Polygamists: Authorities Prepare For the Worst in Texas

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?

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.

Texas officials believe another 25 moms at sect are under 18

Quote:

Texas officials believe another 25 moms at sect are under 18

wandeljw wrote:

Quote:

Texas officials believe another 25 moms at sect are under 18
(Associated Press, April 24, 2008)

SAN ANGELO, Texas (AP) — The number of children in Texas custody after being taken from a polygamist retreat now stands at 462 because officials believe another 25 mothers from the compound are under 18.

Child Protective Services spokesman Darrell Azar says the girls initially claimed to be adults but are now in state custody. Earlier they had been staying voluntarily with their children at a shelter at the San Angelo Coliseum.

The official number of children taken from the ranch controlled by the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints has been rising since a state raid three weeks ago. One reason is that some mothers under 18 claimed to be adults.

Roughly 260 children remain at the coliseum. The others were bused to foster facilities.

Let's hope that the authorities are protecting the American dream by detaining and putting into the foster care system the rest of the roughly 130,000 kids aged 17 and under who became mommies in the last year.

http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/2006/09/12/USTPstats.pdf
pages 6 and 8

dlowan wrote:

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?

your argument would be convincing had the kids not been put in mass into the foster care system. I think that you will find that when the cases hit the courts in June that the state will only agree to let kids go back to the mothers if the mothers have left the cult. The kids are being used as bait.

I have said about six times that the cult needs to follow child sex and child marriage laws, however, a lot of what is being considered abuse is not abuse in my book. It is the majority imposing its will on the minority, a minority that is out of favor and largely powerless in a culture that no longer respects individual rights, nor highly values freedom of choice. The cult is not blaimless though, they really do need to have something similiar to the Amish rumspringa

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.

Prejudice is what the public "has learned" that is not based on fact or reason. The fact is that Jeffs was convicted of rape. This is not prejudice.

This does not mean that the hundreds of other families are guilty of rape.

The simplistic stereotypes that are part of the media-driven hype make it much harder for us as a society to understand or react rationally. I am just suggesting the if you want an intelligent understanding you should ignore the hype.

The media narrative, evil men and soulless zombie women is a science fiction plot rather than an attempt to understand. The idea that adult women are under some sort of mind-control where they are forced to do things against their will is a great story tale that makes things conveniently simple. Maybe that makes some of us feel better, but it is not reality.

Some of the things the public "has learned" about this group may be true. Some other things have already been shown to be false.

The is a real danger that officials overreact based on public prejudice.

The way to guard against this is to question.

Lyndonville, Vermont - April 23, 2008


Lyndon State College Professor Janet Bennion knows a thing or two about polygamy. As the country's leading expert on the subject, she has spent the last 19 years researching and living with polygamous sects in Montana, Utah, and Mexico, and that's why she's disturbed by what's taking place in Texas.


"This is absolutely the wrong way to go about it. This is a group of people that are already against the government and the outside world, and then you get raided by state troops, kidnapping the children," said Bennion.


More than 400 children were removed from the sect's compound in Texas three weeks ago after allegations of forced marriage and sexual abuse began to surface. Professor Bennion agrees those crimes should not be tolerated-- but says Texas authorities should have intervened more cautiously, using a liaison to identify the children at risk.


"If you can establish abuse, of course intervention must be made, but use an intervention that doesn't break the constitution and that doesn't violate all these civil rights laws," argues Bennion.

squinney wrote:

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?

I haven't seen anything yet to indicate that they weren't being taught IAW the laws of the State of TX. There are hundreds of thousands of people that homeschool their children and many of them do so for religious reasons. They manage to meet the state standards so I have to assume that the children are being taught... enough. (I don't know what the state standards typically require)

Quote:

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?

What if they were taught that eating meat was bad? Or that not eating meat was bad? Maybe we could seize the children of people that don't believe in global warming?

One could take this to any extreme they can think of. But, IMO, parents are free to teach their children whatever they choose to teach them. I may not like it, but my option is to take responisbility for my own actions and refuse to support or assist them. Society can apply social pressure and isolate the offenders without resorting to government force.

But more importantly, there is no Freedom Of Religion if you can only participate in government approved religious actions. The seperation of Church and State works both ways...

Quote:

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?

If society "has a say" doesn't that just make them community property?

fishin wrote:

squinney wrote:

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?

I haven't seen anything yet to indicate that they weren't being taught IAW the laws of the State of TX. There are hundreds of thousands of people that homeschool their children and many of them do so for religious reasons. They manage to meet the state standards so I have to assume that the children are being taught... enough. (I don't know what the state standards typically require)

Quote:

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?

What if they were taught that eating meat was bad? Or that not eating meat was bad? Maybe we could seize the children of people that don't believe in global warming?

One could take this to any extreme they can think of. But, IMO, parents are free to teach their children whatever they choose to teach them. I may not like it, but my option is to take responisbility for my own actions and refuse to support or assist them. Society can apply social pressure and isolate the offenders without resorting to government force.

But more importantly, there is no Freedom Of Religion if you can only participate in government approved religious actions. The seperation of Church and State works both ways...

Quote:

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?

If society "has a say" doesn't that just make them community property?

Is it your position that society via laws and action based upon those laws ought never to have a "say" in what parents choose to do with/to their children?

Does this mean that you think there

should be no law re child sexual abuse abuse?

or

the laws should be changed? If so, how? In a way that has some effect, however imperfect, in protecting minors from adult sexual exploitation?


Do you see a way, re law generally, that the situation of minority dissent can be addressed while still having workable laws?

States been lookin the other way for a while, jack...

Nobody wanted the hot potato. At least Texas opened the wrapper...

RH

As a world, we have to have standards. Some of those standards cannot be opted out of for any reason. Just as we do not tolerate female mutilation now that it is known to happen in some sub-cultures, (or canibalism or any number of other behaviors) we shouldn't ignore or amend laws to allow a sub culture to marry off little girls to old men.

dlowan wrote:

fishin wrote:

squinney wrote:

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?

I haven't seen anything yet to indicate that they weren't being taught IAW the laws of the State of TX. There are hundreds of thousands of people that homeschool their children and many of them do so for religious reasons. They manage to meet the state standards so I have to assume that the children are being taught... enough. (I don't know what the state standards typically require)

Quote:

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?

What if they were taught that eating meat was bad? Or that not eating meat was bad? Maybe we could seize the children of people that don't believe in global warming?

One could take this to any extreme they can think of. But, IMO, parents are free to teach their children whatever they choose to teach them. I may not like it, but my option is to take responisbility for my own actions and refuse to support or assist them. Society can apply social pressure and isolate the offenders without resorting to government force.

But more importantly, there is no Freedom Of Religion if you can only participate in government approved religious actions. The seperation of Church and State works both ways...

Quote:

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?

If society "has a say" doesn't that just make them community property?

Is it your position that society via laws and action based upon those laws ought never to have a "say" in what parents choose to do with/to their children?

I have no idea how you could possibly come to that conclusion after reading my posts in this thread.

Squinney's post was an intentional attempt to inject inflammatory rhetoric by labeling one side of the equation as seeing children as "personal property" in an attempt to slant responses.

My point was simply that making child "community property" still leaves them as "property". Once they are determined to be property does it really matter whether they are personal or community property?

Rockhead wrote:

States been lookin the other way for a while, jack...

Nobody wanted the hot potato. At least Texas opened the wrapper...

RH

I should think that we have all seen enough extraconstitutional and unconstitutional behaviour on the part of the state during the Bush administration to know that your reasoning is seriously flawed. Some people are slow learners though.

squinney wrote:

As a world, we have to have standards. Some of those standards cannot be opted out of for any reason. Just as we do not tolerate female mutilation now that it is known to happen in some sub-cultures, (or canibalism or any number of other behaviors) we shouldn't ignore or amend laws to allow a sub culture to marry off little girls to old men.

Fair enough. And since the problem is child brides, as you said yourself in your earlier post, I have no problem with the state removing the brides, and maybe the girls in immediate danger of being "married" off. But how do you get from there to removing all the 400 children in the compound? How is that not way excessive?

Thomas wrote:

squinney wrote:

As a world, we have to have standards. Some of those standards cannot be opted out of for any reason. Just as we do not tolerate female mutilation now that it is known to happen in some sub-cultures, (or canibalism or any number of other behaviors) we shouldn't ignore or amend laws to allow a sub culture to marry off little girls to old men.

Fair enough. And since the problem is child brides, as you said yourself in your earlier post, I have no problem with the state removing the brides, and maybe the girls in immediate danger of being "married" off. But how do you get from there to removing all the 400 children in the compound? How is that not way excessive?

Cases where children are abused in an institutional setting are less common. The Texas case is even more unusual because of the high number of children involved. I do believe it is normal to remove all children from a setting alleged to be abusive.