Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Texas Authorities, Media Ensure Its Not Easy Being Mormon
North Star Writers Group ^ | May 26, 2008 | Lucia de Vernai

Posted on 05/26/2008 6:42:47 AM PDT by Dukes Travels

It’s not easy being Mormon. No cursing, no premarital sex, no Mountain Dew. Perpetual good neighbors, their religion – so inherent to their existence – is a mystery even to those of us who have grown up in predominantly Latter Day Saint communities. In fact, most people know Mormons as the demographic that keeps FamilyFlix in business, Chevy Suburbans on the road and children from divorced families feeling cheated.

Thus, it’s a shame that the one opportunity the country may have to get to know the faith is when political spin taints the message. The high hopes that the Mitt Romney campaign would serve as a vehicle to spread the awareness of the religion have been replaced by the effort to separate the Salt Lake City-based church from the Fundamentalist Latter Day Saints that have been making the news in Texas. The FLDS broke off from the central authority over 100 years ago.

(Excerpt) Read more at northstarwriters.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; US: Texas
KEYWORDS: flds; mormon; mormonbashing; polygamists; whining
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-77 next last

1 posted on 05/26/2008 6:42:48 AM PDT by Dukes Travels
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Dukes Travels

Is it Brigham Young, or bring ‘em young?


2 posted on 05/26/2008 6:48:05 AM PDT by Mr Ramsbotham (Barack Obama--the first black Jimmy Carter.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: greyfoxx39; colorcountry; metmom; Tennessee Nana; Colofornian; SENTINEL
The FLDS broke off from the central authority over 100 years ago.

Well, strictly speaking, the "central authority" broke off from the FLDS over 100 years ago since FLDS' teachings are completely in line with what Joe Smith and Brigham Young taught, especially concerning the "principle" of polygamy.

Apparently there remains strong sympathy for FLDS among the LDS faithful, based upon the FLDS threads on this board.

3 posted on 05/26/2008 6:50:47 AM PDT by Virginia Ridgerunner ("We must not forget that there is a war on and our troops are in the thick of it!"--Duncan Hunter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dukes Travels

No offense to the LDS folks, but when I saw that header, I was certain you meant to write “MORON” and it referred to the “authorities” and “media.”


4 posted on 05/26/2008 7:00:30 AM PDT by Dick Bachert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dukes Travels
It’s not easy being Mormon. No cursing, no premarital sex, no Mountain Dew.

What an ignorant author. Tell me which religion condones premarital sex and cursing.

5 posted on 05/26/2008 7:07:37 AM PDT by JRochelle (Keep sweet means shut up and take it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mr Ramsbotham
Is it Brigham Young, or bring ‘em young?

Its neither. For the FLDS its Breed'em Young.

6 posted on 05/26/2008 7:09:15 AM PDT by JRochelle (Keep sweet means shut up and take it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Dukes Travels

The real downside is trying to make yourself believe the folly that passes for theology in the LDS church.


7 posted on 05/26/2008 7:11:03 AM PDT by whipitgood (Neither of, by, nor for the people any longer...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Virginia Ridgerunner

But that’s why they call them Latter Day Saints. The rules can change which is what happened with polygamy.


8 posted on 05/26/2008 7:12:56 AM PDT by AppyPappy (If you aren't part of the solution, there is good money to be made prolonging the problem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: All
Oh boy!! Another Witch hunting thread. Here's the official kit for you all



Official Texas Child Protective Services Witch Burning Kit®

9 posted on 05/26/2008 7:15:57 AM PDT by abb (Organized Journalism: Marxist-style collectivism applied to information sharing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: abb

"Burn her! Burn! Burn her! Burn her!"
"How do you know she is a witch?"
"She looks like one."
10 posted on 05/26/2008 7:16:33 AM PDT by abb (Organized Journalism: Marxist-style collectivism applied to information sharing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

Comment #11 Removed by Moderator

To: colorcountry; Pan_Yans Wife; MHGinTN; Colofornian; Elsie; FastCoyote; Osage Orange; Greg F; ...

