Good discussion, very informative. As a possible topic for next time, perhaps talk about DOGE, which we are all cheering on, but so far I have heard nothing about cutting the welfare state. Some conservatives at least recognize that the welfare state is the most expensive item in the federal budget. Ben Shapiro recently had an episode on the subject, pointing out that while cutting waste and fraud is great, we are only trimming around the edges until means tested welfare programs come under the knife.
The feds have cleverly convinced most people that receive government assistance that they're not on welfare at all. Most people don't get something called a 'welfare check'. They get what looks like 'tax breaks' even though a lot of lower income households actually get back everything they paid in withholding and more with payments like 'single head of household' or 'child tax credits'. Most people don't consider food or rent assistance welfare, either, yet it is. Now there are all these cash payments that, supposedly, are one time pandemic payouts but yet seem to go on forever. There's no transparency at all and no one seems to be the least bit ashamed to live off other people's money.
The American and State constitutions only allow for civil or criminal actions to be brought against a citizen. The application of administrative law and courts to those with no nexus with government (business license, etc.) is statism run amok, and as your guests stated, is protected Bar attorneys.
Challenging jurisdiction of such administrative courts should be the first response from anyone dragged into this sort of proceeding.
I have a tremendous amount of information about the subject on both sides of the Atlantic. However, because I am truly indigent after decades of misandrist hostility from all too many persons and institutions, I am in no financial state able to have a paid membership. If that means I should get lost, I will just take it as one more time that "men's rights" excludes men who really have been trashed completely. I will turn 73 on March 24, and many have the attitude that I have one foot in the grave and should just pull in the other foot and have done with. That seems to be what happens to all too men, and the rate of suicide among men proves my point exactly.
Nobody cares, least of all that treacherous hag-nation called America. She is quite content that she drives 'her' men to suicide. Because, you know, she needs to combat the patriarchy. . . which exists exactly nowhere in all the land.
On this subject, I wrote and published a novel on August 14, 2021 telling how I was divorce-raped in Montgomery County, Maryland and was ultimately forced to leave the State of Sea-Level Hillbillies to live in Washington, DC because I had the genitalia that rendered me unfit to live there in the county with an unwritten law: if you're not rich, leave. The novel covers close to a decade of being homeless because of a circuit court's misandrist policy plus a homeless shelter that rejected me for the same reason.
I know that Rush Limbaugh was an asshole, but when he invented the term "feminazi," he proved that even an asshole has moments of brilliance, because that word really hit the nail on the head!
The past fifty years has been quite a beatdown of U.S. masculinity. I'm glad to see that you didn't just roll over, but became productive about your demotion to sub-human by virtue of incorrect genitalia.
Been a lot of that going around, as you doubtless know.
The ongoing grift between women and the 'justsis sistem' is plainly satanic. Eternity will put them all where they deserve to be. Looking forward to that.
I created the rather vulgar label of "pussy worship" to describe the plague that has infected the entire Western world. I also learned the rather vulgar expression of "vaginal blood-fart" from two bitches who were sniping at each other viciously in some comments following an article on Yahoo. When I saw that, I adopted it immediately and when some feminazi starts up with me, most likely with hopes that she can file charges against me for sexual harassment or the like, shouting at her, "Get away from me, you vaginal blood-fart!" is most effective! When I shouted that at one feminazi, she moaned, "Oh, my God!" I then shouted, "God didn't make creatures like you!"
I survived three disastrous marriages to three Jewish wives; the first was American and the last two were Israelis, with one being from a religious family and the other from a very anti-religious family. However, it can be accurately said about Israeli women that they think that once the ring is on the finger, they have only four tasks in life to perform:
1) give birth
2) nurse
3) wean
4) bitch
The first three are for relatively short periods of time, but THE LAST ONE NEVER ENDS!!!
No, definitely not looking for a fourth, but I'm not celibate for sure. What I learned was that if a man gets into any sort of relationship with a woman, if something goes wrong, THE MAN IS ALWAYS BLAMED, EVEN IF THE PROBLEM IS NOT EVEN REMOTELY SOMETHING THAT THE MAN COULD CAUSE!!! I did not cause my first wife's psychosomatic condition that many call "hysterical bleeding," bleeding from the uterus so frequent that it all but kills any chances of sex with a man; no sooner did we separate, it ended, and I was told that the condition is common among newlywed women because of fear of pregnancy.
