Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.
Polygamist sect hearing in Texas descends into farce
apnews.myway.com — The case, clearly one of the biggest, most convoluted child-custody hearings in U.S. history; presented an extraordinary spectacle: big-city lawyers in suits and mothers in 19th-century, pioneer-style dresses, all packed into a courtroom and a nearby auditorium connected by video.
petsheep- 657 diggs
- digg it
- SuperWinner, on 04/18/2008, -30/+136Religious people, lol
- pell, on 04/18/2008, -17/+5haha! perfect way to some it up. nice work.
- 16777216, on 04/18/2008, -21/+11I don't see anything funny. These people have had their rights violated, honestly there is no justice, due process or anything here.
- Ebulating, on 04/18/2008, -4/+11Additional details on life at the ranch began to emerge as child welfare investigator Angie Voss testified.
She said that if one of the men fell out of favor with the FLDS, his wives and children would be reassigned to other men. The children would then identify the new man as their father. Voss said that contributed to the problem of identifying children's family links and their ages.
http://apnews.myway.com//article/20080418/D903UFP0 ... - yakski, on 04/18/2008, -8/+18What a crock of crap.. These people follow a nutcase polygamist that arbitrarily allows old men to rape underage teenage girls.. girls that have no idea what is going on because they are brought up in total isolation from the real world... It is truly sad!!!!!!! It is tantamount to slavery. The adults that agree to this, are most often completely brain washed or sadly just completely isolated and uneducated. This would never have happened had the laws against polygamy been enforced, but because these communities (and yes there are many of them) also own the local justice system barely anybody is ever ever ever prosecuted. It is incredibly sad that you think this way. If this had been Islamic polygamists you would be all over it for being unlawful but because they are "christian" polygamists you think it is ok. Child abuse is child abuse no matter what religion.
- fyngyrz, on 04/18/2008, -7/+7Polygamy has nothing to do with child abuse. They're separate issues entirely, just as monogamous marriage and child abuse are separate issues.
The problems here have nothing to do with polygamy. The problems that we should be looking at here are child abuse and the sundering of family bonds by influences outside the family. Both the sect *and* the state are pretty obviously complicit in the latter, if the reports of the state's and sect's behaviors are true.
Polygamy itself is a perfectly reasonable social arrangement, given only that all members of the arrangement are capable of, and have given, informed consent.
The only reason polygamy is illegal is because one set of people is imposing their choice of personal religious and social norms on another set by force. Which is despicable. There's no rational basis for banning polygyny or polyandry at all. - yakski, on 04/18/2008, -5/+8Polygamy is a large part of the problem that is obvious. These communities have hidden themselves and isolated themselves to prevent prosecution. You will never see raids on Amish people precisely because they are somewhat integrated into the local communities. Amish follow their own religion but also the local/state/federal laws. These polygamists communities are by definition breaking the law which is the entire reason they isolate themselves and try to establish local justice systems based on their prophet and the FLDS church in complete disagreement with any other judicial standard. The place themselves out of and above the law which is why bizarre child abuse is allowed to flourish.
- fyngyrz, on 04/18/2008, -5/+7So what you mean to say is that the laws against polygamy are the problem. Because without those laws, there'd be no need to hide a polygamous marriage, would there? And as it turns out, the only reason for these particular laws is religious coercion, so again, we've determined that the root cause of the problem is one religion inflicting its ideas of what is "right" on another.
If we stop trying to inflict our ideas of what personal, informed choices are "ok" upon others, there will be a lot less hiding and ducking in general. But if people want to rape kids, they're going to hide regardless of anything else, and so AGAIN we see that the issue of polygamy isn't pivotal, much less relevant. Except as governmental abuse of people's personal choices and liberties, of course. - 98percentcogdis, on 04/19/2008, -1/+2I just happened to read "Escape" by Carolyn Jessop about a month before the raid on the FLDS compound. She was "married to Meryl Jessop, the guy that has taken charge of the compound since the arrest of the "prophet" Warren Jeffs. It sounds like a lot of "sucking up" goes on to be the # 2 guy in the Polygamist communities in the first place. You can call it politics if you want to, but the game is played a totally different way than conventional politics. In her community (which she left right before the move to the Texas location) things began to change drastically when Warren Jeffs took the position of "prophet" That's when the mandate went out to kill all the community dogs, and the mandate that red clothing was no longer allowed. That is also when the old (pedophiles) started to marry girls that were under age. It was bad enough before that though. Carolyn was married to Meryl Jessop (I don't remember, but somewhere between age 18-20) Meryl was three times her age. She joined a family as the third wife, (her "step daughters were older than her) by the time she escaped there were four or five more wives and a lot more internal abuse. The wife that is preferred has power over the other wives and children, and their children have power over the other (less preferred) wives children. So sex is the thing with the women that gains the power. You have to be the wife that the husband prefers to have sex with. The sad thing is that even the woman's own children will abuse their own mother, if she is at the bottom of this power struggle. Also, the wife with "favor" can beat the ***** out of your children (for being "rebellious" and there is nothing you can do about it, especially if you are the wife that is designated (by the husband) to work in the community and away from your children. It sounds like the biggest nightmare to me. So, I would have to disagree with fyngyrz, there is no equitable way that polygamy could ever work! Period! Human nature will not allow for it.
- fyngyrz, on 04/18/2008, -5/+7So what you mean to say is that the laws against polygamy are the problem. Because without those laws, there'd be no need to hide a polygamous marriage, would there? And as it turns out, the only reason for these particular laws is religious coercion, so again, we've determined that the root cause of the problem is one religion inflicting its ideas of what is "right" on another.
- Tahiri, on 04/18/2008, -7/+8"Polygamy has nothing to do with child abuse"
No, it has everything to do with it, hence why it's illegal you moron- fyngyrz, on 04/18/2008, -6/+5So... by your reasoning, if something is illegal, it's because it causes child abuse? Did you know it is illegal to keep a pet in some places? Also to fly a flag on your porch... must be because it causes child abuse, eh?
As an example of clear thinking, you're not exactly the Poster Child, although it is obvious that your reasoning is indeed childish. - yakski, on 04/19/2008, -1/+3Your thinking is clearly moronic and childish ... indeed reviewing your posts you obviously support child abuse, rape, and molestation. but hey don't let the facts of the case get in your way ... just keep on letting the old men rape the children .. I am sure at 12 years old their consent is really not even needed (that is sarcasm since I clearly need to tell you... oops you may need to look up the word sarcasm in the dictionary). And those boys, let the old men molest them also then throw them out of the sect when they get too old... wow.. you are just sad.
- mahdaeng, on 04/22/2008, -1/+1Please enlighten us, Tahiri. What does polygamy have to do with child abuse? In your explanation, could you also address how leaving bastard children strewn across the world as a result of promiscuity is higher and more noble and better for the children involved than a man marrying more than one woman and supporting for them and the children that result from those unions.
Give it your very best shot.
- fyngyrz, on 04/18/2008, -6/+5So... by your reasoning, if something is illegal, it's because it causes child abuse? Did you know it is illegal to keep a pet in some places? Also to fly a flag on your porch... must be because it causes child abuse, eh?
- designerutah, on 04/18/2008, -3/+4Polygamy "as these people practiced it" has to do with child abuse. Polygamy, the concept of more than one woman being married to a man at the same time, has nothing to do with child abuse. It in fact, has nothing to do with children at all. Yes, children MAY be born into a polygamous relationship. So what? The 3 wives, one husband thing isn't about child abuse. It's possible for a polygamous couple to raise children without child abuse. Doesn't mean it's your cup of tea. But it can be done.
- yakski, on 04/18/2008, -2/+3I agree... polygamy as the FDLS practice it has everything to do with this child abuse and rape issue... And, polygamy by consenting adults is possible without the FLDS church. But we are talking about this case where it has everything to do with it. It is also unlawful.. period. Right or wrong this law makes it a crime to have more than one wife. To be polygamous means you are breaking the law as it stands today. If you wish to change the law go ahead but the only real way you can be polygamous today is either to hide yourself like these people or lie about it, as happens throughout Utah and other western states. There are currently entire towns on welfare because the so-called unwed mothers who are really in polygamous marriages can collect free money since they have never been legally married. So while polygamy itself is not the cause of child abuse it is the case here that it is related to the issue. It is also the case that polygamy is a large part of the original Mormon teachings which allow and actually promote this kind of child abuse.
- fyngyrz, on 04/18/2008, -2/+3"Right or wrong this law "
yeah. That'd be... WRONG. - yakski, on 04/19/2008, -2/+4It does not matter since it is the law... change it or obey it.
- PeppermintPig, on 04/19/2008, -2/+3It was once the law in Germany to rat out your neighbors, to turn Jews and dissidents into the government. If I were to take the low road and make wild assumptions, I'd have to say you support this kind of crap. At the very least, however, I would have to say you don't think these issues out sufficiently and give overly simple answers.
There's no justification for kidnapping 400+ individuals in order to find a single person who may or may not have called to report a rape. How piss poor are the police that they can't even conduct a proper investigation? It's a tragedy and a waste. - yakski, on 04/19/2008, -2/+2PeppermintPig... You are just an idiot!!!! Nowhere ever did I say things like that or support things like that.. you definitely live on the low road.... and if you had a brain in your head you would not support child abuse ...pure and simple you are stupid beyond belief... Yeah you go ahead and let the old men screw the children both male and female... that's right, former MALE sect members also have talked about molestation... But hey don't let the facts get in the way of your sweeping stupidity.
- PeppermintPig, on 04/19/2008, -1/+3What's stupid is that I outlined a low blow tactic for you, and then you pursued the belief that I actually meant it. I was setting an example of how people drop context in order to slam others rather than pursue an INTELLIGENT dialog on the issue. You are quick to use emotional arguments and slander. Never did I say child molestation was good.
- yakski, on 04/19/2008, -2/+2You started the moronic comments .......... INTELLIGENT dialog is obviously beyond your grasp... YOU are supporting child molestation... therefore you approve...
- mahdaeng, on 04/22/2008, -1/+1@yakski:
You're right. Calling people morons and idiots is one of the hallmarks of intelligent dialog. - yakski, on 04/22/2008, -1/+1@mahdaeng .. obviously you care little about the abuse of the children... You would rather write sniping sarcastic comments than show any intelligence and educate yourself about the issue... Sexual abuse, physical abuse and emotional abuse must be less important to you than writing sarcastic comments.
- mahdaeng, on 04/23/2008, -1/+1@yakski:
Surely you can't believe that anyone desires the abuse of children. Your ad hominem and straw man attacks are tiring - but I'll humor you. Point out where, exactly, I stated that I was in favor of child abuse. If you cannot do that, then as a gentleman and objective thinker, you should apologize and retract your accusations.
- fyngyrz, on 04/18/2008, -7/+7Polygamy has nothing to do with child abuse. They're separate issues entirely, just as monogamous marriage and child abuse are separate issues.
- Ebulating, on 04/18/2008, -4/+11Additional details on life at the ranch began to emerge as child welfare investigator Angie Voss testified.
- designer, on 04/18/2008, -26/+9Religious people have built and continue to defend the country you enjoy. Don't be a douchebag.
- cranium, on 04/18/2008, -3/+16Not really, but they're really good at trying to take credit for it.
