Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints [Archive]

John7878

04-15-2008, 09:30 PM

This seems to be turning into a nightmare.

I am against child abuse, but in a week of digging I haven't seen anything but speculation, so far by authorities.

And now they separate the Mothers from their children after taking them from the ranch???

I see the Mothers are starting to get their side of the story out and it looks far different that what the Texas DFPS is saying.

They said the DFPS lied to them. Somehow I think I'd believe them before the DFPS.

I wonder just how long they expect to hold kids away from parents, without finding anything??

Anyone got better information on this??
DID they find anything, cause I haven't seen anything but guessing.

I also hate to see this happen to these families, because if the authorities can do this to them, they can do it to ANYONE.

Heres whats going on in Britain:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=477401&in_page_id=1770

News story on it:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080415/ap_on_re_us/polygamist_retreat

Texas DFPS
http://www.dfps.state.tx.us/Contact_Us/pios.asp

John7878

04-15-2008, 09:56 PM

Wow didn't see a whole section for this, sorry.

Looks like they were ready for another Waco:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080416/ap_on_re_us/polygamist_retreat

At least they didn't kill all the kids this time to "help" them.

Carol25

04-15-2008, 10:34 PM

Originally posted by John7878
This seems to be turning into a nightmare.

I am against child abuse, but in a week of digging I haven't seen anything but speculation, so far by authorities.

And now they separate the Mothers from their children after taking them from the ranch???

I see the Mothers are starting to get their side of the story out and it looks far different that what the Texas DFPS is saying.

They said the DFPS lied to them. Somehow I think I'd believe them before the DFPS.

I wonder just how long they expect to hold kids away from parents, without finding anything??

Anyone got better information on this??
DID they find anything, cause I haven't seen anything but guessing.

I also hate to see this happen to these families, because if the authorities can do this to them, they can do it to ANYONE.

Heres whats going on in Britain:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=477401&in_page_id=1770

News story on it:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080415/ap_on_re_us/polygamist_retreat

Texas DFPS
http://www.dfps.state.tx.us/Contact_Us/pios.asp [/*]
John, I know it sounds so harsh for authorities to take the mothers away from the children but they had to if the children were going to tell them anything that that was really going on at the compound. These mothers are so brainwashed and in turn brainwash their children. That is their job. How could you interview a child when he begins to say something and mother is there to stop him, interrupt or give him the signal to be quiet or else? Didn't you see the interviews with the mothers how they wouldn't answer any questions except about "we want our children back?"
I LE is going to find out the truth (which could go either way) they need to have the freedom to ask questions and have the questions answered.
Perhaps then then they could be reunited again. I hope they can, without the person who is doing the abusing.
Wouldn't you feel better about this short time of indignity and grief for the sake of possibly hundreds of others being raped and abused?

lonetraveler

04-15-2008, 10:44 PM

John7878

04-15-2008, 10:54 PM

Originally posted by Carol25

John, I know it sounds so harsh for authorities to take the mothers away from the children but they had to if the children were going to tell them anything that that was really going on at the compound. These mothers are so brainwashed and in turn brainwash their children. [/*]

You can say anyone in a religion is 'brain washed'.

Personally I am a Deist.

All I am saying is they have had over a week to get proof.....where the heck is it?

And if they are going to take the mothers away, then I would like to see a neutral third party in with the kids while the authorities question them.

And yes, I can see why they wouldn't want the mothers in while questioning the kids, but why remove them completely?
This has to be traumatic on the 400 kids...the ones we ALL want to protect.

The women are saying the police lied to them.
They say the girl they are looking for isn't even there. (And after over a week of looking, and still no girl, maybe the women are telling the truth.)

In the news reports, I see how they try to sensationalize what happening, but with speculation....still no proof.

My mind isn't set in stone....I just need more than a government agency's speculation that there has been a crime committed....show me the proof.

I just wonder how long the kids will be traumatized before they find out one way or the other.

I guess we'll all be waiting......
:shrug:

John7878

04-15-2008, 11:05 PM

Originally posted by lonetraveler
Do you consider at least twenty pregnant, young girls among the many children taken away from that slave camp any evidence???? [/*]

Depends.

I have heard them speculate that girls were pregnant that were too young.

So where are they?

Then I have heard them say in the next news, that they can't even determine the age of the kids.

So I have a hard time deciding which time to believe what they are saying.

Are they lying that they can't tell the kids age or are they lying that the girls are too young to marry??

You tell me.....

(I just hope they don't go after Loretta Lynn and her kids.)

wandering

04-15-2008, 11:11 PM

So, nobody here believes Carolyn Jessop.

lotty

04-15-2008, 11:25 PM

Cases with minors are generally treated carefully...we will not hear as much, as we would if they were adults. Protection of the minor child is a priority. I posted the law in Texas that is being used here. I don't understand the argument about the mothers being removed from the children...if they don't remove the mothers here as the law is written. Texas will face enormous consequences from other mothers who have had their children removed in abuse investigations. If Texas allows all of the mothers to stay with the children, then they are discriminating against every other mother that has been through this already.

John7878

04-15-2008, 11:53 PM

Originally posted by wandering
So, nobody here believes Carolyn Jessop. [/*]

I did a search on her.

She claims she was in a abusive marriage, so she left.

Unfortunately our society probably has more of that than theirs.

But I did see where she claimed that women were sent to a mental institution in Flagstaff, Arizona.

I googled to see if any women had been rescued from there, but I didn't see anything about a rescue, instead I found this:

http://abcnews.go.com/Primetime/Health/story?id=987099&page=1

"she began acting out -- and he called the cops.

She was taken to a mental institution in Flagstaff, Ariz., more than 200 miles away. The police were not interested in her side of the story, Laurene said."

The POLICE took her to the mental institution!!!!

This is getting weird.

Abuse by the church, but the police are the ones taking them away!?!??!

I'm gonna look around some more before posting.

Later--

John7878

04-15-2008, 11:59 PM

Originally posted by Texanne
They found the bed in the church where the girls were taken by their "husbands" immediately after the ceremony. How sick is that? [/*]

Can you post a link to the article that said this?

The only one I found was the one where Authorities 'SPECULATED' why the bed was there.

:confused:

Freebird

04-16-2008, 12:06 AM

Originally posted by John7878
Wow didn't see a whole section for this, sorry.

Looks like they were ready for another Waco:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080416/ap_on_re_us/polygamist_retreat

At least they didn't kill all the kids this time to "help" them. [/*]

Probably as far as the mothers are concerned,it doesn't matter if the kids were killed or taken by CPS.The results(and pain)will be the same for the mothers--they may never see them again.

Carol25

04-16-2008, 12:35 AM

spydernweb2006

04-16-2008, 12:36 AM

Originally posted by Freebird

Probably as far as the mothers are concerned,it doesn't matter if the kids were killed or taken by CPS.The results(and pain)will be the same for the mothers--they may never see them again. [/*]

Forgive me if I have no sympathy for these so called Mothers. These so called Mothers had every chance to help LE identify children. These so called Mothers had every chance to stand up for their abused children. These so called Mothers chose to live a lifestyle that allowed their children to be abused physcially and sexually. For me its all alot of crying for propoganda and sympathy when IMO the only people in this whole mess who deserve smpathy,empathy and consideration are the children.

ANYONE who condones a 14,15 or even 16 year old girl to have sexual relations with an adult male is NO MOTHER or FATHER, they are an enabler to child rape. TX law is very clear that NOONE 16 or younger can give consent for sex. Any Parental figure who allowed the rape of a child does not derserve the right to keep that child in their care and custody. They DO and will have the right to a full CPS investigation and a hearing in court, as any person in the US is guaranteed by the constitution.

So if any of them want to cry because their kids were removed maybe just maybe they should have thought of the ramifications of the lifestyle they chose to live before it came to this. They deserve no more/no less treatment or sympathy then any other person(s) facing the same legal charges.

Forgive me if I cannot muster an iota of sympathy for these so called Mothers.

JMHO

Hugs,

Spyder

walton

04-16-2008, 12:38 AM

Originally posted by John7878
Wow didn't see a whole section for this, sorry.

Looks like they were ready for another Waco:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080416/ap_on_re_us/polygamist_retreat

At least they didn't kill all the kids this time to "help" them. [/*]

Wow.

Google the names Addam Swapp, John Singer and Ervil LeBaron.

The Texas Authorities acted accordingly considering the history.

Carol25

04-16-2008, 12:43 AM

Originally posted by spydernweb2006

Forgive me if I have no sympathy for these so called Mothers. These so called Mothers had every chance to help LE identify children. These so called Mothers had every chance to stand up for their abused children. These so called Mothers chose to live a lifestyle that allowed their children to be abused physcially and sexually. For me its all alot of crying for propoganda and sympathy when IMO the only people in this whole mess who deserve smpathy,empathy and consideration are the children.

ANYONE who condones a 14,15 or even 16 year old girl to have sexual relations with an adult male is NO MOTHER or FATHER, they are an enabler to child rape. TX law is very clear that NOONE 16 or younger can give consent for sex. Any Parental figure who allowed the rape of a child does not derserve the right to keep that child in their care and custody. They DO and will have the right to a full CPS investigation and a hearing in court, as any person in the US is guaranteed by the constitution.

So if any of them want to cry because their kids were removed maybe just maybe they should have thought of the ramifications of the lifestyle they chose to live before it came to this. They deserve no more/no less treatment or sympathy then any other person(s) facing the same legal charges.

Forgive me if I cannot muster an iota of sympathy for these so called Mothers.

JMHO

Hugs,

Spyder [/*]
I wonder if the father and mother of these teenage girls could be accessories to rape for allowing the "spiritual marriage" to a 50 year old man. They handed their daughter over to a statutory rapist, technically.

lotty

04-16-2008, 12:50 AM

IMO/JMO I sincerely wish this issue is as simple as some would like to make it out to be.

This group has changed drastically from their beginnings with Barlow and Musser.

Just please keep in mind the children, their welfare and their environment are the priority.

There is an immense amount of information on the web where the FLDS is concerned. It is a complicated issue in many ways...especially psychologically.

Everyone should be looking out for the rights and future rights of these children. IMO/JMO

nsm

04-16-2008, 01:31 AM

Originally posted by Carol25

John, I know it sounds so harsh for authorities to take the mothers away from the children but they had to if the children were going to tell them anything that that was really going on at the compound. These mothers are so brainwashed and in turn brainwash their children. That is their job. How could you interview a child when he begins to say something and mother is there to stop him, interrupt or give him the signal to be quiet or else? Didn't you see the interviews with the mothers how they wouldn't answer any questions except about "we want our children back?"
I LE is going to find out the truth (which could go either way) they need to have the freedom to ask questions and have the questions answered.
Perhaps then then they could be reunited again. I hope they can, without the person who is doing the abusing.
Wouldn't you feel better about this short time of indignity and grief for the sake of possibly hundreds of others being raped and abused? [/*]

This is a horrendous situation. It is easy to see both sides of it. I feel so bad for those poor mothers. All they know is their family and they are devoted to that. To have their children taken away from a sheltered life and be thrown into a very different situation is wrong. What is scary is that if someone called in an accusation, say for instance on any of our neighborhoods. How would we feel if the the authorities move in and take all of our kids away. We would be devestated. Its just wrong. there had to be a better way to handle this.

Freebird

04-16-2008, 03:44 AM

Originally posted by nsm

This is a horrendous situation. It is easy to see both sides of it. I feel so bad for those poor mothers. All they know is their family and they are devoted to that. To have their children taken away from a sheltered life and be thrown into a very different situation is wrong. What is scary is that if someone called in an accusation, say for instance on any of our neighborhoods. How would we feel if the the authorities move in and take all of our kids away. We would be devestated. Its just wrong. there had to be a better way to handle this. [/*]

ITA...
I think there was a better way to handle it.Arrest the abusers but leave the kids and moms.

LisaM22

04-16-2008, 04:11 AM

Originally posted by John7878
This seems to be turning into a nightmare.

I am against child abuse, but in a week of digging I haven't seen anything but speculation, so far by authorities.

And now they separate the Mothers from their children after taking them from the ranch???

I see the Mothers are starting to get their side of the story out and it looks far different that what the Texas DFPS is saying.

They said the DFPS lied to them. Somehow I think I'd believe them before the DFPS.

I wonder just how long they expect to hold kids away from parents, without finding anything??

Anyone got better information on this??
DID they find anything, cause I haven't seen anything but guessing.

I also hate to see this happen to these families, because if the authorities can do this to them, they can do it to ANYONE.

Heres whats going on in Britain:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=477401&in_page_id=1770

News story on it:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080415/ap_on_re_us/polygamist_retreat

Texas DFPS
http://www.dfps.state.tx.us/Contact_Us/pios.asp [/*]

I do agree, unless they have proof of abuse they are in the wrong, they need to return the children if they have no signs of abuse - just because these Christians believe different then some (which I do not agree with them or their views) I think they should not suffer because of their beliefs if there is no signs of any child abuse - jmho

LisaM22

04-16-2008, 04:12 AM

Originally posted by Freebird

ITA...
I think there was a better way to handle it.Arrest the abusers but leave the kids and moms. [/*]

I so agree, only thing is you have to have evidence of abuse to arrest someone, seems more like a witch hunt then anything - jmho

johnielee333

04-16-2008, 04:22 AM

Originally posted by grammybear
I don't think there would have been an easy solution to the problems that are now being exposed. The FLDS have known for eons that they are breaking the laws in of itself just by being married to more then one person at a time. The FLDS has been fighting the law on their supposed religion platform. But they have also known what the laws were governing marriage between someone say 50 yo and a 13,14,or 15 year old. Why do you think that Jeffs performed these marriages under the cloak of secrecy. If all was above board there would be no reason for running and hiding from the authorities. This is not about religion anymore it is about the care of our very youngest human beings. For years Jeffs and his people have thumbed their nose at the law and now that LE is finally doing all that they can to protect these children the FLDS are crying discrimination of religion. Nothing is further from the truth. They have more then been given the chance to do things right and now it is all about protected these children. If somebody cannot see that this is not a religion issue then we need to rethink this. I hate to see the mothers not having their children with them but if a mother or father will not protect these babies then the law has to step in and take care of them. Otherwise we are going to see future generations being just as badly abused as these children are now.

jmoo [/*]

I AGREE WITH YOU !

johnielee333

04-16-2008, 04:34 AM

Originally posted by wandering
So, nobody here believes Carolyn Jessop. [/*]

I DO.

johnielee333

04-16-2008, 04:36 AM

Originally posted by John7878

Depends.

I have heard them speculate that girls were pregnant that were too young.

So where are they?

Then I have heard them say in the next news, that they can't even determine the age of the kids.

So I have a hard time deciding which time to believe what they are saying.

Are they lying that they can't tell the kids age or are they lying that the girls are too young to marry??

You tell me.....

(I just hope they don't go after Loretta Lynn and her kids.) [/*]

people need to wake up & smell the rats. the sect, that is. the bad evil people. the abuser's. LE did the right thing by taking these kids out of there.

juliekan

04-16-2008, 04:42 AM

Originally posted by Freebird

ITA...
I think there was a better way to handle it.Arrest the abusers but leave the kids and moms. [/*]
And how do you guess who the abusers are? No one seems to want to say it was their step-father that got them pregnant at 13. Oh sorry he's their husband now. Whatever, the laws in Texas do not allow polygamy or marriage before 16 years of age.

juliekan

04-16-2008, 04:48 AM

Originally posted by LisaM22

I so agree, only thing is you have to have evidence of abuse to arrest someone, seems more like a witch hunt then anything - jmho [/*]
Oh my God, please I pray that Lisa doesn't have any children that will ever be abused. Please don't have anyone come back and say her child was not abused and she was just on a witch hunt. In Jesus name I pray. Amen.
The police in Eldorado weren't looking for a fight, everyone had lived peacefully, until they heard that RAPE was occuring. I would want the police to come immediately, if they heard RAPE was happening to someone.

johnielee333

04-16-2008, 04:50 AM

sheltiemom

04-16-2008, 05:05 AM

Originally posted by John7878

I did a search on her.

She claims she was in a abusive marriage, so she left.

Unfortunately our society probably has more of that than theirs.

But I did see where she claimed that women were sent to a mental institution in Flagstaff, Arizona.

I googled to see if any women had been rescued from there, but I didn't see anything about a rescue, instead I found this:

http://abcnews.go.com/Primetime/Health/story?id=987099&page=1

"she began acting out -- and he called the cops.

She was taken to a mental institution in Flagstaff, Ariz., more than 200 miles away. The police were not interested in her side of the story, Laurene said."

The POLICE took her to the mental institution!!!!

This is getting weird.

Abuse by the church, but the police are the ones taking them away!?!??!

I'm gonna look around some more before posting.

Later-- [/*]

-------------------

Carolyn Jessop has been in the news quite a bit since all this started. She was on I believe Larry King the other night. She said one of the women complaining about her children being separated from her was one of her "sister wifes" of Merril Jessop. She said this woman is lying about the age of her 18+ daughter who is the mother of a 9 mo old child. She said this child was 16 when she married.

She also says this woman told on her when she was escaping with her own children - she did not get caught. She stated had she got caught, she would have been punished and her children would have been removed from her.

I believe Carolyn Jessop. She is working to help rescue these young girls. She said Warren Jeffs had lowered the marriage age to 18, then 16 and she was afraid he would lower it to 14 and got her children out.

Here is a link to information on her.

http://www.childbrides.org/carolyn_VS_escape_from_polygamy.html

http://www.childbrides.org/carolyn.html

juliekan

04-16-2008, 05:35 AM

Originally posted by Freebird

ITA...
I think there was a better way to handle it.Arrest the abusers but leave the kids and moms. [/*]
Unfortunantly, the moms probably don't know what abuse is...all of these people were raised the same way, being spiritually and physically married off at a very young, and if under 16 in Texas, illegal age. :(

Freebird

04-16-2008, 07:35 AM

Originally posted by LisaM22

I do agree, unless they have proof of abuse they are in the wrong, they need to return the children if they have no signs of abuse - just because these Christians believe different then some (which I do not agree with them or their views) I think they should not suffer because of their beliefs if there is no signs of any child abuse - jmho [/*]

I see the non-abused kids going back.And when they do,it will be interesting to hear their opinions of the outside world(which I think will be less-then-flattering).

juliekan

04-16-2008, 08:03 AM

Originally posted by Freebird

I see the non-abused kids going back.And when they do,it will be interesting to hear their opinions of the outside world(which I think will be less-then-flattering). [/*]
Of course, when you are raised to think the entire outside world is Satan...

LisaM22

04-16-2008, 08:21 AM

Originally posted by juliekan

Oh my God, please I pray that Lisa doesn't have any children that will ever be abused. Please don't have anyone come back and say her child was not abused and she was just on a witch hunt. In Jesus name I pray. Amen.
The police in Eldorado weren't looking for a fight, everyone had lived peacefully, until they heard that RAPE was occuring. I would want the police to come immediately, if they heard RAPE was happening to someone. [/*]

there was rape in the churches in many communities, should we take their children too, just in case, the law was not designed for witch hunts - have proof of a abuse, then by all means, remove the children from that home - because there is abuse in one home in a neighborhood, doesn't mean there is in all of them - I pray if you have children, they are never taken away from you on a witch hunt- jmho

LisaM22

04-16-2008, 08:23 AM

Originally posted by Freebird

I see the non-abused kids going back.And when they do,it will be interesting to hear their opinions of the outside world(which I think will be less-then-flattering). [/*]

no different then the Amish, they were raised in a closed society too, not many ever leave, some do though

John7878

04-16-2008, 08:40 AM

Originally posted by spydernweb2006

These so called Mothers chose to live a lifestyle that allowed their children to be abused physcially and sexually. [/*]

I'm still considering them innocent until I see proof. I think thats the way our system is SUPPOSED to work.

As for propaganda, the police seem to be pretty good at spreading that too.

They have already painted a picture of young girls, raped on a church altar to stir people up, but you have to be careful and keep an eye on what THEY are doing too.

All I'm saying is that after over a week the authorities have shown NO proof, only speculation, but I have seen the videos of the women claiming that they were lied to.
They say they are not abused or brainwashed.
They claim the girl they are looking for isn't even there....with over a WEEK to search, I am beginning to believe THEM instead of the cops.

Originally posted by spydernweb2006

They DO and will have the right to a full CPS investigation and a hearing in court, as any person in the US is guaranteed by the constitution. [/*]

Lets just hope the KIDS, who we all want to see protected, aren't subjected to YEARS of separation from their families, until the government gets their act together.

Originally posted by spydernweb2006

They deserve no more/no less treatment or sympathy then any other person(s) facing the same legal charges.
[/*]

I agree completely, and thats the problem.

We have to be REAL careful with any precedent we set in this mess. Because anything we let them do to THESE people can be done to ANYONE.

I know, your saying that these parents 'lived' this lifestyle that allegedly had their daughters sexually active.

But how many of 'our' teenagers are sexually active on their own?

Remember YOUR saying that WE deserve no better treatment than THEM.

So if someone's 16yr old is caught having sex, then this should allow the authorities to come in and take your kids away, plus any kids from the brothers or sisters, aunts & uncles....the WHOLE family. Until they interview all of them and they determine if its safe for them to be returned.
Or they get ONE complaint of abuse by a nephew of yours, but they come in and take EVERY kid out of your family to investigate the complaint and to make sure they are out of what could be an abusive family environment.

And don't think I am just trying to be a jerk with this response, I am dead serious.
There is no reason to believe that they wouldn't say that its easier to investigate a complaint if they get to interview kids from all the immediate family's.

The government is already trying to tell us that we can't spank the kids to discipline them, otherwise they will remove them.

In England they are telling parents that if their kids are overweight, that they will remove them from their 'abuse'.

Just for the record, my wife of 38years(this coming May 1st) was JUST 17 when we married and I have a good friend that had a 'barely' 16yr old wife, they just celebrated their 40th anniversary. When I graduated high school there were 2 kids that had their kids there at graduation. And there were a few girls that dropped out of high school to get married.
Teen sex & marriage isn't a new issue by a long shot.

I am not saying that there wasn't any abuse, lets just be real careful that we treat these people as we would like to be treated.

.

walton

04-16-2008, 10:23 AM

Originally posted by John7878

I'm still considering them innocent until I see proof. I think thats the way our system is SUPPOSED to work.

As for propaganda, the police seem to be pretty good at spreading that too.

They have already painted a picture of young girls, raped on a church altar to stir people up, but you have to be careful and keep an eye on what THEY are doing too.

All I'm saying is that after over a week the authorities have shown NO proof, only speculation, but I have seen the videos of the women claiming that they were lied to.
They say they are not abused or brainwashed.
They claim the girl they are looking for isn't even there....with over a WEEK to search, I am beginning to believe THEM instead of the cops.

Lets just hope the KIDS, who we all want to see protected, aren't subjected to YEARS of separation from their families, until the government gets their act together.

I agree completely, and thats the problem.

We have to be REAL careful with any precedent we set in this mess. Because anything we let them do to THESE people can be done to ANYONE.

