Posted on 05/23/2008 10:12:33 AM PDT by LeGrande
"The raid - resulting in the largest child custody case in American history - was based on a lie."
"Police traced the calls to 33-year-old Colorado Springs woman named Rozita Swinton. Swinton had earlier been arrested for making a false report, and accused of posing as "Jennifer," 16, who called 911 to report that her father had locked her in a basement for days. Swinton may also have posed as thirteen-year-old Dana Anderson, who was being sexually abused by her pastor and raped by her father. There is no evidence that Sarah, Jennifer, or Dana exist. Swinton remains a "person of interest" in the case, but has not been charged in connection to the raid. "
There most certainly are men somewhere who are guilty of something.
Now that the state can enter any home and detain occupants based on anonymous phone calls, I'm sure we'll find some somewhere.
Goodbye Fourth Amendment.
Hmmm “illegal cult”?
Based on your assumptions then I think they ought to be going after every religious organization in the country then that teaches the Bible, Koran or Torah - or for that matter anything else. Confucianism, Wiccans, and pretty much any other religion that teaches a ‘deity’ - and sets down laws then.
How about going after Islam, since it is a cult in and of itself?
How about going after MADD? Liberals? Conservatives with guns and bibles?
Give it a rest. It is an accusation that they are polygamists in the first place and it might be true, but until there are court cases then basically, you’re ALL WRONG about this. If they are PROVED in a court of law as having broken the law, then they can be called polygamists.
The point here is very simple... you believe it to be wrong (as do I) - but at the same time, they have a RIGHT TO THEIR RELIGION. GOT THAT? When they break a law, then try them in court and stop being the psychoanalyst and trying to say “it hurts the children”. That’s the “Liberal way out” of an argument (It’s for the children!).
Just fill in the blank with whatever you want. Works nicely in a fascist hillary/obama society.
I am convinced such evidence would demonstrate multi-generational, systemitized incest which is illegal and abusive.
The members may do illegal things but tell me where being a member of the FLDS or any church for that matter is illegal.
You actually asserting they aren’t polygamists?
Evidently the Texas state court of appeals disagrees that the majority of the children were at risk.
CPS got it’s ass handed to it and now is going to appeal to the state supreme court.
Not one person here on this board was in on that raid. Not one person on this board knows the true story.
Not one person on this board knows anything other than what the lying news media prints.
We don’t believe them when we read 90% of what they say otherwise, why the hell are people believing them now?
How did Ms Swinton know about the FLDS anyway?
Hey, you’re asserting they ARE polygamists, then taking it one step further and calling them all guilty. So you’re judge, jury and probably want to be executioner as well. Not in my life time and not on my planet. YOU need to get the hell out of America and move to Iran
That wasn't the question, nor was it why the compound was busted up. You're more worried about busting up polygamists then you are about the children who were abused.
Not only was it a lie, but the appellate judges ruled that there was NO EVIDENCE that supported the claims of the CPS. Basically, the CPS just didn’t like what they THOUGHT was the FLDS belief system and took over 450 children from their parents without any proof whatsoever!
“Fill in the Blank”:
Speeding, 10-19 mph over the speed limit.
A 4 point offense and loss of your first born son (the benevolent dictator does not want you to adversely influence his driving habits).
Good point about their religion being legal. I was wrong about that. They have the right to practice whatever they want as long as it is not doing damage to another person in some manner. Everybody knows they are polygamous though down there it seems. It is odd there is no case for that yet, however.
I make no assertions whatsoever.
You doing that.
I simply asked for the names of the people living in that 'compound' who have been indicted for polygamy, child rape, child abuse, animal cruelty, tearing the tags off of mattresses, mopery with intent to creep, impure thoughts on a Steamboat landing, or any other crime.
You either know the names of indicted persons or you don't.
Which is it?
L
What? Are you an idiot?
First of all, if they didn't abuse them (I'll eschew the meaningless "officially" here), then the children shouldn't have been removed. To the extent that any of the girls were being forced into underaged marriages with much older men (and the evidence now seems to suggest that this allegation has, in the very least, been blown waaaaaaay out of proportion to what actually might have happened), then ONLY those girls should have been removed from ONLY those families. You don't remove children from other families, based on what their neighbour down the street is doing.
Polygamy is illegal. But guess what? Since polygamy is illegal, the logical course of action is to arrest the men who are polygamists. You don't go in and take every last kid out of a community, even from the families which were strictly monogamous and of legal age. You don't do it even if you disagree with their religion and think that they are "sick". You know why? Because the government big enough to do it to them is also big enough to do it to you. What are you going to do when some bureaucratic nabob takes the notion that raising YOUR kids in YOUR religion is "child abuse", and goes in and takes YOUR kids away and puts them in some foster home somewhere?
Where will you be then, hunh Mr. "I want to toss the whole principle of constitutional rule of law aside like it was a used sandwich wrapper"?
You saying they were abused then? :)
I think it’s more like time for “Let’s slam the Texas CPS”, because they didn’t feel like meeting the proper legal requirements first before taking action. . .
Guaranteed, at least a few will prove before a court that their rights were violated, and the citizens of Texas will end up paying the bill. . .
That the FLDS are scum is obvious. That doesn’t mean we don’t have to do things by the book to nail their polygamous butts to the wall. . .
No.
He/she is asserting that we do not yet KNOW what they are.
And there IS a legal definition of polygamist. If they do NOT fit that defintition then they are NOT considered polygamists under the law. And the LAW is all that should matter to the State. Unfortunately an alarming number people, like you, get LAW and MORALITY confused.
There is not (and God help us I hope there never will be) a LAW against everything YOU consider immoral.
I was wrong about that.
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.