…ruled that the state must return some 130 children taken into state custody following an early April raid on a polygamous sect’s West Texas ranch.However, the decision likely will affect about 320 other children from the ranch who now are living in foster homes and shelters throughout the state, attorneys for their parents said.
By a six-to-three majority, the justices decided that a district court judge improperly removed the children, like their parents members of The Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.
[...]
Marleigh Meisner, a spokeswoman for the state Department of Families and Protective Services, which had asked the court to rule in its favor, said the agency was “disappointed but we understand and respect the court’s decision and will take immediate steps to comply. Child Protective Services has one purpose in this case – to protect the children.
“Our goal is to reunite families whenever we can do so, and make sure the children will be safe,” Meisner said.
Liar.
And I don’t believe for a moment Meisner and ilk are going to roll over and return the children to their parents.
Comment by Big Bang Hunter (pumping you up) on 5/29 @ 8:10 pm #
- Well. If they don’t they can all be held in contempt, and spend some time in the slammer. I was going to say at least community service, but they’ve already proven they are derelict in that job.
Pingback by a-foton » Blog Archive » 6-3 [Darleen Click] on 5/29 @ 8:14 pm #
[...] Ed Brill wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerptTexas Supreme Court … …ruled that the state must return some 130 children taken into state custody following an early April raid on a polygamous sect’s West Texas ranch. However, the decision likely will affect about 320 other children from the ranch who now are living in foster homes and shelters throughout the state, attorneys for their parents said. By a six-to-three majority, the justices decided that a district court … [visit site to read more] [...]
Comment by Big Bang Hunter (pumping you up) on 5/29 @ 8:22 pm #
- …and just for the record, I still think Rachael Ray is a hottie, burka or no burka.
Comment by J. Peden on 5/29 @ 9:12 pm #
“Our goal is to reunite families whenever we can do so, and make sure the children will be safe,â€Â
Ah, Families: “
In order to save them, we must first destroy them.”‘Would apply well to CPS itself, though.
Comment by JHoward on 5/29 @ 9:16 pm #
Reminds me of the psychotic goon in the movies who blames his victims for his own murderous rage, Pablo. More transparent rhetoric than that would be difficult to fashion.
The hallowed best-interest clause. Throwing the childrens under the bus of family law profits since political correctness and gender feminism began.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/29 @ 10:04 pm #
Nah, i think they will return the kiddos.
“The ambiguity of current Texas law has allowed for alleged crimes to be committed under the practice of religious freedom. Allegations including, but not limited to, practices of bigamy, polygamy, child abuse, incest, domestic violence, child endangerment, denial of equal education services or opportunities, election and welfare fraud are rampant in these religious sects, also known as “The Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.
“The U.S. Supreme Court has already ruled that while the government may not restrict religious beliefs, they may restrict religious practices. The court has said that no religious actions may violate general laws. Underage marriage, parental consent, education issues, and election fraud are all general laws. . . â€Â
See? Either way Texas wins, and they get rid of the polygs.
tant pis for Utah.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/29 @ 10:07 pm #
If the polygs cut an run for Utah, well that is what Texas wanted all along. –Texas wins!
If the polygs stay then Texas gets to prosecute them with the DNA evidence. –Texas wins!
Its a win/win for Texas.
just not for the kiddos, i guess.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/29 @ 10:09 pm #
I mean, all Texas needed was the DNA.
Of course they will let the kiddos go back.
hahaha
Comment by B Moe on 5/29 @ 10:09 pm #
All caps are a much better indicator of you psychosis than mere bolding. Although you do get bonus points for unattributed, lunatic fringe quotes. You should see if you can bet banned by Alex Jones some time.
Comment by Darleen on 5/29 @ 10:10 pm #
nishishit
If you going to quote, do include the analysis
Comment by Darleen on 5/29 @ 10:11 pm #
link for above:
soretoesandableedingheart.blogspot.com/2008/05/studying-change-of-texas-law.html
Comment by JHoward on 5/29 @ 10:15 pm #
Oh. So you can paste other stuff in these here leetle boxes? Cool.
http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2008_05_25-2008_05_31.shtml#1212100813
I’ll be back some with some other research I plan to do right now about motorized goalposts, nuggie-san. Nitro-burning, hemi-powered motorized goalposts.
Comment by happyfeet on 5/29 @ 10:16 pm #
CPS looks kind of stupid. Like they really didn’t have their act together. They should have a retreat and do role-playing exercises I think, so they don’t traumatize kids no more by hauling them away from their moms when they don’t have any reason for it they can show to anybody. It’s worse than that though. I’m really afraid that the CPS workers in Texas are gonna develop self-esteem issues. Cause of they are teh suck, and now everybody know they’re stupid and incompetent. Someone should intervene and break the cycle.
Comment by happyfeet on 5/29 @ 10:18 pm #
Oh. everybody *knows* … that should say. I bet some of them probably have a case against the university formerly known as Southwest Texas for how ill-prepared they were to make decisions and stuff. I wonder if that’s why they changed the name, to foil lawsuits like this.
Comment by happyfeet on 5/29 @ 10:21 pm #
Hey I have a masters from Southwest Texas.
