April 14th, 2008

Fascism for the FLDS

photo credit: Trent Nelson

A week ago, Texas “authorities”, apparently longing to exercise their dormant muscle power after 15 years of atrophy, conducted a “raid” on the FLDS “compound”.

As I watch the shoddy journalism taking place in the coverage of these events, I wonder to myself why people aren’t up in arms over this display of government aggression. From whence does the state derive authority to kidnap, under the musty blanket of the law, four hundred children? How is it that hearsay and one anonymous phone call—the source of which has yet to be verified—are considered enough evidence to forcefully remove children from their parents, take them into custody, interrogate them (encouraging them to “tattle tale” on their parents), and keep them under guard?

How does such arrogance on the part of Child Protective Services—a fascist arm of the state if ever there was one—go unchecked? Why are a few individuals given the authority to separate families on their word alone?

I’m simply stunned that this event has taken place at all. I fully support any prosecution of child abuse when the evidence clearly shows it has occurred, but I condemn any broad action that targets innocent persons. In this country, people are innocent until proven guilty (at least in word, if not in deed).

Would people speak up more in defense of the innocent if they themselves were kidnapped and interrogated, for something their neighbor or relative had done? Yes, these people are different from “the rest of us”. They have a strange dress, lifestyle, and a religion that is at odds with “mainstream” Christianity. But is that license to pursue the present course of action? I submit that Texan officials have far overstepped their bounds, and will soon find themselves in a mess of legal trouble if they do not immediately apologize and return the children and families to their homes.

Guy Murray, an attorney in California, has been exhaustively covering this debacle on his blog. I encourage you to read through his posts to get up to speed on all sorts of aspects of this mess. His continuing coverage will no doubt be more extensive and thorough than what you’ll see on your nightly news.

Sadly, these events provide one more arrow in the libertarian’s quiver to demonstrate to others how the government immorally intervenes into the lives of citizens who have done no harm to others. Texas—and by extension, America—has shown herself to be the aggressor and destructive force that she is. One can only hope that these events find a peaceful, prompt resolution.

74 Responses to “Fascism for the FLDS”

  1. Yin
    April 14, 2008 at 10:10 am #

    Connor, I think you answered your own question. Why aren’t people up in arms over this? As you pointed out, these people “have a strange dress, lifestyle, and a religion that is at odds with ‘mainstream’ Christianity.” The average American is probably appalled and disgusted by their lifestyle and religious choices. I’ll be honest and say that I am. It’s so easy to focus on that and use it to justify actions. We think these people deserve what they’re getting, so we’re okay with letting the law do whatever they want to see that they get it. It’s sad, but I believe it’s true. I saw on the news that almost two-thirds of Utahns think this whole ordeal has been completely justified, and also long overdue. People are pushing officials to take similar actions in Utah and Arizona. “Cracking down” appears to be the trend.

    Like you, I think abuse, rape, neglect, etc., should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. But, I think that we may have hit a nerve here, though. Especially among LDS who are particularly resentful towards the FLDS for the bad name they may be giving to Mormonism. Ironically, the LDS people should be more sympathetic since such abuse of the law towards them is so fresh in their own history.

  2. Guy Murray
    April 14, 2008 at 10:19 am #

    HI Connor,

    Thanks for the write up on this and the link; however, I’m an attorney on California’s Central Coast. Salt Lake won’t have me. 😉

  3. Connor
    April 14, 2008 at 10:21 am #

    Ha! I’ve assumed for the longest time that you were in SLC. Whoops.. I’ll fix the post now. 🙂

  4. Trent Nelson
    April 14, 2008 at 11:50 am #

    That’s my photo, by the way. I don’t know who Franc is or why he chose to stick his name on it.

  5. Russell Page
    April 14, 2008 at 12:44 pm #

    I started an almost identical blog post, but didn’t publish it. I also found…
    – Officers are taking away cell phones, so members can’t communicate with each other.
    – Child Protective Services workers won’t allow FLDS children near the fenced in areas because the media will ask them questions.
    – Officers are making the media move away from the area where the children are housed.
    – Based on an unsubstantiated tip, the judge granted law enforcement officials a warrant that authorizes them to search “all buildings, temples, temple annexes, places of worship, vaults, safes, lockboxes, locked drawers, medical facilities, structures, places and vehicles at the ranch.”
    – Law enforcement officials were able to enter and search their temple. (Something tells me this wouldn’t have happened so flippantly if it would have been the temple of a different religious group of which many have temples).
    – Men are being detained but not being charged with a crime.

  6. Connor
    April 14, 2008 at 1:49 pm #


    Sorry to hear that – I’ll update the link to point to your blog. Hope you mind me still using the picture even though this dude ripped it off. If not, lemme know, and I’ll find another.


    These findings are disturbing. Thanks for the compilation. You know, I have to laugh. Today I’ve been hearing of all the volunteer lawyers coming to represent each child so that, as the State Bar chair said, “justice can be served” for each child.

    Umm… I think that proper justice would be rendered by the authorities packing up their bags and going home, leaving innocent people to do whatever they please. Good grief.

  7. Carlos U.
    April 14, 2008 at 4:54 pm #

    Connor, you are dead wrong.

    I’m a practicing, faithfull, historically aware member of the Church married to a descendant of poligamist pioneers.

    None of that makes me feel the least ammount of sympathy for child molestors, child rapists, people who transport minors with the purpose of engaging in sexual acts, etc. I thank God the state of Texas had the cojones to do what Utah and Arizona have been too cowardly to do. These perverts engage in pre-meditadet, systematic, ongoing conspiracies to commit ilegal and inmoral acts with CHILDREN that have been condemend by our church authrities. And mental gymnastics about the constitution don’t negate the primary issue: The state and the Fed have the authority and the MORAL OBLIGATION to step in and stop this evil secret combination.

  8. Jeff T
    April 14, 2008 at 5:08 pm #

    While I disapprove of the actions of the FLDS, I think that the more dangerous secret combination here is the government colluding to interfere with the lives of its citizens.

    I too, believe that rape and abuse must be stopped… but not without due warrant.

  9. Connor
    April 14, 2008 at 5:15 pm #


    Did you read my post? Let me reiterate one key phrase for you:

    I fully support any prosecution of child abuse when the evidence clearly shows it has occurred…

    That, hopefully, will resolve your concern.

