I’m sure the higher ups at the Mormon Church wish this story of the FLDS sect in Eldorado, Texas would go away. It keeps reminding people of how extremely late and under what great pressure the church finally distanced itself from the widespread polygamist practices.
The stories are horrific. It’s a little peek into a world of high control and absolute patriarchy.
Women are there for the men. The Prophet decides whom they marry and when. If they are meek, faithful, sweet wives — obedient to their husbands and to the Prophet — then they have a chance that the husbands will invite them to join them in the celestial kingdom someday. The choice of clothing and hairstyle for the women helps keep them estranged from the world around them and dependent on one another.
Here’s one woman’s story of living in a similar environment.
El Dorado was the mythical city of gold the Spanish explorers sought. This compound in Eldorado, Texas, is a place of great sadness.
- - - -
Do you feel like you can actually see the price of gas changing before your eyes as you drive past the gas station?
- - - -
I recently went to a Wednesday night class on “A Theology of Ugly.” It was looking at the brokenness of our world and glimpses of God’s grace. The teacher that night, a good friend of ours, pointed us to one of her favorite poems by Gerard Manley Hopkins. Enjoy:
Glory be to God for dappled things
For skies of couple-colour as a brinded cow;
For rose-moles all in stipple upon trout that swim;
Fresh-firecoal chestnut-falls; finches’ wings;
Landscapes plotted and pieced — fold, fallow, and plough;
And all trades, their gear and tackle and trim.
All things counter, original, spare, strange;
Whatever is fickle, freckled (who knows how?)
With swift, slow; sweet, sour; adazzle, dim;
He fathers-forth whose beauty is past change:
Praise Him.
- - - -
I’m not supposed to be running anymore. But I’ve been cheating in small amounts lately. Cycling has been a wonderful replacement, but a cool, crisp spring morning just calls for a little jog.
Yes, it does, and that’s where I’m headed at this moment.
Have to give my friend Paul Anthony, an ACU journalism graduate, a shout-out. He is now the ace reporter for the San Angelo Standard-Times, and he scooped many of the other news organizations on this FLDS story. He was interviewed by CNN (Nancy Grace) and MSNBC, and his information was alluded to on Anderson Cooper 360, the Today Show, and other national news sources.
You can read a transcript of his Nancy Grace interview here and read his coverage in the S-T here.
Though it’s a horribly sad story, it’s nice to see a friend and fellow Wildcat having such an impact.
I’d like to see the Mormon church take a more aggressive stand on these issues. Distancing themselves from the problem isn’t enough in my mind. They ought to reprimand such spin off cults and offer resources, support groups, etc. to survivors of these type of experiences. What kinds of social actions is the Mormon church taking to thwart these types of things from happening in the future?
The price of gas increased 14 cents WHILE I WAS PUMPING THE GAS!!!!
I got the lower price. I almost said “cheaper” price, but there is nothing cheap about it.
*********************************
I’m with Eric L, this is a chance for Mormons to show their character and their normality. Distance is not enough. They must speak against this kind of thing.
Help me out here a little…
Where does the Bible speak against polygamy ???
Didn’t Abraham have at least two wives (Sarah and Hagar) ???
Where does the Bible speak against multiple wives today ???
Jeff
Let’s not use the OT to justify moral issues.
They also stoned children.
First the Bible tells us to uphold the laws of the country we live in. Polygamy is illegal. That should be clear.
The NT did not repeal the stoning of heretics either, is that permitted?
Jesus made it clear that there was a difference from what God permitted many things(divorce) in the OT because man’s heart was hard and a way man should act.
The Bible instructs deacons and Elders to have one wife. Deacons and Elders are supposed to be living examples for us.
Last, but not least…the words of Jesus…
Jesus replied, “Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning.
I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery.”
Words of Paul
So then, if she marries another man while her husband is still alive, she is called an adulteress. But if her husband dies, she is released from that law and is not an adulteress, even though she marries another man. (Rom 7)
As I think about the lives forever changed in dramatic ways in Eldorado and my own church experience - the saying that one’s theology is lived out rather than defined speaks volumes here about everyone’s belief or non-belief in God. Whether it is about how the Mormon Church handles this with separation and criticism, or through denouncing, support for the children, and grace… it is a visual lesson on how they believe God would handle the situation. How are all individuals or congregations of faith handling this? I believe it truly speaks to how they believe their God would and is handling it with them or without them (perhaps beyond them would be better stated).
I also wonder how this would have made it into the political debate if Mitt Romney were still in the running for President.
G. M. Hopkins often address the ugly, the glorious, the mundane and holy, theodicy and theophany. His poem The Wreck of the Deutschland was the focus of my senior project; I have a soft spot for that awkward, struggling man.
FLDS — I pray for those children constantly. And the corresponding adults, though the prayers are, at times, viciously different. In my better times, I pray for compassion, redemption. In my darker times, I pray for eradication.
“And whoever receives one such child in My name receives Me; but whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to stumble, it would be better for him to have a heavy millstone hung around his neck, and to be drowned in the depth of the sea.
