Judge orders forfeiture of Texas polygamist ranch
Source: Associated Press
Judge orders forfeiture of Texas polygamist ranch
Associated Press | January 9, 2014 | Updated: January 9, 2014 6:05pm
SAN ANGELO — A judge has ordered the forfeiture of a polygamist group's West Texas ranch to the state of Texas.
State District Jude Barbara Walther's order came Monday in Eldorado after the ranch owners failed to appear for the hearing. The San Angelo Standard-Times reports Walther authorized the Schleicher County Sheriff's Office to enter the Yearning for Zion Ranch and inventory the property.
The Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints formerly owned the ranch. The Texas Attorney General's Office filed to seize the ranch in 2012, citing numerous sexual assaults of children committed there. The state has prosecuted 12 male members of the polygamist sect, including leader Warren Jeffs. He is serving a life sentence plus 20 years for sexually assaulting two girls, ages 12 and 15.
Read more: http://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/texas/article/Judge-orders-forfeiture-of-Texas-polygamist-ranch-5129105.php?cmpid=hpts
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Major Nikon
(36,925 posts)It might be worth buying just so you could burn it to the ground.
get the red out
(14,030 posts)Completely!
uppityperson
(116,013 posts)
LisaL
(47,409 posts)uppityperson
(116,013 posts)
tammywammy
(26,582 posts)Wiki 's not the best source, but here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/YFZ_Rancho
delrem
(9,688 posts)Are there polygamist communes that respect the rights of children not to be sexually (or in any other way) exploited?
Children in a community learn to be like the adults, whether those adults are protective or exploitative. That's the same in monogamist/serial-monogamist/polygamist households.
Is it the case that the whole community should be punished, their evidently prosperous properties taken from them, or is this a form of collective punishment that shouldn't happen.
Lots to think about and learn about here.
eta: in light of the incredibly offensive slander directed against me for posing these questions, I double-down on my post. I double-down on the righteousness of my questions.
Major Nikon
(36,925 posts)delrem
(9,688 posts)Major Nikon
(36,925 posts)"...their evidently prosperous properties taken from them, or is this a form of collective punishment that shouldn't happen. "
That's what I was referencing.
delrem
(9,688 posts)stripping the whole community of its properties, strips everyone, innocent and guilty alike, from the properties that sustain them?
Do you think, in all your righteousness, that you know what is best for the innocent?
Do you think, in all your righteousness, that you know what is best for non-monogamist families in general?
Some answering my questions say they *do* think that.
Major Nikon
(36,925 posts)Do you think, in all of your righteousness, that an entire culture based on raping children should be allowed to thrive?
Do you think, in all of your righteousness, that an entity which included a bed specifically intended for the rape of children should be allowed to remain open for business?
I could go on if you like, but it seems like a fool's errand.
Property that is used in the commission of a crime is subject to forfeiture. Few crimes are more abhorrent than the rape of children. The community and the government both have an interest in putting a stop to those crimes even if innocent people rely on that criminal enterprise for their livelihood.
delrem
(9,688 posts)I ask whether both victims and perps should be stripped of their properties, their means of living, for the same crime?
I ask whether every non-monogamist community should be persecuted because of the actions of a few members of some?
Major Nikon
(36,925 posts)Forces the person answering the question to admit to a position of righteous indignation. So no, that's not all you asked.
If you want to ask questions and expect reasonable answers, then you should ask them reasonably.
Furthermore you are asking blanket questions that are far more inclusive than the matter at hand. If you can't discuss the particular situation without conflating other non-related situations, then it's hard to imagine how relevant your point was to begin with.
Innocent people are often harmed by the actions of criminals both directly as a result of the crime and indirectly as a result of enforcement actions. You're trying to place blame on those who enforce rather than the criminals themselves.
delrem
(9,688 posts)OK?
I don't agree with bullshit prejudices against anything except a "western monogamist culture". For example I don't think that the saga of Karla Homolka and Paul Bernardo are usable in any kind of general complaint about monogamous relationships, any more than that I believe the same kind of thing could be valid against polygamous, or any other kind of human relationships.
OK?
