Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Rights and Liberties

The FLDS Children Seized in Texas are in Their Own Private Gitmo

By Richard Wexler, The Nation. Posted May 31, 2008.


Foster care is a toxic intervention, to be used sparingly. In the case of the Yearning for Zion ranch, Texas prescribed megadoses of foster care.
Advertisement

A little boy, maybe 3 years old, walks past row after row of cots arrayed in a sports coliseum in Texas, carrying a little pillow. "I need someone to rock me," he says. "I just want to be rocked, I want to find a rocking chair." Two adults, whose job is child protection, are following him. But they make no move to comfort him. They just follow him and write in their notebooks.

Other children, with their mothers, are jammed into a building dating to the 1800s, with no air conditioning and no indoor plumbing. Chicken pox quickly spreads; many children come down with diarrhea, some are hospitalized. At night, hostile overseers keep the women awake with their loud conversations and sometimes shine lights in their eyes.

More than 400 children and their mothers endured those conditions in the first days after Texas Child Protective Services raided the Yearning for Zion Ranch in Eldorado, according to the only independent eyewitnesses -- mental health professionals brought in by the State of Texas. (Their statements were published in the Salt Lake Tribune.) The state alleges that because some of the mothers are underage, all of the girls are at risk of sexual abuse and all of the boys are at risk of being "groomed" to be abusers.

The physical conditions under which the women and children were held ultimately improved, but the emotional conditions deteriorated, as the children, even toddlers, were separated from their mothers.

Indefinite detention without meaningful hearings, inadequate defense counsel, standards of proof that range from low to nonexistent and, in most states, secret tribunals, may sound like the Bush Administration's war on terror. In fact, it's all standard operating procedure as part of America's war on child abuse. But mass detention is new. And now, with its raid on the compound of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints in Eldorado, the State of Texas has filled that last gap -- complete with their own private Guantánamo.

A Texas appeals court ruled May 22 that the state had no right to take many of the children. But the children remain scattered throughout Texas, as CPS appeals the decision.

On one point, defenders of this indefinite detention are right. The issue on which this massive detention turns is not religion -- the issue is alleged rape. But the allegations against the detainees at Guantánamo also are serious and real. There, the issue also is not religion but terrorism. What's happening in Texas may be worse than Guantánamo. For starters, the victims are children.

When children are needlessly put into foster care, they lose not only mom and dad but often brothers, sisters, aunts, uncles, grandparents, teachers, friends and classmates. For a young enough child, it's an experience akin to a kidnapping. One recent study of foster care "alumni" found they had twice the rate of post-traumatic stress disorder of Gulf War veterans and only 20 percent could be said to be "doing well."

Another study comparing outcomes for 15,000 children found that even maltreated children left in their own homes with little or no help fared better, on average, than comparably maltreated children placed in foster care.

And in the case of the Eldorado 400+, even the State of Texas doesn't claim most children actually were abused; officials say they took the children because they might be abused at some point in the future.

None of this means no child ever should be taken from her or his parents. It means that foster care is an extremely toxic intervention that must be used sparingly and in small doses. In the case of the Yearning for Zion ranch, Texas prescribed megadoses of foster care.

There is one group of foster-care children for whom the trauma of separation is even worse: those taken from battered mothers who allegedly "failed to protect" them from abuse. Taking children under these circumstances is, in the words of one expert, "tantamount to pouring salt into an open wound." "Failure to protect" is the only allegation against the mothers of Eldorado. The way Texas has handled the Eldorado case can be boiled down to a single sentence: Pass the salt.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: texas, child abuse, war on terror, guantánamo, flds, foster care, polygamists, yearning for zion ranch

Richard Wexler is executive director of the National Coalition for Child Protection Reform and author of Wounded Innocents: The Real Victims of the War Against Child Abuse (Prometheus Books).

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Rights and Liberties! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
The parents should sue the hell out of the state of Texas.
Posted by: andabottleof_rum on May 31, 2008 2:06 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This episode will have drastic, and in many cases life-long deleterious consequences for the children wrongfully kidnapped from their parents by the state. The state of Texas should pay for this abuse in such a way that they hesitate to repeat this heavy-handed behavior in the future. At least a million dollars should be paid out on behalf of each detained child.

