Heads up Massachusetts...

[MYSONSDAD]

http://www.lowellsun.com/ci_3072006

Article Launched: 09/29/2005 11:01:10 AM  

Garry: Give dads more custodial privileges
By ERIK ARVIDSON, Sun Statehouse Bureau  

 
 
BOSTON -- State lawmakers have proposed legislation that would give fathers greater custodial rights of their children in divorce and separation cases.

State Rep. Colleen Garry, D-Dracut, has filed a bill that would give temporary shared legal and physical custody to both parents, as long as both parents are considered by a judge to be fit.

Currently, judges determine the custody of a child based on what is in the child's best interest. But critics say that judges in child custody cases tend to favor the mother when determining sole custody of the child.

Garry, who is also a family law attorney, said that while the current law gives both parents shared legal custody, and both parents are involved in making parental decisions for the child, only one parent is given physical custody.

"Unfortunately, it really comes to a point that people are using their children as a bargaining chip. That's the most unfortunate part of all," Garry said. "There are difficulties, such as who is going to have the children on Christmas Eve. But those are also problems in sole custody cases."

Proponents of the bill cited the results of a nonbinding referendum in last November's election, in which 86 percent of the voters in 31 legislative districts in Massachusetts supported the concept of shared parenting.

The initiative asked people if they would instruct their legislator to vote in favor of legislation to create a "strong presumption" in favor of joint physical and legal custody.

Stephen Carrier, president of the Massachusetts Children's Rights Council, said there are numerous benefits to a child of a shared custody arrangement, including the fact that it cuts down on unnecessary litigation.

"Denying custody and limiting access tells a good parent that 'You are no longer important or necessary to a child,'" Carrier said.

Opponents of so-called shared parenting laws argue that they do little to help the child, and are focused on making both parents feel important.

Some opponents also say that children are better off living in one home and sleeping in one bed, as opposed to traveling between the homes of each parent.

Currently, 11 states and the District of Columbia have laws that presume legal custody to be shared by both parents, while eight other states allow for shared custody when both parents agree to it.

Garry's proposal still leaves it to the discretion of a judge to revoke a shared custody agreement in a situation where a member of the family abuses alcohol or drugs, or has deserted the child, and whether "have a history of being able and willing to cooperate in matters concerning the child."

The bill is being considered by the Legislature's Judiciary Committee.
 
     


"Children learn what they live"

[debid13065]

Hey, I read that too....show'd the BF as well.  He's having a horrible time trying just to get visitation with his 4 children.  

[FIRM]

I read this last week, too.

I think that it is great that they are "thinking about" the plight of Fathers and the rights of children to be parented by BOTH genders as equally as possible.

But (isn't there always a "but?"), this is not new news.  The legislators are constantly giving us lip service as pointed out in the article from Mens News Daily below.  Unfortunately, as we have found in Australia, New Zealand, The United Kingdom and ALL anglo saxon based countries including Canada and the USA, it eventually gets boiled down and becomes impotent.

Personally? I am not convinced and don't see anything happening from this except to make the "language" more palatable such as not assuming that the male will be the NCP and etc. knowing full well that there will be no changes, thusly allowing the black robes of mommy court to continue their tyranny as they tear our crying children from our loving arms in the misnomer reference of "the child's best interest."

There is just too much money involved and too many jobs dependent upon the divorce industry (easily, billions of dollars a year) for any real changes to be made without Fathers uniting in unison to force a social change.  Kinda like what the militant women started over a hundred years ago, but can be changed in less than 9 years as the article below alludes to.

We are either men with a back bone or we can sip tea and eat biscuits.  What type of person are the rest of you?

Eric

http://mensnewsdaily.com/blog/2005/...g-and-start.htm

Wednesday, September 21, 2005

Men's Activists: Stop Asking and Start Telling!
by George Rolph


Sometimes I get so frustrated with the men's movement I want to don a bandana, pick up a machine gun and go pay a visit to all those so-called "leaders" of mens groups out there who are doing as much damage to men as the enemies of men are!


Why so angry?


Let me show you something I read today. This is from a press report in Australia:


"The Men's Rights Agency, like dozens of men's groups that have flourished in recent years, has been lobbying long and hard for family law reform. It was delighted when the Howard Government announced a review, and it sweated on the Government's Family Law Amendment (Shared Parental Responsibility) Bill.


