Texas, as well as almost every state in the US have a marriage age of 16 with parental consent. A few states, will even marry 14-year-olds with both parental and court consent. You don't have to be 18 to get legally married. This term 'underage' being used against this religious sect is just media hype.
Now, I would be really wary of marriages of girls under 16 today, but it was not rare back in the years I was growing up and I have several friends and family members who married at 14 and 15. And no, they were not 'Coal Miner's Daughter' types nor members of any religious sect. We are talking NYC and Miami.
with the way these folks operate as a community the whole concept of consent as we would know it does not really apply. they brought in the girl from the colorado city case to help translate for the social workers because these folks, in their isolation, damned near have a different language. they give certain meaning to certain words that only apply within that tightly closed system.
i'm very conflicted about the case. i tend to agree with the court that it was a brazen over reaching to classify these different families, and therefore, different cases as one homogeneous household. each case needs to be evaluated. the taking of children from a home and community should never be something that is easily done. i also have a great deal of apprehension for the girls that are approaching the age where they will be married off to a man of the prophet's choosing. consent? at 13 or 14? when the consequence of refusal is ostracism, banning of the individual and the family, along with consignment to hell.
consent is the alien concept to these folks.
I have been following the story but can't seem to find any data that any of these girls were forced to marry at 14. Would appreciate a link.
To automatically assume that because the parents are part of a religious sect that they are not concerned with the preferences of their daughters is another media hype. I would like to see, again, data that the girl's wishes were ignored. Parents tend to love their children no matter what religion they follow and wouldn't wish to cause them harm or distress. This assumption that all of these girls have been viciously forced into marriage has no basis in fact that I have yet read.
And to take away little kids for this reason is totally illogical.
Hey, I may not agree with the way the Amish or Orthodox Jews or other groups raise their children, but I would never even consider stealing them from their families.
"Keep in mind, that Family and Protective Services, regardless of its name in any state, is typically not especially respectful of family rights. The abuses of CPS (as it is known here) in my own state of Washington, are legion."
I'd like to hear some specifics of the "legion" cases you are referring to. What is the nature of the abuse you allege? Do you mean cases where the CPS "disrespected" family rights without justification? I'd like to hear what the circumstances were.
Because here in the DC area, and in most places I know of, the "abuses" of these types of agencies consist of FAILING to protect children from life- threatening abuse or neglect at the hands of dysfunctional "parents."
For example, you may have heard -- or not --of the recent case here in DC of a woman who killed her four daughters and remained in the house with their decomposing bodies for months before they were discovered.
If the DC family services agency had caught on to the plentiful indications of a dangerous situation in that case, and removed the girls so that they were alive today, would that be something you regard as "disrespecting" family rights?
so conflicted on this. I want to help those girls, but also don't want to give the gov. this kind of power over families.... argh.
So since DC dropped the ball on a child case, that justifies swinging the pendulum all the way in the opposite direction in Texas and taking away parental rights without evidence? Are you saying if these children stay with their parents that they will also be abused or killed? I don't think so. So far, they have found no evidence of physical abuse or murder of children among this religious sect.
Ensley, you're a tool.
Nothing about this is simple. It's very painful to observe.
Thanks, tata, for the compliment.
I guess you probably agree that George Bush has every right to spread American-style democracy by force to people who don't want it, right, because HE thinks it's the best thing since sliced bread?
Did you manage to read these young women's minds and conclude that they are absolutely miserable with their lives? Did it ever occur to you that they may LIKE their religion and the way live? Who has made you the judge that these are "painful" circumstances, not knowing any of those involved personally? Isn't that a bit egocentric?
It's kind of the same thing; most Muslims don't necessarily want to be Christians and are happy in their faith even if YOU find aspects of it 'different.' Would you agree to take away their children and convert them by force?
Again, there is absolutely no evidence that harm has been done to any of these kids, even the three-year-olds. Apparently you have led a very sheltered life and don't realize that teenage girls do get married in this country by choice.
Ensley, comparing people around the country who otherwise are not involved in this type of cult is like comparing apples and oranges.
The people are human breeders. Its all they know from birth and, unfortunatly for some until death. For the women their ONE purpose in life is to produce children and SERVE men. That's it. That's all. Before they even are mentally and emotionally aware of their body. They know nothing else of choices and if they even hint at not obeying or having a thought for themselves, their life can be endangered. They are threatened with the "lake of fire" totally brainwashed every moment of every day of their lives. They don't even know what choice is.
So you cannot compare people who sign to allow their underage (generally being 18yo) to be legally married outside this cult to what goes on inside this cult.
This is a cult. It is not a religion, it is a cult. The finding yields too much to the "beliefs of the community". The "beliefs of the community" do not superceed the rights of the individual under the Constitution and yet, that's exactly what this entire group is premised on. These people are captives, mentally and physically. They do not have free will. The mothers don't, the fathers don't and the children are their "property".
The mothers are so indoctrinated they will spend the rest of their lives living the lie and hand it on to their children. This is not love. This is not freedom. This is NOT Constitutional. This is not legal.
Now, where are their legal marriage certificates, legal birth certificates, legal school documents? Where are their legal credentials to operate a home school? Either the law applies to all or it applies to no one. Most of all where are all the "marriage is between one man and one woman" people? It cuts both ways yanno.
They took Britany Spears' kids away from the comminity of Britany no problem. And she was all legal like.
The fix is in with the judge. And really I see 450-460 children who have now at least been exposed to the outside world; to other people than their "family"; to the possibility that it just MIGHT be alright to say "this is not okay with me" and find support.
Its all very sad.
Just a few points before I hit the sack. You don't consider Amish a cult -- horse & buggies, no electricity, etc? That's perfectly normal?
Southern Baptist Churches around the country have come out saying women must stay home and tend their children, obey their husbands, and not be involved in outside activities. Is that a cult? That's perfectly normal too?
What about Santeria with its animal sacrifices; should kids of its practitioners be taken away?
Who are YOU to tell other people how to worship and parents how to raise their children? These kids were all well-dressed and healthy, which is more than I can say for the way other parents treat their kids. Where is the abuse?!
Your judgment that parents in this sect give permission for their children to marry is somehow different from all the other parents in the US who give consent proves they are bad parents or nutballs? Why? What do you know personally about this sect other than what the sensationalist media have been jockeying around (remember Saddam and his people-shredders?)? What about 'normal' parents who give their underage children written consent to join the military and become cannon fodder?
According to the Constitution, parents have a right to raise their children in whatever faith they choose. Are you saying the government should choose faiths for us; have a list of permitted faiths you have to chose from? Imagine atheists being forced to be Baptists because the govt says atheisim is evil.
As the Appellate Court judge said, there is no evidence these kids have been maltreated in any way. As far as I have read, there has been no mention that any of the girls have refused to return to their homes and husbands. Show me one from this compound who is refusing to go back.
And remember, all 400 of them are not teenage girls and your arguments certainly do not apply to four-year-olds.
e:
You wrote ...
I'd like to hear some specifics of the "legion" cases you are referring to. What is the nature of the abuse you allege? Do you mean cases where the CPS "disrespected" family rights without justification? I'd like to hear what the circumstances were.
Spend some serious quality researching the Wenatchee witch hunts of 15 years ago. That example comes to mind immediately.
The flat rocks were in the process of being turned over about the time I moved here, in mid-1996.
Google is your friend.
Try wenatchee witch hunts.
wenatchee "the power to harm" also yields some paydirt, including the Wikipedia page.
Apples and oranges indeed, MJ.
Self-righteous, ignorant assholes. Go spend a week WORKING in a child protection agency.... and then get back on your soapbox.
Right! Child protection agencies should take away children who are NOT being abused just because someone doesn't like their parents' religion. The judge said there was NO FINDING OF ABUSE, so get off of your soapbox. What more do you want? The children show no evidence of being abused. Period. The media interviewed a few of the guardians ad litem on TV, and they had no objection to the children returning home; said they were perfectly normal, happy children. The govt took 400+ children, including babies. Why did they take the babies?
