Comments on: Texas High Court Makes the Right Call

By: Mark Stewart

Mark Stewart — Mon, 02 Jun 2008 04:11:49 +0000

I agree the high court ruling is correct (maybe slow coming). The Eldorado ruling was also correct. Our neighbours in this FLDS community in Canada and the US need a shake-up. They do not have the resource (and focus) they need to properly manage their at-risk children. Not to worry. Texas is going to afford these people with a vote to Sherrif: a good start. Hopefully relevant jurisdictions across North America will follow and step up to the plate.

By: Lorayne Salas

Lorayne Salas — Sun, 01 Jun 2008 23:40:01 +0000

The jury is still out.
Until we really know what is going on inside those walls we cannot judge.
We must remember that not all people are alike and differences should be respected.
If indeed these young girls are being forced to marry, then we must see what can be done to help them. But until then they should not be yanked from their homes and the only life and family they know.

By: Spider

Spider — Sun, 01 Jun 2008 16:15:13 +0000

KarenD-

Very interesting. I am impressed with your knowledge of the legal system and its laws.
Now, if I may, let me show you my expertise in, gambling. I would be willing to bet you are exactly like our host here, Jami Floyd. Educated as a lawyer, prone to pointing that out at every opportunity to us laymen, but working outside of the field, in Jami's case as a legal news correspondent and an oft ignored blog writer on her own In-Session department, you, my guess as an office worker somewhere in middle America.
Laws, us ignorant laymen feel, are written to keep our country the way the majority of it's citizens want it to be. The vast majority of us do not feel polygamy is a moral way of life, therefore should be illegal. Lawyers, even former or wanna-be lawyers, on the other hand, feel that laws are written for them to find obscure definitions in and, in course, use those definitions as loopholes to violate the actual intent of the law. This is why our legal system works so well. That was sarcasm, KarenD, straight forward, no need to try to read it any other way.

By: den

den — Sat, 31 May 2008 05:56:03 +0000

i believe this argument is about religious differences. one group, cps, or one person wanting to force their beliefs on another.
for all the accusations, not one adult has been arrested. why remove the children who have done nothing wrong. to protect them? from someone doing something wrong? then arrest those doing something wrong. the state of texas doesn't have enough evidence to arrest anyone, then how do they have enough evidence to remove the children?

By: KarenD

KarenD — Fri, 30 May 2008 22:52:37 +0000

"What about the picture of Warren Jeffs kissing an underage girl? "

All that shows is that Jeffs kissed a girl, even IF they ever actually prove her age. That is it.

By: KarenD

KarenD — Fri, 30 May 2008 22:50:49 +0000

"i have a suggestion for Texas, they should condemn the roads at the ranch, to use “intimate domain” to take over the roads of this compound," – robert repass

Just a heads up, but it is "eminent domain".

By: Dotti E. Denman

Dotti E. Denman — Fri, 30 May 2008 22:15:07 +0000

It's unfortunate that the children always get hurt, and carry scars for life. Their mother's are just kids who had kids. I am a woman, and feel that women and children are still just considered as property and things by many in this society - including judges - and all over the world.

By: Lilibeth

Lilibeth — Fri, 30 May 2008 20:17:58 +0000

Jami, I'm sorry, I hear your points, but I disagree with you. What about the picture of Warren Jeffs kissing an underage girl? What about Carolyn Jessop's testimonies? Aren't they proof enough?

I'm sorry but... I believe the overriding principle involving children in any court of law should be to assure their safety and protection. The Texas High Court failed to do so in this case.

Lilibeth
Edmonds, Washington

By: Kathy

Kathy — Fri, 30 May 2008 17:24:44 +0000

I completely agree with the court's descision. I don't agree with wha't's going on at the ranch, but CPS made a huge error in the way they handled this case. They are responsible for upholding the law, and the law was clearly not being followed when police raided the ranch. If CPS had spent more time collecting evidence and doing their duty to PROVE these kids were being abused, this case may have gone a better way and the kids may have gotten the help they needed.

What bothered me the most about this case was that they took all the kids, when really the teenaged girls were the only ones in imminent danger of being married off. Why would you take an infant away from its mother? There was no reason to seperate the younger children if they were not at risk.

Donna: I don't think the polygamists are in the business of stealing children. The reason they have so many is they don't use birth control, and its part of their beliefs to "go forth and multiply". From what i've read, may mothers have a dozen kids or more. Another reason that some of the DNA tests might not match up with anyone on the ranch (from what I've read) is that some of these kids may have been seperated from their birth parents by Warren Jeffs and sent to the YFZ ranch to live with others.

By: Vince in CA

Vince in CA — Fri, 30 May 2008 15:44:53 +0000

It was a polygamist compound. What do you think goes on in there? How many of those women whole heartedly wanted to be there? They consciously put their children, especially daughters, in harm. This country is horrible at protecting it's children. From child molestors to polygamists not very many people get punished sufficiently.

By: Carol

Carol — Fri, 30 May 2008 15:30:21 +0000

Saying that those pictures are proof of child abuse is like saying that "Narnia" is proof that lions can talk.

Photos and film can easily be altered. The Texas authorities had nothing.

By: Jeanne, San Diego

Jeanne, San Diego — Fri, 30 May 2008 15:26:01 +0000

The courts did make the right call. Of course cases of abuse should be investigated but per individual family.

By: Swiss-Canadien feminist for Obama

Swiss-Canadien feminist for Obama — Fri, 30 May 2008 14:35:16 +0000

To Aurale Huff: Thank you for posting this. You are so right!!!!!!!

By: Claudia, Houston, Tx

Claudia, Houston, Tx — Fri, 30 May 2008 13:42:59 +0000

This whole thing was botched from the beginning and unfortunately CPS reacted without proper cause. I hope in the future CPS doesn't have to go through this embarrassment again in their attempt to save children from abuse.

By: Mike in NYC

Mike in NYC — Fri, 30 May 2008 13:17:48 +0000

Bob wrote:

"Cut off the welfare and food stamps unless the families provide through DNA who are the fathers of these children. Other fathers must provide child support why not these breeders."

Good idea.

A judicious application of your plan would certainly benefit our "urban areas."

By: robert repass

robert repass — Fri, 30 May 2008 11:04:31 +0000

i have a suggestion for Texas, they should condemn the roads at the ranch, to use "intimate domain" to take over the roads of this compound, go in, pave the roads, put in side walks, road signs and the like, this would allow the police to patrol these streets, and regular citizen's could drive through. And take some land for a police sub-station and post office. a small library might be a good idea too. What about that home schooling thing, the state does test these kids don't they?

By: Jean V

Jean V — Fri, 30 May 2008 06:08:42 +0000

If the children are in no immediate danger, then I have one question:

Where are the BOYS?

If there is not a 50-50 ratio of boys to girls (a normal gender ratio in a collection of 400 minor children would be pretty nearly 200 boys and 200 girls) then WHAT HAPPENED TO THE MISSING BOYS? Where are they?

Someone in authority needs to get the answer to that question, and fast.

By: Rebecca Randolph

Rebecca Randolph — Fri, 30 May 2008 05:51:24 +0000

What bothers me about this whole fiasco is this question: are the children, and especially the young girls of the FLDS sect- and any other fringe groups who exploit the ignorance and youth of their children now to have no recourse, no one governmental or otherwise who will now stick their neck out to defend these defenseless ones?

I'm afraid that this reversal will set a precident that will discourage governmental agencies from "interfering" with their "rights" because they have no PROOF. Unfortunately, by the time they have the PROOF they need to step in to protect these kids, the damage will already be done.

By: KarenD

KarenD — Fri, 30 May 2008 05:49:12 +0000

Oh, and Spider, just so you know, polygamy as I described can easily be technically legal in California, Hawaii, Nevada, Oregon, and Washington. To a lesser degree it can be OK in Connecticut, Delaware, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Missouri, New Jersey, Ohio, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, and Vermont.

Polygamy would technically be illegal in the following states: Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Florida, Massachusetts, Mississippi, Nebraska, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia, West Virginia, Wyoming, Colorado, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Montana, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Utah, and Wisconsin.

By: Bryan Williams

Bryan Williams — Fri, 30 May 2008 05:31:09 +0000

Thank You Texas for giving every child molestor the loophole they have been working for. Don't be surpised if they come running to your state now, that you will give them the protection they have been looking for. They now know all they have to do is claim to be an FLDS member, and they are home free. They will call their homes temples, and start holding church right beside elementary schools. And if they get caught with underage children they will say they were spirtually married and that makes everything a-ok.

What's next Texas, your gonna allow them to kill virgins as sacrifices?

What makes it even worse, is the crimes that were known to be committed, beyond a shadow of a doubt. They have these mothers that have been getting dhs or other welfare payments for being "single mothers". It is a clear case of fraud. Yet both the mothers and fathers that committed this fraud are going to be allowed to walk away from those crimes.

IF this was you and me, and CPS came and got our children. Even if it turned out the original charges were completly false, would we be able to get our children back so easily? Espically if we couldn't prove we were the parents, or we had a job that could feed and support them? IF we cheated the government out of thousand of dollars, wouldn't we be considered criminals, and therefore unfit parents?

Who in the Texas Supreme Court was paid off with Warren Jeff Money?

Originally posted on amadeusmax.com, reposted here with permission.