Reader comments
Texas judge refuses to sign order to return FLDS children
198 comments | Read story
betty | 12:55 p.m. May 31, 2008
the judge is allowed, by the state supreme court, to have conditions to the
return of the children. her conditions are reasonable.
texas and strong women, yes, my great, great, grandmother went to texas by wagon in 1832 to homestead. she was the first in a long line of us, and none of us would ever allow anyone to treat us the way these pathetic women are letting these men use them as brood sows.
and my father would have taken a shotgun to any so called man wanting to make his girls spirtuals wives
at age 12.
the mothers are as much to blame as the men, they hand the girls over. i think they are so inbred that all the minds are purtrified.
texas and strong women, yes, my great, great, grandmother went to texas by wagon in 1832 to homestead. she was the first in a long line of us, and none of us would ever allow anyone to treat us the way these pathetic women are letting these men use them as brood sows.
and my father would have taken a shotgun to any so called man wanting to make his girls spirtuals wives
at age 12.
the mothers are as much to blame as the men, they hand the girls over. i think they are so inbred that all the minds are purtrified.
concerned woman | 1:03 p.m. May 31, 2008
The judge is gutsy and I like her. She knows there are children at risk. This
is a cult with a huge privacy screen. They kick out young men so the older men
can get more girls as wives. Not women, but girls. There is a lot of sexual
abuse, child abuse, verbal abuse, physical and mental abuse. I say to the
people with their heads in the sand: Get your head out of the sand and read the
truth. The children are in danger. Just look at the past! Hello!
Comments continue below
Brother Chuck Schroeder | 1:09 p.m. May 31, 2008
Is that why this is on TV? Tuesday
Controversial Love Affairs
Are you falling in love with all the wrong people? Dr. Phil's guests are entangled in affairs so taboo, one man could land himself in jail! Emily and Brandon have been married for two-and-a-half years, and Emily was shocked to learn that her husband had sex with a 15-year-old -- twice. Brandon, 25, is now facing two felony charges for having intercourse with a minor, and blames his actions on a porn addiction. Does he really have a disorder, or is he just building a defense for his potential arrest? Then, Debbie, 51, says she has no shame about posing as a younger woman online and meeting attractive men. Her adult children, Michelle and Nathan, say her behavior is not only humiliating, it's also very dangerous. Why did Debbie fake her own death? Is it possible for her to stop this behavior, or should her children just mind their own business?
Controversial Love Affairs
Are you falling in love with all the wrong people? Dr. Phil's guests are entangled in affairs so taboo, one man could land himself in jail! Emily and Brandon have been married for two-and-a-half years, and Emily was shocked to learn that her husband had sex with a 15-year-old -- twice. Brandon, 25, is now facing two felony charges for having intercourse with a minor, and blames his actions on a porn addiction. Does he really have a disorder, or is he just building a defense for his potential arrest? Then, Debbie, 51, says she has no shame about posing as a younger woman online and meeting attractive men. Her adult children, Michelle and Nathan, say her behavior is not only humiliating, it's also very dangerous. Why did Debbie fake her own death? Is it possible for her to stop this behavior, or should her children just mind their own business?
L | 1:14 p.m. May 31, 2008
If it was determined by the Texas Supreme Court was illegal, then how can the
violators be in any position to make any conditions for their return ?
Anonymous | 1:20 p.m. May 31, 2008
In the begining there was one. One ranch home with one family of 400+. Now
there are 400 ones evolving from the one morfing back to one. Darwin would have
a ball figuring out the logic of these Brown Shirts playing racket ball with the
kids in a boxed room. Is this the Judicial Activisim that Senator Hatch talks
about?
Sam | 1:22 p.m. May 31, 2008
The Judge is a bozo. She got it wrong the first time and now she is unwilling to
do what she is required to do which is reverse her ruling.
We are a nation of laws and restrictions on the power of the state. The state must abide by the constitution just like any other citizen. They were compeletely wrong in this case and the judge aided and abetted.
We are a nation of laws and restrictions on the power of the state. The state must abide by the constitution just like any other citizen. They were compeletely wrong in this case and the judge aided and abetted.
Reality Check | 1:26 p.m. May 31, 2008
It appears that the Texas CPS is so dependent on breaking the law to achieve
their, CPS's, goals they are incompentent when it comes to doing things
legally.
The agreement CPS drafted on May 30th, 2008 for the return of the children was so ambigous they, CPS, could not even enforce it.
Looks like CPS just wants this thing to go away.
