Reader comments
More than half of teen girls at FLDS ranch are pregnant or had baby
107 comments | Read story
- Page:
- < Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next >
Re: SJ Bobkins | 10:08 p.m. | 10:19 p.m. April 28, 2008
Right. So far, too many lies have been dished out to us to believe anything the
FLDS might say.
not caught | 10:40 p.m. April 28, 2008
No one is going to jail for this many of the YFZ ranch folk didnt take a dna
test and those who could be prosecuted are already leaving for other nests maybe
hildale or colorado city but more likely the smaller enclaves till the heat if
off. Texas was overwhelmed and the criminal investigation once done wont find
the guilty.
Comments continue below
re: not caught | 10:54 p.m. April 28, 2008
So? Don't take a DNA test, don't get your kids back. Thanks to the
FLDS lies, there's no other way to figure out who the parents are. Simple
as that.
Doug S | 11:08 p.m. April 28, 2008
Steve, the issue is this:
At present, we apparently have evidence strongly suggesting that thirty-three of four hundred children were abused, with an additional twenty or thirty-odd in imminent danger. That gives you perhaps sixty of four hundred children at immediate risk--something like fifteen percent--who concededly should have been placed elsewhere.
Compare that with the overall abuse, neglect, sexual assault, and teenaged pregnancy statistics in our society. Compare it also with the statistics of inner-city youth in any large Texas city. Compare it, too, with the 75% failure rate of the Texas foster care system, and consider the blood-curdling tales routinely coming out of that system.
Consider the other options Texas had with respect to the three-hundred-odd children who were not at immediate risk of abuse. Consider that the mothers offered to get apartments off the compound and get jobs, if they could just stay with their children. Consider that the men offered to leave the compound, if the women and children could stay there together.
Then consider fifteen-year-old idol Hannah Montana, clearly topless, looking-longingly-at-the-camera, while-apologists-gush-about-it-being-art-and-not-softcore-porn.
Then, you tell me whether Texas didn't just take three-hundred-odd children from a warm frying pan and throw them onto a hot fire.
At present, we apparently have evidence strongly suggesting that thirty-three of four hundred children were abused, with an additional twenty or thirty-odd in imminent danger. That gives you perhaps sixty of four hundred children at immediate risk--something like fifteen percent--who concededly should have been placed elsewhere.
Compare that with the overall abuse, neglect, sexual assault, and teenaged pregnancy statistics in our society. Compare it also with the statistics of inner-city youth in any large Texas city. Compare it, too, with the 75% failure rate of the Texas foster care system, and consider the blood-curdling tales routinely coming out of that system.
Consider the other options Texas had with respect to the three-hundred-odd children who were not at immediate risk of abuse. Consider that the mothers offered to get apartments off the compound and get jobs, if they could just stay with their children. Consider that the men offered to leave the compound, if the women and children could stay there together.
Then consider fifteen-year-old idol Hannah Montana, clearly topless, looking-longingly-at-the-camera, while-apologists-gush-about-it-being-art-and-not-softcore-porn.
Then, you tell me whether Texas didn't just take three-hundred-odd children from a warm frying pan and throw them onto a hot fire.
Mahershalalhashbaz | 11:11 p.m. April 28, 2008
The issue is not how old the girls were. It is clearly unconstitutional for
there to be a law respecting an establishment of religion. Plain. Simple.
Read your 2nd amendment for once in your life. The Texas law that says girls
must be 17 to have sex is unconstitutional. It is their religion. It is not
wierd to them. Wierd to us yes. But the constitution trumps our opinions. It
is not our place to tell them what is wierd or abnormal, we have freedom to
teach them if they allow us. Take your version of Christianity and explain why
it is bad and teach them about religion. And to help them where we can. I do
believe in preventing anyone to be forced against their own will, no matter what
age. But this is obviously an attack on their religion. Don't believe
it is their religion? Read your Bible for once in your life. Where do you
think they learned about polygamy? Prophets in the HOLY BIBLE! Tell me
it's not religion. I dare you. Until there is a trial by jury, these
people are innocent until PROVEN GUILTY. And I suppose the Muslims polygamy is
religious. Morons.
BobP | 11:17 p.m. April 28, 2008
The international definition of genocide includes religious discrimination AND
taking the children away from such a group.
Hmm! Haun's Mill massacre of early LDS "Mormon nits (lice) grow up - kill 'em.
Hmm! Haun's Mill massacre of early LDS "Mormon nits (lice) grow up - kill 'em.
