Letters to the Editor
-
Everything degenerates to name calling.
Xanthro, you are not only a fat-head, you are being a troll
Mature way to state an argument.
The fucking National Public Radio isn't good enough for you?
No, the recollections of someone listening to something on the radio is not good enough, regardless of the source of the radio commentary.
Everybody else has to do your research for you because you are too fucking lazy to do any basic moron level googling on the FLDS and Jeffs?
No, people making the claim that 12 year old girls are being married off to old men, need to provide proof, which they haven't.
I'm far more informed about Warren Jeffs, Lost Boys, FLDS and the history behind everything that the vast majority of people, and certainly more than those who have posted so far.
Have to make juvenile points about who a teenager is? Make up total fantasies based on nothing whatsoever in the public record about whether children of a 16 year old (and we have no info at all as to whether the identification was by them, her, relatives, acquaintances, others, or even DNA testing) are really her children?
Published reports say pregnant teenagers, that means those who are 18 and 19, there's nothing juvenile in pointing out they are also adults.
These are fucking CHILDREN you asshole.
When there's actual proof of abuse, then start with your judgments.
You judge them guilty, not based on facts, but on emotion, which you've shown you are unable to control.
They can't protect themselves, make decisions for themselves, or tolerate being cut off from their family if they refuse to go along (yes, it is ironic that the only thing the state can do to help them is indeed to cut them off from their families' sick and insane pressures).
As I've said, if there is sex with underage girls involved, then people need to be in jail, but just because people find their lifestyle creepy doesn't mean that every child should be taken away.
In 1953 the vast majority were back within two years, but the children ripped from their homes were still damaged by it.
It is about the arranged/forced "marriages" between female children of barely reproductive age (and certainly of no majority in any meaningful sense) and older (sometimes much, much older) males.
Repeating something doesn't make it true. People keep throwing out that 12 year olds are being forced into marriage, yet there is ZERO proof of that here. Yes, it's creepy that an 18 year old married to a 60 year old, but it's not against the law. Nor is it against the law to teach your children that such a marriage is not creepy. Nor can the latter be made illegal.
And massive reproduction (and childbirth without medical assistance, beatings for vocalizing pain, and episiotomies without anesthetic using scissors and twine), generalized vile misogyny, insanely repressive family life, abandonment and shunning of male offspring, feeding off the public weal, murder and arson, and on and on.
Seriously, you mix that which isn't against the law, massive reproduction, vile misogyny and repressive family life, with allegations of murder and arson and unsupported charges of beatings and episiotomies with twine. (I assume you meant for the suture after the birth)
Do some research.
I have. I've seen no data that shows murder, arson, beatings for vocalizing pain, nor 12 years old brides, nor even a pregnant 16 year old. The youngest I've found is 17. And I've found unmarried 17 year olds as well.
You've claimed murder and arson, so show the proof.
Your post is one of "These are fucking CHILDREN" coupled with allegations for crimes there is no evidence of, or listing behavior which isn't illegal.
Creepy can't be made illegal.
The closest you've come to showing illegal activity is lost boys, and I've never once seen anything that this group was part of kicking out it's males.
Warren Jeffs was notorious for this in the Colorado City and Hildale, and yes they are the same religion, but you can't punish people based on a religious identity.
-
@Canuckistan Bob
Thanks for your reasoned answer to my comment. It's true that quality of services varies; living as I am in one of the most remote counties in the most economically distressed state in the Union, with a governor who is hellbent for leather on balancing the budget, I'm probably seeing some of the worst.
It's not going to do any good to become emotional with Xanthro. He's made up his mind and is willing to twist the few known quantities of the case to fit his preconceived idea. There's no arguing with such people because they aren't having the discussion in good faith. He's going to keep arguing that these shitheads are the Amish or Mennonites or something--even though everybody else knows the difference between "different religious group that keeps to themselves and wears quaint clothing" and "dangerous criminal cult that has made a sacrament of raping children".
I have a feeling that when all the evidence he keeps demanding is finally publicly available it still won't make any difference to him. Also, we aren't going to get all the details in cases involving minors. Their identitites, etc. are supposed to be protected during legal proceedings. This is to protect them from the media circus as they try to get their lives pieced back together. This is as it should be. People like Xanthro need to shut the hell up and let the investigators do their jobs.
-
@ Canukistan
oh--I just wanted to say--I wasn't making an argument against foster care at all. I think if a social program like that is broken, it should be fixed, not abandoned. And yes, sometimes more money helps. But you work in the field, you know all that.
I do know women who temporarily lost their kids but in each case the kids were placed with relatives--sister or grandma. I think the social workers have first preference for this kind of arrangement if possible.
-
Evidence
It's not going to do any good to become emotional with Xanthro.
It's rare you see me resort to name calling or attacking posters, because of the fact I try keep emotion out of the debate.
He's made up his mind and is willing to twist the few known quantities of the case to fit his preconceived idea. There's no arguing with such people because they aren't having the discussion in good faith.
I'm not going to condemn anyone till actual evidence is produced, when it's produced that changes the equation.
Till then, I base my response on what is known and how these situations have played out in the past. If there charges that people are leveling are true, usually the tone of reporting and police work is very different.
CPS is no longer looking for S.B. (the caller than sparked the raid) and has started to defend itself that she has not been found. That's a sign they don't believe she existed, not that she has been murdered.
He's going to keep arguing that these shitheads are the Amish or Mennonites or something--even though everybody else knows the difference between "different religious group that keeps to themselves and wears quaint clothing" and "dangerous criminal cult that has made a sacrament of raping children".
Warren Jeffs was/is a dangerous man and the evidence indicates that he at least forced the marriage of girls as young as 14 to marry. That's why he's in jail where he belongs.
That said, the FLDS consists of many factions, some directly opposed to Jeffs. As to which side the YFZ compound falls under today, I'll reserve judgment till I have more evidence.
I have a feeling that when all the evidence he keeps demanding is finally publicly available it still won't make any difference to him.
If there is evidence against them, of course my position will change. That IS my position.
Is there a chance that rape occurred there, yes, it's likely in fact. That said, so far actual evidence of rape has not been presented nor indictments issued, except against Dale Barlow who the Texas Rangers interviewed and released.
Also, we aren't going to get all the details in cases involving minors. Their identitites, etc. are supposed to be protected during legal proceedings.
I shouldn't have used name in asking for information, you'll note in a subsequent post I specifically stated that the names won't be released. That said, details will be released. If very young girls were pregnant the reporting wouldn't be "The CPS claims that girls were married off as soon as they reached puberty" it would be "young pregnant girls, some appearing as young as 13 were found at the compound, leading the CPS to remove all the children."
I actually expected to see the latter, and I haven't. It could be that the Texas CPS is being very careful, and actually trying to ensure that the ages are correct, and that is being made difficult by the lack of access to birth records. But typically, the Texas CPS is not that careful.
This is to protect them from the media circus as they try to get their lives pieced back together.
Unfortunately, their lives won't get pieced back together, and most will eventually end up back at one of the compound. Most people there descend from those taken in the Short Creek raid. Instead, most will end up back in the same lifestyle, and with an ever greater distrust of outsiders and the next generation becomes more cloistered and extreme. This has been the case in all previous raids against the group.
Having seen the devastation that home removal often causes, I side on the error of caution in large scale removal. If very young girls were actually forced into marriage and sex (and I'm wholly open to the idea this might be the case) then removal was warranted. If it turns out there wasn't widespread marriage of young girls, then removal isn't warranted.
I may find it odd for a 18 year old girl to marry a 50 year old
man, but it's not and can't be made illegal. It also offends me that this girl was raised that this type of marriage is perfectly acceptable. But the latter is thought a belief, I'm not one to outlaw thought or belief, even when I find it offensive.
This is as it should be. People like Xanthro need to shut the hell up and let the investigators do their jobs.
Notice which side is always calling people names, it's not coming from me. While I may be passionate in my defense of people, I try to be dispassionate toward those I'm debating.
I haven't responded directly to your posts, because bringing up your background according to your posts, could be seen as an attack. For example, it appears you suffered serious emotional trauma, but saying that could be taken as belittling your position, and that's not the intent.
You've suffered abuse at the hands of religious extremists and rightfully this makes you angry, and perhaps it creates a predisposition to pre-judge other religious extremists, and the FLDS is certainly extreme.
I find your posts to be well reasoned and well written, even when writing might have been painful, and I don't think our positions are as far apart as you may think. If actual evidence comes forward about the crimes that have been alleged, then I will fully support prosecution.
Where I think we differ is the burden of proof to remove children from a home, because of our personal experiences. You've witnessed first hand the trauma of remaining in an abusive home, I've witness the trauma of unwarranted removals (though not on the same personal level).
What I fear most is in two years, everyone is back at the compound, and the distrust of authorities is so much greater, that when/if future abuse happens, it's even less likely to be reported to outside authorities.