View Full Version : Mormon Sects Take One on the Chin
Mephisto
29th August 2006, 08:57 AM
Fugitive Polygamist Leader Arrested
By KEN RITTER , 08.29.2006, 10:14 AM
The fugitive leader of a polygamist Mormon sect has been arrested in southern Nevada, the FBI said Tuesday.
Warren Steed Jeffs, 50, was taken into custody after he and two other people were pulled over late Monday by a Nevada Highway Patrol trooper on Interstate 15 just north of Las Vegas, FBI spokesman David Staretz said.
The leader of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was wanted in Utah and Arizona on suspicion of sexual misconduct for allegedly arranging marriages between underage girls and older men.
http://www.forbes.com/home/feeds/ap/2006/08/29/ap2979785.html
___________
Jeffs was indicted in June on an Arizona charge of arranging a marriage between a 16-year-old girl and a married man, and unlawful flight to avoid prosecution.
He is charged in Utah with two felony counts of rape as an accomplice, for allegedly arranging the marriage of a teenage girl to an older man in Nevada.
The FLDS Church split from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints when the mainstream Mormon Church disavowed plural marriage more than 100 years ago
http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/08/29/polygamist.arrest.ap/index.html
daredelvis
29th August 2006, 09:39 AM
Fugitive Polygamist Leader Arrested
By KEN RITTER , 08.29.2006, 10:14 AM
The fugitive leader of a polygamist Mormon sect has been arrested in southern Nevada, the FBI said Tuesday.
This is great news. He is a horrible horrible man. Anyone who is looking for a scary look into FLDS should check out "Under the Banner of Heaven". It will make you sick to your stomach.
Daredelvis
Mephisto
29th August 2006, 10:06 AM
It IS good news, isn't it? :)
I'll look for Under the Banner of Heaven - it'll be good ammo when the missionaries come by on their bikes. ;) Thanks.
daredelvis
29th August 2006, 11:24 AM
It IS good news, isn't it? :)
I'll look for Under the Banner of Heaven - it'll be good ammo when the missionaries come by on their bikes. ;) Thanks.
It is good ammo. He gives a nice condensed history of the church. He had a great quote along the lines of, "the mormon church suffers from the misfortune of having a clear historical record".
Make no mistake. There is a HUGE difference between the mormon church and the FLDS. The FLDS is evil on an appalling scale, and I hope that b@stard never sees the light of day. The adult members of the FLDS are nothing but a bunch of child rapists and abusers.
Daredelvis
Mephisto
29th August 2006, 12:02 PM
It is good ammo. He gives a nice condensed history of the church. He had a great quote along the lines of, "the mormon church suffers from the misfortune of having a clear historical record".
Make no mistake. There is a HUGE difference between the mormon church and the FLDS. The FLDS is evil on an appalling scale, and I hope that b@stard never sees the light of day. The adult members of the FLDS are nothing but a bunch of child rapists and abusers.
Daredelvis
Thanks again, Daredelvis. I'll check it out, and don't worry I'm always polite to missionaries, but I'd really like to see their reaction should I mention the book or the FLDS. I'm surprised at how well some of these people work within the system too - hopefully this will slow their righteous impetus.
Azure
29th August 2006, 12:32 PM
Thanks again, Daredelvis. I'll check it out, and don't worry I'm always polite to missionaries, but I'd really like to see their reaction should I mention the book or the FLDS. I'm surprised at how well some of these people work within the system too - hopefully this will slow their righteous impetus.
Up till today, I had never heard of the FLDS.
I'll have to check it out too. :cool:
Azure
29th August 2006, 12:36 PM
FLDS (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamentalist_Church_of_Jesus_Christ_of_Latter_Da y_Saints)
Beerina
29th August 2006, 12:50 PM
Is 16 an illegal age to get married at? This seems to suggest several different illegal activities, one of which was just that.
Grammatron
29th August 2006, 01:33 PM
Is 16 an illegal age to get married at? This seems to suggest several different illegal activities, one of which was just that.
