"Natural
Parents have NO RIGHTS.... ONLY RESPONSIBILITIES....
"Natural
Parents' Rights now gone with my Homosexual Marriage bill"
16.10 Maximum
Contact & Friendly Parent Rule has to go to conform
to Judicial Practice, or Judges may be held in criminal BREACH OF TRUST"
FYI,
the ideas that the State assigns
Rights &
Responsibilities to it's Citizen is straight from pre-war Nazi
Germany. Under the British system rights are not
State-given, but God Given.
Buying
into the Court's position that what rights remain are Children's Rights,
is buying into the same position that "<Natural> Parents have no
rights", and Canadian Children are at birth the property of the Courts.
Instead their position to promote the "rights" of
a "Parent" in the widest sense of the word, making NO distinction
between NATURAL PARENTS and wannaabe
Legal Parents. They have bowed to
University of Victoria's
assertion that the SCC's
Trociuk Decision"endorses a
Heterosexual View of the Family and must be ignored",
legitimizing the ongoing
Child
Trafficking by the State which views
Canadian
children as State Property and merchandise for sale in the
lucrative Child Adoption Market They
refuse to be hampered by prior obligations to that pesky Natural Parent
who thinks they can Veto
an Adoption.
It appears that many
"Fathers Rights" groups commonly fall in with the United Nations and
Liberal Irwin Cotler's
assertion that the
Child's Right is to be protected, but the Natural Parent has
"NO RIGHTS", making the
State, not the Natural Parents the
Protector of the Child..
Without
Cause or Consent, no Child shall be removed from a Natural Parent!!!
Ask a lawyer what "Common Law" is and they will
likely tell you it is
"Judge Made Law", and expand up this to say
"Common Law is whatever the Judges are commonly saying these days".
This is
completely FALSE. The Judges are Agents of the Crown
and they BY DEFINITION Judges
are WITHOUT CAPACITY to make any law whatsoever. Since
1649, only PARLIAMENT
has the Capacity to make Law.
British Common law was NOT created by Judges, it was only observed
and documented by individuals sent out by the newly Norman Crown after
the
Norman Conquest of 1066 to observe and codify the laws and
customs of the various peoples of Britain.. This was done with a
view to aggregate existing customs which may vary across the land,
into a unified body of Laws. The Authority quoted by the Commoners
in their administration of
Common Law were frequently direct quotations from the
Bible and principles
of
Danelaw
The process of documentation took only a couple of
hundred years, and the product was a STATIC body of Law which was
historical, popular, and has served in the intervening centuries as a
Benchmark against which
Statutory Law may be measured for "Fairness".
It does NOT change.
Beware of the IMPOSTER!!!!
"Natural Parent's Rights" Vs "Parent's Rights"
Be on
the lookout for the "Parent's Rights" IMPOSTER. Insist on "Natural
Parents" only, please!
It comes as a big surprise to us that many groups
that present themselves as "Parents Rights" groups do NOT
subscribe our position that it is the NATURAL
PARENT who's rights are being impinged upon.
Instead their position is to promote the "rights" of
a "Parent" in the widest sense of the word, and make NO distinction for
the rights of a NATURAL PARENT and a NATURAL CHILD to be with each
other.
"Honourable senators know that I have studied a terrible and pernicious
heart of darkness that has developed in our court system, being the use
of
FALSE ACCUSATIONS in civil justice.
This is
the mischief of litigating parties, usually mothers, suddenly within the
context of divorce and within child custody proceedings falsely accusing
the other party, usually fathers, of the sexual abuse of their own
children. ,,,
These
FALSE ALLEGATIONS are often made with the overt or covert complicity
of their lawyers. They are a lethal weapon in the business of parental
alienation. They are a tool for achieving sole custody of children and
creating fatherlessness."
We are also fortunate to haveJay Hill, MP(Prince George – Peace River) here in British Columbia.
“I’m
pushing for equality —both parents should have equal rights and equal
access to their child,”
Hill said. “The courts
seem to start from the premise that somehow fathers aren’t responsible
parents. But both parents are deemed good parents as long as the
marriage lasts; why are they not when the marriage ends?”
We are fortunate in British Columbia to have a
number of pro-family parliamentarians. Of particular
prominence is Paul Forseth,
M.P. - member of the "For the Sake of the Children"
Committee, co-author of the
Dissenting Opinions, and a staunch advocate of pro-family
concerns. Paul has put in many years pushing to have Equal
Parenting issues brought forward to the Canadian Parliament, and
faced fierce opposition from the Prime Minister. Both
Paul and Senator Cools have pressed on to redeem fathers from groups
like the Status of Women (SOW) enduring multiple death
threats from various radical feminist groups while serving on the
Committee. These MPs are tough.