- designer, on 04/18/2008, -10/+3What?
- djbon2112, on 04/18/2008, -3/+15Last time I checked, most of the Founding Fathers were either Deists or anti-religion. Not a single one was Christian. So yes, "Religious people" (i.e. Christians) are really good at trying to take credit for it.
- kosan, on 04/18/2008, -8/+8@djbon2112
Umm... first of all I wouldn't say that out country was built by only the founding fathers. As far as I'm concerned they started it and we continue to build on their foundation.
That argument aside let's look at the Founding Fathers religious affiliations (taken from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Founding_Fathers_of_t ... )
"28 were Episcopalian, 8 were Presbyterians, 7 were Congregationalists, 2 were Lutherans, 2 were Dutch Reformed, and 2 were Methodists"
This leads me to wonder... when was the "last time [you] checked"? Your absurd statement of "Not a single one was Christian" could have been avoided if you had take two seconds to actually check. - pauldy, on 04/18/2008, -5/+3djbon2112 you are what is wrong with the world today. Take partial facts and pervert it into religion being evil. Your a royal turd. There were many people who weren't exactly for organized religion having seen the effects of a church run state. So don't be a dill hole and refer to them as anti religion because they weren't they themselves were religious and believe it or not more than half of the know affiliations believed in the teachings of Jesus. You should spent more time reading your history lessons instead of trying to school others.
- djbon2112, on 04/19/2008, -1/+2@pauldy: Where in my post did I say religion was evil? Though, I have to say, if wanting to get rid of religion makes me "what's wrong with the world today", I'm quite disappointed there's so much right.
@kosan: And the 5 most important were. "Some of them often related their anti-organized church leanings in their speeches and correspondence, including George Washington, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson (who created the "Jefferson Bible"), Benjamin Franklin, and Thomas Paine. ... Several of the Founding Fathers considered themselves to be deists or held beliefs very similar to that of traditional Deists, including Franklin, Jefferson, Paine and Ethan Allen.[11]" - designer, on 04/21/2008, -1/+2The founding fathers hated God and religion so much they held church service in the Capitol?
- Jashobeam5, on 04/21/2008, -1/+1And said that Jesus should be taught about in all US schools, and put Bible verses all over DC monuments, and quoted Scripture frequently in their letters and diaries, and said non-Christians should never hold office, and plead for God's mercy in prayers during official meetings.
- designer, on 04/18/2008, -10/+3What?
- Tahiri, on 04/18/2008, -2/+3In wars they create.
- cranium, on 04/18/2008, -3/+16Not really, but they're really good at trying to take credit for it.
- TFGeditor, on 04/18/2008, -4/+6More like horny, perverted religious people.
- raeshao, on 04/18/2008, -1/+2Comedy gold.
- LeeSoong, on 04/18/2008, -5/+3Well, how about Texas going after ALL the Bishops, Cardinals, Priests, and every member of every Catholic Church?
Isn't all religion just one big conspiracy to commit Fraud - the constant retelling of fables and mythological fairy tales ? Why believe the drug induced ramblings of sheep and goat herders?
Texas shouldn't save all it's Bigotry for Mormons who believe in the saving grace of plural marriage,
destroy the 1st Amendment rights of Catholics too.
- caponumen, on 04/18/2008, -22/+8Big surprise, case DISMISSED..........
- Evildudetx, on 04/18/2008, -0/+2Bigger suprise - all the adult women are sent off so they can be deprogrammed while their children go to normal homes........any adult male found guilty of doing anything to a girl under 17 goes to jail.......
- rexona, on 04/18/2008, -13/+29is that a banjo i can hear?
- MacEnvy, on 04/18/2008, -4/+11No. Banjos are tools of Satan, designed to make us want to dance!
- FlyingSpaghetti, on 04/18/2008, -0/+2My bad. I thought that was David Bowie!
- slantyeyed, on 04/18/2008, -2/+2i think you hear not one, but TWO banjos. they're dueling.
- MacEnvy, on 04/18/2008, -4/+11No. Banjos are tools of Satan, designed to make us want to dance!
- chanop, on 04/18/2008, -18/+4I'd hit it
- kidcodea, on 04/18/2008, -0/+3unibrow fetish uh?
- legendxx, on 04/18/2008, -25/+16They all let 50 year old men marry 10 year old girls. GUILTY
These people make Arab culture look mild.- computershack, on 04/18/2008, -13/+5WTF are you on about? Marrying girls barely in double figures was common in the USA in the 17th,18th and 19th Century. As soon as they entered puberty they were deemed old enough.
- legendxx, on 04/18/2008, -3/+7Yeah when the avg lifespan was around 42. Think before you speak.
- pianomahnn, on 04/18/2008, -6/+3You should do the same. Lifespan has nothing to do with a legally determined age of consent.
- legendxx, on 04/18/2008, -1/+5Are you dumb? If avg life span is less then it's logical to assume that everything else in life will be accelerated time-wise compared to today's standards.
You 'matured' emotionally much faster back then than you do these days because the majority of people didn't have the luxury of atleast 18 years of an education then a couple years of sitting on your ass then joining the workforce. Once you hit puberty you got a job. - PeppermintPig, on 04/18/2008, -3/+3But this particular culture operates on a completely different dynamic. We can debate intellectual maturity, but if these girls are getting pregnant, then they're sexually mature. So, are unnatural acts occurring?? No. But many are making moral judgments based on their cultural norms.
- legendxx, on 04/18/2008, -1/+5Are you dumb? If avg life span is less then it's logical to assume that everything else in life will be accelerated time-wise compared to today's standards.
- Jashobeam5, on 04/21/2008, -0/+2Conmputershack- That never happened. It's a myth. In the US throughout history it was common to wait till age 18 before marriage in most parts of the US.
- pianomahnn, on 04/18/2008, -6/+3You should do the same. Lifespan has nothing to do with a legally determined age of consent.
- Beatmiser, on 04/18/2008, -4/+6You do know what year this is, yes?
- fyngyrz, on 04/18/2008, -3/+2Yeah. This is the year posse commitatus was finally made 100% ineffective; this is another year we tortured people; this is another year we don't need warrants first, search second; this is another year you no longer have the right to an attorney or a hearing; this is another year you can be wiretapped freely; this is another year the US turned its satellites inward upon its own citizens; this is another year citizens were raided by the feds for instate issues using authority only given for interstate issues -- some of this has happened before, but it is getting much, much worse. Polygamy laws have never been reasonable, they're just a religious hangover, or in other words, just an artifact of crippled, exclusivist morality built on, and justified by, superstition.
And yes, this is another year that the MORONS in Washington and state capitals continue to attempt to define "informed consent" of physically mature individuals by drawing a line in the sand about the issue of age, instead of just trying to find out if the individual was capable of informed consent by asking the appropriate questions.
There are certainly many people under that age line who are capable of informed consent, and conversely, there are many over it who are *not* capable of informed consent (just watch Jerry Springer to see some of them.) Age always was a stupid and poorly performing mechanism to try and manage the issue. But after all, that's the history of our lawmakers: Almost uniformly stupid and under-performing.
- fyngyrz, on 04/18/2008, -3/+2Yeah. This is the year posse commitatus was finally made 100% ineffective; this is another year we tortured people; this is another year we don't need warrants first, search second; this is another year you no longer have the right to an attorney or a hearing; this is another year you can be wiretapped freely; this is another year the US turned its satellites inward upon its own citizens; this is another year citizens were raided by the feds for instate issues using authority only given for interstate issues -- some of this has happened before, but it is getting much, much worse. Polygamy laws have never been reasonable, they're just a religious hangover, or in other words, just an artifact of crippled, exclusivist morality built on, and justified by, superstition.
- legendxx, on 04/18/2008, -3/+7Yeah when the avg lifespan was around 42. Think before you speak.
- mahdaeng, on 04/18/2008, -4/+9[[These people make Arab culture look mild.]]
Is that because they have more suicide bombers and honor killings?
- computershack, on 04/18/2008, -13/+5WTF are you on about? Marrying girls barely in double figures was common in the USA in the 17th,18th and 19th Century. As soon as they entered puberty they were deemed old enough.
- orangetiki, on 04/18/2008, -4/+15Looks like Little house on the Prairie meets Law and Order. Let the wackiness ensue.
Also wasn't it said that Al quaida (sp?) taught their people that if ever they were in American court to act a fool so they just get thrown out? - UtahApocalyse, on 04/18/2008, -10/+24The entire case is in shambles. They now have found a 33 year old black lady who was responsible for the phone call triggering the entire raid: http://www.sltrib.com/ci_8969094
- notouch, on 04/18/2008, -3/+8So what if they do end up finding underage girls being forced to marry old adult men? Would they still be able to prosecute the molesters? Or would the judge close the case before they gather enough evidence?
- UtahApocalyse, on 04/18/2008, -4/+6Yes, I don't have much doubt that any and all cases related to this now will be vid. All evidence will be considered to be 'fruit of the poisonous tree' Had Texas just followed the Rule of Law and Constitution wit a proper investigation they may have been able to convict quite a few sickos.
- dcmjzero, on 04/18/2008, -13/+10yeah, i really trust news from UTAH about this. i can't imagine UTAH would have a bias about this story.
- rendersan, on 04/18/2008, -1/+1You'd be surprised. The Salt Lake Tribune, which is where the story comes from, has little sympathy for the LDS church.
- omgwhat, on 04/19/2008, -2/+3Most Mormons in Utah are from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, which is a totally separate church from the one responsible for these compounds. The LDS church does NOT condone polygamy, and it has been outlawed for almost 120 years.
- yakski, on 04/22/2008, -1/+1That is only true in principle but not in practice... Polygamy is still widely practiced among traditional Mormon/LDS families in Utah, particularly rural Utah but even in Salt Lake City. Mormons realize the change by the church elders was ONLY made to avoid further persecution and prosecution. So though the LDS church speaks against polygamy they really use a "don't ask/don't tell" policy. Traditional LDS members are quietly waiting in the wings to see what happens with the gay marriage issue... if that changes they will undoubtedly seek to legalize polygamy so that they can once again follow Joseph Smith and Brigham Young's teachings more closely. That is not to say that many Mormons have traditional families and do not believe in polygamy... but there is still a large community of Mormons believing in, if not practicing, polygamy.
- rendersan, on 04/24/2008, -1/+2Um... I don't know where you get your information, but you are so utterly wrong on every point of what you just said. Do you even know any Mormons? Among the Mormons there is no sympathy for the practice of polygamy, no movement to bring it back, no tolerance for those that practice it or sympathize with those who do, no Sunday school lessons about the practice, no sly wink that it still goes on among us, and no self-identification as polygamists.
Or maybe by "traditional" LDS you are referring to the polygamists themselves and not the Mormons. I can assure you, there is nothing traditional and very little that's Mormon about what they're doing in their enclaves. The church was never about polygamy to begin with, even though that was one of its most unique characteristics in the 1800s. - yakski, on 04/24/2008, -1/+1That is just plain not true... Polygamy was a large part of Mormonism during the Brigham Young times, the man that largely shaped the Mormon philosophy. Polygamy is not just in the FLDS... but also among other Mormons, though the LDS church speaks strongly against it. Non-FLDS polygamy is widespread throughout Utah.. whether they are church going members or not is not known.. the little reports in the media are that they are a mix of LDS that are church members as well as LDS that are not church members. It surely can be said that the LDS church speaks against polygamy but it also can be said they strongly support just about every other facet of early Mormon philosophy... that being true the question of why not polygamy is the real question. This undoubtedly goes back to eliminating the main source of persecution as well as prosecution.
