In regards to West Texas, I have become Patsy

[WolverineDG]

I can't be any more outraged than I already am & I am fed up with all the pontificating, hypocritical, smug bullshit posted about the FLDS in GD.

I'm not going to post this in GD because there are too many over there who have already made up their minds that CPS can only tell the truth & the FLDS can only tell lies. Many bemoaned the fact that the women & children are "brainwashed" & not able to have jobs, education, or earn their own money. Well, some of the women now have their own business, but are these hypocrites happy? No. Why? Because the women are now "bad" victims, apparently. They have not left the church in the droves these folks expected them to, so they are mindless zombies, so it's okay to make fun of them now. Oh, and anyone who doesn't share their "enlightened" views is obviously a liar & child-rape supporter. Wonder what they'll make of "Millie?" (see 3rd link)

Here is a story from the Salt Lake Tribune about their business:
http://www.sltrib.com/polygamy/ci_9737603

And here is the DU thread about it: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x3547508

Here's more from an attorney ad litem, exposing more of the disgusting, unconstitutional way CPS & the State of Texas have acted in this case:
http://iperceive.net/?s=millie

This guy has loads more FLDS expose posts & while he's a bit too conservative for my taste on some things (feminism, liberals, & gays for example), his posts on the FLDS are very good, informative reads.

Oh yeah, and Happy 4th of July. I'd like to think that my ancestor is very proud of me. After all, he didn't get his butt out of bed early on the cold morning of April 19, 1776 to go stand on a bridge & get shot at so I could stand by silently while the State of Texas rolled tanks onto private property & took children at gunpoint.


dg

[Berry Cool]

1. Don't you mean "I have become Berry"?

Patsy's not on a GD strike, I am. And it's not really a strike, it's just a complete withdrawal.

I have PM'ed a few people today who posted about how they were not going to dance on Jesse Helms' grave today because they saw no point in celebrating the death of an old man who hasn't been functional for years anyway. Of course, their posts to GD did no good, because essentially too many people want to have a party over it.

In essence, by their behavior, they're saying Jesse Helms and Tim Russert were equally evil, and that alone is enough to burn my bacon.

And then you have the anti-faith people, whom I also find extremely annoying. It's not enough for them that they feel comfortable being allowed to believe in nothing and not be persecuted for it; they simply will not be happy until they have ridiculed religion to the point where they have made all believers feel like absolute fools.

So yeah, I'm with you.

There are too many people in GD who know nothing on a topic, or know nothing but their own perspective, or know nothing other than what they read in a book or two, and now think they are experts on the subject. Who believe what they want to believe, whose minds are closed to anything else.

I think part of the reason that finding any sort of perspective about FLDS in GD is useless is simply that FLDS people are "religious," period. Not only that, but they're fundie religious. DU'ers like to preach tolerance, but they're not tolerant at all when it comes to fundie religions.

Me? I have a problem with fundie religions when they won't leave me alone, or when they try to force me to believe what they do. But I can honestly say that I have not suffered any prosetylization attempts from FLDS people, any more than I have from the Amish or the Orthodox Jews.

Do I agree with all their religious beliefs, or their rules for how people (especially women) should live? No. But it's their religion, not mine. No one's forcing me to follow it. It's not like they're the Taliban.

It seems that rather like the Amish and Orthodox Jews, they simply seek the freedom to live separately and follow their religion as they see fit, no matter what anyone else thinks of their clothes, beliefs or customs. As a person who has never lived far from the Amish, it's hard for me to understand why they should be treated any differently. True, the Amish don't practice polygamy, but the role for women in their society is hardly open or liberated. Your choice of what to be when you grow up is either wife and mother or nothing. Then again, your choice of what to be when you grow up as a boy is either farmer or nothing. Well, you could be a storekeeper or a blacksmith or run a restaurant, but that's about it.

For the Orthodox Jewish girl, life is pretty circumscribed too. You're expected to marry as soon as you reach marriageable age, and from then on your job is keeping a kosher house and raising as many children as possible. Period. And you live your life separately from all men other than your own husband.

If you grow up in those religions and that's not enough for you, if you want another life, you have to leave the community, and your religion, behind. But it's not as if others are going to come after you and kill you if you do. They may personally believe you're hell bound, but they're not going to try to send you there themselves.

