MH workers: State punished good mothers and good children

Selena · #21 05/12/08, 12:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by iwannabeafarmer

I agree. although unless you can prove the father was over 18 they really had no right to take the kids. Innocent until proven guilty and all that. I don't like the idea, that simply because one group of people, who happen to be in the majority, arbitrarily decide that another group of people are leading a "bad" lifestyle, either fake, or use faulty info, to effect a change they deem better for the changed party. This does not flow with the freedoms we are supposed to be living in this country.

That said i kinda believe the kids are slightly safer now but not necessarily better off.

Problem with innocent till proven guilty with child abuse is potentially more dead/abused children. The state errors on the side of caution (as their law is written it says basically remove 1, remove them all). Pregnant underage girls is bad -- the same folks who moan and squeal over Hollywood have no issue here? Come on... another misuse of religion, a convenient crutch. Next I'll be reading post stating the priests did nothing wrong to the altar boys...

Selena · #22 05/12/08, 12:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fantasymaker

Why? Where is the magic in the number 18? Do you know these girls? Does that make all the native peoples in remote areas that breed young "perverts"
Or is it just because its not the way YOU did it?

Actually I did it using birth control and old enough to not violate the Mann Act. And yes, they are uncivilized third world residents.Impregnating a child, and yes, a child just because she has entered puberty is perverted. And for a bit of factually medical problems with underage girls giving birth, read up on Obstetric fistula, such a nice condition so maybe you can experience too. Quite the problem in Africa.

Selena · #23 05/12/08, 12:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bumpus

.
Utah

Law states that marriage at the age of 18 years and above does not require parental consent.

For those aged 16-17, parental consent is necessary.

For those 15 years old, the following requirements must be met:

Parental consent must be obtained

Approval from Juvenile Court is necessary. The court must conclude that the marriage is voluntary and in the best interests of the minor.

The court may require premarital counseling where and when appropriate.

Nevada

If you are 16 or 17 years old, you must have one parent or legal guardian present. A notarized written permission is also acceptable. It must be written in English and needs to state the name, birth date, age of the minor child, along with the relationship of the person giving consent. The notary must note that the parent or guardian personally appeared before or was subscribed and sworn to.

If you are under 16, marriage can be authorized only by court order when the request has been filed by either parent or legal guardian.

New Hampshire

Applicants who has reached the age of 18 can marry without parental consent.

A female between the age of 13 and 17 years and a male between the age of 14 and 17 years can be married only with the permission of their parent (guardian) and a waiver (See Waiver).

A female below the age of 13 and a male below the age of 14 are not allowed to marry under any conditions.

The above regulations on age apply to New Hampshire residents or to a non-resident who desires to marry a resident. If both parties are non-residents and are below the age of 18 they cannot be married in N.H. under any conditions.

Waivers: When "good and special cause" is shown waivers may be obtained which can alter certain requirements.

Age: When either of the applicants is not yet 18 years of age but meets the minimum age requirements (See Age) whether a resident or marrying a resident of this state, when joined in the request by their parents or guardian, he/she may request and obtain permission to marry by applying to a justice of the superior court or to the judge of probate where one of the parties resides within N.H.

Waiting period: This requirement can be waived on application to a justice of the superior court or judge of probate within the county where the marriage is to take place.

bumpus
.

You have confirmed my suspicion that your fervor is for selfish reasons unrelated to religion....

Ann-NWIowa · #24 05/12/08, 12:44 PM

Girls outside of this sect are regularly getting pregnant under the age of 18. If they ask they can have an abortion without parents being notified. They also regularly give birth. It is extremely naive go on about how awful this sect is on that level.

I agree 100% no child (or woman for that matter) should be forced into a marriage they don't want. If they are forced to have sex then it is rape plain and simple. But taking away a child from a mother is emotional rape of both mother and child and simply wrong UNLESS AND UNTIL it is proven in a court of law there is a justifiable reason for doing so. Breaking of a family unit by the state is so wrong on so many levels. Forbidding practice of religion you do not agree with is also wrong and a violation of the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

Does the government get to take all children when they are born outside wedlock? Like no men and women outside this sect are involved in sex outside marriage with illegitimate children? I really thought the Scarlett Letter was history.

trappmountain · #25 05/12/08, 01:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ann-NWIowa

Girls outside of this sect are regularly getting pregnant under the age of 18. If they ask they can have an abortion without parents being notified. They also regularly give birth. It is extremely naive go on about how awful this sect is on that level.

