Topic: Social and Cultural Issues
Crime in the Name of Religion Freedom of religion is not a license to break the law. But the law is not permitted to establish religion.by Scotch Moose
(Libertarian)
Wednesday, April 16, 2008
From it's earliest days the United States has had to deal with crimes committed under religious justifications. In 1786 Thomas Jefferson and John Adams met with Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman Adja, the ambassador from Tripoli. They asked why were American ships were being pirated and the response was reported back to congress.
It was written in their Koran, that all nations which had not acknowledged the Prophet were sinners, whom it was the right and duty of the faithful to plunder and enslave.
The continuing piracy and enslavement of Americans led to the creation of the United States Navy and Barbary wars of the early 19th century. Recognizing religious freedom is an important part of the character of the United States, but there are obvious limits to what can be tolerated.
Today in the news we have seen over 400 children ripped from their parent's arms. This is an extraordinary action taken against a religious community based on allegations made in what now appears to be a prank phone call. We are told whatever was used to justify the raid these actions had to be taken because these children were endangered by their religious culture. Plural marriage is not part of my culture, and is not in my opinion the best way to live, but that falls far short of high-seas piracy and shackling slaves to oars.
This community we have destroyed were not pirates. They were hard-working, and industrious. They had faith, big loving families, and a sense of community most of us cannot understand. There are accusations of welfare fraud, but I'd bet they would have been happy to stop taking welfare if the world outside of their community would stop taking taxes. I really can't blame someone for wanting their money back.
This community we have destroyed was not armed and dangerous like the branch Davidians in Waco. They stood and watched, offering only passive resistance as their homes, offices, and most holy places were broken and ransacked in a search for a girl who now appears to have been a fictional character. Of the hundreds of people subjected to this humiliation only one needed to be arrested for resisting.
Was there underage sexual activity in that compound? Certainly yes, given that there is underage sexual activity in every State, every City, and every community in this country. The neighborhood down the street from me is predominately poor and black, most children do not graduate from high school, and most girls get pregnant, out of wedlock, before they are eighteen years old. But I don't hear anyone calling to raid that neighborhood and take away their children in order to save them from their culture.
Were there plural marriages and arranged marriages between old men and young girls? It seems likely, mostly because these things are as common in human history as teenage sex. We are told this is a crime because the girl's options were limited by their communities' religious culture. But we all have our choices limited by our culture and our communities. As long as one of the options is to pack up, leave, and start over somewhere else I can't call the expectations of parents a crime.
Sometimes teenagers are unhappy because their parents push them to do well in school and go to college or because their church and community have expectations that can only be met with hard work and discipline. But we really can't start raiding every neighborhood where we find teenage angst.
We cannot tolerate piracy, slavery, or physical torture even when justified by religion. But the values you choose to impart to your children, marriage traditions, and the expectations of a community are pure religion and cannot, in this country, be regulated by law. I don't see a culture of coercion in the FLDS compound that existed to a higher degree than can be found in any other neighborhood or community. The success and resilience of their culture should stand as testament to it's value.
What is most disturbing to me is the hypocrisy. Our mainstream culture is rife with corruption, underage sex, and angst ridden teenagers without hope for a satisfying life. And we would destroy this religious community because their children were not going to turn out like ours. All of us probably have it wrong, and that is why the constitution prohibits the establishment of religion. So all of us can continue to get it wrong in all the diverse and unique ways that we think might be right.
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 10 thumbs so far
2008 Scotch Moose, all rights reserved.
Published: Wednesday, April 16, 2008
Last modified: Wednesday, April 16, 2008
The views expressed in this
article are those of Scotch Moose only and do not represent
the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates. Scotch Moose is
solely responsible for the contents of this article and is not an
employee or otherwise affiliated with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
I agree with the author, and also with lloyd about their view on Polygamy. I disagree with Lloyd's blame that it is "Christians and Jews" who are at fault here.
It is a simple over reach of state power. To assign blame to "Christians and Jews" is equally anti-religious as the fight against the FLDS.
What blows my mind is what the author was trying to point out. Most people now days have sex with multiple other people. The fact that they usually "break up" between flings speaks more to their un-rightousness and moral ignorance than it does to the FLDS members. From what I can tell, they make life-long commitments to each other and don't break them.
I do confess that non-polygamous marriages are "best". I also confess that if a man can care for multiple wives, then biblically speaking those who protest it is "sin" don't have a leg to stand on (assuming he can care for them equally and meets each of their needs in kind).
Posted By: Scott from Oregon
Date: 2008-04-16 14:22:52
What is troubling about this situation is that there was a girl at sixteen with four children! (According to a news report, therefore I can't verify...)
Do the math, folks!
All religion are cults. The smaller they are, the more they are likely to earn the recognition of being a cult, but if you simply observe what transpires in a religion at any level, you see the same kind of brainwashing and absence of basic logic and reasoning.
What to do about cults that have practices that break the norms of society...?
That's a fair and profound question, as who shall grant the government to make that call? Or do they grant the power themselves?
Polygamy should be legal. Because it isn't we have the cults go underground and do some evil things. It only makes the news because it amplifies the myth that Christians and Jews share that polygamy is bad.
This is not counting the number of manogamous marriage Christians, Muslims, and Jews that have an even larger history of sexual child abuse. Hell there are ghetto kids with 4 kids at the age of 16!
I think that 16 should be the age of adulthood because at that age you are given the ultimate responsibility: the freedom to drive safely. So in my atheist thug libertarian opinion, if you are old enough to drive, then you are old enough to be driven.
But back to the religion thing. The only thing that I am critical of is the fact that they had to use religion as an excuse for polygamy. Swingers are all over the country proving that manogamy is boring. Where are the atheist polygamists at? They never seem to get into trouble.
They use religion a an excuse for polygamy because that is the only thing they know. You have to remember that people under a cult have subjected themselves and their brains to their cult. They shut down their reasoning capacity and can not see it any other way.
Yes, 16 must be the age. The problem is that as more laws are there, people mature slower and our children are more childish all the way up to 21 or 22. We have created a nation of kids rather than a Nation of adults. Therefore, today a 16 year old child is less mature than a 16 year old child 50 years ago.
Government should stay out or our households whether that be religion or sex period.
By they way, there is nothing wrong with a monogamous atheist either.
What if in the name of religion a religious person must sacrifice (kill) his oldest daughter or son? I think there are some cases like that on the bible. Maybe in the old testament with Abraham.
Should governments help deter such killing?
I would like to hear some more comments on this out there.
Uh, yes murder should be prevented as best possible without violating civil liberties, even if it is religious.
50 years ago? 16 year olds today have seen more sex, drugs, and rock and roll than those generations. I see a definite problem with kids 16 years old being able to drive, yet not being allowed to buy porn, enlist in the military, buy cigs, or alcohol. If you are 16 and you have a Driver's licence then you NEED to act like an adult. Might as well start treating them that way, legally and morally.
Think about it this way if we didn't have the useless summer breaks they would actually graduate High school at 16.
Want to comment on this
article? Leave your comment here. Your email address is
required to track your comment. However, we will neither
publish your email address nor distribute it to other
organizations or persons. The only reason we might use
it would be if we needed to contact you regarding your
comment. All comments are subject to our
terms of use policy.
2008 Scotch Moose, all rights reserved.