I know, your saying that these parents 'lived' this lifestyle that allegedly had their daughters sexually active.

But how many of 'our' teenagers are sexually active on their own?

Remember YOUR saying that WE deserve no better treatment than THEM.

So if someone's 16yr old is caught having sex, then this should allow the authorities to come in and take your kids away, plus any kids from the brothers or sisters, aunts & uncles....the WHOLE family. Until they interview all of them and they determine if its safe for them to be returned.
Or they get ONE complaint of abuse by a nephew of yours, but they come in and take EVERY kid out of your family to investigate the complaint and to make sure they are out of what could be an abusive family environment.

And don't think I am just trying to be a jerk with this response, I am dead serious.
There is no reason to believe that they wouldn't say that its easier to investigate a complaint if they get to interview kids from all the immediate family's.

The government is already trying to tell us that we can't spank the kids to discipline them, otherwise they will remove them.

In England they are telling parents that if their kids are overweight, that they will remove them from their 'abuse'.

Just for the record, my wife of 38years(this coming May 1st) was JUST 17 when we married and I have a good friend that had a 'barely' 16yr old wife, they just celebrated their 40th anniversary. When I graduated high school there were 2 kids that had their kids there at graduation. And there were a few girls that dropped out of high school to get married.
Teen sex & marriage isn't a new issue by a long shot.

I am not saying that there wasn't any abuse, lets just be real careful that we treat these people as we would like to be treated.

. [/*]

You were able to attend school until graduation. They (if lucky) get to the 8th grade.
You were able to choose your wife and your wife chose you.
Your wife and kids were not taken from you and assigned to your brother, uncle, father or any other male living in your neighborhood.
Your kids get to celebrate their birthdays. They know their birthdays. They are recognized by you and your wife and they recognize you as their parents.
Some of these kids don't know who their parents are, Some of these kids call 5 different women Mom. Some of these kids call this one lady Aunt Jane when really this person is their own sister and their fathers 3rd wife.

In an average setting outside of these compounds when calls are made concerning abuse, the authorities investigate that one home and check for abuse.
If the signs are evident they pull the child or children and are able to question the child with out either parent.

It just so happens that this place housed over 400 plus children. 400 plus children that all lived behind the same 4 walls.

Was it wrong? NO. Not sure how familar you are with Domestic Violence or Child Abuse but the mothers too can be the abuser.

One way for an abuser to continue to abuse is by taking away their identity. jmo
Not all abuse is evident with a black and blue mark.

The evidence that you are looking for will be brought out in court. And because these are minors you might never ever find out who belonged to whom.
What those 300 plus lawyers and that Judge is going to do is first give those little ones their identity. And then they will rule accordingly with each child. A fair shot. Something that they were not getting inside.

If you look at any news clip from any media outlet, you will not see one toy, nor will you see any family pet. You might see one adult size wheel barrow next to a childs wheel barrow. You might see one adult size shovel next to a child shovel.

In any news clip taken from inside the home you will see beds lined up in a row, chairs lined up in a row, dressers lined up along a wall. Almost like a bunk house for a work crew out in the fields.

If you would check out any of the many links provided you will see that the proof is in the pudding.

jmo

John7878

04-16-2008, 10:34 AM

Originally posted by walton

Was it wrong? NO. Not sure how familar you are with Domestic Violence or Child Abuse but the mothers too can be the abuser.

Not all abuse is evident with a black and blue mark.

The evidence that you are looking for will be brought out in court.
If you would check out any of the many links provided you will see that the proof is in the pudding.

jmo [/*]

All that stuff you list as 'abuse' I take with a grain of salt.

Just because someone lives a different life doesn't mean its abusive.

Thats all I ask is a link to evidence.

Heres one for you:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/04/14/national/main4012137.shtml

Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints also say children are "horrified" by physical examinations they have undergone while in state custody.

So now who is traumatizing the children?? FORCING them to be stripped and examined.

And make no mistake, this is scarring these kids for LIFE!

.

Roux

04-16-2008, 10:44 AM

Originally posted by Freebird

I see the non-abused kids going back.And when they do,it will be interesting to hear their opinions of the outside world(which I think will be less-then-flattering). [/*]

Of course it will... they're brainwashed FGS! This sect is a cult and false religion that deprives women and children of free choice.

Roux

04-16-2008, 10:47 AM

Originally posted by LisaM22

no different then the Amish, they were raised in a closed society too, not many ever leave, some do though [/*]

These people try to portray themselves as sweet and non-threatening as the Amish, but they are not. The Amish are law abiding citizens. Furthermore, I don't believe the Amish commit welfare and tax fraud.

walton

04-16-2008, 10:56 AM

Originally posted by John7878

All that stuff you list as 'abuse' I take with a grain of salt.

Just because someone lives a different life doesn't mean its abusive.

Thats all I ask is a link to evidence.

Heres one for you:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/04/14/national/main4012137.shtml

Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints also say children are "horrified" by physical examinations they have undergone while in state custody.

So now who is traumatizing the children?? FORCING them to be stripped and examined.

And make no mistake, this is scarring these kids for LIFE!

. [/*]

Check out the photos from the Pilot : http://web.sccn2.net/flds/

JD is that you? :no:

Could YOU please prove to me that these kids were not abused.
Make sure you back it up with links.

John7878

04-16-2008, 10:56 AM

Originally posted by Roux

Of course it will... they're brainwashed FGS! This sect is a cult and false religion that deprives women and children of free choice. [/*]

Ok what I saw was the news report that kids were being "taken" from their homes and that the women "voluntarily" left.

Then I see a video of the women saying that they left to be with the children, not that they WANTED to leave their homes. When clearly the news was slanting the report to make it seem as though they were.

And they say the police LIED to them.

They say that there is NO abuse.

They say that the girl they are looking for doesn't even live there.

They say that their kids are being abused by the state officials by stripping them for examinations and that the kids are 'horrified'.

I see authorities coming out with conflicting reports. I see them in the news confirming that they still know nothing about the girl that called, the kids......do I need to go on.....

I have to ask myself just who is the brainwashed one here.

lotty

04-16-2008, 11:11 AM

Why can't you wait and see...
First thing with all big news stories, contradictions, differing facts, and immediately different views from "talking heads."

Just wait and let things work out. There are no guarantees that LE is being truthful...There are no guarantees the Mothers are being truthful.

Take some time, sort it out.

Just "try" to look at both sides of the coin. If there is a Sarah, she probably made the call for a reason. If there is not a Sarah, someone made the call for a reason. Please also remember, where minors are concerned...laws regarding their privacy is very different. Many things will never get to the Press.

With Warren Jeffs conviction, it was "Jane Doe", because the crime ocurred when she was a minor. The adult Elissa Wall is the one who put her own anonymity aside to address the public.

Roux

04-16-2008, 11:14 AM

Originally posted by John7878

Ok what I saw was the news report that kids were being "taken" from their homes and that the women "voluntarily" left.

Then I see a video of the women saying that they left to be with the children, not that they WANTED to leave their homes. When clearly the news was slanting the report to make it seem as though they were.

And they say the police LIED to them.

They say that there is NO abuse.

They say that the girl they are looking for doesn't even live there.

They say that their kids are being abused by the state officials by stripping them for examinations and that the kids are 'horrified'.

I see authorities coming out with conflicting reports. I see them in the news confirming that they still know nothing about the girl that called, the kids......do I need to go on.....

I have to ask myself just who is the brainwashed one here. [/*]

Well you proved my point by citing everything the women said. If they're brainwashed, what else would you expect them to say. under the circumstances. You obviously refuse to have an open mind about this situation and have a paranoia about LE. Do you live in Utah or Colorado?

John7878

04-16-2008, 11:24 AM

Originally posted by walton

Check out the photos from the Pilot : http://web.sccn2.net/flds/

JD is that you? :no:

Could YOU please prove to me that these kids were not abused.
Make sure you back it up with links. [/*]

Ok, I looked at several pictures. Great shots from the air, really good view.
But I'm not sure what it has to do with anything.
Did I miss a certain picture that shows child abuse?

No one can prove a 'negative', can't be done.

And I never said that at least one of the kids MAY have been abused.
Heck gather up 400 kids from our town and you'd likely find one that has been abused.

But the only abuse I have found so far is the forced stripping of the kids to undergo state examinations.

The kids we are TRYING to protect.

Like I said my mind isn't set in stone, but neither am I impressed with "speculation" from state authorities.

But Carroll & Lotti says to be patient, so I guess I'll wait for more news.

:shrug:

lotty

04-16-2008, 11:38 AM

Originally posted by John7878
Respectfully snipped

But the only abuse I have found so far is the forced stripping of the kids to undergo state examinations.

:shrug: [/*]

The first time I had a COMPLETE physical exam...I think I was 8yo, I was pretty offended...and felt abused. If you are at all modest it is pretty insulting to your sense of dignity. I have left Dr.'s offices feeling that way a few times since. I lived I got over it.

I'm sure it was standard procedure to check for signs of physical and sexual abuse. I'll bet it was very professional. "Forced stripping!" Or is this just something the parents didn't want performed?

walton

04-16-2008, 11:40 AM

http://www.gosanangelo.com/news/2008/apr/16/flds-a-church-or-a-cult/

As details emerge about the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, the answer to a central question about the polygamist religious group remains unclear: Is the FLDS in Texas operating as a church?

The answer is clearer to the IRS and tax officials in Schleicher County, site of the Yearning For Zion Ranch raided early this month on suspicions of sexual abuse and forced marriage. But it's still in debate within the Mormon community, including as many as 70 sects spawned from the movement Joseph Smith founded 150 years ago.

But neither the FLDS nor the YFZ Ranch has filed for status as a nonprofit organization with the IRS, an IRS spokesman said.

In Schleicher County, records reflect the YFZ Ranch near Eldorado has not requested an exemption from property taxes as a religious organization, an option for qualifying property.

The land and improvements have an assessed value of $21 million, according to the Schleicher County Appraisal District.

John7878

04-16-2008, 11:59 AM

Originally posted by Roux

Well you proved my point by citing everything the women said. If they're brainwashed, what else would you expect them to say. [/*]

This is the tricky part, how do you prove you are NOT brainwashed?

It can't be done, you can't 'prove' a negative.

So you have to prove that they HAVE been brainwashed. Another tricky thing to do.

You can say anyone in ANY religion is brain washed from a young age to believe their religion.

Originally posted by Roux

You obviously refuse to have an open mind about this situation [/*]

I tend to error on the side of the 'innocent' until they PROVE them guilty.
But I can change my mind on a dime, if I get more than speculation.

Originally posted by Roux

and have a paranoia about LE. Do you live in Utah or Colorado? [/*]

Ok this I admit to, but is it still paranoia if its true??

I have a nephew thats a cop and I also have friends in the sheriff's dept and state police.

The majority of cops are great people. Its just the small percentage that ruin their image, but they do a really good job of it.

And No I'm in Illinois.....but luckily not near Chicago and Mayor Daley's gestapo.
Just Google
"Strip search"
"Cops Sued"
"Police abuse"

Check out a couple of these and come join me in my 'paranoia'.

Angela Garbarino beaten off camera:
&feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7KM1ukwBGv4

Stripped naked 6hrs- victim Hope Steffy:
http://www.wkyc.com/video/player.aspx?aid=53707&sid=82447&bw=hi&cat=2

CBS news analyzes Police abuse tapes:
http://search.cbsnews.com/?source=cbs&q=Hope+Steffy&x=0&y=0

Teen Girls Strip Searched:
http://www.cantonrep.com/index.php?ID=373098&Category=15&subCategoryID=0

Four more women come forward in Hope Steffy case:
http://www.wkyc.com/news/news_article.aspx?storyid=84243&provider=gnews

Missouri Cop going nuts after a kid just asks a couple questions.
http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/19/1961.asp

Police Hang Quadriplegic Man Over 4′ Wall to Search Him
Written on October 22, 2007
http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Police+allegedly+hang+quadriplegic+man-a01610788481
http://www.offbeat-news.com/2007/10/18/police-hang-a-quadriplegic-man/

A judge ruled that two Chicago police officers unreasonably searched a man with a screwdriver = they sodomized him.
A settlement of $4 million was reached BEFORE the verdict IF the victim was favored.
http://www.wispid.com/blog/chicago-police-officers-search-man-w-screwdriver/

Off-Duty Chicago Cop Caught On Tape Beating Female Bartender - March 21
The officer, Anthony Abbate, has been in trouble with the law before and when CBS 2's Dave Savini first interviewed him, he had been charged with a DUI, among other things.
http://cbs2chicago.com/slideshows/popular.videos.2007.20.607838.html?rid=2

School Administrator And Former Police Officer Charged With Sexual Assault Against Student
Created: 4/1/2008 6:32:04 PM
Last updated: 4/2/2008 9:13:39 AM
http://content.stlmomsworld.com/news/news_article.aspx?storyid=143409

Officer linked to 3 settlements
Now accused of rape, city 'flex squad' member had role in run-ins that led to suits against city
By Gus G. Sentementes | Sun reporter January 25, 2006
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/local/bal-md.settlement25jan25,1,3179302.story?coll=bal-local-headlines

Authorities say a Hamtramck police officer used a Taser stun gun on his partner during an argument about stopping for a soft drink.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10378923/

State Trooper Must Pay $1M For Making Couple Strip
Jeremy Dozier Was Accused Of Making Couples Run Around Naked In Cook, Lake Counties
http://cbs2chicago.com/topstories/Jeremy.Dozier.Illinois.2.338245.html

Roux

04-16-2008, 12:30 PM

Okay John, I can agree with you that there are MANY instances of LE and DA's mis-use of authority, wrongful convictions, etc. Some warped personalities even get into those careers because of power issues. However those instances do not negate the legitimacy of the majority of investigations and prosecutions.

And you are correct that a negative cannot be proven. However IMO, anyone with a brain the size of a pea and who has ever seen the many TV interviews, books, articles can tell that those women have been brainwashed to the point that they have lost touch with reality. Did you think those two on the clips yesterday seemed normal and truthful? I didn't.

John7878

04-16-2008, 12:34 PM

Originally posted by lotty

The first time I had a COMPLETE physical exam...I think I was 8yo, I was pretty offended...and felt abused. If you are at all modest it is pretty insulting to your sense of dignity. I have left Dr.'s offices feeling that way a few times since. I lived I got over it. [/*]

I went through about the same thing at about the same age.

Yeah, I lived, but unlike you I never 'got over it'.

It damaged me for the rest of my life.

I expect to die an early death, because I have an aversion to medical people, just over the first incident with them.

.

spydernweb2006

04-16-2008, 12:37 PM

I am sure NOONE here would like to see anyone persecuted for their beliefs, nor have their children taken away for following their beliefs. But the REALITY is if your beliefs are against the LAW losing your kids and having legal issues will likely happen.

I am also sure NO FINAL LEGAL ACTIONS will occur before a through and and thruthful investigation is done. To start yelling, screaming and complaining before the through investigation is complete and KNOWN to the public is putting the cart before the horse.

The FLDS children were removed on probale cause and an investigation is underway. The FLDS will NOT recieve any special exceptions as to how that will occur. Its is customary and typical for Parents of suspected abuse to lose temp custody while the investigation is underway. Once the full investigation is done ALL parties will go to court with legal representation and it will be decided on the LAW, not passion, religious belief or want.

You cannot compare other situations in LE to this, as each incident is separate and its equivilent to comparing apples to oranges. None of the Parties involved are the same, as the situation, states involved and people are not any of the people another poster listed in his post.

Due to privacy laws and issues TX Cps will not be making alot public. That does NOT mean it will not be put before the Court of Law. The FLDS "Mothers" can go before cameras and media and say whatever they want but CPS cannot. Its a one sided media blitz, with TX Cps adhearing to the privacy issues of the minors involved. So maybe before flamming CPS people should acknowledge that CPS will now and cannot just go before the media and address any allegations flung at them by the "Media Moms". I DO expect CPS to answer any and all allegations, along with any proof of abuse to the Court and to noone else until then.

JMHO

Hugs,
Spyder

Roux

04-16-2008, 12:41 PM

John, I totally disagree with your statement that it can be said anyone in religion has been brainwashed from an early age. God has given each of us a kernel of truth and knowledge in our spirit, and if an individual feels led to change denominations, convert to Catholicism or Judaism they are free to do so. All it takes is the strength to stand up for yourself and what you individually believe. But as the old saying goes, you must have the courage of your convictions. It is shameful that people like Jim Jones, David Koresh, Rev. Moon, et al pervert religion and control people for their own devices.

lotty

04-16-2008, 12:44 PM

Originally posted by John7878

I went through about the same thing at about the same age.

Yeah, I lived, but unlike you I never 'got over it'.

It damaged me for the rest of my life.

I expect to die an early death, because I have an aversion to medical people, just over the first incident with them.

. [/*]

I can understand that. My husband is the same way. He has to be in extreme pain before he will see anyone in the medical field.
It is unfortunate that your experience effected you this way.

Every person and their experiences are singular to them. How they choose to let it effect them is their decision. My husband would vehemently agree with you on Dr.s.:seeya:

John7878

04-16-2008, 12:46 PM

Originally posted by Roux
Okay However those instances do not negate the legitimacy of the majority of investigations and prosecutions.[/*]

You are absolutely right.

Originally posted by Roux

And you are correct that a negative cannot be proven. However IMO, anyone with a brain the size of a pea and who has ever seen the many TV interviews, books, articles can tell that those women have been brainwashed to the point that they have lost touch with reality. Did you think those two on the clips yesterday seemed normal and truthful? I didn't. [/*]

Gee I haven't looked, I hope its bigger than a pea!

Ok I just posted this the other day and I admit I haven't seen many TV interviews, books, articles on this.

I just started looking yesterday, which is one reason I asked for links to support anything the state was saying.

I haven't even had time to look up the names Walton left for me yet, I still want to look into that.

This could turn out to be a good bust of a abuser.

For the sake of 400+ kids, I certainly hope it is.

Mimi428

04-16-2008, 12:51 PM

I'm not thoroughly up-to-date on all of this right now - but have any of the 'mothers' who are part of this outcry identified which children, specifically, are theirs? As in, children they gave birth to?

We have read that one of the biggest initial difficulties facing LE is to properly identify which children belong to which women.

If I was serious is wanting to reunite with my children - I would go directly to LE & volunteer that information. I would request that a buccal swab be taken to get my DNA run & then give permission for buccal swabs to be taken from any minor children I claim to have given birth to.

I would also voluntarily identify the father(s) of any children I claim to have given birth to.

One of the worst aspects in all of this is the logistics difficulty of matching up children to biological parents. I hope the next time any reporters are given an audience with these women, somebody has the guts to ask - & KEEP ASKING all of them if they have taken any action at all in helping establish full identity - maternity, paternity, etc.

If I was so certain that my precious children were being kept from me illegally, you can dang sure bet I would be willing to get at least THAT much information cleared up.

JMO

John7878

04-16-2008, 01:00 PM

Originally posted by lotty
Every person and their experiences are singular to them. [/*]

True, but you can look for about the same % of outcome from an experience common to a group of people.

Originally posted by lotty

How they choose to let it effect them is their decision. [/*]

LET it affect them!?!??!

As an adult I can look back and realize what they were doing was THOUGHT to be in my best interest. But as an adult I know that it WASN'T in my best interest, nor was it necessary.

Originally posted by lotty

My husband would vehemently agree with you on Dr.s.:seeya: [/*]

Well it affects people differently I guess.
But for my money these state exams of kids should be voluntary. Otherwise your going to destroy a % of them for LIFE if you don't.

.

Mimi428

04-16-2008, 01:23 PM

Originally posted by John7878

Well it affects people differently I guess.
But for my money these state exams of kids should be voluntary. Otherwise your going to destroy a % of them for LIFE if you don't.

. [/*]

<snipped>

Not following what you specifically mean by 'voluntary'. I can think of a lot of medical procedures that a child would not volunteer to have done to them. Like getting immunized against diseases such as measles, etc.

And if the volunteer status is given to the parent - it is readily obvious, IMO that the parent who has the most to conceal will be among those vehemently denying permission.

I have great sympathy for the children involved in this huge dilemma. But I do not believe at this time that children are being examined willy-nilly in any way that would be physically invasive. I DO believe if any of them are considered to be potentially contagious that they would be medically examined whether their mother(s) objected or not - but that is a matter of public health safety.

ALL of these children will be assigned an attorney. ALL of them. Every single one of those children will have an attorney, whose ONLY job will be to protect the child's interests. Much has been on the news here about the number of attorneys who have volunteered to represent them. Last count I heard on the news was 350 attorneys.

You can bet your life those 350 Texas attorneys do NOT all live within 50 miles of San Angelo. I would venture to guess that the majority of them will, at the very least, spend hundreds of dollars on gasoline alone - driving from their hometowns to San Angelo for various court appointments.

johnielee333

04-16-2008, 01:40 PM

Originally posted by walton

You were able to attend school until graduation. They (if lucky) get to the 8th grade.
You were able to choose your wife and your wife chose you.
Your wife and kids were not taken from you and assigned to your brother, uncle, father or any other male living in your neighborhood.
Your kids get to celebrate their birthdays. They know their birthdays. They are recognized by you and your wife and they recognize you as their parents.
Some of these kids don't know who their parents are, Some of these kids call 5 different women Mom. Some of these kids call this one lady Aunt Jane when really this person is their own sister and their fathers 3rd wife.

In an average setting outside of these compounds when calls are made concerning abuse, the authorities investigate that one home and check for abuse.
If the signs are evident they pull the child or children and are able to question the child with out either parent.

It just so happens that this place housed over 400 plus children. 400 plus children that all lived behind the same 4 walls.

Was it wrong? NO. Not sure how familar you are with Domestic Violence or Child Abuse but the mothers too can be the abuser.

One way for an abuser to continue to abuse is by taking away their identity. jmo
Not all abuse is evident with a black and blue mark.

The evidence that you are looking for will be brought out in court. And because these are minors you might never ever find out who belonged to whom.
What those 300 plus lawyers and that Judge is going to do is first give those little ones their identity. And then they will rule accordingly with each child. A fair shot. Something that they were not getting inside.

If you look at any news clip from any media outlet, you will not see one toy, nor will you see any family pet. You might see one adult size wheel barrow next to a childs wheel barrow. You might see one adult size shovel next to a child shovel.

In any news clip taken from inside the home you will see beds lined up in a row, chairs lined up in a row, dressers lined up along a wall. Almost like a bunk house for a work crew out in the fields.

If you would check out any of the many links provided you will see that the proof is in the pudding.

jmo [/*]

:beer:

johnielee333

04-16-2008, 01:41 PM

Originally posted by Roux

Of course it will... they're brainwashed FGS! This sect is a cult and false religion that deprives women and children of free choice. [/*]:beer:

johnielee333

04-16-2008, 01:43 PM

lotty

04-16-2008, 01:58 PM

Affect, sorry.

Need to go get a breath of fresh air...

John7878

04-16-2008, 03:36 PM

Originally posted by Mimi428

But I do not believe at this time that children are being examined willy-nilly in any way that would be physically invasive. [/*]

I wouldn't put it past them that that is exactly what they are doing.

