In Defense of the SUV

SUVI know it’s all the rage right now to attack those wicked, selfish SUV owners for “hogging the roads” and “choking the air” with their oversized gas-guzzling monstrosities.  Some have even suggested that Jesus would not drive an SUV.  Recently, my brother-in-law, wildlife photographer, hunter, and father of 4, answered the critics following his purchase of yet another Chevy Suburban.  I think his reasons for owning an SUV just might change your mind.

My family is the proud owner of a used Chevy Suburban.  To buy this Suburban, we traded in our Mercury Grand Marquis, which is rated as a large sedan.  Got 17 in town, 22 on the highway.  But with our family expanded to four kids (Yeah, I know us overpopulating the world is evil too. Bad, bad, bad, we’re very bad) we couldn’t fit all four of them in car seats in the back seat with only three seatbelts.  So that meant a third row of seats to get the whole herd in.  Thus, the new SUV. 

 We could have gotten all our kids in a mini van, and done a little better on gas mileage, but I’ve seen what can happen to a mini van too many times when in a wreck.  For years, I was called at all hours of the day and night, before Deborah and I got married, to shoot photos of the fatal crash scenes for the Texas Department of Public Safety (i.e. highway patrol) here in the Rio Grande Valley.  I saw way too many small cars (compacts, and even mid-size), and especially mini-vans that were responsible for the majority of deaths that I witnessed.  And when it was a minivan, the fatalities almost always involved kids, even properly strapped into their carseats.   

Whenever I’d get a call in the middle of the night, and the officer would tell me they had fatalities in a mini-van, I’d call it every time, and it would have little kids involved.  Part of the problem with mini vans is that they have those huge doors that slide back for easy access to get people in and out of the vehicle.  There’s not much support (i.e. door frames and metal) for those doors (or for the rest of the vehicle for that matter), and when another vehicle punches its grill (i.e. T-boning them) through the side of that mini van, all the kids in the second and third seat are plastered against the far side of the vehicle, or even thrown thru the opposite window or door, often times in their carseats.   

The other problem with small vehicles is they are “mini.”  They have much less mass, since they are small and lightweight, plus, they use thinner gauge steel, than large SUV’s, so it’s much more likely to crumple and bend and separate than heavier metal.  How many large SUV’s did I see with fatalities?  One.  And that was when that Suburban had a wreck with a vehicle that had much more total mass than it did, and in that case it was an 18-wheeler trailer truck.  So I told myself, even before I was married and had kids, that there was no way I was going to put my most precious possessions in a mini van, or even a small to mid-size car, should I be fortunate enough to have that one day.   

Have I ever had a wreck in a SUV?  Yep, once.  Actually, it was on my birthday, and Deb and I were dating at the time, so this was about 10 years ago.  A lady (about 70 years old) ran a stop sign and I T-boned her right in the passenger side door.  I was going about 45mph in my Suburban, which knocked her old hulking Oldsmabile into a building on the opposite street corner (actually cracked the corner of the building).  I didn’t feel a thing, though the only thing rearranged inside my Suburban was my drink cup which flew out of the cup holder on impact and was laying in the floorboard, but could have also been from me locking up the brakes trying to not hit her.   When I jumped out of my Suburban to check on the old lady, she was laying in the passenger side floorboard of her car.  She wasn’t wearing a seat belt, so the impact of my Suburban on her passengers side door threw her out of her seat into the near side floorboard.  She had a few bumps and bruises from getting thrown around some (which would have been solved with a seat belt), and I came away with narry a bump or bruise.  Fortunately both of us were in large vehicles. Lots of mass around us to take the impact, instead of our bodies taking the impact. 

A huge factor here is kinetic energy or the physics of momentum, which are basically the same thing.  The amount of translational kinetic energy depends upon two variables, the mass of the object and the speed of the object.  Momentum is mass times velocity.  By having a large, heavy vehicle around my family, can I guarantee that they’ll be safe?  No way, because I can’t guarantee how fast or how much mass an object will have coming toward our vehicle.  We’d be no match for a train, or a trailer truck, or even Albino Hayford if he were shot out of a cannon, since they all have so much mass (just kidding, Albino).  But against the majority of vehicles on the road, my family inside our Suburban would have a much greater chance of surviving.  I’m not saying that we would be guaranteed to survive, but we would have a much greater chance of surviving.  

