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

To: Southack

Yeah? But its the mothers who will be permitting the children to have contact with the fathers immediately upon return.


86 posted on 05/30/2008 9:26:59 PM PDT by seanrobins (blog.seanrobins.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies ]


To: seanrobins
"Yeah? But its the mothers who will be permitting the children to have contact with the fathers immediately upon return."

Should those U.S. citizens be presumed guilty or innocent?

89 posted on 05/30/2008 9:30:05 PM PDT by Southack (Media Bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies ]

To: seanrobins
But its the mothers who will be permitting the children to have contact with the fathers immediately upon return.

I've never read any allegations of that sort of incest in the FLDS. They are accused, and likely guilty, of "marrying" girls too young to be married under the laws of most states. But not to their own children, nor anything closer than "cousin", unspecified how close a cousin. They are a relatively small community and to some extent even if they were not polygamist, but separate for some other reason, they'd have a hard time avoiding marriages between "cousins", just as many communities in Appalachia do or did up until the current generation.

However those would be the current laws, previous laws, as recent as August 2005 in Texas, would allow for monogamous marriages of girls as young as 14, and some such as those seem to have occurred. Others cases, in Texas and with the girls of appropriate age to fall under the laws for age of consent (17 unless the other partner is less than 3 years older, then 14) to older men are alleged, and probably occurred, but have not yet resulted in any charges. No evidence of such was submitted before granting custody to the Texas CPS. That is what the courts, and many here, are objecting to. If they, that is CPS in particular and the state in general, can ignore the clear provisions of the law in this case, "for the children", they can do it in other cases and to other people.

335 posted on 05/31/2008 6:10:44 PM PDT by El Gato ("The Second Amendment is the RESET button of the United States Constitution." -- Doug McKay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | 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