Oh that’s neat. I have a huge collection of Japanese anime porn.
Trade ya?
Comment by JD on 5/29 @ 10:22 pm #
Apparently nishit is unwilling to admit how incredibly wrong she has been every step of this way. Why does she hate the Constitution?
Comment by JHoward on 5/29 @ 10:25 pm #
Given your record, don’t count on it. Actually, I’ll give you the DNA evidence and you’ll still be down 3 to 1 as your goalposts clear the traps at 180mph…
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/29 @ 10:47 pm #
“There is no actual evidence that this group is doing any of the things accused by local residents”
at the time.
that is what the DNA is for. ;)
now there will be DNA evidence showing violation of the “general laws”
“The U.S. Supreme Court has already ruled that while the government may not restrict religious beliefs, they may restrict religious practices. The court has said that no religious actions may violate general laws. Underage marriage, parental consent, education issues, and election fraud are all general laws. . . â€Â
either way Texas wins….they just want to get rid of the polygs.
if the polygs run, they are gone from Texas.
if the polygs stay, they get prosecuted with DNA evidence of violations of general laws.
This case has also elevated the polygs into the purview of the public and the media.
FLDS will face increased public scrutiny wherever they are.
Comment by happyfeet on 5/29 @ 10:51 pm #
Run Polygs Run Polygs Run
Daddy please don’t, it wasn’t his fault, he means so much to me
Daddy please don’t, we’re gonna get married…just you wait and see
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/29 @ 10:52 pm #
i dunno feets…..maybe this was the plan all along….to get the DNA and then give the kids back.
the amount of taxpayer dollars this is consuming is a budget breaker.
CPS can’t be happy to expense all that fundage.
maybe CPS was just actually collecting DNA, and taking all the kids was the only way they could get all the samples.
Comment by maggie katzen on 5/29 @ 10:53 pm #
religious persecution by the state. yay!
Comment by JHoward on 5/29 @ 10:55 pm #
And Tom Cruise rappels through the glass in nuggie-san’s bedroom, reaches around to the beltline behind his right hip…
Comment by happyfeet on 5/29 @ 10:56 pm #
But if that was a written in an email kind of plan or a testify to the committee that this was the plan kind of plan they’re in big trouble. There are procedures and stuff. You can’t just barge in willy nilly grabbing children. It sends a bad message. I don’t think people what aren’t malicious will be too eager to call the CPS if these are the ramifications. But maybe I’m naive. (filed under Things Involving Other People’s Kids)
Comment by JHoward on 5/29 @ 10:59 pm #
Ever see goalposts go by at nearly two hundred mph, feets? They whistle.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/29 @ 11:09 pm #
dur feets, if that is why they did it there won’t be a papertrail.
im hypothesizing.
but….why would they take DNA samples from every child unless they were plannin on using them?
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/29 @ 11:14 pm #
JHoward im not movin goalposts…..what i think about this case is evolving as i read different things.
i read Volkh, too.
darleen attributes evil intent to the CPS….but does it make sense that CPS would take all those babies withoust some purpose?
the only thing i can think of is the DNA.
you are welcome to provide an atlternate analysis.
Comment by JD on 5/29 @ 11:30 pm #
Evolving? That sounds so nuancy. How about this.. All of your other predictions and blathering on this topic have been shown to be laughably off base. You ignore that. Does. not. compute.
Comment by Spies, Brigands, and Pirates - UMBA on 5/29 @ 11:33 pm #
CPS can’t be happy to expense all that fundage.
Wait until the lawsuits hit, fascist.
what i think about this case is evolving as i read different things
You misspelled “as i get publicly humiliated yet again”.
Stay classy, liebot.
Comment by maggie katzen on 5/29 @ 11:34 pm #
har, JD, you know what else “evolved”? that case against the Duke Lacrosse players. nishfong.
Comment by Darleen on 5/29 @ 11:38 pm #
nishi must have been channeling one of our other trolls because she doesn’t really look at the site where she lifted her quote (which was the language of the analysis that accompanied the bill that was finally passed in Texas in 2005 that changed the marriage law. Funny thing, too, it was a defacto law that made every marriage that had a 15 y/o in it at that bill’s passage null and void.
The writer of the blog has this interesting thing to say:
Comment by Darleen on 5/29 @ 11:39 pm #
so maybe there’s a reason CPS was hot to seize FLDS children, especially those under five.
There’s money to be made adopting out white babies.
Comment by Pablo on 5/29 @ 11:49 pm #
So, where’s the part where the law says it’s legal for the state to come into a community and abduct all of its kids because they want their fucking DNA?
Zoom!
Comment by Pablo on 5/30 @ 3:46 am #
Stupid polygs. Look how many.
Comment by Akatsukami on 5/30 @ 4:22 am #
Exclusionary Rule, nishi-domo. Any DNA “evidence” will be thrown out as hopelessly compromised by the manifold illegalities orchestrated by CFS.
In the 1980s, with your stranglehold on the mainline media, you leftists had your way with manufactured sex abuse charges. A quarter-century later, though, we can fact-check your asses; Nifong is only the first of many to be brought down when Red fascism is exposed.