- rendersan, on 04/24/2008, -1/+2Um... I don't know where you get your information, but you are so utterly wrong on every point of what you just said. Do you even know any Mormons? Among the Mormons there is no sympathy for the practice of polygamy, no movement to bring it back, no tolerance for those that practice it or sympathize with those who do, no Sunday school lessons about the practice, no sly wink that it still goes on among us, and no self-identification as polygamists.
- yakski, on 04/22/2008, -1/+1That is only true in principle but not in practice... Polygamy is still widely practiced among traditional Mormon/LDS families in Utah, particularly rural Utah but even in Salt Lake City. Mormons realize the change by the church elders was ONLY made to avoid further persecution and prosecution. So though the LDS church speaks against polygamy they really use a "don't ask/don't tell" policy. Traditional LDS members are quietly waiting in the wings to see what happens with the gay marriage issue... if that changes they will undoubtedly seek to legalize polygamy so that they can once again follow Joseph Smith and Brigham Young's teachings more closely. That is not to say that many Mormons have traditional families and do not believe in polygamy... but there is still a large community of Mormons believing in, if not practicing, polygamy.
- yakski, on 04/18/2008, -6/+8Not true ....... as in a lie... this case is currently sealed but the report relates to the OTHER FLDS commune down in Colorado city on the Arizona border NOT to the Texas case ... as least not yet. You are basically manipulating the truth to provide an alibi for child rapists/molesters. The evidence has yet to be made public about this issue so you are incorrect. Moreover the reporting in SLC is incredibly biased .. especially since the Mormons now own controlling shares of SLC Tribune as well as run most of the local TV news stations.
- rendersan, on 04/18/2008, -0/+4The Tribune operates pretty independently of the LDS church. The Deseret News is the newspaper that is favorable to the church, and the two papers are often at odds on the same stories.
- yakski, on 04/22/2008, -0/+1The Tribune USED to be very independent... however due to financial troubles that most newspapers seem to have these days, they have been bought, I believe by the same person that owns the Deseret News... a very mormon paper...
- Tubal22, on 04/19/2008, -1/+2No, actually, the colorado report has nothing to do with the OTHER FLDS commune. They think that it had something to do with the Texas compound because Texas rangers were in Colorado interviewing her. This hoax lady called an ex member of the FLDS group claming that she had a sister named Sarah stuck in a compound. So it's pretty obvious that she was also the one that called Texas CPS. The bad thing is she had nothing to do with the FLDS. #1, she's black, and the FLDS would never allow a black person to be a member. #2, she also called the colorado authoritues, AND WAS CONVICTED OF THIS and said that she was locked in a basement in colorado springs and needed help. Colorado ended up searching through 10 homes before they realized it was a hoax.
Texas CPS went in with some kind of blanket warrant based on a call that they didn't investigate. Regardless of what these people do, even if they cut up and murder puppies and kittens, would all be thrown out in a court of law based on a faulty warrant. - mahdaeng, on 04/22/2008, -1/+1[[especially since the Mormons now own controlling shares of SLC Tribune as well as run most of the local TV news stations.]]
If you were a bit more astute, you could be the reigning master of the ad hominem and straw man attacks. Get your facts straight - and place them in the correct context. The "Mormons" do not own controlling shares of the media outlets you mentioned. People who are Mormons do, which is not a surprise when you consider that most Utah residents are Mormons. You might as well say that the Catholics own most of the businesses in Mexico or the Hindus own Indian media. Please.
And another thing: Stop trying to connect the "Mormons" with the FLDS group. They are two separate groups with different beliefs and life styles.
Your hatred and ignorance do nothing to improve the credibility of your so-called arguments.- yakski, on 04/22/2008, -1/+1Your foolish reply indicates your complete lack of knowledge on this subject... the connection between Mormons and the FLDS is significant.. only a fool would believe otherwise. Mormons who control media are likely to be sympathetic to Mormons .. how obvious can you get? DUHHH!!!
As far as hatred... get the facts... I have never said I hated Mormons or the FLDS for that matter.. what I hate is child and sexual abuse.. get your facts straight!!! There is blatant child abuse and sexual abuse going on.. you wish to ignore it, that much is obvious. And I have far more knowledge of Mormons than you do. .. YOUR ignorance is absolutely incredible.- mahdaeng, on 04/23/2008, -1/+1Your ad hominem responses are beneath any level of civilized and rational discussion. The LDS church and FLDS group are two completely separate entities. They share some common history, but they are currently two very different groups.
[[Mormons who control media are likely to be sympathetic to Mormons .. how obvious can you get? DUHHH!!!]]
I would agree with you there - if only the FLDS were Mormons.
[[And I have far more knowledge of Mormons than you do. .. YOUR ignorance is absolutely incredible.]]
Yeah, and my dad can beat up your dad. Nice, mature response there, friend. - yakski, on 04/23/2008, -1/+1When you put some intelligent thought into your response it would be nice... to claim that there is no polygamy going on withing the current LDS church means either you have no idea what is going on or you choose like many others to look the other way... your lack of mature intelligent thought on this issue is obvious.. you intent is obviously to protect child abusers/molesters because the FLDS are related to the LDS... the fact is that this would never have happened if people in the LDS community had not looked the other way for a very long time on this issue.
- mahdaeng, on 04/23/2008, -1/+1@yakski:
You continue to miss the fact that the LDS and FLDS are two separate groups. You also fail to understand that this means that the LDS church has no jurisdiction over the FLDS group. That's like saying that child molestation in the Catholic church "would never have happened if people in the..." Episcopal "...community had not looked the other way for a very long time on this issue".
As long as you continue to confuse the two groups, this conversation will go nowhere. - yakski, on 04/24/2008, -2/+1The LDS obviously has no control over the FLDS but they do control the police, the media and the court rooms of Utah... they have never chosen to go after the polygamist sect on legal grounds nor have they outed them regularly in the media nor do they enforce the polygamy laws in the court room... when you have complicit support from the LDS community for the FLDS this kind of abuse is bound to happen ... The FLDS was allowed to operate as an independent entity with no interference despite people telling of their own and their children's abuse... Notice this did not happen in Utah but in Texas where the LDS do not control the police and court system. I am not saying the LDS sanctioned the abuse or even the polygamy, but by looking the other way for 50years and ignoring it the police, the courts and the media of Utah (all LDS majority members) sanctioned the activities of the FLDS. This is undoubtedly due to their unwillingness to investigate religious members of a related religious faith.
- mahdaeng, on 04/24/2008, -1/+1@yakski:
[[they do control the police, the media and the court rooms of Utah]]
That is a wild accusation. Proof, please.
[[they have never chosen to go after the polygamist sect on legal grounds nor have they outed them regularly in the media nor do they enforce the polygamy laws in the court room]]
Similarly, according to the references you've posted on other threads, they have also chosen not to prosecute adulterers. Is the Utah government in favor of adultery, then?
[[when you have complicit support from the LDS community for the FLDS this kind of abuse is bound to happen]]
First of all, what complicit support? The LDS community is opposed to the FLDS community. Secondly, what abuse are you referring to? Abuse of media? Abuse of police force? Abuse of children? Please be specific.
[[Notice this did not happen in Utah but in Texas where the LDS do not control the police and court system]]
The LDS have just as much control over the authorities in Texas as they do over those in Utah. In other words, none. We're not talking about the Cosa Nostra here.
And besides, it did happen in Utah once (in the 1950s, I believe), according to one of the articles you posted in another thread. Why didn't the all-powerful LDS church stop the raid then?
[[I am not saying the LDS sanctioned the abuse or even the polygamy, but by looking the other way for 50years and ignoring it the police, the courts and the media of Utah (all LDS majority members) sanctioned the activities of the FLDS.]]
You just contradicted yourself.
[[This is undoubtedly due to their unwillingness to investigate religious members of a related religious faith.]]
Undoubtedly to you, but highly doubtful to most other people. - yakski, on 04/28/2008, -0/+1@mah... Sadly your complete lack of honest intelligent thought is showing.
1. The LDS church does control vast portions of Utah both by owning outright property and businesses as well as by their mandatory 10% tithe and the 'you must do what we tell you to do or get kicked out of the church philosophy'. The vast majority of the controlling politicians and police are Mormon ... hello .. McFly!!! Many of the laws are heavily Mormon influenced... take the drinking laws.. How absolutely bizarre. They were, and mostly still are unbelievably stupid and moronic.
2. [adultery] Right .. how stupid of you.. There is an organized religion related to Mormonism promoting adultery??? Nooo ... I guess not it there ... and why is adultery a crime???? It is not in any state I am aware of a crime. But hey there is this polygamous religious group right over there who by definition is breaking the law... let's just ignore them...
3. To suggest that the LDS church has no control in Utah is laughable.. most of the lawmakers are Mormon.. most of the police at every level are Mormon ,,, most of the judges are Mormon... most of the original laws were written when the LDS church literally controlled everything and everyone in Utah. It is absolutely laughable that you would deny the enormous influence of the LDS church in Utah. Anybody who has ever lived there and is not Mormon is laughing at your absurd idea. A good story... A friend of mine who is not Mormon grew up in SLC and only 2 non-Mormons were allowed on the basketball team in the public schools there. When he and his friend were the 2 best on the team the school reduced it to 1 non-Mormon... so they both quit. But hey you keep your head in the sand. 2. [[I am not saying the LDS sanctioned the abuse or even the polygamy, but by looking the other way for 50years and ignoring it the police, the courts and the media of Utah (all LDS majority members) sanctioned the activities of the FLDS.]] NO CONTRADICTION.... The LDS people of Utah have purposefully ignored criminal activity... period... they knew that polygamy was one of the basic tenets of the FLDS yet have chosen to ignore the issue, therefore while the LDS church itself is against polygamy, their members ignoring the issue has given a sanctuary to the FLDS...
- mahdaeng, on 04/23/2008, -1/+1Your ad hominem responses are beneath any level of civilized and rational discussion. The LDS church and FLDS group are two completely separate entities. They share some common history, but they are currently two very different groups.
- yakski, on 04/22/2008, -1/+1Your foolish reply indicates your complete lack of knowledge on this subject... the connection between Mormons and the FLDS is significant.. only a fool would believe otherwise. Mormons who control media are likely to be sympathetic to Mormons .. how obvious can you get? DUHHH!!!
- rendersan, on 04/18/2008, -0/+4The Tribune operates pretty independently of the LDS church. The Deseret News is the newspaper that is favorable to the church, and the two papers are often at odds on the same stories.
- jchrome, on 04/18/2008, -4/+9The Salt Lake Tribune? Really? Hmmm a paper hailing from Mormon-land "discovers" some information in defense of Mormon offshoot group? Talk about your credible sources! Yikes.