In fact I have nothing, *nothing*, against any kind of polygamous relationship, and I have an overflowing cup of positiveness to say for so many that I can't count.
Major Nikon
(36,925 posts)delrem
(9,688 posts)Major Nikon
(36,925 posts)It's a simple yes or no question. I think most people would answer no. YMMV.
delrem
(9,688 posts)the innocent victims of domestic abuse shouldn't have their fucking homes confiscated, and be sent to live on a street ruled by GOP edicts that strip even fucking "food stamps" from their diet.
OK?
Most sensible people would like to see the family structures retained, absent the decaying forces, rather than agreeing to nuking the entire thing and putting those same families into chaos.
OK?
When folk are too "liberal" in their dispensation of general punishments, like the stripping of the property of thousands of people because they've been victimized, I think they've gone beyond the bend.
Major Nikon
(36,925 posts)That's what you keep refusing to acknowledge and keep pretending exists when it clearly doesn't. The property belonged to Warren Jeffs and his merry band of child rapists. The state is now in the process of stripping that property from them which they were using to commit child rape.
OK?
To date, none of the people who live there who weren't participating in the child raping have been ordered to leave.
OK?
grantcart
(53,061 posts)Beyond all the exploitation of young girls and the disenfranchisement of young men, is the issue of welfare fraud.
The community was a shell game that put all of the assets into the community so that all of the individuals could show up without assets and get maximum state assistance.
delrem
(9,688 posts)grantcart
(53,061 posts)but your premise that there were victims and non victims.
The real victims were the taxpayers who had to put out millions of dollars in welfare for members of a community whose economic scheme was established to defraud the state with hundreds of 'one parent' families when in fact they were families with two parents who then lied about not being in a permanent two parent relationship.
Are the children innocent. Of course. So are the children of Mafia members but that doesn't mean that the assets that they obtained through criminal means should not be taken.
That they used a different legal premise to cease the property, because it was easier to prove, and they didn't bother to even contest it, is not material to the point that beyond the question of sexual exploitation was a sophisticated scheme to allow polygamous families appear that they were monogamous relationships plus dozens of abandoned children who lived in mother only families with no income.
They should have ceased the assets decades ago. If they want to raise hundreds of children in polygamous communities then fine, but don't use government welfare to subsidize it.
delrem
(9,688 posts)grantcart
(53,061 posts)which our designed to conceal millions of dollars of assets. If they were not connected to this sect, then those assets would have to be liquidated before they qualified for welfare. Because of the fraud that they entered into together they miss represented the the women as being abanded wives when in fact they were polygamous wives in an ongoing conspiracy.
delrem
(9,688 posts)grantcart
(53,061 posts)Why you are so ambitious in the defense of these criminals is lost on me but if you think that by making a smart assed reference to a FOX type smear against legitimate single mothers who are accused of cheating while they try to survive as a single parent household as being remotely connected to this ongoing conspiracy involving thousands of adults and tens of millions of dollars you are mistaken, yet again.
We aren't talking about a community of people that became single parents and are struggling to survive but a community that designed their legal cohabitation arrangements to conceal their assets and then go down and claim welfare benefits by lying about the fact that they are single, when in fact they are part of a polygamous family.
This is not something that they do by accident or something that is a result of bad fortune. It is done as part of a planned policy to "drain the beast", the "beast" being the federal government:
http://www.hlntv.com/article/2011/08/03/bleeding-beast-polygamist-sect-accused-abusing-welfare
In discussions about Warren Jeffs and the FLDS (Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints) church the topic of “bleeding the beast,” or taking advantage of government money, often comes up. A former polygamist sect member, Laurie Allen, talked about it in an interview on In Session. Allen produced "Banking on Heaven," a documentary about the FLDS under Jeffs’ leadership. During our interview last week, Allen claimed the FLDS collects food stamps and other forms of public assistance because many of the women technically are still single. In the FLDS, multiple women are often “celestially married” to one man, with only one of the women being legally married to their collective husband. That means the other illegitimate wives can collect assistance for themselves and their children.
