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.
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. ,,,
FALSE ACCUSATIONS are often made with the overt or
covert complicity of their
are a lethal weapon in the business of parental alienation. They
are a tool for achieving sole custody of children and creating
Cause or Consent, no Child shall be
removed from a Natural Parent!!!
"Two Equal Parents may .. agree to unequal
Parenting Time, but this does NOT impugn the Parental Authority
of either Natural Parent relative to Third Party Interlopers.
1. The Bottom Layer: The Initial
Equal Parenting Agreement
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.
2. Middle Layer: The Annual
Supplement & its Parenting Timetable
3. Top Layer: Autonomy of Both
Equal Parents on all matters not previously Constrained.
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
"Conservatives are committed to Shared Parenting. The
national party “Policy Declaration” that was passed by delegates
at our March 2005 Montreal convention
clearly that: Shared Parenting: is an objective of the
Conservative Party of Canada.
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".
our buddies at the
Human Rights Tribunal and the Courts we have with NO
STATUTORY BASIS established that
HOMOSEXUAL RIGHTS trump
NATURAL PARENTS' RIGHTS.
exercising the Courts in Homosexualist Doctrine, the outcome of
any contest between a homosexual "Legal Parent" wannabe and the
"Natural Parent" has been predetermined, because
we have now established that "NATURAL PARENTS HAVE NO
RIGHTS".Our demands for
Homosexual Marriage is now purging from Canadian Statute the
term "Natural Parent", displacing it with the term "Legal
Parents have NO RIGHTS.... ONLY RESPONSIBILITIES....
Parents' Rights now gone with my Homosexual Marriage bill"
Maximum Contact & Friendly Parent Rule has to go to conform
to Judicial Practice, or Judges may be held in criminal BREACH
the ideas that the State assigns
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.
"HELP invents ideological policy-based evidence
to push for increasing institutional child care and decreasing
the time children spend with parents"
Clyde Hertzman wants to know everything he can about about
your family and children. He and his
Human Early Learning Partnerships program has been
successful in subverting our privacy laws to legalize his
collection, analysis, and reporting of your family's
personal information to global policy makers.
Universal Day Care Scam: OECD
Displacement of Natural Parents
The so called "sperm to worm" vision of
Liberal Governments to regulate every activity of Canadians is
pushing to get also into the Universal Daycare business. Pushing
with them are private interests looking for new government
First position that Governments should stay OUT of the Day
Care business and instead restore the Direct Funding to Natural
Parents lost during successive Liberal and Mulroney Governments.
We want to see further Direct Funding for the Nurture of Natural
Parents of Canadian Children instead of creating another
expansion of the typically abusive and treacherous Public
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
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
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
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.
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.
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.
Strong has built his career
acting as the Agent of various international money men.
is not the driving force or decision-maker, apparently, and has
since the age of seventeen been transferring ownership of
Canadian Resources out of the country, making himself a Traitor.
He has fled to communist China.
Pierre E Trudeau is listed in the
Guinness Book of Records as being the Prime Minister with
the longest time in office of any Commonwealth PMO, having a
year "reign of terror".. He popularized open
contempt for the Electorate with his
"Fuddle Duddle" responses to questions and his
"Trudeau Salute". Strangely, many Canadians thought
more of him for it. That tells you something about
talking the Provinces into going to the Judiciary for "Binding
Arbitration" on future Constitutional Amendments during the
"Constitution Act, 1982", Trudeau gave the Judiciary it's
first toe into the formerly closed door on
Supremacy and Judicial subordination to Parliament.
then invited Supreme Court Judges to make decisions he couldn't
survive if he took them to the Electorate; and encouraged the
PACs to expand their role in Governmental decision making.
Making Activist Judges
in the SCC the norm, he successfully conned Canadians into
thinking Parliament is bound by SCC's decisions. By
this skillful lawyering. Trudeau successfully
sidestepped both Parliamentary Accountability to the Electorate,
and to their
Protector, the Queen.
Canadians have been so slow in
correcting Trudeau's displacement of Parliament with Judicial
Oligarchy, Judges are now openly and regularly striking
down Parliamentary Statutes, and committing with impunity
High Treason by incorporating Judgments of Foreign Judges
and legislative bodies into Canadian Orders, and writing
Legislative scripts for lackey parliamentarians like
Action Chief Justice
Beverley McLachlin as Judicial Whip for insists Canadian
Judges be far more aggressive in asserting the power of
Trudeaus' Judicial Oligarchy to speedily harmonize Canadian
Statute with the
Global Judiciary's specifications..
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 -
(You would be well advised to stay away from the Public Servant.)
on the Canadian Courts the Supremacy of Parliament, as
expressed in the legislation of the Canadian Parliament.
Judges are not the "New Priests" of Canada, creating
their own "Law" and ruling by "Divine Right".
(Judges are New Priests) ;
2000-xx-xx "The Charter Revolution & The Court Party" They
may not hijack the legislative process in the execution of the
PUBLIC TRUST placed in them to ADMINISTER our LEGISLATION created in
Put into Law and practice the major components of
Recommendations such as the equality of male and female
parents. It seems the Charter, the trump law of Canadian
legislation has been too easily ignored by those entrusted with the
administration of our Canadian legislation.
Purge the law and practice of the "Child
Support Guidelines" of feminarcissism and hyperbolic reasoning. and
make mothers equally burdened by it.
most outrageous example of Judges usurping the role of Parliament is, of
"New Priests" making the false claim that the
Charter's protection against discrimination based on "sex"
means protection against discrimination based on "sexual orientation".
Does the Charter protect sexual
orientations such as polygamists, pedophiles and bestiality?
Of course not!
S.15. (1) Every individual is equal before and
under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal
benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without
discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour,
religion, SEX,age or mental or physical disability.
S.28. Notwithstanding anything in this
Charter, the rights and freedoms referred to in it are guaranteed equally to
MALE and FEMALE persons.
Charter makes absolutely NO REFERENCE to SEXUAL ORIENTATION.
This is simply a wish of the Judiciary they have read into the Charter,
while ignoring the clear wishes of the Electorate. On this
point they have simply been taking care of their own. See:
Egan v. Canada
the Family Law Judges, in BC especially, typically ignore the Statutes
of Parliament in the Divorce Act, which require Judges to remove
custodial rights of a Parent who will not use those rights to maintain
the relationship with the other parent, usually the mother, and assign
those rights to the other parent, usually the father.
The Charter's usage of the word "sex" is as the
common usage of "gender". The Charter's clear intent is that there
to be no discrimination between male and female, even in such questions
as Parenting. The Courts are driven inexorably towards Equal
Parenting by the Charter, the "Supreme Law of Canada". And yet
they do not comply with our instructions to them in the Statutes of a
duly elected Parliament.
With barely four years of legal practice under her belt (none of
it in the Courtroom apparently) it's hard to think of a better example
Affirmative Action has
been to the Canadian Courts and Public Service than the case of
Breach of trust by public officer
who, in connection with the duties
of his office, commits fraud or a
breach of trust is guilty of an
and liable to
imprisonment for a term not
exceeding five years, whether or not
the fraud or breach of
trust would be an offence if it were
committed in relation to a private
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.