Posted on 04/06/2008 5:27:22 AM PDT by SkyPilot
Local and state officials entered the temple of a secretive polygamist sect late Saturday, said lawmen blockading the road to the YFZ Ranch near Eldorado.
The action comes hours after local prosecutors said officials were preparing for the worst because a group of FLDS members were resisting efforts to search the structure.
The Texas Department of Public Safety trooper and Schleicher County sheriff’s deputy confirmed that officials have entered the temple but said they had no word on whether anything occurred in the effort.
The incursion into the temple caps the three-day saga of the state’s Child Protective Services agency removing at least 183 women and children from the YFZ Ranch since Friday afternoon. Eighteen girls have been placed in state custody since a 16-year-old told authorities she was married to a 50-year-old man and had given birth to his child.
Saturday evening, ambulances were brought in, said Allison Palmer, who as first assistant 51st District attorney, would prosecute any felony crimes uncovered as part of the investigation inside the compound.
“In preparing for entry to the temple, law enforcement is preparing for the worst,” Palmer said Saturday evening. They want to have “medical personnel on hand in case this were to go in a way that no one wants.”
Apparently as a result of action Saturday night at the ranch, about 10:15 p.m. Saturday, a Schleicher County school bus unloaded another group of at least a dozen more women and children from the compound.
Although members of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, or FLDS, have provided varying degrees of cooperation to the sheriff’s deputies and Texas Rangers searching the compound, all cooperation stopped once authorities tried to search the gleaming white temple that towers over the West Texas scrub, Palmer said.
“There may be those who would oppose (entry) by placing themselves between law enforcement and the place of worship,” Palmer said Saturday afternoon. “If an agreement cannot be reached … law enforcement will have to — as gently and peaceably as possible — make entry into that place.”
Sect members consider the temple, dedicated by then-leader of the sect Warren Jeffs in January 2005 and finished many months later, off-limits to those who are not FLDS members, said Palmer, who prosecutes felony cases in Schleicher County.
Palmer said she didn’t know the size or makeup of the group inside the temple.
The earlier refusal to provide access was even more disconcerting because CPS investigators have yet to identify the 16-year-old girl or her roughly 8-month-old baby among the dozens removed from the compound, Palmer said.
“Anytime someone says, ‘Don’t look here,’” she said, “it makes you concerned that’s exactly where you need to look.”
The girl told authorities in two separate phone calls a day apart that she was married to a 50-year-old man, Dale Barlow, who had fathered her child, Palmer said.
The joint raid included the Texas Rangers, CPS, Schleicher County and Tom Green County sheriff’s deputies and game wardens from the Texas Department of Parks and Wildlife.
Although CPS and Department of Public Safety officials have described the compound’s residents as cooperative, Palmer disagreed.
“Things have been a little tense, a little volatile,” she said.
Authorities removed 52 children Friday afternoon and 131 women and children overnight Friday. About 40 of the children are boys, said CPS spokeswoman Marleigh Meisner.
No further children have been taken into state custody since Friday, when 18 girls were judged to have been abused or be at imminent risk for abuse. CPS has found foster homes for the girls, Meisner said, and will place them after concluding its investigation.
Meisner declined to comment on the fate of the 119 other children and said authorities were still searching the ranch for others Saturday evening.
“They’re in the process of looking,” she said. “They’re literally about halfway through.”
(Not sure what you're implying here...maybe you could spell it out). I've at least noted once that when a FReeper posted something along these lines, he was trying to "tag" Lot for something. [If you read Lot's story, you'll note that his daughters first got him drunk in initiating their pregnancies. If you were insinuating this was Lot's issue, then I'd hate for you to be a detective investigating a crime where some guy got a woman drunk & then raped her. (If that was the case, you'd wind up blaming the victim).]
As to whether or not OT “scripture” or the Ten Commandments or GOD ever condoned a man having multiple wives, the OT does often mention that Abraham, Jacob...
Since you say you're an atheist, it sounds to me like you haven't read these accounts too carefully. (And while you may or may not care about the detail I give that follows, I do so for the sake of others who claim that Old Testament polygamy was somehow "God-inspired). Let's break down those you cite:
Abraham: Please tells where in Gen. 16:3 re: Hagar, or anywhere that Hagar is ever referred to as a wife or anything but a maidservant? Unless you think Abram's wife is "god," where did God ever instruct Abram to sleep with her? Where in Gen. 25:1 or thereabouts did God instruct Abraham to take another wife as he did with Keturah?
Jacob Jacob himself says that his whole multiple wife thing was sprung on him because he was "deceived"--he labored for Rachel and was given Leah minus knowledge it was her until he was "knowledgeable" with her to the point where he couldn't (in that day) throw her back like a fish in the lake. So, deception-based polygamy of Jacob is somehow "divine?"(see Gen. 29:23,25). Gen. 30 also shows it wasn't God who prompted Jacob--it was more women (Jacob's 2 wives) who acted in exactly the same pattern as did Abram's wife--with them giving their maidservants to Jacob. (Also, note that Leah was given a "bridal week" even after the deception in Gen. 29. So the question for Rachel's maidservant: Where was her "bridal week" between Gen. 30:3 (Rachel's idea) and Gen. 30:4 (sexual liaison carried out with maidservant)? No mention, there, of a new "bridal week" or "bridal day"...no assumption, therefore, that this was "polygamy" in terms of additional "wives"--they appeared to be "concubines--sexual cohabitators."
