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

Skip to comments.

Texas governor suggests sect may want to move on (FLDS)
The Associated Press ^ | 06/06/2008 | AP

Posted on 06/07/2008 4:39:31 PM PDT by JRochelle

Gov. Rick Perry hinted Thursday that members of a polygamist sect whose children were recently returned amid a botched sex-abuse investigation should pack their bags, a newspaper reported.

Perry, who was in La Baule, France, for a European business conference, said that the state of Texas has an obligation to protect young women from being forced into marriage and underage sex, The Dallas Morning News reported in its online edition.

He also warned members of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints that child sex abuse won't be tolerated and even suggested that followers of the renegade Mormon sect may want to get out.

"If you are going to conduct yourself that way, we are going to prosecute you," Perry said. "If you don't want to be prosecuted for those activities, then maybe Texas is not the place you need to consider calling home."

Willie Jessop, an FLDS elder who lives in Utah, said Perry's remarks were shocking, particularly given a Texas Supreme Court ruling that forced this week's return of 440 sect children on the grounds that child welfare officials provided scant evidence that the children were in danger.

"It's an outrage that he should even make such gross and broad allegations," Jessop said. "He's listening to people that tell lies about the FLDS."

FLDS officials have accused the state of persecuting sect members for their religious beliefs.

Texas authorities raided the sprawling compound in west Texas in early April after three calls to a domestic abuse hot line, purportedly from a 16-year-old mother who said she was being abused by her middle-aged husband. The calls are now being investigated as a hoax.

Perry said that using the information state authorities had at the time, "they acted with the best interest of those children."

"If responsibility needs to be taken for (court edicts) saying that we stepped across some legal line, I'll certainly take that responsibility," the governor said.

Jessop, who has insisted that children at the ranch were not mistreated, has sidestepped questions about underage marriages at the Yearning for Zion ranch. But he did announce this week that the church would no longer sanction marriages of any girl too young to give legal consent.

Though the children have been returned, a criminal investigation continues.


TOPICS: Heated Discussion
KEYWORDS: firstamendment; flds; govwatch; polygamy; runoutoftown; texas
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200 ... 221 next last
To: dmw; LeGrande

“Are you referring to those dirty old men who rape those young kids, get them pregnant, and make slaves out of them for the rest of their miserable lives?”


Come on. That’s not what LeGrande is saying.

Even if one ‘views’ the YFZ Ranch as being the focus of that kind of crime, that isn’t what LeGrande is arguing about.

LeGrande is arguing the law. And that the courts, and sheriffs, and Governors must follow it, as well as any alleged criminals, or suffer prosecution and imprisonment.

Nothing wrong with that. He(she) gets a little ‘emotional’ about it at times, but your reaction is a bit ‘emotional’ too.

Better that we have a concern that those who ‘uphold’ the law are not violating it, than to just assume they do no wrong.


161 posted on 06/08/2008 5:15:12 PM PDT by UCANSEE2 (I reserve the right to misinterpret the comments of any and all pesters)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 142 | View Replies]

To: LeGrande

Let me tell you something you self-centered idiot. YOU are NOT the victim in this mess. Comparing yourself to little girls who are raped against their will and forced to make babies for some perverted old men is not justified under any circumstances. And yet, you call yourself a “victim”. The real victims are these precious girls who’s lives are screwed up forever, not some big cry baby like you hollering about your constitutional rights being violated. Wait a minute, were you there among these perverted men getting your rights violated? If not, then get your arrogant head out of your big arse and stop playing the victim card.


162 posted on 06/08/2008 5:20:21 PM PDT by dmw (Aren't you glad you use common sense? Don't you wish everybody did?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 155 | View Replies]

To: LeGrande

I know. Every day that passes just gives more credence to those who believe it was all an ‘overreaction’.

I think that Flora Jessop had a lot to do with ‘convincing’ the CPS they needed to act.

I think that the phone calls (not just from Rosita Swinton) added to the concerns.

But, I think where there’s smoke, there’s fire.

There is the chance that once Jeffs took the cream of the FLDS crop with him to Texas, that he stopped any illegal practices. But I think that is a ‘slim’ chance.

If that were to be true, then surely the FLDS would have welcomed in the WELFARE , CPS, and LOCAL LE’s once they were aware that those agencies had concerns.

Instead, they hid, they destroyed, they shuffled children around.

Whatever their reasoning for doing so, it was a factor in the decision to go in with a search warrant.


