[ExI] flds raid, was general repudiation...
pharos at gmail.com
Sun Apr 27 11:56:45 UTC 2008
On Sun, Apr 27, 2008 at 6:57 AM, spike wrote:
> No, neither of these, and do let me assure you I am not defending any
> religious group. The critical civics lesson here is that the Texas Child
> Protective Services has set a precedent that it can seize one's children on
> a rumor without due process or legal proof of allegations. The CPS had a
> mole inside the compound for four years, yet the report that spurred the
> seizing of the children was evidently bogus, made by one who had never been
> inside the compound.
> With this action, the Texas CPS demonstrates that the constitutional rights
> associated with depriving one of liberty or property does not apply to
> depriving one of one's children. A weird sort of logic is applied: taking
> one's children is not exactly depriving one of liberty, nor is it depriving
> one of property for one's children are not one's property. Therefor the
> TCPS can take the children, if the TCPS decides any of the following
> criteria are met:
> 1. Girls are being forced to marry against their will
> 2. Boys are being taught to be abusers perhaps later in life
> 3. Girls are being impregnated before the age of consent
> 4. A threat to the safety of the children exists in the home
> 5. Children are being taught that polygamy is acceptable
> 6. Young girls are being married to old men.
> The fact that the feds did not stop this action, nor did the ACLU raise more
> than a token objection tells me that the Texas CPS has now the authority and
> the duty to seize the children of *any* family that is proven to be Muslim.
> Look at the list above. Does the Muslim religion allow any or all of these?
> If one were a Texas Muslim with children, my advice would be to flee that
> state forthwith.
Spike, I think you are exaggerating here, from a horrified libertarian's POV.
Texas had an abuse complaint that justified entry to the premises.
The show of force was obviously to deter gun-happy nuts from starting trouble.
Child abuse is against Texas law and allows the removal of children.
Once they entered the premises they saw young girls with babies, so
child abuse was evident.
As it was a commune, all the adults were probably complicit in the sex
They could not arrest all the adults and leave the children, so all
the children were removed.
It will all come out in court soon enough, but I don't see a problem here.
Good work I say! Texas does the job where Utah is afraid to act
against FLDS because there are too many of them.
More information about the extropy-chat