jbar
Platinum
Reged: 12/16/06
Posts: 976
|
|
===========================================================
They have whole instruction setups on how to manipulate the system.
You didn't think that these men were magically rich and able to support all these wives & kids on their own, did you?
===========================================================
Yes, I did. Most of what I have read on the subject suggested that these men were involved, among other things, in ownership of one of the corporations benefitting from massive mishandling of Iraqi war spending by the government--although this is not to say they did anything dishonest. I have also seen clips of the numerous enterprises in which the "ranch" in Texas was engaged. Add to this the historical reality that many original LDS polygamous families were able to thrive with no governmental assistance at all, and the theory that this is all just a welfare scam doesn't quite hold water.
In any case, this sounds at best like a "chicken and the egg" story: which came first, the polygamy which resulted in welfare or a desire to get welfare, which resulted in polygamy? What difference does it make, if the children who cannot be fed but by the state are the result of many individual acts of fornication, in many seperate locations, or massive fornication in one place, particularly when it can plausibly be argued that this is only in obedience to a particular creed?
No, Gigi, they can't have it both ways. The only equitable solution is, as in most divorce law, the one which is politically non-viable; they must either cut off welfare for ALL parents, men or women, who have children without being legally married, and remove the children if necessary, or else incarcerate BOTH PARENTS until or unless they can assume their responsibilities, either married or unmarried, equally providing for support of their children--unless rape is alleged and proven. What seems to be lacking is a law which will clearly require this, and it will continue to be lacking.
Edited by jbar (05/24/08 05:16 AM)
|
stoltz
Platinum
Reged: 01/29/07
Posts: 1478
Loc: Texas
|
|
-------------------------------------------------------------
I'm not particularly interested in supporting the undocumented wives and large families full of children with my tax dollars, and I'm similarly not interested in dealing with the aftermath of a bunch of underaged girls who were forced into marriage by their parents to older men, without their own free and knowledgeable choices about the alternatives.
------------------------------------------------------------
I was watching the local news a couple of weeks ago where an entity of Texas government (CPS?) was before a Texas committee giving them the lowdown on the current and future costs for this whole thing ... I can't remember the bottom line, but at that time they said the bill was already over $5M and would continue to go up exponentially as this thing will be drug out for well over a year in the courts.
Edit: See the following editorial for some interesting tidbits on the cost. Also, I've heard that some lawmakers are considering drafting legislation FORCING the FLDS to pay for all the costs the state has and will endure. What makes this whole thing more interesting is that there will be political fallout if the Texas Supreme Court does NOT overturn the Court of Appeals verdict. The Texas DA's office is already fine-tuning their PR spin for what could be a giant egg in the face if their appeal to the Texas Supreme Court falls on deaf ears. boo hoo hoo.
http://www.offthekuff.com/mt/archives/011734.html
------------------------------------------------------------
As it is, for THIS situation, it would seem that they GOT thier due process and so it's ridiculous to complain...
------------------------------------------------------------
I'd REALLY like to hear your reasoning for this statement.
|
stoltz
Platinum
Reged: 01/29/07
Posts: 1478
Loc: Texas
|
|
Interesting editorial ... Brings up some things I hadn't thought of, like Texas' Governor Rick Perry's pharmacuetical connection. For those who don't know, he signed into law recently legislation ordering Texas girls to get vaccinated with a drug that is supposed to inhibit a(n STD) virus that causes cervical cancer. There was mention at that time that he had connections to the drug maker.
http://newswithviews.com/Stang/alan50.htm
|
stoltz
Platinum
Reged: 01/29/07
Posts: 1478
Loc: Texas
|
|
The Texas Supreme Court has given their verdict in the case ...
Removal of sect kids 'not warranted'
http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/05/29/texas.polygamists/index.html
--------------------------------------------------------------
SAN ANGELO, Texas (CNN) -- Texas officials had no right to remove scores of children from a polygamist sect, the state Supreme Court ruled Thursday.
The Texas Supreme Court agreed with an earlier lower court's ruling, possibly clearing the way for the children to be returned to their families.
"We are not inclined to disturb the court of appeals' decision," the ruling said. "On the record before us, removal of the children was not warranted."
-------------------------------------------------------------
Now, watch all the spinning by Abbott and Perry in the next few days. LMAO!
|
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