Comment by SDN on 5/30 @ 6:10 am #
“And I don’t believe for a moment Meisner and ilk are going to roll over and return the children to their parents.”
They might, since TX law allows citizens to use deadly force to defend against such crimes as kidnapping. I’d certainly vote to acquit any parent who took that attitude.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/30 @ 6:22 am #
1. im not a leftist. ima hereditary republican that is increasingly disenchanted with the porkparty of the theocons.
2. there is no exclusionary rule for DNA in the US, like fingerprints it can be used, and there is no exclusionary evidence rule for family law anyways. So CPS could collect it. When the criminal indictments are passed out, im sure the FLDS patriarch daddies lawyers will try to argue against it, but there is no precedent for exclusion.
If you read Volkh there don’t seem to be “manifold illegalities orchestrated by CFS”. The argument is not that “general laws” were not violated, just that there wasn’t immediate and imperative risk that justified removing the children. Also the 3 dissenters argued that risk was increased for the cohort of teenagers because the FLDS comprised one household and the majority disagreed.
Again, the argument is not that no criminal activity was occurring, just that criminal activity did not represent immediate imperative risk to the children.
Comment by DarthRove on 5/30 @ 6:29 am #
Plus, nishi, I’m sure that CPS maintained a proper chain of evidence for all of teh Dee-Ennay they got. I can imagine the courtroom scene now … (insert dream sequence wavy lines here)
Prosecuter: Judge, I gots me sum Dee-Ennay here what proovs up sum pole-iggamy. Hang the fuckers!
Judge: Um, that’s a bottle with some spit in it, and a label that says “Damning evidence of whatever we want to prove”.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/30 @ 6:30 am #
Polygamy cannot be made a crime in the US, because of the establishment clause, and because of “spiritual” marriages. Texas is pursuing violations of “general law.”
Forgive me for repeating this but some of you seem to have missed it.
“The ambiguity of current Texas law has allowed for alleged crimes to be committed under the practice of religious freedom. Allegations including, but not limited to, practices of bigamy, polygamy, child abuse, incest, domestic violence, child endangerment, denial of equal education services or opportunities, election and welfare fraud are rampant in these religious sects, also known as “The Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.
“The U.S. Supreme Court has already ruled that while the government may not restrict religious beliefs, they may restrict religious practices. The court has said that no religious actions may violate general laws. Underage marriage, parental consent, education issues, and election fraud are all general laws. . . â€Â
in 2005 the Texas judiciary enacted laws specifically targetting religious practices that violated general laws.
Pablo, whatever state the muslim polygs are living in should certainly follow Texas’ actions.
Comment by Pablo on 5/30 @ 6:38 am #
No, DNA is no longer “just like fingerprints” since the Genetic Nondiscrimination Act became law 9 days ago. I’ve pointed this out to you repeatedly, but like anything else that doesn’t align with your view of things you simply ignore it. That’s because you’re an idiot.
You’re talking about using it in prosecutions, which…SURPRISE!!!…are criminal law not family law. You not perceptive. In fact, you barely sentient.
So, you’re saying that anyone who is a muslim should have their children removed on the basis of them being muslims? After all, Islam allows a man to have multiple wives. So, if you subscribe to Islam, you’re as guilty as an FLDSer.
Comment by JD on 5/30 @ 6:41 am #
1. im not a leftist. ima hereditary republican
I call BS. Your parents politics have no relevance to your philosophy, or lack thereof. Were that the case, I would have a Baracky bumper sticker on my car.
Next time you are right about something on this topic, I will start paying more attention. Why do you hate the Constitution?
Comment by Pablo on 5/30 @ 6:41 am #
Polygamy is illegal in all 57 states. You just don’t seem to understand the law or, shocka!, the legal definition of the term “marriage”.
Comment by Job on 5/30 @ 6:46 am #
nishi is wrong. It may be that the rules of evidence for Family Court allow the illegally obtained DNA evidence to be admitted, but you can bet your ass that no criminal court is going to let it in, and in fact a judge could easily order it destroyed. So, because of the actions of CPS it is now more likely that actual criminal wrongdoing will go unpunished.
Comment by Slartibartfast on 5/30 @ 7:01 am #
It depends on what you mean by polygamy. It’s certainly not legal to marry more than one person, but if you want to set up a household with multiple significant others, there’s absolutely nothing in the law to keep you from doing that. OTOH if you want to raise children in that environment, you might run into some problems.
Personally, I think polygamy is workable in fiction. But I wouldn’t presume to tell others what to do, and as long as no one is doing anyone else any harm, I would tend to keep my nose out of things.
But I think sex between anyone and a 12-year-old should be actively frowned upon. Legally, actively frowned upon.
Comment by Rob Crawford on 5/30 @ 7:05 am #
Why do you hate Mohammed?
Comment by Slartibartfast on 5/30 @ 7:08 am #
I don’t hate him. I just don’t want him porking my daughters.
Comment by Education Guy on 5/30 @ 7:11 am #
I can just picture nishi arguing with her microscope that what it’s showing her isn’t real. If she approaches her life in the same way she tends to argue around these parts, then you know that scene has played out at least once.