Woe to the world because of its stumbling blocks! For it is inevitable that stumbling blocks come; but woe to that man through whom the stumbling block comes!” Mt. 18:5-7, NASB
Jeff wrote, “Where does the Bible speak against polygamy ???”
This is not about polygamy, this is about systematized sexual assault of children. If the “husband” is already married, then he cannot legally marry another person of any age. If the person he attempts to marry is under 17, then he commits a felony of the second degree, and I have yet to see any FLDS person condemn such an arrangement.
The men that run that place are manipulative pedophiles, not prophets, and you would do well to remember that. The women of the compound, although technically victims, are also complicit in the crimes against all the children present. Their “victimhood” does not excuse their role in the matter.
We need to take a firm stand against this kind of thing.
Jon Krakauer (Into Thin Air, Into the Wild) wrote and excellent book called “Under the Banner of Heaven” which details the FDLS. We had six students in our youth group whose parents escaped from this cult. Violence has marked this group for years and children are their victims.
To Blake:
1. “Let’s not use the OT to justify moral issues”… Then shouldn’t we quit quoting Micah 6:8, “What does God require of you but to do justice, love mercy, and walk humbly with your God” as much as we do ???
2. “The Bible tells us to uphold the laws of the country we live in”… Blake, since abortion as a method of birth control is the law of the United States, are you saying that we should uphold it ??? Or is there a higher law that we should follow ???
3. The words of Jesus that Blake quoted seem to be the strongest argument of those that he offered against polygamy. And yet, in the context, is Jesus’ purpose to enforce a “one man, one wife” rule, or is it to condemn men who throw away their wives to obtain others ???
To Kirk:
4. “This is not about polygamy, this is about systematized sexual assault of children.” Kirk, just for the record, I am against systematized sexual assault of children, as I hope we all are. Also for the record, you didn’t answer my question about polygamy; you just changed the subject.
I’m still searching for a logical and consistent argument against polygamy today, as I’m not sure I’ve yet found one…
Jeff,
Would it be appropriate for Jesus to have two brides?
Jeff, here’s another excellent explanation I’ve just come across. These words are not my own, but were posted by a person on another blog. Here ya’ go–
“Post Constantine Western Civilization found its moral basis in Christianity. Christianity opposes polygamy. Christ repeated the command that husband and wife would become one flesh. Note, not wives or husbands. Christianity and Judaism have looked on the polygamy of the Patriarchs as exceptions to the rule that generally brought curses not blessings. We see this early on in the story of Abraham, Sarah, and Hagar and what many would see as its fruits in modern conflict and how the true blessings fell always to the first wife. Judeo-Christian thought has been able to see such relationships as an aberration because it does not fit the perfect form given in the Garden. If greater blessings could be received via multiple marriages we can be sure that God would have allowed for it there.
“This teaching, along with the teaching of monogenism has informed Christian thought about the equal dignity of humans. In all polygamous relationships one sex, at the least, is diminished. It does not meet on equal ground with the other and therefore losses its dignity. The scripture eludes me right now, but this idea was even expressed in the early polygamous relationships of the Patriarchs by forbidding two wives have intercourse with their husband at the same time.
“This equal dignity of the sexes and of all people in general has informed our law. We recognize the God given rights of all men. By our recognition of the rights of all men (as seen in mongenism) we are able to extend these rights to all women (via monogamy).”
This is also a manipulation of the system. Since a man i legally only married to one wife his other wives are single mothers and thus able to collect welfare.
I’ve been reading the hundreds of comments from outraged citizens at:
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/2/free-the-innocent-flds
Also, I’ve seen the video of Texas Foster Care system horrors at:
http://dayofpraise.blogspot.com/
Whew! What a situation!
Perhaps the best argument against polygamy is found in the beginning (Genesis 2: 24), repeated by Jesus in Matthew 19: 4 and Paul in Ephesians 5: 31: “For a man shall leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the TWO shall become ONE flesh.”
Jesus adds in Matthew 19: 6 — “So they are no longer TWO, but ONE.”
To Kirk, Rick Ross:
1. In order to prove what you think it proves, Paul’s statement in Ephesians 5:31 would have to read like this:
“For a man shall leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the TWO shall become ONE flesh. Also, a man shall have no more than one wife at a time.”
But it doesn’t read that way, does it…
2. As best I can tell, there is no explicit statement in either the Old or New Testament forbidding polygamy. Almost all arguments that are made against polygamy from the Scriptures “assume” or “infer” that the author(s) believe in monagamous marriage…
Jeff,
Would it really HAVE to say what you added in order for the statement to mean only one wife? In such a case, Scripture would have to be rewritten to adhere to such a rule. I was just offering the verses as a thread or theme that runs through Scripture.
Blessings.
To Rick Ross:
And I’m just showing that the argument against polygamy from Scripture is not nearly as strong as we like to think it is.
Blessings back at you.
Jeff,
It’s also not strong against abortion or slavery, either.
Q.
Jeff - Yes scripture tells us to follow the laws of the land we live in…unless they contradict something that has to do with our salvation.