Give the govt this power to arbitrarily take away children and next, they will come for the children of the Amish, or the Jews, or the Santeros, or the Muslims, or the Communists, or the atheists, or the antiwar protesters ... Do you REALLY want the govt to have the power to take away your children if you don't see eye to eye? Maybe your kids are next.
It may turn our stomachs, but Neo-Nazis still get parade permits because of the Constitution. This is what freedom is about. It's not what YOU think it should be; it's what the Constitution says it is -- as in freedom of speech, freedom of religion...
Yes, we need to IMMEDIATELY expose those Amish children to electricity and cars and computers and light bulbs. Get real!
Everyone --
This is a hot topic and that's perfectly fine.
Just remember: Attack the argument, not the person. NO PERSONAL ATTACKS.
Thanks.
I think Steve posted on these people way back when they first moved to Texas. The issue here isn't age related so much, as biology. These folks operate on the 'If it bleeds, ir breeds' mentality. And it really doesn't relate to other consent marriages in other places. Some of these girls are forced to marry much older men, which I find perverse in the extreme.
Ensley -
As the Appellate Court judge said, there is no evidence these kids have been maltreated in any way.
Errr NO. The judge specified "physical" only. The judge, and apparently the law, given the parameters of the arguement made by the "mothers", made a ruling in the most microscopic way. Physical.
Also, I will let you know right now I see what you are doing. It won't play. You're all over the map grasping at straws, diluting the topic. A topic that is very specfic to the cult of this particular "religion". As far as I know the Amish live within the law. As far as I know everything the other "religions", no matter how authoritarian, operate within the VERY flexible laws when it come to their brand of brainwashing. But, that's another topic. When a presidential candidate actually says women are to serve men, then that does impinge on womens' independent free choice. If a woman chooses this life, then fine. Her choice. Even if that's all she's ever known and within the law, her choice. That's a different issue. So let's come back to THIS topic. FLDS.
I see these women from time to time at the store and always, when meeting their eyes, there's a silent plea from a woman to a woman. There's a quizical look. There is never any talking and in fact always there's quick look away so's you do NOT talk to them. I see their fear. I don't talk.
Your right wing talking points I've heard peeeelenty over at another music site where I post. I recognize the constant justification; the constant throwing of the bright shiny objects. No, I won't bite. FLDS is unlike ANY other instance you can bring to the table here.
These are human beings basically enslaved. The closest thing you can come to is a harem. I don't really care who's loving on who or with how many. I CARE about the brainwashing that, from birth to never know anything else. I care that if they ever have a thought of something else they will be in danger and forever scared. That's abuse. That's not freedom. Every person in this country OWES their children that at least. Their God of FREE WILL is my God of FREE WILL. They are not doing that and that makes them Spiritually bankrupt, which makes them a cult. Period.
This decision shouldn't be a surprise to anyone. Those women have been performing for the cameras from the beginning. My guess is they were coached right before the raid. Someone in that compound knows how to play the media, and knew just how to take the focus away from anything the FLDS didn't want known to the public.
This isn't about freedom of religion, or the eeeeevil government oppressing some harmless weirdos. These are slave traders who handed out women as fucking gifts.
The FLDS's practices of brainwashing (of women to accept that they're chattel) and abandonment (of low-caste adolescent boys) and what amounts to child marriage (of adolescent girls) are reprehensible, to be sure. But the state is helpless here under the current laws, especially when the sect has a good attorney.
(see, I didn't use the word "cult" even onc ... oh damn! 
)
The state would have to change the marriage laws and lower the age of consent across the board in order to make a case for physical abuse or rape, and it's too late for that in this case. Furthermore, as much as we loathe this Mormon sect's practices, the Establishment Clause forbids the state from interfering in them unless they're in violation of other laws.
