Texas Authorities Raid Polygamist Compound(400 kids taken from a polygamist compound)

This is not new. For example, a cop can pull you over for a broken taillight, then smell something, like marijuana smoke in your car, or alcohol on your breath, and it's all downhill for you from there.

If they discover evidence of a crime other than what you were pulled over for, then they must act on that.

In the FLDS case, the evidence was apparent one they saw the pregnant girls. Would you have them ignore that evidence?

 

I agree with you, Kaethy. It's just a tortured construction to view otherwise, in my opinion.

 

Uh,

Could be me, but seems to me someone is avoiding the problems with their inconsistencies, and replacing it with, well, you know.

 

You can find pregnant girls in most high schools. Do they take all of the kids into custody, and bring them in for genetic testing?

Do they take the kids away from their parents?

Am I not speaking English or something? Am I the only person who sees the injustice and abuse of the law here?

Or is it just that everyone is so enthralled with the idea of imposing their morality through the force of government on some religious Luddites, that the implications and precedent being set is meaningless?

 

It seems you are the only person who misconstrues it so, yes.

 

I see a certain poster in this thread is back, employing the same tactics he employs in Barak Obama threads. Avoidance of answering any questions that might undermine his position, and more Ad Hominem.

But I stand by what I have said, and still no one has the courage to reply.

If there are no charges, has there been a crime?

And can the police hold people for weeks on end, to investigate and interrogate them in order to find a crime?

Does this not undermine the spirit of the Constitution, and basic human rights going back to the Magna Carta?

 

Kaethy, do you believe a crime has been committed? If so, what evidence is that based on?

 

No, myself, Earl, Kaethy, probably others lurking or to come, categorically pointing out the errors in your thinking, these aren't ad hominem attacks.

These, as you directed against myself, are, however.

Your points have been roundly refuted, something I find usually happens.

And this seems to drive you to the above, from what I can tell from this and other threads. That you can't seem to deal with the errors of your posts is something I don't think anyone but yourself can deal with, IMHO.

My beloved wife's 45th tonight, and this erstwhile chef has a dinner to put together....duck confit, seared duck breast, roast corn cake, chard, morel/duck sauce, and a rocking Nuit St. George...

good night, all.

 

Still no answer to the question at hand.

Can citizens be held indefinitely by the police until they are able to investigate and determine a crime? Or are people still innocent until proven guilty in this country?

Why are the old school forum posters who are mentally enslaved to the state afraid to answer this question? Why can't they justify the use of police coercion against citizens who apparently have committed no crime?

Have they been compromised by encouraging a war that has seen countless thousands of innocent people die, because they were supportive when so easily duped?

 

The crime is adult males had sex with underage girls. The evidence is underage girls are mothers and/or pregnant.

Usually pregnant teenage girls in high school have gotten that way against their parents wishes with teenage boys.

In the FLDS case, the girls are mothers already and or pregnant by adult males, not teenage boys, with the consent and encouragement of their parents and pastors. IOW, all the adults involved acted together to make it happen. Isn't that conspiracy?

As for charges, they will be coming. They have to figure out the exact ages of each girl, and who is responsible for impregnating them. And I would say to charge whoever performed their so called "marriage" ceremony and the parents of the girls as well.

And what about the boys? Is it OK to just throw out boys under age 18?

Here's what I posted before
"A child protection supervisor testified Thursday that she encountered several pregnant teen girls at a polygamist ranch who called each other "sister wives" and who believed it was acceptable to be "spiritually united" with a man at any age." and "girls as young as 13 had conceived children at the ranch."
http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/04/17/polygamy.custody/index.html

These people just want to be left alone. They could have had their wish, if they only let the girls grow up first before knocking them up. Warren Jeffs lowered the "marriage" age TWICE, and that's their problem.

 

Without getting to wrapped up in this thread, my real quick thoughts.

I am a firm believer in the end does not justify the means when it comes to the government. I will gladly support even the most disturbing individuals rights as once the government takes those rights away from an individual for one reason it opens the flood gates to take them away for another reason.

For an example, I would be far more likely to support a father killing the sick SOB who raped his daughter over the government abusing the rights of the rapist. Granted the father would still be killing the individual and breaking the law, I however would support that far more than I would support the government over stepping their power.

The government does not like to give back powers, no matter how much you are glad they helped out the possible victims in a circumstance you must understand if they are allowed new powers they can and will surely use them in the future in other ways, possibly a way that does abuse it's citizens, possibly even you or your loved ones.

 

So you're saying it's right to round everyone up, and conduct DNA tests until they figure it out?

Is that how we should hunt for criminals? Round up neighborhoods and keep everyone in custody until we ascertain who is a criminal and who is not? Maybe sniff out who has unpaid parking tickets or smokes marijuana at the same time?

Maybe we can conduct DNA tests and sort out the Jews and the Italians. Separate areas for the Japanese and blacks.

Sorry, you may see evidence of a crime, but that's not carte blanche to arrest everyone. Not in a civilized society. It's the same sort of ustification used to murder thousands of people in Iraq who have nothing to do with Sunni Islam, let alone Saddam Hussein or Osama Bin Laden.

