stoltz
Platinum
Reged: 01/29/07
Posts: 1359
Loc: Texas
|
|
... NOT! Ask the members of the supposed polygamist sect whereby their children were taken from them all because a 16yr old called to report sexual abuse. Of course, they still haven't found the 16yr old, but that doesn't matter. Strip the children - ALL the children - away from their parents and ask questions later.
|
chatter box
Platinum
Reged: 11/09/07
Posts: 968
|
|
They had an undercover agent inside the compound for two years. The girl you spoke of called twice. Kids do not know who there fathers are or even there own last names. The dads said this morning that they were unaware that they had been breaking the laws but now understand.
|
jbar
Platinum
Reged: 12/16/06
Posts: 940
|
|
As long as there were no marriage licenses taken out for the marriages then it was, from a legal point of view, not bigamy, not polygamy, but only mass fornication. I haven't heard of anything being done by the law, in Texas, about fornication in some years.
The only other issue is "statutory rape" because of the ages of some of the girls. The "age of consent" is something arbitrary which varies, in the U.S., from eighteen all the way down to twelve. In some countries it is even lower or non-existent.
Is it really worth causing THE CHILDREN AND THE MOTHERS all of this grief just because of the controlling behaviour of a few men? Perhaps throwing them in jail and confiscating their assets would be one just solution, but how much would these assets be worth in contrast to the support obligations which they have incurred? How could they be productive enough, in jail, to support their extended families?
IMHO the damage done by interfering in this situation in this way far exceeds the good. Instead, thse men could be fined and warned that they will be imprisoned if they take any additional "wives" or advocate doing so. Another solution could be to legalize limited polygamy, as is done in some other countries. This would automatically solve the problem for some of these families as well as a lot of others!
Edited by jbar (04/22/08 01:47 AM)
|
chatter box
Platinum
Reged: 11/09/07
Posts: 968
|
|
Under Texas law if you have lived with someone for two or more years and you introduce that person as your wife you are by common law married. That just about covers everyone there. the statutory rape is going to be the biggiest issue. The argument is will the girls were married so it's ok. Not in Texas, parents can't even give concent to marrage to girls that young. They were putting all the girls in dangers by creating an environment that said it was ok for young girls to have sex. Its a cirlcle effect. In order to justify breaking one law they would break another.
|
stoltz
Platinum
Reged: 01/29/07
Posts: 1359
Loc: Texas
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
They had an undercover agent inside the compound for two years.
--------------------------------------------------------------
I have to say this is the first time I've heard about someone "undercover" in the compound. Not saying its true or false, but only its the first time I heard about it.
-------------------------------------------------------------
The girl you spoke of called twice. Kids do not know who there fathers are or even there own last names.
-------------------------------------------------------------
And ... ?
-------------------------------------------------------------
The dads said this morning that they were unaware that they had been breaking the laws but now understand.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Again, and ... ?
I understand that SOME people may have broken the law as it is in Texas - no dispute there. However, there is a thing called due process that is written in the constitution. (That, along with some other constitutional violations.)
See the following article for more of what I'm trying to convey ...
http://newsblaze.com/story/20080419071411tsop.np
|
justmejulia
Gold
Reged: 04/12/07
Posts: 178
|
|
Stoltz...those children needed to be taken out of there. Come on! These people are in a sick cult where young girls are married off to old men to breed more sect members. You cannot seriously believe they are better off with parents some of whom are not even sure who is mommy. Only to be line bred into more sect members? I live in AZ where this group started out. They throw the young boys out of the compound because they do not want any competition for the old men. The women are just belongings and these old men own many. It is sick and it needs to be stopped. Warren Jeffs is a sick cult leader and the group in Texas are his top people. For whatever reason they went in they got the kids out and that is what matters the most. JMHO
|
chatter box
Platinum
Reged: 11/09/07
Posts: 968
|
|
"The State seized women, children, and DNA samples without warrant or cause"
Parents aproving and supporting sex and marrage to kids at 13,14, & 15 years of age is against the law. Thats a pretty good cause.
"The initial interviews with wives and children violated their self-incrimination rights"
They didn't have to answer the questions and I would bet they had there own attorney there before the raid.
"The state has failed to produce "Sarah," who remains anonymous and may not exist"
Sarah may or may not exist but the state has a right and duty to protect her identaty.
"The state failed to meet due process standards before raiding the compound"
Only the judge, kids lawers and parents know exactly what did or didn't happen.
A bigger question for me is why haven't we heard about any arrest yet?
I wonder of all the kids married before the age of 18 how many of them were boys?
The DNA testing is to find out who the parents are. The state isn't even sure who the moms are in some cases.
Additionally, the Texas' action could itself be characterized as child abuse.
added down from 401 to 52 girls.
http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSN0443225320080405?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews
years of investigations:
http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?section=news/state&id=6067997
Edited by chatter box (04/22/08 11:54 AM)
|
chatter box
Platinum
Reged: 11/09/07
Posts: 968
|
|
This explains things better.
http://www.thestar.com/article/412752
|
jbar
Platinum
Reged: 12/16/06
Posts: 940
|
|
===========================================================
Under Texas law if you have lived with someone for two or more years and you introduce that person as your wife you are by common law married.
===========================================================
This site says that you have to also file a joint tax return with the common law spouse to have a commom law marriage:
http://www.nolo.com/article.cfm/objectId/709FAEE4-ABEA-4E17-BA34836388313A3C/catID/3C3AF4CE-DB9E-48C4-8DFCFE2E47C91747/118/304/145/FAQ/
I doubt if they would have been doing that, or even claiming all of the kids as dependents. So all they have is multiple cases of statutory rape, if the girl was young enough. The problem here though is that, again, we see the law trying to change the perception of something, in the public eye, by assigning to it a peculiarly pejorative name when the object is to stir up hatred of the "rapist" ("statutory rape" when there is no force involved and the rape, if any, may even have taken place in the opposite direction to that assumed) or an admirable name when it is desired to stir up support for those wishing to use law to commit theft ("equitable" property division, "community" property).
Any way you slice it, then, the State of Texas is tearing apart voluntarily formed, loving families who wish to stay together, based upon some arbitrary and demagoguery-soaked law pertaining to age. I have seen extremely young girls who are mature enough to be responsible mothers and I have seen much older women who can't even take care of themselves.
Edited by jbar (04/22/08 04:51 PM)
|
stoltz
Platinum
Reged: 01/29/07
Posts: 1359
Loc: Texas
|
|
I agree that it is immoral, but the more important point is that if the state of Texas has overstepped peoples' constitutional rights then that is more of a travesty than anything "the cult" has been accused of. Because, if they can force their will with disregard to a person's constitutional rights in this case, they can certainly do it any other time under the guise of "the best interest of the children" (or some other emotional headline) to excuse their actions.
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
