Should the government have the right to take your child...
...if you are infringing on that child's rights to person and life?
I see government's protective role of children from abuse by parents as an incredibly dangerous yet ultimately necessary position. Ron Paul has acknowledged that the government has a role in protecting children, particularly regarding the drug issue(his only limitation on the free use and sale of drugs). I wish I could find a link, but those of you who are as hardcore Paulites as I am(I've seen probably every Ron Paul video to come out since 2007) should remember this.
Don't think that I don't understand where a lot of the resentment towards child protective services is coming from. We have seen abuses of this authority in the past. Most of these can be attributed to unaccountable bureaucrats and vague, clueless statues. The obvious solution would be stricter regulation of the CPS bureaucrat and a more accurate common law basis for the statutes.
Isn't this an example of a necessary evil(giving government authority over children) that is necessary to maximize liberty for ALL of us?
Your thoughts?
People have rights not government.
Governments are instituted among men to protect those rights. I'm not saying that the government can't act in cases. I am saying that they can only act to protect your or in this case a childs rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
Of course!
But only if you are some creepy twisted peace-loving polygamist. Then your children are fair targets for the loving embrace of the state.
Gaea Vindice
LXXI BC: Ego sum Spartacus // MDCCCLVII: I am Dred Scott // MCMVL: Ich bin Anne Frank // MMX: Je suis Assange // MMXI: Ik ben von NotHaus
Marriage Licenses and Birth
Marriage Licenses and Birth Certificates are contracts with the state! If you have either then you are just legal guardians and the state is the parent. But for some reason my church thinks its immoral to be "Married" without one! hmm something's not right. Is it because my Church is a Corporation?
DIM
NO!
Plain and simple and good reason to utilize your second amendment right....
Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God. I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty or give me death.”
– Patrick Henry, speech to the Virginia Convention
“The Internet is the first thing that humanity has built that humanity doesn't understand, the largest experiment in anarchy that we have ever had." - Eric Schmidt
Should the mafia have the right to take your child
The government is corrupt and doesn't have our best interest at heart.
It's not your child
If you got a marriage license, you admitted incompetence, and the child, which is a product of your marriage, is property of the corporation known as the USA.
I have a marriage license, but when I found out that the marriage license was always what social services uses in cases where they take a child, I filed a form with the county clerks explaining that corp USA failed to disclose who they were, and therefore there was no signature.
Can you explain that a little more in depth?
How does the marriage license make you more subject to social services intervention? Not mocking you, I just want to know.....we had our son (2ndmarriages) before we got married.
Colchester, New London County, Connecticut
Marriage Licenses: The Real Truth
http://www.usavsus.info/MarriageLicenses-TheRealTruth.htm
You should investigate more on your own, then you can see how far the rabbit hole goes.
Maybe this can help ...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1huRR13j59I
No
This is not government's role. Has anyone else read this from Grigg?
http://freedominourtime.blogspot.com/2009/08/hotlined.html
Overgrown weeds!
This could happen to any of us. My daughter once made an innocuous remark at school to her friends that she was down and wanted to take a bottle of Tylenol. Just a remark, not serious, just 16 yr old bull. Later that day, DCF showed up at the school and carted her off to the mental hospital for a week's stay. One of her friends reported her to guidance, they called the state. We could not get her out of the hospital. Just had to play along, and then weeks of DCF visits to our home. It was bullshit.
Colchester, New London County, Connecticut
Ok, so some out of control
Ok, so some out of control bureaucrats, under some misbegotten authority, abused their power. I can think of 3-4 examples off the top of my head in which the system has worked great. So basically, rather than lobby to fix that broken statute, you would rather throw the baby out with the bathwater and leave my 4 examples out on the street/dead?
Ventura 2012
So you have 3-4 good examples
I can find hundreds of bad examples. Don't throw MY baby out with YOUR bathwater.
My sister in law is an attorney for the state of MA, almost took a job with Child Protection, but when she looked at the stats, she wanted nothing to do with it.
Colchester, New London County, Connecticut
"Don't throw MY baby out with YOUR bathwater."
Nice.
Ron Paul Explorer: The All Paul Search Engine
I worked in the State's
I worked in the State's Attorney's Sex crime unit in my state. I don't believe that you actually think the ratio of legitimate vs illegitimate interventions is even close to "hundreds" to 3-4.
Ventura 2012
What worked great? The
What worked great? The question, at least as I read it, was whether the government should have the right to take your children from you, implying that you're still around to have anything taken away from you at all. I don't think anyone is questioning the state's right to lock you up for beating your kid into a bloody pulp, or raping him, or pimping him out to be raped or whatever, as long as that, or any other criminal conduct, is proven beyond a reasonable doubt. But then, they should not take your kid away from you, but take you away from both your kid and other people.
The whole raison d'être for CPS like agencies, is specifically to take kids away from parents who have not done anything wrong by any reasonable standard. If a parent has committed a crime, prove it, then toss him/her in jail. If he/her has a dependent child, find someone else to take over that responsibility, perhaps starting with relatives, then charities, or perhaps adoptive parents. Which in practice, I am sure would take care of pretty much 100% of the children in question, leaving the government, as usual, utterly unnecessary.
Most examples of abuse
Most examples of abuse aren't capital offenses, and those prison sentences aren't infinite. CPS are specialists at detecting what is often less than apparent child abuse, as well as knowing when a child should be permanently taken from the abusive parent or not.
Ventura 2012
And you're perfectly fine
And you're perfectly fine with having some gaggle of government riff raff come barging in and decide something is "child abuse", despite it not being very apparent? Because some other government stooge told you his aforementioned buddies are "specialists" at it? Are you serious, or are you just playing devil's advocate here? I'm truly befuddled!
And regardless of what offense the offender committed, he really shouldn't get out of jail as long as he still reasonably represents a threat to kids, should he? Corollarily, once he is let out, he should be "fully restituted."
Only if that government has your consent.
Free yourself.
Repent, for the reign of YaHUaH is near!
Good or Bad? Cops Assault Amputee, Steal His Child
Heroic Police Electro-Torture, Humiliate Double Amputee
Honestly, when will the public demand that we deprive the tax-feeders of their little torture toys?
Responding to a domestic violence report, police in Merced, California helped child “protection” workers abduct the two-year-old daughter of 40-year-old Gregory Williams, a double amputee who is confined to a wheelchair.
Williams, a father of three who lost his legs to deep vein thrombosis six years ago and is currently unemployed, had been arguing with his wife. Rather than trying to defuse the situation, the police summoned a CPS worker who decided to seize the two-year-old, Ginni.
When Williams objected, the police placed him under arrest and attempted to force him into the familiar “prone-out” position — face on the ground, hands out at the sides. Since he has no legs to help him break his fall, Williams likely would have landed face-down with enough force to inflict a serious injury. So he reflexively braced himself in his wheelchair.
This act of instinctive self-preservation was described as “resisting arrest” (which, incidentally, is not a crime but an individual right long recognized under common law as a way of protecting one’s self from criminal violence under the color of “authority”).
So Officer John Pinnegar shoved his Portable Electro-Shock Torture device into Williams’ ribs and pulled the trigger twice.
At least one other officer, Sgt. Rodney Court, assisted the valiant Pinnegar in subduing the legless man. Hey, can’t be too careful — “officer safety” and all that. At one point Court shoved a knee into the middle of Williams’ back while Pinnegar cuffed the victim.
The double-amputee was left sitting on the pavement, handcuffed behind the back, with his pants pulled down below the waist — in broad daylight, in full view of the residents of his apartment complex.
According to a news account, “a hostile crowd gathered as the officers tried to perform their duties” — “duties” in this case referring to the exercise of their supposed authority to commit lawless violence against helpless people. It’s a pity nobody in that crowd saw fit to intervene on behalf of the victim.
(Go here to see a video clip of Williams after he was assaulted by the police.)
Williams was held for six days on suspicion of domestic violence and resisting arrest, and then released without charges. Thanks to the ubiquity of Tasers, however, he—like many thousands of others—was subjected to potentially lethal summary punishment for “contempt of cop.”
http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/36713.html#mo...
Ron Paul Explorer: The All Paul Search Engine
this is not something that
this is not something that whatever alternative system you come up with can prevent. I assume you don't want children to be the total property of the parent to be abused on a whim. Someone will be responsible for protecting children from abusive parents. That could be:
A: The community:(ever heard of a lynch mob? They tend to ignore due process)
B: Government police:(many instances of corruption, but the instances of competence don't make it into the newspapers. You have to understand that bias if you want to be a good consumer of information)
C:Private police:(basically the same as government police. they could be slightly better in some areas and worse in others, but you can never take the human element out of the equation).
Ventura 2012
Why Do You Have Such Tremendous Disrepect for People?
People are basically good. Lynch mobs are an aberration.
