COMMENTS: 149
Sex Abuse in the Name of Religion Isn't a Lifestyle -- It's Sex Abuse
Sign up to stay up to date on the latest headlines via email.
I have heard similar thoughts in the weeks since Texas authorities invaded a ranch in Eldorado and rounded up hundreds of children from the polygamous sect of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. Did they traumatize the children in order to protect them? Did they shatter their lives to rescue them?
The invasion came after a tip from a 16-year-old who called herself a victim of sexual abuse. The tip may turn out to be a hoax, but the practices of the sect are well known.
In the world of the FLDS, "spiritual marriage" between older men and underage girls -- what the law defines as rape -- is given the stamp of religious approval. Of 53 girls believed to be between 14 and 17, more than 30 have children or are pregnant, including one who gave birth to her second child in custody. Among the boys, too, there is suspicion of widespread physical abuse. Indeed, many teenage boys are routinely banished to preserve the odds of polygamy.
Nevertheless, the story of children taken from parents, of families wrenched apart, has produced enormous concern and worry in the past weeks. Is this a rescue operation or a state-sponsored attack on parents? Should the state enforce a set of values or tolerate "alternative lifestyles" and religions?
These questions themselves say something about our own cultural moment. Who, after all, doesn't do a double take when hearing that these "endangered children" were never exposed to the Internet or television or processed food? The girls in their prairie dresses who are raised for assigned men have never text-messaged or eaten Fruit Loops or seen "Hannah Montana." The children's requests for a bread-making machine and prayer time have led to some ironic comments about exactly which culture is protecting children.
More to the point is the concern about separating children from parents. Every agency balances the risks of leaving children in a dangerous setting and the trauma of removing them. But cases are generally weighed one at a time. What's different about the FLDS case is that it was a wholesale roundup of all the children of a whole community.
This makes many, like Jane Spinak, a Columbia Law professor who has represented children in foster care, uneasy. "We may not like their lifestyle," she says. "We may not condone the practice of multiple women living together with a man, but it's not for the court to decide lifestyles." Spinak remembers when children were removed from biracial families, let alone gay families. "Lots of people live lives we don't think are good for their children, but we don't take the children away." Indeed, this citizen of New York archly reminds me that two governors in the last few months admitted having had multiple sex partners but their children were not removed as a result.
Nevertheless, what do we make of an entire sect that has sexual abuse at its very heart? That believes plural "marriages" between older men and underage women are not an aberration but a pathway to heaven?
Nobody can prosecute FLDS members for what they believe, says Marci Hamilton, author of "God vs. the Gavel." "They can stay together and believe what they want into eternity. What they can't do is illegal action."
She compares their community to a crack house. "If you go into a drug den in a burnt-out rowhouse and all the adults are drug addicts, how can you leave the children there?" Hamilton calls this sect a "conspiracy of adults to commit systematic child sex abuse."
I understand the ambivalence toward this dramatic story. The uprooting of distraught children from pained parents strikes a primal core. And we are aware that many state foster care systems are flawed enough to amount to a second kind of abuse. But surely the call to understand this sect as just another unique corner of multicultural America is relativism run amok.
Individual hearings are underway. I hope that the children and mothers will tell the truth rather than follow the admonition to "keep sweet." I hope mothers will choose their children over obedience to their patriarchs.
But in the end, what we have on that ranch in Eldorado is not a lifestyle. It's a pedophile ring. If we cannot rescue children from that, we've already destroyed their village.
Stay up to date with the latest AlterNet headlines via email
Comments are closed-
Posted by: UnEasyOne on May 23, 2008 3:09 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Slavery is illegal - and raising your own sex slaves to trade among yourselves is several kinds of illegal.
Give me a dozen girls that I can completely isolate and control - that I can indoctrinate from birth - whose "education" and information sources I can control completely, whose very existence is unrecorded in any public record (so if an unfortunate death or two occur, none is the wiser), whom I can impregnate as soon as that is biologically possible - to bind them to me completely, and allow me to selectively tell them how hard and dangerous the outside world is (for them AND their babies) and it will be a rare girl indeed who escapes.
If they are fearful enough of the consequences, very few will even think of such a thing with anything but terror and the vast majority will tell anyone who asks how grateful they are for the opportunity to stay exactly where they are.
This is NOT "religious freedom" - any more than was the 3/5ths law regarding slaves was relevant to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."
That this abomination is permitted here - and has been for a hundred years, goes beyond scandal - and diminishes us all.
