Friday, April 25, 2008

It's Not OK, Even If Done In The Name Of God

I'm going to go off on a slight tangent here, but this ticks me off to no end.

Dad29 had put up a post the other day regarding the stuff going on in Texas with the polygamist cult in Texas. His general gist is that what was going on in that complex was just OK, because they were Christians. He also laments about what he figures thus:
Yes. This is, without a doubt, the most egregious example of Statism since Waco, and although less deadly (so far), it's just as portentous.

Even more disturbing are the comments put up by readers "Amy" and "Dan". They actually defend the cultists, because, you know, they are religious. They complain that the cultists' rights are being violated, that they are not given the benefit of presumed innocence, and that the kids weren't really being abused in any way.

I'm sorry but that is the biggest pile of cow manure this side of any twenty dairy farms.

I will not pretend to be familiar with the specifics of the Children's Code in Texas, but I cannot imagine it all that different from Wisconsin's laws, which I am rather familiar with, from working in the child welfare system for seven years.

First of all, cases of this sort are not criminal cases. There is no guilt or innocence. There is just cause. These cases had to be investigated by social workers, and the allegations had to be found to be substantiated that the children have been maltreated, or at great risk of being maltreated. I am sure that a case of this magnitude was closely supervised by supervisors, department heads and all the way up the chain before action was taken. Then it had to be reviewed by the District Attorney's office and found to be up to snuff before they would file the petitions for the children's removal. Finally, the judge would have to determine that the facts presented were sufficient before any orders would have been issued.

All of this apparently has occurred, or events wouldn't have unfolded in the way that they have. This is not the final step, but just the first. Each case will be reviewed by the court individually, to determine if further action would be needed, like a full order keeping the children out of the parents' home until certain conditions are met, or in home services would suffice, or that the children can be returned without any further action.

Given the fact that it is abnormal for a teenage girl to feel romantic attraction to someone old enough to be their father or grandfather, one could logically conclude that there was grooming going on, such as a sexual predator would use. And much like a local case, it would not be surprising to find out excessive use of corporal punishment was used on the children as well.

Dad29 and company also argue that the original source of the allegation is unreliable. So what? The fact is, referrals can even be made anonymously. If social services and investigates and finds a reasonable cause for concern, the referral source is irrelevant. Remember, criminal court standards don't apply to these sorts of cases.

And it really doesn't matter if these people worship God, Allah, the Great Spirit, Buddha or the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Child abuse is child abuse, and there is never justification for it, no matter what religion, if any, the people might practice.

It is equally disgusting to use said religion to not only justify this horrendous and inexcusable behavior, but to rationalize one's own conspiracy theories and paranoia of black helicopters.

3 comments:

  1. If the free exercise of religion doesn't include for raising a spliff to Ras Tafari, it certainly doesn't include for child abuse.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Exactly! Sexually abusing a child is NEVER ok.

    Did Texas do the right thing? You bet. Too bad Utah and Arizona don't have the balls to stand up for these children in this 'religious cult'.

    ReplyDelete
  3. you guys are missing a crucial piece of the puzzle: god *wants* old white dudes to do dirty, filthy things to nubile little girls. clearly.

    ReplyDelete