The story about the last one is long, complicated, and, well, insane like her, but when she gave birth in a hospital that gave her savage, primitive treatment, among the damages she suffered was a ministroke that left me married to a totally psychotic stranger. There's much more to the story about the children that I covered partially in one of my editorials. As for the second, she did what many lesbians do: she married to have a sperm donor and an ATM. No, I had no experience with lesbians before, but when we separated, swarms of married women in our city contacted me, some over the phone, some in person, telling me that she wasn't attracted to men; dealing with that in a foreign country in a foreign language made it a situation for which I was not really prepared. She stayed with me until the third child, a boy, was born, thereby giving her children of both sexes, which is what her kind goes for and then move out with the children and filing for divorce. That was in Israel where the family court system is radically different from the so-called system in every other country; I turned to an organization that offered mediation services, and that way, I paid only $200 for the services of a mediator instead of thousands of dollars for a lawyer who could easily rip me off if I had hired one.
I might add that the Talmud says that a man who has had a bad wife will never see Hell. Well, damn, that means I've got it made in the Next World! I had THREE DISASTERS! One catch however: I have to die to collect the reward! For men, there's always a catch that cheats him out of any hope for a reward.
One editorial that tells of a unique aspect of the last divorce is linked to the following URL:
What JCADA Did to Me Because I Am a Convert to Judaism
Criticize them for gender bias and have charges of anti-Semitism thrown into your face! Here's another editorial that tells a lot about a similar subject:
A Story About Israeli Xenophobia, Competing with the French For Sure!
Every one of them is gone back: they are altogether become filthy; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.
and
Romans 3:12 KJV
They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.
Increasing numbers of Today's men are already breaking the lock Feminists have on the family by simply walking away. Without men our society cannot and will not survive, nor do today’s men owe to women and/or society either their loyalty or labor.
Let women take up the mantle of leadership and our society will rapidly collapse, that is the only way to defeat feminism and free ourselves - both men and women as well as our families and society itself.
Finally, at long last, men are separating themselves from Ms. Amerika. They are refusing education (in the feminist schools), refusing employment (in the feminized workplaces) and in many cases leaving Ms. Amerika physically.
There will be much more of this ahead because Ms. Amerika has no intention of changing her malevolent ways, Trump or no Trump.
A religious soldier in the Israeli army taught me one passage from the Bible that I repeat often, even though I'm far from religious now:
Ecclesiastes 7:26:
"I found that some women are worse than death and are as dangerous as traps. Their love is like a net, and their arms hold men like chains."
King Solomon wrote those words. He was called Solomon the Wise not by accident! If, after 1,000 wives, he did not find even one to be worthy, I'm not about to try 997 more to reach the same conclusion!
This analysis is very strong in looking at how family court law has become vastly unconstitutional and how the social services agencies of government now have a vested interest in seeing these problems persist. We must, however, ask an important question. If this was simply a matter of a bureaucracy and government agencies seeking to self sustain themselves, they would treat dead beat mothers with the same severity and harshness as they do dead beat Dad's. The reality is this is NOT the case. While approximately 50% of men end up being dead beat Dad's (even if we use that term where the child support is unfair and excessive) 95% of Mom's who lack custody are deadbeats. Since women almost always get custody, this suggests that there is a pro-woman/anti-male intention behind the entire system. Thus...while the bureaucratic inertia plays an important role...we need to be fully honest...this is a feminist driven operation that is designed to shift power and resources toward women at the expense of families, children and men. Indeed....if we actually had a sex based equal rights amendment that lived up to the terms...it is mostly WOMEN and programs supporting women that would be in violation of it. We need to be honest here...until you deal with gynocentrism, you won't solve these problems.
Agreed. That's why I said an ERA that actually lived up to the meaning of its terms. Frankly...the actions of women are making Sharia law look more and more appealing. I don't want that outcome...but a few centuries of it might be good for "character building" in the less fair sex.
Yes, I saw your qualifier. What I am saying is that New Amerika will never have an ERA that 'lives up to its terms'. It's like expecting the past 60 years of the Civil Rights Era to produce 'equality'. Has it produced equality?
No. It has produced mass iniquity instead. A male-persecuting and white-hating society. And that's all 'equality' ever will produce. Heck, the U.S. corporations openly BRAG that white men need not apply.
The collective power of women -- aided by simp men -- has zero (0) intention of establishing actual 'equality' because that would result in male superiority. Because men are superior to women at everything except menstruating, giving birth, and running their mouths endlessly.
Your entire comment was very good and I shouldn't have focused solely on the part about false hope in the ERA. But the legal and governmental systems in New Amerika have no intention of enforcing ANYTHING that might place females in an inferior position. Which is what an enforced ERA would do.
Actually I think we are saying the same thing in different ways. The new Shemerika is inherently inequitable and its defeat and restoration of a more traditional gender role society is what is needed to preserve both freedom and Western civilization.