It's truly a shame that parents choose to waste their children's lives in the name of supernatural entities, but although I'm somewhat sympathetic to Dawkins' contention that religious indoctrination is "child abuse," in the U.S. it must remain a matter of personal opinion rather than the law.
well poliygamy is ageinst the law...so what we have here is a religious cult forceign minors to break the law...fuck um, take the kids, kill the church.
unless other groups are actualy you know breaking laws and abusign children the initila seperation dose not set a president...now if your pro abusive cult, pro lettign religious cults be abocve the law, pro abuseign women i could see how you could be conflicted on this one...other wise don't let the FUD muddy the facts, FLDS broke the law....blatently, unremosfuly. every one of these women was in a polygimous marrige, they where all more then willign to force their daughters into the same situation at a very young age.....take the kids and ship the adults all to jail
"well poliygamy is ageinst the law...so what we have here is a religious cult forceign minors to break the law...fuck um, take the kids, kill the church."
If anti-polygamy laws were applied consistently across the US or even Texas, it would have been more difficult for the appellate court to return the kids to this situation. But from what I understand, the laws are haphazardly applied, and I'm sure the mothers' attorneys used this fact to cut off the "coercion/inducement of a minor to break the law" argument.
Taking children away from their moms was dumb and the reasoning behind it was even dumber. If you want to deprogram someone from a cult, the first thing you shouldn't do is validate all they have been taught about the outside world. Instead of shining light on the cockroaches that control these breeding factories, all the women were made distraught and probably cohesed in a communal way that wouldn't have been possible otherwise.
I will make no bones about it. The FLDS needs to be destroyed. Not by bullets and bombs, but brick by brick. The people in these communities don't lose their rights as a US citizen at the temple door. And yet they probably have no idea of what these rights even are. These communities distort the demographics around them by producing uneducated boys with no prospects and no support system raised on that crazy old time religion.
Most people think that polygamy and the FLDS is all about sex with young girls. Most people would be making a mistake. It's all about the con. Power and resource control. These religious leaders get to play their own version of God and lead their flock of lemmings to do whatever they demand. I am sure that the statutory rape is only the beginning of a list of bona fide white collar crime whether it be mail fraud, welfare fraud, tax evasion or any other number of offenses. These guys want power. Real power. Absolute power in their communities and the money to get some in the outside world.
"Most people think that polygamy and the FLDS is all about sex with young girls. Most people would be making a mistake. It's all about the con. Power and resource control."
Well said. Sex with young girls is really just another demonstration of the cult leader's power.
"I am sure that the statutory rape is only the beginning of a list of bona fide white collar crime whether it be mail fraud, welfare fraud, tax evasion or any other number of offenses."
That's the good news here. Once they find they can get away with one crime, these psychopaths can never resist pushing their luck in areas where the law is more clear cut.
"The FLDS needs to be destroyed. Not by bullets and bombs, but brick by brick."
It will destroy itself, as the iron laws of genetics in a small self-isolated community ("look, ma, three hands!") come into conflict with the founders' abject fear of having to allow power-threatening outsiders (women who weren't indoctrinated from birth and opportunistic men even more psychopathic than the founders) inside to keep the community physically healthy.
No help for the current victims of the cult, though. A very sad case.
One of the arguments that caused the appellate court to move on the case (according to what I picked up on this morning - I haven't been following the entire magilla) was that although it was a polygamous household each mother was responsible for their child. By that reasoning, the sect was not a "distinct household," but a condominium with horny men dropping by to visit serially.
One wonders about the court's reasoning (of course, it is Texas we're talking about).
wengler who said anythign about deprogrammign the moms..they are broken..work on the kids, lock up the moms.
Welcome to Saudi America. For years, Bush et al have turned a blind eye to gender apartheid in the Middle East, especially in the kingdom of our "Friends the Saudis."
Hell, he probably sees the whackass church in question as a model to be EMULATED.
I for one would love to see ZERO tax exemptions for ANY religion or house of worship, including the one I was raised in.
Any "religion" in which sex plays any part of the doctrine is a cult. End of story.
