Suppose it was not the FLDS church, but the YFZ Family Boarding School.

[pnwmom]

The FLDS parents aren't being persecuted for their religious beliefs. They are being investigated for child abuse; and because they live communally, without clear parent-child relationships, the investigation involves all the people who were living together and sharing parenting. The FLDS are being treated the same as if they were any other group of people under the circumstances, religion notwithstanding.

Suppose it was not a church, but the YFZ Family Boarding School.

A young woman named “Sarah” repeatedly called for help, saying she was 16 and forced into an “educational marriage” with a 50 year old man, who beat her and prevented her from leaving the school. The previous owner of the school was now in prison on child rape charges in another state. There had also been accusations against the local headmaster of the school by a woman who said she had also been forced into sexual relations in an educational marriage – but no charges against him had been brought.

CPS arrived and asked to see any teens named Sarah who were living at the school. They were introduced to several, including pregnant teens who said they were in educational marriages but they weren’t the girl who had called. In their initial interviews, CPS found underage girls living in each of the dormitories who were pregnant or already mothers. All of the girls said they followed the wishes of the headmaster – that girls of any age entered into educational marriages at his direction.

Although hundreds of children of all ages were living in dormitories, there appeared to be loose family groupings, with many mothers and some fathers involved. But the relationships were impossible to sort out. The children called all of the women in their dormitories “mother” and the men, “uncle.” Most of the men appeared to have multiple "educational wives." Many of the women and children gave different names at different times. Many of the women claimed that some of the children were their biological children, but they wouldn’t name their children or provide birth dates or records. Women appeared to care for the children almost interchangeably, even breastfeeding each other’s children. Many of the children didn’t know who their biological parents were, or how old they themselves were. Some of the children indicated they had moved there from other places where they had been living with different mothers and uncles.

Faced with a situation where there appeared to be dozens of underage mothers or mothers-to-be at the school, who all claimed to be “married” at the direction of the headmaster (but who all lacked legal marriage certificates); and where there appeared to be no clear parental supervision, with many parents unwilling to even name their specific children and others giving contradictory and changing information; and where the “mothers” and “uncles” all had strong ties and frequently traveled to other residences out-of-state; and where some children appeared to be at the school with no biological parents at all, CPS decided to remove all the children from the school while they conducted their investigation. A judge ordered DNA testing for all the children and for anyone claiming to be their biological parents.

Under these circumstances, would anyone be arguing that the state hadn’t done the right thing?

[marylanddem]

1. The women are like nineteenth century stepford wives...

[madmusic]

2. Uh, yeah, someone would, like the ACLU

http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_9182798">ACLU weighs in on Texas FLDS raid
The Salt Lake Tribune
Article Last Updated: 05/07/2008 02:54:29 PM MDT

Posted: 1:16 PM- The American Civil Liberties Union has weighed in on the raid on a polygamous sect's ranch in Texas, saying that the men, women and children of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints have fundamental rights that may have been compromised.

The ACLU said that while Texas authorities have the obligation to protect children from physical or sexual harm, the April 3 raid raised questions about the state's actions regarding the sect's right to freedom of religion and due process of law.

"Based upon news reports and other available information, the ACLU has serious concerns that the state's actions so far have not adequately protected the fundamental rights at stake," the national organization said in a May 2 posting on its web site.

The ACLU noted that the raid on the Yearning For Zion ranch was "prompted by a single allegation of abuse now reported most likely to have been made by someone who never resided at YFZ." Even so, parents have been separated from more than 460 children, have been placed in state custody in shelters throughout Texas, "without individual, adversarial hearings and without particularized evidence that they ever engaged in abuse or were likely to engage in abuse."

[pnwmom]

3. They have some "concerns" but they haven't filed a brief.

There "may have been" rights that were compromised. The ACLU leaves a lot of wiggle room in that statement. They know as well as anyone that the children's right to safety and to their own civil liberties trumps the parents right to practice their religion.

[madmusic]

4. "serious concerns"

The ACLU said it will "work to ensure that Texas officials act in a manner that is consistent with the important principles set forth above, including making our views known to the Texas courts at appropriate points in the judicial proceedings."

[pnwmom]

6. Uh-huh. And they haven't filed anything so far, which tells me that

they're not objecting to anything that has happened so far.

[ret5hd]

7. So we should wish the ACLU to "avert their eyes" on this one?

I, for one, have no problem with the ACLU telling the govt "we are watching you", and I hope they keep doing so regardless of the subject matter.

edit:spelling

[pnwmom]

9. I think it's fine the ACLU is watching. The state of Texas and the judges

involved are certainly capable of making mistakes, and having a "watchdog" is always a good idea.

But I also think that the actions the state has taken -- so far -- seem to make sense, and are based on the circumstances of the situation, rather than the religion of the FLDS.

[LisaL]

15. Right. It's not about religion. Then what is all that talk about

beliefs of these people?
If your beliefs are enough to remove your children from you, many people better get ready.
Somebody might find your beliefs harmful to your kids, and then, bye bye kids.

[uppityperson]

16. If your "religion"" involves child abuse, stat rape, yes, somebody find your beliefs harmful

and remove the kids. How about a religion that involves infant sacrifice? Would you still spout this stuff? Your religious rights stop when child abuse is involved. Too bad you disagree.