Texas courts said do what you need to enforce the law and protect the children, but follow the law while doing it. The CPS seems to be saying �it is too hard to follow the law - let�s just let it fade away and we will blame the judges. We, CPS, only want to enforce the law when we can make it easy for us, CPS, by allowing CPS to break the law in order to enforce it�.
Looks like Texas needs to bring in some competent people at Texas CPS.
The FLDS has found a new safe home for their life style. Like Utah, Texas will soon be unable to enforce all it's laws against FLDS members.
The agreement CPS drafted on May 30th, 2008 for the return of the children was so ambigous they, CPS, could not even enforce it.
Looks like CPS just wants this thing to go away.
Texas courts said do what you need to enforce the law and protect the children, but follow the law while doing it. The CPS seems to be saying �it is too hard to follow the law - let�s just let it fade away and we will blame the judges. We, CPS, only want to enforce the law when we can make it easy for us, CPS, by allowing CPS to break the law in order to enforce it�.
Looks like Texas needs to bring in some competent people at Texas CPS.
The FLDS has found a new safe home for their life style. Like Utah, Texas will soon be unable to enforce all it's laws against FLDS members.
re:wrz | 1:39 p.m. May 31, 2008
>>Haven't you heard? What you describe was basically legal in Texas
not more than two years ago. The change was made in Texas law when FLDS came to
town.
If that law had previously been used to justify pushing young girls into marriage with old men, it would have been changed years ago. It was changed in response to the abusive use to which the FLDS tried to put it. A 14-year-old marrying her 16-year-old boyfriend is far less common today than in the past. As a society we have moved on. The law stayed on the books (as many outdated laws continue to do) until it was used to justify child abuse.
A 14-year-old assigned in marriage to a 65-year old man (who already has a dozen or more "wives) is a good reason to change an outdated law. That isn't religious persecution. It is child protection.
There is a big difference between a single family, together with their 16-year-old daughter deciding she is ready to marry - and an entire community offering up it's underage daughters in marriage to old men because their prophet tells them to. The coercion and trauma is a matter of legal record.
If that law had previously been used to justify pushing young girls into marriage with old men, it would have been changed years ago. It was changed in response to the abusive use to which the FLDS tried to put it. A 14-year-old marrying her 16-year-old boyfriend is far less common today than in the past. As a society we have moved on. The law stayed on the books (as many outdated laws continue to do) until it was used to justify child abuse.
A 14-year-old assigned in marriage to a 65-year old man (who already has a dozen or more "wives) is a good reason to change an outdated law. That isn't religious persecution. It is child protection.
There is a big difference between a single family, together with their 16-year-old daughter deciding she is ready to marry - and an entire community offering up it's underage daughters in marriage to old men because their prophet tells them to. The coercion and trauma is a matter of legal record.
The Judicial System | 1:43 p.m. May 31, 2008
does not and never did WORK the way it is used
Reality Check | 1:53 p.m. May 31, 2008
To: concerned woman:
Yes, the judge has guts.
She is also a county judge elected by county voters.
Releasing these children back into the community without giving CPS the practical and legal authority to continue the investigation may not be popular.
Returning them at all may not be poplular.
Maybe she is hoping the Appeals court will release them without any restrictions so they will have to take the political heat for killing the investigation.
Maybe she just wants to force the Appeals Court to issue an order releasing the children so it will be on their head.
-----------------------------
concerned woman wrote at 1:03 p.m. May 31, 2008
The judge is gutsy and I like her. She knows there are children at risk. This is a cult with a huge privacy screen. They kick out young men so the older men can get more girls as wives. Not women, but girls. There is a lot of sexual abuse, child abuse, verbal abuse, physical and mental abuse. I say to the people with their heads in the sand: Get your head out of the sand and read the truth. The children are in danger. Just look at the past! Hello!
Yes, the judge has guts.
She is also a county judge elected by county voters.
Releasing these children back into the community without giving CPS the practical and legal authority to continue the investigation may not be popular.
Returning them at all may not be poplular.
Maybe she is hoping the Appeals court will release them without any restrictions so they will have to take the political heat for killing the investigation.
Maybe she just wants to force the Appeals Court to issue an order releasing the children so it will be on their head.
-----------------------------
concerned woman wrote at 1:03 p.m. May 31, 2008
The judge is gutsy and I like her. She knows there are children at risk. This is a cult with a huge privacy screen. They kick out young men so the older men can get more girls as wives. Not women, but girls. There is a lot of sexual abuse, child abuse, verbal abuse, physical and mental abuse. I say to the people with their heads in the sand: Get your head out of the sand and read the truth. The children are in danger. Just look at the past! Hello!
