State kidnaps over 500 women and children of the FLDS Church
Please note none of the members of this forum endorse the FLDS Church or polygamy.
Laurel Loflund -
Cops Peacefully Enter Polygamist Temple “State troopers armed with a search warrant raided the compound on Friday to look for evidence of a marriage between the girl, who allegedly had a baby at 15, and 50-year-old Dale Barlow.” My do I post this here? Because no one in law enforcement seems inspired to pursue reports of polygamy and arranged marriages in the Islamic community; a clear double standard.
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20080406/D8VSDQKG0.html
In communist Russia, and other places of upheaval, the Christian groups that had consolidated (had exclusive or semi-closed communities, some with communal dining or meeting facilities) were targeted in ways that less obvious groups of believers weren’t. The godless officials wanted the facilities, and hated the facility owners, so gained two objectives when confiscating the property. How will organized, visible community offer de facto protection to kinists in our country, pre- or post-Balkanization? I guess, on the other hand, individuals are now being targeted in ways that groups would not be.
Now we have the newest WACO in Texas with the Mormon “compound” take-over:
Well, polygamy’s not great, but the reasons that the media are giving for this whole thing sound fishy, and no one’s been charged with anything, but around 200 people, mostly children, have been taken from their families because of one anonymous tip that is not panning out?!! I wonder if the nice facilities might have something to do with it. It is disturbing to see such willingness to spy on fellow citizens who haven’t been shown to have broken any law yet…
Laurel Loflund - 06 April 2008 11:30 PM
Howdy, Kinswoman!
So good to see you here.
I posted a bit about the polygamist raid on the front page of Kinism.net this afternoon. I wonder several things about their choice of time and target.
1) could they be attempting to discredit Mormons? My dad seems to think they don’t want Romney to be VP and this might make him look bad, even though there’s no real link.
2) why the heck don’t they go after the Islamic polygamists I know live here in the US, many of whom force unwilling daughters into arranged marriages? Why only the fundamentalist Mormons?
3) Perhaps they are trying to take the attention off of Obama’s religious problems? Distract, delude, destroy…
I doubt the facilities are the prime target, personally. I think government control of religious groups is one of the motives.
They have moved from the very fringe, to the almost mainstream, next...well, could be us, could be the Amish?
God bless,
Laurel
Faust - 06 April 2008 11:37 PM
kinswoman,
You are very Right. I do not endose the FLDS Church but it is the hypocrisy of the Liberals that bothers me. The liberals are for sodomite “marriage” and fornication; why should polygamy bother them? The liberals care nothing about protecting children. A 14 year girl being married is “evil,” 14 year girl being put the pill and being passed around by teenage perverts is “normal.” If any of these girls end up in the foster care system they will suffer much worse abuse than anything that would have happened in their own family. The reason why the liberal hate the FLDS is; They are white people who live outside the control of the government and the cultural marxists, who have lots of children.
A lot of nasty stores and things have been said about the FLDS sect, much of them may even be true. But they live out in the middle of nowhere and do not bother anyone. They are inbreed don’t even try to get outsiders to join their church. Basically the state enjoys destroying people to prove it’s power and intimidate the populace.
And of course the South East Asian Hmong living in Wisconsin are free engage in polygamy and child marriage with out fear of the state bothering them and get lost of welfare payments too.
kinswoman - 06 April 2008 11:23 PM
Now we have the newest WACO in Texas with the Mormon “compound” take-over:
Well, polygamy’s not great, but the reasons that the media are giving for this whole thing sound fishy, and no one’s been charged with anything, but around 200 people, mostly children, have been taken from their families because of one anonymous tip that is not panning out?!! I wonder if the nice facilities might have something to do with it. It is disturbing to see such willingness to spy on fellow citizens who haven’t been shown to have broken any law yet…
kinswoman - 06 April 2008 11:39 PM
Laurel, I couldn’t find your article on the front page - is it under another heading?
kinswoman - 06 April 2008 11:43 PM
Faust,
Exactly what my husband and I were talking about. It is fine legally to mate with about anything or group of anythings in our country, but these folks, who apparently at least take care of their own without government aid, who’ve had NO CHARGES brought against ANYONE, are being rounded up and shipped out to who knows where with the help of those clergy response team churches (or so we’re told). Are there no non-LDS family members they can place the children with? There’s more to this than we’re hearing.