Allen said the group also collects government assistance for children with disabilities – disabilities she attributes to inbreeding in the FLDS community. She claims “in the state ofArizonaalone, they’re getting between 20 and 30 million dollars a year” and most of the members “are living off taxpayer money.” She interviewed former Attorney General Terry Goddard in her documentary. Goddard told her 80% of the FLDS members are on welfare and more than 4,000 of them have state medical insurance access.
In 2006, CNN’s Randi Kaye wrote a blog detailing how polygamy affects taxpayers. In the blog, Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff made a similar assertion, stating "their religious belief is that they'll bleed the beast, meaning the government. They hate the government, so they'll bleed it for everything they can through welfare, tax evasion and fraud."
Another example of bleeding the beast involves property taxes. In 2005, a judge appointed an accountant to help collect more than a million dollars in overdue property taxes from polygamist property owners living inColorado City,Arizona. Six years later, the group is said to owe more than $2 million in delinquent property taxes inColoradoCityandHildale,Utah
The women who actively participate in the fraud lie to the government about their ongoing relationships and support and portray themselves as unattached women living in single housing units. They return to communal houses and turn their money over to the United Effort Plan which buys land and keeps the assets so individuals don't show assets and can continue to generate more welfare income.
Your inability to follow a discussion goes off the deep end when you start to foam at the mouth about "oughta go to jail" because this sub thread was about the dispensation of assets gained from fraud and no I don't think that people on welfare should be able to conceal millions of dollars in assets and continue to get welfare benefits, but that's just me.
I do accept your admission that you love FOX because you seem to have the same information and reasoning abilities of a FOX viewer.
delrem
(9,688 posts)I totally support stripping them of all their property, all their assets, and putting them on the street.
Of course this has nothing whatever to do with my initial post, my initial question - a question that I continue (almost alone, it seems) to consider. But your diversion sure does have punch in a land where cutting food stamps is considered a bipartisan accomplishment.
Aristus
(72,090 posts)
Can I borrow this the next time I have to deal with a hysterical outrage-junkie?
Major Nikon
(36,925 posts)So you can have it for free.
Ash_F
(5,861 posts)That is most likely a false assumption.
delrem
(9,688 posts)Ferxrypsakes, do you not distinguish between perp and victim at all?
Major Nikon
(36,925 posts)It belonged to a shadow organization called The United Order of Texas, created by the rapists.
delrem
(9,688 posts)if it were a good law then after the verdict it would belong to the victims.
The victims wouldn't be turfed, as you seem to want.
Major Nikon
(36,925 posts)The seizure order doesn't require the victims to leave.
delrem
(9,688 posts)I can understand an order putting the matter into the hands of a comptroller who is required, under law, to serve the interests of the community.
Major Nikon
(36,925 posts)Because there is no way to get from point A to point B without going through criminal forfeiture procedings. Even rapists have due process rights.
delrem
(9,688 posts)I don't think you've put in one thought for victim's rights.
Major Nikon
(36,925 posts)With no sense of how to get your ideology to line up with reality.
The reality is that the YFZ ranch belongs to rapists, most or all of which are currently in prison. The list of people who have control of the ranch are a subset of those who are currently in prison for rape. Even from within prison they still retain control of the property and could sell it tomorrow unless the state takes control of it. The reality is this would probably happen one way or another if for no other reason than to pay their legal bills. If you really had any concern for the victims, would you really want the homes they live in to be under the control of their rapists?
delrem
(9,688 posts)And that ends the discussion.
Major Nikon
(36,925 posts)I can't imagine having to maintain such malicious allusions about the people one disagrees with just to convince yourself of your own infallibility.
delrem
(9,688 posts)Major Nikon
(36,925 posts)Cheers!
delrem
(9,688 posts)Cheers!
Major Nikon
(36,925 posts)
CatWoman
(80,288 posts)that's exactly what I was thinking about you............
delrem
(9,688 posts)Nice.
Fact is that I'm being pilloried in this thread with all kinds of innuendo both subtle and unsubtle directed against me by several people including you. I *do* have some visceral reactions - tho' I'm trying to keep my head, even tho' one lovely customer suggested that the generality of my questions somehow shows that I "came out of the woodwork" to defend the perps at the YFZ ranch, this being the common theme.
