NationStates Jolt Archive

As we all know, the CPS of Texas seized 460 children from the FLDS compound. Of those, 31 had children of their own. CPS claimed these mothers were actually 14 year old girls despite the birth certificates which were issued by the states of Utah and Arizona. Apparently, according to the state of Texas, your New York drivers license and your California marriage license are not valid in the state of Texas.
Full faith and credit clause of the US constitution does not apply in Texas which CPS has decided is it's own country not subject to Constitutional ruiles.

Enough of the rant. Back to my point. When this first came to light a lot of people heard the words "child rapist" and automatically jumped to side with the CPS without knowing the facts. They stated as fact, that the all the men on the ranch were baby rapers. The proof they said was that there was pregnant teens. Despite the fact that many of the so called "teens" protested they were adults.
Now the truth is coming out. In the last week CPS has been forced to admit that 8 of the 31 "young teenage girls" are actually adults. One of them is 27. How the fuck do you miss a 27 year old? According to Texas, if you a woman and you look like young and hot, you can have your rights revoked and be treated as a child.
And now they are saying the rest may be older than 16 as well.
A lot of people are going to feel really foolish for jumping to CPS's side on this matter.

http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_9330822

Not to mention they are losing their credibility in regards to their claims about the rest of the children as well.

Looks like even the judges are losing patience with CPS:

"Sloan was informed of the impending decision Monday evening - but the state continued to tell Allred she could not participate in hearings on Tuesday for her two children because she was a minor. Allred turns 28 on June 2.
Allred had been warned, Sloan said, that as an adult she would not be allowed to remain at the Fort Worth shelter with her two children, including a 15-month-old - which a state attorney confirmed during the hearing.
But that apparently did not sit well with the judge hearing her case.
"For a month, six weeks, this mother has been with these children in this facility," he said, resetting the hearing for May 27 to give CPS time to work out an alternative.
Other judges also pressed CPS to accommodate the young mothers who have been in state custody for more than a month - something that one FLDS spokesman said was encouraging."

When there are no official birth certificates and people are constantly lying about their names, age and familiar links, there is little why CPS is in such a bad position. They have an obligation to protect children.

If there hadn't been such deceit, this would have ended a lot sooner but because these people are paranoid due to social conditioning, they are forced to lie. They are causing the errors to happen.

I am always troubled when people's knee-jerk reaction is to side with CPS in any situation. CPS has a tendency to be renegade and they look at our children as though they are state property. I do not understand why more people are not immediately skeptical when CPS is involved.

Something I have been wondering about that case is whether or not Texas will be able to prosecute them on grounds of polygamy. If the state does not recognize the legality of the multiple marriages, or other marriage licenses from other states...how can polygamy be charged?

I am always troubled when people's knee-jerk reaction is to side with CPS in any situation. CPS has a tendency to be renegade and they look at our children as though they are state property. I do not understand why more people are not immediately skeptical when CPS is involved.

Something I have been wondering about that case is whether or not Texas will be able to prosecute them on grounds of polygamy. If the state does not recognize the legality of the multiple marriages, or other marriage licenses from other states...how can polygamy be charged?

Further Proof (http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080428/COL04/804280375/1081)

CPS has waaay too much power, and lacks common sense too often.

And commence another mental masturbation thread on how Child Marriage and Statutory Rape are basic human rights.

:rolleyes:

And commence another mental masturbation thread on how Child Marriage and Statutory Rape are basic human rights.

:rolleyes:

They're guaranteed by the 37th Amendment. Everyone knows that.

They're guaranteed by the 37th Amendment. Everyone knows that.

I thought that was the one that allowed Robot Schwarzenegger to serve as president for all eternity.

I thought that was the one that allowed Robot Schwarzenegger to serve as president for all eternity.

He's not American, so it doesn't work like that.

He's not American, so it doesn't work like that.

thats why he needed the 30th amendment to be president

thats why he needed the 30th amendment to be president

Oh I see. My bad. :p

I thought that was the one that allowed Robot Schwarzenegger to serve as president for all eternity.

It does that as well. It also technically legalizes Kitten-huffing.

Very vaguely worded amendment, the 37th.

Ah, USA. We've been waiting for you.:p

When there are no official birth certificates and people are constantly lying about their names, age and familiar links, there is little why CPS is in such a bad position. They have an obligation to protect children.