You are right. However, having the ability to marry more than one woman so I can have sex with many women has nothing to do with salvation.
If the government said “You can’t believe in Christ” or “You aren’t allowed to read/teach anything in the Bible” then of course we would not have to follow it. God is the higher authority.
However God has not said “You must have more than one wife!” So the laws in this country do not go against God’s authority.
If you have more than one wife you are in sin.
Over 400 children have been stripped from the only life they have ever known. Women are living moment to moment without their children.
Yet who could imagine letting them return to that life? It is unspeakably sad.
And yet this thread has degenerated to God does not condemn polygamy. Note to self: This is the reason you stopped reading the comments. Stick to that resolution.
Jeff-
Micah 6:8 speaks about actions of the heart, which are timeless.
The practice of multiple wives is an action of the flesh, which is NOT timeless. Many things which are spoken of in the Old Testament, are later declared unnecessary or unacceptable in the New Testament. Timeless actions of the heart, like love, mercy, and justice are never declared unacceptable.
I am curious why you are so eager to find a scriptural warning against polygamy. Are you hoping to practice it one day?
Marijuana is not mentioned specifically in the Bible, either, but I am choosing to stay away from it. I think it’s ok to apply a little common sense to our Bible reading….
It seems that many people attempt to use to Bible in order to justify sinful things they already wish to pursue. Was it not this was with slavery?
Who is this Jeff guy?
Jeff is a guy who is still looking, apparently, for the first explicit reference in Scripture that condemns polygamy…
I’ve heard a lot of inferences, a lot of assumptions, and a lot of talk about the “evolution of morality” and the “obligation to follow civil law”, but I’ve not been shown where the Scriptures condemn polygamy…
Can someone help me ???
Jeff -
No, I’m afraid I can’t help you. At least I can’t help find a specific passage forbidding polygamy (short of the old joke about Matthew 6:24).
However, I think several are suggesting that we can develop healthier ways of reading the Bible. If we read it with what William Webb (Slaves, Women, and Homosexuals) calls a “redemptive-movement hermeneutic,” then it becomes much clearer that polygamy was something that God only permitted — because of the fall and because of the hardness of the hearts of people in that (highly patriarchal) culture.
If we read scripture as a story — beginning in loving creation, centering in the redeeming work of Christ that seeks to restore God’s good creation, and ending in “the new heavens and the new earth” (pictured as a return to the garden) — then monogamy comes into clear focus. The words of Genesis 1-2 assume it, as do the words of the one who came to restore all things.
Does that help?
The problem of a man, any man, thinking they are better than anyone else, a woman, a slave, a baby in the womb. Well, it would eventually make him a God of sorts, thus seperating him from the Lord and then he would be lost. There is only one savior.
Mike,
“However, I think several are suggesting that we can develop healthier ways of reading the Bible. If we read it with what William Webb (Slaves, Women, and Homosexuals) calls a “redemptive-movement hermeneutic,” then it becomes much clearer that polygamy was something that God only permitted”
Big change of subject. It seems this “hermeneutic” gives the okay for a monogamous homosexual relationship if we apply it to the topic at a hand. And why do slaves and women need to be redeemed or is this just a semantic inconsistency with respect to the aforementioned 3 groups.
Thank you for your effort, Mike. I am always impressed with your breadth of knowledge and the insight that you show into spiritual things. I appreciate your support of monogamy as the New Testament way…
And yet I continue to be bothered that, in the debate about polygamy, the best that we have to offer against it are “interpretations”, “inferences” and “hermeneutics”…
It’s interesting that in the recent discussion which took place on these pages about alcohol, almost everyone seemed to agree that we can’t make rules where God hasn’t made them (we don’t have the right to tell people they can’t drink just because God said don’t get drunk); yet, in the matter of polygamy, everyone seems to agree that God condemns it even though He allowed it in the OT and remains pretty much silent about it in the NT…
And that, really, has been my point, namely, to point out the seeming inconsistency. Thank you for your patience.
awaiting your response Jeff.
I’m just glad the Spurs won.
Polygamy can be defined as any “form of marriage in which a person has more than one spouse.”
So are there any polygamist colonies where the woman has multiple husbands? And the husbands have to keep the house and the children and compete for the affection of the wife? Didn’t think so.
Oh and Jeff, this link’s for you!
http://www.gotquestions.org/polygamy.html
You all seem to be missing the biggest point which is at this time some 416 children have been taken away from their parents custody because of their religious beliefs. The Judge denied any parent willing to leave the compound custody of their children. CPS has stated they can see no way for the parents to be reunited with their children because of their parents religious beliefs which cause the children psycological damage.. Are any of you teaching your children that homosexuality is a sin? Are you teaching that Abortion is Murder? Are you teaching that pre-marital sex is wrong? What is to keep the CPS from deciding you are doing irrepairable psycological damage to your children by going against societal norms and/or laws and indoctrinating them into your cult. In this country we have a right to free speech and congress shall make no laws establishing a religion are prohibiting the exercise there of. If laws have been violated prosequte the violaters. If children have been physically abused remove them. But to systematically remove all children because of what religious beliefs they hold? I Pray you see the fallacy in that.
