Wacky Cult Guy Predicts “Nuclear Baby”
May 22nd, 2008
|
| Share |
What the hell is a “Nuclear Baby”? Well, I don’t know and it really doesn’t matter either because it’s just something made up by a wacky cult guy who’s gotten himself in hot water recently and is defending himself in the media. Here’s a clip of a recent interview with him by Sheppard Smith on Fox News.
I’m trying to find the full clip, because it cuts off before the end of the interview. The ending is actually the best part. Much as I do not generally find myself complimenting Fox News on their coverage, Sheppard Smith gets it right when he closes the interview by stating in an annoyed tone that it was “irresponsible” to have this guy on the show and dismissing him. To paraphrase it was something like “You know.. I’m sorry, but it was a mistake to have this guy on. You’re talking about nuclear babies and the end of the world and.. it’s really not responsible to have someone like this on television like this. Goodbye.”
Hopefully I can find it unabridged, because although candid, IMHO the best thing a journalist with any integrity can do in that situation is apologize for having such a nutball on the show and dismiss him for what he is.
Also, I really don’t need to go and pick apart this guy’s comments and show the fallacies and wackiness, do I? It should be obvious to most sane people.
This entry was posted on Thursday, May 22nd, 2008 at 10:36 pm and is filed under Just LAME, Not Even Wrong, media, religion. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
View blog reactions
May 22nd, 2008 at 10:56 pm
Here is another clip (which I like even better) of Shep Smith getting irritated about a cult when interviewing a member and giving it straight at the end.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ObFGriBA1U
Hell, I respect the guy for this. I guess it might not be journalistic because he steps out of the reporter roll and gives some unscripted statements and obvious irritation, but nobody should stand by these people and give them any kind of respect or legitimacy.
Quote Comment
May 23rd, 2008 at 12:49 am
From the @ssholes website:
“ABC News is censoring its comments to the story calling us a “Sex Cult” because they can’t handle the Truth. Judging from their “fall lineup”, if we were a sex cult, they would be members.
They are attacking us because they are extreme left wing liberals who hate our message against pre-marital sex, homosexuality, abortion, and beastiality.”
Riiiight
From: Yisrayl Hawkins
Quote Comment
May 23rd, 2008 at 1:21 am
Biff Hendersen said:
Thanks for that link, that was really hilarious.
I was wondering, have you ever thought about maybe adding other contributers to the blog? Or perhaps adding a submission link? I think it would get more visitors if the content were updated a bit more often. Just an idea.
Also, how are the new adds working out? I click them whenever I see something interesting. Only actually bought one thing, that was something I was going to buy anyway, but had forgotten about.
Quote Comment
May 23rd, 2008 at 1:28 am
Good thing this wasn’t on a British television show. If you say some of this stuff there you could be arrested!
Quote Comment
May 23rd, 2008 at 2:00 am
The video starts off by saying that he is alleged to have advocated polygamy. It sounds to me like that is the least of the issues with the cult. I never understood why people made a big deal of cults advocating polygamy or people practicing it either. Yeah, if it’s accompanied by forced marriages and sexual abuse and selling kids and stuff then it’s an issue, but how can they stop people from having multiple wives or even husbands? You can only have one according to the law so only one can be official, but how can they stop people from having multiple spouses within their religion or multiple people they consider their spouse or partner? I guess you call that a “commonlaw partner” or whatever, but still if that’s what people do then that’s their deal and it’s not that bad compared to what cults like to do otherwise.
Quote Comment
May 23rd, 2008 at 2:02 am
Oh, just to add and be clear: I think the idea is pretty messed up and I would never even think of being one of multiple wives. The idea of multiple husbands, however (KIDDING)
I’m just saying to each their own and it’s amazing how they make such a big deal over being “accused of having 30 wives.” If there are 30 women stupid enough to pair up with this guy then who cares?
Quote Comment
May 23rd, 2008 at 2:09 am
Alice in Blunderland said:
I certainly don’t; however having been (happily) married to the same gal for thirty plus years, I can tell you that one wife is more than enough! If one wife and a teenage daughter is any indication what it would be like with two wives, you can keep it.
Quote Comment
May 23rd, 2008 at 2:44 am
DV82XL said:
Yeah, I think it’s easier though if you’re a cult leader to deal with that kind of thing. I mean the thing that makes a relationship difficult is usually the other person having needs or wanting you to do things for them or laying their problems on you or just aggravating you or disagreements.
