digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

31 of 53 teen girls at FLDS ranch are pregnant or had baby

news.yahoo.com — SAN ANTONIO - More than half the teen girls taken from a polygamist compound in west Texas have children or are pregnant, state officials said Monday.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • killbert24, on 04/30/2008, -53/+20Great. More population for an overpopulated world.
    • UsedToVacation, on 04/30/2008, -3/+55Yeah, because that's the biggest problem here...
      • Chandon, on 04/30/2008, -2/+16Damn. That's the sarcastic comment I was going to make.
        • fiah8, on 05/01/2008, -0/+0Your right that is a problem why not wait for them to go in the world and have a live of their own when they get more mature. Crazy people think differently.
      • sarixe, on 04/30/2008, -13/+10still a problem nonetheless
        • killbert24, on 04/30/2008, -6/+9They won't believe until they're starving.
          • Jashobeam5, on 04/30/2008, -8/+3Or because the same comment has been put forth for over 200 years, and it's still not true.

            http://frontpagemagazine.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GU ...
          • RAEP, on 04/30/2008, -4/+4Front Page Magazine is full of *****, just fyi.
          • Fordi, on 04/30/2008, -2/+2@Josho:
            In a fluctuating system, past performance does not indicate future results. Our survival will continue at either the cost of improved technology (which everyone is hoping for and reaching towards), or mass poverty and starvation with a small number of holdouts.

            We, the technologically advanced, are not the only group that has survived. In the third world, and even in second-world countries like India, starvation and overpopulation indicate where the growth balance between population and technology may not fall below. We'll survive almost anything that sustainability failure can throw at us, short of worldwide simultaneous death of all plant life. That's not really the point, though.

            The point is that food shortages due to overpopulation are a decidedly unattractive potential consequence of en masse rejection of contraception.
      • robthom, on 04/30/2008, -2/+1It is a problem, and not a small one either. Overpopulation and the lack of resources to house, clothe, feed and educate everyone leads to more dumb examples just like this. I'm assuming that in your snarky way your referring to teen brides and potential incest being a worse problem. Thats fine but thats only part of the bigger picture. There are also other implications to be concerned about here.
      • yunus, on 04/30/2008, -0/+1If by here you mean Earth, then yes it ranks up there but its political suicide for anyone to talk about it.
    • lhbaker, on 04/30/2008, -1/+11Not really the point....
      • robthom, on 04/30/2008, -3/+1Mabey not the author of the articles point, but that doesn't discredit a legitimate observation either.
    • arichard, on 04/30/2008, -1/+2Actually, the global population will peak around 10-12 billion, so it's not a big concern. Now, keeping those 10-12 billion people fed and clean...
      • robthom, on 04/30/2008, -0/+6"Actually, the global population will peak around 10-12 billion,..."
        Sounds like a good trick, but how does it work?
  • mattwalton56, on 04/30/2008, -10/+24Wow......just, wow...
    • paulajohnw, on 04/30/2008, -9/+8How is this different from the Gen pop?
      • Harabeck, on 04/30/2008, -2/+15Teen pregnancy rates are nowhere near that in "Gen pop".
      • MScrip, on 04/30/2008, -2/+4Nowhere close. That would be like taking a high school classroom, and over half of the girls are pregnant. That's a lot.

        You might have one or two girls pregnant in an entire high school of 1,000 students.

        High school students make mistakes... but FLDS is a baby factory.
        • BearinG, on 05/01/2008, -0/+1out of about 2000 students when i was in high school.. i have never seen any girl pregnant for the 5 years i was there..

          half the students (even more than half) is crazy!
      • Coded1, on 04/30/2008, -2/+1It called chicken hawking.
  • noahgelman, on 04/30/2008, -10/+88Well who didn't see that coming

    /sarcasm
    • Dokument, on 04/30/2008, -3/+4it didnt seem like a very hard case to solve.
    • PixelMagic, on 04/30/2008, -9/+6That's what the girls said. Zing!
  • SmellyFingers, on 04/30/2008, -49/+6Would've been kind of funny if it was 69 of 53. wait wut?
  • HotSaucePanCake, on 04/30/2008, -16/+7hrm i'd figure they were from Arkansas
  • petrodollar, on 04/30/2008, -20/+56Are right wingers still wetting their beds and claiming that these people were unfairly persecuted for their religion, or have they looked at the plain facts of this case and shut the ***** up already?

    "CPS is evil!" Yeah, and getting repeatedly raped and beaten by 50 year old men isn't?
    • inigomntoya, on 04/30/2008, -12/+20I am not justifying any of their beliefs in any way - because who would want to live with more than one wife? But, if a 16 year old girl in my neighborhood was married to an older guy and some random neighbor called in that the 16 year old was getting raped and CPS came in and took away MY kids - I would be pretty pissed off too.
      There was no need to take away ALL of the kids. CPS should be taking this on a case by case basis.
      The FLDS people should be investigated for lying to local authorities about what their true intent was for creating the "ranch" - they told local government that it would be a hunting retreat. The young mothers should be put into a shelter with their children if they can't meet their own needs and the old pedophiles should be arrested.
      • EarlOfLade, on 04/30/2008, -7/+15If you had done nothing wrong and the kids were not abused or victims of any crimes, you'd get them back.
        This is a bit more special, most of these people can not even tell which kid is theirs.

        This sect just another example of the stupidity of religion, much more can be found over at http://fstdt.com/

        • gdbryan39, on 04/30/2008, -11/+3It is obvious that you are not informed nor are you right. There are aproximately ten times as many children in Houston who don't know who
          their father is than those in the FLDS compound. They all know who their father is. They just don't want the authorities to know all about
          them because they know the Texas authorities are hostile towards them They are right about that much. That is as plain as the nose on your
          face. You are either a premeditated liar or are not informed about the people you are talking about.

          I will repeat. I you want to find a bunch of Kids who don't know who their daddy is, go to Houston, Dallas, Fort Worth, El Paso, San Antonio,
          Austin, and the list goes on. If anyone was getting the true story it would verify my statements. Prove me wrong!

          The Government is fixing the problem at the FLDS compound just as they fixed it at the Branch Dividian Compound in Waco.
          The only difference is the people in the FLDS compound knew better than to try to fight back. The next thing that would happen if they did
          is the tanks with flame throwers would move in just as they did in Waco. Some government liars would try to deny that. I saw it with my
          own eyes. The tanks came out of Waco buildings cutting off the flames but had not quite gotten them cut off before they exited the buildings
          and they know that. Two wrongs don't make a right in Waco, Texas or Eldorado, Texas. We need to be careful how we use the long arm
          of the law in our country. Of course it is all right as long as it is not ME. Right?
          • petrodollar, on 04/30/2008, -2/+11"There are aproximately ten times as many children in Houston who don't know who their father is than those in the FLDS compound."

            But issue is whether they were born to underage moms who were impregnated by old men. Funny how you right wingers are tap dancing your asses off to avoiding confronting this fact. You're doing your damndest to make this about infidelity of paternity or whatever when in fact it's about statutory rape.

            "I will repeat. I you want to find a bunch of Kids who don't know who their daddy is, go to Houston, Dallas, Fort Worth, El Paso, San Antonio"

            I repeat: I don't *****' care about bastard kids and neither do the authorities in this case. We only care about children getting knocked up 50 year olds.
          • 14justice, on 04/30/2008, -3/+4I thought it was the left wingers who specialized in wetting their beds when law enforcement did something they didn't approve of. No one has been charged since the raid. What happened to the right of habeas corpus, the right to know the charges against you, and the right to confront your accuser?

            Multiple violations of constitutional rights have occurred, but where is the ACLU? They, like you, have an agenda and believe in selective enforcement according to an ideological litmus test. In your case it seems to be a fixation that someone over 50 is gettin' some!
          • petrodollar, on 04/30/2008, -4/+4They have strong probable cause to believe that numerous rapes and forced marriages occurred and they're conducting DNA tests to determine who the guilty parties are.

            What part of that do you object to?

            And what constitutional right are you claiming has been violated? I suspect you haven't actually read the constitution, so I suggest you check the 4th Amendment, which covers seizures (arrests = seizures). You will notice that the 4th Amendment only guarantees against "unreasonable" searches and seizures. In this case, the fact that a bunch of underage girls appear to have been forced to marry old men makes these seizures emminently "reasonable."

            Please tell us what Constitution you're reading and explain how it's any different from mine.

            Go.
        • MrWhite7, on 04/30/2008, -3/+4you were making some coherent points until your flame tank waco rant.
        • dickybrown, on 04/30/2008, -2/+6what's up with all the cults in TX? I know it's a big state and all but come on....
          • aliceinreality, on 04/30/2008, -0/+6Haven't there only been two major ones in the past 25 years?
          • petrodollar, on 04/30/2008, -3/+5That's two more than any other state can claim over the same time period.
          • ngmcs8203, on 04/30/2008, -0/+3This group originated in Utah until they were kicked out.
          • petrodollar, on 04/30/2008, -2/+8When Utah doesn't want your sect, you've got problems.
      • petrodollar, on 04/30/2008, -5/+13I'm sure the innocents will eventually be let go and allowed to practice what ever kooky religion they damn well please. The problem is that when you bust into a compound and find dozens of pregnant 14 year-olds, you have no way of knowing ex ante who the guilty people are. So the party's over for everyone until they get it all sorted out.