The administrative child support state, a/k/a Title IV-D is a contract-driven business operation (racketeering operation). Child support payees/obligees and payors/obligors are "contractual" in nature by definition. Title IV-D child support operations provide "services", use "outside contractors" to enforce support (e.g., agreements/contracts between state & sheriffs departments, state and judiciary, state and politicians, state and counties). Upon reading such agreements, there are "arrest provisions" built into these agreements to arrest contractual "obligors" for "breaching" the child support contract. You say that child support IS NOT a contract, or that it is a "special kind of debt". Child support is, indeed, a contract by operation of law, and it is a debt like any other debt in commerce; implicating Prohibitions Against Imprisonment for Debt Constitutional issues in every state. Read this from U.S. v. Lewko, 269 F.3d 64, 68-69 (1st Cir. 2001):
"Although the non-custodial parent has a duty to provide financial support, the custodial parent must also demonstrate that he or she is using that money for the care and upbringing of the child. Regardless, a child support obligation arising from a court order, whether family court or another civil court, is a debt that may be enforced through civil remedies. See Mussari, 95 F.3d at 790 ("True, the court order arises from the family relation. Once in place, the order creates a debt. Like any other debt, it is a thing of value, one of millions of obligations that make up the stream of commerce subject to congressional control."); see also Bongiorno, 106 F.3d at 1032 (holding that state-court-imposed child support orders are "functionally equivalent to interstate contracts" and rejecting idea that child support payment obligations are somehow "different") (citing Sage, 92 F.3d 69*69 at 106). Therefore, defendant's attempt to carve out child support payments from other types of interstate monetary transfers in satisfaction of a financial obligation fails."
Also, child support and its enforcement arise out of a civil matter in family courts. Some states will try and bamboozle parents (read: fathers) that child support enforcement can be converted into criminal matters. No one can show me in any state where they were afforded their MIRANDA RIGHTS right out of the box during the civil proceedings ordering child support. No one was read their rights from the "get-go", that they had the right to remain silent about their finances, their right to appointed attorneys knowledgeable in family law, civil law, criminal law, and constitutional law, their right to trials by jury, their right to a complete defense. Civil contempts require "clear and convincing evidence" before anyone can be arrested or jailed. Family Court Judges lie and tell fathers that they only need "preponderance of the evidence" to arrest and jail because it is a civil matter. Again, this is an egregious breach and violation of the U.S. Constitution. No one, and I mean No one, can be arrested in a civil matter, because there is NO 4TH AMENDMENT PROBABLE CAUSE THAT A CRIME WAS COMMITTED!!!!!!!! Probable Cause can NEVER EXIST in a civil matter; it can only exist in criminal matters!!!!!
"We start with the basic proposition that a full-scale arrest must be supported by probable cause”. Atwater v. City of Lago Vista, 532 U.S. 318, 354, 121 S.Ct. 1536, 149 L.Ed.2d 549 (2001).
"By definition, probable cause to arrest can only exist in relation to criminal conduct; civil disputes cannot give rise to probable cause”. Stevens v. Rose, 298 F.3d 880, 883 (9th Cir. 2002); Allen v. City of Portland, 73 F.3d 232 (9th Cir. 1995), the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals (citing cases from the U.S. Supreme Court, Fifth, Seventh, Eighth and Ninth Circuits); Morgan v. Woessner, 997 F.2d 1244, 1252 (9th Cir. 1993) (citing Adams v. Williams, 407 U.S. 143, 148-49, 92 S.Ct. 1921, 32 L.Ed.2d 612 (1972)).
Stevens v. Rose, 298 F.3d at 883 held the following:
“Stevens charges that Hanson violated his Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable seizures by arresting him in connection with a civil dispute. We start with the basic proposition that a full-scale arrest must be supported by probable cause. Atwater v. City of Lago Vista, 532 U.S. 318, 354, 121 S.Ct. 1536, 149 L.Ed.2d 549 (2001); Morgan v. Woessner, 997 F.2d 1244, 1252 (9th Cir. 1993) (citing Adams v. Williams, 407 U.S. 143, 148-49, 92 S.Ct. 1921, 32 L.Ed.2d 612 (1972)). In turn, we have previously held that "[b]y its definition, probable cause can only exist in relation to criminal conduct. It follows that civil disputes cannot give rise to probable cause." Allen v. City of Portland, 73 F.3d 232, 237 (9th Cir. 1995). This rather unremarkable proposition — namely that good intentions do not overcome the rule that civil disputes do not give officers probable cause to arrest — is supported by other circuits as well. See e.g., Wooley v. City of Baton Rouge, 211 F.3d 913, 925-27 (5th Cir. 2000) (holding that seizure of child violated clearly established Fourth Amendment right where there was no probable cause and child was not in imminent danger of harm); Peterson v. City of Plymouth, 60 F.3d 469, 476-77 (8th Cir. 1995) (holding that the arrest was clearly established to be unlawful where officer knew the dispute was a civil, not a criminal, matter); Moore v. Marketplace Rest., 754 F.2d 1336, 1345-47 (7th Cir. 1985) (stating that there would be no probable cause to arrest for breach of contract dispute involving payment for food services). Indeed, the Peterson case closely parallels the circumstances here. The Eighth Circuit upheld judgment as a matter of law in favor of Peterson who was arrested in connection with a dispute over the ownership of a snowblower. The court noted: "Knowledge of Peterson's reasonable and actual claim of right put [the officer] on notice that the dispute was a civil matter not involving criminal intent." 60 F.3d at 477.
