COMMENTS: 139
The FLDS Children Seized in Texas are in Their Own Private Gitmo
Sign up to stay up to date on the latest Civil Liberties headlines via email.
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.
Emotional harm often occurs to children even when foster homes are good. The majority are. But the rate of abuse in foster care, both in family foster homes and in institutions, is far higher than generally realized and far higher than in the general population. Texas institutions are particularly notorious; they were the subject of two scathing reports issued in 2004 by the former State Comptroller. And if the Eldorado detentions go on long enough, many children who probably never were abused on the Yearning for Zion ranch probably will be abused in foster care.
And, arguably, some have been mistreated already. Texas authorities repeatedly have said one reason they separated the children from their mothers was to make it easier to get the "real stories" out of the children -- a tactic that amounts to emotional waterboarding. There also are allegations that authorities pretended to believe some adults they held -- including a 27-year-old who produced a driver's license and birth certificate -- were minors, in order to question them without their lawyers present.
All this suffering is unnecessary because, from the beginning, there has been an alternative. It may have been necessary to take some of the children from the ranch. But none needed to be taken from their mothers.
Meanwhile, back at the ranch, claims made to justify the raid are eroding. Remember the reports that a document had been found on the ranch concerning cyanide? It turned out to be part of a first-aid manual. Remember the claims about young children with broken bones? Looks like the proportion of such children is about the same as in the general population. And every day more "underaged" mothers turn out to be adults.
Through it all, Texas CPS has made one point over and over: aside from the size of the case, there is nothing unusual here. We treat all families this way.
They're right. If anything, the families of the Eldorado 400+ are getting better treatment than the overwhelming majority of families who lose children to state child welfare agencies every year.
Those families are overwhelmingly poor and disproportionately minority. If they get legal representation at all it's likely to be from an overworked public defender who just met them in the hallway five minutes before the hearing. Texas is one of relatively few states where these hearings are public. In most states, children's fate is decided behind closed doors.
At the moment, the fate of the Eldorado children rests with the Texas Supreme Court, but every day foster care is prolonged, more damage is done. The fate of the 300,000 of other American children taken from their parents every year rests with all of us. The usual answers from the left, "more money" and "more training," won't fix this. The Eldorado children could have been put up in five-star hotels and the separation from their mothers still would have been devastating. No one says the solution to Guantánamo is better-trained guards.
Neither money nor training is a substitute for due process. At-risk children will be safer when we demand open hearings, higher standards of proof, and meaningful legal representation for indigent families. They will be safer when we demand civil liberties without exception. Shortcuts that bypass civil liberties will win neither the war on terror nor the war on child abuse.
Stay up to date with the latest Civil Liberties headlines via email
Comments are closed-
Posted by: andabottleof_rum on May 31, 2008 2:06 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
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]
» RE: The parents should sue the hell out of the state of Texas.
Posted by: sirios
» Life in the FLDS compound is far worse for kids than foster care. Texas did the right thing.
Posted by: yellow
» RE: Life in the FLDS compound is far worse for kids than foster care. Texas did the right thing.
Posted by: pomes
» RE: Life in the FLDS compound is far worse for kids than foster care. Texas did the right thing.
Posted by: yellow
» RE: The parents should sue the hell out of the state of Texas.
Posted by: daniel1982
» RE: The parents should sue the hell out of the state of Texas.
Posted by: Walks-in-Storms
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Longdream on May 31, 2008 5:18 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
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
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Longdream on May 31, 2008 5:29 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
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]
» This is nothing more than an elaborate defense of fascism.
Posted by: leland61
» RE: This is nothing more than an elaborate defense of fascism.
Posted by: Longdream
» RE: This is nothing more than an elaborate defense of fascism.
Posted by: oregoncharles
» RE: This is nothing more than an elaborate defense of fascism.
Posted by: Longdream
» RE: Beside the point
Posted by: oregoncharles
» RE: Beside the point
Posted by: Longdream
» RE: This is nothing more than an elaborate defense of fascism. Correct.
