom. Jesus Christ taught that "by their fruits ye shall know them." The fruits of Karl Marx were dark and hateful. As we learn more about the demonic life of Karl Marx, it becomes hard to imagine why anyone would believe his teachings.

Chauncey Riddle, a former Brigham Young University professor, once remarked that Karl Marx made some accurate observations about life, but that the problem arose with Marx's solutions. It is much easier to destroy than it is to build something up. Karl Marx was a destroyer--and we're still paying for it.

Everything that Karl Marx wrote came from a

Marx implied that "capitalists" were capable of nothing but exploitation of the working men and women--a surefire recipe for class hatred instead of problem solving.

framework of class combat. Everything that Jesus Christ taught was from a perspective of loving and serving one's neighbor. Marx's solutions to social problems were diametric opposites of the solutions of Christ. For many Marxism is cool, as it allegedly helps the downtrodden masses. In reality, Marxism stirs up hatred and anger, leaving the masses as downtrodden as before. Based on Karl Marx's bizarre life, it's hard to imagine how anyone can subscribe to his philosophies.

Dedicated to his soon-to-be wife, Jenny Westphalen, Karl Marx described his personal passion in the poem entitled Athenaeum
Look now, my blood-dark sword shall stab
Unerringly within thy soul.
God neither knows nor honors art.
The hellish vapors rise and fill the brain.

Til I go mad and my heart is utterly changed.
See this sword—the Prince of Darkness sold it to me.
For me he beats the time and gives the signs.
Ever more boldly I play the dance of death.
The description fits very well. Karl Marx sought to dominate and/or exploit nearly everyone in his path. His own father described Karl as being possessed by a "demonic spirit". In his personal

Karl Marx sought to dominate and/or exploit nearly everyone in his path. His own father described Karl as being possessed by a "demonic spirit".

quest, he ignored his family, some of whom died of malnutrition.

His mother lamented "If only Karl had created capital instead of writing about it!" Karl Marx never held a steady job, nor did he visit a factory during his entire adult life. He spent virtually all his adult life complaining about the problems, yet Karl Marx never contributed to the physical or spiritual betterment of his fellow men. And yet somehow hundreds of thousands consider Marx an authority on economics.

He was described by a friend as someone
Who comes rushing in, impetuous and wild—
Dark fellow from Trier, in fury raging?
Nor walks nor skips, but leaps upon his prey
In tearing rage, as one who leaps to grasp
Broad spaces in the sky and drags them down to earth,
Stretching his arms wide open to the heavens.
His evil fist is clenched, he roars interminably
As though ten thousand devils had him by the hair.
Marx was the one who coined the phrase "capitalism" as a term of derision.

From the moment he received a statue of Zeus as a present, Marx let his

Ironically, money from Friedrich Engels and from Marx's wife's estate allowed him to live a bourgeois life. He thought nothing of the hypocrisy.

hair and beard grow long in an effort to resemble the foolhardy king of the Greek gods.

Marx fathered an illegitimate son, whom he completely disowned.

Ironically, money from Friedrich Engels and from his wife's estate allowed him to live a bourgeois life. He thought nothing of the hypocrisy.

His book, Capital, was a failure in most of Europe, but it caught on

It takes great skill to be a builder. It takes much less of a person to wish to destroy everything in order for it to be remade in his image. Karl Marx was such a man.

in Russia, especially as it was later championed by Lenin. It has been stated that "without Marx there would have been no Lenin."

Marx taught that value could only be generated by the laborer, and he therefore branded profits and interest as "surplus value", which implied that "capitalists" were capable of nothing but exploitation of the working men and women--a surefire recipe for class hatred instead of problem solving.

Marx had virtually no popularity at the time of his death. Twenty people came to his funeral.

It is debated--incorrectly, I think--that Marx would have opposed the repressions of such fiends as Lenin, Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot. Based on Marx's vile hatred of the bourgeoisie, such a claim hardly makes sense. As one critic of Marx put it:
In the name of human progress, Marx has probably caused more death, misery, degradation and despair than any man who ever lived.
Those acting in the name of Marx have caused tens of millions of deaths of those who got in the way of their grandiose Marxist plans.

It takes great skill to be a builder. It takes much less of a person to wish to destroy everything in order for it to be remade in his image. Karl Marx was such a man.

How unfortunate. The ill-thought "solutions" of Marx have been a burden of untold proportions. On the other hand, the yoke of Jesus Christ is easy, and his burden is light.

Let's fix the problems, sure. But not with a solution that is malevolently worse than the disease!




Thursday, February 05, 2009

Homosexuality: The "Rights" Line is Drawn at Marriage

I oppose homosexual marriage because of its effect on children. Some people seem to be opposed to a lot more things that I think homosexuals should be allowed to do. They seem to be afraid of giving an inch, but having a mile taken from them. That has never been a good reason to oppose the rights of another.

I don't think that homosexual marriage is a right. As I have discussed in various articles elsewhere, something that is almost sure to have a profoundly detrimental effect on children should never be considered a right.

However, there are a lot of things that homosexuals are not now legally allowed to do that they should be allowed to do. Equality Utah commissioned a

I don't think that homosexual marriage is a right. However, there are a lot of things that homosexuals are not now legally allowed to do that they should be allowed to do.

survey in January 2009 that asked the sentiments of Utahns regarding various homosexuality rights issues. Here are a few of those questions and my responses.

1. Do you support changing Utah’s current employment law to make it illegal to fire someone from their job solely because they are gay or transgender? I do support changing the law in this manner, as I supported a bill from the 2008 legislative session that would have changed the law similarly. However, I do not support anyone flaunting their sexuality in public, and I think that employers should be allowed to fire anyone who does so.

2. Do you support changing Utah’s current housing law to make it illegal to deny someone housing solely because they are gay or transgender? I support such legislation as well. What

A landlord's religious feelings should be prioritized such that "loving your fellow man" comes just above advocacy of sexual purity.

two people do together in the privacy of their own domicile, whether rented or owned, is their own business. A landlord's religious feelings should be prioritized such that "loving your fellow man" comes just above advocacy of sexual purity.

3. Do you support providing employees of the State of Utah with optional health insurance coverage for a spouse, a partner, or another designated adult? I support this as well. What I am concerned about is how legally easy it might be for someone to change the partner so designated. Homosexual commitments should be as difficult to break as are heterosexual commitments.

4. Do you support changing Utah adoption laws to allow qualified gay couples to foster or adopt? I supported such legislation during last year's legislative session as well. What I specifically supported in last year's legislation was that homosexual couples should be allowed to adopt only when it is determined to be in the child's best interest. In nearly all cases, a loving mother and father can be found for adoptive children, but I can think of much worse situations than being raised

Despite how we feel about homosexual marriage, it shouldn't change the way we feel about the rights that homosexuals should--but currently don't--have.

by two loving female adults or even two loving male adults.

5. Do you support changing Utah adoption laws to allow qualified non-married hetero-sexual couples to foster or adopt? Yes, with the same stipulations as in number 4 above.

6. Do you support changing Utah adoption laws to allow qualified gay or lesbian adults to legally adopt their partner’s child? Yes, so long as the relationship between the two adults has proven to be long-term and stable, and with the stipulations in number 4 above.

. . .

Do I feel comfortable that homosexuals, if they become legally entitled to a host of new rights, won't continue to advocate for homosexual marriage? No. I'm rather sure, unfortunately, that they will agitate for what would amount to the destruction of marriage. But that's where the line must be drawn, and no closer. Because despite how we feel about homosexual marriage, it shouldn't change the way we feel about the rights that homosexuals should--but currently don't--have.