Time to stop defending the FLDS

[UtahDan]

Originally Posted by KiteRider

Will someone "in private" please explain to me why the government should not take boys out of homes where other children are being systematically raped?

MikeWaters, I look forward to a flood of private responses on this topic, but I won't hold my breath.

Your analysis is actually correct. Waters is just in a corner on this he cannot escape from.

Maybe he will give us some examples of what was and wasn't imminent danger from the hundred or more times he was called upon to make this determination in court.

[il Padrino Ute]

Originally Posted by Adam

If a cult were living in out past Delta in the desert wearing wooden Holland clogs and training the boys all to kill their families and kids and neighbors in the year 2020 on MikeWaters' birthday, there would be no imminent danger and they should be left alone to raise their boys as they saw fit, right? I mean it is 12 years away and there is no danger of them killing anyone in the next little while. They might not go through with it, you never know, so no justification for taking them away, right?

Perhaps CFS in every state should pull kids out of the homes of Catholics. After all, the potential for sexual abuse by the priest is there at all times, given that there have been a lot of cases of abuse by priests throughout the country and more specifically in Boston.

[hyrum]

Originally Posted by UtahDan

Your analysis is actually correct. Waters is just in a corner on this he cannot escape from.

Maybe he will give us some examples of what was and wasn't imminent danger from the hundred or more times he was called upon to make this determination in court.

I believe there is precendent for removing all children from a home -- during this investigational period -- if one is considered abused or endangered.

As for why every child in a subdivision, ward, HUD development, whatever is not taken when one family is suspected of abusing children, the obvious difference is that the FLDS do not live in individual households in the traditional sense with each household governed by a parent, or parents, so it those are not even close comparisons to the FLDS way of living. If those living in building "A" had a different philosophy on impregnating teens than those in building "B" in the compound, the FLDS seem to have done nothing to assert that, and given the stories of strong patriarchal control of marriages and families from the FLDS leadership, there is no reason to believe that might be the case.

[exUte]

Originally Posted by il Padrino Ute

Perhaps CFS in every state should pull kids out of the homes of Catholics. After all, the potential for sexual abuse by the priest is there at all times, given that there have been a lot of cases of abuse by priests throughout the country and more specifically in Boston.

that is where most people have a beef. Assuming ALL boys will grow up to be predators and thus they have to be removed from their parents.

OK, here goes.........

How many AA kids are born out of wedlock? Why not lock up all the AA boys because they will simply impregnate and take off? Some even with underage girls. Check out the stats.

No that is not racist.......it's a fact.

[exUte]

Originally Posted by hyrum

I believe there is precendent for removing all children from a home -- during this investigational period -- if one is considered abused or endangered.

As for why every child in a subdivision, ward, HUD development, whatever is not taken when one family is suspected of abusing children, the obvious difference is that the FLDS do not live in individual households in the traditional sense with each household governed by a parent, or parents, so it those are not even close comparisons to the FLDS way of living. If those living in building "A" had a different philosophy on impregnating teens than those in building "B" in the compound, the FLDS seem to have done nothing to assert that, and given the stories of strong patriarchal control of marriages and families from the FLDS leadership, there is no reason to believe that might be the case.

as to the breaking of laws. Remember, up until two years ago, it was friggin legal to marry at 14. What the hell is that all about? Other states still allow marriage at 14. Why would any law like that be on any books in any state is beyond me.

[exUte]

Originally Posted by Adam

If a cult were living in out past Delta in the desert wearing wooden Holland clogs and training the boys all to kill their families and kids and neighbors in the year 2020 on MikeWaters' birthday, there would be no imminent danger and they should be left alone to raise their boys as they saw fit, right? I mean it is 12 years away and there is no danger of them killing anyone in the next little while. They might not go through with it, you never know, so no justification for taking them away, right?

Should any child being brought up in that religion be confiscated?

[K-dog]

Originally Posted by KiteRider

Will someone "in private" please explain to me why the government should not take boys out of homes where other children are being systematically raped?

MikeWaters, I look forward to a flood of private responses on this topic, but I won't hold my breath.

Because it is statutory rape, not common law rape. The boys are not in danger.

[exUte]

Originally Posted by exUte

as reported by the DesNews?

chirp, chirp? Won't answer a simple question? Do you stick by DNews article claims?

[il Padrino Ute]

Originally Posted by exUte

that is where most people have a beef. Assuming ALL boys will grow up to be predators and thus they have to be removed from their parents.

OK, here goes.........

How many AA kids are born out of wedlock? Why not lock up all the AA boys because they will simply impregnate and take off? Some even with underage girls. Check out the stats.

No that is not racist.......it's a fact.

I meant more that the boys would be in danger of being sexually abused by their priest, not that they would grow up to be predators.

[Flystripper]

Originally Posted by exUte

chirp, chirp? Won't answer a simple question? Do you stick by DNews article claims?

chirp chirp? who are you even talking to?