Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Infanticide, rape, physical abuse, child abandonment, incest, genetic deformities

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 08:27 PM
Original message
Infanticide, rape, physical abuse, child abandonment, incest, genetic deformities
resulting in death (or murder), forced "marriage", tax fraud, welfare fraud, kidnapping, torture, child labor, government complicity in hiding, abetting, and/or excusing flds crimes...

I have read, here and other message boards, and I have heard in "the real world" and spouted by the "media" all of the examples I list below. This is my "open letter" to "them".

Leaving aside for a moment what I think about those dancing on the head of a pin trying to justify forced "marriage" of young, impressionable, brainwashed and controlled young girls,

---Or those who would obfuscate and divert the discussion by picking semantic nits about the definition of pedophilia; the implication appears to be that it's not pedophilia if they're "married" and the child "consented",

---Or those who aren't as concerned until they hear the terms welfare fraud or tax fraud (because forcing little girls into marriage isn't horrific enough and criticism of their crimes must be legitimized as worthy of criminal status),

---Or those whose needle is stuck on branch davidian when they should be looking to a 100-year old jonestown,

---Or those of the beavis-and-butthead-sexual-maturity crowd who wink, wink, nudge, nudge, hee hee, they've got multiple wives and they're "young thangs", too,

---Or those who intentionally or unintentionally divert attention from the seriousness of the flds crimes as they ridicule and focus on the clothes or hairstyle of the women; the men's clothes, not so much a topic, btw,

---Or to those defending flds "polygamy" as though polygamy as practiced by consenting, informed, self-determined, independent adults is the same as what is forced on members of the flds "church",

---Or to those "religious freedom" fighters who think the perversion that is the flds "church" can in any but the most specious manner be constitute "religious" practice,

read about the history of and practices of the flds and their "religion" and their use of "polygamy" and other "accepted" practices. To those who would defend the flds, see what it is you defend. To those who don't know enough to decide, read and learn.


Texas authorities defend polygamous sect raid

ELDORADO, Texas - It was no secret that a polygamist sect that built a compound in the West Texas desert believed in marrying off underage girls to older men. And the sheriff had an informant for four years who was feeding him information about life inside the sect.

But authorities say their hands were tied until last week, when they finally obtained the legal grounds to move against the group.

<snip>

"We are aware that this group is capable of" sexually abusing girls, Sheriff David Doran said. "But there again, this is the United States. We are going to respect them. We're not going to violate their civil rights until we get an outcry.

<snip>

"You cannot go in and bust in someone's house if there's not probable cause to do so," Abbott said. {emphasis added} {"We are aware that this group is capable of" sexually abusing girls" is not probable cause?!}


Convictions: (see other links for more convictions)

Dale Barlow, is a registered sex offender who pleaded no contest to having sex with a minor in Arizona.

POLYGAMIST LEADER: Jeffs bound for Utah

She {Flora Jessop, a former FLDS member who escaped after being married at 16} said that in eight recent cases of child sexual abuse in Washington County, all of the defendants were sentenced to probation.

In a recent case in Mohave County, FLDS member Kelly Fischer was sentenced to 45 days in jail after being convicted of having sex with his 16-year-old wife, who was two decades younger. Prosecutors had asked for prison time.



Torture and abuse

“Everything you did was monitored and controlled and everybody reported on everyone else,” she said. “It was a police state. You were not allowed to make decisions in your life. I had no power over my life or the lives of my children. It was a terrible way to live.”

<snip>

“The method he would use with infants was a form of water torture,” Jessop said of her former husband. “He would spank the baby until it was screaming out of control, and then he would hold the baby faceup under a tap of running water so it couldn’t breathe. He would do this repeatedly. Sometimes, it would go on for an hour, until the baby was so exhausted it couldn’t cry anymore. This method he called ‘breaking them.’”

To a child, the abuse becomes normal, she said, and resistance becomes unthinkable to most. “With this level of mind control, it’s something you’re born into and it’s generational. The babies born into this, they don’t stand a chance from the beginning,” she said.

<snip>

She said her husband controlled his wives through their children. “The way he controlled me was by being violent to my children,” she told Lauer. “If I did something that he didn’t like, my children paid, and they paid a big price. He would hurt them. If he would have been hurting me, I probably would not have conformed. But when you go after a woman’s child, that’s one thing that will put a woman on her knees quickly.”



Babyland

Most unsettling is the revelation of countless numbers of unmarked baby graves in the canyonlands attached to the FLDS polygamy cult headquartered on the Utah-Arizona border. Local residents call it "Babyland" and law enforcement's response to human rights activists questioning the graves has been that unmarked graves are not illegal.

<snip>

Utah's Senator Hatch in choosing to publicly ignore Babyland and the malignancy of polygamy cults in his state has blood on his hands. His cavalier treatment of the crisis is best represented by his statement during a visit to southern Utah in 2003:

"I'm not here to justify polygamy. All I can says is, I know people in Hildale who are polygamists who are very fine people. You come and show me evidence of children being abused there and I'll get involved. Bring me the evidence." <He said further,> "I personally don't believe in polygamy. But I'm not going to judge others who feel differently."


For those who are dismissive of these stories because they're from the women, do you believe the "Lost Boys"?

ST. GEORGE, Utah -- Abandoned by his family, faith, and community, Gideon Barlow arrived here an orphan from another world.

<snip>

Gideon is one of the ''Lost Boys," a group of more than 400 teenagers -- some as young as 13 -- who authorities in Utah and Arizona say have fled or been driven out of the polygamous enclaves of Hildale, Utah, and Colorado City over the last four years.

<snip>

Authorities say the teenagers aren't really being expelled for what they watch or wear, but rather to reduce competition for women in places where men can have dozens of wives. {I included what the "authorities" have said because some people put no stock in what the former-members are saying}

{another male voice for those who deny credence to the women's stories} "There is a virtual Taliban down there. You tell people this stuff happens and they don't believe it," said Dan Fischer, a former FLDS member and dentist living outside Salt Lake City who helps educate and house the exiled teens. The exodus "has been far more dramatic in the last year."


Quotes from "Banking on Heaven" video trailer {for those who give credence rather than dismiss the survivors of this group}


"I personally know of a woman who had a baby...that was deformed, he took the child and drowned it. This was condoned by the FLDS leadership." Elaine - Warren's <Jeffs> sister


"I spent 17 years being beat by my mother 'cause I wouldn't be obedient to my father ...and he wanted me in his bed...I never will back down" unnamed woman on video


"The LDS and the FLDS, uh...go by the same books" Jennie - escapee


"To me, Colorado City is a classic example of what happens when a theocracy takes over a government. You end up with massive, massive corruption and abuse of human rights" unnamed man on video


Blind Eye to Culture of Abuse {read the whole article; far too much information for the 4 paragraph rule, dammit!}


<snip>

The political debacle, coupled with a fear of violating the sect's religious freedom, ushered in 50 years of official passivity and government inaction, even in the face of continuing reports of illegal conduct in the FLDS enclave. {emphasis added}

<snip>

In 2001, Dan Barlow Jr., son of the Colorado City mayor, was charged with 14 counts of sexual abuse, accused of repeatedly molesting his five daughters, ages 12 to 19, over several years. According to the police report, Barlow confessed to the crimes. {emphasis added}

<snip>

Barlow was allowed to plead guilty to a single, lesser charge of sexual abuse, and was sentenced to 120 days in jail — most of which was suspended. He served 13 days. {emphasis added}

<snip>

On both sides of the state line, lenient sentences for sex abuse cases are a common complaint. {emphasis added}




Criminally complicit

Sen. Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah) once visited the FLDS church in Hildale and played the organ. He later defended the group when asked about its alleged abuses.

<snip>

"All I can say is I know people in Hildale who are polygamists who are very fine people. You come and show me the evidence of children being abused there, and I'll get involved," he told local reporters. "Bring the evidence to me."

<snip>

In his successful 1991 bid for Arizona governor, Fife Symington wrote an open letter to the residents of Colorado City concerning their "family-oriented lifestyles," vowing never to do anything to "upset or question" their religion.

"Our policy was one of noninterference," he said recently. "The advice I got when running was this was an issue I wanted to stay away from."




The state of Arizona is contributing to the secrecy. The state Department of Health Services and the Department of Economic Security have been quietly providing services to assist the children and families of fumarase victims for more than 15 years. Both DHS and DES officials refused repeated requests from New Times to document the type and cost of services the state is providing to treat fumarase deficiency. The agencies claim that federal health laws prohibit them from releasing records or allowing their authorities to comment on the situation. Way more than 4 paragraphs worth



flds in Canada

The sect, a group of self-described "fundamentalist Mormons," includes the 1,000-member community of Bountiful near Creston, B.C. That community was headed by its former bishop, Winston Blackmore, who has more than 20 wives and at least 103 children.

<snip>

Debra Palmer, who left the fundamentalist commune in Bountiful in 1988, told CBC News that she was surprised and worried after hearing that Jeffs had been arrested.

Palmer, who lives with her family in Saskatchewan, has alleged she and her children were being abused under the polygamist system.

<snip>



Las Vegas, NV

The name Jessop is almost synonymous with polygamy. Patriarch Joseph Smith Jessop led the split with the Mormon Church decades ago. In the polygamist strongholds of Colorado City and Hilldale, nearly everyone is related to the Jessops, who are considered among the most devout followers of their now incarcerated leader Warren Jeffs.

<snip>

Law enforcement authorities believe that funds from polygamist business enterprises have been used to support Warren Jeffs and to help him remain a fugitive.

In recent years, several polygamist outposts have popped up in Southern Nevada, drawn by explosive growth. Records show Jacob Jessop's construction firm, JNJ, is licensed in Nevada but based in Colorado City.

Since 2004, it has earned more than $7 million on nine projects commissioned by the Las Vegas Valley Water District, including ongoing work at the massive Springs Preserve operation. JNJ has also won contracts with the city of Las Vegas and Clark County.



100 years, 10,000 members, in (at least) 2 countries

Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard told KTAR-AM of Phoenix that Jeffs' arrest is "the beginning of the end of ... the tyrannical rule of a small group of people over the practically 10,000 followers of the FLDS sect." He predicted that it will inspire more people to come forward with allegations of sexual abuse.

<snip>

The FLDS Church split from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints when the mainstream Mormon Church disavowed plural marriage more than 100 years ago.

<snip>

During his four-year rule, the number of underage marriages — some involving girls as young as 13 — escalated into the hundreds, church dissidents said. They said that although the sect has long practiced the custom of arranged marriages, young girls were rarely married off until Warren Jeffs came to power.

People expelled from the community said young men were sent away to avoid competition for brides. Older men were cast out for alleged disobedience, and their wives and children were reassigned by Jeffs to new husbands and fathers, the former members said.




because some people just aren't concerned with forced "marriage", child abuse, etc.

The activities in the community have often appeared out of reach of law enforcement. Members of plural families have in the past come to the attention of state and local officials through occasional allegations of welfare fraud, tax dodging, domestic violence and child abuse.

But officials have said that cases were difficult to build, with trouble finding witnesses to testify.

In Hildale earlier this year, thousands of polygamists were engaged in a standoff over overdue property taxes of about $1.3 million for hundreds of houses.

The Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is an offshoot of the Mormon Church, which has disavowed polygamy for more than a century. The fundamentalist church had long paid the property taxes of its members, but the church hierarchy fell into shambles with Mr. Jeffs on the run.



because others think incest just isn't horrific enough {again, way more than 4 paragraphs can describe}


<snip>

Of even greater concern was the fact that the recessive gene that triggers the disease {fumarase deficiency} was rapidly spreading to thousands of individuals living in the community because of decades of inbreeding.

<snip>

Doctors and family members interviewed by New Times say up to 20 children from families in the polygamist community are currently afflicted with the condition that requires full-time attention from caregivers. Victims suffer a range of symptoms, including severe epileptic seizures, inability to walk or even sit upright, severe speech impediments, failure to grow at a normal rate, and tragic physical deformities.

<snip>

Fifty-two years later, more than half of the 8,000 people now living in Colorado City and Hildale are blood descendants of the Barlows and the Jessops, says Benjamin Bistline, a lifelong resident of the area who has published a book, Colorado City Polygamists, on the history of the fundamentalist community.

{another one with "just a story"} Dr. Vinodh Narayanan, a pediatric neurologist at St. Joseph's Hospital, says he is seeking funding to develop a test that would allow public health officials to collect voluntary blood samples from as many FLDS members as possible. The samples could be tested for the gene at the Translational Genomics Research Institute in Phoenix.



for those who don't believe the "mainstream media" perhaps you can read about fumarase deficiency in these communities, the result of decades of inbreeding (hmm, incest by any other name is still...) in the Annals of Neurology, Volume 47, Issue 5, Pages 583 - 588 (or is the Annals of Neurology too "mainstream"?)

We describe the clinical and imaging features of this disease arising from a consanguineous pedigree in 8 patients in the southwestern United States. Thirteen patients have been previously described in the medical literature. Our patients presented with an early infantile encephalopathy with profound developmental retardation and hypotonia, and most experienced seizures. Previously unreported characteristics described here include structural brain malformations, dysmorphic facial features, and neonatal polycythemia. {quick note for the definition impaired - "consanguineous - of the same blood or origin; specifically :relating to or involving persons (as first cousins) that are relatively closely related (birth defects in _consanguineous_ marriages)." Sounds like incest to me.}


---------------------------------

Books available about this sect

Under the Banner of Heaven of course, as I've been assured by at least one person, "it's just their story." The author wrote about "an array of disturbing firsthand accounts and news stories (such as the recent kidnapping of Elizabeth Smart) of physical and sexual brutality, which he sees as an outgrowth of some fundamentalists' belief in polygamy and the notion that every male speaks to God and can do God's bidding." And who, one might ask, are these "disgruntled former members" about whom the author writes? Surprise! "Dan Lafferty" who along with his brother "Ron...murdered the wife and infant daughter of their younger brother Allen" as told during "jailhouse interviews with Dan Lafferty. Far from being the brooding maniac one might expect, Lafferty is chillingly coherent, still insisting that his motive was merely to obey God's command. Krakauer's accounts of the actual murders are graphic and disturbing, but such detail makes the brothers' claim of divine instruction all the more horrifying." Can you believe the stories of these guys, sheesh. What a bunch of easily dismissed sour grapes.

Colorado City Polygamists another one of those with a "story". My gawd! Now they've got the men doing it, too!

Escape another "poor deluded survivor" (and her "deluded" co-authors) with nothing more than a "story".

More books are listed at the above links. But, hey, they're just "stories" by "disgruntled" former members and those who've been "taken in" by them.

----------------------------

Threads posted by other DUers with even more links to even more evidence:

From Dems Will Win: Senator Hatch refused to help abused polygamy girls A wealth of links and information in that thread alone.

From eppur_se_muova: Woman describes childhood in polygamous household (CNN) {FLDS, Warren Jeffs case} Ah well, just another "disgruntled" former member with no "authoratative" voice.

From donsu: Utah and AZ won't prosecute polygamists - for real Priorities, priorities.

From demobabe: Polygamy: the Red State Answer to Family Values. AZ and UT Attorney Generals Won’t Prosecute It. Yeah, it's a duplicate of donsu's. Government complicity in crime should be shouted out over and over and over and ...

From DeSwiss: Polygamist's Son Jailed For 180 Days For "Having Sex" With 13-Year-Old Girl Oh well, it's not like he was convicted of rape, right? There is also information in this thread about additional convictions of the "it's not really rape when we do it" crowd.

From Herman Munster: Boys Cast Out by Polygamists Find Help

From SoCalDem (in the above thread): and welfare pays them to do itLink to "story" about welfare fraud {SoCalDem's link is no longer working. I found another source (link is still active) for the same article by the same author from the same date. I wanted to make sure SoCalDem was recognized as my source for this information.}


Many, many more can be found using DU's search feature. Even more can be found by using Google. And more in a library, especially some University libraries.