Comment by Pablo on 5/30 @ 7:18 am #
Polygamy is an individual in multiple marriages, and marriage is defined in the law, so any person with more than 2 of them is a polygamist. And yes, you can shack up with however many whoevers you like and it is not against the law.
I’d venture a guess that you can count on it in terms of outcomes, mental health, etc… I don’t see where you run into legal problems without violating the abuse/neglect laws. Unless you happen to be religious, in which case all bets are off.
Comment by Education Guy on 5/30 @ 7:22 am #
On the other hand maybe nishi is right. Maybe the whole rule of law thing is just an excuse we give ourselves to justify the continuation of evil action. It’s not as if this country doesn’t have a history of bending it’s laws when circumstances call for it. Perhaps we simply need a strong leader who will be able to correctly identify our general will and act on it, by say, smiting some Mormons.
Anyone know if Napoleon has living descendants?
Comment by JHoward on 5/30 @ 7:24 am #
Excuse me? Excuse me!? You’ve just spent a week bloviating about yeehah for Texas because they made polygamy illegal, dammit, and you were, you know, a federalist.
WHAAAAAA! They they go, six-foot flames coming outta the pipes.
Comment by JD on 5/30 @ 7:26 am #
JHoward – She is “evolving”. Amoeba level lurks on the horizon.
Comment by JHoward on 5/30 @ 7:28 am #
Indeed, JD. Tends to put me off that conversion to Islam I was considering.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/30 @ 7:28 am #
no pablo, bigamy is a crime in the US, polygamy cant be.
the FLDS religion states a man cannot get to heaven without at least THREE wives.
so polygamy is a mandated religious practice for the FLDS.
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion….” Together with the Free Exercise Clause, (“…or prohibiting the free exercise thereof”)
muslims can go to heaven with one wife, up to 4 wives, or with no wives even. so it is arguable that polygamy is even a mandated religious practice for muslims.
I asked Althouse about the DNA admissability and Volkh. no response.
im not a lawyer, pablo…are u?
like I said, it will likely be argued in the criminal court, but it is admissible in the family court, where it can be used to determine falsification of information issues.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/30 @ 7:33 am #
“because they made polygamy illegal,”
no, JHoward, Texas made violations of general law illegal.
they criminlized child fakemarriage, statutory rape, election fraud, inequity of education, parental consent violations and welfare fraud involving minors.
Comment by Pablo on 5/30 @ 7:35 am #
To be a polygamist you also have to be a bigamist, idiot. The law makes marrying more than one spouse a crime and it does so in all 57 states.
O!
Comment by Pablo on 5/30 @ 7:37 am #
No, but I can read a piece of legislation, particularly one I’ve been directly supporting for a number of years. Can you read a law? Have you tried reading that one?
Comment by JHoward on 5/30 @ 7:38 am #
Even if this were family law, you haven’t moved a Texas court. You’d have no idea whatsoever how a motion to exclude evidence would therefore fly there.
See, any “family law” atty who can tie his shoes would first move for a jury trial…and get it. From there, it’s a small step to rules of evidence, even in the mosh pit of family court. And probably by any number of strategies. This case has the eyes of a nation on it. Even family court’s corruption has limits. Then there are appellate courts and finally, there’s the SC.
You can argue no rational position for tainted evidence jailing people in state or federal prison. No matter how you spin this, the evidence — should it even be damming — is tainted. Which brings us back to presumptions of innocence per each potential defendant, not whether FLDS as a whole is 100% innocent.
If you could argue a rational case for child rape, you’d be on the only common ground you’ll ever find with actual humans, nuggie-san. Of course, then you’d have to lay out a clear path to conviction, one I’d hope you both could and would occur in court.
But, as Pablo notes, you’re very sentience is at question. You’re simply a troll.
Zoom!
Comment by Pablo on 5/30 @ 7:41 am #
I can’t wait to read the first American law that cites the requirements for getting into Heaven.
Look, Ma! Boogers!
Comment by JHoward on 5/30 @ 7:42 am #
Prove it. Heck, prove that FC would acquire jurisdiction. And address your prior federalism.
Zoom!
Comment by JD on 5/30 @ 7:46 am #
no pablo, bigamy is a crime in the US, polygamy cant be.
I just love these little nuggets of idiocy from the nishit.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/30 @ 8:01 am #
my position has been consistant.
i don’t know if there will be any convictions, im neither a judge or a lawyer.
but my hypothesis is that CPS took all the children to get DNA samples from all of them.
why take DNA samples at all? is that SOP?
my hypothesis is that Texas is just trying to ride the polygs out of town on a rail, get rid of them, by making the state of Texas too hot for them.
there is a lot of negative publicity for the polygs in this…those pictures of Jeffs that surfaced are getting broad circulation.
polygs are secretive by nature. public scrutiny of institutionalized child abuse mandated by their religion can’t be good PR for them.
the polygs may be forced to renounce childfakemarriage and clean up their act.
wouldn’t that be a good thing?
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/30 @ 8:05 am #
there is strong precedent for the main LDS church elders to get a revelation and renounce practices condemned by society.
this happened for polygamy over 100 years ago, and for discrimination against blacks more recently.