As far as I am concerned, I don't care what marital arrangements consenting adults arrive at - but harems of jointly-owned progeny to be swapped amongst a favored few fanatics is such a perversion of marriage as to render the word meaningless.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: I could care less what idiocy they believe
Posted by: bitsfick
» RE: I could care less what idiocy they believe
Posted by: Allstar Cookie
» Blah, blah, blah with random leftist rhetoric repeated for brownie points
Posted by: blogbooks
» RE: Blah, blah, blah with random leftist rhetoric repeated for brownie points
Posted by: AMERICAN VETERAN
» RE: I could care less what idiocy they believe
Posted by: Walks-in-Storms
Comments are closed-
Posted by: blogbooks on May 23, 2008 3:53 AM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The next step is always to force our way of life on everyone else. Because they are "savages" or "extremists" or whatever the buzz word of the day is to demonize a people and their culture.
You're no better than anyone else. Stop thinking you are.
This is the same as "bringing democracy to the Middle East."
Let's just destroy every culture that isn't like ours and turn everyone into American Idol watching, pizza gobbling, fat asses. That seems to be the order of the day.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Okay, I'll stop thinking I'm better AND insist that horny old goats not be given young teenagers
Posted by: Beck
» RE: Okay, I'll stop thinking I'm better AND insist that horny old goats not be given young teenagers
Posted by: homebrewmike
Comments are closed-
Posted by: carbon-based on May 23, 2008 3:55 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Some religion, if you're a perverted guy!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Amen
Posted by: Lauren
» RE: Amen
Posted by: carbon-based
» You sound as "correct" as a polygamist
Posted by: january37
» RE: You sound as "correct" as a polygamist
Posted by: carbon-based
Comments are closed-
Posted by: gazooks on May 23, 2008 4:01 AM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
(full story- http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/23/us/23raid.html?hp )
So, opinions are not the law, and actual evidence of abuse is requisite for a state to interfere with the religious lifestyle of a community.
A fortunate thing for all that those willfully sitting in certain judgement of what they think, suppose or speculate are not, in the end, given the weight to sustain a wholesale, invasive disruption and destruction of citizen lives.
I personally find it dismaying that there are so many here so willing to suppose the very worst of these people on the flimsiest of "evidence", and continue to vilify and characterize "them" as prurient in belief, criminal in intent and somehow unworthy of constitutional protections.
It seems that we haven't learned much since Salem.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» the missing elements here are awareness and CHOICE
Posted by: aislinnluv
» RE: the missing elements here are Justice for All
Posted by: gazooks
» the difference
Posted by: aislinnluv
» RE: the difference
Posted by: Tombo
» your logic has flaws
Posted by: aislinnluv
» RE: the missing elements here are awareness and CHOICE
Posted by: 23skidoo
» RE: the missing elements here are awareness and CHOICE - Sure - If I am raping my kids.
Posted by: UnEasyOne
» Thanks for the word
Posted by: january37
» RE: Court Says Texas... What more "evidence" do you need than 14 year old mothers?
Posted by: smadaj
» if they were in the regular population
Posted by: aislinnluv
» RE: Court Says Texas... What more "evidence" do you need than 14 year old mothers?
Posted by: gazooks
» RE: Court Says... Not enough evidence YET
Posted by: UnEasyOne
» RE: Court Says Texas... What more "evidence" do you need than 14 year old mothers?
Posted by: 23skidoo
» RE: Court Says Texas Illegally Seized Sect’s Children
Posted by: astockton
» RE: Court Says Texas Illegally Seized Sect’s Children
Posted by: Orange
» RE: Court Says Texas Illegally Seized Sect’s Children
Posted by: 23skidoo
Comments are closed-
Posted by: fbc21ca on May 23, 2008 4:16 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I find it a bit odd that the media refers to these people as "an LDS church." Why don't they just come out and say "Mormon?" Why the obfuscation? Are they afraid of pissing off Mitt Romney or something?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Call 'em what you are
Posted by: TheJibreelaMonsters
» RE: Call 'em what you are
Posted by: fbc21ca
Comments are closed-
Posted by: kenhymes on May 23, 2008 4:28 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So don't ya think it's pretty obvious that American children must all be rounded up and sent to another country, perhaps Sweden or Germany? After all, they are clearly being abused and endangered at an obscenely high rate (much higher sexual abuse and domestic violence rates than in Europe, e.g.), wilfully denied medical care, knowingly exposed to poisonous and cancer-causing plastics, and later tricked into participation in a death cult known as the Army.