The more mass you have, the more it dissipates the impact of another vehicle. Selfish, yep.  Safe, nope.  Safer, yes.  Worth burning up a little more fossil fuel and the exhaust going into the atmosphere to give my family a better chance of survival in a wreck?  Priceless. 

I’ve already spent way too much time on this.  However, I would love to talk more about Conservation compared to Environmentalism later, but I’ve got to get photos out to one of those evil hunting magazines that teach selfish hunters how to kill blue whales.  Now where are my blue whale hunting slides?



29 Responses to In Defense of the SUV

  1. After seeing your thoughts up on my blog, let me just say, “Amen”! Always encouraging to see another Texan deliver a good-old-fashioned TEXAS BUTT-WHUPPING!!! I got up to cheer so fast, I knocked over my “spotted-owl” sandwich and “bald eagle” wings onto the floor!

    You forgot to mention the most famous enviro-wackos who decry the combustion engine, but fly to their speeches in private jets. See all the hypocrisy here in living color.

    On a more “can’t we all get along” note, I would buy a hybrid vehicle, if it could compete in speed, cost, performance, and wasn’t a tiny deathtrap.

  2. Tim Skoglund says:

    Enjoyed the write up, Lance.

    The mass aspect of a vehicle’s saftety is relative to the other vehicle involved in the collision – mini Vans would be be great if everybody else rode little Chevy Metros. The problem with everybody buying into the mass argument is that you have to get bigger and bigger vehicles to stay ahead of everybody else. If governmental policy restricts size (via fuel economy standards, etc.), you’ll still want the heaviest vehicle permissible. That equation never changes and you will always trade permissible fuel economy for saftey. It’s a no-brainer to say Jesus would value people over fuel economy.

    Now the question of imposing fuel economy restrictions and leveling the vehicle size playing field is a trickier one. The environmentalists might argue that case more convincingly than foolishly suggesting we willingly risk the safety of our families for an inexact inch or two of ocean depth.

  3. Davie Copp says: about a Volvo station wagon…the safest on the road and not so all-consuming, both spatially and environmentally.

    Your California ‘liberal’ friend

  4. S Hanzel says:

    I’m convinced!!!

    My lovely bride (of 17 years this December) and I would have prefered to purchase a much safer SUV over our mini, mini. We had one before and loved it and we both want one again, unfortunately our finances dictated a used mini, mini. But definately one next time…

    Oh, BTW, Albino Hayford, I don’t think we can ever thank you enough for marrying us all those years ago.

  5. Lance Krueger says:

    You’re right, if everyone were driving Metros, and there were no trailertrucks on the road, or no roads crossing train tracks. Until that day happens, it’s Large Vehicles for me and my house. However, I doubt even a Suburban would hold up that well to a train (depending on how fast it’s going, of course), but I’d take my chances in a Suburban over a Yugo any day. Like I said, it’s a gamble. I’m just trying to up my odds. No guarantees though.

    Davie Copp,
    Do Volvo Station Wagons have three rows of seats? I had to have three rows of seats, since you can’t stick four car seats in the second row. On most small to mid-size cars, it’s terrible trying to put three carseats side by side, since they’re packed in there so tight.

    Regarding Volvo’s claims of safety, I remember seeing on 60 Minutes a while back, where they did one of those undercover type expose’s on Volvo, since they touted their rollover safety in their advertising. Come to find out, they had a Volvo outer body, with a complete roll cage and inside supports that made the car stay together in it’s own crash tests. I saw the video where they slowed the video down of the rolling car, and you could clearly see the roll bar. But of course, Volvo doesn’t sell any of their cars with roll bars and such. It was flat out advertising fraud. Now, I don’t know what they’ve done to improve on their obvious need to falsify their safety rating, but I would think the Insurance Institute’s Crash Tests would be a good place to start. Talking about the Insurance Institute, they run their Crash Tests every few months on Dateline, and they did a series of crash tests just a few months ago of minivans. Well guess what, all but one got their lowest rating. The one that did okay, was the Kia Sedona, and it was a notch or two below the top rating. Just mediocre. I think their term was acceptable. The others got unacceptable. I’m just remembering this off the top of my head, but I remember reshowing it to my wife, because she was saying maybe we should just get a minivan since they’re cheap and we were broke at the time. Which I was adamantely opposed to.