        The state still has a high burden for justifying removing children from their families. CPS doesn't just get to take away whoever they like. Prosecutors ultimately make the decision whether to take that step, and they will only do so if they have enough evidence to convince a judge or jury that it's necessary.

        The right wingers are somehow under the mistaken impression that CPS workers just get to walk around and say "I'll take that one, I'll take this one" and walk off with all of mom's kids. But reality just isn't like that.
        • gdbryan39, on 04/30/2008, -13/+1My experience tells me that many of those laughing and making fun of the kooky religion of those folks will not be happy when the same
          program comes home to their town. Example: Muslims have walked through Houston International Airport with underage wives trucking
          along behind them. No one dared to bother them. Men and women have engaged in multiple sex partners for many generations, but now
          precedent says that a man or woman can order DNA tests to prove infidelity just as happened wholesale at the FLDS compound.
          I do not agree with the ideas of this silly religion. I do thinkg that a level playing field is fair under the US constitution. Therefore all the
          prostitutes in Houston, Austin, Dallas, Fort Worth, and the list goes on and on, must be charged with polygamy and sent to prison under
          the level playing field of the constitution or those people need to be compensated for the horrible wrong that has been commited against
          them. Multiple sex partners are still multiple sex partners whether apostate mormon groups, prostitutes, johns, and that list approaches
          infinity rather quickly. THE CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW CONCERNING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF RELIGION AND THE FREE EXERCISE
          THEREOF. It would appear that the Texas authorities just stepped on the constitution big time. They may have that right, but how many
          prostitutes will be sent to prison in Texas in the next few months? How many non religious rounders will be sent to prison to keep them
          company? I deplore the acts of some of those people against underage girls. It is happening all over the country wholesale with almost
          no effrt to stem that process. Single out a religion and prosecute and you just broke our constitution in half. Who will be the next victim?
          Will it be you?
          • petrodollar, on 04/30/2008, -4/+14"Muslims have walked through Houston International Airport with underage wives trucking along behind them."

            Link to the authorities refusing to act on evidence of this? If you can't cought it up, I'm officially calling *****.

            "Men and women have engaged in multiple sex partners for many generations, but now
            precedent says that a man or woman can order DNA tests to prove infidelity just as happened wholesale at the FLDS compound."

            Infidelity has nothing to do with this. WTF is wrong with your brain? No one cares about people having multiple sex partners. They care about OLD MEN RAPING LITTLE KIDS!

            GET IT?
          • Stevo23, on 04/30/2008, -1/+3Are you copy-pasting? Why can't right-wing morons figure out how to format the line-breaks in their rants properly?
      • st00f72, on 04/30/2008, -8/+5It was the 16 y.o. girl who supposedly called the abuse hotline multiple times, the CPS didn't call her. She still has not been found, and I suppose that has a lot to do with the suspicion of abuse on a larger scale.
        • petrodollar, on 04/30/2008, -4/+10The thing is, they found multiple pregnant underage girls at the compound.

          Are you saying that, because the call was a hoax, those girls aren't really pregnant and/or aren't really under age?

          Just where are you going with this line of reasoning, st00f72?
          • st00f72, on 04/30/2008, -0/+4I didn't say it was a hoax, nor did I imply that I think it was. I simply stated, as did the article, that the caller had not yet been found. My reasoning was merely a guess that the state decided the conversations with the caller contained probable cause for intervention.
          • st00f72, on 04/30/2008, -1/+1(edit) the purported 16 y.o. girl (caller or not) had not been found..
        • inigomntoya, on 04/30/2008, -2/+5They found the caller. In Colorado Springs. So, yeah, she wasn't in the compound, or FLDS...
          http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/artic ...
      • ngmcs8203, on 04/30/2008, -1/+520/20 did a story on the FLDS group a few months ago and the abuse wasn't just male to female. The female women were jerking off boys as young as two years old to teach them "the way". They had printed books made up with illustrations and all that were given to children to teach them how even the youngest boys were allowed to fornicate with women older.
      • Dawnrazor, on 04/30/2008, -2/+3these people were raising their kids to believe it was right to be married and knocked up by 14 or 15. They were basicly grooming them for the old perverts to abuse.

        The kids, all of them, are much better off taken away from these freaks.
      • cjhowe, on 04/30/2008, -1/+1By definition, if the girls are able to conceive a child, it's not pedophelia. Just sayin.
        • ascendingPig, on 05/02/2008, -0/+0Old enough to bleed, old enough to breed, eh?
    • Scheissen, on 04/30/2008, -23/+9Are left-wing moonbats still having wet dreams over this bust?
      • ayeroxor, on 04/30/2008, -6/+9Moonbats? Your ancient age is showing. Most people alive today don't even know what that means. Why don't you leave the politics to the people young enough that they can still read, grandpa.
        • lhbaker, on 04/30/2008, -8/+4Yeah, 'cause older people r stoopid. *****.
          • ayeroxor, on 04/30/2008, -5/+7When their entire dogma is based on an era that has long-since passed, and their eyes are closed to anything current, they cease to have relevant insight. *****.
        • dickybrown, on 04/30/2008, -1/+1care to fill us in on moonbats?
          • ayeroxor, on 04/30/2008, -6/+2There's a website all about moonbats. It's called google.com
      • bjornski, on 04/30/2008, -3/+6Are right-wing morons still using stupid, childish terms like "moonbat"?
      • petrodollar, on 04/30/2008, -5/+8Left wingers aren't the ones defending kiddy rapists, Scheissen. If you want to discuss wet dreams, better to take it up with the old men who were diddling dozens underage girls at the FLDS compound and getting them pregnant and occasionally beating the ***** out of them.

        Why are you defending kiddy rapists, Scheissen? Do YOU have wet dreams about raping children too? One has to wonder what your REAL motive is for making these accusations.
        • SolitarySoviet, on 04/30/2008, -1/+4i think you hit the nail right on the head... look at his other comments just today.. one was on a story about giving old men Viagra to better their lives... crazy old pedos sure get mad when their own kind gets busted huh?
      • mllawso, on 04/30/2008, -1/+33/10
    • headzoo, on 04/30/2008, -14/+231 out of 53 doesn't justify keeping all 53 in custody. That's like the government coming to your neighborhood, and taking all the children from every home because a couple children from a couple homes have been abused.
      • pintomp3, on 04/30/2008, -2/+16that depends, are you married to half your neighborhood? this wasn't just a bunch of people who happen to live near each other.
        • headzoo, on 04/30/2008, -4/+2And people wonder where our freedoms and rights are disappearing to in this country. I guess in a post 9/11 world it's ok to lock people up first, and ask questions later.
          • petrodollar, on 04/30/2008, -1/+2You mean like we did with OJ?
          • pintomp3, on 04/30/2008, -1/+5how about the freedom not to be born into a cult where you will be forced to marry and have sex with old men?
          • petrodollar, on 04/30/2008, -2/+1Fact: original drafts of the 4th Amendment expressly prohibited seizure of underage girls used as sex slaves in Texas cults. We're violating Madison and Hamilton's conception of the ideal state everytime we don't send a suspected underage rape victim back home to live with her suspected rapist.

            Unless you have PROOF (reasonable suspicion and a warrant supported by probable cause just aren't good enough for headzoo), you've got NOTHING!
      • carpespasm, on 04/30/2008, -2/+10yep, because since only 31 of the 53 had gotten pregnant only 31 of the 53 had been forced into sex.
        • headzoo, on 04/30/2008, -6/+2Right.. And we should start arresting people based on gut-feeling-no-evidence-speculation.
          /s
        • publiclurker, on 04/30/2008, -3/+5I'd consider the marriage records they confiscated to be more than enough to arrest people, but then again, I'm not a wack job.
          • headzoo, on 04/30/2008, -5/+4I'm talking about detaining _some_ of the children where there is no evidence of wrong doing. There was a time in this country when you were innocent until proven guilty.
          • petrodollar, on 04/30/2008, -6/+6"There was a time in this country when you were innocent until proven guilty."

            You're absolutely right. What's with the cops taking murder suspects into custody and *****? They should be allowed to run around free until they're convicted, just like in the good old days!
          • headzoo, on 04/30/2008, -6/+3"What's with the cops taking murder suspects into custody and *****?"
            We're not talking about murder here, are we?

            "They should be allowed to run around free until they're convicted"
            People suspected of crimes are allowed to run around free. It's called bail. Idiot.
          • petrodollar, on 04/30/2008, -6/+6Hey, Mr. headzoo, I wasn't the "idiot" who originally raised the issue of the cops detaining people who hadn't been proven guilty of a crime and claimed that "there was a time in this country" when that didn't happen.

            Fact is, you opened your fat mouth and got slapped the ***** down. There's such thing as protective custody in this country. Pretty much every advanced society as something similar.

            Read up and learn: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protective_custody

            As far as there being "no evidence of wrongdoing," most right thinking Americans would probably agree that 31 out of 53 underage girls turning up pregnant suggests "wrongdoing."

