Well, when I went googling my name, I found some old stuff I posted in sci.skeptic. Some of that was arguments with people who called religion dangerous, and wanted to consider it child abuse. I've mentioned that here before, and it was funny that I've now found some of those threads, like This one
I remembered having these conversations, but couldn't remember where I was having them. Now I know.
Here is one column saved for you by none other than FreeRepublic.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1523610/posts
It is frightening that a court can remove a child from the natural parent and give that child to someone else, absent any proven harm to the child.If we adopt the 'best interest of the child' philosophy, it won't be long before any rich couple will be able to claim a poor couple's child. This almost happened in the Baby Jessica case.
Note that the judge claimed the mother was unfit because of the 'admitted felony act', not because she proclaimed herself a lesbian.
If her testimony was without merit, the judge would have to discount her claims of committing felony acts. So it appears the judge believed her claim of felony commission, and then discounted or disbelieved her other claims.
If any of you are happy with this, just wait until a judge who finds YOUR personal beliefs or activities offensive gets to take YOUR child from you.
I post this to note that I have been arguing on the side of parents for a long time, long before I had ever heard of the FLDS group. Maybe my long history or arguing against taking children from parents because of the parent's beliefs has made me less interested in the specifics of the FLDS case.