    Which by the way is another reason we don’t own a Volvo. Which we had to trade in our large sedan, the Grand Marquis, for the Suburban, and then finance the rest, which made it manageable.

    Also, part of the reasoning behind getting this particular make of vehicle was it had 4 wheel drive, and the extra size for hauling stuff in the back behind the third seat. I’m a wildlife photographer, and travel around the U.S. and Canada with lots of camera equipment, and needed the room, and needed the ruggedness and mudding ability (plus safety on snow and ice covered roads I deal with up North) of a 4×4. But the extra size and safety factor was the most important. One day it will probably become my work vehicle and replace my old 4×4 Suburban, when I get my wife something newer.

    S Hanzel,
    Don’t get me wrong, money was a big factor in our decision here. This Suburban we bought was not a new one, but a 2002 model. Actually, my work Suburban is a 1991 model with over 300,000 miles on it. I’ve never owned a new vehicle. Always used, which allows you to let someone else take the brunt of the depreciation.

    Lance Krueger

  6. Yeah, I remember the wedding well. It was at that restaurant on the corner of Community and Poway Roads. What was it called? And don’t forget all the jolt cola you guys would bring to the youth meetings!

  7. Daniel B says:

    Community and poway? Which corner? Right now you’ve got a hollywood video a gas station, a bank and a Brigantine that wasn’t there 17 years ago (That was a mobile home park I think).

  8. Sorry…Midland and Poway Road (South side). Used to be kind of an upscale restaurant. That’s where we had the wedding. BTW, Danisl, I think a rehearsing of your accident in TJ might be helpful (weren’t you in a Tahoe?)

  9. Daniel B says:

    No idea what the restraunt was but if it’s where I am thinking it has gone down considerably.

    Yeah we were in a tahoe, but I don’t want to relive that story today seeing as how my wife is presently in TJ on a missions trip and I have a genuine fear of crosisng the border based on that night. Nevertheless I would never travel south of the border in anything less then a full sized SUV or van. I love our Tahoe.

    I can’t wait till I can afford my own SUV. I am glad I don’t have kids in our little car (hyundai). As for gas prices. They aren’t any higher today then they have been in history and America has the cheapest gas in the world. Fuel economy is on the bottom of my priorities. Safety is near the top but style is by far the number 1 motivator in buying a car for me, thus our red hyundai 😉

  10. Echo_ohcE says:

    It may be safer to actually be in an SUV if you are in an accident, but have you ever considered the increased likelihood of getting into an accident in the first place?

    I am quite sick of SUV’s, so I thought I’d provide a counterpoint to your conversation. Unfortunately, I’m not anti-SUV because of environmental issues or anything like that. (However, we ARE called to be good stewards, so Christians have no excuse for simply not caring about the earth. But I don’t think that burning gas is actually all that harmful. I don’t think the earth is really all that fragile. But anyway…)

    No, I hate SUV’s because people are stupid. 99 times out of 100 the driver of an SUV is some tiny little woman who has 6 kids in the back yelling and screaming at each other and watching movies. Meanwhile, she’s talking on the cell phone, and only half paying attention to what she’s doing. And, since she’s driven small cars all her life and this is her first SUV, and because she’s really not paying close attention, she’s either riding one lane line or the other, or occasionally slipping over it. Besides that, with the gigantic engines, too many drivers of SUV’s tend to toss their gigantic cars all over the road, and this is a real danger, especially given the fact that none of the rest of us can see around the beasts.

    Dear SUV drivers,

    You drive like maniacs, and quite frankly, you’re in my way. Figure out where the side of your car is, and stay within the lines.



  11. Echo_ohcE says:


    At least you can count on me to start an argument.

    (It was totally sincere.)


  12. Lupin says:

    You don’t believe the earth is that fragile? That is a bold claim considering some of the experimental evidence.

