Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: greyfoxx39; JRochelle; colorcountry; Utah Binger; P-Marlowe; rightazrain; All
He repeatedly argued the temple is a holy site protected by the First Amendment's religion clause, and that the state should have taken care to make a search of the building as limited as possible. This brings up the possibility that one reason the mormons here are so vehemently defending the FLDS is because if this case is successful for the State of Texas and the federal government, the secrecy of the SLC LDS temples may be questioned.

When the feds were seeking out Mormon "cohabs" during the 1880s...according to one author...Nothing was considered off-limits when it came to searches by government agents (B. Carmon Hardy, The Solemn Covenant, p. 49) [I recommend folks get this 1992 book]

2,552 posted on 04/11/2008 8:24:10 PM PDT by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2480 | View Replies ]


To: Colofornian
Nothing was considered off-limits when it came to searches by government agents

Searches are pretty useless when the people that you want to search are allowed to keep their secrets in a designated building that is immune from searchers.

Was the temple where they kept the little girl break-in beds upstairs in the sacred Temple?

"The state also found beds on the top floor of the temple, where authorities suspect that older men had sex with under-age girls, court documents released on Wednesday said."

2,557 posted on 04/11/2008 8:44:39 PM PDT by ansel12 (This cult stuff is grossing me out.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2552 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson