Amen, brother.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Just who are the bad guys in the polygamy case?
- Thread starter Yours truly
- Start date
Amen, brother.
AP wire report headline:
"31 of 53 teen girls at FLDS ranch are pregnant or had baby"
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iIdMpRHjN4hpNKBhfYyAsR4DDo4QD90B4MU00
So Rat,
You know I question the constitutionality of the raid on the phone call, but let's put that aside for the moment.
You've been calling -- "show me a crime". Let's take the above report:
The condition of the above report (many pregnant underage girls) is consistent with their beliefs -- can you think of a reason it *wouldn't* be substantially true?
I mean, I suppose a bunch of men could have sneaked into the compound at night and repeatedly and regularly raped the young girls of the sect while their parents weren't watching. The girls never told the parents about the heinous activity, and the parents haven't caught on that the births of the children are NOT "virgin births" from God.
The report could be a total fabrication and as it turns out the sect members *don't* live consistent with their religious beliefs -- the just want us to think that 'cause it's good publicity for the compound.
OR could it be that the sect lives it's life the way they believe god has called them to live it ... they "marry" young girls out always and often, get them pregnant and start the process over.
Just a thought, but I'm sorta leaning towards the last one.
JB
"31 of 53 teen girls at FLDS ranch are pregnant or had baby"
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iIdMpRHjN4hpNKBhfYyAsR4DDo4QD90B4MU00
So Rat,
You know I question the constitutionality of the raid on the phone call, but let's put that aside for the moment.
You've been calling -- "show me a crime". Let's take the above report:
The condition of the above report (many pregnant underage girls) is consistent with their beliefs -- can you think of a reason it *wouldn't* be substantially true?
I mean, I suppose a bunch of men could have sneaked into the compound at night and repeatedly and regularly raped the young girls of the sect while their parents weren't watching. The girls never told the parents about the heinous activity, and the parents haven't caught on that the births of the children are NOT "virgin births" from God.
The report could be a total fabrication and as it turns out the sect members *don't* live consistent with their religious beliefs -- the just want us to think that 'cause it's good publicity for the compound.
OR could it be that the sect lives it's life the way they believe god has called them to live it ... they "marry" young girls out always and often, get them pregnant and start the process over.
Just a thought, but I'm sorta leaning towards the last one.
JB
Quote from Turok:
AP wire report headline:
"31 of 53 teen girls at FLDS ranch are pregnant or had baby"
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iIdMpRHjN4hpNKBhfYyAsR4DDo4QD90B4MU00
So Rat,
You know I question the constitutionality of the raid on the phone call, but let's put that aside for the moment.
You've been calling -- "show me a crime". Let's take the above report:
The condition of the above report (many pregnant underage girls) is consistent with their beliefs -- can you think of a reason it *wouldn't* be substantially true?
let's analyze it... 31 of 53 girls are alleged to have been pregnant between the ages of 14 and 17.
previously i had heard maybe 3. so who is right? we will have to wait and see. the reports give no specifics... they don't bother breaking it down.
the legal age in texas until june 2005 was 14.... what role will that play? i guess we need more facts. so far the only facts i have found are that the sheriff and cps knew the original phone call was a hoax 3 days before the invasion. so please forgive me for waiting for the facts.
another thing to remember, if the male is within 3 yrs of age i don't think it's a crime.... this may be specific to Texas... i would have to go research it.
JB,
The article you linked to, says only two (2) are pregers. Not many, but two (2)
BTW, Is it illegal for a 17yo to be pregers? Anywhere in the nation?
The article you linked to, says only two (2) are pregers. Not many, but two (2)
BTW, Is it illegal for a 17yo to be pregers? Anywhere in the nation?
Quote from chuck.ells:
JB,
The article you linked to, says only two (2) are pregers. Not many, but two (2)
BTW, Is it illegal for a 17yo to be pregers? Anywhere in the nation?
according to Texas law they could find today, a 16 yr old girl with a 2 yr old child and it is possible that it is 100% legal.
It said of the 53 girls, 31 are pregnant or have been pregnant. Only 2 are pregnant right now. All these girls are between 14 and 17 years old.
So this means all of the girls that are not pregnant right now in the group would be 29. So 29 girls are not pregnant right now, but they have all been pregnant in the past. Of 29 girls who definately have children, those 29 girls are between the ages of 14 and 17.
What does this say? Of all the girls who are between 14 and 17, MOST have already had children and are not pregnant right now. So they were even younger when they had their first baby.
So this means all of the girls that are not pregnant right now in the group would be 29. So 29 girls are not pregnant right now, but they have all been pregnant in the past. Of 29 girls who definately have children, those 29 girls are between the ages of 14 and 17.
What does this say? Of all the girls who are between 14 and 17, MOST have already had children and are not pregnant right now. So they were even younger when they had their first baby.
Quote from trendlover:
It said of the 53 girls, 31 are pregnant or have been pregnant. Only 2 are pregnant right now. All these girls are between 14 and 17 years old.
So this means all of the girls that are not pregnant right now in the group would be 29. So 29 girls are not pregnant right now, but they have all been pregnant in the past. Of 29 girls who definately have children, those 29 girls are between the ages of 14 and 17.
What does this say? Of all the girls who are between 14 and 17, MOST have already had children and are not pregnant right now. So they were even younger when they had their first baby.
i find it odd that cps would be so vague. we have to remember they lied through their teeth about the hoax phone call.... they knew 3 days in advance of the invasion that the call was fake. please forgive me if i don't take what they say at face value now.
let's also remember that the age law was changed specifically to target FLDS. as i previously noted, a 16 yr old girl could legally have a 2 yr old child at the present moment.
so therefore we need facts not more of these sweeping allegations. lets also hope the hospitalized children recover.. that number is up to 9 now. and don't forget the lost baby and 11 yr old.
Quote from ratboy88:
according to Texas law they could find today, a 16 yr old girl with a 2 yr old child and it is possible that it is 100% legal.
I suppose as long as they have a valid marriage certificate. I wonder if she could be charged with adultry if she gave birth to any children who were not her husband.
Quote from ratboy88:
i find it odd that cps would be so vague. we have to remember they lied through their teeth about the hoax phone call.... they knew 3 days in advance of the invasion that the call was fake. please forgive me if i don't take what they say at face value now.
let's also remember that the age law was changed specifically to target FLDS. as i previously noted, a 16 yr old girl could legally have a 2 yr old child at the present moment.
so therefore we need facts not more of these sweeping allegations. lets also hope the hospitalized children recover.. that number is up to 9 now. and don't forget the lost baby and 11 yr old.
CPS possible mistakes placing and locating the children are one thing. If they made mistakes, this does not prove anything toward the alleged abuse at the sect. It doesn't make alleged abuses any less credible. It just diverts attention from the first serious charges to the sect onto other charges of a different subject.
Why doesn't the testimony of so many ex members of the past account for anything? There is an ex member who was thrown out as a boy, but managed to make his way, become educated, a multimillionaire and a dentist, and he runs a service for other boys who have been thrown out and desperate. This man is living , credible testimony and so are all the boys he helps.
It is proof that it is hard to treat all of these people at the compound as individual familys becasue they do not conduct their lives as individual family, but ALL take their orders from their prophet(Warren Jeffs until his conviction) and now I think Merrill Jessop. Ratboy, this is really not about one hoax call and the authoritys went crazy with no evidence, this is about years and years of testimony from ex members, 4 years of an informant, and still the sect finds ways to use the constitution to their favor. They cry about their constitutional rights when the children have been taken (and yes , I agree it could have been handled with more tenderness and organization), but they themselves cast their own children out on the street for something so simple as wearing a shirt with short sleeves.