Samme | 1:55 p.m. May 31, 2008
"The judge is gutsy and I like her. She knows there are children at
risk."
What's at risk is the US Constitution.
What's at risk is the US Constitution.
Reality Check | 2:09 p.m. May 31, 2008
Except for the "cattle call" hearing and the single temporary custody
order by the district court judge, the justice system in Texas worked.
That single APPEALS court ruling, means we do not have to worry about a bus arriving in our neighborhood to take all the children away.
We do not have to "prove" we have the right to raise our children before they, the state, will "consider" giving "our" children back.
But, the apparent incompetance and lazy behavior of the Texas CPS means that the FLDS life style in Texas is now safe. If that life style includes wide spread child rape, multiple wives ( spirtual or otherwise), and cutting teenage boys off from the support of their family, friends and communities, OR NOT, they, ( the FLDS members ), will be effectively immune from prosecution. (except in very rare individual instances where media plays it up).
The net effect is a win for all of us, but a loss for any true victims of hidden crimes in these reclusive religious communities.
One big win, many small losses. Small to everyone else, life changing for the victim.
But, that is the REAL WORLD. Win some, lose some.
That single APPEALS court ruling, means we do not have to worry about a bus arriving in our neighborhood to take all the children away.
We do not have to "prove" we have the right to raise our children before they, the state, will "consider" giving "our" children back.
But, the apparent incompetance and lazy behavior of the Texas CPS means that the FLDS life style in Texas is now safe. If that life style includes wide spread child rape, multiple wives ( spirtual or otherwise), and cutting teenage boys off from the support of their family, friends and communities, OR NOT, they, ( the FLDS members ), will be effectively immune from prosecution. (except in very rare individual instances where media plays it up).
The net effect is a win for all of us, but a loss for any true victims of hidden crimes in these reclusive religious communities.
One big win, many small losses. Small to everyone else, life changing for the victim.
But, that is the REAL WORLD. Win some, lose some.
Granny Relda | 2:15 p.m. May 31, 2008
All of this tragedy will eventually be a blessing for many families who've
been unlawfully attacked & damaged by CPS nationwide. The actions of TX CPS
are the USUAL behavior of DCFS from sea to shining sea, folks. Ugly but true.
CPS fabricates, lies and removes children based upon nothing - no evidence, no
abuse, nothing. This case may actually force some precedents that will bless
many thousands of U.S. families. My heart bleeds for the mothers & children,
though. No therapy in the world will undo the trauma they've all
experienced. May God bless the judge, and every last CPS worker involved, with
1000 times over the same pain they've visited upon the innocent.
Gray Wolf... | 2:28 p.m. May 31, 2008
Photo caption:
"Judge Barbara Walther wants a deal to include more specific restrictions for FLDS parents."
Go Barbara Walther!
Texas is not going to be run over by polygamists like the state of Utah. The thousands of people in Utah practicing polygamy has left the great state of Utah IMPOTENT!
Go Barbara Walther! Go!
"Judge Barbara Walther wants a deal to include more specific restrictions for FLDS parents."
Go Barbara Walther!
Texas is not going to be run over by polygamists like the state of Utah. The thousands of people in Utah practicing polygamy has left the great state of Utah IMPOTENT!
Go Barbara Walther! Go!
Bruce | 2:28 p.m. May 31, 2008
Maybe what is as disheartening as the trajedy that these people have gone
through is the hatefulness of the anti-FLDS folks posting on many forums.
You still see posts on "12 years olds being forced to marry 60 year olds", "welfare fraud", "brood sows", etc. All of these things have been found to be absoulutely false.
Yet many continue spewing out those misinformed lies. I threw the tv out a few years back. I suppose that I was naive enough to think that there wasn't really anyone that listened to CNN, NBC, etc. anymore. Guess not. Wake up folks, and get your information somewhere besides the mainstream media.
You still see posts on "12 years olds being forced to marry 60 year olds", "welfare fraud", "brood sows", etc. All of these things have been found to be absoulutely false.
Yet many continue spewing out those misinformed lies. I threw the tv out a few years back. I suppose that I was naive enough to think that there wasn't really anyone that listened to CNN, NBC, etc. anymore. Guess not. Wake up folks, and get your information somewhere besides the mainstream media.