Ping


12 posted on 05/26/2008 7:27:14 AM PDT by greyfoxx39 (Protected species legislation enacted May 2008.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Dukes Travels
no premarital sex,

What a side splitter, no,how many have their fake second marriages. Sort of like the thirty minute marriage the moosies have.

13 posted on 05/26/2008 7:30:23 AM PDT by org.whodat (What's the difference between a Democrat and a republican????)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dukes Travels
According to Kermit its not easy being green either.

I don't think I know of a single religion that condones cursing or pre marital sex, so why is that different than being (f)lds?

The (f)lds says they are the true church and the lds are the ones who left the fold. The (f)lds follow the tenets of Joe Smith so it sorta of looks like the lds did leave the fold.

14 posted on 05/26/2008 7:33:07 AM PDT by svcw (There is no plan B.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dukes Travels

I have a large number of problems with LDS theology. That said, equating FLDS with LDS is about like saying that the snake handlers are representative of all Baptists.


15 posted on 05/26/2008 7:40:38 AM PDT by Ingtar (Haley Barbour 2012, Because he has experience in Disaster Recovery. - ejonesie22)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Virginia Ridgerunner

Well..........

Here is one thing that I’ve made attempts to do.

Let’s look at the issue, from the other side of the mirror.


Is it possible that Jeffs and Willie Jessop were smart enough, after being on the run from the law, to curtail their questionable activities?

The whole ‘purpose’ in moving to Texas was to build the temple. They purchased the land, and put their able bodied men, women, and children to work building the Dorms, Houses, Sheds, Concrete Plant, Water Treatment Facility.

They had some zoning and pollution control issues, because they were in a ‘hurry’, and didn’t realize that the wastewater was backing up into the neighbors land. Somewhere.

They were in a hurry because Jeffs had declared that God told him that all the things in their teachings, were going to come true.

The persecution, as well as the literal end of the world as we know it.

The Land they bought, they called the YFZ Ranch.

I think that the name is very important to FLDS teachings, and I have been just letting it go, since no one gave it a second thought.

YFZ - Yearning For Zion. Right?
YFZ - Yearn for Zion. Right?

It has been printed in newspapers, TV, the web, both ways.

The story is that Warren wrote a hymn, called Yearning For Zion. While that may be true, I don’t believe that is the name of their community, their temple, their destiny.

You know what I believe it to be? (pause)

Year For Zion.

I believe it is based on the words in Isaiah 34.

“(For a day of vengeance is to Jehovah, A year of recompences for Zion’s strife,)”



16 posted on 05/26/2008 7:42:23 AM PDT by UCANSEE2 (I reserve the right to misinterpret the comments of any and all pesters)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: svcw
The (f)lds follow the tenets of Joe Smith so it sorta of looks like the lds did leave the fold

Photobucket Link


17 posted on 05/26/2008 7:45:44 AM PDT by greyfoxx39 (Protected species legislation enacted May 2008.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Ingtar

“That said, equating FLDS with LDS is about like saying that the snake handlers are representative of all Baptists.”

Hmmmmm... I didn’t think, while reading the article, that the writer was equating FLDS with LDS.

I think the point was that the Mormons(LDS) are having to educate the rest of the country to the fact that FLDS is not ‘just like’ LDS.

First off, the Mormons don’t drink coffee, or caffeine products.

The FLDS do. (Warren needed them up day and night to work)


Second, the Mormons aren’t predicting the END OF THE WORLD every month or so, and they don’t isolate themselves from the rest of society.


I don’t think anyone on these threads thinks FLDS is the ‘same’ as LDS.


18 posted on 05/26/2008 7:50:30 AM PDT by UCANSEE2 (I reserve the right to misinterpret the comments of any and all pesters)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Dukes Travels

A brief, objective introduction to the LDS church.

1) Founded by a pair of con artists, not uncommon in religion, during a period of religious experimentation, mostly by immigrants, in the US. Having far more females than males at the time, this explained why they dabbled in polygamy and pseudo-socialism when living in the desolation of Utah. They were just being pragmatic.

2) Their second leader (Young), was an exceptionally good manager. He was ambitious, until he went loggerheads with Abraham Lincoln, and was smart enough to realize that if he didn’t behave, after the war, the Union Army would pay a visit.

