Reader comments
5 indicted FLDS men appear before judge
49 comments | Read story
Cats | 10:50 a.m. July 29, 2008
Thank Goodness. Now let justice prevail.
Alex Trebek | 11:03 a.m. July 29, 2008
Here we go. I can't wait to start reading the dozens of comments from FLDS
members saying that their rights are being trampled, the warrant is unjust, the
girls weren't underage at the time of their marriages, the children need
their fathers to be in the home and not at court, yadda, yadda, yadda...
Let the madness ensue...
Let the madness ensue...
Matt in Tucson | 11:04 a.m. July 29, 2008
Why hasn't there been any attempt by Texas to indite Rozita Swinton? It
seems to me that they have more substantial evidence of telephone fraud and
false reporting, and would not need a grand jury.
Comments continue below
zxcvbnm | 11:12 a.m. July 29, 2008
Looks like it is time to do the math........Then supress the evidence.
By the time the "wives" deny having sex a few of the cases will fade away.
Geezz this will be a long movie.
Maggie | 11:17 a.m. July 29, 2008
Thank the Lord. I pray these men will be brought to justice and innocent lives
will no longer be taken advantage of and hurt.
funkydory | 11:27 a.m. July 29, 2008
Wow !! 99 years in prison for an unconsummated, informal marriage/wedding!! I
think we can all sleep better at night feeling clean and sanitized because we
aren't polygamists and we've successfully convinced our government to
persecute those who are. Pretty soon we'll be building gas chambers for
them, right after we dump that silly Amendment about illegal searches.
Good works | 12:28 p.m. July 29, 2008
It's time to stop the FLDS evil abuse. God doesn't command anyone to
commit adultery!
Boise Leon | 12:51 p.m. July 29, 2008
Catch 22
If they get past the illegal search, tainted evidence, taking the 5th, refusal to testify against spouse then there is the issue of the 2005 law itself which was designed by a Mormon AG in Utah to entrap FLDS. The catch is, to overturn the 2005 law you have to convict someone in order to appeal to the state SC and then to appeal to the US SC. You have to convict someone to win. You would have to be crazy to hope for that.
If they get past the illegal search, tainted evidence, taking the 5th, refusal to testify against spouse then there is the issue of the 2005 law itself which was designed by a Mormon AG in Utah to entrap FLDS. The catch is, to overturn the 2005 law you have to convict someone in order to appeal to the state SC and then to appeal to the US SC. You have to convict someone to win. You would have to be crazy to hope for that.
JoMama | 12:59 p.m. July 29, 2008
3 women for every 1 man. Do the math. The only way to do this is: 1)get rid of
men and take their wifes=excommunication 2)get rid of young boys who need to
marry in the future=lost boys c)marry what is available=young girls.
Anonymous | 1:06 p.m. July 29, 2008
I sure am glad that God is our judge and not politicians. Just remember innocent
until proven guilty. I just hope they get a FAIR trial over there.
zxcvbnm | 1:23 p.m. July 29, 2008
Hey Leon.........Rozita Swinton is crazy.....The book peddlers are on a crusade......Texas CPS are operating without the ability to do math.....and the AG sees five registered voters as an attempt to take over the county.
Yep.........most players in this drama are crazy.
14 million so far to arrest five guys for having a relationship with girls that wanted a relationship and some of the girls have claimed publicly that no sex has occured........crazy.
Tanks..helicopters and swat teems to save a non-existant person.....crazy.
The West Texas Jury will surely show up with a rope.....crazy!
Like I said earlier......the movie will be CRAZY.....but I won't buy the popcorn.
Re; Boise Leon | 1:37 p.m. July 29, 2008
Just as in Warren Jeffs' first trial, the allegations will all be proven in
court. The girls have babies, which DNA will prove were fathered by the indicted
men. Taking the 5th won't save the men, and the girls have no right to
refuse to testify, since the 5th only applies to self-incrimination. Claiming a
privilege not to testify against their spouse opens up another whole can of
worms because the girls will essentially be admitting that they are married to
the abuser they are trying to protect.
Warren and the rest of his buddies are finally going to be held accountable for raping young girls in the name of religion.
Overturning the 2005 law is a pipedream for the FLDS. Dozens of states already have similar laws and claims by the FLDS that the law discriminates against religion will fall on deaf ears at the state and federal court level. I seriously doubt the U.S. Supreme Court will even consider the appeal, IF it gets past the Texas Supreme Court, which is extremely doubtful.
Warren and the rest of his buddies are finally going to be held accountable for raping young girls in the name of religion.