[LisaL]

19. It doesn't matter what your beliefs are. You have to actually

do something, rather then just thinking it's an o'key thing to do.
Otherwise people should be arrested and charged for their thoughts. You know, 10 years for thinking jaywalking is not so bad, that sort of thing.
By the way mental health workers who observed these children describe them as well socialized and well behaved.
http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/TopStories/stories/MYSA051108.01A.mhmrreports.3a4fa3e.html

[Virginian]

17. It bothered me that

the evacuees were brought out in busses owned by a Baptist church.

That sounded like the Baptists didn't like the way the Mormons were living.

[Richard Steele]

18. You've long since shown that you'll grasp any straw to defend this child-sex-slave owning cult.

IMHO, you need to find a less reprehensible hobby;
one that doesn't involve defending slavery and child-rape.

[Berry Cool]

5. Actually, I was going to ask whether anyone remembered the McMartin preschool trial.

On its face, it looked like an open-and-shut case of children suffering horrible sexual abuse. Awful things, unspeakable things. But it wasn't nearly that cut and dried, and nothing was proven.

[pnwmom]

8. That case dealt with children too young to speak for themselves.

This case involves pregnant teen mothers who are able to speak.

There is no comparison.

[truedelphi]

11. BUt think abt a few things for a moment

A guy named Timothy V Gatto posted this regarding the authorities coming in and splintering the families


This just happened to occur at the same time that authorities admitted that they couldn’t find the “mystery caller”. I can’t believe that I am the only person in the country wondering what has happened since. I have a hard time understanding why the networks aren’t asking the government why they had to trample on the Bill of Rights. I want to know where the women who were “rescued” are now. I want to know if The First Baptist Church is still caring for them. I want to know why they couldn’t wait until they had solid evidence before they pulled this raid.

I want to know if anyone was disciplined for violating just about every amendment that comprises the Bill of Rights. Most importantly however, I want to know why the mainstream media has not followed up on this critically important story.
#######################################

As far as the last two sentences - I add my own personal "Amen!"

How come these police (or whoever) are taking actions tantamount to punishing/arresting the innocents involved? Why not go after the adult male perps? In a sane police action against the FLDS, the women and kids woul d be left alone in their homes, and the adult male perps would be hauled in.

Why do the network news people fail to ask the important questions? People, this is a police action on our soil.

In my opinion, we all need to think abt this. You go to a peace demonstration to protest the coming war in Iran. And a week later, your kids are taken from you because a lady, no identity offered, at a pay phone in Denver says she knows that you and your spouse are molesting your children. And that therefore the authorities are gonna put your kids in homeless shelters or in foster care. And if you have a problem with that, you can go molest yourself!!

[woo me with science]

12. Actually, some of the most horrible stories about this group

are coming from ex-members associated with groups like "Tapestry Against Polygamy," which has ties to "survivor" groups known to be involved with recovered memory therapy. These people may be spreading stories much like the McMartin stories. They may truly believe what they say happened to them, but they may be offering recovered memory narratives based in bad therapy they received after leaving the group.

I agree with you that the investigation should happen. I think the actual evidence coming out of the compound (e.g., underage mothers and statements by contemporary members about underage "marriages") warrants an investigation. However, I dislike the posting of the extreme stories from ex-members that may very well be fabrications created in therapy after the fact.

Let's wait for the actual evidence from the children who have been removed, and obtain those statements carefully.

[LisaL]

14. WTF are you talking about?

Have you read anything about McMartin case? Eventually a number of children started talking, telling all kinds of stories. They were not too young to talk.
"Eventually a number of children who at first had denied that anything had happened to them were talking about sodomy, oral sex, fondling, and pornography. One boy described a "secret room" and trap doors going into underground tunnels. Some children, who had never met Ray because he was not at the school when they attended, began telling far-fetched stories about things he had done. A few said that they'd been taken to a cemetery to dig up coffins and watch the staff cut up the corpses."


http://www.crimelibrary.com/criminal_mind/psychology/mcmartin_daycare/1.html

[truedelphi]

10. McCain was slipping in the ratings and then we got this

24/7 news account and it showed how our government agencies can move in and stop EVIL EVIL EVIL in its tracks

Not a thing to think about here, accept it, and move on!!

[LisaL]

13. What if the moon was made of cheese?

Maybe you should read what apparently went on after TX removed these children, as alleged by the mental health workers observing the conditions.
"Children living in crowded quarters that led to upper respiratory illnesses. Youngsters plagued with diarrhea from unhealthy foods they usually did not eat. Distressed mothers enduring widespread rudeness - such as flashlights shined in their faces as they tried to sleep."

http://www.sltrib.com/ci_9238520
The child is supposed to be removed if there is an immediate danger.
What would be an immediate danger to these children, the younger ones? Why not remove the men from the ranch, since men are the suspected abusers?
These children were taken from a ranch, placed in crowded shelter, where some got sick, separated from their mothers, now sent all over TX, many separated from their siblings. You don't think that's upsetting to a young child? Why are siblings being separated? How are these mothers supposed to see their children of those children are in different parts of TX?
It's alleged one baby was left without food and water for 24 hours and ended up in the hospital. Do you think the idea that the child might have gotten married years down the road justifies the child's removal by CPS?