- Loonacy, on 04/18/2008, -3/+6Most Mormons from Utah pretty much despise the FLDS church because it gives them a bad name. The various polygamist sects are shunned and a lot of people are saying our Attorney General should have done the same thing they did in Texas a long time ago. I even heard of some letters and petitions to the media asking them to stop referring to them as "FLDS" because it's too close to "LDS" and it's embarrassing to them.
- designerutah, on 04/18/2008, -0/+3True. I live and work in SLC. Not LDS, but my neighbors, co-workers, etc. are pretty pissed off about conditions, and calling for our Attorney General Mark Shirtliff (spelling?) to take action. And he's basically said there's no proof that the FLDS groups in Utah have the same child abuse issues, and without proof, he can't justify going in.
- mahdaeng, on 04/22/2008, -2/+1You obviously know nothing about "Mormon-land". If you did, you would realize that: 1) the FLDS group is not an "offshoot" of the LDS church - they left the church and formed their own group, 2) there is no reason for the LDS church to defend the FLDS group, and 3) the Salt Lake Tribune is often critical of the LDS church.
- yakski, on 04/22/2008, -1/+2Actually you show little knowledge of the Mormons or the FLDS...
1) you actually got this one right
2) there is a great deal of both sympathy and antipathy toward the FLDS by both Mormons and the LDS church itself... it is MUCH more complicated than your simple wrong answer.
3) The SLC Tribune HAS in the past been critical of the LDS church but is now owned by the same person that owns the Deseret New (a spokespiece for the LDS church)... it is already showing in much of the newspaper.- mahdaeng, on 04/23/2008, -1/+1[[Actually you show little knowledge of the Mormons or the FLDS]]
That's interesting, because I am LDS. I would say that my first-hand knowledge carries far more weight than the second- or third-hand "knowledge" (tinged by hatred, fear, and ignorance, I might add) that you keep posting on these threads. However, if you choose to continue living in your fantasy world, that's certainly your prerogative.
Good day to you, sir. - yakski, on 04/23/2008, -1/+1There is no hatred, fear or ignorance in my comments .. just the hard cold facts which you choose to ignore.. As I answered you point for point and this is your rebuttal it appears that keeping your head in the sand is your only response. I do not hate or fear Mormons or FLDS, but you have clearly defended the FLDS abuse of children. To somehow ignore all the reports of all those that have fled or been kicked out of the FLDS, to somehow ignore the fact that this religion supports a policy(polygamy) which is against the law indicates your clear bias in this issue. I know many wonderful Mormon/LDS people... I also know that polygamy exists among the LDS members and flourishes in some parts of the West while the LDS church looks the other way... its a don't ask don't tell philosophy which has allowed polygamy to flourish. You are obviously partaking in that philosophy. I do not even really care if polygamy were legalized. But it is not legal at this time and to ignore how the secret society of the FLDS has damaged women and children is to ignore a crime in progress. Obviously you concern for the people caught in the brain washing and abuse is less than your concern for pretending it does not exist.
- mahdaeng, on 04/23/2008, -1/+1[[but you have clearly defended the FLDS abuse of children]]
Please point out exactly where I did that.
[[to somehow ignore the fact that this religion supports a policy(polygamy) which is against the law indicates your clear bias in this issue]]
Please point out exactly where I did that.
[[I also know that polygamy exists among the LDS members and flourishes in some parts of the West while the LDS church looks the other way]]
This is false. - yakski, on 04/24/2008, -1/+1http://www.absalom.com/mormon/polygamy/faq.htm
Read it ... it is pretty much dead on with what I have seen, been told, and have heard. - mahdaeng, on 04/24/2008, -1/+1From your referenced article: [[Several of today's Mormon faiths practice both polygyny and polyandry, which is consistent with the practices of Joseph Smith the faith's founder.]]
Incorrect. Polygyny was taught by Joseph Smith, but not polyandry.
FTA: [[How many Polygamists are there in Utah?
About 60,000
(5% of Utah Mormons)
]]
Misleading. Define "Mormon".
FTA: [[A recent (1998) poll by the Salt Lake tribune found that 35% of Utah's population think that polygamists should not be prosecuted.]]
I am a Mormon who is opposed to polygamy based on the fact that it is illegal. If it were legal, I would not choose it as a lifestyle, but I would not condemn others for choosing it. Please remember, yakski, that polygamy is not synonymous with child abuse.
FTA: [[In addition, the laws that were written against polygamy are basically laws against consensual sensuality, which cannot be prosecuted in today's legal climate.]]
Now that's interesting, and something of which I was not aware. Does that mean that polygamy is not technically illegal? I'll do more research into it.
FTA: [[Bigamy is usually thought of as having a second spouse without telling the first one that you are already married. As such bigamy is highly frowned upon by the mormon people. Plural marriage, on the other hand, where everyone is aware of the situation, and all concerned give consent is more acceptable.]]
Incomplete. Bigamy (or polygamy, for that matter) is not only frowned upon, but expressly forbidden.
FTA: [[Mormon doctrine states that in order to enter the highest heaven that those who enter must be living in polygamy.]]
Incorrect.
FTA: [[Other Mormon faiths...]]
There are no "other Mormon faiths". There is the LDS church and the various groups that rebelled against it and splintered off to form their own organizations.
FTA: [[The first mormon prophet had 20-30 wives and was murdered for practicing plural marriage privately while denying it publicly.]]
Incorrect. He was not murdered for practicing plural marriage. Attempts were made on his life long before he ever taught the concept of polygamy.
FTA: [[Polygamy still happens among members of the LDS church, just so long as those practicing in it are discrete, but not a moment longer.]]
Perhaps. But much in the same way that a murderer, if no one else knows of his crime, is left alone. If the church finds out, though, the polygamist is excommunicated.
FTA: [[The LDS prophet John Taylor was visited by Joseph Smith and commanded to ordain apostles outside of the normal chain of command in the church, and commissioned them to carry on the practice of polygamy, even after the church abandoned it.]]
Unsubstantiated. This is the story told by the FLDS group in an attempt to legitimize their practices.
FTA: [[I estimate that about 3% of those you see in an LDS church on Sunday are practicing polygamy]]
That's a mighty bold assertion, considering that the worldwide membership of the LDS church is over 12 million.
FTA: [[Next time one of the brethren at a ward picnic introduces you to his sister, or his mother, or his aunt, who happens to live in his home, or introduces you to his single next door neighbor, you might wonder about what relationship they really have...]]
Nice. Innuendo has no place in a serious, rational discussion, but it does tell us a bit more about the credibility and motives of the author.
FTA: [[It is very common for polygamists to rent or buy a duplex, and for the families to live side by side. It is an excellent way of being discrete.]]
That must explain all of the duplexes I've seen in Utah. Wait a minute! I've seen them in Arizona too! And California! Come to think of it, I've seen duplexes all over this country. Neighbors, beware: there just may be a polygamist family in that duplex next door!
FTA: [[The largest concentrations of Polygamists in Utah are near Manti and in Hillsdale (Colorado City, Arizona). Practically the whole town of Colorado City is owned by a religious trust, the members of which practice polygamy. Wherever the LDS has a large concentration of Utah born members, you can be sure that there is polygamy close by.]]
Perhaps. But, once again, the LDS church does not tolerate polygamy. Colorado City and the like are inhabited by FLDS members.
In short, I really have to doubt the credibility of this author. I hope you have better sources than this. - yakski, on 04/24/2008, -1/+1Boy you really need to learn more about Mormonism... There were at least 4 splits after Joseph Smith died.. before there were even more splits within those splits.. so there are many types of Mormons besides the current Salt Lake City Brigham Young LDS... YOU are incorrect therefore.
Further.. originally both Joseph Smith, who had at least 33 or more wives depending on your source, and Brigham Young both stated that polygamy was needed to go to heaven and to quote ..""Now if any of you will deny the plurality of wives and continue to do so, I promise that you will be damned..." Reported in the Deseret News, 1855-NOV-14." so though the LDS church has since rescinded its policy the originators of LDS believed indeed that it was necessary to get to heaven.
The LDS church only does not tolerate polygamy when it is in the open... and they do not go looking for it... try some former Mormon sites for their experiences.. ahh but you only believe church doctrine and therein lies your fundamental inability to see the truth of the matter... you are only willing to believe the one side that you live in... I live in neither side.. I could care less about polygamy or being Mormon.. all I do is look at the evidence. I too hear the church saying one thing and then I also hear people who live another way, or who have left the church, or who have observed polygamous families... but hey keep your head in the sand there so you cannot see the truth of the matter. Oh and just ignore the personal experiences of the author and all the other people who have written about it. Oh and yes pretty much Joseph Smith was killed primarily because his polygamy offended so many people.. to try to deny this is ludicrous.. his religious beliefs aside, the biggest difference between him and all the other religions was his living a polygamous lifestyle. Most historians I have read say this was the main reason used to incite people against him. - mahdaeng, on 04/25/2008, -1/+1[[Boy you really need to learn more about Mormonism... There were at least 4 splits after Joseph Smith died.. before there were even more splits within those splits.. so there are many types of Mormons besides the current Salt Lake City Brigham Young LDS... YOU are incorrect therefore]]
Please point out the incorrect statement to which you refer. Where did I state that there were fewer than four groups that split off from the LDS church? There were far more than four, and groups are still splitting off today.
Again, you need to define "Mormon". I can tell everyone I'm a Muslim, but that doesn't mean I am one.
[[Now if any of you will deny the plurality of wives and continue to do so, I promise that you will be damned]]
This is not the same thing as saying that polygamy is required to go to heaven.
[[The LDS church only does not tolerate polygamy when it is in the open... and they do not go looking for it]]
Of course not. It is not their job to go around looking under rocks and in dusty corners hoping to find something wrong. That falls within the realm of police work - and we've already established that the police and the LDS church are two very separate entities.
[[I could care less about polygamy or being Mormon]]
Then why get so worked up about the issue? You've spent days trying to link up the LDS church with modern polygamists. Why, if you don't care one way or the other?
[[...or who have left the church...]]
Ah - there is the key point. People leave the church when they are either: a) in disagreement with its rules and/or teachings, or b) are excommunicated for consistently breaking those rules.
[[Oh and just ignore the personal experiences of the author and all the other people who have written about it.]]
Which author? The "Escaped" author? Where did I ever say anything against him? I have repeatedly stated that if a law is being broken it should be punished, and that if child abuse is occurring the abuser should be punished to the fullest extent possible. But, hey, keep your head in the sand (if you don't mind my borrowing your favorite phrase) about all that I've said so far.
[[Oh and yes pretty much Joseph Smith was killed primarily because his polygamy offended so many people.. to try to deny this is ludicrous.. his religious beliefs aside, the biggest difference between him and all the other religions was his living a polygamous lifestyle.]]
Wrong again. Don't try to portray yourself as an expert on LDS history if you can't even get that fundamental point correct. Polygamy was only one of the many reasons for the opposition against the LDS church.
[[Most historians I have read say this was the main reason used to incite people against him.]]
And I'm sure you've read all of them, too. - yakski, on 04/25/2008, -1/+1You are hilarious... being damned and not going to heaven are somehow not the same thing... wow ... you are bizarre in your thinking, actually if you really cared there are many many more quotes about polygamy being necessary in order to go to heaven from the early days of the church.