Texas proud | 2:39 p.m. May 31, 2008
I will take a tough Texas judge who has been elected by us to protect these
children and uphold the laws of this state than a bunch of closet polygamous
sypathizers who think these children are property of their sexual predator
condoning parents. Just because you have allowed this type of behavior to go on
behind the Zion curtin does not mean the welfare of these children should not
come first. The parents will get their children back but they have to agree to
what is best for the children not the rules under Jeffs. Are we a perfect
state? No but it is better than Utah who has never aggressively enforced
protecting these children. Get a grip up there as well as a life.
InJustice | 2:44 p.m. May 31, 2008
Judge Barbara Walther will get her latest little shenanigan shoved right down
her throat. It's WHEN, not IF. She tromped out of court on Friday. Good
move, Barb! You represent Texas law well. Extortion isn't always that easy,
Barb.
The Appeals and Supreme Courts have mandated that incompetent Barb vacate her order which gave custody of all the children to CPS. Nowhere did it say should could add provisions that had to be met before vacating the order.
Put your blanket back under the bench, Barb. It's Day 48 and Texas has not brought forth even a single case of child abuse . . . the incompetent dullards involved are still clinging to the ridiculous notion that their dragnet operation based on fraudulent call to 911 does not trample Texas law or the Constitution.
Austin's 3rd Court of Appeals will remedy Barb's injustice on Monday.
The Appeals and Supreme Courts have mandated that incompetent Barb vacate her order which gave custody of all the children to CPS. Nowhere did it say should could add provisions that had to be met before vacating the order.
Put your blanket back under the bench, Barb. It's Day 48 and Texas has not brought forth even a single case of child abuse . . . the incompetent dullards involved are still clinging to the ridiculous notion that their dragnet operation based on fraudulent call to 911 does not trample Texas law or the Constitution.
Austin's 3rd Court of Appeals will remedy Barb's injustice on Monday.
SLIPPERY-SLOPE | 2:46 p.m. May 31, 2008
ARGUMENT AND DECISION
Continuation of my previous comments...
FEMALE ATTORNEY TV VIDEO STATEMENT:
CHILDREN ARE BEING UNLAWFULLY DETAINED.
==
Continuation of my previous comments...
FEMALE ATTORNEY TV VIDEO STATEMENT:
CHILDREN ARE BEING UNLAWFULLY DETAINED.
==
Reality Check | 2:51 p.m. May 31, 2008
There is a wide spread mis-understanding of the legal portion of the Texas CPS
case:
1. After taking the kids the CPS filed a civil lawsuit to permanently remove that children from his/her parents. Required by law and routine.
2. A hearing was held to determine which of the following should have happened.
A. The children should stay in temporary custody of CPS and the trial to permenently remove them should continue over the coming months and years.
B. The children should be returned to the parents subject to any restriction the court approved and the trial to permanently remove them should continue over the coming months and years.
3. Judge W. chose A.
4. Judge W. order the children placed in the temporary custody of CPS while the trial continued.
5. Judge W. also ordered DNA samples and other methods of obtaining evidence which are appropriate having chose A.
6. Judge W. did NOT order the type of option B restrictions which would of been appropriate - such as do not leave the county with the child - and fully cooperate with the CPSs investigation - as if she had chosen option B.
- continued ---
1. After taking the kids the CPS filed a civil lawsuit to permanently remove that children from his/her parents. Required by law and routine.
2. A hearing was held to determine which of the following should have happened.
A. The children should stay in temporary custody of CPS and the trial to permenently remove them should continue over the coming months and years.
B. The children should be returned to the parents subject to any restriction the court approved and the trial to permanently remove them should continue over the coming months and years.
3. Judge W. chose A.
4. Judge W. order the children placed in the temporary custody of CPS while the trial continued.
5. Judge W. also ordered DNA samples and other methods of obtaining evidence which are appropriate having chose A.
6. Judge W. did NOT order the type of option B restrictions which would of been appropriate - such as do not leave the county with the child - and fully cooperate with the CPSs investigation - as if she had chosen option B.
- continued ---
SimonSays | 2:51 p.m. May 31, 2008
Concerned, you are a fool!
It's Day 48 and Texas has not brought forth even a single case of child abuse Proof of abuse? Ridiculous!
There is only proof that Judge Barb has a complete disregard for Texas law, the Constitution, and the higher courts.
It's Day 48 and Texas has not brought forth even a single case of child abuse Proof of abuse? Ridiculous!
