Seperate thread, same subject:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x3180886pnwmom (1000+ posts) Sat Apr-19-08 05:49 PM
Original message
A question no one's been asking the FLDS polygamists:
Advertisements [?]If these mother-child bonds are so important to you, if it is such a detriment for your children to be separated from their mothers,
then why did Warren Jeffs order dozens of children to be taken from their birth parents in Arizona and Utah and sent to live with new families in Texas?
Why weren't you complaining then?
http://www.canada.com/globaltv/national/story.html?id=c...
SNIP
Many children won’t say who their parents are or even who they are. It’s possible some have Canadian connections or may even be Canadian since the surnames on the court documents match some of those in Bountiful — Johnson, Barlow, Steed, Jessop and Jeffs.
B.C.’s Attorney General Wally Oppal said Friday Canadian children are among the those seized. A federal spokesman could not confirm the report.
Part of the confusion, according to people with close connections to the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, is that last summer, the jailed prophet Warren Jeffs ordered dozens of children to be taken from their homes in Utah and Arizona and reassigned to new parents in the Texas compound.
SNIP
yella_dawg (1000+ posts) Sat Apr-19-08 05:51 PM
Response to Original message
2. There's a difference between a lunatic doing something sick
and the government doing the same thing. But it's okay, since there have been accusations of abuse. Accusations are enough nowadays.
lizzy (1000+ posts) Sat Apr-19-08 05:54 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. Ain't that something. I've read from an escaped sect member
how FLDS men would keep the women in line by telling them that if they don't behave, their children will be taken away. But apparently it's all peachy-rosey when the state of TX did it.
trying to explain the difference wiould be pointless, of course.
lizzy (1000+ posts) Sat Apr-19-08 05:59 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. Out of 416 children and teenagers removed by the state, five are said to be
Edited on Sat Apr-19-08 06:00 PM by lizzy
pregnant. That's less than 2 %. That hardly prooves all of the parents don't follow TX age of consent laws , and all children had to be removed.
kestrel91316 (1000+ posts) Sat Apr-19-08 06:33 PM
Response to Reply #11
31. She and a half dozen sock-puppet friends have been defending
FLDS abusers for days now.........
One of them even proclaims women and children PROPERTY, subject to laws regarding unreasonable search and seizure.
Sick MFs..........
how long until they start claiming freeper troll?
NCevilDUer (1000+ posts) Sat Apr-19-08 07:20 PM
Response to Reply #16
58. Fun with math.
Assuming an even spread over the years and equal numbers of male/female.
416 children.
25% are 13-16. That makes the pool 104.
50% are male. That makes the pool 52.
5 pregnancies in 52 girls = 10%, not 2%.
TEN PERCENT OF POST PUBERTY FEMALES UNDER 16.
It does kind of change the perception, doesn't it.
lizzy (1000+ posts) Sat Apr-19-08 07:24 PM
Response to Reply #58
60. If you gonna do the math, at least get your facts straight.
It's been pointed time and time again that there are less males than females among the children
wouldn't that mean the % is higher then?
lizzy (1000+ posts) Sat Apr-19-08 07:52 PM
Response to Reply #65
70. Some statistics for Texas. Add it up.
Edited on Sat Apr-19-08 07:54 PM by lizzy
Every 10 minutes, a teen in TX gets pregnant.
FLDS are not the only ones with the problem.
http://www.dshs.state.tx.us/famplan/tpp.shtm
Strawman. The last defense of the retarded.
NCevilDUer (1000+ posts) Sat Apr-19-08 08:28 PM
Response to Reply #70
81. Did you read your own stats?
1 of 27 16 yr olds (since this is talking about 16 and under) = < 4%
1 of 58 15 yr olds = < 2%
1 of 967 14 yr olds = < .1%
1 of 5280 13 yr olds = < .02%
Add them together any you have 6% or less, which means 9% of FLDS girls 13-16 is 50% MORE than the Texas average.
And that refers only the the CIRRENTLY pregnant - does not include those who had children in the past two or three years (who refuse to identify themselves for fear of incurring the wrath of the elders).
And the general stats refer to children getting pregnant by other children - girls who have boyfriends who are teens themselves, mostly. Not childred who are being raped by adult men.
How could you, as a woman, possibly defend this?
how about. lizzy ain't a woman?
roguevalley (1000+ posts) Sun Apr-20-08 03:34 PM
Response to Reply #130
235. sounds like you're right, seabeyond. I was a teacher and a
quasi-official of the court. If I even SUSPECTED child abuse I was OBLIGATED BY LAW to report. I HAD NO CHOICE in the matter and if I didn't do it, I could go to jail. But I guess pedo's rights are more important than saving women and children from rape and abuse.
yup.
lizzy (1000+ posts) Sun Apr-20-08 12:58 AM
Original message
What if the moon was made of cheese?
tombstone...I'm sensing a tombstone...
lizzy (1000+ posts) Sun Apr-20-08 02:12 AM
Response to Reply #171
182. Yes, I am concerned for the safety of the children.
Even the shrink who testified for CPS admitted that placing those children in foster care is going to be destructive. He also admitted they need special foster care, which does not exist.
So, pardon me if I am concerned about these children and the way they might suffer because state of TX removed them from their mothers.
Now the state is going to make even the mothers of the youngest ones to leave them.
And it's going to send these children to different sites.
So, yes I am concerned they will suffer.
backpeddle
indie_ana_500 (1000+ posts) Sun Apr-20-08 02:30 AM
Response to Reply #182
184. Ha. You must have an inside source, since none of what you said has
been reported in the news. Do you just make this stuff up as you go along?
The children have been temporarily removed so that DNA tests can be performed, and the results come in, physical exams, and investigations away from the mothers (this is standard abuse investigation...you don't ask a possible child abuse victim in front of the possible perpetrator or one who aided the perpetrator if she's been abused; she simply cannot give an honest answer).
It has been reported that several of the young girls are pregnant (13 or younger), which of course probably means that even more of them have been raped but they are not pregnant at this time. Additionally, the children either don't know who their mothers are or they are lying, since the children are giving different names for themselves and identifying different people as their mothers at different times. So much for those "close mother-daughter" bonds. If they are that close, they surely would be able to point out their mothers.
This is standard investigation procedure, and it seems to me that they are being cautious and handling the situation fairly well, considering the large number of children. All the children have attorneys.
If the community had not been raping children, as is evidently what has been happening, none of this would've happened. The foster system is not the best for any child. But the answer is not to leave them in a situation where they will be harmed because of the possibility of not a great home life if they are removed. Many foster children are adopted and grow up to be happy people.
TiT? is that you?
roguevalley (1000+ posts) Sun Apr-20-08 03:36 PM
Response to Original message
237. you are disgusting. LIZZY DISABLED THEIR PROFILE. Freeper.
Edited on Sun Apr-20-08 03:37 PM by roguevalley
Wow. What family values, supporting pedo's right to rape kids. Put your profile up, lizzy or go back to freeperland.
kestrel91316 (1000+ posts) Sat Apr-19-08 06:31 PM
Response to Reply #3
29. Let me guess - you had a child removed from your home for abuse and
you're still working on your anger issues about it.........right???
Because I can't fathom any other logical reason for objecting to the removal of these kids from an obviously abusive environment.
Sick, sick, sick.
it's getting big. The lynch mob is in full force. Lizzy is DOOMED!!!!
