Texas Polygamy Case is Shocking!!!

You misunderstand. Putting the psychological troubles from the confusing life polygamy can create aside, the problem here is abuse. That is the problem. If do not recognize the existence of oppression here, then you miss the point. Polygamy is an idiotic thing in the first place, but that isn't the problem here.

And we don't "let" the Catholic church get away with it. Have not many cases be brought to light? Is that not the main reason most of the world knows about it? Granted I am sure it goes on more than is discovered, but that is the case with pretty much everything.

NO CANDLELIGHT VIGIL??? WHAT PLANET AM I ON???? AMERICANS ARE NOT OUTRAGED AT THIS??? IS IT CAUSE THE NEWS MEDIA IS NOT REPORTING IT???

Court refuses to hear FLDS mothers' request
http://deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,695274039,00.html

By Ben Winslow
Deseret News
Published: April 25, 2008

SAN ANGELO, Texas — An appeals court is rebuffing efforts by Fundamentalist LDS mothers seeking to keep their children from being scattered in foster care facilities across Texas.

In an order issued late Friday, Texas' 3rd Court of Appeals in Austin denied the request by 45 mothers and canceled a hearing scheduled for Tuesday. The appellate court said in its ruling that there was "insufficient information to warrant granting temporary emergency relief," and denied the motion to stop the placement of the children in foster care.

The court's justices did say that they would consider a petition by the Texas Rio Grande Legal Aid Society that questions the original hearing, the evidence and the decision by Judge Barbara Walther to keep all 462 children in state protective custody. It also asked the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services to address those issues in court papers to be filed by May 2.

The appeals court order came on the same day that Texas child welfare authorities finished placing all the children into foster-care facilities after Walther ruled they were abused or were at risk of abuse, stemming from allegations of underage marriages on the FLDS Church's YFZ Ranch.

2 comments |

Hugh McBryde | 12:31 a.m. April 26, 2008
The damage to the children caused by removing them from their home is irreparable and constantly increasing. The ONLY justification for actions like this is the certainty that damage is occurring in the home. So far Texas has yet to show there is damage occurring in the home. They're down to three females, either adult or otherwise that they can say might be pregnant, and depending on who you talk to there may only be one girl pregnant who MIGHT be or MIGHT have been below the age of consent when she became pregnant. They don't know WHO she is pregnant by, and frankly, she does not owe Texas the answer. She is not by their definition, the criminal. POTENTIALLY whoever made her pregnant might be a criminal, but could be young enough themselves to make the act not criminal. Thus Texas has no evidence of a crime at all, and for all they know, the act that made the girl pregnant could have occurred in a place OTHER than Texas. One pregnant teenager of questionable age (she is claiming she is 18) is not enough to ship all kids to foster care. How could the court refuse to hear?

Margaret | 1:21 a.m. April 26, 2008
The cruelty of Texas authorities just makes me sick. Separating the children from mothers terribly traumatizes the kids. This action does not make any sense and makes me wonder how the USA can present itself as a defender of human rights in the world when authorities don't care about constitutional rights of American citizens. It's a shame. I hope the kids will be back with their parents soon, and those responsible for the outrageous action will be punished.

A good letter from the Letters to the Editor in the Salt Lake Tribune. This correspondent aptly suggests, without outright stating it, that there is way more going on here than simply trying to keep children from being "brainwashed" (a bogus reason to kidnap them anyway).

As of today, the rest of the babies who are 366 days or older have been taken from their mothers. Nursing infants who are older than 365 days have been peeled from their mothers' arms, wailing, as Texas Rangers and attorneys stand by, helplessly, crying for the children and the mothers.

Yes, indeed, there is much more going on here. It is psychological warfare against these people, showing them at every turn who's the boss: "Thou shalt have no god before me," the State tells them not so subtly.

http://www.sltrib.com/opinion/ci_9059075

FLDS babies
Public Forum Letter
Article Last Updated: 04/25/2008 08:56:44 PM MDT

OK, now I'm really mad. If the premise for keeping the FLDS children in custody is that they are in imminent peril of being sexually abused or brainwashed, why are nursing mothers being kept from their babies? ("Texas judge won't allow nursing polygamist moms to stay with seized FLDS kids," Tribune, April 22.) You can't indoctrinate nursing babies. You can, however, harm them irreparably by keeping them from the best form of nutrition they have. Is Texas going to monitor these babies for the rest of their lives and assume the cost for treatment of all the diseases that we currently believe breast milk gives children a head start against?
Judge Barbara Walter said that every day in our country nursing mothers return to work after maternity leave. There is one big difference. Whether those mothers returned because of financial or other circumstances, they had a choice. These mothers have had this very basic choice taken away.
Have common sense and due process of law become mutually exclusive in our country? I am so ashamed. I don't want to be a part of a government that has no heart.

Michelle Rollins
Salt Lake City

This is one of them:
http://blogs.sltrib.com/plurallife/2008/04/who-is-she.htm

congress (no one else for that matter) shall make NO LAW don't they understand?

proposes to ship some of the kids to a facility just a couple of streets west of where I live. The whole affair has a stink to it that is getting stronger with each passing day. This is how bad precedent is born.

The Best interests of the children is the overriding and fundamental principle in child protection law here in Canada and I expect it is so in the United States also.

As far as possible Children must be protected by their families first,
from harm.

What is the evidence of harm to these children? That is not a rhetorical question. I am not jumping on any bandwagon here. Is there real evidence of child rape? abuse? neglect? including neglect of their minds? Frankly I don't much care about parent's rights because I have heard too much made of that in my practice. Children do not have a voice. Where these harms have been allowed to occur the solution must not harm the child further. Government autohorities are infamous for not considering the real day to day harm to children from either leaving them in situations of abuse or taking them away. They do have too much power. These situations call for balance and cooperation with healthy respect for the family.

If it is shown that harm arises from the situation in which children live and from persons who are not their parents, then the parents must be required to take steps to ensure the harm ceases, but they should be the ones to choose those steps. Taking children from their parents must be a last resort but at times it is necessary. As a lawyer involved in child abuse and endangerment litigation arising out of family law, I say listen to the children but never guide what they say. The biggest problem is that no one listens to the children. They don't have choice, but they must be safe, really safe, to tell the truth.

when the State can come in without a search warrant and kidnap all of your children. If you do not feel anything for these people then what will happen when your children are taken away?

They came first for the Communists,
but I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.
Then they came for the Fundamental Mormons,
but I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Fundamental Mormon.
Then they came for the Jews,
but I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.
Then they came for the Mormons,
but I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Mormon.
Then they came for the trade unionists,
but I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Catholics,
but I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant.
And then they came for me,
and, by that time, there was no one left to speak up.

Attributed to Pastor Martin Niemöller (1892–1984) about the inactivity of German intellectuals following the Nazi rise to power
and the purging of their chosen targets, group after group.

People if you are not motivated to put aside 1hour- 5 hours-or 10 hours per day(or however many you can budget) to consistently work toward restoring our constitutional government-- through electing Ron Paul as President(currently) then our children WILL NOT HAVE A CONSTITUTION TO DEFEND. PLEASE LOOK AT YOUR LIFE SCHEDULE AND FIGURE OUT HOW YOU CAN MAKE A BIGGER DIFFERENCE!!!

Stay awake

http://www.dailypaul.com/node/46620