A lawyer recently filed a lawsuit against Delta airlines, seeking one million dollars because Delta apparently ruined his vacation. He may win a large sum of money. As this incident in Texas is unimaginably worse, the damages should be unimaginably higher, but a million dollars is a nice, and realistic, sum to seek.

Foster care is hell. I went through it, and for years afterward I fantasized about bombing the building where my brothers and I were taken for occasional meetings with our parents into rubble. I figured the kids in that building who would die would have been better off dead. The utter shock these children in Texas are unjustly experiencing can never be compensated.

Punish the state of Texas financially so as to teach its officials a lesson.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Bad all the way around.
Posted by: Longdream on May 31, 2008 5:18 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I defended the right of Child Protective Services asking law enforcement to remove the children from their environment. It doesn't matter how the situation came to their notice--licensed professionals such as lawyers, physicians, nurses, social workers, teachers, even when off duty, can lose their licenses if they don't report suspected child abuse, and anyone can do so anonymously. If, as some people say, they can't find the pregnant sixteen-year-old who made the original phone call, once the law was there, the sight of the sixteen-year-old with three children in that closed society was sufficient cause to act.

Perhaps the proper way to proceed would have been to remove the pregnant teen-agers, get DNA samples, take samples from the alleged fathers and when there was proof, remove the men from the compound, leaving the women and kids in "peace". That would have been ok if inbred societies given to perverse abuse limited themselves to one KIND of abuse, and we didn't perhaps have to worry about a six-year-old-girl, or an eight-year-old-boy, or any of the women as abusers. The law isn't given the kind of discretion to sort things out like Solomon. The judge in this case ordered the removal of all the children as though they were in one extended family. That's being challenged. If the judge had said bring out only the pregnant girls, THAT would have been challenged.

The law enforcement involvement came when the families refused to cooperate with Child Protective Services, which is staffed with Social Workers, not police. When the family refuses to admit a case manager to make a home investigation, after a time they're told that a court order will be obtained and law enforcement will come to remove the children if they still refuse to cooperate. The scenario would have been a bit different and perhaps less frenetic if the families had yielded to CPS's first requests. Now, the families are refusing to cooperate in the collection of DNA evidence to sort out the parentage issues.

This remains a complicated case, with too many factors at war. It's true that, at least in the basics of nurturance, the children were better cared for at home, not in containment facilities or in Texas's unsavory foster care system. Yet if one considers the psychological abuse and harm caused by extreme religious indoctrination into an isolated society in which women are treated like chattel in a patriarchal system and told that it's God's will that they are so chosen, perhaps for those young women this is an appropriate action.

I'm only saying that it's difficult to make a clear statement that all of the kids are better off or not, one way or the other. If wholesale removal of the kids is a crazy idea, then allowing under-age women to be given as child-brides to religious fanatics is just as insane.

The real role of Child Protective Services is to work with families, assisting them to solve problems. The real truth is that CPS agencies no longer have the resources to treat families, even single families outside an extreme situation like this, on a case by case basis to keep the family together. They no longer have the man- or womanpower to monitor and work with families the way they used to, or the way they should. Thank the "No Child Left Behind" initiative as conceived by the Bush Administration. (Continued in next comment)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Troll alert Posted by: oregoncharles
» RE: My mistake Posted by: oregoncharles
» RE: Bad all the way around. Posted by: oregoncharles
Bad all the way around. (Continued)
Posted by: Longdream on May 31, 2008 5:29 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This isn't really an issue involving the right to practice a religion the way one wishes. Had the FLDS simply practiced polygamy, with multiple adult women over 18-years-of-age choosing to live in marriage with one man, I don't think they would have many legal problems. Utah's attempt to target polygamists by declaring certain kinds of living arrangements felonious was struck down with the aid of the ACLU, as I'm sure it would be in any other state.

If we put aside any personal distaste we may have for the limitations faced by the adult women in that compound and understand that they have the right to choose how they want to live, if not the resources or help to reject their present circumstances and leave, we also must understand that many of them are happy in those circumstances, and given the resources, would stay. Life and love and religion and home, righteousness, belonging, security, a measure of peace in routine--very, very many people would not trade those feelings for all the freedoms on earth.