Mark,
If one of those beliefs IS the abuse of children (i.e., marrying very young, socially and psychologically immature girls) off to older men, essentially facilitating statutory rape under the banner of God’s will) shouldn’t they be taken out of that?
To Quiara:
How do you determine the difference between authentic religious belief and depraved lust which poses as religious belief ???
I read an article in the newspaper this morning to the effect that the “original” Mormons (the circa 1847, Joseph Smith Mormons) believed that polygamy was necessary to their eternal salvation.
I think the natural, human reaction is to judge these older men in the FLDS as perverted child molesters. But notice that the local sheriff knew that he had to wait for an “outcry” (literally, a cry for help) before he could move in on what he had known about for a long time.
The United States was founded on the cornerstone of religious freedom ; the very first ammendment in the “Bill of Rights” is “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof”. We have leaned so far in the direction of religious freedom that it causes problems in other areas of our lives, like the pursuit of justice…
Quiara:
Quiara: I said in my previous comment, “If laws have been violated prosequte the violaters. If children have been physically abused remove them.” Is the teaching of or belief that something is a truthful part of one’s religion adequate reason for the state (CPS) to violate the parent/child relationship? Did you see that the judge said their belief in polygamy was in and of itself abusive? That CPS said even if the Mom agreed to leave the Dad and the compound and promise not to let the children marry until 18 CPS would still not give custody back to the Mother?
I am unhappy that some parents allow their children to eat to the point of being fat. This could cause all sorts of irreparable physical and psychological damage. Should CPS break into all of these homes, kidnap these children, and farm them out? They say that 5 of 416 children meet the definition of teenage and pregnant or have had kids in the FLDS compound. This seems like a very low percentage compared to any public high school in the state of Texas. Is CPS removing these pregnant teenagers from the abuse that must have occured in order for them to actually be statutorally raped? It seems that our dislike of what the FLDS stands for or teaches interferes with our ability to see that what CPS, through the courts, has done is kidnap 416 children.
For better coverage than I can offer see http://www.heartkeepercommonroom.blogspot.com .
Mark, I understand that this a no win situation. I know that it is harmful for these children to be taken from the only kind of life that they have ever known and because this is all they know, they can’t discern if it is right or wrong. My heart goes out to these children but I also don’t think that it is best for these children to go right back into the environment that has wronged them either. Yes, there are many pregnant teenagers out there…in our high schools, at our churches, in our families but…they aren’t pregnant because they were told that their salvation hangs on them having sex with older men. If you can’t see the obvious abuse here…then I don’t know what else to say to you. These FLDS communities are getting rid of the young boys so the young girls can be married off to men who already have several wives and sometimes these men are actually relatives…if that isn’t sick, then I don’t know what is. How can you defend them? Would you treat your daughters like that? Aren’t young women worth more than that? and these aren’t even young women…they are girls.
In Germany, they came first for the Communists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist;
And then they came for the trade unionists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist;
And then they came for the Jews, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew;
And then . . . they came for me . . . And by that time there was no one left to speak up.
(Pastor Martin Niemöller)
Julie: I put this quote in to show the principle I am talking about. If children can be removed from homes purely because of the parents’ thoughts, what prevents an atheist CPS worker from removing children from any Christian home since atheists believe that Christianity is a form of dementia? Please, educate yourself on what is going on in this case. There is 19 yr, old married couple whose baby has been taken from them. What crime have they committed? Again, I urge you to go to http://www.heartkeepercommonroom.blogspot.com and get the facts instead of the hyperbole so you will be able to discuss this rationally instead of just with emotion.
In regard to the girls, for the third time, if there has been abuse, prosecute the abusers. If someone has been abused, remove them, but it is a very slippery slope to let the thought police take control of your children because of your thoughts, not your actions.
The word pedophilia has been used here. Pedophilia is the proper term when the victims are prepubescent. Not even the state alleges this is the case with the FLDS ranch. The state has submitted the medical records of just ten girls they say were ‘married’ while underage. One problem with this is that at least some of these underaged marriages may have been legal at the time they occurred. The state of Texas only raised the age from 14 to 16 in 2005.
They have just five girls who are 16-19 who are pregnant of have children. I can see holding those five girls and prosecuting the fathers of their babies if the men have indeed broken the law. You see, CPS says they do not know if any of the girls were involved with boys their own ages. They say they don’t even know if they have identified any boys 17 and younger who may be the fathers of the babies of the under-aged girls. How can she take away 416 children because five of the teens 16-19 are pregnant, and she doesn’t even know if she’s tried to find out if any teen boys are the fathers? Does that even make sense? She’s not being asked if they *are* teen fathers, she’s being asked if she personally has identified any.
Every adult family member in the 19 households on the ranch has lost his or her child, even though CPS admits that not every adult is guilty (indeed, they can’t be since they only have five incidents) CPS agent Voss testified in court that only ’specific men in the community are suspected perpetrators of child abuse.
