Comments:All FLDS children returning to parents

Finally
Finally, the court has realised that the kidnapping was illegal. The children will now only be mentally scared for life, instead of being mentally scarred for life and being without parents. If anyone but the state had kidnapped 400 children illegally they would face decades in prison but when the state do the same they are just asked to return the children.Anonymous101   15:38, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Note that this is not a vindication of the FLDS per se, so much as it is a slap on the wrist to Texas CPS, which bungled the job terribly. Basically, the courts are not saying that the children should be returned because the FLDS is a wonderful place for them to be & they are in no danger - it is saying that the danger is not immediate *enough* to warrant the action of emergency removal of the children from the compound.  This in no way indicates that the state of Texas has ceased to consider the YFZ compound an unhealthy place for these children, as far as I've read.  --on WP as User:Kasreyn.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 167.127.107.8 (talk) 19:22, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
 * A government court isn't going to promote the FLDS.
 * The FLDS children wanted to stay at the FLDS compound.
 * Governments don't give up on their unjust actionsAnonymous101  19:41, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
 * In a situation where a child may be living in an abusive environment, the state generally doesn't consider the child's opinion to be highly important. Children, especially children subjected to parental abuse, are not very good judges of what sort of upbringing is best for them.  That's for adult society at large to decide.  --on WP as User:Kasreyn  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 167.127.107.8 (talk) 20:17, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
 * So an adult who has never seen the child at home can judge if a child is being abused. A child who is given the option (when removed from their parents) can't decide if they are suffering. Please remember that some of the children were up to aged 16. They are capable of making there own choices. Anonymous101  20:30, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Some of them were 16, not all of them. And if a person sees a child in a marriage with an old man who has sex with her, that can easily be interpreted as abuse. Besides, when growing up in a certain environment, you can suffer more than physical abuse. Emtional and psychological manipulations occur, even if the parents don't realize. The children believe they HAVE to do this in order to ascend to heaven, and I'm sure there's a LOT of outside pressure on them to go through with these marriages. A mother is allowed to give her ten year old kid alcohol, but if he gets drunk because his family lets him, is that abuse? No, but it is improper and unsafe upbringing. Not the BEST parallel, but all I could think of at the moment. - 207.54.204.19 15:25, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Messed up
This sadistic idiots in FLDS rape little kids. There is no excuse for condemning those kids to that fate again. We saved them once. Hopefully this is only temporary while the proper paperwork is completed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.157.101.18 (talk) 16:37, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh, and what makes you so sure they rape kids. Is it the lies given by the government, or maybe the contents of the hoax phone call that resulted in the mass kidnapping. Anonymous101  17:35, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I think it has more to do with seeing footage of a young teenaged girl who's visibly pregnant being escorted to church by a husband old enough to be her father. I think the majority of Americans - those of us not living in polygamist compounds - have agreed that that's too young for informed consent to be given.  Therefore, we can conclude with some certainty that someone has taken advantage of that child.  The remaining task is finding out who and bringing them to justice.  --on WP as User:Kasreyn.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 167.127.107.8 (talk) 20:56, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Hrm
Maybe the right answer is something somewhere between the spectrum of the 2 above comments. Cirt (talk) 16:55, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I admire your commitment to moderation, but I must recommend you see the independant documentary Banking on Heaven. Whatever one's beliefs about the morality of polygamy, the fact remains that this is a group that has hundreds of millions of dollars in the bank and can build golden palaces in the desert, but their wives and children survive on food stamps.  I don't think anyone who isn't living in an echo chamber or cult could fail to see that as unethical, if not downright evil.  --on WP as User:Kasreyn.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 167.127.107.8 (talk) 19:09, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Are these the wives that refused to renounce there faith and leave the compound when pressurized into doing so by Texas officials? Anonymous101  19:18, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
 * No, I'm talking about the way the wives and children of the FLDS have lived for years. Parents within the FLDS are encouraged to "bleed the beast" (a phrase borrowed from the libertarian/republican playbook) and force the government to support their choice to have large families.  As a result, the taxpayers are picking up the tab for the FLDS's many offspring to the tune of $30 million (last I heard; may be higher now), and the money that FLDS parents make which would normally go to feeding their families goes to building giant marble palaces in the desert and enriching the FLDS corporation.  --on WP as User:Kasreyn  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 167.127.107.8 (talk) 20:13, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
 * That's the government's fault for having the welfare system. There wouldn't be this problem in a free market. Anonymous101  20:32, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
 * So the government is cruel and evil, except for when it tries to be compassionate -- in which case it's just stupid instead? How...  convenient!  --on WP as User:Kasreyn  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 167.127.107.8 (talk) 20:45, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
 * So the government is cruel and evil, except for when it tries to be compassionate -- in which case it's just stupid instead? How...  convenient!  --on WP as User:Kasreyn  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 167.127.107.8 (talk) 20:45, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

I read "Baptists abuse FLDS children" in foster homes. Where is the hew and cry for justice there? Petefile epidemic in the CATHOLIC CHURCH? Who is teaching them PARENTING SKILLS?

Why isn't the TEXAS CPS head Marleigh Meisner FIRED? Judge Barabara Walthers prosecuted?

A star of "Sex and the City" is getting her own show, and it's not Sarah Jessica Parker. . The DRUGEREPORT today! FLDS CHILDREN MUST SEE TV???? This is the BAPTIST MORALS? THIS IS TEACHING T H E M P A R E N T I N G  S K I L L S ????

FOX IS IN THE HEN HOUSE, and behind every BUSH?

Here we have a couple of horney women lording over UNCOMMITTED and UNSUBMISSIVE, and a STATE RELIGION OF DEBAUCHERY ESTABLISHED IN TEXAS for ONLY the FLDS to comply with?????

The criminals are on the streets, the victims are in prisons. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.109.163.171 (talk) 04:41, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

SEX THE NEW MODEL FOR PARENTING: JUDGE BARBARA WALTHERS STARING, Marleigh Meisner lies and distortions, Nancy disGRACE
I read "Baptists abuse FLDS children" in foster homes. Where is the hew and cry for justice there?

Why isn't the TEXAS CPS head Marleigh Meisner FIRED? Judge Barabara Walthers prosecuted?

A star of "Sex and the City" is getting her own show, and it's not Sarah Jessica Parker. . The DRUGEREPORT today! FLDS CHILDREN MUST SEE TV???? This is the BAPTIST MORALS? THIS IS TEACHING T H E M P A R E N T I N G  S K I L L S ????

FOX IS IN THE HEN HOUSE, and behind every BUSH? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.109.163.171 (talk) 04:45, 3 June 2008 (UTC)