Posted on 04/19/2008 12:52:14 PM PDT by greyfoxx39
Due to the number of posts debating the legality or wisdom of the state government of Texas' actions regarding the FLDS cult, I think this states the position of many of us.
I'm sure there are some who would dispute this, but I found it to be thought-provoking.
WHERE SHOULD THE LINE BE DRAWN?
The line should be drawn in ALL organizations, religious or otherwise, where individuals are taught to violate the rights of others or to allow their rights to be violated.
If instead of a religious organization, it was a non-religious organization such as a street gang that indoctrinated young girls into submitting to sexual predation on the part of select males in the organization, there wouldn't be any question that rights are being violated and the organization needs to be checked or even dissolved and the perpetrators prevented from perpetrating any further crimes, so why give religious groups a free pass to inculcate a culture of physical, psychological, and sexual abuse when we don't give any other organizations a free pass?
Suppose instead of sex between teenage girls and adult men, it were a question of indoctrinating young virgins into submitting themselves to voluntary human sacrifice in the name of religion? What if it were a question of indoctrinating the youth to become suicide bombers? Would it be so grey a question then?
The line is easily drawn when you understand the fundamental purpose or role of government-- to protect the rights of the individual from infringement.
When children, or even adults, are sufficiently abused and indoctrinated to the point that they willingly submit to any and all forms of abuse or violations of their rights, or they are taught to abuse or otherwise violate the rights of others, the line has been crossed by that individual or organization, even if it's a religion, and it must be stopped.
Vanity Ping
The question is still too wide.
There should be no free passes for abusing children. These men created something that is not a real religion, it was created as a shell religion for the sole purpose of ritually sexually abusing children.
Children are a wholly different matter.
Which is worse:
Removing all child abuse from society but in the process assuring that somewhere at least one persons rights will be infringed.
Keeping rights totally untouched but assuring that somewhere at least one child is going abused.
I neglected to mention that this is from a post on another website...notice the “anon” in the heading.
Maybe so...but if I were the State of Texas, I wouldn’t try this against Muslims.
Let Janet Reno handle it
False choice.
The issue is where the line is drawn, not one extreme or the other.
One of the serious but least mentioned issues regarding these kids is that many of them are carriers of a gene that causes severe handicaps, physical and mental.
Why not?
In the real world yes. But answering a sheds light on where you stand philosophically. Kinda like better to let 10 guilty men go free than imprison or execute an innocent man.
A good start.
First, they are going to determine the parents of each child, by DNA testing.
Every child deserves to know the names of his/her mother and father, likewise to know the names of their full and half-siblings.
At least, after the testing, the court will know the parents of each child and can determine what is best for the child.
Very complicated — because this cult has chosen to breed children as if they were animals or property, with no regard to preserving a legal or socially accepted family unit.
WTG, Texas. A huge task, but I pray God’s blessing will be on doing the right thing for these children who are in State’s custody.
When was the last time you saw a street gang given this level of scrutiny?
This is an argument that public schools should be raided and shut down.
The line has been drawn. It's 150 miles to the south and it's called the Mexican border where on the other side the age of consent is 12. Texas is a dumb place to break laws.
I wonder if this raid was planned well ahead in case Romney was the Republican nominee. This would have really damaged Romney's bid I think.
I agree, but in this case was there? From what little I've gleamed from the media, nobody was being held against their will, the girls that were "married" were 18 yoa or older, the "marriages" were not officially state sanctioned so legally it is not polygamy. Now we are seeing the "authorities" searching for some kind of crime wanting to run dna tests etc.
It seems that because we don't like one man with multiple women it must be a crime. So far I have not seen any reports of any under aged girls being forced to have sex with someone, or manipulated into it. All the girls were of age.
I get very nervous when "govt. authorities" decide some religious group is doing things they don't like.
Why is that anyones business other than the parents and their doctors?
Why aren't all black Americans forced to undergo the same testing, over 65% are born outside of marriage.
Why not infringe NO rights, and just accept that some bad things will happen, and accept that as the price of Freedom? In trying to stamp out all evil, Big Gov becomes too OPPRESSIVE.
