MA&D's passionate love affair with the FLDS church

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
_Sethbag
_Emeritus
Posts: 6855
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2007 10:52 am

Re: MA&D's passionate love affair with the FLDS church

Post by _Sethbag »

mbeesley wrote:
2) that, once in the compound, two or three dozen pregnant young teenaged girls constituted probable cause to suspect that statutory rape had gone on, and that a large number of girls were affected by it?

Is this a hypothetical, or an attempt at a statement of the actual facts, because as far as I know, there is no evidence that there were 24 to 36 pregnant teenagers.

Remember, we're not talking about what we know now, we're talking about what the CPS knew at the time they were searching the compound. What's the tally, something like 50 or 60 girls thought to be in the 14-15 year old range were seen either to be pregnant, or to have infant children already. It's true that some of these girls have subsequently turned out to be over 18, but, and this is important, with the FLDS members obfuscating, playing dumb, refusing to identify themselves, their parents, their children, where they lived, etc. this was the best information the CPS had to go on.

And just because some of the girls have now proven to be 18+ years old doesn't negate the fact that some of the pregnant girls or mothers are in fact in the suspected age range.

You say "there is no evidence..." Are you talking about now? Or at the time CPS was doing the searching? Because whether they acted rightly and in good faith depends on what they perceived at the time, not what they know now. And what evidence are you looking at which shows that all of the 50 or 60 pregnant girls/mothers thought to be 14 or 15 years old were actually 18+? I've seen stories saying only 20 or so of the girls proved to be adults. That leaves 30 or 40 more who aren't.

3) that, based on statements by people, including children, in the compound, that no age was too young for a girl to be married, it was clear that this was part of a pattern and practice that was widespread amongst the FLDS community?

Again, is this a hypothetical or an attempt at a statement of actual facts, because as far as I know, there is no evidence of a pattern and practie that was widespread. That seems to be more propoganda than actual fact.

You've got to be joking. Even if you knock 20 girls off the list of mid-teenaged mothers, you still could have 30 or 40 pregnant young teenagers. Out of a population of what, maybe a thousand, or at most two thousand people? How many pregnant teens do you need to have in a population of a thousand people to have a "widespread" practice? I'd dare say 30 pregnant teen girls out of 1000 people would probably represent several orders of magnitude higher rates of teenage/underage pregnancy than in the rest of the population of the US. That would be like every single girl in both the junior and senior classes, and probably most of the sophomores, of my high school already being mothers or pregnant the year I graduated.

Not to mention that, again, the CPS were in the compound, asking questions. There were lots of apparently young teenaged mothers/pregnant girls walking around, they had information that young girls were "married" off to older men, people were playing coy and not giving good information, entire groups of families living in a few giant dormitory-style buildings, etc. It appeared to the CPS workers on the scene as if this thing with teenaged pregnant girls "married" to older men was a common occurance, and so they acted.

It's not enough for you to come along and say "there is no evidence that blah blah blah". That's not what determines whether CPS was right to take the children. What determines whether they were right to do so was what evidence they had at the time they acted, and what were the reasonable explanations of that evidence. If CPS goes into a home and finds a child all covered in bruises, they're going to act on that, and are you going to come back two weeks later and complain that they still haven't proven, to your satisfaction, that an adult in the house beat the kid?
Mormonism ceased being a compelling topic for me when I finally came to terms with its transformation from a personality cult into a combination of a real estate company, a SuperPac, and Westboro Baptist Church. - Kishkumen
_asbestosman
_Emeritus
Posts: 6215
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 10:32 pm

Post by _asbestosman »

Jersey Girl wrote:Huh? That wasn't directed at you in any way at all, abman. If you thought it was, you were mistaken.

Heck.

No, my response wasn't directed at you. I was just clarifying my position in light of all the comments on the photo and comments about MADBites on this thread.
That's General Leo. He could be my friend if he weren't my enemy.
eritis sicut dii
I support NCMO
_Runtu
_Emeritus
Posts: 16721
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 5:06 am

Post by _Runtu »

asbestosman wrote:
Jersey Girl wrote:Huh? That wasn't directed at you in any way at all, abman. If you thought it was, you were mistaken.

Heck.

No, my response wasn't directed at you. I was just clarifying my position in light of all the comments on the photo and comments about MADBites on this thread.


I have to say I've been a little creeped out by the seeming knee-jerk support for the FLDS over there.
Runtu's Rincón

If you just talk, I find that your mouth comes out with stuff. -- Karl Pilkington
_asbestosman
_Emeritus
Posts: 6215
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 10:32 pm

Post by _asbestosman »

I think the FLDS women are overplaying the persecution card. As much as I dislike having the state take all the children, I think it's ridiculous when one of those women said they were being persecuted just like the Nazis persecuted the Jews. Yeah right. Neither they nor their children are in danger of life and limb. Neither they nor their children are being systematically rounded up and put through gas chambers. We provide them with lawyers and have courts where they can even make appeals (or whatever they're called).