Comment by Pablo on 5/30 @ 8:06 am #
Comment by Pablo on 5/30 @ 8:10 am #
SAFETY IS OF PARAMOUNT IMPORTANCE SO EVERYBODY SHOULD TAKE NOTE.
Zoom!
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/30 @ 8:12 am #
To be a polygamist you also have to be a bigamist, idiot.
nope, one official state marriage + x “spiritual marriages” is polygamy. not illegal.
bigamy == 2 official state marriages
Comment by Rob Crawford on 5/30 @ 8:14 am #
And you approve of this? You approve of illegal prosecution, of illegally taking children from their parents in order to run an unpopular minority out of the state?
Comment by Pablo on 5/30 @ 8:15 am #
Genius, I tell you. Simply genius.
Comment by Rob Crawford on 5/30 @ 8:16 am #
So, nishi, have you called on Muslim leaders in the US to denounce polygamy? You do realize there are Muslim polygamists in the US, don’t you? Would you support their homes being raided and their children being removed in order to “encourage” them to leave?
Comment by JD on 5/30 @ 8:19 am #
my position has been consistant, except when it has been evolving.
there is strong precedent for the main LDS church elders to get a revelation ..
Is the main LDS church in any way responsible for what happened?
The nishit seems intent on proving, again, that she is demonstrably denser than lead.
Comment by JHoward on 5/30 @ 8:21 am #
nuggie-san is blowing CPS’s cover.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/30 @ 8:24 am #
it is not my position to approve or disapprove.
im trying to unnerstand the why.
the linkage i posted shows the evolution of Texas law since 2005.
certainly ppl can make argument that this is targetting a particular religion.
darleen pointed that out on the soretoes website.
Texas will argue that it is prosecuting violations of the general law.
The courts will decide.
But for Texas this is what we call an iterated game.
Their goal is likely not to get individual convictions, but to make Texas non-costviable for polygs.
In games theory spk, Texas will iteratively increase penalties for the adversary player until they achieve their goal.
Comment by Rob Crawford on 5/30 @ 8:27 am #
Oh, STFU, nishidiot. You’ve been crowing your approval for this raid since the day it happened.
Comment by JHoward on 5/30 @ 8:28 am #
You’re close, nuggie-san, so very close. The answer to that question is simply another question: Why indeed?
See, this is (was) family court. Everything is SOP and nothing is SOP. Dig?
Are you perhaps starting to see a glimmer of the constitutionality argument everybody from Darleen to Pournelle, from Volokh to Pablo, and clear across the intrawebs have been raising?
Comment by Education Guy on 5/30 @ 8:31 am #
Their goal is likely not to get individual convictions, but to make Texas non-costviable for polygs.
Malicious prosecution is a crime. So if you are right, the state had better not have left a paper trail.
Comment by JHoward on 5/30 @ 8:32 am #
I take it all back, nuggie-san.
THEY JUST DID! They just decided! TWICE!
Then stop arguing for DNA evidence!
Zoom!
By being thrown out of the state’s appeals and Supreme Courts. By opening themselves up to countless millions in civil suits.
Works for me.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/30 @ 8:34 am #
I do, personally deplore the institutionalized child abuse of the FLDS, exiled teenage boys, fakemarriage, childrape, deliberate intellectual and educational impoverishment.
But that is my personal feeling, and not involved with legalities.
And as a westerner, I think maybe only TmjUtah gets my symapthy for western states with polyg infestations.
We have problems in Colorado.
But i think the commenters here seeking to rationalize FLDS practices because the children are “clean” and “wellcared for” is profoundly creepy.
So is livestock wellcared for.
Comment by Rob Crawford on 5/30 @ 8:34 am #
What’s the Constitution to a libertarian like nishi? It obviously wasn’t written with SCIENCE! in mind, except in the way the founders left open the door for philosopher kings to rule us from the bench.
Comment by Pablo on 5/30 @ 8:35 am #
Rational people do that sort of thing takes place before making declarations about it. You, not so much.
Zoom!
Comment by MayBee on 5/30 @ 8:35 am #
Their goal is likely not to get individual convictions, but to make Texas non-costviable for polygs.
So Texas doesn’t want to protect the children, they just want them to move out of state to continue their babyraping. You have been a cheerleader for Texas’s efforts- you obviously support babyraping. As long as it isn’t done in Texas.
Comment by Pablo on 5/30 @ 8:36 am #
It’s also all in your mind, which, I agree, is extremely creepy.
Comment by Rob Crawford on 5/30 @ 8:36 am #
What about the “infestation” of polygs in New Jersey?
(And way to equate people with pests, nishi. You’re really learning the progressive lingo.)
Comment by JHoward on 5/30 @ 8:37 am #
Link?
Comment by JHoward on 5/30 @ 8:42 am #
The other great irony, nish? You like totally get to say you really don’t care for western polyg fundie xians. Yeah, really. Try it. pw is quite likely cool with that.
Just don’t call me a baby-rape apologist like you did a week ago.
(Oh, and I’m further west than you apparently are, and I happen to have observed events committed in the LDS mindset that would likely make whatever bias you carry pale by comparison. Just saying. I just happen to be able to see the constitutional forest for the trees.)
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/30 @ 8:43 am #
JHoward why take DNA if they aren’t planning on using it somehow?
