Polygamist Pedophiles and Papal Pontifications
POSTED BY: deadlockvictim
UPDATED: Wednesday, May 28, 2008 01:32
VIEWED: 23329
PAGE 12 of 28
I see some quick edit work.
I SAID that I am taking the underage pregnancy thing, from the same source that fed us the bullshit about the phone call, with the same grain of salt till I have a more accurate source of evidence.
You know, that skepticism that I held from the start while all you people were knee-jerking and screaming for heads....
Only to find out the phone call was almost certainly bullshit.
Until I have a better source than the same folk who lied about that call, damned right imma be skeptical, and I have every right to be given the apparent veracity of the source.
Never said it wasn't so - sayin that I am rightfully skeptical of an account given by the folks who just lied to me.
-F
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
So, Frem, since you seem to duck out of the picture whenever real child abuse comes up, I'm going to continue my train of thought by myself.
First of all, if half the girls under 17 are currently pregnant I'd say there was a lot of underage sex and statutory rape going on. I don't know how anyone can draw any other conclusions.
Second, the girls have minimal education especially compared to the boys. Now if these people were meeting the legal requirements of educating their children it would look a little bit better. As it is it looks like they have pretty much slotted their females have only one choice in life.
Third, these underage girls speak of being married to much older men. And I don't hear anything about them having a choice - can those girls say no ? Do they ever say no ?
So all in all, it looks to me like females are treated as inferiors: subject to the whims of males, denied education, forbidden choice, and groomed to accept sex and brood-mare status from an early age.
I suspect this plays very nicely into male fantasies and so there is just not the outrage as when it happens to boys. Meh. I really don't expect better of most males, to tell the truth. I just find it interesting. In the inkblot of life Frem and 6-ix see - not abused little girls - but big brother stomping on them.
How stupid. And self-centered.
***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Well, we seem to have cross-posted.
You can't phony a pregnancy, at least not for long.
"would you have them simply remove the children of every Catholic simply because some of them were abusers ?"
IF CATHOLICS HAD THE POLICY OF SEXUALLY ABUSING YOUNG CHILDREN I WOULD REMOVE ALL CHILDREN. Not b/c some were abused, but because IT WAS A POLICY to abuse them. So maybe YOU don't get it - eh ? These girls were subject to a community policy of underage marriage and sex. As well as being denied an education or choice in their marriages. But perhaps these are small matters to you ?
And no, I don't see what the legal issue is. The police have the duty to respond to emergency calls - even if they are cranks calls, even if they are untrue. They can't pick and choose which they will and won't address.
Oh yeah, AND TO BE ON BOARD WITH A COMMUNITY POLICY OF ABUSING YOUNG GIRLS IS AS REVOLTING AS ANYTHING I'VE SEEN ON THIS BOARD.
***************************************************************
Got it ?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Let me explain again, since you are ignoring willfully, maliciously, nastily, every single explaination I present to you in favor of a whole cloth manufactured strawman.
http://dictionary.law.com/definition2.asp?selected=795
fruit of the poisonous tree
n. in criminal law, the doctrine that evidence discovered due to information found through illegal search or other unconstitutional means (such as a forced confession) may not be introduced by a prosecutor. The theory is that the tree (original illegal evidence) is poisoned and thus taints what grows from it. For example, as part of a coerced admission made without giving a prime suspect the so-called "Miranda warnings" (statement of rights, including the right to remain silent and what he/she says will be used against them), the suspect tells the police the location of stolen property. Since the admission cannot be introduced as evidence in trial, neither can the stolen property.
By their own actions, they have fucked up any chance of successfully prosecuting those responsible for the abuse in anything remotely resembling a fair trial.
And a fair trial is their right, regardless of what they have done - I have not, at any point whatsoever held any position but that FLDS is guilty to some degree of the crimes in question.
But you cannot simply punish an ENTIRE religion without a trial.
And consider that very lack of education and self-realization among the girls in particular as they get fed into the shredding machine that is the Texas Foster Care System ?
What does it take to make you realize this is potentially dangerous for them ?
That *IF* the State can LEGALLY prove individual justification to seperate the children from parental custody (unlikely now, thanks to the poison tree) that these girls are going to need something MORE than just being dumped into the nearest handy foster home ?
Of course, since everyone is willing to accept rule of the gun and damn the law, it's probably going to slide, setting a very dangerous precedent, but still, that leaves the question of
what the hell to DO with these girls once the media frenzy subsides and the State simply disposes of them into the trashheap of the Foster Care System without a backwards glance, doesn't it ?
But no, that never did enter your mind now did it ?
They're gonna need a better solution than that, Doc Perry put that one up front and center, only to be dismissed and ignored in much the same fashion as folks have done me.
Those kids, as you say especially the girls - they ain't rescued at all, not even close, and everybody is so damn busy sticking knives into FLDS (without regard to the influence of THAT, on these kids) that no one has paid a mind to the more important thing of how exactly to handle the situation as it seems to be unfolding.
How bout putting down the knife yourself and getting on the damn phone (where I've been all day) and getting some folk who have the resources to offer assistance to do so ?
And then breaking the red tape blockade so that they have the ability ?
Had they any sense, they would go straight to Doc Perry and his people and issue emergency funding for care and treatment of these kids.
http://www.childtrauma.org/default.asp
(EDIT, oops, that is the old link)
http://childtraumaacademy.org/default.aspx
You wanna help matters, help put the arm on the Governor of TX and make that happen - we're workin on scaring up resources independantly, but that's not really gonna be at full steam till monday, cause we need a solid financial institution to hold it and a lawyer to write the boilerplate, yadda yadda...
Your own bias has completely blinded you to any damn thing I have said here, and I highly reccommend you go back and re-read the thread from the beginning.
-F
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Look, I am sick of your outright lies, Rue.
And you could damn well make a case for the Catholic Church having such abuse as an institutional policy at one time or another.
I stated my piece, often enough, and you have repeatedly and in sequence lied about my position on this matter, lied about how I feel about it, as if you had any way of knowing, and flat lied about where I stand in spite of really overt and obvious statements to clarify it.
I am sick of your hypocritical bullshit, and when it comes right down to it, you ain't not a whit different from any of the right-leaning jackboot snugglers, it's just all about WHO the jackboot lands on, between you, and there's really not a damn dimes worth of difference in my opinion of it.
And to be blunt, I don't think not one of you gives a shit about any of these kids whatsoever, you're all too busy celebrating the destruction of a group you did not agree with to even bother thinking about it, and when all is said and done and it blows over you'll just forget about them as they drop beneath your notice or caring, if they were ever there as anything more than a damned excuse to begin with.
Leaving folks like me in the darkness cussing you and trying to pick up the fucking pieces.
Go to hell.
-Frem
It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
You simply haven't shown it's the fruit of a poisonous tree. They get a call - and they are required to respond. Having responded and having uncovered other facts in the course of their response is a legitimate process.
And children are typically removed from dangerous situations until such time as an final evaluation can be made. No decision has been reached as to the ultimate future of the children in question, just that they will be in protective custody until the process is completed.
I work with and know a few people who were fostered to other families as children. So I don't see it as a one-way trip to hell.
***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Yeah, well, that was certainly a rational post there, Frem.
***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
By SCOTT MICHELS
SAN ANGELO, Texas April 18, 2008
Bruce Perry, a child psychologist, testified that the traditional foster care system could be destructive to children taken from the sect's ranch. But he also testified that the children could be at risk if they are returned to the ranch.
The representatives for the sect's girls ages 5 to 11 requested the children be returned to their parents, while state Children's Protective Services comes up with a long-term plan.
But Perry warned that the possible problem with that kind of arrangement is the children's continued exposure to the destructive belief system that promotes sex could be harmful. When asked, Perry said that the youngest children are probably least at risk if returned to parents in the short term because they are least influenced by unhealthy beliefs. He also said that he thought it would be OK for young mothers to continue to stay with their babies until a more long-term decision is made.
By LISA SANDBERG and TERRI LANGFORD
Copyright 2008 Houston Chronicle and San Antonio Express-News
Dr. Bruce Perry said the adherence by the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints to underage marriage and underage sex puts all children at risk.
"I think that young girls — 14, 15, 16 (years) — are not mature enough to consent to a marriage," Perry said, testifying for the state of Texas.
By MICHELLE ROBERTS – 1 day ago
SAN ANGELO, Texas (AP) — The belief system at a polygamous sect is abusive and teen girls do not resist early marriages because they are trained to be obedient and compliant, an expert testified Friday in a custody hearing for 416 children seized from a secluded ranch.
Many of the women had children when they were minors, some as young as 13, a child welfare worker said earlier in the child custody hearing, one of the largest and most convoluted in U.S. history.
(Bruce Perry) An expert in children in cults testified Friday that while the teen girls believed they were marrying out of free choice, it's a choice based on lessons they've had from birth.
"Obedience is a very important element of their belief system," said psychiatrist Bruce Perry, who interviewed three girls seized in the April 3 raid. "Compliance is being godly, it's part of their honoring God."
He also said that many of the adults at the Yearning For Zion Ranch owned by the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints are loving parents and that the boys seemed emotionally healthy when he played with them.
But, he noted, the sect's belief system "is abusive. The culture is very authoritarian."
Tuesday, Apr. 15, 2008 By HILARY HYLTON/AUSTIN
In some ways, Perry said, this situation highlights "fracture lines in our culture" about lifestyles and parental control. "But the state is not saying 'Don't wear those dresses," Perry says, referring to the legal basis of the Eldorado raid. "It's saying you cannot have sex with 12-year-olds."
For other experts, however, the concern is not the separation of church and state but deprogramming. The bottom line, according to Utah psychologist Dr. Larry Beall, who has worked work with women and children who have fled polygamists sects, is the FLDS is a "cult" involved in "plain ole brainwashing since birth." Says Beale, "They have been taught that anyone on the outside is untrustworthy. They are the enemy and they are going to hurt you." He adds, "My experiences with these kids is once they are out of the controlled environment they come to enjoy their freedom." (Upon reaching puberty, FLDS girls are required to marry, usually into the existing families of older men.)
By TERRI LANGFORD
Copyright 2008 Houston Chronicle
"This is one of the most challenging situations you face in a child protective situation where you have children who are socialized into an abusive lifestyle, yet they feel it is normative," said Perry, a senior fellow of ChildTrauma Academy in Houston, a nonprofit that conducts research and provides
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Seems as if Dr Perry isn't on your side in this Frem.
---------------------------------
Let's party like it's 1929.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:If the medical field helps cover things up we go after those in the medical field that do so. If a pedophile is found working in a school we go after those that hired and failed to monitor them as well. I wonder why you hold the catholic church to different standards?
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
I have no problem suing church leaders for covering up criminal actions or even charging them with a crime. But we don’t sue the entire medical field or the entire legal field for the malpractice of a single doctor or lawyer or even a handful of doctors and lawyers. So why is it that you want to talk in terms of the “Catholic Church” or the “Church.” Isn’t it possible that you’re painting with too broad of a brush. Do you really think every Catholic or even every Catholic minister covered it up?
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME