Let's Get Honest! Absolutely Uncommon Analysis of Family & Conciliation Courts' Operations, Practices, & History

'A Different Kind of Attention Develops Sound Judgment' | 'Suppose I'm Right Here?' (See March 23 & 5, 2014). More Than 745 posts and 45 pages of Public-Interest Investigative Blogging On These Matters Since 2009.

Archive for May 23rd, 2009

Whereas . . . Be It Resolved . . . 1999, US Senate….

leave a comment »

NATIONAL FATHER’S RETURN DAY

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c106:S.+Res.+125`

I wish to publically beg forgiveness for having not noticed this action of Congress from 10 years ago. Now that I DID notice, I understand why some MSM (MainStreamMedia) suddenly got all excited — (coincidentally with the 10-year celebration coming up the next month of this) (and not? coincidentally, the week before “Mothers’ Day”– about the recent hope for Fatherhood Woes .

I had motherhood woes.  No, not the labor.  About losing them suddenly, on a day.  NO, not misplacing them.  Simultaneously I re-filed my understanding of the term “law enforcement” separately from “laws” and “enforce.”  Innocence lost, too.

Well, enough on that…

The link above is more comprehensive and easier to see than here, but I have still copied it for our viewing pleasure (and may take pleasure in a hasty comment or so also).

You know, Marshall MacLuhan wrote that when something becomes an art form, that something has already become extinct.  For example, during the industrial age, the rural landscape was all the rage.  Longing for days past, nostalgia.  The difference is, those were paintings.  

 

What should be taken into consideration in this resolution, in part, is how few female Congresswomen we actually have (though we are at least half the population).  So much for representative government.  I know women can be insane, but I tend to think we would  / should have more common sense, if women’s influence within Congress were not something to be so jealously protected.  We also would call it what it is: circumlocution, and calling the symptom, the cause.

If you have studied the topic (and I am), the key phrases will stand out.  They are not dropped accidentally into place, I assure you.

 

“Whereas more than 1 out of every 3 children currently live in a household where the child’s father does not reside; (Agreed to by Senate)”

How ironic that that the subject and verb do not agree in number in the first statement here.  Did you notice?  Also, more traditional style would’ve written out “1” and “3” as “one” and “three.”  

 

106th CONGRESS

 

1st Session

S. RES. 125

Encouraging and promoting greater involvement of fathers in their children’s lives and designating June 20, 1999, as `National Father’s Return Day’.

(I think they meant “Fathers’ Return,” plural)  Unless someone has appointed a National Father, and I wasn’t told…)


IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

 

June 18, 1999

Mr. LIEBERMAN (for himself, Mr. GREGG, Mr. BAYH, Mr. BROWNBACK, Mr. MACK, Mr. DODD, Mr. DOMENICI, Mr. JEFFORDS, Mr. ALLARD, Mr. COCHRAN, Ms. LANDRIEU, Mr. BUNNING, Mr. ROBB, Mr. DORGAN, Mr. DASCHLE, Mr. AKAKA, Mr. GORTON, Mr. SMITH of Oregon, Mr. ENZI, Mr. BENNETT, Mr. HUTCHINSON, Mr. SESSIONS, Mr. DEWINE, Mr. CAMPBELL, and Mr. THURMOND submitted the following resolution; which was considered and agreed to


RESOLUTION

 

 

Encouraging and promoting greater involvement of fathers in their children’s lives and designating June 20, 1999, as `National Father’s Return Day’.