Re: Fred M | 12:29 a.m. April 29, 2008
Because those fathers will run with the children/wives. Putting the kids with
their mothers will only get them back to their fathers. Fact is, the majority
of the wives aren't legally married. Therefore if a 20 year old man took a
14 year old bride in 2005, the sexual act is not protected under law because she
wasn't his wife legally. I can't understand why so many of you are
crying out against the CPS (who I'm not to excited about either). The
fathers that are guilty are probably already gone, and the mothers would only
follow the fathers to where they are going. This is unfortunate, but I
can't see that texas had any other choice.
Forced | 1:08 a.m. April 29, 2008
How many of the 31 teenaged girls were forced to have sex with an older man? How
many pregnant teens outside the FLDS community are forced BY THEIR PARENTS to
have sex with an older man?
If a Catholic priest was forcing young 13-17 y/o girls in his parish to "spiritually" marry older men and have sex with them, the same people who are defending the FLDS would be demanding long prison time for the priest.
Stop defending child abuse in the name of religion!!!
If a Catholic priest was forcing young 13-17 y/o girls in his parish to "spiritually" marry older men and have sex with them, the same people who are defending the FLDS would be demanding long prison time for the priest.
Stop defending child abuse in the name of religion!!!
The FLDS | 2:08 a.m. April 29, 2008
think teenagers everywhere should be getting pregnant. They want more teenage
boys impregnating your daughters, because by comparison that means they are
doing a poor job. The keep quoting statistics showing that the teenage birth
rate is through the roof in Texas in comparison to their 14-17 population.
What they forget to include is the fact that U.S. pregnancy statistics include teenage girls ages 18 and 19, as well.
Isn't it odd that a "religious group" so completely intent on convincing the world they stand for family values and righteousess is using what they perceive as teenage immorality as a beacon to show the world they aren't quite so immoral by comparison?
Perhaps next the FLDS will compare the female beating rates of Saudi Arabia to show how moral the rates of female beatings among the FLDS are.
Just saying.
What they forget to include is the fact that U.S. pregnancy statistics include teenage girls ages 18 and 19, as well.
Isn't it odd that a "religious group" so completely intent on convincing the world they stand for family values and righteousess is using what they perceive as teenage immorality as a beacon to show the world they aren't quite so immoral by comparison?
Perhaps next the FLDS will compare the female beating rates of Saudi Arabia to show how moral the rates of female beatings among the FLDS are.
Just saying.
justme | 2:28 a.m. April 29, 2008
OK OK ppl, I think the age is the smaller fight here, I beleive that we need to
get the DNA to make sure that the father are only fathers and not grandfathers
as well to the same child. To me that is the bigger crime, like it or not a
child at 14(now) and 15(a few years ago) can consent to SEX, but I dont beleive
that a child would ever consent to sex with her own parent. THAT IS RAPE. And
that is the larger problem.
editors | 2:32 a.m. April 29, 2008
I don't believe anything the CPS puts out there - they are brutal thugs,
and they'll say anything to get their cowardly selves off the hook. They
are going to be sued and the real truth (not that we don't already know
it-they lied, they lied, they keep lying) will come out.
Wait for the lawsuit folks. It's going to blow all the CPS bs out of the water.
Wait for the lawsuit folks. It's going to blow all the CPS bs out of the water.
Cowboy | 3:31 a.m. April 29, 2008
Polygamy is illegal plain and simple. People have abused their right to freedom
of religion by setting up a religious practice that encourages young women and
men to violate this law. If the state of Texas had not stepped in and done
something imagine how many girls in the next 100 years would be born in this
polygamous culture a forced to marry young and share a husband their whole life.
It needed to be stopped. I support Texas and hope other states will follow
their lead.
Sarah | 4:00 a.m. April 29, 2008
Maher:
There is alot of things in the bible that were done under the name of religion that are outlawed. By your theory it would be okay to stone adulteres to death because "it's in the bible" ya whatever. Most societies use pologamy because there are not enough males for all the women. The FLDS don't have that situation. There are plenty of young males to marry the young females, but they kick out the young males so that some 50 year old guy can bring in another 14 year old wife, it's totally sick. They do it, in part for CONTROL. they need control of those girls. If you dealve into the issue's that have been going on with this community. Much of it is about the prophet in charge of all the $$ and property. Religion has nothing to do with it. If the men don't do what the prophet wants, he takes away there $$, property and wives. Don't remember anything about that in the bible.
There is alot of things in the bible that were done under the name of religion that are outlawed. By your theory it would be okay to stone adulteres to death because "it's in the bible" ya whatever. Most societies use pologamy because there are not enough males for all the women. The FLDS don't have that situation. There are plenty of young males to marry the young females, but they kick out the young males so that some 50 year old guy can bring in another 14 year old wife, it's totally sick. They do it, in part for CONTROL. they need control of those girls. If you dealve into the issue's that have been going on with this community. Much of it is about the prophet in charge of all the $$ and property. Religion has nothing to do with it. If the men don't do what the prophet wants, he takes away there $$, property and wives. Don't remember anything about that in the bible.
