Posted on 04/09/2008 8:05:24 PM PDT by metmom
SAN ANGELO, Texas — Teenage girls, often younger than 16, were required to have sex in the soaring white temple after they were married in sect-recognized unions at a polygamist compound in West Texas, according to court documents unsealed Wednesday.
The temple "contains an area where there is a bed where males over the age of 17 engage in sexual activity with female children under the age of 17," said an affidavit quoting a confidential informant who left the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
I’ll look for those posts
That is disgusting. The filthy brute who repeatedly raped this girl must have jumped her as soon as she got up from the childbirth bed each time.
No respect for womenn; no respect for children; no respect for God’s Law.
As someone else suggested, these rotten perverts deserve a bullet in the head.
FLDS is based upon LDS, and they share many of the same basic religious beliefs.
They do not accept the alterations of their religion which were forced upon the LDS church when Utah became a State, and I do understand why.
I’m talking about any group that sanctions rape of girls under the guise of marriage.
In all honesty, I do not know how to reply to this statement without attacking you personally. That is something that I will not do to another Freeper.
Please understand that this is not intended as a personal insult in any way.
To think that members of a church which follows the teachings of Jesus Christ, and have made this an official expression of their religious beliefs...
That takes a very sick and twisted mind, or someone very ignorant about other Christian denominations.
Oh oh oh!
My favorite
Polygamy is illegal, MORAL and the sanctioned by God! (that was a good one!)
And those who are pretty much saying “Well, the girls agreed and were the mens wives”. So the sex with the girls was OK and then men aren’t pervs!
Nasty stuff. Here!
Posters here!
im thinking more a VERY dull knife
I’m not even talking religion here, I’m talking behaviors. I really have paid very little attention to what the religious specifics are.
I’m talking about this particular group of people and their behaviors towards children. Period. What they have done is evil.
You keep going back as if I’m mentioning their religion(and I haven’t) I’m after each person for what they’ve done. And too many freaky deaky posters already have made it clear no matter how it washes out, it’s cool with them (for some bizarro reason) Sorta like a twisted combo-payback for Waco and Ruby Ridge.
That is all.
As for attacking me personally, you brought me into it by responding to another posters quote and pinging it to me....
Years ago, I was in another religious debate and this woman was telling me that 80 percent of all women have been raped.
As with y'all, I challenged that statement and called it false. And as expected, I was labeled as a woman hater.
Oh well, if your mind thinks that something like that actually happens...
Yesterday there were those on FR who said that girls of 13 had chosen to take part in this perversion.
You wanted to know where? Here it is:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1998680/posts?page=59#59
a. You posted to me to start with. No generic there.
b. You took my posts as attacks against a specific religion while they are against illegal and evil behaviors. Again, not generic on your part.
c. You seem to have a dog in this fight-— not sure what-—
and now you’ve brought in something totally unrelated to thread. We’re talking about a specific group, a specific time frame, specific actions and underage girls. Who were raised to be used by these men.
Saying they were ‘married’ to the perves who had sex with them no more makes them true wives than me sticking my head in the oven makes me a biscuit.
I give up!
Even full grown women dont agree to rape...
It sounds like the rape was ritualistic...
On at least the “wedding” night...
wonder if it was part of an “alter ceremony” with an audience ...
These young girls were treated as “celestial virgins”...temple prostitutes...
Like the “rape rooms” that Sadaam’s sons had...
Joseph Smith from all accounts only had children by his first wife, Emma. He had many children with her over a course of many years, and left her pregnant upon his death. It is hard to imagine how he would not have fathered children with other women if he were as sexually active as that.
But but but====
God said it was OK. /sarc.
It wouldn’t surprise me to hear that some of the girls did consent to the marriage. They were raised in a community that expected it. Even the girl who lodged the complaint reportedly recanted at the end of the phone conversation and said to just forget it.
But it’s a moot point. At their age consent is not legally possible when the male partner is so much older. So it really doesn’t matter whether they “chose” it or not.
He did have other children by other women...
Emma pushed one of them down the stairs and she had a miscarriage...
That seems to be the typical Mormon apologetic claim. It is absurd at its face.
According to the scriptures, the whole purpose of polygamy is sex. Read Section D&C 132:
“they are given unto him to multiply and replenish the earth...” How do you multiply and replenish the earth without sex?
Many of the wives later testified under oath, in court, that these were real marriages in every sense. Compton summarised this trial in a radio interview:
“You know, there was something called the Temple Lot Trial in 1893. The RLDS Church was trying to prove that it was the true church, so it could claim the temple lot. The LDS Church was trying to claim the same thing. Anyway, as part of this, polygamy became an issue. And so, the Church encouraged the plural wives of Joseph Smith who were still alive to testify wholly in these trials. And, they testified, “yes, these were real marriages, yes, they included sexual relations.” And it was really explicit, which is remarkable because it was such a Victorian era. But, it was very important for the Mormons to say, “yes, these were real marriages” and, “yes, they included sexual relations.” - http://www.byebyedogma.com/Compton
Transcripts of the entire Temple Lot suit are located in the LDS archives and the RLDS archives. For more information concerning the Temple Lot Case see Clarence L. Wheaton, Historical Facts Concerning the Temple Lot (Independence: Church of Christ, 1954); Tom Bennett, “The Church in Court (Temple Lot Case),” Saints Herald 120 (November 1973):23-26, 39; Joel S. Wight, “The Courts and Sectarianism,” Saints Herald 121 (March 1974):16-17, 38 and Ronald E. Romig, “The Temple Lot Suit after 100 years,” John Whitmer Historical Association Journal 12 (1992):3-15.
Not to get personal, but with your marriage, was it real and have you had sexual relations?
Like I said, I give up. Sometimes, we end up talking to a brick wall.
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.