Overturning the 2005 law is a pipedream for the FLDS. Dozens of states already have similar laws and claims by the FLDS that the law discriminates against religion will fall on deaf ears at the state and federal court level. I seriously doubt the U.S. Supreme Court will even consider the appeal, IF it gets past the Texas Supreme Court, which is extremely doubtful.
Flds Mind blockage | 1:40 p.m. July 29, 2008
It always amazes me how some of you condone the evil of these Flds men. God help
you Flds thru all your perversions, and your un-godly acts against woman. You
will need to bow down someday and ask God for forgiveness for using him(God) for
all your dirty work.
realitycheck | 1:56 p.m. July 29, 2008
these men married and had sex with little girls that were unable to say
"no", because they were indoctrinated to not to go against the wishes
of the prophet and/or told it was God's will. Either way, they had no
choice.
I think the parents of the childen should also face charges, for child endangerment. That's the law against parental stupidity.
That's what's crazy, zxcvbnm. That the parents went along with it all. You missed that one in your comment.
I think the parents of the childen should also face charges, for child endangerment. That's the law against parental stupidity.
That's what's crazy, zxcvbnm. That the parents went along with it all. You missed that one in your comment.
Here we go again.. | 2:00 p.m. July 29, 2008
FLDS Criminals defend FLDS criminals. You people need to wake up and quit living
in SIN!
Snake out | 2:04 p.m. July 29, 2008
I'm happy they are finely doing something about these perverted flds men.
Anonymous | 2:16 p.m. July 29, 2008
Warren Jeffs is no longer a prophet...boo hoo!
realitycheck | 2:24 p.m. July 29, 2008
Fortunately, in Texas you don't need witnesses, and you don't need the
victim to press charges. You simply need compelling and convincing evidence.
(Arizona and Utah differ in this respect, which is why it's so difficult to
prosecute the FLDS there.)
So zxcvbnm, your 11:12am argument about wives denying sex is irrelevant as they most likely will not be called to testify. And even if they do, there's nothing like being told about perjury penalties to convince someone to tell the truth.
Additionally, they can't use the "wives needn't testify against their husbands" excuse since they aren't leaglly married, and if they try it, the "wives" will be imposing additional bigomy charges against the perpetrator. I doubt they want that.
Best they can do is plead the fifth, but since I doubt the state even will put them on the witness stand, it won't matter. The defense would be crazy (there's your favorite word again) to call on them since they could be charged with perjury, and most of these women aren't old enough nor smart enough to get around a decent cross-examination.
The evidence will be found admissible and people are going to jail. As it should be.
So zxcvbnm, your 11:12am argument about wives denying sex is irrelevant as they most likely will not be called to testify. And even if they do, there's nothing like being told about perjury penalties to convince someone to tell the truth.
Additionally, they can't use the "wives needn't testify against their husbands" excuse since they aren't leaglly married, and if they try it, the "wives" will be imposing additional bigomy charges against the perpetrator. I doubt they want that.
Best they can do is plead the fifth, but since I doubt the state even will put them on the witness stand, it won't matter. The defense would be crazy (there's your favorite word again) to call on them since they could be charged with perjury, and most of these women aren't old enough nor smart enough to get around a decent cross-examination.
The evidence will be found admissible and people are going to jail. As it should be.
realitycheck | 2:40 p.m. July 29, 2008
hey zxcvbnm - you seem to feel the state is being intrusive here, yet the FLDS
have left a swath of deceit and corruption in it's wake for many years. I
hear complaints about the state taking over the church corporation, yet nothing
is said about Jeffs and company using state educational funds to BUY AN
AIRPLANE!!
You really trust these people? Obviously Texas doesn't, nor do I. What's happening here is like finding a bag of drugs in a drug dealer's apartment. He'll deny that it's his, but are you really going to believe him? That would be somewhat naive.
We know they assign women to marriage. Is it such a stretch that they do it to underage girls, given their history and male/female ratio? No. Is it prevalent? Once is too many times. We need to kick them of the habit so it doesn't happen in the future. We need to put them on notice that it won't be tolorated.
I love the FLDS saying "the truth will prevail". That's right - it will. You just may not like the results.....
You really trust these people? Obviously Texas doesn't, nor do I. What's happening here is like finding a bag of drugs in a drug dealer's apartment. He'll deny that it's his, but are you really going to believe him? That would be somewhat naive.
We know they assign women to marriage. Is it such a stretch that they do it to underage girls, given their history and male/female ratio? No. Is it prevalent? Once is too many times. We need to kick them of the habit so it doesn't happen in the future. We need to put them on notice that it won't be tolorated.