The cancer in it is the need for "patriarchs", saying they speak for God to take fourteen or fifteen-year-olds as their brides--in many cases not even marrying them to younger men, but to themselves as multiple wives. Given that the compound would have been left alone if they had allowed their wives to be girls until they were eighteen, what does that say about the egomaniacal deviancy which must be at the base of the group in which some men say they speak directly to God and lay down God's law to hide their own willful sins?

Since when do we sanction any institution, religious or otherwise, breaking the law by abusing children? This is somewhat different from the original stance of the Catholic Church, which protected and moved its abusers from parish to parish. At least the Church wasn't insisting on the divine right of priests to sacrifice altar-boys and young girls-- just covering it up, like a normal male-dominated institution would do.

It's my personal opinion that FLDS societies are using male power to oppress and abuse women and commit crimes against children, that they should be fully investigated as cults, and that child abusers inside their walls should be fully prosecuted.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Beside the point Posted by: oregoncharles
» RE: Beside the point Posted by: Longdream
» RE: Why take ALL the children? Posted by: oregoncharles
Fascism pure and simple.
Posted by: leland61 on May 31, 2008 6:09 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The only real reason that this travesty of injustice occurred is that these people practice a religion that most so-called Christians don't like. This reminds me of nothing so much as the Nazi Gestapo raiding communities of Jews to take them away for "re-education", "re-location", and "work camps". Only the profoundly ignorant believe that when the state begins to round people up and take them out of their towns and villages are we living in anything resembling a free country and a democratic state or under the rule of good law. Yes I wrote "good law" because not all laws are good and not all laws are for the benefit of the common good. Of course if you believe, like the Nazis did, that a good law is one that allows you to eliminate people you don't like for whatever reason, then all laws are good.

Laws designed in imitation of the Nuremberg Laws of fascist Germany to eliminate the human standing of certain people before the law because of religion or thinly disguised racism. Laws which allow the fascist state to intervene where it is neither welcome nor constructive.

Where else but Texas would people actually try to justify such Christian sponsored fascism? Well, sadly, nearly anyplace.

By the way, the idea that 12 year old girls are old enough to marry at the behest of their parents is hardly unique to that particular religious sect nor to societies as a whole, including our own in the very recent past and in the present among "hill people" and many parts of the American South - itself in many ways another country.

If there is a specific instance of child abuse, documented, then it needs to be addressed. To raid a whole community and haul people off like a bunch of Jews confronted by the Gestapo should be appalling to anyone with any sense at all. No Excuses.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» awakening Posted by: brer
» RE: awakening Posted by: oregoncharles
» RE: awakening Posted by: pomes
» RE: Fascism pure and simple. Posted by: Deadbeat Dad
» RE: Fascism pure and simple. Posted by: Longdream
» RE: Fascism pure and simple. Posted by: 23skidoo
» RE: Fascism pure and simple. Posted by: Longdream
PASS OUT THE VIAGRA
Posted by: sherman on May 31, 2008 6:59 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
pass out the viagra
freshen the linens
flds pubscent darlings are coming home!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

awakening
Posted by: brer on May 31, 2008 7:19 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I just finished reading "Escape" by Carolyn Jessop. And, having polygamist ancestors myself, I have to say that you cannot believe the mindset instilled into the people in these sects. It is brainwashing of the truest kind, and those who dare to break free are truly courageous.

I think the Texas authorities KNOW of the abuses. They see people trying to escape all the time, and boys thrown out to fend for themselves so that the older leaders can have better access to the women. The authorities KNOW from first hand accounts the horific abuses that are happening there. They just don't have the legal wherewithall to do anything about it. This time they thought they might have had a moment to help, and, sadly, it didn't work out for them.

Sadly, also, for the polygamist families who are living in such a prison.

