6/5 to 6/12 (FLDS & 19th Century Marriage)

[Ladyhawk]

Reading the FLDS concession statement read by Spokesman Willie, the second point, "The church's practices in this regard continue a long tradition of marriage in this country that would have been found to have been unremarkable in 19th century America. In the FLDS church all marriages are consensual. The church insists on appropriate consent, including that of the woman and the man in all circumstances." indicates there are practices from the 19th century other than consent that will be continued. What could those practices be? What was marriage like in the 19th century? A protest against the laws of the time by Lucy Stone & Henry Blackwell prior to their marriage is very interesting. The laws Stone & Blackwell were protesting seem to be the very laws the FLDS are perpetuating....laws that are no longer in existence because they were a violation of basic human rights.

I would like to see the FLDS stop the practice of assigning and reassigning women and their children to different husbands. That practice is just wrong.

Stone & Blackwell's protest

[Mimi428]

Originally posted by Ladyhawk [*]

I would like to see the FLDS stop the practice of assigning and reassigning women and their children to different husbands. That practice is just wrong.

[/*]

<bandwidth snip>

That practice began with Joseph Smith, the original prophet. I seriously doubt the FLDS will ever turn their backs on something like that. Should one of their modern prophets have a 'revelation' to practice something different, there is likely to be a splintering off from that person.

In their society, women can't even get a place in heaven without the direct assistance of a man. They are literally nothing without a man, by their way of thinking.

JMO

[KatyDid]

Originally posted by Ladyhawk [*]Reading the FLDS concession statement read by Spokesman Willie, the second point, "The church's practices in this regard continue a long tradition of marriage in this country that would have been found to have been unremarkable in 19th century America. In the FLDS church all marriages are consensual. The church insists on appropriate consent, including that of the woman and the man in all circumstances." indicates there are practices from the 19th century other than consent that will be continued. What could those practices be? What was marriage like in the 19th century? A protest against the laws of the time by Lucy Stone & Henry Blackwell prior to their marriage is very interesting. The laws Stone & Blackwell were protesting seem to be the very laws the FLDS are perpetuating....laws that are no longer in existence because they were a violation of basic human rights.

I would like to see the FLDS stop the practice of assigning and reassigning women and their children to different husbands. That practice is just wrong.

Stone & Blackwell's protest [/*]

Well, Willy is a bald-faced liar about these 'women' marrying consensually, he should read the VERY revealing book written by Elissa Wall, 'Stolen Innocence'. She was not the only underage girl to be forced into marriage, nor was she the only one that escaped.

Some of these women and their children could end up with 3 or more different husbands/fathers due to the practice of reassignment.

Thanks for starting this thread LadyHawk .

[Details]

Elisa Wall is not proof of everything that happens - but it proves his statement that all these marriages are consentual a lie, and a lie he knows quite well about, since that case got Jeffs sent to jail.

It doesn't prove every marriage is not consentual, but it sure proves that some of them are not consentual. And proved it in court.

[Details]

Exactly. So when they say all marriages are consentual, and hers was not, they're proved liars.

[walton]

Originally posted by Bratlings [*]


No, in court she proved only that "her" marriage was not consensual. I believe her but actually she didnt even prove that, it was a matter of he said/she said. [/*]

he said/she said the nurse said, the sister said, the mother said they all said her marriage was not consensual.

Originally posted by Details [*]Exactly. So when they say all marriages are consentual, and hers was not, they're proved liars. [/*]

yep

[evalles]

Originally posted by Details [*]Exactly. So when they say all marriages are consentual, and hers was not, they're proved liars. [/*]

Kinda like when CPS said all the pregnant girls were minors but they were really adults. They're proved liars.

[lotty]

Originally posted by evalles [*]

Kinda like when CPS said all the pregnant girls were minors but they were really adults. They're proved liars. [/*]

IIRC pregnant or had already born children...and there is at least one falling under that scrutiny with special limitations.