Then >I< believe that there should be a neutral third party to oversee the KIDS welfare.

They should be protected ABOVE ALL ELSE.

From any family abuse or from abuse from overeager state services that do not take the kids welfare into account in their pursuit of the investigation.

John7878

04-16-2008, 03:49 PM

Originally posted by spydernweb2006
But the REALITY is if your beliefs are against the LAW losing your kids and having legal issues will likely happen.[/*]

Right, IF its against the law.

Originally posted by spydernweb2006

The FLDS children were removed on probale cause and an investigation is underway. and it will be decided on the LAW, not passion, religious belief or want.[/*]

I was going to say decided on EVIDENCE. But whatever.

Originally posted by spydernweb2006

You cannot compare other situations in LE to this, as each incident is separate and its equivilent to comparing apples to oranges. None of the Parties involved are the same, as the situation, states involved and people are not any of the people another poster listed in his post.[/*]

If that was my posts you refer to your right, not the same at all. The posting was just to point out that police/state abuses DO occur. Nothing more.

Originally posted by spydernweb2006

Due to privacy laws and issues TX Cps will not be making alot public. The FLDS "Mothers" can go before cameras and media and say whatever they want but CPS cannot. Its a one sided media blitz, with TX Cps adhearing to the privacy issues of the minors involved. [/*]

Actually this isn't true, the police have made many comments in the press, mostly speculation designed to inflame people into thinking that this is a giant collection of pedophiles.
IE an example:
Agents searching the "Yearning For Zion" Ranch in West Texas found a bed in the main temple (shown above), and prosecutors believe it was used for male members to have sex with their underage wives after sect-recognized unions.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2008-04-09-polygamy_N.htm
(Speculation)

And the state agency's have released sound bites that they are still investigating abuses at the ranch, again designed to inflame people that kids have been abused.

Sure would like to see some video of the kids and see just what they think.
But since its a big secret, I guess we'll just wait till the smoke clears.

awareness

04-16-2008, 04:08 PM

Originally posted by John7878
Right, IF its against the law.

I was going to say decided on EVIDENCE. But whatever.

If that was my posts you refer to your right, not the same at all. The posting was just to point out that police/state abuses DO occur. Nothing more.

Actually this isn't true, the police have made many comments in the press, mostly speculation designed to inflame people into thinking that this is a giant collection of pedophiles.
IE an example:
Agents searching the "Yearning For Zion" Ranch in West Texas found a bed in the main temple (shown above), and prosecutors believe it was used for male members to have sex with their underage wives after sect-recognized unions.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2008-04-09-polygamy_N.htm
(Speculation)

And the state agency's have released sound bites that they are still investigating abuses at the ranch, again designed to inflame people that kids have been abused.

Sure would like to see some video of the kids and see just what they think.
But since its a big secret, I guess we'll just wait till the smoke clears. [/*]

Its said they found a female hair in the "matrimonial bed" in the FDLS temple.

You do realize, there's more than one FDLS "church", right? That there's more than one person out there condoning this illegal lifestyle and saying they are "one mighty and strong" that Joseph Smith, Jr prophesized about? Brian Mitchell (Elizabeth Smart's kidnapper) for one.

Polygamy is illegal in the US, in all the states. So yes their religion does condone illegal activities.

I feel sorry for the children the most. The women and men were probably raised in "the principle" of polygamy so its all they know. They're taught its the only true way to heaven. However I can not ever condone childhood weddings, pregnancies, rapes, etc. That is what's happened in some cases. You obviously feel the opposite, that its ok for a young 16 and under girl to get pregnant against her will from a much older man, but that's your choice. Its clear to me no matter what anyone says here, you will maintain your course of beleif on this matter so good luck with that.

I don't feel overly sorry for the mothers, also dont forget not all of them returned to the YFZ ranch, some are alleged to have gone to a battered womens shelter. They separated the kids from the mothers the other day to help encourage the kids to talk more freely/honestly without the shadow of their mothers around. Ive read accounts from various books on women who escape, and that's one thing they do, be overbearing or present during interviews to make sure you stay on track and don't betray the faith. All the FDLS sects realize they preach stuff that's not condoned by the US Gov't so they try to keep it as hush hush as possible, away from the prying eyes of the public.

I feel confident that the State of TX will do what's best for the children involved. Im also sure the reason why more detailed info hasnt been released yet is due to the confidentiality of minors. We may never get more detailed information.

JMO/IMO

awareness

04-16-2008, 04:16 PM

Informant: Men had sex with underage girls in church (http://origin.sltrib.com/ci_8866661)
Im sure more info will be revealed later on in court.

Bed discovered in church with long female hair (http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-compound10apr10,1,2512549.story)

Mimi428

04-16-2008, 04:22 PM

Originally posted by John7878

Then >I< believe that there should be a neutral third party to oversee the KIDS welfare.

[/*]

EACH & EVERY CHILD will have their own attorney. How is that NOT taking their welfare into consideration? If the attorneys do not meet the definition of 'neutral third party' - with the state of TX being the 1st party & the FLDS being the 2nd party - WHO ELSE WOULD QUALIFY in your opinion?

Why would an attorney, assigned to any specific child, allow that child to be abused by CPS workers?

John7878

04-16-2008, 04:44 PM

Originally posted by awareness

Its said they found a female hair in the "matrimonial bed" in the FDLS temple.JMO/IMO [/*]

No didn't see it.... got a link??

Originally posted by awareness

You do realize, there's more than one FDLS "church", right? That there's more than one person out there condoning this illegal lifestyle [/*]

Yes, I knew there was more than one.

Originally posted by awareness

Polygamy is illegal in the US, in all the states. So yes their religion does condone illegal activities.[/*]

But then they have been there how long? Doing illegal stuff?
So they KNOW they are criminals, but these places have been here since the 1800's.

Originally posted by awareness

However I can not ever condone childhood weddings, pregnancies, rapes, etc. That is what's happened in some cases. You obviously feel the opposite, that its ok for a young 16 and under girl to get pregnant against her will from a much older man, but that's your choice. [/*]

WOW from a wedding, to rape, to pregnant against her will.

And I do NOT "obviously feel the opposite".

As I posted before my wife of 38 years was 17 when we were married, a friends wife was BARELY 16 when they got married and they have celebrated their 40th anniversary.
When I graduated 2 of the kids had THEIR kids there!
And I talked to my nephew today and he was talking about child care services at the local high school! So I'm guessing its gotten worse since I left.

Sex & marriage at a young age are NOT a new problem....by a long shot.

So girls in Texas don't get pregnant any younger than 17?!?!?!?
If a 16 yr old girl is pregnant, the father is not allowed to marry her and is instead thrown in jail??

I think the odds are there probably is at least one case of abuse in this mess.
I just happen to think that is probably a lot less prevalent in their society than in our own.

Am I wrong.....heck I could be....lets wait and see....

Originally posted by awareness

I don't feel overly sorry for the mothers, . [/*]

Yet people claim THEY are victims of this as much as the kids.
Weird.

Originally posted by awareness

I feel confident that the State of TX will do what's best for the children involved.
JMO/IMO [/*]

THIS is where we REALLY disagree. I've seen government in action, and its never pretty.

Carol25

04-16-2008, 05:38 PM

Someone said these women sound like the Stepford wives. I think he really hit it. I thought zombies, but I like his comparison.

After thinking about this, I really don't think these women have any idea what "abuse" is. Forcing girls at puberty into "spiritual marriage" is just part of their culture, not abuse. Beating wives is a form of discipline to them, not "abuse. Putting children underwater for infractions is not "abuse", it's discipline. So, in essence they are telling the truth.

The problem is none of these women can figure out that when they are told by the men not to say how old you are, how old any woman was when she had a baby or was married they are hiding something. They can't put two and two together. Why can't we tell them if there'e nothing wrong with what we do?

The brainwashing men tell them the outside world is always wrong. Their laws are wrong..but we'll use them when it's to our advantage.

Wouldn't you just love to debate some of these women? And they would have to answer?

But just like the Stepford wives, they aren't equipped to do that.

johnielee333

04-16-2008, 06:19 PM

Commentary: Can Texas take the children?

By Sunny Hostin
CNN

Sunny Hostin is a legal analyst on "American Morning."

NEW YORK (CNN) -- It's every mother's nightmare: Someone takes your child.
Well, that is what has happened in the Texas polygamist sect case. We have watched more than 400 children being taken from home by bus.
Most of the children were accompanied by their mothers. But now the sect's mothers and children older than 5 have been separated.
And the question heard around the country is, "Can this happen in America?"
The short answer is yes, and thank goodness.
In fact, in this case, both law enforcement officers and officials from the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services had every right to remove these children.
The long answer?
Well, the impetus for the search of the ranch and the removal of the children were phone calls on March 29 and 30, from a 16-year-old girl named Sarah to a local shelter.
Sarah indicated that she was "spiritually married" to an adult male member of the church and that he had physically and sexually abused her. In addition, she told the shelter she had an 8-month-old child.
State law requires anybody who believes that a child has been abused or neglected to report it to the Child Protective Services program, Texas family protective services or a law enforcement agency.
The law requires CPS to investigate reports of child abuse or neglect for the primary purpose of protecting children. Children are at risk if there is a reasonable likelihood that they will be abused or neglected, as defined by the Texas Family Code, in the foreseeable future.
In this case, the sect's leader, Warren Jeffs, was convicted of being an accomplice to the rape of a 14-year-old and is awaiting trial in Arizona on similar charges.
The law also requires CPS to notify law enforcement agencies of all reports of alleged abuse or neglect. The law enforcement agency determines, separate from CPS, whether to conduct a criminal investigation and whether a criminal violation occurred.
CPS doesn't always need a court order to remove children. It can remove children if the person taking possession of the child has sufficient knowledge or reason to believe that there is an immediate danger to the physical health or safety of the child and/or the child has been the victim of sexual abuse.
Law enforcement officers obtained a warrant authorizing a search of the compound. Much has been made of the fact that Sarah has not been identified.
Some, including sect members and their attorneys, have said that the call was not placed by anyone in the compound; that it was placed by a disgruntled member or, worse, was a hoax.
I say it doesn't matter, and the Supreme Court agrees.
Where law enforcement officers illegally search private premises or seize property without probable cause in violation of the Fourth Amendment, the illegally seized evidence will be excluded from evidence.
This rule is designed to deter police misconduct rather than to punish the errors of judges and magistrates. And if a police officer has an objectively reasonable belief that a magistrate had probable cause to issue the search warrant, even if an affidavit doesn't provide the magistrate with probable cause, the evidence can still be used.
There is no indication that law enforcement officers in this case did not rely on good faith on the search warrant, so the warrant is good. And, remember, CPS didn't need a warrant; it had to investigate the allegations.
Texas law prohibits marriages before age 16. Texas law also prohibits men older than 19 from having sex with someone under the age of 16.
It is a crime, period.
And so the children were removed, all 416 of them. Initially, their mothers were allowed along.
But later it was determined that it was not in the best interests of the children to remain with their mothers during the investigation. I agree.
The mothers are part of the problem here. They subscribe to the sect's beliefs. Or maybe they are brainwashed, or victims themselves. But none of that really matters.
What matters is protecting these children, even if that means protecting them from their own mothers.
So what will become of the children?
We will know more Thursday, when state Judge Barbara Walthers will determine whether they should remain separated from their mothers for now or for a long time.

here's the link to this story
http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/04/16/sunny.child/index.html

johnielee333

04-16-2008, 06:24 PM

StickyBeak

04-16-2008, 06:30 PM

Originally posted by Carol25
Someone said these women sound like the Stepford wives. I think he really hit it. I thought zombies, but I like his comparison.

After thinking about this, I really don't think these women have any idea what "abuse" is. Forcing girls at puberty into "spiritual marriage" is just part of their culture, not abuse. Beating wives is a form of discipline to them, not "abuse. Putting children underwater for infractions is not "abuse", it's discipline. So, in essence they are telling the truth.

The problem is none of these women can figure out that when they are told by the men not to say how old you are, how old any woman was when she had a baby or was married they are hiding something. They can't put two and two together. Why can't we tell them if there'e nothing wrong with what we do?

The brainwashing men tell them the outside world is always wrong. Their laws are wrong..but we'll use them when it's to our advantage.

Wouldn't you just love to debate some of these women? And they would have to answer?

But just like the Stepford wives, they aren't equipped to do that. [/*]

ITA, I tried to make this point. If they have been raised in this environment, they would not know abuse. This would be a "normal" existence for them, so be it for their children as well.

I am wondering WHY, no men have come forward to dispute these claims or plead for the children as the women have done.

Another, o/t question maybe. But does anyone think these women are "COLOR CODED"? Seems the head Chick in the pecking order tends to wear green, the meeker lowers maybe in a lavender/violet, I am curioious. And the Hair, Yikes, all rolled up like something out of the 40's. JMO

:seeya:

lotty

04-16-2008, 06:30 PM

Originally posted by johnielee333
Commentary: Can Texas take the children?

By Sunny Hostin
CNN

<respectfully snipped, for length>

here's the link to this story
http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/04/16/sunny.child/index.html [/*]

Wow, great post.
:beer:

Freebird

04-16-2008, 06:48 PM

Freebird

04-16-2008, 06:57 PM

Originally posted by John7878

All that stuff you list as 'abuse' I take with a grain of salt.

Just because someone lives a different life doesn't mean its abusive.

Thats all I ask is a link to evidence.

Heres one for you:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/04/14/national/main4012137.shtml

Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints also say children are "horrified" by physical examinations they have undergone while in state custody.

So now who is traumatizing the children?? FORCING them to be stripped and examined.

And make no mistake, this is scarring these kids for LIFE!

. [/*]

Your last paragraph is the understatement of the year.

Freebird

04-16-2008, 07:09 PM

Originally posted by maryhaze
i'm not fully up to speed on all of this, but i don't think anyone has mentioned the "lost boys". the teens kicked out of the cult at a certain age so they don't compete with the filthy old pedophiles for the young girls. i bet those boys would have some stories to tell. [/*]

Perhaps so why haven't we heard from them?

Carol25

04-16-2008, 08:07 PM

Freebird. from reading your posts I have coming up with questions about you. I now question your age, intellect or if you are a member of the FLDS group.

You, like the women who have been interviewed in this group have ignored all of the questions and links from other posters and posted on trivial things as "many children have not pets" or how the children are "forced to strip" for doctors.

If you have been to a doctor "on the outside" you would know that just isn't true. I would like to see how many posters here have to strip every time they see their doctors. If there are any, I would suggest they get new doctors!

Through the links I have learned from former FLDS members that women and children are property of the church. The only role they have is to propagate and help their husband reach that that highest place in heaven and become a God.

In a link I will provide, one woman described how there were charts showing when the women were ovulating, so they when to take her for another round. They are there only to propagate and serve their masters...or husbands----

Is anything sinking in?

Carol25

04-16-2008, 08:10 PM

Originally posted by Freebird

Perhaps so why haven't we heard from them? [/*]

So again you haven't bothered to read the links. Read the links and find out.

juliekan

04-17-2008, 12:33 AM

so freebird, where is the FLDS sect that you belong to?

tisamystery

04-17-2008, 12:36 AM

Originally posted by Carol25

In a link I will provide, one woman described how there were charts showing when the women were ovulating, so they when to take her for another round. They are there only to propagate and serve their masters...or husbands----

Is anything sinking in? [/*]

Well, that explains how they determine who and when. In the past, reporters have asked polygamist women how their husband determines who to spent the night with. They just smiled coyly. It makes sense that an ovulation chart might be used.

John7878

04-17-2008, 09:40 AM

Originally posted by sadiemay62

However, the cycle of that sick cult needs to be broken, and it will only be broken if they take the children out of there. Their Mother's will be able to join them if they wish. That's totally up to them. [/*]

I don't think so. Its like saying we're gonna take the kids away from a welfare Mom to stop their abuse. Only to have her out having more babies later on.

I can see the same thing here. The cycle is only being interrupted, not broken.

And no the Mothers did NOT have a choice to stay with the kids.

Originally posted by sadiemay62

The children will be initially traumatized, but because children are resilliant, they will be better in the end because of it.[/*]

Thats what they thought about me.
They were wrong.

Originally posted by sadiemay62

You have no idea how horrific life is there. [/*]

Your right, unless you have lived it, I guess no one would know.

Originally posted by sadiemay62

but where do you think the FLDS get their vast sums of money????? Do some research the Church of Latter Day Saints is immensely wealthy. Immensely! jmo [/*]

From our own government???

http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=3084399

John7878

04-17-2008, 10:06 AM

Originally posted by tirante
Next time you have some trouble--call an FLDS elder--instead of the cops. Just remember, if you have any teen-aged daughters, keep them hidden. [/*]

I have been in situations where cops were called....almost totally useless, and more trouble than just taking care of it yourself.

I wouldn't suggest anyone calling them.

John7878

04-17-2008, 10:15 AM

Originally posted by tirante

What do you propose, the government not do business with any company that has an affiliation with a church? [/*]

HUH???

Her quote was "do I know where they get their money".

And I posted a GUESS, that it might be from their government contracts.

I don't know how you got that impression from my answer.

:confused:

John7878

04-17-2008, 10:35 AM

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iIdMpRHjN4hpNKBhfYyAsR4DDo4QD903KJ300

Cut & Paste
"Thursday, a judge was to hear from their attorneys, along with attorneys for their parents and Child Protective Services, on whether the children ought to be returned to the ranch run by a polygamous sect or be placed in permanent foster care."

They still haven't found the original caller, but think they have enough evidence to permanently take the kids.

Cut & Paste
"Typically, each child would be given a separate hearing, but given the number of cases, it's likely the judge will have the state, the children's attorneys and the parents' attorneys make consolidated presentations, at least initially, said Harper Estes, president-elect of the state bar.

"You can't go one-by-one," Estes said. "

So much for the assurance of CPS that EACH child would get their own lawyer.
Now whole groups will be taken under the guise of a fair trial for each.

Cut & Paste
"Meanwhile, Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott said Thursday that FLDS members may face legal troubles other than abuse allegations and custody battles for their children.

Abbott said FLDS mothers who have been defending their polygamous lifestyle in interviews this week may be subject to prosecution for bigamy.

On ABC's "Good Morning America," he said the mothers, in nationally televised interviews Wednesday, "admitted to living in a state of bigamy."

There we go, the women go from brainwashed victim, to convicted criminal in one fell swoop.

So they have to stop talking to the press about their kids being taken or they have the threat of arrest against them???

Sweet.

From one abuser to the next.

awareness

04-17-2008, 03:56 PM

Originally posted by John7878

No didn't see it.... got a link??

Yes, I knew there was more than one.

But then they have been there how long? Doing illegal stuff?
So they KNOW they are criminals, but these places have been here since the 1800's.

WOW from a wedding, to rape, to pregnant against her will.

And I do NOT "obviously feel the opposite".

As I posted before my wife of 38 years was 17 when we were married, a friends wife was BARELY 16 when they got married and they have celebrated their 40th anniversary.
When I graduated 2 of the kids had THEIR kids there!
And I talked to my nephew today and he was talking about child care services at the local high school! So I'm guessing its gotten worse since I left.

Sex & marriage at a young age are NOT a new problem....by a long shot.

So girls in Texas don't get pregnant any younger than 17?!?!?!?
If a 16 yr old girl is pregnant, the father is not allowed to marry her and is instead thrown in jail??

I think the odds are there probably is at least one case of abuse in this mess.
I just happen to think that is probably a lot less prevalent in their society than in our own.

Am I wrong.....heck I could be....lets wait and see....

Yet people claim THEY are victims of this as much as the kids.
Weird.

THIS is where we REALLY disagree. I've seen government in action, and its never pretty. [/*]

I did provide a link for your information regarding the matrimonial bed in the YFZ temple.

They obviously have been condoning and some have been practicing the illegal act of polygamy since Joseph Smith had his revelation - or more like I should say until the US Gov't made it illegal for polygamy, because that happened after Joseph Smith had his revelation.

Yes we disagree on several points, there is some good that can come out of government intervention. Perhaps the government should have intervened when it initially caught wind of polygamist sects out there and shut them down then -- perhaps we wouldnt be dealing with this issue today.

You apparently were wronged in some way and sorry for your own past issues. But that doesnt mean that CPS/State of TX is the evil party here. They aren't the ones abusing the kids, they're trying to help them.

JMO/IMO

johnielee333

04-17-2008, 04:01 PM

Originally posted by sadiemay62

I know what you are saying, and you aren't wrong. However, the cycle of that sick cult needs to be broken, and it will only be broken if they take the children out of there. Their Mother's will be able to join them if they wish. That's totally up to them. There are three notable women (there are more, but don't wish to be recognized in the public's eye), who barely escaped from the compound with their children. The children will be initially traumatized, but because children are resilliant, they will be better in the end because of it.

Trust me, I know what I speak of. It doesn't matter how I know, just that I do know. You have no idea how horrific life is there. The sad thing is many of the Mothers, and children don't know it's horrific. History, and generations keep repeating themselves there. Many don't know there is another way of life. Their Mother's don't know, their Grand-mother's don't know. This cult has been operating throughout the U.S. since the 1800. Don't be fooled by the Church of Latter Day Saints. They were all one in the beginning, but when the authorities started arresting people for Polygamy, the LDS decided to state it's no part of their doctrine any longer. Well, so be it, but where do you think the FLDS get their vast sums of money????? Do some research the Church of Latter Day Saints is immensely wealthy. Immensely! jmo [/*]

:beer:

johnielee333

04-17-2008, 04:08 PM

Originally posted by John7878
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iIdMpRHjN4hpNKBhfYyAsR4DDo4QD903KJ300

Cut & Paste
"Thursday, a judge was to hear from their attorneys, along with attorneys for their parents and Child Protective Services, on whether the children ought to be returned to the ranch run by a polygamous sect or be placed in permanent foster care."

They still haven't found the original caller, but think they have enough evidence to permanently take the kids.

Cut & Paste
"Typically, each child would be given a separate hearing, but given the number of cases, it's likely the judge will have the state, the children's attorneys and the parents' attorneys make consolidated presentations, at least initially, said Harper Estes, president-elect of the state bar.

"You can't go one-by-one," Estes said. "

So much for the assurance of CPS that EACH child would get their own lawyer.
Now whole groups will be taken under the guise of a fair trial for each.

Cut & Paste
"Meanwhile, Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott said Thursday that FLDS members may face legal troubles other than abuse allegations and custody battles for their children.

Abbott said FLDS mothers who have been defending their polygamous lifestyle in interviews this week may be subject to prosecution for bigamy.

On ABC's "Good Morning America," he said the mothers, in nationally televised interviews Wednesday, "admitted to living in a state of bigamy."

There we go, the women go from brainwashed victim, to convicted criminal in one fell swoop.

So they have to stop talking to the press about their kids being taken or they have the threat of arrest against them???

Sweet.

From one abuser to the next. [/*]

geez i just cant believe people dont see the truth about what has happened & still is happening in this sect. hammer

John7878

04-17-2008, 05:07 PM

Originally posted by johnielee333

geez i just cant believe people dont see the truth about what has happened & still is happening in this sect. hammer [/*]

I can't believe that innocent until proven guilty means nothing anymore.

