Mr Spinkles
Mr
I get your point, jonny. It's a perfectly valid one. Your fears of the true motivation and consequences of this raid are plausible.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
400 + Kids Taken From Texas FLDS Compound
- Thread starter zippythepinhead
- Start date
Katzpur
Not your average Mormon
You're missing something here, Mrs. Cardero. Prior to 1862, polygamy was not illegal in America, and when the Latter-day Saints settled the Salt Lake Valley, what is now Utah was not even part of the United States. Despite the efforts of the Church leadership to clarify the doctrine, to explain rationale behind its practice and to point out that it was, in fact, not illegal, Americans from all religious backgrounds united against the Latter-day Saints. Anti-Mormon literature exposing the truth about polygamy and the degradation of Mormon women was everywhere. The Morill Anti-Bigamy Act, signed into law in 1862 by Abraham Lincoln, banned plural marriage. Since nobody had bothered allocating any funds to actually enforce it, though, this law ultimately had very little effect on the Latter-day Saints.
In 1882, Congress passed the Edmunds Act, which declared polygamy to be a felony. The law made it impossible for anyone living in a polygamous family to hold public office, to serve on a jury or to vote. But that wasnt all. It wasnt just the civil rights of polygamist members of the Church that were affected, but the civil rights of all members of the Church who believed in the doctrine of plural marriage, regardless of whether or not they were participating in it. Adulterers and fornicators, on the other hand, had no such penalties applied and did not lose their rights. The Edmunds-Tucker Act, which was signed into law five years later (in 1887) effectively imposed fines of up to $800 and imprisonment of up to five years for anyone convicted of practicing polygamy. It dissolved the corporation of the church and directed the federal government to confiscate Church property in excess of $50,000.
This was not a matter of the government coming to anybody's aid. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints never forced anybody into polygamy. Don't misunderstand me; I'm not saying the same is true with the polygamists in Texas. I am convinced there was some pretty widespread abuse going on in that compound. But you're implying that polygamy in and of itself is characterized by a controlling, manipulative man lording it over a bunch of brainwashed women and their abused children. All jonny's saying is that that's not the case.
cardero
Citizen Mod
I don't think the government has yet devised any weapons that can combat faith, they were probably just preparing for the worse.
.lava
Veteran Member
texan1
Active Member
Some of you may already be aware of this, but in case it is of interest here is a link to a website for "Banking on Heaven", a documentary about life within FLDS. It includes a trailer:
Banking on Heaven : Polygamy in the heartland of the American West : Over the Moon Productions
Banking on Heaven : Polygamy in the heartland of the American West : Over the Moon Productions
Mr Spinkles
Mr
Agreed.Katzpur said:
I'm watching the women in the FLDS church be interviewed right now. I don't need to watch a documentary made by that psycho lady. I'm watching the real thing.
texan1
Active Member
You are right. I am guessing all of the women who have escaped these places are lying psychos. And there was certainly nothing strange about the women who were interviewed on Larry King or the fact that they refused to answer questions about where their husbands were and how the husbands were dealing with this. I got the impression that this was a normal loving community. Hmmmmm......
mrscardero
Kal-El's Mama
I know I'm right.
I was wondering why they refused to answer the questions about their husbands also. My guess is that they don't want to incriminate themselves for practicing polygamy. Having sex and making babies with lots of women is cool on MTV, but when you make a marriage commitment to the women who you're sleeping with, the state likes to take away your children and throw you in prison. I guess this because when they finally did refer to their "husbands," they called him the "father of my children." It's the same reason why they won't give their last names to the media.
I'm not doubting the women who have left the sect and their stories. I can't believe that you would so easily discount their stories just because I don't like the personality of the person taking advantage of this abuse case to push her film. They're likely telling the truth about their experience. What I will tell you though is one person's experience in any church isn't the same as another's. I've watched videos and read stories from people who were once members of my religion that are completely different than the experiences I've had. I never take the word of a dissident without a grain of salt.
And I've seen enough interviews with the lady who made that movie to believe that she is a psycho. I honestly can't stand her. Anyone who takes advantage of child abuse to push their movie is disgusting.
texan1
Active Member
Well, you could be right; I don't know much about that woman. But I think it's still a good thing that their stories are heard. And I think it would be terrible if the women in Texas have their children taken away simply due to polygamy, especially since they most likely had no choice with regards to practicing polygamy in the first place.
It was strange though in my opinion. All of the women interviewed seemed so lifeless, like their souls and their personalities were maybe sucked away from them in this culture. Like they had been beaten down - they looked like the living dead. It seems like most women would be much more passionate and angry if they were in this position. I would be fighting tooth and nail to get my kids back if it was me. Anyway, such a sad situation.
Katzpur
Not your average Mormon
You're welcome. :foryou:
Well, you could be right; I don't know much about that woman. But I think it's still a good thing that their stories are heard. And I think it would be terrible if the women in Texas have their children taken away simply due to polygamy, especially since they most likely had no choice with regards to practicing polygamy in the first place.
It was strange though in my opinion. All of the women interviewed seemed so lifeless, like their souls and their personalities were maybe sucked away from them in this culture. Like they had been beaten down - they looked like the living dead. It seems like most women would be much more passionate and angry if they were in this position. I would be fighting tooth and nail to get my kids back if it was me. Anyway, such a sad situation.
I agree. It's like they have no personalities. I've seen interviews with other women from the same FLDS sect that were completely different. They were laughing and joking. The women at the YFZ ranch are not "normal" polygamists. There are some other social things going on there. Or maybe they've just got bad social skills.
The one thing that really bothered me was the number of pictures of Warren Jeffs that the woman had in her house. I can see having one picture of the prophet in your house, but I counted three or four of the same picture of him in one room. Every picture in her home was of him. Strange, especially given the reason that the guy is in prison. Don't know if you noticed, but the guy from Bountiful obviously didn't have much respect for Warren.
My impression is that the families in the ranch are either Warren Jeffs' families or people very close to him.
I'm surprised that someone hasn't taken over the church from him. It seems that he kinda took over by force when his father died. I don't think that the guy from Bountiful still views Warren Jeffs as a prophet. I wonder where the people in Hillsdale and Colorado City stand.
painted wolf
Grey Muzzle
it my be harsh of me, but I think the woman who gives her 15 year old daughter to a 50 year old man is just as guilty as the man.
I hope this mess gets cleaned up quickly and as tough as fairness allows.
wa:do
I hope this mess gets cleaned up quickly and as tough as fairness allows.
wa:do
I don't think anyone disagrees with you on that point. The point where there disagreement on is whether or not the neighbors are guilty also. Texas obviously thinks they are. I don't.
painted wolf
Grey Muzzle
The neighbors in this case are also part of the culture of abuse.
The neighbor who celebrates the abuse of a child is also guilty of that abuse. The neighbor who facilitates that abuse is not without guilt.
If a man has 50 wives and they all have a few children, then the numbers of abuse victims rises sharply.
wa:do
The neighbor who celebrates the abuse of a child is also guilty of that abuse. The neighbor who facilitates that abuse is not without guilt.
If a man has 50 wives and they all have a few children, then the numbers of abuse victims rises sharply.
wa:do
Hopefully all the evidence that has been gathered doesn't become inadmissible in court.
ABC News: Polygamy Trail Leads to Colorado
This is why I've been arguing for due process.
ABC News: Polygamy Trail Leads to Colorado
This is why I've been arguing for due process.
zippythepinhead
Your Tax Dollars At Work
I agree with you johnny. Due process must be observed according to both Texas and the US Constitutions for the accused adults(if any) and the custody of the children. Also the burden of proof ALWAYS rests with the state to establish probable cause, charging, bringing to trial or hearing, and proving beyond a reasonable doubt in criminal cases that abuse occurred. In civil cases it is usually preponderance of the evidence or 51% that a wrong occurred. In some states for civil it is clear and convincing evidence or the 75% rule that a wrong occured against the plaintiff. Reasonable doubt is about 98% that the accused is the guilty party and is the criminal standard across the board.