Supreme Court Rules In Texas Polyamst Case

[sciencegirl]

Supreme Court has just ruled that all the children must be returned to their families.

No link yet. Just broke on MSNBC News.

[sciencegirl]

http://deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,700230020,00.html

[Texas53]

http://deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,700230020,00.html


I kind of figured Texas CPS was biting off more than they could handle. Maybe since the kids have been outside that ranch, some might feel brave enough to somehow sneak out if anything happens after they are returned. Just a thought.

[SaberGal]

Well, I know for the majority of posters, this is bad news. But I, for one, am thrilled to see that the Law overcame mass public hysteria in this case. Bravo to the appellate court and supreme court judges!

JMHO

[SavannahStar]

Well, I know for the majority of posters, this is bad news. But I, for one, am thrilled to see that the Law overcame mass public hysteria in this case. Bravo to the appellate court and supreme court judges!

JMHO


:zm10:

I am so happy for them.

I wish there was an American flag smilie on here....justice has been served.

[SaberGal]

:zm10:

I am so happy for them.

I wish there was an American flag smilie on here....justice has been served.

:hifive: You and me both! This is the best news I've had since Cynthia Sommer's exoneration.

[awakening2lite]

Texas officials had no right to remove more than 440 children from a polygamist sect, the state Supreme Court ruled Thursday.

A family waits at a San Antonio, Texas, courthouse last week for a reunion with a seized child.

The Texas Supreme Court agreed with an earlier lower court's ruling, possibly clearing the way for the children to be returned to their families. They were removed in April from the Yearning for Zion (YFZ) Ranch, near Eldorado.

The ruling means that each child's case must be weighed individually not all together as it has been so far to determine if abuse has occured, according to attorney close to the case. It does not address the abuse allegations.

"We are not inclined to disturb the court of appeals' decision," the ruling said. "On the record before us, removal of the children was not warranted."

The court's 6-3 ruling came in the case of 38 mothers who had appealed the removal of their 126 children, but attorneys in the case have said the reasoning behind the court rulings can be applied to the removals of all the children from the Yearning for Zion (YFZ) Ranch in a raid that began April 3.

About 460 children were removed, although 20 were later found in court to be adults.

The state has maintained that FLDS members live in an environment in which the sexual abuse of underage girls is allowed through forced marriage to older men, and that young boys on the ranch are groomed to be perpetrators.

FLDS members deny any sexual abuse takes place and claim they are being persecuted because of their religion.

The 3rd District Court of Appeals said in its ruling that the state's Child Protective Services did not demonstrate that all the children on the ranch faced imminent danger, as necessary for their removal.

Attorneys for the mothers argued in documents filed Thursday, saying the child welfare workers failed to satisfy any of a three-pronged "test" in Texas law, which must be satisfied before a child can be removed from its parents.

"Rather than meaningfully address the three statutory criteria, the Department (of Family and Protective Services) offers diversionary reasons as to why it would be impractical, or 'wrong,' to return the children to their parents," the brief said.

Meanwhile, the ACLU added its voice to the argument on the mothers' behalf, saying in its brief, "the state's sole evidence ... was limited to general allegations that these parents are part of a 'culture,' and subscribe to a 'belief' and a 'mindset' that girls as young as 14 may be considered of age to marry," but that the state put forth no specific allegations of the harm the children face.

And a chaotic appeals court hearing last month, in which attorneys for groups of children were heard, was not sufficient for the state to retain custody of the children, despite a judge's ruling to the contrary, the ACLU said.

"When the state forcibly removes children from their parents' care, subsequent hearings must be held, must be adequate, must be fair and must include evidence sufficient to meet the state standard for every child removed," the organization said. "The state has broad powers to respond to actual threats of child abuse, but it may not separate families based on a parent's mere adoption of or association with a particular belief system."

Texas attorney Barbara Elias-Perciful supported the state in her filing. She has been a guardian ad litem -- an attorney representing children's interests -- in child protection cases for 16 years and is also the director of Texas Lawyers for Children.

"This case involves the systematic rape of minor children -- conduct that is institutionalized and euphemistically called 'spiritual marriage,'" she wrote. "Typically, there is no media coverage of the horrific acts sexual predators commit against children ... if the media showed the actual events of adult males demanding sex with 11-year-old girls, there would be no one questioning the graphic danger of returning these children to their home at this time."

source: http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/05/29/texas.polygamists/

[SavannahStar]

:1222423:

A good decision, IMO.