As far as Smith's death, polygamy was only one of the many reasons BUT by far the MOST important one according to most historians .. its the one obvious thing people latched onto. It was only AFTER Smith's polygamy was revealed that he was imprisoned and killed... must be a coincidence, huh, even though historians, aka. experts, say otherwise.
You are the one who has taken a position against government involvement at the FLDS compound, even though there has been substantial evidence of wrong doing for quite a long time.
While I watch and listen to the Salt Lake media and people on this issue it is amazing to see the almost schizophrenic viewpoint of the LDS people. On the one hand there is this anti-governmental interference in religion viewpoint and on the other hand there is this polygamy is bad therefore we are embarrassed by the FLDS viewpoint often exhibited by the same media and people in SLC.
- mahdaeng, on 04/23/2008, -1/+1[[Actually you show little knowledge of the Mormons or the FLDS]]
- yakski, on 04/22/2008, -1/+2Actually you show little knowledge of the Mormons or the FLDS...
- Tahiri, on 04/18/2008, -4/+3Um, the person who triggered this was an under-aged girl....
- Tubal22, on 04/19/2008, -1/+3Um, the person who triggered this was a lady from Colorado who had abolutely nothing to do with the FLDS, who has a history of phoning in false imprisonment stores to authorities.
Texas CPS went in based on one phone call that turned out to be a hoax. Way to go Texas. If Chuck Norris were still a ranger, he'd never fall for that.
- Tubal22, on 04/19/2008, -1/+3Um, the person who triggered this was a lady from Colorado who had abolutely nothing to do with the FLDS, who has a history of phoning in false imprisonment stores to authorities.
- notouch, on 04/18/2008, -3/+8So what if they do end up finding underage girls being forced to marry old adult men? Would they still be able to prosecute the molesters? Or would the judge close the case before they gather enough evidence?
- Slovenian6474, on 04/18/2008, -6/+39"Walther signed an emergency order nearly two weeks ago giving the state custody of the children after a 16-year-old girl called an abuse hot line claiming her husband, a 50-year-old member of the sect, beat and raped her. The girl has yet to be identified."
Biggest prank call ever.- 98percentcogdis, on 04/19/2008, -0/+2What makes you think it was a prank? If the girl was caught by any of the other wives (which could be anywhere from 1- 30 or even 40) she would been immediately taken to another location. They have no problem lying and cheating the "outsiders", because the outsiders are all the devil.
- taintedzodiac, on 04/18/2008, -29/+8Those women. How dare they not dress like men. The disgrace! How will our civilized society survive?
- jchrome, on 04/18/2008, -2/+6Alright nutjob, turn in your mask. You're clearly not fit for Anonymous.
- sexypeon, on 04/18/2008, -1/+2It could be just a Guy Fawkes mask...
- taintedzodiac, on 04/21/2008, -3/+1Meh, Anonymous using the Fawkes mask doesn't mean every Fawkes mask is related to Anonymous.
- jchrome, on 04/18/2008, -2/+6Alright nutjob, turn in your mask. You're clearly not fit for Anonymous.
- RipThe5y5tem, on 04/18/2008, -10/+30I can't feel bad for people who knowingly allow their children to be sexually abused.
- IdevInull, on 04/18/2008, -10/+15How do we know this is true? I am not taking up for these people but we don't really know if it is true yet. Just a bunch of people with "he said she said".
- dcmjzero, on 04/18/2008, -3/+1713 year olds pregnant. enough said.
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,23560126-401, ...- IdevInull, on 04/18/2008, -5/+613 year old girls get prego all the time...could have been a boy they knew. But I will say this -- if it is true then surely it needs to be dealt with.
- pintomp3, on 04/18/2008, -1/+6most 13 year old girls aren't married to 40 year old men.
- mahdaeng, on 04/21/2008, -2/+1@pintomp3:
So tell me what makes more sense: 1) a 13-year-old impregnated by a teenager who is then abandoned and left to raise the baby on her own (or put it up for adoption or kill it), or 2) a 13-year-old impregnated by her husband who is then able to raise the child in a family atmosphere with support from her husband.
- mahdaeng, on 04/18/2008, -7/+3That story could have come from any number of modern communities. Your point is?
- yakski, on 04/18/2008, -2/+5Are you really that uninformed about the fact that the FLDS allows old men to take and impregnate child brides? Have you done any research before you commented? Do you know anything about the teachings of Brigham Young in this area or the widespread ongoing polygamy in the state of Utah and nearby western states? Do some research before you say such ill informed things.
- mahdaeng, on 04/21/2008, -2/+2@yakshi:
I don't know whom you are directing your comment to, but in case they are directed to me, let me answer your question.
I am LDS (not FLDS). I live in Utah. I have thoroughly studied the teachings of Brigham Young. Maybe you can enlighten me as to how "widespread" polygamy is "in the state of Utah and nearby western states". Last time I checked, it is not at all widespread, but rather it is practiced by a very small minority. I am not the one who is uninformed here.
For the record, I am opposed to the FLDS movement. I am also opposed to the government stealing children from their homes based on a prank call. If anyone is guilty of harming a child, let him hang - but more evidence is needed than just a prank phone call. - Wiini, on 04/21/2008, -2/+2Yakshi,
Really you are the one who is very misinformed. Polygamy is not a widespread problem in Utah. In fact, it's hardly even a problem. Aside from the FLDS church (not "Mormons") who practice polygamy in one city in Utah, and one 'compound' in Texas, I can't think of any other polygamist group.
Have you ever even been to Utah or are you just relying on creepy stories your pastor told you? The LDS Church (The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints), with it's 13+million members has had polygamy abolished for over 100 years. Please don't spread propoganda.
In additional, I dislike the FLDS movement immensely. I think it's a fraud and a sham. I think they're leader is a criminal, and a lot of their leadership is blindly following to provide for their own selfish needs. But taking people's kids away based on a phone call is wrong. Wait until it happens to you. - yakski, on 04/22/2008, -1/+1You people are either blind or simple or.. both. As I live in Utah I can clearly see what goes on.. SLC while much more diverse than it was 15yrs ago still has significant numbers of hidden polygamous communities. That HBO show is pretty much on the mark as to the fact that while it exists nobody talks about it. Rural Utah is much worse in that it is in the open and widely practiced ... I am not talking about Moab of course but the podunk little communities. You really need to get out there and open your eyes.
- mahdaeng, on 04/21/2008, -2/+2@yakshi:
- IdevInull, on 04/18/2008, -5/+613 year old girls get prego all the time...could have been a boy they knew. But I will say this -- if it is true then surely it needs to be dealt with.
- brstilson, on 04/18/2008, -4/+9it's not just "he said she said," they found pregnant underage girls there, which is a pretty damned good indicator that sexx0rz had occurred illegally.
- IdevInull, on 04/18/2008, -7/+8Indicator yes -- but not proof. We don't know how they got prego or if there is just one guy that abuses children there. Tests need to be done and things need to be investigated before we start claiming this is systemic in their organization.
- PeppermintPig, on 04/18/2008, -4/+5I think it's a safe bet to say that if they're pregnant, there was likely sex going on.
I don't condone their culture, but I find it antithetical to the law that people make accusations without proof and try these people in the media. In fact, I would argue that people cling to the law to vilify this culture, even though sexually mature girls may be consenting in the situation... again, I don't know what's going on, but I would cast serious doubt on arguments based on statutory law.
Precedent suggests the state will persecute and try to manipulate the girls to accuse their families for things that may not be true. If there are victims, I hope there are people in the state with an actual interest in justice... but lately I doubt it. - 98percentcogdis, on 04/19/2008, -0/+2@ PepermintPig I agree with you. This is one of those media blockbusters which is quite dangerous for these families and children. I also do wish that much more thought and planning had gone into the "liberation" of 416 children, no doubt, they are being traumatized greatly by this situation. I'd have to argue about the comment "even though sexually mature girls may be consenting in the situation" What is consenting? Because you do what your parents (that have nurtured you) tell you to do? Again, Carolyn Jessop" Escaped" shares her feelings and the feelings of her sisters, being told that you have been chosen by God, (through the "prophet") to marry a 60 year old (or older) man. They were given two days notice tops, just long enough to make their dress. It wasn't the happy occasion that we all would imagine. These girls went to the alter with these letches, with deep sorrow! So what does consent actually mean? Then too, they are ALL so brainwashed, it is anything but a normal situation. Sad.
- brstilson, on 04/20/2008, -0/+2How else could they have gotten pregnant? I don't think the "immaculate conception" defense is going to hold up in court.
- PeppermintPig, on 04/18/2008, -4/+5I think it's a safe bet to say that if they're pregnant, there was likely sex going on.
- Tahiri, on 04/18/2008, -0/+4Um, that is the very definition of proof....
- IdevInull, on 04/18/2008, -7/+8Indicator yes -- but not proof. We don't know how they got prego or if there is just one guy that abuses children there. Tests need to be done and things need to be investigated before we start claiming this is systemic in their organization.
- Kireblade, on 04/18/2008, -4/+5We know it's true from the people who have escaped from there.
- IdevInull, on 04/18/2008, -4/+8That is just what I am talking about. Pissed off or disgruntled people can make all sorts of accusations that may or may not be true.
- yakski, on 04/18/2008, -2/+6Your just being ignorant... lost boys, people who have had their children and wives stripped from them by the "prophet", child brides, local criminal justice systems based on what the prophet tells them rather than the law... really can you be any more ignorant of the gross injustices perpetuated by the FLDS and the prophets.
- IdevInull, on 04/18/2008, -2/+2Well till recently I have never heard of these people...Never mind that -- I am always hesitant to join a lynch mob in progress when I don't know the facts.
- IdevInull, on 04/18/2008, -4/+8That is just what I am talking about. Pissed off or disgruntled people can make all sorts of accusations that may or may not be true.
- dcmjzero, on 04/18/2008, -3/+1713 year olds pregnant. enough said.
- IdevInull, on 04/18/2008, -10/+15How do we know this is true? I am not taking up for these people but we don't really know if it is true yet. Just a bunch of people with "he said she said".
- nickcozy, on 04/18/2008, -17/+2Only in US of A,lol
- JointVenture, on 04/18/2008, -2/+5Why do people make such stupid comments when there is a little box in the upper right hand corner of ones browser that can make you look like a stupid ***** in a matter of seconds?
- notouch, on 04/18/2008, -8/+20Just saw another article say at least 20 girls were pregnant or gave birth before they turn 16 or 17.
This is sick!- s0nicfreak, on 04/18/2008, -6/+25Probably wasn't too long ago that members of your religion were ok with that too...
- dcmjzero, on 04/18/2008, -8/+4this would probably be true if as long as it was their ONLY wife. ask yourself: where are all of the extra boys going?
- takamalak, on 04/18/2008, -9/+4Blowing up federal buildings since they can't blow up in a girl.
- Loonacy, on 04/18/2008, -0/+5There's a thing called "Lost Boys Syndrome" here in Utah.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lost_boys_(polygamy)
- notouch, on 04/18/2008, -3/+4What are you trying to say?
for the record, you are talking to an atheist here.- Tubal22, on 04/19/2008, -0/+3That it's only been the last few decades where being 16 and 17 and married is considered "bad". That's kind of the problem with this thing is that they are tearing up this community because they don't have the typical southern baptist texas beliefs.