Yes, Major Nikon, what I had in mind when posing my questions was to engage in a discussion concerned not just primarily with how best to do the victims justice, but *solely* concerned with how best to do the victims justice.
Regarding your contribution, abstracted from your ad hominem jabs at me, I think there's more to it than you state. If someone were to explain how the victims, all of whom are residents of the XFZ ranch, retain possession of their property through a transfer of property rights following the state seizure, I'd be happy. But nobody has explained that. Nobody has explained how this multitude of victims aren't going to be put on the street with zero assets, even though it's clear that they aren't equipped to deal with that kind of development.
Someone suggested that these residents were *all* guilty, because *all* were guilty of "welfare fraud", but nobody has told me how these victims won't be even more dependent on "welfare" after being given the heave ho, even though both Federal and State institutions are in full scale attack on everything related to such "entitlements" up to and including food stamps. Yet I'm supposed to have an almost religious-like belief that these same Fed and State institutions are benevolent to the poor and those who fall through the ever widening cracks. Nobody has explained how the Federal and State gov'ts, after they seize the ranch property, will deal with the following situation fairly so the victims on the ranch don't just get booted by some bank operating by rote in response to state institutions operating by rote - and where the most quality time the victims get in response is some kind of passing "tut tut, too bad" from a decadent middle class that's already gone onto other things to tut tut about.
Those are some of the factors I was thinking about when I posed my questions.
Now I'm junking these threads - so go to it all of you, continue accusing me of all kinds of nauseous shit. I don't care.
Major Nikon
(36,925 posts)get the red out
(14,030 posts)in various places online that come out of the woodwork to defend this cult whenever bad press enters the news cycle in a major way. These people defend them through all sorts of diversionary wording and are absolutely relentless in their attacks on anyone who understands that this group is nothing more than an organized crime gang. They always appear, and are probably now appearing all over the internet wherever this story is posted.
I don't know if these defenders are brainwashed, getting paid or what.
get the red out
(14,030 posts)Brilliant and true; though you will get raked over coals for speaking the truth and putting everything together.
I am absolutely sick of people defending this child molesting cult. But there will be plenty online who do, there always have been. The next step will probably be to talk about property rights, and "freedom of religion" (to abuse women and children of course), and that the "women want to live this way", or to say no one is trapped there. When this first came out and the children were temporarily rescued from the horrific abusive situation I even saw people defending this "way of life" because the kids ate only organic food; never-mind most of the boys will be tossed out and the girls raped by much older men. They had food purity so they had to be defended against the evils of America! Oh and another defense was that most Texans were Baptists so the child raping polygamous cult HAD TO BE RIGHT. Saw all those on various places online.
(And, no dear cult defenders, years later I do not have links.)
Thank you again for braving the onslaught.
Major Nikon
(36,925 posts)What people need to understand about the FLDS is they are a large organization run by a relatively small group of child rapists with head rapist Warren Jeffs in charge (even still from prison). Although they bear some resemblance to the LDS Mormon church, they are more fundamental in that they are more like the original Mormons. The FLDS is a cult. Husbands and wives aren't allowed to have sex with each other. Only a few chosen by Jeffs are allowed to have sex with the women. The chosen few consists of Jeff's inner circle and a few lucrative businessmen who donate heavily to the cult via untraceable cash donations. So basically the women are breeding stock who are pimped out by Jeffs. The properties owned by the FLDS are the guarantee that the people who live in them will go along. Fail to submit completely to Jeffs and you get thrown out. The properties are owned by Jeffs' inner circle through a few shadow organizations. By seizing the property of the rapists, the government is breaking up their criminal raping ring. This doesn't mean the people who live in them will get thrown out. The state of Texas hasn't evicted anyone other than the rapists.
CatWoman
(80,288 posts)Brent Jeffs. His brother committed suicide:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brent_W._Jeffs
Brent W. Jeffs is an author, advocate and member of the influential Jeffs family in the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (FLDS Church).
Jeffs wrote the memoir Lost Boy along with author Maia Szalavitz, which was released on May 19, 2009.[1] The book is a depiction of life within the FLDS Church and his ostracism from the organization at a young age. The title of the book comes from the term "the lost boys", which refers to the many young men expelled from the FLDS Church. Jeffs is grandson to FLDS prophet Rulon Jeffs, nephew to FLDS prophet Warren Jeffs, and his mother is the daughter of another non-FLDS prophet as well.[2]
In 2004 Jeffs named Warren Jeffs in a civil lawsuit seeking damages for sexual abuse he had suffered as a boy.[3] B. W. Jeff's memoir depicts much of the sexual abuse that was inflicted upon him beginning at ages 5 or 6. The memoir also includes abuse from Warren's brothers and other family members.[1]
Jeffs has appeared on NPR,[2] the television show Polygamy: What Love Is This?,[4] Hannity[5] and Dr. Phil,[6] with each appearance having to do with the FLDS and polygamy. In each appearance Jeffs discusses the dangers of the FLDS lifestyle and abuse from Warren Jeffs and other influential FLDS Church leaders.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=104359348
Major Nikon
(36,925 posts)It's a very fucked up group all the way around.
get the red out
(14,030 posts)I guess if you call an organized crime entity a "religion" some people think it should be completely free to do whatever it wants. I have seen people defend them too much for my comfort in several places you would never imagine online.
Major Nikon
(36,925 posts)In order to pay for the YFZ ranch, they made over 175 cash deposits, all just under the federal reporting requirement for $10,000. This had the effect of shielding the wealthy rapists' financing of the ranch so there wasn't a paper trail back to them. They actually operate exactly like many other organized crime entities. The only thing that's different is their principal crime is child rape.
questionseverything
(11,783 posts)People convicted in Abramoff probe[edit]
Adam Kidan (a former Abramoff business partner), was sentenced in Florida in March 2006 to nearly six years in prison for conspiracy and fraud in the 2000 purchase of the Fort Lauderdale-based SunCruz Casinos gambling fleet.
Roger Stillwell (R) Staff in the Department of the Interior under George W. Bush. Pleaded guilty and received two years suspended sentence[88] for not reporting hundreds of dollars' worth of sports and concert tickets he received from Abramoff.
Steven Griles, (R) (former Deputy Interior Secretary) the highest-ranking Bush administration official convicted in the scandal, pleaded guilty to obstruction of justice. He admitted lying to a Senate committee about his relationship with Abramoff, who repeatedly sought Griles' intervention at Interior on behalf of Indian tribal clients.
David Safavian, (R) (former White House official), the Bush administration's former top procurement official, was sentenced to 18 months in prison in October 2006[89] after he was found guilty of covering up his dealings with Abramoff.[90][91]
Bob Ney, then U. S. Representative, (R-Ohio), pleaded guilty September 2006, sentenced in January 2007 to 2½ years in prison, acknowledged taking bribes from Abramoff. Ney was in the traveling party on an Abramoff-sponsored golf trip to Scotland at the heart of the case against Safavian.
1.Neil Volz, (R) a former chief of staff to Ney who left government to work for Abramoff, pleaded guilty in May 2006 to conspiring to corrupt Ney and others with trips and other aid
2.William Heaton, (R) former chief of staff for Ney, pleaded guilty to a federal conspiracy charge involving a golf trip to Scotland, expensive meals, and tickets to sporting events between 2002 and 2004 as payoffs for helping Abramoff's clients.
3.Thomas Hart (R), former chief of staff for Ney, pleaded guilty to a federal conspiracy charge involving a golf trip to Scotland, expensive meals, and tickets to sporting events between 2002 and 2004 as payoffs for helping Abramoff's clients.
Italia Federici, (R) co-founder of the Council of Republicans for Environmental Advocacy, pleaded guilty to tax evasion and obstruction of a Senate investigation into Abramoff's relationship with officials at the Department of the Interior.
Mark Zachares, former aide to U. S. Representative Don Young, (R-Alaska), pleaded guilty to conspiracy. He acknowledged accepting tens of thousands of dollars' worth of gifts and a golf trip to Scotland from Abramoff's team in exchange for official acts on the lobbyist's behalf.
