A Parenting & kids forum. ParentingBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » ParentingBanter.com forum » alt.support » Child Support
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

AN UNMARRIED HUSBAND: UNWELCOME REALITY



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old April 7th 09, 05:29 AM posted to alt.child-support
Dusty
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 340
Default AN UNMARRIED HUSBAND: UNWELCOME REALITY

http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2...ex_html?page=1

AN UNMARRIED HUSBAND: UNWELCOME REALITY

Divorced From Reality
Stephen Baskerville

Date published: 3/29/2009

--The decline of the family now affects virtually every American and
seriously threatens not only social order but freedom and constitutional
government. G.K. Chesterton once observed that the family checks government
power. He was writing about divorce: Despite other threats to the family,
divorce remains the most serious.

Americans would be shocked if they knew what goes on in the name of divorce.
Divorce today licenses unprecedented government intrusion, including the
power to seize children, loot family savings, and incarcerate parents
without trial.

The full implications of the "no-fault" revolution have never been publicly
debated. Divorce today seldom involves two people simply parting ways; 80
percent of divorces are unilateral. Under "no-fault," divorce becomes a
power grab by one spouse, assisted by judicial officials who profit from the
ensuing litigation: judges, lawyers, psychotherapists, and social workers.
Involuntary divorce involves government agents forcibly removing innocent
people from their homes, seizing their property, and separating them from
their children. It requires long-term supervision over private life by state
functionaries, including police and jails.

The most serious consequences involve children. Invariably the first action
in a divorce is to separate the children from one parent, usually the
father. Even if he is innocent of any legal wrongdoing and does not agree to
the divorce, the state seizes his children with no burden of proof to
justify why. The burden of proof--and financial burden--falls on him to
demonstrate why they should be returned.

A legally unimpeachable parent can thus be arrested for seeing his own
children without government authorization. He can be arrested through
additional judicial directives that apply to no one but him. He can be
arrested for domestic violence or child abuse, even without evidence that he
has committed any. He can be arrested for not paying child support,
regardless of the amount demanded. He can even be arrested for not paying an
attorney or psychotherapist. There is no formal charge, no jury, no trial,
and no record.

To justify this, the divorce machinery has generated hysteria against
parents so inflammatory that few dare question it: child abuse,
wife-beating, and nonpayment of "child support"--all propagated by
feminists, bar associations, and social work bureaucracies, with federal
funding. The accused parent loses his children and is abandoned by friends,
family members, parishioners, and co-workers--all terrified to be associated
with an accused "pedophile," "batterer," or "deadbeat dad."

A HOAX

Each of these figures is largely a hoax. There is no evidence of large
numbers of fathers abandoning their families, beating their wives, and
molesting their children. Divorce courts separate parents from their
children, with false accusations as a rationalization.

Child abuse and domestic violence have no precise definition. They are not
adjudicated as assault, and accused parents do not enjoy the constitutional
protections of criminal defendants. Allegations are "confirmed" not by
juries but by judges or social workers.

Domestic "violence" need not be violent or even physical. Official
definitions include "extreme jealousy" and "constant criticizing."

Child abuse is itself the creation of welfare bureaucracies. An intact
family is the safest place for women and children, since child abuse
overwhelmingly occurs in single-parent homes from which the father has been
removed. Britain's Family Education Trust reports that children are up to 33
times more likely to be abused in a single-parent home than in an intact
family. Domestic violence too is far more likely with the breakup of a
marriage than among married couples.

Yet trumped-up accusations are rampant in divorce courts, usually to
eliminate fathers. Elaine Epstein of the Massachusetts Women's Bar
Association writes that "allegations of abuse are now used for tactical
advantage" in custody cases, a trend documented in the Illinois Bar Journal,
Yale Law Review, Rutgers Law Review, and others.

The principal impediment to child abuse is thus the father. "The presence of
the father placed the child at lesser risk for child sexual abuse,"
concludes a study in Adolescent and Family Health. By eliminating fathers,
officials pose as the solution to the problem they themselves create.
Appalling as it sounds, we have created a massive army of officials with a
vested interest in child abuse.

'DEADBEAT DAD'?

The "deadbeat dad" is another creation of divorce machinery. He is far less
likely to have voluntarily abandoned offspring he callously sired than to be
an involuntarily divorced father who has been, as one attorney writes,
"forced to finance the filching of his own children."

