Government-Approved Prayer     

  Report a news item for inclusion here.   

Home

Deseret News 2-6-1. Utah Atheists  recruiting medley of prayer-givers

 ATHEISTS READY FOR FUN, LEGAL ACTION OVER UTAH PRAYER
 The Salt Lake County Council reinstates public prayer at government meetings after a ten year hiatus.  American Atheists and Utah Atheists, though, aren't worried.  Plans are afoot to show lawmakers the error of their unconstitutional ways by having a medley of fringe religious groups invited to deliver an invocation. 

TOP

Home

  By BRYON SAXTON AND SHAWN WILLIAMSON  --  Standard-Examiner staff

SYRACUSE -- Utah atheists are making good on their promise to deliver messages during the public prayer portion of city council meetings.

A member of Utah Atheists exercised his legal right in replacing public prayer, reading from a prepared text to open the Syracuse council meeting Tuesday.

Later this month, the same group will open a Clearfield council meeting. Layton officials anticipate they will soon hear from the same group.

Julian Hatch, of the Board of Utah Atheists, opened the Syracuse council meeting by reading from a two-page text.

In the 90 seconds he was afforded by city policy, Hatch said how one-fifth of Utahns are non-religious and live under the tyranny of religion.

Hatch also said how the only country similar to the United States in its pledge of loyalty to a country and a flag was Nazi Germany, which was led by "religious tyrant" Adolph Hitler.

"This is the first time in Utah history that an atheist gave the opening prayer," Hatch said.

Syracuse recently adopted a policy that allows anyone who requests to do so to open the council meeting with an invocation or thought. The policy, which restricts individuals from opening a meeting more than once every three months, was adopted in response to a December 2003 letter from the Utah Atheists group sent to cities throughout the state challenging the use of prayer to open public meetings.

Hatch was only halfway through his text when his 90 seconds were up. Council members sat in silence as Hatch read his letter.

Outside the council chambers, Hatch said atheists simply want to put a stop to bringing religion into government.

"What good is 90 seconds of prayer going to make?" he asked. "If God didn't listen when they prayed in church, why would he listen here?"

Council members were more affected by the actions of Hatch and his colleagues than by his words.

"We allowed them to make two statements," said Syracuse City Councilman Jon Jepperson. "One was only 90 seconds. The other more pronounced statement was not to stand during the pledge of allegiance."

Utah Atheists are currently scheduled to open the Clearfield council meeting on Jan. 25.

To allow Utah cities to continue opening council meetings with prayer, many city attorneys recommended communities have invocations or devotions on a volunteer basis.

Layton Assistant City Attorney Steve Garside said that if public prayer is allowed by any religious denomination to be part of an opening ceremony, then cities need to afford the same opportunity to all groups.

"In Layton, it has been a positive thing," Garside said of the volunteer prayer policy the city adopted in April.

Clearfield City Recorder Nancy Dean said a person approached her about being part of the city's next council meeting. She said the opportunity is being offered on a first-come, first-served basis.

The disclosure came moments before the city's first council meeting of the year. The meeting also marked the return to an opening ceremony, marked by an opening prayer by Councilman Ivan Anderson.

He came down from the dais before the prayer, saying he was doing so to illustrate that he was praying as a resident and not as a member of the council.

Clearfield officials eliminated the practice of prayer in the first meeting of 2004, due to what some leaders saw as a possible mockery of the practice, initiated by letters from local atheists. The practice was restored after a year.

Mayor Tom Waggoner publicly lamented that the invitation for prayer hadn't generated response from residents. He noted many residents signed a petition asking that prayer be restored, but none has volunteered to be part of the ceremony.

While city officials haven't enlisted people to pray, it appears a statewide organization is actively recruiting atheists to be part of the city ceremony through a Web site, nowscape.com/pray/

Correspondent Antone Clark contributed to this story.


