HULK SMASH!! Or, more talk on the FLDS compound

[stoney321]

Let's be clear: religious freedom does not supersede basic human rights. It does not override the basic (AND FIRST) principle of the United States of America, that being the freedom to life, LIBERTY and the pursuit of happiness. How can you know happiness if you live in a cave of fear and lies? When you're not allowed beyond the "sacred" doors of your cave? When you're threatened with "eternal damnation" - which, let me explain how it's different in the Mormon/Fundy religion. It's not Hell with Satan torturing your soul, it's being cast into Outer Darkness. Or rather, your soul is destroyed, horrors! *eye roll* Freaking religion. Anyway. Back to the rant.

So now we have these "poor mothers" crying to the media about their poor children, the lies the CPS is telling them, yadda yadda. Let me tell you who these "mothers" are. They are Merrill Jessop's daughters. Merrill Jessop is the right hand man of Warren Jeffs and the one that took over the running of the YFZ ranch after his arrest (And the former husband to Carolyn Jessop, current talk-show gal who wrote the book Escaped.) These women - his daughters - were also "given" to Warren a few years back to add to his cadre of wives and to get Merrill moving up the ladder towards prophet-hood himself. These women are still in contact with Warren, in jail. But yes, let's all sway our opinion towards sympathizing with these "poor women" and children. (My sympathies lie with the children, I thank you.)

These women sat in chairs in the "temple" and watched their under-aged (under 16 in the state of Texas with parental consent, under 18 without) daughters be married to whomever the "prophet" said. Be it their UNCLES, their COUSINS, or in Warren Jeffs' case, their STEP-SON. (Warren Jeffs took his father's wives when he became prophet. TOOK THEM. Ahem.) They sat in chairs outside the "sealing room" where those men raped those girls (oh, excuse me, consummated? *gag*) to make their marriages "legitimate." Those mothers held their daughter's babies while their husbands beat the ever loving shit out of them for having an opinion. Those mothers cowered "peacefully" on the floor while Warren Jeffs preached about how to "make a sweet mother" and proceeded to yank half of one of his wives' hair out of her head and kicked her in the ribs. In a church service.

Those poor mothers were poor women at one point: the point when they were forced into a marriage. But then they became complicit. They turned a deaf ear to their daughters. They turned a deaf ear to a few of their sons who were thrown away to keep the competition in check. They forgot their own tears, they swallowed their rage, and they made their daughters suffer the same fate.

They do not have my sympathy. They abused their children, they raised them to believe utter lies and ugliness, and they should be held accountable. (The young ones that haven't been completely turned into monsters should be distributed across the state to various womens shelters to get the help they need.) I swear to (the) god (of your choice), if they let these bastards off, they'll just go deeper into hiding. Point in fact: Short Creek raid in 1953, they got off. This spawned the LeBaron family (that I've talked about before - the ones that had my former co-worker tied up in a goat pen for most of her formative years?) that raised assassins that killed the other leader, Rulon Allred. The Kingston family, the Bristlines... all the modern creeps that the weirdos in Big love are based on. They get weirder after every scare. I can't imagine how they can get worse, but they will. *tears out hair*

And I read today that a lot of the FLDS men are getting "sympathy" from their LDS "brethren." GAAAH!! See?!?! If the Mormon Church really hated them so much, why oh why did they leave them there to fester in the desert sun for over 50 years?? And then the Utah polygamy task force dared to bitch about the Texas Rangers "ruining" their (the Utahns) rapport with the other cult leaders?! Holy crap, did I fall into bizarro land? I'm so proud to be a Texan, y'all. I mean, I'm always proud to be a Texan, but shit on a shingle, this makes me want to kiss those cowboys right on the lips for getting in there and doing it right.

Comments

[ann1962]

You are awesome.

[drusplace.livejournal.com]

I don't normally condone violence or torture or anything like that...But some people just make me want to do not nice things...And then I remember that I do not want to go down to their level. I'm glad you discuss this on your lj, as terrible as it is to read.