I can't believe people think those women are brainwashed, even as they themselves are brainwashed by the one sided slant of the media.

I can't believe people want these mothers to go through the nightmare of having their kids taken away, even as kids the same age are getting pregnant in our society!

I can't believe that it was LEGAL to marry at 14 in Texas right up to 2005, 3 years ago, but now we are going to destroy HUNDREDS of lives because NOW its wrong.

I can't believe ONE case of abuse and they are ready to take EVERY kid out of there.

And finally, I can't believe that some people will STILL believe someone when they say "I'm from the government, and I'm here to help you."

:confused:

walton

04-17-2008, 05:11 PM

Rainkiss

04-17-2008, 05:31 PM

Originally posted by John7878

I can't believe that innocent until proven guilty means nothing anymore.

I can't believe people think those women are brainwashed, even as they themselves are brainwashed by the one sided slant of the media.

I can't believe people want these mothers to go through the nightmare of having their kids taken away, even as kids the same age are getting pregnant in our society!

I can't believe that it was LEGAL to marry at 14 in Texas right up to 2005, 3 years ago, but now we are going to destroy HUNDREDS of lives because NOW its wrong.

I can't believe ONE case of abuse and they are ready to take EVERY kid out of there.

And finally, I can't believe that some people will STILL believe someone when they say "I'm from the government, and I'm here to help you."

:confused: [/*]

John... I don't know you, so I'll start off by saying that I'm going to run under the assumption that you're a rational human being, and that the fact that you're on a discussion board means you're open to the idea of a discussion.

Yes, there are teens in our society getting pregnant. However, there's a difference, here. They may have made bad choices, however, for the most part, they made a CHOICE. And, I'd be willing to bet, most of them are having the baby of someone at least reasonably close to their own age, that they chose for themselves. They weren't handed to a man three our four times their age like some sort of door prize, then told that if they didn't "keep sweet" and submit to the beatings and the sex, they'd go to hell. And they weren't raised to believe that it was the truth, the ONLY truth, and nothing but the truth.

Can you see that difference, or am I wasting my virtual breath, here?

John7878

04-17-2008, 05:39 PM

Originally posted by walton

I can hardly believe you still continue to say some of the things that you do. [/*]

Hi Walton

Ok a question then....why haven't we taken the kids from all the Catholics then?

Hundreds were abused by priests, and STILL the parents send them to the church.

They have proved that the church HID & IGNORED & COVERED UP evidence of what was happening.

The church paid BILLIONS in lawsuits, but the survivors of the abuse say that the situation has NOT changed.

Why is one church treated better than the other???

Whats good for one abuser of kids is good for any of the others too.

:rolleyes:

walton

04-17-2008, 06:04 PM

Details

04-17-2008, 06:54 PM

Originally posted by John7878
Hi Walton

Ok a question then....why haven't we taken the kids from all the Catholics then?

Hundreds were abused by priests, and STILL the parents send them to the church.

They have proved that the church HID & IGNORED & COVERED UP evidence of what was happening.

The church paid BILLIONS in lawsuits, but the survivors of the abuse say that the situation has NOT changed.

Why is one church treated better than the other???

Whats good for one abuser of kids is good for any of the others too.

:rolleyes: [/*]Indeed, any known or suspected pedophile priest is not allowed to maintain a compound of little boys. There is no tolerance among our LE for pedophile priests.

Nor is it an article of faith nor any mainstream position in the Catholic church nor among Catholic families that when little boys hit puberty, they are to be molested by their family priest - quite the opposite.

The Catholic church heirarchy is dirty - I'd even go so far as to say evil. They tolerated (which is quite different from encouraged or endorsed) pedophile priests without doing enough to stop them. But it's never been something that was put out there as right, just, something that should always happen - it's something they say is wrong. The percentage of priests who are pedophiles is nowhere near the 100% of FLDS members that believe in polygamy.

Simple differences:
FLDS: It's right to rape little girls so long as you have a spiritual marriage.
Catholic: It's wrong for a priest to have sex, let alone molest a child.... but we'll try to hush it up if it happens and won't dismiss the priest - we need those guys!

FLDS: Every man needs a bunch of wives - many to most of which start out as little girls.
Catholic: Most priests are good celibate men - few - just like in the general population - are pedophiles.

FLDS: Every child is at risk - girls to be raped in the temple; boys to be worked illegally and thrown out; all of them to harsh physical abuse.
Catholic: A very small percentage of all the children who are Catholic are abused by anyone connected with the church. Far too many children yes - but nothing like the FLDS situation of near 100%.

lotty

04-17-2008, 06:57 PM

Details
:beer:

awareness

04-17-2008, 07:12 PM

awesome post Details.

To my knowledge, law enforcement has gone after pedophile priests. In addition lawsuits have been filed, and people have been given money from settlements as they should be for their pain and suffering. The horrible situation is being corrected. I don't feel that ALL Catholic priests are pedophiles, and Im pretty sure there are more Catholics in the US than Mormons.

I dont feel we should just stop and let the FDLS continue its abuse of children with forced early teen marriages/pregnancies and polygamy. Also forcing young boys out onto the streets. Its just not right. They too, deserve only the best much like the Catholic priest victims do.

JMO/IMO

Details

04-17-2008, 07:20 PM

Originally posted by John7878
...THIS is where we REALLY disagree. I've seen government in action, and its never pretty. [/*]I've seen government in action, and it works most of the time. Of course, all we hear about are the bad cases, and the person in the wrong always dislikes the government intervention and paints themselves as the victim - and we hear their one-sided story and judge all government officials based on that. My hubby was on the wrong side of government intervention - and he hated it! Thought they were the worst people in the world, anti-everything government.

But today, he admits they were right, and really very nice to him. He was in a divorce, and not thinking straight. He still wants to write a letter of thanks to one of the cops, if he could figure out who it is (guy could have, possibly should have arrested him, instead took him away for some donuts and coffee, talked him down), and the judge - he sure didn't like what that judge did to him - but he knows it was exactly what he needed, a kick in the pants to realize he still had 2 kids and they needed him.

Then there's all the child abuse cases they get right (I know of two kids in particular who would have very much worse lives today without them), all the children who would be dead if not for CPS, all the children in good foster homes, all the abused wives who are protected from their husbands, rather than being forced to live with them, take the abuse, or be killed, as in the past, etc. Not to mention all the false allegations they correctly ignore (another where I know plenty about), all the cases where they try to work things out without court cases, all the times when they talk and help.

It's easy to blame the government - if you only look at the times when things go wrong, only hear the wronged parties story and think it unbiased, and expect them to be able to perfectly solve every problem, without hurting anyone's feelings.

We have to focus on where gov't does wrong - because that's how you keep improving. But focusing like that ignores all that is done right - and there is a lot that is done right.

Details

04-17-2008, 07:27 PM

Yep, LE goes after priests - no problem. And they've tried to go after the conspiracists as well - that continues to this day. Of course, the Pope moving Cardinal Law to Rome so he couldn't be made to answer questions sure didn't help - but they do work on it.

LLaFren

04-17-2008, 09:50 PM

I don't post often, and I appreciate those that do, but as a mom, with six (yes six) kids, and an aunt with over 40 nieces and nephews, I've got to say, sometimes CPS is wrong (which is why 2 nieces and 4 nephews, have lived with us for various times), but when you take into consideration that children (no matter how adult the act) are being abused you ask questions after you KNOW they are safe.
CPS is an underpaid, undervalued job. There is abuse in the system no doubt, but be the one who makes the wrong call and you are the problem, not the solution.

I work every day with women who have been abused, who have turned to drugs and made their family life h***, but you know what? There are some people who cannot (CANNOT) be redeemed, no matter what you do or what you show them to be the right path.

Children learn from the people they love, right or wrong, and until you show them that love is not always right they go back. This is what I fear for those kids, they need to know love and right and wrong.

John7878, I really wish you had been one of my foster kids, or one of my clients, I have yet to give up on any of them. They all know I care deeply for them and will fight for them to the best of my abilities and knowledge. I wish you had known that not all foster families are out for the money and most of us really do want to help. And yes government in action is sometimes "pretty" I can prove that with honors kids and college students.

And most of all I wish for all of these kids to be placed in a home where they matter.

I know this rambles, and I apologize, but dang, kids are having kids and think it's the true path, how do you fix that?

John7878

04-17-2008, 11:26 PM

Originally posted by Rainkiss

Yes, there are teens in our society getting pregnant. However, there's a difference, here. They may have made bad choices, however, for the most part, they made a CHOICE.
Can you see that difference, or am I wasting my virtual breath, here? [/*]

I agree completely.

IF girls are being FORCED to marry ANYONE, no matter their age, then its abuse.

Now we get to the practical side of this.
How hard is it going to be to prove this and still have the 'suspects' civil rights protected?

Or even worse, how are we going to keep the innocent KIDS protected, while all of this is looked into.

Rip 400+ kids out of their homes because they THINK they might be abused.
Then subject them to FORCED medical exams...and with the girls we all know what type humiliation they will be going through and what they are examining them for. To a kid this experience can be as bad as rape.

They can find volunteers for the kids, but they can't send the kids back to the home they know, and get enough people to check on them at home, while this investigation drags on??

I know, they want to question the kids without the influence of the parents. But how long are we talking for crimminy sakes!?!??!

They have had TWO WEEKS to find proof. Out of 400 kids they got nothing?
Out of the raid they have nothing?
They don't even have the original caller.
And they have returned NO kids?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080417/ap_on_re_us/polygamist_retreat
QUOTE:
"But under repeated cross-examination, Crawford acknowledged the records contained no evidence of sexual abuse."

I can see they are going to be able to prove nothing in court. But that 400+ kids will be traumatized, some for life, for nothing.

What a can of worms.
:(

Carol25

04-17-2008, 11:41 PM

John 7878, Why would we want to take children away from Catholics for taking them to church? Is there a risk of sitting in a pew?

Why do you have such a high malevolent feeling of LE? What personal experiences have you had?

John7878

04-17-2008, 11:59 PM

Originally posted by Details
I've seen government in action, and it works most of the time.

Then there's all the child abuse cases they get right (I know of two kids in particular who would have very much worse lives today without them), all the children who would be dead if not for CPS, all the children in good foster homes, . [/*]

It hasn't been my experience, but I'll give you that the biggest majority ARE trying to help.

And I think that most times they do.

My best friend was a foster parent. He made a difference in some kids lives.

Then I had another really good friend that had CPS come in and interfere with his kid.
OUCH!!!
The kid thought no one could touch him or tell him what to do.
He pushed a teacher down, and told the counselor that the teacher had said something and made him sad.
So they reamed the teacher! LoL
Eventually when he got older 16 or 17 he was about 6' 2" and 230lbs and thought he could take Dad.
After he picked himself off the floor he called the police. They told him he had better not tangle with Dad anymore and left.

But it was too late for him, the courts eventually got a hold of him and moved him out. He was working a min wage job with no education. His Dad died a couple of years later in his 40's. And he died a couple years after him in his 20's.

Growing up and watching the Andy Griffith show just didn't prepare me for dealing with the real world, I guess.

:shrug:

Carol25

04-17-2008, 11:59 PM

Originally posted by John7878
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iIdMpRHjN4hpNKBhfYyAsR4DDo4QD903KJ300

Cut & Paste
"Thursday, a judge was to hear from their attorneys, along with attorneys for their parents and Child Protective Services, on whether the children ought to be returned to the ranch run by a polygamous sect or be placed in permanent foster care."

They still haven't found the original caller, but think they have enough evidence to permanently take the kids.

Cut & Paste
"Typically, each child would be given a separate hearing, but given the number of cases, it's likely the judge will have the state, the children's attorneys and the parents' attorneys make consolidated presentations, at least initially, said Harper Estes, president-elect of the state bar.

"You can't go one-by-one," Estes said. "

So much for the assurance of CPS that EACH child would get their own lawyer.
Now whole groups will be taken under the guise of a fair trial for each.

Cut & Paste
"Meanwhile, Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott said Thursday that FLDS members may face legal troubles other than abuse allegations and custody battles for their children.

Abbott said FLDS mothers who have been defending their polygamous lifestyle in interviews this week may be subject to prosecution for bigamy.

On ABC's "Good Morning America," he said the mothers, in nationally televised interviews Wednesday, "admitted to living in a state of bigamy."

There we go, the women go from brainwashed victim, to convicted criminal in one fell swoop.

So they have to stop talking to the press about their kids being taken or they have the threat of arrest against them???

Sweet.

From one abuser to the next. [/*]
Teenagers who were interviewed said they knew Sarah who made the call, but "she disappeared about a week ago."" (on the news)

John7878

04-18-2008, 12:18 AM

Originally posted by Carol25
John 7878, Why would we want to take children away from Catholics for taking them to church? Is there a risk of sitting in a pew?[/*]

If they have a pedophile priest that they have been shielding, then yeah, there could be a danger to the kids.

The church deliberately swept the child abuse under the rug and kept it hidden.

Originally posted by Carol25

Why do you have such a high malevolent feeling of LE? What personal experiences have you had? [/*]

The biggest thing I guess is this Hope Steffy case.

http://www.wkyc.com/video/player.aspx?aid=53707&sid=82447&bw=hi&cat=2

Here are police, EIGHT of them, male & female stripping a handcuffed woman naked "for her own safety". And leaving her in her cell naked for 6 hours and then booking her naked except for a vest. (Not all eight are in the cell, apparently just the whole night shift for spectators.)

Its complete BS, they know she wasn't suicidal, this is only to humiliate, embarrass, degrade and punish her.
This whole thing stinks.

Heres a second video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lRhyiXJ91CQ&feature=related

This video explains that the sheriff's dept has NOT turned over ALL the video to Steffy's lawyers. And as of 4-14-2008, they STILL have not turned over the video.
So as bad as the one they DID get, I can only guess that the rest is enough to certainly put them in jail.

I don't know, this has just rubbed my fur the wrong way.

And as bad as this is, it got worse once I started looking at cases like this on the net.
The courts have REALLY messed us over on the protections of the 4th amendment.

:flamemad:

John7878

04-18-2008, 12:23 AM

Originally posted by CAT TOY
you guys are not following the news, the sarah was ID today in court. Didnt you hear?
Sarah is there. the children testified to that in court today.
CT [/*]

FINALLY, now they are getting somewhere.

Thanks for the heads up.....

juliekan

04-18-2008, 12:53 AM

Originally posted by CAT TOY
you guys are not following the news, the sarah was ID today in court. Didnt you hear?
Sarah is there. the children testified to that in court today.
CT [/*]
There were"Sara(h)s there...which Sara(h) was it? Link please, missed it. Thanks.

witchy1

04-18-2008, 01:02 AM

Originally posted by walton

I can hardly believe you still continue to say some of the things that you do. [/*]

I thank you that you are so brave.

juliekan

04-18-2008, 01:22 AM

Originally posted by CAT TOY
you guys are not following the news, the sarah was ID today in court. Didnt you hear?
Sarah is there. the children testified to that in court today.
CT [/*]
have looked at articles online, cannot find that this happened?

Details

04-18-2008, 01:22 AM

Gotta say it - no, in no way shape or form, is a doctors examination, like a rape. I bet many of these children can tell you exactly how much it is different.

Yes, a doctors visit isn't always pleasant - nor is a dentists. But they're necessary, and we all have to deal with them. It's no big deal.

So - John - a police screwup means all the good they do is for nothing? That we should ignore them when they say they've got a whole crew of children in danger? Even when many people from the cult confirm that danger? Even with the solid and concrete evidence of pregnant children, we should ignore it all because some bad cops, somewhere else, messed up?

walton

04-18-2008, 01:43 AM

Originally posted by witchy1

I thank you that you are so brave. [/*]

Hi ya :seeya:

Is that really you? :D

witchy1

04-18-2008, 01:51 AM

Yes Walton!
It's really me. I have been reading your every word for a few years here and, I must admit, {she blushes}, have fallen in love w/u

walton

04-18-2008, 02:08 AM

Originally posted by witchy1
Yes Walton!
It's really me. I have been reading your every word for a few years here and, I must admit, {she blushes}, have fallen in love w/u [/*]

:D

John7878

04-18-2008, 09:25 AM

Originally posted by Details
Gotta say it - no, in no way shape or form, is a doctors examination, like a rape. I bet many of these children can tell you exactly how much it is different. [/*]

Yes, to us it is a whole world of different.
But to a certain percentage of those kids, who don't have our experience, it will be.

Originally posted by Details

Yes, a doctors visit isn't always pleasant - nor is a dentists. But they're necessary, and we all have to deal with them. It's no big deal. [/*]

Really? So if you went to your doc and he said he was going to do a COMPLETE examination on you. (Including the one we know these kids/girls are getting.)
And you told him that you didn't WANT to be examined, but they bring in as many people as they need to hold you down and do it anyway.

You'll deal with it and get over it.

Now think of a CHILD, especially with their background, going through this.

No biggie huh???

Originally posted by Details

So - John - a police screwup means all the good they do is for nothing? That we should ignore them when they say they've got a whole crew of children in danger? Even when many people from the cult confirm that danger? Even with the solid and concrete evidence of pregnant children, we should ignore it all because some bad cops, somewhere else, messed up? [/*]

No I am NOT saying to ignore the call reporting abuse.

This story has been whipped into a frenzy by the allegations that girls as young as 14 or 15 have been FORCED to marry much older men.
This seems to be the main point everyone is saying anyway.
For my money, if ANYONE is forced to marry someone, no matter their age, it should be stopped.
But then 'arranged' marriages have been around a long time.

I am saying we ALL have certain rights under the law. They should be followed.

The judge should QUICKLY go over the proof, to see if there is even a case to be made.
Physical evidence, witnesses, etc.

If there is, then she should try to go from there. (And I know with 400+ kids its a big job.)

And ABOVE ALL, the kids should be protected from suspected abusers and over eager state officials that will traumatize them in efforts to make a case, until this thing is over.

I hope this makes my position clearer.

:confused:

giddyupalw

04-18-2008, 09:39 AM

I can't believe any one would approve of children being married to old men!! They are saying some children at the age of 16 have already a few children... OMG... I have a young daughter and there is no way I would let any one near her!!! This whole thing makes me sick. I just hope the children are placed with good families...the mothers get some help...the men ... well ... I guess I can't say what should be done to them.... :flamemad:

John7878

04-18-2008, 09:41 AM

Originally posted by sadiemay62

Clearly you have an agenda with the "government". I think you probably want a different forum for your beef. Just my opinion. [/*]

Hi SadieMay

I can't deny that I distrust government.

The one we have now is about the worst I have ever seen, even Nixon and Johnson looks good compared to Bush & company.

You are probably even right about a different forum for the anti-government rants.

I just want the kids not to have to suffer because of anything they have no control over, from either side.

I remember getting into trouble with my parents when I was young.
I swore then that if I ever had kids I'd be a Dad like Ward Cleaver and treat
them fairly.
LoL
To be honest, I tried, but in real life it didn't always work out that way.

Anyway thanks for the input, sometimes I just need a kick in the pants.

;)

John7878

04-18-2008, 10:13 AM

Originally posted by witchy1
Yes Walton!
It's really me. I have been reading your every word for a few years here and, I must admit, {she blushes}, have fallen in love w/u [/*]

Well I haven't fallen in love with him LoL, but from his posts I can tell he has a head on his shoulders and posts a good 'opposing' view....or should I say one with a different/good slant to it. (Text isn't the best way to get an idea across.)

And going back on some of my responses to him, I see that in my eagerness to stop typing, I short changed him on some answers.

Oh Oh, I'm wanting to stop typing again.... :tongue:

Later--

Rainkiss

04-18-2008, 10:34 AM

Originally posted by John7878

I agree completely.

IF girls are being FORCED to marry ANYONE, no matter their age, then its abuse.

Now we get to the practical side of this.
How hard is it going to be to prove this and still have the 'suspects' civil rights protected?

Glad we've got some common ground to work from. I'm hoping you'll agree, as well, that said force doesn't have to be physical, and that convincing these girls that if they DON'T marry, they're going to go to hell is also a form of force.

This whole case is going to be a nightmare to prove. The victims and witnesses are all going to say nothing happened. Same reason most domestic violence cases don't go to court, it's hard to prove a woman was beaten by her husband, even with pictures of the bruises, if she gets on the stand and swears she walked into a door. (It happens. I know her, have SEEN the bruises, and still can't convince her he's going to kill her one of these days.)

Or even worse, how are we going to keep the innocent KIDS protected, while all of this is looked into.

Rip 400+ kids out of their homes because they THINK they might be abused.
Then subject them to FORCED medical exams...and with the girls we all know what type humiliation they will be going through and what they are examining them for. To a kid this experience can be as bad as rape.

Well, to start with, you take the kids out of the situation in order to protect them. Which they've done. And, yes, with the evidence they had, they had reason to believe they were in danger of being abused, if not today, then in the future, and it needed to be investigated. If removing those kids when they did prevented one girl from being "married off" and molested, they did the right thing.

And, quite honestly, I'm glad they've been seen by doctors. I'm female, I know exactly what they're going through, and, you know what? It's not the worst thing in the world, and if they've been active, they NEED to be seen. We'll never see their medical records, so who knows what conditions the doctors will find, other than evidence of molestation, that could have caused these kids future pain? These kids haven't even been immunized against ANYTHING. I'm not worried about the kids with chicken pox, I'm worried that a bad case of the measles will hit that compound, none of the kids will get anything other than a prayer, and half of them will die.

They can find volunteers for the kids, but they can't send the kids back to the home they know, and get enough people to check on them at home, while this investigation drags on??

I know, they want to question the kids without the influence of the parents. But how long are we talking for crimminy sakes!?!??!

Nope. They can't send them home and have people check on them. If they send these kids home, they'll vanish to Utah, or wherever else they have these compounds. How are they supposed to keep track of them? They have, for example, an "Elizabeth," age three, brown hair, brown eyes, parents unknown. They go next week to check up on her, and she's gone. Now what? In ten years, she's "married" to her great-uncle and pregnant.

How long? Hard to tell, since they've been conditioned not to answer the questions of people outside their faith, on pain of eternal damnation. And, the parents won't even claim their own children. If everyone cooperated, things would move a lot faster. Can't blame the system for foot-dragging when it's the folks being investigated.

They have had TWO WEEKS to find proof. Out of 400 kids they got nothing?
Out of the raid they have nothing?
They don't even have the original caller.
And they have returned NO kids?

Who are they supposed to return the kids TO? They can't identify the parents of the children. Even the KIDS won't name their mothers.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080417/ap_on_re_us/polygamist_retreat
QUOTE:
"But under repeated cross-examination, Crawford acknowledged the records contained no evidence of sexual abuse."

I can see they are going to be able to prove nothing in court. But that 400+ kids will be traumatized, some for life, for nothing.

What a can of worms.
:( [/*]

I believe the records to which you refer are spiritual marriage records, which indicate that teens were "married" off to older men. My parents' marriage certificate doesn't prove they ever had sex, but I presume they did, at least twice. (I have a brother.)

