for 10 years, i worked in the children's services system…watching as courts consistently ruled against the rights of children…despite horrible abuse which occured in the home…all due to some notion of “family reunification”

i watched as natural parents were provided chance after chance to get it right…and the only thing that occured as a result of these bs laws was that children were left in the foster care system for way too long a period

in the texas case, the idea that the entire community is not responsible is absurd

forget polygamy…you wanna fuck around with multiple partners…go to it

but they all knew….all of them…both knew and taught that girls who reached the age of puberty were to be “married”

this cult has ritualized child abuse…so much so that to leave a child in this enviroment, is tantamount to allowing the child to be emotionally abused….

is this a healthy enviroment for a child??? well according to the texas courts, i guess so, as long as they wont be raped tomorrow

yet it is well known across the country that one of the worst dcfs in the country is that in texas (in no small part due to former gov bush and his moving many services over to non regulated faith based orgs) the fact that a court ruled that the children should be returned is not surprising…despite the mountain of evidence of ritualized child abuse (im sorry, you need to see documents? looking at 13-15 year olds walking around pregnant aint good enuf?)

as for false accusations…especially within the court system, while i am sorry that you dealt with this first hand, the actual occurence is quite low….and is definitely not in evidence here (although it may have been a false report that finally got texas law enforcement to get off their butts and finally take action against these monsters)

We're back to trying to do a balancing act.
As neither of us will be in charge of making the decisions, I won't belabor this.

Let me just fininsh by saying, that, although I agree with a lot of what you say, I don't agree that the same rules should apply in all circumstances. I don't agree that justice should be so blind as to be blind to the ocnsequences.

When dealing with a brianwahed cult, the circumstances are far from ordinary, so the reaction also requires some thinking outside the box.
i don't agree taht allowing for the special circumstnces of dealing with a cult amounts to endangering the rights of everyone.

I do totally agree about the dangers of false accusation, though. That's, actually another example of why the one-size-fits-all approach can fail, and fail miserably.

Somewhere, along the axis, we have to try to find the right . i.e., workable balance.

My father sexually abused both my sisters, and physically abused me, my younger brother and my mother. I have lived with the horror – have you? Or are you just another asshole that likes to talk a story they have not lived, and judge that which they do not know?

I have also seen first-hand a close family friend spend three years fighting false charges brought by a jealous grandparent to get their children back from Hawaii DPS. I watched how that destroyed their family – both the parents and the children.

I have lived it one side of it, and helped friends through the other side of it. I believe fully in laws protecting children, without which my sisters and the rest my family would have suffered immensely more.

I just don't believe that you throw away all rights at the suggestion of abuse, rather than the proof. Every family there was NOT involved in polygamy, and among those that did participate, not all of them were involved with underage girls.

As I said above, removing the 13 year old girls is likely justified. And runi, I most certainly did not say anything that should have led you to say 'And what happened to rigths? Don't the parents of 13 year olds (girls) have rights?'

Yes, but there I was conceding the point of 'risk of imminent danger' for them, due to the church practices, under which the laws DO provide for immediate removal of children. I also then stated that those same laws require a hearing within 14 days to determine if, in that particular instance, that specific child, already removed, should or should not be returned. That is how rights are preserved and children protected at the same time

As for the 'hard evidence', the church itself recorded the marriages, and those records were taken, and could be used. I really don't have those answers, but it is the job of CPS to provide that. It is their utter failure to provide ANYTHING remotely like that that led to both the Texas Appellate and Supreme Courts to rule against them.

Even in cases like this, as with all crimes, no matter how heinous, the burden is on the state to prove guilt. It is their job to do so. If they cannot, they did not do their jobs.

If we accept otherwise, then anyone, anytime, can be jailed, have their children taken away, whatever, on simple allegations, rather than on evidence. Would you prefer we return to pre-Magna Carta law?

these people forfeited their rights as parents the minute they allowed child abuse to occur unabated. all children within this cult are at risk, no matter what their age.

austin roth doesnt know that they have also been taught that it is godly to lie to non believers

austin roth would have you believe that a mother who sits back and watches her daughter be raped can still be a mother

austin roth would have you believe that a child, who has been taught from a birth that this is their role in life can make a decision whether she wishes to be raped

austin roth is a deluded human being
is it ok for children not of the age to be raped to witness rape? to be preached to that it is godly to allow rape? that it is godly to allow a disgusting 50 year old pedophile to rape you or your sister??

in my opinion, the men and the women of this cult should be jailed for as long as the law allows

they are no better than the creep who hangs out in front of school yards

And what happened to rigths?
Don't the parents of 13 year olds have rights?