3) From that point, they had generally wise doctrines, if a tad racist. Be loyal to the US. Be contemporary, that is, keep up with the times. Go for a healthy lifestyle, and keep religious and social discipline. Don’t make waves.

Now, this being said, despite their early origins, and a few annoying foibles, for the most part they have matured into a respectable religion. Ironically, their “soft sell” approach, staying out of national politics, may have been too tame at times, but that has likely kept them out of some of the nastier fights the US has gone through.

The left generally hates them, because they will not bow to the left’s agenda; and the right is dubious about them for religious reasons, even if in considerable agreement with them as far as social, economic and international policies.

Their problems are that first of all, they sometimes offer too much grace to members who are offensive to the gentiles, and there is a willingness among some to stick it to the gentiles in business. This does not make friends. Nor does retroactively declaring other people’s ancestors Mormons.

Second, for some reason they inspire some kook gentiles to extremes of paranoia. While this is not really caused by the Mormons, it is a problem *for* Mormons.

But, again objectively, their pluses far outweigh their minuses. Even in a position of authority they generally will not try to force their religion on subordinates. However, they do try to keep their children away from gentile influences, for example, and prefer that their children not be taught by gentiles, or have too much exposure to gentile ways.


19 posted on 05/26/2008 8:03:03 AM PDT by yefragetuwrabrumuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Virginia Ridgerunner

“Apparently there remains strong sympathy for FLDS among the LDS faithful, based upon the FLDS threads on this board. “

But is that ‘sympathy’ the kind one has for an estranged, crazy, uncle?

Or maybe it’s a kind of ‘bond’ due to having the same roots.

It would be like Methodists bonding with Baptists, even though the Baptists claim the same ‘bloodline’ deal with John the Baptist.

Both had the same roots. Jesus Christ. So if someone attacked Baptists , I would feel ‘sympathy’, and likely get defensive.


20 posted on 05/26/2008 8:06:20 AM PDT by UCANSEE2 (I reserve the right to misinterpret the comments of any and all pesters)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2
Red. LDS still uses the color "red" but FLDS banned that color. There's a difference on children's toys too. FLDS doesn't want the kids to get attached to them ~

There are other differences of far greater note.

Even Ervil LeBaren knew they were different. That's why he tried to take them over.

21 posted on 05/26/2008 8:08:38 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2
Red. LDS still uses the color "red" but FLDS banned that color. There's a difference on children's toys too. FLDS doesn't want the kids to get attached to them ~

There are other differences of far greater note.

Even Ervil LeBaren knew they were different. That's why he tried to take them over.

22 posted on 05/26/2008 8:08:41 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: JRochelle
Tell me which religion condones ...cursing.

I have a friend who was cursed by the priest after Mass about something that had NOTHING to do with church or religion.

23 posted on 05/26/2008 8:14:19 AM PDT by lonestar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: whipitgood

“The real downside is trying to make yourself believe the folly that passes for theology in the LDS church.”


I understand you don’t believe in the LDS theology, but criticizing someone’s religion is silly.

There are all kinds of different ‘theologies’ that make up the religions of Americans, and since they are all different, then one could declare any but one’s own, to be folly.


24 posted on 05/26/2008 8:15:14 AM PDT by UCANSEE2 (I reserve the right to misinterpret the comments of any and all pesters)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Ingtar
I have a large number of problems with LDS theology. That said, equating FLDS with LDS is about like saying that the snake handlers are representative of all Baptists.

Snake handlers are usually Pentacostal, not Baptist.

The primary difference between FLDS and LDS is LDS gave up bigamy to attain statehood. The FLDS clings to the original teachings of J. Smith.

25 posted on 05/26/2008 8:19:38 AM PDT by Graybeard58 (Why is that annoying asterisk in the search bar ?- wearing out my back space key.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2

I only read a bit of the article. The headline, if nothing else, equates the two.


26 posted on 05/26/2008 8:22:09 AM PDT by Ingtar (Haley Barbour 2012, Because he has experience in Disaster Recovery. - ejonesie22)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Dukes Travels; Mr Ramsbotham; JRochelle; whipitgood; AppyPappy
" When they came for the Jews Mormons, I said nothing because I wasn't a Jew Mormon. When they came for the Homeschoolers, I said nothing because I wasn't a Homeschooler..."