If there hadn't been such deceit, this would have ended a lot sooner but because these people are paranoid due to social conditioning, they are forced to lie. They are causing the errors to happen.

Well, all the evidence says they all had official birth certificates from Utah and Arizona but CPS says those are not official documents because they are not issued by the state of Texas. Again, the Full Faith and Credit Clause has been evicted from Texas by the CPS.

The fact is that CPS is refusing to accept documents by states other than Texas in this case because they are deliberately trying to disband an entire religion.

Even one of the judges has told the FLDS fathers that "at this point CPS has no shred of evidence that your children were being abused."

And commence another mental masturbation thread on how Child Marriage and Statutory Rape are basic human rights.

:rolleyes:

WOW. Do you always judge the thread without reading it????

Maybe you should read the FACTS rather than the lies put out by CPS?

I'm not sure I should bother though because you've been ignoring the full evidence which says these people are innocent because you are enamored that CPS are the holy crusaders of our time going after those evil, heretical FLDS heathens.

(sarcasm, hope it's not offensive LOL)

Ah, USA. We've been waiting for you.:p

?????

Even one of the judges has told the FLDS fathers that "at this point CPS has no shred of evidence that your children were being abused."

Really now? Prove it. Because given your history of outright, blatant lies, I have no faith in you to say a word that is honest.

Go ahead, show me where a judge said this. You cant, of course, because once again, you're lying.

CPS is crazy.
One anonymous accusation of abuse and they swoop in and take the children until the parent proves he/she is innocent.

too major charges that scare me in the US at current are
1. Child abuse. CPS assumes your guilty until you prove your innocence .
2. child porn. The media cant show the evidence and once charged everyone assumes your guilty and a sicko.

Well, all the evidence says they all had official birth certificates from Utah and Arizona but CPS says those are not official documents because they are not issued by the state of Texas. Again, the Full Faith and Credit Clause has been evicted from Texas by the CPS.

The fact is that CPS is refusing to accept documents by states other than Texas in this case because they are deliberately trying to disband an entire religion.

Even one of the judges has told the FLDS fathers that "at this point CPS has no shred of evidence that your children were being abused."

First of all, 8 out of 31 not child rapes still leaves 23 child rapes.
Second of all, even if they are all adults, all that does is give them the ability to consent. It doesn't give the church fathers the right to rape and/or marry them without their consent.

And being brainwashed to believe that is not a bad thing is functionally the same thing, by the way.

EDIT: According to the article, there are 17 remaining women whose age is disputed. There were originally 26, out of 31. That means that there are 5 girls who are definitely underage.

"Asked by her husband, Dan, why the state had taken his children, Gossett said a "wide loop" had been thrown around the FLDS community that might not fit all parents. The state, he said, had concerns about the FLDS' beliefs, plural and underage marriages and "communal attitude."
If those allegations prove unfounded, "I'll be the first to apologize to you if it turns out you're not a person who has abused your child," the judge told Dan Jessop, who was in the courtroom. "There is no proof of abuse in your case. That gives you a leg up."


http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_9330822

the judge told Dan Jessop


Even one of the judges has told the FLDS fathers that

As I said. You lied.

First of all, 8 out of 31 not child rapes still leaves 23 child rapes.
Second of all, even if they are all adults, all that does is give them the ability to consent. It doesn't give the church fathers the right to rape and/or marry them without their consent.

And being brainwashed to believe that is not a bad thing is functionally the same thing, by the way.

CPS has failed to show the remaining 23 were cases of child rape and the way things are going, CPS is slowly being forced to admit that none of them were.

As for religious indocrination being child rape, the same can be said about the false doctrines preached by the Baptists that they force down the throats of little children every Sunday.

As I said. You lied.

You do know that Dan Jessop is a father of the FLDS children? Or did you just ignore that part because it didn't fit in with the preconcieved notion that all the fathers are guilty??

You do know that Dan Jessop is a father of the FLDS children?

You do know what the "s" on the end of the word "fathers" means? Just as I said, you lied. Dan Jessop may be a father of some of the FLDS children, he however is not, all by his lonesome, "the FLDS fathers".

"The FLDS fathers" means the fathers of the FLDS children, all the fathers. That's what "The FLDS fathers" means. You said a judge made this comment "to the FLDS fathers". In fact, a judge said it to one father. Not "the FLDS fathers". Not all the fathers, not many of the fathers, no some of the fathers. One father.