"We had high hopes for the law," Price says. "But now I think the whole thing has been a waste of time."


How long will it take to dawn on men that the only way to effect change is not to go cap in hand to feminised government (i.e.. The enemy) and beg them nicely, over cups of tea and a plate of biscuits, for the right to be thought of as human beings? You are talking to the wrong people! These are the same politicians that put the laws in place that stole your rights. Do you honestly think they are going to turn around and tell the people who elected them, "Oh, Sorry. We have totally destroyed family life and ruined the futures of millions of kids and men and we have all been idiots!" Anyone who thinks that has no understanding of the average political animal at all.


Politicians do not give a damn about ordinary people. They listen to whoever makes the most noise. They only change direction when it becomes obvious that to carry on will lose them votes and threaten their power base. Ten years ago, as a brand new activist for men's rights and still a little wet behind the ears and timid, I wrote to a news group that I thought talking to politicians was a waste of time. I was howled down as an idiot who knew nothing. Figuring that my detractors were probably right, I kept quiet for while and carried on researching the problems men were facing. Eventually I realised that in fact, it was I who was right and them who were the idiots.


When the suffragettes became militant and turned their rage onto property, governments began to listen.


* "The Suffragettes had existed since 1903, but the first 'official' violent Suffragette incident occurred in 1909, when Mrs Bouvier and a number of others threw stones at the Home Office windows. She wrote in the Suffragettes magazine Votes for Women:


'We had decided that the time for political arguments was thoroughly exhausted, and we made up our minds that the time for militant action had arrived. We decided to wait till 9 o'clock , when we could be sure that the peaceful deputation headed by Mrs Pankhurst had been arrested, then we determined to show by our action what we thought of the Prime Minister in refusing these ladies admission to the House of Commons. That was our motive for throwing stones at the windows.'"


When reading this, note a couple of things. First, that it took just 6 years for these women's patience to run out. By contrast, men are still begging politicians for help twelve years after the first men's movement groups appeared. That women did this at all is remarkable when you consider the times and social conventions in play during the early 1900's. Note also, that once their patience was gone, the women attacked property and not people. This was a shrewd move. Property has always meant more than lives to politicians. Thirdly, prison conditions then were a lot worse than they are today. You have to admire their commitment!


* "They consciously adopted violence as a way to influence the men. Emmeline Pankhurst said: 'The argument of the broken pane is the most valuable argument in modern politics'. In this interpretation, violence was a cold, conscious tactic.


There is a lovely letter to the Daily Telegraph, dated 26 Feb 1913 , which reads:


'Everyone seems to agree upon the necessity of putting a stop to Suffragist outrages, but no one seems certain how to do so. There are two, only two ways in which this can be done.


1. Kill every woman in the United Kingdom .


2. Give women the vote.


Yours truly, Bertha Brewster'.."


* Source: http://www.johndclare.net/Women1_WhyViolence.htm


These women went on to burn down castles and other buildings, set fire to post boxes, shatter more windows, go on hunger strikes, attack art works, get themselves imprisoned and one even threw herself under the kings horse and was killed in the process. What was the result?


Women eventually gained the vote in 1918 when the Qualification of Women Act (1918) gave women over the age of thirty the vote if they were householders. Ten years later, the Equal Franchise Act (1928) gave all men and women aged 21 or over the vote. (Note my bold text).


In 9 years they achieved their objects and not a cup of tea or biscuit eaten. No begging letters to deaf politicians necessary. No members of the public died as far as I am aware, and the women became a real voice in politics. Gradually though, things slowed down and women went back to being non political. In the early 1970's that all changed again. Once more women became militant. Bombs were exploded in an outside TV broadcasting vehicle when the BBC were filming a Miss World Contest. The post office tower in London was also blown up. Andy Warhole got shot, TV news studios were occupied during national news broadcasts. Suddenly, politicians began the listen once more.


Meanwhile, men's groups supp tea and eat biscuits and write begging letters.


Grrrrr! Pass me that machine gun.


So, what am I saying? Do we have to start shooting people and planting bombs? No! I am not saying that, but I am saying that we have to start getting tough. We have to stop asking politicians, (if they don't mind), we would like them, (if they have the time and are not too busy), to possibly, (if it won't put them out too much), pay attention to our pathetic little pleas to be allowed to live like human beings and instead, we must tell them that we aint gonna take this [censored] no more! In other words its time we fought back like men and not like beaten wimps.


It's time to get militant and it's time to get properly organised. Nothing else is going to cut it.


George Rolph

posted by Mike at 4:17 PM

3 Comments:
Denis said...
YOU ARE EXACTLY RIGHT!

Thanks George

5:13 PM
Eric said...
How true...

I was a "semi-nice" guy until I saw the "handwriting on the wall" at the "Million Dads March" in Washington,D.C. in 2003.

Let me tell you... That is when I got PISSED OFF!

I could make a long story short, but why bother?

Here we are...a week and a half before the Washington, D.C. debacle and "our leader" for the "Million Dads March" for our state decided that some "re-union" was more important than the "Million Dads March" and left me holding the bag. Two days before the "march" for my state, the local press called me and said that they will be covering our "march." Well, at that point in time, the only "people" involved in this "Million Dads March" was two. Me and the guy that decided a "re-union" was more important...

How FREAKING embarrassing!

So, with it all "dropped in my lap," I contacted Robert Muchnick of //www.ChildrensJustice.org and he gave me some advice of what to say. I contacted Barbara Johnson (attorney in Massachussets and runner for the Governor of that state-wonderful woman) and she said she would be there with another person to help her drive to my state. So, with my girlfriend's ex, Barbara and her helper along with a "Jeff," and a few others, we "pulled it off."

The following week, we went to Washington, D.C. following Barbara's "hearse" to Washington, D.C.

To my anguish, only about 50 people showed up. Yeah...there where those that "just happened" to be there, but no real fathers/children rights activist in any numbers. Of the 50? All basically the leaders of the movement and the band that I got to show up that has a "rock opera" for fathers and other NCP's just like you and me, still debuting in NY City...

I get there and see the dismal crowd and get angry (why not show anger?-Aren't YOU angry?) and walked off the site AFTER finding out that there was NOT going to be a meeting that night afterwards as planned by Thomas Lessman, Chairman of the Million Dads March for the "leaders" to organize us into a viable force. This, along with a few other "unmentionables" (gossip amongst us is bad publicity) made me realize how STUPID we all are. And, if we DO NOT CHANGE our "tactics," we will forever keep banging our heads up against that "proverbial wall" that seems to be preventing us from our God GIVEN RIGHTS to parent our own children...by the tyrannically, oppressive, "black robes" of "family" court.

I learned. The learning curve is short if you are not dimwitted. You too, should be ANGRY and not AFRAID to show it. Being "politically correct" does NOT work.

Guess what? The feminazi PIGS laugh at us as they use the internet to keep us "in tow" by denouncing those that show the truth and espouse equality. Why? Cuz they KNOW as long as they can "control us" by "insisting" that we "tone down," we will NEVER accomplish a darn thing...

Wise up!

Again, good article!

Eric Ericson
Fathers' Integrity & Rights Movement (FIRM)

We are (finally) expecting FIRM's TV to debut sometime in late Fall or early Winter (we are having "bandwidth" problems and think we can solve it utilizing the "SETI" precedent.).

[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]

Fathers' Integrity & Rights Movement (FIRM)
FIRM's TV
FIRM's Seminars
FIRM's News & Journal
FIRM's NCP Advocate
FIRM's Equality in Parenting Radio Show

--------------------
Equality is not a difficult concept...

[FIRM]

Is our anger "righteous?"

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://mensnewsdaily.com/blog/2005/...being-angry.htm

Yes! We have every right to be angry. We have suffered as a race, forty years of insults from the feminist left wing of politics. We have had to watch as more and more good men are robbed in divorce courts and family courts; have their souls raped; are put down constantly; removed from their families; falsely accused of the most disgusting crimes while feminism defends the false accusers; blamed for all of societies ills based on a false construct of "patriarchy" that has never existed in the western world and, we have had to watch our children being brainwashed into believing all these lies.

Anger used constructively is a powerful motivating force that has always driven men to achieve greater and greater things. Hate is a different matter. Hate is almost always the most destructive of emotions that tends to do more damage to those who suffer it than to others. Feminism is fuelled by hate and those who advocate this hate are often less than stable human beings. We must learn from this.

We must also organise world wide and join together as one if we are to be effective. I would urge all men everywhere to work towards a single International Band Of Brothers in order to have the political force we need to change things.

http://mensnewsdaily.com/blog/menta...rothers_29.html



George Rolph.