.

Just because it happens doesn't make it right. Most young girls outside of this sect do not get pregnant by 50 60 year old men that some other old man chose for them(this also means he decided they were old enough to have sex and have children at this young age also). Unless, of course they are raped!

Linebacker · #26 05/12/08, 01:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ann-NWIowa

Girls outside of this sect are regularly getting pregnant under the age of 18. If they ask they can have an abortion without parents being notified. They also regularly give birth. It is extremely naive go on about how awful this sect is on that level.

I agree 100% no child (or woman for that matter) should be forced into a marriage they don't want. If they are forced to have sex then it is rape plain and simple. But taking away a child from a mother is emotional rape of both mother and child and simply wrong UNLESS AND UNTIL it is proven in a court of law there is a justifiable reason for doing so. Breaking of a family unit by the state is so wrong on so many levels. Forbidding practice of religion you do not agree with is also wrong and a violation of the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

Does the government get to take all children when they are born outside wedlock? Like no men and women outside this sect are involved in sex outside marriage with illegitimate children? I really thought the Scarlett Letter was history.

I, in no way, condone the alleged forced marriages and rapes. However, I agree that separating mothers and their children is incomprehensible. It is very peculiar how fast the CPS moved ahead on these actions, when separating the men from the community would have been less traumatic in my opinion. I know, it's just my opinion, but it seems strange to remove and separate the entire family instead of just one.

Brad

Kstornado11 · #27 05/12/08, 01:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by trappmountain

Just because it happens doesn't make it right. Most young girls outside of this sect do not get pregnant by 50 60 year old men that some other old man chose for them(this also means he decided they were old enough to have sex and have children at this young age also). Unless, of course they are raped!

And don't forget the brainwashing that if they don't marry into polygamy ,they will go to hell.

primroselane · #28 05/12/08, 11:11 PM

FLDS moms website: http://truthwillprevail.org/

fantasymaker · #29 05/13/08, 05:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jen74145

LOL, yeah, because the girls had so much choice, didn't they? Why am I not surprised... and yeah, I really don't think any girl under sixteen has any business being married, let alone starting a family.

Not to mention the whole abandoning sons thing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Selena

Actually I did it using birth control and old enough to not violate the Mann Act. And yes, they are uncivilized third world residents.Impregnating a child, and yes, a child just because she has entered puberty is perverted. And for a bit of factually medical problems with underage girls giving birth, read up on Obstetric fistula, such a nice condition so maybe you can experience too. Quite the problem in Africa.

Could you please relate these comments to the passage you quoted?

Selena · #30 05/13/08, 09:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fantasymaker

Could you please relate these comments to the passage you quoted?

It is pretty much a no-brainer to figure out which posts to which the comments belong.

Ann-NWIowa · #31 05/13/08, 10:07 PM

Again I don't agree with their practices, but brainwashing isn't exactly what's going on. They are raising their children with the beliefs they were raised with. As misguided as we believe they are, they are under our Constitution entitled to their own religious beliefs. How much underage sex was going on has yet to be proved. So far its just spectulation. Confidentiality (social worker's favorite word) should prevent actual facts being made public short of a trial. They have taken these children and scattered them to the 4 corners of Texas, broken family groups, traumatized those children and the mothers. I was a foster mother for 15 years and I can tell you that no matter how bad the birth parents are children still want their mommy and daddy. The children undoubtedly believe they've done something terrible to cause this separation because that's how children think.

The worst aspect to this whole thing is that if the government is free to rush in on an unsubstantiated complaint and rip children from their parents, what is there to protect any family from it happening to them. An angry relative or neighbor or even child could make the same type of 911 call alleging you're doing something you shouldn't and next thing you know your kids are in foster care. And once they are in foster care its darn hard for a parent to get them back. Guilty until proven innocent is NOT what our judicial system is supposed to be about.