{{QUestion from the Floor:  What about serial monogamist fathers?  What about fathers who father a child by someone else while married?  Is this act going to clean up divorce permanently?  Otherwise, it could start to look like this:

Does this include wife #1, Girlfriend #2?  What if Girlfriend #2 comes with children?  Should she then fork them over to their former father, and make new ones with her Husband #2?  Are we moving into male polygamy, or are we assuming that Dads are going to have ONE woman and no others, and therefore that any woman who dares to give birth to children with a certain man, had better not leave him — OR, permit him to leave her either — or life is surely going to get confusing, fast….}}  


Whereas more than 1 out of every 3 children currently live in a household where the child’s father does not reside;

{{Does this include fathers killed in the Iraq war?  Or where Dad is in prison?  Or he was not originally from the U.S. and got deported (I do know one situation like this, and it happened with no warning).  Does this take into account the thousands across the nation in foster care with no mother or father?  I just want to know about those statistics.  Does this mean US only?? Because it doesn’t say so.}}

Whereas approximately half of all the children born in the United States will spend at least half of their childhood…

{{What about children NOT born in the United States, but now living here, as their parents (or one parent) is a citizen?  I know some like that….}}

 … in a family without a father figure;

{{{WAIT a minute!  Which is it we’re concerned about — biological paternity fathers, or any old father figure?  AND, Who took a survey saying that half the kids spent half their childhood with neither a father, NOR a father figure.  Will any old male do?  Or is it the biological bond we are talking about here?  Please be consistent…}}

Whereas approximately 40 to 50 percent of all marriages are predicted to end in divorce;

{{And the solution is to tell the divorcing fathers to go back?  Or the mothers divorcing for reasons such as unfaithfulness — or physical, or substance, including drug, abuse.  Or, say, a man declare’s he now prefers women — should this man stick around for a father figure?  To promote healthy marriages?}}{{Or, for that matter, if the woman does the same thing…}}{{I don’t mean to be troublesome, but I really do know a number of cases that fit this description}}

{{I myself was the product of an earlier generation of “stick together for the kids” family.  They did.  My mother’s voice was squashed in marriage.  She is to this day pretty passive.  I then was given a real great example, as a growing woman, of how to respect myself, and chose a man to marry who was abusive.  In fact HIS parents had done the same thing.  They just slept separately and one of them gave orders and (apparently) the other one did all the work.  As women tend to live longer, then both fathers died earlier in life (one, by suicide), and here are the older women, having stuck it out, but not having any real wisdom to impart to either generation.  With those cold, distant, under the same roof marriages, we ended up seeking community, met in that community, thought we knew each other (or at least I did), and had a disgraceful marriage marked by domestic violence from start til finish — and beyond, thanks to these Fathers Return” policies below.  

My ex, determined NOT to be like his own parents, ended up doing so anyhow.  He was concerned about living at the same address, not about what went on under its roof.  He gave orders and expected me to fulfil them (and work).  If I didn’t, there was the assault.  I do not, really, think that this was preferable to having separated earlier.  

If I had had a mother who respected herself and was strong (or permitted to be in that time), perhaps I would’ve known to separate at the beginning of the violence.  Of course, then I would have to face these types of policies sooner or later, better dead and in a 2-parent household, than single and not.  He could then remarry (if he didn’t do himself in as well), and then whoever survived would qualify for being in a healthy marriage}}{{I’m spilling some guts here, to illustrate how to THINK– or at least to engage in comparing proclamation to reality you actually personally know, when a proclamation is made:  DOES that shoe fit life as you have experienced it, or are aware of others who have?  Or does it just make a nice clack, clack sound on the hard floors of the Senate Rotunda (if the floor is indeed hard — ain’t been there recently).  }}

Whereas approximately 3 out of every 5 divorcing couples have at least 1 child;

Whereas almost half of all children aged 11 through 16 that live in mother-headed homes have not seen their father in the last 12 months;

 

  • Oh NO! ! ! !   a MOTHER-HEADED home.  That’s a phrase I hear about a lot, in the general public, as a social problem.  ANYTHING but a MOTHER-HEADED home.  
  • Not seen their father in the last 12 months – – – First of all, according to WHOM?  Cite your data.  Is this including people who were married and divorced, after living together, or are the figures lumped together with wild oats sown during (or shortly after) high school.  Have you compensated for the Mormons or Mormon off-shoots who actually practice polygamy?  That would skew the figures, some, eh?  Those are all different situations.  ALSO, some of those fathers (disproportionately African Americans) are incarcerated.  IN the process of “National Fathers Return” day, is there going to be a new, general amnesty to restore the balance in the community?  