Monday Nov.7th 2005 Dear Equal
Parenting-BC: "Conservatives are committed to
Shared Parenting. The national party “Policy Declaration” that was
passed by delegates at our March 2005 Montreal convention says
clearly that: 65. Shared Parenting: A
Conservative Government will make the necessary changes to the
Divorce Act to ensure that in the event of a marital breakdown, the
Divorce Act will allow both parents and all grandparents to maintain
a meaningful relationship with their children and grandchildren,
unless it is clearly demonstrated not to be in the best interests of
the children.
My Liberal colleagues that served with me on
the Senate-Commons committee that wrote the “For
the Sake of the Children report, admitted that they have
little confidence that their Party will ever enact the needed
amendments to the Divorce Act, that completely fulfills the report
recommendations. The NDP opposed us during the Committee process,
and have never been supportive of dads.
Conservatives are the only hope for fairness
and reasonableness in Divorce and Family Law. I encourage those who
care, to focus their energy where it will help the most, by working
to elect as many Conservatives as possible. I hope that the many who
are frustrated, not become sidetracked into protest, which does
nothing during an election but undercut our ability to make good
things happen. The Liberals and the NDP will say anything in an
election to get a vote, but they will never deliver “shared
parenting”. Every vote that does not go to a Conservative in the
next election is a vote against “shared parenting”.
Paul Forseth MP
Although not from British Columbia, and less familiar
to us, we cannot neglect to recognize the solid support of once Liberal
MP, Rodger Gallaway of
Sarnia. Gallaway and Cools were frequently photographed together
while championing the rights of children to both
NATURAL PARENTS.
Arnie Hein's, "Cross My Heart" Equal Parenting Trek
CA 2005
Arnie Hein
is embarking on a cross-Canada cycle to raise awareness regarding the
Father being stripped of
the family by the Family Court System. He is seeking fairness.
" I want my
kids back, at least half the time. I want this law that removes children
from their fathers - and fathers from their children -to change. I am
cycling across Canada to raise awareness of this problem.
I need other fathers to know they are not alone. I want to unify the men
and children abused by this Family Court System. It is important that
the general public becomes aware of this problem. "
"Natural
Parents have NO RIGHTS.... ONLY RESPONSIBILITIES....
"Natural
Parents' Rights now gone with my Homosexual Marriage bill"
16.10 Maximum
Contact & Friendly Parent Rule has to go to conform
to Judicial Practice, or Judges may be held in criminal BREACH OF TRUST"
FYI,
the ideas that the State assigngs
Rights &
Responsibilities to it's Citizen is straight from pre-war Nazi
Germany. Under the British system rights are not
State-given, but God Given.
Buying
into the Court's position that what rights remain are Children's Rights,
is buying into the same position that "<Natural> Parents have no
rights", and Canadian Children are at birth the property of the Courts.
"In spite of credible revelations dating back to
April 2002 about Bill Graham, a sex addicted bi-sexual sodomizing a 15
year old male prostitute named
Lawrence Metherel, Paul Martin
allowed Graham to remain
Canada’s Foreign Affairs Minister - and eventually named him to the
portfolio of Minister of Defense.
"On Sept. 28/2005 a vote was held in Parliament to raise the age of
consent from 14 (one of the lowest age of consents in the world) to 16
(an age which many still consider too low).
"Bill Graham, Paul Martin, and Anne McLellan, on
Sept. 28th, voted against raising the age of consent to 16
Ask a lawyer what "Common Law" is and they will
likely tell you it is
"Judge Made Law", and expand up this to say
"Common Law is whatever the Judges are commonly saying these days".
This is
completely FALSE. The Judges are Agents of the Crown
and they BY DEFINITION Judges
are WITHOUT CAPACITY to make any law whatsoever. Since
1649, only PARLIAMENT
has the Capacity to make Law.
British Common law was NOT created by Judges, it was only observed
and documented by individuals sent out by the newly Norman Crown after
the
Norman Conquest of 1066 to observe and codify the laws and
customs of the various peoples of Britain.. This was done with a
view to aggregate existing customs which may vary across the land,
into a unified body of Laws. The Authority quoted by the Commoners
in their administration of
Common Law were frequently direct quotations from the
Bible and principles
of
Danelaw
The process of documentation took only a couple of
hundred years, and the product was a STATIC body of Law which was
historical, popular, and has served in the intervening centuries as a
Benchmark against which
Statutory Law may be measured for "Fairness".
