You're using "bloody" in celebration of Slick Rick's pardon?

That's not how I do it.

tim

I think their whole sect is creepy and don't personally approve of the lifestyle.

That said, the execution of the raid and the aftermath has just been horrible! I guess they took every child from the compound, but not everyone who lived there was a polygamist, and quite a few normal male-female parent/family units have lost their children as well. Add to that the whole thing was based off a prank phone call, yeesh.

I have nothing against the idea of polygamy, but as some one pointed out the reality on the ground is different from an abstract idea, polygamy in the context of their compound meant incest and statutory rape.

I'm not sure it's important to say that children were taken from parents who weren't polygamist? If you're responsible for the welfare of a child, and you move that child into a "compound" where other children are being raped - I think that's lawful grounds to get DCF involved.

What would happen if a non white person took their child to a crack house? Nobody in here would be saying "The law has no right to take that child from that parent". The same thing goes here. When you isolate a child from society, that's very bad. But when you put that child in harm's way, that's a clear demonstration that you aren't fit to care for a child.

http://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/story?id=4911318&page=1

The 3rd Court of Appeals in Austin, in response to motions from 41 sect mothers, ruled that Child Protective Services did not present enough evidence at an April hearing to show that the children were in immediate danger of abuse, which would have justified keeping them in state custody.

Those dang liberal activist judges, legislating from the bench!

Nope. This time they were all dang Republican judges legislating from the bench. But you could hear the sarcasm dripping off that one across a continent. If only the one who made the "prank" call wasn't in a shallow grave in Arizona....

tim

Obviously they were Republican activist judges legislating from the bench. Otherwise, Republicans would right now be whining about activist judges and legislating from the bench.

On that note, if it was a sect of Unitarian Universalists, our Republican buddies wouldn't be asking each other "Isn't the law really more of a suggestion, that you can follow if you choose to?"

I guess the moral of the story is, if you want to marry an underage girl even though it is against the law, join a religious cult. But make sure your in a conservative state. Who cares if the girl agrees.

If people are supposed to care about whether or not the 14 year old girl gives consent to marry and engage in sexual relations - that girl should live in Afghanistan. Taliban infringing on the rights of women, bad. Texans infringing on the rights of women, we won't go and call it good, but we'll cheer when those Texans are out of reach of the "law n order".