You can't imagine what it's like until you've lived it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: awakening Posted by: 23skidoo
» RE: awakening Posted by: Longdream
» RE: awakening Posted by: oregoncharles
» RE: awakening Posted by: Longdream
» RE: awakening Posted by: KPelley
history repeats itself
Posted by: sirios on May 31, 2008 7:37 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If the fathers are the main concern for abuse, then allow the childeren to stay with the mothers until the matter is settled. Ok, maybe the mothers are complicit by not protecting the childeren from the alleged abuse by the fathers, but ripping the childeren away from their mothers in the way the state did is criminal. please don't tell me this is not motivated by the religious beliefs of the state officials, because it most certainly is. A case in point was the abduction of american indian childeren by the early american christians. this is just a seemingly tamer version of that, but tell that to the traumatized childeren.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

send teens to foster care,send the children home
Posted by: whealeydj on May 31, 2008 8:06 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
maybe too simplistic solution but it balances the danger to teens from patriarchs and danger to children from cold hearted foster care.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

WHA?!?
Posted by: Rishy on May 31, 2008 8:30 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am flummoxed by the attitudes here.

That FLDS compound amounts to nothing more than pedophilia under the guise of religion. I doubt those of you defending this would be singing the same song if had been a NAMBLA compound that had been raided. The sham of religion doesn’t give one the right to harm others. The children who were subject to this were abused whether they were forced into sex or simply had to live with the knowledge of these practices. The men of this community abused the children abetted by the childrens parents. These people shouldn’t be allowed to own pets let alone raise children.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: WHA?!? Posted by: sirios
» RE: WHA?!? Posted by: Rishy
» RE: WHA?!? Posted by: sirios
» RE: WHA?!? Posted by: Longdream
Curious application of the law
Posted by: ciccio on May 31, 2008 9:22 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
One rather odd fact is that the state claimed the children were abused or likely to be abused. They
did not claim the women were the abusers, but were themselves victim of it. So the real question is why were the victims taken into custody and not the perpetrators.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"Needlessly placed into fostercare"!?
Posted by: Ayla87 on May 31, 2008 9:28 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What the hell is wrong with you!? These kids all came from an organization, whose founder is sitting in jail right now for marrying a 14 year old girl to her 19 year old cousin. And it was a call from a girl in this specific compound, confessing that she had been abused, that started this whole investigation.

Like hell it was needless!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: disconnect Posted by: oregoncharles
» RE: Uh-uh, Terry Posted by: Longdream
» RE: Oh, I get it... Posted by: oregoncharles
A point overlooked
Posted by: zipper696 on May 31, 2008 10:43 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Quote:
"When children are needlessly put into foster care, they lose not only mom and dad but often brothers, sisters, aunts, uncles, grandparents, teachers, friends and classmates..."

Which might be relevant if the authorities knew FOR SURE who the "mom,dad,brothers, sisters, aunts, uncles, grandparents" actually were...
Let's remember that many of the men in the community have refused to supply DNA samples to aid correct identification of the children's true parenthood - what possible reason could they have for this, except to hide clear evidence of underage sex and incest?

Don't you think it significant that throughout the proceedings it was consistently the sweet, pure mothers were the only ones seen entering the courtroom and standing before the cameras whilst the patriarchs skulked in the compound?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: A point overlooked Posted by: oregoncharles
» RE: A point overlooked Posted by: pomes
Texas Foster Care
Posted by: Big Cow on May 31, 2008 10:51 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I, too, am the product of the Texas Foster Care system. I lived with my foster family for almost a year in the mid 1950's when I was nine years old and in the fourth grade. I, too, was whisked away by a social worker from the Child and Family Service and was not allowed to see or talk to either of my parents, my sister or any of my friends for more than a month. But my experience was much better than those cited above. It was not wonderful but my foster family truly tried to make my life better than it had been up until that time. Also, it helped that I quickly learned some survival techniques such as asking my foster mother to read the Bible aloud to me when she was was not happy with me and I was afraid I would get a spanking with a board that was set aside strictly to warm my backseat. But the main thing I want to stress is that the Texas Foster Care System did not cause me any permanent harm either physically or psychologically and they did provide me with a safe and stable environment. The experience taught me some valuable coping skills that have helped me survive and thrive the many challenges life has presented. It made me a much stronger person emotionally and to have empathy and understanding for other people. Children are strong and when they are dealt the cruelties of life, they become emotionally stronger and better able to handle life's future ups and downs. Understand, I certainly do not advocate putting children in foster homes
but, if it should become necessary, regardless of the reason, the experience probably will not cause them significant permanent harm either physically or emotionally.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Texas Foster Care Posted by: 23skidoo
» RE: Texas Foster Care Posted by: karyse
Why Is Texas Attacking The Victims
Posted by: bcgirl125 on May 31, 2008 1:22 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
While the perpetrators of domestic abuse and child rape go free? It is absolutely unbelievable that women and children are being herded like cattle by government goons while the patriarchs who commit the abuse are allowed to slip away free.

