News: Fathers’ Rights, Child Support, Custody

1 response so far ↓

• 1 wdfields // Oct 14, 2006 at 6:00 pm

  Another sad day reflective of a divisive demise to which far too many an honorable entrusted member of our community can, have and likely foresee(n) — and/or may have even been subjected themselves.

  What of our accomplishments?

  On the (Historical) Road Again

  Consequences of “old” systems may be well ascertained, known and/or speculated by some — i.e., “[T]he Soviet government prizes nothing so highly as the . . . masses of . . . working women. Let them know that the old . . . complicated training . . to engage in political activity . . . that was inaccessible to women [is no more]. [T]he principal aim of [such] activity in the Soviet Republic is to fight against the landlords and the capitalists . . . [which] opens for the women . . . a field for political activity which will consist of utilizing their organizing ability to ‘help.’” Lenin, “Speech at Non-Party Conference of Women Workers,” 1919.

  “Abolishing the private ownership of land and almost entirely abolishing the private ownership of factories and works, the Soviet government strives to enlist all [men and women] in . . . [communistic models]. When this is the case . . . the work of socialist construction will be firmly established. Then the toilers will show that they can live and administer without the landlords and capitalists. Then socialist construction will be so firmly established in Russia that the Soviet Republic will have no cause to fear any external enemies [abroad or within]. Id., Lenin (1919).

  . . . Take the position of women. Not a single democratic party in the world, not even in any of the most advanced . . . , had done in our sphere in tens of years a hundredth part of what we did in the very first year we were in power. In the literal sense, we did not leave a single brick standing of the despicable laws which placed women in a state of “inferiority” (side note, might this seem a bit presumptuous? For sure, the honors bestowed to us as gifts from the almighty(s) — e.g., motherhood, family compassion, loving cultivation, . . . — all most certainly should be bitterly despised and held-up in the most despicable of human conditions (say, why don’t we caste negative lights upon family and childrearing of but the most cherishable and precious establishments as merely an utmost handicap?) Oh may an almighty forgive us in our failings and ineptitude in an appreciation of your most joyous of gifts. Grant us understanding and mercy in navigating our “new liberal” ‘progression” of most surely further uncertainty.) . . . Ok, back to Lenin . . . compared with men (oh, and now we may discern one of the oldest and easiest invigoration/catalysts tactics for gender-based finger pointing for suggestions/invigorations — i.e., most likely the most readily available avenue of their time for an availment to speedily launch ‘trendy,’ ‘clever’ and ’sexy’ ideology of their then existent academia) . . . Ok, back to Lenin . . .

  we did not leave a single brick standing . . . of the laws restricting divorce, of the disgusting formalities attending divorce . . . of the laws on children . . . To the shame . . . of capitalism, be it said, numerous survivals of these laws exist in all ‘civilized’ (note, why would he even consider a descriptor of civilized here? Maybe simply a Freudian — oops, such descriptor may not have been in their awareness regarding uncontrolled conscious expression, or at least the descriptor of “Freudian.”) countries. We have the rights a thousand times to be proud of what we have done in this sphere. See Lenin, “A Great Beginning, June 28, 1919.

  . . . (in further chastising Democratic principals) democracy promises equality and liberty (well, cynically, in theory only. Some of NOW entrusted positions may choose to simply ignore oaths of office and obligations for collective dedication to a graciously gifted American fabric of delicate weave from our founders). In fact, ‘not’ a single . . . not even the most advanced one, ‘has given’ the feminine half of the ‘humane race’ either full legal equality with men or freedom from the guardianship and oppression of men. Lenin, “Pravda” November 6, 1919.

  The yoke of capital, the tyranny of ’sacred private property,’ the despotism of philistine stupidity, the greed of petty proprietors — these are the things that prevented the most democratic . . . from infringing upon . . . filthy and infamous laws. The Soviet Republic, the republic of workers and peasants, promptly wiped out these laws and left not a stone in the structure of bourgeois fraud and bourgeois hypocrisy. Id.

  . . .

  And so, we may see the face of Greed and the seduction to yet another “bite of the Apple.”

  The wooing form of entitlists for entitlements. The suggestions for more . . . More . . . MOre . . . MORE — love, house, power, bling . . . . Entitlists wishing to “take/capitalize” not via deserving reward from responsible endeavors and contributions to society via opportunities so readily emerging with presentments within truly free and dignified democratic societies.

  . . . Instead, the present entitlists may strive to “take” through politically correct MANDATES for serving to their falsely based Entitlements — and mind you, at utter expense and expungment to/of shared responsibility for humanitarian respect and for some, even against sworn oaths of office for protections of Liberty.

  . . . Yes, as though of a crescendo-ing climax . . . for more, More, MOre MORE . . . and NOW.