[copykween.livejournal.com]

I keep seeing articles about these women boo-hooing that they can't have access to their kids. Well, not if they're going to turn around and put them straight back into forced sexual slavery! Monsters, indeed. *shudders*

[chantal87.livejournal.com]

This whole situation makes my brain bleed.
And you my dear rock my world!

[tabaqui]

It makes me ill with rage. Please, please, please, let this get those kids *free*. I would hope that any woman or man who left the church would come talk to them, that any 'thrown away' boy would come and talk to them, that the littlest ones are so little they soon forget and that the *truth* of what the fuck goes on their is smeared across every newspaper front page and tv screen.

I have zero tolerance for this kind of shite. Just, zero. Every 'elder' who was complicit in what happened should be in jail, now, forever.

*seethes*

Some YFZ woman on the news last night, all 'i know that what they *the children* are going through right now is worse than anything they went through here' FUCKING BULLSHIT.

[liz-marcs.livejournal.com]

A saw bits and pieces on CNN last night. It was funny to see Anderson Cooper and the person reporting on the story basically calling bullshit on the "poor, grieving mothers."


Anderson (paraphrased): So, d'ya believe 'em?

Reporter (paraphrased): Oh, shit no.

Anderson (paraphrased): Why not?

Reporter (paraphrased): I had to pull teeth to get even names. Let alone ages. Plus, they all answered my questions the exact same way, using the exact same words.

Anderson (paraphrased): Yeah, sounded to me like they're reading from a script, too.

Reporter (paraphrased): Let's just saying they're trying to use the media to drum up sympathy, and doing a shitty job of it, too.

Anderson (paraphrased): Gee! Ya think?

Reporter (paraphrased): Ex-FLDS members who've escaped from these wackaloons say they're lying sacks of shit, every last one. Plus, everything I've heard and seen since I've been talking to these people says to me that the State of Texas is the only good guy here because, sheet, these people are kree-pee.

Anderson (paraphrased): AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Busted!


Then they go one to Boutiful, BC where they interview another lying sack of shit showing "sympathy" for his brethren. They said he was some Bishop in the FLDS and got tossed out on his ear by Warren Jeffs.

Reporter (paraphrased): Okay, when the Texas Rangers went ape on the FLDS compound, they found a row of beds inside the temple that *ahem* had been used. What do you say to that?

Laying Sack of Shit (paraphrased): Oh, I'm sure it was for the family who was responsible for caretaking the temple.

Reporter's expression: Wow! You are a lying sack of shit!


What really got me with the bishop up in British Columbia is that he's all bragging that he's got more than 100 kids and something like 22 wives. Then he goes on to brag that he's not a very good father, and really it's "the fillies" who want to have the kids and he's just obliging, and that the only reason why he was out of bed on a Sunday instead of lounging around and taking it easy was because reporter-guy was a guest.

I mean, what the fuck? Are you kidding me? That's a case of not even trying to win someone over to your side.

My favorite part of the piece? While they're on this guy's ranch, they show a film of the "quarters" for women and their children and note that it looks exactly like a low-rent motel with no windows. Okay, I understand looking like a hotel with 22 wives and more than 100 kids, but where the fuck are the windows? Seriously. Where the fuck are the windows? I don't know why that that creeped me out more than anything, but it really, really did creep me out.

Anyway, I had to shut the thing off in the middle of the interview with the Bountiful guy because he was making me physically ill.

[beadattitude.livejournal.com]

Oh hon. This just makes me so sick to my stomach. And you know what? I'm startin' to think that maybe the Christian church as run by menfolk? Have just fucked the whole thing up. I'm not so much with the believing anymore. The ideals, yeah, the love thy neighbor, yeah. The patriarchical stuffs and such, not so much. In fact, I'm just not sure I believe or want to believe anymore and I sure as hell can't talk to my family about it. I sho' don't feel like anybody's eye is on me, sparrow or not.

[dwivian]

Devil's Advocate Point -- how do you reconcile that Religious Freedom *IS* a basic human right? How do you handle conflicts between the fundamental rights of a human? Can we legitimately decide that for those not in our care?

[flyingichthyo.livejournal.com]

I love this summary. I hope everyone realizes how absurd these people are.

[redbrickrose.livejournal.com]

This whole thing is so disgusting. It's so depressing that this shit still happens, but thanks for giving us the real story.

[sweetumms33.livejournal.com]

This is just getting a to a point of absurd. I do not agree with the universal notion that mother's know best. Because as you so aptly point out, in this case, they are just bat-shit crazy. I'm thinking of those kids, and how hard its going to be to adjust to the world outside the compound. The thing is, we know a family that's part of a Quaker community in PA and people think they are crazy. But from what I've seen, everyone's treated well, they just don't have electricity and video games. That's a decision to live in a different way within American law; this church is NOT.

Thank you for posting.

[jennem.livejournal.com]

Because "your" right to religious freedom stops at the point where it begins to infringe and violate the fundamental rights of others.

In other words, you don't get to violate the rights of others in the name of your religion, and claim that its your "right" to do so.

Satanists have the fundamental right to practice their religion in this country. They can talk about the devil and worship the devil all they want. But their right to practice their religion doesn't encompass the ability to perform human sacrifices and murder people. Why? Because doing so violates that person's right to life.

If we aren't going to allow the Satanists to commit murder, we sure as shit are not going to allow the FLDS to commit child molestation and rape in the name of their religion.

[liz-marcs.livejournal.com]

I'm thinking when you reach the point where you're hurting another human being, raping them, or treating them like chattel, then your religious freedom should be burned and a fork stuck in it because you are so done as religion (as it damn well should be).

Let's take a more mainstream example: the pedophile priests in the Roman Catholic Church. Do you know how many years the RCC hid behind the whole "freedom of religion" thing to shield priests who raped kids (both boys and girls, although the girls part doesn't get as much press)? Decades, at least. There's no telling how long it actually went on, thanks to statute of limitations.

Here's what really sucks, the RCC is still trying to pull the "religious freedom" and "sanctity of the confessional" and the "if you bring this holy man to court you're going to find yourself at the wrong end of your local priest" shit, even though the jig is well and truly up. And do you know what really sucks? Sometimes the RCC is still able to pull it off. (For my own experience on this front, read The Very Strange Case of Father J and Father F (http://liz-marcs.livejournal.com/319574.html). You'll see why I'm so very unforgiving about this issue.)

Now, the FLDS leadership has no more right than the RCC leadership to hide behind the cloak of "religious freedom" to cover up their abuse children and women. (And let us not forget, both cases are analogous because both cases involve the sexual abuse and rape of underage children.)

Maybe the FLDS leadership actually believes it, but none of the women and children (or at least very damn few) have any exposure to alternative opinions or even the outside world. They are not at all allowed to be exposed to anything their leadership doesn't approve of, so they are incapable of making any kind of informed choice. In short, they're mass-brainwashed, and if they rebel, they're subjected to violence and even death.

I highly recommend reading Under the Banner of Heaven by Jon Krakauer for a detailed look at the FLDS, their practices, their numerous abuses, and their roots in the modern-day Mormon church.

I guarantee you that you'll pretty much stop with the idea that the FLDS and their "brethren organizations" are anything resembling a religion or think that religious freedom should apply to what is essentially a criminal enterprise.

[southernbangel.livejournal.com]

This whole thing makes me sick. The horrors of your past Mormon posts have always been disturbing, to say the least, but to actually read and hear justifications for this behavior from the participants' mouths? GAH. I don't think there are words to describe how disgusted and sickened I am by this turn of events.

[dwivian]

Well said. I was reading a story today about a new religion that uses hallucinogens as part of the rituals, and makes sure everyone is included in the tradition even from infancy forward.

I have a REAL issue giving drugs to kids, even as part of a religion.

But, the control of the child falls to the parent first, so I'm told. If I interfere in THAT ritual, what's to stop us from banning Jewish children having wine at passover, or Catholic children having communion wine on Sunday? Where is that grey line drawn best?