I'm sure I'll be bombarded for this, but here it goes anyway:

Just because you don't personally agree with their theology and marital practices (neither do I, BTW), doesn't mean the State should have done what they did. Particularly on the strength of a specious call from a known mentally disturbed woman with an axe to grind.

If there really were children being abused, then by all means, vigorously investigate and prosecute those as individual cases (as would be done in any other instance). That's just "old-fashioned Police work". But to remove over 450 children from their families on the possibility that maybe a dozen were at risk is preposterous, and just threw us all headlong down the infamous "slippery slope".

Do you think it's better for large groups of children to be forcibly separated from their parents and each other for an indeterminate period, simply because their neighbors might have abused their own children? And placed into the care of the State!? Nothing bad has ever happened to children in foster care, right? No child has ever been abused, molested, or neglected while in foster care, right? I thought this forum was for those who value individual rights.

BTW, try placing 5 or 6 siblings in the same foster home, it just won't happen. Imagine being told the only way you'll ever see your children again is to completely renounce and give up your religion. That's what the mothers are being told. Is that OK w/you? Sounds a bit too Chinese Communist to me.

This thing has now drug on for a month, and not one single criminal charge has been filed against anyone, and children are being quietly returned to their families as we speak.

This will end badly for the State of Texas. It's already cost over 20 million dollars and rising every day. Now their next move is to confiscate the property to "recover their costs". Where's the Freeper outrage over that???

The Supreme Court rules against some guy up North (who was probably "different" too), and lets a municipality take his cheesy little couple of acres, and the Freeper Constitutionalists lit this board up w/righteous indignation like a Christmas tree for a month.

Look at the threads on the "Assault on the Family" in our society on this board. If you don't think it's a real short leap from their "Fundamentalist Christian" families to "regular" mainstream Christian families, you're sadly mistaken.

But let these "weird Mormons" be dispossessed of everything, even their very families, and you are gleeful because they go to a different church than you do? Take a hard look at yourselves. If they get away with this, maybe you're next, maybe you're last. But when they do come for you, will anyone be left to say something???
27 posted on 05/26/2008 8:22:45 AM PDT by conservativeharleyguy (Democrats: Over 60 million fooled daily!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

I don’t think they ‘banned’ it.

IIRC, Warren Jeffs declared the RED CLOTHES were not to be worn by any FLDS because that is the color JESUS wore, and will wear upon his reappearance.

It is like ‘purple’ being reserved for royalty.

Warren had a RED SUV, and in one of the ‘news articles’ they asked the FLDS folks about the color RED, and said, “what about the RED cars, there are some RED cars around.”

The FLDS folks said, “it’s just a car”.

So, I think the RED thing only applied to clothes, and may have been restricted as far as printed signs, materials.

Warren and the FLDS keep the children from ‘play’ and ‘toys’ because they teach the children to be subdued, under control, seen -not heard. They teach the children the value of hard work from an early age.

FLDS doesn’t want their members to watch TV. I’m with them on that one.


28 posted on 05/26/2008 8:22:50 AM PDT by UCANSEE2 (I reserve the right to misinterpret the comments of any and all pesters)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: All

Everyone on this chart has either never been a member of the LDS church or was excommunicated from it, except Joseph Smith and John Taylor. I wouldn’t want anyone to be misled...


29 posted on 05/26/2008 8:23:22 AM PDT by TheDon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2
I don’t think anyone on these threads thinks FLDS is the ‘same’ as LDS.

Maybe not the same but close enough for horseshoes.

30 posted on 05/26/2008 8:25:18 AM PDT by humblegunner (Che is Gay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: All
If you want to learn more about the Mormons:

31 posted on 05/26/2008 8:25:23 AM PDT by TheDon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
Damn. Must get more fuel delivered. Many, many witches to burn...


32 posted on 05/26/2008 8:28:55 AM PDT by abb (Organized Journalism: Marxist-style collectivism applied to information sharing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Virginia Ridgerunner

I’ve seen little sympathy for FLDS on threads on these boards. Just concern for the state overstepping it’s authority and abusing it’s power.


