<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: &#8220;ACLU confounded by FLDS case&#8221;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.asoftanswer.com/2008/04/16/aclu-confounded-by-flds-case/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.asoftanswer.com/2008/04/16/aclu-confounded-by-flds-case/</link>
	<description>Latter-day Saints in the public square</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 07 Oct 2008 04:41:05 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Ken</title>
		<link>http://www.asoftanswer.com/2008/04/16/aclu-confounded-by-flds-case/#comment-4269</link>
		<dc:creator>Ken</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 May 2008 16:28:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.asoftanswer.com/?p=1115#comment-4269</guid>
		<description>Several serious problems with what CPS did and media portrayal of this:

1. Texas law up until two years ago allowed 14 year old girls to be married with parental consent, and still allows it for 16 year olds today.  Contrary to popular belief, a minor *married* to an adult is not statutory rape if the marriage had parental consent.  

These girls had reached puberty. If they  were in Texas public school (where CPS wants to put them) the school office would be handing out condoms to them and making sure they know how to use them.  

Why is consensual marriage of a 14 year-old "evil" and "rape" and "child abuse" but "sexual activity" of a 14 year old in school is "normal"?  Something is wrong here.

2. It is ridiculously unconstitutional to take away the children of all the families because of the alleged (unproven) complaint against one person.

3. The foster-care system is notorious for sexual abuse.  A large percentage of the children "saved" from the FLDS ranch *will* be sexually abused in foster care - either by the foster parents, or by other teenage foster children.

4. Americans routinely practice serial polygamy (divorce and remarriage) and the children of divorced parents are just as traumatized, if not more so, than children of a polygamous marriage.

5. Islam is polygamous too.  Is CPS going to take all the kids from Muslim families in America just because Muslim girls are indoctrinated to believe polygamy is ok, and they should submit to their husbands?

6. The CPS officials and prosecutors who seized all these children without evidence should be fired, if not prosecuted themselves for what they have done.  Their actions have endangered the rights and safety of all American families.

7. All the above being true, the FLDS sect is really screwed up, as is polygamy.  But really, do we "normal" Americans have our own act together so much that we can look down on these people?  Should CPS take away all the "latch key children" of single-parents?

There needs to be a large outcry against what Texas CPS has done here.  Some people need to lose their jobs over this.

-- Not a polygmist or a Mormon</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Several serious problems with what CPS did and media portrayal of this:</p>
<p>1. Texas law up until two years ago allowed 14 year old girls to be married with parental consent, and still allows it for 16 year olds today.  Contrary to popular belief, a minor *married* to an adult is not statutory rape if the marriage had parental consent.  </p>
<p>These girls had reached puberty. If they  were in Texas public school (where CPS wants to put them) the school office would be handing out condoms to them and making sure they know how to use them.  </p>
<p>Why is consensual marriage of a 14 year-old &#8220;evil&#8221; and &#8220;rape&#8221; and &#8220;child abuse&#8221; but &#8220;sexual activity&#8221; of a 14 year old in school is &#8220;normal&#8221;?  Something is wrong here.</p>
<p>2. It is ridiculously unconstitutional to take away the children of all the families because of the alleged (unproven) complaint against one person.</p>
<p>3. The foster-care system is notorious for sexual abuse.  A large percentage of the children &#8220;saved&#8221; from the FLDS ranch *will* be sexually abused in foster care - either by the foster parents, or by other teenage foster children.</p>
<p>4. Americans routinely practice serial polygamy (divorce and remarriage) and the children of divorced parents are just as traumatized, if not more so, than children of a polygamous marriage.</p>
<p>5. Islam is polygamous too.  Is CPS going to take all the kids from Muslim families in America just because Muslim girls are indoctrinated to believe polygamy is ok, and they should submit to their husbands?</p>
<p>6. The CPS officials and prosecutors who seized all these children without evidence should be fired, if not prosecuted themselves for what they have done.  Their actions have endangered the rights and safety of all American families.</p>
<p>7. All the above being true, the FLDS sect is really screwed up, as is polygamy.  But really, do we &#8220;normal&#8221; Americans have our own act together so much that we can look down on these people?  Should CPS take away all the &#8220;latch key children&#8221; of single-parents?</p>
<p>There needs to be a large outcry against what Texas CPS has done here.  Some people need to lose their jobs over this.</p>
<p>&#8211; Not a polygmist or a Mormon</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ACLU weighs in on FLDS raid &#124; A Soft Answer</title>
		<link>http://www.asoftanswer.com/2008/04/16/aclu-confounded-by-flds-case/#comment-4218</link>
		<dc:creator>ACLU weighs in on FLDS raid &#124; A Soft Answer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 May 2008 18:59:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.asoftanswer.com/?p=1115#comment-4218</guid>
		<description>[...] some hemming and hawing, the ACLU weighs in on the FLDS raid. &#8220;The ACLU has serious concerns that the state&#8217;s [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] some hemming and hawing, the ACLU weighs in on the FLDS raid. &#8220;The ACLU has serious concerns that the state&#8217;s [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Craig</title>
		<link>http://www.asoftanswer.com/2008/04/16/aclu-confounded-by-flds-case/#comment-4099</link>
		<dc:creator>Craig</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Apr 2008 02:24:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.asoftanswer.com/?p=1115#comment-4099</guid>
		<description>No matter how much I disagree with the FLDS culture and practices, I'm appalled by Texas' apparent disregard for the constitutional rights of the FLDS families. Legal justification to remove one child or a household of children doesn't create legal justification to remove all children from a community. If the concern is about underage girls being married to middle-aged men, why remove young boys? 

They are being punished simply for their religious affiliation. Someone in the sect may be guilty; therefore, Texas posits that all sect members must be guilty of child abuse.

If there is abuse, get the abused child/children out and put the abuser/s in custody. Texas is overreaching, and it may get away with it because the FLDS espouse unpopular beliefs.

The government needs to obey the law just as much as we do. And nothing undermines confidence in government more than when it refuses to abide by the law. We can't cut down the law to get at the devil because without the law what will protect us when the winds begin to blow against us? 

Texas lost its moral high ground when it skirted the law and removed all children when it may have been justified in removing one. And that one child hasn't been found yet.

Now, I'm open to be corrected depending on the evidence Texas presents tomorrow at the hearing, but I still don't think they have enough to terminate the parental rights of every mother in the FLDS compound.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>No matter how much I disagree with the FLDS culture and practices, I&#8217;m appalled by Texas&#8217; apparent disregard for the constitutional rights of the FLDS families. Legal justification to remove one child or a household of children doesn&#8217;t create legal justification to remove all children from a community. If the concern is about underage girls being married to middle-aged men, why remove young boys? </p>
<p>They are being punished simply for their religious affiliation. Someone in the sect may be guilty; therefore, Texas posits that all sect members must be guilty of child abuse.</p>
<p>If there is abuse, get the abused child/children out and put the abuser/s in custody. Texas is overreaching, and it may get away with it because the FLDS espouse unpopular beliefs.</p>
<p>The government needs to obey the law just as much as we do. And nothing undermines confidence in government more than when it refuses to abide by the law. We can&#8217;t cut down the law to get at the devil because without the law what will protect us when the winds begin to blow against us? </p>
<p>Texas lost its moral high ground when it skirted the law and removed all children when it may have been justified in removing one. And that one child hasn&#8217;t been found yet.</p>
<p>Now, I&#8217;m open to be corrected depending on the evidence Texas presents tomorrow at the hearing, but I still don&#8217;t think they have enough to terminate the parental rights of every mother in the FLDS compound.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David H. Sundwall</title>
		<link>http://www.asoftanswer.com/2008/04/16/aclu-confounded-by-flds-case/#comment-4096</link>
		<dc:creator>David H. Sundwall</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Apr 2008 17:44:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.asoftanswer.com/?p=1115#comment-4096</guid>
		<description>Good take.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good take.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David B</title>
		<link>http://www.asoftanswer.com/2008/04/16/aclu-confounded-by-flds-case/#comment-4094</link>
		<dc:creator>David B</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Apr 2008 17:19:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.asoftanswer.com/?p=1115#comment-4094</guid>
		<description>My take: if this had been a case of child pornography rather than child polygyny, the religious and parental rights wouldn't enter into it at all. Therefore, Texas comes out ham-handed but in the morally superior position as i see it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My take: if this had been a case of child pornography rather than child polygyny, the religious and parental rights wouldn&#8217;t enter into it at all. Therefore, Texas comes out ham-handed but in the morally superior position as i see it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
