Comments on: The North Dakota Shared-Parenting Initiative: Trust Parents, Not the System http://mensnewsdaily.com/2006/08/22/north-dakota%e2%80%99s-shared-parenting-initiative-trust-parents-not-the-system/ Men's Rights Activism, MRA Politics, Analysis, Commentary and Global News Mon, 23 Nov 2009 22:49:00 -1000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: DcFather http://mensnewsdaily.com/2006/08/22/north-dakota%e2%80%99s-shared-parenting-initiative-trust-parents-not-the-system/comment-page-1/#comment-76523 DcFather Wed, 23 Aug 2006 11:30:28 +0000 http://mensnewsdaily.com/2006/08/22/north-dakota%e2%80%99s-shared-parenting-initiative-trust-parents-not-the-system/#comment-76523 You know, the PETA folks and others are outraged by dog-fights, cock-fights, and the like. Well, divorce and child custody is essentially the same thing. Instead of back alley gamblers, we have government bureaucrats and Bar Associations cashing in by feeding at a similar trough using parents. They throw them in a ring, make them fight like hell over their children, then count the money they get from it. Just like the puppies or chicks losing parents to a sick greed, we have children in 21st century America suffering the same fate so as to not threaten the livelihood of these people. The big difference between warring animals and warring parents is that, after the combatants are throughly bloodied, and the offspring are left to suffer the consequences, with parents they nearly always declare the female combatant the winner. They do this as a means to entice her into playing the game in the first place, because unlike dogs and cocks and fathers, women at least have choices. You know, the PETA folks and others are outraged by dog-fights, cock-fights, and the like. Well, divorce and child custody is essentially the same thing. Instead of back alley gamblers, we have government bureaucrats and Bar Associations cashing in by feeding at a similar trough using parents. They throw them in a ring, make them fight like hell over their children, then count the money they get from it. Just like the puppies or chicks losing parents to a sick greed, we have children in 21st century America suffering the same fate so as to not threaten the livelihood of these people.

The big difference between warring animals and warring parents is that, after the combatants are throughly bloodied, and the offspring are left to suffer the consequences, with parents they nearly always declare the female combatant the winner. They do this as a means to entice her into playing the game in the first place, because unlike dogs and cocks and fathers, women at least have choices.