33 posted on 05/26/2008 8:30:29 AM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat

The LDS doesn’t do fake marriages.


34 posted on 05/26/2008 8:31:51 AM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: conservativeharleyguy

First, there is nothing “quiet” about how the CPS has returned the 12 children to their three families. Google FLDS, and the first 99 or so articles that come up will be about this very non-quiet story.

But more important, please define “family” for us. Do you mean a mom, dad, and one or more children? Or do you mean 7 moms and their childrens, and one dad? Or 7 moms, some of whom have been “given” the children of other moms as punishment for those moms, or even just because the leader of the church got a bee in his bonnet? Or 7 moms, a bunch of children, one dad—until that dad ticked off the church leader and had the entire family ripped away from him and given to some other “dad”?

You cannot compare that kind of family to the kind of family most of us know. To say that it’s wrong to have children “ripped from the arms of their mothers” ignores the fact that this happens anyway in their world when they are (for whatever reason) give to some other mother, or to some other father.


35 posted on 05/26/2008 8:48:26 AM PDT by MizSterious (God bless the Texas Rangers for freeing women & children from sexual slavery and abuse.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: abb
I am absolutely fascinated by your fascination with witches and burning them to death.
36 posted on 05/26/2008 8:54:32 AM PDT by svcw (There is no plan B.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: svcw

It’s all here. The original transcripts and everything.
http://etext.virginia.edu/salem/witchcraft/


37 posted on 05/26/2008 8:58:04 AM PDT by abb (Organized Journalism: Marxist-style collectivism applied to information sharing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: abb
Ok, I know you have posted these before.
It is your fascination (maybe even obsession) with witches that intrigues me.
38 posted on 05/26/2008 9:00:31 AM PDT by svcw (There is no plan B.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Dukes Travels

“... no premarital sex...”

The Mormon god boinked someone else’s wife; Mary.

So much for that argument.


39 posted on 05/26/2008 9:21:42 AM PDT by Enosh (†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JRochelle

“Tell me which religion condones premarital sex and cursing.”

Pastafarian heaven includes beer volcanoes and strippers, so presumably those bases are covered.


40 posted on 05/26/2008 9:25:19 AM PDT by Enosh (†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Enosh
Pastafarian heaven includes beer volcanoes and strippers, s

Really? I thought it was just a political gimmick. I'll have to check out it now.

41 posted on 05/26/2008 9:27:05 AM PDT by Ron Jeremy (sonic)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: TheDon
If you want to learn more about the mormons:

.... .... ....

42 posted on 05/26/2008 9:29:02 AM PDT by greyfoxx39 (Protected species legislation enacted May 2008.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: conservativeharleyguy
Imagine being told the only way you'll ever see your children again is to completely renounce and give up your religion.

I know where you're coming from in libertarian terms, but you've got to remember that children are wards; not property. And what constitutes a religion, at least in this country, is defined by the individual, who might or might not make a "religious" practice of bringing up little girls for the sole purpose of having a fresh supply of sweet young teenagers for middle-aged men to prey upon. I don't fault the state for its concern.

43 posted on 05/26/2008 9:29:37 AM PDT by Mr Ramsbotham (Barack Obama--the first black Jimmy Carter.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Ron Jeremy
It is just a gimmick, but it's funny as all get out!

WWFSMD?

44 posted on 05/26/2008 9:30:31 AM PDT by Enosh (†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: MizSterious
Did you read my first paragraph? I never said I agree with their lifestyle, just with the way this was handled by the Texas authorities. Collective punishments rarely have their desired effect. We don't have to agree with their religious beliefs, but this country was founded on Christian belief in religious tolerance, and I believe in their right to have them.

So, until specific criminal activity is discovered (no charges have yet been filed), I am willing to at least give them some benefit of the doubt. I may not agree with them, but wouldn't you want the same. There are those in America who believe that exposure of your children to any Christian belief is abuse.

From the looks of your "about" page, you appear to have made this topic your hobby, and somewhat of a personal crusade (to the point where the Moderator [peace and blessings be upon him (;{) ] had to intervene).

I won't pretend to know as many infinite details about this case as someone who appears to have centered their life around it (for whatever reason one can only speculate), but I still believe it's wrong to approach it the way your blessed Texas Rangers did.