I love the FLDS saying "the truth will prevail". That's right - it will. You just may not like the results.....
John | 2:44 p.m. July 29, 2008
Even Brigham Young had descendants who saw the light, and learned how evil
polygamy was and got the heck out. Some people have enough intelligence to know
when something isn't right. Polygamy will always be wrong and abusive!
Bad Traditions | 3:12 p.m. July 29, 2008
Some BAD family traditions are better off given up rather than lead innocent
people to hell. Polygamy is not good and can only destroy innocent lives.
It's not a revelation by God. Although, it was something concocted up by
some perverted over sexed leader.
zxcvbnm | 3:23 p.m. July 29, 2008
Hey RC......I put quotation marks around wives for a reason.
You have to prove sex occured.....Teresa denys it......and there is no proof of it. So threaten a 17 year old "girl" and put the "victim" in prison. Great press.....Texas sentences a 17 year old virgin for claiming she is a 17 year old virgin.
But ole Malonis will be right there saying something about nothing.......
Jack | 3:24 p.m. July 29, 2008
RE: zxcvbnm
I was wondering if by chance you would be willing to go into treatment? I'm the person to see :O))
I was wondering if by chance you would be willing to go into treatment? I'm the person to see :O))
realitycheck | 3:33 p.m. July 29, 2008
Every time I see a comment like "Here we go again 2pm", I have to
cringe. You are imposing your concept of sin on others. That makes you no
better than the FLDS, as they impose their concept of sin on everyone around
them.
Your concept of sin is not the same as everyone else's. The assumption based on your wording is that you are talking about polygamy. How is that a sin? Whom does it hurt? No one.
Granted, the concept as practiced by FLDS has incurred multiple victims, but polygamy isn't the reason why. It's the craziness of trying to take every religious word ever written and dissecting it and creating rules and restrictions based on every little word. And then twisting even that, to comply with leadership that is making no sense at all.
The bible is a conceptual work, not a historical document. It is a self-help guide to life, not an operator's manual. The FLDS missed that point, missed the entire concept, and dove in head first with rules to cover every little word. Now they can't see the forest for the trees.
That's not polygamy's fault. That's the FLDS leadership and parents' fault.
Your concept of sin is not the same as everyone else's. The assumption based on your wording is that you are talking about polygamy. How is that a sin? Whom does it hurt? No one.
Granted, the concept as practiced by FLDS has incurred multiple victims, but polygamy isn't the reason why. It's the craziness of trying to take every religious word ever written and dissecting it and creating rules and restrictions based on every little word. And then twisting even that, to comply with leadership that is making no sense at all.
The bible is a conceptual work, not a historical document. It is a self-help guide to life, not an operator's manual. The FLDS missed that point, missed the entire concept, and dove in head first with rules to cover every little word. Now they can't see the forest for the trees.
That's not polygamy's fault. That's the FLDS leadership and parents' fault.
Justice for all | 3:41 p.m. July 29, 2008
It's good to see even the "Don't Mess with Texas" Macho-Men
finally taking the LEGAL route to address this issue.
The dubious basis for the earlier raid and subsequent over-reaction by Texas Rangers and CPS is a black eye for Texas. Maybe now, with this new approach, they can protect the kids who were being abused and at the same time not trample on the civil rights of their parents who should be presumed to be innocent until proven guilty IN A COURT OF LAW (not in the media or some Ex-FLDS book).
THIS is the way to go about it Texas. Not rushing in with a bogus warrant, armored personel carriers and a SWAT team with guns drawn, to handle a situation that could have been handled by legal means, in court, instead of at the point of a gun.
I hope this approach will have better results than the "Don't Mess with Texas", "We don't need no stinking constitution" approach they tried earlier.
The dubious basis for the earlier raid and subsequent over-reaction by Texas Rangers and CPS is a black eye for Texas. Maybe now, with this new approach, they can protect the kids who were being abused and at the same time not trample on the civil rights of their parents who should be presumed to be innocent until proven guilty IN A COURT OF LAW (not in the media or some Ex-FLDS book).
THIS is the way to go about it Texas. Not rushing in with a bogus warrant, armored personel carriers and a SWAT team with guns drawn, to handle a situation that could have been handled by legal means, in court, instead of at the point of a gun.
I hope this approach will have better results than the "Don't Mess with Texas", "We don't need no stinking constitution" approach they tried earlier.
wrz | 3:47 p.m. July 29, 2008
Matt in Tucson | 11:04 a.m. July 29, 2008
Why hasn't there been any attempt by Texas to indite Rozita Swinton?"
