<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Rafal Smigrodzki wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:7641ddc60805062228w662cc2bby8f6122f796599305@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">On Mon, May 5, 2008 at 12:33 AM, John Grigg <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:possiblepaths2050@gmail.com"><possiblepaths2050@gmail.com></a> wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap=""> There is a real disconnect in the Libertarian thinking of you and Lee.
But honest self-appraisal (as in "looking into your own soul") has
been replaced with intellectual slight of hand and side stepping.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
### Bill accused me of being intelligent and now you are accusing me
of intellectual sleight of hand and substituting technical expertise
in rhetoric for honesty. So far you have been a worthy participant in
a discussion, where we exchanged some opinions - but it looks like all
the pertinent ideas have been presented, so let's finish here, before
we get into a repetitive and unnecessarily dissonant mode of
discourse.
Let me just add that this particular issue is one where I did a lot of
honest self-appraisal and as a result I changed my mind very
significantly. There was a time when I read a comment about Waco by a
reader published in the National Geographic, something like "They took
themselves out the gene pool", and I thought "Wow, this dude hit the
nail on the head!"
Needless to say, I am now deeply ashamed about these thoughts. I am
really ashamed and sorry.
So, please, don't say I didn't look into my soul ... even though,
strictly speaking, I have none.
Rafal
_______________________________________________
extropy-chat mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org">extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat">http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
I just wanted to point out that today a panel of three judges ruled
that the FLDS children should not have been removed from their homes.<br>
One important statement in the article I want to point out was this: <br>
<p _extended="true">"The existence of the FLDS belief system as
described by the department's witnesses, by itself, does not put
children of FLDS parents in physical danger," the three-judge panel
said."<br>
</p>
<p _extended="true"><br>
Maybe there is hope for us after all.<br>
</p>
<p _extended="true">Kevin Freels<br>
</p>
<p _extended="true"><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/05/22/flds.ruling/index.html?eref=rss_topstories">http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/05/22/flds.ruling/index.html?eref=rss_topstories</a></p>
<p _extended="true"><br>
SAN ANGELO, Texas (CNN) -- The state of Texas should not have removed
the more than 460 children it took from a polygamist sect's ranch
because it didn't prove they were in "imminent enough" danger, an
appeals court ruled Thursday.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
"The existence of the FLDS belief system as described by the
department's witnesses, by itself, does not put children of FLDS
parents in physical danger," the three-judge panel said. <br>
<br>
An attorney representing the mothers said the trial court that
originally backed the state's seizure of the children has 10 days to
vacate its decision. If it doesn't, the appeals court will act, said
Julie Balovich of the Texas RioGrande Legal Aid.<br>
<br>
"It is a great day for families in the state of Texas," she said.<br>
<br>
The state's Department of Family and Protective Services "did not
present any evidence of danger to the physical health or safety of any
male children or any female children who had not reached puberty," the
judges ruled. Watch how the ruling favors FLDS »<br>
<br>
According to the ruling, the mothers said the state should have proved
that the children's health or safety was in danger; that there was "an
urgent need for protection" that required immediately separating the
children from their parents; and that the state made "reasonable
efforts" to avoid removing the children.<br>
<br>
<br>
Because no such proof was presented, the mothers argued, the District
Court -- which backed the department's seizure of the children -- "was
required to return the children to their parents and abused its
discretion by failing to do so."<br>
<br>
The ruling does not order the children returned to Yearning for Zion
ranch in Eldorado, Texas, but directs the lower court to vacate its
orders granting custody of the women's children to CPS. <br>
<br>
"The legislature has required that there be evidence to support a
finding that there is a danger to the physical health or safety of the
children in question and that the need for protection is urgent and
warrants immediate removal," the ruling said. <br>
<br>
It concluded, "Evidence that children raised in this particular
environment may some day have their physical health and safety
threatened is not evidence that the danger is imminent enough to
warrant invoking the extreme measure of immediate removal prior to full
litigation of the issue."<br>
<br>
The children were removed last month from the Yearning for Zion ranch,
which is owned by the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of
Latter-day Saints, a Mormon offshoot that practices polygamy.<br>
<br>
"The way that the courts have ignored the legal rights of these mothers
is ridiculous," Balovich said before a news conference. "It was about
time a court stood up and said that what has been happening to these
families is wrong."<br>
<br>
Later, flanked by some of the FLDS mothers represented in the case,
Balovich explained that authorities considered YFZ ranch one household,
an assertion with which the appeals court did not agree.<br>
<br>
<br>
Therefore, proving there was abuse in one household did not mean the
state could apply that behavior to the entire ranch. <br>
<br>
"This was the right decision," Balovich said, adding that she and her
clients were "ecstatic about this news."<br>
<br>
Although the ruling applies only to the 38 mothers and their children,
"we believe the reasoning in the court of appeals decision would apply
to all children," Balovich said. <br>
<br>
The authenticity of the initial abuse reports that focused authorities'
attention on the ranch is in question, the court noted in its ruling.
Police have alleged that a family shelter crisis line received multiple
calls on March 29 and 30 from a caller claiming to be Sarah Jessop
Barlow, age 16. <br>
<br>
The girl reported that she had an 8-month-old baby and was pregnant
again, and that she was married to Dale Barlow, who abused her
physically and sexually.<br>
<br>
At least one of the telephones used by "Sarah Barlow" to make the calls
has been traced back to a Colorado woman. Police have named Rozita
Swinton a person of interest in connection with the reports of abuse at
the ranch, but she has not been charged, although she faces charges of
providing a false report to authorities in a Colorado case.<br>
<br>
Court hearings in the FLDS case resumed Monday, with hearings in
several courtrooms to accommodate lawyers for the children. The
hearings were held so the parties could review "family service plans"
dictating the parameters under which FLDS children can regain custody
of their children.<br>
<br>
<br>
FLDS members have denied any physical or sexual abuse takes place, and
maintain they are being persecuted for their religious beliefs. <br>
<br>
The sect's leader, Warren Jeffs, is in a Utah prison after a conviction
on charges of being an accomplice to rape in connection with a marriage
he performed in 2001. Jeffs also faces trial in Arizona on eight
charges including sexual conduct with a minor, incest and conspiracy. <br>
<br>
</p>
</body>
</html>