Originally justified to recover welfare costs, child support has become an
entitlement for all mothers, regardless of their behavior, and a subsidy on
middle-class divorce. It allows the mother--simply by divorcing--to
confiscate her husband's income. It is tax-free to the recipient, and
nonpayment means incarceration without trial. The Journal of Socio-Economics
notes that child support serves as an "economic incentive for middle-class
women to seek divorce." Economist Robert Willis calculates that one-fifth to
one-third of child support payments are used for children; the rest is
profit for the custodial parent.

State governments also generate revenue from child support, giving them a
financial incentive to make it onerous and to encourage divorce. Federal
taxpayers subsidize this family destruction scheme with about $3 billion
annually. Officials have admitted that the arrearages are far beyond the
parents' ability to pay.

Government's divorce apparatus has become a machine for destroying families,
seizing children, and incarcerating parents without trial. It is the most
repressive government machinery ever created in the United States.
---------------
Stephen Baskerville is associate professor of government at Patrick Henry
College and author of "Taken Into Custody: The War Against Fathers,
Marriage, and the Family" (Cumberland House). This column is adapted from an
article in the Jan.-Feb. issue of Touchstone magazine.

  #2  
Old April 7th 09, 06:48 AM posted to alt.child-support
Chris
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,421
Default AN UNMARRIED HUSBAND: UNWELCOME REALITY

Excellent article!

--
Any man that's good enough to pay child support is good enough to have
custody of such child.
"Dusty" wrote in message
...
http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2...ex_html?page=1

AN UNMARRIED HUSBAND: UNWELCOME REALITY

Divorced From Reality
Stephen Baskerville

Date published: 3/29/2009

--The decline of the family now affects virtually every American and
seriously threatens not only social order but freedom and constitutional
government. G.K. Chesterton once observed that the family checks
government power. He was writing about divorce: Despite other threats to
the family, divorce remains the most serious.

Americans would be shocked if they knew what goes on in the name of
divorce. Divorce today licenses unprecedented government intrusion,
including the power to seize children, loot family savings, and
incarcerate parents without trial.

The full implications of the "no-fault" revolution have never been
publicly debated. Divorce today seldom involves two people simply parting
ways; 80 percent of divorces are unilateral. Under "no-fault," divorce
becomes a power grab by one spouse, assisted by judicial officials who
profit from the ensuing litigation: judges, lawyers, psychotherapists, and
social workers. Involuntary divorce involves government agents forcibly
removing innocent people from their homes, seizing their property, and
separating them from their children. It requires long-term supervision
over private life by state functionaries, including police and jails.

The most serious consequences involve children. Invariably the first
action in a divorce is to separate the children from one parent, usually
the father. Even if he is innocent of any legal wrongdoing and does not
agree to the divorce, the state seizes his children with no burden of
proof to justify why. The burden of proof--and financial burden--falls on
him to demonstrate why they should be returned.

A legally unimpeachable parent can thus be arrested for seeing his own
children without government authorization. He can be arrested through
additional judicial directives that apply to no one but him. He can be
arrested for domestic violence or child abuse, even without evidence that
he has committed any. He can be arrested for not paying child support,
regardless of the amount demanded. He can even be arrested for not paying
an attorney or psychotherapist. There is no formal charge, no jury, no
trial, and no record.

To justify this, the divorce machinery has generated hysteria against
parents so inflammatory that few dare question it: child abuse,
wife-beating, and nonpayment of "child support"--all propagated by
feminists, bar associations, and social work bureaucracies, with federal
funding. The accused parent loses his children and is abandoned by
friends, family members, parishioners, and co-workers--all terrified to be
associated with an accused "pedophile," "batterer," or "deadbeat dad."

A HOAX

Each of these figures is largely a hoax. There is no evidence of large
numbers of fathers abandoning their families, beating their wives, and
molesting their children. Divorce courts separate parents from their
children, with false accusations as a rationalization.

Child abuse and domestic violence have no precise definition. They are not
adjudicated as assault, and accused parents do not enjoy the
constitutional protections of criminal defendants. Allegations are
"confirmed" not by juries but by judges or social workers.

Domestic "violence" need not be violent or even physical. Official
definitions include "extreme jealousy" and "constant criticizing."