Copyright ©2005, Ogden Publishing Corporation

Clearfield City Council Meeting January 25, 2005 at 7 PM (801-525-2700)

To dee council members at the city internet site:

http://www.clearfieldcity.org/administration/council/

Clearfield City Council Recorder Nancy Dean (801-525-2714) officially denied Utah Atheists to participate in the "Invocation" for the meeting since Stephen Clark, Chris Allan, and Julian Hatch are NOT residents of Clearfield City on Tuesday January 18, 2005. Clearfield could not provide any requirements for resident status. This was after inviting UTAH to participate the week before in an email after a personal visit was made by Julian Hatch to the office on January 11, 2005.

And after a news article in the Ogden Standard Examiner dated January 13, 2005 concerning prayers in Syracuse, Clearfield, and Layton specifically mentioned Clearfield Officials claiming Utah Atheists would give the Invocation at the 25th meeting. The attached article says: "Utah Atheists are currently scheduled to open the Clearfield council meeting on Jan. 25."

Also attached are the four Clearfield City Council meeting minutes over the past year where the prayer issue was discussed. There is not an electronic copy of the Resolution 2004R-20 adopted at the December 14, 2004 council meeting on the Clearfield City internet site, although Julian, Chris, and Stephen have paper copies of it. The two pertinent clauses in the invocation policy are listed below:

1. An invocation and the Pledge of Allegiance to the United States Flag will be given at the beginning of each regular Council meeting by a resident of Clearfield City.

2. The City recorder is hereby assigned to coordinate the invocation on a non-discriminatory basis.

5. If no one signs up to give the invocation by the Wednesday before the City Council meeting, or if the person who has requested to provide the invocation does not show up at the meeting in time to offer the invocation, then a member of the City Council will be assigned to give the invocation and lead the Pledge of Allegiance.

7. Those selected shall offer invocations that are non-proselytizing and shall not degrade any person because of religion, race, ethnic background, natural origin, sex gender or philosophy and shall not be crude, vulgar or offensive to the public sense of decency.

UTAH has the following objections:

1. "Invocation" connotes a similar religious exercise (invoking god) as "prayer" that SOS case determined was religious worship. It specifically directs what a person must do and atheists can't in good conscience pray or invoke supernatural spirits. We ask it be changed to something reflecting "generic opening thoughts" as dictated by SOS v whitehead.

2. Federal case law has determined that no citizen may be coerced into pledging loyalty or standing and reciting the Pledge of Allegiance. The ordinance ties the invocation with the pledge...even if invocation is considered non religious, the Pledge does have "Under God" in it and there is no opportunity for the participant to say something different or not include it in the ceremony. To give the invocation means you must recite the pledge.

2. We are "all" tax payers to the state and Federal govt. and Clearfield City gets funding from both sources. The SOS decision determined that the opportunity to participate must be allowed to everyone, otherwise the benefit could not be legally defensible as "indirect" and "all" could not have an equal opportunity to participate. The residency requirement is discriminatory.

3. Clearfield deliberately and knowingly deleted "non-denominational" from the resolution just prior to passage so they could pray to specific deity such as "Jesus Christ." This violates Federal case law.

4. Assignment of invocation and pledge to government official wrongfully forces these persons to participate in religion and coerces the pledge. Utah Atheists also finds it inappropriate for government officials to lead the pledge or prayer because it appears that government is sponsoring religious worship and loyalty oaths. This is not inclusive of all to participate in the meetings.