An attorney asks: “If the situation could be proposed that the men would leave the community and not have contact,” and the same supervision provided as at the San Angelo Coliseum, would Voss be willing to allow the children to return?’
No. In fact, she testified that she could see no situation where these people should get their children back- not if their mothers divorce their husbands and leave the ranch and live apart forever and promise never to let their daughters marry before 18. Her stated reasons for that are not their practices but their belief that children are a blessing, that birth control is wrong, and in male leadership. These are beliefs shared by many other groups. This is not about practices. Three children in custody now are the children of a monogamous couple who married after they both were over 18 (I think she was 20). The wife has an EMT license which she says she pursued even though her husband told her he’d rather she didn’t. They are not accused of abuse, they have neither married underage or married off their children, and she offered to leave her husband and the ranch anyway and support herself and her children as an EMT if only she could have her children back. She still could not have her children returned. One child in custody was merely visiting her grandmother on the ranch. She’s from Canada.
The mothers were not even served legal documents required by law- and though the Judge and CPS claim that they don’t know how to identify the women, they actually do have birth certificates, social security cards, and in at least some cases driver’s licenses (if you believe they apply for and refuse Welfare benefits, you must realize they have to hvae proof of identity). CPS and the judge have chosen to believe these documents might be forged so they don’t have to accept them. However, these are the very documents used to prove the girls are under-aged, and to prosecute Warren Jeffs and others in Colorado City.
Up until 2005 it was legal for children 16 and older to get married without parental permission and children 14-16 could marry with parental permission. The state changed the law not because they found the practice of under-age marriage inherently abhorrent, but specifically to target FLDS members- that is the public statement, made many places and times, by the law’s author, Hildebran.
So we’re saying that something that was protected by state law as recently as three years ago is so obviously abusive and foul that people who have never even done it but have thought it was acceptable should obviously lose their children.
Should all of the state of Texas have lost their children since the entire state obviously wasn’t that incensed about 14 year olds marrying until 2005? Does it bother anybody here that the state has presented no evidence of FLDS girls among these 416 children who have married and had children before 16?
I would suggest reading the live updates of the two day court case instead of the media’s salacious and often downright false versions.
you can find day two here.
But I have a hunch that nobody here is much is interested in learning the other side of the story.
DeputyHeadMistress,
I can assure you that I am very interested, and I was reading the court updates live both days.
You are correct that, technically, what is going on is not pedophilia, since the girls involved are not pre-pubescent. However, it is still a second-degree felony–punishable by up to 20 years in prison–for a girl under the age of 17 to have sexual contact with any person with whom she is not legally married. The next-to-the-last word is the key–legally. Texas law only recognizes one marriage at a time; since a second or third marriage is not a legal marriage, the crime still attaches. Thus, it doesn’t matter that the marriage age was changed from 14 to 16–these aren’t legal marriages anyway.
Yes, it is a defense to criminal prosecution if the boy is less than three years older than the girl, but I have yet to hear any facts which would indicate that the youngsters involved on this ranch are merely engaging in teenage promiscuity.
We know that the people at the YFZ Ranch were hand-chosen because of their severe loyalty to convicted-felon Warren Jeffs. His picture is on the wall in every room in the compound–the pictures and videos from the tours given by the FLDS prove it.
This is not an exercise in religious freedom, this is criminal behavior which is trying to be shielded by a religious facade.
My prayers go out to the men, women, and children under the control of Warren Jeffs and the (so-called) FLDS, that God may grant them protection and deliverance from this delusion and that they may find truth and peace.
For clarification in my last post, the crime is being committed not by these girl-victims, but by the men who engage in the sexual contact with them.
I agree that those five or fewer adult men who ‘married’ teen girls should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. I do not agree that because perhaps as many as five members of the community did this, 416 children, including nursing babies, should be removed from their mothers, particular when those mothers weren’t even members of the households where adult males ‘married’ teen brides.
And if this case was truly about actual crimes committed, why do the state’s witnesses repeatedly make it about their *beliefs?*
And no, these aren’t legal marriages. FLDS doesn’t even try to get their plural marriages (which practice I am NOT defending) recognized by the court. They simply live together like thousands and thousands of other people across the nation. If they had simply given birth control pills to their girls, they would be applauded by the state instead of pilloried.
“I have yet to hear any facts which would indicate that the youngsters involved on this ranch are merely engaging in teenage promiscuity.”
In other words, they are guilty until they prove their innocence beyond a shadow of a doubt. I don’t care for FLDS teachings or practices, but I do care for such legal standards as ‘innocent until proven guilty.’ The point was that the CPS worker could not even say whether or not she’d TRIED to ascertain if any teen boys were involved- which makes her testimony highly suspect, for one thing. How can she not know what she has or has not tried to do? That might be one reason why you haven’t heard any such facts- CPS was very deliberately not looking for them, based on its own testimony. And one of the earliest acts they took was to move the 27 older boys to a ranch 400 miles away where nobody else could find out, either. IF you read Brooke Adams’ Polygamy Files, we have an FLDS woman telling her that one of the boys removed is a 17 year old married to a girl his own age with whom he has a child, so maybe you haven’t seen any information indicating that not all five pregnant teens are statutory rape victims because you weren’t looking.