Faust - 07 April 2008 12:18 AM
kinswoman,
Yes it is sickening. The Waco raid was done to coincided with the hearing in which the BATF was to ask for more funding in the federal budget. Has the US gone down to the level of the Roman Empire where people are attacked by the state for show? Today there are likely 20,000,000 illegal aliens in the US, damaging our economy and causing great social unrest and crime. AK-47 wielding gangs are roaming the streets of the city where I live in the Southwest. Why is the state wasting time and money by attacking this very small sect?
Laurel Loflund - 07 April 2008 09:35 AM
kinswoman - 06 April 2008 11:39 PM
Laurel, I couldn’t find your article on the front page - is it under another heading?
It’s not a full article, Kinswoman, just a news feed with a question attacked in the right coclumn…
State has now kidnaped over 500 women and children of the FLDS Church. These people seem incredibly peaceful and nonviolent, they sat back and watched all of the women and children in their community be taken away by the state’s goons and did nothing to fight back. They are now being held prisoner on military base. Is this what the Liberals call Freedom? Who will be next?
The story about the 16 year old girl that caused the raid seems to be a hoax.
The Hmong living in Wisconsin are free engage in polygamy and child marriage with out fear of the state bothering them. There have been a number of case of child prostitution rings run by Hmong crime syndicates as well. They were imported as refugees and collect large amounts of government welfare payments.
I am not an Alex Jones fan (too much attention to what the state supposedly does to the minorities), but I do listen to him from time to time. He has been tooting the horn to warn people about the move toward martial law here in the states, and one thing he keeps bringing up is that the state will supposedly start rounding up groups of people and putting them into detention centers. Well, the FLDS round-up has all the earmarks of one of those first moves toward martial law that he mentions. Do it once, do it twice, eventually people accept it as the norm.
I saw some photos of the ladies and their little girls, neatly dressed and obviously well-cared for, being put on busses, and my heart went out to them. I do not condone polygamy; however, the so-called helpers here have done nothing but throw what amounts to normal family life for these people into complete disarray.
More respect will be deserved by our “helpers” when they start seriously addressing, as you said, Faust, the Hmong polygamy, the Muslim polygamy, as well as the FLDS polygamy.
A polygamist compound with hundreds of children was rife with sexual abuse, child welfare officials allege in court documents, with girls spiritually married to much older men as soon as they reached puberty and boys groomed to perpetuate the cycle.
Yes the thought of the state rounding up all of the women and children in community and holding them prisoner on military base is sickening and scary to say the least!
I fear the hypocrisy problem is even worse than that… I don’t know what it is was like when you were a teenager, I am young enough to be your son. But the conversations I over heard and things people told me… I am sure you seen bad things happen young people too? A few weeks ago a high school girl was grabbed by members of the football team and raped and humiliated. Three of boys video taped the crime. The prosecutor refused press changes claiming lack of evidence. The fact more and worse sexual abuse of girls in going on in many High Schools of America today than in this odd sect. No polygamy is not the best idea and no 14 year old girls should be playing and reading books not getting married. But 14 year old girls should be taught that fornication is normal by “sex educators,” or put on “pill,” and passed around and abused by young perverts either.
I would put money on this being a test run; pick out a easily vilified group and see how the public reacts, get them used to the idea, and then broaden it out.
Things were much different when I was a teenager; it was only in the last years of my teens when the hippie-type behavior made it to the general public, and was considered quite shocking. But then again, my high school was pretty conservative. NO ONE would have dared to treat ladies the way the youtube culture of today does. NO ONE would have spoken to them afterwards.
(On a slightly different topic, my high school did not have a single black student until I was a senior, and that one was an exchange student. We did, however, have 2nd or 3rd generation Mexican-American and Asian students.)