Only polygamists are on their radar screen. All other law breakers get a pass... Such as illegal immigrants and drug dealers.
Texas even went to the trouble of changing the marriage age from 14 to 16 a couple a years ago to get at the polygamists who had infested their holy and pure land.
Why hasn't there been any attempt by Texas to indite Rozita Swinton?"
Only polygamists are on their radar screen. All other law breakers get a pass... Such as illegal immigrants and drug dealers.
Texas even went to the trouble of changing the marriage age from 14 to 16 a couple a years ago to get at the polygamists who had infested their holy and pure land.
zxcvbnm | 4:01 p.m. July 29, 2008
Yep John.....careful with that argument.....there are plenty of people who chose the wrong religion then saw the light.
Carolyn Jessops daughter went back to YFZ as soon as she could.....I guess she saw the light.
RC.......the "wives" were written with quotation marks for a reason.
Lets' just see if Texas will send a 17 year old virgin to prison for testifying that she is a 17 year old virgin............great press.
Jake | 6:01 p.m. July 29, 2008
Hey Reality Check --Quit imposing your know it all attitude on here and practice
what you preach!!!
Yes , and the FLDS are sinful people. Sorry you dumped the evil and are torn between good and evil.
Yes , and the FLDS are sinful people. Sorry you dumped the evil and are torn between good and evil.
Gal50 | 6:05 p.m. July 29, 2008
These cases are not as clear cut as people would like. Few people want the FLDS
to continue to get away with criminal behavior, but they just might, and if so,
their only punishment will be the raid on the compound, the public scrutiny, the
seizing of the children, the scattering of family members, the short-term
incarceration of the men prior to bonding out and the emotional and financial
expense of a trial. It is unclear as to how much money these men have and
therefore, the quality of their legal representation. The legislator that
sponsored the marriage law said in the press that he did target the FLDS, and
that isn't legal according to the US Supreme Court. But, that law probably
won't apply in this case. The statutory rape laws will be applied, since no
marriages exist.
I agree that the girls will most likely not take the stand. They could plead and have pled the fifth since they have committed criminal bigamy.
Three of the men do not have children by these girls, so the state has other proof of intercourse. Maybe that is why the doctor has three failure to protect charges.
I agree that the girls will most likely not take the stand. They could plead and have pled the fifth since they have committed criminal bigamy.
Three of the men do not have children by these girls, so the state has other proof of intercourse. Maybe that is why the doctor has three failure to protect charges.
What the-- | 8:54 p.m. July 29, 2008
Heck?
Cats | 4:30 a.m. July 30, 2008
I think it's so funny the way the FLDS keep screaming about Rozita Swinton.
That's a total red herring and completely irrelevant to this case.
What's relevant is the child rape and fraud committed by the FLDS for many years.
Religious freedom may be the most important freedom that we have in this country. But, one is not allowed to practice one's religion to the point of damaging or destroying the lives of others.
If we are going to practice Freedom of Religion without restrictions we are going to have to allow muslim men to committ "honor" killings of their wives and daughters. We are going to have to allow satanists to sacrifice virgins, etc., etc., etc.
Freedom of Religion is not an absolute right. It doesn't allow us to committ crimes against others. The FLDS have been committing crimes against the taxpayers and their own members for many years. IT NEEDS TO STOP.
What's relevant is the child rape and fraud committed by the FLDS for many years.
Religious freedom may be the most important freedom that we have in this country. But, one is not allowed to practice one's religion to the point of damaging or destroying the lives of others.
If we are going to practice Freedom of Religion without restrictions we are going to have to allow muslim men to committ "honor" killings of their wives and daughters. We are going to have to allow satanists to sacrifice virgins, etc., etc., etc.
Freedom of Religion is not an absolute right. It doesn't allow us to committ crimes against others. The FLDS have been committing crimes against the taxpayers and their own members for many years. IT NEEDS TO STOP.
zxcvbnm | 7:01 a.m. July 30, 2008
RC......Teresa has already been declaired pregnant then unpregnent by CPS. Malonis made that point.
As far as Teresas lack of sexual experience she has declared that as well.
The diary entries say nothing about her sexual experience other than her desire.......ramblings of a teenager.
Re; Cats | 7:18 a.m. July 30, 2008
Couldn't agree more.
Freedom of Religion does not give the FLDS the right to pick and choose which laws they're willing to obey.
The FLDS can either obey all laws, get the laws they disagree with changed, or be held accountable for the laws they decide to break.