In Rzayeva v. Foster, 134 F.Supp.2d 239, 248-49 (D.Conn. 2001), the District Court held that holding involuntary civil confinement is a "massive curtailment of liberty", is tantamount to the infringement of being arrested and can be made only upon probable cause, citing Vitek v. Jones, 445 U.S. 480, 491, 100 S.Ct. 1254, 63 L.Ed.2d 552 (1980).
The rules regarding incarceration for failure to pay child Support requires states to implement due process safeguards as required from the United States Supreme Court case Turner v. Rogers, 131 S.Ct. 2507 (2011). The ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court provided guidance on the factors to be considered when determining which cases should be referred to the court for civil contempt, including a determination of the noncustodial parent’s ability to pay. A court may not impose punishment "in a civil contempt proceeding when it is clearly established that the alleged contemnor is unable to comply with the terms of the order." Hicks v. Feiock, 485 U.S. 624, 638, n. 9, 108 S.Ct. 1423, 99 L.Ed.2d 721 (1988). Turner v. Rogers, at 2516.
Punishment is an element of criminal contempt, not civil contempt. Criminal contempt requires ALL criminal Due Process including probable cause, indictment, right to appointed, competent counsel, right to exculpatory evidence, right to present evidence, testimony and witnesses, right to trial by jury, right to appeal, and other Due Process considerations.
As we have seen, state family court judges routinely ignore U.S. Supreme Court and U.S. Courts of Appeals precedential law (caselaw). Judges MUST be brought to task on this by filing Judicial Misconduct Complaints, since Judges took a Constitutional Oath to Uphold, Support & Defend the U.S. Constitution & all laws thereunder. When ignoring/violating U.S. Supreme Court, or Circuit Court of Appeals, caselaw, judges are not following law, are incompetent, ignorant, or both. Filing Judicial Misconduct Complaints for this, puts a black mark on a judge's career line for promotions.
Some will say that it will piss off the family court judges. So what!!!! If the judge retaliates, you keep filing judicial misconduct complaints against the judge.
The United States Supreme Court has ruled that the Due Process Clause Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment requires judges to recuse themselves not only when actual bias has been demonstrated or when the judge has an economic interest in the outcome of the case (receiving funding for child support enforcement that goes to state judicial pensions, and salaries, bonuses & bounties) but also when "extreme facts" create a "probability of bias." Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal Co., 129 S.Ct. 2252, 556 U.S. 868 (2009). It may also violate due process when a judge presides over a criminal contempt case that resulted from the defendant's hostility towards the judge. See Taylor v. Hayes, 418 U.S. 488, 501 (1974) (a judge who had "become embroiled in a running controversy" with the defendant could not subsequently preside over that defendant's contempt trial).
Amerika is an evil nation, because it is a feminist nation. The U.S. is the Female Vexation of Scripture (Strong's Concordance 6869, rival wife; female adversary; feminine affliction).
Given the chance, Ms. Amerika will wipe out fatherhood and even masculinity itself, then sit back and call it all 'good' and 'progressive'. Call it 'liberation' and 'righteousness'. There is no way forward for a nation that despises and persecutes its own sons, based on the lies and whims of females. Donald Trump ain't gonna save you. He's a feminist too.
May heaven turn against her and return to her double the iniquity she has dealt out to me and my brothers. Let an example for all the nations be made of her.
Great talk Tom! Thank you for continuing this important work!
Thanks Hannah. It is important isn't it? Change that and good things happen! Good to see you.
Good discussion, very informative. As a possible topic for next time, perhaps talk about DOGE, which we are all cheering on, but so far I have heard nothing about cutting the welfare state. Some conservatives at least recognize that the welfare state is the most expensive item in the federal budget. Ben Shapiro recently had an episode on the subject, pointing out that while cutting waste and fraud is great, we are only trimming around the edges until means tested welfare programs come under the knife.
It's likely we spend more on means tested programs then on defense spending which is mammoth.
That's what Ben Shapiro said a few days ago.
The feds have cleverly convinced most people that receive government assistance that they're not on welfare at all. Most people don't get something called a 'welfare check'. They get what looks like 'tax breaks' even though a lot of lower income households actually get back everything they paid in withholding and more with payments like 'single head of household' or 'child tax credits'. Most people don't consider food or rent assistance welfare, either, yet it is. Now there are all these cash payments that, supposedly, are one time pandemic payouts but yet seem to go on forever. There's no transparency at all and no one seems to be the least bit ashamed to live off other people's money.
Bingo.
Thanks for the info. Well said.
The American and State constitutions only allow for civil or criminal actions to be brought against a citizen. The application of administrative law and courts to those with no nexus with government (business license, etc.) is statism run amok, and as your guests stated, is protected Bar attorneys.
Challenging jurisdiction of such administrative courts should be the first response from anyone dragged into this sort of proceeding.
Yes, but it would be a helluva one sided fight....
I have a tremendous amount of information about the subject on both sides of the Atlantic. However, because I am truly indigent after decades of misandrist hostility from all too many persons and institutions, I am in no financial state able to have a paid membership. If that means I should get lost, I will just take it as one more time that "men's rights" excludes men who really have been trashed completely. I will turn 73 on March 24, and many have the attitude that I have one foot in the grave and should just pull in the other foot and have done with. That seems to be what happens to all too men, and the rate of suicide among men proves my point exactly.
Nobody cares, least of all that treacherous hag-nation called America. She is quite content that she drives 'her' men to suicide. Because, you know, she needs to combat the patriarchy. . . which exists exactly nowhere in all the land.
Ms. Amerika's turn is coming.
On this subject, I wrote and published a novel on August 14, 2021 telling how I was divorce-raped in Montgomery County, Maryland and was ultimately forced to leave the State of Sea-Level Hillbillies to live in Washington, DC because I had the genitalia that rendered me unfit to live there in the county with an unwritten law: if you're not rich, leave. The novel covers close to a decade of being homeless because of a circuit court's misandrist policy plus a homeless shelter that rejected me for the same reason.
https://www.amazon.com/s?k=street+daddy+marcel+abrahamsohn&crid=U5GRBACRFRZZ&sprefix=%2Caps%2C65&ref=nb_sb_ss_recent_2_0_recent
I have written a number of editorials on the subject as well:
Fatherhood Is Not Dead
https://authorhouse.haus/3CHdUDL
A Father’s Report, Despite the Negative Image that Fathers Have in the Western World Today
https://authorhouse.haus/4bjd5Od
Having Unacceptable Genitalia – a Widespread Problem
https://authorhouse.haus/4b3F4kE
Laws Never Enforced Now in the United States
https://authorhouse.haus/42TQjKv
I know that Rush Limbaugh was an asshole, but when he invented the term "feminazi," he proved that even an asshole has moments of brilliance, because that word really hit the nail on the head!
The past fifty years has been quite a beatdown of U.S. masculinity. I'm glad to see that you didn't just roll over, but became productive about your demotion to sub-human by virtue of incorrect genitalia.
Been a lot of that going around, as you doubtless know.
The ongoing grift between women and the 'justsis sistem' is plainly satanic. Eternity will put them all where they deserve to be. Looking forward to that.
Cheers.
I created the rather vulgar label of "pussy worship" to describe the plague that has infected the entire Western world. I also learned the rather vulgar expression of "vaginal blood-fart" from two bitches who were sniping at each other viciously in some comments following an article on Yahoo. When I saw that, I adopted it immediately and when some feminazi starts up with me, most likely with hopes that she can file charges against me for sexual harassment or the like, shouting at her, "Get away from me, you vaginal blood-fart!" is most effective! When I shouted that at one feminazi, she moaned, "Oh, my God!" I then shouted, "God didn't make creatures like you!"
I survived three disastrous marriages to three Jewish wives; the first was American and the last two were Israelis, with one being from a religious family and the other from a very anti-religious family. However, it can be accurately said about Israeli women that they think that once the ring is on the finger, they have only four tasks in life to perform:
1) give birth
2) nurse
3) wean
4) bitch
The first three are for relatively short periods of time, but THE LAST ONE NEVER ENDS!!!
I heard that phrase VBF back in the Eighties when I still lived in Amerika. Haven't heard it again until today.
Amigo if you went down 3 times, I guess I can assume you're not looking for a 4th.
Where I live, they say Amerika has 4 castes. Yep they use the word 'castes':
1. children
2. women
3. household pets
4. males
Had to go four thousand miles to hear the truth about my own cuntry. < no that isn't a misspelling. :O)
No, definitely not looking for a fourth, but I'm not celibate for sure. What I learned was that if a man gets into any sort of relationship with a woman, if something goes wrong, THE MAN IS ALWAYS BLAMED, EVEN IF THE PROBLEM IS NOT EVEN REMOTELY SOMETHING THAT THE MAN COULD CAUSE!!! I did not cause my first wife's psychosomatic condition that many call "hysterical bleeding," bleeding from the uterus so frequent that it all but kills any chances of sex with a man; no sooner did we separate, it ended, and I was told that the condition is common among newlywed women because of fear of pregnancy.