  13. Daniel B says:

    Gee wiz Echo

    Looks like your prejudices go beyond mischaracterizing denominational adherents into judging anyone for anything based on your experiences. 99% of SUV drivers are tiny women? Really? I’m sure you also believe 99% of blondes are idiots and 99% of women have smaller brains then men and 99% of people from the middle east are terrorists. This explains why you think 99% of charismatics are going to hell. I am just surpised that you don’t allow others who stereotype presbyterians as “I can’t do whatever I want and still go to heaven”, nonevangelistic, alcholic, no-fun, don’t worship, judgemental jerks, have their own opinions.

    BTW 99% of Cowboy “fans” are jumping off the bandwagon today and jumping onto the Bolt bandwagon

  14. RubeRad says:

    99% of women have smaller brains then men

    99% of women have smaller bodies than men, thus 99% of women have smaller brains than men.

    Do Volvo Station Wagons have three rows of seats?

    That was our problem too. The range of cars out there with three rows is very limited. There’s the Cadillac SRX or the Chrysler Pacifica, if you have that kind of green (40K+?). There’s the new Ford Freestyle, if they even make those anymore (if they even make those anymore — have you seen any of them on the road?)

    As for three car seats in a row, one of the million-dollar ideas I will never get around to developing: dual/triple car seats. Why do car seats have to be for only one baby? Why not make side-by-side carseats for two or three babies? How much extra plastic between adjacent car seats could be safely eliminated by fusing the seats together? Could not four kids comfortably sit in the back seat of even a small car? Then why couldn’t a 4-child-seat insert be built for that space? Especially with the rise of fertility treatments that increases the number of twins, triplets, … this concept should be a winner!

    For the record, we went with a Honda Odyssey. I guess we’re counting on the airbags. And God’s sovereignty.

  15. RubeRad says:

    Also note that the Dodge Magnum was another great opportunity to introduce a 3-row wagon into the market. That car is so long! If they had a 3-row option, we probably would have bought one.

  16. RubeRad says:

    On a more “can’t we all get along” note, I would buy a hybrid vehicle, if it could compete in speed, cost, performance, and wasn’t a tiny deathtrap.

    I don’t know about cost and deathtrap, but see here for a group at SDSU that understands that nobody will buy hybrids if they are wimpy! From the article:

    “We’ve got those kinds of cars around, and Americans don’t want to buy them. They’re not fun to look at. They’re not fun to drive. They don’t go fast….”

    the Prius “was a somewhat homely, underperforming car, not really in tune with the desires of a majority of American drivers.”

  17. Lance Krueger says:

    I don’t know where you’re from, but in Texas, the Suburban is the “Texas Cadillac.” Heck, we’re born and raised riding horses and driving big SUV’s. How do you think we Texans are going to haul our horse trailer to town, and fit inside any vehicle less than a Suburban with our ten gallon cowboy hats and two six-shooters strapped to our sides? 😉

    Shoot, down here in the Rio Grande Valley of South Texas, you don’t even have to be an SUV owner to have six kids in the back seat (not strapped in) screaming and yelling, and for the driver to be breast-feeding her newborn in one arm and using the other arm to swing into the backseat, beating the kids — in a stick shift! Trust me, I’ve seen it!

    In the scenario you paint above of the mom with six screaming kids in the back of an SUV, I’ve yet to see a kid come out of their comatose state when you flip down the TV in the SUV. So screaming kids and watching TV can’t be the reason the lady’s swerving all over the road. So we’re left with the SUV and the lady on the cell phone as the last two possible problems. As I said before, we’re born driving SUV’s with a horse trailer attached, so she’s obviously experienced at driving a SUV, especially if she happens to not be pulling a trailer. So the culprit has got to be a woman on a cell phone, while she’s driving. That to me, my friend, is the scariest scenario I can imagine, whatever car they might be driving!

    Actually, down here in the RGV we’ve got the unlicensed, uninsured drivers from Mexico that think the best action at a stop sign is to honk and keep going at full speed. And then we’ve got the winter Texans (i.e. snow birds, snow diggers, etc.) that are at least 70 years old, and haven’t taken a driving test since before WWII, and can’t see or hear very well, it makes for some terribly exciting driving.

