it would seem that other societies have taken firmer stands in their war on creeping decadence.

Societies have to enforce their moral codes in one way or another, and the louder the message, the more effective it is. Compare the events in Pakistan with the public shaming of Bristol Palin in an attempt to curb teen pregnancy - which do you think has a better chance of succeeding?

Did they go overboard in Pakistan? It would seem so. But what I take from this is that feel more strongly about honoring their fathers and mothers, so to speak, than Americans do. And if Americans want change on things like teen pregnancy, they better up the stakes a little bit. Actions speaking louder than words and all that.

I think people are over-thinking this a little bit in their efforts to find Republican hypocrisy, which is a pretty modest goal. Sure, she cut these programs, and sure, her teenage daughter is pregnant. It's only hypocritical if you buy the party line, which obviously even Republicans do not. The truth is that white Republicans have judged (correctly) that they are losing the numbers game, and unless they step in now, will soon be the minority.

Not all white Christians are Republican, but lots and lots of Republicans are white Christians. And many of these folks see themselves in a holy demographic struggle against non-whites, which they couch in terms of traditional values, etc. Hillary Clinton knew that score when she nakedly appealed to "hard-working Americans, white Americans." They've tried and will continue to try various tactics: restrict immigration, deport the non-whites, cut lots and lots of social programs that disproportionately benefit non-whites, etc. But obviously, in a demographic struggle, there's ultimately only one way to prevail: out-breed the opposition.

And in steps Sarah Palin. Now McCain catches a lot of flak for his immigration stance, but can't just reverse this too, because he needs those elusive independents. And what better way to bring back the dissidents than to pick a white, Christian breeding machine? People talk about narrow-casting from time to time, when someone on the national stage will speak in code that the bulk of Americans ignore, but a slice finds highly compelling. Like Huckabee talking about "vertical relationships" during the primaries. This Palin pick among other things is a direct appeal to the nativist wing, and she could not be a better suited.

It's that simple. Palin's dedicated much of her life to making white, Christian babies, and she didn't wait till her mid-thirties to start. At 44 she has five children, four of whom aren't defective and can go on to produce more white, Christian babies. This is also the reason they could not be happier that not only is Bristol Palin pregnant at 17, the father is a man's man white Christian who will probably get the kind of respectable blue-collar Alaskan job that Sarah Palin's husband commands, which will be more than adequate to raise a good-sized family on.

Family values and all that, it's just code. To be sure they have a big tent: the rich probably aren't voting for McCain because of Palin's pregnancy prowess, but they were in the bag anyway. Same with the hyper-hawkish dual-loyalty neocon Jews a la Lieberman and Wolfowitz. But Palin sure will prop up this part of the tent.

So. Where were we? Oh yeah, condemning Republican hypocrisy. Well, have fun playing that game while McCain/Palin waltz to the White House.

While really the West didn't get into the game until Henry the VIII. And it wasn't extended to Mr. Regular till this century, when divorce became easy and highly popular, and much of the stigma vanished.

Pop quiz: the difference between temporary marriages to young, attractive women practiced in Twelver Shi'ism and serially marrying young, attractive women as practiced in the U.S. by, say, Donald Trump, is...?

Oh, that's right. The women Trump uses for a few years are legally entitled to half of his belongings, while these women are simply paid up front. Women think of this as "equality."

It would seem to me that the Persians have the edge in that regard, though: you don't have to be Donald Trump rich to do it, and you don't risk half your livelihood every time.

P.S. I'm sure Donny's smart enough to go for a pre-nup, in which case I can't even see the difference between his marriages and sigheh, except that in Persia they have the grace not to pretend it'll last forever.

Probably she's working on another All About My Sex Life article and is waiting till the Palin hubbub subsides so as to achieve maximum effect.

But more on topic, the prevalence of infidelity would seem to suggest nothing more revelatory than this: fidelity and monogamy genes never got that much penetration into the gene pool. Looking at our closest relatives, I don't see why anyone should be surprised.