Depends on the state and whether or not parents gave permission.
LawnOven
29th August 2006, 01:36 PM
Is 16 an illegal age to get married at? This seems to suggest several different illegal activities, one of which was just that.
Here ya go.
http://marriage.about.com/cs/teenmarriage/a/teenus.htm
nightwind
29th August 2006, 06:11 PM
My only question is doesn't the FBI have anything better to do?
With all of the true scumbags that are out there, this is what makes news?
a_unique_person
29th August 2006, 06:25 PM
If you read the link, it's not harmless. They have a belief that the more virtuous you are, the more wives you can have. These inevitably leads to a shortage of women. Boys have to be excluded from their families, young girls are forced to marry older men. It's child abuse.
fuelair
29th August 2006, 06:35 PM
It IS good news, isn't it? :)
I'll look for Under the Banner of Heaven - it'll be good ammo when the missionaries come by on their bikes. ;) Thanks.
No offence - because I enjoy fish/barrel play myself - but the one's who come around on the bikes are pretty much vetted as normal Mormons and don't admire those rectums any more than non-Mormons do so that book really doesn't apply to them - they "answered for it a bit like 100 years ago.
As always, it's the fundies, the True Believers, who mess things up - for them and for us all.
Mephisto
29th August 2006, 06:35 PM
Up till today, I had never heard of the FLDS.
I'll have to check it out too. :cool:
Looks like you found out that fundies of every flavor are weird, some to the point of criminality. Thanks for throwing the link in for everyone to see. :)
Mephisto
29th August 2006, 06:40 PM
No offence - because I enjoy fish/barrel play myself - but the one's who come around on the bikes are pretty much vetted as normal Mormons and don't admire those rectums any more than non-Mormons do so that book really doesn't apply to them - they "answered for it a bit like 100 years ago.
As always, it's the fundies, the True Believers, who mess things up - for them and for us all.
My pet peeve is the JWs. I always take time to talk to them and throw them a few questions they can't answer. Once two women and a young girl showed up and I had the young girl looking up at her Mom as she stammered for answers and really clumsy misdirection. They tried to leave several times until I tossed yet another question into their lap (hint: ask them how many people are in the JW church worldwide, THEN ask them how many people are going to take part in the Rapture - ;)).
By the time I turned them loose they couldn't even remember where they had parked their car and walked past my house twice in a big hurry. :)
Gwyn ap Nudd
29th August 2006, 06:48 PM
Because there are not enough women for all the wives that the "church leaders" need, they often resort to 1)kicking rank-and file members and giving their wives to "more deserving" husbands, 2) kicking out young boys ("the Lost Boys (http://childbrides.org/boys.html)")onto the streets with no skills and no education forcing them into hustling either drugs or their bodies (or both) just to survive and 3) marrying off young girls to the lecherous "church leaders." (The specific charge against Jeffs involves a 16 year old, but the church has been known to marry them off even younger, some as young as 12 .)
nightwind
29th August 2006, 08:39 PM
Oh my God!!! A shortage of women!!!!! Oh noooooo!
And older guys marrying younger women!! Noooooo!! Not that!
Please.
Tailgater
29th August 2006, 08:47 PM
My pet peeve is the JWs. I always take time to talk to them and throw them a few questions they can't answer. Once two women and a young girl showed up and I had the young girl looking up at her Mom as she stammered for answers and really clumsy misdirection. They tried to leave several times until I tossed yet another question into their lap (hint: ask them how many people are in the JW church worldwide, THEN ask them how many people are going to take part in the Rapture - ;)).
By the time I turned them loose they couldn't even remember where they had parked their car and walked past my house twice in a big hurry. :)
I'll have to remember this post next time you're preaching "tolerance to muslims" in a middle east thread. I guess making women and children feel like crap is OK as long as it fits your views.
daredelvis
29th August 2006, 11:09 PM
Oh my God!!! A shortage of women!!!!! Oh noooooo!