It's obvious. We're a toxic and abusive culture with no respect for the rights or needs of our own children, and we don't have a right to be parents. Who's going to be first to turn themselves in?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Oh, I guess if you're breaking the law, you should be the first
Posted by: 23skidoo
» RE: Wonder how old the adult women were on THEIR wedding night
Posted by: UnEasyOne
Comments are closed-
Posted by: whathaway on May 23, 2008 4:39 AM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Whoa there buddy, don't bring reason into this emotionally charged topic
Posted by: blogbooks
» RE: the feminist belief that almost all sex is rape and abusive.
Posted by: Lauren
» Huh?
Posted by: january37
» RE: Whoa there buddy, don't bring reason into this emotionally charged topic
Posted by: AMERICAN VETERAN
» RE: This guy just wants to define all rape into nonexistence
Posted by: UnEasyOne
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Magginkat on May 23, 2008 5:09 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Horny old men who don't want the competition. Horny old goats that an ordinary woman in ordinary life,wouldn't give the time of day. Is that how this starts?
What gets me is how many women are in this mess. I realize some have been brainwashed but what can explain the crowd that is in this compound.
These nasty old bastards are child molestors, I don't give a hoot if they call it religion.
One Texas court threw out the case against these vile cretins yesterday and the rest of the day we were bombarded with the pictures of the smiling zombies stading behind the lawyer who "won" this case.
Freedom of religion is one thing. These children should have freedom from this religion.
This is what came with the rabid right when they took over this country. The republicans used these religious nut cases to take over this country. What will it take to get this slime out of goverment?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Horny Old Child Molestors
Posted by: free woman
Comments are closed-
Posted by: leland61 on May 23, 2008 5:24 AM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Americans practice polygamy on the installment plan all the time - it is called divorce and remarriage. Yet when a group of people says that is stupid and wrong, suddenly we have 'moral outrage'. Humbug and nonsense.
If there was sexual abuse it needs to be identified and dealt with on a case by case basis. Whenever the state or any of its agencies begins to invade entire communities and round people up and separate children from parents what you have is a POLICE STATE and STATE TERRORISM AGAINST ITS OWN CITIZENS AND RESIDENTS.
This is yet another example of what this country has degenerated into and the so called liberals are aiding and abetting the descent into totalitarianism and fascism. We already have a new Gestapo called Homeland Security whose minions are rounding up brown skinned people by the thousands and casting adults and children into prison camps.
TIME TO WAKE UP FOLKS BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE. Fascists always can find a good reason for state sponsored terrorism; protection of children is one of the most pathetic pieces of propaganda so far.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» We did wake up. Old men were marrying girls, illegally.
Posted by: Beck
» RE: We did wake up. Old men were marrying girls, illegally.
Posted by: Tombo
» RE: We did wake up. Old men were marrying girls, illegally.
Posted by: emmas
» RE: We did wake up. Old men were marrying girls, illegally.
Posted by: 23skidoo
» RE: Nope - just enough to warrant an inversigation - NO ONE HAS BEEN ARRESTED!
Posted by: UnEasyOne
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Moonray on May 23, 2008 5:55 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In fact, I strongly suspect the FLDS raid was launched after complaints from at least one other church in Texas -- complaints mainly stemming from jealousy over the FLDS' wealth and laid-back coupling arrangements. Primitive churches virtually rule communities in Texas and throughout the South, so it's a good bet their grimy hands are all over the FLDS fiasco.
The bottom line is that religions -- ALL religions -- cause tremendous harm and our society should acknowledge that by strongly discouraging participation in any group that is based on superstition.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» oh please
Posted by: liberalibrarian
» you are right
Posted by: TheJibreelaMonsters
» RE: oh please
Posted by: SOWILO
» RE: Church-inflicted child abuse is all around you
Posted by: peacemama
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Moonray on May 23, 2008 5:59 AM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: PS. I agree with the court that state went too far
Posted by: ladyoracle
» RE: PS. I agree with the court that state went too far
Posted by: whathaway
Comments are closed-
Posted by: PaulK on May 23, 2008 6:21 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Tell this one to a mob enforcer. If you poison 30 guys, and your expensive lawyer can prove that 15 of them had heart attacks before you actually killed them, then in the eyes of the court you're not liable for whacking the other 15 guys!