- dcmjzero, on 04/18/2008, -8/+4this would probably be true if as long as it was their ONLY wife. ask yourself: where are all of the extra boys going?
- Oea420, on 04/18/2008, -2/+24Probably wasn't too long ago that humanity in general was okay with it... considering 16-17 is kinda... prime childbearing age
these days we've been conditioned to think it's wrong and immoral, but you have to remember our lifespans are now much longer..
Girls have been having babies at 16-17 since the dawn of the human species. Look at things from a different light sometimes.- plunderbunny, on 04/18/2008, -7/+7Yeah, but the only difference here is that the man impregnating most of them is probably in his 50's. That is sick.
- intangible, on 04/18/2008, -2/+1Most states allow it if they older man marries the 15-16 year old first. you'd be surprised at how legal that is.
- notouch, on 04/18/2008, -1/+3Question is: were the pregnant result of a rape, or voluntary sex?
- rlbond86, on 04/18/2008, -0/+313-year olds aren't old enough to consent to sex, or marriage in Texas, so at the very least this is statutory rape.
- plunderbunny, on 04/18/2008, -7/+7Yeah, but the only difference here is that the man impregnating most of them is probably in his 50's. That is sick.
- computershack, on 04/18/2008, -3/+11Why? It's no different to what went on in the US for the thick end of 300 years. It was only in the early 20th Century that it became frowned upon.
- 16777216, on 04/18/2008, -6/+7I had a child at 16 and no federal agents raided my moms house? I was married at 17 again no raised eyebrows. This is persecution period.
- chanop, on 04/18/2008, -4/+2o_O
- yakski, on 04/18/2008, -3/+5This is about old men forcing themselves on children 12-16 because their religion and their prophet tells them this is ok. Clearly you have not grown up enough yet or maybe you think this would be ok for your child?
- 16777216, on 04/18/2008, -5/+2Haven't grown up? I'm 28! If my daughter were 15 and ended up knocked up I would support her 100 percent. Don't talk down to me little man...in real life I would knock you out.
- yakski, on 04/18/2008, -2/+5Yeah right....... apparently you have learned nothing in your life. If you would let your 15yr old marry a 50yr old I feel sorry for your daughter.
- Loonacy, on 04/18/2008, -3/+4How about if your daughter were raised in an environment that told her if she didn't marry this 50 year old man who already had 10 wives and let him have sex with her that her soul would be lost and she would go to hell? I don't really see how that constitutes as "consenting" sexual relationships.
"Have sex with me or go to Hell" is no better than "Have sex with me or die." In a word: Rape.
- rlbond86, on 04/18/2008, -0/+3Except that it is ILLEGAL in Texas. Opium and heroin used to be legal too.
- 16777216, on 04/18/2008, -6/+7I had a child at 16 and no federal agents raided my moms house? I was married at 17 again no raised eyebrows. This is persecution period.
- IdevInull, on 04/18/2008, -6/+14My mom was married at 16 and had my brother before she was 17....what is wrong with that?
- notouch, on 04/18/2008, -1/+3Was your mom willing to get married? did she consent to the sex?
If yes, nothing's wrong. Same apply to these girls.- intangible, on 04/18/2008, -3/+2So you agree that the state jumped the gun in kidnapping all the children without any investigation into the situation?
- notouch, on 04/18/2008, -1/+3Was your mom willing to get married? did she consent to the sex?
- mahdaeng, on 04/18/2008, -2/+13Sounds like the typical American high school.
- celticchrys, on 04/18/2008, -3/+11Well, if they did not consent, it is sick. If they did consent, it's actually legal to marry at 16 in many states with parental permission and consent of the individual. I was disgusted by the fact that this case was started with a call reporting a 16 year old claiming to be raped, but now it looks like that was a prank call. That changes everything.
- notouch, on 04/18/2008, -5/+6Difference with these girls getting pregnant and other teenagers pregnant is: these were forced into marriage, and thus, pregnancy was more result of a rape than consensual sex.
- mahdaeng, on 04/21/2008, -2/+2Says who? The prank caller?
- mahdaeng, on 04/22/2008, -1/+2Again I ask: Says who?
- mahdaeng, on 04/23/2008, -1/+2Buried again with no attempt at an answer. This, folks, is Digg at its finest.
- mahdaeng, on 04/22/2008, -1/+2Again I ask: Says who?
- mahdaeng, on 04/21/2008, -2/+2Says who? The prank caller?
- HonestAbe, on 04/19/2008, -2/+4Out of 200? I don't think that rate of pregnancy is actually so dissimilar from other American cultures.
- mahdaeng, on 04/21/2008, -1/+2It's probably on the low end, as a matter of fact.
- Oea420, on 04/19/2008, -1/+2Don't get me wrong, this religious sect has been known for bad things for quite awhile, I think something needed to happen. These girls were most likely raised/brainwashed in ways we can only imagine or read about.
I just wanted to make the point that older men having sex and making babies with 16-17 year old girls is not as 'horrible' as a lot of people make it out to be these days, as long as there is consent and not a long history of intense brainwashing that masquerades as consent.- yakski, on 04/19/2008, -1/+2You cannot have consent when children do not know what is going on... these kids are brainwashed and uneducated.. read what former members have said about the horrible lives they had as children. Read about what they said about not even meeting their 50+year old 'husband' until their marriage day which was arranged by the 'prophet'. They are basically treated like slaves... and you want to support this?
- Oea420, on 04/19/2008, -0/+2I think you misunderstood my comment..
"as long as there is consent and not a long history of intense brainwashing that masquerades as consent."
I totally am against anything this sect was doing, but I am also against people raging over the former issue all the time these days.
- Oea420, on 04/19/2008, -0/+2I think you misunderstood my comment..
- yakski, on 04/19/2008, -1/+2You cannot have consent when children do not know what is going on... these kids are brainwashed and uneducated.. read what former members have said about the horrible lives they had as children. Read about what they said about not even meeting their 50+year old 'husband' until their marriage day which was arranged by the 'prophet'. They are basically treated like slaves... and you want to support this?
- jenny66, on 04/23/2008, -0/+0Did you actually see any girls that are pregnant? I havnt! You see them all the time in high schools though and I dont see the government raiding the schools. Whos to say that the father of those babes arent older men?
- s0nicfreak, on 04/18/2008, -6/+25Probably wasn't too long ago that members of your religion were ok with that too...
- Harabeck, on 04/18/2008, -13/+27I cant believe the mothers are wondering why there kids were taken when you see them talking on the news.
Maybe because you train your sons to grow up and rape others' underage daughters and your daughters to just accept this?- iamtherealwoody, on 04/18/2008, -4/+13Those ladies look like they're straight from some bad horror movie. Watching those interviews make me cringe.
- jolifam77, on 04/19/2008, -2/+1Yeah, The Wicker Man, right? You guys have all been brainwashed to believe all sects are out to burn people as sacrifices. Sheesh. For Gods sake wake up... The people are harmless as doves, believe me.
- Jashobeam5, on 04/21/2008, -0/+2Child rape is not harmless.
- jolifam77, on 04/19/2008, -2/+1Yeah, The Wicker Man, right? You guys have all been brainwashed to believe all sects are out to burn people as sacrifices. Sheesh. For Gods sake wake up... The people are harmless as doves, believe me.
- superkendall, on 04/18/2008, -2/+3The problem is, probably not all the guys were raping anyone - they were just trying to raise a family. And now all the people that were abiding by the rules, are having children taken away from them the same as people who actually did do something wrong (if any of them did). Is that right either?
- Jashobeam5, on 04/21/2008, -0/+2If the girls were 10 and 11, yep, it was rape, and yes the children should be taken away from rapists. It's not "raising a family" to force a 10 year old to marry an adult.
- iamtherealwoody, on 04/18/2008, -4/+13Those ladies look like they're straight from some bad horror movie. Watching those interviews make me cringe.
- HaSatan, on 04/18/2008, -8/+26For all the humping going on, you would think these women would dress a little hotter.
- winmywii, on 04/18/2008, -2/+9If you can dress like that and get some there is hope for all of us.
- Krystar, on 04/18/2008, -1/+6HAHAHAHAHAHAHAH Dugg for making light of child molestation...
wait...
- YodaJones, on 04/18/2008, -10/+23How much for the little girl?
- warispeace21, on 04/18/2008, -1/+7Dugg for Blues Brothers reference.
- slantyeyed, on 04/18/2008, -0/+2probably just a couple cows or horses?
- jetblackz4, on 04/18/2008, -6/+7They remind me of the Manson girls in that picture on their way to the court.
- snifner, on 04/18/2008, -1/+4Manson was an auditor for Scientology at the Hollywood celeb center in 1967.
He left the church and used Hubbards confusion technique to create his own flock.
When was captured in Death Valley they found an e-meter and various Co$ books.
So I've read.
- snifner, on 04/18/2008, -1/+4Manson was an auditor for Scientology at the Hollywood celeb center in 1967.
- pogfreak, on 04/18/2008, -21/+1Why even bother with a court hearing - they are *obviously* guilty - LYNCH THE CHILD *****!!!!!!
- sonaboy, on 04/18/2008, -7/+29it's pretty funny how peoples heads are so spun by a sect that exercises practices that were pretty much social norms in America merely 4 generations ago.
total control of their women
early marriage and child bearing
arranged marriages of young women to much older men
i'm glad America is becoming much more secular these days.- brstilson, on 04/18/2008, -3/+9I still think there were statutory laws 4 generations ago that prevented 10-year-old girls from being married off and sex0r3d. That's really the only issue, here. I don't even think many people care about the polygamy anymore.
- sonaboy, on 04/18/2008, -1/+310 year olds? I hadn't read that. I read "underage" which can mean varying things, but I just assumed they talked about 15-18 year-olds, like the article referenced. you're probably right about there being statute laws for girls VERY young. There were, until recently, some southern and midwestern states that had pretty low ages of consent though.
- cranium, on 04/18/2008, -1/+5They're being coerced into marriage, I don't care if they're 50, it's still rape.
- superkendall, on 04/18/2008, -1/+3Underage is less than 18, not necessarily 10 you know.
- sonaboy, on 04/18/2008, -1/+310 year olds? I hadn't read that. I read "underage" which can mean varying things, but I just assumed they talked about 15-18 year-olds, like the article referenced. you're probably right about there being statute laws for girls VERY young. There were, until recently, some southern and midwestern states that had pretty low ages of consent though.
- dcmjzero, on 04/18/2008, -4/+11polygamy WAS NEVER accepted in america. neither was dropping off "extra" boys in the desert (read up on the "lost boys").
- IdevInull, on 04/18/2008, -0/+4I had never heard of this -- certainly is tragic though. I could not imagine leaving my children like that.
- sonaboy, on 04/18/2008, -1/+2never? there's people living in America this very instant who are polygamists.
- WhyBother, on 04/18/2008, -1/+2Exactly. And the ones we know about are on trial. It was never accepted. Hell, when people back east heard about the Mormons, they demanded the cavalry be sent in to disperse the "sex cult". And yes, the phrase "sex cult" was used back them.
- sonaboy, on 04/18/2008, -2/+1Like I said, I'm glad America is becoming more and more secular. It cuts down on fundamentalist nutjobs AND the culture police.