And older guys marrying younger women!! Noooooo!! Not that!
Please.
Not women, children. Were talking about 12 years old in some cases. Read some of the links. Also, whole scale welfare fraud, looting school districts and on and on.... Pure evil.
Daredelvis
Mephisto
30th August 2006, 08:29 AM
I'll have to remember this post next time you're preaching "tolerance to muslims" in a middle east thread. I guess making women and children feel like crap is OK as long as it fits your views.
Oh give me a friggin break! I can have tolerance and STILL ask provoking questions about their religion. If Muslims showed up at my door selling their religion, I probably wouldn't treat them any differently.
Besides, I'm insisting on tolerance with regards to violence against cultures and religions. I wouldn't hurt a JW, a Mormon, a Baptist or even a Muslim that came to my door pushing his religion, but I believe missionaries are supposed to have some degree of expertise in handling skeptic disbelievers and I like to prove to them that their logic isn't infallible.
And for the record, if I "make them feel like crap," it's because of cognitive dissonance (the catch phrase for the week) - they have trouble believing their religion when evidence to the contrary is staring them in the face.
What's a skeptic for anyway?
SteveGrenard
30th August 2006, 08:39 AM
How would you handle a muslim who came to your door to sell you his religion and told you that unless you bought it he was going to kill you?
Mephisto
30th August 2006, 08:45 AM
How would you handle a muslim who came to your door to sell you his religion and told you that unless you bought it he was going to kill you?
Do they do that? I wasn't aware that Muslim home invasion crimes were on the rise.
I wouldn't do anything at all. Telling me he's going to kill me isn't the same thing as trying to kill me. What would you suggest? A pre-emptive strike on his Mosque?
The Mutha
30th August 2006, 12:48 PM
CNN was interviewing a woman who left the FLDS at 14, the night before she was to marry an older man she quantified as "not so nice". The woman went on and on about Jeffs being found in a red vehicle. Apparently red is an "evil" color to the FLDS and you are not allowed to wear it or buy a vehicle in that color. So I guess the red Escalade was a disguise?
a_unique_person
30th August 2006, 05:58 PM
I'll have to remember this post next time you're preaching "tolerance to muslims" in a middle east thread. I guess making women and children feel like crap is OK as long as it fits your views.
A guess is a good enough excuse to launch a personal attack on a forum member, it appears.
Darth Rotor
30th August 2006, 06:04 PM
How would you handle a muslim who came to your door to sell you his religion and told you that unless you bought it he was going to kill you?
Get the shotgun. If he didnt leave, I'd have to decide on a call to the cops, or pulling the trigger. Other details in the situation would inform my decision.
DR
Tailgater
30th August 2006, 07:11 PM
A guess is a good enough excuse to launch a personal attack on a forum member, it appears.
I'm not the one taking in pride in embarassing a mother in front of her kid. He's the one that said she was trying to leave at one point and he did a good enough job on her that she had to hurry past the house.....twice. He did such a good job on her, she forgot where she parked her car. Mom would be so proud. He had to make sure she didn't come back to pick at his pet peeve. A simple "No thanks, I don't believe what you do, please don't come back" wouldn't suffice.
Then adding smilies like he's bragging about it.
SteveGrenard
30th August 2006, 07:19 PM
Do they do that? I wasn't aware that Muslim home invasion crimes were on the rise.
I wouldn't do anything at all. Telling me he's going to kill me isn't the same thing as trying to kill me. What would you suggest? A pre-emptive strike on his Mosque?
Ask the non-Moslems being accosted, attacked and killed for the moslem crime of apostasy and/or their religion if it is other than moslem, e.g. jews, christians, hindus, buddihists, animalists in places like the Phillippines, Indonesia and the Horn of Africa. The moslem jidhadists not only invade homes, they invade communities, entire populations and countries or parts of countries.
Assuming the threat you receive were real you are telling me you wouldn't take it seriously and do nothing to defend or protect yourself?