With a cult leader then by definition there are no disagreements because your followers always take what you say as absolute truth. They also live to serve you. If your wife nags you or something just say “Oh I talked to god today and he commanded me not to cut the grass today, so that’s that. Also, you have to do the dishes all yourself because that’s in the scripture. God also said your mother can’t come to visit anymore and he commands that you stop doing that annoying thing you do where you tap your fingernails on the keyboard. Oh and before I forget, I threw out all your CD’s of Yanni, because he’s the anti-christ and you’re not allowed to listen to him anymore. You can’t watch The View either.”
Quote Comment
May 23rd, 2008 at 2:53 am
Well that’s true. Cult leaders don’t really have normal relationships or have to deal with accommodating others.
As for polygamy, it always seems to be in a very male-oriented society or group where women are not given much freedom and the man is in charge of his wives. I guess this makes sense, because it must be very dis-empowering to a woman to have her hubby decide he wants another and not show the commitment to her she must show to him and that he can go bed some other women when he feels like it.
I think in that kind of arrangement it’s got to be a lot different. Basically the man doesn’t have to deal with the woman’s crap because her job is to just do as she is told.
Quote Comment
May 23rd, 2008 at 11:27 am
Well most polygamist cults and groups are where a man has multiple wives as opposed to advocating a woman have multiple husbands. It seems that way in at least the vast majority of modern movements, although there are probably exceptions.
This poses a very obvious problem, in addition to simply being very disempowering to women. The birth rate is approximately 50% male and 50% female. Thus, females become a valuable commodity and are treated as such. This seems to lead to a lot of them getting ‘taken’ at an early age, whenever possible or even traded amongst multiple men as wives and that kind of thing. You add to that the fact that these groups are generally isolated and kinda messed up in their religious views, often with sexual undertones and it’s no surprise what often occurs.
That having been said, I don’t have any problem with someone taking multiple partners as wives. I mean, if it’s all voluntary and adults are doing it by choice, then that’s their thing. Legally you can only have one partner, and I don’t know that should be changed, because if it were it would likely completely change the dynamics of marriage and lead to people not bothering to get divorced when they separate but taking another spouse and this would cause a huge mess legally. However, legal marriage is one thing. You can’t legislate whether eight women want to live with one man and commit to him as a wife, even if it’s not officially sanctioned. That’s just their choice… a stupid one, if you ask me, but it’s their choice.
Quote Comment
May 23rd, 2008 at 11:39 am
Polygamy evolved in cultures where life was hard on men and there was a consequential surplus of women. The system was not there to provide men with multiple sex partners, but to guarantee support for the widows and extra females. The Arab sheik with twenty wives was not a super stud, but basically forced by tradition to marry any unattached girl in the tribe.
The truth is a lot less titillating than what it seems at first glance.
Quote Comment
May 23rd, 2008 at 1:07 pm
DV82XL said:
Yeah, that’s definitely true in the historical context. However, it’s a bit different when you have a cult leader who has 30 wives because he claims that god told him he needed multiple wives. It seems like the modern fringe religious groups practicing it are more of a power thing or just a wacked out belief in an antiquated practice.
Quote Comment
May 23rd, 2008 at 1:26 pm
drbuzz0 said:
No question at all here. In fact what I wrote is proof of that, as there is no social or economic reason for this practice in the context of these cults.
Quote Comment
May 23rd, 2008 at 2:53 pm
DV82XL said:
No there’s definitely not and anyone who understands the practice should realize pretty fast that it only was established for reasons which no longer exist and anyone who uses modern religion to justify having multiple wives is likely just getting jollies off of the idea of it.
That’s really common in cults though where the leader(s) have multiple sex partners and have a lot of sexual control. Jim Jones, David Koresh (sp?) and all that gang were big on having a large number of ‘lovers’ or in reality sex slaves.
The cult leader generally being male in these circumstances there’s a control issue where the women of the cult become property and are used for sex by the leaders. The men on the other hand are left powerless and end up having their wives and girlfriends taken away to go boink the leader while they sit there like an idiot.
Quote Comment
May 27th, 2008 at 2:12 pm
What DV82XL says is exactly correct. Polygamy has never existed in serious quantities except as a way of taking care of excess females. The amount of polygamy in our society is zero (to several decimal places) and is not worth worrying about. We have enough real problems to put our efforts into.
Quote Comment
May 28th, 2008 at 4:20 pm
Chuck said:
I’m not saying polygamy is a problem. Even if it were widespread it would not be something I’d see as justified to go after. As it is stated, if eight women want to shack up with some old scraggly guy who says he talks to god, then that’s their dig.
However, any cult where there are people being held against their will or the potential for abuse of children or other illegal activities is obviously worth going after individually.
Quote Comment