Replies

Lots of sadness here. On one hand you have a bunch of kids, possibly abused, possibly loved well (the verdict is not in, folks) taken from the only homes they've ever known and put into situations they are totally unaccustomed to but might even be better off or maybe not. Who knows what will happen. It can't be easy for them regardless of what happened before and what will happen to them after. Can you imagine how frightened they are? Can you imagine them crying in their beds? I feel very sorry for these kids. Many children have wonderful foster homes. Many children have horrid foster homes. Roll of the dice. Does the government have the right to come into a home and take a child based on religious beliefs? A complicated question. If the child is abused, I'd say yes, generally. Who makes that call? There's the rub. Abuse to one might not be abuse to another. Crying about how a 13 year old was married off to a 50 year old man, welp, that happens all over the world every day, folks. Is it right? No. Are we running into Africa or Syria and yanking young women out of their homes based on that truth? No. It's their “custom”. Acceptable there but not here? A dilemma. Do you spank your child? Is it right? Some say yes, some scream abuse. There's no way to make an unbrella declaration without some parent and/or some child having pain. That's a very sad reality.

Another sad fact is that people use this situation to profess Christian ideals, loving their neighbor, forgiving and accepting, whilst slamming the Mormon church. Less thought or work is given to the needs of the children involved during discussions in this forum than the long past sins of church fathers in another denomination. Although I'm not Mormon, I know that the FLDS is not a part of the Utah church. Not that it matters much to these kids. Nor are the comments productive. They are destructive. How do they help anyone? I will now be stoned by the bloc o' Mormon haters with their righteous rocks of indignation. Ah well.....I'll join you in exiting, stage right.

Abuse to one might not be abuse to another.

OK, if you've had any "problems" with what the laws on our penal codes say is "abuse," I would assume you've lobbied our government in some manner to change them; otherwise, I find the timing a little bid odd for it to become a "sudden" issue for you.

Crying about how a 13 year old was married off to a 50 year old man, welp, that happens all over the world every day, folks. Is it right? No. Are we running into Africa or Syria and yanking young women out of their homes based on that truth? No. It's their “custom”. Acceptable there but not here? A dilemma.

You know, there's just a teeny, weeny, small issue here that you forgot to mention that kind of destroys your argument, and that's called "national sovereignty." (Despite the Left's claims to the contrary, the US has not declared itself to be the police force of the world.) Oh, and BTW, it's only an American who is already predisposed to hand over a 13 yo to an already 50 yo married man that this situation constitutes a "dilemma." (For the rest of us, not exactly a big tug of war as to whether you remove a victim of statutory rape from the paws of an already married man--who may also be a pedophile--but who already has a harem of 2 or 3 or 4 all the way up to 40 or so wives).

Do you spank your child? Is it right? Some say yes, some scream abuse. There's no way to make an unbrella declaration without some parent and/or some child having pain. That's a very sad reality.

"Pain" isn't usually the issue CPS acts on. Rather it's usually anything that leaves a mark or is an obvious assault. (Of course, with liberals as social workers, this could change more & more)

Another sad fact is that people use this situation to profess Christian ideals, loving their neighbor, forgiving and accepting, whilst slamming the Mormon church.

Tell you what. Christ can hear you in prayer. (Why don't get on his case for the way he "slammed" the religious Pharisees of His day as He went about practicing his ideals, loving his neighbors, and forgiving & accepting others...well, at least that way you'll show some consistency).

I will now be stoned by the bloc o' Mormon haters with their righteous rocks of indignation.

Hmmm...I seemed to recall Jesus being a bit on the "indignant" side when he took a whip & overturned the money-changers' tables in the temple. I guess by your standards that would have made Jesus a "money changer hater," eh? (And tell us again why it's OK for you to stone other posters in here with your condescending "righteous rocks" by accusing them of being "haters?")