State sponsored child abuse
Ok, I can understand this “protect the children” thing to a degree but these guys are going too far.
In Pennsylvania the courts have just gone and taken a newborn baby away from his mother because the baby’s father was convicted of a sex offence (raping two teenaged girls) 22 years ago. He has not offended since.
TWENTY TWO YEARS AGO!?!?
Pardon me but I think that is ridiculous, stupid, foolish, moronic, and several other things that are not repeatable in public company. This is the third child that that the state has taken from the couple for the exact same reason. Each time basing it on her husbands past offences, admitting that there is no evidence or reason to suspect that he has done anything new. They quite frankly admit that they are basing this wholly on his past offence and the fact that he is on a sex offenders registry.
In an attempt to placate the officials the couple is living in separate houses despite being married. This doesn’t matter. The child was taken.
I know a lot of folks out there on the conservative side dislike the ACLU but they are representing the mother in her attempt to regain custody of her children. I hope they succeed. I concede that there are times (which should be rare and extreme) when it is necessary to take a child from its parents. But to do so due to a 22 year old crime is abuse of the system.
I first heard of this case a week or two ago when Fox News anchor John Gibson was talking to a judge and it was mentioned that a federal court had issued a restraining order against the county officials to stop them from following the mother around day and night to remind her that they were going to take the baby. Gibson of course was all in favor of the local officials while the judge was pointing out that the county was on legally shaky ground because the mother hadn't broken any law.
What the hell happened to the conservative ideal of getting the Government to stay the hell out of our lives??????
Officials Remove Newborn Over Father's Abuse Case (registration required.)
In Pennsylvania the courts have just gone and taken a newborn baby away from his mother because the baby’s father was convicted of a sex offence (raping two teenaged girls) 22 years ago. He has not offended since.
TWENTY TWO YEARS AGO!?!?
Pardon me but I think that is ridiculous, stupid, foolish, moronic, and several other things that are not repeatable in public company. This is the third child that that the state has taken from the couple for the exact same reason. Each time basing it on her husbands past offences, admitting that there is no evidence or reason to suspect that he has done anything new. They quite frankly admit that they are basing this wholly on his past offence and the fact that he is on a sex offenders registry.
In an attempt to placate the officials the couple is living in separate houses despite being married. This doesn’t matter. The child was taken.
I know a lot of folks out there on the conservative side dislike the ACLU but they are representing the mother in her attempt to regain custody of her children. I hope they succeed. I concede that there are times (which should be rare and extreme) when it is necessary to take a child from its parents. But to do so due to a 22 year old crime is abuse of the system.
I first heard of this case a week or two ago when Fox News anchor John Gibson was talking to a judge and it was mentioned that a federal court had issued a restraining order against the county officials to stop them from following the mother around day and night to remind her that they were going to take the baby. Gibson of course was all in favor of the local officials while the judge was pointing out that the county was on legally shaky ground because the mother hadn't broken any law.
What the hell happened to the conservative ideal of getting the Government to stay the hell out of our lives??????
Officials Remove Newborn Over Father's Abuse Case (registration required.)
posted by exMI | 12:51
4 Comments:
Surely you wouldn't class John Gibson among the conservatives with principles. He is the only news anchor who has never spoken to another person on the air for more than ninety seconds without asking a dumb or uniformed question.
I agree. No one should take a child from parents without a clear and observable danger to the child. It appears that other states are following the Florida example, when in doubt, use foster care or some substitute.
This incenses me! These men have already been punished for their crimes-- and to stalk and then hold responsible their wives and infants is unconstitutional. I cannot believe this!
The foster care system in our county is a nightmare and to so capriciously drop a child into the middle of it for the "forgotten" sins of the father is evil!
GEEZZZ..Does this freaking country have nothing better to do with its time and money? I am so sick of bureaucrats who want to appear to fix a problem by doing absolutly nothing to address it.
This child didnt appear to be in danger..What are they doing for all the others who are already shown to be?
Do the mother and child have any rights here????..Or do the fathers past crimes override any rights of mother and child? Is this woman automatically an unfit parent because of who she choose as a spouse?
Im sorry...What country are we in again?
This is very bad. When does a crime leave the criminal? I thought when someone did their time, they did their time.
Post a Comment
<< Home