Posted by: oregoncharles
» RE: This is nothing more than an elaborate defense of fascism. Correct.
Posted by: Longdream
» RE: Bad all the way around. (Continued)
Posted by: Plowhandle
» RE: Why take ALL the children?
Posted by: oregoncharles
Comments are closed-
Posted by: leland61 on May 31, 2008 6:09 AM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
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
Comments are closed-
Posted by: sherman on May 31, 2008 6:59 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
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]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: brer on May 31, 2008 7:19 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
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
Comments are closed-
Posted by: sirios on May 31, 2008 7:37 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: whealeydj on May 31, 2008 8:06 AM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: send teens to foster care,send the children home
Posted by: 23skidoo
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Rishy on May 31, 2008 8:30 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
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
» You're ignorant and it amuses me
Posted by: blogbooks
» RE: WHA?!?
Posted by: sirios
» RE: WHA?!?
Posted by: Longdream
Comments are closed-
Posted by: ciccio on May 31, 2008 9:22 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
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]
» That gets right on down to the nub, doesn't it.
Posted by: Sojourner
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Ayla87 on May 31, 2008 9:28 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Like hell it was needless!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: "Needlessly placed into fostercare"!?
Posted by: zipper696
» RE: "Needlessly placed into fostercare"!?
Posted by: 23skidoo
» RE: "Needlessly placed into fostercare"!?
Posted by: Longdream
» Oh lordy lordy, a 19 year old and a 14 year old, the sky is falling!
Posted by: blogbooks
» RE: "Needlessly placed into fostercare"!?
Posted by: oregoncharles
» RE: "Needlessly placed into fostercare"!?
Posted by: Longdream
» RE: disconnect
Posted by: oregoncharles
» RE: "Needlessly placed into fostercare"!?
Posted by: terryhallinan
» RE: Uh-uh, Terry
Posted by: Longdream
» RE: Oh, I get it...
Posted by: oregoncharles
» RE: "Needlessly placed into fostercare"!?
Posted by: pomes
Comments are closed-
Posted by: zipper696 on May 31, 2008 10:43 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"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
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Big Cow on May 31, 2008 10:51 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
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
Comments are closed-
Posted by: bcgirl125 on May 31, 2008 1:22 PM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
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]
» Because the state is not equipped to raise families
Posted by: blogbooks
Comments are closed-
Posted by: blogbooks on May 31, 2008 3:13 PM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
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]
» Sorry, but I don't think it was a "safe" community if.....
Posted by: mjabele
Comments are closed-
Posted by: petey0571 on May 31, 2008 3:19 PM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
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]
» RE: I Guess I'm a "Gitmo" Torturer According To Your Author
Posted by: terryhallinan
Comments are closed-
Posted by: blogbooks on May 31, 2008 3:21 PM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
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]
» No, it's much more simple than that...
Posted by: mjabele
» RE: No, it's much more simple than that...
Posted by: richholland
» RE: Lies.
Posted by: Longdream
» RE: Punishment of child abusers.
Posted by: Longdream
» RE: Wrong
Posted by: oregoncharles
Comments are closed-
Posted by: pamphyila on May 31, 2008 4:16 PM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: raywigton on May 31, 2008 8:17 PM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
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
Comments are closed-
Posted by: eiu101 on May 31, 2008 10:55 PM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
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
Comments are closed-
Posted by: mistereporter on Jun 1, 2008 12:36 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
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
Comments are closed-
Posted by: zorba1 on Jun 1, 2008 1:19 AM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
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
» Now you're the one going off on a rant...
Posted by: mjabele
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Chris Herz on Jun 1, 2008 3:01 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
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
» The government DID act to "protect the populace".....
Posted by: mjabele
» RE: Bad All Around
Posted by: Longdream
» RE: Bizarre Sociopathy ...
Posted by: gazooks
» RE: Bad All Around
Posted by: pomes
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Walks-in-Storms on Jun 1, 2008 10:25 AM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We've somehow forgotten - conveniently, it seems to people like me - places like St. Anthony, Idaho (where the IRS sealed the town, then went door to door, demanding to see townspeoples tax records), or San Luis, Colorado (where U.S. Fish and Wild life sealed off the town, including helicopters flying "top cover," then went door to door arresting 108 of the 739 townspeople); and on and on.
