Posted on 06/10/2008 8:51:53 AM PDT by abb
[The Texas governor's] office had received 449 messages opposed to the removal of the children and just 32 from people who supported it.
An "anybody can call our office" response is hardly the valid indication of public support as indicated by the article's headline.
Considering the source, I would be inclined to chalk this article up to yet another example of MSM bias combined with readership pandering.
Somebody torched the Governor’s Mansion in the state of Texas
By Bruce Sterling June 10, 2008 | 9:34:43 AM
http://blog.wired.com/sterling/2008/06/somebody-torche.html
On this board, that kind of talk gets you labeled as someone “ a high level of tolerence for child rape”.
Object all you want, give examples as you did, quote the Constitution, it doesn’t matter.
You’re one of ‘us’ now, the Rapist Group.
Meets every Friday, 8pm, in the FLDS Church basement.
Two judges disagree with you.
Maybe they overstepped and maybe they didn’t but clearly at least SOME of these children were abused.
You are free to believe that. Hey, I believe it too.
But that's not the way our justice system works. In order for the state to step in and take your children there is a specific burden of proof that must be met. CPS knew that. They chose to act anyway thereby ruining any chances of actually prosecuting the people doing the abusing.
They didn't just "overstep." They took a gigantic leap into the realm of police state. When someone, anyone, can be snatched up and placed into state custody on vague allegations then we are all in danger.
Also, if you choose to equate 13 year olds forced into marriage with old men and 12 year olds being homeschooled, that’s your business but I don’t think most homeschoolers would appreciate it.
Are you deliberately being obtuse? I don't think homeschoolers do anything wrong. But so what? The FLDS people haven't been proven to anything wrong either. And that's the trouble here. If the state decides later that homeschoolers are "abusing" their children then this evolution is the precedent that CPS was trying to set. No arrest warrant, no real evidence. Just grab 'em.
CPS has plenty of problems but they did this one just fine as far I’m concerned.
That's probably the saddest part of this whole mess. Too many Freepers are more than willing to sacrifice their (and my, and everyone else's) rights in order to nail some religious nutcases.
More will come out of this and I hope plenty of these FLDS nut cases end up in jail.
We can only hope. However, considering how CPS went off half cocked and probably tainted any evidence that they might have been able to take to trial I don't think that's likely any more.
Which is exactly the point that some of us have been trying to make from the beginning...
First gather evidence. Then take it to a judge and get an arrest warrant.
You don't just go tearing into someone's home and grab their children. You have to follow the rule of law.
Otherwise you're likely to come up with an empty sack.
/sarc
Can you name who wasn’t?
In as much as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me. : Matthew 25:40
I am glad for whatever abuse was prevented in this short time against the least of these...
I am glad for whatever abuse was prevented in this short time against the least of these...
Okay, I'm confused.
Which abuse are you talking about?
The alleged abuse of the children at the FLDS ranch that to date has not been proven and that two judges now say that there was no evidence of?
Or the abuse (that we all witnessed) perpetrated by the CPS on the uncharged, unconvicted mothers at the FLDS ranch?
We breathlessly await your answer.
I can.
Legally, none of them.
I know, that whole "innocent until proven guilty in a court of law" thing really gets in the way of a good lynching now doesn't it?
Besides, once we get rid of all of the FLDS types we can go after the Joooooooos, right?
After all, there's a rumor that they killed Jesus.
We breathlessly await your answer.
Are you a plural being now?
How about the girls who left that very group after being forced into marriage as children? How about the convicted molesters who wandered in and out of that group and back and forth across state lines? But hey don't let the innocence and welfare of a little child get in the way of a good high minded self-righteous attitude. No one was put in jail, children were moved for their own safety. The children have a constitutional right to be free from abuse and sexual exploitation. This right was what the CPS workers were trying to PROTECT. There were over a half a dozen pregnant minors in the group. Whether the CPS workers blew it or not, they were trying to prevent exactly this kind of abuse. (YES the presence/prevalence of pregnant minors is a pretty clear indicator of abuse when no one is trying to prosecute or track down the father.)
They, of course, have proof. Which is why criminal charges were filed against the people that committed those crimes, right?
Right?
And that makes all of the people in the FLDS ranch guilty too, right?
How about the convicted molesters who wandered in and out of that group and back and forth across state lines?
Ah, guilty by association. So, if your neighbor steals a car we can lock you up without a trial and seize your children?
No one was put in jail, children were moved for their own safety.
Without due process of law, children were seized by the state and placed into custody, then shipped off to state-chosen foster parents and the mother's of said children were enjoined from contacting them. True, it isn't jail. But the state doesn't have to put you in jail to take your liberty.
The children have a constitutional right to be free from abuse and sexual exploitation.
They sure do. But first you actually have to prove abuse and sexual exploitation. We have a process for that. CPS chose not to follow that process.
There were over a half a dozen pregnant minors in the group.
The last I heard this had been reduced to ONE pregnant minor. And that one was suspect.
Now then, how many pregnant minors currently go to school in the Austin, TX public school system? Where is CPS?
(YES the presence/prevalence of pregnant minors is a pretty clear indicator of abuse when no one is trying to prosecute or track down the father.)
All of what you say is true, but first you HAVE TO PROVE THE ALLEGATIONS!
I'm not sure what part of this is eluding you.
Let me make this perfectly clear.
NO CRIMINAL CHARGES = NO CRIME.
NO CRIME = NO STEALING CHILDREN.
That's what I say.
And fortunately, that's what two judges said too.
Not two judges, three in the unanimous opinion of the third circuit court of appeals, and the TX supreme court.
“No one was put in jail, children were moved for their own safety.”
31 adult women were taken into CPS custody, and held against their will, as “underage minors.”
Later, CPS admitted in court that the women are adults, based on the same documents that the women presented, and no further proof, before the women were kidnapped by CPS.
Your post includes other errors of fact - you might want to read some of the court records.
Their was a search warrant issued. The LEO’s moved to execute that warrant. They found and “reasonable cause” to suspect that the children in this communal home had their welfare endangered. They moved on their lawful authority to remove the children from the endangerment. (The families were all in one home near as I can tell, so certain dangers could be considered to be dangers to all including the transient residency of convicted child molesters in this same home which is my point previously. Nothing to do with guilt by association. EVERYTHING to do with protecting the welfare and rights of the minor.)
Two different courts found that the LEO’s reasonable cause was unjustified to the extent of separating the children from their parents and ordered that the children be returned back to their parents. However, even the courts made stipulations on the parents that would have to be abided by for the protection of the welfare of the children.
So while the courts found that there was not enough reasonable cause to separate them from their parents in all cases, there was some sort evidence of continuing threat to the children or else why would they have ordered restrictions on the parents even after the children are returned to their care/guardianship?
These LEO’s have never been tried, never been convicted, never been found guilty of any wrongdoing. They made a judgment call about the safety of a citizen of the state of Texas. The courts found that they made the wrong call. The courts adjusted the call and this investigation is still ongoing with the courts satisfied as to the safety of the children and the protection of their rights in the meantime.
This has never had anything to do with the guilt or innocence of the adults. It has everything to do with the safety and welfare of the children involved. So while as much BS gets tossed around about the “do it for the children”, this one really was done for the the children.
Sometimes the rights of individuals in society conflicts. That's what the courts are there to sort out. In this case the CPS workers were faced with the conflict of the parent's rights to direct the upbringing of their children and the children's right to be free from abuse and exploitation. They tried to resolve the case and made mistakes. It doesn't mean that they should have never went into the compound. It doesn't mean that they were wrong in their judgment that immediate action needed to be taken to protect the children. They just were wrong about separating them from their parents. They could have demanded that the children be removed from any and all endangering situations until the investigation was complete and the various parents would have had to found separate residency by defacto.
Funny how the article implies that the laws be damned, the public wanted the children returned to a potentially abusive situation, and that’s all that counts.
Then, there are those who state there is no evidence, there never was.
Funny,again,because that is not what the TXSC said.
What the TXSC stated, resembles more closely with your closing paragraph.
If you would like to read it for yourself, and see where the TXSC definitively STATES that there was EVIDENCE, here:
http://www.supreme.courts.state.tx.us/historical/2008/may/080391.htm
and here:
http://www.supreme.courts.state.tx.us/historical/2008/may/080391.htm
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.