Ninety-nine percent of the time there are no cops around. At no time that I have been out and about, whether in a large crowd or on a lonely stretch of beach has anyone ever tried to lynch me. When I meet up with another car at stop sign at a lonely intersection in the middle of the night, we take our turns and proceed safely. I do not attempt to commit vehicular homicide against the other driver and he affords me the same courtesy.
Your apparent fear of your fellow man has clouded your perceptions. You continue to cheer on government which has demonstrably killed far more people than it could ever reasonably claim to have saved. Governments killed over a quarter of a billion people in wars during the twentieth century. That doesn't count all the other people killed, injured, robbed, raped, imprisoned, experimented on and sterilized by the government.
Government did all those things "for your own good," and of course, "for the children." How can you help these tyrants promote such hypocrisy? Why do you so loudly proclaim your desire to live and die as a slave?
That being said, private police or security forces would be an excellent option. Those who subscribe to protective services might be expected to contractually agree to submit to litigation in the case of any dispute and security companies could follow reciprocal agreements which would bring the majority of folks under an umbrella of voluntary compliance which provides cost effective protection.
Freedom and security are not incompatible as long as you don't give up your sovereignty and your absolute right to self determination.
Ron Paul Explorer: The All Paul Search Engine
Parents Branded Pedophiles For Taking Pics Of 3-Yr-Old In Bath
The family took some pictures of their kids in the bathtub and had the photos developed at Wal Mart. A photo developer at Wal Mart turned the photos over to the police. Allthough the family got their children back and were vindicated in court, they had to go through a year of hell to get there.
That photo developer is lucky she doesn't live around my neighborhood. She would likely end up being turned over to the police... a few pieces at a time.
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=dcd_1253513400
A few pieces at a time
Thanks for the big giggle!
Colchester, New London County, Connecticut
By the Way, Governments Don't Have "Rights."
Of course government doesn't have a "right" to take your child because only individuals have rights.
Governments have powers (which they abuse) and duties (which they ignore).
Ron Paul Explorer: The All Paul Search Engine
Here is your only issue.
Self-responsibility.... do you want to take care of yourself, or do you want someone to take care of you?
Reading this thread is like a socialist hallmark moment.
~If kids get abused, there should be a government solution.~
~If kids get abused, the state should take care of it~
~If kids get abused, we don't know but someone should take care of it~
Christ wept, people. THINK.
Your children should be your property until they come of age.. which is not a birthday, but a time when they are RESPONSIBLE FOR THEMSELVES.
This gets right to the point and blows out all the liberal weeping and whining about how 1 child in 1,000 has a bad time of it.
If one child in 1,000 has a bad time of it, let's fix that like we USED to.
The locals get together and fix it. PERIOD.
The government should have no say whatsover in what we do with our children. They are OURS. Meaning that the child should be aware that if they screw up too much, they can deal with thier choices outside of mom and dad's home.
No Virginia, not a foster home... reality.
Again, self-responsibility.
Without it, nothing works. This is the thing they have been taking away from you for 100 years and counting.... why?
Figure that out and you'll figure out what freedom means.
~Live life to its fullest, with an open heart, open arms and most important... an open mind~
People get punished for breaking laws
and hurting children should count as breaking the law.
A problem with CPS is that they purposely go about things in a manner that has nothing to do with punishing crimes. They want to get the family embroiled in years and years of "services" that ensure continued funding to CPS. They aren't interested in going about things in a manner that causes evidence to be admissible because prosecuting crimes is not where they get their money.
As long as prosecution is how we deal with one adult assaulting another, I want people who hurt children to be prosecuted, too.
Defend Liberty!
Children, in some cases have to be protected. State not Fed.
I pledge allegiance to the Constitution of The United States of America and to The Republic for which it stands. One Nation FREE AND INDEPENDENT with LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL!
I pledge allegiance to the Constitution of The United States of America and to The Republic for which it stands. Fifty states FREE AND INDEPENDENT with LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL!
This is not a black and
This is not a black and white issue and in fact is very complexed. Many here think that the problems we face are black and white and I am positive they are not.
The problem isn't the laws themselves in many cases but rather how the laws are written. The primary role of Government is to protect life, liberty and property. They actually have an obligation to protect these 3 things, the manner in how they protect these issues is the problem.
www.retakecongress.com
www.retakecongress.com
www.revolutionbroadcasting.com
www.RJHarrismoneybomb.com
agreed 100%
agreed 100%
Ventura 2012
"the manner in how they protect these issues is the problem."
Any time that someone else holds power over you, whether by your own volition or not, problems will arise. Then the problems will get bigger...and bigger...
Ron Paul Explorer: The All Paul Search Engine