- celticchrys, on 04/18/2008, -1/+4Just because they live here does not mean that it is accepted by American society. There are people who practice polyamory in secret of course, but there is a difference in deciding you want to pursue an unconventional relationship and forcing someone into something. The reason this case was a case was because of reports of a 16 year old being raped.
- WhyBother, on 04/18/2008, -1/+2Exactly. And the ones we know about are on trial. It was never accepted. Hell, when people back east heard about the Mormons, they demanded the cavalry be sent in to disperse the "sex cult". And yes, the phrase "sex cult" was used back them.
- IdevInull, on 04/18/2008, -0/+4I had never heard of this -- certainly is tragic though. I could not imagine leaving my children like that.
- qber, on 04/18/2008, -2/+6Slavery was also an accepted social norm in parts of America several generations ago. Times change.
- PeppermintPig, on 04/18/2008, -3/+3I certainly hope you are not equating polygamy with slavery.
- allisonaxe, on 04/18/2008, -1/+3Polygamy, in this case, is a form of sexual slavery. I think he's within bounds.
- sonaboy, on 04/18/2008, -2/+1sure, but people aren't freaking out over slavery like this in 2008. I just think it's funny how quickly things change and norms from merely 4 generations ago can flip people out like they do.
- solid12345, on 04/19/2008, -0/+2But slavery also like polygamy was practiced by a small minority of Americans who had the wealth to do so.
The biggest like in American history is that millions of poor white Southerners went to war to defend an institution of slavery that they had no personal interest in for example.- Jashobeam5, on 04/21/2008, -0/+1Read some Southern diaries. They went to war to defend state's rights. They were fighting for a concept, but ended up defending an indefensible cause by their actions.
- PeppermintPig, on 04/18/2008, -3/+3I certainly hope you are not equating polygamy with slavery.
- JointVenture, on 04/18/2008, -2/+3Funny coming from a guy who lives in KANSAS.
- sonaboy, on 04/18/2008, -1/+1trust me, Kansans are encouraged and completely capable of looking down on Texans. i only live 30 yards inside the state.
- notouch, on 04/18/2008, -1/+3key word: 4 generations ago.
I thought we are suppose to move forward, not backward. - gryphon50, on 04/18/2008, -1/+1they get rid of the boys because if they grew up, they'd be p*ssed off men with no wives or girlfriends. That could become problematic for the elders with ten wives.
- Risingashes, on 04/19/2008, -0/+1Same as with China and all the farmers dumping girls to save their future.
Whenever you screw with the natural order you get unintended blowback.
- Risingashes, on 04/19/2008, -0/+1Same as with China and all the farmers dumping girls to save their future.
- brstilson, on 04/18/2008, -3/+9I still think there were statutory laws 4 generations ago that prevented 10-year-old girls from being married off and sex0r3d. That's really the only issue, here. I don't even think many people care about the polygamy anymore.
- pauldy, on 04/18/2008, -13/+17I'm amazed at the amount of utter contempt for these people by the same people who defend terrorism. Last I checked the original claims that brought the law down on this compound came from a known fraud in Colorado. These people surrendered to the raid without fighting back and the only charges that have been filed were filed against the person who filed a false report. These people are defiantly weird but I can't imagine how so many have jumped to persecuting them based off what amounts to schoolyard rhetoric.
- brstilson, on 04/18/2008, -11/+8perhaps you didn't hear...
THEY'RE RAPING CHILDREN- 16777216, on 04/18/2008, -5/+6Uh no one under 13 has been found raped. They should move to AR , it is legal to marry at any age here. (no lie)
- publiclurker, on 04/18/2008, -3/+2So you're from AR. I guess that explains a few things.
- 16777216, on 04/18/2008, -4/+3Like? I am so not like most of the people down here.
- publiclurker, on 04/18/2008, -3/+2So you're from AR. I guess that explains a few things.
- haterofps3, on 04/18/2008, -4/+4a 50 year old having relations with a 16 year old is wrong on every level.
Wait the two years and then we wont have to come to your home and take your children! - notouch, on 04/18/2008, -2/+6Rape or not, forcing women and girls to marry is wrong itself.
- 16777216, on 04/18/2008, -3/+5Tell a Baptist that after his daughter gets knocked up.
- Jashobeam5, on 04/21/2008, -1/+2What century are you living in? Baptists don't do that.
- 16777216, on 05/14/2008, -0/+1O rly?
- pauldy, on 04/18/2008, -2/+3I haven't seen allegations outside of media rhetoric of forcing them, and about the best argument that one could make is the culture and environment made them feel compelled to marry at that age. But the same argument could be made against any social group so its way to gray an area to put these kids through the trauma of ripping them out of their homes and tearing them away from their families. If this continues it wouldn't be a stretch to see the state taking children away from parents charged with drunk driving or possession.
- jolifam77, on 04/19/2008, -1/+2yeah, I'm a little scared of the mob mentality here. it hearkens to ancient times. the devient mentality is not on the "the ranch" but right here on Digg, and the internet.
- 16777216, on 04/18/2008, -3/+5Tell a Baptist that after his daughter gets knocked up.
- 16777216, on 04/18/2008, -5/+6Uh no one under 13 has been found raped. They should move to AR , it is legal to marry at any age here. (no lie)
- mahdaeng, on 04/18/2008, -4/+7You shouldn't be getting dugg down. Your points are valid. Until proof of wrongdoing is proven, aren't these people supposed to be considered innocent?
Now, what if the government decided to target all the pot-smokers on Digg because someone claimed that they were into some weird and criminal things. Then you'd hear an uproar, alright. Everyone would be screaming "Injustice!" from the top of their lungs.
When it's deemed acceptable for the government to target one group, don't be surprised when it targets another.
The hypocrisy on Digg knows no bounds.- haterofps3, on 04/18/2008, -3/+416 year old girls are impregnated by their middle age husband, it is wrong and should be stopped.
- gryphon50, on 04/18/2008, -1/+2ummm, a bunch of their 13 yr. olds are pregnant. So it's not like it's just some unfounded rumor about the child rape going on there.
- pauldy, on 04/18/2008, -1/+3The same problem exists in many urban schools, do we automatically assume that an adult is responsible for the impregnation or is it simply ok to assume this here because they are different?
- Jashobeam5, on 04/21/2008, -0/+2If it happens and the male is found, he can be prosecuted for child rape. There is no reason to allow this to go on because the adults are calling these marriages, when in fact the children are raped and not allowed to escape. Different is OK. Child abusing cults, not OK.
- pauldy, on 04/18/2008, -1/+3The same problem exists in many urban schools, do we automatically assume that an adult is responsible for the impregnation or is it simply ok to assume this here because they are different?
- brstilson, on 04/18/2008, -11/+8perhaps you didn't hear...
- ElAssoWipo, on 04/18/2008, -12/+14Polygamy, the little perverted part of Joseph's Smith Jr.'s master plan most mormons tend to not remember.
"Jesus told me I could have five wives"
The 1800's player's best line.
"Smith was married to approximately 33 women besides Emma.[48]In the group of Smith's well-documented wives, eleven (33 percent) were 14 to 20 years old when they married him. Nine wives (27 percent) were twenty-one to thirty years old. Eight wives (24 percent) were in Smith's own peer group, ages thirty-one to forty. In the group aged forty-one to fifty, there is a substantial drop off: two wives, or 6 percent, and three (9 percent) in the group aged fifty-one to sixty. [49] Although Smith fathered several children with Emma, no additional offspring from any of the women making a "plural wife" claim has ever been proven,[50] and in fact of the approximately twelve children of these wives that were claimed to have been fathered by Joseph Smith, five so far have been conclusively shown as genetically unrelated, through DNA analysis of living descendants.[51] Work is ongoing to determine paternity or non-paternity of the remaining individuals."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Smith%2C_Jr.#P ...- seomike, on 04/18/2008, -3/+5"no additional offspring from any of the women making a "plural wife" claim has ever been proven," Kind of fits along with what I've read about this matter as well.
I've read Joseph Smith's personal journal and he never once mentions having plural wives. I've also read portions of Emma Hales accounts she being his first wife and she to her death bed claimed that Joseph didn't have plural wives. So all we have is word of mouth from Brigham Young and associates as well as temple sealing records which are not restricted to just living people. You can seal a dead person to you as your wife and opponents to the religion can and have used that to make it look like there was married with more than one spouse in LDS records which is why estimates have been so high in the past of actually how many wives he may have had.
I'm not excusing it at all or sticking up for it. BUT if you read what was practiced by the LDS church in the 1800's and what these cultists are doing it's night and day.
For example:
LDS - Polygamy was based on the consent of the first wife and free agency. If she didn't want her husband to practice it, it didn't happen, period.
FLDS - Polygamy "Heavenly Father" reveals to the prophet who you are going to marry and you have no choice but to accept it and free agency is taken away. There are plenty of testimony that Men have given daughters to higher ups to get in better standings with them. Women are basically a commodity and bargaining chip.
LDS - Polygamy was more of an assignment. and less that 5% of the church even practiced it. Most of the practitioners even higher ups like Heber Kimball loathed even going home because of the noise and the infighting of the wifes.
FLDS - Polygamy is for any male in their sect. However it's dog eat dog when it comes to the pretty girls. They've stripped the fee agency part out of it completely, they pit wife on wife and have even used water torture on infants to instill male dominant fear as a subliminal instinct. They've taken an easily abusable doctrine and twisted it for self gratification. The same way King David did with Uriah and Bathsheba.
LDS - Polygamy was used by Abraham, Issac and Jacob to establish God's people securely and quickly in a region and they were allowed to do the same exact thing. Once that privilege was starting to go from sacred to abused it was disallowed.
FLDS - Polygamy is the only way unto salvation for man and women and was never intended to be stopped.
IF anything comes from all this can we at least get those kids out of harms way and get that polygamist woman on TV to SHAVE HER UNI-BROW that thing is enormous!!!! - ElAssoWipo, on 04/18/2008, -0/+2Here are the records:
http://www.familysearch.org/Eng/Search/AF/individu ...
- seomike, on 04/18/2008, -3/+5"no additional offspring from any of the women making a "plural wife" claim has ever been proven," Kind of fits along with what I've read about this matter as well.
- eyegraphix, on 04/18/2008, -14/+11Religious freaks... hopefully these children get taken away and can grow up in a better environment, even if it is foster homes. I'd much rather have my kid in foster care then with these people.
- shig, on 04/21/2008, -1/+1CPS is over 7-times more likely to abuse children than the national average. Your average child in foster care is prescribed a minimum of 5 psychotropic drugs.
- Jashobeam5, on 04/21/2008, -0/+2In this cult your girls are pretty much assured of being raped. I'd rather they be found good adoptive homes rather than live with child rapists.
- shig, on 04/21/2008, -1/+1CPS is over 7-times more likely to abuse children than the national average. Your average child in foster care is prescribed a minimum of 5 psychotropic drugs.
- Jovensdesciple, on 04/18/2008, -20/+12What a disgrace this whole thing is. Imagine if a bunch of Texas cops raided a Muslim compound and took their children with no proof that they did anything wrong. Stop hating white religious people... That's all this is unless they were trying to persuade McCain not to choose Romney as his vp.
- raoulduke87, on 04/18/2008, -6/+10So, pregnant teenagers aren't proof?