During a fifteen year period of investigation concerning federal outrages like the State of Texas raid on the FLDS farm, I discovered the routine nature of this sort of thing, and warned, as a matter of fact, the sheriff of Costilla County - San Luis, CO - of the impending U.S. raid on his county. Having established covert surveillance (including an undercover operative inside Fish and Wildlife) on the Fish and Wildlife Director Terry Grosz and his office, I knew as much about the impending raid as most of its perpetrators. I knew of the phone taxidermy shop Grosz had set up in San Luis, and I knew of the specious "complaints" the office would use to justify the raid. That's also how I happen to recognize the tactic ubiquitous among state and federal agencies, that of the supposed anonymous "tip" used to supposedly legalize the invevitable raid that follows.
The Patriot Act is yet another example of legislation intended to expand even further the scope of "suspicion" excuse for these same Gestapo tactics. Anyone seeking to justify means like the horror of the San Angelo FLDS raid and imprisonment of women and children with the supposed end that is "child protection" ought stop and think for a moment.
There are no crimes which justify the trashing the U.S. Constitution.
I know about that, too. You see, for most of twenty-three years, the U.S. Government burglarized my homes and offices more than sixty times, stopped me on the nation's streets and highways more than 109 (after a time, I kept a diary), falsified police and public records in order to incite an Amadou Diallo, Dr. Sal Culosi, or Sean Bell police shooting, and much, much more - including wounds inflicted by sniper fire and overt attempts at murder by motor vehicle - all on the supposed grounds of a nebulous and never produced report that I was a tax cheat (the lawsuit I have filed several times is on my own website and elsewhere on the Internet).
How will the welfare of the FLDS children have been served when we have all lost all our freedom? Will "rape" by an agent of IRS (what do you think happens when an illegal alien female is discovered by the kind of creep who would work for IRS?) or another Gestapo-like federal or state agency be somehow less offensive than "rape" (by the criteria stated here, both my grandmothers and great grandmothers were raped by my grandfathers) by a church elder?
ALL fourteen year old females are incapable of deciding to have sex? ALL are "traumatized" by an act as natural as that one? In all the world, what percentage of females have sex on their own volition before reaching the age arbitrarily set by U.S. society? Is it mere coincidence that the judge who ordered this dastardly abortion of legal due process was a woman (let's all read some feminist literature of the sexties and seventies)?
As to the real reasons for the Yearning for Zion raid, ask yourself how any judge could have been unaware that the raid in question was unconstitutional. Anyone with even faint understanding of how our system of government and law is supposed to work knew it.
"Mere coincidence?" Uh-uh - I don't think so.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Whacked is what I call it.
Posted by: Longdream
» RE: Whacked is what I call it.
Posted by: Walks-in-Storms
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Big Cow on Jun 1, 2008 2:27 PM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: oregoncharles on Jun 1, 2008 4:12 PM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The admission comes in two stages: first, the statement that they're a lawyer, under "RE: This is nothing more than an elaborate defense of fascism." Then, the statement that "We(!) don't have to spin anything.", under "My Debut." You'll find my own response, titled "Busted", next in that string.
Interested parties are entitled to post comments, but it's dishonest not to state that interest.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Alli on Jun 1, 2008 4:55 PM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Read "Under the Banner of Heaven." Former FLDS members who've escaped talk about the rampant sexual abuse toward children (sometimes at the hands of other children out of curiosity for a banned subject). They don't talk about it at all because they're told they'll go straight to hell if they accuse an adult man OR because they'll be forced to marry the abuser. The book also details the history of the Mormon religion (what a crock that is) and the formation of the FLDS sect that still practices polygamy today. It's a system set up to take away the rights, thoughts, freedoms, and choices of women. They are wombs to provide more "souls for Zion" and nothing more.
So yeah, give them back their kids and shame on the state of Texas for using the only tools in their power to try to protect those kids! Religious freedom is a right in this country, but when people use that right to step all over other people, they should be stopped. The FLDS is way over the line, but thanks to the media, the ACLU, and people crying "facism!", they'll continue to get away with it. Brilliant, just brilliant.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: FLDS rips apart families all the time...
Posted by: oregoncharles
» Frankly, I think you're threatening people's rights and safety...
Posted by: mjabele
» RE: Try to be responsive..
Posted by: oregoncharles
» ???
Posted by: mjabele
» RE: ???
Posted by: oregoncharles
Comments are closed-
Posted by: raywigton on Jun 1, 2008 10:39 PM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Even though I think the Book of Mormon is a fabrication (one portion of it is copied word for word from the Old Testament) it is the only place in scripture where the practice of polygamy is prohibited. I also read a portion of Mormon church history where the official historian quotes the founder, Joseph Smith saying “brother Brigham has committed sin” referring to Brigham Young consummating his “temple marriage” to a second wife. Young would take over the church a couple of years after Smith was murdered. It makes me believe that this whole plural marriage thing is Young’s corruption of a rather innocent practice. You see, Mormons believe that the highest state of heaven “my fathers house has many rooms” is for couples. Since Paul said wives are “not given” in heaven, the only way for a woman not married to receive this highest glory would be through a temple marriage, never consummated in the flesh, to a man already married. I guess there was a shortage of men in the 1830’s and 40’s. There seems to be a deep concern for the salvation of women in the original Mormon church. This concept is still corrupted in the FLDS church but the mainstream Mormons dumped the practice, which generally only the wealthy and powerful ever engaged in anyway. They have never acknowledged that Brigham Young was wrong because if he is a prophet as they believe, he can’t “lead them astray.”
I think when all is said and done, probably all the kids will go home and nothing will change. But one thing needs to change, girls need to have a say in who they marry and the church needs to not be using the parental consent clause to wed 16 year olds. That was established because 16 year old girls get pregnant and parents could allow marriage for the child’s sake. It wasn’t intended to be used as an excuse for early and arranged marriage. The FLDS need to gain some understanding about what is considered acceptable in our nation. Acceptable doesn’t include 16 year old child brides for 30 something year old men even when most of these girls think that it is alright. They just aren’t worldly enough to make the decision.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: More politics and religion
Posted by: Alli
» RE: More politics and religion
Posted by: raywigton
» RE: More politics and religion
Posted by: Alli
Comments are closed-
Posted by: paganpat on Jun 1, 2008 11:40 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: What a sad story.
Posted by: oregoncharles
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Alli on Jun 2, 2008 8:36 AM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Sorry if I implied that because of the way the FLDS treats families the state of Texas was justified in everything they did. They did make some bad choices in a lose-lose situation. I agree with a lot of what you say. However, I also feel that the FLDS has been getting away with too many atrocities for far too long.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: petey0571 on Jun 2, 2008 5:35 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: oregoncharles on Jun 3, 2008 7:23 AM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The FLDS kids are going back to their parents. The Texas Supreme Court DID declare the state's action "unjustified," and even Longdream's pet local judge had to go along.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Longdream, you lose!
Posted by: Longdream
» RE: Longdream, you lose!
Posted by: oregoncharles
Comments are closed-
Posted by: nomomorons on Jun 3, 2008 11:20 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Pretty sickening that this sort of thing seems to be protected because the folks doing it proclaim themselves Christians.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Fundamental Misunderstanding
Posted by: oregoncharles
» RE: Fundamental Misunderstanding
Posted by: Rishy
» RE: Fundamental Misunderstanding
Posted by: Longdream
» RE: Exactly - hey, this time you're right!
Posted by: oregoncharles
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Mewsician on Jun 4, 2008 1:16 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Can anybody explain to me why the Texas authorities don't systematically test for and establish paternity for the fetus of every pregnant under-age female in that pitiful group and then, armed with that data, throw every one of those fathers in jail for statutory rape? Why are those pedophile rapists allowed to walk free? Is anyone seriously suggesting that they should be allowed to continue raping children in the name of religion?? Didn't the Catholic Church already fight this battle - and, much too late, lose????
