Polygamists: Authorities Prepare For the Worst in Texas

this is a link to an in-depth study of polygamy sponsored by the canadian government :

POLYGAMY IN CANADA

i have not read the report but only had a a quick glance at a few sections .
from what i have seen , there is a feeling that polygamous marriages should perhaps be given status since it might prevent them from being driven even further underground . it might even assist government agencies in helping women and children who are looking for help .
hbg

Polygamy has Arrived: Britain and Canada Pay Welfare Benefits to Polygamist Immigrants
"several hundred" men in the Greater Toronto Area receiving welfare payments for their multiple wives.

By Hilary White

LONDON/TORONTO, Ont., February 12, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Conservative analysts have long argued that the primacy of natural, monogamous marriage in the laws of western countries, such as Britain and Canada, is being eroded by mass immigration from Islamic states and the success of the homosexual lobby in re-writing the legal definition of marriage. And indeed, it has recently been revealed that in Britain and Canada, immigration and welfare rules tacitly admit that polygamy, which remains illegal in both countries, is one of the new facts of life.

Muslims in Britain are to challenge UK law which forbids husbands from having more than one wife.

They say they will refer Britain's ban on polygamous marriage to the European Court of Human Rights this autumn.

Yes, I have nothing against polygamy as long as it involves adults only and
they're self-sufficient and don't rely on government assistance in order
to cope with multiple family households.

The minute children are married off to polygamous extremists, all bets
are off.

fishin wrote:

squinney wrote:

With your reasoning, ebrown, every child abuse case is prejudiced. Every time the authorities enter a home to search for evidence of child abuse, whether the tip came from a teacher, hospital records, a neighbor or wherever, they go in looking for evidence to back the claim or suspicion.

What you say is true. But in what percentage of those cases are the children removed from the household while there is an investigation? And how many involve more than 1 or 2 children? In this case, they have removed the equivelent of all the children of a small town. That pretty much removes it from the realm of standard practices.

Quote:

I'm lost as to why you are trying to defend this.

I can't and won't speak for ebrown but to me, this whole thing reeks of the Day care sex abuse hysteria of yesteryear. And maybe it hits home more stringly because the Fells Acre case was right here and people are sensitive to the gross miscarriage of justice that occured in that case.

Re bolded.


I would imagine it is standard practice (it certainly is here) to remove a child who is to be interviewed re alleged abuse from contact with the alleged abuser, which, if the alleged abuser lives with the child usually means the alleged abuser leaves the house/is denied contact with the child until the investigation is complete.

fishin wrote:

I can't and won't speak for ebrown but to me, this whole thing reeks of the Day care sex abuse hysteria of yesteryear. And maybe it hits home more stringly because the Fells Acre case was right here and people are sensitive to the gross miscarriage of justice that occured in that case.

I remember the sexual abuse hysteria in daycares, there was a very prominent case here in our town, however, I see no relation to this case
where you have solid evidence of young girls being mothers, being pregnant, suffering from mental abuse, having no (home)schooling, and being brainwashed by their religious fundamentalist old-geezer-husbands. Child abuse is not always evidentiary, yet if there is reasonable cause, the child(ren) need to be evaluated in a safe environment, away from the alleged perpetrators.

Fishin, do you know which standards of evidence, if any, the state must meet before it can separate parents from their children? Judging by the affidavit wandeljw posted, their evidence so far meets the "probable cause" standard, so the police can search and seize. I'm also pretty confident that they haven't yet met the "beyond all reasonable doubt" standard. So everybody on the compound is presumed innocent of any crime until convicted in a court of law.

What I'm not confident of is the thing in the middle. What standard of evidence applies before the state can (a) deprive parents of custody for their child, and (b) separate parents and children while it decides wheter to take custody from the parents?

Texas Family Code, Sec 262.001

SUBCHAPTER B. TAKING POSSESSION OF CHILD


§ 262.101. FILING PETITION BEFORE TAKING POSSESSION OF
CHILD. An original suit filed by a governmental entity that
requests permission to take possession of a child without prior
notice and a hearing must be supported by an affidavit sworn to by a
person with personal knowledge and stating facts sufficient to
satisfy a person of ordinary prudence and caution that:

(1) there is an immediate danger to the physical health or safety of the child or the child has been a victim of neglect or sexual abuse and that continuation in the home would be contrary to the child's welfare;

(2) there is no time, consistent with the physical health or safety of the child, for a full adversary hearing under Subchapter C; and

(3) reasonable efforts, consistent with the circumstances and providing for the safety of the child, were made to prevent or eliminate the need for the removal of the child.

Court to hear Texas sect mothers' pleas to see children
(By MICHELLE ROBERTS, Associated Press, April 24, 2008)

A Texas appeals court on Thursday agreed to hear arguments that hundreds of children the state took from a polygamist compound should be allowed to see their mothers while the massive custody case is resolved.

The Yearning For Zion Ranch was raided three weeks ago, but many of the mothers had not been separated from their children until Thursday.

Two buses took the women back to the west Texas ranch from nearby San Angelo Coliseum, where the state had been keeping them and the children.

One woman held up a cardboard sign that read, "SOS; Mothers Separated; Help."

The women were moved out in preparation for moving the last of 437 children to group homes, shelters and residences, some hundreds of miles away, over the next few days. Buses earlier had taken 138 of the children away.

The 3rd Court of Appeals set a hearing for Tuesday on the motion from dozens of mothers to remain in contact with their children. State officials last week had ordered all mothers away except for those with children under 5.

After raiding the ranch, owned by the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, state officials took custody of all children found there, believing they might be victims of physical or sexual abuse.

The move sparked one of the biggest child-custody cases in U.S. history, a case complicated by a tangled web of family bonds.

Experts and lawyers fear the children's transition to foster care may be much harder than it is for other foster children. They will be plunged into a culture radically different from the community where they and their families shunned the outside world as a hostile, contaminating influence.

Many of the children have seen little or no television. They have been essentially home-schooled all their lives. Most were raised on garden-grown vegetables and twice-daily prayers with family. They frolic in long dresses and buttoned-up shirts from another century.

"There's going to be problems," said Susan Hays, who represents a toddler in the custody case. "They are a throwback to the 19th century in how they dress and how they behave."

The state Child Protective Services program said it chose foster homes where the youngsters can be kept apart from other children for now.

"We recognize it's critical that these children not be exposed to mainstream culture too quickly or other things that would hinder their success," agency spokeswoman Shari Pulliam said. "We just want to protect them from abuse and neglect. We're not trying to change them."

Authorities say the FLDS church, a renegade Mormon splinter group, believes in marrying off underage girls to older men, and that there is evidence of physical and sexual abuse at the ranch.

The individual custody cases could result in a number of possibilities: Some children could be placed in permanent foster care; some parents who have left the sect may win custody; some youngsters may be allowed to return to the ranch in Eldorado; and some may turn 18 before the case is complete and be allowed to choose their own fates.

Would you want children removed from their parents if they were only being taught magic potions, animal sacrifice and that the Devil is the only true authority over them?

What if they were being taught white supremiscist indoctrination, and to harm fags and niggers?

Where do societies step in and where do they stay out? Are children property that belong to parents or does society at large have a say?

Also, we have laws as to every child being educated. Are they meeting the requirements? How can they without having to teach some things they do not believe? Science? History? Math? Are they reading Grapes of Wrath or other "classics" that a regular high school student would read that would also expose them to outside thought?

Would you want children removed from their parents if they were only being taught magic potions, animal sacrifice and that the Devil is the only true authority over them?

What if they were being taught white supremiscist indoctrination, and to harm fags and niggers?

Where do societies step in and where do they stay out? Are children property that belong to parents or does society at large have a say?

ebrown,

It may not be simply prejudice that the group is "odd". In the last few years, the public has learned about the criminal allegations against leaders of the group like Jeffs.

wandeljw wrote:

ebrown,

It may not be simply prejudice that the group is "odd". In the last few years, the public has learned about the criminal allegations against leaders of the group like Jeffs.

What most American know about Polygamy cults can be summed up in the sentence "Polygamy, men taking advantage of women". The fact that the women claim to be happy, to have chosen this life, and to be fulfilled gets almost no mention. Polygamy cults don't agree with the conventional morality and views on the relationship between the sexes, and the majority wants to deprive them of the right to disagree under the sham argument "we need to protect the women and children from these terrible men". The women don't want to be protected, or be told what to do, or be told that they are backwards and wrong...they just want those who don't agree with them to leave them alone. But no, we can't do that. We bust up their community, take away their kids, and tell them to do what is expected of them if they want to get their kids back. That will teach them who is boss......teach them that they don't have the right to disagree with the majority.

hawkeye10 wrote:

wandeljw wrote:

ebrown,

It may not be simply prejudice that the group is "odd". In the last few years, the public has learned about the criminal allegations against leaders of the group like Jeffs.

What most American know about Polygamy cults can be summed up in the sentence "Polygamy, men taking advantage of women". The fact that the women claim to be happy, to have chosen this life, and to be fulfilled gets almost no mention. Polygamy cults don't agree with the conventional morality and views on the relationship between the sexes, and the majority wants to deprive them of the right to disagree under the sham argument "we need to protect the women and children from these terrible men". The women don't want to be protected, or be told what to do, or be told that they are backwards and wrong...they just want those who don't agree with them to leave them alone. But no, we can't do that. We bust up their community, take away their kids, and tell them to do what is expected of them if they want to get their kids back. That will teach them who is boss......teach them that they don't have the right to disagree with the majority.

I think that is a very false take on this.



As far as I have been able to research, while polygamy remains illegal, the authorities have generally taken the wise stance of ignoring it between consenting adults.


This is about whether or not there has been abuse of minors.


I agree that some of the heat here is because of prejudice against fringe groups like these, but in the end this case is about whether or not men in this cult have abused young women.


There are laws that ought, in my view, be adhered to re adults having sex with minors.


In such a group as this the minor girls might feel fine about older men having sex with them, if their "prophet" tells them it is ok.



However, they are NOT adults, and, while such situations are complex and it is very difficult to see the best course, investigating such allegations, where there seems to be some reasonable reason to believe crimes may have occurred, ought to occur.


I think where people are feeling that the home-schooling etc is problematic is because there is a feeling of discomfort that both children and adults raised in this sect have had little or no opportunity to be exposed to views not espoused by the sect, and that, therefore, whether even adult members of the group have been able to give INFORMED consent to the sect's practices is moot.


Personally, I believe that it is very negative for people to be raised without free access to a world view different from that in which one is being raised, and therefore that such self-isolating sects are extremely concerning, and places where abuse is at high risk of occurring (given the human propensity to abuse power, especially unexamined power....look at the abuse of kids in The Children of God, as just one example) but that is a very different question from that as to whether crimes have been committed against minors, and THAT is what the authorities are investigating.


Are you arguing that isolated sects ought not to be subject to laws against child abuse?