"When the family is a creation of the state, children become it's property"

[GFR7]

"(W)here the family is a creation of the state, children become, in important legal respects, the property of the state."

This piece is depicting this coalition as "paranoid and delusional" - but if one knows how to take the long view of such matters, it is anything but......

Maggie Gallagher and Rick Warren Fear 'Marriage Equality will Turn Children into Property of the State'

February 2, 2015
WASHINGTON- Last week, a coalition of nearly 20 Catholic and Protestant leaders, including National Organization for Marriage founder Maggie Gallagher and prominent Proposition 8 supporter Rick Warren, met to sign a statement dubbed, “The Two Shall Become One Flesh: Reclaiming Marriage,” urging all Christians to fight against marriage equality.

Arguing that the sexual revolution of the 1960's and 70's has graveley weakened marriage, the signatories believe that the "truth" about marriage can be found in “both Revelation and reason" and “the truths inscribed on the human heart.”

...

Fearing some sort of state-sanctioned perscecution against anti-gay Christians, the paranoid and delusional group warned that same-sex marriage will lead “to the coercion and persecution of those who refuse to acknowledge the state’s redefinition of marriage, which is beyond the state’s competence.”
.....

The signatories also went so far as to argue that same-sex marriage will cause children to become the property of the government- “(W)here the family is a creation of the state, children become, in important legal respects, the property of the state."

http://www.armagayddon.com/#!Maggie...ate/ccik/20CFCB2A-16F2-48CC-A51D-51F468F48B4A

 

[republicanchick]

"(W)here the family is a creation of the state, children become, in important legal respects, the property of the state."

This piece is depicting this coalition as "paranoid and delusional" - but if one knows how to take the long view of such matters, it is anything but......



http://www.armagayddon.com/#!Maggie...ate/ccik/20CFCB2A-16F2-48CC-A51D-51F468F48B4A

the state is already attempting to remove children from poor mothers and give them a "good home"

never mind that children belong w/ their natural parents unless there is terrible abuse (and no repentance/parental recovery...)

the state, when it removes children, usually totally separates children from parents.. How is that good for children? it is NOT (w/ few exceptions, it is NOT)

then the state makes the parent(s) go through all kinds of stupid hoops to get the kids back. If a paren has a terrible drug addiction, then I can u/stand making the parent straighten up, but that is not always the case. Some reasons for removal are just downright stupid..


+++

 

[GFR7]

the state is already attempting to remove children from poor mothers and give them a "good home"

never mind that children belong w/ their natural parents unless there is terrible abuse (and no repentance/parental recovery...)

the state, when it removes children, usually totally separates children from parents.. How is that good for children? it is NOT (w/ few exceptions, it is NOT)

then the state makes the parent(s) go through all kinds of stupid hoops to get the kids back. If a paren has a terrible drug addiction, then I can u/stand making the parent straighten up, but that is not always the case. Some reasons for removal are just downright stupid..


+++

I agree fully. In the UK esp. Scotland they are starting to appoint every child a "state guardian" - or there was proposed legislation to do so. Awful, and things are getting worse.

 

[republicanchick]

I agree fully. In the UK esp. Scotland they are starting to appoint every child a "state guardian" - or there was proposed legislation to do so. Awful, and things are getting worse.

sounds like Guilty until proven innocent

I do (strangely) u/stand the logic behind this, to protect children. Chldren need to be protected. By why ASSUME, just automatically ASSUME that a child is being abused or neglected?

if he shows up with bruises all the time, not logically explained by parents... then there is a problem.. If not, if there is no evidence of abuse, leave parents alone. If you take kids from parents for one bogus reason, u can take them for ANY reason, any reason that "sounds good on paper"

PLEASE

Death to tyranny!



+++

 

[GFR7]

sounds like Guilty until proven innocent

I do (strangely) u/stand the logic behind this, to protect children. Chldren need to be protected. By why ASSUME, just automatically ASSUME that a child is being abused or neglected?

if he shows up with bruises all the time, not logically explained by parents... then there is a problem.. If not, if there is no evidence of abuse, leave parents alone. If you take kids from parents for one bogus reason, u can take them for ANY reason, any reason that "sounds good on paper"

PLEASE

Death to tyranny!



+++

I share your view, sister.

 

[Rusha]

sounds like Guilty until proven innocent

I do (strangely) u/stand the logic behind this, to protect children. Chldren need to be protected. By why ASSUME, just automatically ASSUME that a child is being abused or neglected?

if he shows up with bruises all the time, not logically explained by parents... then there is a problem.. If not, if there is no evidence of abuse, leave parents alone. If you take kids from parents for one bogus reason, u can take them for ANY reason, any reason that "sounds good on paper"

PLEASE

Death to tyranny!]

Without investigating and taking some type of action, how can they know whether or not the child is being abused?

When it comes to children and the allegation or evidence that there is sexual or physical abuse OR neglect, the state should always err on the side of caution. By acting in the CHILD'S interest.

 

[GFR7]

Without investigating and taking some type of action, how can they know whether or not the child is being abused?

When it comes to children and the allegation or evidence that there is sexual or physical abuse OR neglect, the state should always err on the side of caution. By acting in the CHILD'S interest.

But if they err, and take a child away from its parents, even for a week or a month, when there was actually no need to, this is severely, extremely traumatic for the child.

I have a friend who had this experience and now edits a website which writes on the evils of social services.