Throw all these creepy FLDS adult males who run the cult in jail forever just like Warren Jeffs. Then there would be no need for foster care and family disruption.

Again, where are the pictures of these male criminals doing perp walks in handcuffs? All I see on the TV newscast are women and kids being swept up in these raids.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Welcome to the new world order
Posted by: blogbooks on May 31, 2008 3:13 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You either play ball and conform or the government comes in and makes your life miserable.

Have no student loans? Have no credit card debt? Not working for a major corporation?

You'd better watch out, you're next on the list.

Further, I'd like to add that only a week or two ago Alternet readers were attacking the mother's and supporting the social worker cows that took their children away.

Now that you see the reality of it you change your tune.

You don't want 400 religiously sheltered children thrust into the public school system. Living in foster care with kids that used to belong to crack addicts, child beaters and rapists?

The kids were better off in their safe, loving, religious community than they ever will be thrown into the public schools and foster care.

Hey, at least we know that a few years down the road the military will have some new recruits. Foster kids either join the military or end up on the streets because nobody gives a crap about them.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I Guess I'm a "Gitmo" Torturer According To Your Author
Posted by: petey0571 on May 31, 2008 3:19 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I was a foster kid for many years, and now I'm a foster & adoptive parent. I had a really good foster mom. As a foster parent I have had many kids here under many circumstances. A two year old was here recently, he had a mom who kept him in a car seat 24 hours a day for the first 1 1/2 years of his life. Taking him out of the car seat only rarely to change him, everyone thought he was autistic, because no one had ever held him or interacted with him at all. The only way DCFS even knew that this had happened was because the mother told it to the police when she was arrested for DUI. Think about it, how many times do you see a baby carried around in a car carrier, and how would you know if that baby ever leaves that carrier. However I'm sure somebody will find a way to blame the foster care system if this little one has problems later in life.

We had another little girl and her older brother who were taken into custody because the girl went to school with a big gash on her arm. Everybody was outraged. How could DCFS take this woman's kids away just for her daughter getting a cut on her arm? Well when you looked a little deeper in the facts, it turns out that the kids (she was 5 - her big brother was 10) were locked in the garage for two day in freezing weather because mom's old boyfriend was back in town & he didn't like kids. The girl cut her arm when big brother boosted her through the roof vent. The police and social workers all knew this after talking to the kids, but they also knew that they would never testify against their mom. So all they could do was charge mom for the cut. It seems the kids were so used to this abuse that it was no big deal to them. The kids didn't didn't even seem upset by being in foster care, as it turns out this was their 3rd time. Most of the kids we have taken care of have been here because of similar circumstances. This kind of chronic neglect is by far the most common kind of abuse, and in my opinion does far more lasting damage than anything else, and it's nearly impossible to prove.

It's easy to politicize and pre-judge these kind of cases, and say that poor people are being singled out, but I think this stuff happens all the time, just that some folks are better at hiding it than others. Abuse is abuse, there's no excuse for letting it slide.

Everybody's so concerned for the parent's right to due process, who's looking out for the kids? All the kids go back because there were only 5 girls sexually assaulted? How many assaults would be sufficient for the author?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Destruction of cultures that are different from ours
Posted by: blogbooks on May 31, 2008 3:21 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The essential crime committed by the FLDS is being different from mainstream American culture.

So they must be destroyed.

You're all hypocrites and it amuses me that you're oblivious to your own intellectual and moral failings.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Lies. Posted by: Longdream
» RE: Wrong Posted by: oregoncharles
Law Breakers?
Posted by: pamphyila on May 31, 2008 4:16 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We have laws to hold onto when we run into situations that need to be confronted. One this I don't see anyone address is that these "families" are held together with welfare money and food stamps because the secondary, tertiary and etc. wives are posing as single mothers! If these are indeed "families" then this is welfare fraud. Also, if there are laws prohibiting under age sex and marriage - then they have been breached. This had put the entire community at risk by their own actions, as much as if they had all been growing weed! So are they surprised that they have gotten into this situation, especially after what has happened to Jeffs, their leader. There are other laws that dictate that anyone working with children, say, as a teacher, who sees any signs of abuse is required to report it! I wonder if there have been breaches of any other laws. How much education is required in Texas? I could go on. This group of people has put themselves in jeapordy by their illegal behavior(s). The American Way would be to legitimize their practices under the cause of relgious freedom - but these people are too cultish to have considered that option. What choice do we, as a law abiding society have?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Individual rights
Posted by: raywigton on May 31, 2008 8:17 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I noticed how the tune has changed as the opinionated learn more about this case. First they made fun of the women who were evasive in answering questions and seemed brainwashed. (I made fun of their hair.) Now the brain game is all the fault of the men and the patriarchal mentality of the FLDS Church. Aren’t most churches patriarchal? If the police confiscated your pastor's records concerning the whole church membership because of a phone call from an anonymous source, would you think it was right? Isn’t the genetic testing an invasion of privacy? In Iraq our troops were considerate of an Islamic mosque but the “sacred temple” of the FLDS was desecrated by the police. If the FLDS are a cult, what is your church? When churches change pastors do members leave? Cults have a charismatic leader. Is Warren Jeffs charismatic? Is he the reason members attend?

The law says that girls can marry quite young in many other nations and these states: Arizona-no legal minimum, under 16 approval of a superior court judge; Georgia-15 with parental consent; Hawaii-15 with parental consent; Michigan-15 and under with parental consent and probate judge approval; Mississippi-15 for females with parental consent; Missouri-15 with parental consent; New Hampshire-14 for males and 13 for females, in cases of "special cause" with parental consent and court permission; New York-14 with parental and judicial consent; North Carolina-no limit in case of pregnancy or birth of child with parental consent; Pennsylvania-Under 16 approval of a Judge of the Orphans Court; Texas-14 with judicial consent; Utah-15 with court approval; West Virginia-Under 16 with parental and judicial consent. The judicial approval is almost always based on pregnancy in all of these states. The laws are designed that men are older than their wife. Under Texas law, if the FLDS had control of a judicial seat somewhere, they could legally wed 14 year old girls.

Do any of you believe that the child protective services agency of any state is doing a good job? Mr. Wexler is advocating reform of the child protective services. That’s what this article was about and I think it was a good one.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Individual rights Posted by: zorba1
» RE: Individual rights Posted by: fork
» RE: What Pure Crap! Posted by: Longdream
» RE: Individual rights Posted by: petey0571
I don't get it
Posted by: eiu101 on May 31, 2008 10:55 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Did Alternet not just post an article a few weeks ago citing the need to remove children from abusive, religious fundamentalist enclaves?

And now you print the complete opposite opinion. Typical, convenient liberal hindsight.

Great. Which is it? Is mass child removal of religious and cultural dissenters a right and duty of the State, or do we all adopt a libertarian line now that it's suddenly clear that the State was wrong in doing so?

When that first article was published, commentors all claimed that anybody who disagreed with the State of Texas was a Christ-fascist righty who only listens to Michael Savage's radio show. We needed to look out for "the children", and afterall their parents were all religious, abusive psycopaths.

Now that it's apparent that those children should never have been torn from their homes, we're all singing another tune about State abuse of police power and how we, yet again, need to look out for "the children".

You damn people. You only support State actions like this in the first place because it's never your own kids that end up in ratty shelters or abusive foster homes. It must feel great to be right all the time and to know what's best for everybody else. Hey statists/leftists/neocons - do us all a big one and leave other people's children alone.

