Polygamy Sects

[LauraD 2]

Jennie, if you were a 13 or 14 year old girl, and one day your father brought home one of his friends (who you had probably previously referred to as "Uncle X") and told you that next Monday you were going to marry Uncle X and be one of his loving and obedient wives, would you be a happy and willing participant in that marriage? Would you, the night of your wedding, go with your 40-50 year old new husband to immediately comsummate the marriage and start work on getting you pregnant?

Even if the state you were in permitted you to get married at 14, and you had the approval of both your parents? Because that is the reality of life for girls within this particular church. If you are an adolescent boy and not from one of the prominent families, odds are you will be "cast out" for some trumped up charge of sinning. There aren't enough young girls to go around.

(As far as I know, there is no evidence to support anyone in this particular sect being on welfare. They are completely self supporting; they want as little outside involvement as possible.)

[Jennie1976 1]

Jennie, if you were a 13 or 14 year old girl, and one day your father brought home one of his friends (who you had probably previously referred to as "Uncle X") and told you that next Monday you were going to marry Uncle X and be one of his loving and obedient wives, would you be a happy and willing participant in that marriage? Would you, the night of your wedding, go with your 40-50 year old new husband to immediately comsummate the marriage and start work on getting you pregnant?

If I had been taught that it was right and correct, I can't imagine I would have any opinions to the contrary. As it is, I was taught to get married after I got my degree...so I did...and didn't think anything of it. What I'm saying is that it is not my place (or the government's) to dictate what they should believe. I don't believe in Islam...should I demand that their wives be allowed to wear miniskirts? As I said, I do NOT agree with their beliefs. My issue is with the government dictating them.

Even if the state you were in permitted you to get married at 14, and you had the approval of both your parents? Because that is the reality of life for girls within this particular church. If you are an adolescent boy and not from one of the prominent families, odds are you will be "cast out" for some trumped up charge of sinning. There aren't enough young girls to go around.

Again, I'm NOT agreeing with marriage at 14...my children will certainly be taught differently. However, if the government allows it in those cases with parent permission (and this sect obviously has given parent permission), then who is the government to say that THIS particular group is not allowed to do it.

[ELENATION 0]

I understand where you are coming from Jennie and by the way ,the miniskirt comment was too funny.... I had a mental picture of a woman wearing an abaya covering the hair and a really short jilbab...oh gee....:crying:

My concern at this Texas sect is that the underage girls were having sex with the older men and that goes against the laws of the land, so if there is no government intervention in order to respect their freedom of religion, we would be allowing them to break the law.. where do we draw the line..? and the fact that an underage girl called the authorities regarding the matter, which means that she probably was not consenting to the whole marriage and sex with the older men, and it's scary because if at some point the government is notified that at a certain church they are practicing human sacrifices with children and they couldn't intervene because it was part of their religious belief and we have to respect their freedom of religion, then imagine that.... I know this is a drastic example, but I just think that there's got to be a time where we draw the line and someone intervenes otherwise people would be hiding behind religions/churchs/cults to commit horrible acts and they would feel that they are safe and that there is nothing anybody can do about it.

[Jennie1976 1]

Elenation...I completely agree...which is why I'm so conflicted. Sex with minors is deplorable, but, in certain states, allowable by law. The girl who called for help should get ALL the help we can give her. But the others who still have their beliefs...I don't know. I just don't think the government should allow it in some cases but not others. If the girl wants to get married, no matter how misguided, and the government allows it for others, then she should be allowed to do so. Again, I do NOT agree with that law, but it IS the law. And I don't think the government should pick and choose who has to follow the law and who doesn't. Either it's a law or it's not. And, in Texas, they have allowed it before.

But, the girl who called for help wanted help and should get it.

Like I said, I'm conflicted. There are no clear answers. But to me, the government needs to be consistent...even if I'M not :-)

[ELENATION 0]

Elenation...I completely agree...which is why I'm so conflicted. Sex with minors is deplorable, but, in certain states, allowable by law. The girl who called for help should get ALL the help we can give her. But the others who still have their beliefs...I don't know. I just don't think the government should allow it in some cases but not others. If the girl wants to get married, no matter how misguided, and the government allows it for others, then she should be allowed to do so. Again, I do NOT agree with that law, but it IS the law. And I don't think the government should pick and choose who has to follow the law and who doesn't. Either it's a law or it's not. And, in Texas, they have allowed it before.

But, the girl who called for help wanted help and should get it.

Like I said, I'm conflicted. There are no clear answers. But to me, the government needs to be consistent...even if I'M not :-)

Consistency yes! definitely, sex with minors shouldn't be allowed by the law anywhere in this country, the fact that they have allowed it in Texas before or that they do in some states is disturbing.

[taz 2]

I think another issue we should not forget is the issue of physical abuse. I don't believe anyone has the right to abuse another person. Do you notice it is always done to people who are smaller and more defenseless? The other thought is who of us would choose to be raped and beaten by anyone whatever our religious beliefs? The term "barefoot and pregnant" applies here. My sister's former husband did his best to isolate her and keep her at home. She became so depressed and had such a low self esteem that she could hardly function. Thank goodness he was also bad with jobs. After being in the workplace for a while she realized she didn't have to stay with him.