-----------------------------

Now, apologists, "religious freedom" defenders, and those who view this as a titillating diversion of a story to enhance your infantile wet dreams in which you control numerous women little girls for your sexual pleasure - your turn. Are you willing to take on this 50 year old, enraged, feminist, who is 1/4 "Mormon" and a possible descendant of polygamists (I have the red hair and familial resemblance to suggest it) who has spent years researching, studying, reporting, and reading about these sick fucks in "religious" clothing? Warning: years of attempted brainwashing by my LDS family members and friends never "took". You'd better be a damned sight better than they were at presenting your argument and asserting your authority and the authority of your knowledge over me and mine.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Lars39 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 08:30 PM
Response to Original message
1. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 08:31 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Thank you.
Your sig line seems very appropriate for this particular discussion.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Iris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 08:38 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. once more from me
The effort you took to put together all of this documentation should not go ignored.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 08:41 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. Thank you, Iris.
Doing my bit to educate as many as will read.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Quantess Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 10:37 PM
Response to Reply #6
67. Here's an article about Fumarase Deficiency, a result of inbreeding in the polygamous FLDS cults
Intermarriage among close relatives is producing children who have two copies of a recessive gene for a debilitating condition called Fumarase Deficiency.

They predict the scale of the problem will increase dramatically in the future. Wyler, who has lived in the polygamist community most of his life, said he expects residents to continue marrying close relatives.

"Around here," Wyler said, "you're pretty much related to everybody."

Fumarase Deficiency is an enzyme irregularity that causes severe mental retardation, epileptic seizures and other cruel effects that leave children nearly helpless and unable to take care of themselves.

Dr. Theodore Tarby has treated many of the children at clinics in Arizona under contracts with the state. All are retarded. "In the severe category of mental retardation," the neurologist said, "which means an IQ down there around 25 or so".

According to community historian Ben Bistline, most of the community's 8,000 residents are in two major families descended from a handful of founders who settled there in the 1930s to live a polygamist lifestyle.

"Ninety percent of the community is related to one side or the other," Bistline said.


http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,635182923,00.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 10:43 PM
Response to Reply #67
69. Thank YOU! That 4 paragraph limit was killing me.
Geez, so much information reduced to 4 paragraph limitations counting on people to take the time to read the full articles. Yeah, crazy-making.

Thank you, quantessd!

:yourock:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Quantess Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 11:46 PM
Response to Reply #69
82. That article was not included in your OP.
Edited on Wed Apr-16-08 12:19 AM by quantessd
Here is a link to the similar one in your OP, for convenience.
http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/2005-12-29/news/forbidden-fruit/

Tarby's young patient was afflicted with an extremely rare disease called fumarase deficiency.

"I had never seen a patient with it," Tarby says. "Right away I asked the parents if there were any other children with the same problem."

The parents said their daughter had cerebral palsy. Tarby asked them to bring the girl to him for an examination.

"As soon as I saw her, I knew she had the same thing as her brother," Tarby says.

The fact that fumarase deficiency had shown up in one child was startling enough -- there had only been a handful of cases reported worldwide. But now that it was appearing in two children in the same family was an indication it was being spread by a gene that was getting passed to the children by their parents.....

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 11:57 PM
Response to Reply #82
85. Thank you...again.
So many articles, so little time and so little space in which to post them all.

I edited out many scores of articles to keep the OP to the gawd-awful length it was.

Thank you for including more articles relevant to the discussion at hand.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Greyhound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 08:33 PM
Response to Original message
3. This should be fun...
:popcorn:
:kick: & R


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hekate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 08:39 PM
Response to Original message
5. KnR for a well-researched and informative post. Thank you Cerridwen for speaking up.
:yourock:

Hekate

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 08:43 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. For those who have not yet learned that they, too, can speak up.
Thank you, Hekate - from one "Goddess" to another. :D

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Frank Cannon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 08:43 PM
Response to Original message
8. Word up
:thumbsup: :thumbsup:

It's amazing, some of the shit that people on this forum will take up for.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 08:46 PM
Response to Reply #8
12. I choose, for the time being, to attribute it to ignorance; that is,
to the lack of knowledge. This is my solution for said lack.

Thank you.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Frank Cannon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 08:52 PM
Response to Reply #12
17. You put a lot of work into that post, and I appreciate it
I think you pretty much squelched any possible debate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 08:58 PM
Response to Reply #17
20. Thank you for saying so.
Though I'd like to think I showed how some are defending what I consider the indefensible. But that's just me and YMMV.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lonestarnot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 08:43 PM
Response to Original message
9. Bunch of sick ass law breaking freaks, mostly with big heads.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 08:47 PM
Response to Reply #9
13. There's a joke in your post I'm resisting...
:evilgrin:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lonestarnot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 09:18 PM
Response to Reply #13
36. LOL, I know where you're "heading."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 09:21 PM
Response to Reply #36
39. .
:rofl:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Trajan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 08:44 PM
Response to Original message
10. K and R'd ....
Well Done Miss P ...

Now, I'm gonna slip outta here quietly lest I fumble and draw that kind of wrath ....

It's deserved by the FLDS to be whacked like this: Wrong is as wrong does .... and so wrong they are ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 08:50 PM
Response to Reply #10
15. Not today you won't...
Mr. G ...

Not today. :D

Of course, it oughta' be good for the next meet-up, huh? LOL

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kitty Herder Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 08:45 PM
Response to Original message
11. Thank you for this post! From a born-in-the-covenant EX-Mormon and fellow descendent of polygamists.
:yourock: :applause: :applause:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 08:48 PM
Response to Reply #11
14. I'm honored.
I thank YOU for much valuable information you've provided me in many threads about this topic.

We "rock" together.

:yourock:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kitty Herder Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 09:00 PM
Response to Reply #14
23. I'm glad if I was able to help, but you've provided so much more information in this one post
than anything I've posted. Again, thank you.

:hug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cynatnite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 08:50 PM
Response to Original message
16. I must have missed something...who is defending this crap?
Questioning how it's being handled or asking for more information isn't the same as defending nor is it being apologists.

Can someone please link to other DUer's who are defending these disgusting practices? I'd like to condemn them publicly myself.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 08:55 PM
Response to Reply #16
18. It's against DU rules to call out another DUer, and this isn't just DUers.
I'm talking about a lot of people from whom I've heard and read the various arguments and defense as I listed.

I'm afraid you'll have to look around DU for the offending posts.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cynatnite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 08:57 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. You still are calling out other DUer's...
you don't have to post a link to do call out another DUer. Plenty of them get locked for doing the same thing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 09:00 PM
Response to Reply #19
22. If a DUer has posted some of the things I listed, then yes, that
could be true. As I said, I've heard many of the same things from talking heads, pundits, politicians, co-workers, etc. I'm not sure how to separate what is said here from what is said "there" to make it less about "calling out DUers".

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Iris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 08:58 PM
Response to Reply #16
21. Some have suggested that some of the children should be left behind b/c they might not be victims of
abuse. However, in situation where a child has been abused and there are more children in the family, the authorities do not leave the remaining children in the home.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cynatnite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 09:03 PM
Response to Reply #21
24. That sounds like ignorance talking...
I remember back in the seventies and eighties where children were being abused, but allowed to remain in the home...then the child would wind up dead. After a few notorious cases the laws began changing to where if there was a suspicion, the child would be removed.

I'd rather them go a little over the top in protecting a child than not at all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Iris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 09:05 PM
Response to Reply #24
25. my thoughts exactly
I wouldn't want to be in the shoes of the TX authorities, but, really, what choice do they have? Who would be the one to look over the children and decide which ones look abused and which ones should be left behind to fend for themselves?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 09:10 PM
Response to Reply #25
30. I have a couple of criticisms for the TX authorities
They waited four years and they apparently did not think to provide an environment in which the children and women could feel safe and "at home"; as much as one could feel at home in this awful situation.

Beyond those 2 things, I am relieved that someone...finally...did...something. How sad is that? Talk about "lowering the bar".

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Iris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 09:19 PM
Response to Reply #30
37. good point, and maybe naively in the back of my mind, I think of those "authorities"
as a bit overwhelmed by the whole thing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-17-08 08:32 PM
Response to Reply #37
310. Not so naive. I posted a link to a report of what happened in 1953 when
"the authorities" took on this group. The political fallout was astonishing. Too bad some will put political expediency before the "common good".

They would have been less overwhelmed had this been "nipped in the bud". But those days, who cared about what was happening to women and children? /sarcasm

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 09:07 PM
Response to Reply #24
27. I agree.
Thereby explaining my overly researched post/thread. I do not accept ignorance as excuse; after one has been provided information.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cynatnite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 09:22 PM
Response to Reply #27
41. I say ignorance because there are some who don't fully grasp...
how difficult the handling of abuse can be. They usually don't take children out of homes on whims and I think some folks think the state authorities do.

I do wonder if a lot of these kids feel free enough to talk about what went on there. If nothing was coming out of their investigations wouldn't they have started returning children? That's not to mention some mothers are opting not to go back as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Iris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 09:29 PM
Response to Reply #41
48. that's a good point. Somehow the arguments seem to be that the gov't. is interfering with the
religious upbringing of these children and that somehow that's going to spill over onto the rest of us.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-17-08 08:59 PM
Response to Reply #48
315. They apparently have a different definition of religion than I.
Incest, rape, abuse, and denying "Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s" ("Ἀπόδοτε οὖν τὰ Καίσαρος Καίσαρι καὶ τὰ τοῦ Θεοῦ τῷ Θεῷ") (Matthew 22:21)". link, seems to be their MO.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 09:29 PM
Response to Reply #41
49. The children and the women are in the hands of those they have
been taught are the enemy. If they ever talk openly, it will be far into the future and after much trust is earned by the "authorities".

I cannot see them ever trusting anyone ever again; regardless of the outcome of the current situation. Imagine everything you've ever been taught proving to be other than you've been taught. The biggest "sin" in all of this, IMO, is how long it has been allowed to continue.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Iris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 09:34 PM
Response to Reply #49
51. yes. How many babies have been born in the 4 years since they moved to TX?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 10:12 PM
Response to Reply #51
61. And what, precipitated those births?
I bet you can imagine. I know I can. I'll presume that many others reading this can.

Thank you, Iris, for your contributions to this thread and all the posts regarding this topic. :hug:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 11:14 AM
Response to Reply #24
126. I have seen some "DUers" up in arms about the supposed violation
of the adults' rights posed by the raid. They don't seem at all concerned about the children's rights to be free of abuse and oppression.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wizard777 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-17-08 03:04 AM
Response to Reply #126
287. Okay then let's all quit bitchin about the warrantless wire taps and searches.
Edited on Thu Apr-17-08 03:04 AM by Wizard777
Do you think the terrorists will only kill adults? Do you think they won't kill our children too? Do you think bio chem nuke weapons kill discriminantly? Are you ready to admit you were wrong and go apologize to George Bush and every last freeper?

I'm not. I'm still siding with upholding the US Constitution.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-17-08 11:58 AM
Response to Reply #287
303. i think there is enough evidence crime was committed, we will have to see
but to yell at all that you are concerned with constitution and no one else is.... ones that see rape and abuse as crimes and not ignored for religious right.... is wrong, as in incorrect. the difference here is you are ignoring crimes committed and putting religous freedom from constitution above

we will wait and see if texas has what they need to prosecute.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wizard777 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-17-08 05:16 PM
Response to Reply #303
308. I'm not ignoring crimes. I have yet to see any REAL evidence of crimes.
Right now this case is all hat and no cattle.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-17-08 05:34 PM
Response to Reply #308
309. are you fuckin kidding me. i can see a 14 yr old being raped by her 50 yr old oldman
Edited on Thu Apr-17-08 05:35 PM by seabeyond
right in front of you and you still would not SEE a crime. or making baby cry then sticking in water then cry then sticking in water....

that is why you started on that bullshit about spanking last night huh. defending the waterboarding of babies, cause parents cant spank today ergo all kids out of control

geez

that is sick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-17-08 09:23 PM
Response to Reply #308
320. Perhaps someday you'll take the words of women as valid
rather than dismissing them as unworthy of your concern.

I posted many links to the words of survivors of this group yet you call them "no evidence". Who else do you dismiss so out of hand?

I also posted some article about the boys who've been abandoned. Do you also consider them unworthy of your standard for evidence?

Sad, it is to watch your words as you attempt to defend the destruction of body, mind, and soul (if you believe in that) of your fellow human beings.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wizard777 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-18-08 01:31 AM
Response to Reply #320
340. I hear ya and I feel ya. But this is just one side of it.
CPS has it's own horror stories.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-17-08 10:51 PM
Response to Reply #308
334. Here, I'll type slowly for you.
Is incest legal in the US?

Does medical proof of incest qualify as proof of incest?

Please read link in OP about fumarase syndrome. (oopsie, the link is dead. guess you'll have to find your own denial of evidence.) Dispute or confirm the male sanctioned evidence.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-17-08 09:12 PM
Response to Reply #287
316. Where in the Constitution does it say one must allow rape, infanticide,
physical abuse, brainwashing, torture, etc. in the name of "religion"? Wait, you call those practices "religion"? What the hell kind of church do you attend?

Where in the Constitution do you see "religion" defined?

While you're defending these scum people based on "Constitutional" doctrine, do you also defend the right of "religionists" to justify murdering gays, as "religious" practice? Or the "right" to deny those of non-white skin color their Constitutional rights due to "Biblical" tenets? What other atrocities in the name of "religion" do you defend?





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 09:05 PM
Response to Reply #21
26. Is witnessing abuse being a victim of abuse (for a child)?
I think so. Perhaps the "some" who "have suggested" may agree. Maybe not. I'll leave it to each to decide. I will NOT leave it to them to decide without as much information as I can provide in one thread/post.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 09:12 PM
Response to Reply #21
34. An abusive home is just that. One doesn't leave behind children
who haven't (YET) been harmed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gollygee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 09:23 AM
Response to Reply #21
112. Self-delete (posted in wrong spot)
Edited on Wed Apr-16-08 09:24 AM by gollygee
whoops - posted in wrong place~
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
girl gone mad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 09:27 PM
Response to Reply #16
46. here..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eppur_se_muova Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 10:31 PM
Response to Reply #16
66. self-edit -- someone beat me to it. nt
Edited on Tue Apr-15-08 10:32 PM by eppur_se_muova
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 09:09 PM
Response to Original message
28. BEST. POST. EVER. ...........give the girl a standing ovation!!!!!
Edited on Tue Apr-15-08 09:31 PM by kestrel91316
BTW Cerridwen, you are probably related to me. And my assistant, lol.

My dad's family were Mormons, and there are lots of polygamists back a ways on his side. Turns out my assistant (redheaded, lol, like you and my paternal grandmother) is my 7th cousin - those Allreds in NC 200 yrs ago joined up with the Mormons and bought into the polygamy thing bigtime.

Oh, and Barack Obama comes from NC Allred stock on his mom's side so he's a cousin, too.

I am no friend to Mormon fundamentalists, not even those who have remained mainstream on the outside. They are rapists and rapist wanna-bes.

Oh, and REC!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Iris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 09:11 PM
Response to Reply #28
32. The only problem with this post that I see is
that I have to scroll so far to get to the discussion part!

(but I'm not complaining ;) )
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 09:23 PM
Response to Reply #32
42. Yeah, brevity is not usually my forte...
But, hey, you should have seen it before I edited it down for 4-paragraph-rules and the overwhelming amount of information I found just on the 'net (so it would be link-able).

LOL

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Iris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 09:25 PM
Response to Reply #42
43. well, if I ever saw a case against brevity, this was it!
Again - very nicely done.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 05:45 PM
Response to Reply #42
212. You did a magnificent job.
And it must be exhausting dealing with facts that brutal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 09:20 PM
Response to Reply #28
38. "We are famil-eeeee"
Okay, now I got an ear worm. LOL

LDS church members have been good and bad to my family over the years. It's difficult for me to slam them for their beliefs regardless of my own, or my own lack thereof, depending on your viewpoint.

The leadership and the system are the two "things" about which I have much criticism. The individual members I take individually. The flds leadership and its relationship to the LDS leadership is problematic (I'm being diplomatic).

Regardless, it's nice to have another member of my family; the more the merrier! :D

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 09:29 PM
Response to Reply #38
47. I guess I have a bee up my butt about Mormons because of how
they treated my dad when he was a kid, for not buying into their silly doctrines. Held him back from promotion to Star Scout in the Boy Scouts because he didn't spend his Sundays in the Mormon Church.......

And I wasn't treated very well by the Mormons in the Utah town where we lived when I was in JHS (my dad was in the USAF).