Atheists attack use of prayers at meeting Thr, Jan 27, 2005

By ANTONE CLARK
Standard-Examiner correspondent
CLEARFIELD -- The former state leader of a group of atheists criticized the City Council for reinstating prayer as part of its opening ceremony and said God is not a being, but a device used to fool, manipulate and trick people.
Chris Allen, of Salt Lake City, former state director of the Utah Chapter of the American Atheists, spoke out against the city's practice of having an invocation, or an opening ceremony, during the resident comment portion of Tuesday's meeting. Other atheists who echoed similar comments joined Allen.
His comments came after a potential confrontation during the invocation was abated.
Mayor Tom Waggoner chose to let Allen and other atheists speak during the resident portion at the end of the meeting, even though they are not city residents. In doing so, he defused a confrontation that Allen had planned to wage during the prayer.
Allen said he was prepared to make a statement during the prayer, so there would be something in the official record to record his disapproval of the process. Waggoner at first refused but then chose to accommodate Allen and others at the end of the meeting, by giving them three minutes apiece at the podium.
The city's second meeting of the year was opened with a prayer offered by Councilman Jim Barlow. Barlow offered the prayer when no one from the city was signed up to begin the meeting. It was Barlow who led the campaign to reinstate the practice after it was dropped in the first meeting of 2004, due to what some officials saw as a possible mockery of the practice, initiated by letters from local atheists. The practice was only restored after a year of wrestling with the issue.
City officials had been approached in early January by an atheist about signing up for the opening ceremony. But the practice is only open to residents of the city and Allen distributed a letter from Julian Hatch, who represented the Utah Atheists at a Syracuse meeting earlier this month. The letter claimed that nonreligious residents in the city are reluctant to come forward and participate, for fear of possible retribution "by the local government and other religious believers."
Waggoner said the idea of possible retribution against any who might come forth is ridiculous.
"I'm sure people in Utah are a little better than that," the mayor said.
Stephen Clark, of Salt Lake City, stressed the need for a separation of church and state and likened the trend of a form of religion in a public meeting to problems in Iran and Iraq, where he said there is no freedom because of the lack of such separation. Clark quoted the words of Jesus Christ, James Madison and Thomas Jefferson in making his case.
Harold Illig, of Salt Lake City, also spoke out against the practice of prayer and suggested that the ruler of the universe shouldn't be asked to care about the things that people care about. He said studies show there is no efficacy in prayer.
The city still has no one signed up to lead an invocation or opening ceremony for its next meeting, according to Nancy Dean, city recorder. Dean showed a new form that is being used by the city to handle such requests. The form clearly stresses that the applicant needs to be a resident of the city.
Dean has suggested the city will solicit potential participants in its March-April edition of the city newsletter.

Copyright ©2005, Ogden Publishing Corporation
http://www.standard.net/standard/news/news_story.html?sid=00050126230000788489+cat%3Dnews+template%3Dnews1.html&TVS=1%24648757126%2450%24Thu+Jan+27+16%3A09%3A11+EST+2005-42734%240%2439353739304243454631363935453242413136353736353733323

TOP

All pages by @com.  All right reserved ©2001

Home

sltrib.com/search/ci_2596694
State school board keeps prayers
[...]

One morning a man comes into the church on crutches. He stops in front of the holy water and splashes some of it on both of his legs, then throws away his crutches. An alter boy witnessed the scene and runs into the rectory to tell the priest what he'd just seen. Without batting an eye, the priest says, "Son, you've just witnessed a miracle. Tell me, where is this man?"

"Flat on his ass, Father, over by the holy water."

Article Last Updated: 3/05/2005

State school board keeps prayers

By Ronnie Lynn
The Salt Lake Tribune

Salt Lake Tribune

They will be called "opening remarks" instead of "reverence," but under new bylaws passed Friday, state school board members may still begin their monthly meetings with prayers.
Board members also may invite patrons to give the opening remarks or choose not to address the board when it comes their turn.
Like many public bodies in Utah, board members take turns opening their monthly meetings with a prayer.
The bylaw change is the group's response to the Utah Atheists' complaint that the board not use its official power to promote personal religious agendas.
Some members wanted to nix opening remarks altogether, saying they distract the board and public from business.
"I am reluctant to have our meetings start out on an offensive note," board member Greg Haws said. "I would prefer to eliminate [opening remarks], get on with our business and start out on a happy note."
In the end, the board voted, 8-4, to broaden its policy by allowing members to invite constituents to share a prayer, poem or other insightful comments.
"I don't think prayer is necessary to have an effective state school board meeting, but at the same time, I'm concerned that we not become a nation who does not recognize the possibility of divine intervention in what we are doing and request it," board member John Pingree said.
Said fellow board member Bill Colbert: "Our country is founded on religious principles. . . . I think succumbing to a minority trying to force its way to make this society something they'd rather it be is wrong."
The new bylaws prohibit the board from previewing or editing opening remarks made by the public.
Gary Swenson led Friday's opening remarks with reverence for three teachers who made a difference in his life and then reading a prayer associated with American Indians' alcohol-awareness meetings. The prayer asked the "wind" for strength and wisdom.
rlynn@sltrib.com

"Utah Atheists recruiting medley of prayer-givers" SYRACUSE -- Utah atheists are making good on their promise to deliver messages during who would be in charge of facilitating an opening exercise prayer. more..."

http://www.standard.net/live/opinion/letterstotheeditor/125435/

Founders didn't want a national religion
Monday, February 11, 2008


Many of the founders of this nation were individuals who had abandoned European theocracies and desired to clearly separate an individual's beliefs from a national religion. It is clearly stated in Article VI of our Constitution that: "... no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States."

This does not prohibit any religious belief or lack of belief by an individual, but it does clearly state that our nation is not to be a nation defined by any religious belief.

George Washington and John Adams were both individuals of the Christian faith, but the United States was not founded as a Christian nation. A portion of the terms of the treaty with Tripoli, drafted in 1796 under George Washington and signed by John Adams in 1797, reads: "As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility" (of others).

This separation of an individual's belief and the lack of a national belief is one of the great strengths of individual freedom within our nation.

David I. Rasmussen
Ogden

http://www.standard.net/live/opinion/letterstotheeditor/125431/

Religion, government work better separately
Monday, February 11, 2008


I write in response to the Jan. 31 letter "Founding Fathers' words evidence of beliefs": It is a risky game to use out-of-context quotes to make a case as to the full and true Christian beliefs of our Founding Fathers. These quotes can be countered easily by a simple search of the library or Internet.

To illustrate my point consider the following, taken from a page I found on the Internet: Thomas Jefferson, in a letter to William Short: "I have examined all the known superstitions of the world and I do not find in our particular superstition of Christianity one redeeming feature."

Adams signed the Treaty of Tripoli. Article 11 states, "The Government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion."

Madison wrote, "Religion and government will both exist in greater purity, the less they are mixed together."

My bottom line is that argument by selected quotes does little to prove anything. The fact is that it makes not one iota of difference if our Founding Fathers were Christians or worshipped at the altar of Zeus, they were wise and rational men who realized that a state-supported religion was incompatible with a democracy, hence the first phrase of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion." God and Jesus are not mentioned at all in the Constitution; is there a significance to that?

Lee Witten
Ogden

IRS probes pastor's Huckabee endorsement

By G I L L I A N   F L A C C U S

BUENA PARK, Calif. - A Southern Baptist preacher who endorsed GOP presidential hopeful Mike Huckabee on church letterhead said Wednesday he was being investigated by the Internal Revenue Service for mixing religion with politics. ADVERTISEMENT

Rev. Wiley Drake, a prominent pastor in the Southern Baptist Convention, said he received a 14-page letter from the IRS on Feb. 7.

Under federal tax law, church officials can legally discuss politics, but they cannot endorse candidates or parties without risking their tax-exempt status. Most who do so receive a warning.

On Aug. 11, Drake wrote a press release on letterhead from the First Southern Baptist Church in Buena Park that announced his personal endorsement of Huckabee and asked all Southern Baptists to get behind the candidate.

"After very serious prayer and consideration, I announce today that I am going to personally endorse Mike Huckabee," the release said. "I ask all of my Southern Baptist brothers and sister to consider getting behind Mike and helping him all you can."

He continued: "I believe God has chosen Mike for such an hour, and I believe of all those running Mike Huckabee will listen to God."

The letter sent to Drake by the IRS also quoted from segments of the pastor's church-based Internet show, "The Wiley Drake Show." In the quotes, Drake endorsed Huckabee again.