[evalles]

Originally posted by lotty [*]
IIRC pregnant or had already born children...and there is at least one falling under that scrutiny with special limitations. [/*]

They ended up w/ how many that were actual minors ? Last I heard was 5, someone else said 2.

Now there is one, believed to be confirmed case of sexual abuse.
Is anyone ready to admit that abuse might not have been as rampant as was claimed on the ranch ?

[Ladyhawk]

This pretty well sums up how this FLDS group interprets 'consentual'....as an agreement to the following:

From FLDS Beliefs 101 - Arranged Marriages........

"To have a proper marriage, one that will exists for eternity in heaven, a marriage must be assigned by the prophet. “You can only get married and be a priesthood family if he (the prophet) says whom you should marry. “(WSJ 10/31/1995). No dating, courting, or choosing your own spouse is allowed. “If a boy and girl agree to get married and just go do it, they can never be gods, because you must be married by revelation through the prophet.” (WSJ 11/1/95)"


FLDS Beliefs 101

[juliekan]

http://writ.news.findlaw.com/hamilton/20080603.html

"The Texas Supreme Court Affirms that CPS Has Ongoing Jurisdiction"

"The Texas Supreme Court Did Not Clear the Adults at the FLDS Compound of Abuse Claims, Nor Did it Vindicate Any "Rights" on Their Part"


Lotty posted this article on the links site. It is by Professor Hamilton, a Fellow at the Program in Law and Public Affairs at Princeton. It's a great article explaining the Texas Supreme Court Ruling. I enjoyed reading something by a true scholar, not just a media talking head (or just one of us guessing about the legal points )

[juliekan]

Originally posted by evalles [*]
They ended up w/ how many that were actual minors ? Last I heard was 5, someone else said 2.

Now there is one, believed to be confirmed case of sexual abuse.
Is anyone ready to admit that abuse might not have been as rampant as was claimed on the ranch ? [/*]

http://gosanangelo.com/news/2008/jun...turns-for-now/

In her motion filed on Monday, Natalie Malonis said of her client that the girl is "an identified sexual abuse victim."

Malonis also said,"There's going to be some evidence before long that gets out into the public domain. There are other children who are similarly situated to mine."

[Carol25]

Originally posted by juliekan [*]

http://gosanangelo.com/news/2008/jun...turns-for-now/

In her motion filed on Monday, Natalie Malonis said of her client that the girl is "an identified sexual abuse victim."

Malonis also said,"There's going to be some evidence before long that gets out into the public domain. There are other children who are similarly situated to mine." [/*]

Thanks julikan for the link. Although I didn't read it. I was held by the picture of the child back at the ranch. It's sad, isn't it.

[Mimi428]

Originally posted by juliekan [*]

http://gosanangelo.com/news/2008/jun...turns-for-now/

In her motion filed on Monday, Natalie Malonis said of her client that the girl is "an identified sexual abuse victim."

Malonis also said,"There's going to be some evidence before long that gets out into the public domain. There are other children who are similarly situated to mine." [/*]

Thanks for that link. Most appreciated.

Same website has a brief article about the indictments that are expected to follow & a quote from Sheriff Doran.

http://gosanangelo.com/news/2008/jun...ndictments-in/

Doran. . . told the Standard-Times that controversial photos released of sect leader Warren Jeffs deeply kissing the 12-year-old daughter of ranch leader Merrill Jessop are "just the beginning" of evidence likely to be released in the case.

Originally posted by Imperfect [*]

Hi JK,

I just read that one myself and ITA with your take on it.

I especially liked this:



And I actually stood up and cheered when I read this:

[/*]

AMEN!!!!

[lotty]

Originally posted by juliekan [*]

http://gosanangelo.com/news/2008/jun...turns-for-now/

In her motion filed on Monday, Natalie Malonis said of her client that the girl is "an identified sexual abuse victim."

Malonis also said,"There's going to be some evidence before long that gets out into the public domain. There are other children who are similarly situated to mine." [/*]

Here is what keeps bothering me...The girl might be a mother, with someone else caring for her child, does this mean that a member of the FLDS has done the same thing that people are screaming about CPS doing. Someone took this girl's child and cared for and claimed it as their own, for what, to possibly hide a crime. All the while CPS was trying to investigate a crime. Pot, kettle. As always JMO/IMO.

[Mimi428]

Originally posted by juliekan [*]http://writ.news.findlaw.com/hamilton/20080603.html

[/*]

<bandwidth snip>

Thanks for finding & posting that link.

So many great points, it's a shame we can't quote the whole thing.

I have been downright disgusted with the inaccurate spins so much of the media have been cranking out about this whole situation. I fully expect the FLDS to promote their own viewpoint, but it is disheartening to see it regurgitated by the media, whom I would hope would be somewhat interested in actually educating their audience on what the laws allow.

Excerpt. . .

“Code prohibits interference with an investigation, and a person who relocates a residence or conceals a child with the intent to interfere with an investigation commits an offense.”

[juliekan]

Originally posted by Imperfect [*]Pulled this over from the links thread:

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/...o/5817593.html



Putting aside for a moment how proud I feel about those big, strong, protective family men -- the eternal ''gods' of the sect who are the only entrance to heaven for their lowly female counterparts -- I have to say that I'm very encouraged that these polygamist baby daddies are running like scared little rabbits as fast and far away from LE, and therefore the adolescent girls of the sect, as possible.

Okay - that was the world's longest sentence. [/*]

From this link: "Two weeks ago at their children's custody hearings, a number of mothers, including a wife of YFZ leader Merrill Jessop, testified that their spouses had disappeared, leaving no forwarding information"

Now for the humor...last night Bratlings posted this response:
"who do you call first to find a missing husband when you have 10,000 relatives?"

[Mimi428]

Originally posted by Bratlings [*]


Big deal... as long as they are adults. Many cultures practice arranged marriages. In fact in "Open court" right now there is a thread devoted to that and no harsh criticisms like here. [/*]

How old are the couple in question in the thread you are referring to? IIRC, they are both 40+ years old.

In nearly 6 years, I have used this emoticon twice. But your comparison warrants it.



I'm ashamed of you - or for you - that you would equate an coerced 'marriage' of an adolescent female to an adult male 20, 30, 40+ years her senior to the situation we have read about it in the thread on OC.

[Ladyhawk]

Originally posted by Bratlings [*]


Big deal... as long as they are adults. Many cultures practice arranged marriages. In fact in "Open court" right now there is a thread devoted to that and no harsh criticisms like here. [/*]

I really don't think I am making a harsh criticism of anything with this post....just presenting information that explains why the FLDS claims every marriage is consentual....

[evalles]

Originally posted by juliekan [*]http://writ.news.findlaw.com/hamilton/20080603.html

"The Texas Supreme Court Affirms that CPS Has Ongoing Jurisdiction"

"The Texas Supreme Court Did Not Clear the Adults at the FLDS Compound of Abuse Claims, Nor Did it Vindicate Any "Rights" on Their Part"


Lotty posted this article on the links site. It is by Professor Hamilton, a Fellow at the Program in Law and Public Affairs at Princeton. It's a great article explaining the Texas Supreme Court Ruling. I enjoyed reading something by a true scholar, not just a media talking head (or just one of us guessing about the legal points ) [/*]

Who said it did ?
There has to be an investigation before they can be cleared of abuse claims.
We know they were accused.
The appeals court said they didn't have the right to take them based on the evidence they had. They didn't meet the 3 criteria needed for removal.
It stands to reason,that if they didn't have sufficient evidence and they took them anyway, this was a violation of their rights.
I don't care if they investigate and find abuse and deal with it in accordance with the law. I care that they took the kids without showing they were in immediate danger as required by law.
And, this is one interpretation of the order, there are many.

But, based on this article, do you now think the higher courts were right ?

Originally posted by juliekan [*]

From this link: "Two weeks ago at their children's custody hearings, a number of mothers, including a wife of YFZ leader Merrill Jessop, testified that their spouses had disappeared, leaving no forwarding information"

Now for the humor...last night Bratlings posted this response:
"who do you call first to find a missing husband when you have 10,000 relatives?"

[/*]

Yep...that Bratlings is a laugh a minute

[juliekan]

http://www.abpnews.com/3214.article

Polygamist sect's children sing, write poems to thank Baptists

Sounds like the foster care was excellent!

[Mimi428]

Originally posted by Imperfect [*]
I have to say that I'm very encouraged that these polygamist baby daddies are running like scared little rabbits as fast and far away from LE, and therefore the adolescent girls of the sect, as possible.

[/*]

<bandwidth snip>

My guess is that a few of them are trying to figure out how best to present "the turkey baster defense" when it is revealed that they have fathered children with females who were clearly unable by law to consent to sexual activity.

Second guess is that some of them are furiously planning on how to get out of the country (if they haven't done so already).

[evalles]

Originally posted by lotty [*]

Here is what keeps bothering me...The girl might be a mother, with someone else caring for her child, does this mean that a member of the FLDS has done the same thing that people are screaming about CPS doing. Someone took this girl's child and cared for and claimed it as their own, for what, to possibly hide a crime. All the while CPS was trying to investigate a crime. Pot, kettle. As always JMO/IMO. [/*]

The differnce is we should be able to expect CPS to follow the law.
In one report, her attorney said there was no reason to believe the girl had a child, so who knows.
If true, there's no way of knowing if the girl allowed someone else to take care of the baby.
The baby is likely with family.
Big difference between CPS placing hundreds of kids with total strangers and the baby of a teen mom staying with family.
CPS committed a crime when it took over 400 children without satisfying the 3 mandates required by Texas law. They're now, working overtime to cover it up.

[Mimi428]

Originally posted by evalles [*]


It stands to reason,that if they didn't have sufficient evidence and they took them anyway, this was a violation of their rights.
[/*]

<bandwidth snip>

There is a shortened CV about the person who wrote that article.

Would you care to post yours?

http://writ.news.findlaw.com/hamilton/

Professor Hamilton is an internationally recognized expert on constitutional and copyright law. She is frequently asked to advise Congress and state legislatures on the constitutionality of pending legislation and to consult in cases before the United States Supreme Court.

This is from her original article -

Moreover, neither the Texas Supreme Court nor the lower appellate court ruled on whether the parents have any “rights,” constitutional or otherwise – a point the Texas Supreme Court stated explicitly. To the contrary, both decisions were state law rulings on the sufficiency of the evidence to date to take all of the children at once.

Ever heard of the saying "if you find yourself in a hole - stop digging"?

[Mimi428]

Originally posted by Imperfect [*]

Quite the predicament, I'd say. [/*]

<snipped>

Warren's going to have to have some non-stop revelations on those reassignment pairings. Those closest to him, the ones most in his favor, are likely to have been given some of the youngest females. I think there is a strong possibility that his closest allies will either be leaving the country or occupying their own cells.

and when that happens, look for a coup

[evalles]

Imperfect,

The part you stood up and cheered to was the writer's opionion and not part of the dissent written by the judge.

This gives a little more of the opinion written by one of the dissenting judges.

http://messengerandadvocate.wordpres...t-flds-ruling/

Let's not forget that the dissenters lost, 6-3 and majority rules.

[evalles]

Originally posted by juliekan [*]http://www.abpnews.com/3214.article

Polygamist sect's children sing, write poems to thank Baptists

Sounds like the foster care was excellent! [/*]

I agree, and these were obviously good, well behaved children.
This is usually a product of their upbringing.

[Mimi428]

Originally posted by Imperfect [*]

'Turkey baster defense'. ROFL!

Or ... here comes the immaculate conception, FLDS style!

Or ... maybe the prophet WILLED those pregnancies from his jail cell ... though a revelation. Yeah, THAT's the ticket.