As I said, you lied.

First of all, 8 out of 31 not child rapes still leaves 23 child rapes.
Second of all, even if they are all adults, all that does is give them the ability to consent. It doesn't give the church fathers the right to rape and/or marry them without their consent.

And being brainwashed to believe that is not a bad thing is functionally the same thing, by the way.

EDIT: According to the article, there are 17 remaining women whose age is disputed. There were originally 26, out of 31. That means that there are 5 girls who are definitely underage.

actually, according to the article there are only 17 left. The rest have apparently turned out to be adults after the courts had to literally force CPS to accept out of state birth certificates.

actually, according to the article there are only 17 left. The rest have apparently turned out to be adults after the courts had to literally force CPS to accept out of state birth certificates.

Lying again huh? Your own article clearly states, the claims were made about 31 females, who the state claimed were minors.

Of those 31 females, The ages of 26 were in dispute. Which meant there was no dispute that 5 of them were minors. So that's 5 right there.

Now, of the 26 that were in dispute, only 17 remain in dispute. So the ages of 9 of them are no longer in dispute. However, nowhere in your linked article does it say that all 9 are adults. It merely said that their ages were no longer in dispute. The article mentiones 5 that the state admits are adults, it makes no such claim about the other 4. Only that their age isn't in dispute anymore. And of the original 31, 5 were certainly minors

Which makes this statement:

The rest have apparently turned out to be adults

A bold faced lie.

Again.

Further Proof (http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080428/COL04/804280375/1081)

CPS has waaay too much power, and lacks common sense too often.

It's due process. If I was going to find fault in the case you linked to, it would be with the idiot security guard, who failed to exercise common sense.

After they failed to apply reasonable discretion (God knows why, perhaps just a little Hitler) and it was established that the kid was holding an alcoholic beverage, it needs to be properly investigated. Small infringements often lead to more serious convictions, and CPS is obliged not to wave them aside as "oh it's just one drink."

You would expect nothing less in any branch of the law.

The fact is that many kids are abused, and abusers go to considerable lengths to keep the kids quiet. If you succeed in cutting the power of CPS, in favour of legal guardians, more abusers will get away with abusing kids.

The rights of kids (their HUMAN rights, not their right to eat candy for dinner) trump those of parents.

Lying again huh? Your own article clearly states, the claims were made about 31 females, who the state claimed were minors.

Of those 31 females, The ages of 26 were in dispute. Which meant there was no dispute that 5 of them were minors. So that's 5 right there.

Now, of the 26 that were in dispute, only 17 remain in dispute. So the ages of 9 of them are no longer in dispute. However, nowhere in your linked article does it say that all 9 are adults. It merely said that their ages were no longer in dispute. The article mentiones 5 that the state admits are adults, it makes no such claim about the other 4. Only that their age isn't in dispute anymore. And of the original 31, 5 were certainly minors

Which makes this statement:



A bold faced lie.

Again.

Now, now, no pointing out the illogical assertions made by the OP; he has tender feelings and a fragile hold on his distorted reality. It is the only way he can continue to believe that he's right is if we stop correcting him. Oh, but what fun is there in letting ignorance run amok?

It's not nice to be logical and factual.

CPS is crazy.
One anonymous accusation of abuse and they swoop in and take the children until the parent proves he/she is innocent.



They're required to do so by law in most states.

When I worked a summer job at a test scoring center, we were extremely reluctant to report concerns derived from the stuff we scored, because if we indicated that the potential for child abuse was being expressed by someone, then Ohio's equivalent of CPS had to remove the child from the custody of their parents, and undergo an investigation.

Breaking development.

The Court of Appeals has ruled that the Texas CPS had no right to seize the children.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/05/22/flds.ruling/

"The existence of the FLDS belief system as described by the department's witnesses, by itself, does not put children of FLDS parents in physical danger," the three-judge panel said.

The state's Department of Family and Protective Services "did not present any evidence of danger to the physical health or safety of any male children or any female children who had not reached puberty," the judges ruled. "

"It concluded, "Evidence that children raised in this particular environment may some day have their physical health and safety threatened is not evidence that the danger is imminent enough to warrant invoking the extreme measure of immediate removal prior to full litigation of the issue.""

Looks like the children are going to be returned. Can't wait to see the lawsuits against the state start.

Lying again huh? Your own article clearly states, the claims were made about 31 females, who the state claimed were minors.

Of those 31 females, The ages of 26 were in dispute. Which meant there was no dispute that 5 of them were minors. So that's 5 right there.

Now, of the 26 that were in dispute, only 17 remain in dispute. So the ages of 9 of them are no longer in dispute. However, nowhere in your linked article does it say that all 9 are adults. It merely said that their ages were no longer in dispute. The article mentiones 5 that the state admits are adults, it makes no such claim about the other 4. Only that their age isn't in dispute anymore. And of the original 31, 5 were certainly minors

Which makes this statement:



A bold faced lie.

Again.

I understand that you're typical response to evidence to use namecalling but the least you can do is present EVIDENCE to back you up.

They have admitted that 9 of the disputed persons were indeed adults, not just 5 as you insist without showing any evidence.

Me thinks, also, that you are doing a heck of a lot of protesting for someone who has no connection with the case.

Breaking development.

The Court of Appeals has ruled that the Texas CPS had no right to seize the children.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/05/22/flds.ruling/

"The existence of the FLDS belief system as described by the department's witnesses, by itself, does not put children of FLDS parents in physical danger," the three-judge panel said.

The state's Department of Family and Protective Services "did not present any evidence of danger to the physical health or safety of any male children or any female children who had not reached puberty," the judges ruled. "

"It concluded, "Evidence that children raised in this particular environment may some day have their physical health and safety threatened is not evidence that the danger is imminent enough to warrant invoking the extreme measure of immediate removal prior to full litigation of the issue.""

Looks like the children are going to be returned. Can't wait to see the lawsuits against the state start.

Ironically, so many were flabbergasted that the children were being taught that the outside world was immoral and hostile...yet in one event the outside world has shown them how true their teachings are. When all is said and done, the hostile and immoral world will throw money at them as if that will repair injustice (incidentally showing further immorality). Who protects the children from the society at large? The parents. [as I'm starting to wander off topic, I'll leave it at that.]

They're required to do so by law in most states.

When I worked a summer job at a test scoring center, we were extremely reluctant to report concerns derived from the stuff we scored, because if we indicated that the potential for child abuse was being expressed by someone, then Ohio's equivalent of CPS had to remove the child from the custody of their parents, and undergo an investigation.

The appeals court has ruled that the CPS has overstepped its bounds.

Me thinks, also, that you are doing a heck of a lot of protesting for someone who has no connection with the case.

What the fuck is that supposed to mean?


ps- You are posting about it more then he is. Hell, you are starting topics about it. Can I insinuate that you might be one of the kiddie touchers?

Ironically, so many were flabbergasted that the children were being taught that the outside world was immoral and hostile...yet in one event the outside world has shown them how true their teachings are. When all is said and done, the hostile and immoral world will throw money at them as if that will repair injustice (incidentally showing further immorality). Who protects the children from the society at large? The parents. [as I'm starting to wander off topic, I'll leave it at that.]

I'm just waiting for Neo Art to jump in and declare that everything I said in that post was an absolute prefabricated lie.
LOL

What the fuck is that supposed to mean?


ps- You are posting about it more then he is. Hell, you are starting topics about it. Can I insinuate that you might be one of the kiddie touchers?

I'm not implying anything. Just noting that he is protesting with the "you're a big fat liar" in all of his posts and he has not presented any evidence to back up his assertion that CPS is 100% in the right.


I don't know what country you live in. But in the USA you innocent of ALL crimes unless the courts find you to be actually guilty.

The fact is that the courts are now saying that there is no proof that the parents did what CPS has accused them. It is quite apparent that CPS deliberately acted with malice because of the group's religious teachings.
They used false and misleading information to seize children from their parents. Then they deliberately went about covering up their screw ups.

In the USA everyone has rights and there are rights that you cannot take away for any reason.

If you read the Appeals Court article, they clearly said that a group's religious beliefs is not enough to take children from their parents. Unless you live in dark ages Europe where no body had any rights and you were guilty just because someone made an anonymous accusation against you (the Republic of Venice) and in Salem Mass.of the 16th century where you were guilty of witchcraft as soon as someone pointed the finger at you. In both cases, no evidence was required for you to be declared guilty and then either imprisoned or executed.