]]> By: Roger Knight http://mensnewsdaily.com/2006/08/22/north-dakota%e2%80%99s-shared-parenting-initiative-trust-parents-not-the-system/comment-page-1/#comment-76522 Roger Knight Wed, 23 Aug 2006 06:48:54 +0000 http://mensnewsdaily.com/2006/08/22/north-dakota%e2%80%99s-shared-parenting-initiative-trust-parents-not-the-system/#comment-76522 This is one of those situations where we are seeing a misuse of language. North Dakota, or any state, elects not to do family law the federal government’s way. Thus the federal government stops funding that state’s child support enforcement. That is not a penalty, that is a PLUS!!!! Fewer Treasury Notes we have to sell to the Saudi Royal Family. Less National Debt. Less federal spending. This is not a penalty! With shared parenting a state no longer needs to commit the CRIME of Peonage against its noncustodial parents because they will no longer be noncustodial parents. This business of calling a state’s decision to not accept federal funds by doing things its own way a “penalty” is a serious misuse of language. To wit: If you quit your job at IBM, IBM quits paying you. Nobody every said that is a “penalty”; it is the natural consequence of quitting a job. Everyone is free to quit their job under the 13th Amendment and the Antipeonage Act. Likewise, every state is free to refuse federal funds. To call such a “mandate” is to call it something it is not. Everything child support enforcement does is a CRIME of Peonage anyway, 18 U.S.C. §1581, because such denies to the noncustodial parent the CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT to quit his job. So why is the cessation of federal funding for a federal crime a penalty? It is like calling the ocean land and calling land ocean. The reason I keep bringing this up is passing the North Dakota initiative is only the first part of the battle. As long as the bastards and bitches retain their decision making positions, i.e. bar licenses, judges and commissioners, administrative law judges, state legislators, bureaucrats, county sheriffs, and so on, they will work to undermine any shared parenting law. It is their nature and it is what fills their rice bowls. There is a reason the French Revolution used the guillotine. Fortunately we have the Antipeonage Act. The Shared Parenting Initiative offers a better deal for new divorces, and for preventing new divorces by leveling the playing field and causing some petitioners (most of whom are female) to reconsider. But what about those who already have been fucked over by this insane system? How do we redress their injury? By screaming for the enforcement of the Peonage Law. It's a FELONY, stupid!! Once we force, through the federal grand juries, the recognition that peonage is a CRIME, then restitution and the doctrine of unclean hands comes into play. You are not supposed to profit from your criminal behavior. To get a fair hearing, we need to indict the bastards and the bitches who wear the black robes and clothed with the authority of the prosecutor's office and the sheriff's office for the CRIME of peonage. Those who replace them will hopefully not be clones with the same incentives as their predecessors, as they will recognize the Antipeonage Act is finally being understood by the public, including those who serve on federal grand and petit juries. That is why we have to also scream for the enforcement of the Peonage Law. Either we use the Peonage Law or we use the Second Amendment to obtain redress. Someone in Reno, Nevada has already used the Second Amendment against Judge Weller. I prefer the Peonage Law. This is one of those situations where we are seeing a misuse of language.
North Dakota, or any state, elects not to do family law the federal government’s way. Thus
the federal government stops funding that state’s child support enforcement.
That is not a penalty, that is a PLUS!!!!
Fewer Treasury Notes we have to sell to the Saudi Royal Family. Less National Debt. Less federal spending. This is not a penalty!
With shared parenting a state no longer needs to commit the CRIME of Peonage against its noncustodial parents because they will no longer be noncustodial parents.
This business of calling a state’s decision to not accept federal funds by doing things its own way a “penalty” is a serious misuse of language. To wit:
If you quit your job at IBM, IBM quits paying you. Nobody every said that is a “penalty”; it is the natural consequence of quitting a job. Everyone is free to quit their job under the 13th Amendment and the Antipeonage Act.
Likewise, every state is free to refuse federal funds.
To call such a “mandate” is to call it something it is not.
Everything child support enforcement does is a CRIME of Peonage anyway, 18 U.S.C. §1581, because such denies to the noncustodial parent the CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT to quit his job.
So why is the cessation of federal funding for a federal crime a penalty?
It is like calling the ocean land and calling land ocean.

The reason I keep bringing this up is passing the North Dakota initiative is only the first part of the battle. As long as the bastards and bitches retain their decision making positions, i.e. bar licenses, judges and commissioners, administrative law judges, state legislators, bureaucrats, county sheriffs, and so on, they will work to undermine any shared parenting law. It is their nature and it is what fills their rice bowls.
There is a reason the French Revolution used the guillotine.
Fortunately we have the Antipeonage Act.
The Shared Parenting Initiative offers a better deal for new divorces, and for preventing new divorces by leveling the playing field and causing some petitioners (most of whom are female) to reconsider.
But what about those who already have been fucked over by this insane system? How do we redress their injury?
By screaming for the enforcement of the Peonage Law. It’s a FELONY, stupid!!
Once we force, through the federal grand juries, the recognition that peonage is a CRIME, then restitution and the doctrine of unclean hands comes into play. You are not supposed to profit from your criminal behavior.
To get a fair hearing, we need to indict the bastards and the bitches who wear the black robes and clothed with the authority of the prosecutor’s office and the sheriff’s office for the CRIME of peonage. Those who replace them will hopefully not be clones with the same incentives as their predecessors, as they will recognize the Antipeonage Act is finally being understood by the public, including those who serve on federal grand and petit juries.

That is why we have to also scream for the enforcement of the Peonage Law.

Either we use the Peonage Law or we use the Second Amendment to obtain redress. Someone in Reno, Nevada has already used the Second Amendment against Judge Weller. I prefer the Peonage Law.

]]>