[/*]

No doubt they would claim it if they could. Now if they can find any attorneys willing to promote those ideas in court . . .



In all seriousness, the high incidence of fumarase deficiency births is a direct result of the overwhelming control Warren Jeffs has exerted on his followers. They have all shown complete & utter disregard to the medical personnel who have tried for YEARS to help them reduce the numbers. They are willfully ignorant to the science of genetics - because to become more informed would undermine the divine authority of Warren to decide, through revelation, who should reproduce with whom.

Classic examples of "if the facts do not support the theory, they must be disregarded".

Tragic.

[SavannahStar]

Originally posted by Roux [*]

From the article: Willie said the girl called him asking for another atty because Malonis was interested in pursuing her own agenda and not the best interest of her client.

That is so patently ridiculous and you'd think with what's about to be revealed that Willie would stop his lies. Maybe the order keeping the girl away from her father and Raymond Jessop should also have included Willie Jessop. [/*]

That's actually NOT so patently ridiculous about Malonis. Trust me.

[lotty]

Originally posted by Imperfect [*]

'Turkey baster defense'. ROFL!

Or ... here comes the immaculate conception, FLDS style!

Or ... maybe the prophet WILLED those pregnancies from his jail cell ... though a revelation. Yeah, THAT's the ticket.

[/*]

IMO, sadly...

http://www.rickross.com/reference/po...lygamy107.html

Peterson and other sources say Black was brought before a state grand jury last April, where he testified that the Stubbs sisters' pregnancies were a result of artificial insemination.

"He's saying he impregnated them with a syringe," Peterson says.

Authorities confirm that Black is claiming the "turkey-baster" defense.

[Mimi428]

Originally posted by Bratlings [*]


Or maybe she was willingly married at a legal age and the State has branded her a sex abuse victim against her will. [/*]

Why would her own attorney work against her client's interests? Her attorney cannot have evidence of legal marriage & ignore that or represent that it didn't exist.

[evalles]

37 years old, listed as 18 or younger and refused an attorney !!


When Sarah first was taken from the ranch with her children, Texas officials said she was 18 or younger. Sarah wasn't allowed to have her own attorney until her age was verified through two official sources, she adds.
"Do you know how old I am?" Sarah said Monday. "I'm 37 years old tomorrow! I kind of thought, well, as much as I don't like what you are doing, that is one of the nicest compliments. I had to either laugh or cry, and so I laughed."

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/1...2,00.html?pg=2

[Roux]

Originally posted by SavannahStar [*]

That's actually NOT so patently ridiculous about Malonis. Trust me. [/*]

You seem to infer that you have inside information. Have you had personal experience with atty Malonis?

[lotty]

Originally posted by Bratlings [*]


Black is in Canada and not relevant to this case. [/*]

http://www.rickross.com/reference/po...lygamy107.html
Meanwhile, the Arizona AG's office filed a complaint in Mohave County Superior Court on February 27, charging Colorado City-area polygamist Orson William Black Jr. with five felony counts of sexual misconduct with two girls.

[Roux]

Originally posted by Bratlings [*]


I believe the Baptists being referred to were the shelter workers not the foster care people. [/*]

I don't understand your statement. The Baptist ranch workers who took care of the children were being thanked. The article didn't say anything about "foster care people."

[juliekan]

Originally posted by juliekan [*]http://www.abpnews.com/3214.article

Polygamist sect's children sing, write poems to thank Baptists

Sounds like the foster care was excellent! [/*]

No Bratlings, the children were "entrusted to the Texas Baptist child-care agency" when the children were put in foster care. It was the Baptist Child and Family Services Youth Ranch in Gonzales County.

I see from other posts that I should have said caretakers, not foster care? Whatever...

[Mimi428]

Originally posted by Bratlings [*]


Black is in Canada and not relevant to this case. [/*]

He came from the same FLDS group as Warren Jeffs.

Last I read, he was known to be in Chihuahua, Mexico.