    I remember when my Dad was in a wreck on the way to dropping my brother and I off at school one morning. He ran into a winter Texan straddling the center line. My dad told him “You can have the right half or the left half of the road, just not the middle half!” Good advice.

    On a more serious note, you reminded me of another reason I love SUV’s. Increased visibility!!! Unless a trailer truck is in front of you, you can see over the tops of multiple cars ahead of you, and I’ve evaded several disasters because I saw things coming before anyone else did. Our last car was the Grand Marquis, which is the SUV of cars. It’s the same size as a full size Cadillac or Lincoln. I remember when we bought it, I didn’t like the fact that I couldn’t see over the cars in front of me. So, one more safety reason for buying an SUV! Thanks, you’re solidifying my point!!!

    Good idea about the four carseats all in a row. But this would only be for multiple births at the same time. Don’t know how you’d stick our kids ages 7, 5, 2, and 5 months in the same kind of car seat. Plus, as I mentioned before, kinetic energy and momentum would be at work for that car seat in a frontal wreck. The weight of all those kids, and that long of a plastic carseat would probably send them flying, and the carseat would probably buckle in the middle. Plus, how would you attach the thing with seatbelts? I guess you’d have to have some reach through to be able to buckle all three seatbelts into their buckles. Then, if you could buckle all three seatbelts in, that should help out with the buckling in the middle problem.

    I seriously thought I would have gotten a lot more “hate mail” from Jim’s California friends on this list. 😉 Come on guys, gimme your best!

    Lance Krueger

  18. Yeah, Echo, the answer to your problem is just keep stupid people from driving…an idiot driving a VW Bug can cause a lot of damage on the highway. And while I’m at it, keep stupid people from voting, too. And why not keep fat ladies from bowling in stretch pants as well?

  19. Lupin says:

    All of your reasons for driving an SUV seem to be good for you guys but detrimental for everyone else.
    They are massive so they are good for you, but how about for the people driving smaller cars that you could possibly reck into?
    They are tall so that you can avoid accidents, but what about the people with a shorter car behind you?
    Are you sure Jesus would drive an SUV? Not only are they gas guzzlers, they put other, more environment friendly, families at risk.

  20. RubeRad says:

    But this would only be for multiple births at the same time. Don’t know how you’d stick our kids ages 7, 5, 2, and 5 months in the same kind of car seat.

    Well, you could make a quadruplet model, and you could make a 3-seat gradated model for holding infant, toddler, booster. If you’re really clever, maybe you could make units that snap-together in any combination, but that would make it harder to be safe and rigid.

    The weight of all those kids, and that long of a plastic carseat would probably send them flying, and the carseat would probably buckle in the middle. Plus, how would you attach the thing with seatbelts?

    It’s been a number of years I think that all cars sold in the U.S. have been required to have steel latches bolted/welded to the metal under the seats, specifically for child seats to latch to (I’m sure you’ve noticed the dangly straps in the back of all your baby seats that fly around and trip you every time you try to switch cars)! So no adult seatbelts are actually required at all. Latch to those frame hooks, and maybe add some ratchet straps to hold it down good and snug. As for buckling in the middle, it wouldn’t be hard to add a metal frame across the whole back. This is getting more and more expensive though — maybe that’s why nobody has ever made these! It’s just easier to go buy a 3-row SUV! I should probably target Europe, where a Ford Escort is not a “small” car, but a “Family” car, and a 3-row SUV is not really a market option!

