"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.
In
"Women and the Process of Constitutional Reform"
McLellan warns that <Horrors!>
"Provincial
Legislatures may impose a presumption of Joint Custody...
and perpetuate the domination of men over women"
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.
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!!!
"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
"The Family Courts
are <generally> a bunch of second rate hangers-on
... build each other's businesses through
referrals...Family Law is a <parasitic> self-sustaining
Industry"
Habeas
Corpus : "literally, "you
may have the body". A Habeas
Corpus is a legal writ that protects an individual against arbitrary
imprisonment by requiring that any person arrested be brought before
a court for formal charge. If the charge is considered to be valid,
the person must submit to trial; if not, the person goes free. When
the law is suspended, then individuals can be imprisoned
indefinitely and without charge."
.....
Skeletons in the Closet, a film drawn from the dramatized lives
of families living with a protected
Pedophile and the mental
illness it may create when a loving, faithful, Victim keeps the
Secret. This is shockingly
common. The Secret is their Power -
BREAK IT!
(You would be well advised to stay away from the Public Servant.)
MP
Russ Hiebert, Conservatives Reviewing Role of Human Rights Commission
CHRC Grilled in Parliament on
Criminality, Hate Posts, Richard Warman and
Abuse
Conservatives Reviewing Role of Human
Rights Commission, CTV Power Play, June 18,
2009
Russ Hiebert, B.C. Conservative MP and human
rights committee member and Jennifer Lynch,
chief commissioner of the Human Rights
Commission
"The Human Rights
Committee is holding hearings on the Canada
Human Rights Commission, reportedly to try
to reform how they operate and improve their
practices. There have complaints including
secret trials and disregard for the rules of
evidence."
"Mary Woo Sims, the former chief commissioner of the
BC Human Rights Commission,
is a hero to some in the gay and lesbian community for her record as
a defender and promoter of human rights.
Sims, a motorcycle-riding lesbian, lost a bid last year to
get elected to Coquitlam city council",
Georgia Straight
Hester Lessard, UVic Feminist Law Prof:
Heterosexual View of Parenthood must be ignored
"Trociuk is .. a
disheartening endorsement of biological concepts of parenthood
... flawed .... it legitimizes a heterosexual view of the family. ..
It must be ignored."
our domestic laws, both provincial and
federal, delineate freedom of expression (or
"free
speech") in a manner that is somewhat
different than the approach taken in the
United States.
...
...
could in fact lead to criminal charges.
Outside of the criminal realm, Canadian
defamation laws also limit freedom of
expression
Lawyers consistently estimate the homosexual fraction of
the Law Societies & Judiciaries as "forty-something" percent.
That is, a randomly selected Judge or Lawyer is about thirty
times more likely to be homosexual than the population at large
A beautify of English
Common Law is that it
is STATIC, and NOT DYNAMIC as these
Activist Judges would have
you think.
Ask a lawyer what "Common Law" is and they
likely tell you it is
"Judge Made Law", and expand this to say
"Common Law is whatever the Judges are commonly saying in Courts
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 be Lawmakers..
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 then in
existence.. This was done with a view to aggregate
existing various customs into a unified system of Justice.
The Authority quoted by the Commoners in their administration of
Common Law
were frequently direct quotations from the
Bible and
Danelaw
The process of documentation took
only a couple of hundred years, and the product was a STATIC
body of law which historical, popular, and has served for
centuries as a Benchmark against which new
Statutory Law may be measured and perhaps mollified in
"Fairness".
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.
