Appeals Court Supports FLDS
Breaking news, in case you haven’t seen it already:
Court: Texas wrongly seized sect children
Judge has 10 days to comply with ruling; applies to 48 polygamist mothers
I’m not a big fan of the FLDS teachings and lifestyle, but I’ve been appalled at what seems to be a blatant disregard for the FLDS’ constitutional rights, to say nothing of due process. Count me in as one happy to see this development.
I cringe at saying anything to defend the FLDS but… CPS makes me cringe even more. It should make all of us sick at the power this organization has. They have shown America thta CPS can go into anyone’s home (on a prank call, no less), take all the kids with absolutely no court order and no proof, and then weeks later, show up in court with just the most basic of unsubstantiated allegations, and keep your kids in foster care with God knows whom and in what kind of environment. Then parents can be given the daunting and impossible task of 1) proving a negative; then 2) proving to the state you can care for your kids (mind you, that no real substantive reunification plan with specifics was even provided to the kids’ parents). So, FLDS sickens me, but, if you can believe it, CPS sickens me even more. So much for due process. So much for Consitutional rights. CPS has proven that they believe they’re above all that. I was happy to hear of the court’s ruling, not so much for the FLDS but for what this can mean to other Americans and their rights as parents and the VERY high hurdle CPS should have to jump over before taking kids away (minus proof of substantion and imminent danger).
Hmmm…. I think I rambled here. Sorry!
Comment by lulubelle — May 22, 2008 @ 5:40 pm
Before this latest ruling, I had wondered if there was additional evidence of abuse that simply hadn’t been leaked to the media. I’m glad for the sake of those kids that there wasn’t–but unfortunately, as lulubelle said, that doesn’t inspire confidence in this particular branch of CPS.
By the way, due process is a constitutional right–and, especially significant in this situation, is connected not only to procedural concerns, but also to broader issues of unenumerated rights in family, parenthood, procreation, etc.
Comment by Melanie2 — May 22, 2008 @ 6:01 pm
Really not a polygamy fan here. But I am delighted to see the rule of law win the day.
Comment by Jami — May 22, 2008 @ 6:07 pm
Not to be dramatic or anything, but I swear on a stack of Bibles that the first words to my mind were “He has heard our prayers…” I consider this nothing short of divine intervention.
Our feelings about plural marriage and the sexual elements of this situation aside, these people are our Church’s spiritual cousins (far distant cousins you avoid at a family reunion, yes … but cousins, nonetheless — come on, they read the Book of Mormon!). To me, the experience is instructive to show us what could still happen if a body of believers holds dear to beliefs that the establishment considers dangerous.
(Of course, our Church has opted to intermingle with society, in an effort to show that we’re not dangerous, instead of isolating ourselves.)
Our own prophets have extolled the (inspired, but not scriptural) virtues of the Constitution. As a Church, we’ve derived enormous benefit from its protections, even when the local and state and federal authorities ignored it and our ancestors fled to Mexico, only to end up back in the United States. We should be doing everything we can to stand up for the FLDS’ constitutional rights, INSOFAR as they stay within the protections of the law. This isn’t a case of theology as much as it is a case about the constitution and civil rights.
Sadly, this isn’t over, by a long shot. Not with columnists at the Dallas Morning News practically calling for the government to find a way to take up permanent residence inside the FLDS religion and in the compound (No, I’m not going to link to the specific DMN column and drive up its readership.)
I have a number of family members who continue to say that this is about sex, and religion, and have openly rooted for CPS to finally shut down this mockery of our religion. It’s not. It’s about our rights as citizens, because at the end of the day, if we don’t have rights, neither does our own Church.
Comment by queuno — May 22, 2008 @ 6:17 pm
Check out Guy’s coverage at Messenger and Advocate:
http://messengerandadvocate.wordpress.com/
There’s some interesting stuff he pulled from the decision and other writings.
Comment by Ray — May 22, 2008 @ 7:30 pm
Thanks, Ray.
Guy’s synopsis includes this “evidence”:
The Department conceded at the hearing that teenage pregnancy, by itself, is not a reason to remove children from their home and parents, but took the position that immediate removal was necessary in this case because “there is a mindset that even the young girls report that they will marry at whatever age, and that it’s the highest blessing they can have to have children.”
Look at that last phrase. What, are they going to come for our YW program next?
Comment by queuno — May 22, 2008 @ 7:38 pm
so, so glad about this ruling. I’ve been biting my fingernails over this.
lol, queuno.
Comment by sare — May 22, 2008 @ 9:19 pm
Glad to hear common sense has prevailed. However, it is sad that the ones who have suffered in all of this are the children. I sincerely pray that they are not scarred for life from all of this.
Comment by Stephanie — May 22, 2008 @ 9:44 pm
wait, so the children will be given back over to this sect, the forced “marriages” of young girls barely out of puberty (13, 14, etc) will continue, and that is a good thing?
So the CPS had no right to go into this compound, what right does the FLDS have to commit rape? what about the rights of these girls?
Comment by eddie — May 22, 2008 @ 9:48 pm
This whole case has made me sick. CPS is out of control and I’m so happy about this recent ruling.
Comment by Ayla — May 22, 2008 @ 10:02 pm
in re eddie:
No one has the “right” to commit rape. However, our founding fathers wisely decided that governmental power should be organized and limited. Thus, everyone who is accused has what is called the right to due process, i.e. a fair hearing on whether that person has actually done wrong. No one here wants FLDS abuse perpetuated. However, all of us were concerned that the Texas government was apparently saying “if you are an unpopular group, or if we accuse you of something really bad, we don’t have to prove that you did it in order to punish you.” Get it? Anyone can be accused.
As a lawyer, I have seen this weird lynch mentality: if someone is accused of something awful like child abuse, then the mob often doesn’t want to have to prove that it actually happened. Thank goodness our laws protect us to some extent from that mob.
Comment by Natasha — May 22, 2008 @ 10:03 pm
I don’t like to be on the side defending the FLDS, but this quote from Messangerandadvocate sums it up best for me:
Comment by Nebraska — May 22, 2008 @ 10:35 pm
[…] Appeals Court Supports FLDS (Artemis at Feminist Mormon Housewifes–Thanks Artemis for your posting this over at fMh) […]
Pingback by Texas Appeals Court Rules FLDS Children Must Be Returned « Messenger and Advocate — May 22, 2008 @ 10:44 pm
Someone is going to yell at me for this comparison. I think I’m ok with that though, because I’m curious as to other peoples thoughts. I think on _some_ levels American attitudes are revealed by the government reaction to TX which is _similar_ in a _general_ way to our reaction to Iraq. Something dangerous is rumored, so we (the the body of people as represented by the government) go charging in to save the day. When we arrive we discover the rumors were based on inaccurate information, yet there are other problems (which could very well lead to the rumored problems) and we’re now committed to solving the problems. Now, are things better because of the decisions? Maybe, probably, it’s hard to tell because we can never redo what’s in the past. Either way, we’re now committed to making things more in line with our views on human rights.
Comment by Janell the Great — May 22, 2008 @ 10:49 pm
Maybe it’s just that I’m not a mom, but I think the madness has to stop somewhere, and why not now? Why should we return children to young moms who are legally not able to be married to their husbands? Why are Mormons forgetting that we believe in the nuclear family? How is it different for them to be adopted now than when they were born?
Comment by Michelle Glauser — May 23, 2008 @ 4:20 am
Because young, unmarried moms have rights and their kids have rights. Just because we believe something doesn’t mean we necessarily have the right to impose that belief on others–that’s where Texas flubbed up. Mormons and others should not forget that other people have the same constitutional right to believe how, where, and what they may. Adoption should be used when parents are gone or their parental rights are terminated, but those rights should only be severed if there is evidence to support the abuse of those rights.
Comment by Artemis — May 23, 2008 @ 8:39 am
Legality was the big problem here. FLDS, were apparently targeted for their beliefs and then were assumed guilty until proven innocent. Then, when the courts and all layers of fact exonerate them, the state is still holding the kids.
Whether you are worried that the FLDS are somehow bringing us bad publicity as polygamy supporters, or you are worried that they are nutjobs is irrelevant. The government severely mistreated them and molested justice, especially ironic since we have no standing charges of molestation in their compound.
Comment by TrevorM — May 23, 2008 @ 8:50 am
Check out Slate’s piece on the subject.
Comment by Artemis — May 23, 2008 @ 9:20 am
It’s really kind of sad to be in a place where I’m happy that girls will be going back to a place where they have such a narrow range of options . . . There really is no “win” in any of this, I don’t think - I don’t agree with the FLDS narrow view of the role of women or isolationist mindset (although I admire them for their tenacity and work ethic) but neither do I agree with the Texas government in removing all of the children on no real grounds other than, “But I don’t like their religion.” And as in all things with this case, I’m torn between, Get those children out of there and show them a different way, and What the heck gives the government a right to interfere in any of this. And then there’s the probability that this will probably make the FLDS retreat further into themselves, becoming more isolated from the rest of the world, making it harder for those who need help to get help . . . So, no winners in my opinion, just a really crappy situation made a lot less crappy for the moms and dads.
Comment by Quimby — May 23, 2008 @ 11:14 pm