    However, you raise a larger issue: a “MORAL OBLIGATION” to step in and stop marriages to teenage brides. Might I ask you a question? What if the 16 year old bride-to-be consents, as does her parents, as does the groom-to-be? What moral obligation does the state have to intervene in such an arrangement?

    This isn’t some round-up rodeo where the sheriff flashes his badge and does as he pleases with those he thinks to be guilty. The onus of proof is on the government—they must have evidence for intervening into the private affairs of citizens.

    The rule of law demands that any so-called moral obligation be discharged within the guarantees afforded by our Constitution.

  10. David
    April 14, 2008 at 7:13 pm #

    “I submit that Texan officials have far overstepped their bounds, and will soon find themselves in a mess of legal trouble if they do not immediately apologize and return the children and families to their homes.”

    If only that were true. I submit that you are right about that except that Texas officials will probably escape any real trouble any time soon because too many people get hung up on the differences between the FLDS and mainstream America so that they fail to consider the trampling of basic rights that Texas is doing right now.

  11. Kelly W.
    April 15, 2008 at 7:23 am #

    I am reminded of the saying, but I can’t remember the wording. It goes something like this:

    First they came for the communists, but I wasn’t a communist so I didn’t worry. Then they came for the jews, but I wasn’t a jew so I didn’t worry. Then they came for the polygamists, but I wasn’t a polygamist…….

  12. Connor
    April 15, 2008 at 7:38 am #


    That saying can be found on this post.

  13. Connor
    April 15, 2008 at 8:13 am #

    I have started a petition that I invite you all to sign:

    Free the Innocent FLDS

  14. Mormon Paleo
    April 15, 2008 at 10:05 am #


    Great post!

    If an anonymous tip from an anonymous source (yet to be located but presumably wasn’t even in the compound at the time of the call, and is now presumed to be outside of Texas) accusing a man who wasn’t there (Dale Barlow) of something untraceable could provoke the tearing apart of 139 mothers from their 400+ children, what would it take to tear my wife and children from me?

  15. Jeff W
    April 15, 2008 at 2:31 pm #

    The government is no more justified in destroying FLDS families now than they were in destroying LDS families when polygamy was still practiced as a part of our religion. Do we really think that 400 children being ripped from loving families to be indoctrinated and destroyed by the state is a good thing? Apparently most Utahns (Mormons) do. I guess the proclamation on the family only counts if your not FLDS. Who knows, perhaps these kids would be better off placed in single parent or gay homes–they sure wouldn’t be different then.

  16. Scott
    April 15, 2008 at 6:25 pm #

    I have quietly observed this whole event. I take everything the MSM has published with a very large grain of salt. Still, the more information becomes availble, the more troubling this all becomes.

    I am all for saving abused children. But seriously, do they really have evidence of serious abuse against all of these children? Are we to believe that putting these children through the hell of the foster care system (and perhaps even adopting them out while teaching them that their natural parents were evil) is going to be better for them?

    If there were abuses, the officials should take action to address those specific abuses. When there is abuse in a family, officials often remove all of the children from that family. Texas officials seem to be saying that all FLDS families on the compound were sufficiently abusive to warrant removal of all of their children. Given the types of situations where they refrain from removing children, that is very difficult to believe.

    The past FLDS raids failed to take the religion out of the children that were removed. After due process, most ended up back in FLDS communities within a couple of years. Only they were then even more jaded about and afraid of ‘outside’ society than before. This will be no different unless the children undergo some kind of reprogramming and are never returned to their families.

    This sounds like stuff that was done in Nazi Germany, where my Dad grew up; not like something that happens in USA in 2008. I am very concerned.

  17. DougT
    April 15, 2008 at 6:55 pm #


    Amen Brother!

    Unfortunately for the rest of the world the US aren’t the only one plagued by this problem.

  18. Mike Simons
    April 15, 2008 at 7:50 pm #

    I was furious when I read about this about a week ago. I don’t understand what the state is thinking. What the heck are they going to do with 400 misplaced children now? They’ve broken up families and started these kids on a very rough road.

  19. Barbara
    April 16, 2008 at 8:14 am #

    This has been a discussion in our home since it raised it’s ugly head on the news, this is a prime example how corrupt our judicial system is. A judge putting such a warrant out and then a sheriff thinking he could follow through with such non-sense. The People need to start learning the concepts of the Constitution and know what Rights and liberties really mean. Now, because a “Barlow” moved into a town here in Colorado next to me, the neighbors actually believe they can call the sheriff and have him invade them because they put up a 7 ft. fence. Mr. Barlow called the sheriff and invited him to his house and one of our commissioners actually knew what the Constitution stands for and said, ” They have a constitutional right to live.” You have no Rights till you assert them. Thank you Connor for this article. Barb

  20. Brian Duffin
    April 16, 2008 at 10:37 am #

    Guy: If it makes you feel any better, SLC won’t have me either! I am banished to the desert wastelands of Arizona! 🙂

    Connor: Thank you for starting the petition. I signed it and added a statement.

  21. Mason
    April 16, 2008 at 11:29 am #


    I think you ought to change the name of the Facebook group you created. “Free the Innocent FLDS” makes it sound as though the group is claiming that they are entirely 100% innocent–every one of them–which I doubt is true. “The Constitution Applies to all Americans–Even the FLDS” … or something along those lines would, in my view, be something that more people would be willing to stand behind because it is an endorsement of constitutional rights for everyone instead of appearing to be an endorsement of a backward religious “sect” who many LDS feel the need to distance themselves from.

  22. Connor
    April 16, 2008 at 12:12 pm #


    I see your point. FB won’t let me change the group’s name, though, so that’s not an option.

    I understand how at first glance people might think that it (and the petition) refers to all FLDS, but I would hope they would read a little more, or do their homework, to realize that that’s not the case. Perhaps I’m expecting too much… 🙂

  23. Mason
    April 17, 2008 at 8:30 am #

    Yeah, I think the main problem is that “first glance” is all that a lot of people are willing to give and then they walk away misunderstanding your/our position.

  24. janet
    April 17, 2008 at 10:12 pm #

    If a government or religious official were to marry a 50 year old man to a 16 year old boy with the consent of the boy and his parents, would that marriage be legal? If the age of the boy and the man were changed would it then be legal? If not, why not? What makes the act on the part of the one performing the ritual legal or illegal? If the act is illegal, is the couple married under the law? What gives government the constitutional right to deny marriage to gays or to require that marriage is between a man and a woman? If you believe that the age, gender and other restrictions placed on marriage are legal and constitutional, then you must concede that the restrictions against polygamy are also legal. That being the case, we are not talking about polygamy, we are discussing adultery, fornication and statutory rape. None of which are condoned by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.