There is only proof that Judge Barb has a complete disregard for Texas law, the Constitution, and the higher courts.
COSMO | 2:57 p.m. May 31, 2008
You chest thumping Texas Brush Poppers, crack me up almost everytime you open
your ignorant mouths.
To Bruce | 3:04 p.m. May 31, 2008
I'm sure you did throw your TV out years ago, along with anything else that
might have open your eyes to whats really goes on behind closed doors, just the
way pervert Jeffs wants it. I believe its one of the many reasons you are in
denial. Seeing that you posted...means you have access to a computer...so do
some research...by the way..pictures dont lie...PERV JEFFS and a little 12 year
old girl...now if you condone that...you are just as sick as he is.
Reality Check | 3:10 p.m. May 31, 2008
--continued--
7. The appeals court struck down only the order giving CPS temporary custody while the trial to take them away permanently continued.
8 The Supreme Court reminded the media and everybody else that the law suit to permanently remove the children continued and that the Trial Court had the ability to protect the children using option B.
9. The Supreme Court also reminded everyone that option B included the ability for the Trial Court to issue orders to the parents to allow the lawsuit and investigation to continue under option B including restrictions on travel and CPS access to the children in the parents home.
10. Judge W is now trying to implement option B as the Supreme Court pointed out Texas law allows here to - ignorant Media Circus continues.
Timing remains a problem - this all was supposed to be completed with in 14 days of removal of the children from their home - but appeals court pointed out that was just a procedural requirement that would not be reversed by an Appeals court of circumstances justified it.
Media Circus continues - Texas CPS continues to be incompetent. Judge W. wallowing in mess she caused.
7. The appeals court struck down only the order giving CPS temporary custody while the trial to take them away permanently continued.
8 The Supreme Court reminded the media and everybody else that the law suit to permanently remove the children continued and that the Trial Court had the ability to protect the children using option B.
9. The Supreme Court also reminded everyone that option B included the ability for the Trial Court to issue orders to the parents to allow the lawsuit and investigation to continue under option B including restrictions on travel and CPS access to the children in the parents home.
10. Judge W is now trying to implement option B as the Supreme Court pointed out Texas law allows here to - ignorant Media Circus continues.
Timing remains a problem - this all was supposed to be completed with in 14 days of removal of the children from their home - but appeals court pointed out that was just a procedural requirement that would not be reversed by an Appeals court of circumstances justified it.
Media Circus continues - Texas CPS continues to be incompetent. Judge W. wallowing in mess she caused.
awarthurhu | 3:12 p.m. May 31, 2008
There were never 5 proven cases of abuse. There were 5 alleged pregnant teens.
There were only two that were actually pregnant, others were said to be pregnant
at some previous date when they were teens, but didn't say if it was
illegal or not. The two pregnant "teens" who gave birth were both
women over 18 who were essentially put into prison like an immigration raid,
except in an immigration raid a birth certificate can prove you are a citizen,
but the CPS didn't accept either a birth certificate or drivers licence.
Nancy Grace still talks about the 13 year old pregnant girl, the appeals court
noted that "girl" is actually 22. The CPS has zero victims and 0
perpetrators, only their "systemic belief system". If that basis is
valid, all FDLS members in the USA could have their children taken away under a
similar theory, and every other culture such as Hmong who have demonstrated such
customs in the past. If the United Nations ran under such rules, we'd be
sending UN troops across the globe in search of under-age pregnant women and
removing them to "safety".
WrongBetty | 3:11 p.m. May 31, 2008
Whacko Judge Barb has no legal standing to add provisions that had to be met
before vacating the order. Order must be vacated; PERIOD.
Student | 3:17 p.m. May 31, 2008
Not of the locals in Eldorado Texas support Judge Walther:
"Many here cheered the raids, but on Friday residents were fuming. "I absolutely don't agree with what they do," Curtis Phillips, 33, said of the FLDS as he worked the register at the town's feed and mercantile store. "But blowing in that ranch like cowboys and taking all those kids -- that was just stupid. That's why people like me don't trust the government."
"Many here cheered the raids, but on Friday residents were fuming. "I absolutely don't agree with what they do," Curtis Phillips, 33, said of the FLDS as he worked the register at the town's feed and mercantile store. "But blowing in that ranch like cowboys and taking all those kids -- that was just stupid. That's why people like me don't trust the government."
awesomeron | 3:25 p.m. May 31, 2008
Anything that will delay the return of these young women and children to their
situation of Spiritual, Physical and Sexual Abuse is a good thing. Brain Washing
is Spiritual Abuse because it deprives the Spirit of the exercise of Free Will.