[SavannahStar]

:hifive: You and me both! This is the best news I've had since Cynthia Sommer's exoneration.


This is what is SO important (from the CNN article):

"The state has broad powers to respond to actual threats of child abuse, but it may not separate families based on a parent's mere adoption of or association with a particular belief system."

:zm10:

[Tracian]

This is what is SO important (from the CNN article):

"The state has broad powers to respond to actual threats of child abuse, but it may not separate families based on a parent's mere adoption of or association with a particular belief system."

:zm10:


Well, I wonder if CPS is going to try another tactic to keep the children away.

I bet Nancy Grace is going to pop a cork on tonight's show.

[SaberGal]

Well, I wonder if CPS is going to try another tactic to keep the children away.

I bet Nancy Grace is going to pop a cork on tonight's show.

You know she will pop a gasket or two....I might even tune in to her show tonight just to see it....:girl_haha:

[johnielee333]

this is terrible !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! what's wrong with these judge's !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[SavannahStar]

Well, I wonder if CPS is going to try another tactic to keep the children away.

I bet Nancy Grace is going to pop a cork on tonight's show.

Oh Lordy Nancy will have a FIT!!!!

Does this remind you of her---->:madranting94dp:

:girl_haha:

[johnielee333]

these kids are abused from day one. maybe not sexual or Physical abuse but mental abuse. why cant people see that mental abuse is just as bad as Physical abuse ? i do not agree with the Supreme court's ruling !!!!!!!

[SaberGal]

Oh Lordy Nancy will have a FIT!!!!

Does this remind you of her---->:madranting94dp:

:girl_haha:

Ah...that's just her on a normal night. This will be her tonight....:45024:

:girl_haha:

[Tracian]

this is terrible !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! what's wrong with these judge's !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

They applied the law as it should be equally to all people. Proof is needed, not just speculation, you should be pleased, because if their children can be taken away without proof, then any one of us could suffer the same, with some hoax call because someone just is bored or does not like you.

[Tracian]

Ah...that's just her on a normal night. This will be her tonight....:45024:

:girl_haha:


Well, IMO, it is going to be like this:

Nancy on the way to the studio:

:45024:

Nancy at her desk, giving her report:

:madranting94dp:


:22wink:

[Texas53]

Has there been anymore news on the woman whose cell phone number was linked back to the hoax call? I haven't heard or seen anything lately.

[SaberGal]

Well, IMO, it is going to be like this:

Nancy on the way to the studio:

:45024:

Nancy at her desk, giving her report:

:madranting94dp:


:22wink:

There you go....oh, to be a fly on the wall in the room she is in right now!

[Tracian]

Has there been anymore news on the woman whose cell phone number was linked back to the hoax call? I haven't heard or seen anything lately.



I read something about that just recently. I will try to find the article.

[johnielee333]

i hope they take it all the way up to the U.S. Supreme Court.

[Tracian]

Sorry, all I can find is this older article. I think she was mentioned in another article, but can't find it.

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,695271689,00.html

[Tracian]

i hope they take it all the way up to the U.S. Supreme Court.



I would hope in the future that CPS follows the law so they can protect children, not just participate in sensationalism in the media.

[Details]

One thing I found interesting - seems to me the courts don't think they were wrong about the children being in danger - only that there were lesser steps than removing them that could have been used. The court said Judge Barbara Walther, who ordered the children held in temporary state custody, could take other steps to ensure the safety of the children.http://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/Story?id=4958876&page=2

I think they're wrong - leave the children there, and they will vanish into a house of hiding, or to another state, or to another country, etc. But it's interesting - the supreme court's decision - at least what they've quoted so far, doesn't seem to disagree with the central issue, that FLDS children do need CPS intervention. Only with the degree of that intervention.

[SavannahStar]

They applied the law as it should be equally to all people. Proof is needed, not just speculation, you should be pleased, because if their children can be taken away without proof, then any one of us could suffer the same, with some hoax call because someone just is bored or does not like you.


That's really the bottom line, Tracian. To me it is just that simple.

Oh what a divisive issue this is! I don't think I've seen anything quite like it in all my years of message board posting.

Although I never liked the idea used on another board, that only the pro-CPS people post on a thread with like-minded posters, and the others on another thread....there certainly is some truth to the idea that neither side will budge an inch on their opinion. So be it.

I don't think this is the end of things though. Will be very interesting in the next few days/weeks and months....

I pray for those parents and children, that they be allowed their peace.