We are seeing the same thing today with the FLDS case. An anonymous person pointed a finger of accusation and CPS declared them guilty as accused without evidence and then tried to use hearsay as "valid evidence".

WOW. Do you always judge the thread without reading it????

Maybe you should read the FACTS rather than the lies put out by CPS?

I'm not sure I should bother though because you've been ignoring the full evidence which says these people are innocent because you are enamored that CPS are the holy crusaders of our time going after those evil, heretical FLDS heathens.

(sarcasm, hope it's not offensive LOL)

They managed to convict the founder of that church for acting on his belief that he should fuck little girls in the name of his religion.

I think that's reason enough to suspect the rest of them.

http://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/story?id=4911318&page=1

The apeals court is further ruling that CPS cannot keep the children in state custody.

"The court said that the state had not demonstrated that the children were in immediate danger and that Judge Barbara Walther abused her discretion in failing to return the children to their families.
"

Abuse of power is a very serious charge.

"likely means that the children of the 38 mothers will be returned to their families"

"contrary to what the state had argued, the court found that the polygamist sect's belief system, by itself, did not place the children in danger of abuse."

the cream of the crop:

"There was also no evidence that any of the children of the 38 mothers had been sexually abused "

They managed to convict the founder of that church for acting on his belief that he should fuck little girls in the name of his religion.

I think that's reason enough to suspect the rest of them.

No. No it is not enough reason. Unless you prefer to live in Nazi Germany, Taliban ruled Afghanistan, Soviet Russia, or medieval Europe.

This case also reminds me of that movie. About that woman and the plane. She took her daughter on board and the kid disappeared. When she insisted she had a daughter and wanted to look for her, the Air Marshall declared her guilty of being a terrorist without evidence and eveyone on board believed her to be a terrorist just because a government agent had said so.

Same thing here. CPS, a government agent says "all FLDS people are evil baby molestors". Public: "It has to be so because CPS said it was so."

Remember at the end of the movie it turned out the woman was right and the passengers were all wrong.

No. No it is not enough reason. Unless you prefer to live in Nazi Germany, Taliban ruled Afghanistan, Soviet Russia, or medieval Europe.

This case also reminds me of that movie. About that woman and the plane. She took her daughter on board and the kid disappeared. When she insisted she had a daughter and wanted to look for her, the Air Marshall declared her guilty of being a terrorist without evidence and eveyone on board believed her to be a terrorist just because a government agent had said so.

Same thing here. CPS, a government agent says "all FLDS people are evil baby molestors". Public: "It has to be so because CPS said it was so."

Remember at the end of the movie it turned out the woman was right and the passengers were all wrong.

This isn't a movie.

On the basis of their leader's teachings, I would have just gotten a warrant to have permanent surveillance on the compound - until I had enough information for an arrest.

I would have arrested them in ones and twos over time, not all at once.

They are child fuckers.

No. No it is not enough reason. Unless you prefer to live in Nazi Germany, Taliban ruled Afghanistan, Soviet Russia, or medieval Europe.




GODWIIIIN!!!!!!!

I just hope this doesn't cause the FLDS kids to grow up and ally themselves with Islamic Jihad, and run around with bombs in their backpacks screaming "death to America." LOL

I just hope this doesn't cause the FLDS kids to grow up and ally themselves with Islamic Jihad, and run around with bombs in their backpacks screaming "death to America." LOL

Are you fucking serious?

This isn't a movie.

On the basis of their leader's teachings, I would have just gotten a warrant to have permanent surveillance on the compound - until I had enough information for an arrest.

I would have arrested them in ones and twos over time, not all at once.

They are child fuckers.

No they are not and you have no evidence that they are. The Appeals Court has already said that they did not do what CPS has accused them of.

Look at the facts. Look at the evidence.

You can't persecute a whole group just because of the acts of the leader. Otherwise every American would be liable for the crimes committed by the President of the United States, including yourself.

The President lied, therefore you are a liar. The President used his powers to torture people, therefore, you also go around torturing people.

See how that works.

Are you fucking serious?

Which part?? You didn't see the LOL???????

I don't really think they'll run off and join IJ but I do think they are going to have a very negative view of the state of Texas because of all this.

Everything they've been taught by their parents and their schools about the outside world was forcefully confirmed by CPS and its supporters.

How do you fix that? It's not something you can just throw money at and I'm not certain a simple apology will be much help.