But the introduction of birth control as a technology and a concept (not sure of the exact year on this, but before my time, I think) radically changed the attitude of women toward sex. Up until then, sex had consequences (little consequences with two legs) and social ostracism as an additional “benefit”. But with the idea that women could indulge without consequence, everything changed; we all know the results.
To digress on early marriages, traditional cultures in many parts of the world have married off young girls pretty much as soon as they reached puberty to much older men. Logically this can be explained as the family seeking someone who was established financially and able to take care of the girl and her future children. In Iran it was not uncommon for a 15 year old to be married to a 45 year old; in fact, I am acquainted with an Iranian fellow whose parents fit this marriage description.
In Europe’s middle ages upper class girls were often married at twelve and encouraged to produce heirs as quickly as possible. Poor people married much later.
But things are very bad for young women today in the general culture, and many are brainwashed to think this is normal.
More on the case that caused the earlier charges against Warren Jeffs and the story about the 16 year old girl that caused the Texas raid seems to be a hoax.
First, some facts: The 14 year old young woman who brought charges against Warren Jeffs (whom I personally feel is a bad man who rules unrighteously) was married to a 19 year old young man, as his first and only wife. There was no polygamy involved.
The young woman consented to the marriage, and agreed in court that she consented to the marriage. It was later in the marriage, when she began to feel uncomfortable in her relationship, that she went to Warren Jeffs and asked for a release. Jeffs, instead of just granting her a release (their term for a divorce), encourgaed her to try to work on her marriage. It was pastoral advice like that given in practically every similar case in any church: the first time you have personality problems with your spouse, your pastor or priest is almost always going to suggest you try to work things out, rather than just get divorced.
But, it was this advice that led to Warren’s conviction as “accomplice to rape”, because Ms. Wall suggested that had Mr. Jeffs not told her to try to work things out, that her husband would not have had the opportunity to initiate sexual intercourse with her on two occasions that she allegedly did not want. She testified in court that she was not ready for sexual intercourse, though her husband testified that she initiated it on one of those occurances. After their marriage broke down further, she left the home and moved into the home of another man, with whom she enjoyed sexual relations outside of marriage. This sort of shot down her credibility in some peoples’ eyes when she said she was not interested in or ready for sex. But, they jury delivered a guilty verdict nonetheless.
Her ex-husband has never been charged with rape, though, which leaves one wondering how someone (Jeffs) can be an accomplice to a rape that apparently was not actually committed.
So, Elisa Wall was not forced to marry her husband, who was only five years older than herself, and who was not a polygamist. She decided after the fact that Warren Jeffs’ advice to STAY MARRIED is what led to the “rape” she experienced.
The blog is three pages long, the post in question is a little bit past the mid way point of the second page. The link to the other pages is at the bottom of the page.
Yes “things are very bad for young women today in the general culture, and many are brainwashed to think this is normal.” One is greatly saddened by how poorly young women are treated these days. I do not disagree with most of what say, but I do not think technology was the main cause of the moral decline of the 1960’s. As one person pointed out the girls who did not have the such still joined in and suffered the consequences. Also the technology is far from perfect at stopping all the consequences.
Well, as to digress on marriage I was commenting on the situation… Yes, there is nothing intrinsically evil about young marriage. And nothing wrong with a young woman marring an older man. But must of us would want our child to have few more years of childhood, but I would rather they marry than lead a degenerate life. One could I suppose even make a case there is nothing intrinsically evil about polygamy, but I will not go there. But what the “general culture” does to girls is most definitely intrinsically evil.
If the facts of the case are as cited above, then this is nothing but a prevarication to suppress a white culturally dissident group or a mere land grab. Agencies and persons can collude to different ends.
I have some, perhaps, controversial views on polygamy, and why it is a venial error. I’ll probably upset some. I might should keep my keyboard silent.
