Originally Posted By Elderp Looks like the FLDS church won their appeal. Why is it that in these high profile cases it seems like they always go overboard. I remember when they first reported this story they were saying as many as 40 girls were being molested. Now they have a list of 5 and they are really certain on that because of consent laws. I have to admit that as a LDS member I kinda wish that Texas would of dealt a devasting blow to this church, but now it looks like they are going to go right back to normal. I also think that the court made the fair and just ruling, I just wish our church didn't have to deal with them anymore. If I have to read "renegade mormons" one more time... <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24777095" target="_blank">http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24777095</a>
Originally Posted By Moderation Actually it wasn't the church that won this writ, it was 38 parents of children taken into state custody who brought and won this writ. And the news stories if anything, have under played just how badly the State CPA was slam dunked by the court- reading the actual decision, I have never seen any CPA agency so completely, conclusively and redundantly over ruled. I guess even scizmatic- mormon polygamists who dress like Little House on the Prarie extras have rights, even in Texas!
Originally Posted By gottaluvdavillains Hmm - Interesting that these parents won since they wouldn't even say which children were theirs. How will the state know who to release the children to? And what about the underage married pregnant teens?
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder So if the kids are theirs, they can abuse them as they see fit?
Originally Posted By X-san ***If I have to read "renegade mormons" one more time...*** That's interesting. I would think some mainstream christian churches might say the same about LDS and its' claims of christianity.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<So if the kids are theirs, they can abuse them as they see fit?>> See, that's the thing. They weren't abused. It was mass hysteria orchestrated by an overzealous District Attorney. We encountered the same thing in the 1984 Jordan MN Child Abuse Scandal. <<Beginning in 1983, Jordan was swept up in an instance of what has been called satanic ritual abuse. Twenty-four adults were arrested and charged with acts of sexual abuse, child pornography and other crimes..[3] According to Jordan native Tom Dubbe, the scandal began with the arrest of 26-year-old James Rud on sex abuse charges. Rud undoubtedly had a history of child molestation, but "once Rud was arrested he was given a difficult choice by Minnesota's first woman county attorney, Kathleen Morris. Morris suggested: Name names and we'll go easier on you.">> Eventually the witch-hunt ended and Kathleen Morris was tarred, feathered, and run out of town on a rail. I fear over-zealous prosecutors FAR MORE than I fear alleged child abusers. “First, we kill the attorneys…â€
Originally Posted By RoadTrip P.S. <“First, we kill the attorneys…â€>> Just a fairly common slogan... not something I would actually support. I think jail time would be fine.
Originally Posted By EighthDwarf <<***If I have to read "renegade mormons" one more time...*** That's interesting. I would think some mainstream christian churches might say the same about LDS and its' claims of christianity.>> LOL! I think we've beat that argument to death by now though....
Originally Posted By gottaluvdavillains So does that mean because of the way it was handled the married to dirty old men, underaged, pregnant teenage girls are not a problem anymore? I heard on the news that the will decide by tuesday to appeal this ruling.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<So does that mean because of the way it was handled the married to dirty old men, underaged, pregnant teenage girls are not a problem anymore? No. It means it didn't actually happen. If this didn't involve a bunch of "loony toon" Mormons would you all find this so hard to fathom? I thought not. Your prejudice is despicable. (I ain't a Mormon and don't want to be one. I just know what is fair.)
Originally Posted By EighthDwarf "Your prejudice is despicable." It was the mainstream Mormons who started polygamy, which often involved young women. They have since more or less abandoned that practice but have never denied it being an "eternal principle." These FLDS folks are trying to follow the original teaching of the Mormon church (the "F" stands for fundamental). Therefore, comparing these people to Mormons seems like fair game.
Originally Posted By gottaluvdavillains I am sorry - but it was reported that one teen had given birth since being moved and there were around 7 others pregnant - I don't really consider this group to really be Mormon - they are not (according to others who are) following the Temple beliefs. They follow some of the Mormon teachings but not all - I would say they are more like a cult. I really don't care what they are referred to - if they were following the laws of the state they are in there wouldn't have been a problem. The sad thing is - the state didn't follow the proper steps to handle this situation - Also if everything was on the up and up with this group why would they not come forward and say which children were theirs so maybe they could see them - why would they put themselves and the children through DNA testing? I am not prejudice - I just don't like to see babies having babies with men who should be protecting them! I don't care what religion they are.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder "<<So does that mean because of the way it was handled the married to dirty old men, underaged, pregnant teenage girls are not a problem anymore? No. It means it didn't actually happen. If this didn't involve a bunch of "loony toon" Mormons would you all find this so hard to fathom? I thought not. Your prejudice is despicable. (I ain't a Mormon and don't want to be one. I just know what is fair.)" What in the world has gotten into you? It's entirely reasonable to be suspicious of this sect. Simply because this court made the ruling it did absolutely does not mean that's the end of this and nothing harmful is going on. There's no prejudice being shown by the poster here, likely a healthy skepticism, which I also have. The following paragraph is from the CNN article on the subject: "The sect's leader, Warren Jeffs, is in a Utah prison after being convicted on charges of being an accomplice to rape in connection with a marriage he performed in 2001. Jeffs also faces trial in Arizona on charges stemming from arranged marriages involving FLDS teens" Anything even remotely connected to Jeffs deserves all the suspicion it can handle.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip There is reality and there is (perhaps unfounded) suspicion. Jeffs is reality. The rest of these parents? Perhaps/probably should not have been charged. Kind of like Jordan Minnesota in 1984. Rud was reality. Twenty three other adults were falsely charged. Somewhere I thought I remembered something about innocent until proven guilty. When did that disappear?