This FLDS case has caused me to wonder: What would the police in a small community in Ohio or Pennsylvania or Indiana do if, someday, a teenage Amish girl ran into the station, barefoot, cap strings flying, and reported that she was being beaten and sexually abused? Would they call child and family services? Would the state move in and try to take ALL the Amish children in that particular community away? Or even ALL the Amish children in ALL the communities in that state away? And what would be said about that?

Would there be nearly as much outrage collectively against the Amish? Would they be the subject of talk shows? Would there be TV documentaries about their "cult"?

Or is this all about the sex? Is it just that we're outraged at the idea that there's a bunch of guys out there whom we have convinced ourselves are having a lot more sex than most men are, and with a lot of younger women than most men their age are, maybe even girls, and are using religion as their justification?

Because if that's what it is, we need to be honest with ourselves.

But if the sex is taking place with underage girls, we can do something about that. Same thing with child abuse. There are legal remedies applicable on a case-by-case, family-by-family basis. Those legal remedies don't have to include taking everyone's children away.

What kills me is, as is so often the case with DU, the hypocrisy. They can see children snatched out of the arms of FLDS mothers without so much as a by-your-leave, but if they knew a couple with children who was using drugs on occasion--a little pot here, a little hash there--and the state found out about it and used it as an excuse to take the couple's kids away, most of them would be screaming bloody murder. Or if the couple were involved in a divorce, and one of the two had a few drunk driving convictions and thus lost custody of the kids to the other. Outrage! How can they do that! Well, they CAN do that, because if you've driven drunk, a case can be made that you are a potential danger to your children.

Happy 4th of July, Wolfie. I think your ancestor would be proud of you, too. I like to think mine would understand my stance. After all, my grandparents didn't get up some morning and get on a ship and spend weeks crammed like sandines into a stinking hold with other people like themselves, feeling seasick and miserable, just so they could get to yet another country where they would only be treated like refuse and have equal opportunity only if they were wealthy, of the majority ethnic background and followed the majority religion.

[WolverineDG]

2. It's a take-off on what Patsy's said time & again

that she's so outraged at shrubbie, she can't be anymore outraged than she already is. But yeah, girl, I hear ya.

I think it's all about wanting to find fault in an unpopular minority group as a way of overlooking all of the blatant sexualization of young girls that goes on in mainstream society. Have you seen the clothes & swimsuits that are marketed to young girls (& I'm not talking teens)??? :wow: Miley Cyrus in Vanity Fair also springs to mind. Why the hell do young, talented, beautiful teenage stars feel they have to strip off their clothes & pose in provocative ways in order to be considered "serious" & "adult?" DUers who have no problem with these, yet go all Linda Blair at the mere mention of the FLDS, are hypocrites.

dg

[Berry Cool]

3. LOL, that makes sense.

True, there are many DU'ers who have no problem with sexualized children in mainstream society. Because, see, that's all about freedom. (Or, should I say, it's all about the kind of sexuality that personally turns them on.)

We're not alone in that. There are quite a few DU'ers who are not fond of pornography because they regard it as exploitative of women and children by its very definition, and regard it as teaching men to regard women as nothing but sex objects. There are also DU'ers who are against prostitution for essentially the same reasons. They get shouted down regularly by those why regard pornography as freeing and liberating, and prostitution as "sex work" that is as legitimate as any other kind of work, as well as a boon to those in society who can't get anyone to have sex with them without having to pay for it.

In other words, when it comes to sex on DU, you're not allowed to criticize anyone else's tastes or preferences...unless they have something to do with religion. Then they're sick and disgusting!

Oh, and another area of DU hypocrisy: childbearing, period. Where you have people who will argue for abortion rights forever, because every woman should have the right to control how many children she has or doesn't have, and who will argue against totalitarian governments like China that control how many children women are allowed to have, and who have all the sympathy in the world for a woman who has to resort to drastic measures to get pregnant because nothing else is working...yet let an article be printed about some fundie family who has 25 kids and is getting ready for number 26, and all of a sudden it's about the importance of contraception and population control and the selfish use of finite resources and "It's a vagina, not a clown car!" I really don't see what business other people's parenthood decisions are of theirs, period.