I agree, but then there is that pesky Fourth Amendment to the Unites States Constitution. Let's review it.
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
Dang! It seem those silly old geezers who wrote it forgot to put in an exception for child abuse. They also forgot to put in an exception for drug dealers and as some cities are discovering the even neglected to put in an exception for searches for illegal weapons.(sarcasm off)
There's a reason they did not put any exceptions. The people who want to destroy this country are spending considerable efforts to find popular reason to chip away at the Bill of Rights, particularly the 2nd and 4th amendments that stand athwart their path to socialization. Don't fall for the persuasive "it's about the children," because ultimately it's not.
>>>So far I have not seen any reports of any under aged girls being forced to have sex with someone, or manipulated into it. All the girls were of age.
A relative is working the case for the Texas DCFS....there are more than a dozen pregnant 12 year olds among those taken from that hell hole. The media has yet to report on the full extent of the horrors of that place.
When asked why the news coverage was so slanted against the administration...he said that CNN, the New York Times and other liberals institutions were afraid of being bombed.
I believe him.
That's why Texas might want to think twice about intervening in Muslim polygamy.
Well while we are at it way not eliminate free speech and the right to religious liberty? We can always "baby bait" everyone by saying we're doing it to protect the children.
Just exactly what crime was committed by these people?
So are you ‘reporting’ more than two dozen pregnant 12 year olds, then? With all due respect, hearsay is hearsay......
With all due respect - I see a lot of people here appearing to condone the ritual sexual abuse of children in the name of freedom of religion, and it sickens me.
I remember reading on threads at FR during the days immediately following Katrina about all the murders, rapes, gang activity that went on in the superdome. After the media got there we discovered none of it was true. I will believe these rumors when they prove them.
If 12 yoa girls were being sexually abused I want the perpetrators put away forever, at this point I'm more inclined to believe it's the authorities covering their butts.
No,you have missed the point. I have seen no one condone criminal activity of any kind. We have yet to see any proof that crimes were being committed. If they had pregnant minors I think we would have seen pictures or been told about it.
Everybody wants to support the "govt" against these "cultists", but what happens when they label your church, or club, a "cult". Does the "govt" have the right to just come in and take all the kids away and destroy your life? No, a thousand times NO!
If your relative in Texas is involved, there must be a reason why he/she isn't speaking out publicly. That said, he/she should be keeping their mouth shut unless there is some official statement.
In this case they had a search warrant. Two of them I believe.
Why is each and every question labeled as support of polygamy?
States should not be able to remove ALL of the children of a religious group, then decide whether some of them are abused.
Right. So far, none. The “line” is already drawn and it was drawn about 220 years ago and has been modified, slightly, but is still pretty good guide. Constitutional rights can be infringed so long as there is a “compelling state interest” and the infrigement is “narrowly tailored to achieve the intended result”. Sometimes, the Courts have a tough case and it comes out in a way many think is wrong—so the Amish must have what they view to be satanic, orange signs on their buggies to signify that they are a slow moving vehicle. It’s constitutional because traffic safety is compelling, it’s not directed just at the amish, and it’s narrowly tailored.
Statutory rape is enforced against everyone, therefore being in a religious group is not a shield against such a charge. But that’s where it gets tricky. First, there’s the age of consent which, I believe in TX is 16. Lots of allegations, but no proof that any girls under the age of 16 are pregnant now. Also, it’s typically not statutory rape if the father is within 2 years (i.e., not rape if the father is 17), in most states. Age of consent in TX was only 14 as recently as 2005. It is irrelevant how old the father is if the woman is of the age of consent, thus a 15 year old could have sex with a 50 year old in TX as recently as 2005, no matter how sick we think it is.
Additionally, statutory rape is rarely prosecuted and when it is, it is a “strict liability” offence, meaning that the intent or knowledge is not relevant (i.e., not knowing her true age is not an excuse, ever). There are, for instance, girls of 15 having babies all over the damn place in urban areas—no one is ever charged with statutory rape in these cases, most of which will be related to gang activity. So, in short, to prosecute for rape, you have to have girls getting pregnant before the age of consent. If you have that, then you’re golden. Unfortunately for the prosecution in TX, they don’t have this yet.