And no, I'm not one of those "America haters" and "child abuse apologists" to which you refer. I just believe this action will be harder on the majority of those children than if the Texas Rangers had simply rooted out the actual abusers, and taken them down hard. That would have served as an object lesson to everyone there. But that's not really what it's about anyway. If you think it was "for the children", then I believe you're mistaken. Again, what are you going to do when they come for you and no-one is left to speak out???
45 posted on 05/26/2008 9:56:35 AM PDT by conservativeharleyguy (Democrats: Over 60 million fooled daily!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: conservativeharleyguy

Only one problem. These people admit to practicing polygamy which is illegal. The state has girls in custody that were obviously underage when they were pregnant. And the cult won’t produce documentation about ages and marital status.

In short, they brought it on themselves.


46 posted on 05/26/2008 10:10:23 AM PDT by AppyPappy (If you aren't part of the solution, there is good money to be made prolonging the problem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: greyfoxx39
About as helpful as learning more about Christianity by going to:

And no, I don't recommend going to this website!

47 posted on 05/26/2008 10:18:08 AM PDT by TheDon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: TheDon
And no, I don't recommend going to this website!

Why not? Ex-Christian, Non-Christian...what's the difference?

48 posted on 05/26/2008 10:25:26 AM PDT by greyfoxx39 (Protected species legislation enacted May 2008.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: conservativeharleyguy

My point is—how DO you sort it out?

In a “normal” child abuse case, when there’s an accusation of child abuse, authorities come in and remove not just the one child, but all of the children in the household. That’s what was done here. The difference is not only in the number of children involved in this case, but the very murky relationships—which child belongs to which parent? Most of the men (except those involved in monogamous marriage at the time) disappeared, the women lied to protect them, and the children weren’t going to speak up while those enabling mothers were watching their every move.

The only way they could properly question the children was—just like in any other case—to separate the victims from the alleged perps and the witnesses.


49 posted on 05/26/2008 10:25:26 AM PDT by MizSterious (God bless the Texas Rangers for freeing women & children from sexual slavery and abuse.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: MizSterious
"...In a “normal” child abuse case, when there’s an accusation of child abuse, authorities come in and remove not just the one child, but all of the children in the household..."

And, as it turns out, the accusation is false. So the answer is to seperate every child from every household? Ever hear of "Fruit of the Poisoned Tree"? Please don't say it's better to just go in and grab all of them, and then sort it out. The correct answer is to verify the source of the calls first, determine whether or not it's credible , then take the action appropriate to the actual situation. Apparently, it wasn't too hard to verify, since they did manage to do it after the fact (...OOPS..., it was just some nut-case with a history of doing the same thing.

Unless of course, you just need a pretext to pursue some other agenda. But then, "It's for the sake of the children" has worked before ("Hey, maybe if we make it about polygamy, "cults", and kids, even the Conservative Christians will let us do it").

Texas has no case, or they would have immediately brought charges. If they couldn't do that, then they didn't prepare properly. If they had conducted this correctly, a few bad apples would have gone straight to jail (or would be on the lam, with a price on their heads), their kids would be getting the help they need, and there wouldn't be 450 plus kids floundering in the foster care system. Instead, they did it backwards, and now they are trying to make the "crime" fit the charge, rather than the charge fit the crime. It seems to me that they are now just making it up as they go.

I seem to remember a great deal of acrimony over the years on this forum about the broken foster care system, and its numerous failures. Now all of a sudden, just because it suits your purpose at the moment, it's OK to put hundreds of kids into that failing system??

So if I decide to call the Oklahoma authorities and tell them that your neighbor is molesting his children, when the Police come and take your kids too - because well..., you do live right next door, you do go to the same church, and you were seen together somewhere, you won't say anything.... right?

I'm not trying to be difficult, but I really don't like the thought of the authorities using unsubstantiated claims as a pretext to raid someone's home, then pretend they had a legitimate reason all along. Again that old "Fruit of the Poisoned Tree" thing.
50 posted on 05/26/2008 11:36:02 AM PDT by conservativeharleyguy (Democrats: Over 60 million fooled daily!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-77 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson