Free Innocent FLDS Children Now!

[User-Removed]

Originally Posted by lisajo

one thing to Remember...... these people are so called spititual married. therefore any marrage after the first is not leagal, I think it is horrid that a man can take a 13 year old or 15 year old time and time again just to have more children, that is abuse! a 50 year old has no right to take a bride of 15 again and again, it is sick and twisted! Sounds like it is a competion to see who can father more kids and be the closest to God. come on people this is twisted!

Actually...the aspect of the "spiritual union" isn't illegal...there are numerous polygamous sects that wed the multiple wives on a "spiritual concept"...what separates them from the Jeffs Cult is that they REFUSE to marry underaged males or females.

No one is after the Jeffs Cult for their desires to practice their faith...they're after them for marry off underaged girls...plain and simple.

I have a good friend who is "married" to 5...yes 5 women...all were in their 20's when "married".

[Fiannan]

Originally Posted by Moksha

This particular compound is the 1700 acre Yearning for Zion Ranch, where young girls routinely are married in polygamous unions to old men, and the boys are driven off homeless after a certain age to reduce the competition for these nubile brides.

The Temple (complete with connubial beds) is only a portion of this compound.

My guess is that these fundamentalists know the difference between Temples and compounds. You tote your rifles and handguns around the compound but not the Temple.

Have you ever seen guns displayed by members of the FLDS?

[Fiannan]

If you had justice the state of Texas would be up on charges of abusing children:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ISFPJL66p4c

Sick, absolutely sick.

[santiagodraco]

Originally Posted by WillowTheWhisp

How ironic it seems to me that in today's society there are those who do not marry at all and yet have several children with different partners and are looked on as better than these FLDS for they have committed no crime.

First off, let me compliment those here who see what is happening for what it is, an attempt to protect children. Seeing anything more in this, I think, is choosing to see what you wish to see rather than what actually is.

Willow, I have to assume you see that your comment has nothing to do with what is happening in Texas and everything to do with your opinion of those who don't follow your beliefs. It's pretty clear. If you have sex with minors you are breaking the law, both mans and gods, end of story. If you have unmarried sex that is a completely different issue and has nothing to do with sex with minors (unless of course it occurred between a minor and an adult).

You may not like the perceived "attack" against a "religion" but I think it's pretty apparent that GOD has no place for those that manipulate the growth of children, in an ISOLATED environment no less, in order to create a stable of what amount to personal slaves.

It doesn't always take a gun to force others to do what you want. Sometimes all you need is privacy and time. This is what has happened here and it's shameful.

I cannot believe that the adult males in that group don't understand exactly what they are doing, that is unless they are very good at fooling themselves as well as the others around them.

I am certainly concerned about the ordeal that the children are under now, but I have no sympathy for the adults who should know better and have finally been called to task for their behavior.

[santiagodraco]

Originally Posted by Fiannan

If you had justice the state of Texas would be up on charges of abusing children:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ISFPJL66p4c

Sick, absolutely sick.

So this justifies what is being done to the children at that compound? Hardly.

Personally I think the children should be returned to their "home". However that cannot happen unless you can guarantee they will be protected from abuse AND that they will have the freedom to chose their own life direction and not tought to believe that everything beyond their walls are monsters.

[lisajo]

Originally Posted by MyDogSkip

Actually...the aspect of the "spiritual union" isn't illegal...there are numerous polygamous sects that wed the multiple wives on a "spiritual concept"...what separates them from the Jeffs Cult is that they REFUSE to marry underaged males or females.

No one is after the Jeffs Cult for their desires to practice their faith...they're after them for marry off underaged girls...plain and simple.

I have a good friend who is "married" to 5...yes 5 women...all were in their 20's when "married".

Yes i agree...should of used better wording. What i ment was only a first marrage If done the way a normal marrage is done. any one that is done after that is not legal, that is why they are called spititual marrage, away to get around it to not break the law. did i just make it sound worse lol?

[lisajo]

Originally Posted by santiagodraco

So this justifies what is being done to the children at that compound? Hardly.

Personally I think the children should be returned to their "home". However that cannot happen unless you can guarantee they will be protected from abuse AND that they will have the freedom to chose their own life direction and not tought to believe that everything beyond their walls are monsters.

I wonder if it would be ok to return the children to the compound but to remove the Men????? Nahhhhhh just a thought.....i do feel for the Mothers though. (to a point)

[Alaskagain]

I think that is a most excellent idea, LisaJo; let the women and children go back to their familiar surroundings, and take all the men into custody!

I don't deny that if forced underage marriages took place, and adult women/mothers/sisters knew about it, the responsibility and accountability should be shared. I don't entirely buy into a defense of the adult women by victimization and brainwashing.

But I do feel the younger children need to be in their own familiar surroundings. At this point, it is the only place they will feel remotely secure.

And this "spiritual marriage" business -- if it were a "spiritual" marriage, no physical contact should have been made at all. Everything in the marriage should have been on a "spiritual" level.

[lisajo]

Originally Posted by Alaskagain

I think that is a most excellent idea, LisaJo; let the women and children go back to their familiar surroundings, and take all the men into custody!

It seams to me the best way to deal with this.... that way they can do all the DNA testing there and the kids will be more comfortable and we wouldnt drain the the child protective services in that state....finding homes for all the children will cripple it and other children will be set aside. Just my thoughts....

[MaidservantX]

Originally Posted by Fiannan

Could you please show me what compund the press keeps talking aobut? Isn't the so-called compound actually their temple? Ph well, I'll bet there's plenty of fundamentalists who think every Mormon temple is a compound too.

I think you are missing something(s), Fiannan.

Alma 30:7-11 (and so forth) goes like this:

"Now there was no law against a man's belief; for it was strictly contrary to the commands of God there should be a law which should bring men on unequal grounds . . . . Now if a man desire to serve God, it was his privilage . . . but if he did not believe in him there was no law to punish him. But if he murdered he was punished unto death . . . and if he committed adultery he was also punished; yea, for all this wickedness they were punished. For there was a law that men should be judged according to their crimes. Nevertheless, there was no law against a man's belief . . ."

I recall a controversary near where I live where some high school children were upset because they were not allowed to wear gang colors while LDS people were allowed to wear CTR rings. I felt everyone in that scenario missed something as well. It is not that a person cannot wear symbolism. It is that gangs commit crimes, and LDS and cheerleaders and French club and international organizations, etc, -- don't. Commit crimes that is.