 

Whereas 79 percent of people in the United States believe that the most significant family or social problem facing the country is the physical absence of fathers from the home, resulting in a lack of involvement of fathers in the rearing and development of children;

 

 

{{If you don’t want to talk back to THAT claim, you are not awake.  Let me help….}}

“Whereas 79 percent of people in the United States believe”

  • ACCORDING TO WHOM?  Our founding fathers were talking about events that were commonly known, and did not have access to the Internet — or for that matter, a public library system, or many things we now take for granted.  It is irresponsible in this Congress to fail to cite references.  The mere fact of being a Senator or a Representative (yes, they did one of these too), does NOT carry with it the gift of prophecy and clairvoyance.  We deserve some cites.  And to examine the sources of those cites.  The casual flippant format of these statements is disrespectful.  It sounds “august” but doesn’t show a grassroots movement, and doesn’t show facts.  IN FACT, whose idea was it?  Is this coming from single Moms?  If this is the unanimous sentiment of the children themselves, then why are we seeing sites like “Courageouskids.net” to document kids that WERE put with their (abusive, molesting) Dads and it traumatizeid their lives.  Why are we reading about intact families that are getting wiped out, still, these days, when a Dad is distressed over the economy.  Over, his wife’s intended divorce?  Or what about Leichtenberg, Castillo, untold others, in Illinois (that was in 1999, future, but is a consequence and fall out of this type of limited thinking.  THEY GOT their fathered selves back into kids’ lives — and they KILLED THEIR KIDS.  (also happening overseas:  Dad in Australia picks one of his three young children to drop off a bridge to yer young death — and of two boys and a girl, it just happened to be the girl.  Gonzales’ father was “in” his children’s lives — and this SINGLE-HEADED-MOM-HOUSEHOLD pleaded with police to do something, they didn’t, and the result was 3 dead children in the back of a pickup.  I think the Dad died too.  This REALLY does not bear scrutiny as a nationwide policy.).  

{I missed that poll — did you?  Perhaps because that season, I was busy filling out a restraining order, after seeking support, help, and refuge from the father who WAS present in the home}}

Whereas the likelihood that a young male will engage in criminal activity doubles if he is reared without a father and triples if he lives in a neighborhood comprised largely of single-parent families;

Whereas studies reveal that even in high-crime, inner city neighborhoods, over 90 percent of children from safe, stable, 2-parent homes do not become delinquents;

Whereas compared to children reared in 2-parent families, children reared in single-parent families are less likely to complete high school and thus, more likely as adults to obtain low paying, unstable jobs;

Whereas researchers have linked the presence of fathers with improved fetal and infant development, and father-child interaction has been shown to promote a child’s physical well-being, perceptual abilities, and competency for interpersonal relations;

LIKE THIS ONE?  

Whereas researchers have also found that both boys and girls demonstrate a greater ability to take initiative and exercise self-control when they are reared by fathers who are actively involved in their upbringing;

Whereas the general involvement of parents in the lives of their children has decreased significantly over the last generation;

 

{{I relate this to the educational system. . . .}}

Whereas a Gallup Poll indicated that over 50 percent of all adults agree that fathers today spend less time with their children than their fathers spent with them;

Whereas nearly 20 percent of children in grades 6 through 12 report that they have not had a meaningful conversation with even 1 parent in over a month;

 

AGAIN, THIS IT NOT TYPICAL OF HOMESCHOOLERS, WHO I AM SURE WERE NOT POLLED.  IN FACT, ONE OF THE MORE OUTSTANDING CHARACTERISTICS OF THEM IS THAT THEY DO SPEAK MORE WITH THEIR PARENTS!  AND OTHER ADULTS!

 

Whereas in a broad survey of 100,000 children in grades 6 through 12, less than half of the children `feel they have family boundaries or high expectations from parents or teachers’;

Whereas 3 out of 4 adolescents report that `they do not have adults in their lives that model positive behaviors’;

Whereas in a widely cited study of the health risks to the young people in the United States, University of Minnesota researchers found that `independent of race, ethnicity, family structure and poverty status, adolescents who are connected to their parents, their schools, and to their school community are healthier than those who are not’, and that `when teens feel connected to their families, and when parents are involved in their children’s lives, teens are protected’;

Whereas millions of single mothers in the United States are heroically struggling to raise their children in safe and loving environments;

Whereas promoting responsible fatherhood is not meant to diminish the parenting efforts of single mothers, but rather to increase the chances that children will have 2 caring parents to help them grow up healthy and secure;

Whereas many of this country’s leading experts on family and child development agree that it is in the best interest of both children and the United States to encourage more 2-parent, father-involved families to form and endure;

Whereas in 1994, the National Fatherhood Initiative was formed to further the goal of raising societal awareness about the ramifications of father absence and father disengagement by mobilizing a national response to father absence;

{{ODD TIMING THAT< WITH THE PASSAGE OF VAWA}}

 

Whereas the Congressional Task Force on Fatherhood Promotion and the Senate Task Force on Fatherhood Promotion that were formed in 1997, the Governors’ Task Force on Fatherhood Promotion of 1998, and the Mayor’s Task Force on Fatherhood Promotion of 1999 were created to work in partnership with the National Fatherhood Initiative;

Whereas on June 14, 1999, the National Fatherhood Initiative is holding a national summit on supporting urban fathers in Washington, D.C., to mobilize a response to father absence by many powerful sectors of society, including public policy, social services, educational, religious, entertainment, media, and civic groups; and

Whereas those groups are working across party, ideological, racial, and gender lines in order to reverse the trend of father absence and disengagement by encouraging and supporting responsible fatherhood and greater father involvement in children’s lives: Now, therefore, be it

 

    Resolved, That the Senate–

 

  •  
      (1) recognizes that the creation of a better United States requires the active involvement of fathers in the rearing and development of their children;

 

  •  
      (2) urges each father in the United States to accept his full share of responsibility for the lives of his children, to be actively involved in rearing his children, and to encourage the emotional, academic, moral, and spiritual development of his children;

 

  •  
      (3) urges the States to hold fathers who ignore their legal responsibilities accountable for their actions and to pursue more aggressive enforcement of child support obligations;

 

  •  
      (4) encourages each father to devote time, energy, and resources to his children, recognizing that children need not only material support, but also, more importantly, a secure, affectionate, family environment;

 

  •  
      (5) urges governments and institutions at every level to remove barriers to father involvement and enact public policies that encourage and support the efforts of fathers who do want to become more engaged in the lives of their children;

 

  •  
      (6) to demonstrate the commitment of the Senate to those critically important goals, designates June 20, 1999, as `National Father’s Return Day’;

 

  •  
      (7) calls on fathers around the country to use the day to reconnect and rededicate themselves to their children’s lives, to spend National Father’s Return Day with their children, and to express their love and support for them; and

 

  •  
      (8) requests that the President issue a proclamation calling on the people of the United States to observe `National Father’s Return Day’ with appropriate ceremonies and activities.

Written by Let's Get Honest

May 23, 2009 at 6:05 pm

Ireland’s CPS Woes — Convicted Sex Offender Training Young People for Child Protection Workers??

leave a comment »

Warning:  My post today starts in Ireland, but ends up back in the USA.

This is a little more complicated than “Who’s Policing the Police?”

Who’s Watching the People Training the Trainers to Watch the People?

This was prompted by an article that came to my attention called

Moral of This Grim Tale is Lesson in Passing Buck

As best as I can decipher the T&C of the Copyright here, I must only point to the home page, not the actual page of the article in question.  So if you want the whole thing, I have given you title of article, and home page of “http://www.independent.ie

This appears to be a universal, and world-wide problem.  The  more the agencies, the less the accountability, and SOME agencies attract inappropriate sorts.  Unfortunately some agencies and institutions (including schools of many sorts, not just one “sort”) attract unscrupulous sorts because that’s a clear and steady place CHILDREN are found.