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: ONLY ONE QUESTION
Posted by: Longdream
Comments are closed-
Posted by: oregoncharles on Jun 4, 2008 7:51 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Every time some of us try to point out that Texas abused its power, and the children, by taking ALL 430 kids out of that FLDS compound and separating them from their parents, somebody says:
"Oh, but the FLDS elders were doing such bad things! And they were resisting the investigation!"
True - they were. But these people are really saying:
Because some people were doing REALLY BAD THINGS, the state was justified in doing ANYTHING, no matter how bad or to whom.
(The Texas Supreme Court did not agree, and declared the removal of the children "unjustified.")
That is exactly the logic of the War on Terror, or the invasion of Iraq, or the Israeli torture of the Palestinians, or the American torture of prisoners - need I go on? Not only is it perfectly ridiculous logic, it's an extraordinarily dangerous and immoral attitude. It isn't surprising; actually it's very common, as we've seen.
What shocks me is to see so much of it on Alternet. I thought this was a progressive site, where people would be sensitive to that kind of thinking.
Some of you badly need your moral compasses adjusted, and I'm sorry I didn't think this out and write it until so late in the string. It took me a while to overcome my preconceptions.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: talkville on Jun 4, 2008 8:39 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
All these things, Polygamy, Gay Marriage, Gay-Lesbianism, Age of Consents, etc (that vast World of Regulation of all sorts of social relations in our society.
There's a certain Irony in all this cultural upheaval going on.
A bit of subtle, 'lawyerly' or 'legislative' or even 'moral' Imagination can, with a bit of determined effort, be applied to another World that affects us Real Individuals in these times of ours with regard to the Field of Law and Legislation: the World of Fictitious Indivduals; that world which is variously referred to as "the World of Business" or "the Corporate World".
In THAT World, governed by a more subtle and total kind of Freedom and Equality and Fraternity, what does all this fuss and hoopla and indignation about modes of living and organizing social relationships even matter??
Polygamy? so what? Think of a Grand Patriarch such as PepsiCo for example; how many 'Wives' does Mr PepsiCo have (Taco Bell.... etc)? Or WR Grace?; or ENRON? How many 'Children'? One thing's certain: there are NO LIMITS.
Cannibalism? No big deal -- think "Mergers".
Concubines, Paramours? There's no end to the kind, degree, sort and scale of Relationships that can be fashioned and practiced in THAT World!! No Indignation matters a whit!! No Repugnance holds!! WR Grace, Exxon-Mobil, Altria, National and Trans-National in scope. Many a relationship that, if it were to be found in this real world of us real individuals would cause an uproar of the most Epic proportions!!!
And while the Corporate-State (another of those Other-Worldly kinds of relations) focuses completely upon the regulation in all aspects of THIS world of ours in relation to FLDS and elsewhere, that Other World continues, in that most Perfect Moral and Actual Freedom to establish ANY kinds of relationships it wishes.
There, it's ALL 'OK' and even celebrated; while here on this real level of ours, lives, bonds, relationships and 'ways of living' are ripped apart, torn asunder and NO means or methods are ignored in the accomplishment of such high 'moral ends'!!
Where is the Corporate State when it comes to intervening, regulating, managing and 'taking over' those Fictitious Individuals practicing Polygamy, Incest, Cannibalism and all sorts of other 'morally repugnant' and taboo-types of relations with and upon each other?? Why, totally on THEIR side!! For THAT is the World that Rules and Governs us, the Lowly Real People.
Meanwhile, in this real 'lower' World of ours, social relations continue rapidly to degrade. I wonder where the REAL problems lie??
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
McCain and Lieberman's "Enemy Belligerent" Act Could Set U.S. on Path to Military Dictatorship
The FBI Could Be Watching You on Facebook
Why Are We Afraid to Tax the Super-Rich?




