Criminalizing FLDS parents
I'm not a lawyer, but based on all the commentary on domestic partner benefits, it's safe to say that the Texas Constitution provides that marriage is limited to the union of one man and one woman and that any legal status identical or similar to marriage cannot be created or recognized. I can also safely say that bigamy and polygamy are felonies graduated based on the age of the putative spouse under the Texas Penal Code. Professor Harrington's editorial, "Stop state-inflicted suffering," April 25, notwithstanding - anyone in a polygamous marriage in Texas is likely committing at least a third-degree felony.
In the case of the FLDS, however, the situation goes much deeper than polygamy. Children as young as 13 are purported to have been forced into plural marriages and to engage in sexual activity. The Texas Penal Code provides that "A person commits [indecency with a child] if, with a child younger than 17 years and not the person's spouse, whether the child is of the same or opposite sex, the person: (1) engages in sexual contact with the child or causes the child to engage in sexual contact." This, together with the fact that a man is limited to one spouse in Texas at any one time, suggests that the male members of FLDS with multiple wives and particularly those with underage wives could be considered to have committed indecency with a child. Further, the FLDS mothers could also be considered to have engaged in at least conspiracy to commit indecency with a child by permitting their daughters to enter into illegal marriages and sexual relationships. Under the Texas Penal Code, those male members of FLDS could also be considered to have committed sexual assault and to have committed continuous sexual abuse of a young child or children.
The situation Child Protective Services faces is one of investigating an entire enclave of potential child molesters and enablers. As a civil rights attorney, Harrington should be aware that CPS has broad power to protect a child's rights, including removing children from abusive homes - even those where the parents, spouses and children consider abuse allowable because of their religion. This is why the children are being separated from their parents, because all of the FLDS parents are potentially criminals who participated in a conspiracy to commit child abuse, and the primary purpose of CPS is to protect children. But I'm not a lawyer, and this letter, like UT law professor Harrington's sad editorial, is a gross oversimplification of the situation rather than a dissertation.
Charles Tolliver UT alum
Setting UTIMCO business straight
Regarding the April 23 "Horns Up, Horns Down" editorial, I thought it might be useful for your readers to receive an accurate explanation of the suggested changes relating to UTIMCO's Board of Directors, since your opinions were directed toward matters that are not being discussed.
The editorial raises questions about the propriety of UTIMCO directors contributing to the endowment and states that they have been prohibited from making such contributions due to a conflict of interest rule. There is no such ban, nor has there ever been one. I am confident that all Texans share our gratitude for the significant contributions that our directors have and will continue to make.
The suggested rule change being discussed by the UTIMCO board relates to removing a ban that was put in place a few years ago that prohibits directors from investing in the same funds and partnerships in which UTIMCO is investing We believe this ban inhibits the full flow of ideas and information that the UTIMCO board could provide to the UTIMCO staff. Such investments, if permitted, would be a matter of public record to the extent of the Texas Public Information Act, no directors could receive favorable treatment and any director with such an investment would be required to recuse him or herself from any decisions regarding these potential investments. All of the pecuniary interest rules would remain in place.
The editorial goes on to state that I told the Houston Chronicle that UTIMCO is more professional now than when the rule was imposed. The quote in the Houston Chronicle about the professionalism of UTIMCO came not from me but from Charles Miller, the previous chairman of the Board of Regents, who was a proponent of the ban at the time it was initially proposed and who now supports it rescission.
While everyone is entitled to their opinion, we do feel that facts should be accurate. Just as we work very hard every day to support the University's endowment for current and future generations, we know that you work very hard every day to uphold the highest standards of journalistic integrity. And, of course, we support The Daily Texan's right to voice its opinions on matters it deems important.
Bruce Zimmerman UTIMCO CEO and chief investment officer
Be the first to comment on this article!