There are good reasons not to support polygamy, but I thought we were supposed to have “religious freedom” in this country. Silly me. Only for people of color do we have religious freedom. How is marrying more than one wife any more objectionable than serially abandoning several and the progeny produced by them? In both cases the man has had intercourse with more than one woman. That is not the essence of the law. The essence of the law is the honor and devotion owed to the wife, and the exclusivity of their union. But in permissible divorce, the failure of one party on that score releases the other to...what? To also violate the self-same exclusivity. That is, the contract has been made null. The called-for standard of honor and devotion cannot be met in a polygamous relationship, in my opinion. It violates the exclusivity “contract”, but not in a way that is vastly different or far more morally objectionable than permissible divorce. The fact that the “rules” of the polygamous contract are unequal, and biased toward men tells us that what we object to is the “simultaneity” of multiple contracts, not that there are multiple contracts. It also violates our sense of “fairness”, another word for “equality” sentiments. There is no biblical reason why women cannot be treated differently than men, in principle, so this objection is moot. It also shows us our focus on sexual union as the central fact of a marriage, when in fact this is a very limited perspective. Many other “unities” operate in a marriage, and may in fact be more central than sexual union. One can, it is obvious, be married, and perhaps happily so, in a sexless marriage.
One really good reason not to support polygamy is that most men cannot adequately provide for multiple wives and dozens of children. Then there is jealousy and other deleterious outcomes. Women are designed by their Maker to respond to the service and care of a single, devoted man, and not to compete among rivals. There will always be competition under such circumstances. In agrarian societies, polygamy is more viable than otherwise, and sometimes even almost necessary to produce “workers.”
Just as Jesus did not utterly outlaw divorce, He also did not utterly outlaw polygamy, it seems. While I think His words show us that polygamy is a sinful error, He did not criminalize it. The fact is that the Bible does not criminalize polygamy and if we are “Theonomists”, neither should we. Christ provided conditions for divorce, though I know of no conditions for polygamy. Nevertheless, Christ’s words are clear that the ideal is that the “two” should become one flesh, not the many. Our reaction to polygamy should probably be as we would react to an error of judgment that amounts to sin, and counsel our brethren to abandon it.
It is clear, monogamy is ideal, and should be upheld as such. In the NT we are given qualifications for elders, among which is to be the husband of one wife. Since all should strive toward being qualified for elder status, polygamy should be eschewed. But the idea that polygamy is somehow a “crime” (notably considered a crime against the state, no less) is misplaced. These people are not criminals. They are simply mistaken. Their traditionalism is admirable, since it better comprehends the nature of gender relations and both male and female psychology.
Laurel is correct to point out that traditional societies have typically given girls early to be married, for various reasons, some of which were financial. In Christ’s time, girls were placed into arranged marriages at young ages, although there was a period of waiting until the girl came of age, and usually resided with her own family until this waiting period had elapsed.
I don’t want to stir up a patriarchism debate here, since it is off topic, but there is a very good reason why young girls were always under the authority of some institution in the patristic era and why the West’s most traditional societies had strict regulations regarding the status of women. In the patristic era a woman in the church was either under her father’s care, soon married, or under church authority if single, as Paul directs.
The awful abuses against women that have been mentioned above are all the fruits of feminism. Women under traditional care were not, in the main, subjected to the abuses they see today, though their possibilities for self-development and the varieties of roles they would play in society were restricted, typically by class (or “caste”, in some cases). Rene Guenon is very instructive on the role of “caste” (essentially race/ethnicity) in traditional societies.
The question remains, which is correct from a biblical perspective. Is it both/and or either/or.
I think the facts in the quotes above are for the most part correct. I am not saying bad things may not go on in this sect, but the thought of the state rounding up all of the women and children in community and holding them prisoner on military base is sickening and scary to say the least! I don’t really know what goes on in this community. The press is now attacking the FLDS for opposing miscegenation. But these people seem incredibly peaceful and nonviolent. People who live near the members of this Church say the children all seem happy and have bicycles and ipods.
I agree with you said for the most part, I just did not want to go there. The hypocrisy of the “general culture” is what bothers me most. Polygamy is not the best idea and I would rather see 14 year old girls playing and reading books than getting married. These things are not necessarily bad by themselves, but what the “general culture” does to girls is most definitely intrinsically evil. As Laurel said “things are very bad for young women today in the general culture, and many are brainwashed to think this is normal.”