David in Michigan | 5:54 a.m. April 29, 2008
To Mahershalalhashbaz ("Read your 2nd amendment for once in your
life"):
I took your advice and read the 2nd amendment. It said something about the right to bear arms. Maybe you should read the 1st amendment (should I say "for once in your life"?)
I took your advice and read the 2nd amendment. It said something about the right to bear arms. Maybe you should read the 1st amendment (should I say "for once in your life"?)
just thinking II | 5:57 a.m. April 29, 2008
Jules
IF GOD WANTED THIS TO BE, WOULD THE MILLIONS OF PEOPLE IN HIS WORLD BE SPAWNING!!!!
Yes they are. if you believe God created the earth and man, then you must realize that it is normal for young girls 13-14 to menstate. So if God created them to do that he must be alright with them breeding. and they do. sorry you can not see that. you may not like it, but those are the facts of life. we men have made laws to stop people from breeding at a young age. those are man�s laws and they are good. I have three girls. from the time they were little they all wanted to be mothers. that is why girls play with dolls. the feminist don�t want the girls to play with dolls, (man�s laws) but they still do it. now my girls were all in their twenties when they had children. but they all had them. I had a son who was 18 as was his girlfriend. No they were not married. but they still had a baby. that is what happens. so don�t use the pharse God is not for it. He is.
IF GOD WANTED THIS TO BE, WOULD THE MILLIONS OF PEOPLE IN HIS WORLD BE SPAWNING!!!!
Yes they are. if you believe God created the earth and man, then you must realize that it is normal for young girls 13-14 to menstate. So if God created them to do that he must be alright with them breeding. and they do. sorry you can not see that. you may not like it, but those are the facts of life. we men have made laws to stop people from breeding at a young age. those are man�s laws and they are good. I have three girls. from the time they were little they all wanted to be mothers. that is why girls play with dolls. the feminist don�t want the girls to play with dolls, (man�s laws) but they still do it. now my girls were all in their twenties when they had children. but they all had them. I had a son who was 18 as was his girlfriend. No they were not married. but they still had a baby. that is what happens. so don�t use the pharse God is not for it. He is.
Kevin In Texas | 7:30 a.m. April 29, 2008
There are still a large percentage of girls of those 14-17 year old girls who
claim to be over 18 and CPS refuses to believe them about their ages. I
don't know what the truth is but there are still discrepancies.
Thumbs down with Texas | 7:42 a.m. April 29, 2008
So why do they need to keep 431 children in state custody? Do they really think
the babies and boys are in danger of suddenly becoming pregnant?
I don't agree with the FLDS sex-related practices. But I definitely think Texas has illegally obtained their evidence.
Besides, if the problem is with men having sex with underage girls, why haven't any men been seized, taken from their homes, forced to give DNA samples, and isolated from their lifestyle? Why punish those who are already victims--the children and mothers?
Thanks to media attention, Texas has tried to suddenly annihilate a mouse with a missile. They are not justified in how they have handled this sad situation.
I don't agree with the FLDS sex-related practices. But I definitely think Texas has illegally obtained their evidence.
Besides, if the problem is with men having sex with underage girls, why haven't any men been seized, taken from their homes, forced to give DNA samples, and isolated from their lifestyle? Why punish those who are already victims--the children and mothers?
Thanks to media attention, Texas has tried to suddenly annihilate a mouse with a missile. They are not justified in how they have handled this sad situation.
Oh Please! | 9:12 a.m. April 29, 2008
Mormoms are like everyone else - some support FLDS kids not being torn from
Moms, others say get em out of there so the cycle can be broken. I'm an
active Mormon, and say, protect the children. Texas had no real choice in my
mind. Don't paint Mormons as FLDS supporters any more than you can assume
that all those who question Texas' methods on national comment boards such
as CNN or FOX as Mormons. Not true! Opinions are diverse and that goes accross
the religeous/nonreligeous board.
Amara | 9:33 a.m. April 29, 2008
You defenders of the FLDS make me sick! If God had wanted polygamy don't
you suppose He might have arranged the birth of more girls and fewer boys so
that teenage boys weren't abandoned?
And turning on underpaid civil servants who go into social work because they wanted to help make things better and now have followed the law is pathetic!
I suspect that most of you would rather perpetuate a situation where young girls are intimidated into unnatural & premature sex by religion and young, uneducated boys are abandoned because you don't want to admit that Joseph Smith and your scriptures are behind all of this.
You are disgusting!!!!
And turning on underpaid civil servants who go into social work because they wanted to help make things better and now have followed the law is pathetic!
I suspect that most of you would rather perpetuate a situation where young girls are intimidated into unnatural & premature sex by religion and young, uneducated boys are abandoned because you don't want to admit that Joseph Smith and your scriptures are behind all of this.
You are disgusting!!!!
re:ello | 10:08 a.m. April 29, 2008
They did not post this comment before, so I will try again. I don't hear
all the Mormon's I know defending the FLDS! They want to defend the
children, not the adults. I am Mormon, and resent that charge. This abuse
needs to be stopped, and Texas didn't have much choice once it was in there
and saw for themselves what was going on. Let's all pray for those kids -
and where are the boys? The disappearance of those boys sounds down-right
sinister. They need protecting as much as the girls, if not more, if
that's possible.
John Lambert | 10:23 a.m. April 29, 2008
To William F. Butler:
I think your evidence supports the theory that the FLDS are an exceptional case.
I do know that states go after other cases of statutory rape. It is just since they ususally involve only one person they do not make the headlines.
One in 34 girls 14-17 being pregnant is only 3%. ALthough there is the factor that the FLDS seek pregnancy and many teenagers in other situations try and lower their chances of pregnancy, over 50% pregnant or having had a child is clearly an abnormal situation.
I think your evidence supports the theory that the FLDS are an exceptional case.
I do know that states go after other cases of statutory rape. It is just since they ususally involve only one person they do not make the headlines.
One in 34 girls 14-17 being pregnant is only 3%. ALthough there is the factor that the FLDS seek pregnancy and many teenagers in other situations try and lower their chances of pregnancy, over 50% pregnant or having had a child is clearly an abnormal situation.
The cry | 11:02 a.m. April 29, 2008
Why all the cry for liberties despite the fact that for those adult liberties,
children must lose theirs.
Red | 11:15 a.m. April 29, 2008
Red Texan: "Texas will indeed successfully prosecute the guilty here, and
they don't need any untoward help as you suggest, Red."
They'll certainly prosecute some of the guilty, but IMO crimes committed under color of law will not even be addressed by the State.
One of the sad, sad conclusions of this debacle is that, if you've got automatic weapons and tanks, and a judge in your pocket who'll rule your way despite the evidence, you don't need to worry about "quaint," "outdated" relics like the Constitution.
And law.
And evidence.
Sigh --
They'll certainly prosecute some of the guilty, but IMO crimes committed under color of law will not even be addressed by the State.
One of the sad, sad conclusions of this debacle is that, if you've got automatic weapons and tanks, and a judge in your pocket who'll rule your way despite the evidence, you don't need to worry about "quaint," "outdated" relics like the Constitution.
And law.
And evidence.
Sigh --
Red | 11:25 a.m. April 29, 2008
To Red Texan (part 2):
Each child has a lawyer ("Guardian Ad Litem") who is supposed to defend that child's interest.
The State won't tell the Guardians Ad Litem where their clients are being detained. The kids have been sprinkled all over the state, without regard for (to deliberately prevent?) contact between each tot and his/her lawyer.
You can bet, though, that "friendly," smiling, sympathetic "coaches" know where each child is. And that they are "comforting" them, with legal pad at hand.
I predict that, after the State has coaxed enough "evidence" out of the kids, the confusion as to where they are will suddenly evaporate. Everyone will be very apologetic that their lawyers weren't at hand when their statements were manufactured.
But the statements will be there, and pre-schoolers (or, even, third graders) won't be able to challenge the accuracy of what they "said."
Each child has a lawyer ("Guardian Ad Litem") who is supposed to defend that child's interest.
The State won't tell the Guardians Ad Litem where their clients are being detained. The kids have been sprinkled all over the state, without regard for (to deliberately prevent?) contact between each tot and his/her lawyer.
You can bet, though, that "friendly," smiling, sympathetic "coaches" know where each child is. And that they are "comforting" them, with legal pad at hand.
I predict that, after the State has coaxed enough "evidence" out of the kids, the confusion as to where they are will suddenly evaporate. Everyone will be very apologetic that their lawyers weren't at hand when their statements were manufactured.
But the statements will be there, and pre-schoolers (or, even, third graders) won't be able to challenge the accuracy of what they "said."
Not a statistical naif | 12:06 p.m. April 29, 2008
These numbers don't add up. If 31 of those 53 girls are or have been
pregnant, that is 59%. During a period of 48 months, if the numbers are
constant, and each of them only had one child, 11% of them should be pregnant.
Instead, less than 4% of them are. If they had multiple children, the numbers
would be even higher. If the number of children is growing rapidly, the numbers
should be higher. The state of Texas is lying (again.)
Adam | 12:09 p.m. April 29, 2008
How do we get rid of the instigators of the ranch. They have no direction from
God.
I spend a lot of my time thinking of the children crying for their mothers and WE sit around and do nothing.
So let me play with numbers. The CPS could be right in saying all the girls that had babies are 22 years. I say this because they are quoted as saying they look like teenages. They also use a range of 12-19. So they could all be 19 or look like 19.
My take is that they have to keep the children long enough to cover themselves not for justice or protection of the kids.
Not a poligamist. End poligamy right now for the sake of the children.
I was taken from my home as a teenager by the government and I have paid the price big time throughout my life.
There is that mentality out there by people that they know what is best for you. They are very dangerous when you give them power.
I spend a lot of my time thinking of the children crying for their mothers and WE sit around and do nothing.
So let me play with numbers. The CPS could be right in saying all the girls that had babies are 22 years. I say this because they are quoted as saying they look like teenages. They also use a range of 12-19. So they could all be 19 or look like 19.
My take is that they have to keep the children long enough to cover themselves not for justice or protection of the kids.
Not a poligamist. End poligamy right now for the sake of the children.
I was taken from my home as a teenager by the government and I have paid the price big time throughout my life.
There is that mentality out there by people that they know what is best for you. They are very dangerous when you give them power.
Today | 12:19 p.m. April 29, 2008
Remember the Texan who said there was nuclear weapons of mass distruction in
Iran?
Remember the innocent people they set on fire in Waco, Texas. Remember the outcome of the hearings on this matter?
We got Jeffs put away now we need to put away the CPS.
Remember the innocent people they set on fire in Waco, Texas. Remember the outcome of the hearings on this matter?
We got Jeffs put away now we need to put away the CPS.
To Red | 12:30 p.m. April 29, 2008
While you want to claim the Constitution, tongue in cheek as outdated you seem
to forget the Declaration of Independence that allows for life, liberty and the
pursuit of happiness. Clearly you think the parents religious rights trump the
Declaration of Independence rights for these children. Why do you insist on
ignoring the children rights?
Girls | 12:38 p.m. April 29, 2008
Today's girls are reaching menarche at younger and younger ages and
according to obesity, prematurity and other conditions. The nearer to 100
pounds the more likely puberty, regardless of chronological age. It seems many
here assume that having babies at that age is therefore acceptable and even
safer than at an older age. That is a false assumption and birth defects of the
children in these very young mothers is near that of 35+ aged women and simply
because these girls are TOO young. Couple early pregnancies with multiple
pregnancies and you rapidly age a body.
Anonymous | 1:24 p.m. April 29, 2008
Why can't people understand that this sect was using its teen girls as a
way to increase its membership? There was clearly abuse. I can't comprehend
why a mother let an old man "marry" her teen daughter. I am pretty
sure her teen daughter was not happy at all about the idea. And for those
talking about pregnant high school girls and hannah montana: most of them
included the singer, did it because they wanted to. And for those who got
pregnant against their will, justice is being applied when they ask for it.
Those underage marriages were just sick. No other word to qualify those.
SG | 1:30 p.m. April 29, 2008
As I follow the events related to the FLDS compound raid by authorities in
Eldorado, Texas, and the subsequent legal posturing surrounding the case, I have
noticed something remarkably bizarre: The absence of fathers in the courts,
where the fate of their families is to be decided, showing their faces and
fighting for their wives and children. In the television films and newspapers
pictures about the case I only see women wearing 18th century attire and a
�pioneer� hairstyle; but no males. Is
there something wrong with this picture?. I definitely support the Texas
authorities in their investigation of child abuse in these secretive compounds.
Impregnating young girls ages 16 or younger, even under the smokescreen of
religion is the closest thing to slavery. Brainwashing them into submission to
these pervasive practices is the worst kind of abuse I can think of. To those
that claim that these people�s religious rights are being
trampled let me remind them that both polygamy and slavery have been declared
illegal in this country over a century ago.
The Texan | 1:30 p.m. April 29, 2008
Sittinger here reading a whole bunch of people who could answer their own
questions if they would just stop and read. But then they wouldn't be able
to cause a stink.
Things are going very well down here, thank you. It's the people in Utah and Arizona that are ignoring the obvious mess.
WMD is not a topic of this discussion. Stay on subject. WMD is the topic of 14 United Nations resolutions, twit.
Things are going very well down here, thank you. It's the people in Utah and Arizona that are ignoring the obvious mess.
WMD is not a topic of this discussion. Stay on subject. WMD is the topic of 14 United Nations resolutions, twit.
Red | 2:10 p.m. April 29, 2008
Re: to Red: "Clearly you think the parents religious rights trump the
� [childrens] rights.... Why do you insist on ignoring the
children rights?"
Nobody's rights should -- or need to -- be ignored. One of the most important of those rights -- so important that, without it, all other rights are in grave danger -- is the right to an honest government that is committed to following the law. If Texas had followed its own laws, odds are that the final result would be better:
Children would be safe.
Perps would pay.
Families who needed it would get counseling and support.
People could believe unpopular things without being harassed; only illegal actions would run afoul of the law.
Texas is sending the message that it is OK to ignore the law, as long as your "heart is pure." Ironically, that's exactly how the FLDS feel!
FLDS lawyers will have a field day, and one or more of Texas' goals probably won't be acheived.
The message that "your Government doesn�t have to follow the law" will do Texas a lot more harm than good in the long run.
Nobody's rights should -- or need to -- be ignored. One of the most important of those rights -- so important that, without it, all other rights are in grave danger -- is the right to an honest government that is committed to following the law. If Texas had followed its own laws, odds are that the final result would be better:
Children would be safe.
Perps would pay.
Families who needed it would get counseling and support.
People could believe unpopular things without being harassed; only illegal actions would run afoul of the law.
Texas is sending the message that it is OK to ignore the law, as long as your "heart is pure." Ironically, that's exactly how the FLDS feel!
FLDS lawyers will have a field day, and one or more of Texas' goals probably won't be acheived.
The message that "your Government doesn�t have to follow the law" will do Texas a lot more harm than good in the long run.
To William Butler | 2:25 p.m. April 29, 2008
Go back at look at your ages which included age 18 and age 19, both legal ages
to marry without parental consent. One could conceivably be legally married,
get pregnant at age 18 and then again at age 19 and be counted in your
statistics. We are not discussing that but "marriages" with parental
consent (possibly incest and without your own personal consent) and without
legal protection offered a legal wife, and underage pregnancy. Again, they are
very different issues.
BeeCareful | 4:47 p.m. April 29, 2008
How do they know how old they are? Do they have birth certifcates? No! This
whole story is a fraud!
The state CPS "estimated" the age of the women by eye-balling them! How accurate could that be? Do you suppose that method would be allowed in a court of law, even in Texas!? The story also dosen't say how many of the "teenagers" are 19, or 18!
The CPS's hatred of this peaceful group is so pervasive they are willing to do or say anything to make them look bad.
Shame, shame, shame!
The state CPS "estimated" the age of the women by eye-balling them! How accurate could that be? Do you suppose that method would be allowed in a court of law, even in Texas!? The story also dosen't say how many of the "teenagers" are 19, or 18!
The CPS's hatred of this peaceful group is so pervasive they are willing to do or say anything to make them look bad.
Shame, shame, shame!
Ronald A. Young | 5:12 p.m. April 29, 2008
I just want the Males found, Charged, Convicted and Jailed. This is not about
Religion or Pural Marriage, it is about violence, and Rape, mind control and
Repression of Women. Nothing more, nothing less.
ayzel | 5:35 p.m. April 29, 2008
Doug S, how many wives to you have, are you at 3 yet, will you get your own
spirit planet? The only reason you could possibly not be outraged by what the
FLDS does is if you are one of them.
Polygamy is a lifestyle | 7:13 p.m. April 29, 2008
We can look at various areas in the world where polygamy is/has been practiced.
It can be a lifestyle, but in advanced societies it fades. This is a great clue
that it does so because it tends to make women 2nd class citizens. We try hard
to keep this out of our Democratic society. If someone claims it's their
"religion" fine. But if it breaks laws like taking away the
"rights" of others, it will not be tolerated.
In the case of the FLDS these women have been told that they must do this to get to "heaven". They have been told that they must "obey" their husbands. They have been conditioned or "brainwashed" in many people's opinions. In our country, this is unconstitutional and will not be tolerated any longer.
In the case of the FLDS these women have been told that they must do this to get to "heaven". They have been told that they must "obey" their husbands. They have been conditioned or "brainwashed" in many people's opinions. In our country, this is unconstitutional and will not be tolerated any longer.
Eric R | 8:52 p.m. April 29, 2008
What an unspeakable horrific tragedy it is that has been occurring for so many
years in Iran, Iraq, Syria, Egypt, Africa, India and many other countries that
these girls have been getting married as young as 13!! Oh the "sexual
abuse" that must be occurring! Can you imagine that these are
"spiritual marriages"? For hundreds of years the paperwork was not
even getting filed in the courthouse! I plead with the US and the United
Nations for help. Thousands of buses will be needed and we will gather these
"abused" females to various sports stadiums. We will dole them out to
various strangers where they will be safe!
zoar | 10:00 p.m. April 29, 2008
Amendment IV: Warrants and searches.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
This is what this all about. Not polygamy, not underage girls but the trampling of constitutional rights. You see the evidence that they have gathered is tainted by reason of the first warrant.
There are also possible violations of the 5th and 6th amendments
Once constitutional lawyers start arguing before federal judges, this whole case will be thrown out. Nobody will be going to jail. The way this whole thing was carried out sealed that deal.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
This is what this all about. Not polygamy, not underage girls but the trampling of constitutional rights. You see the evidence that they have gathered is tainted by reason of the first warrant.
There are also possible violations of the 5th and 6th amendments
Once constitutional lawyers start arguing before federal judges, this whole case will be thrown out. Nobody will be going to jail. The way this whole thing was carried out sealed that deal.
I assume you are being | 10:15 p.m. April 29, 2008
Sarcastic Eric R. And although I do feel bad for any girls in the world that
endure this type of thinking, we can help most in our own country right now. We
have tried to help other countries get Democracy so we should always try and
help people in our own country when they are not getting it. This is the case
in this "religion". We are determining that "religion"
cannot be an excuse for abuse here in this country. Hopefully, other countries
will follow suit.
To Red | 9:54 a.m. April 30, 2008
You are indeed ignoring the Rights of the child. You claim nobody needs to be
ignored, yet that is precisely what you do when you claim "religious
rights" over the Declaration of Independence Right to Life, Liberty,
etc.
You seem not to understand that we are not discussing a typical American Neighborhood in which each individual acts as an entity unto themselves. The FLDS function for their prophet. Each person is not an entity unto themselves, but an extension of that same prophet. They did not live in separate homes, but communal living with only 19 homes among hundreds and hundreds of occupants. Again, you misunderstand the mentality of the group and in so miss out on why what you expect is unreasonable. If your prophet asked you to impregnate your own daughter, would you? Within the FLDS community, the answer would be "yes."
You seem not to understand that we are not discussing a typical American Neighborhood in which each individual acts as an entity unto themselves. The FLDS function for their prophet. Each person is not an entity unto themselves, but an extension of that same prophet. They did not live in separate homes, but communal living with only 19 homes among hundreds and hundreds of occupants. Again, you misunderstand the mentality of the group and in so miss out on why what you expect is unreasonable. If your prophet asked you to impregnate your own daughter, would you? Within the FLDS community, the answer would be "yes."
G | 12:02 p.m. April 30, 2008
"You claim nobody needs to be ignored, yet that is precisely what you do
when you claim "religious rights" over the Declaration of Independence
Right to Life, Liberty, etc."
The Declaration of Independence is *not* the Constitution. It is not a legal document or law in any sense, form, or manner, and therefore is irrelevant to the point at hand.
The Constitution, formerly the highest law of the land, is where rights are enumerated (NOT given). The First Amendment says that the government cannot ban a religion. Other Amendments cover quite a few other things the government cannot do, like unreasonable search and seizure. Texas CPS has violated about all of them except, ironically, the Second Amendment, which I suppose is the only Amendment that Texas recognizes.
The Declaration of Independence is *not* the Constitution. It is not a legal document or law in any sense, form, or manner, and therefore is irrelevant to the point at hand.
The Constitution, formerly the highest law of the land, is where rights are enumerated (NOT given). The First Amendment says that the government cannot ban a religion. Other Amendments cover quite a few other things the government cannot do, like unreasonable search and seizure. Texas CPS has violated about all of them except, ironically, the Second Amendment, which I suppose is the only Amendment that Texas recognizes.
laura | 6:44 p.m. April 30, 2008
i believe in our justice system an an hope an prey for the best out come for
these kids, an thank god for whom ever made that call.. any MOTHER who stands
by or gives a man permission to have his way with a young girl 14-17 then they
are wrong! i would do any thing to protect my children an stand up for them. an
i think if they want their kids back then this is the time to start showing that
they care..an SPEAK OUT AN TELL THE TRUTH.....it all comes down to the kids they
deserve a good life an choices without penalties not to be locked up in a gate
like cattle. an as for the men should be treated as any other man would be for
having sex with children tried as child sex afenders
Red | 8:39 p.m. April 30, 2008
Professor: "Where are the missing 27 boys?"
gal50: "Where are the missing 39 boys?"
Just a guess, but probably they're on "labor missions" earning million$ for the sect.
The girls are being socialized into their adult roles at the ranch, and I'd guess that the boys are being similarly socialized for their (admittedly different) role as workers.
gal50: "Where are the missing 39 boys?"
Just a guess, but probably they're on "labor missions" earning million$ for the sect.
The girls are being socialized into their adult roles at the ranch, and I'd guess that the boys are being similarly socialized for their (admittedly different) role as workers.
To G | 7:42 a.m. May 1, 2008
The Declaration of Independence was the legal groundwork for both the Articles
of Confederation And the Constitution and need not be ignored. In fact, many
con-law professors hold a reading of the Declaration of Independence because of
its importance to the creation of the very Constitution you claim it is
irrelevan.
Your understanding of the first amendment is seriously lacking. Here is the actual text:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Then we have this:In 1879, the Supreme Court was first called to interpret the extent of the free exercise clause in Reynolds v. United States, as related to the prosecution of polygamy under federal law. The Supreme Court upheld the conviction, deciding that to do otherwise would provide constitutional protection for a gamut of religious beliefs, including those as extreme as human sacrifice. The Court said, "Laws are made for the government of actions, and while they cannot interfere with mere religious beliefs and opinions, they may with practices."
Your understanding of the first amendment is seriously lacking. Here is the actual text:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Then we have this:In 1879, the Supreme Court was first called to interpret the extent of the free exercise clause in Reynolds v. United States, as related to the prosecution of polygamy under federal law. The Supreme Court upheld the conviction, deciding that to do otherwise would provide constitutional protection for a gamut of religious beliefs, including those as extreme as human sacrifice. The Court said, "Laws are made for the government of actions, and while they cannot interfere with mere religious beliefs and opinions, they may with practices."
To G, part 2 | 7:48 a.m. May 1, 2008
In simple terms, you may believe whatever you like but the court has the right
to limit your actions. So, you may not sacrifice humans, you may not beat the
devil or other evil spirits out of your child, you may not withhold insulin from
a diabetic child and etc. You might not be aware of it, but nobody may consent
to harm inflicted upon them. It's the law.
For those still ranting about the teen pregnancy rate of TX, are you aware that those include ages 18 and 19? Pull out those legal adults and see the change in pregnancy rates.
For those still ranting about the teen pregnancy rate of TX, are you aware that those include ages 18 and 19? Pull out those legal adults and see the change in pregnancy rates.
Search and seizure | 7:56 a.m. May 1, 2008
Are you really not aware that there was a warrant? Are you really not aware
that the search was not only because of the ultimately phoney phone call, which
did give them cause based on FLDS history, but 4 years of investigation? Are
you not aware that a girl listed her age at 16 only to be told that wasn't
her age by Roy Jessop who informed her that her age was 18, which she dutifully
reported to the worker who was witness to this?
This is ultimately not about polygamy, but abuse, incest, and abandonment.
This is ultimately not about polygamy, but abuse, incest, and abandonment.
Not about religion | 7:59 a.m. May 1, 2008
This is not about religion but actions. This might surprise you but human
sacrifice is not legal even if you really really really believe that it will get
you or the victim into heaven, hell, or where ever you wish to go in the
afterlife. see Reynolds v. United States
- Page:
- < Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next >
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
- 'Oz' hard to watch for singer Minnelli 10:27 p.m.
- Foul trouble hurting Aggies 10:25 p.m.
- 5 men detained in Pakistan 10:24 p.m.
- S.C. first lady files for divorce 10:24 p.m.
- Salazar calls for high flows in Colo. 10:23 p.m.
- Wild horses shot dead in Nevada 10:22 p.m.
- Gun laws getting looser across U.S. 10:22 p.m.
- Tests show no mussels in waters 10:21 p.m.
- Cable falls on I-80, closing lanes 10:19 p.m.
- Couple arrested in theft of ammo 10:18 p.m.
- Letters: Global warming a lie
277 - BYU football: Bronco weighs in on Hall195
- Palin signs books, chats with fans169
- Andersen apologizes for Jordan hoax143
- Nude bathers cited for lewdness138
- Max Hall wants to look ahead130
- Jazz fall apart late at L.A.110
- LDS to emphasize helping needy106
- Revive full food tax?106
- Panel passes BCS playoff bill105
David Rankin, one of Utah's youngest and ablest astrophotographers has...
There was a time when free shipping was rare. This holiday season, you...
Can you tell I just got out of a budget meeting with Gov Gary Herbert?
Latest comments
He is doing all he can to repair his image. He has shown through the years...
Miles is a great kid and plays hard. He has worked hard on his phisique and...
has anyone ever seen josh van weezop miss a shot from 15 feet??? didnt think...
Wish I could have seen the game. Sounds like a good one. Anyone with...
The smooth singing Natalie Cole brought the Spirit of Christmas to the...
I love David Archuleta's Christmas album "Christmas From The Heart". Every...
It is unfortunate that the des news is unable to publish results for all...
I think if Boone Pickens was really wanting to cash in, he would say natural...
First i would like to say how amussing it is to read comments on such a...
I refuse... I don't use Holy War either, as was said by someone else I...
Advertisements
McMartin was only one of several sexual abuse charges prosecuted in the eighties using the testimony of very young children who had been coached by CPS workers, their parents, psychologists, lawyers and other adults. Convictions were obtained in some cases with no evidence except the testimony of three and four year-olds.
The state of Texas has no evidence of criminal behavior of anyone at YFZ or they would have arrested the adults involved. A pregnant teenager is not evidence of violation of Texas law.