Court: Sect children should be returned to parents

[Woodmonkey]

Those underage pregnant girls have been abused. There is proof that many of the male children had prior broken bones. I'd say there'd been abuse and not just from the men.

[Bluehawk]

Originally Posted by Woodmonkey

Those underage pregnant girls have been abused. There is proof that many of the male children had prior broken bones. I'd say there'd been abuse and not just from the men.

I nearly tossed my cookies when I saw that photo of Jeffs kissing that little girl like she was a concubine or something...

There's some root to this thing, and I just hope now they'll be able to get at it specifically, instead of in that haymaker manner they tried.

Out of 463 kids, for the boys to have some broken bones isn't necessarily a sign of any abuse, except maybe the total insanity of being a boy... especially on a farm.

[Woodmonkey]

I saw that pic of him kissing her too. He had to pick her up cause she was so little.

[Bluehawk]

Originally Posted by Woodmonkey

I saw that pic of him kissing her too. He had to pick her up cause she was so little.

YUKKKKKKK!

Basically, the state of Texas is proposing to make the argument that because Jeffs married and kissed little girls, and was head man at the compound, then EVERY other adult male there does the same thing, and therefore EVERY female child in those families is at risk of abuse.

Some probably are, but surely not ALL... and at the moment Jeffs is a guest of the government in a place where there are no little girls.

I am hoping against hope that Texas will be compelled, at least, to make their case for each of the kids involved...I see no other way to sort it out.

Do you, Katie?

Now, that could either result in the exoneration of a few hundred parents, or it could possibly result in a truly horrendous revelation of conspiracy (you alluded to this earlier) of the MOTHERS to conceal their own and their daughter's involvements with statutory rape.

For starters I would like to see each of the fathers on the stand explaining themselves. There is no law (other than the law of common sense) against a man having and living with multiple pregnant women in his care or for whom he is responsible in some way... so long as he is not married to more than one at a time, the females are beyond the age of consent AT THE TIME OF CONCEPTION, and the marriage conforms with other Texas law.

[Woodmonkey]

I do hope that the state of Texas has to justify taking children from their parents. It's a cult today, but tomorrow could be an innocent family with no resources. The state needs a reason, and a good one, to intervene in families.

[Bluehawk]

Originally Posted by Woodmonkey

I do hope that the state of Texas has to justify taking children from their parents. It's a cult today, but tomorrow could be an innocent family with no resources. The state needs a reason, and a good one, to intervene in families.

Okay, here's a question the answer to which, as a male and father, I simply cannot come up with:

As a woman and mother yourself, what in the hell would in any way or time allow the mothers and women in that group to permit their daughters and sons to be treated poorly or abusively?

For the Texas case to have even SOME merit would have to assume that the mothers were complicit in sustaining the routine and constant abuse of their children.

My experience with wives, mothers of my 4 kids, a stepmother, aunts, grandmothers, my own daughters, female friends and mothers in general tells me that it is better to grab a lion by his family jewels than to mess with a woman's children.

If those mothers were acting in the capacity of procurers for their middle-aged pedophile husbands and boyfriends, then the outrage is far deeper than the inability of their men to have sufficient decency to keep from sex with girls.