God, the thought of government agents knowing more about what's best for kids that their own parents, and having the power to strip them apart from one another - the very thought runs contrary to the principles upon which this country was founded. How utterly perverse.

So some 16 year old girls may (or may not, we're still not sure) have been married and had children of their own. Bizare, certainly. Wouldn't want it in my back yard. But things like that occur in all kinds of places around the world! I don't see the coffee shop liberals proclaiming the dire need to invade every country on earth that practices polygamy which might involve teenaged girls. In fact, if we pulled in say, Egypt what we just did in Texas, they'd call it imperialism and bemoan the violation of human rights.

I wonder how many of the "anti-war" crowd supported this Texas police state action. That would certainly require an interesting stretch of logic, wouldn't it?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Try This ..., Posted by: gazooks
My debut
Posted by: mistereporter on Jun 1, 2008 12:36 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I’m a newbie, enlisted Saturday evening. I hope I’m not locked out on the FLDS topic.

In your friendly neighborhood courthouse, jurors do not hear allegations, speculations, guesses, rumors and innuendos. Neither do they hear the unsworn testimony of a “New York Times” best-selling attention-grabbing woman who “escaped” from the den of iniquity.

(Another “Times” best-seller is the 14-year-old bride Arizona picked to make the “rape” and “incest” case against Warren Jeffs, which case “probably” emboldened Texas to move on the Eldorado compound.)

None of the FLDS spin comes anywhere close to admissible truth in your friendly neighborhood courthouse.

Some of the posters on this site write convincingly about the awful things going on behind the compound walls. One of our friends wrote of “egomaniacal deviancy." Oooh! A word man's delight!

Posters write from their human natures. I know that because I have that kind of nature, too. The human kind. However, I come from another direction.

For 40 of my 77 years I was tethered to a court-reporting machine. I have some mighty big biases: The Rule of Law is tatooed on my soul, Due Process is etched on my mind.

I cannot think without those biases.

I don't know the word limits here on Alternet. Indulge me this smartassy: I heard a rumor that when the Texas white hats bullied their way into the compound, with tank and assault rifles at the ready, they were singing “Onward Christian Soldiers.”

Thank you for letting me join your club. Joe

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Helluva Good Start, Posted by: gazooks
» RE: My debut Posted by: Longdream
» RE: Busted! Posted by: oregoncharles
» RE: Busted! Posted by: mistereporter
» RE: Busted! Posted by: Longdream
» RE: My debut Posted by: mistereporter
» RE: My debut Posted by: Longdream
» RE: My debut Posted by: mistereporter
4th amendment rights
Posted by: zorba1 on Jun 1, 2008 1:19 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Every American has a legal right to deny entry into thier home by childrens services, social workers need to get a warrant proving proable cause, so says the supreme court.
Childrens services to me is a pile of shit, scum ass bithes and bastards.
We have done fostercare and adoptions for 25 years, nothing has changed to make me think different.
Social workers act like Gods, we never liked them and i would tell them quick this is my home you dont order me around in our home.
You seemed to miss the story yourself.
It was about the well being of the children, the true fact that fostercare rarely helps and does do plenty of life long damage.
Social workers are famous for asking children misleading questions, easily confusing young and even teenage kids, new laws have been passed barring social workers from questioning children away from thier parents but the dam social workers still disobey the law.
There are 500,000 children in fostercare in the US right now, over 100,000 just in calif.
A recent Government study says as many as 80% of kids in fostercare should not be there.
They never should have been taken from thier families.
I have nothing but contempt for social workers and thier patsy judges.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Try a little accuracy. Posted by: Longdream
» RE: Too late. Posted by: oregoncharles
» RE: Too late. Posted by: Longdream
» RE: You mean the 23-yr. old? Posted by: oregoncharles
Bad All Around
Posted by: Chris Herz on Jun 1, 2008 3:01 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Situations like have only lose-lose consequences. There is also never a one-size-fits-all answer.

The one common element is a bunch of brain washed women and their innocent kids. It's always beat the hell of me why any woman would listen to any priest from any of the sky-god cults. Here is yet another consequence of our toleration for the most bizarre sociopathy when it masquerades as religion.

Chris Herz

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Bad All Around Posted by: terryhallinan