The initial judge just got bitchslapped:

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/hotstories/5796565.html

"The order by a panel of the 3rd Court of Appeals in Austin gave State District Judge Barbara Walther 10 days to vacate her order, which applied to more than 460 children."

But the children might not be returned right away because CPS is deciding if they have any good chance of fighting the ruling at the State Supreme Court level.

All child custody hearings related to the FLDS in Texas have been cancelled because of the ruling.

"that child custody status hearings that started here this week had been canceled in its wake"

""The way that the courts have ignored the legal rights of these mothers is ridiculous," said Texas Rural Legal Aid attorney Julie Balovich, who also represents FLDS mothers. "It was about time a court stood up and said that was has been happening to these families is wrong.""

"Removing children from their homes on an emergency basis before fully litigating the issue of whether the parents should continue to have custody of the children is an extreme measure."

"The danger must be to the physical health or safety to the child," the appeals court wrote. "The Department (CPS) did not present any evidence of danger to the physical health or safety of any male children or any female children who had not reached puberty."

Again, absolutely no evidence was presented by CPS when they seized the children.

"The state can either ask the Texas Supreme Court to stay the order or comply by returning the children to their parents,"

""What they’ve been told to do is start over, and do it right." They also ruled that CPS cannot take the children until after there has been a trial.

This isn't a movie.

On the basis of their leader's teachings, I would have just gotten a warrant to have permanent surveillance on the compound - until I had enough information for an arrest.

I would have arrested them in ones and twos over time, not all at once.

They are child fuckers.

By this attitude, I take it you won't mind if the government installs surveillance in your living room and watches every move you make. Because I'm quite sure you've broken the law at one point or another.

Hell with it, let's install surveillance in everyone's living rooms. I mean, what are civil rights for? We're all potentially child molesters. Every one of us has, somewhere back in our ancestry, someone who molested a child. Hell, way back when it was considered normal. So all of us are, as you so succinctly phrased it, "child fuckers", predicated from birth, genetics and our original belief system to molest children.

Were children molested at this ranch? Probably. Are children molested, every day, not a mile from where you live? Probably. Are children molested by the religious authority figures of whatever religion you belong to? More than likely. Even atheists molest children. Doesn't make it right, but it also doesn't mean it's right for the government to swoop in and take the entire compound's children away.

By this attitude, I take it you won't mind if the government installs surveillance in your living room and watches every move you make. Because I'm quite sure you've broken the law at one point or another.

Hell with it, let's install surveillance in everyone's living rooms. I mean, what are civil rights for? We're all potentially child molesters. Every one of us has, somewhere back in our ancestry, someone who molested a child. Hell, way back when it was considered normal. So all of us are, as you so succinctly phrased it, "child fuckers", predicated from birth, genetics and our original belief system to molest children.

Were children molested at this ranch? Probably. Are children molested, every day, not a mile from where you live? Probably. Are children molested by the religious authority figures of whatever religion you belong to? More than likely. Even atheists molest children. Doesn't make it right, but it also doesn't mean it's right for the government to swoop in and take the entire compound's children away.

Except there's quite a few accounts from former FLDS members (mostly women) who corroborate the stories of child marriages and statutory rape committed in the name of religion.

I'm not implying anything. Just noting that he is protesting with the "you're a big fat liar" in all of his posts and he has not presented any evidence to back up his assertion that CPS is 100% in the right.
He hasn't made that assertion. Saying that you're wrong isn't the same as saying that the CPS was right.
This case also reminds me of that movie. About that woman and the plane. She took her daughter on board and the kid disappeared. When she insisted she had a daughter and wanted to look for her, the Air Marshall declared her guilty of being a terrorist without evidence and eveyone on board believed her to be a terrorist just because a government agent had said so.

Same thing here. CPS, a government agent says "all FLDS people are evil baby molestors". Public: "It has to be so because CPS said it was so."

Remember at the end of the movie it turned out the woman was right and the passengers were all wrong.

That's not what happened in that movie at all. The woman was acting hysterical, raving about a child that nobody had seen, she was harassing the captain, she was accusing an Middle Eastern man of killing her husband and kidnapping her daughter and she sabotaged the plane mid-flight. Not to mention that the whole thing was planned by the air marshal and a stewardess so they could smuggle drugs. It doesn't take an awful lot of imagination to see that, from the passengers' point of view, she looked dangerous.

