Reader comments
FLDS women petition to have kids returned
34 comments | Read story
Get today's headlines via email
Afternoon edition
Deseret News Family Deals
In News
Across Site
- Is 'nauseating,' 'foul,' 'nasty'...
- Salt Lake County opposes property...
- Las Vegas revises request for rights...
- Prepare so an earthquake doesn't...
- Is technology making us stupid?
- Crews searching recycling center in...
- West Valley City leaders to join call...
- Colliding causes: Gay rights and...
- Woman charged in Rasmussen death...
- Photos: Salt Lake Main Library...
In News
Across Site
- Powells, Coxes put differences aside...
- Colliding causes: Gay rights and...
- Crews searching recycling center in...
- Despite data, Lyme disease sufferers...
- View live stream of services for...
- LDS bishop ordered to stand trial for...
- Father-in-law dragged deeper into...
- Battling misconceptions: Faced with...
- Focus returns to Powell children today
- Josh Powell had 'incestuous' images...
In News
Across Site
- Gay rights and religious liberty
93 - Families at odds over Powell's actions
54 - LDS bishop ordered to stand trial
41 - Utah House blocks Sandstrom bill
39 - Powell call:'I'm afraid for their lives'
33 - Photos: Year of the Dragon
26 - Bill would cut auto safety checks
24 - DEA deal blow to Mexican cartel
24 - Should SLC bid again for Olympics?
23 - Utah takes $171M in settlement
19







Nice attempt at setting up a strawman, but when religious beliefs include raping underage girls, those beliefs are no longer protected beliefs and people practicing those beliefs deserve to have their children taken away.
I've been reading comments on this ever since it happened, the Deseret News and most of the people who comment need to get some morality to them and quit standing behind "religious beliefs" for the purpose of excusing immorality, perversion, physical, mental, spiritual (of the soul of an individual) abuse. You want to stand behind wrong under the guise of right! One day the Lord will explain to you whats right! But then again it may be too late for you to learn that.
God bless Texas and "right"
This is not about religious rights or the infringement thereof; this about the possible human rights abused existing under the guise of religious practice. Religious rights don't include protection again possible abuse.
I do not see where the State had provided any significant evidence of "immorality, perversion, physical, mental, spiritual" abuse. One all those points, the FLDS people would seem to be better than the Texas and US population as a whole.
Texas could have learned something from them.
*sigh* I don't know how many times the same debate has to be re-hashed and re-fought on these comment boards.
There is a DIFFERENCE between teenagers who CHOOSE to be sexually active, and those who are forced into 'spiritual' marriages and sexual relations, often with close male relatives, and given no choice of their own.
This is about sexual ABUSE, and incest, and rape, not sexual freedom of choice.
2. A plea from a teenaged girl within the compound asking for help to escape from a forced marriage. (now assumed to be a hoax - but, still probably cause to investigate)
3. Numerous teenagers (over 30) 14-17 year-olds who were pregnant or already had children.
All signs, to any reasonable person looking at the whole picture, that there was possible abuse happening at the YFZ Ranch.
Finally. The FLDS refusing to provide proper identification of the children and their parental relationships, making it impossible for CPS to separate out individuals who might be responsible for abuse.
The FLDS are solely responsible for creating a situation in which all of the children had to be taken into protective custody.
Utah Mother--
"
This is about sexual ABUSE, and incest, and rape, not sexual freedom of choice. "
What percentage of teenage pregnancies (12-14) in the US do NOT involve incest and/or rape (including statutory) and which 14 year olds are old enough to legally have "freedom of choice"?
There it is again. You claim along with the rest that every person in that compound was guilty by association. I'm not saying DON'T punish the guilty, but remember that in this country, you are considered innocent until PROVEN guilty. And that does not go for GROUPS or COMMUNITIES, mind you. American citizens have a right to be dealt with as individuals.
Re: realitycheck60
When it has been admitted that there were homes in that community that consisted of a man and his wife, both adults from before the time that they were married, with children born to the two of them, and no others living in the home, your argument is shown to be erroneous. These 464 children were NOT the occupants of ONE HOME, but only one community. Only a person with a very warped view of what a family is would argue beyond that point. I say it again: you CANNOT take children from their homes and their parents simply because they are "guilty by association."
They don't have marriage licenses, birth certificates, or other records to show relationships.
They won't identify which pregnant girls belong to which family.
Then they expect CPS to be clairvoyant enough to know that some families have only one father, one mother, a few kids, and no underaged pregnant girls.
Maybe if they'd been more cooperative, all of the kids wouldn't have had to be removed.
No charges have been brought against anybody for child abuse. Yet!
Since the FLDS refused to identify the parents of each child, Texas was forced to determine parent-child relationships through DNA tests.
The FLDS created the confusion, so stop blaming CPS.
It's just sad that all of the children have to suffer because of the actions of their parents.