As for polygamy, it is almost never prosecuted since the civil damages tend to be enough deterrent (two wives suing is quite enough) and even more rarely when it is a religion. Obama’s father, for example, was a polygamist as is about 2/3 of the world’s population. There have always been serious questions about whether laws against polygamy can withstand serious constitutional challenge nowadays. Frankly, I could give a hoot about that aspect and I suspect 90% of people feel the same way.
Then we have to figure how the feds got there—an anonymous tip that is now almost certainly going to be proven a hoax. this is a big problem since one could argue under the “fruits of the poisonous tree” doctrine, some or all of the evidence gathered as a result of a bad warrant must be tossed out. That means no case at all, in theory. IN this case, that won’t happen, but without a “smoking gun”, which in this case means a pregnant, under aged girl, there is no crime and the gov’t clearly violated the civil rights of the community. It is irrelevant how repugnant they might be—the bill of rights was created precisely to protect those persons and thoughts we might despise.
Testimony about the pregnant minors is in the affadavits.
I agree CPS has to much power and power that can definitely be abused.
I don’t think it was abused in this case.
There are good cases to use as examples to reign in rogue CPS, but this isn’t the one. This one is definitely not the one I’d pick for that.
Here in Atlanta not long ago, a drug squad shot and killed a violent drug dealer after getting a fraudulent search warrant. The lady was killed. She was a really violent 80 plus year old drug dealer (sarc).....If I'm not mistaken, the 'officers' have been convicted for their crimes....
All it takes is a random anonymous call from a neighbor to the authorities and the the police will come to your house......
Sorry to doublepost, but I should clarify that you don’t need a pregnant girl, but clear and convincing evidence that girls under age of consent were having sex (even if consensual) with persons who are not exempt from statutory rape law of tx. Pregnancy, obviously is the best proof. I seriously doubt the constitutionality of getting 100s of DNA samples for a fishing expedition.
And by what coercion are the adults going to be DNA tested?
If they want their kids they have to PROVE they are the bio parents. simple enough.
So you’re saying that because it appears that street gangs are given a pass, we should just ignore what’s going on with the fLDS? Are you saying “Oh well, just another raped child. What’s for dinner tonight, honey?”
One of the bloggers was reporting something along those lines. It’s literally mind-boggling, between the sheer numbers of abuse and the amount and severity of it.
If you have to ask, you might as well erase your tagline because it’s obvious that to you, it means nothing. If you’d like to know what they’ve done that’s criminal, please read some of the articles on these threads. Some threads contain the information in the warrants, and others detail what they found when they entered the ranch.
Guess what? Not every case is the same. This is not Georgia, and it’s darned sure not Waco, either.
What would you have them do? Walk in, see the obvious signs of child rape, and shrug their shoulders and leave?
Of course this is hearsay.
Does anyone remember the McMartin Preschool Trial in Southern California? The crimes alleged against the owners and teachers of the school makes this Texas place seem like Romper Room. The Parents said they were molesters, the kids said they were molested and the cops said the kids were molested. The prosecution wove a tale of the darkest depravity where kittens and puppies were threatened and killed in subterranean basements to win the children's secrecy and compliance in unspeakable acts of pedophilia.
The end result was not guilty on all counts. the charge was concocted out of whole cloth.
Pardon my ignorance, I thought the US Constitution applied to every state....forget everything I said....
Your posts are very well put. Expect to be calumnied by the FRothers.
>>>It’s literally mind-boggling, between the sheer numbers of abuse and the amount and severity of it.
Agreed.
As I said earlier, why is every question considered support of polygamy and/or child abuse? Is the state ALWAYS right?
What’s for dinner tonight, honey?
No clue, you'll have to ask wife.
Please point out which constitutional rights have been violated. They had two valid warrants. The judge has looked all of this information over, and if they weren’t valid this judge would have run them out of court (and maybe the town) on a rail. So you have valid warrants, you act on them—tell me, please, where they went wrong. Are the authorities NOT allowed to enforce laws in this country? Should they just sit on their hands and let people do...gee, I don’t know...whatever strikes their fancy?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.