Well, and there was that little matter about my g-g-g-grandfather William Adams Hickman............hired assassin for Joe Smith and Brigham Young, lol.......who eventually turned on his masters.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 09:33 PM
Response to Reply #47
50. Ah, the stories you and I could tell and "swap"
My LDS grandfather married my Catholic grandmother and raised their children Catholic in a predominately (at the time) "Mormon" town. His family refused to come to her "pagan" (Catholic) funeral. It just sort of goes downhill after that (and before that, but there are far too many stories for this message board).

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Canuckistanian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 09:10 PM
Response to Original message
29. And has anyone brought Warren Hatch the evidence?
I'm sure HUNDREDS HAVE.

And we can see the results.

Thanks, Cerridwen, for keeping this issue front and center.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-17-08 09:15 PM
Response to Reply #29
317. If you mean
Orrin Hatch...he's quoted in my OP. He's quite fine with this group, thankyouverymuch. See the part about "complicity" in my OP.

The state of Utah and its legislative representatives have an interesting history. I'll leave it at that.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
femrap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 09:10 PM
Response to Original message
31. I watch very little msm tv....
Edited on Tue Apr-15-08 09:12 PM by femrap
but I did see a bit of this story. Where are the fathers??? I never see any of them....or is there just a couple of them?

Within the past year, I read an article where many of the children are born with a very rare genetic disease due to incest....it leaves them unable to feed themselves, dress themselves, etc. They usually die prior to the teenage years.

WHERE ARE THESE KIDS? The men in the community keep insisting that the women keep reproducing because they don't understand the genetics of incest.

And from what I saw on msm tv, the mothers are being punished. Why? Again, where the hell are the fathers????

I am so sick of our PATRIARCHAL culture.

edited to add the word patriarchal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 09:55 PM
Response to Reply #31
56. Ah, the "fathers" are never responsible in this type of environment
only the "mothers". There is a wealth of information in that knowledge. (to the lurkers out there) Pursue it.

:hi:

Thank you, femrap for giving me this opportunity to say what I just said. :D

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
femrap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 10:03 AM
Response to Reply #56
115. My pleasure....
I am going to try to find that article about the genetic disease that these fundy mormons are generating.

Take care!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 09:12 PM
Response to Original message
33. K & R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
opihimoimoi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 09:15 PM
Response to Reply #33
35. K&R #19
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 09:56 PM
Response to Reply #35
58. Thank you. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 09:56 PM
Response to Reply #33
57. Thank you, ma'am. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
girl gone mad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 09:22 PM
Response to Original message
40. Those who would condone the lifestyle of this cult..
they don't deserve your reasoned, researched response.

They are remnants of a bygone era where women had few rights and through marriage, men "rescued" women from a life of loneliness and total dependence on generous relatives.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Iris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 09:26 PM
Response to Reply #40
44. Honestly, I don't even think they cared about rescuing anyone.
Edited on Tue Apr-15-08 09:32 PM by Iris
I think the women are/were seen as childbearers and sexual repositories.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 09:58 PM
Response to Reply #44
59. Perhaps. Sometimes, we "get" to settle for the
unintended consequences. Sad commentary, but for the sake of those women, their children, and all the rest of us, I guess I'll "settle"...for now.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 09:27 PM
Response to Reply #40
45. True. But those who might be influenced by their words most
definitely DO deserve to see additional information.

I have a habit of posting for the lurker and those who speak/post little but think/read much.

I also have the added benefit of "getting it out of my system"; well, for the moment anyway.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
janx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 05:42 PM
Response to Reply #40
207. I am amazed at just how many people like this are still around!
It's 2008, and every once in awhile I am taken aback at a comment from some guy who wants to "help" a much younger female...

It boils down to fear, but I expected that kind of fear to have vanished. It hasn't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beaverhausen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 09:35 PM
Response to Original message
52. The sad thing is, the Eldorado kids are lucky - they got out. There are thousands still out there
who are suffering all this abuse - in Colorado, in Utah, in Arizona...

What will be done with them?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 09:37 PM
Response to Reply #52
53. and Canada...
I agree. Perhaps this will set a precedent? I can only hope that this is the start of refusing to "turn a blind eye" to this group and its practices.

I also wonder if there are other compounds in other parts of the world. I would not be surprised. Saddened and angry; but, not surprised.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beaverhausen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 09:40 PM
Response to Reply #53
54. I fear this might make the rest of them go deeper into hiding
and we know they have money, so they can survive very well wherever they go.

I just hope they can keep these kids from going back into that damn place.

thanks so much for your post and all that information.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 09:43 PM
Response to Reply #54
55. Very good, and sad, point.
Edited on Tue Apr-15-08 09:45 PM by Cerridwen
It's how they've survived all these years.

You're welcome for "all that information". I hope you and others find it useful and informative. Please use as you see fit.

edit to add: oh my gosh, I forgot to thank you for your thread citing much of the same information. I was working on mine when I saw yours. I thought for a split second of not posting; then I decided I'd spent so damned much time and effort on it, I had to post mine. Good for us. Double the information! :D

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 11:08 AM
Response to Reply #54
123. hubby was asking last night. where do they get all the money. obvi ously
they have a lot. what they built. where are they getting it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marrah_G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 12:03 PM
Response to Reply #123
134. They own alot of companies
Also in NV they are home builders who use the young men of the community as slave labor. They do not pay them, in fact the state still pays their families welfare benefits for them. They work all day, do not go to school and do not get a paycheck. Most are thrown out as soon as they show any interest in females or are deemed a threat to the older males in any way.

They also have gov contracts and defense contracts.

So they have tons of money, much of it provided at tax payer expense. They call it "bleeding the beast". We are the beast they are referring to.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 12:31 PM
Response to Reply #134
139. it is simply harvesting females for their use and the slave labor until to much trouble
anyone anyone justifying this in any way, .... and i have only seen males, give me one female seeing this as ok, ..... anyone ok with this has real issues.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fudge stripe cookays Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-17-08 06:00 AM
Response to Reply #123
293. They save quite a bit....
by charging it to us, the taxpayers.

They have one legal wife, then keep the others off the books. Because the woman would be considered a single parent, with all these kids, they can get AFDC and tax breaks because of it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
prairierose Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 11:07 AM
Response to Reply #53
122. Cerridwen, there is a fairly new one...
in western South Dakota. Every time I see a new story about this cult, I wonder what is going on there. I have the feeling the authorities in the area are afraid to find out.

Thanks for all of this information in one place. I am bookmarking this so that if I need more information to argue with some idiot about this, I will have all of this ammunition in one place.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-17-08 08:55 PM
Response to Reply #122
314. Hi prairierose. Thank you for reminding me.
I think a post of mine (from long ago) had a reference to the SD group. The link was bad so I chose to delete it for this OP.

Please, if you have current and active links, post those as well.

Some here not only need a mountain of evidence, they need the damned mountain to fall on them!

Please feel free to use this information (as this post or otherwise) as ammunition as you see fit.

:hi:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Greyhound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 10:01 PM
Response to Original message
60. I can recommend once, but you can help get this through the GD:P noise on the FP.
This is beyond outrageous and it is far past time this obscenity is exposed to the light.
:kick:



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 10:20 PM
Response to Reply #60
64. FP? Front page?
Hey, inquiring minds want to know. :D

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Greyhound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 02:47 AM
Response to Reply #64
89. Yes. n/t
:kick:


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JeanGrey Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 10:12 PM
Response to Original message
62. Outstanding. I read only today that MANY of the children
don't even know who their parents are! Can you believe that? My god.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 10:19 PM
Response to Reply #62
63. No, I can't.
Thank God, Goddess, Spaghetti Monster, whomever, I have been fortunate to NOT add this to my list of life experiences.

Thank you for your response and the nice word you used. :D

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wizard777 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-17-08 02:27 AM
Response to Reply #62
283. That's not true.
The children know who their father is. But it can get a little confusing for some of the younger ones as to who the mother is. That is because the children refer to all the wives as mother. There is no concept of my children and your children. Only our children. That kinda makes it a trick question for the kids. You ask them to point to their mother. Being a monogamy oriented person. Your expecting them to point to one person. But they are polygamy oriented kids that except every woman married to their father as their mother. They will point to every woman married to thier father. The older kids and even some of the younger ones do know who their "birth mother" is. It's miscommunication complicated by culture clash.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JeanGrey Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-17-08 10:25 AM
Response to Reply #283
299. Well, DUH. That is the whole point. This entire thing is so
disgusting. I hope they can get these men prosecuted and help these women.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-17-08 09:18 PM
Response to Reply #283
318. How do you know so much of the "mindset" of this group? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 10:25 PM
Response to Original message
65. Thank you --- had no idea of these numbers!!
Nor of the vast abuse ---

I haven't been watching the story on TV . . . so thanks for the recap ---

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 10:48 PM
Response to Reply #65
71. You're welcome. eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DeepModem Mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 10:42 PM
Response to Original message
68. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 10:48 PM
Response to Reply #68
72. Thank you. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catherine Vincent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 10:46 PM
Response to Original message
70. Wow! All the info that is coming out about this case is so overwhelming.
:-(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 10:49 PM
Response to Reply #70
73. Overwhelming...good point.
Thank you.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wind Dancer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 11:05 PM
Response to Original message
74. Thanks for posting all your research.
I was truly disgusted after reading, "Under the Banner of Heaven" - so sad there are still so many being abused by these sick fucks!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 11:28 PM
Response to Reply #74
79. You're welcome.
There is so much to know about what is happening with this group. As another poster pointed out "it's overwhelming".

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Manifestor_of_Light Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 11:18 PM
Response to Original message
75. You forgot another form of negligent homicide.
Death in childbirth. How many of these girls died because their pelves were too small and the baby was too big?

Even a good percentage of adult women need C-sections because of cephalopelvic disproportion. I think the figure is 10-15% of grown women. Just because a woman is grown does not mean her pelvis is wide enough to pass a baby. The percentage would be higher with young girls because they are not grown yet, and their pelves might or might not widen sufficiently to deliver a baby safely.

If the baby is too big and you don't get a C-section, which you can only get in a hospital, you DIE. NO QUESTION.

How many of these girls and their babies died in childbirth due to a problem curable with modern surgery?

:cry:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 11:21 PM
Response to Reply #75
76. Oh, my gawd! Thank you!
There is only so much I can put in a post and hope people will take the time to read.

I thank you so very much for adding yet more detail; as awful as it is to read.

If I ever do another "tell all", I'll be sure to remember this point as well.

Thank you again, for the additional information.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Manifestor_of_Light Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 12:09 PM
Response to Reply #76
135. I mentioned that because I've had a baby by C-section.
People don't realize how dangerous childbirth is. Back in the old days, like the 19th century, one third of mothers died in childbirth, either from cephalopelvic disproportion or from childbed fever (an infection caused by doctors with dirty hands).

When I matured physically, my shoulders got broader and my ribs got bigger but my hips never got any wider. I am petite and small boned. If I had not gained weight and acquired a tummy, I could still get in a skirt I wore in the 7th grade when I was 11. And I'm 53 now.

Basically the hole in the pelvis has to be 4 inches in diameter for the baby's head to come out safely. When I was in labor I had NO dilation and NO dropping. Which is about as dysfunctional at childbirth as you can get.

The natural childbirth nuts who say "It's a natural process, therefore we don't need any doctors interfering" are full of shit in my opinion.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 11:20 AM
Response to Reply #75
128. We'll never know about the ones who died. Remember,
the temple has an incinerator/crematory.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kristopher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 11:26 PM
Response to Original message
77. Personally I prefer Bill Maher's take on it. NT
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 11:27 PM
Response to Reply #77
78. Which is? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kristopher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 11:41 PM
Response to Reply #78
81. Tied it to the Pope's visit and the Catholic church's "problem"
He pointed out the major role the current Pope played in protecting pedophile priests.

Unlike you I do worry about the Constitutional issues raised by the case in Texas and, like Maher, the hypocrisy of society in tolerating it anywhere in the name of freedom of religion. Unfortunately, I can also see a large segment of the "values voters" forgetting some of their values as they rally to the "leftists attacking individual and religious freedom." They are just schizophrenic enough to ignore or rationalize the lifestyle with chants of "Remember Waco", "Remember Ruby Ridge" or some such nonsense.

For those reasons, and to effect real change against cults and other abuses of the freedom of religion, I'd prefer to see more due process than has so far been the case. The, shall we say, zealousness of the authorities may come with a heavy price that serves to legitimize more than it serves to stigmatize.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 11:53 PM
Response to Reply #81
83. Please, do tell, what other words would you like to put in my mouth or ideas
would you like to project into my head?

As you are worrying about the "Constitutional issues"; do any of those "Constitutional issues" include concerns about the citizens NOT male, over 21, or 18, or 16, or just the male leaders? Are you as concerned with the "Constitutional issues" concerning the women, girls and "under-aged" boys?

Did you read my OP and the included links about why I think this group has very little to do with "religion"? Or is this just another knee-jerk hit at a woman who has the "audacity" to question the actions of these men? Hey, if you can project thoughts into my head, I can project them into yours, right?

Did you read any of the links I posted before you expressed your concern about the "zealousness of the authorities"?

Do you get the difference between what I noted about the branch davidians versus the jonestown cult? Did you understand what I posted about the difference between "religion" and religion?

Hell, did you read my OP and check out the links?

Just in the off chance you did read and still missed it, here's a primer for you.

Snake oil salesmen touting their wares using the cloak of religion are still snake oil salesmen. This has very little, if anything, to do with religion or religious freedom. You might have guessed that, or even comprehended that, had you read the OP with an intent to understand rather than as an attempt to defend such atrocities.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CTyankee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 04:11 PM
Response to Reply #83
177. You said it! "Civil liberties for the guys" is what it is to me.
Is there some throwback thinking going on, maybe subconsciously, that wants things this way...?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 11:54 PM
Response to Reply #81
84. kinda like the due process we are waiting in our military for rape of women. or the rapes by
contractors. still waiting for the due process as the rapes continue.

it seems like we put the actual crime of rape pretty low on the must do list.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kristopher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 12:34 AM
Response to Reply #84
88. I don't see how that relates, but if you do, ok.
Edited on Wed Apr-16-08 12:35 AM by kristopher
I'm just saying that there are potential outcomes that are not going to make those who want to stop cults having such broad license very happy. I want to rein in religion myself, but if this is/has been handled improperly by authorities, ultimately it is going to do nothing more than create future victims.

I know you don't want that, but religion in this country is VERY protective of its freedoms.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 06:52 AM
Response to Reply #88
91. i dont want to rein in religion. it is not mine ot tell someone to or not to do their religion
Edited on Wed Apr-16-08 07:06 AM by seabeyond
this is not about religion. this is about rape. this is about forcing girls to marry men 3, 4 x's their age and treated less than property with no rights, this is about abuse. not religion

i dont give a shit about their religion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 07:39 AM
Response to Reply #88
95. Not cultS - this particular group.
As I said in my OP "---Or to those "religious freedom" fighters who think the perversion that is the flds "church" can in any but the most specious manner be constitute "religious" practice".

No where did I mention "rein{ing} in religion" (though you did) as I happen to believe in religious freedom and, since it's related, I also support the separation of church and state for the sake of both.

I'm so very tired of those who would commit heinous acts then cloak those acts in "religion" to avoid the consequences that would most surely fall on them were it not for our very twisted views of religion in this country. I'm even more tired of those who buy into their perversions of religious teaching in order to defend them.

I'm not sure what to think of people who can look at the actions of the flds and think religion. That to me, is akin to watching a man rape a woman and thinking they're watching a couple making love.

How the hell did we become so confused in this country that we're willing to accept any perversity as long as it's duly tagged "religion"?

However, I do agree with you on one issue (maybe more but I'm being specific to this topic :D ), "if this is/has been handled improperly by the authorities, ultimately it is going to do nothing more than create future victims." I wholeheartedly agree. I hope the authorities in TX proceed with as much delicacy and respect due each person in that compound; including any of the men who have been victimized by the leadership of this group. Those men will be the silent and silenced victims if the authorities and others are not careful. I want to make sure they are not forgotten.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kristopher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 10:03 AM
Response to Reply #95
116. Whether you like it or not religion is core to this event.
Reining in religion = re-establishing separation of church and state

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-17-08 09:20 PM
Response to Reply #116
319. Please, do not equate this group with religion.
Seriously, it is an insult to those who take their faith very seriously and who would condemn these practices with no reserve.

This group only uses the cloak of "religion" to further its purposes.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 05:43 PM
Response to Reply #81
210. So...leave them alone until....what, exactly?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
janx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 06:10 PM
Response to Reply #81
226. This is nothing like Waco, fortunately.
Texas law enforcement handled this beautifully.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-15-08 11:34 PM
Response to Reply #77
80. since maher has never said a nice thing about women or children, what
Edited on Tue Apr-15-08 11:59 PM by seabeyond
would that take be....

waiting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 12:13 AM
Response to Original message
86. i went onto the other thread you are refering to. i gotta believe it is internet pumping of chest
say whatever knowing no one will look the creeps in the eyes so they are shameless in the crap they spew.

probably a bunch of ugly farts with less personality that cant get a woman for anything, well... unless they fork over the bucks. disgusting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 12:19 AM
Response to Reply #86
87. Hi seabeyond.
I wasn't actually referring to any particular thread on DU. This has been going on for years on DU, in real life, and from the "mainstream" media. I had finally had enough of people setting aside what is going on in favor of...well, you read my list as intro into the "meat and guts" of my OP.

The only thing the threads and posts on DU did was to remind me of what is generally discussed in the "public forum".

Regardless, thank you for taking the time to look around here. Watch for it elsewhere, too. It's amazingly ugly and distracting. I'm tired of it being a punch-line on late-night talk shows. There are some serious issues going on in the US. This is one of them. It's not funny to anyone with an ounce of compassion.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 06:53 AM
Response to Reply #87
92. It's not funny to anyone with an ounce of compassion
yes, there are so really serious issues going on
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LeftishBrit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 04:55 AM
Response to Original message
90. How utterly sickening.
I can't believe people condoned this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 07:08 AM
Response to Reply #90
94. seems lots of males on this board. i am not seeing a single woman, moms
Edited on Wed Apr-16-08 07:28 AM by seabeyond
who i would think be most empathetic to the other moms having their children taken from them. i would think moms all over would be standing up, speaking out for these moms, but it is not a single female. it is only males on this board that are outraged, i tell you, for interference with these young girls forced marriages that are such a bad deal. after all, so many in so many cultures force marriage on young girls without consent. what is the deal

i have just come out of perusing a couple three other threads. a bit hot
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 07:45 AM
Response to Reply #94
97. *sigh* I found one. She's not defending what happens so much as blaming
the mothers for not doing anything.

Yeah, the beavis-and-butthead crowd are ugly. I wonder if they know or care what they say about themselves when they defend this.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 07:56 AM
Response to Reply #97
98. perfect... the beavis and butthead. proudly. the look at how stupid i am
and like.... like it. odd odd.
i have never been fond of stupid. not allowed in our house, my world
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 08:00 AM
Response to Reply #98
100. "Stupid should be painful"
I wish I could remember who said that.

Of course, I would have my moments of pain as well. I'd like to think it wouldn't be chronic though. :D

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 08:07 AM
Response to Reply #100
102. oh man... that is funny. unfortunately it is painful for all of us but the stupid
Edited on Wed Apr-16-08 08:07 AM by seabeyond
actually, i do feel a thunk upside the head when i do a stupid. maybe that is the difference. these men like being stupid, feel an honor in it or something. i dont. i actively work not to be

that is one of the issues my son is having in school today. boys really do not want to be smart. they think it is cool to be stupid. too many boys are adopting this attitude or perception and probably is the beavis and butthead, sponge bob, ed ed and eddy, and a couple more programs that is encouraging that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 08:15 AM
Response to Reply #102
104. I blame limbaugh and reagan.
They made it fashionable to be stupid, i.e., "dittoheads". Ew.

I wish you luck with your son. Today's environment cannot be healthy for children.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lilith Velkor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 02:23 PM
Response to Reply #100
168. Anton LaVey
You're welcome.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wizard777 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 09:41 PM
Response to Reply #168
276. Who is the head of the Church of Satan and author of the Satanic Bible.
He once hosted a dinner at which human flesh was served. Using quotes like that Cerridwen should have no problems convincing the fundies they are wrong. :sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lilith Velkor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-17-08 02:16 AM
Response to Reply #276
282. It sounds like you are the one who needs convincing
LaVey's clownishness in the '60s is downright benign in comparison to the FLDS. Cerridwen is not trying to convince the fundies that they're wrong -- obviously, they are. As are the people defending those creeps on a so-called liberal message board. That's her point, and she's right IMFO.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wizard777 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-17-08 02:47 AM
Response to Reply #282
285. Canabalism is "clownish"?
Ooooookay. I'm not afraid to go out on limb either. But your really out there on that one. Remind me to never have dinner at your place.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lilith Velkor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-17-08 03:15 AM
Response to Reply #285
289. Remind me to never have daycare at yours.
Eating dead human flesh for a publicity stunt IS merely clownish when compared to abusing live children. To be appalled at the former while shrugging off the latter is WAY the fuck out there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wizard777 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-17-08 04:17 AM
Response to Reply #289
291. Please don't! I already have 50 God children.
I have yet to see any real evidence in this case. At this point Texas cannot even prove the complaintant exists. You can't abuse children that don't exist. Most of what I'm seeing is guilt by association. These people are being judged on the actions of others like Warren Jeffs. They are being painted with a broad brush. It like saying that because of the priest scandal all catholics are pedophiles. That's pure BS.

I don't want hear all this antiFLDS crap. You can't place a religion on trial. You have to place people on trial and I want to see evidence against these people. I'm hearing a lot of talk. But I'm not seeing any evidence. As they say in Texas. You're all hat and no cattle.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-17-08 09:57 PM
Response to Reply #291
326. Do their mothers know?
I see you're still trying to equate this group with religion.

What the hell is your definition of religion that you can call the practices of this group a religion?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-17-08 09:37 PM
Response to Reply #276
322. I have no concerns about what "fundies" think. They are beyond reason
or logic. As you, too, appear to be.

Nice you should take an unattributed quote in an attempt to paint me with broad brush.

Not that you care, but I heard that quote from a stand-up comic or read it on a bumper sticker. Given the number of bumper stickers I've read with that quote, must be a lot of us "satan worshippers" driving around out there.

By the way, since we're painting with broad brushes and making "guilty by association"; I had no conscious knowledge of that name, though you seemed to come by it rather easily. How did that happen? Oh, nevermind, I'm sure you just googled the quote and came up with it. /sarcasm



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-17-08 10:32 PM
Response to Reply #168
332. Thank you...I think.
I hadn't heard that name or his agenda prior to your post. Too bad. I might not have used it.

I was thinking of bumper stickers and the "Here's your sign" guy; Bill...something. I'd google his name but it's not pertinent for now.

Thank you for the attribution, though. I'll proceed with caution with that particular quote.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Greyhound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-19-08 07:29 AM
Response to Reply #332
345. Bill Engvall.
Trying to discredit an idea by attacking the person who had it is just evidence that the attacker has no argument against the idea itself.
:hi:



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
acmavm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 12:46 PM
Response to Reply #97
142. Who, pray tell, are you talking about? I posted regarding the women
in this crowd of misfit holyroller morans. I wondered where their minds were, where the desire for a better life for their daughters is. Of course that was after I made my remarks regarding the men who I plainly stated were the primary fucking guilty parties. But NOTHING, NOTHING ON THIS EARTH will ever make be believe there is an excuse good enough when some fucking mother allows some dirty old man to rape her daughter.

NOT EVER.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-17-08 09:47 PM
Response to Reply #142
323. Not you.
I didn't see your earlier post(s). I would have provided a link for you. In case you haven't yet noticed it, I'm "in your face", not behind your back.

Just in case you hadn't yet put "two and two" together, those women, who so obviously disgust you, were only a few years ago, of the age of the children whom you are so anxious to defend.

Please, do tell; at what age do those children become worthy of your contempt rather than compassion? This has been going on for GENERATIONS. The children who invoke such compassion and outrage on your part are mere years away from becoming the women of whom you are so contemptuous.

Please, tell me at what age the children worthy of your sympathy become women worthy of your disdain. At the birth of their first child; which appears to be somewhere around 15 or 16? The birth of their second? Third? Or is it age specific? Should they be 16 and know better? 18? 21? Your age?

Do you understand that the women about whom you speak so viciously, are not so many years removed from children themselves?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 07:41 AM
Response to Reply #90
96. We're (in the US) a bit confused as to what religion is these days.
We're showing a disturbing trend to accept almost any behavior or idea as long as it's cloaked in "religion".

As I said, disturbing.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 08:04 AM
Response to Reply #96
101. any behavior abusing the children and women cloak as religion
Edited on Wed Apr-16-08 08:11 AM by seabeyond
any behavior degrading women, abusing women and children cloak as personal freedom.

i am seeing the attacks coming from more than just one direction. you will hear the same men argue when there is a post on 12 yr old stripper employed for men enjoyment or a step father put into prostitution at 14 or abundance of children being prostitutes, there being a market for our childen.

this is more than just a religious issue

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 08:08 AM
Response to Reply #101
103. Precisely.
This goes so far beyond "religion" and this one group. The mentality and public sensibilities that allowed the actions of this group to go on, with impunity, says much about our "collective" "values".

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wizard777 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 07:16 PM
Response to Reply #101
250. Spare the rod and spoil the child.
Edited on Wed Apr-16-08 07:18 PM by Wizard777
In my days we got our asses beat and we got them beat but good. Now we no longer allow parents or principle to discipline children with corporal punishment (spankings.) Because that's child abuse. Now we have kids that beat up their teachers and shoot up the school. We will not allow anyone to spank the child before they show up with a gun. But once they show up at school with the gun. We will allow the police to put a bullet right between their eyes. Some how this isn't child abuse. In fact many call it justice. Personally I find it to be more abusive to shoot a child than to beat them. But I'm just crazy like that.

This is exactly why some of us challenge others when they use words like rape, imprisoned, and child abuse. Every time a kid beats up his teacher or shoots up a school. To me that's more proof that the talks and time outs aren't working. Time to bring back the switch and the board of education. As my principle used to say, "those that do not learn from logic and rationality. Shall be taught by Mr. Pain. Now bend over." Those old adages get to be old adages because they are truth that works.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 07:26 PM
Response to Reply #250
251. i have never spanked my children. my 13 year old, 7th grade took SAT with seniors
and beat over 56% of the college bound seniors and will be honored by the state. he is politically active and socially conscous and could take you on easily. my other child in the fourth grade addresses the other children about obama and the truths about him, and discussions on the war, our current pres and our responsiblities as beings on this earth. he will always defend the underdog at personal risk. he will always find the good in people

both children want respect and know the only way to get it is to give it. yet they know they will not always receive even if they earn. they have learned that regardless it is theirs to handle in a respectful manner, agreeing, or disagreeing.

my children at 13 and 10 have not been a challenge at all to me, nor the school nor anyone and are admired by adults

now.... i am connected to my children and spend time, nurture, educate my children. i respect them and have set the example for them on respect

all your posts and talk of women are so very disrespectful, you would fail in our house

we never make a person less to feel good about ourselves. we can easily rise a person up to the highest, and comfortably sit with them in their glory without ego being envolved

the issue you discuss has a lot to do with so much more than you state, spankings, that it is clear you dont know what the hell you are talking about.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wizard777 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 07:42 PM
Response to Reply #251
254. That's great. But not all children are like that. Not all children are the same.
There are children that won't do something simply because you have told them not to. Then their are the children that with their brother's brain hanging out the side of his head. They still can't understand why they shouldn't do that. Then there are the varying degrees obedience inbetween. A solution has to eliminate more problems than it creates. Doing away with corporal punishment hasn't done that. So it's not a valid solution.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 07:44 PM
Response to Reply #254
255. i think it has more to do with social environment, two working parents
Edited on Wed Apr-16-08 07:46 PM by seabeyond
single parent home, economic conditions, social example of worth, parental examples, not enough time connecting with the children and more....

i dont agree with spanking is the cure all

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wizard777 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 08:12 PM
Response to Reply #255
261. Obama is the product of a single parent home.
Like I said not all kids are the same. I also don't believe spanking is a cure all. But it does quickly establish boundaries until the child can understand why those boundaries exist. A spanking is always proceeded by a long talk on why you got beat. Spanking alone is abusive. Your not probiding the child with a coping mechanism that will allow them to avoid the next spanking by modifying their behavior.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 08:30 PM
Response to Reply #261
265. i was spanked when i was a kid. i dont have an issue or am anti spanking
i know exactly what spanking is about and the reasons for. i found it not necessary if as a parent i am consistent and patient and willing to teach discipline to child thru learning to CHOSE the appropriate behavior because they want to, not out of fear. spanking is getting the results you want because the child fears.... my way is to get the child to think and make the right choice because they think it is the best choices.

and i know many parents that are single, many parents that are two families homes connected. i know a hell of a lot more that are not connected with the child and i think that is one of the top reasons children have issue. not being connected and putting time in with child is at all end of the economic scale. the richest to the poorest. and i see the same bad behavior from the richest to the poorest.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-17-08 09:56 PM
Response to Reply #261
325. Off topic, much? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-17-08 10:00 PM
Response to Reply #325
327. figured out today why he went on the rant about spanking. to justify the waterboarding of babies
all of a sudden we are talking spanking and how our kids are out of control. hit me today on another thread talking the same thing, with the same person, when talking about the babies, literally babies being "disciplined" i figured this was why. to validate that. or abuse in general of the children, i dont know
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lilith Velkor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-17-08 01:44 AM
Response to Reply #250
281. Bollocks.
Kids don't shoot up schools because they weren't spanked enough by adults - they do it because they constantly get their asses kicked by bullies who always get away with it. Usually, one or both parents are bullies as well.

They know they'll go to juvie or the psych ward if they fight back, so they figure they might as well really earn it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-17-08 09:54 PM
Response to Reply #250
324. I would suggest, that you are hardly a shining example of what corporal
Edited on Thu Apr-17-08 09:55 PM by Cerridwen
punishment creates. It ain't pretty.

"Talks and time outs" are a recent occurrence in our history. The world is currently being run by the generation for whom, "{getting their} asses beat...and beat but good" was the "norm." Take a look around. It ain't workin'.

"Those old adages get to be old adages because they are truth that works." No, those old adages get to be old adages because some "man/men/people who benefit from them" and are in charge have hold of/control the canon of "truth" and their "followers" were too fucking cowed to speak out.

edit for addition
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Crunchy Frog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-18-08 01:54 AM
Response to Reply #250
341. Rape children so they won't engage in school shootings.
Makes alot of sense. :crazy:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Coexist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 06:58 AM
Response to Original message
93. knr
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 07:59 AM
Response to Reply #93
99. Thank you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bean fidhleir Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 08:22 AM
Response to Original message
105. Isn't religion a protected category? How can the state say a certain religion isn't protected?
We have a very schizzy system. Back in the 1600s in England, people could be thrown in jail for having the "wrong" religion, and were prevented from holding public office, voting, practicing certain professions and other oppressions.

To prevent that happening on this side of the pond, the Bill Of Rights guarantees protection of religious belief and practice from government persecution. Except that it doesn't work, does it. If the state doesn't like the practices (like Mormon polygamy, or Native doping) then it ignores the Constitution.

Shouldn't it be an all-or-nothing deal? Either every religion gets an automatic pass on within-congregation behaviors, or every religion is treated like a social club and subject to all the laws of the outside world.

Why shouldn't it work that way?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 08:33 AM
Response to Reply #105
107. I think it would work that way if we had one standard definition of religion.
We don't. We also have far too many people who would abuse the use of "religious" ideas for their own, hardly "religious" reasons.

Pretty tough to separate the snake oil salesmen from the prophets when so many are focused on profits.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 08:35 AM
Response to Reply #105
108. rape is not protected. well n theory it isnt. seems our good old boy network
are protecting those that rape in our military and other good ole boy environments. but it is not suppose to be protected. have the illusion it is wrong. sure wish we would get it into our leaders heads that it is wrong. they seem confused right now, along with a lot of others on this board.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truedelphi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 06:34 PM
Response to Reply #108
230. Rape is also just considered part of life if you are unfortunate enough to be one
Out of evey 98 Americans who is in prison, or who lives under parole and probation, with prison as a reality hanging over your head.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 06:37 PM
Response to Reply #230
234. i will be the first to defend. it makes me sick. i would love to do something about that
AS much as all the rape of our women. it is wrong wrong wrong.

now

have i proven myself for your support on not raping our children.....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lapislzi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 10:32 AM
Response to Reply #105
120. Religion and belief are protected. Practice is not necessarily.
You cannot perform human sacrifice and duck behind the canard of "religious expression." The law can and should prevail. Sexual abuse is against the law and will be prosecuted.

During Prohibition, the Catholic church had to obtain special permission to perform its rites using alcoholic wine. I doubt whether any of these religions could or would obtain dispensation to perform morally repugnant practices (and I'm not talking about polyandry between consenting adults; I am specifically referring to underage marriage).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bean fidhleir Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 11:11 AM
Response to Reply #120
125. But what's "underage"?
In New Hampshire, the minimum age is F13 and M14. In Alabama and SC, the minimum is 14. In Minnesota 15. Some other states have no minimum, with parental consent. Pregnancy substitutes for parental consent in Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Maryland and Oklahoma.

(My personal view of what's going on is that it's nothing but another occasion for political grandstanding and voyeuristic self-righteousness at the expense of a small pariah group. Nobody gets all puffed up about kids being forced to survive in rat-infested holes in the South Bronx or similar. But the Kult Kids are White, and it's about sex. If they were Black and it was about total life deprivation, we wouldn't be hearing Word One.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 11:16 AM
Response to Reply #125
127. this child is born in and has no say from the time of conception to end of life
no right, no voice, no choice. a harvesting of female to be used by male.

but wtf.... see no further than your own pathetically limited world
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lapislzi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 11:49 AM
Response to Reply #125
132. 1. Let's confine the discussion to TX 2. You're making assumptions.
I don't see these groups moving to NH to make their lives easier, do you? Since this case is the purview of Texas, let's keep the discussion there, OK? We could have a longer discussion about why the states you've listed have consent laws that are nonsensical and abusive, but that is outside the scope of this thread. We're talking about forced marriages here, not kids fooling around.

Who is this "nobody" that you're referring to? I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you mean the media--in which case you'd be right.

Despite the media's propensity for voyeurism, I don't for a moment believe that these allegations will amount to "nothing." It's a "something" that is receiving, perhaps, an undue amount of attention, but it is a "something" nonetheless.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bean fidhleir Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 12:03 PM
Response to Reply #132
133. Yes, you're right, I'm making assumptions
One of them is that "underage" is not an absolute value, and a particular state's choice is not a law of nature. It's just somebody's choice. Like the choice to execute people - would you defend that? The two choices have the same basis and level of validity.

"Despite the media's propensity for voyeurism, I don't for a moment believe that these allegations will amount to "nothing." It's a "something" that is receiving, perhaps, an undue amount of attention, but it is a "something" nonetheless."

Sorry for not expressing myself more clearly. By "nothing" I meant that the government's motives are political rather than an expression of true caring, not that there was nothing going on in the compound. Your assessment of "undue amount of attention" is exactly how I feel about it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lapislzi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 01:22 PM
Response to Reply #133
157. Many legal determinations have an arbitrary character, but
We use them nonetheless because you have to draw the line somewhere. Why 18 for voting and military service but 21 for drinking? It gives the law a parameter in which to operate. Physiologically, any female who has reached menarche can be considered a "woman," although typically she will not reach legal majority for several years. Why the age of sexual consent and the age of legal majority are so divergent I cannot say. I don't agree with it.

Again, I would also make the distinction between teenagers experimenting with sex and child brides (or bridegrooms for that matter) being parceled off to older partners.

This group treats its women and children as chattel and I have a real problem with that. As many others do, I see.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wizard777 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-17-08 03:13 AM
Response to Reply #125
288. Those are just the legal concepts. Then there are the religious concepts of adulthood.
So who want's to tell the Jews they can't hold a barmitzva (male rite of passage into adulthood) or batmitzva (female rite of passage into adulthood)when their child turns 13? They have to wait until the child is 18. You maybe an adult at 13 in Israel. But here in America it's 18.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
musette_sf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-17-08 08:35 PM
Response to Reply #288
311. i don't remember that part of the bat mitzvah
Edited on Thu Apr-17-08 08:36 PM by musette_sf
where the 13-year-old girl gets handed over to Uncle Shlomo as his new wife.

or the bar mitzvah where the 13-year-old boy gets abandoned on the roadside.

most Israelis are not even practicing Jews, and the age of majority is 18.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-17-08 10:03 PM
Response to Reply #125
328. No, no, no. What is consent?
What is consent to what happens in one's life?

It's happening to only white kids so it's political grandstanding?! Okay, that' not even worthy a response. And so, the end of mine (for this post).

No, I take that back. I do have a response. What is happening here can be directly linked to the mindset that would allow those practices you find worthy of you disgust. If you don't get that, I don't have time at this moment to "connect the dots" for you.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 11:27 AM
Response to Reply #105
130. EVERYONE'S religious rights end where another person's body begins.
How's that for a simple summary?

Your religion or anyone else's CANNOT ever include coercion of another person. Particularly where that coercion ends in a violent crime.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bean fidhleir Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 12:17 PM
Response to Reply #130
137. I like that, but does it really conform to the Constitution?
I dislike organized religion because of all the horrors committed by it or using it as a cloak, and since it's a choice not an imposition I have a considerable problem with it being protected by the Constitution. But since it IS protected, what right do we have to limit it? Should we regard the Constitution is "just a goddamned piece of paper"? There seems to be a lot of hypocrisy in the way we deal with things. It too often seems to boil down to whose ox is being gored and how powerful the ox-owner is. Doesn't it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 12:23 PM
Response to Reply #137
138. why can you ignore rape, child abuse, torturing babies for religious constitutional
Edited on Wed Apr-16-08 12:38 PM by seabeyond
rights for men.

why is it you can ignore all that for their right to do it under religion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bean fidhleir Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 12:46 PM
Response to Reply #138
141. I *DON'T* ignore that. That's what I'm trying to get at.
Some of their practices, disgusting as we might find them, can legitimately be called "religious" and therefore are protected by the Constitution. Or should be, if the Constitution means what it says. Do we want it to mean what it says, or only when it's convenient? That's my problem.

I myself don't think the Constitution should protect religion at all. Religion is a choice, for one thing, and there's absolutely no way to tell how much of it is honest and how much a cloak for behavior that's destructive of human good. So as long as the state doesn't say "you must be an Orthodox Rastafarian" or similar, that should be the end of its role (imo).

But right now, here and now, today, in the U. S. of A., the Constitution claims to protect religious practice as well as belief and communion. So how can we legitimately criminalize behaviors that are plausibly rooted in religion and therefore sacrosanct under the Constitution?

Or is the Constitution "just a goddamned piece of paper" as the psychopath-in-chief claims?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 01:07 PM
Response to Reply #141
148. What about this do you NOT get?????
A person's religious rights end where another person's body begins.
A person's religious rights end where another person's body begins.
A person's religious rights end where another person's body begins.
A person's religious rights end where another person's body begins.
A person's religious rights end where another person's body begins.
A person's religious rights end where another person's body begins.
A person's religious rights end where another person's body begins.
A person's religious rights end where another person's body begins.
A person's religious rights end where another person's body begins.
A person's religious rights end where another person's body begins.
A person's religious rights end where another person's body begins.
A person's religious rights end where another person's body begins.
A person's religious rights end where another person's body begins.
A person's religious rights end where another person's body begins.
A person's religious rights end where another person's body begins.
A person's religious rights end where another person's body begins.

ARE WE CLEAR NOW????
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 01:12 PM
Response to Reply #141
149. rape does not get shadowed by any religious belief, nor sacrifice of human
(murder) or theft (gift) many other things. what you are NOT getting is this is a crime and not a religious constitutional right, ....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LanternWaste Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 01:13 PM
Response to Reply #141
150. By reading relevant court cases. Here's starter...
"So how can we legitimately criminalize behaviors that are plausibly rooted in religion and therefore sacrosanct under the Constitution?"

By reading relevant court cases. Here's starter...




Employment Division, Department of Human Resources of Oregon v. Smith

As with its ruling in Lying v. Northwest Indian Cemetery Association, the Court warned of the perils of allowing a minority religious group to have veto power over laws. The neutrality of laws and their general applicability protect them from First Amendment challenge.

Majority Ruling:
individual's willingness to forgo conduct required by his religion. However, this is not the case when the conduct is prohibited by law. The Oregon law is not specifically directed at the Native Americans� religious practice and is constitutional when applied to other citizens. It is a permissible reading of the ...to say that if prohibiting the exercise of religion is not the object of the but merely the incidental effect of a generally applicable and otherwise valid provision, the First Amendment has not been offended....To make an individual�s obligation to obey such a law contingent upon the law's coincidence with his religious beliefs, except where the State's interest is compelling-permitting him, by virtue of his beliefs, to become a law unto himself, contradicts both constitutional tradition and common sense. To adopt a true compelling interest requirement for laws that affect religious practice would lead towards anarchy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bean fidhleir Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 01:34 PM
Response to Reply #150
161. And the Supreme Court has also said that factual innocence is no bar
to confiscation of property or even, for God's sake, execution!

Some laws are not legitimate, regardless of what a court says.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LanternWaste Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-17-08 07:26 AM
Response to Reply #161
294. why this particular ruling is not legitimate?
Then would you kindly tell me specifically and with relevance why this particular ruling is not legitimate?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wizard777 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-17-08 03:59 AM
Response to Reply #150
290. Neither of these cases interfere with the practice of religion.
Edited on Thu Apr-17-08 04:00 AM by Wizard777
Oregon v Smith is about the denial of unemployment benefits. And Lying v. NICA was about indians using land they don't own for religious purposes. But when it comes to the religious uses of peyote, marijuana, and other drugs that are illegal. SCOTUS consistently sides with the religion. The practitioners cannot be incarcerated for practicing their religion. But that is all that covers. Just incarceration. Your employer can fire you for the drug use and you can be denied unemployment benefits. These do not interfere with the practice of your religion. Something else may come into play here. That's the religious freedom restoration act. That basically states that the government cannot place a burden upon religion. I think that was passed as a compensation for SCOTUS over turning the sherbert test.

Also then Scalia was concerned with preventing anarchy. But more recently I think the focus of the court will shift to preventing a communist police state.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LanternWaste Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-17-08 09:14 AM
Response to Reply #290
295. To me, the relevant passage is
To me, the relevant passage is, "to make an individual�s obligation to obey such a law contingent upon the law's coincidence with his religious beliefs, except where the State's interest is compelling-permitting him, by virtue of his beliefs, to become a law unto himself, contradicts both constitutional tradition and common sense. To adopt a true compelling interest requirement for laws that affect religious practice would lead towards anarchy.

But there are many, many court cases that may be read at one's pleasure that does indeed, spell out specifically the legal obligations, limits of those obligations and secular parameters placed on the practitioners of any religion in the U.S.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wizard777 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-17-08 04:06 PM
Response to Reply #295
307. I take issue with his use of the word coincidence.
Though the church and state occupy the same place in time. Many of the churches predate the founding of this country. Maybe he was using the second sence that it's something that accidently happened that appears to be planned. Basically Opps we accidentally outlawed your religion. Well if the government caused the accident. The liability is theirs and it is they who must change and not the church.

To Scallia I would say, Look up and tell that painting of Moses on the ceiling that a church can have no moral authority (the ability to distinguish good from evil) in this country. To a certain degree he also invalidates the uses of english common law. Because the Kings authority to declare that law comes from the church. That king cannot be a law unto himself. That would be anarchy as Scallia says. That goes without mentioning that teh crown thought a government of the people, by the people, and for the people (self rule)was anarchy.

In all actuallity what is occuring here is that the individual is rejecting secular law to adhere to church law or doctrine. Anarchy cannot exist in the presence of law and the order it provides. Also anarchy is a self defeating arguement. The only rule of anarchy is that there are no rules. That eliminates the rule that creates anarchy. I think Scallia meant Chaos and I'll spare you long diatribe on chaos theory that makes it the same self defeating arguement as anarchy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 01:15 PM
Response to Reply #141
152. Oh, dear, how shall we EVER keep the satanists from practicing human sacrifice?
How shall we ever keep the Jews from roasting and eating Christian babies??? ZOMG!!!!!1!!!!!11 Anybody can do anything they want if they cloak it under the guise of religion!!!!Even assassinating political figures!!!!! OMG!!!11!!!


Where in the Constitution does it say that people's behavior toward one another cannot be regulated?
Where does it say that children and women have no rights and men practicing religions have unlimited rights?
Are you really this thick?
Or are you perhaps just here to make trouble?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 01:19 PM
Response to Reply #152
154. Are you really this thick?... a question i am often asking of some males concerning
attitudes towards abuse and criminal misbehavior to women and children. it seems like too many are just that thick.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 01:46 PM
Response to Reply #154
165. This particular one is obviously a direct descendant of the
militia types with his obsession about the Constitutional rights of the FLDS men..........

Sick, sick, sick.........
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wizard777 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 06:34 PM
Response to Reply #152
231. You are simply failing to understand the MORAL authority of the church.
Edited on Wed Apr-16-08 06:35 PM by Wizard777
Beter yet how will we STOP the pentagon and justice system from CONTINUING to use human sacrafice? Why don't we just turn war into a dog fight? I'll sacrafice my dog for a war. But not one human being.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LanternWaste Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-17-08 11:43 AM
Response to Reply #231
300. I believe your conflating the secular "human sacrifice" vs. religious practices
I believe your conflating the secular "human sacrifice" (the occupation in Iraq, yes?) vs. freedom of religious practices in your particular post. A difference which is noted in both classical and contemporary western law and western religion.

Might I suggest...
1. 'Catholicism and Fundamentalism' by Karl Keating
2. 'The Everlasting Man' by G.K. Cheserton
3. and even 'First Apology', a letter by Justin Matyr addressed to Roman Emperor Antoninus Pius.

These are wonderful works which spell out the specific differences between religious law & secular law (or, as you put it, "moral authority"), which has priority under which circumstances, etc.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gollygee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 06:09 PM
Response to Reply #141
225. One person's constitutional rights end where someone else's begin
Edited on Wed Apr-16-08 06:10 PM by gollygee
So some 50-year-old pedophile's freedom of religion ends where 12-year-old Hester Prudence Smith's right to not be RAPED begins. Or are you kidding?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-17-08 10:55 PM
Response to Reply #141
335. "Religion" is not always a choice.
To say that shows your ignorance of many "religious" customs; including baptism at birth...and this particular group hiding behind a cross (and some gold tablets).

If you equate the practices of the flds with religion, then your view of religion is...interesting, to say the least.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 12:59 PM
Response to Reply #137
144. The Constitution allows for the courts to decide when
rights are in conflict. And I guarantee you when a child's right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness is placed in jeopardy by an adult's purported right to practice religion, that child is and should come first.

But if you want to harp on freedom of religion as being superior to all other freedoms, go right ahead. It just makes you look like you support rape and child sexual abuse.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bean fidhleir Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 01:30 PM
Response to Reply #144
160. No law is superior to the Constitution. That's what makes it the Constitution
Laws can be declared to be forbidden by the Constitution, but they cannot Constitutionally be declared to override the Constitution. That should not be a hard concept to grasp!

As to my alleged "harping", do PLEASE read what I'm actually writing, not make up something that you like better. My thesis is that the Constitution should be a secular document, with nothing at all to say about religion apart from declaring that no government entity can appear to give preferential treatment. Religion should get ZERO preferential treatment. ALL laws should be secular laws, with religions treated like any other social club.

The reason why elderly people can have their entire life savings confiscated by the government, and people like the psychopath-in-chief can kill a million people and make us pay for it, is that we allow the Constitution to be treated like "just a goddamned piece of paper" rather than the absolute touchstone for all other laws. As long as we allow government to ignore the Constitution for our convenience, it will also be ignored for our harm. Unless we demand that it be enforced ALL THE TIME, even when the result makes us barf, we'll go on being screwed and screwed again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 01:44 PM
Response to Reply #160
164. There are no Constitutional issues in the FLDS case.
No one is telling them they can't believe what they want to. But rape is not a Constitutional right. Child sexual abuse is not a Constitutional right. Women and children are not the property of men.

How do laws prohibiting rape and child sexual abuse interfere with any religious rights??

More importantly, why are you trying to turn this thread into a debate on the Constitution? Start your own thread where you can discuss how you believe freedom of religion is superior to all other freedoms.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wizard777 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 06:23 PM
Response to Reply #164
228. That depend upon how you define rape.
Edited on Wed Apr-16-08 06:24 PM by Wizard777
If you were to tell our forefathers and even our foremothers that a husband could rape his wife. They would have laughed your ass all the way back to England. That would be a breach of the contract of marriage. That woman promised to "love, honor, and obey" her husband. Before he can rape her she would have to renig on that promise and breech their contract of marriage. So it's her crimes that are causing you view the Husband as a criminal. When she married him she consented to sex with him for life. You can't call consentual sex rape. But that was indeed the mind set of that time. A husband being able to rape his wife is a relatively new concept of law. It is far from being time tested.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gollygee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 06:28 PM
Response to Reply #228
229. This is one of the most sickening posts I've ever read at DU.
Are you saying you don't believe a man can rape a woman he's married to?

And, by the way, they were not MARRIED to these young girls. They made up some non-legal union of their own but the girls did not have the legal protection of marriage.

This post is truly sickening. You think that "love honor and obey" includes willingness to be raped? What? Sick sick sick.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 06:35 PM
Response to Reply #229
232. this "man" feels the need to make women not only less, but
insignificant. when i see men that act like this it is the man that cannot get or keep a woman. they lack. they cannot handle their own lack so they have to transfer it to the other gender. it is pathetic how he tries to prove what a man he is, .... per another thread, continually by stepping on women.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wizard777 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 06:42 PM
Response to Reply #232
237. No! I'm simply telling you how it was. Caligula married his Horse.
Now does this statement mean that I support people marrying their horse or even beatiality? HELL NO! I'm simply stating a fact. If you can't handle facts and truth your next stop is psychosis. Geesh.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gollygee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 06:43 PM
Response to Reply #237
238. That's irrelevant
we're talking about these women and these children, here in 2008.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wizard777 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 07:34 PM
Response to Reply #238
253. We are also discussinng the Constitution and Religion.
There is a lot of kill the messenger BS going on. This being done to try to induce hysteria. That hysteria is exactly how we ended up invading Iraq and finding no WMD's. But the use of hysterics will produce a different out come this time. NOPE! They've raided the compound and can't find the victim. Until they they locate that victim anything else they found is inadmissable. When this goes to court. It's not only going to have to be established that what these have done is a crime. They are going to have to prove it. OMG! The horror, the outrage, and the hysterics.
Some of us are actually trying understand these people and what makes them tick. Some of us are looking at what possible defenses they may exercize. The hysteric expressed here aren't going to float in court.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 07:48 PM
Response to Reply #253
257. no we are discussing this group and the abuses.... not the mens constitutional rigths to abuse
and the posts on another thread i have read of yours, and the posts you started with in htis thread were flaimbait pure and simple. to now shout and become hysterical over the hysterical behavior of others is not correct, it is just shifting blame and responsiblity for your posts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 08:14 PM
Response to Reply #253
262. Understand THIS, then:
The FLDS has a deeply ingrained culture of sexual enslavement of women and sexual abuse of children, brought about by habitual GROOMING of children to accept child rape as normal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wizard777 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 09:31 PM
Response to Reply #262
271. YES OR NO. No one has answered this question.
Can a woman be submissive to her husband without being a sex slave or sexually abused?

What you say very well may be true. I know it's a stupid question but please give me my stupid yes or no answer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 09:34 PM
Response to Reply #271
273. of course a person, male or female can be submissive to the other. that is generally
Edited on Wed Apr-16-08 09:35 PM by seabeyond
how it works in a partnership. opposites attract. and dont be foolish enough to believe it is gender specific. it is not. there is a difference between submissive and conditioned to believe no voice, no option, no choice, no rights. slavery. owned.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wizard777 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 09:55 PM
Response to Reply #273
277. That's the longest Yes I've ever seen. LMAO
So you believe relationships function on magnatism where opposites attract. Others believe it functions on chemistry where likes attract.

But in the biblical sense. That is exactly what submissive means. No voice to say Adam eat this apple. No choice between God and the serpent. No right to get them kicked out of paradise. Personally I don't believe that women should have to pay for the sins of Eve. But the text of mainstrean religion says they do. Your not going to get an ultra orthodox FLDS to say they don't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 10:19 PM
Response to Reply #277
278. sins of eve my ass. adam was the one the couldnt handle the pressure
always blame the female for the weak male. rollin eyes.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wizard777 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 11:31 PM
Response to Reply #278
280. Hey it's not my religion. While we respect their religion and their right to practice it.
We consider it to be a silly story.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-17-08 10:42 PM
Response to Reply #271
333. Only if you consider the act of sex as one person "submitting" to another.
What is your definition of sex? See if you can stay within the DU rules as you define it, mkay?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 07:01 PM
Response to Reply #237
244. no. i do not believe that was your intent. i believe the intent was to put down women
i have read enough of your posts that you have made yourself more than clear
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wizard777 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 07:56 PM
Response to Reply #244
258. No. I believe in womens rights. My mother was sufragette.
You must have missed that post. But I also believe in a womans right to be submissive to their Husband. You go into an amish community and start talking about womens rights. Don't be surprised when they look at you like your a two headed chicken and pull out their bibles. That's just the ones that haven't memorized it. Not all women want equal rights and that's something some of you can't seem to understand.

Now begin your usual word twistings and kill the messenger attacks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 08:01 PM
Response to Reply #258
260. i live in the bible belt in panhandle of texas. i am not about
Edited on Wed Apr-16-08 08:03 PM by seabeyond
telling women the way they need to walk life. i am not about missing with a persons religion. another challenge my family and i have had is kids in a baptist private school from 98 to 04 afte the election. my liberal, open minded kids went thru hell in an environment of the movie "passion", kerry being a murderer, all liberals are evil. and we did it in respect and love.

i am opposed to torturing babies, raping our children and harvesting girls for the entertainment of men.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wizard777 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 09:17 PM
Response to Reply #260
269. I'm opposed to those things too. Contrary to what those who are trying to vilify me say.
Edited on Wed Apr-16-08 09:18 PM by Wizard777
I'm simply trying to understand the law, the religion, and how they both equate to the Constitution. I've never been afraid to ask a stupid question.

I too have lived in the Bible belt. (please don't kill the messenger)That's where I've heard things like old enough to bleed is old enough to breed. It's in the Bible. In Moses' day they were marrying 13 & 14 year old girls. That is true. But the life expectancy in those days was 35. Now it's doubled. Life expectancy is now 70. So should we also double the age of consent to 26 or 28? You can disagree with me on that without me grossly expanding the meaning of pedophilia into something it's not and all that other crap. As life expands. Shouldn't childhood also be expanded? Should we say your nolonger an adult at 18? Now you become an adult at 26. If we do that. Will Future generations look back on us and say, Age of consent at 16 and adulthood at 18. What a bunch of perv.s they were. Will some demand to live like we do with age of consent at 16 and adulthood at 18? I guess some people want to be stuck in the 60's and others want to be stuck in 60 BC.

Thank You for not submitin to hysterics and allowing a rational discussion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 09:30 PM
Response to Reply #269
270. i am comfortable where the ages are.
i am uncomfortable how too many of our older males are feeding on our youth. the whole debate you find interesting is not something that holds any interest for me what so ever. i think it only dissolves the not very sturdy boundary of fuckin with our children as it stands now.

i have had conversation with my husband and other males. what about the femlae 15 that looks older
she isnt, leave her alone... he says

how about 16, 17.
not 18 leave her alone

what if she wants you, hits on you, begs you
not 18 leave her alone

he doesnt make the boudaries squishy or flexible or any condition

when you start playing with all these rules that are no longer cemented rules it becomes easier and easier to justify, validate inappropriate behavior.

i am tired of our children being prey to too many grown men. there is too big a market for our youth.

that is my position.

why more men are not challenging their own gender has me more concerned instead of trying to find ways to validate the use of our youth for their sexual pleasure.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wizard777 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 10:44 PM
Response to Reply #270
279. What I find interesting is what biblical or religious justifications they have that could be used
Edited on Wed Apr-16-08 10:47 PM by Wizard777
to mount a first amendment defense. It's like the RCC abuse cases. Their insurance company required them to make a first amendment claim in court or they would not pay any awards. To which my immediate reply was that's not going to float unless they claim pedophillia as a rite or doctrine of the church. Now I'm patiently waiting to see if the FLDS does that. Until I understand their point. I can't formulate a counterpoint to defeat it.

As far as the polygamy is concerned. I don't have a problem with it. But I also support gay marriage. I think Polygamy for the FLDS would pass as first amendment protected. It is part of the church doctrine of the prophet Joseph Smith. That decission would not legalize polygamy for the whole country. Just the FLDS. The prosecutors also have the religious freedom restoration act to contend with. That basically says that government may not place a burden on the church.

I have more of a problem with a church abandoning the doctrine of their prophet. As the Mormon church has done. I don't think the orthodox sect of the FLDS should be bound by their decission to abandon that doctrine.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LanternWaste Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-17-08 09:17 AM
Response to Reply #269
296. Might I suggest the following...
Might I suggest the following...

Arlin M. Adams and Charles J. Emmerich, A Nation Dedicated to Religious Liberty: The Constitutional Heritage of the Religion Clauses

Jesse H. Choper, Securing Religious Liberty: Principles for Judicial Interpretation of the Religion Clauses

Terry Eastland, ed., Religious Liberty in the Supreme Court: The Cases That Define the Debate Over Church and State

They are very good primers for in-depth questions requiring in-depth, studied and cited answers...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Greyhound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-17-08 09:31 PM
Response to Reply #237
321. In the first place you're just wrong, Caligula made his horse a Senator.
He married his sister. In the second place, I've noticed that you have avoided answering any the OP's questions or replies to your spew. What's the matter, afraid of the wrathful "little woman" that will kick your ass up one side and down the other? Worried that you have not one fact to back up your asinine position?




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 06:36 PM
Response to Reply #229
233. i am saying, he is not even worth addressin. i think people probably stopped
posting to him on another thread so he hops here
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gollygee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 06:38 PM
Response to Reply #233
235. I'm just astounded that there are people defending child rapists and wife rapists at DU
Shocked and sad.

Women and children should have no rights. We're just chattel. My god.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 07:03 PM
Response to Reply #235
245. he last to thump his chest a lot. those are not men to take seriously at all
Edited on Wed Apr-16-08 07:03 PM by seabeyond
pathetic more than anything.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lukasahero Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 07:56 PM
Response to Reply #228
259. Wow - are you really defending marital rape as a man's right in marriage?
Edited on Wed Apr-16-08 07:57 PM by lukasahero
I know you're kind of stuck in the "good ol' days" but most of us have evolved but women can vote now and everything. Deciding who has access to our bodies and when seems a pretty fundamental human right.

edited for grammar
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wizard777 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-17-08 04:48 AM
Response to Reply #259
292. What I'm saying is that marital rape is a relatively new concept,.
Times an attitudes change. In the days of our forefathers, and 100 or more years after that, to even suggest a husband could rape his wife. They would have laughed at you. The reason being that marriage was veiwed as a life long consent to sex. That life long consent negates the possibility of rape. They would have seen the problem as being the woman breeching the contract of marriage by trying to deny her husband sex. Even later when divorce comes into play. Denial of sex is ground for divorce because it breeches the contract of marriage and divorce disolves that contract. like I said before. Just because I say, Caligula married his horse. This does not mean that I support people marrying horses or even beastiality. I'm merely trying to educate you to the fact that caligula married his horse. That's all.

I'm 76 and far from stuck in the good old days. I'm a very progressive person. I like some of the stuff metalica does. I even like some of the stuff M&M does. Your confusing being stuck in the good old days with being well versed in history. I am very well versed in history. What of it I haven't actually witnessed. I have learned about.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LanternWaste Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-17-08 11:45 AM
Response to Reply #228
301. I imagine most people define rape as per the local and federal statutes
I imagine most people define rape as per the contemporary local and federal statutes. Do you believe that is an invalid interpretation of the definition?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wizard777 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 06:05 PM
Response to Reply #144
222. One problem with that. At the time of the writing of the constitution and about 100 or so years
after. Women and children were considered to be Chattel. Women were the property of their husbands and children were the property of their parents. But they were by law considered to be property like your house, your wagon, or your dog. So you have to keep that in the back of your mind while trying to discern the framers intent. You also have to keep in mind that it was considered to be damn near a hanging offense to try tell someone what they could and could not do with their property. It was also a sin. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbors.......
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 06:17 PM
Response to Reply #222
227. no one talk to you on other thread anymore. gotta come in here to spout more
offensive bullshit.....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 01:01 PM
Response to Reply #137
145. Congress shall make no law respecting establishment of religion.
Edited on Wed Apr-16-08 01:02 PM by kestrel91316
Where in there do you infer a right to rape children and make sexual slaves out of women?

Just curious.

The bible ain't the law of the land. You sound very much like the DOMINIONISTS, for whom their particular religious rights are superior to all other person's rights.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bean fidhleir Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 01:47 PM
Response to Reply #145
166. I'm going to drop out here. It's just too unpleasant to have vile words
forced into my mouth while my actual words are totally ignored.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 04:14 PM
Response to Reply #166
178. You wanna defend the FLDS and it's doctrine of child rape,
you're gonna GET "vile". In spades.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 04:22 PM
Response to Reply #178
183. vile words too unpleasant for guy, yet girls being raped and babies being water tortured
Edited on Wed Apr-16-08 04:23 PM by seabeyond
huge..... wow.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-17-08 10:04 PM
Response to Reply #137
329. Where do you see *choice* in the actions of the people within this group?
How do you define choice?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kineneb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 12:13 PM
Response to Reply #105
136. real issue: it is the polygamy with children below legal age of consent
I really don't care if they had 60 wives, as long as they were all Consenting Adults at the time of their "marriage" (although even in Islam, a man is limited to no more than 4 wives, and only if he can afford to support all of them by himself).

The real issue is inbreeding and child abuse. Plain and simple. 13-year-old girls are children, no matter the maturity of their bodies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandyd921 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-21-08 12:42 AM
Response to Reply #105
352. Because human beings also have a right not to be abused.
The right not to be mistreated or abused is about as basic as you can get! There are times when human rights must trump religious freedom. Especially when exploitation and abuse are masquerading as religion!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aikoaiko Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 08:31 AM
Response to Original message
106. I'll push back a little.

Part of the problem is that by declaring polygamy illegal it forced the cultural practice underground (because it is unreasonable to dictate who, as consenting adults, people can and cannot marry) and for these sects to become insular. Many of the problems, it appears, are partially due to isolating them.

Had we said you are free to practice your marriages as you wish, but there are basic, fundamental laws that pertain to you as everyone else (no sex with minors, no abandonment of children, domestic violence, no welfare fraud, etc).

Of course, the law is the law, and they are accountable for their violations of it, but so many of the harms could be reduced if we just let them legitimately marry who they wish. Many of the problems you sited developed because of they were forced into the shadows. The cure for what ails them is sunshine.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 08:40 AM
Response to Reply #106
109. I agree.
"---Or to those defending flds "polygamy" as though polygamy as practiced by consenting, informed, self-determined, independent adults is the same as what is forced on members of the flds 'church'"

I made a point of noting that I hardly regard what the flds practices as polygamy. Were I to "name" it, I'd call is sexual slavery; though I'm not even sure sex is an accurate word. That would depend on each person's definition of sex. THAT discussion would be useful for getting this thread locked. :D







Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marrah_G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 08:46 AM
Response to Original message
110. Pretty damn amazing post
Thank you for this. They are only slightly better then the Taliban.

Perhaps this incident will help bring to light the fact that so many women worldwide still live under oppression simply because they are female.

Blessed Be Cerr, and thank you again for posting this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Habibi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 09:05 AM
Response to Original message
111. Thank you, Cerridwen.
This is eye-opening, much appreciated. K & R.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gollygee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 09:25 AM
Response to Original message
113. Thank you!
I was pretty shocked by a thread that included someone strongly defending this group of people. They're forcing young girls to marry old men. Making a girl have sex against her will is RAPE, people. *sigh* And even if the 13-year-old (was coerced and) agreed to it, a 13-year-old can't consent to sex.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 11:29 AM
Response to Reply #113
131. ANY sex by an adult with a girl under 16 in TX is RAPE. Doesn't matter if she
came begging for it or was beaten into submission.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
knitter4democracy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 09:49 AM
Response to Original message
114. You've nailed exactly why I find this so very disturbing.
This isn't about religious freedom--this is about pedophilia, tax fraud, and all sorts of broken laws. Religion shouldn't shield anyone from breaking the law, especially when it comes to raping children.

The video of the women was the final straw for me. That one who said it was Zion, heaven on earth, was so creepy, nodding when she was saying no, dead eyes while smiling that creepy smile. She's been really hurt for many, many years, and I think her body language was giving her away. Some part of her was trying to tell us just how bad it was.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hoof Hearted Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 10:06 AM
Response to Original message
117. K&R Well thought out and extremely informative. Great post.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
windoe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 10:26 AM
Response to Original message
118. All cults should me banned in US
and I include Moonies, Scientologists to the list. Mind control and brainwashing should not be openly condoned by the government in the form of tax breaks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 10:30 AM
Response to Reply #118
119. THAT, I would take issue with.
I don't have a lot of time to go into it now, but I don't agree with what you've said.

I'm on my way to work and if I have time this evening, I'll try to post my thoughts more comprehensively.

Upthread I mention we don't have a standard definition of what constitutes religion. That is part of the issue here.

Anyway, gotta go.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
windoe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 11:26 AM
Response to Reply #119
129. Perhaps the issue is with compliance
Edited on Wed Apr-16-08 11:27 AM by windoe
-and the difference between choosing to go into an altered state (I am very liberal when it comes to personal freedoms), or being coerced and controlled. I am referring to mind control, which I have issue with.
If I can answer my own post on banning cults, it would be important to define: What is a cult? If people join Earth religions, hold drumming circles, make up their own groups, are these cults? (No.) My definition of a cult is an abuse of power, often using behavior modification techniques to deny people their own free will, and very often to steal their money. Also these groups isolate their followers, often turning them against their own families and their own communities and especially people of other faiths. This is disturbing in small groups, but in large groups, for example the extreme right wing neo con fundamentalist cult, they can be quite destructive.
Again I am very liberal when it comes to personal choices, and do not wish for pagans and people of other alternative lifestyles to be victims of some sort of witch hunt (literally!!). Yet when I read about the mind control methods used by the Moonie cult, Scientologists, and some other groups, and now these Mormon sects, I have issue with them receiving tax exempt status.
I would like to see a discussion about this, but know it would probably be flame bait. What forum is this appropriate?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-17-08 08:45 PM
Response to Reply #129
313. Let me expand a bit on why I think "banning" is such a bad idea.
As some have noted in this thread, "banning" causes that which has been banned to hide. If something is hidden (occult, if you will), it is more difficult to address though it does not, in fact, stop, it just goes "underground".

The absolute best thing to do with this type of group is to EXPOSE it, to the light of day. Show it for what it is.

As much as we have tried in this country (and elsewhere), banning, or making illegal, does not stop the activity, it just creates a "black market". Whether it was booze, or whether it is drugs, it DOES NOT STOP, that which is banned. It just makes that activity go "Underground".

IM(never very humble)Opinion, the illumination of light, exposure, is FAR more dangerous than trying to make illegal what happens regardless of the legal code.

Murder does not stop, because it's illegal. Rape does not stop, because it's illegal. Drug use, does not stop because it's illegal. Behaviors continue whether they are legal or not. They do, however, become harder to track and trace and educate against, when they go "underground".

The absolute best way to deal with this sort of behavior is to expose it for what it IS. Sexual slavery, infanticide, brainwashing, and other more "acceptable" forms of crime.

If we were to ban brainwashing, we might have to look much closer at our "governmentally approved" forms of brainwashing; boot-camp, anyone? Yeah, that's another tangent. How we teach humans to devalue and despise other humans in the name of "military might". We probably don't want to go there.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 11:03 AM
Response to Reply #118
121. you ban that. yesterday 10 yr old said booze, cig bad, should be banned
Edited on Wed Apr-16-08 11:10 AM by seabeyond
i told him, you may not like, but if he choses that to ban, someone else may get to ban something he wants.

good bad or ugly..... it is anothers choice.

when they break the law though, abuse, rape, .... or drinking and driving, then they pay the repercussion
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yellerpup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 11:11 AM
Response to Original message
124. Great work.
I don't understand why they've been allowed to get away with this all these years. I've heard the arguments, but they don't make sense. You've laid out evidence so that it is irrefutable. Thanks. :kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
redqueen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 12:34 PM
Response to Original message
140. K&R
*sigh*
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
windoe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 12:52 PM
Response to Original message
143. Freedom of choice is a civil right,
children's civil rights need to be protected since they cannot protect themselves. Is it up to society to protect children's civil rights? If you are being forced to live in an abusive environment, are not civil rights being denied?
Mind control sounds off subject but it involves abuse of children and adults in order to change thought patterns. The parents who defend the cult have been mind controlled, ('broken' by water torture as infants!!)--so really they cannot perceive their treatment as abuse.
So I submit that cults interfere with children and adults civil rights while religions are joined out of free will and protect the rights of children until they can make the choice themselves.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wizard777 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 07:45 PM
Response to Reply #143
256. Amen! Freedom only exists in a choice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Missouri Blue Donating Member (84 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 01:06 PM
Response to Original message
146. K&R-- they're despicable

I think when things are this bad, people go into denial-- and they fear that they have been misinformed. Literal disbelief is dominant, but there's also paralysis.

So, I could understand why the response wasn't quicker. Understand, but strongly disapprove.

It is, indeed, the most heinous cult since Jonestown.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chovexani Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 01:07 PM
Response to Original message
147. Holy fuck, people are defending this shit?!
Wait, never mind. This is DU in 2008. Of course there are people defending it.

:banghead:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 01:15 PM
Response to Reply #147
151. YES....... can you believe
oh ya... i see, i guess you can. i still get surprised
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chovexani Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 01:25 PM
Response to Reply #151
158. Sometimes I do. Then reality sets in.
This is no longer the same site I've been hanging out at for years. :(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 01:39 PM
Response to Reply #158
162. you know.... something happened.
i know i was not this messed up with perception in the past. i didnt know if it was just something in our society or shift in people on here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Divine Discontent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 01:18 PM
Response to Original message
153. well I don't know much about this issue
but whoever would defend these men and their "right" (cough cough) to do these things are so far left that even Gandhi would spit on them...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 01:22 PM
Response to Reply #153
156. to support abuse of fellow human being is to be left? wow. i didnt know.
hm.....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Divine Discontent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 01:26 PM
Response to Reply #156
159. no
I'm referencing the extreme (and this is not 'the political left') left mentality that I see referenced in psychological discussions as being against law and stopping being from doing as they please. I admit it's not fair to characterize that as 'left', however, the less control there is in something the more it's considered liberal. The more control and restrictive the more it's considered right ideology, right? So, I've seen very few posts in the 3-4 years on here that seem to be so far left in thought that I shudder at their projections or beliefs. They should just be called backers of lawlessness.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 01:43 PM
Response to Reply #159
163. this is why i am bothered. i have been seeing a lot, way too many lately
Edited on Wed Apr-16-08 01:43 PM by seabeyond
when it comes to 12 yr old strippers being employed and enjoyed by grown men, 14 year old girls put into prostitution and gang rapes by step father, large number of kids in dallas prostituting themselves because there is such a market for our youth and other threads totally dehumanizing the female and her experience for male enjoyment.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Divine Discontent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 02:15 PM
Response to Reply #163
167. it is shocking when you put it all together like that
I know the desire for 'want' is something all humans battle, but my goodness, when people go for obvious children to please themselves, I feel like they've given up hope. I can at least understand a discussion of saying the age of consent should be 16 everywhere, but when I read the stories (like the father forcing his 12-14 year old daughter to repeated gang rapes in a porn shop) I shake my head at humanity.

thank you, and keep fighting the good fight!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mountainman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 03:54 PM
Response to Reply #159
172. It's a big circle, the further left you go the closer to the right you are.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 04:25 PM
Response to Reply #172
185. you know..... mountain man
there is truth in that. wisdom. oooosh... lol this is good.

when reading this poster, i started on the farthest of the left is the same as the fathest on the right.

thank you
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mountainman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 05:01 PM
Response to Reply #185
188. Just connect the farthest left and the farthest right and you complete the circle.
You see it here at DU all the time. The fascist liberals are here. The politically correct DUers are here. The ideologue liberals are here. Just like the right, if you ain't with them your are against them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 05:06 PM
Response to Reply #188
190. something to be said sittin the absolute, motionless, middle.....stillness. lol lol
no ripples either way
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mountainman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 05:26 PM
Response to Reply #190
196. That is called mindfulness meditation. Where ever you go, there you are.
You are tapping into Buddhism!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 05:28 PM
Response to Reply #196
197. ya, you dont even know
or maybe you do..... lol

but thank you.

i appreciate the reminder on this board

i stepped away a couple years ago, but a fun trip it was.... a fun trip it continues and who knows what will come, lol.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 05:33 PM
Response to Reply #172
199. Yup. The ultra left and ultra right whackjobs meet up on the backside.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 05:31 PM
Response to Reply #153
198. Well, NO. This is more like so far to the right it makes the John Birch Society
look like Ghandi's acolytes. I can only see pedophiles and Dominionists defending this. Seriously.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 05:37 PM
Response to Reply #198
202. no, you are wrong. the people defending this
are those that see free for all with females in all way. beyond being human. things to be used..... at least the right dominionist preach not abusing though they feed exactly that. the left not only says they want it, the deserve it the females want it too and all are consenting and all is fun, .... free for all with no boundaries

exaggerating, but just a tad as we see from those defending this on this board
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
northamericancitizen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 01:21 PM
Response to Original message
155. K & R nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beaverhausen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 03:26 PM
Response to Original message
169. this needs a kick. I'm really saddened to see people making fun of these women on other threads
and amazed how many are unaware that this is going on today in our country.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 03:46 PM
Response to Reply #169
170. we are such a different people today than just a mere decade ago.
odd isnt it. so many words, decency, integrity, kind, nice seem to have just fallen along the wayside.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 03:49 PM
Response to Original message
171. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Honeycombe8 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 04:05 PM
Response to Reply #171
175. Your wives "know their place," no doubt. Black people did in 1950s Louisiana (where I'm from), too.
Just because some people have learned to get by or live a certain way, does not mean that they are happy with it, or that they would have chosen it in the first place. Just because they don't threaten to kill you over it, doesn't mean it's okay.

The point really is....people have civil rights. All people. Including minors. Including women.

It is against the law to stand in the way of anyone trying to get an education, better himself/herself, move about the country freely, or in any other way pursue happiness and liberty in this country.

The polygamist sect under question did, and does, do just that. Whether you approve or not is not the point. The point is...it is against the law in our country.

BTW, you cannot have wiveS. It is against the law. If you have some girlfriends you like to call wives, that's your business. But that's not called marriage. It's called something else.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beaverhausen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 04:05 PM
Response to Reply #171
176. it's about the FLDS
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
moggie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 05:06 PM
Response to Reply #171
191. Did you even READ the OP?
Cerridwen explicitly says that what these monstrous men have been getting away with has nothing to do with "polygamy as practiced by consenting, informed, self-determined, independent adults". So what's your problem?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 05:08 PM
Response to Reply #191
193. be careful, this poster also suggest smart girl was with her man and that
she was taken away from him.

if i am getting his jest from posts below, what happened to the smart girl was wrong in that the cops took her from the man that had possession of her.

sounding pretty sick and missed up to me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 05:36 PM
Response to Reply #171
200. Believe it or not, the FLDS legal case really has nothing to do with
polygamy per se. It has everything to do with systematic, culture-wide grooming of children to accept rape as normal.

I don't give a damn how many adults of either gender set up housekeeping together and who sleeps with who. I truly don't. But this isn't about what consenting adults are doing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 05:38 PM
Response to Reply #200
203. i see it as harvesting girls for entertainment of men. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fascisthunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 03:55 PM
Response to Original message
173. Need to Bookmark This.... Kick! (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LulaMay Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 04:03 PM
Response to Original message
174. It's crazy anyone would even try to justify it. Those who do, what are your motives?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 04:17 PM
Response to Reply #174
180. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 05:39 PM
Response to Reply #180
204. So, in your circles, what does one do with the excess males???
Just curious.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vektor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 07:00 PM
Response to Reply #204
243. Hmm, looks like the freak doesn't have an answer.
He's probably off somewhere beating and raping an 11 year old, and can't come to the keyboard right now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 07:04 PM
Response to Reply #243
246. delete, i got mean with the pathetic.... n/t
Edited on Wed Apr-16-08 07:05 PM by seabeyond
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vektor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 07:07 PM
Response to Reply #246
247. Oh, let it out, seabeyond...
This poster is a shit-eating troll who will be banned in no time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 07:09 PM
Response to Reply #247
248. oh... you know keeping the left hand busy cause cant get a woman
Edited on Wed Apr-16-08 07:09 PM by seabeyond
let alone more than one.....

itsy bitsy teeney weeney kinda stuff....

if he came face to face.... instead of a moniter, shrivel up and blow away
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Corgigal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-17-08 02:29 PM
Response to Reply #243
306. Thanks for posting what I was thinking
Most of the DU'ers were trying to use legal and logical answers to a probably perv. The minute I read someone playing the age game, I know what I'm dealing with.

So to cut to the chase. I have two daughters and if two grown old men touch them,then I will hunt them down. I think the security of my children is my number one reason for being here. If some "religion" tells you differently, then you have failed as a human being.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cleita Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 04:14 PM
Response to Original message
179. Well Cerridwin, I have a hard time dealing
with mainstream LDS, let alone radical extremists like these. The state of Utah, not so covertly, is run like a theocracy and it seems that the monogamous LDSers have a loose tolerance of the polygamists. I have seen clothes in dress shops like these women wear in Salt Lake City displayed alongside more modern apparel.

If you remember a few years back when the young girl Elizabeth Smart was kidnapped by a homeless man and his wife in Salt Lake City, she was right under everyone's nose and no one noticed. Why? Because the man forced his two wives to wear veils. No one in the city seemed to think it was in any way odd because religion and religious practices are pretty much in the open in daily life and the LDS members know who the polygamists are. So until the state of Utah and other states start cracking down on these cultists and enforcing the law, instead of looking the other way, these cults will continue to operate as they have.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 04:22 PM
Response to Reply #179
184. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 04:29 PM
Response to Reply #184
186. he stole her, raped her, held her.... you are sick to paint it any other way
filth....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
crispini Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 05:37 PM
Response to Reply #184
201. You have GOT to be kidding me.
:puke:

Google "stockholm syndrome" and educate yourself.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 05:41 PM
Response to Reply #184
205. Elizabeth Smart was kidnapped and brainwashed AS A CHILD.
You are a disgusting freak and I have alerted on you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LisaL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 09:12 PM
Response to Reply #205
268. There are many examples of
the same things happening with other kidnap victims, when they seem not to be able to escape even though it appears they should be physically able to do so.
Whatever it's Stockholm syndrome or something else I don't know.
I am sure it's some sort of psychological thing.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cleita Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 05:53 PM
Response to Reply #184
217. Oh, fer chrissakes! Did you ever hear of Stockholm syndrome?
Blaming the victim is not how you approach this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 05:56 PM
Response to Reply #217
219. he CLAIMS to have many HAPPY wives. if this is him figurin women, ya
right.... he doesnt know free will from imprisoning. hence the cults problem
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vektor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 06:53 PM
Response to Reply #184
240. Go...
Edited on Wed Apr-16-08 07:01 PM by Vektor
...directly to hell you sick, sick fuck.

You are a piece of filth who condones the abuse and rape of women and children. "Not without a whip"...

Fuck you, you dickless sack of shit. Is your pathetic, demented ego so small and weak that you feel you have to have multiple females under your control in order to feel important? Are you sincerely so deranged that you feel you can justify the sick, obscene things you are claiming you believe?

I don't know if you are actually a sick troll just making shit up to start trouble on this website, or a REAL pedophile who condones these things, but either way, you need to burn in hell. You're a fucking coward and I defy you to talk that sort of bilge to any woman who has NOT been brainwashed by the sick cult you claim you're a part of.

You'd have your sorry rapist ass kicked from shit to shinola so fast, you wouldn't know what hit you. Outside of your cult, (if you really are what you say you are, and that's unlikely, but just in case) that whip you speak of would be shoved directly up your ass by any woman who knew what you stood for. Chances are, the women in the cult you claim to belong to hate you too, they are just to afraid to say so. Don't think anyone respects you, shithead - they don't.