It seems to me that the wholesale dismantling of the family unit, in the name of protecting and educating children, needs to be addressed.  The mass failures need to be addressed.  I do not believe it is possible to stop every crime from happening.  But if I DID want crime stopped, based on my personal, and extensive experience, I would rather (next time) see what I can personally do, when it hits me in the face (pun intentional) than, as we WOMEN are taught to do, call out for someone to intervene and help.  Yeah, right.  

The report into how Niall McElwee, a well-known child protection expert, was able to remain in his post at Athlone Institute of Technology for two years after having been convicted of indecent assault of two young women makes for grim reading.

Yet, in the first of a series of shameful lacks of adherence to child protection procedures, no restrictions were put on the lecturer’s behaviour.

 Yet a convicted sex offender was still appearing regularly in the media and at conferences and academic gatherings the world over.  

It is clear no referral system exists between our two largest social care authorities. McElwee will probably argue that, as far as he was concerned, if the gardai and the HSE knew of his conduct, and both saw fit to continue working with him, then he was surely in the clear. Yet common sense dictates that a call should also have been made to his employers in the Athlone Institute of Technology, where he was charged with training young people to become child protection workers. Having a sex offender in that important role seems ironic, to say the very least.

(The original has hyperlinks in the text, and related articles to the side.)

 

I noticed visitors from other countries (no comments so far, eh?), including Belgium, Bucharest, Egypt, Saudia Arabia, Canada, Australia, Trinidad, and a few places I had to look up on the map.  This site gets some views.  Well, welcome Ireland, I guess you have similar issues here.  

Kind of reminds me of the sketch of the Max Escher hands I was familiar with, growing up.  Metaphorically, this is basically what I think America at least is turning into.  It has become a nation of pronouncers and declarers (all in the best interests of the kids, and to protect them).

It is absolutely essential that we ALL begin studying the ‘studiers’ and researching the researchers.  Unless we LIKE dropping off our tax dollars in order to hire people to execute policies promoted, many times, by a wealthy foundation driving institutions, initiatives and Congress on a vision of the wealthy about what to do with the poor, mostly, how to manage them.  (And keep them poor).  

I personally want answers for the language degradation that has drenched the brains of people wishing to tell me how to:  leave abuse, raise children, what lifestyle to work, what personal priorities to espouse, what is and is not “OK” when I can read laws that already exist and say this.  There is practically not one word which can be taken at face value, yet we are supposed to do this.  I don’t.  As I said, no wonder “mental health professionals” abound in certain circles — and once established a profession has to continue.  Where to find more clients?  Produce them

I didn’t know that Ireland, also, had similar issues.  Perhaps if worldwide, we people who are being studied and protected (or our kids are) by these institutions in such a manner that, as adults, they see fit to address what happened to them in class action lawsuits, we might communicate about alternative theories than Farming Out Our Thinking, Letting Our Own Self-Suffiency Exit [Stage Right]

That acronym is “FOOTLOOSE” and was just made up.  It makes about as much sense as “Health and Human Services” (HHS, the major U.S. Federal grant-making agency) in charge of doing so.  Maybe I should delete an “O” in the 2nd syllable, because somewhere, footing (“grasp on reality”) has indeed been Lost.  

Remember that old science fiction film (with alien invaders, only recognizable if you had special glasses), called

“SERVING HUMANITY” ?

This was accurate.  Not til the end of the movie does it become clear that this refers to a menu, and people were the food.  Yes, they were “serving humanity,” for sure.

WHEN STUDIED< STUDY BACK.  WHEN REPORTED ON, REPORT BACK! WHEN PROPHESIED OVER (in essence, that’s what a lot of these studies are in concept — simple proclamations.    (Well, not quite as simple or well-written, as the Declaration  of Independence, true).