            Do you live in some alternate universe where that isn't the case?
          • petrodollar, on 04/30/2008, -5/+6Here ya go, headzoo: http://childlaw.sc.edu/frmPublications/epcinforpak ...

            I'm sure you can explain to everyone why this is a gross injustice. I mean, where do the cops get off thinking they can deprive a sexually abused child of her god-given right to remain in the custody of the abuser? Surely the founding fathers would be rolling over in their graves if we knew we were allowing the underage victims of child rape to be separated from their suspected rapists! WHERE'S THE OUTRAGE?!?!?!
          • headzoo, on 04/30/2008, -4/+4"most right thinking Americans would probably agree that 31 out of 53 underage girls turning up pregnant suggests "wrongdoing.""
            I live in a world where 22 of the parents would still have their children, because there is no evidence of wrong doing. That's the point I made from the start. I'm all for the other 31 parents having their children taken into custody.

            "where do the cops get off thinking they can deprive a sexually abused child of her god-given right to remain in the custody of the abuser"

            Where do the cops get of taking 22 children when there's no proof of they were abused? Then again, why stop at 22.. We're dealing with hundreds of children that have been taken from their parents with no proof of wrong doing on the parent's part.

            "Surely the founding fathers would be rolling over in their graves"

            They sure would. I have a hard time imaging they would approve of the police getting an anonymous phone call about one abused child on Monday, and coming along and taking hundreds of children on Tuesday.

            The cornerstone of your entire argument is they must all be guilty. Lets take all the children now, and sort out the innocent ones later.
          • petrodollar, on 04/30/2008, -2/+4They had numerous allegations of abuse from prior investigations of this church you moron. They had detailed descriptions of how underage girls were being forced into marriage. Then they busted into the place and found numerous pregnant underage girls and other circumstantial evidence of statutory rape.

            If Austria adopted your legal sensibilities, that ***** who imprisoned his daughter for 24 years would have had a few more months to get his thing on. Because, even though there was every indication that something foul was afoot, until the cops had DNA evidence they should have just sent the daughter back to live with him. What business did they have questioning her at the police station like that!?! That was a massive deprivation of her liberty!!!
        • lhbaker, on 04/30/2008, -3/+8You're right. No evidence of child rape if 22 aren't pregnant. They're just practicing their religion.
      • petrodollar, on 04/30/2008, -3/+11Are you saying that the other 22 kids must not have been raped because they're not pregnant? Most thinking people would say that when 31 out of 53 teen girls are preggers, there's a good chance that the remaining 22 have been diddled at least once or twice.
        • headzoo, on 04/30/2008, -4/+3Most thinking people base their judgments on facts, not hunches.
          • petrodollar, on 04/30/2008, -2/+4Facts like 31 out of 53 underage girls in the compound are pregnant?
    • insertAliasHere, on 04/30/2008, -2/+36I honestly must have missed something. I'm a conservative, and I think that FLDS is ***** crazy. But maybe that's just me.
      • carpespasm, on 04/30/2008, -1/+9yeah, I'm not sure where people are getting the impression that it's been called a bad action by one side or the other.
      • Jashobeam5, on 04/30/2008, -2/+5I don't know of any conservaties in real life who thought the raid was wrong. I've heard conservatives warning against this kind of thing and hoping someone would stop such abuse for a long time.
        • petrodollar, on 04/30/2008, -9/+8Michael Savage has been yelling about this every night. He's pissed because he thinks the CPS workers are lesbians. He compares them to nazis throwing jews into ovens.

          The right wingers are touchy because deep down in their jesusy hearts they sympathize with a bunch of dirty old men who want to get their rocks off with youngsters.
          • insertAliasHere, on 04/30/2008, -4/+9***** Michael Savage. He doesn't speak for all conservatives. He's just one of the more vocal ones. Does Michael Moore speak for all liberals? If he speaks for you that's fine, but do you think that he speaks for every democrat?

            And ***** you too. Way to generalize.
          • petrodollar, on 04/30/2008, -6/+6Michael Savage must speak for a respectable number of conservatives, because he has sky high ratings and his books sell millions of copies. Does it matter that he doesn't speak for ALL right wingers? Of course not. All that matters is that he speaks for a few million of them here and there. If they didn't approve of what he says, millions of them wouldn't listen to his show 5 nights/week.
          • PolishLogic, on 04/30/2008, -2/+5Michael Savage? Give me a ***** break.
      • PolishLogic, on 04/30/2008, -0/+3x2
    • bingobongony, on 04/30/2008, -8/+6Please provide links to any real right wingers who were complaining.
      • petrodollar, on 04/30/2008, -3/+9http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2008426/p ...

        "The state of Texas’s case is built on the premise of a lie. And religious intolerance is not to be tolerated. The removal of 450 kids is without precedent. And was done lightly with out sufficient preparation and now these kids will be subject to people who do not have their best interests in mind.

        The kids are now nothing more than slaves to the state and the whims of state worker that only care about headlines and prosecuting this case in the media. We should ask all of the state workers when they stopped having sex with cows."
      • bingobongony, on 04/30/2008, -9/+3no no no...I didn't say "please bury me because you have no FACTS to back up your statement and you are a little pussy. I said "please provide links..." How come you haven't done so?
        • petrodollar, on 04/30/2008, -3/+6Are you saying the the posters on freerepublic aren't "real right wingers?" Or are you claiming that they're not actually "compaining?"

          Spell it out for me.
          • bingobongony, on 04/30/2008, -2/+1POSTERS? Are you ***** kidding?

            Of course, if people talking about how "left wingers" are saying xxxxxx, becuase some POSTERS on Huffingtonpost, or moveon were saying it, you would be here whining like hte bitch that you are.
        • proudblackwoman, on 04/30/2008, -0/+1http://digg.com/odd_stuff/Bingobongony_Trolls_all_ ...
    • tomasII, on 04/30/2008, -1/+1Funny the left wingers are usually the ones crying about rights being taken away.

      BTW I absolutely do not support this pedophile cult in any way.
    • eryximachus, on 04/30/2008, -2/+3Are you really trying to say that the bogus phone call these cops received justified invasive gynecological exams against these girls?

      I think we live in a pretty sick world where a bogus phone call can allow the state to perform such dastardly acts.

      Let's just bring the star chamber back while we're at it.
      • johnhummel, on 04/30/2008, -0/+3Let's see how this goes.

        Police: Hi, we got a call that there was abuse here.
        FLDS: Nope - as you can see, nothing to worry about!
        Police: Hey, uh, we see a lot of teenage girls here pregnant. That looks illegal.
        FLDS: What? Oh, those are wives! It's legal!
        Police: Let me get this straight - you've got a commune here full of pregnant teenage girls, and we're suppose to not check this out.
        FLDS: You'd be trampling on our rights.
        Police: Uh - yeah. We're calling social services, because even at a cursory glance, this is ***** up.

        And - scene. Now, let's play this another way.

        Police: Hey, we got a call of someone screaming.
        Drug House: Oh, no - as you can see, there's nothing to worry about here.
        Police: You know, we can see a lot of drug paraphernalia, and is that a dead body over there?
        Drug House: Oh, it's nothing to worry about!
        Police: Uh - right. No, sorry, but we gotta book ya'.
        Drug House: But you're infringing on our religious rights!

        Sorry - but the argument of "a bogus phone call can allow the state to do dastardly acts" doesn't fly here. The "bogus phone call" was from a concerned citizen. The police did what they should - they invistigaed, and saw what looks like a crime - an institution level crime of getting teenage girls pregnant. At that moment, they did everything legally in calling in social services. As for the rest - "dastardly acts" - you're calling "Hey, stick this cotton swab in your mouth - I need to verify that the baby over there is yours or not, and if it is, somebody's got some 'splainin to do, because you're only 14" isn't a "dastardly act".

        It's called investigating a crime.
        • eryximachus, on 04/30/2008, -2/+11) There is no way a cop can tell the difference between a 17-year old girl and 15-year old girl. Even if they could, there is no law that says a teenager cannot have a child. The simple fact a girl is pregnant means nothing and certainly doesn't justify the atrocities committed here.

          2) A girl should NOT be compelled to submit to any kind of gynecological procedure against her will. You seem to be making the mistake of lumping these people together. These are sentient human beings who have free will.

          3) Your casual dismissal of this false reporting of a delusional, pledged Obama Delegate to the Democratic National Convention also highlights your twisted morality. Telling the truth is the fundamental basis of our civilization. It has been recognized for the 3,000 years Western Civilization has existed to be the cornerstone of a successful and just society. Your sexual, hypocritical mores however are simply the result of early 1990s politically correct nonsense and are shared by almost no countries on this earth. Your priorities are way out of whack, and prove how your view of the human condition is totally disconnected not just from reality but from history as well.



          Lying to the police is a far more serious offense that ***** a 16-year old girl in a state that recently raised its age of consent laws.
  • Zlorp, on 04/30/2008, -31/+13wives this young were perfectly normally and accepted in human history. hell even the virgin Mary was supposedly 16 or so. Are we trying to say that God is a pedophile?
    • petrodollar, on 04/30/2008, -9/+33Yes. Jesus was a rape baby.
    • geobay, on 04/30/2008, -8/+18Sure...an imaginary pedophile

      why not?
    • shcforward, on 04/30/2008, -2/+1914. But then again when lots of people only lived to be 30 or 40 back then, they had different standards.