The Females say that no one is forced to do anything they do not want to do.
However if your so called father, Bride Trains you from age 8 ( I am not sure
exactly what that entails and am not sure I want to know). Plus you are married
at 12,13,14 (girls only) want to or not then what is your choice? No girl in
that age range that I have even met wanted to be married to a 50 year old, or
their 19 year old repulsive 1st cousin, who they hate. Now they can do what some
parents do when Joe or Josie turns 8 and the Relatives come a long way for the
Baptism and do to being inactive, They only know that the Water is Wet and Cold.
You can Convince ten but is that really Choice. No its not. But you want to stay
in the Will so in they go.
Ronald A. Young | 3:30 p.m. May 31, 2008
Judge Walters is a Hero!!!
sharon | 3:41 p.m. May 31, 2008
Three cheers for Judge WALTHER !!!...for having courage and the guts !
Reality Check | 3:44 p.m. May 31, 2008
"Student" wrote at: 3:17 p.m. May 31, 2008
"Not of the locals in Eldorado Texas support Judge Walther ... "
-----------------------------------------
She has been elected judge in the county several times - so some of the locals must support her.
"Not of the locals in Eldorado Texas support Judge Walther ... "
-----------------------------------------
She has been elected judge in the county several times - so some of the locals must support her.
oh brother | 3:44 p.m. May 31, 2008
The "coercion" of an "old man" to an "underage
girl" is not a matter of legal record. Please show me 1 example.
That's right, you can't find it because you are too busy creating flds
tales to look at the facts which BOTH the COURT of Appeals and the Supreme Court
affirm do not exist. The fact remains there are more pregnant underage girls in
my own neighborhood than the FLDS neighborhood.
Hey Betty | 3:45 p.m. May 31, 2008
The Supreme Court of Texas ruled that Judge Walther had very specific rules that
she should abide. She once again overstepped. You cannot judge the many for
the few.
Hero | 3:45 p.m. May 31, 2008
Judge Walther could only be your hero if you prefer communism to the
Constitution. Again, you cannot judge the many for the few.
Sokel | 3:50 p.m. May 31, 2008
This judge needs to face immediate impeachment and
removal from office.
removal from office.
Forest | 3:50 p.m. May 31, 2008
Please give me a break. Before long on this comment board we'll be hearing
about "proof" of 65 year old FLDS men marrying 11 year old girls for
sex. Well at least they're getting married!
Of course our president's friends in Saudi Arabia practice polygamy openly. Could that be part of the reason why we don't hear condemnation of polygamy from higher up in our government? Could it be that at the higher levels of our government there is acceptance of that lifestyle?
An all out attack on a religion from lower level government agencies is bound to fail, especially when the US constitution is violated in the process. It will just result in that religion becoming stronger in the long run as they pull closer together to support each other. Look how the US became stronger after the Pearl Harbor attack.
Perhaps we should follow the example of our president and focus on fighting terrorists, and leave the FLDS alone if they demonstrate a willingness to follow marriage age laws in the future. I think that they have demonstrated themselves to be good parents.
Of course our president's friends in Saudi Arabia practice polygamy openly. Could that be part of the reason why we don't hear condemnation of polygamy from higher up in our government? Could it be that at the higher levels of our government there is acceptance of that lifestyle?
An all out attack on a religion from lower level government agencies is bound to fail, especially when the US constitution is violated in the process. It will just result in that religion becoming stronger in the long run as they pull closer together to support each other. Look how the US became stronger after the Pearl Harbor attack.
Perhaps we should follow the example of our president and focus on fighting terrorists, and leave the FLDS alone if they demonstrate a willingness to follow marriage age laws in the future. I think that they have demonstrated themselves to be good parents.
Re: Rich | 3:52 p.m. May 31, 2008
What can the LDS church do Rich? This problem is the FLDS�.
A group like the ACLU has to be the group to help not another church. The ACLU
has the legal power and money to help. The Baptists in Texas thought they were
helping...Wrong. They were interfering and more. According to the constitution
this situation shouldn't have happened this way. People tell me that the
ACLU are liberals. Are they? They don't like discrimination of anyone. Even
if people don't live our life style they have rights under the
constitution. If we believe in civil rights for all men without government
intervention then that is being a conservative. Sometimes I think we get it
backwards. It hurts to watch this but we can write our Congress and Senate
officials, who by the way are being very quiet about this whole thing, and let
them know how we feel. If there would have been an ACLU back in the early days
our people wouldn't have gotten pushed to and fro and terrorized like they
were. And later on there wouldn't have been a Holocaust either.