[Tracian]

One thing I found interesting - seems to me the courts don't think they were wrong about the children being in danger - only that there were lesser steps than removing them that could have been used. http://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/Story?id=4958876&page=2

I think they're wrong - leave the children there, and they will vanish into a house of hiding, or to another state, or to another country, etc. But it's interesting - the supreme court's decision - at least what they've quoted so far, doesn't seem to disagree with the central issue, that FLDS children do need CPS intervention. Only with the degree of that intervention.


Many of us that didn't support the way CPS handled this have been arguing the way this was handled, not that we support the practices or alleged practices of the FLDS.

IMO, the way CPS handled this only supports the paranoia of this sect, especially when nursing young mothers were separated from their infants, I realize the judge ruled that they could be together in state custody, later, but the damage was already done.

Also, CPS did either offer false information to the media, and that as well makes many question what their motives. I firmly believe that they circumvented their own rules, offered horror stories that they could not support with evidence to the media in order to gain public support and outrage.

I don't care if it is the FLDS, Baptists, Atheists, whatever, the law must be applied equally, and followed, because the minute it is allowed to be 'over looked' because society doesn't 'relate' with a group, then it is only a matter of time when the next group, and the next is also 'allowed' to be treated differently under the law.

I think the court did the right thing, now it is up to CPS and investigators to do their job the way they should have in the first place.

[awakening2lite]

I think Texas tried it's best to put an end to the child abuse and they gave every chance for the children or the women to make changes in their lives, or ask for help. It's up to them now.

[Tracian]

That's really the bottom line, Tracian. To me it is just that simple.

Oh what a divisive issue this is! I don't think I've seen anything quite like it in all my years of message board posting.

Although I never liked the idea used on another board, that only the pro-CPS people post on a thread with like-minded posters, and the others on another thread....there certainly is some truth to the idea that neither side will budge an inch on their opinion. So be it.

I don't think this is the end of things though. Will be very interesting in the next few days/weeks and months....

I pray for those parents and children, that they be allowed their peace.



Well, I think we are all 'Pro-CPS' as long as they do their job properly, not change the rules as they choose according to the case, or their own possible biases.

This forum is a walk in the park, try the Anna Nicole Smith forum, if you want to see a divisive issue!!!:67302:

[SaberGal]

Many of us that didn't support the way CPS handled this have been arguing the way this was handled, not that we support the practices or alleged practices of the FLDS.

IMO, the way CPS handled this only supports the paranoia of this sect, especially when nursing young mothers were separated from their infants, I realize the judge ruled that they could be together in state custody, later, but the damage was already done.

Also, CPS did either offer false information to the media, and that as well makes many question what their motives. I firmly believe that they circumvented their own rules, offered horror stories that they could not support with evidence to the media in order to gain public support and outrage.

I don't care if it is the FLDS, Baptists, Atheists, whatever, the law must be applied equally, and followed, because the minute it is allowed to be 'over looked' because society doesn't 'relate' with a group, then it is only a matter of time when the next group, and the next is also 'allowed' to be treated differently under the law.

I think the court did the right thing, now it is up to CPS and investigators to do their job the way they should have in the first place.

Absolutely correct. And, it doesn't really matter what anyone THINKS may or may not have been going on. The only thing that matters, or should matter when it comes to the law is evidence. Actual evidence...not anyone's feelings or suspicions; not rumors or innuendo. Many people felt Cynthia Sommer and so many others who have been exonerated were guilty too...only to find out too late that they were innocent.

JMHO

[SavannahStar]

I think Texas tried it's best to put an end to the child abuse and they gave every chance for the children or the women to make changes in their lives, or ask for help. It's up to them now.

I just can't agree with that. I don't think they did their "best"....not to swoop up every kid and mother like that, and not investigate specifics.

[SavannahStar]

Well, I think we are all 'Pro-CPS' as long as they do their job properly, not change the rules as they choose according to the case, or their own possible biases.

This forum is a walk in the park, try the Anna Nicole Smith forum, if you want to see a divisive issue!!!:67302:

Just to clarify, by "pro-CPS" I meant agreeing with what they did in this specific case....:71526:

[awakening2lite]

I kind of figured Texas CPS was biting off more than they could handle. Maybe since the kids have been outside that ranch, some might feel brave enough to somehow sneak out if anything happens after they are returned. Just a thought.


I agree, they took a big bite. It's a very tough case when no body is speaking up about what goes on.

I hope you are right and in the future some of them come out of it and pave the way for others to put an end to little girl "spiritual" brides and "throw away" boys.