I think if it's truly the case that there is sufficient justification for the removal of all children from the YFZ ranch in Texas, that the US ought to pool resources and get the kids from Colorado City, etc. If the behavior of Warren Jeffs, etc. is sufficient evidence to warrant the forcible removal of children by CPS, then why can't they do it elsewhere? Why? Is it that Utah / Arizona are too scared, too poor, or what? Are the concerns of Utah and Arizona similar to mine? If I crank call them (I won't) will it be for the best for the children in CC? This whole thing is a huge complicated mess in my mind. It's not some simple thing where I can say that obviously the best decision was to remove the children from their homes given the history of underage marriage from that group's leader.
That's General Leo. He could be my friend if he weren't my enemy.
eritis sicut dii
I support NCMO
_mbeesley
_Emeritus
Posts: 74
Joined: Thu May 01, 2008 10:51 pm

Post by _mbeesley »

Dr. Shades wrote:Mbeesley:

Would you feel that way if you weren't a Mormon?

This has nothing to do with feelings, from my perspective. It has to do with a dispassionate analysis of the evidence and procedures that were followed. Unlike some folks, I am unwilling to buy into the State's claims of what they were acting on and what they found when they investigated a single phone call.

I simply agree with the reasoning of the Texas Third District Court of Appeal that there was an insufficient showing that an emergency existed that required the removal of every single child. Now, the Texas Supreme Court may disagree. That is the nature of the beast. But my analysis is not based on my personal disdain for child abuse or my view that polygamy is not inherently evil. And it certainly is not going to be influenced by sleasy tactics such as releasing inflamatory photos that have little if any bearing on whether all of the children at the Ranch were in immediate danger of abuse.

I realize it is an emotional issue for many, understandably so. But in this particular case, I am more interested in the actual evidence, procedures, and applicable law.

Now, if you want to discuss an emotional issue, let's talk about that a**h*** in the White House and his unnecessary preemptive war in Iraq that has cost this Country 3 trillion dollars. That's an issue I can get really emotional over.
Cogito ergo sum.
_truth dancer
_Emeritus
Posts: 4792
Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 12:40 pm

Post by _truth dancer »

I think if it's truly the case that there is sufficient justification for the removal of all children from the YFZ ranch in Texas, that the US ought to pool resources and get the kids from Colorado City, etc. If the behavior of Warren Jeffs, etc. is sufficient evidence to warrant the forcible removal of children by CPS, then why can't they do it elsewhere?


It is not just the influence of WJ, it is how his influence is playing out as children live with child abusers, perpetrators and sexual predators; as mothers and fathers allow their young girls to be sexually used by old men, as the adult community stand by and allow children to be abused, as patriarchs repeatedly rape girls at will.

Why? Is it that Utah / Arizona are too scared, too poor, or what?


Too unmotivated.

Are the concerns of Utah and Arizona similar to mine? If I crank call them (I won't) will it be for the best for the children in CC?


If you know of abuse I think it is your obligation to report.

This whole thing is a huge complicated mess in my mind.


Yes it is. I don't think anyone would disagree with you.

It's not some simple thing where I can say that obviously the best decision was to remove the children from their homes given the history of underage marriage from that group's leader.


There is more to it.

IF the FLDS adults had come forth and provided honest information I feel certain all the children would not have been removed. But no one was coming forth with the most basic information. They "forget" who lives in their homes, to whom their loved ones are married, how old they are, if they are married, etc. etc. Children can't or won't identify their parents, and some children (something like 100) still can't be matched with bio parents.

In other words, I'm guessing their are young (so far) monogamous couples who have not abused their infants and whose children are not in imminent danger, however, if they are living in a home with a child abuser who has raped girls, and if the parents think there is nothing wrong with the rape of girls in their home, there is a serious problem. (I don't know the legal term but isn't there something about abetting crime)?

If the FLDS adults were honest and forthcoming, CPS could have sorted out the mess and most likely kept some families together, however, when all they get is lies, and when it is clear these people will leave town given half a chance CPS had little choice than to protect all the children until they had time to address each child on an individual basis.

The law doesn't allow CPS to see evidence of abuse and NOT intervene.

~dancer~
"The search for reality is the most dangerous of all undertakings for it destroys the world in which you live." Nisargadatta Maharaj
_TAK
_Emeritus
Posts: 1555
Joined: Thu Feb 08, 2007 4:47 pm

Post by _TAK »

There is more to it.

IF the FLDS adults had come forth and provided honest information I feel certain all the children would not have been removed. But no one was coming forth with the most basic information. They "forget" who lives in their homes, to whom their loved ones are married, how old they are, if they are married, etc. etc. Children can't or won't identify their parents, and some children (something like 100) still can't be matched with bio parents.

In other words, I'm guessing their are young (so far) monogamous couples who have not abused their infants and whose children are not in imminent danger, however, if they are living in a home with a child abuser who has raped girls, and if the parents think there is nothing wrong with the rape of girls in their home, there is a serious problem. (I don't know the legal term but isn't there something about abetting crime)?

If the FLDS adults were honest and forthcoming, CPS could have sorted out the mess and most likely kept some families together, however, when all they get is lies, and when it is clear these people will leave town given half a chance CPS had little choice than to protect all the children until they had time to address each child on an individual basis.

The law doesn't allow CPS to see evidence of abuse and NOT intervene.


Gee I am shocked! Another example of lying for the lord.. Yup no similarities what so ever !
_antishock8
_Emeritus
Posts: 2425
Joined: Sun Jan 27, 2008 2:02 am

Post by _antishock8 »

TAK wrote:
There is more to it.

IF the FLDS adults had come forth and provided honest information I feel certain all the children would not have been removed. But no one was coming forth with the most basic information. They "forget" who lives in their homes, to whom their loved ones are married, how old they are, if they are married, etc. etc. Children can't or won't identify their parents, and some children (something like 100) still can't be matched with bio parents.

In other words, I'm guessing their are young (so far) monogamous couples who have not abused their infants and whose children are not in imminent danger, however, if they are living in a home with a child abuser who has raped girls, and if the parents think there is nothing wrong with the rape of girls in their home, there is a serious problem. (I don't know the legal term but isn't there something about abetting crime)?

If the FLDS adults were honest and forthcoming, CPS could have sorted out the mess and most likely kept some families together, however, when all they get is lies, and when it is clear these people will leave town given half a chance CPS had little choice than to protect all the children until they had time to address each child on an individual basis.

The law doesn't allow CPS to see evidence of abuse and NOT intervene.


Gee I am shocked! Another example of lying for the lord.. Yup no similarities what so ever !


Exactly. The historical and cultural ingrained practice of lying and deception by the Mormon church and its fruits, er, offshoots once again rears its ugly head.

What a shame for those YOUNG GIRLS who get raped. What a shame for those YOUNG BOYS who are abandoned because the Lord's annointed can't have any competition for that YOUNG GIRL lovin'.
You can’t trust adults to tell you the truth.

Scream the lie, whisper the retraction.- The Left
_truth dancer
_Emeritus
Posts: 4792
Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 12:40 pm

Post by _truth dancer »

truth dancer wrote:
I think if it's truly the case that there is sufficient justification for the removal of all children from the YFZ ranch in Texas, that the US ought to pool resources and get the kids from Colorado City, etc. If the behavior of Warren Jeffs, etc. is sufficient evidence to warrant the forcible removal of children by CPS, then why can't they do it elsewhere?


It is not just the influence of WJ, it is how his influence is playing out as children live with child abusers, perpetrators and sexual predators; as mothers and fathers allow their young girls to be sexually used by old men, as the adult community stand by and allow children to be abused, as patriarchs repeatedly rape girls at will.

Why? Is it that Utah / Arizona are too scared, too poor, or what?


Too unmotivated.

Are the concerns of Utah and Arizona similar to mine? If I crank call them (I won't) will it be for the best for the children in CC?


If you know of abuse I think it is your obligation to report.

This whole thing is a huge complicated mess in my mind.


Yes it is. I don't think anyone would disagree with you.

It's not some simple thing where I can say that obviously the best decision was to remove the children from their homes given the history of underage marriage from that group's leader.


There is more to it.

IF the FLDS adults had come forth and provided honest information I feel certain all the children would not have been removed. But no one was coming forth with the most basic information. They "forget" who lives in their homes, to whom their loved ones are married, how old they are, if they are married, etc. etc. Children can't or won't identify their parents, and some children (something like 100) still can't be matched with bio parents.

In other words, I'm guessing there are young (so far) monogamous couples who have not abused their infants and whose children are not in imminent danger, however, if they are living in a home with a child abuser who has raped girls, and if the parents think there is nothing wrong with the rape of girls in their home, there is a serious problem. (I don't know the legal term but isn't there something about abetting crime)?

If the FLDS adults were honest and forthcoming, CPS could have sorted out the mess and most likely kept some families together, however, when all they get is lies, and when it is clear these people will leave town given half a chance CPS had little choice than to protect all the children until they had time to address each child on an individual basis.

The law doesn't allow CPS to see evidence of abuse and NOT intervene.

~dancer~



Edit to fix one of those very horrible typos not allowed on this board... :-) Opps, sorry about that. I have gotten in the habit of at least proof reading most of my posts lately which is a big improvement.
"The search for reality is the most dangerous of all undertakings for it destroys the world in which you live." Nisargadatta Maharaj
_Dr. Shades
_Emeritus
Posts: 14117
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 9:07 pm

Post by _Dr. Shades »

I still don't get the backlash against the Texas DCFS from the MA&Dites.

Hey MA&Dites, is it or is it not true that ALL the minor females were either being groomed to be statutorially raped or had already been statutorially raped?

Is it the doctrine and practice of the FLDS church to marry off the female children while still underage, or isn't it?

Does that constitute imminent jeopardy to those kids, or doesn't it?
"Finally, for your rather strange idea that miracles are somehow linked to the amount of gay sexual gratification that is taking place would require that primitive Christianity was launched by gay sex, would it not?"

--Louis Midgley
Post Reply