Kevin A. Ring former staff to John Doolittle (R-CA) was convicted of five charges of corruption.[92][93] He was sentenced to 20 months in prison in October 2011.[3]
James Hirni, former staff to Tim Hutchinson (R-AR) was charged with wire fraud for giving a staffer for Don Young (R) of Alaska a bribe in exchange for amendments to the Federal Highway Bill. (2008)[94]
Tom DeLay (R-TX) Two of the House Majority Leader's former aides were indicted (2004–2005); DeLay himself was investigated, but he was not indicted or convicted in connection with the Abramoff scandal.
1.Michael Scanlon (R), a former staff member of Tom DeLay, pled guilty to committing bribery in the course of his work for Abramoff.[86][87]
2.Tony Rudy (R), another former staff member of Tom DeLay, he also left DeLay to work with Abramoff; pleaded guilty to conspiracy.[87]
John Albaugh, former chief of staff to Ernest Istook (R-OK), pled guilty to accepting bribes connected to the Federal Highway Bill. Istook was not charged. (2008)[95]
Jared Carpenter (R) Vice-President of the Council of Republicans for Environmental Advocacy, was discovered during the Abramoff investigation and pled guilty to income tax evasion. He got 45 days, plus 4 years probation.[96]
Major Nikon
(36,925 posts)questionseverything
(11,783 posts)but i am going to guess NONE of those i listed lost property
i just have a problem when laws are enforced unequally
Major Nikon
(36,925 posts)But I suspect none of them are. If the crimes don't qualify for criminal forfeiture, then no property is going to be seized. There also has to be a nexus between the crime and the property. In the case of the FLDS kiddie diddlers, they purchased the property for kid diddling. They also used laundered money to buy it.
questionseverything
(11,783 posts)is just wrong
but it reminds me of something i was taught growing up.....that when 'THEY' come to take your rights away,'THEY' will use the most outrageous evil example they can find (and of course every1 will agree those people must be punished)...then it is established and every1's rights are gone
drunk driving and roadblocks would be a good example of that happening in our past
i admit i like the idea of prosecuting bush,cheney for their war crimes and seizing their property or goldman sachs but we both know they will never be targeted
Major Nikon
(36,925 posts)Please spare me your transparent feigned outrage and righteous indignation.
If you don't like the criminal forfeiture laws, petition your lawmakers. Lecturing me on the subject is a waste of both of our time.
Cheers!
Nitram
(27,609 posts)Polygamous sects are part of a tradition that allows both polygamy and the marriage of female children. The two go hand-in-hand.
Niceguy1
(2,467 posts)But polygamy does not always equate to child abuse.
Major Nikon
(36,925 posts)The reason why they isolate themselves in the first place is so they can marry off their daughters at ages that wouldn't be allowed otherwise.
Niceguy1
(2,467 posts)Not just the Mormons. Honestly there are probably more people who aren't Mormon or even white that practice polygamy then there are mormons.
Major Nikon
(36,925 posts)When you make kid diddling part of your culture, the law can and should step in.
I don't think too many people realize just how fucked up the FLDS kid diddlers are. In most cases, husbands can't even have sex with their own wives. There's just a dozen or so men hand picked by Warren Jeffs that are impregnating all the women in the church. He is still running his cult from inside prison and if anyone thinks kids aren't still being diddled, they are fooling themselves. They recognize no other authority outside of Jeffs, who is a convicted child rapist.
delrem
(9,688 posts)Niceguy1
(2,467 posts)who live in regular single family homes and don't touch their children..........I don't think Cults of any kind represents normal life for any situations
delrem
(9,688 posts)IMO my questions don't imply that I do.
MindMover
(5,016 posts)Favored child molesters thru your all inclusive questions.......
Your assumption that one law is one too many because it may infringe on your rights is beyond naive, ...
delrem
(9,688 posts)
My ignore list now has one person on it. One slanderous sleazebag of a person.
MindMover
(5,016 posts)looking into your past and present ... and your vociferous defensive attitude signals a perp-vic mentality ....
delrem
(9,688 posts)I posed questions, AKA a possible line of thought:
"How are sexual assaults on children related to polygamy?
Are there polygamist communes that respect the rights of children not to be sexually (or in any other way) exploited?
Children in a community learn to be like the adults, whether those adults are protective or exploitative. That's the same in monogamist/serial-monogamist/polygamist households.
Is it the case that the whole community should be punished, their evidently prosperous properties taken from them, or is this a form of collective punishment that shouldn't happen.
Lots to think about and learn about here.
eta: in light of the incredibly offensive slander directed against me for posing these questions, I double-down on my post. I double-down on the righteousness of my questions."
MindMover
(5,016 posts)
Major Nikon
(36,925 posts)Yet you have not offered any evidence to support that.
Rather than doubling down on an unsupported assertion, perhaps you can just try backing up that first.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)Women as "vessels" who are there to fulfil the desires of men.
Niceguy1
(2,467 posts)But in a respectfully loving home a consenting polygamous relationship is no different than any other alternative lifestyle. When all is consensual and respectful.
LeftOfWest
(482 posts)Some of the replies here are despicable.
get the red out
(14,030 posts)If it is Southern Christians or Catholics engaging in it. Try to say that a polygamous, child-raping cult is nothing but an out of control, abusive patriarchy and there is HELL TO PAY. I really don't get that.
I am against the abuse of children and the enslavement of women at all times. Though that is often not a popular position.
Marrah_G
(28,581 posts)This is a community where the rape of young girls was an accepted and integral part of their community. Women have no rights there, at least not rights that they know of, and are kept ignorant of the outside world.
questionseverything
(11,783 posts)the woman themselves have been brainwashed since birth so even if they have played apart in the criminal activity wether it is the child abuse or welfare fraud....they are victims too
warren jeffs is evil incarnate,there has been a reality show "breaking the faith" about young woman escaping the compound or cric as they call it.....while i am sure it is scripted to some point the look it gives you inside these girls minds is heartbreaking
get the red out
(14,030 posts)Where cults can raise people from birth to never be free, to be absolute slaves and even trap them in compounds where even the bravest have to "escape". We are a sad excuse for a country so long as this goes on, a very sad excuse for a damned country.
Squinch
(59,372 posts)The communities are pretty consistent in their widespread exploitation of children. For many years in this group, the FLDS, girls were married off as young as 12 and 13, to men in their 40's and 50's.
Before Jeffs was caught, and possibly still, though the information is harder to come by, children were taken out of school at absurdly young ages in order to put them to work full time and make money for the elders. Young boys (13,14,15) are routinely banished and abandoned in order to take them out of competition with the old men for teenaged wives. (By that I mean they are taken from their isolated communities with no skills and no education, and dumped on the streets of cities or by the sides of roads and told not to return home.)
Anecdotal reports by people who have left the community indicate that incest is pretty rampant. including molestations of both boys and girls.
Their "prosperous properties" are largely funded by a practice known as "bleeding the beast" which is essentially bilking the government for every penny they can in the form of illegal welfare and municipal payments. For example, the FLDS community in Short Creek declared themselves a school district, took all the state monies earmarked for education, and used the money for things like planes and the construction of a runway.
This is a community that needs to be prosecuted for their systemic racketeering abuses, systemic child abuses, and systemic abuses of women. So yes, the collective punishment is warranted.
Dash87
(3,220 posts)They're all cults, and within cults, this type of thing is commonplace (if not almost a constant). The power-hungry cult leaders always have to rape everybody for some reason. My guess would be that it's a power thing to keep the women in the society in line. Either that, or they're just nuts and want to spread their "holy seed" or some crazy non-sense.
Squinch
(59,372 posts)are righteous in this life, they will be given a planet of their own after they die, and they will be the god of that planet. So all the souls they bring to earth now will be the ones who populate their personal planet. So it is the holy seed thing.
And all their wives are supposed to wash the husband's feet with their hair when they get to heaven. And women can only get to heaven if their husband lets them in.
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)get the red out
(14,030 posts)I wish we lived in a country with the balls to protect freedom at home for a change.
Squinch
(59,372 posts)At one point it looked very possible that the population at the YFZ ranch would take over the population of the town, and the church elders were poised to put the town in a stranglehold, because they could get all YFZ members to vote as a bloc.
But in Short Creek, the people who are left - who must include most of those that lived in Texas for a while - sound like they are living a hellish existence.
MisterP
(23,730 posts)