      • petrodollar, on 04/30/2008, -6/+11Actually, people routinely lived well into their 70s and 80s back then. Some of those mummified egyptians were old as hell when they died.

        The biggest difference is that people weren't expected to go to school until age 18 or 22 or whatever. Society needed you to get to work ASAP. If you weren't out on the farm by age 12 or so, you were useless. Now we extend childhood and young adulthood much longer because young people have a lot more to learn before they can become productive.
      • Zlorp, on 04/30/2008, -8/+8if you were to believe the bible, people lived to be 900 years old sometimes.
        • LordVance, on 04/30/2008, -1/+2replied in the wrong spot, whoops...
    • Chebsi, on 04/30/2008, -14/+4Take your facts elsewhere, they're not welcome at Digg!
      • LordVance, on 04/30/2008, -0/+7But it is a "fact" taken out of the incredibly important context of when the average person was expected to being working as an adult in society, and when the average person was expected to die. Sure, if we expect to live into our 70's 16 years old seems like a baby - but if we are expecting to make it to our 40's you better be prepared for your mid-life crisis pretty soon...
    • Jforsyth89, on 04/30/2008, -5/+24Slavery was perfectly normal and accepted in human history. That doesn't justify it in any sort of way.
    • Daniel591992, on 04/30/2008, -1/+5No. Depends on the age of consent which was less than 16 anyways.
      • 14justice, on 04/30/2008, -3/+1Interestingly, the Texas Legislature passed laws in 2005 which raised the legal age for marriage with parental consent from 14 to 16 specifically to tighten the screws on FLDS. This is a deliberate, well planned, long term attempt to destroy the freedom of religion and association of a targeted group of people.
        Here were the Texas rules on marriage prior to 2005:
        Male: 14 – parental consent and/or permission of judge required. Below age of consent parties need parental consent and permission of judge, no younger than 14 for males and 13 for females.
        Female: 14 – parental consent and/or permission of judge required. Below age of consent parties need parental consent and permission of judge. No younger than 14 for males and 13 for females.
    • chrgrose, on 04/30/2008, -1/+14Would you rather return to the stone age of civilization or keep up with the rest of us?
      • EarlOfLade, on 04/30/2008, -2/+7From what I hear from these religious lunatics - stone age!
        • Philbert, on 04/30/2008, -1/+3I wouldn't exactly call the 1800's the stone age.
    • graycat, on 04/30/2008, -2/+2Works for me.
    • Jashobeam5, on 04/30/2008, -4/+1No, we have no evidence of how old Mary was. She could have been 30 for all we know. When Jesus healed a 12-year-old, he called her child. The oddly popular theory that child marriages were very common all throughout history, just has no basis in fact.
    • goldfishey, on 04/30/2008, -2/+3doesn't really matter what people did 100 years ago, or what they do in other places. The government is meant to be separate from religion and the government makes the laws. The law applies to all people in the country. ALL. So if the government says girls or boys can not have sex till they are 16, or 17 or 18 or whatever it happens to be, then thats it, You don't get to override the law in the name of religion,
    • OMGIAMTHEMAN, on 04/30/2008, -0/+1Mary was more like 13 according to the oxford dictionary of the bible
    • cobbwobbles, on 05/01/2008, -0/+1You are out of your ***** mind.
  • aboron, on 04/30/2008, -4/+97"FLDS spokesman Rod Parker" -- with a name like that it's no wonder the girls are getting pregnant. He should find a new place to park it.
    • synergye, on 04/30/2008, -2/+0this whole comment thread is made of win!. First pedobear, and now this!
    • zebraz, on 04/30/2008, -5/+1Could be worse.
      His name could be Rod Poker.
  • Bacontastic, on 04/30/2008, -4/+43Polygamist cults are ***** up. Who would have guessed?
    • petrodollar, on 04/30/2008, -10/+4If done right I think they have the potential to be pretty cool, provided you have enough money to support all those wives. The problem is what to do with all the poor schlubs who can't get any because the polygamists done snatched up all the women.
      • eir574, on 04/30/2008, -1/+13Traditionally, one expels the poor schlubs from the community while they're still teenagers for minor or even completely imagined infractions. At that point, the schlubs are the problem of the rest of society, and you never have to think about them again. That's the only reason I think I may have a problem with polygamy. The numbers just don't work out in communities where it's always one man to multiple women, or vice versa.
        • petrodollar, on 04/30/2008, -5/+3"At that point, the schlubs are the problem of the rest of society, and you never have to think about them again."

          Well, until they raise a fuss and get the laws changed to ban polygamy. If you could ensure that they would remain politically and economically disenfranchized, you could pull it off.

          Maybe you could cut off their balls while they're still fairly young so that they're less likely to be disgruntled when they reach adulthood.
      • mike17032, on 04/30/2008, -0/+1If you had ever had a girlfriend (or even been around a women other than your mom) you would understand the special kind of hell having 3 wives would be.
      • insomniac8400, on 04/30/2008, -0/+2What do you think creates a terrorist willing to blow himself up because someone told him he would get 72 virgins in heaven? A society where the priest has 100 wives and the common man is left to be a virgin till he dies.
    • Icyfenix, on 04/30/2008, -1/+1Makes for good TV tho- Big Love FTW Amirite?
    • zebraz, on 04/30/2008, -0/+1I prefer monogamist cults myself.
  • richman241, on 04/30/2008, -5/+28Wait, was Jamie Lynn Spears there?
    • Pink05, on 04/30/2008, -1/+0In other News...Angelina Jolie is on her way there...
  • nusuni, on 04/30/2008, -7/+40The real question is how many of the pregnancies occurred as a result of incest. Have a feeling that stat would cause even those with the toughest stomach to vomit a little bit.
    • bingham37, on 04/30/2008, -0/+3My thoughts exactly, those poor girls, to be kept like defenseless rabbits for breeding... I just can't understand the complete lack of humanity or decency required to do that to other people... or to defend in any way that utterly sick society. It's just too disgusting and despicable for words... those men are monsters and I hope that similar societies are abolished fast... because you know there are more out there.
  • DannySpace, on 04/30/2008, -6/+6A whacked out Adolescent Preggo Religious Cult? Quick, Call the ATF!
    • tedonion, on 04/30/2008, -1/+7Not quite. . . try a whacked out child raping religious cult, so yes, call the ATF.
  • JohnnyHotballs, on 04/30/2008, -29/+9………………………………………………………………………………………………
    ………………….._,,-~’’’¯¯¯’’~-,,…………………………………………………………
    ………………..,-‘’ ; ; ;_,,---,,_ ; ;’’-,…………………………….._,,,---,,_………………
    ……………….,’ ; ; ;,-‘ , , , , , ‘-, ; ;’-,,,,---~~’’’’’’~--,,,_…..,,-~’’ ; ; ; ;__;’-,……………
    ……………….| ; ; ;,’ , , , _,,-~’’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ¯’’~’-,,_ ,,-~’’ , , ‘, ;’, …………
    ……………….’, ; ; ‘-, ,-~’’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’’-, , , , , ,’ ; |…………
    …………………’, ; ;,’’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’-, , ,-‘ ;,-‘…………
    ………………….,’-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’’-‘ ;,,-‘…………..
    ………………..,’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;__ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ‘-,’……………..
    ………………,-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,-‘’¯: : ’’-, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; _ ; ; ; ; ;’,……………..
    ……………..,’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;| : : : : : :| ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ,-‘’¯: ¯’’-, ; ; ;’,…………….
    …………….,’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ‘-,_: : _,-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; | : : : : : :| ; ; ; |……………
    ……………,’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ¯¯ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’-,,_ : :,-‘ ; ; ; ;|……………
    …………..,-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ,,-~’’ , , , , ,,,-~~-, , , , _ ; ; ;¯¯ ; ; ; ; ;|……..........
    …………,-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,’ , , , , , , ,( : : : : :) , , , ,’’-, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;|……………
    ……….,-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’, , , , , , , , ,’~---~’’ , , , , , ,’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’,…………..
    …….,-‘’ ; _, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ‘’~-,,,,--~~’’’¯’’’~-,,_ , ,_,-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ‘,………….
    ….,-‘’-~’’,-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; | ; ; | ..L.O.L.. ,’; ,’’¯ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ,_ ; ‘-,………..
    ……….,’ ; ;,-, ; ;, ; ; ;, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ‘, ; ;’, . . . . .,’ ;,’ ; ; ; ;, ; ; ;,’-, ; ;,’ ‘’~--‘’’………
    ………,’-~’ ,-‘-~’’ ‘, ,-‘ ‘, ,,- ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ‘, ; ; ‘~-,,,-‘’ ; ,’ ; ; ; ; ‘, ;,-‘’ ; ‘, ,-‘,……………..
    ……….,-‘’ ; ; ; ; ; ‘’ ; ; ;’’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ‘’-,,_ ; ; ; _,-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ;’-‘’ ; ; ; ‘’ ; ;’-,…………..
    ……..,-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;¯¯’’¯ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; , ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’’-,……….
    ……,-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ,, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; |, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ‘-,…….
    …..,’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;|..’-,_ ; ; ; , ; ; ; ; ; ‘,…..
    ….,’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; | ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,’…….’’’,-~’ ; ; ; ; ; ,’…..
    …,’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’~-,,,,,--~~’’’’’’~-,, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,’…..,-~’’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ,-‘……
    …| ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ‘, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,’…,-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,-‘……..
    …’, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ,-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ,’….’, ; ; ; ; _,,-‘’…………
    ….’, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ,-‘’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,’…….’’~~’’¯………………
    …..’’-, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;_,,-‘’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ,-‘…………………………….
    ………’’~-,,_ ; ; ; ; _,,,-~’’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,-‘……………………………..
    ………..| ; ; ;¯¯’’’’¯ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,,-‘……………………………….
    ………..’, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,-‘…………………………………
    …………| ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;|…………………………………..
    …………’, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ~-,,___ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’,………………………………….
    ………….’, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,-‘….’’-, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ‘,…………………………………
    ………..,’ ‘- ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,-‘’……….’-, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ‘,………………………………..
    ……….,’ ; ;’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ,,-‘…………….’, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’,……………………………….
    ………,’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,-‘’…………………’’-, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; |……………………………….
    ……..,’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,,-‘………………………’’, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; |………………………………
    ……..| ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,’…………………………,’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;,’……………………………….
    ……..| ; ; ; ; ; ; ,’………………………..,-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ,’’………………………………..
    ……..| ; ; ; ; ; ;,’……………………….,-‘ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ,-‘………………………………….
    ……..’,_ , ; , ;,’……………………….,’ ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ,-‘……………………………………
    ………’,,’,¯,’,’’|……………………….| ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ‘--,,………………………………….
    ………….¯…’’………………………..’-, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’’~,,…………………………….
    ……………………………………………’’-,, ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;’’~-,,……………………….
    ………………………………………………..’’-, ; ; ; ; ; ,,_ ; ;’-,’’-,……………………..
    …………………………………………………..’, ; ; ; ; ; ; ‘-,__,--...........................
    ……………………………………………………’-, ; ; ;,,-~’’’ , ,|, |……………………
    ………………………………………………………’’~-‘’_ , , ,,’,_/--‘……………………
    ...P.....E.....D.....O.....B.....E.....A.....R .........A.....P.....P.....R.....O.....V.....E.....S…
    • RoflcopterFUEL, on 04/30/2008, -3/+5It was funny the first time. Don't kill it, or get your own ascii art.
      • JohnnyHotballs, on 04/30/2008, -7/+1 im not talented enough to do ascii art. besdes, this is a highly appropriate application.
        • vuke69, on 04/30/2008, -1/+3You had me at "not talented"...
        • Namaha, on 04/30/2008, -1/+2You're right, that's why it was done already.
  • EmerilLIVE, on 04/30/2008, -4/+55Well obviously if God wanted men to have multiple wives, there would be a more appropriate ratio on the births of male vs. female. But that just makes to much sense. Cults like this always have to somehow eliminate a large percentage of the male population in order to create an unnatural ratio to sustain their atrocities.
    • Exact0, on 04/30/2008, -1/+9This cult has the The Lost Boys, correct?
    • stonewaljacksn, on 04/30/2008, -0/+2after much thinking on the subject, it seems to me that women are the ones who are supposed to be getting impregnated by a bunch of different guys...i guess thats why guys compensate by trying to cage up women all for themselves. being a boy my self, i guess that kind of sucks for me.
    • ICSU, on 04/30/2008, -3/+5In the past, many men died quite earlier than women (wars, hunting...) so polygamy was the right choice in those communities. Just like religion, this is another stone age habit that is not needed any more but still lingers.
      • 14justice, on 04/30/2008, -0/+3Men die earlier than women now, too --- which is why the pickings are so good for us survivors here in the retirement home!
  • URnotheonly1, on 04/30/2008, -11/+2Yeah, hmmmmm, do I know her?
  • kanabiis, on 04/30/2008, -11/+59Compare this to the Texas teen pregnancy rate which is 108 per 1000, so if this compound was anywhere near statistical average, there would be 5 of those 51 teens would be pregnant.