You say "no murder implies no rape". I don't think it does -- I think that there is some line past which are both rape and murder. I just don't know where that line is.

It's really ugly to start legislating religions, but it is even more annoying when people shroud horrific activity with religion in order to make it acceptable.

I don't have any answers on where that line goes, so I was wondering if others had figured it out and could share.

[dwivian]

See above, but well said! I apprecate it a lot.

(previous comment at: http://stoney321.livejournal.com/295989.html?thread=12102453#t12102453 )

[wolfshark]

I have no words.

On second thought, I have quite a few of them, but none of them are repeatable in public.

I will say this. A mother who cares that little for the welfare of their children? Isn't a mother in any sense but the biological. They've forfeited everything else.

[liz-marcs.livejournal.com]

Hate to break it to you sport, but religions are already constrained from certain practices if they violate civil law and health and safety regulations.

Here's something that people forget: The First Amendment rights in the U.S. are not absolute and never have been. They can and have been abridged/curbed in certain circumstances if the practices in question are deemed illegal (if done outside of the umbrella of religious freedom) and/or harmful to another person's civil rights.

Your example of the law stopping Jewish children have wine on Sabbath and Catholic children having communion wine on Sunday does not hold water because (wait for it) most alcohol laws specifically exempt the religious use of alcohol and specifically exempt children drinking some alcohol (but not to access) provided they are in the presence of their parents or guardians.

So, see? The law has already taken the religious use of liquor into account (or at least most states have), and have specifically allowed for it.

Furthermore, allowing someone to drink alcohol =/= equal actual rape and actual murder no matter how you slice it. This kind of slippery slope argument is pure straw man and you know it. Not only is actual rape and actual murder a fundamental violation of someone's civil rights, it's pretty much against the law.

Here, let me give you an example of something that's relatively harmless that's been declared verboten even though it was fought for under the guise of "religious freedom." Native Americans are not allowed to use peyote in religious rituals on their own reservations (people forget that the Supreme Court smacked down that right and very hard a few years).

If drug use is "not allowed," if human sacrifice is "not allowed," if "animal cruelty" is not allowed even if performed under the cloak of religious freedom, and if people have been smacked down, arrested and sent to jail because they tried to do these things and then claimed "religious freedom" as their defense, then the FLDS leadership can damn well be charged with murder, child abuse, rape, and fraud and the kids taken away from their parents and put into a different environment should the State of Texas have proof that underaged girls were forced into marriages and raped (and there is already plenty of evidence of that), and if there's proof that women were abused and murdered.

In short, please note for future reference that the Establishment Clause does not give any religion a free pass to break the law with impunity. It only requires that the Federal Government (and only the U.S. Federal Government) maintains a stance of "neutrality" on the issue of religion, i.e., the federal government cannot impose a "religion test" as a basis of citizenship/office holding and it cannot give one religion preference over another (at least in theory, as we all know it's not always true in practice) in the form of tax breaks, etc.

So, really, your stance still doesn't hold a drop of water, because it requires a deliberate misreading and understanding of what religious freedom actually means under U.S. law.

[liz-marcs.livejournal.com]

See my reply above.

[soberloki.livejournal.com]

You are awesome and sharp and I agree wholeheartedly with this post.

[stoney321.livejournal.com]

Well, that's what my icon says... Hahahahah. <3

[stoney321.livejournal.com]

I'm for the "stick them in jail and let it be known they hurt kids" kind of torture. Let the criminals deal with them, Oz style.
:(

[jerusha]

I just started reading Escape, and she has quite a bit to say about Jessop's daughters, none of it positive. *sigh* As soon as these women stopped protecting their children from abuse, they became perpetrators. And if Utah had gotten off its ass a long time ago, these people would have been stopped.

[stoney321.livejournal.com]

Yeah, that's EXACTLY what they're going to do. OH! And it's important to note that two of them weren't even LIVING at the YFZ ranch. Also, their children (boys) are grown so... WTF?

[stoney321.livejournal.com]

I am SO WORRIED that they'll get off like the last time. I'm hoping not. Which... is why I'm not shutting up. :D