It does NOT change.
The common practice in BC Courts when Fathers do not
pay Child Support -
which most of the time is merely
Imputed - is to send
non-paying Father to Prison until he or his family members pay the fees
imposed by the Judge.
Even when mothers agree that Child Support should no
longer be paid, we find that the Family
Enforcement agencies, which are private contractors functioning as
Bounty Hunters, typically refuse to end their claim on the father's
income,.
EqualParenting-BC
invites websites in other Provinces and States to create
collaborative web-pages and link with us when they share our
purpose of making available to those that need them any day of
the week MEETINGS,
within driving distance of the alienated parent who still
suffers.
If
you find yourself a
Spouse of a Survivor (SOS) and they have never
"Broken the Silence" until now, your chances of keeping
your marriage together are extremely low. In spite of
the all the hatred, false accusations, verbal
and physical verbal abuse your spouse
lays on you, it very
well may be that these are all a cry for assurance that you
love them, will not leave them. On the other hand,
your un-Recovered Spouse may be a perpetrating
Psychopath also and be looking for a Victim of their
own. The trick for you as an
SOS is to remain faithful to your marriage without
becoming a Victim yourself. Our hope for you is that you two
can overcome the Lies of the Enemy, and redeem your life
together, finding pleasure instead of pain in the call of
the "SOS"
"Spouses Of Survivors" (SOS) &
"Partners in Healing"
(PIH) are Recovery
Groups for spouses of sexual abuse Victims & Survivors. They are open to
both men and women. The impact of sexual abuse on victims and their
spouses is little affected by the victims' gender. The incidence of sexual
abuse of girls is only mildly greater than sexual abuse of boys, but the boys
are almost entirely ignored in publicly funded programs. The primary
perpetrators of sexual abuse of children are Step-Parents, Teachers, Social
Workers, Day-Care Workers, Foster Homes, Church & Sports Leaders, etc.
The
group that poses the Greatest Risk of sexual abuse is the
STEP-PARENTS and the
STEP-FAMILY
members.
In contrast,
NATURAL PARENTS have extremely LOW rates of sexual
abuse, emphasizing the crucial need for
Equal Parenting after divorce.. The remedy of Sexual Abuse must
be immediate and vindicating for the Victim if the consequences are to be
inconsequential. The power of the Perpetrator is the Lie and the Silence,
which is commonly kept in place even when the Victim marries.
The failure
rate of these marriages is over 95%. The remedy is
Breaking the Silence, of
course. We regret to inform you however, that the
prognosis is very gloomy if the silence has never been broken, and the risk to
your children is extreme. A history of unmitigated sexual
abuse is often ignored by the Divorce Industry. Contact us, and we will
get you at Temporary Sponsor who is either sexual abuse Survivor or a spouse of
a sexual abuse victim.
"Spouses of Survivors" (SOS) & "Partners in Healing" (PIH)
1.
The Bottom Layer: The Initial Equal Parenting Agreement
Initial Equal Parenting Agreement creating full time, all time
equality of both natural parents, subordinate to no third parties (a
Constitutional right ignored by most Family Courts); a series of
tentative
Parenting Timetables for each year and statement of intent, or
"Wishes"; the requirement that the tentative Parenting Timetable laid
out there will be reviewed and finalized annually and incorporated into
the
Annual Parenting Supplement. Parental authority and discretion
is always equal and unaffected by inequalities of Parenting Time
allocations.
3.
Top Layer: Autonomy of Both Equal Parents on all matters not
previously Constrained.
Parenting Timetable alternates all residual parenting questions
between the two otherwise equal parents who are subordinate to no third
parties. Full autonomy of each parent during their Parenting Time
as allotted in the agreed Parenting Timetable on all residual parenting
questions not previously constrained by Covenants in the initial Equal
Parenting Agreement, or the current Annual Parenting Supplement.
Full discretion on residual parenting with the Timetabled Parent, but
flexibility encouraged and provided by Ad Hoc Agreements.
4.
Icing on the Cake.....
Forget about the Courts and your Ex, and go have fun with your kids!!!
Disclaimer: EqualParenting-BC.Ca encourages exercising democratic
rights such as the freedom of expression, but does not by association or
reference to other materials condone or sanction violence or hatred.
should
ever be forgot
