The Utah Supreme Court today put a temporary hold on a trial judge's orders to return a little girl to her soldier father after she was given up for adoption without his consent two years ago.
I think there are circumstances which pertain to stripping the father of rights. Was he abusive and putting the fetus and mother in harmful situations? Was the conception because of rape? Did he abandon the mother and fetus?
I feel that in this case, the adoption was conducted unethically. I do have some questions though. If the father is a soldier, will he be sent overseas and if yes, where will the child go?
Would the law have been followed if the child had been from a white family?
Ugh, how corrupt. Thank you for explaining utah's ruling on adoption. I'm from Canada where things are a little more cut and dry when it comes to adoption but cases like this (especially concerning First Nations children) are still prevalent.
But it's a little confusing, if the birth mother wasn't in Utah at the time of adoption, shouldn't the laws of the state in which she gave birth apply? Oh that poor man.
Oh OK, that makes sense. I'd been a little confused because the baby had been born prematurely just days after the father had gone to work (because, isn't that essentially what happened? This father was punished for going to work?), so I wasn't sure when the mother would have had time to arrange a trip to Utah. It almost sounds like the agency, or perhaps the family, had been preying upon the mother's doubts.
I can understand why somewhere like Utah would have that law. Very conservative religious communities place some serious pressures on pregnant young women. For many, to be able to place the child for adoption without the father's permission being an issue may mean the difference between staying single or having an unhappily forced marriage that is expected to last forever. And there are probably a lot of unhappy marriages that women can't really leave but know darn well they don't want to let an accidental baby be raised in.
But they should have kept it to people who have been residents of Utah for a certain number of years. Something like that maybe isn't so bad if you've lived your life knowing it could happen and being prepared to behave in a way that reduces the chances. Huge shock if you aren't expecting it.
but Mormonism isn't like very conservative religious communities you'd see in the southern states.
How is it different?
They are very baby crazy, though. The goal is to have a huge horde of children. The more, the better. I think a lot of Mormons would see it as saving the souls of wayward children or something.
My mom followed the trial against the man who abducted Elizabeth Smart, and she told me at one point during the trial the prosecutor mentioned or accused Elizabeth Smart of not wanting to have children while as a result of her rape and abduction when she was 14 or 15 and apparently the people in court reacted with shock/surprise because she wouldn't want children. When my mom told me about it, I was incredibly shocked, but I also thought it was very telling about the culture and really how the worth of females is measured (but, I think that can be said of many religiously conservative communities...especially those with a specific religious majority).
No need to apologize for the length, the information is important. I wonder if Mormons outside of Utah are different (or maybe they're better at keeping their beliefs inside the home/Church?).
It's only been, maybe, 30-ish years since they've actually started loosening their practices that discriminated against non-Mormons
Isn't that around the time Mormons startedto depict themselves as Christian?
(which they didn't really want to join in the first place),
I didn't know that.
The ones who don't are shunned.
Just thinking about this, man I'd have been treated like a Devil or something, not only is my family not Mormon, but we're not "Abrahamic" either. Wow, just wow.
Also, while I knew about the bigotry within the faith, I didn't know how deep it was. That the amount of sin someone has is related to someone's skin color? That's frightening (on so many levels, especially when I remember that it's a part of Hinduism as well in some ways...though thankfully not my family's Hinduism).
I've heard that they are and have heard that Mormons from other areas are absolutely amazed by the snobbish attitudes they receive when they visit the state.
Yeah, because the Mormons I've known have been extremely nice...at least to my face.
Yeah. I know. This is what kept my family out of the LDS church, since my older sister is half black. If you ask a lay member, they'll say the prophet (the title of whomever leads the church) has had a "revelation" from God and they don't believe that anymore. However, that would mean God and God's prophet was wrong about something so (they don't generally tell people this) the teachings are still "true" but need to be set aside until the time is right or some other kind of BS like that.
Are they just not aware that Jesus Christ (probably) had dark skin?
I feel that in this case, the adoption was conducted unethically. I do have some questions though. If the father is a soldier, will he be sent overseas and if yes, where will the child go?
Would the law have been followed if the child had been from a white family?
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
OK, so I found it here. The birth mother apparently went to Utah days after the father went to South Carolina. http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/55422492-78/bland-achane-adoption-child.html.csp
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Reply
But they should have kept it to people who have been residents of Utah for a certain number of years. Something like that maybe isn't so bad if you've lived your life knowing it could happen and being prepared to behave in a way that reduces the chances. Huge shock if you aren't expecting it.
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
How is it different?
They are very baby crazy, though. The goal is to have a huge horde of children. The more, the better. I think a lot of Mormons would see it as saving the souls of wayward children or something.
My mom followed the trial against the man who abducted Elizabeth Smart, and she told me at one point during the trial the prosecutor mentioned or accused Elizabeth Smart of not wanting to have children while as a result of her rape and abduction when she was 14 or 15 and apparently the people in court reacted with shock/surprise because she wouldn't want children. When my mom told me about it, I was incredibly shocked, but I also thought it was very telling about the culture and really how the worth of females is measured (but, I think that can be said of many religiously conservative communities...especially those with a specific religious majority).
There's church in all the public schools.
Isn't that illegal??
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
It's only been, maybe, 30-ish years since they've actually started loosening their practices that discriminated against non-Mormons
Isn't that around the time Mormons startedto depict themselves as Christian?
(which they didn't really want to join in the first place),
I didn't know that.
The ones who don't are shunned.
Just thinking about this, man I'd have been treated like a Devil or something, not only is my family not Mormon, but we're not "Abrahamic" either. Wow, just wow.
Also, while I knew about the bigotry within the faith, I didn't know how deep it was. That the amount of sin someone has is related to someone's skin color? That's frightening (on so many levels, especially when I remember that it's a part of Hinduism as well in some ways...though thankfully not my family's Hinduism).
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Yeah, because the Mormons I've known have been extremely nice...at least to my face.
Yeah. I know. This is what kept my family out of the LDS church, since my older sister is half black. If you ask a lay member, they'll say the prophet (the title of whomever leads the church) has had a "revelation" from God and they don't believe that anymore. However, that would mean God and God's prophet was wrong about something so (they don't generally tell people this) the teachings are still "true" but need to be set aside until the time is right or some other kind of BS like that.
Are they just not aware that Jesus Christ (probably) had dark skin?
Reply
Leave a comment