Whoa! Polygamist solution is frightening...

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by MissBrattified

I know it's not THE point, but it is part of the issue. People can't sit passively by and allow crimes to be committed without being held at least somewhat accountable for their passive acceptance of illegal behavior.

As for taking away the children--I think the state of Texas is overreacting, no doubt, but I think they are trying to err on the side of caution. While the media is trying this group based on appearance and religious beliefs, I don't believe that is what the state of Texas is doing at all.

In fact, they've been pretty tolerant of illegal behavior (guised under religious freedom) by allowing the group to practice polygamy right under their noses for quite some time.

I don't think they are overreaching. It would be very hard for anyone to believe that any family living on that compound site was NOT endorsing polygamy. Especially with men involved......

[Steve Epley]

Originally Posted by Newman

Pressing On-

1. How many individual cases do you think CPS would have had to prosecute before there were no more marriages to 16 and 17 year old girls?

2. Does it cause you any concern that CPS was told that there was a 16 year old girl being raped and physically abused, who already had one child and was pregnant again... yet they waited a full 3 days to go in.....claiming this particular child was NOT at immediate risk of harm and thus it took them 3 days to respond?

Yet when they go in they end up taking all the children because they are alleged to be in immediate danger because of the parents' beliefs.

3. Is it ok that they probably knew the call they were responding to was a bogus call? There was a tape of the call and the girl wasn't using the right vocabulary? The girl implicated someone known to be in police custody in another state? The call could have been traced to a tower in another state?

4. Did you know the caller changed the name and circumstances implicating a group in another state the next day? CPS from that state investigated as soon as they got it. Did not find the call had merit and did not take all the children in that community away?

5. Is it ok to trample over Constitutional rights so long as its a group of people that we find repugnant?

6. Do you really believe that Apostolics are immune to this type of prosecution in the future based on beliefs by some that women are subservient to men and pastors are authority figures? That homosexuality is wrong and children should not be given birth control? That children can't think for themselves and can't watch TV? That the girls are required to dress differently? That some Apostolics in California may want to opt out of public shools in California given their pro-homosexual agendas?

7. How much power do you want to give to the government over parental control and religous freedom?

DANGER AHEAD.....

While I find this group disgusting and revolting I agree with you. It looks to me as if a good attorney would have a case against the state and overzealous actions.

[Hoovie]

Bro Epley, nice to see you!

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by Newman

Pressing On-

1. How many individual cases do you think CPS would have had to prosecute before there were no more marriages to 16 and 17 year old girls?

2. Does it cause you any concern that CPS was told that there was a 16 year old girl being raped and physically abused, who already had one child and was pregnant again... yet they waited a full 3 days to go in.....claiming this particular child was NOT at immediate risk of harm and thus it took them 3 days to respond?

Yet when they go in they end up taking all the children because they are alleged to be in immediate danger because of the parents' beliefs.

3. Is it ok that they probably knew the call they were responding to was a bogus call? There was a tape of the call and the girl wasn't using the right vocabulary? The girl implicated someone known to be in police custody in another state? The call could have been traced to a tower in another state?

4. Did you know the caller changed the name and circumstances implicating a group in another state the next day? CPS from that state investigated as soon as they got it. Did not find the call had merit and did not take all the children in that community away?

5. Is it ok to trample over Constitutional rights so long as its a group of people that we find repugnant?

6. Do you really believe that Apostolics are immune to this type of prosecution in the future based on beliefs by some that women are subservient to men and pastors are authority figures? That homosexuality is wrong and children should not be given birth control? That children can't think for themselves and can't watch TV? That the girls are required to dress differently? That some Apostolics in California may want to opt out of public shools in California given their pro-homosexual agendas?

7. How much power do you want to give to the government over parental control and religous freedom?

DANGER AHEAD.....

I stand on this:

In Texas, it is a felony to have sex with a person younger than 17 if the perpetrator is more than three years older than the teen. Sex with any child younger than 14 is considered aggravated sexual assault.

"Religion appears to play little or no role in the allegations about practices at the Eldorado ranch. No religious belief held by an adult justifies any kind of child abuse. No religious belief allows an adult to have sex with an underage girl. One fear is that any children that you don't remove will be themselves abused, and the other fear is that any children you don't remove will be whisked out of the state, which both puts them at risk potentially and impedes an investigation" " Scott McCown, a former district judge.

Most of these children, like the young babies, there is no evidence whatsoever they were under any threat of being physically or sexually abused. You are removing children because 12 or 14 years down the line, they are gong to be sexually molested.

Leaving the Eldorado ranch families intact was not a viable option. Investigators found clear evidence of a pattern of sexual abuse, including 20 girls who had been impregnated between the ages of 13 and 16 and boys who were being indoctrinated to become adult perpretrators of sexual abuse.

State Rep. Harvey Hilderbran, R-Kerrville whose district includes Eldorado, speculated that law enforcement and CPS probably had a loose plan in place. Hilderbran remembers talking to CPS officials about the ranch in 2005, when he worked to pass a bill targeted at the sect that raised the legal marriage age with parental consent from 14 to 16. The bill passed.

[Scott Hutchinson]

I find this group sick as well,but hey people with all of this hate crime legislation,that keeps trying to get passed,there are those people out who are trying to shut down the church for speaking agains't sin.
There are radical elements of people of influence who say the Bible is a book of hate speech because it condemns Homosexuality and such.
And there are other radicals out there who say The Bible is a Anti-Semtic book.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by Scott Hutchinson

I find this group sick as well,but hey people with all of this hate crime legislation,that keeps trying to get passed,there are those people out who are trying to shut down the church for speaking agains't sin.
There are radical elements of people of influence who say the Bible is a book of hate speech because it condemns Homosexuality and such.
And there are other radicals out there who say The Bible is a Anti-Semtic book.

True, but you know what the Word says - The gates of Hell shall not prevail.....

This group is no where close to being Biblical.

[Rico]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

This group is no where close to being Biblical.

........and neither are apostolics, according to some.

[MissBrattified]

I don't think we should stand by and allow children to be abused simply because we're afraid our own rights will be immediately or eventually infringed.

Religious freedom: Yes. Freedom to commit crimes: No.

The right thing to do, if polygamy is what they want to practice, would be to press legislation to legalize it.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by MissBrattified

I don't think we should stand by and allow children to be abused simply because we're afraid our own rights will be immediately or eventually infringed.

Religious freedom: Yes. Freedom to commit crimes: No.

The right thing to do, if polygamy is what they want to practice, would be to press legislation to legalize it.

Yes, my friend - Amen!

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by Rico

........and neither are apostolics, according to some.

LOL! Well, I heard a preacher, once say, "If people think we are a cult they need to stick around and find out how much we disagree!"