I am not suggesting you take action against anyone other than the person or persons making the threat, not others at a nearby mosque.
Or you would convert to islam and be done with it?
kittynh
30th August 2006, 08:05 PM
sadly, a big problem in Salt Lake City and in Utah and Nevada are young teenage boys that have been kicked out of these polygamy cults. There just aren't enough women. So any teenage boys that act out or are seen as a threat to the much older men, is OUT. Simply kicked OUT. A young man is also seen competition. What 14 year old is going to want a 39 year old man, when she can have an 18 year old. If you go to these cults you would find a real shortage of teenage boys and young men in their 20's, except for the few picked to be leaders.
Hey, you know God really messed up when he made the sex of babies about 50/50....
Tailgater
30th August 2006, 08:31 PM
OK, sorry for the rant. I just expect more from someone who puts so much emphasis on respecting other religions, races, etc and not attacking the innocent (physically or verbally). Meph, you always talk about not grouping a religion with their extremists and I want you to read this. You posted your story in a thread about a criminal. Most of those JWs that walk around are not missionaries the way you describe. Most of them are the average member getting the word out for the church. Much like a salesman with a script. They are doing something that they feel is good and helpful to others. You said that they tried to leave after you showed disbelief (and maybe disrespect) and continued on agressively with questions. They are there out of peace and love, not to be confrontational. I have a friend from high school that hit the drug scene pretty hard. To the point of hospitalization. Rehabs would not fix him. He was invited by the JWs to join in prayer and studies at the church. Somewhere along the way he found god (or thought he did). He is alive today because of them. A little weird, but alive and healthy and positive about his life. I can't have a conversation with him without god coming up, and it annoys the hell out of me, but I'm happy for him. The story you gave is an example of the same confrontational disbelief and arrogance that many muslims see in the west, and dislike us for it. You give many examples in your posts why we are creating more hatred for ourselves. If that was a group of muslims, you probably could have added it to the list. Everyone wants respect for what they believe in despite how idiotic it may seem to us. I hope that was less of a personal attack and apologize if the prior post was. I was running on emotion.
Azure
30th August 2006, 10:54 PM
My only question is doesn't the FBI have anything better to do?
With all of the true scumbags that are out there, this is what makes news?
And this guy isn't a true scumbag?
The FBI should only capture the violent criminals? :rolleyes:
Kopji
30th August 2006, 11:55 PM
The law talks real tough, but for all the hoopla, I'd put my money on him being released. This whole thing hinges on the hope that his arrest will cause some women who were afraid, to come forward.
Despite their differences the FLDS has wide sympathy among the LDS community. I watched a Libertarian candidate in Coconino county politically self destruct a couple years ago when he made the mistake of calling the FLDS a bunch of child abusers who needed to be locked up.
The cult's more recent 'management by excommunication' may have changed things a little in favor of justice. Virtually orphaned children walking barefoot across the desert at night after being tossed from their community and families is powerful imagery against a dangerous cult. But is it enough? I doubt it.
Arizona attempted to remove children from the FLDS cult in the 1950's and the political backlash was devastating. This was called the Short Creek raid. linky (http://www.childpro.org/2001-2002%20media/2001-02%20media%2001.htm)
SusanB-M1
31st August 2006, 09:29 AM
There was an interview the other night (Five Live I think) with one of the daughters of the arrested man. She is one of about 38 siblings apparently and said that family gatherings on her father's ranch are fun.
I can't begin to understand how people would want to live in that way, but a practical question puzzles me. Where do these huge families find the money to live, as it appears they do, very comfortably. It is hard enough these days for parents to keep a good standard of living with both working and just a few children. So I wonder if anyone here knows the answer?
daredelvis
31st August 2006, 09:55 AM
There was an interview the other night (Five Live I think) with one of the daughters of the arrested man. She is one of about 38 siblings apparently and said that family gatherings on her father's ranch are fun.