    Anyway you apologists want to spin this, there is a problem here.... It is especially telling considering the fact that the fathers of these babies are 2-3 times the age of the teen mother. In the United States, you can easily guesstimate the age of the father of the child with a very high degree of accuracy by using the following formula:

    m < 16 --> 1/f o< m , where m = mother's age and f = father's age

    so if the girl from the FLDS compound is 16, then this formula dictates that the father would be 18, and if you just use observable metrics you would find this is pretty accurate.

    In the case of this compound this formula is blown WAY out of the water by a very large margin. The fathers of these children are 30 years old plus. When you look at this from just a scientific standpoint you can easily prove that this trend is way out of the observable behavior of teenage mothers. It is not common for a teen mother too choose a father of her children in America to be 35-50 years old.

    I don't care what any of your FLDS apologists who are frequenting these threads say, a statistical observation clearly shows that there is something beyond 'choice' working here, and it is clear from the investigation that physical, emotional and mental manipulation is occurring.

    Sources for the figures found in this post, lest I be accused of pulling numbers out of my ass:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_incidence_of_t ...
    http://www.teenpregnancy.org/resources/data/govrat ...
    • twiztidsinz, on 04/30/2008, -2/+8*covers ears* LALALALALA I CANT HEAR YOU LALALALALA
      dugg btw
    • nationalist, on 04/30/2008, -4/+2global instance of t
      • kanabiis, on 04/30/2008, -2/+8I dont know why digg truncates the link, ask the powers that be, but the article is

        Global_incidence_of_teenage_pregnancy#North_America

        notice the #North_America...

        so get over it
        • twiztidsinz, on 04/30/2008, -0/+3from what I'm to understand, the URL's become truncated when you edit the comment
      • kanabiis, on 04/30/2008, -0/+5Look, if you dont like my numbers, google it yourself, you will find the same numbers that I do...

        Unless you are trying to tell me that at high schools in your city have a 60% pregnancy rate.... which I would find highly highly improbable.

        Furthermore, I gave the FLDS the benefit of the doubt by using Texas state pregnancy rate, which is higher then the national average by a high percentage. The US national pregnancy rate is only 84 out of a 1000 girls, which would mean only 4 of the girls from the compound should have children.

        But please, lets just pick on the name of my link.......
    • Icyfenix, on 04/30/2008, -0/+4***** dude that was waaaay well written and throughly researched. I logged in to digg you but not the story
    • swiftheart, on 04/30/2008, -0/+1Can you reply with your citations in just regular text form? They get truncated weirdly and I was interesting in seeing where you got the formula from.
    • kutza, on 04/30/2008, -3/+3I live in Utah. I know a few FLDS first hand. That's not blown out of proportion at all. The formula above takes into account CULTURE. The formula wont hold true in the middle east, and it doesn't take into count the FLDS. The birthrate you used even proved it. Secondly, those boys are not at 'marriage' age by FLDS standards. If there was a 1-to-1 ratio there would be no polygamy. They kick the boys out when they get old enough for just about any reason. The girls get 'poofed' if they are 'bad', basically sent away to get married in another commune. So yeah, there is a ton of abuse, and no the ages aren't off.

      Know your subject matter before commenting.
      • kanabiis, on 04/30/2008, -0/+5Ummm what are you talking about, the above formula is regarding 'regular' teen pregnancies, NOT FLDS

        If you would have read the history of my comments, the FLDS situation does not adhere to the above formula... the formula is based on statistical teen pregnancies.. ie. the real world. where a 16 year old girl is impregnated by a boy about 2 years older then her.

        In the FLDS situation the girls are impregnated by men 2-3 times their age. So I dont know what you are basing your comment on other then, plain ignorance regarding this particular discussion thread.

        I KNOW the subject matter, you apparently are just commenting on, well, I don't know what your commenting on, because the formula you are dismissing is a formula based on statistical analysis of teen pregnancies in the United States, and the relative ages of the mother and father used to display the fact that the situation in the FLDS compound is NOT common behavior of teenage girls. ie. pregnant by men 2-3 times their age.

        So.......next time before you start spouting off at the mouth, read the ***** thread.
    • mllawso, on 04/30/2008, -1/+4Keep your dirty, fact based arguments off my digg.
  • rbk303, on 04/30/2008, -13/+11Oh that's fine. As long as the leader doesn't think he's Jesus. Then we'd have to burn them alive.
    • bingobongony, on 04/30/2008, -2/+7Yeah...uhhhh..you DO realize that there are audio recordings from Waco that PROVE that the Davidians started the fire, right?
  • amanilaenvelope, on 04/30/2008, -5/+32this sounds a lot like my high school.
    • Lst01, on 04/30/2008, -1/+8this sounds a lot like my middle school.
      • jumico, on 04/30/2008, -1/+6this sounds a lot like my elementary school.
  • Unksean, on 04/30/2008, -8/+25Screw so called "religious tolerance." This is just ***** evil.
    • EarlOfLade, on 04/30/2008, -6/+10Why should we be tolerant towards religion?

