Jump to content
IGNORED

polygamist sect hearing in texas decends into farce


redwing

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 195
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  2
  • Topic Count:  135
  • Topics Per Day:  0.02
  • Content Count:  7,537
  • Content Per Day:  1.08
  • Reputation:   157
  • Days Won:  2
  • Joined:  04/06/2005
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  09/29/1956

False report or not...............MINORS ARE PREGNANT! Bunches of them!

Anybody who thinks thats okay .........well in my opinion, as more problems than the Constitution.

But many states ALLOW those as young as 14 to marry with the consent of their parents. Texas did until a few months ago (less than 2 years). Some states allow marriage without consent as young as 16. It is even LEGAL for a minor who is married to be pregnant. (A minor is usually considered to be someone who is not legal age. Legal age has varied between 16-21.) If it is legal and they are married why would you have a problem with that?

Now, if you are talking about the massive rate of promiscuity among the young in our society, and the "entertainment" industry that is programming them to think these things are okay, the abortion, poverty, destruction of family units, disease and all that goes with it. I would agree, that should be addressed. But it should be addressed by His Own! It is the church who has abdicated its responsibility. It was never intended to be the role of a secular government. So, in that sense, we, the church, by not caring for His helpless ones, have brought this upon ourselves. We should not have abdicated. We should not have allowed the enemy an open door to so violently rip apart families.

Well I am not a lawyer ( <_< ) and I am not even American so I may not have the facts right but I do remember reading somewhere that the law allowed for children under 16 to marry with their parents consent AS LONG AS THERE WAS NO MORE THAN A 2 YEAR AGE GAP BETWEEN THE MARRIAGE PARTNERS....from what we are reading it appears that not only are some of the "husbands" old enough to be the girls father ( or even grandfather in some cases) but that hte girl is given no choice in the matter but is told that they have to obey the husband that is chosen for them ..in most peoples eyes ( as in the eye of the law that we all agree to uphold even if we do not fully agree with every law) THAT IS RAPE.

As for comparing it to "promiscuity amongst the young in our society" ...at least they have the right to chose and the knowledge that they would be supported if they were raped and you have a very easy means of not watching "the entertainment industry" ..the women and children of that compound have not even had the freedom of choice or the knowledge that they CAN chose

:) you got it Pear! What states "allow" and what goes on between minors has nothing to do with what was going on here. And since all of this was done by a "supposed" church, as well as the families of these young girls to begin with, your points have nothing to do with this situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  1
  • Topic Count:  272
  • Topics Per Day:  0.08
  • Content Count:  2,338
  • Content Per Day:  0.65
  • Reputation:   11
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  07/19/2014
  • Status:  Offline

:)<_<
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  8
  • Topic Count:  200
  • Topics Per Day:  0.23
  • Content Count:  4,273
  • Content Per Day:  4.85
  • Reputation:   1,855
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  12/17/2021
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  06/03/1955

His One, thanks for your thoughtful reply. I hear (understand) what you are saying. I guess we just have different priorities. My concern if for the children and their right not to be subjected to sexual abuse, psychological abuse, teen pregnancy and other horrors that take place within the FLDS cult. Yours, it reads to me, is the rights of the predictors' and co-conspirators' to privacy, freedom of "religion" and the right not to incriminate themselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  4
  • Topic Count:  144
  • Topics Per Day:  0.02
  • Content Count:  4,512
  • Content Per Day:  0.68
  • Reputation:   625
  • Days Won:  10
  • Joined:  04/11/2006
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  10/07/1979

quote brandon's popo: "His One, thanks for your thoughtful reply. I hear (understand) what you are saying. I guess we just have different priorities. My concern if for the children and their right not to be subjected to sexual abuse, psychological abuse, teen pregnancy and other horrors that take place within the FLDS cult. Yours, it reads to me, is the rights of the predictors' and co-conspirators' to privacy, freedom of "religion" and the right not to incriminate themselves."

Wow, could you be more condescending brandon's popo?

There's a virtue/right in this country that many of us seem to have forgotten. Guilt has to be proven, innocence does not. But, I guess it's more prudent to convict people without a trial.

You are working on the assumption that everyone there was abusing children, but that hasn't been proven. But, I guess your presumptions are all that counts, right?

As we continue to compromise our rights for our ideology, we will just end up with fewer rights and more ideology. Guess what other ideologies have been placed over individual liberty. Nazism, Stalinism, Marxism, Humanism. All of which have been responsible for the most vicious atrocities the world has ever seen and has caused the death of untold hundreds of millions of people. Humanism being the most recent, over millions of babies have been aborted worldwide and over 40 million per year. The death toll of Humanism has killed more people than Nazism, Stalinism or Marxism combined.

But, hey who cares about the law right, those were bad people, we just know it don't we?

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  8
  • Topic Count:  200
  • Topics Per Day:  0.23
  • Content Count:  4,273
  • Content Per Day:  4.85
  • Reputation:   1,855
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  12/17/2021
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  06/03/1955

quote brandon's popo: "His One, thanks for your thoughtful reply. I hear (understand) what you are saying. I guess we just have different priorities. My concern if for the children and their right not to be subjected to sexual abuse, psychological abuse, teen pregnancy and other horrors that take place within the FLDS cult. Yours, it reads to me, is the rights of the predictors' and co-conspirators' to privacy, freedom of "religion" and the right not to incriminate themselves."

Wow, could you be more condescending brandon's popo?

There's a virtue/right in this country that many of us seem to have forgotten. Guilt has to be proven, innocence does not. But, I guess it's more prudent to convict people without a trial.

You are working on the assumption that everyone there was abusing children, but that hasn't been proven. But, I guess your presumptions are all that counts, right?

As we continue to compromise our rights for our ideology, we will just end up with fewer rights and more ideology. Guess what other ideologies have been placed over individual liberty. Nazism, Stalinism, Marxism, Humanism. All of which have been responsible for the most vicious atrocities the world has ever seen and has caused the death of untold hundreds of millions of people. Humanism being the most recent, over millions of babies have been aborted worldwide and over 40 million per year. The death toll of Humanism has killed more people than Nazism, Stalinism or Marxism combined.

But, hey who cares about the law right, those were bad people, we just know it don't we?

I wasn't being condescending towards anyone. I just gave a snyopsis of my position/concern as posted. I also gave my understanding of what His One had written. I am focused on the rights and protection of the victims/children while he/you are focused of the rights and protection of the perpetrators/adults. If this is not a correct understanding, please enlighten me. :thumbsup:

Edit: I am talking about the state having the right to remove the children from their questionable environment, not about whether the parents are guilty or not. Once it is determined either way, then the question becomes criminal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  8
  • Topic Count:  200
  • Topics Per Day:  0.23
  • Content Count:  4,273
  • Content Per Day:  4.85
  • Reputation:   1,855
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  12/17/2021
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  06/03/1955

The children, sad and frightened when taken from the FLDS compound, are now waving and smiling as they are moved to foster homes. They have had a taste of the real world. Go figure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  4
  • Topic Count:  144
  • Topics Per Day:  0.02
  • Content Count:  4,512
  • Content Per Day:  0.68
  • Reputation:   625
  • Days Won:  10
  • Joined:  04/11/2006
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  10/07/1979

All children smile and wave in front of cameras, it's very exciting for them, they don't know how to respond to all the changes in their lives.

As for your synopsis, it still sounds condescending.

quote brandon's popo: "I am focused on the rights and protection of the victims/children while he/you are focused of the rights and protection of the perpetrators/adults."

So, because they are parents/adults, they are perpetrators? Still don't get it?

I am talking about everyone's right. The kids, the adults, the 4th Amendment.

You have already convicted these people. That's the problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  4
  • Topic Count:  144
  • Topics Per Day:  0.02
  • Content Count:  4,512
  • Content Per Day:  0.68
  • Reputation:   625
  • Days Won:  10
  • Joined:  04/11/2006
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  10/07/1979

The children, sad and frightened when taken from the FLDS compound, are now waving and smiling as they are moved to foster homes. They have had a taste of the real world. Go figure.

Propaganda/Spin. Delusion.

The children were sad and frightened because they were being taken from their families and there were a bunch of police with machine guns yelling at them and their families.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Diamond Member
  • Followers:  2
  • Topic Count:  65
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  1,066
  • Content Per Day:  0.16
  • Reputation:   26
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  08/15/2006
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  02/02/1961

You have already convicted these people. That's the problem.

Kinda hard not to convict anyone when you see 12 and 13 year old children either pregnant or carrying babies. And I believe it's kinda obvious where they got them, and it ain't from the little boys in the compound.

a.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...