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

Because the question isn't a legitimate question. I have no political agenda, here, and your continually returning to this makes the discussion moot. I have repeatedly said this is the conclusion I come to, based on what I would conclude is best for these kids, and this is it. I have also said it is painful to me, as a human being (and a father) as this whole thing is a tragedy, and these kids will be hurt by whatever choice is made. In my best estimation, based on what I've come to know about the specifics of this case, this is the best answer to the YFZ regime's systematic child abuse.

 

While I am equally annoyed by the intrusion, the reality is my newly banned friend, the issue is not with sex or being uptight, its about the possible rape of underage girls.

We live in a society where most 50 year old men that have sex with 13 year old girls go to jail. There is clear difference between Polygamy and Pedophilia.

Are the laws that different in Canada than the US?

 

For the millionth time, pedophilia is sex with prepubescent children, and is considered a mental disorder.

It would be helpful to discourse if we could at least use the appropriate terms instead of trying to create an emotional effect (usually blackmail) by using terms incorrectly.

Re: gworld's banning, looks like some posts were removed. I wonder why he was the only one who got banned.

 

"The International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (F65.4) defines pedophilia as "a sexual preference for children, boys or girls or both, usually of prepubertal or early pubertal age."[1]
The APA's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders 4th edition, Text Revision gives the following as its "Diagnostic criteria for 302.2 Pedophilia":[10]
A. Over a period of at least 6 months, recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors involving sexual activity with a prepubescent child or children (generally age 13 years or younger);
B. The person has acted on these sexual urges, or the sexual urges or fantasies cause marked distress or interpersonal difficulty;
C. The person is at least age 16 years and at least 5 years older than the child or children in Criterion A."

From Wiki...

"prepubertal or early pubertal age"

I did... It looks like you are using them "incompletely" and partially incorrectly. Looks like I as was spot on, as per the definition.

I wonder how many licks there are to get to the tootsie roll center of a tootsie pop.

 

Seems consistent with the sort of mental challenge I could imagine you testing yourself with.

 

You mean like getting upset about the definition of pedophilia? Of course now for the first time, you've got the proper definition so when you spout it for the million and first time, you might actually be making a statement of fact.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedophile

In related news...

Texas checking how many sect 'girls' are women
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080516/ap_on_re_us/polygamist_retreat

 

Gee, somebody forgot to include the rest of the article. Can't imagine why....

Hmm...

 

http://abcnews.go.com/2020/Story?id=4863899&page=1

 

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24009286/

“Everything you did was monitored and controlled and everybody reported on everyone else,” she said. “It was a police state. You were not allowed to make decisions in your life. I had no power over my life or the lives of my children. It was a terrible way to live.”

The alleged control began in infancy.

“The method he would use with infants was a form of water torture,” Jessop said of her former husband. “He would spank the baby until it was screaming out of control, and then he would hold the baby faceup under a tap of running water so it couldn’t breathe. He would do this repeatedly. Sometimes, it would go on for an hour, until the baby was so exhausted it couldn’t cry anymore. This method he called ‘breaking them.’”

To a child, the abuse becomes normal, she said, and resistance becomes unthinkable to most. “With this level of mind control, it’s something you’re born into and it’s generational. The babies born into this, they don’t stand a chance from the beginning,” she said.

 

For those who would like pretend that it is only pedophilia to have sex with prepubescent children, I completely disagree. Girls go into puberty between 10-14 yrs. of age. Having sex with a 10-12 yr. old, no matter if she has had her menstrual cycle or not, is pedophilia IMO.

 

I agree, the only way it is not pedophilia is if you are in the same age range.

 

Right - this has been the working definition, and it applies here.

 

I disagree is the misuse of the word in this thread. I haven't read about prepubescent children having sex regarding this group. If there has not been pedophilia, then the word is being intentionally misused for "political" purposes.

Anyone care to source pedophilia in this thread?

And please exclude 14 year olds. In South Carolina, pedophilia is not illegal but a 14 year old having sex is.

 

Guerilla seems to be having a problem seeing answers he's asked for.

No. A middle aged guy indoctrinating a child and forcing a 14 year old into marriage and impregnation, brainwashing eternal damnation for disobedience, and worldly, corporeal, brutal punishment now - no, I won't exclude this brand of pedophilia.

Didn't Guerilla have partial articles to again cut and paste?

 

Just caught my mistake in this post.

It's the other way around. Pedophilia is illegal, having sex at age 14 is not.

I'm still interested in seeing a source for pedophilia with the FLDS event this thread is about. Anyone care to source the charges or assertions of pedophilia?

 

I guess we can repeat the source, but it appears the blinders are on, as it has been provided multiple times. Seems to be going around.

Other than that, lordy.

http://www.scstatehouse.net/code/t16c003.htm

Earlier, Guerilla stated that age gaps are not included in statutory laws - this of course was refuted. Now, he claims there is no provision in South Carolina for sex with 14 year olds. Uh, yep, there is. Especially appropros to this thread, the law is quite clear with respect to those who should be stewards of those minors, and not their abusers.

So much work to attempt to disparage the obvious. I wonder why, and I wonder, what's the next tactic?

 

Ok, one more time. Would anyone care to source the pedophilia that has occurred in these FLDS arrests?

From my last article posting, it looks like the state of Texas now only "thinks" not "knows" there was wrong doing.