163 posted on 06/08/2008 5:21:06 PM PDT by UCANSEE2 (I reserve the right to misinterpret the comments of any and all pesters)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2; LeGrande

LEGRANDE:”The logical, fact based, thinking is that you can’t arrest someone to prevent him from committing a crime.”

UCANSEE2:Well, you are wrong about that.

LEGRANDE: LOL You don’t even know how wrong you are.

UCANSEE2: Am I?

There are a lot of people in jail who were planning criminal acts, and got put in jail for doing so.

For example: Woman wants her husband dead, and meets with a hired killer to pay him to do it. Turns out he is a undercover cop, and they bust her and put her in jail for conspiracy to commit murder.

*************
I had this exact same “discussion” with LeGrande. Good luck getting anywhere with him, he knows more than all of us combined.

She didn’t commit the actual crime, and wouldn’t. She was going to pay someone else to commit the crime. Yet, she goes to jail.


164 posted on 06/08/2008 5:22:49 PM PDT by FastCoyote (I am intolerant of the intolerable.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2
It seems the problem with the Waco and Ruby Ridge cases was that they DIDN’T remove the children, and ensure their safety.

I believe that you are actually serious. That was the justification that Janet Reno used. They killed the Children to protect them.

Now you compare it to the YFZ Ranch, where they did remove them?

Now they can never remove the Children.

Could you do me a favor? We obviously aren't speaking the same language and it is hard when we don't have anything in common. Could you please read the Constitution, The Law by Frederic Bastiat and Fooled by Randomness by Taleb. I feel guilty taking advantage of your ignorance. If you read those three things you will probably get angry with me for mistreating you.

165 posted on 06/08/2008 5:26:42 PM PDT by LeGrande
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 151 | View Replies]

To: LeGrande

[Isn’t the Governor suggesting that the FLDS disobey a Judges orders? Is that breaking the law?]

Here comes the PRO-FLDS Cabal. Ping all your See No Evil, Hear No Evil, Speak No Evil friends!

And don’t get so emotional about things!


166 posted on 06/08/2008 5:26:50 PM PDT by FastCoyote (I am intolerant of the intolerable.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: LeGrande

“I would do what the State of Utah did. Investigate, prosecute and convict. Simple. “


Did the state of Utah encounter the same problems with investigating that the state of Texas did?

I know that Jeffs and others would move from one side of the state line to the other to avoid arrest.

What prompted the state of Utah to go after Warren?

Had Texas found Sarah and ‘Dale Barlow’, do you think they would have taken all the children?


167 posted on 06/08/2008 5:27:19 PM PDT by UCANSEE2 (I reserve the right to misinterpret the comments of any and all pesters)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies]

To: brytlea

“I don’t know why this became a religious *war*.”

It isn’t.

It’s just an emotional response by some that ‘they are next’.


168 posted on 06/08/2008 5:29:11 PM PDT by UCANSEE2 (I reserve the right to misinterpret the comments of any and all pesters)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 143 | View Replies]

To: Awestruck

[This sounds like “all coloreds leave town by sundown...” ]

Actually, it sounds more like “all incestual child abusers leave town”, but since you had to make up words to put in his mouth I guess I understand where you are coming from.


169 posted on 06/08/2008 5:33:34 PM PDT by FastCoyote (I am intolerant of the intolerable.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: LeGrande
I feel guilty taking advantage of your ignorance. And I you, so I will not waste my time responding.
170 posted on 06/08/2008 5:34:22 PM PDT by roylene
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 165 | View Replies]

To: LeGrande

“Now they can never remove the Children.”

If, and when the arrests are made, I betcha CPS can and will go back in and take children into custody.


171 posted on 06/08/2008 5:34:57 PM PDT by UCANSEE2 (I reserve the right to misinterpret the comments of any and all pesters)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 165 | View Replies]

To: FastCoyote
She didn’t commit the actual crime, and wouldn’t. She was going to pay someone else to commit the crime. Yet, she goes to jail.

Conspiracy to commit a crime is a crime. Raising your fist to hit someone is assault, that is a crime, actually hitting someone is battery. When someone is charged with assault and battery they are being charged for two separate crimes. Police are prohibited by the constitution from seizing someone to prevent them from committing a crime.

The fact that I have to explain these basic constitutional concepts on FR to you saddens me.

172 posted on 06/08/2008 5:35:00 PM PDT by LeGrande
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 164 | View Replies]

To: LeGrande

“They killed the Children to protect them.”

And since that wasn’t the case at the YFZ Ranch, just what the heck are you talking about?


“I feel guilty taking advantage of your ignorance. “

I know. No one knows more about the ‘law’ than you. You have so declared.


“If you read those three things you will probably get angry with me for mistreating you.”

Nope. Anger stems from lack of control of emotions.
When I read someone’s posts, I do my best to put myself in their shoes, to understand where they are coming from.

The children being returned to their ‘parents’ weren’t done by the fourth amendment to the constitution. They were done by the statutes in Texas law regarding CPS and the justification for removal of children.

The Constitution wasn’t written with CPS in mind, as it did not even exist back then.

If the fourth amendment clearly covered this situation, there would be no need for state Statutes.


173 posted on 06/08/2008 5:42:01 PM PDT by UCANSEE2 (I reserve the right to misinterpret the comments of any and all pesters)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 165 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2
Did the state of Utah encounter the same problems with investigating that the state of Texas did?

Worse problems.

I know that Jeffs and others would move from one side of the state line to the other to avoid arrest.

That is why Colorado City is on the border.

What prompted the state of Utah to go after Warren?

The State of Utah does its best to uphold the law.

Had Texas found Sarah and ‘Dale Barlow’, do you think they would have taken all the children?

They didn't find Sarah or Dale Barlow and they took all the children, that was wrong. I think what you meant was if they had found Sarah, would they have the right to take all of the children? Yes, either that or arrest and remove the men.

174 posted on 06/08/2008 5:43:28 PM PDT by LeGrande
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 167 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2; LeGrande

[LeGrande is arguing the law.]

Actually, he is not. There is but a rare instance of LeGrande taking an anti-Mormon position through many hundreds if not thousands of posts, though he is supposedly an atheist ex-Mormon. LeGrande is attempting to square the circle of his inner moral conflicts and will abuse anyone in the way of his battle of the ego. But good luck, your turn to be called a cabalist/Nazi/etc. will soon come.


175 posted on 06/08/2008 5:43:59 PM PDT by FastCoyote (I am intolerant of the intolerable.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2
If, and when the arrests are made, I betcha CPS can and will go back in and take children into custody.

If pigs had wings they could fly.

176 posted on 06/08/2008 5:44:58 PM PDT by LeGrande
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 171 | View Replies]

To: LeGrande

[Conspiracy to commit a crime is a crime. Raising your fist to hit someone is assault, that is a crime, actually hitting someone is battery. When someone is charged with assault and battery they are being charged for two separate crimes. Police are prohibited by the constitution from seizing someone to prevent them from committing a crime.

The fact that I have to explain these basic constitutional concepts on FR to you saddens me. ]

But conspiring to commit incest with underage brides in polygamist marriages is obviously NOT a crime (says you).

And I see you are changing your tune to be more in line with the real world - so I guess progress is possible.


177 posted on 06/08/2008 5:47:48 PM PDT by FastCoyote (I am intolerant of the intolerable.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 172 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2
I know. No one knows more about the ‘law’ than you. You have so declared.

Where? Do I have an evil doppleganger?

The children being returned to their ‘parents’ weren’t done by the fourth amendment to the constitution. They were done by the statutes in Texas law regarding CPS and the justification for removal of children.

The Constitution wasn’t written with CPS in mind, as it did not even exist back then.

If the fourth amendment clearly covered this situation, there would be no need for state Statutes.

Everything you just stated is wrong. I will point out one mistake just for giggles, by rewriting your statement, without changing the meaning.

"The Constitution wasn’t written with Semi-autos in mind, as they did not even exist back then."

Do I have to explain the error in your reasoning?

178 posted on 06/08/2008 5:58:14 PM PDT by LeGrande
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 173 | View Replies]

To: FastCoyote
But conspiring to commit incest with underage brides in polygamist marriages is obviously NOT a crime (says you).

No, that is a crime. You are simply lying when you stated that I said otherwise.

And I see you are changing your tune to be more in line with the real world - so I guess progress is possible.

How is that?

179 posted on 06/08/2008 6:01:57 PM PDT by LeGrande
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 177 | View Replies]

To: FastCoyote

still waiting for the proof that they are incestual child abusers.....oh yeah..i forgot.. you don’t have any and neither does the state.


180 posted on 06/08/2008 6:51:37 PM PDT by Awestruck (All the usual suspects)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 169 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200 ... 221 next last

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.

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