FLDS changing church policy regarding underage "marriages"

[uppityperson]

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5g8-DEMtAE9q4i4ySQ0eV_qZefmRQD9127NI00

ELDORADO, Texas (AP) — An elder in a Texas polygamist group says church policy going forward will to be to forbid any girl to marry who is not old enough to legally consent in the state where she lives. Willie Jessop of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints said Monday the church has been widely misunderstood. But he says the church will not sanction marriages of underage girls and will counsel members against such unions.

http://deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,700231225,00.html

Perhaps bowing to the pressure at the center of the FLDS custody case, a spokesman for the church today released a prepared statement saying members will be counseled to not allow or participate in marriages below the age of consent.

FLDS member Willy Jessop released the statement this afternoon and said it would apply to all members of the church.

"The church commits it will not preside over the marriage of any woman under the age of legal consent in the jurisdiction in which the marriage takes place," Jessop said.

edited for missing bracket

[CaliforniaPeggy]

1. I'm really hoping that they will enforce this...

I'm thinking that there will be lots of men who will be unhappy...

[uppityperson]

2. Indeed, on both those sentiments.

[Bunny]

3. So, I guess we can assume that since they're now "counseling" against it,

that it was permitted before? Well, that's just dandy, isn't it?

And I wish Mr. Jessop would clarify the word "marriage". Does he mean "marriage", as in: husband and wife till death do us part? Or does he mean "marriage", as in: no more raping girls oh, sorry, I meant to say "spiritual" "marriage". :shrug:

[hokies4ever]

5. Texas botches this case

Lucky to get this kind of agreement. From a legal standpoint, I'm not sure why the FLDS lawyer let them agree to these stipulations. You don't negotiate a plea deal after the appeals courts have ruled in your favor.

[blondeatlast]

8. It means "oops, we have a public relations nightmare on our hands" marriage.

Time to tax the bastards--they've made multi-millions off of welfare (ya know, lots of children, very few fathers around...).

:mad:

[Fleshdancer]

4. Counseling members isn't enough.

What are the consequences? While we're speaking about the treatment of minors, where is the discussion on how the boys are thrown out on the streets like trash? Will the elders counsel against this? If so, what are the consequences?

[FreeState]

9. Marriages are arranged by the Prophet - there are no others n/t

[Fleshdancer]

12. and when he dies? n/t

[FreeState]

15. Another Prophet is chosen (like the Pope or the mainstream LDS Prophet) n/t

[Fleshdancer]

16. well obviously, but will he be bound to this new rule? n/t

[musette_sf]

18. the "new rule" means absolutely nothing

there are no legal marriages after Wife #1, so they are free to go back and abuse children at will.

[FreeState]

20. No thats not true

the FLDS church sees them as marriages. Your twisting words here to demonize them - can say I blame you or anyone for that matter - but the FLDS church sees sealings as marriages - they may not be civil marriages but to the church they are Marriages in the eyes of God - notice they do not use the word Civil in there statement - it covers all marriages.

[blondeatlast]

21. But since they are not legally recognized marriages, they can (and indeed do) collect

MILLIONS in welfare--lots of kids, very few fathers.

The legal definition is important here because they can claim not to be married (and do) and therefore skirt the law regarding statutory rape and parental responsibility.

[musette_sf]

22. i'm not trying to twist anything, FS

i do think that the FLDS leaders are very aware of the law, and the letter of the law. i think Jessop is skilled at playing the legal game, and that the FLDS has deep pockets for legal advice that will allow them to continue to do exactly what they want.

Jessop was very specific on his legalities: "the church commits that it will not preside over the marriage of any woman under the age of legal consent in the jurisdiction in which the marriage takes place". if he's being precise about jurisdictions, i believe he is also being precise about "marriage". plural marriage in ANY of the jurisdictions in the US is illegal. therefore any "marriage" after Wife #1 isn't a legal marriage, and therefore is not subject to any "new rule".

i appreciate your posts on this topic, from your perspective, and don't understand why you think i am "twisting" and "demonizing". you yourself said in this thread "I dont see how the policy could be broken unless the leader is lying."

[FreeState]

19. Generally yes -

but generally policy can be changed by the leader, however I tend to believe they are doing this to save face so most likely it will be upheld by whom ever replaces him when he dies (he is only 54 right now).

[Fleshdancer]

23. Interesting....

In your opinion, do you think this prophet will stand by today's statement?

[FreeState]

6. The leader chooses the spouses...

so the leader chooses who marries who - I dont see how the policy could be broken unless the leader is lying... since he is the one doing the arranging... (from Prison for the time being - and hopefully for a long long time).


http://flds101.blogspot.com/2008/05/flds-beliefs-101-arranged-marriages.html

To have a proper marriage, one that will exists for eternity in heaven, a marriage must be assigned by the prophet. “You can only get married and be a priesthood family if he (the prophet) says whom you should marry. “(WSJ 10/31/1995). No dating, courting, or choosing your own spouse is allowed. “If a boy and girl agree to get married and just go do it, they can never be gods, because you must be married by revelation through the prophet.” (WSJ 11/1/95)

[Wiley50]

7. A PR Move? Does this supercede the "Old enough to bleed, Old enough to Breed" rule? n/t

[blondeatlast]

10. Does that mean the young males will get to reach majority before they are summarily discarded?

I pretty much doubt it.

[Brigid]

11. That doesn't mean a whole lot if . . .

the girls are forced into marriage after they reach that age.

[musette_sf]

13. um, since no legal "marriage" occurs

except with Wife #1, seems like just more lies and double-talk coming from these abusers.

they're not "bowing to any pressure". they're using word games that mean absolutely nothing.

if no legal marriage occurs after Wife #1, then there need be no "policy changes". all will continue as before.

what a steaming pile.

on edit: liar Jessop also said in his statement:

"In the FLDS church all marriages are consensual. The church insists on appropriate consent, including that of the woman and the man in all circumstances."

which is a total lie since it is completely at odds with their beliefs. from the FLDS 101 site kindly posted by FreeState:

"What are the consequences of entering a marriage that isn’t arranged by the prophet? They won’t go the highest heaven (Celestial Kingdom), and eventually they will experience a second death – dissolution of their souls! 'What is dissolution? It is the death of the spirit and the body together. Both of them die. They dissolve back into what they were before they were born as a spirit. That person will never be that person again.' (WSJ 11/1/95)"

just more Lying For The Lord.

[blondeatlast]

17. Lack of a legal marriage is also how they bilk the welfare system.

The fact that these aren't "legal" or indeed, even "marriage" can't be stressed enough. It "excuses" these child rapists from a score of problems.

[JerseygirlCT]

14. "consent" is still a slipperly term in that world

I don't think women have the power to consent to anything there.