Confirmed: Fraudulent Polygamy Cult Tipster is Barack Obama Delegate

[Shogun]

HA!

yea, I forgot how manifest destiny targets christian bastions of polygamy!

 

[AllieBaba]

It's the same thing, dear.
This is the same link I used in another thread, but it's a good article.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/columnist/2004-10-03-turley_x.htm
Indeed, studies have found polygamy present in 78% of the world's cultures, including some Native American tribes. (While most are polygynists — with one man and multiple women — there are polyandrists in Nepal and Tibet in which one woman has multiple male spouses.) As many as 50,000 polygamists live in the United States.

Given this history and the long religious traditions, it cannot be seriously denied that polygamy is a legitimate religious belief. Since polygamy is a criminal offense, polygamists do not seek marriage licenses. However, even living as married can send you to prison. Prosecutors have asked courts to declare a person as married under common law and then convicted them of polygamy.

 

[Ravi]

He doesn't live there.

I'd think you'd be for sticking up for the rights of people who live alternate lifestyles. But I forgot...you only believe in rights of NON CHRISTIAN alternate lifestyles.

It's open season on Christians, has been for some time. Christians don't deserve rights and nobody cares if they get shit on.

Actually, if they were non-believers I'd have the same problem. It's really got nothing to do with religion. Religion is just their excuse.

 

[AllieBaba]

No, sex abuse is the "excuse" of Texas, who has STILL NOT FILED ANY CHARGES, and is denying that it is a criminal investigation.

 

[Shogun]

no, im afraid it's not the same thing. gay rights are not out trying to validate sex with underage kids in some dogma junky scheme to legitimize anything for the sake of faith.

sorry.


but, I did have a good laugh at your manifest destiny joke.

 

[AllieBaba]

There's no PROOF that they are. Just as there's no PROOF that the FLDS folks are doing that.

When there's proof, you'll be justified in denying them access to their kids.

 

[jillian]

No, sex abuse is the "excuse" of Texas, who has STILL NOT FILED ANY CHARGES, and is denying that it is a criminal investigation.

Why would Texas file charges before the DNA is back? They don't even know who the kids' parents are without that.

 

[Ravi]

Why would Texas file charges before the DNA is back? They don't even know who the kids' parents are without that.

Exactly. So how can they give the kids back to the parents when they don't know who the parents are?

 

[AllieBaba]

Why would Texas file charges before the DNA is back? They don't even know who the kids' parents are without that.

What does matching to their parents have to do with proving child sexual abuse? Lots of kids live in non-traditional homes where they are being raised by family friends, extended family, etc. Do we get to yank all them if they don't know who their biological parents are? Are we going to yank all adopted children who don't know they're adopted?

 

[jillian]

Exactly. So how can they give the kids back to the parents when they don't know who the parents are?

That's why there's a process. The first part of the process was determining that the kids' should be protected pending a hearing.

Now they're doing DNA.

Then there will be a hearing.

After that, if there's any criminal process, it can kick in.

 

[AllieBaba]

Exactly. So how can they give the kids back to the parents when they don't know who the parents are?

When did it become the state's perogative to force children to live with only their biological parents, or to determine that if they AREN'T living with their biological parents and don't know who they are, they should be subjected to DNA testing?

 

[Larkinn]

There's no PROOF that they are. Just as there's no PROOF that the FLDS folks are doing that.

When there's proof, you'll be justified in denying them access to their kids.

No, all they need is evidence, which they claim to have. They need proof (at least a preponderance) to have the removal upheld in a court.

 

[jillian]

What does matching to their parents have to do with proving child sexual abuse? Lots of kids live in non-traditional homes where they are being raised by family friends, extended family, etc. Do we get to yank all them if they don't know who their biological parents are? Are we going to yank all adopted children who don't know they're adopted?

The DNA will allow them to form the basis of the abuse charges. If they have the DNA for the father and the mother is underage or was underage at the time she got pregnant, then criminal charges can begin.

And, on the flipside, if the judge decides to return the children, they have to know which people get which children. Since the kids don't know, and the parents won't tell, the DNA will allow for the lawful return of the children if the judge decides that's appropriate.

Right now it's just a jumble of kids....

And no, the law doesn't allow children to go willy nilly to any person that asks.

 

[AllieBaba]

I haven't heard anyone claim to have evidence. All I've heard is the police stating that it's not a criminal investigation, that it's all the child welfare division's ball of wax.

 

[jillian]

There's no PROOF that they are. Just as there's no PROOF that the FLDS folks are doing that.

When there's proof, you'll be justified in denying them access to their kids.

You don't know what proof there is yet because there hasn't been a hearing yet.

 

[AllieBaba]

The DNA will allow them to form the basis of the abuse charges. If they have the DNA for the father and the mother is underage or was underage at the time she got pregnant, then criminal charges can begin.

And, on the flipside, if the judge decides to return the children, they have to know which people get which children. Since the kids don't know, and the parents won't tell, the DNA will allow for the lawful return of the children if the judge decides that's appropriate.

Right now it's just a jumble of kids....

And no, the law doesn't allow children to go willy nilly to any person that asks.

The parents are raising them as one family, and they are within their rights to do so. It is not the state's job to step in and force them to "claim" their biological children individually.

Anyway, as I've said before, if they can do this then they should be marching into abortion clinics and chopping those families up until they can determine whether there was any child sexual abuse of the girls who are getting abortions, and any girl who does get an abortion should be forced to 1. Name her parents and allow the state to contact them, and 2. Name the father of the baby so the state can contact him, and 3. Be placed in foster care until the state sorts it out.

Has anyone bothered to look into whether or not underage marriage is legal with the parent's consent? Or do you think if a parent gives consent, they should be clapped in irons as well?

 

[Ravi]

When did it become the state's perogative to force children to live with only their biological parents, or to determine that if they AREN'T living with their biological parents and don't know who they are, they should be subjected to DNA testing?

When they have evidence that the children are being harmed. Which they claim they have.

 

[Larkinn]

The parents are raising them as one family, and they are within their rights to do so. It is not the state's job to step in and force them to "claim" their biological children individually.

Interesting...so you think that people who are not related to the child have as much standing as those who are related to the child?

 

[AllieBaba]

I don't think the fact that they raise their children as one family gives the state the right to force them to raise them any differently. I can see forcing the birth certificate issue, but not making the claim that the children "should" know who their biological parents are, or that the children "should" only be linked to their own parents.

 

[jillian]

I don't think the fact that they raise their children as one family gives the state the right to force them to raise them any differently. I can see forcing the birth certificate issue, but not making the claim that the children "should" know who their biological parents are, or that the children "should" only be linked to their own parents.

Before someone can get the children back, they have to have standing to seek their custody. There are rules about who has such standing, regardless of what the cult decided.

And no one is giving the kids back to anyone until a determination is made as to abuse.