It's time the FLDS realized that they aren't above the law.
Freedom of Religion does not give the FLDS the right to pick and choose which laws they're willing to obey.
The FLDS can either obey all laws, get the laws they disagree with changed, or be held accountable for the laws they decide to break.
It's time the FLDS realized that they aren't above the law.
realitycheck | 9:03 a.m. July 30, 2008
re - Jake 6:01pm:
I'm torn between good and evil? where do you get that from? My vision of good and evil is clearcut.
I have no idea what you are trying to say, Jake. I do what I say, which I assume is what you mean by "practice what you preach". (I stated my opinion, which I guess you call "preaching". You just stated your opinion of me. Is that preaching too?)
You'll have to be more specific. And I never said the FLDS wasn't "sinful", although the word "sin" conjures up too many religious overtones. I prefer "morally corrupt" but probably same thing.
I said polygamy isn't a "sin", and I stand by that. Why do you think it's a "sin"? Someone wrote it in a book? Get a grip. If it doesn't hurt anyone, it's not a "sin" as you put it.
But the FLDS do many other things that certainly are morally corrupt and hurt many people, especially children - and I believe some in the FLDS are actually evil. I'm not defending the FLDS if that's what you thought. (Are you new - never read my posts?)
So what are you trying to say?
I'm torn between good and evil? where do you get that from? My vision of good and evil is clearcut.
I have no idea what you are trying to say, Jake. I do what I say, which I assume is what you mean by "practice what you preach". (I stated my opinion, which I guess you call "preaching". You just stated your opinion of me. Is that preaching too?)
You'll have to be more specific. And I never said the FLDS wasn't "sinful", although the word "sin" conjures up too many religious overtones. I prefer "morally corrupt" but probably same thing.
I said polygamy isn't a "sin", and I stand by that. Why do you think it's a "sin"? Someone wrote it in a book? Get a grip. If it doesn't hurt anyone, it's not a "sin" as you put it.
But the FLDS do many other things that certainly are morally corrupt and hurt many people, especially children - and I believe some in the FLDS are actually evil. I'm not defending the FLDS if that's what you thought. (Are you new - never read my posts?)
So what are you trying to say?
re - wrz 3:47pm | 10:04 a.m. July 30, 2008
Texas didn't change the law from 14 to 16 to "get the
polygamists".
They changed the law to get the FLDS, who were forcing children to marry their uncles. Sure, FLDS practices polygamy, but that's kind of irrelevant. If the FLDS only married at 18+ but practiced polygamy, Texas wouldn't have had to change the law as it would have had no effect.
Why does everyone keep thinking this is a polygamy issue? There's realy nothing wrong with having more than one wife as long as they are all consenting adults.
It's when people twist common sense in the name of religion, and abuse their followers because they have the power to do so - that's the problem. But thousands practice polygamy with no ill effect. It's when you throw religion into the mix that it gets all screwed up. Just look at the FLDS.
They changed the law to get the FLDS, who were forcing children to marry their uncles. Sure, FLDS practices polygamy, but that's kind of irrelevant. If the FLDS only married at 18+ but practiced polygamy, Texas wouldn't have had to change the law as it would have had no effect.
Why does everyone keep thinking this is a polygamy issue? There's realy nothing wrong with having more than one wife as long as they are all consenting adults.
It's when people twist common sense in the name of religion, and abuse their followers because they have the power to do so - that's the problem. But thousands practice polygamy with no ill effect. It's when you throw religion into the mix that it gets all screwed up. Just look at the FLDS.
James T. | 10:37 a.m. July 30, 2008
To Reality Check
You are confused? Polygamy is "using God" to commit adultery. You are way off in never never land on this.
Oh, by the way- calm down, and don't come off so steamy and over heated on these posts. And I agree with others that POLYGAMY is very morally wrong, corrupt and as well sick and abusive. PLEASE, Reality check, Try to have a peaceful day. You seem to need one.
You are confused? Polygamy is "using God" to commit adultery. You are way off in never never land on this.
Oh, by the way- calm down, and don't come off so steamy and over heated on these posts. And I agree with others that POLYGAMY is very morally wrong, corrupt and as well sick and abusive. PLEASE, Reality check, Try to have a peaceful day. You seem to need one.
re re: wrz 10:04 | 10:53 a.m. July 30, 2008
That's true there are others who practice polygamy or Polyandry. There is
nothing wrong with a women having more than one husband either, as long as the
men these women choose are all over the age of 18. They do it in Africa, and
it's quite well enjoyed there by these woman.
realitycheck | 11:56 a.m. July 30, 2008
re - James T
I won't say you're confused. It's more like your morals are from a book rather than from the effect on others.