Give 'em time to get the investigations completed. I do hope you agree that the men who molested early teen-age girls should be punished. It's going to take time, especially with the lack of birth certificates and cooperation, for them to identify those men.

The kids are already traumatized. Their lives have been something none of us raised in the outside world can imagine, but the words of those who've escaped give a fair picture of what it was like, and it scares me that it can go on in this country.

It is a can of worms, and there are snakes down in the bottom of the can that the investigators need to find before they can finish with it.

Rainkiss

04-18-2008, 10:36 AM

Originally posted by tirante

How in the world can anyone connect Mr. Bush to the incident in San Angelo? What a stretch! [/*]

I believe that was a statement referring to his opinion of the government in general, not to this incident in specific.

John7878

04-18-2008, 11:31 AM

Originally posted by Rainkiss

I believe that was a statement referring to his opinion of the government in general, not to this incident in specific. [/*]

Thanks Rainkiss, that was correct.

This Brent Jeffs has a video interview that I think I would accept as definitive proof of abuse and what exactly is going on. (for those that are going to ask about the first women to come forward saying the same thing and why I wouldn't believe them as well....when someone is writing a book and making money off the deal.....well I tend to be cautious...thats all.)

The video at the top of this page:
http://news.search.yahoo.com/news/search?p=Key+witness+speaks+out&c=

Very articulate, composed and thoughtful assessment of the situation.

Hope they get him in court to testify.

:D

tisamystery

04-18-2008, 11:49 AM

John7878, thanks for your posting. Your a big man to be able to step back and realize you might have been overly zealous. I for one misread you. I see now that your heart is in the right place. Cudos to you.:)

Roux

04-18-2008, 12:07 PM

John, thank you so much for posting the link to the video of Brent Jeffs. God bless that young man and I hope that some of the people who are doubtful about the situation will change their minds because of his courage to step forward.

spirit07

04-18-2008, 12:16 PM

Originally posted by John7878

The video at the top of this page:
http://news.search.yahoo.com/news/search?p=Key+witness+speaks+out&c=

Very articulate, composed and thoughtful assessment of the situation.

Hope they get him in court to testify.

:D [/*]

John, thank you for the Brent Jeffs video interview. I hope the boys get the protection they need as well as the girls.

walton

04-18-2008, 12:59 PM

Originally posted by John7878

Well I haven't fallen in love with him LoL, but from his posts I can tell he has a head on his shoulders and posts a good 'opposing' view....or should I say one with a different/good slant to it. (Text isn't the best way to get an idea across.)

And going back on some of my responses to him, I see that in my eagerness to stop typing, I short changed him on some answers.

Oh Oh, I'm wanting to stop typing again.... :tongue:

Later-- [/*]

I can tell he has a head on his shoulders and posts a good 'opposing' view....or should I say one with a different/good slant to it. (Text isn't the best way to get an idea across.)[/*]

You are so on mark with this. :D I can't spell worth a hill a beans but my heart I think is in the right place.

But I gotta tell ya, I am not a him but a her. Yup, a woman. Been married to my hubby for over 30 years. And I've had this attitude for over 50.

Now before I get all mushy and stuff I just want to say thanks.

Thank you and I stand by my promise I made earlier.

:rose:

juliekan

04-18-2008, 01:09 PM

PHew! I thought you were a woman.:)

walton

04-18-2008, 01:13 PM

lotty

04-18-2008, 01:22 PM

Originally posted by walton

Thanks for sharing.

Very good video and very nicely done. I've always liked Quinones.
Very professional and very polite.

Didn't one of Brents brothers die from suicide because of all the crap Warren put him thru? [/*]

Yes it was Clayne Jeffs that commited suicide.
http://www.rickross.com/reference/polygamy/polygamy225.html
:mad:

John7878

04-18-2008, 03:07 PM

Originally posted by walton

But I gotta tell ya, I am not a him but a her. Yup, a woman. Been married to my hubby for over 30 years. And I've had this attitude for over 50.

Thank you and I stand by my promise I made earlier.

[/*]

Dang! Sorta stuck my foot in it again huh?

And I can't rem the promise, my most-of-the-tizmers has kicked in.

Originally posted by tisamystery
John7878, thanks for your posting. Your a big man to be able to step back and realize you might have been overly zealous. I for one misread you. I see now that your heart is in the right place. Cudos to you.:) [/*]

Well I been thinking this over. And I have to admit that I am getting my mouth in gear before my head, so I could get a good beating over this post.

BUT, in my keeping with watching out for the kids, I had been thinking about the separate foster homes they want to put them in.
I was thinking about instead they could approach a different community.
Just for instance, as an example, say the Amish. (I have NO idea about these different communities or which would be the best....that would have to be left to someone that knows what they are talking about.) Where they dress about the same as the kids.
The kids already have 'multiple' mother/father figures, so they would integrate with people that would be more familiar to them.
I'm thinking that they could take more kids into a community and try to keep them together and more stable. (?)

I think someone also posted that the Amish have the kids decide if they want to stay within the community or leave for the 'outside world' when they reach a certain age.

Still mulling over the problem of the parents once this is settled.

Like I posted before I think this will just be an interruption of this cycle of abuse, not a cure.
Trying to step back and see the big picture and how a change could be affected, but I'm thinking that people like Brent Jeffs might have a better idea on how to stop it.

Anyway, just throwing that out there as a thought.
I know there is going to be a different view, don't hesitate to give it to me!! LoL

:D

Rainkiss

04-18-2008, 03:18 PM

No beatings from this corner. That's not a bad idea, actually, putting the children together in one community... except for the fact that I can't think offhand of many communities that could handle such a large influx of children, many of whom will, I suspect, need special handling.

The best we can hope for on that front is that they'll attempt to place (identifiable) siblings together.

John7878

04-18-2008, 03:23 PM

Originally posted by Rainkiss
It is a can of worms, and there are snakes down in the bottom of the can that the investigators need to find before they can finish with it. [/*]

Wow that was a big reply!!

I took the grandkid and walked him all the way uptown. Stopped at the restaurant and had a drink, and the waitress's got to play with him. Then circled the block and visited with a woman who I had taken flying. (She got to play with him too.)

Also stopped by next door to her and visited another friend and then headed back home.

Long story short, I'm tired......Gram pa ain't used to this.....

So, time for our afternoon nap...

:seeya:

walton

04-18-2008, 03:51 PM

Maybe what they need more than to get lost in a community is to be part of a family.

They tried keeping certain groups together- The Indian reservations for example.

In order to be a part of Society we must learn how to live in our Society. jmo

Details

04-18-2008, 04:21 PM

Originally posted by John7878
Yes, to us it is a whole world of different.
But to a certain percentage of those kids, who don't have our experience, it will be.

Really? So if you went to your doc and he said he was going to do a COMPLETE examination on you. (Including the one we know these kids/girls are getting.)
And you told him that you didn't WANT to be examined, but they bring in as many people as they need to hold you down and do it anyway.

You'll deal with it and get over it.

Now think of a CHILD, especially with their background, going through this.

No biggie huh??? An unpleasant necessity of life. And one in which you don't have a rapist enjoying your pain, but a group of people trying to help you, trying to cause you the least pain possible. Yes, it's entirely different. Just like my daughter's vaccination is entirely different than an abusive parent slapping their child - both are a person causing pain - but one is done as gently as practical, the other is done with the intent of causing pain and with anger.

Yes, they'll have to deal and get over it. If you didn't - sorry (IIRC, you alluded to some such issue for yourself?) - but it's a necessity, and it's nothing like rape. As I said - some of these kids can tell you all about how different it is from rape. No I am NOT saying to ignore the call reporting abuse.

This story has been whipped into a frenzy by the allegations that girls as young as 14 or 15 have been FORCED to marry much older men.
This seems to be the main point everyone is saying anyway.
For my money, if ANYONE is forced to marry someone, no matter their age, it should be stopped.
But then 'arranged' marriages have been around a long time. And they're wrong - even if they're a tradition for some. Always, period.I am saying we ALL have certain rights under the law. They should be followed.

The judge should QUICKLY go over the proof, to see if there is even a case to be made.
Physical evidence, witnesses, etc. Pregnant children are proof. One pregnant child is proof of one abuser, but a whole compound with a ton of them is proof of a major problem. They had the informant, they had the caller, and they had the pregnant teenagers - that's all solid proof. If there is, then she should try to go from there. (And I know with 400+ kids its a big job.)

And ABOVE ALL, the kids should be protected from suspected abusers and over eager state officials that will traumatize them in efforts to make a case, until this thing is over.

I hope this makes my position clearer.

:confused: [/*]Not entirely. I just don't get how you miss pregnant 16 year olds - particularly ones where this is their 4th child! How is that not solid and absolute evidence for you? A whole compound filled with pregnant underage girls - should LE just turn a blind eye, pretend they don't see the pattern? Reports from those leaving the cult, from those in the cult (informer), from the trial of Jeffs, from testimony in that trial by Jeffs, the husband, the wife - do they turn a blind eye to all of it, just play total idiots? How much of a mountain of evidence is enough to you?

Details

04-18-2008, 04:34 PM

Originally posted by John7878
Thanks Rainkiss, that was correct.

This Brent Jeffs has a video interview that I think I would accept as definitive proof of abuse and what exactly is going on. (for those that are going to ask about the first women to come forward saying the same thing and why I wouldn't believe them as well....when someone is writing a book and making money off the deal.....well I tend to be cautious...thats all.)

The video at the top of this page:
http://news.search.yahoo.com/news/search?p=Key+witness+speaks+out&c=

Very articulate, composed and thoughtful assessment of the situation.

Hope they get him in court to testify.

:D [/*]People write books and give interviews to attempt to warn the world about the horrors being hidden by the FLDS, to try to get help for those still trapped there. To ignore all of them because they might make money seems so cynical that you could blind yourself to the truth. If a person sells a bible in a store, does that make the bible unreliable? Or a koran? Or whatever other book? Hey - how do you know Brent Jeffs didn't get paid for the interview?

There's a bunch of FLDS escapees who tell the same story - some in books, some in interviews. There's all the sworn testimony in the Jeffs trial. There's the words from the FLDS itself that conform to everything these people say. I know you may not know about all of this - but shouldn't you look before you are ready to discard someone's description of rape and abuse just because they might have gotten paid for their book?

I really don't want to give you a 'beating' - but this I feel strongly about. There's a mountain of evidence, reports for decades of abuse, the police have been overly lenient, not overly strict - up until now when they are finally doing a little. I don't know why so many ignore all of the stories. The Jeffs trial alone should have made it all clear - everything under oath, plenty of evidence.

John7878

04-18-2008, 06:06 PM

Originally posted by Details
They had the informant, they had the caller, and they had the pregnant teenagers - that's all solid proof. Not entirely. I just don't get how you miss pregnant 16 year olds - particularly ones where this is their 4th child! How is that not solid and absolute evidence for you? [/*]

I think they said the sheriff (or someone) had someone on the inside that they said they had been working with for 4 years.
But I never heard any evidence from them after that.
That seems strange to me.

As for the 16 yr olds, I have dealt with police, you'd be surprised how slippery "proof" can be. (But then thats another sad story.)

If a 18 yr old girl has a baby about 3 years old, then that COULD make her birth before the law was changed in Texas in 2005.

If a 16yr old is there with a kid, what do you do if they say she was originally from a different state, where that law didn't apply.
I don't think they keep close tabs on these people, so you need to have proof to nail it down in court.

Then on top of this theres no birth records, cops are saying they don't really have an idea how old they are.
Plus they have no idea who the parents really are.

This typing text really isn't the best way to get an idea across.

I AM on your side, I just think the news automatically convicted these people and sensationalized this to make news. (I don't like when they do that....just give me the facts, and I like to make up my own mind, without the hype.)

But with what I have seen now, I think they can actually prove what they claim in a court of law.

So hopefully the 'elders' will be joining their leader in prison.

BTW If you think letting someone go because of lack of proof is bad, try letting them go because of a technicality in the law.

TWO days ago in our paper a sexual predator was released by the court after the police didn't update their sheet to let the predator know that he had to report ALL his internet activities.
And this is after he tried to meet with a 'girl' (READ internet cop) and was arrested.....proof positive!

Don't know if I cleared up anything, but my fingers are tired anyway.

:)

John7878

04-18-2008, 06:20 PM

Originally posted by Details
If a person sells a bible in a store, does that make the bible unreliable?[/*]

It might be, if they wrote it!

Originally posted by Details

Hey - how do you know Brent Jeffs didn't get paid for the interview?[/*]

In it they said he came, on his own, from Salt Lake City.

Originally posted by Details

I really don't want to give you a 'beating' - but this I feel strongly about. I don't know why so many ignore all of the stories. The Jeffs trial alone should have made it all clear - everything under oath, plenty of evidence.

I know you may not know about all of this

[/*]

Boy you hit the nail on the head here, this post was what...3 days ago.
I didn't know nuttin about this case.

I'm not proud, if I don't know something, I'll admit to it.

I suppose that could account for a lot of the confusion.
I heard about the Jeff's trial, but never did google it to look at what was presented in the trial.

So do I get off on ignorance?!?!?!?

Newest Release?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080418/ap_on_re_us/polygamist_retreat

:confused:

Details

04-18-2008, 06:51 PM

Hey, we all get off on ignorance. There's always something more we don't know, someone who knows more than we do. Refusing to learn, and refusing to let your opinion change as more facts come in are the real problems.

I don't know if you've read the daily thread, or the news articles - they've got lots of good stuff about what LE did know and find out when they went to the compound. It did evolve - they sent some police there - met resistance with trying to talk to Sarah, apparently went in to try to find her, found situations that required more officers and CPS evaluation - and on and on it went. They didn't start out going in there to remove all the children. That happened after they saw the conditions.

Here's a nice story of one of the CPS people.
http://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/story?id=4674105&page=1

withay

04-18-2008, 10:03 PM

Just for the record, my wife of 38years(this coming May 1st) was JUST 17 when we married and I have a good friend that had a 'barely' 16yr old wife, they just celebrated their 40th anniversary. When I graduated high school there were 2 kids that had their kids there at graduation. And there were a few girls that dropped out of high school to get married.
Teen sex & marriage isn't a new issue by a long shot.

I am not saying that there wasn't any abuse, lets just be real careful that we treat these people as we would like to be treated.

. [/*][/QUOTE]

The big difference in all of the cases you have cited here is that the husbands and wives were close in age and married and/or had children because they chose to, not because they were forced to. In almost all of the states, the age of consent laws have what is called a "romeo and juliet" clause. This means that if the age difference between the two is three years or less (in most states) a crime has not been committed.

Freebird

04-18-2008, 10:23 PM

Originally posted by Rainkiss

Glad we've got some common ground to work from. I'm hoping you'll agree, as well, that said force doesn't have to be physical, and that convincing these girls that if they DON'T marry, they're going to go to hell is also a form of force.

This whole case is going to be a nightmare to prove. The victims and witnesses are all going to say nothing happened. Same reason most domestic violence cases don't go to court, it's hard to prove a woman was beaten by her husband, even with pictures of the bruises, if she gets on the stand and swears she walked into a door. (It happens. I know her, have SEEN the bruises, and still can't convince her he's going to kill her one of these days.)

Well, to start with, you take the kids out of the situation in order to protect them. Which they've done. And, yes, with the evidence they had, they had reason to believe they were in danger of being abused, if not today, then in the future, and it needed to be investigated. If removing those kids when they did prevented one girl from being "married off" and molested, they did the right thing.

And, quite honestly, I'm glad they've been seen by doctors. I'm female, I know exactly what they're going through, and, you know what? It's not the worst thing in the world, and if they've been active, they NEED to be seen. We'll never see their medical records, so who knows what conditions the doctors will find, other than evidence of molestation, that could have caused these kids future pain? These kids haven't even been immunized against ANYTHING. I'm not worried about the kids with chicken pox, I'm worried that a bad case of the measles will hit that compound, none of the kids will get anything other than a prayer, and half of them will die.

Nope. They can't send them home and have people check on them. If they send these kids home, they'll vanish to Utah, or wherever else they have these compounds. How are they supposed to keep track of them? They have, for example, an "Elizabeth," age three, brown hair, brown eyes, parents unknown. They go next week to check up on her, and she's gone. Now what? In ten years, she's "married" to her great-uncle and pregnant.

How long? Hard to tell, since they've been conditioned not to answer the questions of people outside their faith, on pain of eternal damnation. And, the parents won't even claim their own children. If everyone cooperated, things would move a lot faster. Can't blame the system for foot-dragging when it's the folks being investigated.

Who are they supposed to return the kids TO? They can't identify the parents of the children. Even the KIDS won't name their mothers.

I believe the records to which you refer are spiritual marriage records, which indicate that teens were "married" off to older men. My parents' marriage certificate doesn't prove they ever had sex, but I presume they did, at least twice. (I have a brother.)

Give 'em time to get the investigations completed. I do hope you agree that the men who molested early teen-age girls should be punished. It's going to take time, especially with the lack of birth certificates and cooperation, for them to identify those men.

The kids are already traumatized. Their lives have been something none of us raised in the outside world can imagine, but the words of those who've escaped give a fair picture of what it was like, and it scares me that it can go on in this country.

It is a can of worms, and there are snakes down in the bottom of the can that the investigators need to find before they can finish with it. [/*]

And they will now be further traumatized.I think they would be more cooperative and say who their mothers are(those that know)IF they knew they would go back to their mothers. Otherwise,there's no incentive for them to cooperate.

wandering

04-18-2008, 10:57 PM

Originally posted by lotty

Yes it was Clayne Jeffs that commited suicide.
http://www.rickross.com/reference/polygamy/polygamy225.html
:mad: [/*]A woman named Kathleen was on LKL and said there were beatings and reported suicides that weren't really suicides, among the boys. I wonder if this is one of them.

KatyDid

04-18-2008, 11:03 PM

Originally posted by withay
Just for the record, my wife of 38years(this coming May 1st) was JUST 17 when we married and I have a good friend that had a 'barely' 16yr old wife, they just celebrated their 40th anniversary. When I graduated high school there were 2 kids that had their kids there at graduation. And there were a few girls that dropped out of high school to get married.
Teen sex & marriage isn't a new issue by a long shot.

I am not saying that there wasn't any abuse, lets just be real careful that we treat these people as we would like to be treated.

. [/*]

The big difference in all of the cases you have cited here is that the husbands and wives were close in age and married and/or had children because they chose to, not because they were forced to. In almost all of the states, the age of consent laws have what is called a "romeo and juliet" clause. This means that if the age difference between the two is three years or less (in most states) a crime has not been committed. [/*][/QUOTE]

AND, it sounds like they speak of monogamy. The issue is not just just the crim of having sex with underage children , it also includes polygamy, which is a crime in these United States.

evalles

04-19-2008, 01:56 AM

Originally posted by Details
An unpleasant necessity of life. And one in which you don't have a rapist enjoying your pain, but a group of people trying to help you, trying to cause you the least pain possible. Yes, it's entirely different. Just like my daughter's vaccination is entirely different than an abusive parent slapping their child - both are a person causing pain - but one is done as gently as practical, the other is done with the intent of causing pain and with anger.

Yes, they'll have to deal and get over it. If you didn't - sorry (IIRC, you alluded to some such issue for yourself?) - but it's a necessity, and it's nothing like rape. As I said - some of these kids can tell you all about how different it is from rape. And they're wrong - even if they're a tradition for some. Always, period.Pregnant children are proof. One pregnant child is proof of one abuser, but a whole compound with a ton of them is proof of a major problem. They had the informant, they had the caller, and they had the pregnant teenagers - that's all solid proof. Not entirely. I just don't get how you miss pregnant 16 year olds - particularly ones where this is their 4th child! How is that not solid and absolute evidence for you? A whole compound filled with pregnant underage girls - should LE just turn a blind eye, pretend they don't see the pattern? Reports from those leaving the cult, from those in the cult (informer), from the trial of Jeffs, from testimony in that trial by Jeffs, the husband, the wife - do they turn a blind eye to all of it, just play total idiots? How much of a mountain of evidence is enough to you? [/*]

Filled w/ pregnant 16 year olds ? There were 5! You can find that many in your local Wal Mart. OMG, next thing you know they'll be cartin out all the children of the Wal-Mart shoppers because there's some pregnant teenagers there. That's it, I'm goin to Target.

withay

04-19-2008, 05:15 AM

Originally posted by evalles

Filled w/ pregnant 16 year olds ? There were 5! You can find that many in your local Wal Mart. OMG, next thing you know they'll be cartin out all the children of the Wal-Mart shoppers because there's some pregnant teenagers there. That's it, I'm goin to Target. [/*]

According to birth records taken from the ranch there have been 20 births to girls who were underaged at the time of birth or conception, some as young as 13. This was according to testimony given today in court (4/18/2008). I do not believe this includes any girls who are currently pregnant.

johnielee333

04-19-2008, 06:53 AM

Originally posted by LisaM22

I do agree, unless they have proof of abuse they are in the wrong, they need to return the children if they have no signs of abuse - just because these Christians believe different then some (which I do not agree with them or their views) I think they should not suffer because of their beliefs if there is no signs of any child abuse - jmho [/*]

hey LisaM22, what if there's evidence of welfare fraud,
false imprisonment, kidnapping & bigamy ? these are all crime's that are against the law & they can be charged with. they are breaking the law by doing these things. there is evidence that prove these things. believe me when i say they will & do have proof of child rape & other abuse. you will see.

lili

04-19-2008, 08:48 AM

Originally posted by lotty
IMO/JMO I sincerely wish this issue is as simple as some would like to make it out to be.

This group has changed drastically from their beginnings with Barlow and Musser.

Just please keep in mind the children, their welfare and their environment are the priority.

There is an immense amount of information on the web where the FLDS is concerned. It is a complicated issue in many ways...especially psychologically.

Everyone should be looking out for the rights and future rights of these children. IMO/JMO [/*]

Their parents are supposed to do that. So who were they looking out for, lotty?

JMO

lili

04-19-2008, 09:11 AM

Originally posted by withay

According to birth records taken from the ranch there have been 20 births to girls who were underaged at the time of birth or conception, some as young as 13. This was according to testimony given today in court (4/18/2008). I do not believe this includes any girls who are currently pregnant. [/*]

So... that somehow makes it "better" - that none are pregnant at this point in time?

This is one of the most disgusting and abusive things I've had the unfortune to read or hear on the news, IMO. If I had a girl, or a boy, for that matter, you can bet your bottom dollar where they WON'T be.

JMO

lili

04-19-2008, 09:18 AM

John7878

04-19-2008, 10:14 AM

Originally posted by KatyDid
This means that if the age difference between the two is three years or less (in most states) a crime has not been committed. [/*]

What would you do in a 'reversed' forced marriage??
This is where the girl WANTS to get married, but the parents are going through the roof!

Ok lets say your (or my) 16yr old daughter comes home with her 30 yr old boyfriend and tells you they are in love and want to get married.

You have the option to call police or throw him out of your house, probably without opening the door first.

Ok now lets say we have the same situation, but she says she's pregnant.
They say they are in love and want to get married.