  25. Jeff T
    April 17, 2008 at 10:28 pm #

    No government has the moral authority to redefine marriage when God was the one to instituted it. Who are we as a government that derives its authority from the people to overturn or change an institution that God created?

    So, if God declares polygamous marriage to be lawful in his eyes, who are we as a mortal government to change that? and if God condemns homosexual marriage, who are we to condone it?

    I don’t think your comparison works, since it isn’t the government that should define or restrict marriage in the first place.

  26. janet
    April 19, 2008 at 6:35 am #

    So, if God declares polygamous marriage to be lawful in his eyes, who are we as a mortal government to change that? and if God condemns homosexual marriage, who are we to condone it?

    I am talking about the LEGAL authority to perform the marriage not the structure of the marriage. I think that you missed that point. An illegal act does not a marriage make regardless of who is involved, who approved, or who participated. To be a marriage, it must be legal.

  27. Jeff T
    April 19, 2008 at 2:04 pm #

    I see what you are saying… sorry I misunderstood. In other words, because polygamous marriage isn’t recognized lawfully, those who are participating in it aren’t even married under the law. Therefore, the crime isn’t polygamy (since it doesn’t exist under U.S. law) but fornication and adultery between adults who THINK they are married but aren’t. Therefore, even if we approve of the idea of polygamy in principle, we would condemn their actions on the basis that we don’t approve of sexual relations outside of marriage, since the parties involved aren’t married.

  28. Bishop Rick
    April 19, 2008 at 2:15 pm #

    I was wondering when you were going to weigh in on this issue. I am a bit surprised that you have no compassion for those young girls who cant defend themselves from some very bad people. But I fully expected you to stand with the FLDS on the issue and you did not disappoint. You have always thought that polygamy was a gift from God when in fact nothing could be further from the truth. Polygamy was a perk created by Joseph Smith, nothing more and nothing less. The plan of God was one man and one woman. It is written right in the Bible , well it’s in my Bible Im not sure it is in yours.

  29. Jeff T
    April 19, 2008 at 5:01 pm #

    I can’t speak for Connor, but here’s my two cents:

    It is wrong for anyone to practice polygamy today. Why? Because God has not authorized it. He has asked His saints to discontinue the practice. I do not approve of the actions of the FLDS in this regard.

    However, I think anyone who has read the bible will recognize times in history when God has approved and authorized the practice. Examples such as Abraham and may of the biblical prophets illustrate this. Therefore, while the practice is forbidden by God today, there have been times in history when it was not.

    While I object to the way Texas has treated the FLDS, I do not approve of the practice of polygamy. I simply want the constitutional rights of every citizen to be protected, and due process of law to be preserved, which has not happened in Texas.

  30. J
    April 19, 2008 at 10:52 pm #

    Hey folks, first of all, it is not yours to approve of polygamy as practiced by others. YOU can take it or leave it for yourself but that’s where the jurisdiction of your judgment meets its end. Second, did you all know that there are even worse people out there? These other people are REALLY sick. [edited] My cousin told me that his neighbor told him that when his friend was still just a kid, his father took him into a pool of water and held him under so that he could be “reborn”! And it’s like a vicious cycle of weird behavior, his father did it to him and his father did it to him, and his father, and his father, on and on, all the way back. I just wish everybody and everybody’s kids could all belong to my religion so they would be happy.

  31. J
    April 19, 2008 at 11:00 pm #

    Oh and Bishop Rick, does your Bible have a part in it where a guy is date raped by his two daughters? NWT? KJV? Mine does.

  32. janet
    April 20, 2008 at 8:02 am #

    Jeff T. I’m glad you got it:) That is what I meant.

    There is one qualifier though that requires additional clarification and that is the word ADULT.

    Statutory rape is different than rape in that the act most frequently occurs between a consenting adult and one determined by law as incapable of consenting due to age or influence (position of power or influence over the minor): The age factor is 1) Too young to make the decision. 2) Significantly younger than the perpetrator, and still a minor (even if the perpetrator is also a minor). 3) Under the authority of …(such as a teacher, leader, parent) a person forcing, manipulating or persuading the minor to make a significant major decision usually reserved, under the law, for adults).

    There is a reason that marriage law includes age limits and statutory rape laws include authority verbiage. Say for instance, your 12, 13, 14, or 15 year old daughter decided to eat lunch on a road trip with a group of kids and on the trip, she encounters a polygamist who is charming and persuasive. She “willingly” takes off and “marries” him. Then she shows up on your doorstep months later, pregnant, with her forty year old “husband” in tow. Do you say, “Welcome son!”, or do you call the police? Would your decision be determined by the fact that she said “yes” to the “marriage” or by her age and the set of circumstances under which her disappearance and the “marriage” took place? If the law were different, allowing polygamy, would it alter your thinking (all other variables being the same)?

    Some of these kids that were taken are mothers at 12, 13,14, 15… If that’s OK then why counsel other young teens to put their babies up for adoption?

    Sometimes it helps to do paradigm shifts and not jump to conclusions before we obtain understanding.

    J – Just because the Bible tells a story doesn’t mean that God sanctioned the action. In some cases he did and in some cases he didn’t. The stories are told so that we can learn how to judge. In the Bible that was especially important because the judgement of people often involved the death penalty.

  33. J
    April 20, 2008 at 10:49 am #

    Swing and a miss. Uh janet, have you ever actually read the Bible? My point, that you seem to have overlooked from way up there on your ivory tower, is that the Bible does not exist for people to use as the backbone of their bigotry. Do you honestly think that polygamist boogey men are out there trying to pick up teenagers? Since paradigm shifting is the norm for you why not try the advanced class, it’s called “Putting Things in Proper Context”. It’s honors credit, but if you put in the hours I think you can keep up.

  34. Tilden
    April 20, 2008 at 3:44 pm #

    The Texas authorities are taking DNA samples from all concerned, and soon we’ll know what’s what, including the biological heritage of the kids and the timing of their conception. Every indication points to rampant statutory rape, if not worse than that.

    Given that Mr. Boyack doesn’t approve of R-rated movies and other forms of immorality, his stance on polygamy in general, and the involvement of young girls in particular, is curious, to put it mildly.

  35. George
    April 20, 2008 at 5:10 pm #


    Believe me, people ARE up in arms about this. I’ve been all over the blogs and the newspapers. While many people feel the “end justifies the means”, I am very encouraged to see how many others (including the ACLU) realize that the government overstepped it’s bounds and has violated the civil liberties of these families. A CPS investigation could have been conducted with oversight and audit that did not involve tearing these families from their homes.

  36. Connor
    April 20, 2008 at 7:57 pm #

    It would seem, based on some of the above comments, that a few clarifications are in order:

    • I do not agree with the beliefs, practices, or marital style of the FLDS.
    • I condemn abuse in any form.

    Having clarified those issues, I would remind the readers of the nature of this post. I’m not referring to abuse, polygamy, or alleged “brainwashing” that perpetuates the cycle and leads these women to become alleged “victims” of rape, abuse, and the rest. I am discussing the Constitutionality of the government’s actions, and the ways in which the civil liberties of these people have been infringed.

    If there are cases of abuse, they should be specifically investigated and prosecuted. Rounding up neighbors, fellow church-goers, and others based on some alleged future action is patently absurd, and morally atrocious.

  37. George
    April 20, 2008 at 8:20 pm #


    I think we were all clear on that, but thank you for the clarification, anyway. It’s always better to be safe than sorry! 🙂

  38. nodedog
    April 21, 2008 at 1:57 pm #

    I just signed your petition. I appreciate that you have gone to the effort to put the word out. I don’t understand why people are so full of animosity towards people that they don’t even know.

    It is truely scarey to imagine them getting away with this. Before you know it only state sponsored religion will be considered safe for children. Better pick out a good Baptist church now.

  39. Tilden
    April 21, 2008 at 4:27 pm #

    Forgive what will be an apparent off-topic comment, but if you bear with me you will presently see that it is not off-topic at all but bears upon your credibility with respect to your claim to oppose polygamy.

    In a prior posting, you alleged that a number of presidential candidates, including Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and John McCain, are members of the Council on Foreign Relations. Oddly enough, a link in your own post contradicted your claim, showing that McCain is a member, but not Mrs. Clinton or Obama.

    I wrote to both you and the CFR to inquire about the matter. You did not answer, and the comment section on that posting was closed. The CFR sent me their membership list, and it verified what had been contained in the link from your article, i.e., that you lied when connecting several candidates to that organization.

    You make a great show of promoting “morality,” but isn’t telling the truth the foundation of morality? And if you lie about one thing, how can someone believe you on a different subject?

    When it comes to polygamy, your attacks on the Texas authorities are so flimsy as to call into doubt your proclaimed opposition to polygamy and the rape of young girls. Regardless of the genesis of the phone call that brought the authorities to the cult’s so-called “ranch,” their illegal practices there had been an open secret for years. Your condemnation of law enforcement is disingenuous at best.

    Similarly, in the Mormon-run states of Utah and Arizona, polygamist cults operate more or less openly, with only rare interference or investigation, let alone prosecution. For instance, when Elizabeth Smart was “kidnapped” some years back, she was observed with polygamists out and about in Salt Lake, none of whom were tracked down or prosecuted.

    If you and other Mormons were actually opposed to polygamy rather than stating a pro-forma opposition that means nothing, you’d be clamoring for real action.

  40. Connor
    April 21, 2008 at 4:58 pm #


    Wow, now there’s an accusatory comment. Please allow me to rebut your errant claims.

    I wrote to both you and the CFR to inquire about the matter. You did not answer, and the comment section on that posting was closed.

    I receive many emails per day, and must prioritize them. You are correct in asserting that I have yet to respond to yours. It wasn’t high on my priority list, especially with everything that’s been going on around here lately.

    As per closing the comment section on the CFR thread, you are mistaken. The comment section on every post on this blog is currently open. I verified this just now, so I don’t know what you’re talking about here.

    The CFR sent me their membership list, and it verified what had been contained in the link from your article, i.e., that you lied when linking several candidates to that organization.

    I reject your claim that I am lying by claiming that Obama is a member. A person might be mistaken or have bad facts without explicitly lying.

    In this case, it would appear that my facts have proven wrong. If you’ll read this comment, you’ll see that at the time I posted the article, the linked candidates were under a “leadership and staff” section of the CFR’s website. They have since been moved to a “Candidates 2008” section.

    You will note, then, that at the time of writing my article, I was going off of the basis of their current website’s content, which associated those candidates with a “leadership and staff” categorization. Leadership and/or staff clearly indicates an affiliation with and/or membership within the organization. Therefore, I felt comfortable in arguing that based on that admission on CFR’s own website, the candidates were CFR members. Based on CFR’s latest website content reorganization, it would seem that they are not making such a statement.

    I hope you will agree, then, that I was not nor am currently lying. Being misled by something is far different from maliciously trying to deceive my readers. Your eagerness to brand me a liar is foolhardy and completely off base.

    When it comes to polygamy, your attacks on the Texas authorities are so flimsy as to call into doubt your proclaimed opposition to polygamy and the rape of young girls.

    Attacks? Whom have I attacked? By opposing somebody’s actions, am I supposedly attacking them? Does speaking out against their actions constitute some form of abuse, verbal or otherwise? Again, you seem to be throwing around heavy words without any legitimate basis. Easy up, soldier.

    As I have said several times now, I do not condone abuse in any fashion. If there are cases of abuse, then they should be investigated and prosecuted.

    Child abuse is different, however, than mutual consent between adults. While polygamy is against the law (under certain situations/circumstances), that is a far cry from the alleged abuse that has supposedly justified the removal of 416 children.

    My issue is not with the (proper) investigation and prosecution of abuse. It is with the broad powers assumed by the government to remove children based on some alleged future action.

    Your condemnation of law enforcement is disingenuous at best.

    I do not condemn proper law enforcement. I do condemn any action outside of the proper role of government. Would speaking out against a dictator in a communist nation be considered disingenuous, in your eyes? Or do you rather feel that the state can do not wrong? That its actions are wise and proper, and therefore should be respected and left unchallenged?

    If you and other Mormons were actually opposed to polygamy rather than stating a pro-forma opposition that means nothing, you’d be clamoring for real action.

    What a pathetic insinuation. Do you know, sir, what it means to be opposed to something? In your eyes, I imagine that opposition merits force. I disagree.

    While some who oppose a lifestyle or practice consider that sufficient grounds to enforce their own code of morality, I would contend that proper opposition does not merit using the force of government unless that person is breaking some established law that infringes upon the rights of another.

    A few examples are in order.

    • I oppose murder. Murder is an action which infringes upon the victim’s life and liberty. Therefore, force is warranted in using the government to prevent murder, or punish the murderer in the case that the action has already taken place.
    • I oppose materialism. I am disgusted by people who lavishly spend money they often don’t yet have on clothing and other accessories. However, materialism is not something that infringes upon another person’s life or liberty. Therefore, it is inappropriate to use the force of government to mandate that the person not be materialistic.
    • I oppose polygamy. I believe that marriage is between a man and a woman. I believe that God has sanctioned polygamy in the past for His purposes, and may yet do so again. I am not one to tell God what he cannot command. However, polygamy (when between consenting adults) does not infringe upon the life or liberty of any other individual. Therefore, I find it wholly inappropriate to use the force of government to prevent people from associating one with another in whatever way they choose (that, again, does not negatively impact the life/liberty of another).

    So, while I do indeed oppose polygamy (though you may consider me a liar, as you apparently are eager to do), I likewise oppose using the government to force people to not associate with each other as they please (monogamously or otherwise). Ideological opposition does not justify force.

    So yes, Mr. Tilden, I am “actually opposed to polygamy”. But I am against using the guise of government to legally kidnap children in order to prevent some future alleged action from occurring. This is still the United States, and while it is highly ignored these days, we do indeed have a Constitution. These women and children—not charged with any crimes—have been persecuted by the government unreasonably. That is what this post is about, and nothing more.

    So, disagree with me all you want. Feel free to dig up old blog posts in your quest to portray me as a hypocrite or fraud. But do not call me a liar, for such an accusation is without any merit or substance.

    And lay off the trigger finger, will ya?

  41. Brenda Campeau
    April 21, 2008 at 7:45 pm #

    Conner please go to this web sight, This Attorney in california has down her home work and I think this can inspire you, http://www.geocities.com/madaboutcha/congress?20085?200821 . As for some negative comments about you these people are ignorant and need to do their home work, I for one am grateful to you for your effort charge on!

  42. Tilden
    April 21, 2008 at 9:42 pm #

    Yesterday, the comments were closed on that thread. Today, the comments are open. What a difference a day makes.

    I’ll accept your explanation that, at the time of writing, you had used a “leadership & staff” section of the CFR website as the basis of your accusation. That said, it was nonsensical to interpret it as you did, and in any case your interpretation has been invalidated by what you term CFR’s “reorganization” of its website.

    Given that you are still being linked elsewhere, an ethical approach would require that you correct your main posting to reflect that the people who you claimed are CFR members are in fact not members. In saying this, I express no judgment of CFR. I’m going strictly on facts; yours are wrong, and failure to correct errors is no different than lying.

    I can’t know for a fact whether you’re sincere in your opposition to polygamy; only you can know your own mind. Yet, I am free to evaluate your sincerity in light of the contexts of child abuse in Texas and willful blindness in Utah and Arizona. I find your sincerity wanting. You do not.

    As for whether God mandated polygamy when Joseph Smith and Brigham Young took nearly 100 wives between them, including the previous wives and teenage daughters of some of their followers, and then changed his mind in 1890 when the federal government began seizing Mormon assets in Utah, well, let me just say that your reading of history is convenient for you.

    A more dispassionate reading would note that Mormon president Wilford Woodruff, in 1889, declared that he’d received a revelation from God that polygamy would be defended in Utah. Less than a year later, when the feds started closing in, Woodruff received a new revelation countermanding the first. (This would be if, and only if, I were to believe that any Mormon has ever received a revelation from anyone, as opposed to inventing it after the fact to justify his whims.)

    Mr. Boyack, I happened to notice your complaint in a different posting about the Supreme Court reversing itself on the constitutionality of anti-sodomy laws. What do you think about the Mormon president’s reversal on polygamy within one year, or of God’s reversal? You follow a capricious leader, whoever that leader might be.

    I don’t know if you, Mr. Boyack, are a hypocrite or a fraud. I think your ideas suggest it, and so does your religion. But, as I noted earlier, I can’t know your mind.

  43. Connor
    April 21, 2008 at 10:09 pm #

    Yesterday, the comments were closed on that thread. Today, the comments are open. What a difference a day makes.

    The comments on that thread have not been closed at any time. You’re seeing things, dude.

    That said, it was nonsensical to interpret it as you did, and in any case your interpretation has been invalidated by what you term CFR’s “reorganization” of its website.

    Nonsensical. Right. So if the ACLU posts some information about a person on their site under a “leadership and staff” section, we’re not to believe that that person is part of their.. err.. leadership and staff? Can you be on the staff, or in the leadership, of an organization without being a member?

    I’m going strictly on facts; yours are wrong, and failure to correct errors is no different than lying.

    Very well. To satiate your desire, I’ve commented on that thread.

    I find your sincerity wanting.

    On what grounds?

    …your reading of history is convenient for you.

    :::chuckles::: I read history as it is, not as I want it to be. You seem to think that because I oppose polygamy, and because some polygamous relationships involve abuse, that I therefore don’t really oppose polygamy, and that I’m lying.

    Or how about your assertion regarding Joseph Smith and Brigham Young’s wives? You fail to mention that many of these marriages were platonic in nature. Many, of course were not. Most all of the women and children living in these relationships were well cared for, loved, and supported. Oh the inhumanity!

    Read history as you please, but don’t project your version of it onto others you claim of reading it wrong themselves.

    You follow a capricious leader, whoever that leader might be.

    I follow God, good sir. God changes commandments as he sees fit. Or, to quote Job: “the Lord gave, and the Lord hath taken away; blessed be the name of the Lord.”

    I don’t know if you, Mr. Boyack, are a hypocrite or a fraud. I think your ideas suggest it, and so does your religion.

    Strong words, Mr. Tilden. Try building bridges next time instead of sending the wrecking ball into your neighbor’s yard.

  44. Bartleby
    April 22, 2008 at 12:04 am #

    Just a vicious, evil, witch hunt – kidnapping those poor innocent children, ripping them from their homes, families, and loved ones. The more corrupt and evil this country gets, the more it engages in such witch hunts. Child “protective” services everywhere need to be exposed.

  45. Tilden
    April 22, 2008 at 8:14 am #

    So if the ACLU posts some information about a person on their site under a “leadership and staff” section, we’re not to believe that that person is part of their.. err.. leadership and staff?

    If the classification doesn’t make any sense — which it didn’t — then you should question the classification.

    You seem to think that because I oppose polygamy, and because some polygamous relationships involve abuse, that I therefore don’t really oppose polygamy, and that I’m lying.

    ALL polygamy is abusive. It is clear to me that you are acting as an apologist for the polygamist cult(s). I wonder how many other Mormons who claim to “disapprove” of polygamy take the stance that you do.

  46. Tilden
    April 22, 2008 at 8:42 am #

    By the way, speaking of the ACLU, as we could have predicted they are siding with the polygamists, just like you.

  47. Connor
    April 22, 2008 at 9:47 am #

    ALL polygamy is abusive.

    According to whom? Are you arguing, then, that consenting adults who enter into such an arrangement are abusing one another? Granted, coercive relationships of any nature are abusive (polygamous or otherwise), but I cannot agree with you that a style of relationship is itself abusive. That simply doesn’t make sense.

    It is clear to me that you are acting as an apologist for the polygamist cult(s).

    It is clear to me that you obviously have misjudged my intentions and goals. I’m not an apologist for one group over another, I’m an apologist for the Constitution and civil rights guaranteed to all citizens, regardless of color, creed, or other classification.

  48. Jared
    April 22, 2008 at 11:22 am #

    I believe Tilden that you miss the point of Connor’s argument completely. You’ve seem to have distorted Connor’s argument from his original post which stated that that the rights and liberties of the residents of this FLDS compound have been violated on false or at best weak evidence. The fact that they are polygamist and that polygamy is illegal in Texas had nothing to do with the decision made by Texas Law enforcement to raid the ranch. The stated reason for the raid was given as an anonymous phone call that purported child abuse. I truly have no idea whether or not such criminal violations and abuses were going on in the compound. I do know however that simple virtue is not a valid argument for the state’s violation of Liberty. Liberty in fact is a catalyst for virtue and not vice versa. What I mean by these last two statements is that the argument being made by the authorities that they simply believe there to be abuses going on inside the ranch never was or is it now sufficient cause to so overtly abuse governmental power. The Founding Fathers ought to be roiling in their graves that this is happening in the country they sacrificed to build. There is a protocol that must be adhered to in order to justify these types of actions. Evidence must be gathered and a case must be made before action is taken. Hearsay and rumor are not adequate in and of themselves to make such a case. I fear the day that Liberty, our most unique and precious right regularly becomes so callously disregarded in the name of virtue or any other reason.

    I’m not a Mormon so I think I am in a position to make an objective observation regarding the true intention behind your argument. It’s apparent that your attempt to argue in favor of the actions of the Texas authorities is merely a façade. Clearly your true intentions based on your pointed attacks toward both Connor and his religion, are simply feeble attempts to discredit both. You are transparent, you are a coward and your are weak in my opinion. The fact that you must resort to such tactics rather than standing up for yourself and verbalizing your true bigoted thoughts is proof enough. I would have much more respect for you if you just stated that you hate Mormons and you hate Connor because he is one. I suppose though that I shouldn’t hold my breath.

  49. Tilden
    April 22, 2008 at 1:00 pm #

    First off, I don’t need to credit or discredit Mormonism. There are things to be said for it, among them being that Mormons are typically public-spirited and polite. There are also things to be said against it, but I won’t go into that list.

    Texas, and the other 49 states, prohibit polygamy. It’s no secret that the so-called “ranch” is a polygamist center. That alone should be grounds for investigation. If consenting adults want to do the horizontal mambo with each other, I’m as libertarian as they come.

    When they involve children, the story changes. The track record of polygamists with children is a disaster. In their cult communities, there is typically rampant incest, child abuse, subjugation of kids, welfare fraud, withholding of education, and expulsion of surplus boys. All of these are serious issues that go well beyond what anyone is doing in the privacy of their bedrooms.

    I think Texas was well within its rights and duties to investigate, phone call or no phone call. In fact, from what I’ve been able to glean from the coverage, it sounds like the Texas investigation was long overdue. The proof, I quite strongly suspect, will be in the DNA results.

    No way should children be returned to that cult.

  50. John
    April 22, 2008 at 1:20 pm #

    That alone should be grounds for investigation.

    Grounds for investigation, or a raid where children are taken from their mothers?

    Also, terms like “track record” or “typically” aren’t usually enough to justify conviction. Do we actually have evidence that incest, child abuse, etc. are happening?

    I still remain suspicious that the authorities there have the grounds to rip families apart. Sure, they’re illegal families, but mothers and children nonetheless.

    If I fall into a broadly generalized group that has a “track record” of mistreating children, does that give the cops the right to invade my home and take my children from me?

  51. Brian Duffin
    April 22, 2008 at 1:24 pm #

    Why stop with the FLDS families? It’s time to put a stop to the abuse endured by the children born into the Amish cult! Depiriving their children of electricty, cars, television, internet and normal clothes!!

    Oh, and when we’re done solving the Amish problem, let’s take the children out of the Jehovah’s Witnesses homes. The poor kids aren’t even allowed to celebrate birthday’s and holidays!

    And what about gypsies and nomadic families in the US? Surely these poor children deserve a better life?

    So many cults, so little time.

  52. Tilden
    April 22, 2008 at 1:47 pm #

    Neither the Amish nor the Jehovah’s Witnesses marry their daughters off to 50-year-old men at the age of 14 or 15, and all the rest. The first amendment protects freedom of religion, but not all actions based on it. For instance, when a Christian Scientist parent allows her child to die of an easily treatable infection, she goes to jail.

    Polygamists are not a “broadly generalized” group, except maybe in certain parts of Utah and Arizona where the local Mormons pay lip service to the law but refuse to actually enforce it.

  53. Brian Duffin
    April 22, 2008 at 2:06 pm #


    If there are 14 and 15-year old girls being wed to 50-year old men, let’s stop it. I agree with you, but there is a proper and lawful way to go about accomplishing that task

    Texas officials relied on third-hand information on one specific girl to raid the compound and remove 400+ children. Now that their probable cause is suspect, what grounds do they have for keeping the children away from their parents?

    So, until someone defends the Constitution and speaks out against the abuse against the Constitution in Texas, nobody’s child is safe!

    Btw, Tilden, I encourage you to write to the Governors of Utah and Arizona and complain about the lack of prosecution for polygamy.

  54. Tilden
    April 22, 2008 at 2:16 pm #

    The proper and lawful way to go about it is to do what they are doing: Keep the children out of that snakepit while everyone’s DNA is compared. The one phone call is far from the only evidence Texas had. There have been many reports about this cult community over the years.

    Face it, your polygamist friends (the ones who you “disapprove” of but rush to defend) are about to get their comeuppance. Naturally, when the DNA tests nail the facts to the wall for everyone to see, then this website will be falling all over itself to cry crocodile tears for those kids and deny any complicity.

    It would be nice if the Mormon-controlled states of Arizona and Utah would become more aggressive about polygamy, but they won’t. Maybe it’s time for the federal government to make some noises about the issue, as it did in the 1880s.

  55. Brian Duffin
    April 22, 2008 at 2:25 pm #


    Where to begin…

    First of all, I recommend a course in Constitutional Law and then perhaps one in Criminal Law where you can learn about due process and rights. A quick perusal of legal blogs will reveal questioning by attorneys of the tactics employed against the FLDS. A small group called the ACLU even called to complain.

    Mormon-controlled states? I beg your pardon? Been to Arizona lately? The Governor, Attorney General, Secretary of State and many in the legislature are NOT LDS. I do not live in Utah (thankfully), so I cannot speak for the religious make-up of the government officials, but I can say with confidence that the LDS Church does not run the government of Utah, nor does it have any desire to do so. Anyhow, you are dodging the issue at hand.

    I have no love for polygamy and those who practice it. We have outlawed it and if the government wants to enforce the laws against polygamy, I say let them do it. But do so within the confines of the law!

  56. Jared
    April 22, 2008 at 3:14 pm #

    Again Tildo you miss the point as you continue to spin around in circles on this issue. What you choose to shut your eyes from is the fact that no one here is arguing in favor of polygamy. The Texas authorities didn’t go into the FLDS ranch because of their polygamist activities. They went in citing child welfare issues and not polygamy. On top of that, the evidence they used as a basis for the raid turned out to be false. I’m sure that they would have had a much stronger case for the raid if illegal polygamy were the issue but it’s not. The government jumped at this opportunity while failing to do the ground work necessary to legitimize their actions. I don’t know how you or anyone else could support such behavior. As long as you continue to spew your disdain for the people of the FLDS Church and ignore the facts in favor of some other non-related perceived evil, you’ll continue to be seen as ignorant and misinformed by Connor and his readers.

    By the way, I do live in Arizona and I can assure you that the state is by no means “Mormon Controlled.” Again you continue to show your true self as you spew your ignorant rhetoric. I should have assumed before I wrote my first post that I shouldn’t expect much more out of you. My mistake, I gave you the benefit of the doubt.

  57. Brenda Campeau
    April 22, 2008 at 5:24 pm #

    I can,t believe people are so blind what has this government already made people scared to come forward or are they just so busy with their own life and don,t care what does it take to open your eyes because if you don,t speak up your children will be next I know how corrupt they are and I always thought they couldn,t mess with me I had not broke any laws boy was I wrong they make-up anything they want and its pretty hard to be innocent and be slandered ,jailed and the whole time your kids go through foster care they are pretty much ruined for life for children to know deeply in their hearts they have good parents who love and have never once abused them even though the state trys to brain wash them how are they going to turn out, from most of the home work I have done its not a good one I have interviewed children who are now eighteen and put in to foster care and their stories are hirendous my own daughter was drugged at eight years old with a adult dose of some wacked out adult tranquilizer and told this would keep her from being scared when my family finally recused them the practicioner she went to told my in-laws this probably would of killed her they blame innocent parents of useing drugs but then actually b ecome the drug pusher to innocent children its pretty tramatizing to now you r children could die at the hands of cps and they would let it happen to cover their own butts and make money from doing it I think half of them are on drugs and need to be tested if you don,t believe me I pretty much have evidence from dna from their own siliva, this is the worst crime I have ever seen hurting innocent children all they have to do is blame the innocent parents for thier own abuse to our beautiful kids please go to this web sight finally I know I am not crazy and it happens all the time I always trusted someone who took a oath to protect our kids its sickening what the abuse of power And money has done to our society I hope no human-being ever has to go through what I have been through or what these people are going through what ever happened for equal protection of the law for citizen,s of the united state,s this isn,t a forth of what I,ve been through my own mother died when I was 12 and all I wanted was kids of my own to be a mother too more than anyone, what does,nt kill us makes us stronger but I have almost died 4 time in the last year and a half this kind of torture can kill you and I still am not strong or got my spirit back but is taking its toll on my health and if I didn,t have two older children and a wonderful husband I would be I had to be around someone at all times because I was so devastated I wanted to walk in front of a train or jump off a water tower but to love your kids so much and have someone accuse you of neglecting or abusing them can really messes you up you will never know how devastating this is unless it happens to you, please help these innocent children and thier mothers before you are the next victim of cps,s cruelty it will happen if people don,t stand up for others please save our children and reunite familys back together no stranger is going to care for kids like aparent will their your flesh & blood and a gift from god how dare anyone break this bond. I can,t wait tell they meet their creator I hope he sends all of them straight to hell!

  58. Brenda Campeau
    April 22, 2008 at 5:34 pm #

    oops my teenage daugter interupted me but the web sight is http://www.geocities.com/madaboutcha/congress?20085?200821 I was on this web sight a few days before the FDLS raid and it helped me alot to believe in myself again. And I soon learned their is innocent children ripped away all the time.

  59. Tilden
    April 22, 2008 at 6:44 pm #

    Sorry, but the Mormons own Utah and Idaho lock, stock, and barrel, and they also run Arizona and Nevada, and are making significant inroads into Colorado and Oregon. The Mormon “abandonment” of polygamy in 1890 was something of a ruse, as current events are showing.

  60. Connor
    April 22, 2008 at 6:46 pm #


    Your asinine comments are clearly not based in reality. If you wish to comment in the future, please cite facts, statistics, or at least something concrete. Your hollow accusations and blanket statements will no longer be tolerated.

  61. Tilden
    April 22, 2008 at 11:23 pm #

    So much for your allegiance to anything “constitutional.” Mormons have always had an uneasy relationship with the fundamentals of American law.

  62. Jeff T
    April 23, 2008 at 1:32 pm #

    Dude, Connor believes more than anyone I know in constitutional law. He is simply asking for due process of law, as required by the constitution. This has nothing to do with his Mormon religion.

    How does asking you to back up your claims and generalizations with sources constitute and “uneasy relationship with American law?”

  63. Tilden
    April 23, 2008 at 4:43 pm #

    Jeff, like zealots of all kinds, he will censor the opinions of those with whom he disagrees. By the way, seeing as how the Mormons are overwhelmingly the sorts of “conservatives” who favor far right-wing appointments to the Supreme Court, I’d say this ruling, which would almost certainly legalize the search of the cult compound regardless of the authenticity of the phone call, should be filed under, Be careful what you wish for.

  64. Connor
    April 23, 2008 at 5:09 pm #


    If you would poke around the blog, you’d see that I don’t censor people I disagree with. So stop it already with the silly, baseless accusations.

    I do, however, “censor” (or ban, rather) trolls. You are appearing to be one, as your comments are inflammatory, without any substance, and broadly accusatory.

    Again, feel free to participate, but any future comment after this last one that does not contribute anything substantive to the discussion will be nixed. Cry all you want, but you’ve been warned.

  65. Jeff T
    April 23, 2008 at 8:24 pm #

    “By the way, seeing as how the Mormons are overwhelmingly the sorts of “conservatives” who favor far right-wing appointments to the Supreme Court, I’d say this ruling, which would almost certainly legalize the search of the cult compound regardless of the authenticity of the phone call, should be filed under, Be careful what you wish for.”

    I am fairly certain that none of us (constitutionalists) are wishing for this. This is exactly the abuse of power we are against. And I certainly hope you aren’t wishing for it. You lump Connor and the rest of us into the “right wing conservatives” who supposedly back this ruling, merely because Connor is a mormon. You do this despite Connor’s protests, in this post and many others, against such abuse of power. If that isn’t bigotry, I don’t know what is. Why lump Connor and others into the group that is wishing for this kind of government power, when he vocally opposes this kind of government power? Just because he’s mormon?

  66. George
    April 26, 2008 at 9:22 am #

    The REAL (and very low) Number regarding teen pregnancy at the compound:


  67. George
    April 27, 2008 at 8:13 am #

    Ben Stein sees this incident for the travesty of justice that it is!:


  68. An FLDS Mother
    April 28, 2008 at 3:19 pm #

    Connor, I want to thank you on behalf of all FLDS people. Thank you for your interest and for the petition you made. I didn’t get to sign it , but I don’t think Texas Gov. would have wanted an FLDS to sign it. My dear friends & Family are all involved. I saw them on the “sad children” video on http://www.captivefldschildren.org/index.php
    Oh, how heart breaking….. Then too hear how they tore the children out of their mothers arms. An officer held the mother from behind while a CPS worker pried the dear childs hands from its mother. As they both screamed and cryed… “No” and “Mother” They took them away.
    They call this saving a child from harm? What mental damages have they just done? Far more than they ever would have had by living at the ranch with their loving mothers.
    Thank you every one who has a heart and is touch by this sad event. Thank you Connor for your care.

  69. An FLDS Mother
    April 28, 2008 at 4:09 pm #

    Hows this…..
    Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide

    Adopted by Resolution 260 (III) A of the United Nations General Assembly on 9 December 1948.
    Article 1

    The Contracting Parties confirm that genocide, whether committed in time of peace or in time of war, is a crime under international law which they undertake to prevent and to punish.
    Article 2

    In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

    * (a) Killing members of the group;
    * (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
    * (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
    * (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
    * (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

    Article 3

    The following acts shall be punishable:

    * (a) Genocide;
    * (b) Conspiracy to commit genocide;
    * (c) Direct and public incitement to commit genocide;
    * (d) Attempt to commit genocide;
    * (e) Complicity in genocide.

    Article 4

    Persons committing genocide or any of the other acts enumerated in Article 3 shall be punished, whether they are constitutionally responsible rulers, public officials or private individuals.

  70. G. McLaughlin
    May 18, 2008 at 12:31 am #

    Father in Heaven: Send thy Spirit to all the FLDS people, succor the Mothers and Fathers, any who are guilty, may they be punished, but reunite the Mothers and the children Heavenly Father, touch the hearts of the CPS, the Governor of Texas, the courts, send down blessings upon folk like Connor and all who uphold our constitution and rights, and we ask thy Blessing upon all who would help the FLDS, we thank thee that thou has heard our prayer, our cry of our heart and that soon, the reuniting of these , thy children with their parents will soon be realized. May the FLDS forgive as the Lord has done to all who have usurped and taken away their rights, and may reconcilation, love, forgiveness, Christ Likeness be extend to all and for all. Your Son, Jesus christ taught us to pray the Lord’s Prayer, may we do so, following His example, and we stand upon thy word, the Holy Bible, and the Book of Mormon, totally believing that you Heavenly Father will indeed bring the FLDS into total victory of their rights as Americans. We stand upon thy Word, KNOWING DELIVERANCE IS AT HAND. We look to thee Father in Heaven for a complete resolution and soon return of the children to the Mothers, in the name of Jesus Christ, Amen. Thank You Father, for we KNOW and believe it has already happened, and we thank you for this miracle. Amjen

  71. George
    May 18, 2008 at 6:48 am #

    G. McLaughlin,

    What are you thinking?

    The Mothers and Children are not going to be reunited. Part of the whole alleged “abuse” case was that the Mothers perpetuated the cycle.

    Speaking of abuse, have you been paying attention to the fallout? There are already many cases of abuse by both the foster homes and CPS personnel.

    Don’t be so certain that your “righteous path” has done these families or society any good.

  72. steve
    May 20, 2008 at 7:35 pm #

    a class action law suit is in order asap
    The way things are going these people are going to lose their kids.

  73. Thomas
    July 20, 2008 at 2:46 pm #

    On the 24th of July, the Senate Judiciary Committee is holding hearings on the FLdS. However, only the anti-FLDS crowd is invited to testify. Fairness demands that the FLDS be allowed to respond. We must light a fire under the feet of the Juduciary Committee.

  74. An FLDS Mother
    July 21, 2008 at 8:13 am #

    Yes Thomas you are right. A very sweet man named Bill Medvecky has put together a petition just for that. Here is the link for that petition.


    The above link will take you to the website for the Letter to Congress.

    If you have a site, please link to it.

    If not, we ask our friends here, to send the link to all the people in their address book.

    We need this Letter distributed throughout the Country today, please do what you can to give the children a voice in their future and some security in practicing their religion.

Leave a Reply

Leave your opinion here. Please be nice. Your Email address will be kept private.