 

It is a sad situation from whatever angle you are looking from. However, polygamy is against the law in the US. Based on that fact only, they are breaking the law. Although, like most people, I am mainly concerned with the sexual abuse of minors. Personally, I am glad they are doing the DNA tests.

 

you are another brain washed person.

just think it this way. those abuses going in catholic churches and why not police ride those churches and arrest every attendent their?

those media were making a big noise over that 16 years old girl and her call etc.. and it turn out to be fake.

its more linked to polygamy than abuse or rape. maybe somem powerful judges or senators who have some feminin side ordered for the ride.

 

Hard to argue with such ironclad logic. I wish I could be freed from my brainwashing so that I could come to such a devastatingly incontrovertible point of view. Must be the awful "feminin" demon plaguing me.

Grim, those rights stop at the door of harming another. And one key reason for the state is precisely to protect those who cannot protect themselves. In the instance of this issue, these girls are allegedly being victimized, and can turn to no "father to kill the SOB's," as it is allegedly the fathers themselves who have committed these crimes. And the mothers, victims themselves at one point, enabling the crimes to continue. These girls are in a system, a closed society, without anyone to turn to for relief from crime. So it is precisely the role of law to protect them.

I also have to ask, how do your statements above square with:

(From the other thread). In that instance, it was a father whose handicapped child was apparently punched by another. There are victims in both instances. Why should the victimizer there not just be "taken care of" by the victim's father, over serving "hard time" (a state function)? I just don't understand where you're coming from here.

@Rebecca: I agree with you. This whole thing is tragic.

 

Yes, yes there are brain washed people here. It's very sad, but it's mostly the older people, the ones who have been fed so many lies, it would crush their world to acknowledge the truth.

Yes, but these folks will continue to insist that fake phone calls are probable cause to investigate and take 400+ people into custody, then separate children from their mothers.

Oh gee, I just saw that now we're conflating this thread with the handicapped attack thread, which is based on a lie. I'm not sure what's worse, the brain washing, or the Stockholm syndrome of the brain washee as he desperately tries to rationalize his irrational positions.

 

I'll agree with one caveat. The law is not just.

That's not unreasonable. Abusing children is evil.

I am firmly against forced genetic testing. The government has been known to engage in Eugenics programs before. The last thing I want is them taking my DNA and putting me on a list of people with undesirable attributes.

 

Rights to not 'stop' last I checked you are innocent until proven guilty, once proven guilty certain rights might stop, however before hand there is the reason those rights are there

How do they not? I have no problem with the government working within the law, not trampling anyones rights making them pay. It's when they bypass the rule of law and or individual rights that I have a problem with.

 

In a hyper-moralistic police state, every citizen should be expected to submit to search on demand, regardless of probable cause. Heck, we should just start testing people at birth to find out if they might have a predisposition to crime, so we can incarcerate them before they hurt anyone...

Maybe establish a Department of Precrime like in Minority Report. Then people can watch their kids get taken away for the future crime of speeding, or smoking a joint. Or for cheating in school. Or shop lifting.

Hey, here's an idea! Let's just lock all humans up in jail! There are so many laws, it's almost impossible for a person to go through life without breaking any of them. Guilty until proven innocent, right?

 

I am in complete agreement. And no one has declared anyone guilty.

But this isn't the issue.

The issue here is one of deciding whether there is an immediate danger to the children. The judge ruling in this case has the largest custody battle in the history of this nation before her bench. There are facts in evidence that apparently led her, as well as Texas child welfare authorities, to conclude there is an immediate danger to these girls, warranting the temporary removal out of the care of the alleged perpetrators of crimes against them. Here, an hour ago, is further news:

http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=dc7e9674-40e0-4d77-bba9-db2d138618e1&k=40829

Earlier, we had:

It just seems as plain as day to me, that there is more than ample reason to step in. Earl has covered much of this in his posts as well. And when it is reasonable to conclude from the evidence that there is an immediate threat to the alleged victims, it is lawful - it isn't the state "overstepping its bounds" - to remove the alleged victims from the immediate danger. With children, it's always sad, and no solution is painless.

But those whose job it is to protect kids, when no one else will - as is the case with children abused from within a family situation - must weigh the awful weight of damage done by removing the abused kids from their families, against the damage done by leaving them in. With 416 children, it is a tragedy on a titanic scale. But the duty to protect them is still there, as if it were one abused kid.

The judge is doing the right thing, in my opinion.

On the wheelchair thing, OK. I guess you think the authorities have worked outside the law in this case, but imprisonment wouldn't be "overstepping" in the case of the wheelchair incident. I do not agree with your conclusions with respect to this issue, but understand now that you don't see a disconnect, so fair enough.

I see Guerilla has returned to the misstatement that there wasn't probable cause to warrant an investigation, although this has been refuted several times throughout the thread. He has a grave misunderstanding as to what constitutes probable cause, but will likely never understand his misapprehension, in my opinion. His construing this as the equivalent of Hitler's Germany, or some post-apocalyptic fiction, exemplifies the wantonness of his arguments, also in my opinion.