As to the beliefs of this sect- they are certainly distasteful and incompatible with Christianity. However, the state has made some claims about what the sect believes that are not supported by anything but the state’s say-so, and the parents were not even allowed to defend themselves before they lost their kids. The state psychiatrist admitted he’d not spoken to any FLDS adults and only three children, and that he got most of his information from the media- yet his testimony about what they believe was admitted in court and relied on by the judge. Is that the standard you’d want to see used against you in a case where the state was trying to take your children?
The vast majority of *these* parents have not even been accused by the state of committing the crimes you are all accusing them of, the initial allegation bringing men with guns and armored vehicles onto their ranch turns out to be a complete hoax made by a 33 year old woman in Colorado Springs with no affiliation with FLDS sects at all, yet they are *all* losing their children.
The Lost Boys are a travesty and their parents should be punished- although the boys themselves insist they do not want their parents involved. It’s a tragic, horrible story. But this isn’t about those boys, who were kicked out of FLDS sects in Arizona and Utah. This is about 416 children removed from their families in the YfZ ranch in Texas. Yes, the YfZ ranch is about three or four years new, and most of the members came from the other FLDS communities- they are fluid and members seem to travel between them (and also Bountiful, in Canada). However, nobody is accusing these parents of these 416 children of being responsible for any of the Lost Boys, so unless and until that happens, is it fair to suggest it’s acceptable for them to lose their kids because of abusive practices in the community in Arizona? Do you stand at risk to lose your children because another church in your denomination has behaved reprehensibly- even if the two churches share close ties? Shouldn’t the state have to prove that *you* are abusive before it takes your kids?
We should declare these people guilty based on what Warren Jeffs has done, or the abuse the Jessops experienced, or even a principled dislike of polygamy and other FLDS beliefs, or else we need to remove all Catholic children from their homes because American Catholic priests have often been pedophiles and the Catholic church hierarchy protected them.
Let me share what Cicero of Redstate had to say:
Frankly, I believe that the more concerned we are with any genuine abuse here, the more we should be concerned with the state’s tactics here, as anotehr blogger (a lawyer in Texas) points out:
Frankly, the rush to condemn FLDS and sanction just about state reaction no matter how severe here frightens me to death. This smiling complacency with tyranny is one of the most horrifying forces I know. As C.S. Lewis said, “Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.”
Mark and DeputyHeadMistress, no matter what you say, you will not change my mind. You can run up the freedom flag…and if you knew me at all, you would know that there aren’t many who love freedom more than I love freedom…but you can’t run up the freedom flag and still allow those girls to be married off to those old men for what they think is for their salvation…you are blind if you don’t see that those men aren’t thinking about salvation.
Julie, What have I ever said that makes you say “but you can’t run up the freedom flag and still allow those girls to be married off to those old men” My hole point has been there is no evidence that is the case with all the children and if no abuse has occured how is CPS justified in stealing these children? What part of “if there has been abuse, prosecute the abusers. If someone has been abused, remove them” (now for the 4th time) do you understand to be me saying leave these girls in an abusive situation. Have you even read what my objections to CPS are or do you just think I’m defending pologamy so you don’t need to read my post? I’m not defending pologamy I’m defending parents rights to raise the children as they see fit.
I did understand your remarks but I don’t think that you can always say that parents should be able to raise their children as they see fit….even if that is in a religious context…that doesn’t make it any more right. I think that CPS had to remove them to begin sorting out what was really happening inside those walls. I don’t think that CPS goes in to purposely disrupt a family or infringe on their rights. I think that they have to investigate. I did say earlier that is a no win situation. I hate that those children have to be frightened and separated from their parents but I do think that it needs to be investigated. The women speak like robots and with a very flat affect. Clues that something is not right. I don’t necessarily need to know what is going on behind those walls but for the sake of those children someone does.
Julie:
That is why we have a constitution. Something that is supposed to be absolute. Something that protects us from the whim of who is currently in power. I’m glad my rights are guranteed by that constitution and not by what you or anyone else feels about something. Gay’s feel abused if you speak against homosexuality, Adulterer’s feel abused if you speak against adultery, People who have aborted babies feel abused if you suggest it’s murder, illegal immigrants feel abused if you suggest that laws should be enforced etc. etc. I could go on and on but the point is that regardless of who is in control I am supposed to have guranteed rights. Rights that cannot be taken away without due process. CPS takes away peoples rights without proving their case and than the parents years later may get their children back after who knows what damage has been done. If someone phoned in a call that Highland C of C was teaching the abuse of girls because they knew of 3 teenage girls who had become pregnant while attending the Highland youth group would CPS be justified in rounding up all the children in the Highland Youth group and removing them from their parents? If you want to argue that would never happen how about someone calls in that the Youth minister at a Church in Midland Texas is in a relationship with a 15 year old has fled the state with her and all the parents of children in that youth group had subjected their children to probable abuse? (true case) Should they all be rounded up and removed by CPS and tried as one house instead of individual households? We all feel that is something that should not and would not happen but why? I suggest it is because we beleive we have rights and that somehow these situations are seen as anomalies or some sort. We all think in the case of the youth minister you prosoqute him (which is what the Govt. did)not the Church are the parents.If a CPS worker decided to persue such a case would you want it to be handled as this one has been? Remove first prove case later? I’m with Deputy Headmistress I think you have made up your mind based on the “yuuccck” factor of pologamy and don’t want to see the Constitutional rights that have been violated. Whatever happened to the saying “I totally disagree with what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it”?
Mark wrote, “Whatever happened to the saying “I totally disagree with what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it”?”
That’s referring to freedom of speech, not freedom to engage in criminal conduct.
This is not about polygamy, this is about sexual assault of a child.
Your analogy to the youth minister fails: the parents of the youth did not insist that their children be molested.
This case is different, in part because the children and the women had no right to come and go as they pleased. They had no way to escape from the situation, no one to call to report the abuse.
Your sympathy is misplaced. The leaders of this group are evil. The abuse has to be stopped and the compound broken up.
Kirk: Did you see the CPS said “if the mothers leave the flds, leave their husbands, consent to CPS monitoring, pledge not to let their children marry until 18″ that CPS still would not give the mothers custody. This implies the mothers could leave and kidnapping or unlawful imprisonment are not mentioned in the search warrant. I If a 2 year old hasn’t been abused and no one is alleging the have, then CPS is not removing them for criminal conduct via the sexual assault of a child. CPS is removing these younger children because of what the flds teaches or beleives, a clear violation of free speech and freedom of religion. I agree the leaders of the group are evil. Bill Maher calls the leader of Catholicism evil and what Catholic Priest have done to their Flocks worse then the flds, what if Bill was in control of CPS? Would you support the removal of every Catholic child from their homes because Bill says the Catholics are evil? It is not the ones who have been abused nor the ones who have done any abuse I am talking about. I have said now for the 5th time “In regard to the girls,if there has been abuse, prosecute the abusers. If someone has been abused, remove them.
You say “This is not about polygamy, this is about sexual assault of a child.” That is not the reason CPS or the State of Texas gives for holding these Children. The State of Texas alleges criminal abuse in only 5 cases so why has CPS Kidnapped over 400 children? Either for what might happen or for what one thinks. How is that not a violation of our constitution?
My Analogy was not to say the circumstances were the same and you know that. My analogy was to say what,except the constitution, keeps an overzealous CPS agent from doing the same thing in those 2 situations that are being done with the flds?
Julie, Kirk and others
I feel you think I’m voicing my opinion because I agree with polygamy and what is taught by the FLDS. Nothing could be farther from the truth. I abhor what they teach and stand for. As a Christian I say they are wrong. However, with the history of perseqution that christianity has undergone, are you willing to turn over our constitutional rights to free thought, free speech, freedom of religion, freedom of association etc to todays CPS when you don’t know what tomorrows CPS may define as doing Irreparable psycological harm. You can’t mention a husband and wife as the norm for raising a family in California Public Schools. How far is it from that law (which would have seemed ludicrous to all just 50 years ago) to one that says if your religion teaches _________ you are doing psycological harm to your children and big brother may steal them from you with no due process at all.
Our religious differences with the FLDS and our revulsion at their teaching does not change the fact that their constitutional rights have been violated. That more then 400 children have been ripped from their homes not for any criminal activity but because as CPS agent Voss says ” In fact, she testified that she could see no situation where these people should get their children back- not if their mothers divorce their husbands and leave the ranch and live apart forever and promise never to let their daughters marry before 18. Her stated reasons for that are not their practices but their belief that children are a blessing, that birth control is wrong, and in male leadership.”
With the history of perseqution that Christianity has undergone that comment ought to scare the bejeebers out of you.
Mark, first of all Ms. Voss did not say this–”Her stated reasons for that are not their practices but their belief that children are a blessing, that birth control is wrong, and in male leadership.”
She said that she did not believe that it would be safe for any of the children to go back to the ranch while the case is pending–not forever–and it had nothing to do with the fact that children are a blessing, birth control, or male leadership.
It sounds to me like you would be willing to allow people to do whatever they want to–legal or illegal, criminal or not–as long as the word “religion” is somehow attached to it.
This slippery slope argument you are making–that we better permit the FLDS to do whatever they want because, if we let CPS take the children, we will be next–is simply fallacious.
Look, we’re not talking about some victim-free crime that is being committed here. It’s not like the FLDS are guilty of smoking peyote as part of their worship services. They tell these mothers and girls that they must marry men three times their ages (contrary to the laws of the State of Texas) or else: 1) they will be eternally da.mn.ed to hell; and 2) they will be kicked out on the street without.
These children and mothers are not free actors who willingly decide to wear frontier clothes and play the game. (Not that it would make a difference if it was a willing decision. By law, a girl under 17 years old does not have legal capacity to consent to sexual relations.)