Which for the most part is irrelevant. We still have hundreds of kids, erm, some are adults, being held without charges.

 

Apparently the consistent testimony of numerous ex-members, the evidence entered into record in several days of preliminary hearings (which includes seized journal entries, establishing practice of underage marriage and pregnancy, and multiple affidavits made by investigating authorities corroborating same), and the conviction of the head of the sect - who established the authoritarian dogma by which the FYZ cult is run, on precisely this issue of criminal sexual abuse, with more to come, apparently - isn't enough for Guerilla. It is for me, so far.

I will repeat only part of what I wrote earlier, since the thread has long been diluted by diversionary tactics, as I see it:

Guerilla has made his point known: whether child porn or "marriage" between a 14 year old and a middle-aged man, neither should be illegal, so long as the children involved "consented" to such arrangements. I say, hogwash.

Hogwash, in the Texas case, because it is patently clear to all but those who refuse to call a spade a spade that these girls (and boys, who become abusers themselves) are raised, from day one, under a brutally authoritarian thumb - obey ("stay sweet," the watchword for the girls and women), or face brutality on earth, eternal damnation in the afterlife.

Hogwash, whether in the Texas case or the case of child porn, because kids cannot "consent" to such acts by any reasonable standard of informed consent. Guerilla seems to me to have considerable trouble even acknowledging the concept, though it has been made quite clear. No one else should have trouble divining "consent" respecting child porn, or 13-14 year old girls married off to middle aged men.

At the end of a long day, it seems to me that Guerilla has made so many untrue statements in this thread that it is overly burdensome to list them in one place. The latest, respecting South Carolina (Guerilla: "sex with 14 year olds isn't illegal"), again, was refuted. The law:

Pay close attention, folks. I emphasized paragraph (B)(2) because this is precisely germane to this thread. These girls are slaves; the women, victims themselves, become enablers; the boys, destroyed by such depraved practice; and they become the men to continue it.

I am reminded of Hannah Arendt's Banality of Evil; the protests (already) made, and assuredly to be made, by members defending these practices have been and will continue to be that they are just living "normally," according to a sacred code, handed down by a (sex offender) "Prophet." It doesn't fly.

 

The boys WHO AREN'T BANNED become abusers. The boys who ARE banned, well that's a whole nother story isn't it? The FLDS try to portray themselves as loving parents, except for when they aren't!
So let's see;

1. they "marry" off and impregnate underage girls
2. they waterboard babies
3. they break bones at an unusual percentage rate, even in very young children
4. they discard boys as young as 14
5. they break up marriages and assign women and their children to new "husbands"

But it isn't marriage because the men are already married. They try to cloak their sins in religious terms, "spiritual marriage". No, it isn't spiritual, it's polygamy, and it's illegal. And if the girl is underage, it's rape, and it's illegal for her parents to give consent to the "marriage", because you can't legally consent to something that's illegal. So the parents are conspirators. Yes, I know, some of the girls are over 18. That doesn't negate the well established pattern of underage girls being victimized. Oh, so it wasn't 30 (or whatever) girls, it was only 10 or 15, or even 5. In most situations, one victim would be enough for outrage. These people have managed to fool the public to a certain degree with their pastel dresses. But rape is still rape.

They waterboard babies to make compliant children. Do I need to mention that waterboarding is illegal? No wonder all the kids are well mannered, they fear for their lives. But they don't know it's fear, cuz that's all they have ever known. If any of them didn't get the message through torture as a baby, well we'll just break a few bones, there! Did you get the message now! You betcha they do. And if not, well if they are boys, throw em out. And if they are girls, just get em preggo soon as possible. And if that still doesn't work, hubby will be mean to her kids until she is brought into compliance, (see link in previous post), and that pretty much does it for mothers.

There are people who devote significant time and money to support the boys who have been thrown out, because the FLDS doesn't give a shit about their own.

And where in the bible does it say wives and children can be reassigned to new men whenever the first husband falls out of favor??? So it's till death do us part, or until somebody gets pissed off at somebody else, then you can just move into a new mans house. SICK. And hardly religious or pious is it? That's how grown men are kept in line. If you don't go along, they can take your wives and children away from you, and ban you.

These people are sick. This isn't real religion, or mormonism, or christianity. It's a cult of abuse. The last thing we should do is leave these people alone.

I admit, probably not every single man at the ranch is an abuser, and each case has to be considered individually. We will probably give most of the kids back, but the parents will have to comply with the state. And the families will be tracked to try and prevent more abuse. Better not have any more accidently broken bones! Not to mention marrying off the girls.

I predict some of the men will disappear to avoid prosecution, and will abandon their families, only to go and make new families somewhere else. Most of the women will comply with the state to get their kids back.

I wonder if any of the kids will be abandoned to the state by both parents?

And as for arguing about the technicalities of the law, or variances in law from one jurisdiction to another, that's nit picky. This happened in Texas. The FLDS is subject to the law wherever they live, just like the rest of us are. And arguing about whether or not these practices are moral, and citing examples of different standards in different times and places, well, that's always been the case. Different people in different places, at different times have always done things differently. I don't look for the lowest standard ever and use that no matter what. The current law in Texas applies, current law is an attempt to codify current morality. If you don't agree with Texas law, then start some kind of effort to reform it. But that's just what Texas did recently. They realized their marriage law was out of date with current morality, and they changed the law to raise the legal age for marriage.