  NOW, some of perhaps well known Freudian shortcoming tendency may rapidly lash-out via self-license for an expungement of the NOW shared responsibility for mature guardianship of Liberty in leisure dismissal (or through fained stewardship) of the more honorable civil and humanitarian respects of “unalienable” bequeathed heritage.

  (One hundred years ago, expressing pride in the) “achievement of . . . full equality or rights for women” [as presented by Lenin] . . . with necessary measures to assist ‘motherhood” — to build labor-saving houses, schools, clinics, maternity homes, nursery schools, kindergartens; to assist in the political education of women; to help them freely to enter higher schools and universities . . . free them from useless and degrading [mere] household toil. Lawrence & Wishart, London 1950 in commentary regarding representations of Lenin and Stalin for the Communist founding.

  Further commentary from Engels, Id., . . . The modern (note, ‘modern” in the context of about the mid 1800’s for the time of his writing) individual family is founded on the open or concealed domestic slavery of the wife, and modern society is a mass composed of these individual families as its molecules. Id., on Engels.

  Say, I have an idea, lets flip injustices completely around in the name of “equality.” Let’s enslave men for “our” entitlement. Further, let’s do this in guise of “best interests of the children.” Wink-wink!

  For sure, let’s squelch out notions of, calling for, or suggestions to

  human decency,
  liberty,
  freedom,
  private property,
  hope,
  faith,
  personal security,
  democracy,
  capitalism,
  . . .
  land of opportunity.

  In its place, after the kidnapping of Ms. Liberty — let’s supplant none other than ideas for

  Entitlements for the Self-Licensed Entitled.

  Is this resonating with anyone?

  Take away the spirit of man/women and we may as well have handled the knife in direct killing.

  Yes, Marxism and/or Communism may seem great in theory; but in practicality, the losses inherent therein serve antithesis to some of our most beautiful of human virtues — i.e., beauty of dreams, liberty, freedom, faith, hope, opportunity . . . assets of well known effectiveness to creativity, productivity, joy . . . of not only individual, but also collectively for benefit to various groups such as family, extended family, loved ones, communities and . . . even civilized society.

  Well, what do you know?

  Maybe our Founders did understand such principals of great historical, theological, philosophical and mythological backdrops? And for whom? US collectively as a civilized American Democracy?

  Let us endeavor a more honorable respect toward the potential vision(s) of our founders in more responsible collective efforts . . .

  Else, we risk falling victim to one of the more divisive of lullings . . . i.e., of the too easy of gender finger-pointing simpleton ideologues – as some may readily recognize from various contexts of “world” history.

  . . .

  We have already cleared paths to “liberating” divorce — no fault design — maybe justifiably so. Perhaps we can not turn back the hands of time. But this modern incorporation need not release to suspect members further “self-license” for out right denigration of “loving and needy parents” to and for “endearing innocent children.”

  We now share in the responsibility to fully integrate modern changes with maturity. These can and must be accommodated with greater respect to well known tenants of dire need to productive, fruitful and joyous civil society. These openings for availing more collective sharing of opportunities must include responsibility and commitments to meaningful guardianship of humanitarian decency and respects — as may be readily appreciated by and via our founders.

  On the other hand, we may choose instead to reflect more upon urges of the founders to communism — e.g., Marx, Lenin & Engels — “Abolition of the family! [likening the foundation of family to Capital and ‘private’ gain]. The bourgeois family will vanish as a matter of course . . . And your education! Is not that also social . . . of society. The Communists . . . seek to alter the character of that intervention, and to rescue education from the influence of . . . ” Marx & Engels, “The Communist Manifesto.”

  For sure, their teachings may even be deemed sexy . . . in liking, painting or casting of monogamy to an abandonment(s) to hetaerism and adultery. In other words, why should anyone even try at all? Why not just casually forget such notions of/for commitment and simply let-go for the more liberating embrace of the “no fault” divorce and further seek to satiate the insatiable hunger(s) for More with NOW urgent tenacity.

  Say, maybe we have already been Duped?

  Some may have already swallowed, or be in the process of swallowing, the Marxist pill coated with sugar and spice and everything nice, not to mention by the coaxing of sexy PC trendy enticements as previously articulated by Marx him/herself. Others of us, on the other hand, may find it a difficult pill to take; let alone digest.

  In practical stages of our day, judicial officers, for example, of the judiciary setting, may encounter difficulty in trying to “shove” square pegs (of activism) through round holes (constitutionality consciousnesses). Such concerns may be real and need not be casually dismissed.

  Further, there may be some (within administrative bodies of more remote and protected setting) of suspect motive for working with less than pure virtue.

  Most Divorce advocates (PSI – Maximus – Mothers) are not Widows. So while some of us may possess traditional tendencies for enhanced sensitivities relative to “widows” and orphans, let’s not dump the apple cart for those tempting “widow” by choice — via rampant false allegations of abuse. (mind you, we may still have means for addressing needy causes. But let’s not entice the More entitlements of already recognized vulnerabilities of the known human condition).

  Further more, in another setting, states (federalism) may simply see a desire for self-serving (“conflict of interest” type luring for the fabrication of deadbeats) with creative means for federal annuity programs of illusory perpetuity grandeur. Thus, the falsely inflicted belief for need and addiction to the Federal Dole may be seen to warp their more glorious virtue of more classic/important Federalism tenant of initial founding. In deed, even the purest of purities (even conservative republicans of recent history) may be found to have fallen, unbeknownst to themselves, victim to such momentums of large scale gratifications (billions of dollars annually)). For sure, state budgets can be quite conveniently aligned. In these settings, the words “we’ll just say NO” seem feeble in relative perspective to a perhaps mere belated short fuse nominal liability. (e.g., shortened SOL via state immunity provisions, etc.)

  Yet some of us (the people, the governed, the entrusting servants, citizens, loving parents, grandparents) of an out-side perspective, armed with but even the most basic of common sense understanding, can see right through the present divisive demise (sham).

  In the case of an innocent former family of joint ownership and operation of their catering business in St. Louis MI; a despondent human victim of the prolonged reckless acts for extortion and enslavement via “sheltered” state operatives/thugs (apparently, under-trained in the more stealth tactics) finally broke down and carried-out attacks against those within the more visible awareness in the performance of theft from the works of his labors. Those of lesser visibility to his awareness, shelter behind one way mirrors; enforced security buildings . . . out of perhaps an internal fear stemming from their own awareness and realization of the vileness of their “acts” for the “interests of children.”

  In the case of a recent Pilot to FL, the lawlessness of the “entrusted” seemed readily apparent. With awareness of the let downs within, probably from the entrusted honorable members to our country of pledged allegiance; Cuba may have seemed to pose perhaps a more trustworthy venture.

  In the case of more than one law enforcement officer facing the prospect of wife and mother of their endearing children threatening with need for MORE and NOW; their present reality of the injustice from certain VAWA type industries and perhaps also of the misadministration of justice via real lawlessness within the domestic relations industry – such well-known understandings may present them a road too great to endeavor. Again, needless loss of lives may result, yet via mere collateral type consequences of our NOW readily recognized non-civil society. Yes, again, for the “best interests of our children.”

  Some Law enforcement operatives (executive realms) in various local communities may readily embrace the “free” Federal Dole. Others may find internal conflicts given the seeming covertness of such actions and their feeling of disrespect in the acts required to be administered — perhaps even repugnant to their own common sense sympathies to human dignity, liberty and individual property rights.

  In other former legal contexts and realms, we have found some justified in use of deadly force when sensing need to protect home, person (or perhaps even personal property) and/or family. Yet, we now recognize present PC academies across country (maybe even world wide) framing such common-law understandings in direct contradiction. Especially when we have blanket cloaking of the NOW more “honored” and accepted recitations of insatiable advocates for More MOre MORE . . NOW.

  In the area of Oakland, Calif. and near the stage for the present case, the Preying Mantis Women’s brigade of Santa Cruz proudly boast of a vow to “refuse to hold [laws of humankind] and vow to use our creative energies to examine every alternative available in order to create havoc and my any means necessary work to topple the empire . . . of the United States of Amerika.” Preying Mantis Women’s Brigade, 1980. (I can only hope this as satire?)

  Should we take comfort that some of apparent vulnerabilities represent as more mature? I believe we can and must seek greater and more responsible respect for discernment of equality complete with “checks and balances.” Absent such, we have only ourselves to blame for the resultant tyranny.

  Oh, how quickly I forget. We really have no need for checks and balances in this context. The mind of any “sugar and spice and everything nice” advocate can most certainly be trusted as a mind for all of humankind. I’m already comforted with confidence in the advocacy for such – even, heaven forbid, the clever minds of the “Praying Mantis Ideologue.” Simply trust in practices for the better virtues of “self-service” and “self-definition” within streets and neighborhoods of our children for the disruption of Federalism, tarnish-ment (or is that garnishment) of Opportunity, expungement of “individual” Freedom . . . and ultimate kidnapping of Ms. Liberty . . . to perhaps an embarrassment of an otherwise once dignified and democratic society.

  I’m saddened by the possibility of yet another loss of life as represented in this news release.

  I’m saddened further by the reality of very vile influences of “our own society” that will likely result in the needless loss (self inflicted termination or otherwise) of many other loving parents.

  In sincerity of voice and compassion for all afflicted,

  - just adad

You must log in to post a comment.