[LauraD 2]

Uh, y'all? Who said sex with minors was legal in Texas? Statuatory rape is just as illegal here as it is anywhere else. Our legal age of consent is 17.

Regarding my earlier question those little girls aren't given a choice about whether or not they get married, or who they marry. I don't know what religion the folks across the street from me are, but if I found out they were forcing their little girl to "marry" a middle aged man who already had other "wives", I'd damn sure call the police and report it as child abuse.

The court hearings on this whole mess start tomorrow, I think. I'm sure that in the end, almost-if not all-of those kids, will end up going back into the compound with their mothers. The gate will get locked up tight. But now, they know it's not so far to town, and if any of them want to get there, they know which way to go.

[Jennie1976 1]

Sex with minors definitely should not be allowed. So the high school up the street from me...the one that offers child care because so many girls have had babies...all of them should be arrested? And their boyfriends? And, since I know that's not what you mean, how about this:

Those fourteen, fifteen, and sixteen year old girls that are pregnant and/or have babies...should they be taken from their homes? Their parents allowed them to become pregnant and/or have sex.

In the Catholic religion, the Eucharist is believed to be the actual body and blood of Christ. Should they be arrested (and come after with TANKS!!!) for canibolism (sp?)?

In Christianity, Mary married Joseph when she was about 14 and Joseph was about 30. If you aren't Christian, this doesn't matter and has no meaning to you. But if you ARE Christian, what does THAT say? And I am VERY Christian!

I'm NOT AND WILL NEVER say that I agree with these people. I'm saying that the government had NO right to go in there.

There WAS NO phone call.

The man who supposedly raped the 16-year-old girl had not been in Texas for 30 years (as verified by his parole officer).

The 16-year-old girl has never been found and, interestingly enough, the 9-1-1 tape has not been released.

They went in there with A TANK! A TANK!!!!!

I'm sorry...the government had NO right to do this. These are their (very strange) religious beliefs. While child abuse should ALWAYS be punished, they had no proof of that.

[MrsFlipFlops 2]

First of all, there was no 911 tape, the girl didn't call 911, she called a domestic violence line- which for privacy reasons can NEVER be released. Secondly, you're comparing apples to oranges. We're talking about the LAWS of the country. What people do in other countries or other times is irrelevant because they don't live in the United States in this time. I'm sorry, but yes, if a mother is allowing her minor child to have sex with someone who is above the age of 18, yes, I have a problem with that. Morals aside, it's AGAINST THE LAW! We're not talking about someone speeding here people, we're talking about child abuse! This irritates me more than anything, when people are ignorant to what is considered abuse and neglect. You have no clue what law enforcement or CPS had proof of. You're claiming that they went in there with no proof, la la la. They have more proof of abuse/neglect than you claim to have that they didn't. A few news reports does not make you an expert. They went in there with a TANK for their own protection. Anyone remember Waco, people? There were shots fired! I'm sorry it "scared" the people on the compound, but you bet your socks that I want those law enforcement to be protected with any protection they need. When you're up against the unknown you take EVERY precaution. Ask any officer you've ever known. Even when you encounter someone on the street, first thing they're wanting to know is where is that person's hands, are they carrying anything, can I be harmed? This was a whole compound of the unknown! LE didn't know if they had weapons. They didn't USE the tank, they just HAD it.

Also, you state that the man that the girl claims abused her hasn't been in Texas in 30 years. Read the reports... a LOT of these family members have the SAME name. Who knows if THAT Dale Barlow is the one she's talking about. The LEADER of this group is IN JAIL for conspiracy to commit statutory rape! LE had insider informants for the past 4 years!

[MrsFlipFlops 2]

I will fight tooth and nail to protect religious freedoms, but NO religion should promote child abuse!

[Jennie1976 1]

First of all, there was no 911 tape, the girl didn't call 911, she called a domestic violence line- which for privacy reasons can NEVER be released.

I apologize...I thought it was a 911 tape.

Secondly, you're comparing apples to oranges. We're talking about the LAWS of the country. What people do in other countries or other times is irrelevant because they don't live in the United States in this time.

True. See my other post about the laws of Texas.

I'm sorry, but yes, if a mother is allowing her minor child to have sex with someone who is above the age of 18, yes, I have a problem with that. Morals aside, it's AGAINST THE LAW! We're not talking about someone speeding here people, we're talking about child abuse!

Absolutely true again. USUALLY when that happens, they send one, maybe two police officers to THAT house and not take down the whole neighborhood. LEGALLY, they can't go in blindly. They can go into the house of suspected abuse...that's all.

This irritates me more than anything, when people are ignorant to what is considered abuse and neglect. You have no clue what law enforcement or CPS had proof of. You're claiming that they went in there with no proof, la la la. They have more proof of abuse/neglect than you claim to have that they didn't. A few news reports does not make you an expert.

Actually, I do have SOME (not a lot, but some) inside information, not released to the press. This is why I feel so strongly about this.

They went in there with a TANK for their own protection. Anyone remember Waco, people? There were shots fired! I'm sorry it "scared" the people on the compound, but you bet your socks that I want those law enforcement to be protected with any protection they need. When you're up against the unknown you take EVERY precaution.

I'm sorry, but we will have to agree to disagree. There was NO reason for a tank. And don't even get me started on Waco. Like I said, I actually know inside information on both of those (which I can't get into on a public forum). What I CAN say is that unnecessary police violence is despicable. Child abuse is even worse, but, to me, taking the children of INNOCENT people--even for a SECOND--is despicable as well.

Ask any officer you've ever known. Even when you encounter someone on the street, first thing they're wanting to know is where is that person's hands, are they carrying anything, can I be harmed? This was a whole compound of the unknown! LE didn't know if they had weapons. They didn't USE the tank, they just HAD it.

I'm so glad they didn't USE the tank. Maybe, instead of police cars, they can just use tanks! Oh wait, isn't that called a "police state"? And isn't that against our Constitution?

Also, you state that the man that the girl claims abused her hasn't been in Texas in 30 years. Read the reports... a LOT of these family members have the SAME name. Who knows if THAT Dale Barlow is the one she's talking about.

Good, then show me the report that shows they got him. They went in with a tank! Surely they are competent enough to find ONE man in a SECURE compound. Surely you are not suggesting that our government is inept?

The LEADER of this group is IN JAIL for conspiracy to commit statutory rape! LE had insider informants for the past 4 years!

So that gives us the right to arrest the rest of them? Unless they have PROOF, and it's ABSOLUTE proof, then they need to back off. Yes, I would rather the government back out of our lives, even if a few innocent people get hurt than to have a government run society. Socialism, fascism, whatever. People who want it can go live in another society.

These police had no proof. They have arrested two men...one for tampering with evidence. The other for interfering with the duties of a public servant. If so many girls were being molested...or even if one was...where's the arrest?

[Jennie1976 1]

Okay, I just re-read my last post. I was a bit rude in places. I apologize. My opinion stays the same, but I DEFINITELY could have said it in a better tone. I am truly sorry for letting my emotions get the better of me.

[ELENATION 0]

"I would rather the government back out of our lives, even if a few innocent people get hurt than to have a government run society. Socialism, fascism, whatever. People who want it can go live in another society. "

With this I agree, I don't want the government involved in our lives, I'D HATE to have a government run society, unfortunately I lived 15 years of my life under comunism and believe me, I know how horrible it is, and yeah, I agree that whoever likes a society like that should go somewhere else, I only want government intervention when the law is broken and with that call that they received reporting child/sexual abuse and maybe other evidences that we don't know about, the government felt that they were breaking the law, so they intervened, so I'm ok with that, but I also agree with you that the government needs to be consistent.:tt1:

Edited April 17, 2008 by ELENATION

[LauraD 2]

Jennie, we are going to have to agree to disagree on....a lot. (I was going to put a wink here to indicate tone, but it seemed so inappropriate for this topic.)

Respectfully, could you indicate to me which of your posts was the one about the laws in Texas? The only one I thought relevant was the age of consent, and that covered a lot of states.

In retrospect, of course everyone looks at the tank and the guns and says "oh!the children!". Well, here in Texas well look at a walled up religious sect and think- Waco. Personally, I think the FBI made the biggest fustercluck in history, and are responsible for the death of every individual that died, including their own men. But this is a state where the gun ranges have ladies' nights.

Do I want them to take the pregnant girls away? Yes. I see the forced statuatory rape, with parental permission or not, as systemic child sex abuse on a community scale. None of the marriages these girls are entering into are legalling binding, so none of the men or the parents are protected by law. Of course, it's not feasible, so it's better for them all to stay together, where they can at least not feel like freaks in the world.

I can honor a lot of things, and I can find faith in a lot of different religions. I cannot find honor, faith, or any kind of god in a religion that requires women to submit en masse to bullies who basically use them for baby and f'ing factories. Who run off any young men because they know if those young girls have any choice, they won't look twice at their daddy's friends. To me, that "church" is nothing but a pedophile's utopia. They breed their own.

[plain 12]

That's really the cruxt of the whole arguement. The age of consent in Texas. It's 17. You can marry earlier with parental approval, but this is not a clear-cut case of parental approval. Basically this whole sect looks and sounds like it's a means to allow select, older men to have sex with numerous (and sometimes underage) women. Has anybody caught the media interviews with the older women of the compound? When asked if any of them had ever witnessed abuse, or witnessed a 16 yr or younger who was pregnant, they responded with basically "All I know is that my daughters are clean and pure". Hello? Sidestep the question?

I am usually for less (much less) government intervention into private lives, especially religious lives. But in allergations of abuse, they have to act.

I, personally, am very suspicious of any religion that shrouds itself in secrecy and isolation. Perhaps that shows the shallowness of my opinions. Somebody in this thread posted earlier that some cults use the freedom of religions to set up a self-serving group. I think the degree of secrecy and isolation is inversely proportional to the validity of the religion.