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder When it comes to child abuse, there is no such thing. That's the reality, good, bad, or indifferent.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip I would NEVER suggest that child abuse should in any way be tolerated. But cases like this where over 400 children are separated from their parents on virtually NO EVIDENCE shows just how far the legal system in this country has gotten out of control. We don't treat the children in our country terribly well. We treat our parents even worse. Much of that is due to the legal profession. My dad was a lawyer. I have a nephew and a niece who are lawyers. I have nothing personally against lawyers. I only hate what they have done to America.
Originally Posted By ADMIN <font color="#FF0000">Message removed by an administrator. <a href="MsgBoard-Rules.asp" target="_blank">Click here</a> for the LaughingPlace.com Community Standards.</font>
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<William Shakespeare > Henry VI, part 2 > Act 4, Scene 2 Henry VI, part 2 Act 4, Scene 2 SCENE II. Blackheath. Enter GEORGE BEVIS and JOHN HOLLAND BEVIS Come, and get thee a sword, though made of a lath; they have been up these two days. HOLLAND They have the more need to sleep now, then. BEVIS I tell thee, Jack Cade the clothier means to dress the commonwealth, and turn it, and set a new nap upon it. HOLLAND So he had need, for 'tis threadbare. Well, I say it was never merry world in England since gentlemen came up. BEVIS O miserable age! virtue is not regarded in handicrafts-men. HOLLAND The nobility think scorn to go in leather aprons. BEVIS Nay, more, the king's council are no good workmen. HOLLAND True; and yet it is said, labour in thy vocation; which is as much to say as, let the magistrates be labouring men; and therefore should we be magistrates. BEVIS Thou hast hit it; for there's no better sign of a brave mind than a hard hand. HOLLAND I see them! I see them! there's Best's son, the tanner of Wingham,-- BEVIS He shall have the skin of our enemies, to make dog's-leather of. HOLLAND And Dick the Butcher,-- BEVIS Then is sin struck down like an ox, and iniquity's throat cut like a calf. HOLLAND And Smith the weaver,-- BEVIS Argo, their thread of life is spun. HOLLAND Come, come, let's fall in with them. Drum. Enter CADE, DICK the Butcher, SMITH the Weaver, and a Sawyer, with infinite numbers CADE We John Cade, so termed of our supposed father,-- DICK [Aside] Or rather, of stealing a cade of herrings. CADE For our enemies shall fall before us, inspired with the spirit of putting down kings and princes, --Command silence. DICK Silence! CADE My father was a Mortimer,-- DICK [Aside] He was an honest man, and a good bricklayer. CADE My mother a Plantagenet,-- DICK [Aside] I knew her well; she was a midwife. CADE My wife descended of the Lacies,-- DICK [Aside] She was, indeed, a pedler's daughter, and sold many laces. SMITH [Aside] But now of late, notable to travel with her furred pack, she washes bucks here at home. CADE Therefore am I of an honourable house. DICK [Aside] Ay, by my faith, the field is honourable; and there was he borne, under a hedge, for his father had never a house but the cage. CADE Valiant I am. SMITH [Aside] A' must needs; for beggary is valiant. CADE I am able to endure much. DICK [Aside] No question of that; for I have seen him whipped three market-days together. CADE I fear neither sword nor fire. SMITH [Aside] He need not fear the sword; for his coat is of proof. DICK [Aside] But methinks he should stand in fear of fire, being burnt i' the hand for stealing of sheep. CADE Be brave, then; for your captain is brave, and vows reformation. There shall be in England seven halfpenny loaves sold for a penny: the three-hooped pot; shall have ten hoops and I will make it felony to drink small beer: all the realm shall be in common; and in Cheapside shall my palfrey go to grass: and when I am king, as king I will be,-- ALL God save your majesty! CADE I thank you, good people: there shall be no money; all shall eat and drink on my score; and I will apparel them all in one livery, that they may agree like brothers and worship me their lord. DICK The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers.>> What can I say?? As long as you guys know your place... ;-)
Originally Posted By RoadTrip Hey SingleParkPassholder, Don't mind me. Sometimes I get more into proving my argument than going with what I believe. I think the truth on all of this lies somewhere between what you think and what I think. Even if Mormons are freaking crazy. Imagine being in Lehi, Utah on a Sunday evening at 6:00 PM and not being able to find a drink in the whole danged town?? Decided right then and there that I would never spend any substantial time in Utah. But I still think Mormons are OK. If a bit weird.
Originally Posted By mele Maybe if the entire group had been more truthful instead of lying about who they are, teaching their children to lie about who their parents are, and moving girls into hiding, maybe the state would have been a little more trusting and allowed parents to keep their children. They behaved in ways that made them look extremely guilty and then got upset when they weren't trusted at their word. Can't have it both ways. It looks like there definitely was abuse going on in the compound and multiple people knew about it and obviously condoned it by continuing to live there. Just because it might not have been proven that these children were abused, it doesn't mean that they are in a situation where it is more likely. I would have made these parents move away from the compound before giving them custody and they should be closely monitored until they are adults.