Child abuse is itself the creation of welfare bureaucracies. An intact
family is the safest place for women and children, since child abuse
overwhelmingly occurs in single-parent homes from which the father has
been removed. Britain's Family Education Trust reports that children are
up to 33 times more likely to be abused in a single-parent home than in an
intact family. Domestic violence too is far more likely with the breakup
of a marriage than among married couples.

Yet trumped-up accusations are rampant in divorce courts, usually to
eliminate fathers. Elaine Epstein of the Massachusetts Women's Bar
Association writes that "allegations of abuse are now used for tactical
advantage" in custody cases, a trend documented in the Illinois Bar
Journal, Yale Law Review, Rutgers Law Review, and others.

The principal impediment to child abuse is thus the father. "The presence
of the father placed the child at lesser risk for child sexual abuse,"
concludes a study in Adolescent and Family Health. By eliminating fathers,
officials pose as the solution to the problem they themselves create.
Appalling as it sounds, we have created a massive army of officials with a
vested interest in child abuse.

'DEADBEAT DAD'?

The "deadbeat dad" is another creation of divorce machinery. He is far
less likely to have voluntarily abandoned offspring he callously sired
than to be an involuntarily divorced father who has been, as one attorney
writes, "forced to finance the filching of his own children."

Originally justified to recover welfare costs, child support has become an
entitlement for all mothers, regardless of their behavior, and a subsidy
on middle-class divorce. It allows the mother--simply by divorcing--to
confiscate her husband's income. It is tax-free to the recipient, and
nonpayment means incarceration without trial. The Journal of
Socio-Economics notes that child support serves as an "economic incentive
for middle-class women to seek divorce." Economist Robert Willis
calculates that one-fifth to one-third of child support payments are used
for children; the rest is profit for the custodial parent.

State governments also generate revenue from child support, giving them a
financial incentive to make it onerous and to encourage divorce. Federal
taxpayers subsidize this family destruction scheme with about $3 billion
annually. Officials have admitted that the arrearages are far beyond the
parents' ability to pay.

Government's divorce apparatus has become a machine for destroying
families, seizing children, and incarcerating parents without trial. It is
the most repressive government machinery ever created in the United
States.
---------------
Stephen Baskerville is associate professor of government at Patrick Henry
College and author of "Taken Into Custody: The War Against Fathers,
Marriage, and the Family" (Cumberland House). This column is adapted from
an article in the Jan.-Feb. issue of Touchstone magazine.


  #3  
Old April 9th 09, 06:22 AM posted to alt.child-support,alt.politics.economics,alt.politics.usa.constitution
DB[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 266
Default AN UNMARRIED HUSBAND: UNWELCOME REALITY

Do you take this woman to be your lawfully wedded wife?

No thanks, I don't need the liability or the government's right to take my
freedom!


"Dusty" wrote in message
...
http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2...ex_html?page=1

AN UNMARRIED HUSBAND: UNWELCOME REALITY

Divorced From Reality
Stephen Baskerville

Date published: 3/29/2009

--The decline of the family now affects virtually every American and
seriously threatens not only social order but freedom and constitutional
government. G.K. Chesterton once observed that the family checks
government power. He was writing about divorce: Despite other threats to
the family, divorce remains the most serious.

Americans would be shocked if they knew what goes on in the name of
divorce. Divorce today licenses unprecedented government intrusion,
including the power to seize children, loot family savings, and
incarcerate parents without trial.

The full implications of the "no-fault" revolution have never been
publicly debated. Divorce today seldom involves two people simply parting
ways; 80 percent of divorces are unilateral. Under "no-fault," divorce
becomes a power grab by one spouse, assisted by judicial officials who
profit from the ensuing litigation: judges, lawyers, psychotherapists, and
social workers. Involuntary divorce involves government agents forcibly
removing innocent people from their homes, seizing their property, and
separating them from their children. It requires long-term supervision
over private life by state functionaries, including police and jails.

The most serious consequences involve children. Invariably the first
action in a divorce is to separate the children from one parent, usually
the father. Even if he is innocent of any legal wrongdoing and does not
agree to the divorce, the state seizes his children with no burden of
proof to justify why. The burden of proof--and financial burden--falls on
him to demonstrate why they should be returned.