Hats off to the good people of Texas for trying.:howdy:

[Walton]

Just popping in to say thank you to all those that shared their thoughts and links.

"Knowledge is Power" Sir Francis Bacon


I am going to take a day or two off from the boards.

:give_rose: << For those that shared and cared.

[SavannahStar]

Just popping in to say thank you to all those that shared their thoughts and links.

"Knowledge is Power" Sir Francis Bacon


I am going to take a day or two off from the boards.

:give_rose: << For those that shared and cared.

Bye Walton. Take care.

(I do know how you must feel....I recall being absolutely devastated by some verdicts....:1187603408.CR.Mothe)

God bless.

[Tracian]

Just popping in to say thank you to all those that shared their thoughts and links.

"Knowledge is Power" Sir Francis Bacon


I am going to take a day or two off from the boards.

:give_rose: << For those that shared and cared.


It is always a pleasure to agree and disagree with intelligent posters, take care, hope to see you back very soon.:1222423:

[dojewo]

Just popping in to say thank you to all those that shared their thoughts and links.

"Knowledge is Power" Sir Francis Bacon


I am going to take a day or two off from the boards.

:give_rose: << For those that shared and cared.
Hey Walton, I lurk here more then I post but I know how you feel. [[[[hugs]]]] for you Buddy!

[johnielee333]

You tell 'em Nancy Grace !!!!!!!!

[Tracian]

Nancy is once again living on speculation and hyperbole.

[Tracian]

All the court said is that the cases must be dealt with according to their own merits, everyone of us would want the same.

Even the Manson 'Family' was not all charged with the crimes committed, and they all worshipped 'Charlie'.

[RayStar]

I don't the think the state just decided to take the kids on a flim flam notion. There is proof that there is some abuse in this camp. There is no way women of today would wear clothing like that and the hair dos. If young women are being used as sexual slaves for old men it needs to be stopped right away. I do feel the government is in our lives too much but this case is over the top.

OK before any poster blows a fuse, once the kids are returned what if they(the kids) agree that there is abuse inside the camp. What should the government do? Perhaps, more time should be given to the kids to see life outside the prison they reside in to see how others live. Well most of us! OK I have my bullet proof vest on now.

[Cat]

No bullets from me, Raystar. I agree with you.

[RayStar]

No bullets from me, Raystar. I agree with you.

Thanks Cat. This is really a BIG MESS AND SHAME. JMHO

[SaberGal]

Thanks Cat. This is really a BIG MESS AND SHAME. JMHO

No bullets from me, either, Raystar, even though we disagree on this particualr issue :22wink:

The argument about their dress and hair do's being evidence of abuse falls a little limp, IMO, but no bullets. If any of these children have been abused, CPS will have to treat this case like they do the rest of their cases - on an individual basis. Someone made an excellent analogy the other day...what we have seen here is the equivalent of all catholics having their children taken away because some of the catholic leaders abused kids.

You are right...this case is a mess and a shame!

[dojewo]

I don't the think the state just decided to take the kids on a flim flam notion. There is proof that there is some abuse in this camp. There is no way women of today would wear clothing like that and the hair dos. If young women are being used as sexual slaves for old men it needs to be stopped right away. I do feel the government is in our lives too much but this case is over the top.

OK before any poster blows a fuse, once the kids are returned what if they(the kids) agree that there is abuse inside the camp. What should the government do? Perhaps, more time should be given to the kids to see life outside the prison they reside in to see how others live. Well most of us! OK I have my bullet proof vest on now.No bullets from here either

[Tracian]

I don't the think the state just decided to take the kids on a flim flam notion. There is proof that there is some abuse in this camp. There is no way women of today would wear clothing like that and the hair dos. If young women are being used as sexual slaves for old men it needs to be stopped right away. I do feel the government is in our lives too much but this case is over the top.

OK before any poster blows a fuse, once the kids are returned what if they(the kids) agree that there is abuse inside the camp. What should the government do? Perhaps, more time should be given to the kids to see life outside the prison they reside in to see how others live. Well most of us! OK I have my bullet proof vest on now.


I am not going to 'blow a fuse' but the law is the law.

Back in the 80's the only 'proof' needed was hysteria against many day care centers, and those that worked there.

CPS is supposed to be professionals, therefore, they should have acted in a professional manner, not a hysterical manner.

Since they were so concerned the best way was to walk softly, and use the laws, not the media.

So much misinformation, including that information that NG again reported tonight.

I will post the transcripts tomorrow, unless someone beats me to it.

[lyndawitha"y]

No bullets from here either

Ditto from me too:cray::1187603408.CR.Mothe

I was late getting home from work this eve..and caught the news on Nancy Grace..Yiks I haven't seen her so riled for some time..I think this mess hits her even harder now that she is a MOM..JMOO there..:71526::shock:

I was going to just post my condolensences..to the Texas CPS and for all those that worked so hard to bring this "Child Abusing Sect' to justice...well, it seems it won't be served..at least none too quickly:missing:.I think most of us know that these kids are going to be AWOL in the near future..and the gates of their compounds will have locks on all their gates!! Gives a new meaning to a "Gated Community"!!:missing:

Again..so sorry about this miscarriage of justice!:waitasec:

[RayStar]

No bullets from me, either, Raystar, even though we disagree on this particualr issue :22wink:

The argument about their dress and hair do's being evidence of abuse falls a little limp, IMO, but no bullets. If any of these children have been abused, CPS will have to treat this case like they do the rest of their cases - on an individual basis. Someone made an excellent analogy the other day...what we have seen here is the equivalent of all catholics having their children taken away because some of the catholic leaders abused kids.

You are right...this case is a mess and a shame!
Good post. There is no way their dress and hairdos will not factor into some form of abuse. I doubt you can look at catholics and determine they are catholic from their dress or hair dos. These people want to stand alone and we the real world have a right to disagree. I really see the cult (MOO) as just a form of slavery and sexual sleeze. What the kids are missing as far as knowing how to live outside of the prison camp, is probably a greater sin. Just look at the lost boys 60 minutes featured. No we cannot judge a book by its cover mostly, however the cover is in plain view with this cult!:madranting94dp:

GollyGeeWhiz posted somewhere on this board about Fumarase (sp). It was a very informative article.

Sabergirl, I really think you want less governmental involvement in our lives. Maybe I am incorrect.:0009: In this case, I want them all over their lives.

***PROTECT THE CHILDREN***

[Tracian]

Good post. There is no way their dress and hairdos will not factor into some form of abuse. I doubt you can look at catholics and determine they are catholic from their dress or hair dos. These people want to stand alone and we the real world have a right to disagree. I really see the cult (MOO) as just a form of slavery and sexual sleeze. What the kids are missing as far as knowing how to live outside of the prison camp, is probably a greater sin. Just look at the lost boys 60 minutes featured. No we cannot judge a book by its cover mostly, however the cover is in plain view with this cult!:madranting94dp:

GollyGeeWhiz posted somewhere on this board about Fumarase (sp). It was a very informative article.

Sabergirl, I really think you want less governmental involvement in our lives. Maybe I am incorrect.:0009: In this case, I want them all over their lives.

***PROTECT THE CHILDREN***


Protect the children was the battle cry in the 80's..

McMartin
Little Rascals
Wee Care

those were the 'quick ones'

http://users.cybercity.dk/~ccc44406/smwane/geraldo.htm


When you protect civil rights, you protect the children...

[rem16]

Good post. There is no way their dress and hairdos will not factor into some form of abuse. I doubt you can look at catholics and determine they are catholic from their dress or hair dos. These people want to stand alone and we the real world have a right to disagree. I really see the cult (MOO) as just a form of slavery and sexual sleeze. What the kids are missing as far as knowing how to live outside of the prison camp, is probably a greater sin. Just look at the lost boys 60 minutes featured. No we cannot judge a book by its cover mostly, however the cover is in plain view with this cult!:madranting94dp:

GollyGeeWhiz posted somewhere on this board about Fumarase (sp). It was a very informative article.

Sabergirl, I really think you want less governmental involvement in our lives. Maybe I am incorrect.:0009: In this case, I want them all over their lives.

***PROTECT THE CHILDREN***

Great post! I totally agree. It is sad that the children have to go back to living in that environment. The mothers are brainwashed, IMO and they truly think they are doing the best for them.

[SaberGal]

Good post. There is no way their dress and hairdos will not factor into some form of abuse. I doubt you can look at catholics and determine they are catholic from their dress or hair dos. These people want to stand alone and we the real world have a right to disagree. I really see the cult (MOO) as just a form of slavery and sexual sleeze. What the kids are missing as far as knowing how to live outside of the prison camp, is probably a greater sin. Just look at the lost boys 60 minutes featured. No we cannot judge a book by its cover mostly, however the cover is in plain view with this cult!:madranting94dp:

GollyGeeWhiz posted somewhere on this board about Fumarase (sp). It was a very informative article.

Sabergirl, I really think you want less governmental involvement in our lives. Maybe I am incorrect.:0009: In this case, I want them all over their lives.

***PROTECT THE CHILDREN***

You are absolutely correct that I want less government in our lives...in fact, the less they are involved the better off we all are, IMO. They (many government figures) can't even balance their own budgets (state and federal) and manage their own personal lives but they think that they should be allowed to dictate and run our lives? No thanks....I'll take my chances and yes, make my own mistakes and have my own successes without their help.

That said...back to the Texas case and the argument regarding dresses and hair...one of my favorite TV shows of all time is Little House on the Prairie...Growing up (and admittedly, even in my adulthood) I have often wished for those simple times when life was good...you grew your own food, owned your livestock, lived off the land, you knew and trusted your neighbors and people dressed modestly. Given the opportunity, I can see how going back in time so to speak, is easily appealing to many of these people. That is not to say that I in any way agree with the FDLS lifestyle. But no way am I buying that the choices in the way they dress themselves or their children is indicative of abuse...no more than "normal" parents dressing their little girls in bikini's, halters and mini's is indicative of abuse. I am way more offended by the way some "normal" people dress their children than the prairie dresses I see on the FDLS members.

You know you are one of my favorite posters, Raystar and I hate to disagree with you, my friend, but on this one I have to....:11_2_104:

[Details]

I couldn't care less about the clothes they wear - even if they force them on the children - that's no harm. It's the child abuse. And the Tx supreme court is wrong, IMO. They've got a cult that moves and hides it's people. When investigating very real evidence of child abuse, they cannot assume that the cult members will abide by a restraining order, or ask permission to leave the state (or country). The Supreme Court said they had no issue with the investigation, they only said that they thought CPS had not tried sufficiently to avoid removing the children.

This case is not over (even if the media declares it so, the courts have not), and while I expect that the children, especially those with the worst tales to telll, will likely vanish, they're exposed, the investigation can and should continue. All this ruling said was that CPS should use measures short of removing the children from their homes.

[johnielee333]

I don't the think the state just decided to take the kids on a flim flam notion. There is proof that there is some abuse in this camp. There is no way women of today would wear clothing like that and the hair dos. If young women are being used as sexual slaves for old men it needs to be stopped right away. I do feel the government is in our lives too much but this case is over the top.

OK before any poster blows a fuse, once the kids are returned what if they(the kids) agree that there is abuse inside the camp. What should the government do? Perhaps, more time should be given to the kids to see life outside the prison they reside in to see how others live. Well most of us! OK I have my bullet proof vest on now.

i agree.

[SaberGal]

I couldn't care less about the clothes they wear - even if they force them on the children - that's no harm. It's the child abuse. And the Tx supreme court is wrong, IMO. They've got a cult that moves and hides it's people. When investigating very real evidence of child abuse, they cannot assume that the cult members will abide by a restraining order, or ask permission to leave the state (or country). The Supreme Court said they had no issue with the investigation, they only said that they thought CPS had not tried sufficiently to avoid removing the children.

This case is not over (even if the media declares it so, the courts have not), and while I expect that the children, especially those with the worst tales to telll, will likely vanish, they're exposed, the investigation can and should continue. All this ruling said was that CPS should use measures short of removing the children from their homes.

I agree. This case is far from over...and maybe there is abuse that should be investigated. My only point is that they cannot and should not treat this group any different, (or collectively for that matter), than they do anyone else in the state of Texas. Treat them on an individual, case by case basis and do it by the book with the law applied equally. And don't remove over 400 kids from parental authority without any actual evidence of abuse and/or imminent danger.

And as far as them moving...and I'm personalizing this...if I have just had my children removed from my home, accused of horrible things that I didn't do because my neighbors/leaders may or may not have done horrible things...and now my kids have been returned to me...as long as I have no court order ordering me to stay put...you bet your buttons I'm moving. In the court of general public opinion, it doesn't really matter what these parents do at this point. Most people's minds have already been made up and no matter what the courts or investigation finds, or what the truth is, every single one of these parents are guilty of something as far as the general public is concerned. There are exceptions, of course, but generally speaking...

ETA: JMHO

[Details]

I think they are treating these people the same as anyone else. If, let's say, 3 mothers are invited by a convicted sex offender to live with him, with their children, and CPS is called, has concerns about abuse - you really think any of the children will be left in that house? If the mothers are all saying they believe in the sex offender, don't want to leave? Nope. The guideline is if the parent or guardian has the means and will to protect the child. They fail that test completely. Both in terms of will, and in terms of means (you can't well protect your child in a compound of others who will enforce the prophet's will).

I'm talking with a court order (the ruling only addressed removing them from their homes - they specifically refer to other methods CPS will have of protecting the children, like court orders, as why they ruled against CPS) - I think they're still going to run. Maybe across the border. And the little girls will be given to old men, and the boys will be worked then thrown away, and we could have helped them and failed them.

They had ample evidence of abuse, and the imminent danger is that a child abusing cult with hiding houses will remove the children once they are found to a place where they cannot be found.



I personalize this too. If I were so lost, so broken, so failed as a mother that I ever, EVER exposed my child to that environment, put her under the control of people like Jeffs and the leadership of that cult, taught her that marriage was fine at any age, whenever she was told, I hope and pray that someone would stop me. No matter how I cried, no matter what I said.

[RayStar]

SaberGal I am enjoying the exchange of ideas in all of the posting on this board. I hope you know I really always look forward to reading yours. This is a choice we freely possess. I think freedom of choice is not possessed by many at the compound.

[johnielee333]

I think they are treating these people the same as anyone else. If, let's say, 3 mothers are invited by a convicted sex offender to live with him, with their children, and CPS is called, has concerns about abuse - you really think any of the children will be left in that house? If the mothers are all saying they believe in the sex offender, don't want to leave? Nope. The guideline is if the parent or guardian has the means and will to protect the child. They fail that test completely. Both in terms of will, and in terms of means (you can't well protect your child in a compound of others who will enforce the prophet's will).

I'm talking with a court order (the ruling only addressed removing them from their homes - they specifically refer to other methods CPS will have of protecting the children, like court orders, as why they ruled against CPS) - I think they're still going to run. Maybe across the border. And the little girls will be given to old men, and the boys will be worked then thrown away, and we could have helped them and failed them.

They had ample evidence of abuse, and the imminent danger is that a child abusing cult with hiding houses will remove the children once they are found to a place where they cannot be found.



I personalize this too. If I were so lost, so broken, so failed as a mother that I ever, EVER exposed my child to that environment, put her under the control of people like Jeffs and the leadership of that cult, taught her that marriage was fine at any age, whenever she was told, I hope and pray that someone would stop me. No matter how I cried, no matter what I said.

i so agree with you.

[johnielee333]

SaberGal I am enjoying the exchange of ideas in all of the posting on this board. I hope you know I really always look forward to reading yours. This is a choice we freely possess. I think freedom of choice is not possessed by many at the compound.

yep i agree. we have a free choice,they dont.

[johnielee333]

I couldn't care less about the clothes they wear - even if they force them on the children - that's no harm. It's the child abuse. And the Tx supreme court is wrong, IMO. They've got a cult that moves and hides it's people. When investigating very real evidence of child abuse, they cannot assume that the cult members will abide by a restraining order, or ask permission to leave the state (or country). The Supreme Court said they had no issue with the investigation, they only said that they thought CPS had not tried sufficiently to avoid removing the children.

This case is not over (even if the media declares it so, the courts have not), and while I expect that the children, especially those with the worst tales to telll, will likely vanish, they're exposed, the investigation can and should continue. All this ruling said was that CPS should use measures short of removing the children from their homes.

yep i agree.

[awakening2lite]

I think they are treating these people the same as anyone else. If, let's say, 3 mothers are invited by a convicted sex offender to live with him, with their children, and CPS is called, has concerns about abuse - you really think any of the children will be left in that house? If the mothers are all saying they believe in the sex offender, don't want to leave? Nope. The guideline is if the parent or guardian has the means and will to protect the child. They fail that test completely. Both in terms of will, and in terms of means (you can't well protect your child in a compound of others who will enforce the prophet's will).

I'm talking with a court order (the ruling only addressed removing them from their homes - they specifically refer to other methods CPS will have of protecting the children, like court orders, as why they ruled against CPS) - I think they're still going to run. Maybe across the border. And the little girls will be given to old men, and the boys will be worked then thrown away, and we could have helped them and failed them.

They had ample evidence of abuse, and the imminent danger is that a child abusing cult with hiding houses will remove the children once they are found to a place where they cannot be found.



I personalize this too. If I were so lost, so broken, so failed as a mother that I ever, EVER exposed my child to that environment, put her under the control of people like Jeffs and the leadership of that cult, taught her that marriage was fine at any age, whenever she was told, I hope and pray that someone would stop me. No matter how I cried, no matter what I said.

Well said. I totally agree. The children were the losers in this battle.

[Jute]

SaberGal I am enjoying the exchange of ideas in all of the posting on this board. I hope you know I really always look forward to reading yours. This is a choice we freely possess. I think freedom of choice is not possessed by many at the compound.

RayStar-I so agree with you about this board, respect for other's pov is so important here. I also am in agreement with your assessment that the members of the compound have little freedom of choice. For the adults, I see it as sad but no one has the right to force them to leave. For the children, I see it as simply tragic.

[SaberGal]

SaberGal I am enjoying the exchange of ideas in all of the posting on this board. I hope you know I really always look forward to reading yours. This is a choice we freely possess. I think freedom of choice is not possessed by many at the compound.

I too am enjoying the exchange with everyone and seeing other people's viewpoints. I lurk alot more than I post usually but this issue, I believe, on a broader scale, is important to everyone's future rights and freedoms. I do believe this is case will set a precedent when it's over.

[Jute]

I think they are treating these people the same as anyone else. If, let's say, 3 mothers are invited by a convicted sex offender to live with him, with their children, and CPS is called, has concerns about abuse - you really think any of the children will be left in that house? If the mothers are all saying they believe in the sex offender, don't want to leave? Nope. The guideline is if the parent or guardian has the means and will to protect the child. They fail that test completely. Both in terms of will, and in terms of means (you can't well protect your child in a compound of others who will enforce the prophet's will).

I'm talking with a court order (the ruling only addressed removing them from their homes - they specifically refer to other methods CPS will have of protecting the children, like court orders, as why they ruled against CPS) - I think they're still going to run. Maybe across the border. And the little girls will be given to old men, and the boys will be worked then thrown away, and we could have helped them and failed them.

They had ample evidence of abuse, and the imminent danger is that a child abusing cult with hiding houses will remove the children once they are found to a place where they cannot be found.



I personalize this too. If I were so lost, so broken, so failed as a mother that I ever, EVER exposed my child to that environment, put her under the control of people like Jeffs and the leadership of that cult, taught her that marriage was fine at any age, whenever she was told, I hope and pray that someone would stop me. No matter how I cried, no matter what I said.

Details-I really wonder how many of the mothers are now secretly crying because they did exactly what you have said you would? I do believe that most do love their children and want what is best for them, I also believe that they know how they themselves feel being treated the way they are-and know this is not how they want their daughters to feel. And they certainly don't want their little boys, who they love so much, to be taken from their lives if they are seen as 'not worthy.' I can't even imagine what a mother would feel, knowing that her 13 or 14 year old son had been turned out into the world-it's no wonder they appear so numb, it's the only way a loving mother could possible survive. MO.

[Jute]

I too am enjoying the exchange with everyone and seeing other people's viewpoints. I lurk alot more than I post usually but this issue, I believe, on a broader scale, is important to everyone's future rights and freedoms. I do believe this is case will set a precedent when it's over.

I do, too, SaberGirl. One of the issues that will be glaring to some is that religion has not been allowed to be used as an excuse in this case, which I am so glad of. Hiding behind religious freedom in order to abuse children should never be allowed and it's time that the message that religious freedom is a sacred right in the US is brought up, and to try to misuse that right is a disservice to all.

[Jute]

Well said. I totally agree. The children were the losers in this battle.

Carolyn Jessop said something to the effect of 'another generation lost' when she heard the appeals court ruling. I hope that she isn't right.

[RayStar]

http://www.rickross.com/groups/polygamy.html Anyone want to look at this site. I hope I did this correctly.

[RayStar]

Hello Jute you are new to me. Sabergal and I have a connection.
Well I must confess. I have a really big problem with men controlling women. I also wonder if some of the older kids don't want to return to the compound how will it be handled? OH well, I'm sure some good will come out of this event.
Nice to meet you Jute.:)

[Jute]

Hello Jute you are new to me. Sabergal and I have a connection.
Well I must confess. I have a really big problem with men controlling women. I also wonder if some of the older kids don't want to return to the compound how will it be handled? OH well, I'm sure some good will come out of this event.
Nice to meet you Jute.:)

Nice to meet you, too, RayStar! :howdy: Yes, I hope something significantly good comes out of this terrible situation. Right now I'm just not seeing what it will be, but I do agree that it is likely.