Idea | 3:57 p.m. May 31, 2008
I have an idea, one that maybe the Judge and others in the know have thought of.
If you want your kids, give us the ranch and land and all your money first.
Sound reasonable?
Hey Sharon | 4:02 p.m. May 31, 2008
Walther doesn't have the guts to follow the Constitution. Apparently you
find Communism "gusty", just wait until you are deemed unpopular and
people lie about you. The "lost boys" were often in their 20's.
Apparently that isn't adult enough for your taste. Clearly you find that
adult women, up to age 27 though CPS deems them "minor" is acceptable
despite proof in the form of birth certificates and drivers licenses. I hope
your children are removed when you speed and your license is deemed unacceptable
perhaps only then will you get a clue.
I certainly hope my vote cancels out yours.
I am agnostic but value the Constitution which requires EVIDENCE.
I certainly hope my vote cancels out yours.
I am agnostic but value the Constitution which requires EVIDENCE.
Crazy | 4:02 p.m. May 31, 2008
What would the good Judge do if the FLDS said - OK, keep the kids, raise them
and let Texas fund the cost at millions of dollars for the rest of their lives,
we are leaving and have a good life. - They would croke and give these kids back
so fast your head would swim. This is all about power and money.
Already over 45 days | 4:08 p.m. May 31, 2008
Where is the "proof" of abuse? It's already been over 45 days.
The broken bones issue was made moot since the rates and type of injuries were
proven not related to abuse. Perhaps 5 girls were pregnant and underage at the
time, but that is significantly lower than my own neighborhood. Not one in my
neighborhood touched on prosecution despite paternity testing. I wonder why the
FLDS are being picked on when what is happening with them is no different. For
the most part, according to records, girls are "marrying" boys near
their own age. Big deal.
capt. john | 4:08 p.m. May 31, 2008
The process will expose those sickos.
10 year old girl deciding to get married?
No evidence. I saw the pictures of Jeffs.
10 year old girl deciding to get married?
No evidence. I saw the pictures of Jeffs.
Alex | 4:09 p.m. May 31, 2008
I don't hate the judge. I just think she ought to take the 5 that she has
good evidence on and run with those. If she expects the results of the DNA
tests pretty darn quick, I can understand her stalling. Otherwise, she should
take her five and let the rest go.
hey reality check | 4:10 p.m. May 31, 2008
People often vote for the person whose name is familiar. Now that a notorious
case showing the judge's incompetence and hatred of the Constitution and
other courts, she will likely not be voted back in office. Lucky for us, the
vote is soon.
Reality Check | 4:11 p.m. May 31, 2008
To: Wrong Betty
Just the opposite of what you stated is true.
Texas Supreme Court wrote on May 29, 2008:
...
"the Family Code gives the district court broad authority to protect children short of separating them from their parents and placing them in foster care. The court may make and modify temporary orders �for the safety and welfare of the child,�[4] including an order �restraining a party from removing the child beyond a geographical area identified by the court.�[5] The court may also order the removal of an alleged perpetrator from the child�s home[6] and may issue orders to assist the Department in its investigation.[7] The Code prohibits interference with an investigation,[8] and a person who relocates a residence or conceals a child with the intent to interfere with an investigation commits an offense.[9]
While the district court must vacate the current temporary custody orders as directed by the court of appeals, it need not do so without granting other appropriate relief to protect the children, as the mothers involved in this proceeding concede in response to the Department�s motion for emergency relief. The court of appeals� decision does not conclude the SAPCR proceedings."
---
end Supremes quote
Just the opposite of what you stated is true.
Texas Supreme Court wrote on May 29, 2008:
...
"the Family Code gives the district court broad authority to protect children short of separating them from their parents and placing them in foster care. The court may make and modify temporary orders �for the safety and welfare of the child,�[4] including an order �restraining a party from removing the child beyond a geographical area identified by the court.�[5] The court may also order the removal of an alleged perpetrator from the child�s home[6] and may issue orders to assist the Department in its investigation.[7] The Code prohibits interference with an investigation,[8] and a person who relocates a residence or conceals a child with the intent to interfere with an investigation commits an offense.[9]
While the district court must vacate the current temporary custody orders as directed by the court of appeals, it need not do so without granting other appropriate relief to protect the children, as the mothers involved in this proceeding concede in response to the Department�s motion for emergency relief. The court of appeals� decision does not conclude the SAPCR proceedings."