Lying again huh? Your own article clearly states, the claims were made about 31 females, who the state claimed were minors.

Of those 31 females, The ages of 26 were in dispute. Which meant there was no dispute that 5 of them were minors. So that's 5 right there.

Now, of the 26 that were in dispute, only 17 remain in dispute. So the ages of 9 of them are no longer in dispute. However, nowhere in your linked article does it say that all 9 are adults. It merely said that their ages were no longer in dispute. The article mentiones 5 that the state admits are adults, it makes no such claim about the other 4. Only that their age isn't in dispute anymore. And of the original 31, 5 were certainly minors

Which makes this statement:



A bold faced lie.

Again.

Actually, it does.


"An underpinning of the state's case for taking hundreds of FLDS children into custody continued to weaken Tuesday as officials acknowledged four more women whose ages were disputed are adults - including one who is 27. "

Notice it says FOUR MORE, not FOUR.

"Still to come: The state was prepared to admit one additional mother was an adult, but her hearing was postponed. "

That's 5.

"Four women had been deemed adults before Tuesday; other women's hearings have yet to come up in court."

And four previously. That makes NINE. 26 - 17 is 9.

You're right about the 5, though. It does appear 5 weren't even in dispute. They mention at least one specific case where the mother is 17.

Something happened there. Clearly there is some evidence that some people were guilty of childmolestation at the very least. I have to say my initial reaction was that it was a cult full of sick people. However, when you look at it, there seems to have been a pretty grievious abuse of rights that's hard to deny. How do you justify ignoring the official documents of adults and taking them into custody claiming they are children and thus victims of abuse?

I'll point out that in my family 3 of five women were pregnant before turning 17. By the standard of just assuming anyone that young with children is being abused, my family should have been seperated. Or *gasp* it could be that the cases of my sister and cousins getting pregnant were not related. Nah, that's just too simple.

USOA, you seem to think there's absolutely no evidence that anything was being done to the girls in that sect.
None of your articles have said anything like that.
Care to give some actual proof?

"Asked by her husband, Dan, why the state had taken his children, Gossett said a "wide loop" had been thrown around the FLDS community that might not fit all parents. The state, he said, had concerns about the FLDS' beliefs, plural and underage marriages and "communal attitude."
If those allegations prove unfounded, "I'll be the first to apologize to you if it turns out you're not a person who has abused your child," the judge told Dan Jessop, who was in the courtroom. "There is no proof of abuse in your case. That gives you a leg up."

You're an idiot.

USOA, you seem to think there's absolutely no evidence that anything was being done to the girls in that sect.
None of your articles have said anything like that.
Care to give some actual proof?

I was going to post earlier but I gave up cause I guess Jolt is having some tech issues or something. I'll try to redo in a few with qoutes direct from the decision that speak to those "underage" pregnant girls.

In its ruling today, the Texas 3rd Court of Appeals ruled that:

The main threat percieved by CPS came not from potential sexual abuse but from the religious beliefs of the FLDS church.

There was absolutely no evidence of sexual or physical abuse of prepubescent girls.

While it is clear that some girls had become pregnant before the age of 17, there is no evidence regarding the marital status of the girls when they became pregnant or the circumstances under which they became pregnant. The only thing being used as evidence they were sexually abused was that they are members of the FLDS church.
In the state of Texas, it is not illegal to have sexual intercourse with your spouse if she is under age. Texas allows 16 year olds to marry with parental consent and it allows girls younger than 16 to marry with the permission of the court. However, a man cannot legally have more than one wife.

On the charges of that 20 underage girls at the FLDS ranch were pregnant, thus proving they were sexually assaulted.
15 are actually adults. The 13 year old pregnant girl turned out to be 22 as she had been insisting to CPS.

Now regarding the 5 pregnant minors. None of them were 14 at the time of their pregnancies. The 3rd Court has found they were 16 at the time of pregnancy. Late 15 at the earliest.

With the exception of the 5 there was no evidence whatsover of any other children being sexually abused or being in danger of such abuse.

CPS has been forced to admit that teenagers being pregnant was not a sufficient reason to remove 460 children and hence commenced an attack on the FLDS belief system. Particularly that the girls told CPS agents that they believed you should be allowed to marry at any age and having children of your own is the highest of blessings.
The fact is that CPS own witnesses admitted that there is diverse opinion with in the FLDS community on when a good age for marriage is, how many spouses you should have, and when you should have children. . Just as there is in all other religions.