So, the State of Texas is going to take all the 13 and 14 year old girls and put them back in the compound, on the grounds that they haven't been impregnated by their great-uncles quite yet. It was only 15 or so of their sisters who had a problem with the community, the 13 and 14 year old girls are perfectly safe, not the tiniest chance of the entire community conspiring to reoffend. After all, these are Christian white breeding stock, the very moral fiber of America. As a matter of fact, the pregnant 15 year old girls, they're perfectly safe too because you can't get pregnant twice (wink). Send them all back.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Marlena on May 23, 2008 6:42 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: I'm wondering.....
Posted by: VZEQICVA
Comments are closed-
Posted by: uncleeddie on May 23, 2008 6:58 AM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» The fact that 30 of 53 14-to-17-yr-old girls are pregnant is proof
Posted by: janvdb
» RE: The fact that 30 of 53 14-to-17-yr-old girls are pregnant is proof
Posted by: 23skidoo
» RE: Like the abolition of slavery, perhaps? That part of the constitution?
Posted by: UnEasyOne
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Last Chance on May 23, 2008 7:05 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: What about the subjugation of women?
Posted by: marie.vorrath
» RE: What about the subjugation of women?
Posted by: 23skidoo
» RE: That's why we have criminal law
Posted by: UnEasyOne
Comments are closed-
Posted by: ladyoracle on May 23, 2008 7:28 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Thank you!
Posted by: 23skidoo
» RE: Thank you! - Like the indoctrination compounds run by FLDS?
Posted by: UnEasyOne
Comments are closed-
Posted by: VZEQICVA on May 23, 2008 7:30 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» i'm with you about the welfare and food stamps
Posted by: aislinnluv
Comments are closed-
Posted by: redbird30328 on May 23, 2008 7:39 AM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» pop- the can of worms opens
Posted by: aislinnluv
» Except when it's illegal behavior
Posted by: westomoon
» RE: xcept when it's illegal behavior
Posted by: 23skidoo
Comments are closed-
Posted by: SageRave on May 23, 2008 7:49 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This would protects both children and society at large.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: If this is protection....
Posted by: redbird30328
» RE: If this is protection....
Posted by: Sushi
» RE: Now there's a solution
Posted by: shannasmusic
Comments are closed-
Posted by: zorro on May 23, 2008 8:05 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» separation
Posted by: liberalibrarian
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Ipsi Dixit on May 23, 2008 8:14 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Utah Prosecute that stuff
Posted by: TheJibreelaMonsters
Comments are closed-
Posted by: smadaj on May 23, 2008 8:14 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Oddly enough, in our society, we've decided that there is some nebulous age when children are still children, generally prior to puberty, but extending into the first few years of adolescence - and the majority of us have also reached the conclusion that when children move through adolescence, if they decide to express themselves sexually, it's generally with someone who has that same youthful glow that they have.
What planet are you from that says a fourteen year old girl might find a sixty year old man sexually appealing? Planet Playboy? You should learn that porn tells you lies about the population it depicts, and move yourself closer to living in the real world, where compassion counts for at least a little something.
You missed the coercion, deception and exploitation inherent in a society such as this particular sect perpetrates against it's female population for the purpose of sexual gratification of the males. Watch out for what humans say in the name of God. 'Cause they'll say whatever serves their own higher purpose.
Otherwise, you'll never make Jedi.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: To Sloppy, and his? ilk who believe sex with minors is not in and of itself abuse
Posted by: whathaway
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Walks-in-Storms on May 23, 2008 8:21 AM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» And neither did EVERYONE in the compound
Posted by: brunowe
» and the authorities weren't able to find out who was
Posted by: aislinnluv
» RE: How do You know what "EVERYONE in the compound" did? Have a revelation?
Posted by: UnEasyOne
» I said NOT everyone in the compound did
Posted by: brunowe
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Walks-in-Storms on May 23, 2008 8:32 AM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: And while I'm thinking about my last here . . .
Posted by: free woman
Comments are closed-
Posted by: baldhawk on May 23, 2008 8:33 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
To assume parents or adults have rights over a child thinking and life beyond enforcing safety, to keep the child from jumping into a snake pit, or touching a burning stove, is dangerous at best.
Why hesitate on any grounds to remove a child from a home where the child's will is subverted to the point that when he/she reaches adulthood, there will be no choice left in life?
Even remotely considering parents have the right to impose a religious ideology on their children's is not in a child's best interest, not now, not in the long run.
