6 votes

U.S. Government child protector handcuffs boy to porch with dead chicken around his neck

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Unfortunately, foster parents are notorious for this type of

abuse. I know some good ones, but there are definitely a lot of bad ones.

Christians should not be warmongers! http://www.lewrockwell.com/vance/vance87.html

makes me think

about how the government shut down Lester Roloff children's homes.

A classic example of the unrestrained use of government force against a child care facility occurred in 1984, when the State of Texas attempted to completely shut down three children's homes run by Pastor Lester Roloff. He, like Pastor Silevin before him, refused to allow the state to license his homes for the children who had been voluntarily placed there by their parents. The state of Texas went to court, but in 1981 a state district judge denied its request for an injunction against the Pastor's homes, concluding that the licensing procedure as applied to the church running them would violate the constitutions of both the United States and Texas. The federal Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's decision.

However, the state Supreme Court rejected the churches' contention that licensing would interfere with religious freedom. The Chief Justice did not object to the quality of the care provided by the Roloff homes; his concern was the simple fact they would not submit to licensing. He noted that the homes have "a good record of high quality service," and that they could "easily satisfy licensing requirements, but had chosen not to do so."

So the state wanted certain restrictions on the care provided children in Pastor Roloff's homes. Several of those restrictions were so incredible that they show that the majority reason the state went after the child care facilities was simply that they were too successful.

The first of these restrictions was (not a complete list):

"You should not threaten a child with the displeasure of a deity."

In other words, you couldn't tell a child that he was a sinner. Remember that these children had been placed in these homes because they had become disciplinary problems to their parents. The parents, who had seen their children become involved in prostitution, drugs and criminal activity, had turned to the Pastor for help in turning their child around. They turned to him because he was a Christian Pastor, and because he had demonstrated success in hundreds of similar cases before. These parents loved their children and wanted them to stop their criminal and anti-social behavior. They cared for them enough to voluntarily place them in a program that had proven successful. Only a very small percentage of these children had been placed in these homes by the court system.

One of the reasons the Pastor was successful was because he turned the children to religion. But the state told him he could not use that as a method of correcting the child.

The second restriction was:

"The institution shall see that each child is provided with personal clothing suitable to the child's age and size. It shall be comparable to the clothing of other children in the community."

The Pastor and his staff felt that much of the clothing the children were wearing was too suggestive and improper. So they attempted to provide the children with modest clothing less stimulating and provocative. They felt that this restriction would place the children back into the clothing that in many cases had caused them to have problems before their arrival at the Roloff homes.

The third restriction was:

"Children should be encouraged to form friendships with persons outside the institution."

It would be fair to observe that such friendships were frequently what brought the children to the homes in the first place.

The fourth restriction was:

Pastor Lester Roloff - Man of God"The opinions and recommendations of the children in care shall be considered in the development and evaluation of the program and activities. The procedure for this shall be documented."

Letting the inmates run the prison sounds like an excellent idea until the prisoners suggest that the restraining bars should be removed. Many of these children had become discipline problems mainly because they had decided that they could best run their own lives. When this determination had failed, the parents placed them into Pastor Roloff's homes so that they would learn some discipline. But the state wanted them to learn how to run their own lives again.

The purpose of all this incredible pressure on the Roloff homes appeared to be the desire of the state to weaken the ability of the Roloff homes to be successful with these troubled children. A secondary purpose appeared to be the desire to weaken the family, and encourage the state to devise methods that would remove the control of the children from the parents and to give them over to the state.

Wow, wow, wow

glad they caught this but I have a bad feeling those children are still not safe.

"We can see with our eyes, hear with our ears and feel with our touch, but we understand with our hearts."

Headline should read.

Major serial theif (government & its Rothschild puppet slaves) punishes petty theif the boy with the chicken. While the big theif goes on theiving unchecked the thug minion cop attacks the petti theif to distract.