"Yes, I endorsed him personally and yes, we use the First Southern Baptist Church. Yes, we broadcast the 'Wiley Drake Show' from the First Southern Baptist Church. Everything we do is under the auspices of the church," Drake said on the show...

 More at http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080214/ap_on_re_us/irs_pastor_investigated_3;_ylt=AjBQeMpMgfcjjQSd6Xf.N8wE1vAI

Thai monks told to behave on networking Web sites

Tue Mar 4, 2:02 AM ET

Thai officials urged Buddhist monks on Tuesday to avoid using social networking Web sites to woo women after an advocacy group found some monks were doing just that.

The request came as police in the northeast detained a monk accused of using a Web site to lure a woman to his temple and raping her.

"I call on Hi5 users to tell the monks to leave the site if they are found using it," junior minister Jakrapob Penkair told reporters after a Buddhist monitoring group said some monks were flirting on the Web site popular with Thai users.

Reports of monks caught using or selling drugs or having consensual sex with women are not uncommon in the Thai media, which reported on Tuesday a 23-year-old monk was caught raping a teenager he lured to his room through the Web site.

A senior Culture Ministry official said monks should not be banned from the cyberspace, but should turn this "crisis" into "opportunity" by bringing Buddha's teaching to the young.

"Instead of using the Net to flirt with young girls, monks should find ways to preach Dharma and lead them in the right direction," said Ladda Thangsupachai, head of the Cultural Surveillance Centre.

(Reporting by Nopporn Wong-Anan; Editing by Michael Battye)
source: http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080304/wr_nm/thailand_monks_dc_1&printer=1

debunked:  http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/bl_fell_cancer_cure.htm

Atheist soldier says Army punished him
By JOHN MILBURN, Associated Press WriterWed Mar 5, 9:16 PM ET

A soldier claimed Wednesday that his promotion was blocked because he had claimed in a lawsuit that the Army was violating his right to be an atheist.

Attorneys for Spc. Jeremy Hall and the Military Religious Freedom Foundation refiled the federal lawsuit Wednesday in Kansas City, Kan., and added a complaint alleging that the blocked promotion was in response to the legal action.

The suit was filed in September but dropped last month so the new allegations could be included. Among the defendants are Defense Secretary Robert Gates.

Hall alleges he was denied his constitutional right to hold a meeting to discuss atheism while he was deployed in Iraq with his military police unit. He says in the new complaint that his promotion was blocked after the commander of the 1st Infantry Division and Fort Riley sent an e-mail post-wide saying Hall had sued.

Fort Riley spokeswoman Alison Kohler said the post "can't comment on ongoing legal matters" and offered no further statement.

According to the lawsuit, Hall was counseled by his platoon sergeant after being informed that his promotion was blocked. He says the sergeant explained that Hall would be "unable to put aside his personal convictions and pray with his troops" and would have trouble bonding with them if promoted to a leadership position.

Hall responded that religion is not a requirement of leadership, even though the sergeant wondered how he had rights if atheism wasn't a religion. Hall said atheism is protected under the Army's chaplain's manual.

"It shouldn't matter if one is Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Buddhist or atheist," said Pedro Irigonegaray, an attorney whose firm filed the lawsuit. "In the military, all are equal and to be considered equal."

Maj. Freddy J. Welborn was named in the lawsuit as the officer who prevented Hall from holding a meeting of atheists and non-Christians. It alleges that Welborn threatened to file military charges against Hall and to block his re-enlistment. Welborn has denied the allegations.

The lawsuit alleges that Gates permits a military culture in which officers are encouraged to pressure soldiers to adopt and espouse fundamentalist Christian beliefs, and in which activities by Christian organizations are sanctioned.

Hall's attorneys say Fort Riley has permitted a culture promoting Christianity and anti-Islamic sentiment, including posters quoting conservative columnist Ann Coulter and sale of a book, "A Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam," at the post exchange.

The Pentagon has said that the military values and respects religious freedoms, but that accommodating religious practices should not interfere with unit cohesion, readiness, standards or discipline.

Mikey Weinstein, president and founder of the religious freedom foundation, said the lawsuit would show the "almost incomprehensible national security risks to America" posed by the military's pattern of violating the religious freedom of those in uniform.

"It is beyond despicable, indeed wholly unlawful, that the United States Army is actively attempting to destroy the professional career of one of its decorated young fighting soldiers, with two completed combat tours in Iraq, simply because he had the rare courage to stand up for his constitutional rights," Weinstein said in a statement.

Weinstein previously sued the Air Force for acts he said illegally imposed Christianity on its students at the academy. A federal judge threw out that lawsuit in 2006.

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080306/ap_on_re_us/military_religion_lawsuit

Supreme Court Agrees To Hear Controversy Over Religious Symbols On Public Property
Monday, March 31, 2008

Utah Religious Group Seeks To Place Its 'Seven Aphorisms' Beside The Ten Commandments

The U.S. Supreme Court announced today that it will hear a Utah dispute that centers on the display of religious symbols on public property.

Americans United for Separation of Church and State said the case brings the high court back into a confusing and controversial area of constitutional law.

Pleasant Grove City v. Summum deals with a religious group called Summum, which sought to erect its “Seven Aphorisms” alongside a Ten Commandments monument in a public park in Pleasant Grove, Utah. The group said city officials cannot constitutionally approve the Commandment display while excluding other monuments.

A federal appeals court agreed, holding that it violates freedom of speech for government to allow one group’s message on public property and exclude another.

“If government creates an open forum, it can’t pick and choose among religions,” said the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, Americans United executive director. “Government officials could have avoided this controversy by refusing to put up the Ten Commandments in the first place.”

Source: http://www.au.org/site/News2?abbr=pr&page=NewsArticle&id=9743

Non-Muslims Deserve to Be Punished
A report posted on Islam Watch, a site run by Muslims who oppose intolerant teachings and hatred for unbelievers, exposes a prominent Islamic cleric and lawyer who support extreme punishment for non-Muslims — including killing and rape.

A question-and-answer session with Imam Abdul Makin in an East London mosque asks why Allah would tell Muslims to kill and rape innocent non-Muslims, including their wives and daughters, according to Islam Watch.

"Because non-Muslims are never innocent, they are guilty of denying Allah and his prophet," the Imam says, according to the report. "If you don't believe me, here is the legal authority, the top Muslim lawyer of Britain."

The lawyer, Anjem Choudary, backs up the Imam's position, saying that all Muslims are innocent.

Click here to watch the interview with Islamic lawyer Anjem Choudary.

"You are innocent if you are a Muslim," Choudary tells the BBC. "Then you are innocent in the eyes of God. If you are not a Muslim, then you are guilty of not believing in God."

Source: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,344409,00.html

They should have seen this coming...
Row over spiritualist regulations
Mediums and spiritualists fear changes to laws regulating the industry could leave them open to malicious civil action by sceptics.

The union representing spiritual workers is to lobby the government over changes to the industry's regulation.

The Fraudulent Mediums Act is due to be repealed next month and replaced by new EU consumer protection regulations.

The British Humanist Association said the change offered vulnerable people greater protection against fraud.

Under the 1951 Fraudulent Mediums Act, prosecutors have to prove the medium or healer had intended to be fraudulent in order to secure a conviction.

But under the EU Unfair Commercial Practices Directive, which comes into force in the UK on 26 May, it will be the medium's responsibility to prove they did not mislead or coerce vulnerable consumers.

'Religion'

The Spiritual Workers' Association says making mediums subject to the consumer-protection regulations does not recognise spiritualism is a religion.

It plans to lobby the government over the issue on Friday.

Its founder Carole McEntee-Taylor, told BBC News: "The problem is that it's turning spiritualism the religion into a consumer product, which it is not."

She said the change in law left mediums more vulnerable to prosecution.

She said: "The Fraudulent Mediums Act protected the medium

 because it meant person receiving the information was taking personal responsibility.

"They would have to prove the medium was fraudulent or giving them advice which make them make a decision which would cost them money."

The British Humanist Association's chief executive Hanne Stinson, said the current law was not fit for purpose.

He said: "We hope that the new regulations will make real changes to the current situation, where psychic practitioners are permitted to make completely unsubstantiated claims and to take payment for their services, without fear of legal action.

"It is high time that this industry is better regulated, with adequate protections for consumers."

Susie Collings, of the College of Psychic Studies welcomed the new rules, saying they would tighten standards, discourage "less than ethical" practitioners and make it easier for the public to understand what to expect from a reading.

However, she said: "There is always the possibility that mediums will be targeted by people intent on making money by suing what they see as easy targets and that is a big concern for the individual."


Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/uk_news/7351199.stm
 

The Salt Lake Tribune
By Brooke Adams  and Mark Havnes
05/09/2008

ST. GEORGE - Attorney General Mark Shurtleff called a raid on a polygamous sect's ranch in Texas no surprise given the group's resistant, secretive practices but said Thursday he would never authorize such a move in Utah.
"I know you are worried about that. We're not going to do it," said Shurtleff, drawing applause from a crowd at the Dixie Center packed with fundamentalist Mormons. "We don't believe that is the answer."
It's been more than a month since Texas authorities took more than 400 children from the ranch, home to members of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, because of abuse allegations.
But aftershocks of the event continue to reverberate through fundamentalist Mormon communities thousands of miles away, as shown during the fourth annual town hall meeting on polygamy at the Dixie Center.
At the back of the hall, a caution-yellow banner advertised the sect's Web site and thanked the public for its support.
About 500 people packed two ballrooms to listen to and question Shurtleff, Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard, Arizona lawmaker David Lujan, Safety Net Coordinator Paul Murphy and Don Timpson, a member of the fundamentalist group known as The Work of Jesus Christ.
Goddard called the Safety Net Committee, which brings together polygamous communities, law enforcement and service providers, a "movement" that would forestall a Texas-style raid.
"I think that action was in part because that fundamentalist discussion was not taking place," he said. "The feeling was if there were children in distress there was no way they could get their voices heard. That's not true of Arizona any more."
Shurtleff tried to quell some fears, even as he made it clear that Utah will continue to prosecute crimes that hurt women and children and said in particular that the "religious principle" of incest, practiced by a couple groups that allow close relatives to marry, was "something we will not stand for."
He said that Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman has asked FLDS leaders for a list of children and parents who are Utah residents as the first step in working to protect their interests in the Texas action.
He also asked for a show of hands of those related to children in custody. As many as 50 hands shot up. His office is looking into helping Utah relatives become foster parents to the FLDS children.
As in previous years, some audience members asked the attorneys general for help in pushing for decriminalization of polygamy, which they said would do more to open the closed communities than any prosecutorial action.
Shurtleff's advice: "Wait until after the election" to bring up any such proposals.
Timpson said removal of FLDS children in Texas could be tied back historically to Utah's move in 1935 to elevate polygamy from misdemeanor to felony status.
That caused polygamists to seek isolated locales safe from scrutiny.
"My belief is that the somewhat ill-conceived bigamy statute needs to be revised," he said. "It is outmoded [and] I doubt it would stand constitutional scrutiny at this time."
Lujan, an Arizona lawmaker, came under fire for proposed legislation that would bar men who married underage girls to get custody of their children in domestic disputes.
Earlier in the day, three panels spoke about media coverage of polygamous communities.
One panel, comprised of plural wives from all but the FLDS community, said media tend to miss the diversity of the various groups, which collectively have about 35,000 members.
Speakers from nonprofit social ser vice groups said that many children they deal with have little or no education and suffer emotional problems.
Michelle Benward, whose organization New Frontiers for Families began working with FLDS teens two years ago, said many of the children she helps have been torn by watching images of the raid on the FLDS ranch in Texas. The raid has "broken many hearts, she said.

Source: Salt Lake Tribune

LINK:  Polygamy

TOP