If the facts of the case are as cited above, then this is nothing but a prevarication to suppress a white culturally dissident group or a mere land grab. Agencies and persons can collude to different ends.
It is clear, monogamy is ideal, and should be upheld as such. In the NT we are given qualifications for elders, among which is to be the husband of one wife. Since all should strive toward being qualified for elder status, polygamy should be eschewed. But the idea that polygamy is somehow a “crime” (notably considered a crime against the state, no less) is misplaced. These people are not criminals. They are simply mistaken. Their traditionalism is admirable, since it better comprehends the nature of gender relations and both male and female psychology.
I agree that they are mistaken as to the polygamy issue. It is not a criminal situation.
I don’t want to stir up a patriarchism debate here, since it is off topic, but there is a very good reason why young girls were always under the authority of some institution in the patristic era and why the West’s most traditional societies had strict regulations regarding the status of women. In the patristic era a woman in the church was either under her father’s care, soon married, or under church authority if single, as Paul directs.
The awful abuses against women that have been mentioned above are all the fruits of feminism. Women under traditional care were not, in the main, subjected to the abuses they see today, though their possibilities for self-development and the varieties of roles they would play in society were restricted, typically by class (or “caste”, in some cases). Rene Guenon is very instructive on the role of “caste” (essentially race/ethnicity) in traditional societies.
Feminism is, of course, involved with the deterioration of society in general and with the situation today for women in general. But without convenient means (the birth control pill as opposed to other less convenient methods of contraception) to prolong the period of time a woman remained child-free, as some (strange) people would put it, the whole feminist/careerism trajectory would never have made it off the launch pad.
But that’s neither here nor there with the FLDS problem. I still believe the issue here is the government asserting its rights over religion, family, and property.
Society’s hypocrisy, that is, mistaking its own twisted standard for health, is only a vehicle for this big chunk of totalitarianism.
At least they had the sense not to kill them all this time.
I hope this madness can be defeated in the court room. Their attorneys are already trying to get the legally questionable warrants thrown out. I fear I am not optimistic about the legal processes doing the right thing, but we can hope. There are I know some unappealing things about this sect, I am glad at least the members of this forum are looking at the big picture, the precedent this raid sets for abuse by the state is scary.
And on an odd note, what the press thinks of as a bizarre custom?
The FLDS is an extremist religious cult… It has many bizarre rules. For example, when a young girl is growing up, she starts building up what is called ‘a hope chest’. This is like a trousseau of sorts, except that the girl starts to collect items long before there is a husband on the horizon. It contains practical things to set her up for married life - pots and pans, sheets and towels…
Is this what Liberals call freedom?
Jessop said that those at the ranch have no Internet or television access and have no way to know what has become of the 133 women and 401 children taken from the ranch since last Thursday. He expressed concern for their well-being. “There needs to be a public outcry that goes far and wide,” he said. “What’s coming we don’t know. The hauling off of women and children matches anything in Russia or Germany.” Jessop said he was a young man at the time of the 1953 Short Creek Raid, when Arizona authorities took away all the community’s women and children and kept them in state custody for two years. Jessop said there were “a lot of things that need to be said” and that attorneys representing the sect would be doing that, presumbably in a court hearing set for Wednesday. Back at Fort Concho, media watched as a group of 9 young boys were walking around a grassy parade field. The boys approached the fence at one end of the field, where reporters called out to ask if they were being treated well. One young man shook his head, no. As reporters moved closer to the fence, a CPS worker called the boys back to the buildings. One older boy then appeared to be being scolded by the worker. Officers then approached the media and told them to move across the street. The boys then returned to the middle of the field to play soccer.
Mothers from polygamous sect send letter to Texas governor seeking help for children…
Mothers from polygamous sect send letter to Texas governor seeking help for children
SAN ANGELO, Texas (AP) — The mothers of children removed from a polygamous sect’s ranch are appealing to Texas Governor Rick Perry for help.
The mothers say in the letter mailed to Perry on Saturday that some of their children have become sick and even required hospitalization.
They also say children have been questioned about things they know nothing about since they were placed in the legal custody of the state.
More than 400 children were rounded up from the ranch operated by the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.
