Saturday, August 16, 2008

34 FLDS Children off the hotseat.

I love the way the headline reads too. There's no bias at the Houston Chronicle;

"Court lets CPS end oversight of 34 FLDS children."

Oh yeah. We were forced to do it, and finally, the courts have let us end our oversight. What kind of loon writes a headline like that? It's similar to all the screaming headlines about Levi Barlow Jeffs who was up on a misdemeanor beef who "plea bargained" to guilty. For a misdemeanor. To read the headlines you would have thought initatially that FLDS men were starting to "fess up" to sexual crimes. The stories made sure of course, that you knew there was a "girl" in the car with him. Levi by the way is all of 19. His crime was a failure to STOP when asked to. It's a TRAFFIC TICKET PEOPLE. But I digress.

"Friday's court action doesn't mean CPS ends its involvement with the 10 families of the 34 children, all members of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, a group that allegedly practices underage marriage.

"CPS may still investigate the families or deliver services."

"Deliver Services?" Did we fall straight through the 1984 Newspeak trapdoor to "Wonderland" with no fanfare at all? I get it that any entity or person will try to color or spin their phrasing to their benefit, but haven't journalists learned that they can paraphrase? There is no "service" the FLDS want from CPS or frankly need either. What next? Do we hear that the executioner was allowed to "end oversight" of a prisoner after he "delivered services?" CPS is never going to go away. They're going to hang around the doors of these people until every child in the house is 18.

"Last week, armed with new evidence, the agency returned to court to again seek custody, but this time only of eight children, six girls and two boys ages 5 to 17. The agency said it was doing so either because they lived in households that refused to condemn underage marriages or were actively involved in the practice.

(Judge Barbara) Walthers will hold hearings on that request beginning Monday in San Angelo."

I have freedom of speech in this country, and freedom of religion but if I express the view that what was once entirely legal in this country (as Willie Jessop also pointed out as recently as 100 or so years ago) and say it's a good idea, my children can be taken from me. Thank God they are grown because I have expressed just those ideas at home and apparently though I am free to express those ideas the children do not belong to me. They belong to the state. The state doesn't want their children to hear that kind of stuff.

Wake up. The dangerous agenda of CPS is still being pushed. They can go anywhere, anytime and if they determine you merely advocate beliefs they do not agree with, they can take your children. Anytime. In Canada churches have already been attacked by the government for merely preaching the unvarnished view the Bible expresses that homosexuality is wrong. The Bible is a book filled with "hate speech" by the standards of our liberal bureaucracy. Soon, merely refusing to condemn those attitutes expressed by God's law will be an abusive environment.

"CPS is still deciding what to do with the 400 or so pending cases."

Well we know now. They will either seek custody of the children or be let to terminate oversight, but still "deliver services." If CPS can have it's way, they'll NEVER go away and they will always threaten to take the children, and may actually do so.

Sphere: Related Content


ztgstmv said...

I have never seen where it says he refused to stop his car. Do you have a link?
In this article ( it indicates that he was nothing but cooperative. They only charged him because he had a girl in the car, and they were searching for girls.

The Pharisee said...

If you click on Levi's name in the article, it's linked to the Deseret News and that says he "wouldn't stop" and had a "Girl in the car."

It's a major minor violation, a "big misdemeanor" as it were. Levi DIDN'T stop for a traffic check is what it amounts to.

The fact that he has plea bargained to something that has to be LESS that what he was charged with, namely a misdemeanor, says that he has been now charged with an even LESS severe misdemeanor.

In any case it's certainly not going to hurt the young man in the long run, particularly if he stays out of trouble.