Removing children wholesale in this fashion is totally unAmerican. If there were men abusing young girls, then they should have been arrested, tried and punished not their victims and the children.

Wags · #32 05/13/08, 10:38 PM

So allegedly the compound was raided due to an "unsubstantiated" complaint - but what if the compliant was in fact substantiated and they did nothing. Then there would be a hue and cry about the authorities failing to act.

Just because someone claims something is a part of their religion doesn't make it right. Child sacrifice is part of some religions - should that be allowed? Suicide attacks are a part of another religion - should we allow that in our country? I don't think so.

I also must say that I am sickened to see in this thread once again that there are men promoting and defending the marrying of young girls to old men. It shows their true perverted colors.

fantasymaker · #33 05/15/08, 01:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Selena

It is pretty much a no-brainer to figure out which posts to which the comments belong.

True enough but being a little slow Id like you to explain How they relate to it.

mamajohnson · #34 05/15/08, 01:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bumpus

.
It's nothing more than a kangaroo court.

False imprisonment for different religious beliefs.

At least they did not kill all of the families including the children like they did at
Waco by a bunch of Wackooooooooos.

bumpus
.

I agree 100%.
I am almost ashamed to be a Texan because of this, BUT it is our government that is shameful.

Madame · #35 05/16/08, 01:01 PM

I agreed that the state was wrong until I read Carolyn Jessup's book, Escape. Warren Jeffs, among other things, claims to be Jesus. There is horrendous spousal abuse, and the abused women are told it's their fault they're abused. The religion was an okay one - a little quirky, but who cares - but WJ has perverted it beyond belief. After reading the book, I think the state was right to take the kids away.

dragonfly65 · #36 05/16/08, 02:30 PM

For those that don't understand how the state can justify taking the children - In the state of Texas, the state is the legal guardian of all children in the state unless the parents have gone to court and had themselves declared the child's legal guardian. We found this out when our son was hit by a car and we had to go to court to get the driver's insurance company to pay for medical bills.

As for the children being seperated from the mothers - I saw an interview with several of the older mothers. One of them said that they, as women were happy to submit themselves and their children to their husbands and do what they said to be pure because the men knew what the women needed to do to be pure because the men were pure. Yeah, right.

I'm all for freedom of religion, but illegal is illegal, and if they are doing illegal stuff it should be stopped.

BTW, why do all the crackpots who want to be Jesus always end up in Texas?

Kstornado11 · #37 05/16/08, 06:45 PM

They're supposed to have the woman who helped convict Jeffs on 20/20 tonight. I saw her on Oprah the other day,her story is pretty darn sad & sickening.

AR Transplant · #38 05/16/08, 08:10 PM

It is upsetting that children are taken from their mothers who really do love them very much I believe. BUT they have proven that they will not protect their daughters when some old man decides that it is ok to rape them in the name of religion.

I would guess that if a religious group decided that they would kill every third child in the name of their god you would be all for taking all the children away from the families, why is rape any different?

I also think that if the mothers interfer in any way with the investigation they should be arrested as well.

There is a special place in hell for those that harm inocent children.

ar

muzzelloader · #39 05/16/08, 09:38 PM

MY TAKE ON THIS IS THE RAPIST NEED TO BE TAKEN OUT TO THE WOODS AND HUNG UP BY THEIR PRIVET PARTS!So havening said that My question is who are these men and wher are they and why are they not in jail waiting for trial? What I want to know is if the charges are true and they are not close at hand to be arrested why are there not arrest warrants out for their capture?

bumpus · #40 05/17/08, 07:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AR Transplant

I would guess that if a religious group decided that they would kill every third child in the name of their god you would be all for taking all the children away from the families, why is rape any different?

They do in America and in most other countries.

It's the group of popular demand and they sacrafice children in the name of
I don't want them

It's called aboration

Quote:

Originally Posted by AR Transplant

There is a special place in hell for those that harm inocent children.

There is not special place in hell, that is not in the bible.
All Hell does is enlarge itself daily to make room for those who DO NOT OBEY GOD

bumpus
.