[WolverineDG]

6. oh Berry, you know you have it in for the Orthodox Jews

After all, didn't they try to run you over with the Menorah-mobile a year ago? ;)

:hug:

dg

[Berry Cool]

18. Well, I have no proof that those were Orthodox Jews.

I think it's just Jews in general who have it in for me. In Cleveland, anyway. :rofl:

[Patsy Stone]

4. Hey, girl!

:hug:

Happy 4th to you too! :toast: Proud to know you. :patriot:

[WolverineDG]

5. Aw, shucks!

:blush:

Thanks Pats! :patriot: :loveya:

dg

[uppityperson]

7. WTF does this have to do with Countdown/KO? Did you mispost?

Or are you just hoping to post in the wrong forum to stifle anyone who disagrees?

The mission of the DU Countdown/Keith Olbermann Group is to help to promote the formation of an activist community around the support of the last consistently truthful TV journalist. Basically the Group will be intended to complement and extend the nightly KOEB liveblog thread. It's not JUST about Keith Olbermann, as we also cover territory he doesn't. He's the core theme, but a fully-formed community may be able to address some progressive issues even beyond what Keith says and does.

More specifically, the mission of the Countdown/Keith Olbermann Group is to:

1) Discuss the newsletter, upcoming topics and guests.
2) Link to, and discussion of, KO's latest blog.
3) Discuss and plan action strategies on Countdown/blog topics where appropriate.
4) Organize letters in support of KO to the station periodically, pen some LTTE about topics he raises, direct stories that we would like to see him cover to the Countdown team, and suggest possible guests.
5) Discuss plan of countering false impressions and anti-Olbermann web sites.
6) Discuss and promote appearances by Keith Olbermann.
7) Discuss Countdown ratings.
8) Work on NewsQuiz questions.
9) Raise awareness of Countdown among those outside of DU.

[CC]

8. Since she is a regular of this very close knit

group she has every right to post whatever she wants here. We often go off topic and none of us minds a bit. Maybe if you took the time to do a search you would find that it isn't as off topic as you think it is. The group has grown as far as its topics go and I can only remember once that a thread got locked and very few people that have ever needed and been alerted on. Some of those got pizza delivered elsewhere. If you have a problem with her post then hide the thread. There is no reason for you to come here and attack her.


Edited to add- We EDVs and the men who love us tend to talk to each here and blow off steam here. Been doing it for a long time, hopefully will be able to continue doing so for a long time and are very supportive of each other and welcome new comers. The one thing we do have in common is the love of Countdown and appreciation of Keith, from that we have become friends no matter where we are from and what views we have. That would be the Ties that Bind us.

[uppityperson]

9. People who regularly visit a group can use that group to post an attack on others (or would it be

continuing a flame war from another topic?)? And being a regular of a group means you don't have to follow the group rules? Huh. And I have no reason to post here asking why? Huh again. I wonder what KO would say about that.

I appreciate KO, even though I don't get to see him often enough. And I guess that because I don't post here regularly, I should not post here, since I'm not part of the very close knit group who posts here regularly.

[SharonRB]

10. As CC stated above, we welcome newcomers all the time

who often then become regulars.

This is a nice, calm, refuge from some of the other parts of DU, and if Berry or anyone else feels the need to come here and blow off steam, then she's perfectly within her rights to do so. I don't see that it's bothered anyone else.

Thanks for stopping by, though, and if you should feel like stopping by again -- for a reason other than to critcize one of our regulars -- you're more than welcome.

Also, KO is not a regular of DU or our Countdown group (as much as we'd love it if he should stop by some time), so I don't thnk he has any input as to what we do or do not post.

[uppityperson]

11. If the purpose of the group is about KO, seems asking what he might think is reasonable.

Like in other groups about other people, posters muse about what the Group Topic Person might think. Example: I wonder what Barack Obama thinks about pulling out of Iraq immediately, like I say I would like.

See? I just figured that since it was a group about KO, asking what he might think would be appropriate.

[Berry Cool]

19. To be honest, I don't think anyone here is in a position to poll KO as to what he thinks

of what we post, nor do I think he really cares.

It's quite possible that he's actually a bit afraid of us...although he need not be.

If he is, it's because he's afraid we're some kind of stalker nutjobs who would try to lock him up and jump his bones against his will if we ever saw him in person. Which is patently absurd.

But anyway, that has nothing to do with the topics we discuss here. But I seriously doubt he regards them as any type of reflection on him.

[RevCheesehead]

25. Speak for yourself.

"If he is, it's because he's afraid we're some kind of stalker nutjobs who would try to lock him up and jump his bones against his will if we ever saw him in person. Which is patently absurd."

:rofl:

[CC]

12. Sorry but that is not what I said or

meant. I did not mean that only regulars are allowed to post or that others opinions aren't welcome. I wouldn't know if it is a continuation of a flame war since I didn't go look to see if there was one. As far as group rules, I guess we have all been lax for a long time since every single post hasn't been about Countdown. Since I don't recall any flame wars here I guess none of us or the mods found that what we were posting that egregious of rule violations. :shrug: I also didn't see anyone called out in that post. I guess I will have to go reread it and see whose user name I missed in there out of curiosity.

I didn't not read your post as an asking why only but as an attack. My apologies if it was not meant as an attack.

As for KO's opinion I really wouldn't know where it falls on the FLDS. I would think it would go along Constitutional lines since he seems to be a strong advocate for following the Constitution and might be a bit taken aback at the government removing a whole communities children under the guise of one fake phone call.

Yes we are close knit and it doesn't take much posting or long to become one of the close knit posters in the group. A love for Countdown and KO, and even reasoned disagreement with Keith or other posters is welcome. As is anyone that would like to join us in our nightly discussions. You are more than welcome to join us anytime just like anyone.

As I said before my apologies if I misread your post. I know it is very difficult to get emotions across when typing and things can be taken wrong very easily.

[uppityperson]

13. Only a couple reasons I wish I got cable and KO is one. Animal planet another.

You wrote "Since she is a regular of this very close knit group she has every right to post whatever she wants here". So, people who regularly visit a group can use that group to post an attack on others (or would it be continuing a flame war from another topic?)? And being a regular of a group means you don't have to follow the group rules? Now you say that is not what you said or meant. So I copied for you. Seems what you wrote is that. Not sure what you meant though, as I can only read your words.

And you misread what I wrote, or misunderstood, so will again copy/paste.

"People who regularly visit a group can use that group to post an attack on others (or would it be continuing a flame war from another topic?)? And being a regular of a group means you don't have to follow the group rules? Huh. And I have no reason to post here asking why? Huh again. I wonder what KO would say about that."

Nothing to do with what KO might say about removing kids from a potentially hazardous situation while an investigation into whether or not they were in danger was going on. I think he would uphold the Constitution, and also want to take a close look at child endangerment in a community that espoused it. So to speak. But that is better left to the FLDS threads elsewhere, since by expressing our differing opinions here we again get away from the groups purpose.

I wonder what KO would think about using a forum's group to attack others, to continue a flamewar, to then complain when those being complained about might chose to answer. Censorship or free speech? I'd like to think he would go for free speech.

Tata. Happy day after Independence Day. Off to go help just grown kid pack to leave this home for own. Independence indeed. Somewhat.

[Berry Cool]

20. I fail to see where anyone here was attacking any specific person.

And what KO's opinion of the FLDS has to do with anything, I do not know. Nor do I think he would have an opinion about how we use our forum.

And no one here has complained about free speech or expressed a desire for censorship. Disagreement with others' opinions does not equal a wish to censor their opinions.

[CC]

24. I had to leave last night

to take the middle child (who is no longer a child) to the Airport. Or as we have been joking for a couple days now, sending him back from Amish land to Mormon land.

I think part of the problem is none of us read Wolvie's post as continuing a flame war from elsewhere or as a calling out, but as a getting frustration off her chest. Some of that is an understanding of what we all tend to do here and some is an understanding of where she is coming from and why she is so frustrated with it. It is up to her if she wants to share with others why but there is enough history that we just didn't see it the way you seem to of seen it. Since we have some history there we are going to defend her from those that may not know the history.

I have read some of the threads elsewhere on the FLDS and rarely make it all the way through. Though I don't agree with their religion and it makes me cringe to feel like I am defending them there is a far more dangerous thing going on than whether of not they have married underage girls to old men. ( As much as that idea make me cringe and feel sick over it.) If they get evidence on it they should prosecute any of the men involved. But though tatters and even ripped into shreds by Bushco we do still have a Constitution that guides us on how things should be done here and even if it is a group that is abhorrent to some of us we as a people need to make sure it isn't violated. In the end that piece of paper is what makes US what we are and without it we become something else and to me that far worse than anything anyone could do to this country.

BTW you can get clips of Countdown on MSNBC after the show if you want to see Keith even though you don't have cable. Not sure about Animal Planet though I would miss it with out cable.