I declare this based on my recent (internet-based) scrutiny of programs that have been scrutinizing the huddled masses, and sorting them by color, shape, income category, marital status, and of course, gender.  In our school system we also sort them, (within schools already sorted by several of the above statistics) by how well they perform according to their peers, and the wider public, all of which is then reported and discussed on high, and then sometimes, even personally presented by a representative from someone on high.

I declarae that this appears to have been the source of some of the puzzlement and confusion in the family law systems, where we expect “laws” already in place to protect “families” to be fairly enforced, and not (beyond our reach, and without information to us) that policy-makers entering into prisons, child support offices, and in conventions on parenting education and fatherhood, conduct random samplings  and then nationwide infrastructures to tie TIME  with Kids to MONEY for KIDS, and shift wealth around accordingly.   I do not approve of “outcome based” education. As a mother and educator, I know that if the engagement, the joy of learning and the understanding that learning is a necessary and enjoyable skill (in fact, way of life) is the principle, then the stick -and-carrot approach is not the MAIN approach.  I have a higher opinion of children than that.  

Nor, do I wish to enter into a courtroom and find out years later that agencies working in the background — but driven by governmental POLICIES — have determined (Big-Brother, In Loco Parentis, “JUST-us” theories — to, for its own ends, use a “carrot and stick” approach with noncustodial fathers (including incarcerated ones and middle and higher class ones as well), particularly to fathers /spouses who have used the same approach on the wives, particularly when it comes to the stick (hands, implement, weapons, etc.)  That philosophy is going to infantilize a nation, PERMANENTLY.  

Recently, in California, a six foot tall Dept. of Education Head (Federal), Arne Duncan, was seen towering over some youngsters (this is called “PR”) and then proclaiming on TV that California Schools have “lost their way,” and no, they will not be considered individually, but will sink or swim together.  This is called, “No Child Left Behind,” and Big Brother stepping in to scold and fix what (er, Big Brother designed and forced on the general public to start with).  

My gut response to having a 40+ male appointee (and I”m 50+) hailing from a city I used to live and work (in the schools) in, Chicago, come to California and lecture us about having lost our way — was, “ON WHAT BASIS HAS AN ENTIRE STATE BECOME YOUR AUDIENCE, TO BE SCOLDED LIKE A BAD CHILD?” And within this state are thousands of parents whose children are not even in the public school system.  What hypocrisy.!

Meanwhile, in one Northern California school, a (female, naturally) middle school (think “puberty” and you have the general age range if you’re not from this country)music teacher was surrounded by a group of children and stoned.  Not to death, but rocks werre thrown at her, there was injury, and her escape was prevented.  She was punished for attempting to set a limit on some of their behavior.  Thankfully, and children were arrested.  The District brought in more law enforcement through the end of the year.

And in another school district, a superintendent being brought in (to clean up a mess, naturally — it’s why the come in, right?), in a noble move, said that HIS seven year old would attend a local elementary school.

That’s noble.  At least he’s willing to sacrifice his own child, as well as others.  

I have a separate blog on education (infantile in size, so far), and another one (pre-natal in state) on the topic of Administering Families and Serving Humanity, and yes, that was sarcastic.  Prepare to be shocked.

But these are related topics.

Meanwhile, any public discussion of any type of schooling NOT federally-mandated, budgeted, and NOT doing less for its dollars than almost any existing business I can think of, will not make the evening news.  

 

The cartoonist to the left has inserted hands writing checks.  

The Declaration of Independence

Read, and understand.  What was this Declaration of Independence FROM — from what?

Drafted by Thomas Jefferson between June 11 and June 28, 1776, the Declaration of Independence is at once the nation’s most cherished symbol of liberty and Jefferson’s most enduring monument. Here, in exalted and unforgettable phrases, Jefferson expressed the convictions in the minds and hearts of the American people. The political philosophy of the Declaration was not new; its ideals of individual liberty had already been expressed by John Locke and the Continental philosophers. What Jefferson did was to summarize this philosophy in “self-evident truths” and set forth a list of grievances against the King in order to justify before the world the breaking of ties between the colonies and the mother country. We invite you to read a transcription of the complete text of the Declaration.

 

SO DO I:

IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.–Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only. 
He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures. 
He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.
He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.
He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.
He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.
He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent: 
For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:
For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences

For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:
For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.
He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.
He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands. 
He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our Brittish brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.


The 56 signatures on the Declaration appear in the positions indicated:

IF these facts had shown up in, say, “Family Court,” the response would be, “you are blaming us!  Stop blaming us!  You are stuck in the past,” (etc.).  Yet, if a people within a nation can peaceably assemble to seek redress of grievances — and other countries have followed this example (Republic of Philippines, 2004), why cannot an individually, peaceably do so in a courtroom?

And how is it possible to seek redress, when the act of listing the grievances is then itself new sort of speech-crime, called, remembering them and speaking up?  (Parental Alienation, etc.)  We do not all live in the “eternal now of the spotless mind,” but are affected by a chain of events (see above), particular when said events cause suffering.  

It has to be acknowledged that the phrase referring to the merciless Indian savages later led to intentional genocide, a reversal.  In an irony to the HHS structure (which you may read on their FY2008 self-description) there is an IHS which has more discretion over how to use its funds than the other agencies.  That is a separate post.  

It has to be acknowledged that the signers of this declaration (and authors) did not, most likely, envision either Indians or African Americans (to them, slaves) voting.  It has to ALSO be acknowledged, and should be publically, that WOMEN having this power to vote also was not on the horizon at this time.  However, the words stand and express a declaration of independence against tyranny.

I could make a good case for the family law system falling under “inciting domestic insurrections,” and the conflict between the standards in the compulsory education system (LGBT sensitivity, no prayer, political correctness, not to mention the many fads and phases which simply teaching:  reading, writing, and math have been subjected to) with the standards held by many conservatives who then go, with their connections, through Congress to “promote fatherhood” on the basis that is has somehow disappeared is another one.  

Anyone who intentionally wastes my time and goes about to slow down, dumb down, indoctrinate, and/or traumatize MY and their father’s) OFFSPRING (children, in our case, daughters), is pretending to act, not acting, in their best interests.  This IS being done, on a national basis, and I am tired of it.  However, I have done nothing here, but report, and in the spirit of the above Declaration of Independence.  

When I took a stand against the above, I became instant enemies with some forces I didn’t know existed (to this day).  When I went to law for help, innocently, I then found a hornet’s nests of personalities I would never have, knowing this, freely associated with.  Preventing anyone from exiting dangerous and oppressive situation when alternatives to that situation exists, IS a form of tyranny (a.k.a. “abuse.”)  

Do YOU have time to take out (from life) to watch the people training the trainers to protect your children? (OR, educate them?)  I don’t.  I’d rather do it myself.  I believe that quite possibly if the economic structure were not so dependent on dismantled families, we might have “healthier marriages” and more funds with which  to feed, clothe, educate, and set our children on a healthy passage in life.

We cannot do this by chasing myths and accepting every foollish fallacy handed down from on high!

I hope in future posts to compare some of the language behind this one, and the multiple FACTUAL allegations presented in this declaration with the simple-minded assertions that jump start some of the proclamations put out  by the United States Congress to solve problems IT declares existed, and starting SWEEPING reforms and policy changes, at our expense and to our detriment many times.

The rhetoric — and format — of these proclamations is not even in the same league with the one above, yet have effected a sea-change in the basic judicial processes, balance of powers, in transgression of several passages in the Bill of Rights.  These have not been announced openly nationwide.  They have been conferenced, but not voted on in general elections properly.  And they produce strange fruit.

Congressional Task Force on Father Promotion” (Google result)

Today’s post, however is long enough.

I am going to post it next.

In 1998, the House of Representatives, and in 1999, the Congress, resolved as you are about to see.

For a reference point, the “Violence Against Women Act” had only passed in 1994.

One wonders why the unanimity on fatherlessness so soon after this one, which gave women a way out of violence, and primarily in the home.

 

 

%d bloggers like this: