Posted on 08/17/2008 10:09:06 AM PDT by Saundra Duffy
SAN ANGELO, Texas — Child welfare authorities have decided court supervision is no longer needed for 34 more children taken in the raid on the Fundamentalist LDS Church's YFZ Ranch.
Texas Child Protective Services filed papers here Thursday seeking to "non-suit" 10 cases involving 34 children, said agency spokesman Patrick Crimmins. That is in addition to 32 children non-suited earlier this month.
(Excerpt) Read more at deseretnews.com ...
“Religious bias trumps constitutional rights in this case unfortunately.”
I wasn’t aware that the FLDS was actually a religion.
Even the Mormons claim it isn’t.
Why would CPS return the children of the men under indictment, especially to the men?
If the Grand Jury is expected to reconvene, to present more indictments, should those children already have been returned?
“But the witch hunt continues . . . “
Since they are after the ‘men’ who committed sex with minors, wouldn’t that be a ‘warlock’ hunt?
“I am thinking the totals should result in the hundreds of millions. “
I hope the lawyers start with the fact that adult women were held against their will - two of whom gave birth with TX CPS officials watching and waiting to grab the baby when it came through the birth canal. Thank God, CPS was slapped with restraining orders just in time or they’d have snatched the babies for sure.
Despite the pro-raid pro-roundup sentiment on FR, I think the majority of Americans were horrified at what the government tried to do.
The lawsuits should hold TX authorities’ feet to the fire. Those kids will be suffering from PTSD for the rest of their lives.
“My predictions is that the 5 FLDS polygamists recently indicted by the State will be convicted “
TX authorities condemned the entire community, even rounding up all the innocent children. So let’s say there were five guilty men. Why on earth did they round up all those children and put all of the innocent families through hell?
Surely you do not condone depriving all of the innocent FLDS men, women and children of their constitutional rights.
“Religious bias trumps constitutional rights in this case unfortunately.”
You noticed that, too?
“I wasn’t aware that the FLDS was actually a religion.”
The FLDS do not claim status as a Church, probably because they didn’t want the government poking its big nose into their private lives. Didn’t work. Big Brother is alive and well.
TX CPS is still in control of most of their lives. Imagine the grief, fear and heartache this is causing. Anyone who has had to deal with even an inkling of CPS meddling would understand.
“Since they are after the ‘men’ who committed sex with minors, wouldn’t that be a ‘warlock’ hunt?”
They went after the entire community - men, women and children, not caring about their constitutional rights.
I call that a witch hunt.
“I wasn’t aware that the FLDS was actually a religion.”
Confirms my point.
“The FLDS do not claim status as a Church,”
28 posted on Sunday, August 17, 2008 11:36:41 PM by Saundra Duffy
On your home page you listed this:
“To obey its laws; to respect its flag;”
The FLDS under Warren Jeff’s RULE as man-GOD, don’t believe in the LAWS of the United States, unless those laws benefit them.
“They went after the entire community “
No they didn’t. They went based on a multitude of complaints, including one from Family Services. They originally took a limited number of children. The onsite investigation took almost an entire week.
Then, after the FLDS members either couldn’t or wouldn’t identify who was who, the CPS ended up taking all the children, to give them time to obtain proper and legal identification of all the children, in their search for Sarah. Only then could they be sure that Sarah was not to be found.
I had assumed, at the beginning, that FLDS was a religion, or cult.
Later, I found out they hadn’t registered the YFZ Ranch, or the temple they built there, as a ‘church’.
Also, I found out that the FLDS was just a registered name of a private enterprise, as a subsidiary of the UEP Trust.
Then, there came the objections of the LDS, who didn’t like anyone thinking there was any connection between the LDS and FLDS. Specifically, the LDS said the FLDS were NOT Mormons, and the FLDS said they were the only true Mormons.
Then, after the LE got a search warrant, and took evidence, Warren’s lawyers tried to fight the taking of the evidence on the basis of ‘protection of religious documents’ and the ‘religious sanctity of the church or temple’.
I find that to be a bit hypocritical.
And it really matters not whether it was a religion or not.
You can’t legally hide behind the veil of a religion, or a cult, to commit crimes.
Ya know, that is just absolutely sick. Whomever those two are need to be institutionalized to remove them from open society. I can think of no one that I know, associate with or (until now) even heard of where such a perverted, nauseating mental ill scenario would cross their mind in the wildest of thoughts. It sounds just like a Gestapo agent straight out of 1939.
Last time I checked, if, and that’s a big if in these cases, if a father commits a crime the children are not taken away from their mothers.
Children are better off in a polygamous family than becoming wards of the state.
Similarly, in the inner city, underage mothers are rewarded with houses and healthcare and food stamps, yet in these cases their children are taken away? Children are better off with underage mothers than the state. In fact, I think the state is the worst place for children to be placed, under nearly all circumstances.
“Sorry FLDSers and polygamy apologists”
I prefer Constitutional apologist, thanks. But hey, if you get your kids taken from you because your neighbor doesnt like the way you live, I’ll be sure and look the other way.
And you should realize how ignorant you are about the word “polygamy”. The courts are filled with domestic abuse and child abuse cases from monogamous relationships...does monogamy therefore cause abuse? What you know about polygamy could fit in a thimble. Why don’t you do your homework? But I doubt you will.. like a lazy liberal you prefer to keep your petty prejudices without actually doing any research (other than parroting what you’ve been spoon fed by the MSM).
Thanks for the response.
If a father is accused of committing ‘child abuse’, and the mother is thought to be complicit in covering up the abuse (especially by lying to authorities about the age of the child, whether the child is, or is not hers, and who the father is), then I assure you they do take the child into protective custody until the investigation can be completed.
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.