...David, Solomon, and many others who had multiple wives and since all these men according to the Bible, found great favor and grace with GOD and were not punished for it, one could reasonably conclude that at one time the practice was not against their religious faith.
Response: First of all, if we're going to "commend" polygamy just because David engaged in it (which seems to be your cockeyed argument), then I guess we have to "commend" adultery just because David also engaged in that, eh? (2 Sam chptrs 11 & 12). I mean, in effect, David made Bathsheba into a "temporary" polygamist--which is the bottom-line net effect of adultery. You can't get around that adultery, pure and simple, IS adultery according to Gen. 2:24; Matt 19:4-6 & was indeed "against...faith."
Secondly, David's concubines, post-repentance, were treated like widows (2 Sam. 20:3). His actions with Bathsheba was labeled by God as an act where David "despised" God (2 Sam. 12:10). It's possible that his first wife, Michal, may have died re: pre Solomon's birth via Bathsheba (2 Sam. 6:23 mentions her death).
Solomon: Solomon had been warned NOT to intermarry (1 Kings 11:2). Polygamy & "concubinage" behavior with idolatry-loving women turned his heart away from God (1 Kings 11:4). Solomon was condemned by God (1 Kings 11:9-11).
The Old Testament clearly condemned polygamy: "He MUST NOT take many wives, or his heart will be led astray." (Deut. 17:17). Solomon clearly ignored Deut 17 to his detriment.
I just get a little peeved when some folks attack Mormons for their religious beliefs; some of the most politically conservative and patriotic and moral folks I’ve known.
Oh. It's OK, then for YOU to "get a little peeved" at somebody's religious belief that says, "defend the truth from counterfeits," but if this same religious person acts upon a Mormon who provokes them, all of a sudden we hear from you, "Thou shalt not attack Mormons for their religious beliefs." (Which Mt. Sinai did you hear that commandment from?)
You have FReepmail.
The Spirit of the Lord has witness to me, thank you!
See my post 501. It's been my experience that if folks actually read the Old Testament accounts instead of relying upon hearsay, then they'd see there's little there to try to justify its practice.
While I would not agree with them, I think their answer would be that adultery is relations outside of wedlock. To their thinking, the people are married, even if it is with multiple wives, thus it would not be adultery.
Where I disagree with this, personally, is that the man had to be married to one woman first, and simply DESIRING to have a second wife (or third, fourth, whatever) would already be an act of adultery. Did not Christ say something about how the mere desire for someone other than your spouse means you already commited the sin in your heart?
Perhaps. But many others have thought the same.. such as Reverend Jim Jones.
Yes, indeed, Exodus 21 is "interesting." Tell us...since Exodus 21 also sets up minimum standards for treatment of slaves, does that then mean you would claim that the Bible advocates slavery? (keep in mind that not all slavery in the Biblical era was American-style slavery...some of it was multi-year economic debt repayment--temporary bond servants).
Moses' Five Books neither encourage/discourage slavery. Exodus 21:7-11, along with Lev. 25:44-46, establish basic treatment standards. Your reference to Ex. 21:10 no more reinforces the practice of polygamy than it would slavery...and the fact that you isolated that verse from a 4-verse context of slavery--and didn't mention that little fact--is a form of half-truth deception if you did that purposely.
Please see post 501 re: paragraph there about Abraham. Wanna show us ANY passage from Genesis which says that Abram/Abraham had a second WIFE. (Sleeping with your maidservant or a concubine doesn't make her a WIFE--even if she gets pregnant and you raise the kid as the kid's dad)
Is that from DaveMSmith 3:16?
So you're telling me if that if I worship my tulips in my backyard, and devotedly do so, and otherwise "live a good life," I have "earned" the right to knock on the door of the Host of Heaven, & demand entry, eh?
(And what authority conveyed this special "insight" to you?)
You may be correct. It is a splitting of hairs that I do not care to get involved in. Try to understand that when I am explaining what I think others would think or say (or use as a legal defense), that it does not necessarily mean I believe the way they do. Some think that sex between men and little boys is ok... but simply making a true statement that some DO believe that, it does not mean I agree with them.
Let it suffice to say that we are in agreement that the claim that Christ was a result of multiple marriage is a false claim.
“You have FReepmail.”
Right back at ya.
So are you morally clean?
Sure they are.
They have the same texts and the same name.
It's a freakin' cult.
You're telling us that because the word "Bible" doesn't appear in the Bible, that it's an incorrect concept and "an abomination?" Really?
You know, you could make a really long list of "words not in the Bible" but if you concluded the concepts weren't there, you'd be dead wrong.
Where's the word "monotheist" in the Bible?
How about "abortion?" Is that in the Bible? "Eschatology"--is that word there?
What about concepts that most Christians don't adhere to (a few do)...concepts LDS readily embrace: Wanna tell us where the phrase "age of accountability" resides in the Bible. How about the word "agency?"
Did I make such a claim?
As far as I know, I am a sinner.. just as everyone else is.. including YOU.
It's Swedenborgian/New Church. Check my profile page if you're interested.
Bravo. Very good points.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.