The story about the last one is long, complicated, and, well, insane like her, but when she gave birth in a hospital that gave her savage, primitive treatment, among the damages she suffered was a ministroke that left me married to a totally psychotic stranger. There's much more to the story about the children that I covered partially in one of my editorials. As for the second, she did what many lesbians do: she married to have a sperm donor and an ATM. No, I had no experience with lesbians before, but when we separated, swarms of married women in our city contacted me, some over the phone, some in person, telling me that she wasn't attracted to men; dealing with that in a foreign country in a foreign language made it a situation for which I was not really prepared. She stayed with me until the third child, a boy, was born, thereby giving her children of both sexes, which is what her kind goes for and then move out with the children and filing for divorce. That was in Israel where the family court system is radically different from the so-called system in every other country; I turned to an organization that offered mediation services, and that way, I paid only $200 for the services of a mediator instead of thousands of dollars for a lawyer who could easily rip me off if I had hired one.
I might add that the Talmud says that a man who has had a bad wife will never see Hell. Well, damn, that means I've got it made in the Next World! I had THREE DISASTERS! One catch however: I have to die to collect the reward! For men, there's always a catch that cheats him out of any hope for a reward.
One editorial that tells of a unique aspect of the last divorce is linked to the following URL:
What JCADA Did to Me Because I Am a Convert to Judaism
https://authorhouse.haus/4bBARW1
Criticize them for gender bias and have charges of anti-Semitism thrown into your face! Here's another editorial that tells a lot about a similar subject:
A Story About Israeli Xenophobia, Competing with the French For Sure!
https://authorhouse.haus/41l72Er
I don't need to be a fiction writer; telling true stories are even harder to believe!
The Bible clearly states that no one is good:
Psalm 53:3 KJV
Every one of them is gone back: they are altogether become filthy; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.
and
Romans 3:12 KJV
They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.
Increasing numbers of Today's men are already breaking the lock Feminists have on the family by simply walking away. Without men our society cannot and will not survive, nor do today’s men owe to women and/or society either their loyalty or labor.
Let women take up the mantle of leadership and our society will rapidly collapse, that is the only way to defeat feminism and free ourselves - both men and women as well as our families and society itself.
Finally, at long last, men are separating themselves from Ms. Amerika. They are refusing education (in the feminist schools), refusing employment (in the feminized workplaces) and in many cases leaving Ms. Amerika physically.
There will be much more of this ahead because Ms. Amerika has no intention of changing her malevolent ways, Trump or no Trump.
A religious soldier in the Israeli army taught me one passage from the Bible that I repeat often, even though I'm far from religious now:
Ecclesiastes 7:26:
"I found that some women are worse than death and are as dangerous as traps. Their love is like a net, and their arms hold men like chains."
King Solomon wrote those words. He was called Solomon the Wise not by accident! If, after 1,000 wives, he did not find even one to be worthy, I'm not about to try 997 more to reach the same conclusion!
This analysis is very strong in looking at how family court law has become vastly unconstitutional and how the social services agencies of government now have a vested interest in seeing these problems persist. We must, however, ask an important question. If this was simply a matter of a bureaucracy and government agencies seeking to self sustain themselves, they would treat dead beat mothers with the same severity and harshness as they do dead beat Dad's. The reality is this is NOT the case. While approximately 50% of men end up being dead beat Dad's (even if we use that term where the child support is unfair and excessive) 95% of Mom's who lack custody are deadbeats. Since women almost always get custody, this suggests that there is a pro-woman/anti-male intention behind the entire system. Thus...while the bureaucratic inertia plays an important role...we need to be fully honest...this is a feminist driven operation that is designed to shift power and resources toward women at the expense of families, children and men. Indeed....if we actually had a sex based equal rights amendment that lived up to the terms...it is mostly WOMEN and programs supporting women that would be in violation of it. We need to be honest here...until you deal with gynocentrism, you won't solve these problems.
An equal rights amendment would not help. It would simply be treated like 'civil rights' are now.
Who receives 'civil rights' in the U.S.? Everybody except white males.
So much for an equal rights amendment.
Agreed. That's why I said an ERA that actually lived up to the meaning of its terms. Frankly...the actions of women are making Sharia law look more and more appealing. I don't want that outcome...but a few centuries of it might be good for "character building" in the less fair sex.
Yes, I saw your qualifier. What I am saying is that New Amerika will never have an ERA that 'lives up to its terms'. It's like expecting the past 60 years of the Civil Rights Era to produce 'equality'. Has it produced equality?
No. It has produced mass iniquity instead. A male-persecuting and white-hating society. And that's all 'equality' ever will produce. Heck, the U.S. corporations openly BRAG that white men need not apply.
The collective power of women -- aided by simp men -- has zero (0) intention of establishing actual 'equality' because that would result in male superiority. Because men are superior to women at everything except menstruating, giving birth, and running their mouths endlessly.
Your entire comment was very good and I shouldn't have focused solely on the part about false hope in the ERA. But the legal and governmental systems in New Amerika have no intention of enforcing ANYTHING that might place females in an inferior position. Which is what an enforced ERA would do.
Cheers.
Actually I think we are saying the same thing in different ways. The new Shemerika is inherently inequitable and its defeat and restoration of a more traditional gender role society is what is needed to preserve both freedom and Western civilization.
We are in agreement. Well-stated sitrep.
Thank you, gentlemen, for the discussion. If it's any consolation, things are even worse in Isreal.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rl-cTa-mau8
The administrative child support state, a/k/a Title IV-D is a contract-driven business operation (racketeering operation). Child support payees/obligees and payors/obligors are "contractual" in nature by definition. Title IV-D child support operations provide "services", use "outside contractors" to enforce support (e.g., agreements/contracts between state & sheriffs departments, state and judiciary, state and politicians, state and counties). Upon reading such agreements, there are "arrest provisions" built into these agreements to arrest contractual "obligors" for "breaching" the child support contract. You say that child support IS NOT a contract, or that it is a "special kind of debt". Child support is, indeed, a contract by operation of law, and it is a debt like any other debt in commerce; implicating Prohibitions Against Imprisonment for Debt Constitutional issues in every state. Read this from U.S. v. Lewko, 269 F.3d 64, 68-69 (1st Cir. 2001):
"Although the non-custodial parent has a duty to provide financial support, the custodial parent must also demonstrate that he or she is using that money for the care and upbringing of the child. Regardless, a child support obligation arising from a court order, whether family court or another civil court, is a debt that may be enforced through civil remedies. See Mussari, 95 F.3d at 790 ("True, the court order arises from the family relation. Once in place, the order creates a debt. Like any other debt, it is a thing of value, one of millions of obligations that make up the stream of commerce subject to congressional control."); see also Bongiorno, 106 F.3d at 1032 (holding that state-court-imposed child support orders are "functionally equivalent to interstate contracts" and rejecting idea that child support payment obligations are somehow "different") (citing Sage, 92 F.3d 69*69 at 106). Therefore, defendant's attempt to carve out child support payments from other types of interstate monetary transfers in satisfaction of a financial obligation fails."
Also, child support and its enforcement arise out of a civil matter in family courts. Some states will try and bamboozle parents (read: fathers) that child support enforcement can be converted into criminal matters. No one can show me in any state where they were afforded their MIRANDA RIGHTS right out of the box during the civil proceedings ordering child support. No one was read their rights from the "get-go", that they had the right to remain silent about their finances, their right to appointed attorneys knowledgeable in family law, civil law, criminal law, and constitutional law, their right to trials by jury, their right to a complete defense. Civil contempts require "clear and convincing evidence" before anyone can be arrested or jailed. Family Court Judges lie and tell fathers that they only need "preponderance of the evidence" to arrest and jail because it is a civil matter. Again, this is an egregious breach and violation of the U.S. Constitution. No one, and I mean No one, can be arrested in a civil matter, because there is NO 4TH AMENDMENT PROBABLE CAUSE THAT A CRIME WAS COMMITTED!!!!!!!! Probable Cause can NEVER EXIST in a civil matter; it can only exist in criminal matters!!!!!
"We start with the basic proposition that a full-scale arrest must be supported by probable cause”. Atwater v. City of Lago Vista, 532 U.S. 318, 354, 121 S.Ct. 1536, 149 L.Ed.2d 549 (2001).
"By definition, probable cause to arrest can only exist in relation to criminal conduct; civil disputes cannot give rise to probable cause”. Stevens v. Rose, 298 F.3d 880, 883 (9th Cir. 2002); Allen v. City of Portland, 73 F.3d 232 (9th Cir. 1995), the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals (citing cases from the U.S. Supreme Court, Fifth, Seventh, Eighth and Ninth Circuits); Morgan v. Woessner, 997 F.2d 1244, 1252 (9th Cir. 1993) (citing Adams v. Williams, 407 U.S. 143, 148-49, 92 S.Ct. 1921, 32 L.Ed.2d 612 (1972)).
