Good news for once
I've been meaning to write more about the polygamist case for a while, but never got around to it. So first a quite update for those not following the story. The polygamists petitioned to have their children returned pending the results of the states investigation. The court refused to return the children even temporarily. They claimed that girls were raised to accept early marriages to older men. Therefore even if they were of age, and willingly agreed to a marriage they were being abused. Essentially they were being culturally abused. Unlike in our superior culture, where there are outside influences inhibiting the free will of children. Then what about the boys you ask? They were also being abused. They were being abused because they were being raised in a culture that encourages them to become future abusers of girls. Which is abusive to them. That's right. So essentially the court ruled that if you are a member of this religion you are not allowed to have children. It doesn't matter what you do personally or how you raise them (as evidence by some parents who were not polygamist and did not encourage their children to be polygamists.)
The state continues to argue that they were just despite the fact that the initial complaint of abuse at the ranch came from a woman in colarado who also called in to complain she was being abuse by a catholic priest, and that she was being held in the basement and sexually abuse by her grandfather. The state didn't feel it necassary to investigate that call before seizing all the children. Also more than half the girls who were originally claimed to be underage mothers have now been classified as adults and one of them is 27. The state maintains that there are 5 girls who got at 15, and 16. First off It is entirely legal to marry and be pregnant at 16. Secondly 5? out of 250? I wonder how that compares to the rates of teen pregnancy in the country. And how it compares to the rates of teenage among minorities in the inner city. Maybe the should start taking away all the minority children from inner cities.
Well the Appeals courts of weighed in and essentially told the judge and child services that they were full of shit and had no right to seize the 450 children in the first place. Even if we were to buy all of the states arguments, there is still no evidence of immediate danger, the only condition under which it is legal to seize children. They appeals court ruled that they had not demonstrated that there was any danger to the prepubescent children, or even that any of the pregnant girls had been impregnated by older men (had they been impregnanted by boys it would not have been abuse.) And critisized child services for not trying to come to an arrangement short of complete removal of all children. If there were any justice, the officials and judge involved in the seizing of these children would be sent to prison for kidnapping/fired/suspended/or at least docked their wages, but i'm confident there will be no consequences whatsoever.
The state continues to argue that they were just despite the fact that the initial complaint of abuse at the ranch came from a woman in colarado who also called in to complain she was being abuse by a catholic priest, and that she was being held in the basement and sexually abuse by her grandfather. The state didn't feel it necassary to investigate that call before seizing all the children. Also more than half the girls who were originally claimed to be underage mothers have now been classified as adults and one of them is 27. The state maintains that there are 5 girls who got at 15, and 16. First off It is entirely legal to marry and be pregnant at 16. Secondly 5? out of 250? I wonder how that compares to the rates of teen pregnancy in the country. And how it compares to the rates of teenage among minorities in the inner city. Maybe the should start taking away all the minority children from inner cities.
Well the Appeals courts of weighed in and essentially told the judge and child services that they were full of shit and had no right to seize the 450 children in the first place. Even if we were to buy all of the states arguments, there is still no evidence of immediate danger, the only condition under which it is legal to seize children. They appeals court ruled that they had not demonstrated that there was any danger to the prepubescent children, or even that any of the pregnant girls had been impregnated by older men (had they been impregnanted by boys it would not have been abuse.) And critisized child services for not trying to come to an arrangement short of complete removal of all children. If there were any justice, the officials and judge involved in the seizing of these children would be sent to prison for kidnapping/fired/suspended/or at least docked their wages, but i'm confident there will be no consequences whatsoever.
posted by Trashcan at 5/24/2008 08:53:00 PM
3 Comments:
do they at least have to make an official apology?
child beaters in lithuania get off scott free; but you still have to be glad that at least the children are taken away from them.
so as long as they get the children back, that's good already. i'm sure they'll get a huge cash settlement from the state.
First off, there's no way the officials in question can apologize for exactly the reason aras just mentioned. At the end of this there may be a big lawsuit coming. Therefore they can never admit any fault Also they have in point of fact not gotten their children back yet. First off the judgement gave them 10 days to give the children back. And now they have appealed to the texas supreme court. It's not clear to me what that means. If they don't have to give the children back until the supreme court makes a verdict/how long that could take.
I should also point out this is all about the issue of the children being taken away prior to any investigation. It is still entirely possible, and possibly justified that after a complete investigation the children will be taken away again.
Post a Comment
<< Home