Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

AL: Couple who ran religious boarding school in Alabama arrested for human trafficking

China

By China
in The Tailgate

Recommended Posts

China

China

Posted
Posted

Couple who ran religious boarding school in Alabama arrested for human trafficking

 

The owners of a religious boarding school that was once raided in Alabama have been arrested in Baldwin County and transported to Texas to face human trafficking charges.

 

Gary Dwayne Wiggins, 49, and wife Meghann Shereen Wiggins, 34, were arrested in Alabama shortly after a Texas grand jury indicted them Aug. 6 on one count each of human trafficking, according to the Burnet County Sheriff’s Office in Texas.

 

The couple are accused of forcing four underage boys to work for a lawn care company they owned, according to court documents.

 

The charges stem from a year-long investigation into allegations of abuse, neglect, labor violations, fraud and human trafficking at the Joshua Home and other businesses owned by Gary Wiggins. In July 2018, Texas authorities got a search warrant for the Joshua Home, Joshua Home Lawn Care and Joshua Home Moving.

 

Authorities later removed eight boys ages 10 to 17 from the Joshua Home, according to local news outlets. All the boys were from out of state and were later returned to their parents or guardians.

 

Before their arrest, the Wigginses were well-known to Alabama and Missouri authorities for the schools they operated in those states.

 

Three years ago, the Wigginses ran Blessed Hope Boys Academy in a rural community in Baldwin County called Seminole. Blessed Hope was billed as a private boarding school where parents could send troubled teens for hard work and a Christian education. It opened around 2013.

 

But in December 2016, authorities raided Blessed Hope after some of the boys escaped to a nearby neighbor’s house, saying they were victims of abuse. They told authorities that Gary Wiggins – known as Brother Gary – punished students by locking them in a closet, withholding food and forcing them to exercise for hours.

 

Alabama’s Department of Human Resources removed 22 boys ages 8 to 17, all from out of state, and eventually sent them back to their parents or guardians.

 

Blessed Hope had operated in Alabama without state regulation or oversight because of a loophole in state law at that time which exempted schools that operate as church ministry from state inspection.

 

Click on the link for the full article

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Renegade7

Renegade7

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, LadySkinsFan said:

Churches are given too much exemption from laws that for profit companies have to follow. Along with the exemptions are tax exemptions. Enough of this. Churches should be taxed like every other corporate entity. That is one solution to our tax shortfall.

 

Not all churches are crooked, you'll destroy the good ones taxing them like the bad ones or megachurches should.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Destino

Destino

Posted
Posted
13 hours ago, LadySkinsFan said:

Churches are given too much exemption from laws that for profit companies have to follow. Along with the exemptions are tax exemptions. Enough of this. Churches should be taxed like every other corporate entity. That is one solution to our tax shortfall.

I agree that church schools should have always been subject to inspections and regulations.  It seems Alabama changed that law so that they are now.  They should be subject to all regulations for any service they wish to operate that doesn’t directly violate their ability to freely worship.

 

Taxing churches however, seems like a really bad idea.  You’d have a separation of church and state constitutional issue concerning the free establishment of religion.  This would end the IRS prohibition on tax exempt religious entities working directly for campaigns.  This would also likely result in all not for profits being taxed, as it would be unconstitutional to only tax the religious ones.  

 

Basically you would be handing the republican a major win by simply attempting to do this, no matter how it turned out.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Larry

Larry

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, Destino said:

I agree that church schools should have always been subject to inspections and regulations.  It seems Alabama changed that law so that they are now.  They should be subject to all regulations for any service they wish to operate that doesn’t directly violate their ability to freely worship.

 

Taxing churches however, seems like a really bad idea.  You’d have a separation of church and state constitutional issue concerning the free establishment of religion.  You’d also end the irs prohibition on tax exempt religious entities from directly working for campaigns.  This would also likely result in all not for profits being taxed, as it would be unconstitutional to only tax the religious ones.  

 

Basically you would be handing the republican a major win by simply attempting to do this, no matter how it turned out.  

 

It's at least been argued that the Religious Right was born as a political entity because of rumors that the IRS was about to attempt to tax Jerry Fallwell and Pat Robertson.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Elessar78

Elessar78

Posted
Posted
11 hours ago, Renegade7 said:

 

Not all churches are crooked, you'll destroy the good ones taxing them like the bad ones or megachurches should.

So the rest of the community should shoulder the burden for their existence? I go to church the congregants should support the church

completely. If they can’t, then fold or exist more modestly. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Renegade7

Renegade7

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Elessar78 said:

So the rest of the community should shoulder the burden for their existence? I go to church the congregants should support the church

completely. If they can’t, then fold or exist more modestly. 

 

I dont know if this is the thread for this, but your talking about punishing everyone for the actions of a few and not making a dent in the ones you really mad at. This will kill off the churches that can barely keep the AC running and leave the megachurches that like @Destino pointed out will then legally be able to fund political campaigns.   Is that really what you want?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Elessar78

Elessar78

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

 

I dont know if this is the thread for this, but your talking about punishing everyone for the actions of a few and not making a dent in the ones you really mad at. This will kill off the churches that can barely keep the AC running and leave the megachurches that like @Destino pointed out will then legally be able to fund political campaigns.   Is that really what you want?

That's a theoretical outcome. As with anything there will be casualties and I'm sorry about that. But I feel strongly about this—they use public roads, they rely on public services, they are part of the community. They should pay taxes to support that. If they are not already, they can apply to be a 501(c)(3) and try to maintain their tax exempt status.

 

Is NOT taxing religious institutions a violation of the establishment clause?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Renegade7

Renegade7

Posted
Posted
27 minutes ago, Elessar78 said:

That's a theoretical outcome. As with anything there will be casualties and I'm sorry about that. But I feel strongly about this—they use public roads, they rely on public services, they are part of the community. They should pay taxes to support that. If they are not already, they can apply to be a 501(c)(3) and try to maintain their tax exempt status.

 

You're in denial in your first sentence and confirm with your second.  All non-profits use the same roads as us, I dont get your logic on that, they pay utilities they arent exempt from contributing to the cost of our infrastructure at all, like the power grid or water.

 

I agree with being more conservative on who gets this exemption, revenue alone ain't enough, churches like Westboro ahouldnt be allowed nonprofit status.  But who makes that call and on what criteria if religion alone doesnt count anymore?

 

 

Quote

Is NOT taxing religious institutions a violation of the establishment clause?

 

Doesnt that say US cant take sides for a particular religion?  How are they taking sides if any religion can apply for the religious tax exemption?  It's not jus for Christians.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Destino

Destino

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, Elessar78 said:

That's a theoretical outcome. As with anything there will be casualties and I'm sorry about that. But I feel strongly about this—they use public roads, they rely on public services, they are part of the community. They should pay taxes to support that. If they are not already, they can apply to be a 501(c)(3) and try to maintain their tax exempt status.

 

Is NOT taxing religious institutions a violation of the establishment clause?

 

501c3 exempt purposes: “The exempt purposes set forth in section 501(c)(3) are charitable, religious, educational, scientific, literary, testing for public safety, fostering national or international amateur sports competition, and preventing cruelty to children or animals.”

 

The only way you’d tax churches is by changing the definitions of “exempt purposes” specifically to exclude religious services.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...