When did you religious folk start giving a damn about proof. Why can't the authorities just act on their "faith" that these kids were being sexually abused?- Jovensdesciple, on 04/18/2008, -6/+7Half of the mexican teens in southern California are pregnant, does that mean that they are all breaking the law??? Bitch about that.
- raoulduke87, on 04/18/2008, -1/+9If they got pregnant by people over the age of consent, which in this case it looks like they did, the adults are breaking the law. It's called statutory rape and if I have to follow that law and you have to follow that law, then so do these people.
- Jovensdesciple, on 04/18/2008, -9/+5Then arrest those adults who got the girls pregnant, don't tear apart the whole community. 16 is not all that young anyways.
- raoulduke87, on 04/18/2008, -3/+4The mothers are responsible as well for allowing their children to be brought up in an environment where they might get taken advantage of like that. What a bunch of wonderful, stand-up mothers!!
And no, 16 isn't that young, I agree. But the laws the law. - Tahiri, on 04/18/2008, -2/+5"Then arrest those adults who got the girls pregnant, don't tear apart the whole community."
So the community can keep raping 13 year olds? Yeah that sure solves the problem. Lock up the victims.
- raoulduke87, on 04/18/2008, -1/+9If they got pregnant by people over the age of consent, which in this case it looks like they did, the adults are breaking the law. It's called statutory rape and if I have to follow that law and you have to follow that law, then so do these people.
- dagnome1984, on 04/18/2008, -5/+3 "When did you religious folk start giving a damn about proof." Nice false dichotomy logical fallacy you just tossed in there.
- raoulduke87, on 04/18/2008, -1/+8I just said it to be funny. but it had the side effect of being true. I suppose that was the part you took offense to.
- Tahiri, on 04/18/2008, -1/+5I loved it raoulduke
- raoulduke87, on 04/18/2008, -1/+3aw, shucks. thanks
- Jovensdesciple, on 04/18/2008, -6/+7Half of the mexican teens in southern California are pregnant, does that mean that they are all breaking the law??? Bitch about that.
- dcmjzero, on 04/18/2008, -7/+8i don't care what color they are. or what religion they are. i just don't like cults. and being a texan, i am afraid of cults who build "compounds". this has nothing to do with their religion or their skin color, and everything to do with ABUSING CHILDREN.
- 16777216, on 04/18/2008, -10/+5Idiot. This is how America was 100 years ago. We're the freaks. there is no cult or compound that was their home.
- NOFXY, on 04/18/2008, -3/+5and about that same time ago, slavery was legal, lets all just go back to the dark ages because "that's the way it used to be"
- 16777216, on 04/18/2008, -10/+5Idiot. This is how America was 100 years ago. We're the freaks. there is no cult or compound that was their home.
- takamalak, on 04/18/2008, -8/+5Shut up, idiot.
- raoulduke87, on 04/18/2008, -6/+10So, pregnant teenagers aren't proof?
- bincoder, on 04/18/2008, -9/+11My religion is to invade and take what I can get from other religions. Cars houses money, whatever... do these sects respect my religion? I think they should, but thats just me.
Pfft at people assuming they can do as they please under the umbrella of religious freedom. Let them move to north korea. - brstilson, on 04/18/2008, -9/+3What I want to know is, why are these guys waiting until they're 50 to get married? I mean obviously they don't allow sex before marriage, so that's a lot of pent-up ***** those guys have.
- RidesAPaleHorse, on 04/18/2008, -3/+8They aren't waiting until they're 50. The marry a young girl when they're say, 18-24, Then as the girl gets older, they marry another young girl and so on.
- RidesAPaleHorse, on 04/18/2008, -1/+6Why is this being Dugg down? Have you read the claims of the victims in this case? That's exactly what they said these men do.
- plunderbunny, on 04/18/2008, -4/+3That's probably why they need more than one wife.
- gryphon50, on 04/18/2008, -1/+2the older wives turn into child carers and household drudges, their place in bed is taken over by the next 12 yr. old girl.
- RidesAPaleHorse, on 04/18/2008, -3/+8They aren't waiting until they're 50. The marry a young girl when they're say, 18-24, Then as the girl gets older, they marry another young girl and so on.
- kanabiis, on 04/18/2008, -5/+31These people are sick and hide behind religion to further the male dominated sexual perversion rampant in these sects.
It is less about religion and 'god' and more about power and control by a few men in the group. Take the religion away from the situation and it is clear what is truly going on here, men controlling a group of women for their sexual gratification. It is no different then forced rape, and should be exposed for what it is.
That fact that the sex is 'consensual' is also suspect, brainwashed women believing that the 'prophet' commands them to spread their legs or else be dammed to hell is not far from forced sex with a gun to the head, in both cases the 'consenting' woman is fearing for her life.
The fact that people are flocking to these people in support because they are 'religiously persecuted' is quite troubling as well, it seems there are a number of people who will support anything someone does as long as 'god' is involved.- pauldy, on 04/18/2008, -6/+2What a feminatzi. I think you are the sick one you have tried and convicted these people without so much as a shred of evidence. It seems now the purported victim was a 33 year old fraudster from Colorado and the supposed culprit hasn't been in the state of Texas since the mid 70s. To add insult to injury you accuse the women involved of being mindless drones who blindly follow their leader performing sexual acts for their own salvation when you have no idea what the climate is there. There are people who are somewhat supporting them in the sense we are standing up and saying there is not enough information to convict them. This may all change tomorrow but as of the last bit of info I was able to get about an hour ago there is no evidence of abuse or rape. No one has satisfactory explained what a "spiritual wife" is and I'm not sure given the phrase it comes with the same privileges one would expect in a traditional marriage. So what you refer to as flocking to defend religious persecution I call standing up for civil rights and so far these poor people have been violated by the state of texas.
- rlbond86, on 04/18/2008, -0/+3They broke the laws of statutory rape and polygamy. Thus they should be arrested.
- kanabiis, on 04/18/2008, -1/+3Without a shred of evidence, some of you people keep saying no evidence, yet investigators have found underage girls pregnant, and 18 year old girls with children as old as 3 or 4 years. To claim that is not enough evidence is clearly dishonest, and devoid of any factual basis. If a girl is 18 with a 3 year old child, it is not a stretch to say that girl was 15 when she was impregnated. If you cannot see the crime, then I can't help you much.
Good thing for the children involved that the State is not so blind.- jolifam77, on 04/19/2008, -1/+2As of 2005, 14 yrs old was the age of consent in Texas. Case closed.
- scubaman5000, on 04/19/2008, -1/+2"These people are sick and hide behind religion to further the male dominated sexual perversion rampant in these sects."
Actually these people very much believe that polygamy is the way for them to get to heaven. It has nothing to do with male dominated sexual perversion. To them sexual relations is a very sacred thing, probably more so than the rest of the nation.
"It is less about religion and 'god' and more about power and control by a few men in the group. Take the religion away from the situation and it is clear what is truly going on here, men controlling a group of women for their sexual gratification. It is no different then forced rape, and should be exposed for what it is."
You couldn't be more wrong about their attitude toward sex. This is honestly what they believe. That they have a prophet that talks to God and that plural marriage is a commandment directly from God.
"That fact that the sex is 'consensual' is also suspect, brainwashed women believing that the 'prophet' commands them to spread their legs or else be dammed to hell is not far from forced sex with a gun to the head, in both cases the 'consenting' woman is fearing for her life."
I agree with you here. These people (including their leaders) all believe so strongly in this that they refuse to question it. It will carry on from generation to generation as it has done for years. Sex here is consensual but not because they want to, it's because they feel they have to. But you need to understand the men are victims of this belief as much as the women. Obviously it's not as nasty looking from the men's point of view.
"The fact that people are flocking to these people in support because they are 'religiously persecuted' is quite troubling as well, it seems there are a number of people who will support anything someone does as long as 'god' is involved."
There probably is a lot of people flocking to support them because god is involved... for me personally I support them because I believe in the right to think for yourself without the government getting involved. Protecting their right to believe as they see fit protects my right to believe as I see fit if that makes any sense. At least that's the way I see it.
Just to give you some perspective on where I'm coming from I was raised in the real Mormon church and was extremely active in it until about 10 years ago when I left and formed my own ideas about the world (atheist). Mainstream Mormons still believe that polygamy was a commandment from God which was in place for a period of time early in the church's development. In fact I am descended from a polygamist line. So with that background I'm a little more qualified to comment on how they truly feel about polygamy. My own mother used to teach me that polygamy was a commandment from God and that when we die and go to the Celestial Kingdom (Mormon version of heaven) we will live in polygamist families.- kanabiis, on 04/19/2008, -2/+2While I appreciate your candor regarding the subject, as a citizen of the modern world, and specifically the United States, we are a nation of laws, not a nation of God, regardless of what some people may choose to believe. There are laws against underage sex with an adult, regardless of religious affiliation, this is for protection of those who the law feels should be protected.
To further the matters, the recent expose on how some of these sects obtain their money, specifically my tax money going to welfare for the mothers who claim to be 'single mothers without a father' is troubling as well. Not only are they lawbreakers, but fraudsters as well, taking my hard earned money by deceit and flat out fraud....
What kind of religion promotes lawlessness, lying and fraud as a way to get into the 'kingdom of heaven'?- scubaman5000, on 04/19/2008, -1/+2Here is where I agree with you completely. This is where the government needs to focus their attention. Abuse of welfare and individual cases where the law was actually broken (not this minority report style preemptive strike that is going on right now). The offenders should face the consequences, not the victims. In the case that we have right now they have hundreds of kids who are not currently involved in any form of abuse as far as underage sex is concerned.
Teaching your kids that marijuana is ok is not against the l
- scubaman5000, on 04/19/2008, -1/+2Here is where I agree with you completely. This is where the government needs to focus their attention. Abuse of welfare and individual cases where the law was actually broken (not this minority report style preemptive strike that is going on right now). The offenders should face the consequences, not the victims. In the case that we have right now they have hundreds of kids who are not currently involved in any form of abuse as far as underage sex is concerned.
- kanabiis, on 04/19/2008, -2/+2While I appreciate your candor regarding the subject, as a citizen of the modern world, and specifically the United States, we are a nation of laws, not a nation of God, regardless of what some people may choose to believe. There are laws against underage sex with an adult, regardless of religious affiliation, this is for protection of those who the law feels should be protected.
- pauldy, on 04/18/2008, -6/+2What a feminatzi. I think you are the sick one you have tried and convicted these people without so much as a shred of evidence. It seems now the purported victim was a 33 year old fraudster from Colorado and the supposed culprit hasn't been in the state of Texas since the mid 70s. To add insult to injury you accuse the women involved of being mindless drones who blindly follow their leader performing sexual acts for their own salvation when you have no idea what the climate is there. There are people who are somewhat supporting them in the sense we are standing up and saying there is not enough information to convict them. This may all change tomorrow but as of the last bit of info I was able to get about an hour ago there is no evidence of abuse or rape. No one has satisfactory explained what a "spiritual wife" is and I'm not sure given the phrase it comes with the same privileges one would expect in a traditional marriage. So what you refer to as flocking to defend religious persecution I call standing up for civil rights and so far these poor people have been violated by the state of texas.