      It is nothing but a bunch of bronze age myths that is not real. Religion needs to be challenged each and every day and all the religious ***** needs to be dealt with.
      • carpespasm, on 04/30/2008, -1/+7it's got to be done in a reasonable way though. It sucks that you can't beat reason into someone's head, but you really can't. To replace someone's illogical beliefs with logical but not-understood ones is just a lesser evil. If you're right you have to take the high road and prove you're right with the truth and showing people how you're right through example and explanation. This is true whether you have religious faith or not. If you're right you don't have to beat it into people, it becomes evident on it's own as they become familiar with your argument.
        • Dustmuffins, on 04/30/2008, -0/+2Dugg for the last sentence. Well put.
        • Adamande, on 04/30/2008, -1/+2Oh sure. Science and reason really hit it big with the religious crowd over the past 2000 years. We really made huge progress by being respectful and hoping for everyone to just enter the age of reason at their own pace. 98% of the world is still religious, they are still killing each other for it and they are even trying to hijack science and pervert it into another wild creation story. I agree with EarlOfLade. The time to tip toe gracefully around religious nuts is over. Grown ups with imaginary friends deserve no respect, and they should be told as much.
        • EarlOfLade, on 04/30/2008, -0/+1I guess you have never read fstdt.com...
  • mrogi, on 04/30/2008, -5/+39The Fundamentalist Mormon church is heaven on earth for demented pedophiles. Those douchebags built a compound and stocked it with hundreds of teenage girls they can ***** and impregnate with impunity. I hope the law shuts down that compound and demolishes the building.
    • 14justice, on 04/30/2008, -2/+2Maybe so, but how are they different from the Saudi royal family?
      • pcghost, on 04/30/2008, -0/+3The Saudi royal family doesn't live in Texas or any other U.S. state. Can I get a NIMBY please?
        • 14justice, on 04/30/2008, -1/+1Coming soon to a mosque near you. usinfo.state.gov/products/pubs/muslimlife/immigrat.htm
  • TheWriteGuy, on 04/30/2008, -13/+9Most organized religions are a means to corral and control the bodies of young nubile females for the purpose of marrying them off to male members of the congregation -- at least, that's how most of the long-time established religions in human society today originally began.
  • s0nicfreak, on 04/30/2008, -23/+17So it's like a typical urban highschool then?
    • kanabiis, on 04/30/2008, -1/+14Not unless your typical urban high school has a pregnancy rate of 60%.......

      US teen pregnancy rate is 84 out of 1000..... or .084%

      Google, use it
  • hakrzcode, on 04/30/2008, -18/+8Here in iowa the numbers are much higher, and that is not in the so called cult.
  • Ratteler, on 04/30/2008, -17/+11Same stats as my neighborhood in the Bronx, but there's no news coverage, no troops, no cult, and no one violating their 1st Amendment rights to practice their religion.

    "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
    • Icyfenix, on 04/30/2008, -5/+5Pregnant 14 year olds.
      What were you doing when you were 14?
      Sorry but there's a limit.

      Also it is part of my religion to digg down black-and-white-ethics comments
    • Jashobeam5, on 04/30/2008, -4/+11Did Congress make a law prohibiting the free exercise of religion? No, men raped girls, and they are hopefully going to jail for it. Jeffs even admitted he LIED and it's not about religion. There was a clip of him confessing on TV today.
      • Izult, on 05/01/2008, -0/+2That's pure semantics if you really want to get down to it. There are people in that group who truly believe their religion and are willing to enter into those kind of relationships so for them they were simply practicing their religion.

        Digg me down if you want (cause i know the narrow minded "my way's the only right way" people will) but the truth is that there are more polygamous relationships out there that are functional working relationships that don't even have religion attached to them.

        They were "married" by their beliefs. We're the ones telling them they weren't and it's rape. Now while I agree that FORCING a young girl into a marriage she doesn't want is wrong and in that situation it would be considered rape, I'm also willing to acknowledge the fact that some of those girls are willfully participating in this because in their mind/belief system that's their ticket to heaven. Agree or disagree, it's still their religion and you can't tell me that the foster system is any better.
    • lhbaker, on 04/30/2008, -5/+2Was your mom 14 WHEN SHE ABORTED YOU?
    • tedonion, on 04/30/2008, -2/+12Unlike many parts of the world, here in the western world religious freedom does not extend to raping children, or denying medical care, or denying education, etc. . .
    • PolishLogic, on 04/30/2008, -0/+9You seem to take the First Amendment a bit too far. By your logic:

      Your interpretation of freedom of religion: human sacrifices are perfectly legal. As are other forms of murder in the name of religion.

      Your interpretation of freedom of press: a reporter can commit breaking and entering, robbery or any crime in the name of getting a story and not be touched.

      Your interpretation of freedom of speech: libel and slander laws are unconstitutional.

      Thankfully, the legal system disagrees with you.
  • Envark, on 04/30/2008, -10/+1Woops, my bad.
    • ayeroxor, on 04/30/2008, -4/+5What? You just noticed you can't spell 'whoops'?
  • threemagic, on 04/30/2008, -10/+30Another shining example of religion being used for your own sick uses.

    If there was a God, why hasn't he salt pillared people like this...

    boy touching priests.. SALT
    mormon pedo... SALT
    Muslim jihadist... SALT

    maybe faith wouldn't seem so dumb if God actually took care of business once in a while.
    • Exact0, on 04/30/2008, -8/+7Maybe god's an *****.
    • NightVortez, on 04/30/2008, -5/+7Can't forget that throughout history religion has been one of the top, if not the top, sources of murder, in fact, it has killed the (so called) son of God.

      If God, or any type of being of worship, really does exist I can't see him being a big fan of religion.
    • iRelinquish, on 04/30/2008, -1/+2error fix: fundamentalist mormon pedo?
      • threemagic, on 04/30/2008, -0/+1if it helps you sleep at night, sure
  • Scheissen, on 04/30/2008, -18/+3Are you left-wing liberals still having wet dreams over your government saying what is right? Polygamy is wrong for this cult, but never mind the Catholic Priests who rape their alter boys.
    • furi0us1, on 04/30/2008, -0/+12I don't see how left wing liberals can be accused of favoring govt control over morality. Thats typically the domain of the so called religious right.
      • SolitarySoviet, on 04/30/2008, -0/+3the problem his types have is that they dont want government telling everyone how to live... he would rather some preacher do the exact same thing... hes just a stupid fan of another team..
    • carpespasm, on 04/30/2008, -1/+11screw that, those pedos should have been locked away too. The church hiding them in different parishes is disgusting as well.
      • SolitarySoviet, on 04/30/2008, -0/+1I would say killed not locked away... there's only so much space on this earth and more and more people every day to occupy it.. we don't need people like that using up everybody else's resources, hell we shouldn't even waste the power to fry em... we have to think green and suffocate such people. :-)
    • bjornski, on 04/30/2008, -0/+6Wait, so now it's the LIBERALS defending the Catholic priests?

      Project much?

      Get your head out of your ass. Every time you start a sentence with "are you left wing liberals...." you KNOW it's going to be full of *****, and absolutely lacking any facts.
      • SolitarySoviet, on 04/30/2008, -1/+4read his other comments hes still stuck in the hate democrats, atheists, and damned dirty socialists mindset... me thinks hes just another brainwashed fool stuck in the past and trying his hardest to force his beliefs down the throats of others in a desperate attempt to make his life matter before he dies... I sure wish those types would go out with a squeak instead of a bang.. (well unless the bang is a self induced shotgun wound.)
    • SolitarySoviet, on 04/30/2008, -1/+3dont listen to Scheissen hes totally a pedo himself
  • pedo, on 04/30/2008, -15/+8this sounds like my kinda religion! where do you sign up??
    • Pink05, on 04/30/2008, -1/+1Does 'Pedo' stand for 'pedo'phile by chance? ew loser
      • pedo, on 04/30/2008, -0/+1does pink05 stand for "fat and ugly" by chance? ew loser
        • Pink05, on 04/30/2008, -1/+0haha clever comment back..how long did it take u to think that one up..thats why u have -5 diggs you disgusting peice of sh*t PEDOPHILE
          • pedo, on 04/30/2008, -0/+1i'm rubber you're glue whatever you say bounces off me and sticks to you
  • meghalc, on 04/30/2008, -11/+10I guess we found the White ghetto?! lol
  • nixfu, on 04/30/2008, -10/+25

    Funny how similar all this sounds to everyday normal life in a typical islamic country to me.

    Sex and marriage to lots of young girls based on religion (aka pedophile prophet), abuse of women and children etc... yep...just like a typical middle east country normal life.


    Why are people not saying "you have to just understand its all part of their culture" for this case like they do to excuse the barbaric behavior of the followers of the pedophile, murderous warlord Mohammed?


    • Schleiden, on 04/30/2008, -4/+9Except this happened in America.
    • karaokekidd, on 04/30/2008, -10/+5They are white. White people must be uniform, especially white men. We are slaves, work till you die, no time to think comrade.
    • Adamande, on 04/30/2008, -0/+2Exactly what "typical islamic country" are you referring to?
    • warlokaz2004, on 04/30/2008, -0/+2In afghanistan a girl is a 'woman' and married by the ripe old age of 13
  • odiego, on 04/30/2008, -12/+6Warren Jeff for President.
  • Corrosionx, on 04/30/2008, -12/+2I tell you this was all a ploy to get birth certificates on these people and turn them into citizens/milk cows for the government.
    • fadeout, on 04/30/2008, -1/+5LOL, how did I guess you'd be a Paultard before looking at your account.

      Are the communists after their precious bodily fluids, too?
      • Corrosionx, on 04/30/2008, -2/+1You clearly have no idea how the system works. They issue a birth certificate when you are born and get loans on that, based on how much they calculate you will pay in taxes in your life. This is a fact. You're just a dumbass who's waiting for the authorities to tell you how to think.
  • fnordy, on 04/30/2008, -2/+10I guess Bush's Abstinence replacement for Sex Ed isn't working too well...
    • bjornski, on 04/30/2008, -2/+5It never did work. Statistics show that pregnancy rates in the "ignorance only" zones increased, not decreased.

      But hey, gotta spend more money to "just say no" and provide zero services or results. That's the conservative way.
      • Jashobeam5, on 04/30/2008, -1/+1The main reason teens have sex, aside from cults like this, is that their parents don't care. This is the result in study after study of teens. When parents are loving, keep communication open with their kids, explian their desire of the kids to wait till they are older to have sex, and the girls have a healthy self image the rates of teens having sex goes way down.
  • furi0us1, on 04/30/2008, -6/+12I know I'm gonna be dugg down for this, but honestly how is what they're doing any different than what any religion does? You indoctrinate your children with your beliefs before they're mature enough to decide for themselves. You shield them, as best as you can, from opposing views. This is exactly what this cult has done with their children, although obviously the outcome here is much worse for the kids. But isn't this just a different degree of the same evil? How can you be outraged at this and not be outraged at religious indoctrination in general?
    • parrotscience, on 04/30/2008, -5/+2Thank you Richard Dawkins.
      • BlacklabelSAR, on 04/30/2008, -1/+3His comment was 100% accurate, and so is Richard Dawkins.
        • empiric, on 04/30/2008, -1/+2How long until that decaying old crank gets naturally deselected, anyway?

          Fact is, "The God Delusion" is nothing but indoctrination for book-cash. Otherwise, he'd write an objective science book, not one explicitly predicated by its very title on pre-requiring and then parasiting off of religion. But, since you agree, you'll let slide the fact his description of religion historically and presently is nothing but a erroneous caricature that you like, and therefore you call it "accurate" and "fact" rather than "indoctrination".
    • Schleiden, on 04/30/2008, -6/+3Who says there aren't people outraged at religious indoctrination? My parents were religious, yet they never forced me into anything.

      Enjoy your logical fallacies.
      • furi0us1, on 05/01/2008, -0/+1Congratulations on being in one of the exceptions to my generalization when it comes to devout families.
    • dildobaggins, on 04/30/2008, -1/+5Yeah, I agree 100%.
      One thing that's always gotten me about religion is that you can get away with just about anything so long as you tack on the name of your God or savior to it. Damn, I used to hate the Sunday crowd when I worked in a restaurant, they were always the rudest assholes (and cheap too). guess they were forgiven the week's sins and could head out and be mean all over again for another week.....and it only cost them a $20.00 donation in the collection plate.
      • ammundsen, on 04/30/2008, -0/+2That is not surprising. If they were devout Christians they probably wouldn't have been having someone else work on the Sabbath during church hours to provide them with lunch. Rather, they'd be at home having a family dinner. The people you are talking about are show Christians.
        • Jashobeam5, on 04/30/2008, -0/+1Sabbath? That's Saturday. There is no NT law on keeping the Sabbath anymore. Paul wrote a bit about that, and Jesus even explained the reason for the Sabbath.

          Just because people are coming from a religious institution on a Sunday does not mean they are actually religious. I do agree a lot of people are just "show." You can tell a true Christian if they follow Christ's leadership which includes the Fruit of the Spirt- "love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control."
    • empiric, on 04/30/2008, -0/+1You think you're going to be Dugg down for that? Nothing gets automatically Dugg up like broad-brush generalizing attacks on all "religion".

      Reality check, though, I was raised Lutheran and wasn't "shielded" from anything--notable case in point, asking for and getting (strident atheist) Ayn Rand books for Christmas. I was allowed to pursue whatever views I wanted, and decide for myself. When your perception gets more aligned with reality, you'll be aware most Christian denominations are of this nature, rather than like the FLDS.
      • Jashobeam5, on 04/30/2008, -0/+1Well, said! My parents never checked to see what books I was reading. They provided guidance and morals and encouraged me to learn about a variety of topics, even those they didn't agree with.

        I was "shielded" though, not from information, but from violent people.
      • furi0us1, on 05/01/2008, -0/+0Well thats great for you. But I obviously wasn't talking about those families that saw the inside of a church a handful of times a year. I was referring to people that are devout. Perhaps I should have made myself more clear for those that are overly defensive.

        Furthermore, there are always going to be a handful of exceptions. You being one of those exceptions doesn't disprove the rule. My "generalization" is accurate as a whole for those families that are devout.
  • binaryloop, on 04/30/2008, -5/+9Looks like the other 22 have been slacking off. Back to the kitchen with you!
    • vuke69, on 04/30/2008, -2/+3Surely you mean bedroom?
      • SolitarySoviet, on 04/30/2008, -3/+1no no kitchen first THEN bedroom... their going to want a damn sandwich ready the moment their done with them, and have you ever tasted baloney and recently raped teenager tears? far too much sodium for the health of these old pedo rapists.... eating like that wont allow them to be 85 and still banging 14 year olds.. seriously what kind of total psycho are you???

        /sarcasm

        serious note... Kill them all.... really.
  • dildobaggins, on 04/30/2008, -7/+7Damn,
    I need to hang out with Mormons more.
    And to think, I thought they were just a bunch of sick, ***** up assholes.
    Wait, 14-17? Never mind, guess I was right.
    • iRelinquish, on 04/30/2008, -6/+5fundamentalist mormons. AKA not the real mormon church!
      • Izult, on 05/02/2008, -1/+1That depends entirely on who you ask. Technically the "real" Mormon church is disobeying a revelation. Rather convenient that they got the revelation to stop all practice of polygamy around the same time they were getting admitted to the Union as a State wouldn't you say?
    • Tishiablo, on 04/30/2008, -2/+2Says Dildo Baggins...
    • warlokaz2004, on 04/30/2008, -1/+1I had a Mormon teacher for a class, he showed us pics of how he, his brother in law, and their wives dressed all amish for holoween....they were Polygamists. Basically in the big scheme of things, everything we make fun of Mormons for, mormons turn around and make fun of Polygamists for. Always gotta be a bottom bitch.
      • Izult, on 05/02/2008, -1/+1that's super funny since they believe in the Celestial kingdom that they'll be practicing it anyhow.
  • Aaronraw, on 04/30/2008, -9/+1So...They put out? Too soon?
  • iRelinquish, on 04/30/2008, -3/+14(FLDS)fundamentalist mormons = pedo's hiding behind a religion.
    Those people are not LDS Mormons.
    Any of those people would have been excomunicated from the (Utah) lds church in a heart beat.
    • Yage2006, on 04/30/2008, -3/+4It is worse when its not a cult though and a big religion like catholics.
      • SolitarySoviet, on 04/30/2008, -1/+2so how big does it have to get before cult turns into big religion?? its all the same to me... and to be honest the most godless people Ive ever met have been the most religious...

        it just seems Religion = stop thinking for yourself and dont have morals unless they are written down for you and preached by a sexually frustrated old white man with homosexual tendencies
        • Jashobeam5, on 04/30/2008, -0/+1Cult- If you leave you are dead to us, and that may mean physically.
          Religion- You are welcome to stop attending our services or move to another church.

          You apparently don't understand religion, but you feel free to hate it. Sounds like intollerance to me.
    • lhbaker, on 04/30/2008, -2/+11True, but Joseph Smith is still to blame. The LDS denounced polygamy only under enormous political pressure.
      • SushiCW, on 04/30/2008, -1/+4Polygamy isn't the problem. The problem is men who shouldn't even be allowed ONE wife.
    • Izult, on 05/02/2008, -1/+2Really? So i suppose not a single one of them believe that by following the revelation of Joseph Smith, that they're guaranteed a place in the Celestial Kingdom? None of 'em right?
  • DaviDTC, on 04/30/2008, -1/+7Someone probably already mentioned this, but they just said that one of the girls, under 18, just had a baby boy while being held.
    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24356447
  • gaapgod, on 04/30/2008, -10/+3Who else is really tired of this story? Can we go after people who are actually hurting human society for once? Like Paris Hilton....
    Buried.
    • SolitarySoviet, on 04/30/2008, -4/+1mod parent up!!!! Paris Hilton is ***** evil (and has a UGLY horse face too)

      if damage to female respect could me meaured in lives... Paris would be the new Hitler
  • lhbaker, on 04/30/2008, -2/+11Who the ***** would defend this *****?
    • gaapgod, on 04/30/2008, -7/+1I'm not DEFENDING it, just pointing out that it's tired news. Jeez does every comment need to come with a caveat?
    • awianch, on 04/30/2008, -5/+2I will, I'd rather live free with these people than a soicety that's under control Do I agree with it, hell no, but what do I care. And the children thing seems like a familiar battle cry. I don't believe the government because they have an agenda (gain of power, and they don't like secret society's) plus they've fooled us on this one so many times I need more proof than what I've seen so far.
      • lhbaker, on 04/30/2008, -0/+4Child-rape is not part of a free society. Are those girls free because they believe they'll go to hell if they don't marry their uncle because the 'prophet' told them to?
  • ussoldier, on 04/30/2008, -20/+3Nobody has yet to ever put together a convincing solidly compeling argument that:

    1. Sex with women younger than 18 is 'evil'
    Humans, in fact, have been doing it for millions of years before so called "modern society". In some cultures, particularly ones that have not been run over and ground into the ground by Western Culture, it is still quite accepted. Modern Western Society really isn't all that grand or enlightened... most of our food is toxic, people are obese, purile, petty, and stupid as they ever were. Some could argue that it would 'hurt' the female, but females are built to pass a baby through... sorry, any male penis is small by comparison. Psychologist argue trauma and psychlogical damage to the so called 'underaged' person, but this also is nonsense... this could happen also in mature relationships, as well as joy and pleasure. It has nothing to do with the age, but rather, the total experience and how you experience and perceive it. I have had acadmeic discussions with girls that had sex when they were extremely young (11, 12), and they were rather normal, and did not regard it as having been traumatic at all, but rather, experimental.

    2. Incest is 'evil'
    The best I have heard is that it may in some cases cause birth defects, but this is (1) only if the sex produces children and (2) sex between non related people can produce birth defects as well and (3) a huge majority of time during sexual intercourse, it is undertaken simply for enjoyments sake, not to get pregnant (4) condoms prevent pregnancy, therefore, whatever arguement against incest that was based on birth defects, falls to pieces when safe sex is practiced during incest.

    3. May - December relationships are 'evil'.
    Best argument I've seen is against the difference between the maturity levels and life stages of the two people, but this is crap. There are people who will never mature, even at 60, and then there are kids that are mature far beyond their years. If anything, intelligence seems to matter more than age.

    I am sick to death of Western Society blanket calling things 'evil' simply because it offends your own neurotic hangups and morees about sex... the fact is, not everybody shares your views, or wishes to be limited or restricted by your frumpy, neurotic, retrograde view about sex. Unlike gravity, I see no law of the universe anywhere that says that sex with a child is wrong, sex with your sister is wrong, or sex with someones grandfather is wrong. All three are physically possible, all three can, like any other sex, be done without physical or psychological harm of any kind being incurred (on the contrary, producing sexual pleasure), and all three should be destigmitized... finally, and we should stop persecuting people and lovers and couples who do not fit our tightwad Puritananical views. The Puritans are long dead and gone.
    • ussoldier, on 04/30/2008, -12/+3I just want to add: in the case of the 11-12 girls having sex, they initiated or were equal participants in the relationship.

      and if you really want to discuss ***** up sexual evil taboo relationships, lets talk about:

      1. Sex outside of marriage
      2. Interracial Sex
      3. Gay sex, between the same genders

      All three were, until very recently, in Western Culture, outlawed, considered vilely evil, persecuted, prosecuted, villified... and in some cases lynchings ensued. Today, they are widespread and common, so much so I dare say 90% of the people here have enaged in any one of those 3. I dare say so many people here have engaged in sex outside of marriage even, that its hard to even conceive otherwise, that at one time it was strictly outlawed and harsh measures were taken against people just for having sex without being married. Today, we think "butt out" if someone was to critizize us, its our business... and thats exactly the same with other relationships... butt out, its none of your business what we do with our bodies or how we live our lives... it really isn't.

      If I'm 13,and I want to have a relationship with someone who is 25, for example, who are you to interfere in my life or love life. I don't know you from jack. As 13, I didn't vote on any of your laws, I have have had any input in any of your laws or rules or been asked to agree to or been consulted on any of them, so basically, ***** off.
      • goffy59, on 04/30/2008, -1/+10You are ***** nuts!
      • Zekarus, on 04/30/2008, -2/+5You are the biggest argument against genetic defect due to incest and cults brainwashing you to point where you're a ***** retard.

        That is all. Please do one [and only] service to humanity by dying in a fire.
      • dazparkour, on 04/30/2008, -1/+2I prefer my gay sex between different genders...
        Really though, that is all the proof I need to know you don't need any real response, however (paraphrased) "If I'm 13, I didn't get to vote, therefor, I shouldn't follow the law", I'll correct you - because you are too immature to make decisions on running a country, you damn well better do what your told.
      • bingobongony, on 04/30/2008, -1/+1It is amazing that ussoldier can type what he does and STILL claim that he did not have sex with the 5 year old girl and say that he was wrongly impirosoned for doing so.

        Remember...this is a guy who called 14-15 year old girls bitches for not wanting to "webcam" with him on stickam after finding out that he was almost 40 years old. (Keep in mind that this was AFTER he spent over a year in jail for molesting a 5 year old...so he didn't learn his lesson.)
    • plecostomus, on 04/30/2008, -2/+8It's not the underage sex that's inherently evil.

      It's indoctrinating girls to believe that they MUST HAVE SEX with whatever man their cult the leaders pick out for them that's evil, and then slamming them to the bed even when the "religious values" don't take. It's rape. Even the boys are forced to take on this life or get kicked out of their community, so it's unfair to both sexes.
    • jayb1rd, on 04/30/2008, -1/+5You must be a member of NAMBLA or something.

      But seriously, let's face it, consent laws exist for a reason. Here in Kansas, we have the "Romeo & Juliet Clause" which makes it so that two teenagers cannot get in trouble for a consenting relationship and you can have sex with a minor as long as they are only 2 years younger than you. The bottom line is, the FLDS girls did not CHOOSE this lifestyle. I think it's really interesting that so many of you bash scientology because it's "weird" but in cases like this where young girls are being RAPED suddenly it's their fault.
    • SolitarySoviet, on 04/30/2008, -4/+3WOW I mean WOW.. reading your comment and the second addition to it I would have to agree with goffy... YOU ARE ***** OFF YOUR ROCKER... you must have been seriously brain damaged to defend these pedos, underage sex, and incest and then turn around and condemn Interracial sex, sex outside of marriage, and gays.... honestly WHAT THE ***** IS WRONG WITH YOU......

      oh wait the name "US Soldier" explains it... typical American psycho... eat a cheeseburger and go kill some babies you ***** nutter.
      • jerrycurley, on 05/03/2008, -0/+1He is defending pedophiles becuase he IS one! Check his Digg history.


        However..you are a little pussy ass bitch who would ***** his pants at the first sing of trouble. If you saw a real US Soldier in person, you would not be Mr. Internet Tough Guy. Go home to mommy.
    • mike17032, on 04/30/2008, -0/+3Why dont you have a seat over there?

      I bet this isnt the first time you have heard that.
      • jerrycurley, on 05/03/2008, -0/+0It isn't. He has already spent time in jail for molesting a 5 year old.
    • Pink05, on 04/30/2008, -1/+0You were definitely a product of your father and sister...you were also repeatedly raped by your daddy/grandfather as a child and your a dirty pedophile.. I feel really bad if you have any daughters..your a disgrace to the American people...what a disgusting f*cking pig you are..you should be ashamed of yourself
    • Pink05, on 04/30/2008, -0/+1HE IS A KNOWN PEDOPHILEE!!!!!!

      ussoldier on 04/17/2008
      "Speaking as someone who was falsely convicted of child molestation, and spent 2 years in prison on a 10 year sentence before winning my appeal, and almost dying in there from having diabetes that was untreated... all I got to say is, ***** YOU BACK. ROYALLY. FOR REAL, BUDDY. BURN IN HELL YOU SON OF A BITCH. I would be dead, or still in prison, if, even as tired and fatigued as I was, I didn't fight for my very life to escape that thunderdome.

      You have no idea what its like to be falsely accused of something like that, tried, convicted without a shred of evidence... its like being burned alive as a witch in the Middle Ages... even there is evidence to the contrary... its terrifying, expensive, confusing, nightmarish. And it only gets worse. You don't stand a chance in hell in court no matter how plainly you speak. Why? Because of high and mighty son of a bitches like you who think with their vindictive punitive mentality, and not with logic or reason. And it only gets worse. Prison is a hellish nightmare, and about 1000 times worse if you have some kind of medical illness like I did.. which is fine on the outside as long as I can get normal nutrition... but inside prison, its near concentration camp conditions. I would be dead today if I hadn't of fought for my life and gotten out.

      How did it happen to me? I was invited to some friends house. I didn't want to go, but they pestered me. It got late, but they kept insisting on me staying. While I was there, the mom jumped on her 4 year old daughter to take her bath, over and over again, but she wouldn't. When they finally took the kid to take her bath, the mom asked her why her clothes were funny, and she blamed it on me. Said I stuck my finger in her. What the hell. The mom freaks, the cops are called, etc. "
  • JamalJenkins, on 07/14/2008, -1/+4I'm surprised this didn't happen in Utah. Since when did Texas > Utah for underage chicks married to fat slobs?