I can't begin to understand how people would want to live in that way, but a practical question puzzles me. Where do these huge families find the money to live, as it appears they do, very comfortably. It is hard enough these days for parents to keep a good standard of living with both working and just a few children. So I wonder if anyone here knows the answer?
Read up on them. They are HUGE welfare scammers. The U.S. government is evil in their mind. It is not ironic that they are depending on the government to finance their lifestyle as they subscribe to the "starve the beast" philosophy.
Daredelvis
nightwind
31st August 2006, 08:14 PM
Snore. Snore. Snore. There is some kind of agenda here. Still really don't see any big crime here. Now lets see, the guy encouraged someone to procreate? And I don't see any rape here. And when did this all occur?
And what is going to happen if the one witness left backs down?
This guy should not have ever been on the FBI most wanted list. This is the most absurd thing I have ever seen. Sure he is a religious extremist. Big deal. This is what they do.
This whole thing is a joke. Wait and see what happens here, and then think of the money wasted on this case, when it could have been used on important cases. What a crock.
Checkmite
31st August 2006, 09:27 PM
Child abusers are scumbags, worthy of as much attention as it takes to deal with them.
Dark Jaguar
31st August 2006, 09:51 PM
Snore. Snore. Snore. There is some kind of agenda here. Still really don't see any big crime here. Now lets see, the guy encouraged someone to procreate? And I don't see any rape here. And when did this all occur?
And what is going to happen if the one witness left backs down?
This guy should not have ever been on the FBI most wanted list. This is the most absurd thing I have ever seen. Sure he is a religious extremist. Big deal. This is what they do.
This whole thing is a joke. Wait and see what happens here, and then think of the money wasted on this case, when it could have been used on important cases. What a crock.
You ignored a lot of things up there.
You ignored that some of these kids are as young as 12. "Marrying" them off is not healthy for the child, or do you not see that as the case?
You also ignored the "lost boys", the kids kicked to the street as a direct result of this. Is kicking out people who can't fend for themselves "okay"?
Is someone who orchastrated a large amount of this behavior someone that should be allowed to continue to do so?
Address ALL of this, because THESE are the things we are upset about.
Your "boo hoo this isn't that big a deal" ignoring of the other issues isn't exactly good logic.
It would be like if I pointed out a murderer who resisted arrest and I was talking about how this person needs to be put away and you responded "oh big deal, so the guy resisted arrest!", totally ignoring the MURDERING part and not even bothering to acknowledge that that's the issue we are upset with.
Art Vandelay
1st September 2006, 01:05 AM
I object to how his polygamy is being presented as a relevant, let alone most important, characteristic. If a gay man were charged with child abuse, would you discuss his homosexuality so prominantly?
You ignored that some of these kids are as young as 12. No, Mephisto did.
You also ignored the "lost boys", the kids kicked to the street as a direct result of this. No Mephisto did.
Is someone who orchastrated a large amount of this behavior someone that should be allowed to continue to do so?
Address ALL of this, because THESE are the things we are upset about.Then why are none of them mentioned in the OP? Hmmm?
It would be like if I pointed out a murderer who resisted arrest and I was talking about how this person needs to be put away and you responded "oh big deal, so the guy resisted arrest!", totally ignoring the MURDERING part and not even bothering to acknowledge that that's the issue we are upset with.It would be like if a thread were started which mentioned that a fugitive homosexual was caught, and made no reference to the fact that he murdered someone, and when someone said "Gay? What's the big deal?" and someone else were to say that he is ignoring the fact that he's a murderer.
If you read the link, it's not harmless. They have a belief that the more virtuous you are, the more wives you can have. These inevitably leads to a shortage of women. Boys have to be excluded from their families, young girls are forced to marry older men. It's child abuse.The polygamy itself is harmless. It's how it's practiced that's the problem.
Kopji
1st September 2006, 02:19 AM
The victimization part of this is that the church owns everything. They do not own their homes, land, or obviously even families. Excommunicated children are sent walking. Disobedient husbands have their wives taken away and given to more obedient members. The church is managed by excommunicating people who do not obey. Members cannot leave, they have nowhere to go and own nothing. They live as virtual slaves, at the whim of the prophet.