Wow. Dig the Sheriff’s crazy set of wheels (oops; showing my age). In Texas, even the county sheriff has an armored personnel carrier? Cool. Probably got it with some Homeland Security funding. 9-11 changed everything, you know. I bet their storm troopers, I mean, their SWAT team has some cool uniforms, too. With big, bullet-proof Texas ten-gallon hats.
Hey, at least they didn’t burn the place down. Maybe they learned from the Branch Davidian episode.
FWIW, I think all religions are cults. Some are just better at compromising, or hiding their beliefs to fit in with the surrounding community. But what if the surrounding community is Texas? Immovable object, meet irresistible force. The isolationists (probably well-armed) and the post 9-11 police state. They feed off of each other’s paranoia.
This episode fits in with my fantasy of the perfect country (I’m not big enough to rule the world). If your cult/religion doesn’t want to comply with the surrounding community’s norms, move it to Texas. It’s big enough to hold all the crazies, and Texans seem to be big on that “rugged individualist” crap, just as long as you don’t mess with them. Thump your bibles, play with snakes, whatever. Works for me. Just don’t come crying to me whenever they slap you down.
What? Can’t do that? Too extreme? Can’t ignore them? Then ban all religions. They do more harm than good; religion is nothing but brain washing/mind control.
What? Too extreme in the other direction? Can’t ban them? I knew you’d say that. Here’s my compromise; tax the crap out of religions. All religions. Religions have been getting a free ride for too long. Time for them to pay their share. And if they want to have their own, little, isolationist, self-sustaining, cult compound like this? Tax them even more. Tax them enough to pay for the intervention/de-programming/counseling/taking caring of the cult members when the sh*t hits the fan. And keep them the hell out of the government and military, dammit.
Im with jen on the ermovla of tax exemption....if they can show that they are operating as a none profit and useign teh funds for the good of soceity wit hno strings then great...otherwise pay taxes.
I think you already covered it well.
What are your thoughts?
"That's simply wrong."
Yes, we need to IMMEDIATELY expose those Amish children to electricity and cars and computers and light bulbs.
Amish children are aware of how we English live, and are encouraged to interact with our world from an early age. I frequently see 8th graders in the grocery store when I visit my family in central Ohio.
Amish people believe that their way of life can only be freely chosen by adults. No infant baptism for them. They are separate but among mainstream culture. Kids do opt out of the Amish religion and visit their parents and sibs on the farm having moved away to the city. Happens all the time. Hey, little Jedidiah didn't see the Light, but we know we're right either way.
FLDS and other jack Mormon cults, OTOH, preach the opposite: Exposure to 'the worldly' outside their cult is spiritually dangerous to their members, and the outside world is where they dump their trash, like excess adolescent males and untreated sewage...that's how all this started, zoning violations.
RE the Amish:
In "The God Delusion," Richard Dawkins makes an excellent point about the nature of ANY indoctrination of children into any one religion--even the ones that aren't going on every two seconds about eternal damnation and sin--as a form of child abuse.
He then goes on to posit that free societies OWE all children in their borders a secular education, with no opt-outs. As he puts it, why should we feel good about having the Amish et al as a sort of "quaint" cultural zoo?
His arguments are radical but amazingly well-structured. After reading The God Delusion, let me say that if I never got another day off for a religious holiday, I would do it tomorrow if it meant wiping all organized religion off the map. Including my own. Humanity would be the better for it.
Good point, Jen.
In my view, it's simply wrong.
We created minimum standards with laws, and a religion should, at a minimum, do no harm.
At the point a religion results in widespread harm, we should be wary of its principles.
Because this is institutionalized law breaking by the adults involved, whether they know it or not. There is plenty of illegal activity going on, and we are not supposed to leave children in that atmosphere, at least until things have been sorted out.
There is abundant evidence that children come to harm upon puberty here, but a logical court would conclude that this represented a threat to the younger children.
If we find the body of a teenager in someone's closet, we don't leave the preschoolers there on the excuse that there's no evidence of dead preschoolers on the premises.
Commenting by HaloScan