The Department of CPS did not present any actual evidence or facts that would have merit the mass removal of all the children.

The CPS own lead investigator stated that the reason for the removal was the religious belief system of the FLDS church.

The FLDS belief system itself does not constitute a valid threat to children.

CPS had no proof that the any of the prepubescent children were in danger.

That CPS insisted that the ranch constituted one single household is contrary to all the evidence. CPS own witnesses admitted, under oath, that the ranch was divided into seperate families with seperate households. While the ranch was more communal than most people are used to, it is not sufficient cause to treat the whole ranch as being one single household.

CPS also admits that not all the families are polygamous and not all the families allowed their children to marry under age. This illustrates the dangers of ascribing the beliefs of a religious system to every single one of its followers even to those who don't agree or follow every tenet of the faith.

CPS did not meet statutory requirements.

The authenticity of the call that resulted in the seizure of the children is in serious doubt and hence the CPS acted on false and deliberately misleading information.

As such, the children must be returned to their families or the 3rd Court of Appeals will take stronger action or whatever the phrase "The writ will issue only if the district court fails to comply with this opinion."

http://blogs.chron.com/texaspolitics/archives/3rd%20Court.pdf

And commence another mental masturbation thread on how Child Marriage and Statutory Rape are basic human rights.

:rolleyes:

Apparently this wasn't as widespread as initially thought. It would seem these were isolated cases and CPS did not establish the children were endanger or the appeals court wouldn't have ruled the way it did.

Whatever gets people out of the cuckoo compounds is fine by me.

You're an idiot.

And you're flaming. Don't.

Except there's quite a few accounts from former FLDS members (mostly women) who corroborate the stories of child marriages and statutory rape committed in the name of religion.

Wealthy white women angry they didn't have special privileges in the cult and who now have personal vendettas against some cult members. They are not reliable witnesses

Wealthy white women angry they didn't have special privileges in the cult and who now have personal vendettas against some cult members. They are not reliable witnesses

Interesting that you call it a "cult (http://www.weaselhut.net/proof.png)" here and not a religion...

Im still undecided on how I feel about this whole mess. There is definitally something weird/sick/probably illegal going on at that ranch IMO. However, CPS not only greatly overstepped their bounds, they also screwed up royally (saying that 28 year olds were kids...) and apperantly presented a shoddy case.

Interesting that you call it a "cult (http://www.weaselhut.net/proof.png)" here and not a religion...

My bad. Slip of the tongue on my part which demonstrates how misperceptions can easily create biases that are hard to overturn.

Then again, Christianity was commonly referred to as a cult, even by its sympathizers when it first came out. LOL

Im still undecided on how I feel about this whole mess. There is definitally something weird/sick/probably illegal going on at that ranch IMO. However, CPS not only greatly overstepped their bounds, they also screwed up royally (saying that 28 year olds were kids...) and apperantly presented a shoddy case.

The polygamy is still illegal according to 3rd AC of Texas. So the question is, how many of the girls who are pregnant are actually married and how many those are in polygamous marriages. Then, apparently, the state can file bigamy charges.
While you can have sex with a 14 year old if she is your wife, you can't do with a 14 year old who is not your wife. That is where the polygamy issue collides with child abuse issue. Once you do it a young girl you are not married to then it becomes child abuse.


At least that is what I am reading out of their decision. Unless I am reading it wrong.

While you can have sex with a 14 year old if she is your wife, you can't do with a 14 year old who is not your wife.

Im pretty sure your not allowed to marry a 14 year old anymore...

I thought that was the one that allowed Robot Schwarzenegger to serve as president for all eternity.

You idiot! That was Robot NIXON! (Robot Schwarzenegger was the 38th)


I'm sorry I shouldn't have called you an idiot. You were only off by one after all :p

Im pretty sure your not allowed to marry a 14 year old anymore...

You can but only with a court order (or consent same thing).

the Texas State Supreme Court is already looking the case and they have already denied the state's motion for a stay.

CPS is arguing to the state Supreme Court that because all the people on the ranch had the same religious beiliefs, they constitute one big household.

CPS constinues to claim that there are pregnant 13 year olds even though they only they found turned out to be 22.

12 of the children have already been returned to their parents due to a seperate court order against CPS.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/24/us/24raid.html?ref=us