A legally unimpeachable parent can thus be arrested for seeing his own
children without government authorization. He can be arrested through
additional judicial directives that apply to no one but him. He can be
arrested for domestic violence or child abuse, even without evidence that
he has committed any. He can be arrested for not paying child support,
regardless of the amount demanded. He can even be arrested for not paying
an attorney or psychotherapist. There is no formal charge, no jury, no
trial, and no record.

To justify this, the divorce machinery has generated hysteria against
parents so inflammatory that few dare question it: child abuse,
wife-beating, and nonpayment of "child support"--all propagated by
feminists, bar associations, and social work bureaucracies, with federal
funding. The accused parent loses his children and is abandoned by
friends, family members, parishioners, and co-workers--all terrified to be
associated with an accused "pedophile," "batterer," or "deadbeat dad."

A HOAX

Each of these figures is largely a hoax. There is no evidence of large
numbers of fathers abandoning their families, beating their wives, and
molesting their children. Divorce courts separate parents from their
children, with false accusations as a rationalization.

Child abuse and domestic violence have no precise definition. They are not
adjudicated as assault, and accused parents do not enjoy the
constitutional protections of criminal defendants. Allegations are
"confirmed" not by juries but by judges or social workers.

Domestic "violence" need not be violent or even physical. Official
definitions include "extreme jealousy" and "constant criticizing."

Child abuse is itself the creation of welfare bureaucracies. An intact
family is the safest place for women and children, since child abuse
overwhelmingly occurs in single-parent homes from which the father has
been removed. Britain's Family Education Trust reports that children are
up to 33 times more likely to be abused in a single-parent home than in an
intact family. Domestic violence too is far more likely with the breakup
of a marriage than among married couples.

Yet trumped-up accusations are rampant in divorce courts, usually to
eliminate fathers. Elaine Epstein of the Massachusetts Women's Bar
Association writes that "allegations of abuse are now used for tactical
advantage" in custody cases, a trend documented in the Illinois Bar
Journal, Yale Law Review, Rutgers Law Review, and others.

The principal impediment to child abuse is thus the father. "The presence
of the father placed the child at lesser risk for child sexual abuse,"
concludes a study in Adolescent and Family Health. By eliminating fathers,
officials pose as the solution to the problem they themselves create.
Appalling as it sounds, we have created a massive army of officials with a
vested interest in child abuse.

'DEADBEAT DAD'?

The "deadbeat dad" is another creation of divorce machinery. He is far
less likely to have voluntarily abandoned offspring he callously sired
than to be an involuntarily divorced father who has been, as one attorney
writes, "forced to finance the filching of his own children."

Originally justified to recover welfare costs, child support has become an
entitlement for all mothers, regardless of their behavior, and a subsidy
on middle-class divorce. It allows the mother--simply by divorcing--to
confiscate her husband's income. It is tax-free to the recipient, and
nonpayment means incarceration without trial. The Journal of
Socio-Economics notes that child support serves as an "economic incentive
for middle-class women to seek divorce." Economist Robert Willis
calculates that one-fifth to one-third of child support payments are used
for children; the rest is profit for the custodial parent.

State governments also generate revenue from child support, giving them a
financial incentive to make it onerous and to encourage divorce. Federal
taxpayers subsidize this family destruction scheme with about $3 billion
annually. Officials have admitted that the arrearages are far beyond the
parents' ability to pay.

Government's divorce apparatus has become a machine for destroying
families, seizing children, and incarcerating parents without trial. It is
the most repressive government machinery ever created in the United
States.
---------------
Stephen Baskerville is associate professor of government at Patrick Henry
College and author of "Taken Into Custody: The War Against Fathers,
Marriage, and the Family" (Cumberland House). This column is adapted from
an article in the Jan.-Feb. issue of Touchstone magazine.



 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Reality check DB Child Support 15 April 16th 07 04:04 AM
Measles REALITY Sheri Nakken RN, MA, Hahnemannian Homeopath Kids Health 14 October 23rd 06 03:08 PM
Mumps REALITY Sheri Nakken RN, MA, Hahnemannian Homeopath Kids Health 1 October 21st 06 02:31 AM
U.K. May Extend Divorce Rights to Unmarried Couples Dusty Child Support 5 June 2nd 06 08:47 AM
unwelcome belly touching Vicky Bilaniuk Pregnancy 4 July 19th 04 01:53 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:28 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2018 ParentingBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.