Remember that mysterious telephone call that inspired the raid? A footnote in the ruling even mentions that "the authenticity" of the original telephone call is "in doubt."
The existence of the FLDS belief system as described by the Department's witnesses, by itself, does not put children of FLDS parents in physical danger. It is the imposition of certain alleged tenets of that system on specific individuals that may put them in physical danger.Thank you, Appellate Court, for differentiating between beliefs and actions.
This is a relief.
No one should get legal grief
for an odd religious belief.
Isn't that something the first amendment forbids?
Now give back the gosh darn kids!
2 comments:
Freedom of religion does not mean freedom to abuse.
"Freedom of religion does not mean freedom to abuse."
Absolutely true. But the appeals court found that the child protection agency had overreached, based on the evidence offered so far.
Post a Comment