Adultery is when you cheat on your wife. Since all parties know about each other, it's not cheating. Perhaps you think it's wrong for several women to be living with one man - personally I can't think of anything wrong with it. I'm more offended by two men living together, but that's just because it gives me the heebie-jeebies.
And I'm WAY more offended by someone using God to force women into marriage, restrict the movement and rights of individuals, deny education, force uniform dress codes, and convince people that unless you do exactly what they say then you are damned for eternity. Especially when it's done to children that trust you. And that has absolutely nothing to do with polygamy. It's due to religious extremism.
James - you seem to be confusing issues that are consensual with issues that are forced. If two (or more) people want to do something that only affects them, then let them do it. But when it's forced, or affects others (like children) then it's obviously wrong.
I won't say you're confused. It's more like your morals are from a book rather than from the effect on others.
Adultery is when you cheat on your wife. Since all parties know about each other, it's not cheating. Perhaps you think it's wrong for several women to be living with one man - personally I can't think of anything wrong with it. I'm more offended by two men living together, but that's just because it gives me the heebie-jeebies.
And I'm WAY more offended by someone using God to force women into marriage, restrict the movement and rights of individuals, deny education, force uniform dress codes, and convince people that unless you do exactly what they say then you are damned for eternity. Especially when it's done to children that trust you. And that has absolutely nothing to do with polygamy. It's due to religious extremism.
James - you seem to be confusing issues that are consensual with issues that are forced. If two (or more) people want to do something that only affects them, then let them do it. But when it's forced, or affects others (like children) then it's obviously wrong.
realitycheck | 12:12 p.m. July 30, 2008
by the way, James - your LDS badge is showing. Perhaps if you put it away and
actually state what is wrong with polygamy, then we will have a better
understanding. Obviously it's not "cheating" - so what is the
real issue?
And don't say God or some prophet said it was wrong. Unless you've personally spoken to God, then you simply read it in some book, and that doesn't really count, now does it.
By the way - there are those that practice polygamy and are totally non-religious. So they're not "using God to commit adultery". They simply all love each other and want to be together. Sounds ok to me.
So - what is your real issue with polygamy?
And don't say God or some prophet said it was wrong. Unless you've personally spoken to God, then you simply read it in some book, and that doesn't really count, now does it.
By the way - there are those that practice polygamy and are totally non-religious. So they're not "using God to commit adultery". They simply all love each other and want to be together. Sounds ok to me.
So - what is your real issue with polygamy?
Gregory | 12:43 p.m. July 30, 2008
James T. | 10:37 a.m. July 30, 2008
"To Reality Check
Oh, by the way- calm down, and don't come off so steamy and over heated on these posts. And I agree with others that POLYGAMY is very morally wrong, corrupt and as well sick and abusive."
You call people morally wrong, corrupt, sick and abusive, and then accuse OTHERS of being over heated?
Seems like you're the one who needs anger management counseling.
"To Reality Check
Oh, by the way- calm down, and don't come off so steamy and over heated on these posts. And I agree with others that POLYGAMY is very morally wrong, corrupt and as well sick and abusive."
You call people morally wrong, corrupt, sick and abusive, and then accuse OTHERS of being over heated?
Seems like you're the one who needs anger management counseling.
T M. | 12:52 p.m. July 30, 2008
Some on here are fuming and very morally disconnected! Geez! It's adultery
as well for a woman who cheats on her husband as it is for a husband to cheat on
his wife- NO DIFFERENCE! Polygamy is a lie, and has been established with flds,
for the purpose of sleeping with more than one bed partner, and made up
revelation using the name of God so it looks good to some-- ruffing off the
jagged edges. Perversion is perversion.
A bunch of sickos! and nothing to do with GOD!
A bunch of sickos! and nothing to do with GOD!
Steve | 2:06 p.m. July 30, 2008
Hey Gregory!
Lose morals are lose morals and it looks to me like polygamy is for those who have loose morals. Some of us out here have "control" over ourselves, and our sexual desires, and don't need to go and mess around with young girls. Some of us like having one good woman for a wife. And some of us have close relationships with our wives and would never offend them by having uncontrolled sexual desires for someone else. Many of us enjoy this believe it or not. We also have personal relationships with our children as well and don't spend our time thinking about breeding a bunch of women. You guys are totally twisted!
Lose morals are lose morals and it looks to me like polygamy is for those who have loose morals. Some of us out here have "control" over ourselves, and our sexual desires, and don't need to go and mess around with young girls. Some of us like having one good woman for a wife. And some of us have close relationships with our wives and would never offend them by having uncontrolled sexual desires for someone else. Many of us enjoy this believe it or not. We also have personal relationships with our children as well and don't spend our time thinking about breeding a bunch of women. You guys are totally twisted!
realitycheck | 2:49 p.m. July 30, 2008
TM 12:52pm, Steve 2:06pm, James T, et al:
Now, I've stated clearly that I find nothing wrong with polygamy. If 3, 4, 5 people all love each other and want to live together and have children, what's the problem, as long as the children know who their parents are?
TM - it's not adultery. Adultery is cheating on your spouse. This isn't cheating since everyone knows and agrees with it.
Steve - how is that loose morals? Or are you putting your morals on others? Who does this hurt? If no one is hurt, how can it be immoral?
I have yet for anyone to come up with a LEGITIMATE reason why polygamy is wrong. Some of you would also be against gays living arraignments. I am too, but it's their choice (nasty as it is).
Can anyone actually come up with a NON-RELIGIOUS reason why polygamy is wrong?
By the way, TM - I agree with you that polygamy has nothing to do with God. It's a personal lifestyle choice that hurts no one. So why do people keep bringing up polygamy?
Isn't the real issue Religious Extremism? Isn't that what is really causing the FLDS abuses?
Now, I've stated clearly that I find nothing wrong with polygamy. If 3, 4, 5 people all love each other and want to live together and have children, what's the problem, as long as the children know who their parents are?
TM - it's not adultery. Adultery is cheating on your spouse. This isn't cheating since everyone knows and agrees with it.
Steve - how is that loose morals? Or are you putting your morals on others? Who does this hurt? If no one is hurt, how can it be immoral?
I have yet for anyone to come up with a LEGITIMATE reason why polygamy is wrong. Some of you would also be against gays living arraignments. I am too, but it's their choice (nasty as it is).
Can anyone actually come up with a NON-RELIGIOUS reason why polygamy is wrong?
By the way, TM - I agree with you that polygamy has nothing to do with God. It's a personal lifestyle choice that hurts no one. So why do people keep bringing up polygamy?
Isn't the real issue Religious Extremism? Isn't that what is really causing the FLDS abuses?
chomama | 2:58 p.m. July 30, 2008
re - steve 2:06pm
I would agree that the way the FLDS does it is wrong - where they could have 30 wives all living in other places, kids don't even know who their real mother is, etc. That's just twisted.
But for your average (non-religious extremist) person, living with 2 or 3 women (or a woman living with 2 or 3 men) and supporting them and they all live together and love each other and the children know who their mother and father is and they have a loving home ALL TOGETHER then what's wrong with that?
There's a BIG difference between a religious extremist having a bunch of wives spread out all over the place versus a few people living together raising a loving family.
Agreed?
I would agree that the way the FLDS does it is wrong - where they could have 30 wives all living in other places, kids don't even know who their real mother is, etc. That's just twisted.
But for your average (non-religious extremist) person, living with 2 or 3 women (or a woman living with 2 or 3 men) and supporting them and they all live together and love each other and the children know who their mother and father is and they have a loving home ALL TOGETHER then what's wrong with that?
There's a BIG difference between a religious extremist having a bunch of wives spread out all over the place versus a few people living together raising a loving family.
Agreed?
chomama | 3:09 p.m. July 30, 2008
re - Steve 2:06pm:
"uncontrolled sexual desires for someone else" !!!
are you talking about polygamy? Because it sure sounds like you're talking about prostitution or child rape. Or do you consider them all to be the same thing?
And we agree that the FLDS has taken the concept of polygamy to a twisted place. But that's not polygamy's fault. That's the FLDS taking a concept and making it way more and way worse than it was ever designed to be. They did the same thing with religion (obviously) - they took it way past anything reasonable and twisted it all around to suit their needs.
It's not about polygamy. It's about taking everything to an extreme. There is little in life that still works well when taken to extremes.
"uncontrolled sexual desires for someone else" !!!
are you talking about polygamy? Because it sure sounds like you're talking about prostitution or child rape. Or do you consider them all to be the same thing?
And we agree that the FLDS has taken the concept of polygamy to a twisted place. But that's not polygamy's fault. That's the FLDS taking a concept and making it way more and way worse than it was ever designed to be. They did the same thing with religion (obviously) - they took it way past anything reasonable and twisted it all around to suit their needs.