[WolverineDG]

14. Oh are you a regular here too?

I find it interesting that none of the regular KOEB posters have objected to this or any other post I've made in this forum on this subject. But then, we're all friends & we stand by each other, even if we do disagree.

BTW, :loveya: CC & Sharon!

dg

[CC]

15. Hi Wolvie.

Hope you got some down time yesterday and this weekend.

I ended up going over to read the other thread. Me that is surrounded by Amish farms finds it kind of funny to watch all the ruckus over "people dressing funny" and all. If the state decided that some of what the Amish did was child abuse it would kill a whole tourist industry here. An argument could be made for it though. Girls only go to school to age 12 and boys are done at 14 and only attend Amish run schools.
It can be scary to watch a 5 year old girl mowing the lawn with a Push Reel Mower in bare feet with her long dress blowing toward it while her younger sisters are pulling weeds right there too. Then there are the sharp farm implements and wood working tools that 5 and 6 year old boys use on a regular basis.:scared: Somehow they survive without serious injury and people pay to come look at them. They also tolerate being gawked at a lot better than I would.
Oh and lets not forget, no buttons, zippers or velcro to hold those shirts and pants closed. They use straight pins since the other stuff is too militaristic. Imagine an "English" two year old with straight pins holding their clothes shut and not poking themselves or swallowing it.

While I don't agree with the Amish religion or the short education all the kids I have met seem healthy and happy, even the teenagers. Also met a lot of very nice people that would anything for their neighbors be they Amish or English. Kind of hard for me to decide all FDLS members are the devil when I have just as fundy a religion on my doorstep and I know they aren't all of the devil.

[WolverineDG]

17. Thanks CC

I hope you & yours have a great weekend too. :)

dg

[Berry Cool]

21. This is what I'm saying.

What happens if someone decides that keeping children in school only to age 12 or 14 is a form of "abuse"? Do we then impose the attitude of the majority on the minority? For their own supposed good?

I always thought the reason for Amish not using buttons, zippers, etc., was because they were not "plain" and simple enough. In short, anything that might cause a person to stand out or as a distinct individual or something that someone might feel pride about because it is different from or prettier than what someone else has is discouraged.

[CC]

23. On buttons, I asked once and had it retold a

few times. Buttons and zippers were used for military uniforms and they do not use anything that came from uniforms.They also don't vote unless the church elders tell them to on something that will impact them directly. At least the Lancaster County ones I know. Also though the Church officially owns all their land they still pay property taxes here.

I get all my flowers from the Groph's farm about 4 miles from here or Hilltop about 6 miles away. Love getting good sized perennials for about $1.50 each. lol Go for a gallon pot and it might cost you a whole $3.00. Then there is the farm about a half mile away that we get fresh eggs and seasonal veggies. Terry will grab some unpasteurized milk from him once in a while. I don't drink milk. Yuk! I try to behave and avoid looking at the cakes, pies, sweet buns/rolls that they sell. I'm even evil and tip the kids when they help carry stuff to the car. Though I was lectured by mom and dad not to give them more than a dollar.:rofl: When you go almost weekly you do get to know them and they you. I feel honored they have let me take pictures of their kids but then there is a trust that has been built up over the years.

When they raided the FLDS the Amish came to my mind first. I know not all of any group is good but also that not all of any group is bad. Just over a year ago an Amish man killed his whole family and himself. So yes they too can have the stresses of life and mental illness and may even have pedophiles. They try to handle it on their own without going outside the community so we don't hear about it unless it gets so bad it can't be contained.

The second thing that came to mind on the FLDS raid was when is Texas going to start removing the 13, 14 and 15 year old girls that get pregnant from the rest of the families in TX? I know they are quite a few of them within the state and I bet there are a whole lot of them than there are members of the FLDS. Shouldn't CPS be taking them away from their parents since they allowed them to get pregnant that young? If there is more than a couple in a small town that are pregnant that young then going by how this was done the whole town should lose their kids because there is obviously something going on that allows young girls to have sex in those towns.:eyes: Good thing Gloucester High School isn't in TX or they might of all lost their kids. If you follow the path the CPS has taken it isn't that far fetched that it could happen eventually. That is one reason why they need to follow not only Constitutional laws but all laws. After 7 plus years of Bush it isn't hard to follow the path down to the worst conclusion. They have done things that in 2000 we would of been called tin foil hatters over even thinking no less saying. Sometimes that is the thing I think I will never forgive Bushco for more than anything. Even after growing up during the Vietnam War and Watergate I retained a belief that there were those in the government that would stop those that went too far. Now I don't even have that.

I don't support the FDLS and think they are a bit wacky but they do have the same rights (and responsibilities) as the rest of us including being allowed to practice their religion. If someone is caught having sex even in marriage with an underage person (female or male) then that person should be prosecuted and jailed but you don't break up every family in a community over a few bad apples.

I also take what ex-members have to say with a grain of salt. I know that the one I have seen on TV repeatedly tells stories that seem to get more outrageous each successive time she is on. Then again she has a book to sell. I seem to only see the same woman no matter what channel it is on.

Sometimes I wish Keith would talk about it and bring on J. Turley to talk about the Constitutional part of it. I would love to hear his thoughts on what was done. Then again I would love to take his Constitutional Law class if I were closer to Georgetown and think he would be a great Supreme Court justice.

Oh well there went me keeping my thoughts on it all to myself. :rofl:

:hi:

[uppityperson]

16. I go all over DU and agree with you that making fun of people for their dress is wrong.

It takes all types, fashion is just socially acceptable (or not) and making fun of people for how they dress is wrong. We disagree mightily on the FLDS debacle, so won't get into that here, but mocking people for clothing? bah. Edited to add that you may not have noticed I don't jump in the clothing mocking stuff. Will argue FLDS stuff, and CPS stuff, and all that, but not mocking clothing choices. Also not mocking living far from technology, or growing good food/back to nature stuff either as nothing wrong with any of that.

And on that clothing post I do object to your "All the FLDS detractors" stuff, as your OP here classifies all who disagree into 1 reasoning why ("CPS can only tell the truth & the FLDS can only tell lies." or "All the FLDS detractors whine about the women not having jobs & not having their own money.") which isn't true. But maybe you weren't talking about me. My chiming in on that post was to point out that not all religions engage in "mind control", since I don't believe they do.

However, my posting here was due to the "i'm gonna post here to bitch about people elsewhere" in a group that has little to do with the subject. That was why I posted here.

[Berry Cool]

22. Uppityperson, if you feel you're being criticized in places you didn't know about,

feel free to defend yourself here as not fitting in with the bulk of the FLDS critics. But I think the real issue Wolfie is discussing here is not that EVERY FLDS detractor is arguing the same argument, but that she is becoming tired of arguing with the issue with people who really, truly DO believe (because they have said as much) that CPS is telling the whole truth, the FLDS is only telling lies, and are saying the women and children are essentially being abused because of the lives they lead. If you're different, great. It's nice to know someone is, although I'd like to know what your concern is, just out of curiosity.

It's a fact that here in the KOEB, we oftentimes do feel free to post here to bitch not so much about specific people elsewhere (except for Olbermann Watch) as about general attitudes on DU that we do not understand because we find them to be hypocritically at variance with the kind of beliefs and attitudes one would expect Democrats in general to express. Not that Dems are ever in lockstep agreement on anything or that there is not room for variances in opinion, but there are some basic values one would expect us all to share.

A tolerance for the religious practices of others, assuming they do not interfere with our own decisions about how to practice or not practice religion, would be one.

Another would be a belief that parents, in general, should have custody of their own children and raise them as they see fit without excessive interference from the government except in cases where that government can prove they are in serious danger. After all, even though Democrats generally agree that the government can and should play a role in the success of families, nowhere in the Democratic philosophy is it written that the government is a superior guardian and should raise children instead of their parents.

A third--and this is really where Wolfie comes in big--is a respect for due process of law as outlined in the Constitution. Americans are not to be deprived of what is ours (property, our children, our freedom) without it. This means that before your kids can be taken away, there should at least be some evidence that you are mistreating them and that they are in serious danger if they stay with you. And that a report of someone else in your community--neighborhood, religious group, whatever--abusing or possibly abusing their children isn't a good enough reason to take YOUR kids away from YOU.

An argument can be made that if taking away all the FLDS children can be justified by concern that some of them are being abused or forced into marriage too young, one can also justify taking away all the children from, say, a Catholic parish, if one of the parish priests is accused of having molested young boys.

This is the kind of thing reasonable people can be genuinely concerned about. No one wants to see children abused. But no one wants to see parents and children separated just because of suspicion of wrongdoing within a group.