That is a huge amount of testing to order…even if they shop it to labs out of state it will take months and cost megabucks.
Do you have a hypothesis?
Comment by JD on 5/30 @ 8:45 am #
it is not my position to approve or disapprove.
This is not nearly the position you were taking when you were babbling incessantly about childrape and fakemarriages.
But i think the commenters here seeking to rationalize FLDS practices
An outright lie.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/30 @ 8:46 am #
i have seen a consistant argument from darleen and many others that innercity kids should be removed from their parents before the FLDS kids because they are in worse shape.
Comment by JD on 5/30 @ 8:46 am #
Why did they take it? Because they could. It is the same way of thinking that led to the Courts bitch-slapping them.
Comment by Rob Crawford on 5/30 @ 8:46 am #
Because they’re idiots? Because CPS is used to getting its way, regardless of the law, and this was just a tactic to intimidate their targets?
Comment by JD on 5/30 @ 8:47 am #
No, nishit, you have not seen that arguement presented. You interpreted their comparisons as such, and then proceed to lie.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/30 @ 8:48 am #
it is not my position to approve or disapprove.
the context of that quote has been stripped.
i guess i must more explicit to thwart the cherrypickers.
it is not my position to approve or disapprove of the State of Texas’ actions in this matter.
Comment by Rob Crawford on 5/30 @ 8:50 am #
Thereby, once more, demonstrating your lack of intelligence, despite your claims to be so bright.
They were pointing out why your position — your open admiration for the raid, and claims that it was perfectly legal — was both ridiculous and essentially based on bigotry. If children can be removed from their homes because they’re being “indoctrinated” in an unpopular creed, then can’t we extend that to other groups?
Hmmm… connecting two threads here… if we can remove children from their homes because their parents have exposed them to unpopular and harmful religious beliefs, shouldn’t Barack’s children be removed for their own safety? I mean, have you HEARD some of the hatred that’s preached in their “church”?
Comment by Pablo on 5/30 @ 8:50 am #
You might notice that their plans just got canceled.
And abducting 460+ kids and housing them indefinitely is what, cheap? Comparatively, determining parentage via DNA is peanuts..
Comment by JD on 5/30 @ 8:50 am #
Except for that little fact that you have been prancing and preening in approval of their actions ever since it happened …
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/30 @ 8:51 am #
darleen even argued that UN employees should have their children taken.
right darleen?
Comment by Rob Crawford on 5/30 @ 8:52 am #
Then why have you been expressing your glee over the assault on the liberties of the “polyg infestation”? Why have you been expressing your support of it?
Why have you been intentionally confusing support for the Constitutional rights of the accused with support for their behavior? Or is this just the result of your general lack of intelligence?
Comment by Pablo on 5/30 @ 8:53 am #
And screeching about the STATES RIGHTS!!!eleventy!!?
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/30 @ 8:54 am #
I read discussion ot the raid when it first happened.
according to Texas law the judge issueing the warrants only had to have a “sincere belief at the time” that a crime had been committed.
possibly that is unconstitutional, i am not a constitutional scholar.
Comment by JHoward on 5/30 @ 8:55 am #
Huh? See #72.
Sure I have a very functional working theory: Statism. The inevitable corruption of power.
In this case, the 4th branch of government, the burgeoning, plain-as-the-nose-on-your-face CPS/family court/gender feminist quasi-federalized socio-secular religion of State thingie. It makes money, it invents work for itself, it converts unintended consequences into intended results and industries, it conflicts divisions of power and due processes, and it feeds on protectionism, fear, sloth, bigotry, racism, and the need for social convenience…
…and so it utterly conflicts the libertarian, anti-authoritarian stance, that stance seen in classic liberalism, the founding of our system of government, and, not so subtly, probably a decent share of your fellow commenter’s principles and statements.
Yeah, I have a hypothesis.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/30 @ 8:55 am #
well, i couldn’t darleen to admit that the FLDS practice of exploiting their children is wrong.
therefore she must approve it.
Comment by Rob Crawford on 5/30 @ 8:55 am #
Again, that’s using the standards you’ve argued for, because UN employees have been (repeatedly) involved in child sex and slavery operations. And there’s a hell of a lot more evidence of that than there is against the FLDS.
You’re the one that claimed due process doesn’t apply when there are accusations of child abuse, and that communal guilt and punishment are appropriate.
Comment by MayBee on 5/30 @ 8:56 am #
possibly that is unconstitutional, i am not a constitutional scholar.
You called people stupid and two-digits for not “getting it”. You accused people of supporting baby rapers.
Comment by Education Guy on 5/30 @ 8:56 am #
Do you have a hypothesis?
Because they are arrogant and they thought they would get away with it. Read the opinion of the latest decision. The state has been acting under the rules applicable to those within the same household, and yet these people do not all live under the same roof. They have been bending the rules to fit their needs.
I believe that those responsible for the types of acts that the FLDS is accused of should be punished, but it is becoming more clear that the actions of the state in this case are less likely to bring that about than if they had simply followed the letter of the law.
I don’t understand why this doesn’t make you mad.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/30 @ 8:57 am #
hmm….JHoward, where do you draw the line between federalism and statism then?
Comment by JHoward on 5/30 @ 8:57 am #
The context of that quote, nuggie-san, you have stripped. I guess Darleen will have to be more explicit so as to thwart your opportunistic cherrypicking.
Comment by Rob Crawford on 5/30 @ 8:59 am #
We’ve never seen you admit that Mohammad’s rape of Aisha was wrong, therefore you must approve it.
We’ve never seen you admit that the practice of “temporary marriages” in Islam is wrong, therefore you must approve it.
We’ve never seen you admit that feminine genital mutilation is wrong, therefore you must approve it.
We’ve never seen you admit that sacrificing animals on holy days is wrong, therefore you must approve it.
We’ve never seen you admit that “honor” killings are wrong, therefore you must approve it.
We’ve never seen you admit that preaching race-hatred and bigotry in a supposed “church” is wrong, therefore you must approve it.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/30 @ 9:00 am #
due process doesn’t apply when there are accusations of child abuse, and that communal guilt and punishment are appropriate.
i still think that is true.
i think children are removed from abuser homes before guilt is determined.
note, the coursts are not saying no abuse has been committed, just that the children were not at immediate risk of being abused.
Comment by JHoward on 5/30 @ 9:00 am #
When you answer a single question put to you honestly, then I’ll
answerask you why you elect to avoid the obvious, contextual difference between federalism and statism. Cherrypicker.Comment by Rob Crawford on 5/30 @ 9:00 am #
Uh, you realize that only an idiot argues that “federalism” means states can ignore the Bill of Rights, don’t you?
Comment by JHoward on 5/30 @ 9:03 am #
Cites?
Comment by Rob Crawford on 5/30 @ 9:03 am #
NB: your classification of them as “abuser homes” presumes guilt.
Comment by Education Guy on 5/30 @ 9:04 am #
due process doesn’t apply when there are accusations of child abuse, and that communal guilt and punishment are appropriate.
Wow. Just wow.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/30 @ 9:04 am #
haha, darleens quote was facetious hyperbole, trudat.
i think she might even be sorry she brought it up on michele’s thread.
ppl mocked her. ;)
Rob Crawford, what i believe or don’t believe isn’t the issue.
you said i was lying when i said commenters were excusing FLDS institutionalized child abuse.
Darleen excuses it.
she refuses to condemn it.
Comment by Carin -BONC on 5/30 @ 9:05 am #
i have seen a consistant argument from darleen and many others that innercity kids should be removed from their parents before the FLDS kids because they are in worse shape.
Not before. Concurrently. The motivations leading a 12 y/o inner city girl to have sex (and get pregnant) may be different than those of the FDLS child, but the result is exactly the same.
And, FTR, I don’t know -or claim to know- if children as young as that are having babies in FDLS. So far, it doesn’t appear to be the case.
I in no way, support the FDLS lifestyle. If they can pin a crime on ‘em, I’m perfectly content to see it happen. If they lived near me, I’d do everything I could to make them feel uncomfortable. I’d probably even participate in “rescue” operations to help people break away.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/30 @ 9:07 am #
/shrug
im out.
have a nice day.
;)
Comment by Rob Crawford on 5/30 @ 9:07 am #
Stop lying, nishi.
Then again, you’re so stupid you may not realize you’re lying.
Comment by Rob Crawford on 5/30 @ 9:08 am #
Translation: “You’ve all once more shown what a shallow, ignorant c*nt I am, so I’ll step out for a while.”
Comment by Spies, Brigands, and Pirates - UMBA on 5/30 @ 9:09 am #
hmm….JHoward, where do you draw the line between federalism and statism then?
Fourteenth Amendment. Read it. Moron.
it is not my position to approve or disapprove.
You know, clumsy lies don’t really work very well when the original comments are still there for all to read. You’d think that a “three digit” would understand that.
Moron.
Comment by JHoward on 5/30 @ 9:13 am #
Except to commend it of acting covertly and illegally so as to single out a specific religion and drive it out of their lands.
Comment by MayBee on 5/30 @ 9:17 am #
nishi- Did Dr. Pournelle post your comment to him?
Comment by Rob Crawford on 5/30 @ 9:36 am #
Or did he see your style of “writing”, decide not to waste his time on the scribblings of toddlers, and toss it into the trash?
Comment by Pablo on 5/30 @ 9:49 am #
In fact, she explicitly excused that. “It was a long time ago (though she was about 700 years off), everybody did it, etc.” She also repeatedly attempted to attribute to me the idea that because it was OK for Mohammad to be a child rapist that it’s OK for FLDSers to do it too, which reeks of projection.
Comment by MayBee on 5/30 @ 9:54 am #
We’ve never seen you admit that feminine genital mutilation is wrong, therefore you must approve it.
In fact, she will only say that Mohammed said only the smallest amount of tissue be removed, so it isn’t really so bad.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/30 @ 10:19 am #
maybee, don’t be stupid.
i said that removing the prepuce in FGM is the exact analog of removing the foreskin in circumscion.
isn’t that true?
Comment by Pablo on 5/30 @ 10:27 am #
Yeah, we don’t want nishi in a turf war.
Comment by MayBee on 5/30 @ 10:39 am #
Failure to denounce it duly noted, nishi.
Comment by JD on 5/30 @ 11:28 am #
So the nishit is an advocate of African genocide, eugenics, and now we can add female genital mutilation to the list, because it is just a little skin. Nice.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/30 @ 11:44 am #
i can tell when you guyz have lost the argument, cuz thats when the ad homs start flyin.
;)
Comment by Rob Crawford on 5/30 @ 11:59 am #
Says the person who never shuts up about “sandwichboard men”, “theocons”, “two-digits”, etc.
Really, nishidiot, you’re either the most dishonest person I’ve ever met or the dumbest. Which is it?
Comment by Education Guy on 5/30 @ 12:08 pm #
Well, it’s better than letting the ad homs fly when you’ve won the argument. That would be like bragging and that’s just poor sportsmanship.
Comment by guinsPen on 5/30 @ 2:23 pm #
nishizonoshewhosmeltitdealtit
Comment by Pablo on 5/30 @ 2:25 pm #
Au contraire, one can tell when you’ve lost by this.
rawr.
Comment by Pablo on 5/30 @ 2:26 pm #
JD, don’t forget non-xian childrape.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/30 @ 3:32 pm #
Actually, I think it is fine that the children be returned at this point.
The State has the DNA.
;)
Comment by Pablo on 5/30 @ 5:45 pm #
*
I think it is fine….
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/30 @ 6:10 pm #
yup pablo i do. ur cherry pickin, that is the reason the community is culpable, not individual familes.
but the children aren’t going back just yet.
guess what darleen? they just swabbed Jeffs for DNA.
Do you think these little girls might be grown up FLDS mommies now?
Half the children in the compound are surnamed Jeffs.
i sure wonder why they would swab Jeffs if he has nothing to do with the Texas FLDS.
wat do you think Slart?
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/30 @ 6:14 pm #
these little girls
Comment by Pablo on 5/30 @ 6:22 pm #
No, that was a full comment, copied intact from just a couple days ago.
And you’re fine with it when they do. You just said so. That will happen beginning Monday, all 400+ of them.
Comment by Pablo on 5/30 @ 6:24 pm #
Really?
Liar. Poseur. Fraud.
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/30 @ 6:44 pm #
haha, i wouldn’t bet on it.
guess we know why they wanted the DNA samples.
;)
Comment by Pablo on 5/30 @ 6:54 pm #
I would. Then again, I pay attention and you’re an ignorant, blithering twit. And you wouldn’t know shit if you had a mouthful.
Comment by thor - typical PW traffic driver on 5/30 @ 6:59 pm #
Oh nishibot, save your outrage for the next Tampa Bay school teacher that has sex with her child husband/students.
Jeffs is already in jail.
Comment by Pablo on 5/30 @ 7:03 pm #
Did you notice the state is conceding the return of 300+ kids who weren’t covered by the Supremes’ order?
No, of course you didn’t. You’re an idiot. But I did.
Comment by JHoward on 5/30 @ 7:03 pm #
Zoom!
Comment by JHoward on 5/30 @ 7:07 pm #
Whoa, Pablo, that link sez the kids can’t leave the Texas fatherland.
Like, that totally destroys
anotherthe final nuggie-bot-san racing goalpost.Zoom!
Comment by Pablo on 5/30 @ 7:10 pm #
BwaaaaaaaahWaaaaaaaahhhhhZoom!
Comment by Pablo on 5/30 @ 7:13 pm #
Andthenblammo!
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/30 @ 7:24 pm #
yup, im cheerfully wrong about Texas wanting the polygs to run for the border….
do you think…those little girls Jeffs is sukkin face with in the pics are actually in custody or at YFZ?
or…..mebbe actual Warren Jeffs babies are bein held by the CPS?
wow.
Comment by Pablo on 5/30 @ 7:28 pm #
Funny, you were just cheering that on.
See? Either way Texas wins, and they get rid of the polygs.
Liar. Poseur. Fraud.
Zoom!
Comment by MayBee on 5/30 @ 7:29 pm #
or…..mebbe actual Warren Jeffs babies are bein held by the CPS?
Isn’t he already in prison, and therefore not a threat to his young wives or their babies? Why should CPS hold on to his babies?
Comment by Pablo on 5/30 @ 8:06 pm #
And why should the state take them away from their mothers? To victimize them all again?
Comment by Spies, Brigands, and Pirates - UMBA on 5/30 @ 8:13 pm #
yup, im cheerfully wrong about Texas wanting the polygs to run for the border….
You’re aggressively and moronically wrong about everything you’ve ever jabbered about on this site, liebot.
You don’t know jack shit about ANYTHING, as far as I can tell. Certainly you don’t know anything about math, science, humanities, law, politics, or the arts. Most likely you’re a bit confused about your own shoe size. You’re a stupid, immature, spoiled, illiterate, bigoted, arrogant child.
Comment by click here on 5/20 @ 4:46 am #
Hello, I’m a regular visitor to your site so i finally decided its time to sign your guestbook, so here i sign !
Comment by Sanchez on 8/14 @ 5:42 am #
Very interesting post – Might be old new, but it was new to me. Thanks.