By law, you still have the option to send this father of your future grandchild to prison.
No doubt, the law has been broken.

But if your in this situation, what do you do?

Originally posted by KatyDid

AND, it sounds like they speak of monogamy. The issue is not just just the crim of having sex with underage children , it also includes polygamy, which is a crime in these United States. [/*]

The reality of this is there is NO way they are going to be able to enforce this law, with consenting adults. (please don't make this out that I am defending abuse in this case)

And truth be told, I'm thinking we wouldn't have this big a mess in this case, if it was made legal.

If it was made legal then there would be public records of who married whom and at what age.
I think authorities would be able to control it more and have a better chance to make sure women are of age and its not forced.

I know people don't like it, but the reality is that when booze was outlawed people still got it.

Same with drugs, against the law, but you could probably go out right now and buy some off the street.

John7878

04-19-2008, 10:23 AM

Originally posted by lili

So that makes it OK, because it's in the recent past, but not quite right now?

JMO [/*]

Not "OK", but maybe legal.

Age of consent was changed just 3 years ago in Texas.

So if you had a 18yr old with a 3 yr old kid it was legal then.

Remember don't shoot the messenger.

walton

04-19-2008, 11:33 AM

Originally posted by John7878

The reality of this is there is NO way they are going to be able to enforce this law, with consenting adults. (please don't make this out that I am defending abuse in this case)

And truth be told, I'm thinking we wouldn't have this big a mess in this case, if it was made legal.

If it was made legal then there would be public records of who married whom and at what age.
I think authorities would be able to control it more and have a better chance to make sure women are of age and its not forced.

I know people don't like it, but the reality is that when booze was outlawed people still got it.

Same with drugs, against the law, but you could probably go out right now and buy some off the street. [/*]

In making it legal would there be a limit on how many wives each man could have? how many husbands each woman should have? Would same sex marriages also be included?

How about signing up for Welfare programs we have the :

Olsons who are married with 2 children- both parents work.

Andersons who are married with one child who is handicapped and needs full time caregiver- Dad works two jobs and they still struggle for things needed for child. Welfare helps out with some but not enough to cover all needs.

Smiths whose household is one man and 4 wives with let us just say 2 kids each. Hubby works full time but doesn't make enough to feed everyone and their health care- Signs up for welfare and is eligible for all programs and possibly a cell phone thrown in just because.

Well here at the end of the line is Grandma- Grandpa died a few years back and Grandma is sitting in the dark at nights with the furnace turned low. She walks to the store cuz she can't afford the upkeep for a car. She buys the closeout grocery items and eats beans for a week. She has tried to get food stamps but there isn't enough money in the system. (No I am not that grandma but I've seen these grandmas more than I care to count)

This is just one part of the mess of making Polygamy legal.

We could talk about health care and insurance but my blood pressure is telling me to stop.

I think before they ever allow Polygamy to be legal they better darn well clean up this mess. It isn't like it hasn't been practiced for the last 150 years or so. Let us try to go at least 20 years with out Polygamy. We could let these kids grow up first and then see where we are. Arizona and Utah have to wait longer because they have more to clean up.

jmo

walton

04-19-2008, 01:36 PM

The "beast" has been there for a long time.

One of the reasons that the FLDS has so much money is that they use the kids to work construction and out in the fields.

In some of the Pilots photos you can see young mothers with their children in strollers as they work in the field.

You can see a young boy on equipment high in the sky working on a building. Not real sure but I think they said the boy looked to be aged 8-10.

No toys, no pets. Just equipment.

John7878

04-19-2008, 08:18 PM

Originally posted by walton

This is just one part of the mess of making Polygamy legal.

Let us try to go at least 20 years with out Polygamy.
jmo [/*]

The way the system is setup now, all these 'wives' are listed as single mothers, thats how they are using the system.

But if they had a legal husband, we could make sure they wouldn't be able to do that anymore.

Sure lets wipe out polygamy, we can get our magic wand and get rid of drugs, illegal guns, and every other thing we have been fighting since the dawn of time while we're at it.

Be nice if it was that easy.

:biggrin:

Freebird

04-19-2008, 09:36 PM

Originally posted by walton
The "beast" has been there for a long time.

One of the reasons that the FLDS has so much money is that they use the kids to work construction and out in the fields.

In some of the Pilots photos you can see young mothers with their children in strollers as they work in the field.

You can see a young boy on equipment high in the sky working on a building. Not real sure but I think they said the boy looked to be aged 8-10.

No toys, no pets. Just equipment. [/*]

Another thing you don't see in these cults are overweight and diabetic kids.I wonder why.

spydernweb2006

04-19-2008, 11:17 PM

Originally posted by John7878

The way the system is setup now, all these 'wives' are listed as single mothers, thats how they are using the system.

But if they had a legal husband, we could make sure they wouldn't be able to do that anymore.

Sure lets wipe out polygamy, we can get our magic wand and get rid of drugs, illegal guns, and every other thing we have been fighting since the dawn of time while we're at it.

Be nice if it was that easy.

:biggrin: [/*]

What we NEED to do is make it mandatory to name the Father of these food stamp kids and garnish his wages for the amount of stamps if he is not paying child support. These so called Father's in the FDLS get by because they DO NOT pay support for the "legally illegitimate" kids, but reap the welfare and food stamp benefits they bring in.

They should make it Mandatory that the "Mother" name ALL persons in the household and their income to get even one penny of welfare and assistance. The TOTAL income including the Father's should be taken into account.

These FDLS people are lieing to the welfare and food stamp offices to get these services and should be held liable for it. They are claimimming a woman and her kids are a separate household and therefore in poverty and due services that IF investigated they would not be eligible for.

This burns my tushie off. Years ago when the Docs felt my Hubby had cancer, the awesome food stamp office offered us, a family of 4 a whopping $15.00 bucks a month assistance eventhough he couldnt work until after the needed surgery. I have NP with anyone needing help, but it boils my blood to see people willfully milking the system unlawfully as the FDLS has and will continue to do if allowed.

I hope, wish and PRAY the Govt opens the books and investigates all the FDLS for food stamp and welfare fraud!

JMHO

Hugs,

Spyder

Carol25

04-19-2008, 11:29 PM

Originally posted by spydernweb2006

What we NEED to do is make it mandatory to name the Father of these food stamp kids and garnish his wages for the amount of stamps if he is not paying child support. These so called Father's in the FDLS get by because they DO NOT pay support for the "legally illegitimate" kids, but reap the welfare and food stamp benefits they bring in.

They should make it Mandatory that the "Mother" name ALL persons in the household and their income to get even one penny of welfare and assistance. The TOTAL income including the Father's should be taken into account.

These FDLS people are lieing to the welfare and food stamp offices to get these services and should be held liable for it. They are claimimming a woman and her kids are a separate household and therefore in poverty and due services that IF investigated they would not be eligible for.

This burns my tushie off. Years ago when the Docs felt my Hubby had cancer, the awesome food stamp office offered us, a family of 4 a whopping $15.00 bucks a month assistance eventhough he couldnt work until after the needed surgery. I have NP with anyone needing help, but it boils my blood to see people willfully milking the system unlawfully as the FDLS has and will continue to do if allowed.

I hope, wish and PRAY the Govt opens the books and investigates all the FDLS for food stamp and welfare fraud!

JMHO

Hugs,

Spyder [/*]
What was the last estimate the FLDS had? $100 million?:flamemad: What did they get in gov't contracts alone?

http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/04/17/polygamy.pentagon/?iref=mpstoryview

spirit07

04-20-2008, 12:45 AM

Originally posted by spydernweb2006

What we NEED to do is make it mandatory to name the Father of these food stamp kids and garnish his wages for the amount of stamps if he is not paying child support. These so called Father's in the FDLS get by because they DO NOT pay support for the "legally illegitimate" kids, but reap the welfare and food stamp benefits they bring in.

They should make it Mandatory that the "Mother" name ALL persons in the household and their income to get even one penny of welfare and assistance. The TOTAL income including the Father's should be taken into account.[/*]

Spyder, I agree. In many states (most?all?) it is mandatory to tell who the father is and the state goes after them if they are not paying support. I thought that typically at least one home visit was made (not sure though if one is just receiving food stamps)? I wonder how it works in Texas and if the mothers claimed the fathers deserted or something? If they had to claim a father, then it will be interesting to see what those women claimed at the welfare office. Basically, I hope there is a way they can fine the 'church' or 'community'. You can't have it both ways.

evalles

04-20-2008, 01:02 AM

Originally posted by spydernweb2006

What we NEED to do is make it mandatory to name the Father of these food stamp kids and garnish his wages for the amount of stamps if he is not paying child support. These so called Father's in the FDLS get by because they DO NOT pay support for the "legally illegitimate" kids, but reap the welfare and food stamp benefits they bring in.

They should make it Mandatory that the "Mother" name ALL persons in the household and their income to get even one penny of welfare and assistance. The TOTAL income including the Father's should be taken into account.

These FDLS people are lieing to the welfare and food stamp offices to get these services and should be held liable for it. They are claimimming a woman and her kids are a separate household and therefore in poverty and due services that IF investigated they would not be eligible for.

This burns my tushie off. Years ago when the Docs felt my Hubby had cancer, the awesome food stamp office offered us, a family of 4 a whopping $15.00 bucks a month assistance eventhough he couldnt work until after the needed surgery. I have NP with anyone needing help, but it boils my blood to see people willfully milking the system unlawfully as the FDLS has and will continue to do if allowed.

I hope, wish and PRAY the Govt opens the books and investigates all the FDLS for food stamp and welfare fraud!

JMHO

Hugs,

Spyder [/*]

Can you please post the link to see these documents ?

evalles

04-20-2008, 01:05 AM

Originally posted by John7878

Not "OK", but maybe legal.

Age of consent was changed just 3 years ago in Texas.

So if you had a 18yr old with a 3 yr old kid it was legal then.

Remember don't shoot the messenger. [/*]

Wow, I didn't realise that TX was so screwed up. Are you saying that 3 years ago it was legal for 15 year olds to get married in Texas ?

Details

04-20-2008, 01:25 AM

Originally posted by Freebird
Another thing you don't see in these cults are overweight and diabetic kids.I wonder why. [/*]Because they barely get enough food to live? Because the wife and children have no excess money spent on them beyond the necessity? Because they're worked to the bone in the cult's fields and businesses? Because they don't get cited enough for child labor?

evalles

04-20-2008, 01:48 AM

Originally posted by Details
Because they barely get enough food to live? Because the wife and children have no excess money spent on them beyond the necessity? Because they're worked to the bone in the cult's fields and businesses? Because they don't get cited enough for child labor? [/*]

The kids looked healthy to me when they were stolen. The mother's don't look so good, they're probably not sleeping well due to the separation anxiety.

Under cross-examination, state child-welfare investigator Angie Voss conceded there have been no allegations of abuse against babies, prepubescent girls or any boys.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080418/ap_on_re_us/polygamist_retreat

Carol25

04-20-2008, 02:50 AM

Originally posted by evalles

The kids looked healthy to me when they were stolen. The mother's don't look so good, they're probably not sleeping well due to the separation anxiety.

Under cross-examination, state child-welfare investigator Angie Voss conceded there have been no allegations of abuse against babies, prepubescent girls or any boys.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080418/ap_on_re_us/polygamist_retreat [/*]
Evalles, the children were taken because it was in their best interest to do so. If I had been one of those children and later learned about the entire FLDS group, I would be so appreciative!

By looking at the women, you can see and hear what their life has given them. They are mere robots. They don't appear that way after a couple of days, it takes a lifetime of abuse annd indoctrination. You can see the men appear to be well fed.

Details

04-20-2008, 03:07 AM

Originally posted by evalles
The kids looked healthy to me when they were stolen. The mother's don't look so good, they're probably not sleeping well due to the separation anxiety.

Under cross-examination, state child-welfare investigator Angie Voss conceded there have been no allegations of abuse against babies, prepubescent girls or any boys.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080418/ap_on_re_us/polygamist_retreat [/*]Not a spare ounce. They're fed enough - but only that.

No allegations because they're scared - those who have escaped - like Darren Jeffs - paint quite the different picture. Waterboarding infants - you learn early to obey and keep your mouth shut in that type of environment.

Not that this is unusal. Abused children from even normal abusive households have often been trained, taught, and beaten until they know they are never to tell the truth of what happened. They come in to school covered in bruises, and insist they fell down the stairs.

Freebird

04-20-2008, 03:08 AM

Freebird

04-20-2008, 03:15 AM

evalles

04-20-2008, 03:19 AM

Originally posted by Carol25

Evalles, the children were taken because it was in their best interest to do so. If I had been one of those children and later learned about the entire FLDS group, I would be so appreciative!

By looking at the women, you can see and hear what their life has given them. They are mere robots. They don't appear that way after a couple of days, it takes a lifetime of abuse annd indoctrination. You can see the men appear to be well fed. [/*]

They're supposed to be at risk. Some could argue that if your neighbor was nicer or richer that it might be better for your child to be with her.

Details

04-20-2008, 03:35 AM

Originally posted by evalles
They're supposed to be at risk. Some could argue that if your neighbor was nicer or richer that it might be better for your child to be with her. [/*]I don't know if anyone can be so blinded by bias to really think that - but this is an argument about a child being at an enourmous, near certainty risk of abuse - not about a nicer life or a richer life, but simply one with less risk of abuse.

So - this isn't about a richer family taking a poorer family's children. It's about an abusive family losing their children. I don't see any way anyone can fail to see that distinction. Without abuse, these children would be still at home, no matter how weird we think their way of life is. Just like the Amish children - they're weird, their children don't get some things most Americans do - and no one suggests they need to lose their children over that.

It's the ABUSE. Nothing else.

evalles

04-20-2008, 04:04 AM

Originally posted by Details
I don't know if anyone can be so blinded by bias to really think that - but this is an argument about a child being at an enourmous, near certainty risk of abuse - not about a nicer life or a richer life, but simply one with less risk of abuse.

So - this isn't about a richer family taking a poorer family's children. It's about an abusive family losing their children. I don't see any way anyone can fail to see that distinction. Without abuse, these children would be still at home, no matter how weird we think their way of life is. Just like the Amish children - they're weird, their children don't get some things most Americans do - and no one suggests they need to lose their children over that.

It's the ABUSE. Nothing else. [/*]

What about all those Catholics that continue to take their children to mass, even though they know that Catholic priests rape little boys.
They're obviously putting their kids at risk, CPS should check into it.

evalles

04-20-2008, 04:06 AM

Originally posted by Details
I don't know if anyone can be so blinded by bias to really think that - but this is an argument about a child being at an enourmous, near certainty risk of abuse - not about a nicer life or a richer life, but simply one with less risk of abuse.

So - this isn't about a richer family taking a poorer family's children. It's about an abusive family losing their children. I don't see any way anyone can fail to see that distinction. Without abuse, these children would be still at home, no matter how weird we think their way of life is. Just like the Amish children - they're weird, their children don't get some things most Americans do - and no one suggests they need to lose their children over that.

It's the ABUSE. Nothing else. [/*]

Under cross-examination, state child-welfare investigator Angie Voss conceded there have been no allegations of abuse against babies, prepubescent girls or any boys.

That doesn't sound like an enormous, near certainty of abuse.

Details

04-20-2008, 04:10 AM

All the questions you ask have been answered, by me and others, a dozen times over. If you didn't listen then, I don't see a need to repeat myself.

evalles

04-20-2008, 04:18 AM

Originally posted by Details
All the questions you ask have been answered, by me and others, a dozen times over. If you didn't listen then, I don't see a need to repeat myself. [/*]

But you're so good at it.

According to you--
The 16 year old should get to keep her children because the no good Dad's are the abusers.
However, all the other, older mothers should lose their children, and it doesn't matter if the no good dad's are the abusers.

This doesn't make any sense, regardless of how many times I listen to it.

I'm not the one who's biased.

juliekan

04-20-2008, 04:21 AM

I've been MIA for a bit (teenagers :punch: ), just heard on LKL the sect moms (3) say they have never seen an underage girl get married? Asked if polygamy was illegal, did they break the states' laws, said they didn't know what the laws were?Complaints about laws passed 3 months ago...what were those? I live here...no idea.

evalles

04-20-2008, 04:30 AM

Originally posted by Freebird

I'm very concerned over the possibility that the kids who were not abused on the ranch will be in foster care.If that were to happen,it will be just as a great tragedy as what happened on the ranch and CPS will be ultimately responsible. [/*]

I can't imagine what they're going through. Since kids are so much more likely to be abused in foster care, I don't hold out much hope for these kids if they aren't returned to their mothers.
Other kids can be so cruel, I don't see how these nice, well- mannered kids are going to adapt to our schools. I'm afraid they'll be tortured. This is going to lead to depression and then maybe suicide. I'm having a hard time seeing that this is in their best interests.
As you know, CPS will be responsible but they will never accept responsibility. When these kids grow in to mal- adjusted adults, CPS will still blame it on the parents.

Details

04-20-2008, 04:37 AM

The parents are to blame. Not CPS. For teaching little children that it's OK for old men to have sex with them, for turning them over to those old men when they are far underage, for teaching little boys to become the pedophiles of the future, for discarding most of those little boys.

Compared to their fate in the cult - they are far less likely to be abused in foster care. It's sad how the multitude and majority of good foster parents, who work so hard for so little money are so much maligned as being worse than living with a pedophilic cult.

Details

04-20-2008, 04:43 AM

Originally posted by juliekan
I've been MIA for a bit (teenagers :punch: ), just heard on LKL the sect moms (3) say they have never seen an underage girl get married? Asked if polygamy was illegal, did they break the states' laws, said they didn't know what the laws were?Complaints about laws passed 3 months ago...what were those? I live here...no idea. [/*]They may be lying for the faith - a common thing taught to FLDS, according to other FLDS. Or they may be relying on a technicality - maybe they aren't in the temple to witness the ceremony.

I wouldn't be surprised a bit if they don't know what the laws were - not in the cult's best interests for them to know. Some don't know who the President is, or think it's Warren Jeffs.

evalles

04-20-2008, 04:46 AM

Originally posted by Details
The parents are to blame. Not CPS. For teaching little children that it's OK for old men to have sex with them, for turning them over to those old men when they are far underage, for teaching little boys to become the pedophiles of the future, for discarding most of those little boys. [/*]

The post said , if the children that ARE NOT abused are abused after CPS placed them in foster care, CPS will be to blame.

It's ridiculous to assume that all 400 children were abused.

If CPS removed your child who WAS NOT abused and placed them in an abusive home, would it be your fault ?
__________________________________________________ __There are none so blind as those that believe everything they read in the media..

evalles

04-20-2008, 04:51 AM

Originally posted by juliekan
I've been MIA for a bit (teenagers :punch: ), just heard on LKL the sect moms (3) say they have never seen an underage girl get married? Asked if polygamy was illegal, did they break the states' laws, said they didn't know what the laws were?Complaints about laws passed 3 months ago...what were those? I live here...no idea. [/*]

Per the state's web-site. 16 year olds can marry with parental consent. What I've gathered from other posts is that the age was 15 not too long ago.
On a blog about this subject, someone posted:
it is legal to marry a 13 year old IN New Hampshire [2]
> and then have sex with that spouse IN Texas [2].

Who came up w/ these laws. a bunch of pedophiles ?

Details

04-20-2008, 04:52 AM

If I put my child in a situation where in a year, or two years, they will be abused, spend those years teaching her that abuse is OK and right - yep, it's my fault. These children are going from a place where abuse lies in nearly all their future (and we're not even talking about what cult members describe as a cult childhood that is very abusive - waterboarding infants, or the violations of child labor laws here), to a place where it does not lie in most of their futures.

Not that I am willing to blind myself willingly to what the children endure now, nor to what the shrink found, nor to what other FLDS children say today about their childhoods.

Details

04-20-2008, 04:54 AM

Originally posted by evalles

Per the state's web-site. 16 year olds can marry with parental consent. What I've gathered from other posts is that the age was 15 not too long ago.
On a blog about this subject, someone posted:
it is legal to marry a 13 year old IN New Hampshire [2]
> and then have sex with that spouse IN Texas [2].

Who came up w/ these laws. a bunch of pedophiles ? [/*]A bunch of idiots who were convinced that CPS should not meddle in the choices of parents. That we should just butt out and let them do whatever, and if they said it was OK, who were we to judge.

walton

04-20-2008, 04:55 AM

Originally posted by evalles

The post said , if the children that ARE NOT abused are abused after CPS placed them in foster care, CPS will be to blame.

It's ridiculous to assume that all 400 children were abused.

If CPS removed your child who WAS NOT abused and placed them in an abusive home, would it be your fault ?
__________________________________________________ __There are none so blind as those that believe everything they read in the media.. [/*]

evalles do have issues with CPS? Did something happen to you that makes you feel this way?

Have you always had a trust issue?
Do you have issues with the government?

Let me help. I'll start a thread for you. This message board has some of the finest advice givers that I've ever seen.

Love Walton

evalles

04-20-2008, 04:59 AM

Originally posted by Details
The parents are to blame. Not CPS. For teaching little children that it's OK for old men to have sex with them, for turning them over to those old men when they are far underage, for teaching little boys to become the pedophiles of the future, for discarding most of those little boys.

Compared to their fate in the cult - they are far less likely to be abused in foster care. It's sad how the multitude and majority of good foster parents, who work so hard for so little money are so much maligned as being worse than living with a pedophilic cult. [/*]

I read about one of the FLDS girl's that left the ranch ending up a cocaine addict.

I wish you could back up 1/2 of what you're saying w/ facts instead of heresay. I know, I know, the 16 year old mother is all the proof you need.
The only thing that proves is that someone had sex with a minor. Do you know the name or age of the baby's daddy ?

Details

04-20-2008, 05:09 AM

Originally posted by evalles
I read about one of the FLDS girl's that left the ranch ending up a cocaine addict.

I wish you could back up 1/2 of what you're saying w/ facts instead of heresay. I know, I know, the 16 year old mother is all the proof you need.
The only thing that proves is that someone had sex with a minor. Do you know the name or age of the baby's daddy ? [/*]One FLDS escapee with problems (imagine that, after being raised the way she was!) is all the proof you need to ignore the words of many other FLDS escapees?

I've posted the facts - time and time again - and not just the one 16 year old. If you are ever interested, you'll go out and find them. The many times I've posted them, and you saying you don't know anything other than that one, shows that my posting it again will not do a thing for you.

evalles

04-20-2008, 05:20 AM

Originally posted by Details
One FLDS escapee with problems (imagine that, after being raised the way she was!) is all the proof you need to ignore the words of many other FLDS escapees?

I've posted the facts - time and time again - and not just the one 16 year old. If you are ever interested, you'll go out and find them. The many times I've posted them, and you saying you don't know anything other than that one, shows that my posting it again will not do a thing for you. [/*]

You've posted no facts.

Do you work for Texas ? Is this some kind of smear campaign against the parents ?

juliekan

04-20-2008, 05:24 AM

Originally posted by evalles

You've posted no facts.

Do you work for Texas ? Is this some kind of smear campaign against the parents ? [/*]
EV, check your pm...please:)

evalles

04-20-2008, 05:44 AM

Originally posted by juliekan

EV, check your pm...please:) [/*]

I just finished my reply. YOu should have it by now.

Thanks.

Details

04-20-2008, 06:29 AM

Originally posted by evalles
You've posted no facts.

Do you work for Texas ? Is this some kind of smear campaign against the parents ? [/*]Just because you haven't read them doesn't mean I haven't posted facts. I've posted plenty. Funny hearing you talk of a smear campaign after you've assigned me not only a profession but a mindset in the post right above.

John7878

04-20-2008, 11:31 AM

Originally posted by Details
People write books and give interviews to attempt to warn the world about the horrors being hidden by the FLDS, to try to get help for those still trapped there. To ignore all of them because they might make money seems so cynical that you could blind yourself to the truth. [/*]

Hi Details!

I also want to point out that Carolyn Jessop is not just writing books about this.

She is also wrangling her way to controlling the $110 million dollar trust fund for this place.

Cut&Paste:
Also, a PRlVATE BENEFICIARY
PETITIONERS' NOTICE OF PROPOSED SUBSTITUTE TRUSTEES AND REQUEST FOR PARTIAL
REFORMATION OF TRUST was filed in the matter on June 29, 2005, proposing the following individuals as
trustees: Lee Van Dam; Richard L. Holm; Carolyn Jessop; Winston Blackmore; Don Timpson; Merrill 1.Harker;
George R. Hammon; Rayo S. Johnson; Roger Williams; and Margaret Cooke.

http://thehopeorg.org/AZ_UEP_notice.pdf

These millions of dollars seem to have attracted a lot of people.

Glad I was able to cut & past most of this, I get tired of typing fast.

:)

John7878

04-20-2008, 12:31 PM

Originally posted by evalles

Wow, I didn't realise that TX was so screwed up. Are you saying that 3 years ago it was legal for 15 year olds to get married in Texas ? [/*]

No 14 yr olds....and yes 3 years ago.

And the law was changed specifically because these people moved there.

Even the guy who sponsored the bill admits to it.

BTW the court took over the $110 million dollar trust in 2005 also.

Search:
UNITED EFFORT PLAN TRUST

juliekan

04-20-2008, 01:10 PM

Carol25

04-20-2008, 01:34 PM

walton

04-20-2008, 01:35 PM

Originally posted by John7878

No 14 yr olds....and yes 3 years ago.

And the law was changed specifically because these people moved there.

Even the guy who sponsored the bill admits to it.

BTW the court took over the $110 million dollar trust in 2005 also.

Search:
UNITED EFFORT PLAN TRUST [/*]

Bruce Wissan is watching over that trust. And from everything that I've seen he is doing a great job.

Not only did Warren find ways to make monies off the government he made sure his followers didn't have a pot to

He would tell different ones to leave and what could they do? Call the authorities? The Mayor? The LE in that area? they were Warrenites themselves.

jmo

I am no writer but I sure do like to read. She and so many others have told their story time and time again.

And no one would listen.

Roux

04-20-2008, 02:00 PM

Originally posted by evalles

But you're so good at it.

According to you--
The 16 year old should get to keep her children because the no good Dad's are the abusers.
However, all the other, older mothers should lose their children, and it doesn't matter if the no good dad's are the abusers.

This doesn't make any sense, regardless of how many times I listen to it.

I'm not the one who's biased. [/*]
With all due respect I think you are the one who's biased. After reading numerous of your posts, I conclude that because of your personal experience you project all blame on CPS and none on the cult.

Hey Paula

04-20-2008, 03:04 PM

Originally posted by essiemadge
carolyn jessop will make an excellent trustee. she is a woman who lived there for years, she knows the people and the lifestyle. she is educated and articulate. she was and is a devoted mother, stayed in the lifestyle until, she was able to get her children out with her.
what is your problem with her???? that she is a woman. that she is not a politician???? [/*]

ITA!

I can't think of anyone better qualified than someone who has walked in the shoes of those who were abused and had the courage, fortitude and perseverance to end the cycle of abuse in her own personal life. She is a role model for those striving for get out from under a male dominated cult, which operates under the guise of religion, but uses women and children for its own pleasure and comfort.

IMO

Details

04-20-2008, 03:10 PM

Originally posted by evalles
You did that yourself, with your post.
And here it is.

Originally posted by Details
A bunch of idiots who were convinced that CPS should not meddle in the choices of parents. That we should just butt out and let them do whatever, and if they said it was OK, who were we to judge.

Who is the "we" you were referring to ?

Funny that you're trying to deny your affiliation with this profession you find so noble [/*]"We" is society. The people who build CPS because we believe children need to be protected - even from their own parents when parents are abusive. That's "we". I'd have no shame to admit it if I were in CPS - and many good stories are out there to prove their worth. I'm sure I could give quite a bit more in the line of details were I in CPS.

And this topic is about the children, CPS - not about me.

tisamystery

04-20-2008, 03:11 PM

Originally posted by juliekan

Kansas Setting Minimum Marriage Age to 15
Kansas has had no minimum age for marriage as long as there was parental or court approval
DATED MAY 5, 2006
www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12644597/

Let's see what Kansas has been doing... [/*]

Looks like Kansas may be a great spot for their next compound.

Details

04-20-2008, 03:15 PM

Originally posted by John7878
Hi Details!

I also want to point out that Carolyn Jessop is not just writing books about this.

She is also wrangling her way to controlling the $110 million dollar trust fund for this place.

Cut&Paste:
Also, a PRlVATE BENEFICIARY
PETITIONERS' NOTICE OF PROPOSED SUBSTITUTE TRUSTEES AND REQUEST FOR PARTIAL
REFORMATION OF TRUST was filed in the matter on June 29, 2005, proposing the following individuals as
trustees: Lee Van Dam; Richard L. Holm; Carolyn Jessop; Winston Blackmore; Don Timpson; Merrill 1.Harker;
George R. Hammon; Rayo S. Johnson; Roger Williams; and Margaret Cooke.

http://thehopeorg.org/AZ_UEP_notice.pdf

These millions of dollars seem to have attracted a lot of people.

Glad I was able to cut & past most of this, I get tired of typing fast.

:) [/*]Did you go to the home page, read what they are and why they are doing this? Just remove the PDF, and look at "thehopeorg.org". This is one more way to try to stop the cult from continuing to steal children from their mothers, force children into marriages. Their goal is to support FLDS members with that money. It's entirely appropriate and right for her to try to get onto that board.

She could have had a far more peaceful life had she been willing to be quiet and stop fighting. Or just written her book and taken the profits. Instead she continues to fight. That costs time, money, everything. And being on the trust fund board doesn't give her a partial share of the money. It gives her more responsibility, more work, overseeing the money with many other trustees, so it goes to the right people.

Details

04-20-2008, 03:17 PM

Originally posted by jenny_92808
I totally agree with you. These mothers also choose to allow their sons to be thrown out when they reach a certain age. They barely educate the boys and then just drop them off in the desert or wherever and tell them they are going to hell and never to return. Just so they can maintain the male to female ratio they want.

What they are doing is evil in my opinion. Raping young girls, brain-washed/enslavement of women and throwing out boys. They steal from the state by having the woman take welfare, when they have the money to support them. [/*]Yep - that's the cult, in a nutshell.

juliekan

04-20-2008, 03:33 PM

Originally posted by tisamystery

Looks like Kansas may be a great spot for their next compound. [/*]
Would have been a better bet than Texas...right EV?

evalles

04-20-2008, 10:14 PM

Originally posted by juliekan

Would have been a better bet than Texas...right EV? [/*]

but not as good as Alabama

spageddy

04-21-2008, 09:07 AM

What rights/responsibilities does the state of Texas-or any state- have regarding the education of these children? If they are being taught in schools on the ranch, don't those schools require certification? Wouldn't that also apply to homeschooling? If, as has been reported elsewhere, the women receive some type of welfare, then wouldn't that involve filing a birth certificate for each child ? And if births are recorded, then is there a board of education or some other government entity that tracks children in terms of schooling? I guess what I'm trying to ask is this: Is it legal to keep your kids home, establish your own school, and teach 'em whatever you want?

lady

04-21-2008, 09:17 AM

I've tried to understand these people and be sympathetic, but the more I hear from women who actually lived this life and escaped, I'm just disgusted.

John7878

04-21-2008, 09:43 AM

Originally posted by essiemadge
carolyn jessop will make an excellent trustee. she is a woman who lived there for years, she knows the people and the lifestyle. she is educated and articulate. she was and is a devoted mother, stayed in the lifestyle until, she was able to get her children out with her.
what is your problem with her???? that she is a woman. that she is not a politician???? [/*]

Didn't read all the posts huh?

Ok people were saying that she had been trying to tell people what went on there and asking why I didn't believe her outright.

My reply was that she was writing a book and making money off of it and that she was also trying to get control of the $110 million dollar trust.

To me, this could be a conflict of interest. And I just said I took her opinion with a grain of salt.

But the other guy that came to testify on what was going on had no such conflicts of interest.
Which is why I would believe him more readily.

Thats the point I was making.

John7878

04-21-2008, 09:45 AM

Originally posted by tirante

This may come as a shock. But there are people who try to do the right thing, without an avaricious goal. [/*]

True enough.

And there are those that don't.

So how do YOU sort them out???

:confused:

lady

04-21-2008, 10:00 AM

Originally posted by John7878

True enough.

And there are those that don't.

So how do YOU sort them out???

:confused: [/*]
People who have escaped these places have been interviewed for years now. I don't think all of them are writing books or are trying to make money. The "Lost Boys" who were kicked out are very believable. What do they have to gain by talking about what happened to them?
The LK interviews with the mothers and what they said and how they acted and sounded made me ill.
They are just sick. IMO

lotty

04-21-2008, 10:52 AM

Brent Jeffs, who is suing Warren Jeffs and the UEP for molestation/sodomy recommended Carolyn Jessop as a Trustee of the UEP in his suit. Several other males that were kicked out or left also recommended Carolyn Jessop as a Trustee of the UEP.

http://www.attorneygeneral.utah.gov/PrRel/prjuly142005.htm

lady

04-21-2008, 11:48 AM

It has to be very hard, almost a miracle for anyone to leave these cults. They are brainwashed from birth, cut off from the outside world, and punished if they complain. How would they know this is sick and wrong?
I don't know how these brave people escaped, but I'm glad they did. IMO

walton

04-21-2008, 11:59 AM

evalles

04-21-2008, 01:31 PM

Originally posted by essiemadge

maybe john the poster is working for the polygamists himself. how do we know, we know nothing about him. todays atlanta, ga paper said the polys had hired a public relations firm to get them better press. could fake posters be far behind???
i turst ms jessop because i read her book and have listened to her talk in public appearances since then. anyone who reads her book and does not admire her must be a very cold person with no empathy for women and children. imho [/*]

As screwed up as their actions were in this case, CPS needs a public relations firm (paid for w/ our taxes of course).

I don't understand how anyone can justify taking children away from their mothers based on a bunch of maybe's.

It's wrong to trash someone because he questions people's motives. That's what any rational person does to get to the truth of the matter.

evalles

04-21-2008, 01:36 PM

Originally posted by spageddy
What rights/responsibilities does the state of Texas-or any state- have regarding the education of these children? If they are being taught in schools on the ranch, don't those schools require certification? Wouldn't that also apply to homeschooling? If, as has been reported elsewhere, the women receive some type of welfare, then wouldn't that involve filing a birth certificate for each child ? And if births are recorded, then is there a board of education or some other government entity that tracks children in terms of schooling? I guess what I'm trying to ask is this: Is it legal to keep your kids home, establish your own school, and teach 'em whatever you want? [/*]

This is what I found, there may be newer info.
On Wednesday, June 15, 1994, the Texas Supreme Court unanimously upheld the appeal of the Arlington v. Leeper case, which defined the current home-schooling rights of parents in the state of Texas. In a 30 page ruling, the court upheld the lower court rulings which said that students attending legitimate home schools are not required to attend public schools. The court said that the Texas Education Agency had no legal basis for prosecution of 150 homeschooling families and that legitimate home schools are exempt from the state's compulsory attendance law.

The Supreme Court agreed with the district court's ruling that a home school was considered legitimate if parents used some sort of curriculum consisting of books, workbooks or other written materials and that they met "basic education goals" by teaching reading, spelling, grammar, mathematics and good citizenship. Once that standard is met, the state's authority ends, although the district court said school officials could ask home-school parents about curricula and standardized tests.

The Supreme Court specifically said Wednesday that the Texas Education Agency could request evidence of standardized test, even though home-school parents are not required to give such tests. The Court also said that any new rules on home schools written by the State Board of Education would be subject to judicial review.

The Supreme Court also lifted, as unnecessary, a permanent injunction barring school districts from charging parents who educate their children at home with criminal violations. The court said that Texas law was never intended to criminalize home schooling and noted that home schools were a historical practicality for many Texas families in the 20th century.

And, finally, in an 8-1 decision, the Court upheld the ruling that the state pay $360,000 in attorney fees for the plaintiffs.

lady

04-21-2008, 01:38 PM

Originally posted by evalles

As screwed up as their actions were in this case, CPS needs a public relations firm (paid for w/ our taxes of course).

I don't understand how anyone can justify taking children away from their mothers based on a bunch of maybe's.

It's wrong to trash someone because he questions people's motives. That's what any rational person does to get to the truth of the matter. [/*]
Mothers get their children taken away nowadays for anything, even if there's a hint of anything.
This Cult has had years and years of dysfunction and abuse going on and has been investigated.
No Religion is above the Law.

evalles

04-21-2008, 02:39 PM

Originally posted by lady

Mothers get their children taken away nowadays for anything, even if there's a hint of anything.
This Cult has had years and years of dysfunction and abuse going on and has been investigated.
No Religion is above the Law. [/*]

Do you think it's ok for woment to have their kids taken away for anything ?

This isn't supposed to be about religion. Each individual child and their family should be considered.

xray ra

04-21-2008, 03:00 PM

Originally posted by evalles

Do you think it's ok for woment to have their kids taken away for anything ?

This isn't supposed to be about religion. Each individual child and their family should be considered. [/*]

Yes I agree that the individual children should be considered. The problem is that the parents of these individual children have not been properly identified. Until the DNA testing is completed there are no legal parents to release these individual children to.

IIIRC, after the tsunami in the Pacific many children were released to the wrong "parents". Many were kidnapped in this way. Hopefully, that tragic error, by well meaning agencies, will not be repeated in Texas.

lady

04-21-2008, 03:06 PM

Originally posted by evalles

Do you think it's ok for woment to have their kids taken away for anything ?

This isn't supposed to be about religion. Each individual child and their family should be considered. [/*]
Yes...If there is a HINT of abuse, a child should be taken away,immediately, until the parents are proved to be innocent.
Children are the ones that have to be protected.

awareness

04-21-2008, 03:22 PM

Originally posted by tirante

<snip>Whose kids are whose? Who are the mothers? Who are the fathers? Any birth certificates? Any schooling records?

If nothing else, the FLDS cannot even claim they are home schooling, because they do not even know, or will not tell, who the kids belong to. No parents, no home school. No certification, no private school. [/*]

Authorities supposedly found some kind of schooling records, so there is something to verify what kind of home schooling they are receiving (or "home" meaning on the ranch, possibly in a schoolroom setting?).

Wandering posted that there's no birth certificates for some of the younger kids.

JMO/IMO

spageddy

04-21-2008, 04:26 PM

thank you evalles for your research on the legality of home schools in Texas. I guess the answer to my question- can they keep the kids at home & teach whatever they want- is Yes. Too bad. I was hoping there would be stricter guidelines for a home-school curriculum.

evalles

04-21-2008, 04:33 PM

Originally posted by lady

Yes...If there is a HINT of abuse, a child should be taken away,immediately, until the parents are proved to be innocent.
Children are the ones that have to be protected. [/*]

That was a terrifying comment.
Do you have children ?
If your neighbor didn't like you and called CPS to tell them you spanked your kid that would be a hint.
They should be able to come take your kid and give them to strangers ?
How are you going to prove your innocence ?
Being guilty until proven innocent is unconstitutional.
If the majority think this way, we're on our way to becoming a police state.

lady

04-21-2008, 05:02 PM

Originally posted by evalles

That was a terrifying comment.
Do you have children ?
If your neighbor didn't like you and called CPS to tell them you spanked your kid that would be a hint.
They should be able to come take your kid and give them to strangers ?
How are you going to prove your innocence ?
Being guilty until proven innocent is unconstitutional.
If the majority think this way, we're on our way to becoming a police state. [/*]
When it involves a child/childrens welfare, it's definitely guilty until proven innocent.

Jay

04-21-2008, 06:06 PM

Originally posted by tirante

Innocent until proven guilty is not in the Constitution; it is a legal concept, not a law. [/*]

I have to disagree. It IS the law of the land per Article 6.

evalles

04-21-2008, 06:19 PM

Originally posted by lady

When it involves a child/childrens welfare, it's definitely guilty until proven innocent. [/*]

Keep saying that until someone close to you has their babies ripped from them before doing an investigation to see if the accusations are valid.
Imagine not knowing where your children are or who they're with and there's only an overworked state employee checking on them when you are innocent of any abuse.
It is torture.
OMG, if the children look healthy and are well cared for, they can investigate without putting them with strangers.

Devotion

04-21-2008, 06:20 PM

Originally posted by tirante

Isn't that a large part of the problem; who are the parents?

Whose kids are whose? Who are the mothers? Who are the fathers? Any birth certificates? Any schooling records?

If nothing else, the FLDS cannot even claim they are home schooling,

because they do not even know, or will not tell, who the kids belong to.
No parents, no home school. No certification, no private school. [/*]

IT would tell us alot if Every child that can hold a pencil, could be TESTED to find out what grade level each child are in....mho

evalles

04-21-2008, 06:22 PM

CPS : I'M FROM THE GOVERNMENT AND I'M HERE TO HELP.

:flamemad:

Carol25

04-21-2008, 06:32 PM

evalles

04-21-2008, 06:44 PM

Originally posted by Carol25

I believe that is what they are going to do. They have to find out who is who first. [/*]

I finally have to concede to something here.
NOW that they have them , they do have to know who to give them back to.
The parents that provide docs to prove their parentage should then get a more rapid hearing, right ?

xray ra

04-21-2008, 06:52 PM

Originally posted by evalles

I finally have to concede to something here.
NOW that they have them , they do have to know who to give them back to.
The parents that provide docs to prove their parentage should then get a more rapid hearing, right ? [/*]

hi ev:seeya:

It's great to see your post. Finally LOL. Yes, the real parents, the ones who do not abuse or mistreat their kids, should be able to get them back ASAP.
That would be a good outcome. It would even be better if they got their kids back AND got the he!! out of that sect too!!! IMO

evalles

04-21-2008, 06:58 PM

Originally posted by xray ra

hi ev:seeya:

It's great to see your post. Finally LOL. Yes, the real parents, the ones who do not abuse or mistreat their kids, should be able to get them back ASAP.
That would be a good outcome. It would even be better if they got their kids back AND got the he!! out of that sect too!!! IMO [/*]

AMEN.

CAROL25 should be proud LOL.

Devotion

04-21-2008, 07:02 PM

Originally posted by awareness

awesome post Details.

To my knowledge, law enforcement has gone after pedophile priests.
In addition lawsuits have been filed, and people have been given money from settlements as they should be for their pain and suffering.
The horrible situation is being corrected. I don't feel that ALL Catholic priests are pedophiles, and Im pretty sure there are more Catholics in the US than Mormons.

I dont feel we should just stop and let the FDLS continue its abuse of children with forced early teen marriages/pregnancies and polygamy.

Also forcing young boys out onto the streets.
Its just not right. They too, deserve only the best much like the Catholic priest victims do.

JMO/IMO [/*]

I agree, good post Details..

This is comparing apples to oranges...
the FDLS children with the Catholic children....

there is NO comparison.
Here's just a few of the differences....

1.The Catholic children know WHO their parents are.
2. Most of the Catholic children were from loving homes with 2 loving parents.
3. Most of the boys were going to a good/ fine school.
4. They had TV's, books, sports, music lessons, vacations, healthy food, etc....
5. They were allowed to show their feeling, to LAUGH and CRY.
6. They were allowed to shop for cloths and toys.
7. They were not locked in basements & closets and not fed.
8. They were not forced to work or thrown out when they turned 13.
9. Last but not least, they were allowed to be FREE and think free.....jmo

xray ra

04-21-2008, 07:04 PM

elvalles: I read much of your post re: the abuses in the foster care system . How very sad. I know you have done a lot of research. But......
My SIL was a foster mom to many children over a period of 15 yrs or so. She always took kids between 4 or 5 and 10yrs old. They all had lots of problems physically and emotionally from abuse at the hands of their biologic parents. I think most Foster families are caring and nurturing. They have to be. It is really hard work. I know I don't have the patience to deal w/those kids. She received enough money from the state to make sure they had what they needed and not much more. She spent hours and hours working w/them on their school work and taking them to therapy. They all played little league sports and had a pretty good life.
Like everything, there are bad apples that spoil all the good work that these foster parents do.

Devotion

04-21-2008, 07:29 PM

Originally posted by jenny_92808

I totally agree with you.

These mothers also choose to allow their sons to be thrown out when they reach a certain age.

They barely educate the boys and then just drop them off in the desert,
or wherever and tell them they are going to hell and never to return.

Just so they can maintain the male to female ratio they want.

What they are doing is EVIL in my opinion.

RAPING young girls, brain-washed/enslavement of women and throwing out boys.

They STEAL from the state by having the woman take welfare, when they have the money to support them..... [/*]

Post of the day!.....jmo

Devotion

04-21-2008, 08:01 PM

Originally posted by Rainkiss

I'm hoping you'll agree, as well, that said force doesn't have to be physical, and that convincing

these girls that if they DON'T marry, they're going to go to hell is also a form of FORCE.

This whole case is going to be a nightmare to prove.

Well, to start with, you take the kids out of the situation in order to protect them. Which they've done.
If removing those kids when they did, prevented one girl from being "married off" and molested, they did the right thing.

We'll never see their medical records, so who knows what conditions the doctors will find, other than evidence of molestation, that could have caused these kids future pain?

Nope. They can't send them home and have people check on them.

If they send these kids home, they'll vanish to Utah, or wherever else they have these compounds.

How are they supposed to keep track of them?

They have, for example, an "Elizabeth," age three, brown hair, brown eyes, parents unknown. They go next week to check up on her, and she's gone. Now what? In ten years, she's "married" to her great-uncle and pregnant.

How long? Hard to tell, since they've been conditioned not to answer the questions of people outside their faith, on pain of ETERNAL DAMNATION.

And, the parents won't even claim their own children.

Who are they supposed to return the kids TO?

They can't identify the parents of the children.
Even the KIDS won't name their mothers.

I believe the records to which you refer are spiritual marriage records, which indicate that teens were "married" off to older men.

Give 'em time to get the investigations completed. I do hope you agree that the men who molested early teen-age girls should be punished.