It has nothing to do with protecting life style or fringe value which have a right to exist. Such children have no spokespeople to look after their own interest, nor have enough information to know what's their best interest, since that too has been blocked.
Only after the child is removed from such abusive environments, and is allowed to experience a broader life, will the child be able to recover his own sense of self and right to his personal choices. Given that, he'll be glad to have been rescued.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: MamaJulie on May 23, 2008 9:48 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Sexualization of girls
Posted by: gazooks
» RE: Sexualization of girls - factually wrong
Posted by: UnEasyOne
» RE: Sexualization of girls - factually wrong
Posted by: gazooks
» RE: Sexualization of girls - factually wrong
Posted by: whathaway
» RE: More "Big Lie" Child protection law is NOT criminal law
Posted by: UnEasyOne
Comments are closed-
Posted by: JohnJlws on May 23, 2008 9:52 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
When did we become a land without due process?
I disagree with the multi-wife, illegal lifestyle of some in the FLDS. I’m repulsed by men who have sex with kids and anyone who allows it, regardless if it’s in the name of wonderful “religion,” or it’s just the product of a sick mind. I think there were other options, like asking the men to leave the compound, or, if we’re all so concerned, providing the resources to CPS that would allow them to station however many caseworkers for however long at the compound until the courts sorted it all out.
This seems like a decision made out of perceived necessity and efficiency, but a better decision might have resulted, if there had been inclusion of mental health experts, the legal community and more resources. We should base decisions on facts not innuendo, rumor, urban legend or whether someone looks and acts different.
I’m wondering, too, when we decided “guilty until proven innocent,” like we do at Gitmo, was okay. If we say “he’s a child abuser, rescue the children,” then doesn’t this argument extend rather scarily into every aspect of “odd” behavior and every charge that might be leveled against any of us? And I take exception to several of the foundational arguments of this piece:
“…but the practices of the sect are well known.” Well, if they’re so well known then proving them in our legal system, like is guaranteed to all Americans in our Constitution, should be a pretty simple process.
“…Of 53 girls believed to be between 14 and 17…” Does this included the women that appeared to be so young as to be “children,” but in fact turned out to be adults? If perpetrated by the state, I wonder if false imprisonment and kidnapping are crimes.
“Nevertheless, what do we make of an entire sect that has sexual abuse at its very heart?” I haven’t seen this document. I’ve “heard” about it like in your statement “…but the practices of the sect are well known.” I’d like to see the document you’re referencing. I’m wondering if this isn’t one of those circular arguments: i.e., “but the practices, like the entire sect has sexual abuse at its heart, are well known.” Again, if things like these are so transparent and pervasive, let’s get them resolved in the legal system we supposedly have. If they’re a product of the fact they all look like and behave like weirdoes, let’s try to exhibit a bit more intelligence.
“It's a pedophile ring.” There are indications that there has been some abuse as there are in virtually all populations. Let’s prosecute those who are perpetrators of this abuse and let’s prosecute anyone who is responsible for allowing their children to be abused, but let’s not take 400 “kids,” away from their parents because “the practices of the sect are well known.” Otherwise, I fear, all of us may be the subject of another headline lamenting “…another unique corner of multicultural America is relativism run amok.”
Let’s prosecute criminals in the courts and if we don’t like that process, let’s change the process. What happened at the FLDS strikes me as “concern for the children” run amok and a gross violation of due process that any one of us would demand, regardless of the charges against us.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Well...Probable cause exists to suspect ongoing abuse
Posted by: UnEasyOne
» Sorry, name calling probably didn't do it.
Posted by: JohnJlws
» RE: One court agreed - that decision is being appealed
Posted by: UnEasyOne
» RE: One court agreed - that decision is being appealed
Posted by: JohnJlws
» RE: I MEANT to say that you were "Being disingenuous"
Posted by: UnEasyOne
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Sojourner on May 23, 2008 10:00 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I agree with those who find the paternal management of the community, as if they were raising hogs, to be disgusting. I also agree with those who say that none of us is so free of *sin* that we can throw the first stone.
That's why we have laws and courts in the first place. Otherwise we'd have decisions made by people who cannot recognize how they need everyone else to be just like themselves.
Yes, the interference of the state generated some temporary dislocation for a whole lot of people. But that same state also enforced the guidelines that reject such interference. Democracy 1 Autocracy 0.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» PS. Is there less incest among FLDS than in our dominant culture?
Posted by: Sojourner
Comments are closed-
Posted by: jareilly on May 23, 2008 10:11 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If the Texas CPS blew the case, then it should be thrown out in the courts. But that doesn't excuse what goes on in Warren Jeff's FLDS mafia. And it doesn't make us facsists if we believe a willfully ignorant criminal cult should be broken up. As for the women in the cult being it's biggest supporters, remember that in Africa, it is often the women, even the mothers, who perform female genital mutilation. Cruelty and barbarism vs. children can never be justified by "cultural and religious freedom". There is no basis in the Bible or the Koran for underaged polygamy or genital mutilation. These practices are artifacts of debased, run-down cultures which have lost their original reasons to exist. They are not unlike genetic disorders carried on by small sub-populations, that stay in the breeding pool even though they no longer confer any survival advantage on the carriers (if they ever did).
Once you are 18 if you want to cut yourself up or marry your aging second cousin, it's your choice. Before then, the state, the people have a clear and unambiguous interest in protecting you.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Noblestarr on May 23, 2008 11:15 AM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Her bias is shown early, when she calls rape sex “between older men and underage girls.” However, the Texas statute uses the term “sexual assault” for sex between a person of any age and a “child” not the spouse of the actor. A child is defined as a person UNDER the age of 17. More over, with parental consent, a person 16 years or older can marry. (NOTE: the age may have been 15 before a change to the law in 2005. Further, I have to wonder whether the change was targeted at FLDS.)
Use of the term “older men” is also misleading. While it is true that the men at issue are older, the term I believe was meant to suggest “OLD” men rather than, for example, men between the age of 17 and 30.
For the sake of argument, if polygamy were legal in Texas and the year was before 2005, most of what Ellen Goodman and Marci Hamilton call rape would NOT be “sexual abuse” under Texas law. And Texas does not use the term “rape.” This is sloppy use of the term because rape inherently suggests wrong doing and coercion. In my opinion, she hasn’t laid out a clear case of either.
I do believe in the rule of law and, in the case of the raid on YFZ Ranch, I hope FLDS men challenge Texas’s bigamy law. After all, it was only a few years ago in Texas v. Lawrence (2003) the Supreme Court struck down Texas sodomy law. The Court also struck down Virginia’s anti-miscegenation law in Loving v. Virginia (1967) and the California Supreme Court recently struck down the state’s law defining marriage as between “one man and one woman.” It seems to me that life style prohibitions are “out.”
As a civil libertarian, I am appalled. Since the raid was wrong and possibly the search, I think Texas has a black eye, the children should be returned to their parents and there should be no prosecutions bigamy. If by truly independent (of the raid) and legal means, Texas officials discover that an FLDS (or other) adult has sex with a person under 15 years of age, then I have no reservation of prosecuting the adult for sexual assault under § 22.011 the Texas Penal Code.
Ellen plays fast and loose in other ways. For example, she states that the tip came from a “16-year old who called herself a victim of sexual abuse.” While she subsequently states that the call may turn out to be a hoax, the fact of the matter is that it is now believed that the caller is much older than 16 and never visited the YFZ Ranch. Nor was the allegation corroborated by other evidence.
She says that “many teenage boys are routinely banished” but provides us no clue as to how many boys have actually been “banished” from the YFZ Ranch. May be it’s not many. And is banishment illegal?
In sum, I think Ellen’s article is a sloppy piece of work and her conclusion lacks merit. But I give her credit for the Vietnam War phrase for a catchy lead in. And it applies – Texas is trying to destroy a life style. She should have taken her own lead.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: FLDS is another life style, live with it
Posted by: DaBear
» RE: FLDS is another life style, live with it
Posted by: DaBear
Comments are closed-
Posted by: jeffersonian on May 23, 2008 11:22 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
and it is ILLEGAL in most states. The adults belong in prison and the kids belong in foster homes.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: they are not
Posted by: VZEQICVA
Comments are closed-
Posted by: jeffersonian on May 23, 2008 11:33 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
one might be describing a "cult"
they are just hiding behind "religious freedom" to do whatever they want
the authorities should be even tougher on them next time
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: DaBear on May 23, 2008 11:38 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What strikes me still is the nature and quality of the furor-continuum... just reading the comments above here is a pretty wild trip. Sickening but in a roller coaster kinda way. Just need some cotton candy.
The court ruling.. I gotta read the actual ruling rather than the reportage on it... my gut reaction is, a fundie court protecting fundie religionists, how unsurprising. But I won't know until I read the actual ruling itself. There are a ton of issues that need to be sorted out. Unfortunately the typical 'Merkaaner mode of "debate" isn't going to produce a viable healthy result in the end. The best 'Merkaaners can hope for is a bigger mess brought about by the very lowest and vilest of cultural thuggery from all sides. gawd bless 'Merkuh, land of the fundie freaks and narrow-mindeds.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: kelethian on May 23, 2008 11:56 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
All because i thought a group of child abusers needed to suck atomics.
For once, i think the State had the right idea in charging in to save children. This Mormon cult needs to be banned, along with Scientology.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Rune on May 23, 2008 12:25 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The ratio of boys to girls is about even among those suspected to be under age 13, but among the adolescents, the count is 53 girls and 17 boys. This is href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2005/jun/14/usa.julianborger">not new, for a similar count was noted in another FLDS encampment in 2005. The boys are being raised in the same abusive cult that is disintegrated from mainstream society as the girls, but only the boys are being routinely pushed out with no resources and few coping skills. Those facts, too, speak of a major abusive scandal and tragedy, but other than April 30th, every day the news has focused on the FLDS child round up has been a day in which the plight of the Texas boys was ignored. Last year, some of the abandoned boys banded together to lobby state law makers for appropriate and necessary protections, yet still they are ignored for the most part by the national and alternative press, although local news in heavily Mormon areas has given some attention to the problem. Not surprisingly, then, the comments on Alternet reflect a general ignorance about that side of the story.
I don't mean to make light of the alleged forced marriages of young girls (although should be noted that it is now coming to light that some of the allegedly pregnant girls turn out to be women as old as 27), but I do find it disturbing that there seems to be such a lack of concern, or even thought, about the damage and neglect of the male children in this cult.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» absolutely, we should be worried about the boys
Posted by: aislinnluv
» RE: absolutely, we should be worried about the boys
Posted by: shannasmusic
» RE: Your point is valid rune, but...
Posted by: UnEasyOne
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Elmo409 on May 23, 2008 1:08 PM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Testing the limits of religious freedoms - Neither is acceptable
Posted by: UnEasyOne
» RE: Meaningless, meaningless
Posted by: shannasmusic
Comments are closed-
Posted by: shannasmusic on May 23, 2008 1:39 PM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
My main concern is the brainwashing involved. I think that is the frustration of the case workers, and the reason they tried so hard to keep the children. But, then again, all parents brainwash their children in the way that they think their children should go...even if that brainwashing is insisting that they learn to think for themselves.
Is the brainwashed subjegation in this sect any worse than the brainwashing that goes on in a "normal" family? How about the Christian families that teach their children that gays are an abomination, and that females were created by God to serve men? How about the southern families who still teach their children that the white race is superior? At least this sect keeps their intolerant views contained on a ranch.
Incidentally, that is simultaneously the worst thing about it. These females are not able to gain exposure to the outside world, which is one sign of a cult. The leaders know that the women would start asking questions if they were exposed to more information. They might consider for the first time that they won't go to hell if they refuse to marry.
In the end, I guess there is nothing we can do about it. And maybe nothing that we should do.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Too many "on the other hand"s - bigotry is bad
Posted by: UnEasyOne
» RE: Too many "on the other hand"s - bigotry is bad
Posted by: shannasmusic
Comments are closed-
Posted by: ThePublicRecord on May 23, 2008 4:22 PM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Pentagon Connected Ministry's Obama Bashing Message
By Chris Rodda
The Public Record
May 22, 2008
Published in : Nation/World
The almost incomprehensible attack on Barack Obama below is excerpted from a "Sermon of the Month" by Dr. Cecil Todd, founder of Revival Fires International, a 501(c)3 ministry which, "at the request of the Chief Chaplains of the Pentagon," has been shipping Bibles to Iraq, via military airlift, since 2003. According to a Revival Fires press release this "full Bible is designed and authorized by the Chief Chaplains of the Pentagon." This Pentagon involvement and Bible distribution led Navy chaplain LCDR Brian K. Waite to Revival Fires.
In 2001, LCDR Waite, then a mega-church pastor and reserve chaplain, published a virulently anti-Muslim book titled Islam Uncovered -- a book which was pulled from the shelves in 2002 due to plagiarism and faked endorsements. A few months later, Waite was accepted into the Naval Chaplain Corps. As an active duty chaplain, Waite has not only endorsed Revival Fires in uniform on the ministry's website, but appeared on advertisements for, and as a featured speaker at, their 2006 and 2007 campmeetings. He is also scheduled to appear at their 2008 campmeeting, to be held in June.
The Military Religious Freedom Foundation (MRFF) recently exposed LCDR Waite's anti-Muslim writings, his plagiarism scandal, his blatant violations of military regulations in endorsing Revival Fires Ministries, and his diploma-mill educational background. Waite's anti-Muslim ideology led to his dismissal from the faculty of the Graduate Theological Foundation, a civilian institution where he was the director of a Military Ministries doctoral program, but no apparent action by the military.
Excerpts from "Who I Want In The White House!"
By Dr. Cecil Todd
Today, a fierce political battle rages across our nation, as once again the American people will be choosing who will lead our country as President, for the next four years!
The top contenders in this race are Hillary Clinton, Barack Hussein Obama and John McCain -- all three of these Presidential wannabe’s are U.S. Senators.
Many sincere -- seeking Americans are asking “WHO WOULD BE THE BEST PERSON OF THESE THREE PEOPLE TO SERVE AS PRESIDENT OF THE MOST POWERFUL NATION IN THE WORLD?”
.................................
As a minister, I am forbidden by law to tell you how to vote! (I would never do that!) Yet, we all know this law is being broken again and again by many ministers, who are pushing their liberal candidates! I will urge you , “Do not vote as a Democrat … and do not vote as a Republican … BUT AS A CHILD OF GOD BE SURE TO VOTE!
As a servant of the most high God, I beg you, “Do not vote for a ‘baby-killer,’ or a promoter of the homosexual life-style or someone who will sell-out our freedoms as a nation and as Christians! That does narrow down the candidates!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: desiree2877 on May 23, 2008 9:14 PM
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: KACalder on May 23, 2008 9:30 PM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The wholesale stealing of those children was WRONG. Regardless what wrongs were being committed by FLDS, this brutal act does not right those wrongs. This isn't the first time child protective services have been a cure worse than the disease.
I tend to agree with those posters who have said it should be case by case.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Yes - protecting children from ongoing abuse by a sex-slave ring is evil!
Posted by: UnEasyOne
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Freticat on May 24, 2008 6:45 AM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This means that some or all of these minor brides may indeed have been legally married, even if they were coerced into the union. That does not make these marriages right, and the US laws against polygamy, though often spottily or selectively enforced, do not recognize exemptions for religious considerations. However, this does mean that the validity of the state's actions are subject to questions of legality, and the process of straightening this out will peobably be long, tedious, painful and expensive.
It's interesting to note that in most states in the US and most countries around the world, it is possible to legally marry someone below the age of consent, and that the age of consent is usually below the age of majority. This means it would be possible to be guilty of posession of "child" pornography for having intimate photographs of one's own spouse or legal sex partner. It's no wonder that this whole situation is a mess.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Jumping to conclusions?
Posted by: whathaway
» RE: Jumping to conclusions?
Posted by: KACalder
» RE: If you have to shoot a rapist to prevent a rape, that is NOT a "wrong"
Posted by: UnEasyOne
Comments are closed-
Posted by: meetmeineleusis on May 24, 2008 1:59 PM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: It's our ranch it's our home (it's not a compound)
Posted by: Lily H.
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Plowhandle on May 28, 2008 8:50 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Pratt was, incidentally, KILLED by the husband of a woman who he had stolen for his own growing harem.
I could go on all day about this evil cult, but I just wanted to plant a thought in your minds that all is not well with the mormons, and make sure everyone knew about the depths to which the Republicans have sunk in their determination to totally ruin our Nation.
This vile tenet of their 'faith' is only the tip of the iceberg.
They actually make the $cientologists look almost normal!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Bearzerker on May 29, 2008 12:52 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
the law is the law... why should a sex cult be exempt the same laws that everyone else MUST follow?
and... isn't polygamy against the law?
I just read earlier today that a baby was posted for sale online!!!
parents arrested after baby posted for sale online
thats right... parents listed their own newborn daughter for sale on Craigslist
now isn't that a form of slavery?, I mean if a person/entity actually bought the baby...
wouldn't the baby be property of "insertcorporatenamehere"
what the hell is going on in the world today... too much weirdness... is it a full moon or something?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: pedophilia is pedophilia...unless it's religion
Posted by: illit
200,000 March For Immigration Reform in Massive D.C. Rally
"This Is What Change Looks Like": Congress Passes Health-Care Reform
Are Greedy Water Bottlers Siphoning Your City's Drinking Water?




