My default position is that the authorities must not hesitate to go in to protect children who may be being abused. But I also have strong beliefs about the sanctity of the family, and believe that the state should interpose itself between family members only as a last resort -- which, obviously, an abusive situation requires.

But what is abuse? Is it always clear? Under the law, there's no doubt at all that having sex with underage teenage girls is by definition a crime, whether or not you call her your "wife." In the state of Texas, a person under the age of 16 cannot consent to marriage. And obviously, polygamous marriages are not recognized as marriages. If teenage girls are being forced into polygamous marriages and into sexual relationships, the state has a responsibility to get in there and stop it. If no one will protect those minors, the state must.

But. I've been trying to think about this situation in light of the fact that the fundamentalist LDS cult (Tom Wolfe says the difference between a "cult" and a religion is political power) is unpopular, and I certainly find their beliefs and lifestyle repulsive. But this is a free country, and as such, I have to tolerate a certain amount of repulsiveness; my own religious freedom depends on it, and so do yours. But tolerance can only go so far. 

Jules wanted to know where the reports are the show all of the veterans who either do not suffer the after effects or that go on to cope with their symptoms, living productive, fairly normal lives. Well, if we reverse this study information on the fact sheet, if 18% develop PTS or the more chronic PTSD, that means at least 82% of all troops come home to healthy, productive lives. With over 1 million already having served in Iraq and Afghanistan, that's approximately 820,000 troops. With 11% of the 18% that goes on to have the more chronic "disorder", that means another 70,000 who have the "acute", short term PTS and go on to live fairly healthy lives.

That is good news. Especially for our troops who may be concerned that they will be part of some overwhelming number of troops who will not be able to return to "normal". However, that's really not the point. These troops, by and far, do not need our "defense". They know they are fine and going on with their lives.

There are still 11%, over 110, 000 troops, who will struggle with PTSD. Some of the 70,000 with the "acute" variety, will not receive treatment, will stop treatment or will refuse treatment and may go on to develop the chronic disorder. Then, there are the unknown numbers who will not report any symptoms, not seek treatment and be below the radar, with both soldier and family suffering. These are the people that we need to worry about, that we need to "defend".