It's not about polygamy. It's about taking everything to an extreme. There is little in life that still works well when taken to extremes.
chomama | 3:58 p.m. July 30, 2008
Is anyone even aware that polygamy ISN'T a religious term? It's a
social living-arrangement term.
So saying "polygamy is using God to commit adultery" is a totally incorrect statement.
It's no different than someone that is a vegetarian for their religion. Being vegetarian doesn't imply religion - but some practice it as part of their religion. You certainly don't need to be religious to be a vegetarian... nor a polygamist.
So saying "polygamy is using God to commit adultery" is a totally incorrect statement.
It's no different than someone that is a vegetarian for their religion. Being vegetarian doesn't imply religion - but some practice it as part of their religion. You certainly don't need to be religious to be a vegetarian... nor a polygamist.
Dennis | 9:53 p.m. July 30, 2008
Hello? reality check
How about sexually transmitted diseases? You are one of a kind and very twisted.
How about sexually transmitted diseases? You are one of a kind and very twisted.
realitycheck | 9:46 a.m. July 31, 2008
what do STDs have to do with it? you can get that from one wife, much less 3.
you really trying to use STDs to say that polygamy is bad? come on, dude. You can do better than that. can't get a much weaker argument. I mean, these would be your wives.
btw - just for the record, I wouldn't practice polygamy. my hispanic wife is all I can handle. I just can't think of a reason why people shouldn't be able to do it.
Anyone have an actual legitimate reason, that makes sense? cuz the last one was weak....
you really trying to use STDs to say that polygamy is bad? come on, dude. You can do better than that. can't get a much weaker argument. I mean, these would be your wives.
btw - just for the record, I wouldn't practice polygamy. my hispanic wife is all I can handle. I just can't think of a reason why people shouldn't be able to do it.
Anyone have an actual legitimate reason, that makes sense? cuz the last one was weak....
Texas is being judged | 10:22 a.m. Aug. 1, 2008
The real indictment here is against the sorry state of Texas. Not to mention its
governor, who will certainly never reside in the governor�s
mansion again. And the Texas CPS, with its culture of lying and outright
incompetence. And the Texas Rangers, who, having led the state into this mess
all speed ahead, have dragged their feet to cover it up. And certainly the Texas
legal system, as represented by Barbara Walther and Natalie
Malonis�what a nasty pair of lawbreakers they are!
Add your comment
Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.
Words Remaining
E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.
Related content
- Soccer MVPs know how to win 1:56 a.m.
- Alta's Ohai is Ms. Soccer 2009 1:56 a.m.
- High school soccer: Past MVPs 1:37 a.m.
- Senators want food tax restored 1:27 a.m.
- Utah women lag in higher education 1:16 a.m.
- Hatch empathizes with Muslims 1:14 a.m.
- Matheson gets no thanks from GOP 1:13 a.m.
- Mitchell seeks to block witnesses 1:12 a.m.
- Party insiders may take on Bennett 1:11 a.m.
- Input sought on nondiscrimination 1:11 a.m.
- TCU showdown has big implications
- Seniors helped BYU regroup
- Lambert surprisingly tops news
- Bystanders framed for child porn
- Hope for single moms
- Soccer MVPs know how to win
- Korver and Miles to be evaluated
- Matheson gets no thanks from GOP
- Utah Jazz Extra: Whose hot/not
- Newhouse Hotel, an explosive end
- House passes health care bill
228 - TCU showdown has big implications183
- Lobo suspended182
- Cougars crush hapless Cowboys154
- Utah Jazz fall apart against Kings131
- TCU 4th in AP poll; U. 16th, Y. 22nd118
- Thousands protest health bill114
- RSL rallies to advance103
- No 'backlash' for pioneers, gays analogy97
- Utes pound winless Lobos89
Meghan McCain, the daughter of former presidential candidate John...
Why do so many people live so close to refineries in Utah and elsewhere?
Advertisement
Latest comments
Sounds like a good option if you can't or won't switch to AT&T for the...
I worked with and around Bill Sederburg for 5 years while he was at...
hand. He needs to work on his moves to the basket and rebounding. Lateral...
play Fez or Koufos tonight. He went with a smaller line up and Boozer, Okur...
I've met Bennett before and he is a nice man. He also knows the Constitution...
That's never been a secret. Everyone will pay for it except those that don't...
I agree with NonMormon. I am active LDS, and I enjoy Ash's articles, and I...
I kept saying don't resign Milsap, especially after Portland offered that...
BYU is the slowest team that has ever been in the top 25. Utah will put up a...
i think u have the cowboys ranked too low! at least an A- LOL nice work!
Advertisements