Stevens v. Rose, 298 F.3d at 883 held the following:
“Stevens charges that Hanson violated his Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable seizures by arresting him in connection with a civil dispute. We start with the basic proposition that a full-scale arrest must be supported by probable cause. Atwater v. City of Lago Vista, 532 U.S. 318, 354, 121 S.Ct. 1536, 149 L.Ed.2d 549 (2001); Morgan v. Woessner, 997 F.2d 1244, 1252 (9th Cir. 1993) (citing Adams v. Williams, 407 U.S. 143, 148-49, 92 S.Ct. 1921, 32 L.Ed.2d 612 (1972)). In turn, we have previously held that "[b]y its definition, probable cause can only exist in relation to criminal conduct. It follows that civil disputes cannot give rise to probable cause." Allen v. City of Portland, 73 F.3d 232, 237 (9th Cir. 1995). This rather unremarkable proposition — namely that good intentions do not overcome the rule that civil disputes do not give officers probable cause to arrest — is supported by other circuits as well. See e.g., Wooley v. City of Baton Rouge, 211 F.3d 913, 925-27 (5th Cir. 2000) (holding that seizure of child violated clearly established Fourth Amendment right where there was no probable cause and child was not in imminent danger of harm); Peterson v. City of Plymouth, 60 F.3d 469, 476-77 (8th Cir. 1995) (holding that the arrest was clearly established to be unlawful where officer knew the dispute was a civil, not a criminal, matter); Moore v. Marketplace Rest., 754 F.2d 1336, 1345-47 (7th Cir. 1985) (stating that there would be no probable cause to arrest for breach of contract dispute involving payment for food services). Indeed, the Peterson case closely parallels the circumstances here. The Eighth Circuit upheld judgment as a matter of law in favor of Peterson who was arrested in connection with a dispute over the ownership of a snowblower. The court noted: "Knowledge of Peterson's reasonable and actual claim of right put [the officer] on notice that the dispute was a civil matter not involving criminal intent." 60 F.3d at 477.
In Rzayeva v. Foster, 134 F.Supp.2d 239, 248-49 (D.Conn. 2001), the District Court held that holding involuntary civil confinement is a "massive curtailment of liberty", is tantamount to the infringement of being arrested and can be made only upon probable cause, citing Vitek v. Jones, 445 U.S. 480, 491, 100 S.Ct. 1254, 63 L.Ed.2d 552 (1980).
The rules regarding incarceration for failure to pay child Support requires states to implement due process safeguards as required from the United States Supreme Court case Turner v. Rogers, 131 S.Ct. 2507 (2011). The ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court provided guidance on the factors to be considered when determining which cases should be referred to the court for civil contempt, including a determination of the noncustodial parent’s ability to pay. A court may not impose punishment "in a civil contempt proceeding when it is clearly established that the alleged contemnor is unable to comply with the terms of the order." Hicks v. Feiock, 485 U.S. 624, 638, n. 9, 108 S.Ct. 1423, 99 L.Ed.2d 721 (1988). Turner v. Rogers, at 2516.
Punishment is an element of criminal contempt, not civil contempt. Criminal contempt requires ALL criminal Due Process including probable cause, indictment, right to appointed, competent counsel, right to exculpatory evidence, right to present evidence, testimony and witnesses, right to trial by jury, right to appeal, and other Due Process considerations.
As we have seen, state family court judges routinely ignore U.S. Supreme Court and U.S. Courts of Appeals precedential law (caselaw). Judges MUST be brought to task on this by filing Judicial Misconduct Complaints, since Judges took a Constitutional Oath to Uphold, Support & Defend the U.S. Constitution & all laws thereunder. When ignoring/violating U.S. Supreme Court, or Circuit Court of Appeals, caselaw, judges are not following law, are incompetent, ignorant, or both. Filing Judicial Misconduct Complaints for this, puts a black mark on a judge's career line for promotions.
Some will say that it will piss off the family court judges. So what!!!! If the judge retaliates, you keep filing judicial misconduct complaints against the judge.
The United States Supreme Court has ruled that the Due Process Clause Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment requires judges to recuse themselves not only when actual bias has been demonstrated or when the judge has an economic interest in the outcome of the case (receiving funding for child support enforcement that goes to state judicial pensions, and salaries, bonuses & bounties) but also when "extreme facts" create a "probability of bias." Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal Co., 129 S.Ct. 2252, 556 U.S. 868 (2009). It may also violate due process when a judge presides over a criminal contempt case that resulted from the defendant's hostility towards the judge. See Taylor v. Hayes, 418 U.S. 488, 501 (1974) (a judge who had "become embroiled in a running controversy" with the defendant could not subsequently preside over that defendant's contempt trial).
Amerika is an evil nation, because it is a feminist nation. The U.S. is the Female Vexation of Scripture (Strong's Concordance 6869, rival wife; female adversary; feminine affliction).
Given the chance, Ms. Amerika will wipe out fatherhood and even masculinity itself, then sit back and call it all 'good' and 'progressive'. Call it 'liberation' and 'righteousness'. There is no way forward for a nation that despises and persecutes its own sons, based on the lies and whims of females. Donald Trump ain't gonna save you. He's a feminist too.
May heaven turn against her and return to her double the iniquity she has dealt out to me and my brothers. Let an example for all the nations be made of her.