---
end Supremes quote
USA Proud | 4:12 p.m. May 31, 2008
Dear Texas Proud,
Will you Texans like putting out the money it's going to take to raise these kids that you know nothing about? How many of them are you tending at this moment? Are they happy and well adjusted to their new surroundings? How is your own family doing? Perfect? You will never love these babies like their own famuly does. Are there problems in the FLDS communtiy, probably. Are there problems in your community.. You know the answer. Clean your own doorstep before you start sweeping someone elses.
Will you Texans like putting out the money it's going to take to raise these kids that you know nothing about? How many of them are you tending at this moment? Are they happy and well adjusted to their new surroundings? How is your own family doing? Perfect? You will never love these babies like their own famuly does. Are there problems in the FLDS communtiy, probably. Are there problems in your community.. You know the answer. Clean your own doorstep before you start sweeping someone elses.
TO realitycheck | 4:15 p.m. May 31, 2008
The Supreme Court did not offer free reign to Judge Walther but very specific
actions. Walther decided to ignore the Supreme Court of Texas ruling by adding
additional requirements not contained within the ruling.
Need Proof | 4:17 p.m. May 31, 2008
There are high up government officials arrested everyday for contacting young
teenage girls on the internet to meet for a sexual encounter with them. Now
that's grose isn't it? And there is PROOF of that happening isn't
there? PROOF, very important.
to re:wrz | 4:23 p.m. May 31, 2008
It's not a matter of marrying a 14 year old since they are only spiritually
marrying. The issue is consent to sex and sorry to disregard you, but girls are
quite commonly getting pregnant at age 14 in Texas which has the third highest
rate in that age range in the COUNTRY. I can't give you the link, but you
can easily find it. Not only pregnancy but it seems TX has issues with
STD's in that age range as well. In TX, every 10 hours a 14 year old gets
pregnant.
Wondering | 4:23 p.m. May 31, 2008
Does anyone know what Ms. Jessop's daughter, who returned to the FLDS
community when she turned 18, says about her moms book and all of this mess?
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.
Video
Related content
- All's quiet on Irish front 10:30 p.m.
- WAC hopes to avoid snub repeat 10:28 p.m.
- Kruger pick sets up Ravens victory 10:25 p.m.
- U. eyes bowl for redemption 10:22 p.m.
- Y. student vanished in China 10:11 p.m.
- Poll: Limbaugh top conservative 10:03 p.m.
- Birthdays for Monday, Nov. 30 10:01 p.m.
- For-profit colleges get fed aid 9:58 p.m.
- Senate opens health-care debate 9:57 p.m.
- Many pilots run out of gas 9:56 p.m.
- Hall mouths off about hate of Utah
- BYU is champion of the state
- Cougars beat Utes in overtime
- Credit Coug defense for win
- Field goals, penalties doomed Utes
- Cougar defense rose to occasion
- Marriage definitions vary widely
- Banged up Jazz get best of Blazers
- Jones' joy for life remembered
- Fantasy is reality for BYU professor
- Hall mouths off about hate of Utah
855 - Cougars beat Utes in overtime472
- BYU is champion of the state136
- Thunder rolls by Jazz136
- Man trapped in Nutty Putty cave dies117
- Cave to be sealed with body inside116
- Editorial: Poor welcome for Palin113
- Max Hall issues apology91
- Rivalry Week is highly profane90
- Hall's legacy measured today79
I wanted to tell them not to go. I dropped subtle hints. "My money is on...
When I was a kid, I worshipped my grandpa. He was undoubtedly my hero....
Latest comments
RIP. My heart goes to his family.
Amy, what a great article. You get it. Keep up the good work.
Paul Krueger's pick in tonight's NFL game looked a lot like his pick of Max...
Way to go Haley!!! Hope to see you playing for the U!
Wow, are you byu fans really annoyed that he "appologized" for insulting an...
Of course he doesn't mean it, but kudos for trying to make up for heated...
Why don't ya all keep your comments to the game of football. I agree that...
Many (most) of us started our careers in hourly non-benefited jobs. That's...
I got tired of all the "hate" of the Ute fans at RES several years ago and...
I graduated from both the U and the Y. I choose to cheer for the U because...
Advertisements
Haven't you heard? What you describe was basically legal in Texas not more than two years ago. The change was made in Texas law when FLDS came to town.