Polygamy caller found

Post by **_harmony** » Fri Apr 18, 2008 5:22 pm

It just goes to show you can't right a wrong with another wrong.

Post by **_Dr. Shades** » Fri Apr 18, 2008 5:40 pm

Although she lied about her identity, what she said about the occurrences at the compound was actually true, was it not?

Post by **_RockHeaded** » Fri Apr 18, 2008 5:45 pm

Dr. Shades wrote:Although she lied about her identity, what she said about the occurrences at the compound was actually true, was it not?

Do we know for sure? I don't think that I've seen anything that states that what she said was happening there. If it wasn't happening then she deffinately needs to be prosecuted big because she has disrupted these peoples lives. I don't agree with their lifestyle but I do agree in freedom of religion.

Post by **_The Nehor** » Fri Apr 18, 2008 6:00 pm

I'm waiting for the Lifetime original movie to tell me what happened.

Post by **_asbestosman** » Fri Apr 18, 2008 6:02 pm

RockHeaded wrote:I don't agree with their lifestyle but I do agree in freedom of religion.

Freedom of religion does not enter into the picture for me. Freedom of religion is not a defense against child abuse. Privacy, unfortunately, can be used as a defense so long as privacy had to be illegaly intruded upon in order to uncover the abuse. I don't like that, but I don't want to remove privacy either. I want abusers to be caught. I want to make it impossible for them to hide their abuse behind the cover of privacy. I just don't want to remove all privacy.

Lying in order to get a warrant is a terrible thing to do. I do not want my home invaded and my children removed just because someone makes a false report about me. Now, perhaps we need to change the standards for obtaining warrants to protect children. I might grant that. As much as I hate child abuse, I also hate government intrusion into my life just to make certain that I'm not abusing anyone. Sorry, but having someone merely accuse me of being an abuser doesn't seem to be sufficient grounds for the government to intrude.

Post by **_Coca Cola** » Fri Apr 18, 2008 6:11 pm

It helps me understand why Utah and Arizona have been more cautious in their approach - only dealing with specific and individual cases of abuse, rather than the whole compound, like in 1953.

The Texas authorities are probably tearing their hair out. What a mess!!

My sympathies are with the women and children.

Post by **_moksha** » Fri Apr 18, 2008 6:47 pm

Isn't there a danger of unleashing some unspeakable evil - bigger than the Tunguska Event - when you have that many lawyers in close proximity working on the same case?

Post by **_RockHeaded** » Fri Apr 18, 2008 7:10 pm

asbestosman wrote:
RockHeaded wrote:I don't agree with their lifestyle but I do agree in freedom of religion.

Freedom of religion does not enter into the picture for me. Freedom of religion is not a defense against child abuse. Privacy, unfortunately, can be used as a defense so long as privacy had to be illegaly intruded upon in order to uncover the abuse. I don't like that, but I don't want to remove privacy either. I want abusers to be caught. I want to make it impossible for them to hide their abuse behind the cover of privacy. I just don't want to remove all privacy.

Lying in order to get a warrant is a terrible thing to do. I do not want my home invaded and my children removed just because someone makes a false report about me. Now, perhaps we need to change the standards for obtaining warrants to protect children. I might grant that. As much as I hate child abuse, I also hate government intrusion into my life just to make certain that I'm not abusing anyone. Sorry, but having someone merely accuse me of being an abuser doesn't seem to be sufficient grounds for the government to intrude.

I completely agree with you. The only thing I was saying is I haven't seen that they've found evidence of abuse yet. They may have but I didn't see it. If they do not find evidence then it is obvious this lady called in because she doesn't like this religion. The Feds went in because of the call yes but they had to of been thinking about Waco as well. I personally do not agree with the FLDS it disgusts me. If they weren't abusing these children, and are following the law, they should be able to believe what they want.

RockHeaded

Post by **_Dr. Shades** » Fri Apr 18, 2008 7:19 pm

RockHeaded wrote:I completely agree with you. The only thing I was saying is I haven't seen that they've found evidence of abuse yet.

So pregnant teens and teens with multiple children isn't evidence of abuse?

Post by **_RockHeaded** » Fri Apr 18, 2008 7:23 pm

Dr. Shades wrote:
RockHeaded wrote:I completely agree with you. The only thing I was saying is I haven't seen that they've found evidence of abuse yet.

So pregnant teens and teens with multiple children isn't evidence of abuse?

There again I hadn't seen that they have proven that yet, if they had then I am sorry for saying anything at all Shades.