Yes, it is ok for a "man" to have a baby, you stupid shit. That person is not hurting, raping, coercing, abusing, or brainwashing anyone.

And no, it is not ok for a man to have a collection of underage CHILDREN as "wives." Only a sick, demented, weak, insecure, and insane fool would feel the need to to that in order to feel powerful and important.

Fuck off and die, you inhuman sack of dog shit. You're worthless.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 08:20 PM
Response to Reply #240
264. Whew, at least now I don't have to worry about getting in trouble for
calling him a couple names.

LOVE your post!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 06:59 PM
Response to Reply #184
242. Dear, sweet, Lord.
What blistering ignorance.

"without a whip - you can't make a woman do ANYTHING - i know this for sure"

Uh, no. You don't. And the level of how much you don't is mindblowing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fascisthunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 07:12 PM
Response to Reply #184
249. You Sick Twisted Individual
I don't believe you would EVER say that shit in public. Maybe you just think this shit is funny, but I don't. Get help for yourself before you rape or molest somebody.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JerseygirlCT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 04:18 PM
Response to Original message
181. K&R, with thanks. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Uncle Joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 04:21 PM
Response to Original message
182. Kicked and recommended.
Thanks for the in depth post, Cerridwen.:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SidneyCarton Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 04:54 PM
Response to Original message
187. There is no excusing this
I am an active Mormon in California, my parents converted and my wife happens to be a Polig. decedent. There is no excuse for the activities of the FLDS church. There is no law they have not broken, no innocence they have not destroyed and no trust they have not abused. They deserve to face the full weight of Law enforcement on their communities. The ongoing, willful, allowance of this abomination by the state governments of Utah and Arizona are a disgrace. Those who have continued to allow this disaster should be removed from office and replaced with leaders who actually intend to enforce the writ of law throughout the entirety of the state.

The First Amendment does not allow me to:

Beat my children
Rape my daughters
Sell them into Sexual Slavery
Abandon my sons into homelessness

These people have broken plenty of laws that have nothing to do with freedom of expression and deserve to face justice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 05:06 PM
Response to Reply #187
192. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 05:12 PM
Response to Reply #192
194. again, stating elizabeth smart willingly allowed self kidnapped from her bed? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SidneyCarton Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 05:18 PM
Response to Reply #192
195. This is a question of law, not approval
Last time I checked, sex with a minor (even when it's consensual) is a crime. At least it is in my state, and from what I've read it's also a crime in Texas. If you have a problem with that, I suggest you either campaign to change the laws in these respective states, or find underage girlfriends elsewhere.

As to Elizabeth Smart:

First, she was KIDNAPPED. That in and of itself is a crime, unless you can prove decisively that she absolutely wanted to go with him.

Second, of course she went along with things, much like Patty Hearst she suffered from "Stockholm Syndrome" and much like Ms. Hearst should not be judged for what she did under duress. Unless you think that President Carter was mistaken in pardoning her.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 05:45 PM
Response to Reply #192
211. Elizabeth Smart aided and abetted NOTHING.
You are DISGUSTING.

Kidnapped children who are threatened with death, or whose families are threatened, will do ANYTHING to save their own lives or their family's.

You are the most disgusting POS I have ever seen on DU, and I have seen plenty.

ALERTING.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Andrea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 09:32 PM
Response to Reply #211
272. What's going on here?
You've alerted, I've alerted, I'm sure others have too and still this person's vile posts are here. Where are the mods? This is a sick and dangerous person. This has been going on for hours.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-17-08 11:51 AM
Response to Reply #272
302. Maybe trolls have infiltrated the ranks of our mods?
Can't think of any other rational explanation. They are derelict.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Andrea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-17-08 01:29 PM
Response to Reply #302
305. As near as I could tell,
it took at least 5 hours for those posts to be removed and that whacko to be tombstoned. I've never seen it take that long for someone to be TSed when there were legitimate complaints. This person posted the worst things I've ever seen here. I kept expecting it to turn into one of those Law and Order episodes where someone is being held hostage and the cops are tracking them through their ISP.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beaverhausen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 05:47 PM
Response to Reply #192
214. Elizabeth Smart did NOT choose to be with that man
Elizabeth Smart Afraid Alleged Kidnappers Will Come After Her Again

Smart, 20, Was Rescued Five Years Ago Today
ABC News/March 12, 2008

By Chris Cuomo, Laura Zaccaro and Joann Brady

Elizabeth Smart, the girl whose abduction in 2002 captivated the nation, is now a 20-year-old music major at Brigham Young University. She calls her life today "great," but she still harbors some fear of her alleged kidnappers, who are being held in a Utah mental hospital.

"I think that if they were to be released, I think they would come back and they would try to come back after me and I don't think that they - that any child or any human should ever be in danger of having that happen again," Smart told "Good Morning America" today.

On March 12, 2003, five years ago today, Smart was found just miles away from her home with polygamist street preacher Brian David Mitchell and his wife, Wanda Eileen Barzee.

The 15-year-old was reportedly forced to live for nine months as Mitchell's wife. The self-styled prophet and drifter had done odd jobs around the Smart home.

Mitchell and Barzee have been indicted on kidnapping and other charges, but both were found incompetent to stand trial. If they face trial, though, Smart says she's ready to testify against them.

"I don't think I really want to, but I don't want them getting back out," she said. "I don't want them ever out because I really, I really believe that they wouldn't stop."

http://www.rickross.com/reference/smart/smart58.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 05:55 PM
Response to Reply #214
218. dont you think this poster is a full of shit adolescent boy saying outrage to anger people
i am thinking probably this is all this poster is about.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vektor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 06:55 PM
Response to Reply #218
241. I'm pretty sure he's a fake, and he's about 12 years old.
But he needs to be told what a sack of shit he is for even saying these things, fake or not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Andrea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 09:34 PM
Response to Reply #241
274. Even if it is a 12-year old, it's very disturbing
If a 12 year old is saying stuff like this, I shudder to think what he will be doing in a few years. This is sick stuff.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gollygee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 06:05 PM
Response to Reply #192
221. OMG are you blaming Elizabeth Smart for getting kidnapped and raped?
WOW.

:(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 05:42 PM
Response to Reply #187
209. Thank you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SidneyCarton Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 06:06 PM
Response to Reply #209
223. No problem, it needs to be said. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Trajan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-17-08 08:37 PM
Response to Reply #187
312. I've stayed out of here ...
Primarily because Cerridwen doesnt really need any help here, she is kicking ass and taking names as it is .... I would just be in the way ....

That being said: I am atheist, and though I am atheist, I have much respect for a number of Mormons of which whom I have made acquaintance .... They are very upstanding CIVIC minded individuals who would help ANY person without regard to their religion, color, gender, ethnicity or other human characteristics .... They are, in a two words "Model Citizens" ...

While I could not disagree more with Mormon theology (as with any abrahamic theology), I have the greatest respect for them as human beings .... They live a humanistic life, selflessly offering help to anyone who needs it ....

I appreciate the distinctions you have made here, and note that your priorities are EXACTLY in the right place .... Hooray for you and your spouse ....

Welcome to DU ....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
myrna minx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 05:02 PM
Response to Original message
189. I just ache for these women and children.
:cry:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
autorank Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 05:41 PM
Response to Original message
206. Truly outstanding post. k*r Hats off to Texas law enforcement and child protection folks
This is a gift to those of us who want to know about this.

It is a horror - the minute those moms had their cell phones confiscated, they left the real world
and their children and returned to the compound. Why? Because they could no longer serve
their "leader" by coaching their children.

The law enforcement people involved deserve a medal. How professional of them and how respectful
of the rights of children. God bless them and the example they offer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LisaL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 09:04 PM
Response to Reply #206
267. That's not true. They say they were kicked out and not allowed
to stay with the children after the children were moved to the stadium.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
autorank Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-18-08 12:22 AM
Response to Reply #267
339. It is true. They chose to go back to the compound when they lost their phones.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 05:42 PM
Response to Original message
208. Completely agree with you. Keep fighting.
Although it may be hard on DU where anything that defames, derides, defiles, or denigrates a woman is no biggie.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 05:47 PM
Response to Reply #208
213. yes. what is it? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KamaAina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 05:51 PM
Response to Original message
215. And we all know how scrupulous Texas sheriffs are about upholding civil rights
Edited on Wed Apr-16-08 05:51 PM by KamaAina
"We are aware that this group is capable of" sexually abusing girls, Sheriff David Doran said. "But there again, this is the United States. We are going to respect them. We're not going to violate their civil rights until we get an outcry.

:sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulia%2C_Texas

Tulia gained notoriety following a drug sting in July 1999 that rounded up 46 people, forty of whom were African Americans. The remaining detainees were white people known to have ties within the black community, and in fact lived in the black part of town. Nearly one in three of Tulia's black males were arrested, about 15% of the town's black population.<4><5> All charges were based on the word of undercover officer Tom Coleman, a so called "gypsy cop" who made his living traveling through impoverished rural Texas offering to work undercover cheaply for short periods of time for underfunded police departments. Coleman claimed to have made over one hundred drug buys in the small town, essentially an impossible feat for an undercover officer working alone. He never recorded any of the sales, but claimed to have written painstaking notes on his leg under his shorts and upper arm under his shirt sleeve when nobody was looking.

Oh, now I get it. "We are going to respect them. We're not going to violate their civil rights as long as they're white." :grr:

edit: italics
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fed_up_mother Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-19-08 12:51 PM
Response to Reply #215
350. ""Outcry" is a term meaning that someone called in a complaint
Do a search on "abuse outcry" it's part of the legal mumbo jumbo. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
L0oniX Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 05:51 PM
Response to Original message
216. K&R ...Rot in Hell Warren Jeffs
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SidneyCarton Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 06:07 PM
Response to Reply #216
224. From your lips to God's ears
I'd drop the hammer on him myself.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
crispini Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 06:04 PM
Response to Original message
220. K & R
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MichiganVote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 06:38 PM
Response to Original message
236. Take a bow...most amazing post I've ever seen on DU..well done
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
crispini Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 06:49 PM
Response to Original message
239. "I lived thirty five years of my life in fear and terror"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bettie Donating Member (774 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 07:30 PM
Response to Original message
252. Thank you for putting this together
I have read, horrified, the posts by people who seem to think that what these people are doing was OK.

Thanks for taking the time to set them straight.

Bettie
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madmusic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 08:19 PM
Response to Original message
263. Trial my media sucks
And I hate Nancy Grace because she hates our freedoms. She's a terrorist!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
omega minimo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 08:39 PM
Response to Original message
266. THEY CAN READ?!!!!!?????!!!!!
....:wow:
:bounce::bounce:




k/r
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Andrea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-16-08 09:37 PM
Response to Original message
275. Fantastic job you've done on this
You have such a grasp of the situation. I wonder if you've considered writing a book?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Faux pas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-17-08 02:32 AM
Response to Original message
284. Great job! Saving it for later when my brain is on full function.
Tried to 'R' it, but I was too late....:(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Moloch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-17-08 02:54 AM
Response to Original message
286. Thank you!
I hope these people (including some of the complicit women who are playing victims) get justice. And how.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
janx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-17-08 09:38 AM
Response to Original message
297. Apparently, you can add bigamy to the list:
Abbott said FLDS mothers who have been defending their polygamous lifestyle in interviews this week may be subject to prosecution for bigamy.

On ABC's "Good Morning America," he said the mothers, in nationally televised interviews Wednesday, "admitted to living in a state of bigamy."

"That also would be grounds for legal prosecution in the state of Texas," he said.


http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iIdMpRHjN4hpNKBhfYyAsR4DDo4QD903KJ300
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Greyhound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-17-08 10:09 AM
Response to Original message
298. I guess they finally came out, eh? n/t
:kick:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-17-08 11:14 PM
Response to Reply #298
338. Apparently. It would seem that shining a light causes all kinds of things
to scurry and run.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Greyhound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-18-08 04:04 AM
Response to Reply #338
342. Unfortunately the scurrying things, or rather their bigger relatives, run the world
as witnessed by this and a million other outrages on this planet.
:kick:


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
siligut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-17-08 12:53 PM
Response to Original message
304. I have copied and am saving this.
You have really put together something here, I cannot imagine that anyone could ignore or condone this cult now.
Seems like this thread has prompted some new members; why am I not surprised?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-17-08 11:13 PM
Response to Reply #304
337. Aw, gee.
I missed the chance to welcome our new members. /sarcasm

Please, if you are so inclined, share this information as you see fit.

Thank you.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mrreowwr_kittty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-17-08 10:24 PM
Response to Original message
330. Thank you so much for your hard work compiling this Cerridwen
I'm a resident of Arizona and I am so disgusted at the inaction, at all levels of government, to protect the women, girls, and boys who have been destroyed by this patriarchal death cult. We have a Legislature full of religious wingnuts who really don't give a crap about woman and try to twist every bill introduced to address Colorado City into their personal jihad against gays. The Governor and AG are deathly afraid to offend the LDS faction or risk another Waco but guess what? It's already gone beyond that. Women and girls are being enslaved to creepy old men, babies are being smothered, and boys are being driven out to fend for themselves.

We don't have to point to cultures thousands of miles away, like the Taliban, to illustrate why mixing church and state is an abomination against humanity. It's going on right here in our own backyards.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-17-08 11:10 PM
Response to Reply #330
336. Good points all, the catburgler.
Thank you for the additional focus.

What so many Americans find repulsive in "other" cultures, we turn a "blind eye" toward in our own. The epitome of ethnocentric thinking.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GoneOffShore Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-17-08 10:26 PM
Response to Original message
331. Here's a late night kick
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jamastiene Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-18-08 04:47 AM
Response to Original message
343. I can't recommend this again.
But I can sure :kick: it again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
varelse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-18-08 08:21 PM
Response to Original message
344. I regret that I have but one "recommend" to give this thread :P
However, I can give it the occasional :kick:

I've bookmarked this thread, and I've emailed the link to close friends and family. Thank you, Cerridwen, for taking the time to compose the best editorial I've seen on this subject, and for sharing it with all of us.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-19-08 12:18 PM
Response to Original message
346. They will get away with it.
The "religious" freedom defenders will win.

The actions of the flds will be legitimized as "religious" and the Constitution will be upheld. I guess we should have defended the right to choose (as one example) as a religious practice rather than attempting to justify the right of a woman to control her own body. That was our mistake; to think we could convince people that women had rights.

We should have just started a church; then we'd be protected through our "religion's" right to freedom of practice. Hmm, I wonder what else I can get away with if I just start a new "religion" and claim "religious" freedom. I have some very interesting ideas. I doubt they'd be popular ideas, but hey, it's my "religious" freedom, right?





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-19-08 12:26 PM
Response to Reply #346
347. i think so too, especially in todays climate. the boundary of fucking our children has become
so blurred for so many of our males, and we are seeing an increasing number of our females. our generation have fucked up in so many areas, but to feed on our children like this..... it will just escalate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-19-08 12:30 PM
Response to Reply #347
348. Hi seabeyond. I want to take this opportunity to thank you for keeping
the discussion going around this issue. I haven't been able to stick around and keep at it. You've done a wonderful job and I, for one (I bet there are others) appreciate it.

It's so sad to me what people will excuse, accept, and defend if it is call "religion." We are so very confused as a people.

Anyway, thank you! You have done much to help get the word out.

:yourock:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-19-08 12:42 PM
Response to Reply #348
349. if it isnt religion it is the extreme left in personal right and freedom
it is both extreme on both sides hence why it is epidemic. too few people shouting out there must be boundaries. that is why so many on here are protecting the right to fuck (and i have to use the harsh and abrasive word, not sugar coated) our youth. they must make it/keep it ok.... cause of their own wants and desires

and you are welcome. i have two boys that will adopt this world and nieces that will have to figure all this out to live in balance and health. i watch their struggle in this, to be a child in the adults perverted sexual world.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
VotesForWomen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-19-08 02:02 PM
Response to Original message
351. 'giving away' young daughters to uncles/cousins/brothers in law etc. for marriage is standard operat
operating procedure in polygamist societies. the father will make a deal with his male relative to 'give' him his daughter for marriage, often when the daughter is barely a teenager, and by the time the girl is old enough to have a clue she's already got several kids and no possibility of making it on her own even if she wanted to. it's sick; it's little better than chattel slavery.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 03rd 2024, 11:40 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC