Just who are the bad guys in the polygamy case?
- Thread starter Yours truly
- Start date
Perhaps you're right.
If you are, then having a "harem" of "TPFB's" is not the intent. Its simply a symptom.
Which "terrible crime"?
I'm saying, if you want to clean things up, why not start at the hospitals? Or at least include them. Sheesh, you'll be able to collect thousands of children that way. Not hundreds, but thousands upon thousands.
You are ether for it, or against it. which one?
"Department of Public Safety Sgt. Danny Crawford testified to DPS's discovery of a church bishop's records taken from a safe at the ranch that listed about 38 families, some of them polygamous and some that included wives 16 or 17 years old. But under repeated cross-examination, Crawford acknowledged the records contained no evidence of sexual abuse."
from:http://apnews.myway.com/article/20080417/D903RV800.html
from:http://apnews.myway.com/article/20080417/D903RV800.html
I don't understand how they could legally be bigamous marriages. I'm guessing they didn't get marriage licenses,etc, so they were not in legally recognizable marriages. Suddenly it is illegal to have a mistress or three?
The state created this humongous mess, and now they are trying to have one judge decide all the cases simultaneously. It is an outrage and clearly a violation of these people's rights to due process.
And where are the victims? All I have seen is women who are distraught over what these thugs from the state have done to their children.
The state created this humongous mess, and now they are trying to have one judge decide all the cases simultaneously. It is an outrage and clearly a violation of these people's rights to due process.
And where are the victims? All I have seen is women who are distraught over what these thugs from the state have done to their children.
That is true and is almost certainly true in all of these cult-type compounds. That fact doesn't seem to be enough for some in this thread to be able to justify busting the operation up.
If you're asking where the victims are, some of them have escaped and are telling anyone who will listen that underage girls are being forced to marry and have sex against their will.
(cough) Guantanamo Bay (cough)
AAA, something very ironic just occurred to me. You're constantly saying that it is only white Christian males who can be defamed in PC thinking, and that any volley fired at another special interest group is condemned by the PC police as racism or whatever (and there's quite a bit of truth in that)
Here, though, we're condemning a group that is as deserving of condemnation as the radical Muslims, but you don't seem to like it. Why is that? In this case, you seem to be using the same arguments in defense of the lawbreakers (and lawbreakers they surely are) as those who would defend radical Muslims. The PC argument goes like this - 'You have no proof against this or that bearded, Qu'ran-reading, desert-camp-attending, Western-lifestyle-condemning Islamic jihadi. Your (detention of him, surveillance of him, suspicion of him) is illegal'.
Substitute 'polygamist, our-leader-is-God-incarnate-believing, 14-year-old-child-marrying, closed-compound-with-huge-church-living, weird-Christian-sect devotee', and you have the same argument!! How much evidence do you need before you say 'That's enough'?
You know goddamn well that 14 year old girls have been married off, forced into sex, impregnated and forced to bear children on this property. Don't give me the 'you have no evidence' argument.