There is no free exercise of religion here–there’s just not. And you will see, once the spell is broken after the passage of a few months, these women and children will not want to go back. Right now they are afraid of what will become of them if they do not obey the leader.
Kirk: This will be my last reply. I have since my first post said if someone has broken the law file charges and prosequte them so where do you get off saying “It sounds to me like you would be willing to allow people to do whatever they want to–legal or illegal, criminal or not–as long as the word “religion” is somehow attached to it.” I have consistently said Charge the abusers with a crime. I am glad you have been appointed the arbiter of what is or isn’t religion. I had’t realized that position existed but now that I know I will defer to your superior wisdom and once again ignore the Constitution as you seem to argue for. You make various statements about this religion that I to beleive will be proven true. My problem and the constitutional issue here is might happen is not the same as has happened. I don’t know how to link but if you will look at News reports in the Salt Lake City Paper you will find the exact quote I posted. I am not saying it is just a slippery slope issue. I said “You say “This is not about polygamy, this is about sexual assault of a child.” That is not the reason CPS or the State of Texas gives for holding these Children. The State of Texas alleges criminal abuse in only 5 cases so why has CPS Kidnapped over 400 children? Either for what might happen or for what one thinks. How is that not a violation of our constitution? You have not answered that other then to proclaim that as the arbiter of religion you declare this one isn’t. You do not wish to address my clear questions so i will cease to pose them.
Kidnapped?
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
Perhaps CPS removed all the children because they determined their was a very high potential for abuse against all of these children.
My question is where are the men? Where are the men of this compound while all of the women sit in court day after day and face reporters. I think these women are guilty of allowing abuse; and they are guilty of being cult members first, and mothers last;
but why are these men hiding behind them? Why are these men allowing the women and children in their lives to take all the heat?If they so adamently believe that why they are doing is right, why are they locking themelves inside their compound and hiding from it all?
HW, the men are hiding because any and all of them face felony charges for sexual assault to a child, and could face up to 20 years in prison if convicted. These men would rather not be cellmates with their leader Warren Jeffs, who is now serving 10 years to life in Utah for being an accomplice to rape.
It will be interesting to see how many men appear for the DNA testing, and how many assert their privilege against self-incrimination.
From the LA Times April 22
Texas authorities confronted with the question of what to do with the 416 children removed from a polygamist compound earlier this month face an unenviable choice, one brought home to outsiders by the wrenching media images of the youngsters’ weeping mothers. Anachronistic hairdos and prairie dresses notwithstanding, their pain at being cut off from contact with their children is apparent. Yet should the children be returned to a family environment in which underage girls are sometimes sent to live with older men who have multiple wives, or should they be placed in foster homes?
Last week, state District Judge Barbara L. Walther ruled that the children should stay in state custody for the moment. They are undergoing DNA testing to untangle the complex family ties in a community where children identify all the women in a household as their mothers, and where wives are sometimes reassigned to new husbands. Once the testing is completed, the children’s fates will be decided in individual hearings running through June.
At the heart of many of the cases will be determining whether children at the Yearning for Zion ranch are in danger even if they don’t live in households in which physical or sexual abuse has taken place. Walther found enough evidence of such danger to keep all the children away from their parents, at least for the short term. But if that kind of logic guides permanent custody decisions, it could set a very dangerous precedent, and ultimately harm the very children the state is trying to protect.
The DNA test results should make it easier for authorities to identify those responsible for abuse. If it’s clear that an underage girl gave birth, the father, the church elders who arranged the marriage and the girl’s parents (if it can be found that they were complicit in statutory rape) could be subject to criminal charges. But presumably there will be many families in which there is no such evidence of abuse.
The polygamist lifestyle is deeply distasteful on many levels, but society’s disgust matters far less than the welfare of the sect’s children. Does anybody believe they’d be better off inthe foster system than returned to loving, nonabusive parents who are fully capable of caring for them? If the courts are worried that the parents will train their children to perpetuate and accept sexual abuse, they can appoint child welfare officials to monitor individual families.
The alternative is to punish families for their religious ideology, not their behavior. That could well run afoul of the 1st Amendment and other protections, and it’s a legal can of worms that Texas would be wise not to open.
More news about CPS
“When Texas child welfare authorities released statistics showing nearly 60 percent of the teen girls taken from a polygamist sect’s ranch were pregnant or had children, they seemed to prove what was alleged all along: The sect commonly pushed girls into marriage and sex. But in the past week, the state has twice been forced to admit “girls” who gave birth while in state custody are actually adults. One was 22 and said she showed state officials a Utah birth certificate shortly after she and more than 400 minors were seized from the West Texas ranch in an April raid….
Child Protective Services has complained that sect members refused to cooperate with their investigation, constantly changing answers or refusing answers to questions about age and parentage. Parker said the state ignored evidence the young mothers presented, including birth certificates and Social Security cards. He said that with their long braided hair, makeup-free faces and pioneer dresses, the women look very young.”
For those of you who think this was such a great idea for CPS to kidnap these children you may look very foolish very soon. By the way, you home schoolers out there-you’re next.