We're progresing, however, At least we're talking about real complications and possible solutions.
It doesn't really count for much when it comes to follow up courtt hearings.

Arrest polygamists? That has led to shot gun standoffs, and I suspect the aurthorities would be too scared to try it.

I actually agree that the younger children should not have been taken en masse,.
I just think that once they were, the opportunity arose to untangle some of he family relationships which the cult tries very hard to keep hidden.

The first move was ill-considered, and it looks like the next moves will be likewise.

You want a 'rational' solution? Something very similar to what the Texas Supreme's hinted at:

1. Return all male children, and all female children 10 – 12 years of age or younger, immediately

2. For each of those families, if the state can provide evidence that those children are in some immediate and imminent risk of harm, remove them.

3. The 13+ year old children are more problematic, and I am torn. In the end, I would support their immediate removal, a long as the 14 day hearing period to determine if they should be returned is adhered to

4. Arrest every one of the 18 year old males that can be proven to be in a polygamist marriage

5. Use the fact of being in a polygamist marriage against the mothers, in a hearing, to remove the male and 12 and younger female children

6. Determine the status of the women in the polygamist relationships. If they were coerced and/or minors below the legal age of marital consent when the marriage occurred, annull the marriage, and return their children (if taken), s long as they promise to leave the church

7. If they have voluntarily and of their own free will (and were of age) entered into and remained in the polygamist marriage, leave their children in foster care, and charge them as well

How does that strike you?

I, on the other hand, try to think of rational solutions. Since the children are to be returned to their families, I would require some methodology for ascertaining just who the rightful families are. I'm sure the heartbroken fathers and mothers will be more than happy to provide DNA samples or verifiable documentation to show which children's welfare they are, and will continue to be, responsible for.

With rights come responsibilities, and it's all about trying to balance the two. It's never a winner take all batttle, or civilized societies would not be possible.

In this case, it isn't even a question of claiming rights, it's claiming more rights than the rest of society. Techbicallyk the men could be arrested just for marrying multiple wives. That they are not, already allows them to enjoy more rights than other people.

In the cases, for example, where the women apply for welfare, the adults have had all the rights, while the state is shouldering responsibilities. I have no pronlem with helping those in need, but I would like the state to know just whose needs it is meeting.
To use your absurdsit method of debate, the alternative' would be to just hand over children and welfare checks on demand, first come first served.

I'll take your argument seriously, when you explain what would be an acceptable solution to this mess, Or, are you advocating that things should just go on as before,, with no regard for the children and the women involved?

I have an even BETTER idea. Why bother with ANY of those pesky protections of the rights of the parents, and their children who were not in the 'at risk' group, who were members of the sect (which I fully agree is a deplorable group as a whole, and needs to have their illegal activities curtailed).

Texas is a death penalty state, and has a long history of taking justice into our own hands. So, instead of removing the male children, and the female children under ten years of age, and having hearings, rather, let's remove every male of age (18 or older), take them out behind their church, and shoot them in the back of the head.

Now THAT will protect the children.

How can the necessary,, case by case, evidence be collected, when this cult is, by its very nature, prepared in every way to hide the eevidence? How can the members even be expected to provide credible information when they've been menatlly brianwashed to reist doing so by any means necessary?

Would the court allow secret surveillance and recording of converstions? Of course not, because that would violate some other rights and rules.
So, how is it to be done, dear court and defenders of rights?

Outside of the cult, polygamy itself is a punishable crime, and so is underage sex. Outside of the cult, a boy is senenced to a long prison term for having consensual sex in his teens. For the cult, however, we knowingly condone an anything goes standard,
In both cases, the law is allowed to float off into a stratosphere of abstraction, without so much as a hat tip to consequences in real life.
What the court failed to note, is that thase are no ordinary people, and, therefore, these are not ordinary circumstances. We don't have the same rules in a condominimu, a senior citizens'' home, a hospital and a mental institution, because we recognize the different circumstnaces.
This court failed to recognize the difference between a cult and a suburb of NYC,