  21. Lance Krueger says:

    Yep, my family comes first above everyone else. If the others out there aren’t going to do everything they can to protect their family, then that’s their problem.
    The guy behind me can look under my Suburban. Just kidding. 🙂 Same deal as I’ve got to deal with when I get behind an 18 wheeler trailer truck. And as I mentioned before, my Suburban is no match for them if we came into contact. I don’t see you and the other environmentalists calling for an end to trucking. Trailer trucks get way worse gas mileage, sending tons of exhaust straight up into the sky, and any vehicle that hits one or is hit by one is doomed. Plus, there’s a whole lot more of them on the road putting way many more miles on a daily basis all over North America. They are on the road nearly round the clock by guys that are on uppers to stay awake because if they’re not driving, they’re not making money. That’s how you get a majority of your food to your grocery stores, your Ipods and PlayStations to electronics stores, your hybrid cars shipped to the dealerships, and just about any other item you need to SURVIVE!!! But I don’t hear you wanting to shut down the trucking industry. No, no, that would affect you too much, and all the things I listed above are not easily looked past, considering you need your stuff. What would you do if all trucking and shipping were shut down by the enviro-whackos, and you had no food in your supermarket? Or any food store whatsoever? What would you do? I know it would be an inconvenience for me, but since I am a hunter and fisherman, I would provide lots of food for my family. But you, and the other tree hugging, bunny hugging environmentalists would just starve. Sorry, that’s reality dude.

    Sounds like you’ve got this thing thought through. Get out there and produce this thing, and market it. Just get it patented first, which will cost you at least $12K. You could make a lot of money, but you’re going to have to spend a bunch of money to produce it first, and then market it. But as they say, it takes money to make money.
    Usually our vehicles are old enough that they don’t mesh up with the fancy buckling systems of the new carseats. Now that we’ve got the ‘Burban, I guess it doesn’t really matter.

  22. Lupin says:

    Wow. You seem to be pretty hostile towards me. 18-wheeler’s are huge and they do require a lot of gasoline. My comments were meant to imply that based on the reasoning in this discussion I don’t think Jesus would drive an SUV. It was implied earlier that Jesus would drive an SUV.

    I don’t think Jesus would drive a huge car just so that he could ensure his company/family safety over others who a) can’t afford an SUV, b) don’t drive an SUV for environmental reasons, or c) don’t need an SUV. Jesus put his closest friends and family at risk of death by preaching the word of the Lord. He sacrificed his life for others.

    Now I have no idea if Jesus would actually drive an SUV, and I realize that the above was an extreme example that had a lot graver consequences for the world than a bad car wreck if He did not put his family and friends in danger. I am merely stating that I don’t think Jesus would drive an SUV for the stated reasons, which is what Tim implied above.

  23. Lupin says:

    As for whether I would starve, you know absolutely nothing about me. Also, I never advocated for doing anything as drastic as shutting down any kind of transportation. It’s funny how a little counterpoint, and a little interest shown in just thinking about the environment makes me a ‘tree-hugging, bunny hugging environmentalist’.

  24. Lance Krueger says:

    Hostile? No. Bustin’ your chops? Messin’ with you? Yes. Come on, lighten up dude. You’re right, I don’t know you, so how could I get hostile with you? I could only suspect from the little you wrote above that you are sympathetic toward environmental concerns. Didn’t know if you were a hunter, a fisherman, someone just wanting to take care of our world, or an enviro-whacko. Which of those you are (or aren’t), or what combination of those, I have no idea. All I saw was a slight crack in your armor when you mentioned concern for the environment. Am I concerned about the environment? You betcha. I want there to be an even better place for my kids to grow up in, but I want my kids to experience the fullness of the creation God made for them, and to take part in all the activities in that environment they wish to. For me, I am not an environmentalist, as they don’t figure man into the picture. They think man is supposed to be hands off, and we’re not supposed to touch anything. On the other hand, I am a Conservationist. Actually, a lot of the basic principles of Conservation and Environmentalism are the same. Actually, Environmentalism came out of Conservation. The split came when Muir and Thoreau felt like nature needed to be left alone, with man not being a part of it. Conservation, in a very basic explanation, believes protecting and improving the environment through the hand of man. Game Management, Land Management, etc. are all part of Conservation. Some prominent figures in Conservation are Theodore Roosevelt (yep, the past President, and one of the faces on Mt. Rushmore) and Aldo Leopold. They, both of them hunters and fishermen, believed as I do, that man can destroy nature, but man can also help nature restore itself. Thus Management. There’s much more to it, but I’ll leave it at that.

    Now, regarding the 18 wheeler thing, if you’re not calling for truck drivers to downsize or use some other form of transportation to haul their goods and to fulfill their job, then why would you demand the same thing of SUV owners? I doubt there are many that are driving them for any other reason than necessity. Necessity, just like the trailer truck driver. They’ve got to have a vehicle that size to accomplish certain tasks, Same with an SUV owner. Some may have it for safety, roomy interior for hauling lots of stuff or people, power for towing, etc. I doubt there are a whole lot of people that own them if they don’t hold the above reasons in high regard. As I mentioned, I actually have two Suburbans now. One for my wife, who is hauling all our kids, so it’s a seating issue and a safety issue. My other Suburban is my work vehicle, which when I’m traveling all over the U.S. and Canada, I’ve got the entire backend filled up with all the stuff I need to do my job as a wildlife photographer. Could I do that with a Geo, or even a mid-sized car? Nope. So, to do my job, I need the size of a Suburban, plus the 4×4 capability in the nasty backroads I go down to get to the wildlife. Are there other options, like a pickup and a trailer, or a cargo van? Sure there are, but the best vehicle for me is a Suburban. Just like an 18 wheeler is the best thing for a trucker to haul his load of goodies across the U.S., so is our Suburban for my wife’s and my two jobs, housewife and photographer. So, all I’m asking is that you not rant about SUV’s, when you don’t rant about 18 wheelers. Keep it consistent. I was just trying to point out that it’s easy to pick on something that doesn’t help you (i.e. SUV), but it’s inconsistent when you overlook another thing that is causing more harm to you, but you say nothing because you’re benefitting from it (i.e. the goods 18 wheelers make available to you so your life is easier). I know the buzzword nowadays is to badmouth SUV’s, but let’s be real and wail on both of them, or neither of them. If you can live with a small car, then more power to ya. If I could live with a smaller car, I would, but I can’t and won’t. At least not at this stage of my life. Would I ever get a compact car? Nope, my personal safety is too important. So the smallest thing I would probably drive would be a large Sedan. Smaller than a Suburban, but bigger and safer than a compact or mid-size.

    Now do I think Jesus would drive an SUV? I don’t know. Jim was the one that put that in the title. Just something to catch people’s attention, I guess. But now that I think about it, Jesus would at minimum probably have two SUV’s, since he would have the 12 disciples along with him. An SUV would accommodate that group the best, I would think. He certainly made sure that when he crossed the Sea of Gallilea, that he had a big enough boat to accommodate all of his disciples. It didn’t say all of those grown men had to squeeze into a canoe or dingy. It was large enough that Jesus was actually able to lay down and sleep in it. So would he own an SUV? Probably not, too small. He’d probably have a tour bus or an RV so all of them could be in the same vehicle together, and he could sleep between speaking engagements if he needed. Do those get worse mileage and send more pollutants into the air than an SUV? You know the answer to that one.


  25. Echo_ohcE says:

    Daniel B,

    I never, ever, ever said that 99% of Charismatics are going to hell.

    And I don’t think hair color has much to do with intelligence. There are plenty of women who are smarter than me, like my blonde wife.

    But let’s face it. No, lets not. It’s not worth it.

    Whatever Danny.

  26. Lupin says:


    I wasn’t saying that all people should stop driving SUVs, so I was not being inconsistent. I was saying I don’t think Jesus would drive an SUV for the stated reasons. That’s it.
    A chink in my armor for saying environmentally friendly? I think the basic idea that people think it’s bad to talk about ‘environmentalist’ ideas at all is kind of hurtful for moving forward as a nation towards a better environment. There are both liberal and conservative people in this nation that are tearing it apart, and I think the only way to sanely move forward is to start trying to get rid of the bad taste in our mouths when we encounter one or the other.
    I agree that last reason sounds like a good reason for Jesus to drive something.


  27. Daniel B says:

    Hey Echo,
    after seeing your defensive comment I went back and read my 99% rant and realized that was way more inflamatory then I meant for it to be. I think I meant it to be humeros but it does seem very rude, I apologize. Thanks for demonstrating restraint by not stoking the flame of ill will. The reality is I don’t have negative feelings about you (well sometimes I do), I think your a very intelligent and passionate brother in Christ. Sorry for coming across so rude.


  28. Echo_ohcE says:


    That was downright humbling. Thanks. Awe inspiring. Glory to God!


  29. Lita Tubaugh says:

    I love your site, it has good information, Have a great day!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: