Answering 'Breaking News' continued

[windcatcher]

Posters, remember many here are fairly libertarian in their outlook. Then there are may who remember the Texas CPS and Lester Rolloff. So, there is a lot of healthy suspicion about the States motives in this case.

Another point to remember is the folks involved are not Christians, they are members of the Fundamental Church of LDS aka renegade Morm*ns (*s to cut do on the google adds). Even though the women dress modestly, remember so do Musl*m and Orthod*x J*wish women.

I'm Christian, fundamental /Southern Baptist, and politically conservate....not 'neo', strong Constitutionalist.......... yea! You Go Chuck Baldwin....all the way to office.
--------------
Response continues:

What about the children's rights, not to be s*xually assulted,

The definition of children is not defined in your statement. Many cultures, including our own, recognize the difference between a pre-pubescent child and those who have 'come of age' ....and our own society attempts to control but doesn't enforce chasity or prosecution upon the s*xual expressions of pubescent youths who 'experiment' with each other but don't rape. According to one statement by a woman who left a similar cult (yes, folks, this is not the only one) she was taught nothing of the birds and bees, and was married off at 14 years o f age, her father arranged with church official, her mother didn't want, but had no power to do anything in a male dominated society.

forced to live with and have s*x old men,

this may happen but it is not necessarily the all-inclusive experience of every person belonging to this sect. Force is rape. Consent at the age of 18 is not. When the Texas state allowed 14 y/o's to marry....just 3 years ago... a consenting 14 y/o was of legal age to give consent. Still seems illegal (not merely immoral) to me....but it may depend how the state of Texas regards unlicensed marriage. What if it's 2 14 y/o? A 14 y/o and someone 17 and 11 months? How about 14 and 26? If 'consent' was coerced, or forced by any means, then it is rape: In a society where early and arranged marriage is accepted as normal, it is likely that very few of these women would understand the same objections which you or I might have in the same situation.....

sold as s*x slaves?

Guess I missed the article which establish that this was a fact, routine and customary occurrence: I read something that 'alleged' or rumoured such....but even that article suggested the rarity and the arrangment involved the leadership of the cult and the 'suitor'. The guilty should be prosecuted.

I guess children have no rights not to be abused anymore.

Honestly, doesn't this work both ways? Children have rights to live safely in secure homes with their none abusing parents and parents have the right to possess their belief systems, no matter how offensive it is to us, as long as their children are not abused. Is it right to take children which have not been abused from their parents because they and their parents are part of a belief system which you and I do not agree with? Why would some equate protecting their constitutional rights as support ing their belief..... when the former protects us all, but the latter is a peculiar individual expression which we Christians want to preserve for ourselves and our prosperity.... but can only do so at the expense or risk of allowing others their beliefs.

(We really must be careful here.....because we are getting into areas of justice or judgement based on the potential for wrong doing) To take this into an area of our own belief system: You (DonnA et al) and I can probably agree that we both believe the Bible is the Word of God:

The Bible teaches: Proverbs 13:24 "He that spareth his rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes. Proverbs 19: 18 "Chasten thy son while there is hope, and let not thy soul spare for his crying. Proverbs 22: 6 "Train up a child in the way he should go, and when he is old, he will not depart from it." vs 15 "Foolishness is bound in the heart of a child, but the rod of correction shall drive it far from him." Proverbs 23: 13-14 "Withhold not correction from the child: for if thou beatest him with the rod, he shall not die. Thou shalt beat him with the rod, and shalt deliver his soul from hell."

What should we do? Shall we tear Proverbs out of our Bible? If one is a 'Bible believer', would it be 'right' or 'just' to remove kids from a home based upon Biblical teachings or 'the potential for (as yet no occurrance) abuse' or someone using our religion based upon the possible expression of those beliefs? This is dangerous ground for us to encourage our government to lower its requirement for proof or to expand enforcement into the 'mind reading' or 'reading the future' without some concern:

We the people still are the government, no matter how much we wish to blame 'the government' for the things we disapprove of. As the people who give our recognition to the ones which we elect to rule..... it is also our right, our opportunity, our necessity, to be careful as to what rights we protect for ourselves and our neighbors, and what are (the narrow) areas of enforcement permitted and within reason for our government to restrict. Some forms of evil we have to find constitutional ways to limit, control or change.

And just which children are they going to give to which mothers? They have constantly lied about which children are theirs, they kept swapping out kids. Some of the kids don't even know which mother is theirs.

This last statement is not completely clear. We know only what is reported, that is what some reporter or person 'alleged'...... If their accounts are true then we may assume there was definately an effort to confuse the CPS officials in their bone dig: I would think that most mothers would know which are their own children. But when they are rounded up with little explanation and involved in a law enforcement action which purpose they know not........and which could be as much against their practice of religion, or their choice to live in a compound or closed and private community, why proffer information unnecessarily? As citizens of this country, they are within their rights to peacefully reserve their rights to speak or not to speak. Until there is a charge of abuse, there is no right to remove a child from a home.......even if that home has multiple families living under its roof.

If it were to have occurred in a Baptist Church..... we would most likely cooperate: But what if the child, and the family were unnamed and the specifics were not revealed? Would we cooperate without question the removing of our children and separating the wives from their husbands until the CPS had the time to investigate each and every family and home?

Yes, I do feel a vested interest of sorts: My ancestry.....besides being German, English is also American Indian. Not once in the history of our country has so many children been removed from their families within the citizenship: The removal of American Indian children from their families and homes and sending them on the trail of tears.... is another matter.

 

[annsni]

The law of Texas states:

Sexual assault for anyone to intentionally or knowingly penetrate a person under age 17, other than his spouse. The actor has an affirmative defense if he is not more than three years older than the victim, who is at least age 14

It was sexual assault according to the state.

 

[windcatcher]

The law of Texas states:

Sexual assault for anyone to intentionally or knowingly penetrate a person under age 17, other than his spouse. The actor has an affirmative defense if he is not more than three years older than the victim, who is at least age 14

It was sexual assault according to the state.

Thanks Ann.... and I accept that you have the correct info which I missed.

The thing is 3 years ago this was the law regarding a legitimately recognized marriage. It is highly doubtful that a 14 yr old and a senior citizen got any legimate license to marry:

Have they found one or several 14y/o (or under) who were forced married to old men yet?

 

[annsni]

Thanks Ann.... and I accept that you have the correct info which I missed.

The thing is 3 years ago this was the law regarding a legitimately recognized marriage. It is highly doubtful that a 14 yr old and a senior citizen got any legimate license to marry:

Have they found one or several 14y/o (or under) who were forced married to old men yet?

From what I understand, they're being very secretive about any information on anything that's illegal. So they're not telling who's children is who's (so that the mothers can't be charged individually), they're not agreeing that there is "marriage" happening, etc. However, a child under the age of 17 who's already a parent makes it clear that something is happening. Especially when it's numerous girls who are mothers before the age of 17 (a much higher proportion than the general population - even in inner city America!) Interestingly enough, the man who started the sect told his followers that they were to not marry before the age of 18 - so these men and women are breaking not only the laws of the state but their own leaders guidelines.

I don't have all the facts before me (and I'm honestly tired and don't want to google right now) but I do think that they have atleast one who reported that she was forced to marry before she could legally marry.

 

[4His_glory]

From what I understand, they're being very secretive about any information on anything that's illegal. So they're not telling who's children is who's (so that the mothers can't be charged individually), they're not agreeing that there is "marriage" happening, etc. However, a child under the age of 17 who's already a parent makes it clear that something is happening. Especially when it's numerous girls who are mothers before the age of 17 (a much higher proportion than the general population - even in inner city America!) Interestingly enough, the man who started the sect told his followers that they were to not marry before the age of 18 - so these men and women are breaking not only the laws of the state but their own leaders guidelines.

I don't have all the facts before me (and I'm honestly tired and don't want to google right now) but I do think that they have atleast one who reported that she was forced to marry before she could legally marry.

I believe you are right. I remember watching an interview of a former FLDS member who explained that they stopped getting legal documents like birth certificates and marriage licenses because these could be used as evidence against them in court. This alone speaks volumes that these people knew full well that they were breaking the law. Which because it looks like they are going to get away with this is really sad.

 

[annsni]

What made me so sad was to see interviews of some of the wives. They were zombies!! It was amazing! Quiet, monotone, answering with the same answer over and over again. I'm not saying all of them were but I'd say atleast some were brainwashed. My heart went out to them.

 

[annsni]

According to an article Squire Robinson posted elsewhere, the age a minor can marry with parental consent is 16.

The article states "After the raid, Child Protective Services (CPS), the Texas department responsible for such matters, said it identified 20 minors and young adult women with children who had become pregnant between the ages of 13 and 16. The age of sexual consent in Texas is 17."

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/rtrs/20080502/twl-uk-usa-polygamists-bd5ae06.html

 

[donnA]

Anything less then 17 and it's considered rape.

 

[annsni]

Anything less then 17 and it's considered rape.

Yep - unless you're 16 and married. And since these men were already married, we know where that leaves them....

 

[faithgirl46]

What made me so sad was to see interviews of some of the wives. They were zombies!! It was amazing! Quiet, monotone, answering with the same answer over and over again. I'm not saying all of them were but I'd say atleast some were brainwashed. My heart went out to them.

I saw that too. I agree, they looked like zombies.

 

[windcatcher]

I perceive that there are some who believe everything printed in the press: that believe everything the government uses to explain its actions: If so then accept the early reports of the raid that there was an inside informant living at the 'compound' for 4 years who allowed the abusive acts of incest and child rape to go on without intervening to stop the abuse or informing the authorities...or who informed the authorities but the authorities either did not notify CPS or CPS did not act for 4 years of gathering information to stop the abuse:

That over 60 women were participants in the sexual abuse of their children: That removal of over 400 children from their mothers was justified, including children as young as suckling infants and under the age of 6, were in imminent danger of incest and rape, the only charges so far which have been reported: That 3 years ago, when Texas had exceptions for 14 y/o girls to marry....that noone on the ranch.....oppps, I mean "compound" (that is the 'name' the authorities want to refer to it)....... anyway, we who read the reports that there were teenagers who gave birth..... have accepted the assumption that in every case it was the result of incest or rape and that not one conformed to the statue of law or the acceptance of society of teen with teen behavior which results in the same.

And, there is agreement with the CPS authorities who remove these children from their teen aged mothers because of the imminent danger that these mothers will commit or allow sexual abuse of their infants and young to occur. And, there is agreement on this board, that the teen mothers, who are all victims of sexual abuse, also present a real and imminent danger to their own children which deserves the removal of their children from them and placement in a scattered foster care system across the state.

Furthermore, there is agreement on this board that the court which ruled that most of the children were not in imminent danger and should be returned to their mothers, was less informed than we are and is unjust in its ruling:

Bottom line, we believe our media reports......selectively, and we accept government's explanations without question. We accept that foster care is wholesome placement for children, that children belong to the government and in homes which they approve: and that government is the best judge of what constitutes abuse and is correct in all instances of its determinations.


-----------------
According to statements, CPS believes there are over 2,000,000 children abused in our country each year! The majority are not reported. A mere 400+ children is just a dent in their goals of ending child abuse. ............Coming, perhaps, to a town or a church, or a charitable institution, or a orphanage, or a home for unwed mothers, or a home schooler, or a home........NEAR YOU!

According to NCANDS whose latest statistics are for 2005 an estimated 3.3 million referrals of child abuse or neglect were received by public social service or CPS agencies. Of these referrals, 899,000 children were confirmed to be victims of abuse or neglect (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2007). That means about 12 out of every 1,000 children up to age 18 in the United States were found to be victims of maltreatment in 2005

http://www.americanhumane.org/site/PageServer?pagename=nr_fact_sheets_childabusedata

 

[donnA]

If a young girl of 14 is married to her cousin, then we know for sure, 1. illegally wed 2. rape 3. incest. There are and have been girls as young as 14 wed and pregnant at 14 and 15 yr old. They have girls 14-17 who have children, in that case it makes it a fact that they were married at an illegal age, if indeed they are really married(the fact they chose to claim to be unwed mothers and receive welfare proves they understand they aren't really marrie), who an actual adult man had sex with (molestation, rape, pedophilia). These are facts people want to ignore, that these girls do exsist.

 

[donnA]

Yep - unless you're 16 and married. And since these men were already married, we know where that leaves them....

sex offender

 

[annsni]

Windcatcher - From what I understand, nursing babies stayed with the mothers.

 

[donnA]

that children belong to the government and in homes which they approve: and that government is the best judge of what constitutes abuse and is correct in all instances of its determinations

No children do not belong in goverment hommes. But as a nation we have responibility to protect children. What the giverment constutes abuse? Do you mean older men having sex with 14 yr old girls, molestion them, raping them is not abuse? Do you approve of this? Do you approve of incest?
If not then yes the goverment has to step in and do something to help abused children. No one person has the power, no one private group has the power to do as much as needs to be done. Lots of ideals from people who disagree, but no real solutions. In reality, something has to be done when children are abused. Forcing a young girl to have sex, rape, forced incest, swapping out teenage girls, buying a teenage girl for sex, this is wrong, it is abuse, even if there are people who do not believe it.
What is your realistic proposition as to what our country should do about such abuses? Remember, facts bare out the truth of this, these girls do exist, when you have a 14 yr old pregnant or a 15 yr old with children, you can see the facts are true.

 

[Joe]

Windcatcher is at it again

 

[windcatcher]

Windcatcher - From what I understand, nursing babies stayed with the mothers.

I've read that too.... and its contradictions. It is hard to know what is information and what is disinformation.

According to some reports I read.... some nursing children were removed. No medication given the nursing mothers and some of the young children sent into foster care.....

But then I did also read the report that there was an informant living on the ranch(none of these things can I now find in the currently posted reports and old links don't connect to the material I oringinally read), ...... and I also remember reading about the mental health worker's protest that the removal of the children was more traumatic and severe than any imminent danger alleged by the CPS:

=====================
I agree with the MH on the basis, that keeping mothers and children together during an investigation under these particular allegations is relatively safe.... any harm would be immediately identified as suspicious so at this point the children have protection: rapport and trust relationships might develop between the investigators and the 'client/suspects' which might encourage a more candid and honest disclosure and more beneficial information; The allegations on which the removal of the children was based involved children older than 12 (presumably 14) but which could have sufficed by protecting in place those under age 10 or 12, and temporary boarding or foster placement of all children above that age.... until enough was known to make decisive decisions like prosecuting some, restoring some families, and dividing some families.

One thing the MH workers know/knew..... the investigation was only beginning and would take time, the allegations ....just that, an unproven but serious report: children are easily traumatized by significant change.... especially when unprepared and unexplained: In an event as large as this was, some disorder is to be expected and may account for some false messages..... but false messages do frequently occur until there is a new establishment of order in the field which includes the one or ones who make the policy and decide the boundaries and the limits of flexibility. Crimes and abuse require victims, perpetrators and behaviors: This requires persons with names and actions called behaviors.....not beliefs. Then you have a case.

I dare say the MH workers were more objective but quickly thrown out and had no serious status..... MH were probably the window dressing which CPS hoped would increase the legitamacy of the action: the raid was conducted by the authority of the CPS or it might not have occurred. Confi8dentiality statements are frequently required..... and are a professional acknowldgement of privacy rights. If the CPS invited or allowed the MH workers to assist in the assessments of the children and the mothers.... the confidentiality was there to protect the identities of parents, children and staff conducting the investigation. MH workers are typically silent (confidential) and don't identify (call by name or divulge how known) each other when 'out of office' or associated disciplines (i.e. social and case workers) or clients.

MH workers are not inclined to give subjective (or opinionated) observations: Behavior is specific: If someone is angry and threatening and beligerant and disrepectiful...... all these are subjective and each person who reads this would have his own idea (judgement/ opinion) of what this 'someone' was like: But, if I or a MH worker describes someone as 'he got red in the face and broke a sweat, and rapidly approached writer with his arm extended and his finger pointing until his finger was within an inch of my nose, and he was standing leaning towards me..... all the while calling me in a loud voice "you hokem blokem doboly do' who do you think you are you 'swear word here and specific curse word there' and whatever else was said as exact quotes here." then we can read this or hear this testimony and practically picture it as though we witnessed it and any judgements made because of the specifically objective material (uses our 5 senses, what words, tone, tempo, what was seen, smelled, heard, tasted, felt: nothing regarding 'opinion' or 'interpretation'.)

I know some questioned the 'confidentiality statements'...... They are misinformed if they think MH workers broke confidentiality by speaking to the problems they saw.

The MH workers did break one very critical law of politics and govenment agencies which often have to compete with each other: Namely, unless you are very well confident in the necessity of your own office and its funding and the demand and support of the public..... watch carefully the money powers behind them before you make public those you might cross. In agencies and politics.... Some agencies are rich in funding...... and also power because of all the money which flows to and through them: CPS, while it will tell everyone that it is underfunded..... which is probably true...It has tremendous monies poured into it and through it to foster care and for promoting adoption and for case management. MH may get some referrals from CPS for substance abuse counseling, anger management, treatment of PTSD, depression, anziety and dissociative disorders, and personality disorders....... any of which may be the result of childhood abuse, or develop into some form of child abuse if coping skills are inadequate. CPS may be able to save the broken pieces from being discarded.... but, frequently, it is through MH that the pieces start going back together again.

 

[donnA]

I'm sure rape is traumatizing too, so is incest, knowing that your parents gave you away to some man so their religion could have more money.
I remember reading that these children are developmentally behind other children their age by several years because of the brain washing and trauma of living this life style.
And how about the child who said living off the ranch with the baptists who originally housed a bunch of them said they were 'best care for children', contrasting with the only other thing the child knew, which was life on the ranch.
Yeah, being rescued from sexual predators is always traumatizing.

 

[Joe]

http://www.childbrides.org/carolyn.html

At 35 years old, Carolyn Jessop decided to escape her abusive marriage to Merril Jessop, get her eight children safely out of Colorado City, Arizona, and leave the FLDS.

Seventeen years earlier, she had been forced into an arranged polygamous marriage with the 50-year-old Merril Jessop.

If Carolyn got caught escaping, she knew that her children would be taken from her and that she would be shunned by the community. * Worse yet, she feared that the local FLDS doctor would probably diagnose her as mentally ill. * If that happened, she could be sent to a mental institution in Flagstaff, Arizona, where several other "rebellious" women from the community had been "warehoused."

At 10 p.m. on April 21, 2003, she found her window of opportunity to flee. * She and her eight children crept out of the home they shared with her husband's other six wives and 46 children, leaving forever.

Below are some articles discussing the harrowing experience Carolyn endurred trying to escape her polygamous life.
*

Carolyn Jessop is a schoolteacher, an educated woman. She said the Colorado City community is growing more restrictive and she feared her daughters might be pushed into polygamous marriages.

Jessop says she worked as a schoolteacher, but her husband took her paychecks.

"I was required to sign that over to my husband and ask him for everything," she said.

Jessop says she was the fourth of seven wives of 67-year-old Merril Jessop. They've been married 17 years and had eight children but she's wanted out for a long time.

"The marriage has been abusive from the beginning," she said.

Carolyn Jessop says the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints is taking measures to increase control over membership.

"They've taken the children that are FLDS out of the public schools
Jessop says that in this polygamous Colorado City community on the Utah-Arizona border, she was controlled financially, she didn't have a car with a license and she had to arrange for her brothers to help her escape with her children.

"I called my brothers and they drove all night to come and pick us up," she said.

Jessop says her husband wants to get her children back to Colorado City and polygamy and her children are frightened by prophecies from the polygamous religion.
Part of the indoctrination is that the world is coming to an end. If they are in the big wicked city they'll be destroyed. There is a lot of fear and a lot of anxiety.

You write about how having children or having your husband sexually favor you is how a polygamist's wife gets status.

Yes. That's how I thought. I think that most of us in the community thought the same because it was pretty obvious that the woman he liked to have sex with was the one who could get shoes for her kids and the basic necessities she needed, and the other women in the family had to just basically go without.

You describe physical abuse and beatings. How widespread was that?

It was a big part of the culture. Dominance and control. It was all to maintain the work of God. If it was done in the name of God, then you didn't question it. It was just a fundamental part of life. I think that in the community people did have their limits when it came to physical violence of what was okay and what was not okay. And so there were cases of extreme violence in families and people viewed that as not being okay. But a man was believed to have the spirit of God and he could get divine revelation from God that pertained to his family. If he had a revelation that in order to get a wife in line physical violence [was required], then he was within his right to use whatever means he needed to have control of his family. Mostly it pertained to children. It was frowned upon for a man to beat his wife, but they did it all the time.

What was scary?

He was talking about moving people to what he called "The Center Place." I knew Warren well enough to know what he had up his sleeve, and I knew he was going to move us into compounds and separate us from family, friends and relatives. The main thing that held me to the life was my family and the fear of being alone and not being able to see them. Because once you leave, they won't ever speak to you again. When I realized we were going into compounds, which I could see being prison camps, I knew I would be separated from my children and I knew I wouldn't have access to my family anymore. I was going to lose it all anyway and if I didn't get out as soon as possible, and I went into one of those camps, I would never get out. To me it became very scary at that point. I knew I had to run.


http://www.childbrides.org/carolyn.html

 

[Joe]

Here is a great website to learn about Elissa Wall http://www.childbrides.org/elissa.html

Elissa Wall acted as a liazon between CPS, Police and the FLDS. She used to be in the FLDS. She has done numerous interviews on shows like Oprah, Good morning America etc...

She says the CPS workers were extremely caring and very sensitive to the children's needs during the ordeal. She bragged on them.

She had mixed emotions about the ordeal. She loved seeing her brothers and sisters, yet hated seeing them so upset yet she knew it was the right thing to do. She said she knew it had to be done.