Unmitigated codswallop. ...so your logical conclusion is that she must be returned to experience more physical abuse, because it hasn't been fatal ...yet? The father has, according to his daughter and witnesses, physically abused the child in the past. And under our laws, that is enough to remove any child from any parent. Whether or not the father is ever charged for that abuse, or found guilty or innocent, is another matter.
The Judge ordered the child to be under the jurisdiction of the Child Protection Agency while he personally continued to direct an investigation of the case. I sincerely hope the child reaches her majority before the investigation is concluded.
Fortunately, this child is very lucky that the judge in this case does not follow your line of "reasoning." You see, the judge cannot be certain that this particular Muslim parent is not now, or will possibly become, an "honor killer." That is because Muslims (The Religion of Peace) have demonstrated a history of this murderous behavior toward women.
The judge was logical in his pursuit of this child's safety.
Well done. Thanks for the ping.
Maybe the judge intends his investigation to pass the child's 18th birthday.
Alternately, you allege that because some Muslims kill people, and her father is a Muslim, therefore her father will kill her. That is illogical gogswallow, or whatever you call it.
This line of reasoning does not pass a constitutional test:
"You see, the judge cannot be certain that this particular Muslim parent is not now, or will possibly become, an "honor killer."
If she was abused then she should be removed from the home, on that we agree. Religion is irrelevant to the facts.
I am a conservative Christian who cherishes our Constitution. If anyone doubts my bona fides, you can google "foutsc." The internet is littered with my defense of this nation and the conservative principles I think should guide it.
I intend no disrespect to anyone in the forum. We're all on the same side after all.