The kids are already traumatized. Their lives have been something none of us raised in the outside world can imagine,

but the words of those who've escaped give a fair picture of what it was like,

and it scares me that it can go on in this country.

It is a can of worms, and there are snakes down in

the bottom of the can that the investigators need to find before they can finish with it. [/*]

Could some of these children be from other CULTS in the US or Canada and do not remember their parents?
IF these "clean living" people are so ignorant of our LAWS, then WHY are they HIDING, LYING and not answering simple questions?.......jmo

evalles

04-21-2008, 08:20 PM

Originally posted by xray ra
elvalles: I read much of your post re: the abuses in the foster care system . How very sad. I know you have done a lot of research. But......
My SIL was a foster mom to many children over a period of 15 yrs or so. She always took kids between 4 or 5 and 10yrs old. They all had lots of problems physically and emotionally from abuse at the hands of their biologic parents. I think most Foster families are caring and nurturing. They have to be. It is really hard work. I know I don't have the patience to deal w/those kids. She received enough money from the state to make sure they had what they needed and not much more. She spent hours and hours working w/them on their school work and taking them to therapy. They all played little league sports and had a pretty good life.
Like everything, there are bad apples that spoil all the good work that these foster parents do. [/*]

I don't think all foster parents are bad, I also don't think all the mother's in this case are bad. There are many foster parents that take issue with CPS actions. Did your SIL ever take care of a child that she didn't really feel was abused ? Despite what CPS said ?

Jay

04-21-2008, 08:37 PM

Originally posted by tirante

News to me.

Article 6 - Debts, Supremacy, Oaths
Amendment 6 does address a speedy trial, but no mention of innocence.

Article 6, clause 2:

This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.

The Constitution, as interpreted by the Supreme Court, is the law of the land.

http://www.usconstitution.net/constnot.html#innocent

"The concept of the presumption of innocence is one of the most basic in our system of justice. However, in so many words, it is not codified in the text of the Constitution. This basic right comes to us, like many things, from English jurisprudence, and has been a part of that system for so long, that it is considered common law"

I see what it says, but it does not mean it is constitutionally correct.

It is not "considered" common law, it "IS" common law, meaning a Judicially created doctrine.

The righ to be considered innocent until proven guilty, while only in a courtroom setting, sure, is part of the right to a fair trial under the 6th AM, as made applicable to the states through the Due Process clause of the 14th AM.

As we read in the syllabus:

Held: The Kentucky Supreme Court erred in interpreting Taylor, supra, as holding that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment absolutely requires that an instruction on the presumption of innocence must be given in every criminal case. The failure to give such an instruction when requested does not, in and of itself, violate the Constitution. Under Taylor, such a failure must be evaluated in light of the totality of the circumstances -- including all the instructions, the arguments of counsel, whether the weight of the evidence was overwhelming, and other relevant factors -- to determine whether the defendant received a constitutionally fair trial.

It is a right, but the SC has ruled the failure to give the instruction is not "in and of itself" reversible error. See also Taylor v. Kentucky in the head note.

http://supreme.justia.com/us/441/786/case.html

xray ra

04-21-2008, 08:38 PM

Originally posted by evalles

I don't think all foster parents are bad, I also don't think all the mother's in this case are bad. There are many foster parents that take issue with CPS actions. Did your SIL ever take care of a child that she didn't really feel was abused ? Despite what CPS said ? [/*]

No, not any of them! She fostered mostly boys who had been sexually abused or from drug addicted Moms. A few little girls that had also been sexually abused. She specifically asked for the hardest cases. The ones that would be more permanent. She wanted to make a difference.

Three of her boys stayed w/her until HS graduation. One of the young girls stayed for 5or 6 yrs. then was adopted. She only adopted one child though, I think it had to do w/her being able to continue to foster kids.
This was my ex-SIL so I haven't seen her in over 5 yrs now.

evalles

04-21-2008, 10:21 PM

Originally posted by tirante

I am not a lawyer, and I assume neither are you.

Google all you want--it ain't in the Constitution. Period. It is not there! That was all I posted. [/*]

but it's the law right ?

evalles

04-21-2008, 10:34 PM

Originally posted by xray ra

No, not any of them! She fostered mostly boys who had been sexually abused or from drug addicted Moms. A few little girls that had also been sexually abused. She specifically asked for the hardest cases. The ones that would be more permanent. She wanted to make a difference.

Three of her boys stayed w/her until HS graduation. One of the young girls stayed for 5or 6 yrs. then was adopted. She only adopted one child though, I think it had to do w/her being able to continue to foster kids.
This was my ex-SIL so I haven't seen her in over 5 yrs now. [/*]

sexual abuse is usually pretty clear cut. I don't know if I could have done it. One thing that stands out about your SIL - she wasn't in it to adopt. Some fosterers now take in kids w/ the intention of adopting which IMO pits them against the parents. I don't think they'd ask for a hard case. My daughter spent a week in a foster home & said a couple of the girls didn't need to be there. 1 told her that her parents were unstable but finally let her live w/ her grandparents. They taught her several different languages. She said as soon as she was stable,swooped in & took her. This was after her grandparents petitioned for custody

Jay

04-21-2008, 10:52 PM

Originally posted by tirante

I am not a lawyer, and I assume neither are you.

Google all you want--it ain't in the Constitution. Period. It is not there! That was all I posted. [/*]

Here is what you posted originally:

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by tirante

Innocent until proven guilty is not in the Constitution; it is a legal concept, not a law. [/*]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I stated it IS the law, per article 6 and the Supremacy clause. I did not mean it was "directly" contained in the wording of A6, I know it is not. If you took it as meaning that, sorry!!

It is the law though, any way we look at it, textual or decisional.

Many doctrines are judicially created that are law and part of the constitution that are NOT in the text of it, such as the seperation of church and state, the right to privacy, freedom of locomotion, freedom of association, etc.

FoxySly

04-21-2008, 10:52 PM

Originally posted by essiemadge
maybe john the poster is working for the polygamists himself. how do we know, we know nothing about him. todays atlanta, ga paper said the polys had hired a public relations firm to get them better press. could fake posters be far behind???
[/*]
~Snip

I agree. And IMO this john poster is very scary to me.

Also, I wish others who have posted about the Mothers to please have patience. It is hard for most to understand that they do not know any better.
Just imagine never seeing, hearing, learning from the outside world it's truths. To only know the fear and life you have been taught/brainwashed into believing.

Sly

Jay

04-21-2008, 10:53 PM

Originally posted by evalles

but it's the law right ? [/*]

Correct!!

John7878

04-21-2008, 10:54 PM

Originally posted by lotty
Brent Jeffs, who is suing Warren Jeffs and the UEP for molestation/sodomy recommended Carolyn Jessop as a Trustee of the UEP in his suit. Several other males that were kicked out or left also recommended Carolyn Jessop as a Trustee of the UEP.

http://www.attorneygeneral.utah.gov/PrRel/prjuly142005.htm [/*]

Thanks for that link lotty!!

Helps clear up a few things.

Appreciate it.

Jay

04-21-2008, 11:03 PM

Originally posted by tirante

No. It is a concept, not a law.

Otherwise, no one could be kept in jail awaiting trial. If they are "innocent", how can they be imprisoned? They are not convicted of anything, yet they are in jail? Riddle me that.

MOST crimes are bailable offenses. If a person can not make bail, they are required to be detained. Such does not negate the innocent until proven guilty asserted right.

Flight risks, etc., are denied bail for a purpose.

If that were equated to arrest and incarceration, police could not arrest and jail anyone before they were convicted. The federal constitution only requires an arrest be founded on probable cause, not proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

A person can be arrested and detained on a "Material witness" warrant in rare cases, and yet they have committed NO crime.

John7878

04-21-2008, 11:07 PM

Originally posted by Details
Did you go to the home page, read what they are and why they are doing this? [/*]

Well its been pretty nice the last couple days, so I haven't followed up on some stuff.

Been working on putting the snowplow up for the summer and getting the Jeep ready for summer too.

I saw the reasoning on the lawsuits.

But I still need to read down the latest posts yet......

xray ra

04-22-2008, 12:16 AM

Originally posted by tirante

Is, "INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY', in the Constitution? THAT, is the question.

Simple Q--is the phrase anywhere in the Constitution? Extremely simple, it only requires a YES, or a NO.

No explanations. No court decisions. No opinions. No mention of bail. No arrest and incarceration. No material witness analogies. No flight risk analogies. No Googles. Etc...........

Is it THERE? Simple? Yea, or nay?

Can you do that? If not, I give up. You win. [/*]

OK tirante, the phrase "innocent until proven guilty" is NOT in the United States constitution.
However, I think that the concept of "PRESUMED innocent until proven guilty" is a basis of most State and Local civil codes of Law. Does that help? Now, let's get back to the perverts in Texas.
I hope that Ron White was right about Texas having an"Express Lane"!!!!
:biggrin:

Details

04-22-2008, 02:34 AM

Originally posted by John7878
Well its been pretty nice the last couple days, so I haven't followed up on some stuff.

Been working on putting the snowplow up for the summer and getting the Jeep ready for summer too.

I saw the reasoning on the lawsuits.

But I still need to read down the latest posts yet...... [/*]I read a saying once I really liked and while I don't recall word for word, the thought was, "You can trust everyone or trust no one, the result is about the same." As I see it - if you have a reasonable degree of trust for all people, you'll be wrong sometimes and lose out. If you have nearly no trust for anyone, you'll be wrong plenty, and lose out. It's pretty near equal.

But - to me - one way of living is a LOT more pleasant!

There's been no reason to distrust, and the things you've found, when looked into are all clean. That organization she works with do a ton of work for lost boys and other FLDS escapeees, unpaid, for no reason other than that they need to help. Might be time to flip the bit - switch to not trusting her without verification, to trusting her until there's a reason not to.

Funny, BTW, we've been having a bizarre bit of snow up here - and it doesn't snow much here in winter!

Jay

04-22-2008, 04:57 AM

John7878

04-22-2008, 07:17 AM

Originally posted by essiemadge

maybe john the poster is working for the polygamists himself. how do we know, we know nothing about him. [/*]

If I was, I'm not doing too good of a job, I'd probably get fired.

I'm just watching what is being done, how its being done, because something like this is really tricky.
Because like I said before, you want to watch how/what they are doing to these people, because anything you let them do to THESE people, they can do to YOU. So you want them treated like YOU would want to be treated.

When this first started I wondered just what they were going to be able to prove vs the trouble they were going to and the effect on the kids.

But after some posted links and info posted on here. I think they can make a case.

Maybe why you might think that I am one of them is that I have criticized OUR society and the fact that we have kids as young as theirs running around pregnant.

Well you only have to open your eyes to see that its true.

Your response will be that they weren't 'forced' into it. But someone wanted the 'brainwashing' included in the definition of 'forced'. So then we have to look at each girl and see if she was influenced to have sex, either by the guy or 'peer pressure'.

See? All I am saying is there is going to be a real fine line here.

And as for the women & kids being brainwashed by their religion, I KNOW you don't want me going there. Because its even a finer line IMO.

lady

04-22-2008, 07:55 AM

BS...there's a difference between teenagers having sex with consent and a 50 yr old man demanding a 13yr old to have sex with him.
It's so sick, I can't stand it.

Hey Paula

04-22-2008, 09:29 AM

Originally posted by lady
BS...there's a difference between teenagers having sex with consent and a 50 yr old man demanding a 13yr old to have sex with him.
It's so sick, I can't stand it. [/*]

It is sick and vile and against all that is holy to use religion for selfish and evil purposes. Sadly, it's done all the time because of this "fine line", which needs to be erased permanently. Religion cannot be used to enslave, abuse and/or rape women and children. Religion cannot be used to break the law and rob the government.

Of course there's a difference between teenagers having sex with consent and a cult practicing this daily on children who are forced into sex with 50 year old men, and in some cases, their own fathers. Pedophilia and incest aren't religions, they are crimes.

IMO

Details

04-22-2008, 02:27 PM

Originally posted by John7878
If I was, I'm not doing too good of a job, I'd probably get fired.

I'm just watching what is being done, how its being done, because something like this is really tricky.
Because like I said before, you want to watch how/what they are doing to these people, because anything you let them do to THESE people, they can do to YOU. So you want them treated like YOU would want to be treated.Anytime I put myself and my daugther in a cult that will hand her over to an old man for sex, they can treat me this way. No problem at all. They waited too long to go in. ....But someone wanted the 'brainwashing' included in the definition of 'forced'. So then we have to look at each girl and see if she was influenced to have sex, either by the guy or 'peer pressure'.

See? All I am saying is there is going to be a real fine line here.

And as for the women & kids being brainwashed by their religion, I KNOW you don't want me going there. Because its even a finer line IMO. [/*]It's not such a fine line as you think. "Peer pressure" - unorganized, undictated pressure from your peers - other kids, is quite different from an ADULT (difference 1), dictating exactly what you WILL do (or else be throwin in a mental institution, or kicked out if you are a boy - difference 2 - the real levels of threat if you fail to be brainwashed), within a compound with a guard tower (difference 3).

Children getting pregnant happens. The difference is that here it's deliberate, organized, and enforced. Outside it's random, accidental, and not to mention, with ONE other of similar age. You can find, of course, some guys going around getting a bunch of girls pregnant - difference is, in the outside world, that's the exception, and looked down on. In FLDS, that's the rule, and a goal and prize to be envied.

We could then get into the little detail that they are not legally married - legal marriage is between two only, even if we were to forget the age difference - so there's another big difference between a pair of people, and one guy adding to his harem.

evalles

04-22-2008, 02:30 PM

Originally posted by FoxySly

~Snip

I agree. And IMO this john poster is very scary to me.

Also, I wish others who have posted about the Mothers to please have patience. It is hard for most to understand that they do not know any better.
Just imagine never seeing, hearing, learning from the outside world it's truths. To only know the fear and life you have been taught/brainwashed into believing.

Sly [/*]

You're scared of someone because he believes in civil rights and not making judgements til he gets all the facts.

evalles

04-22-2008, 02:32 PM

Originally posted by tirante

No. It is a concept, not a law.

Otherwise, no one could be kept in jail awaiting trial. If they are "innocent", how can they be imprisoned? They are not convicted of anything, yet they are in jail? Riddle me that.

Not guilty, until proven guilty, is a more realistic, and desciptive, expression. [/*]

Then it's a court rule ?

lady

04-23-2008, 06:19 AM

Originally posted by evalles

Then it's a court rule ? [/*]
If they set bond and they meet the bond they are set free, if they are deemed to be a flight risk, they will not set bond.
Just my knowledge of the situation. IMO

John7878

04-23-2008, 02:51 PM

John7878

04-23-2008, 03:24 PM

Originally posted by Details
Anytime I put myself and my daugther in a cult that will hand her over to an old man for sex, they can treat me this way. No problem at all. [/*]

I don't know, maybe its me.

But thats exactly my point.

If someone calls the cops and tells them this is what you have been doing.

Do you want them to follow the letter of the law when dealing with you??

See, some people that are accused ARE guilty, but SOME are not.

And thats all I'm suggesting is that everyone is treated equal under the law and that the laws are followed.

Originally posted by Details

It's not such a fine line as you think. "Peer pressure" - unorganized, undictated pressure from your peers - other kids, is quite different from an ADULT (difference 1), dictating exactly what you WILL do (or else be throwin in a mental institution, or kicked out if you are a boy - difference 2 - the real levels of threat if you fail to be brainwashed), within a compound with a guard tower (difference 3).

Children getting pregnant happens. The difference is that here it's deliberate, organized, and enforced. Outside it's random, accidental, and not to mention, with ONE other of similar age. You can find, of course, some guys going around getting a bunch of girls pregnant - difference is, in the outside world, that's the exception, and looked down on. In FLDS, that's the rule, and a goal and prize to be envied. [/*]

Very good reply.

I think I goofed on my post on this.
My intent was not to imply that those circumstances were a fine line, right now.
(now lets see if I can get it right)
It was to point out that it could become a fine line in the future using the qualification of what brainwashed/peer pressure is.

But your point is very well stated.

Originally posted by Details

We could then get into the little detail that they are not legally married - legal marriage is between two only, even if we were to forget the age difference - so there's another big difference between a pair of people, and one guy adding to his harem. [/*]

Well my opinion on this is that government should stay out of the bedroom of LEGAL CONSENTING ADULTS.

(remember I said adults and consenting)

But I admit that there can be problems with this stance.
Gay couples used the same argument, that government should stay out of the bedroom of LEGAL CONSENTING ADULTS.

THEN they actually reversed their stance and say that NOW, they WANT the government to recognize their 'marriages'.
Unbelievable!

I'm still reeling from that one.

So I guess the downside is that these people could try to pull the same stunt.

I think I'm starting to ramble....I better go...

John7878

04-23-2008, 03:41 PM

Originally posted by FoxySly

~Snip

I agree. And IMO this john poster is very scary to me.

Sly [/*]

I used to be scarier, but I'm getting too old to scare many people now.

About the only one scared anymore is me, when I look into the mirror.

Even the youngest grandkid pushes me around now! LoL

:shrug:

Rainkiss

04-23-2008, 03:44 PM

Originally posted by John7878

*snipped to include just the bit I'm responding to* (And ending a sentence with a preposition, so shoot me. ;) )

Well my opinion on this is that government should stay out of the bedroom of LEGAL CONSENTING ADULTS.

(remember I said adults and consenting)

But I admit that there can be problems with this stance.
Gay couples used the same argument, that government should stay out of the bedroom of LEGAL CONSENTING ADULTS.

THEN they actually reversed their stance and say that NOW, they WANT the government to recognize their 'marriages'.
Unbelievable!

I'm still reeling from that one.

So I guess the downside is that these people could try to pull the same stunt.

I think I'm starting to ramble....I better go... [/*]

I agree wholeheartedly with you that "government should stay out of the bedroom of LEGAL CONSENTING ADULTS." I go a bit further, and agree that that statement includes gay couples. For the record, I think that, if gays want to be able to marry, more power to 'em. I imagine there were arguments about permitting a black to marry a white back in the day, saying that it weakened the institution of marriage. Maybe it's just me, but I figure mine can handle it if the married couple next door happens to be Bob and James, rather than Bob and Jane.

And, quite honestly, if everyone involved was a consenting adult, I'd be all for people believing in polygamy (or polyandry, for that matter) stepping up and trying to legalize it.

However, we're dealing with a different situation, here. We're not dealing with adults. And, I'd argue, we're dealing with some adults who lack the information TO consent, as they've been raised to believe it's not a matter of consent, it's what God demands they do.

WHOLE different ball game.

John7878

04-23-2008, 03:51 PM

Originally posted by Rainkiss

Maybe it's just me, but I figure mine can handle it if the married couple next door happens to be Bob and James, rather than Bob and Jane.[/*]

It would be hard for me if they didn't keep it in the house.....if ya know what I mean....

Originally posted by Rainkiss

However, we're dealing with a different situation, here. [/*]

TA DA!!!!

Absolutely!!

:D

Rainkiss

04-23-2008, 04:09 PM

Originally posted by John7878

It would be hard for me if they didn't keep it in the house.....if ya know what I mean....

TA DA!!!!

Absolutely!!

:D [/*]

Hey, live and let live works to a point. (I'd have as many issues with Bob and Jane doing the nasty in the front yard as Bob and James, but inside, curtains closed, none of my business either way.

So, we agree on the point, that, had they actually followed the laws, the kids should have been left at the ranch. Had only consenting adults been practicing polygamy, and all other laws been followed (and we can differ on the consent factor for the moment), that removing the children was wrong...

However, as they haven't (with suspected child abuse, incest, and a woeful lack of the home teaching they're supposed to be providing, to the point of, IMO, neglect, and possible welfare fraud (not naming the fathers where required on the forms, even when they were known)), then the investigation (at least) is proper, and that removal to ensure the safety of the children was the correct decision, at least at the time it was made?

Details

04-23-2008, 04:26 PM

Originally posted by John7878
I don't know, maybe its me.

But thats exactly my point.

If someone calls the cops and tells them this is what you have been doing.

Do you want them to follow the letter of the law when dealing with you??

See, some people that are accused ARE guilty, but SOME are not.

And thats all I'm suggesting is that everyone is treated equal under the law and that the laws are followed.Yes, absolutely, 1000% - yes. If someone calls the cops and says this is what I have been doing, then yes, I want them to investigate. Period. If my daughter is pregnant - that's good probable cause to think the report likely to be true, get into my records, my things, and look for more information, remove my daughter and ask her questions.

Yes - whenever there is a report, it should be investigated. Follow the letter of the law. Because the law is sensible - without evidence, they come by, I open the door, show them to my daughter's room (don't try to hide her, nor any of my other children) my daughter is not pregnant, they talk to her in private - no problem. My daughter is pregnant, they talk to her in private, and decide if they need to take her away for awhile for a full investigation. I had something not unlike this happen once - at a checkin, my infant was not gaining weight, was almost losing. We talked about the problem, they had us come back to be rechecked in a month, rather than the usual. Had the problem continued, she'd have been in CPS hands, I'm sure. But we got her eating figured out, she was fine, all done. Very good reply.

I think I goofed on my post on this.
My intent was not to imply that those circumstances were a fine line, right now.
(now lets see if I can get it right)
It was to point out that it could become a fine line in the future using the qualification of what brainwashed/peer pressure is.

But your point is very well stated.

Well my opinion on this is that government should stay out of the bedroom of LEGAL CONSENTING ADULTS.

(remember I said adults and consenting)

But I admit that there can be problems with this stance.
Gay couples used the same argument, that government should stay out of the bedroom of LEGAL CONSENTING ADULTS.

THEN they actually reversed their stance and say that NOW, they WANT the government to recognize their 'marriages'.
Unbelievable!

I'm still reeling from that one.

So I guess the downside is that these people could try to pull the same stunt.

I think I'm starting to ramble....I better go... [/*]I'd agree - legal and consenting adults - anything goes. Including marriage - but that's another deal. The term "brainwashed" can be misused - but so can anything. It's a slippery slope argument - and the problem is, a slippery slope argument is great for scaring people, but when you look at the real world, the only time we slip down the slope is when we choose to, when we find that it is the right path.

When the speed limit got dropped to 55, I heard arguments that this was the start of a totaliarian gov't. After all, they used safety and gas milage to drop it to 55, next thing they'd do was say that 45 caused even fewer fatal accidents and saved even more gas, then 35, then 25, then the gov't would remove our cars altogether, to control us (yes, the individual was serious, not mentally unballanced, quite intelligent). Obviously that didn't happen. We tried that direction, people didn't like it, the limit was removed.

When schools were integrated, when black children were allowed to go to white schools, slippery slope was used to scare white parents - if you let them in the schools, some black boy is going to be kissing your white daughter! But in that case - we took a step in that direction, found it to be right, and continued taking steps in that direction, removing the laws against interracial marriage, and all other racist and divisive laws.

Slippery slope just isn't real. It does describe some situations where we take a step down a path, find it to be correct, and choose to take another step - but every step is our own choice. Backing off of it, going another direction is also always our own choice.