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


1 posted on 04/25/2008 9:49:53 PM PDT by Howdy there
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: UCANSEE2; muawiyah; CindyDawg; humblegunner; najida; greyfoxx39; Politicalmom; Borges; ...

Ping, new article.

“An attorney for FLDS families in Texas today challenged the state’s claim of a pervasive pattern of underage girls having children, saying the state’s own documents show that just two teenagers in custody are pregnant.

Snip
Of the three teenagers listed as pregnant, Parker said, one is about to turn 18 and another refused to take a pregnancy test, he said.

“That leaves us with one,” he said. Based on that list, Parker said, “I challenge the CPS to come forward with the pregnant minors.”

Chris Van Deusen, a CPS spokesman, said, “The only thing we can say is we’re aware that there are 20 girls who became pregnant, and they were between the ages of 13 and 16.

“That’s not to say that there are 20 now, but at the time theyconceived, they were 13, 14, 15 or 16,” he said. “That establishes that there is some sexual abuse here.”

Parker said the 20 minors the state has identified either as pregnant or mothers actually had children over a 10-year period.”


2 posted on 04/25/2008 9:56:00 PM PDT by Howdy there
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: NYpeanut; the808bass; brytlea; pandoraou812; ricks_place; CindyDawg; Huntress; Pebcak; ...

PING!!

FReepmail to be added to the FLDS Eldorado Legal Case Ping List

(Merril Jessop has retained a criminal defense attorney, according to the statement by Danny Hurley)


9 posted on 04/25/2008 10:30:01 PM PDT by Politicalmom (The children were taken because they were either being raised to be raped, or raised to be a rapist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Howdy there

At the risk of spamming, and admitting that 10 is not 20, here’s the Dallas Morning News article, saying that there are currently 10 pregnant girls, not 2 or threehttp://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/texassouthwest/stories/DN-polygamists_23tex.ART.State.Edition2.4682227.html

and the Deseret News, which added 25 mothers under the age of 18 to the 17.

http://deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,695273381,00.html
Lawyers are paid to tell the clients’ stories.


14 posted on 04/25/2008 10:36:42 PM PDT by hocndoc (http://www.LifeEthics.org (I have a mustard seed and I'm not afraid to use it.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Howdy there

Black women have the highest teen pregnancy rate (134 per 1,000 women aged 15-19), followed by Hispanics (131 per 1,000) and non-Hispanic whites (48 per 1,000).

Sounds lower than “NORMAL” people.


30 posted on 04/25/2008 11:42:31 PM PDT by John Jamieson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Howdy there

Of course an FLDS lawyer is going to say they’re over 18! They’re going to try that on as many as they possibly can. Because then they can be represented by an FLDS lawyer and not a court appointed one. And because the fewer underage girls, the less men can be charged.


42 posted on 04/26/2008 4:56:25 AM PDT by ktscarlett66 (Face it girls....I'm older and I have more insurance....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Howdy there
The chart does not indicate whether the women are legally married or the ages of the children's fathers. Among them: One woman, now 30, listed as having given birth to her first child in 1993 when she was 14

I wonder how many are actually like this something that happened in years past. The ranch is just a few years old so women like this one had the child in another state so I do not see what Texas can do except remove kids under civil law.

43 posted on 04/26/2008 5:08:06 AM PDT by mouser (run the rats out its the only hope we have)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Howdy there

Actually, until VERY recently, one could MARRY in Texas at the age of 14, with parent’s consent. The cops FORGET that.


45 posted on 04/26/2008 5:26:31 AM PDT by 2harddrive (...House a TOTAL Loss.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Howdy there

There have been LOTS of prego 14-year olds, legally married, in Texas in the past....and there are a TON of them NOW...UNMARRIED, in ghettos in Dallas, and Houston.


48 posted on 04/26/2008 5:33:00 AM PDT by 2harddrive (...House a TOTAL Loss.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Howdy there; P-Marlowe

Pregnancy rates isn’t the issue. You can go into any high school in the nation and find 20 pregnant girls now, and the number will be much higher over the last 10 years.

If pregnancies are adequate reason to walk off with kids and close down organizations, then we’ll be closing down all the public high schools (and many private ones) in the next month or so.

The issues are that:

a. The kids don’t know their moms and the moms don’t know their kids or they aren’t talking. It is NECESSARY to sort that out to establish parentage/responsibility. You can’t just assign some kid to some lady because you like their hair color.

b. This place has something like 400+ girls to about 24 boys. That is odd. How does that accidentally happen? And if it isn’t accidental, then how has it been brought about.....selective abortion of males?? Sending males off someplace??? Tiny little male graves??? Some odd genetic factor???


53 posted on 04/26/2008 5:46:05 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain -- Those denying the War was Necessary Do NOT Support the Troops!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Howdy there
Parker also refuted CPS' description of an orderly, calm separation of mothers and children at the coliseum. He said it was "complete pandemonium." As the children, all younger than 5, figured out what was happening, they started screaming and CPS workers had to pry many away from their mothers. "This is inhuman. This is un-American," said Parker, who also said a civil rights lawsuit is possible. He also said CPS assured nursing mothers they would be able to take breast milk to their infants but, as of early Friday, had been given no information on where the children had been taken. They also were told sibling groups would be kept together. Thirteen children from one family were sent to five locations, he said. All the FLDS men and many women, some of whom returned Friday, remain on the ranch. "There is a real singular mind-set at the ranch right now to get these children home," he said.

A rather sad situation. Hopefully, the children will be reunited with their families soon. Unfortunately for them, this will likely devolve into a bonfire of the vanities similiar to the Duke affair.

64 posted on 04/26/2008 6:50:08 AM PDT by TheDon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Howdy there

I wouldn’t take this too seriously. CPS would only present the court with a count of those girls who had already been definitively documented to be both underage and pregnant. The information this FLDS attorney is referring to is almost a week old. They were still testing and interviewing and trying to wade through all the misinformation that the women and children were giving them. A lot of pregnant girls were still claiming to be over 18, and had not yet undergone testing such as Xrays to try to determine their real ages. Seems a lot them got younger in a big hurry when they found out it would let them stay with their infants and toddlers.


88 posted on 04/26/2008 12:13:58 PM PDT by GovernmentShrinker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Howdy there
It most certainly is not true in this case, but imagine if you were a GOOD religion, say baptist, and you ran a home for unwed mothers, and it did good business since there are so many, and you had a hundred people in your little compound, and then one of them claimed sex abuse, and they seized all the kids.

Then you too could be facing a CPS who would say something like this:

Chris Van Deusen, a CPS spokesman, said, "The only thing we can say is we're aware that there are 20 girls who became pregnant, and they were between the ages of 13 and 16. "That's not to say that there are 20 now, but at the time they conceived, they were 13, 14, 15 or 16," he said. "That establishes that there is some sexual abuse here."

As I said, most certainly not the case here, but I just want to illustrate that there is no logic in the argument that, because girls under 18 had children, there MUST have been sexual abuse.

As I have said before, in my daughter's middle school there were more than one girl who was pregnant or had a kid. That's 12-14 year-olds. Nobody filed charges of sex abuse.

And again I'll say, this is certainly not the same as THIS case. This case is DIFFERENT.

96 posted on 04/26/2008 2:02:45 PM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Howdy there

....and just how many teenaged girls get pregnant at the local high school every year and have an abortion?... or, keep the kid and collect welfare?


110 posted on 04/26/2008 4:33:07 PM PDT by Eva (CHANGE - the new euphemism for Marxist revolution)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Howdy there

Have they prosecuted Britany Spears’ prego younger sister yet? Or is this selective enforcement of chastity laws?


116 posted on 04/26/2008 9:26:43 PM PDT by 2harddrive (...House a TOTAL Loss.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | 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