It is unfortunate that the laws are so pathetic and weak. The strongest charge is the Utah one, something obscure like arranging for the rape of a child with an adult. Not polygamy. Although I think that after 150 years of LDS history there could be a pretty good case made that there are no benign forms of polygamy.
Gwyn ap Nudd
1st September 2006, 05:33 AM
I object to how his polygamy is being presented as a relevant, let alone most important, characteristic. If a gay man were charged with child abuse, would you discuss his homosexuality so prominantly?
No, Mephisto did.
No Mephisto did.
Is someone who orchastrated a large amount of this behavior someone that should be allowed to continue to do so?
Then why are none of them mentioned in the OP? Hmmm?
It would be like if a thread were started which mentioned that a fugitive homosexual was caught, and made no reference to the fact that he murdered someone, and when someone said "Gay? What's the big deal?" and someone else were to say that he is ignoring the fact that he's a murderer.
The polygamy itself is harmless. It's how it's practiced that's the problem.
I agree with you to a large extent. But...
The references to polygamy in the OP and in the articles he links to are not the charges for which he was arrested, or the ones for which the posters here vilify him and his church. The references are simply to identify his church ("It's that fundie branch of Mormonism that still practices polygamy.") and his role and responsibility as head of that church. Church policy has not only allowed the crimes, but encouraged them. And Jeffs not only bears "ultimate" responsibility as the head of the church, but he actively participated in both creating the policy and in committing the crimes.
The analogy is not to your hypothetical argument about a gay murderer, but rather to articles (and JREF threads) about child-molesting Catholic priests. Of course, being a Catholic priest is not a horrible crime, but if a Catholic religious leader does commit a horrible crime and uses his position in the church to cover it up and/or to escape judgment, then it does become relevant.
ponderingturtle
1st September 2006, 07:07 AM
The victimization part of this is that the church owns everything. They do not own their homes, land, or obviously even families. Excommunicated children are sent walking. Disobedient husbands have their wives taken away and given to more obedient members. The church is managed by excommunicating people who do not obey. Members cannot leave, they have nowhere to go and own nothing. They live as virtual slaves, at the whim of the prophet.
It is unfortunate that the laws are so pathetic and weak. The strongest charge is the Utah one, something obscure like arranging for the rape of a child with an adult. Not polygamy. Although I think that after 150 years of LDS history there could be a pretty good case made that there are no benign forms of polygamy.
How much evidence for polyandry instead of polygyny? Personaly I don't see these as evidence agenst polygamy but agenst church enforced marriage and unequal marriage. It seems a bit like saying that after looking at many abusive marriages that there are no benign forms of marriage.
Art Vandelay
1st September 2006, 02:36 PM
Although I think that after 150 years of LDS history there could be a pretty good case made that there are no benign forms of polygamy.It seems to me that a much more logical conclusion would be that there are no benign forms of LDS.
The references are simply to identify his church ("It's that fundie branch of Mormonism that still practices polygamy.") and his role and responsibility as head of that church. Wouldn't actually naming the church be a more efficient way of indentifying it? The fact that people consider the polygamy to be the most prominent feature of the church seems rather absurd.
Gwyn ap Nudd
5th September 2006, 04:05 PM
Wouldn't actually naming the church be a more efficient way of indentifying it?
It would be if the FLDS were as widely known as the Roman Catholic Church. But how many people are aware of the differences betwee the LDS (the Mormons) and the FLDS? Or even that there is a difference between the LDS and any of the break-away sects?
The fact that people consider the polygamy to be the most prominent feature of the church seems rather absurd.
It is not "the most prominant feature" of the sect. It is, however, the most obvious difference between it and the LDS (and most other religions in America).
© 2001-2009, James Randi Educational Foundation. All Rights Reserved.
vBulletin® v3.7.7, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.