|
|
|
Goals for December 30th - Your FEEDBACK
From: Webmaster (webmaster@AKidsRight.org)
This is a message from a mailing list, members@kids-right.org Unsubscribe instructions at bottom of message. ====================================================================== Good People & People of Faith: Thanks for the response to the request for letters. Eight have been received so far. The final package will be sent out tomorrow (Thursday) afternoon (you can still FAX a letter tomorrow morning for delivery to Senator Clinton to: 315-635-3243) and you can expect a list message on Friday with details on the messages. They will also be scanned for posting at the web site. This message contains info on: 1. December 30th - the goal. 2. Why we Sacrifice 3. Your FEEDBACK - to events in Syracuse (Dec. 30th) 1. December 30th - the goal. ---------------------------- As you read some of the feedback below some may wonder exactly what the goals are. There are a lot of details at the website, http://www.AKidsRight.Org/, but to summarize: 1. To arrange a face-to-face meeting with Senator Hillary Clinton - Not just for one person, but initially for a small group of 5-8 parents who can relate personal stories, their love for their kids, and desire for the protection of their rights. 2. To then get active participation from the Senator and a public statement calling for Congressional Hearings into reform - OR - a clear statement on why she does not feel such hearings are necessary. We are NOT asking her at this point to decide on the issue itself, but just whether it requires serious investigation by Congress. 3. The goal of hearings would be the introduction of a Family Rights Act, Civil Rights legislation that would not be "more interference/law", but establish the protections we have talked about for the parent/child bond: a. Assumption of fitness and equal participation. b. Right to counsel. c. Protection of a jury and proof beyond a reasonable doubt that you are a demonstrated serous threat to your child. 4. Why at the Federal Level - One of our most basic human rights is family (which was not "given" to us by our local State or even the Federal Government). The basic protections of that relationship should not change depending on what state we live in. We need to "officially" recognize this, by Congressional Act, as one of the rights "reserved to the people." We do not need to wait for a Court decision to "give it back to us" and Constitutional Amendment is possible if necessary. The Ninth Amendment - The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. 2. Why we Sacrifice ------------------- In case we need any reminder of what we are struggling for. Here is a recent message that came from our web site -- we get several a week. They don't make for happy reading: --- Jonathan Moreno <Raven2165@aol.com> > I am at a point where i do not know where to turn...I have 2 > daughters...their mother left us when my youngest was 11 > months...and i had them myself for three years would always ask her > to see them and at first she did so sparatically...then when she got > a new boyfriend she wanted them back...one home study sided with me > to have custody of them...she got a new attorney and we went to > court for the final...she had encrued some bills in my name while we > were separated.... and they all mysteriously poped up just 2 days > before we went to court...my first attorney gave up on me and my new > on eis bleeding me dry financially with really no results... > ... there are so many things to list but i guess the most important > is i have not seen or heard from my children since mid February and > now my ex has moved i assume she is still in the same city but i > have no idea where...since i had to move for work. i don't know > where to turn as i keep getting no answers...I love my daughters > very much and have tried to pay child support through the Texas > attorney generals office but she has not signed the final paperwork > yet..so with that i am drowning with no help. > ... i just want to see my children and cannot...last time i had seen > them she had told them i was mean and did not have a job...this is > killing me inside ...I hope you can help 3. Your FEEDBACK - to events in Syracuse (Dec. 30th) ---------------------------------------------------- This feedback is in response to a list message sent by John Murtari, http://www.AKidsRight.org/archive/archive2002/0062.html --- David Friedman <dave@silentmajority.info > > When you say the problem is with "us" it seems you are suggesting > that more people should spend their time getting arrested and > defending petty federal charges. There are many people in this > movement who are working very hard and making progress. Just because > they are not in agreement with your strategy does not minimize their > efforts. Indeed I would say that they are getting a far higher > return on their time, money and energy investments by lobbying, > litigating and educating. > Many are getting positive press, petitions signed, letters written > and have the support of many legislators. The tide of publicity, > public opinion and the law (based on recent child custody & support > cases) is changing. Most of us simply do not have the time or > interest in being in jail. Sorry the message may not have been clear, but I always try to acknowledge there are many roles required (just as you say), to bring reform. They are all valuable. But if you see this as a civil rights effort (and I think that is a pretty good analogy) -- history says you also need a component of people who "do by personal sacrifice." Up to now most of the "doing" has been unfortunate. I'm sure you are aware of folks who have committed suicide or just involved revenge/violence. There is a component that involved the physical demonstration of what we believe in. Yes, I am saying that we need more people to do that, but the other efforts are still valuable. --- Joe Liberty <joseph@patriotsaints.com> http://www.trt.ny.org/ > "We would like to see J.A.I.L. represented at the Federal Building > in Syracuse NY on Dec. 30th if possible. Wear your T-shirts!" > I am a member of the New York Tyranny Response Team of New York > http://www.trt.ny.org I would like to add this event to our > calendar. Could you send me the street address of the Federal > Building in Syracuse? > I can't promise that we will be there, because we have several other > events this winter and it is the Holiday season, but I would like to > give our members the option... --- Del Parker <irishcoins2000@hotmail.com> > ... We live in a constitutional republic with elected > representatives to represent us. It is a fundamental right > protected by the Constitution, so the argument goes, that we have a > basis to petition and have access to our elected officials. So long > as you are peacefully seeking that access, you have the whole weight > of the U.S. Constitution behind you. > You need to review carefully the facts regarding your "demanding", and > succinctly address exactly what you are demanding. You are not pointing a > gun at someone and demanding the law be changed. You are standing in your > right to have freedom to access your elected official. You are demanding to > see your official. Your are demanding to have the right to access the > official. There is a difference. And the judge is using the "demanding" > part of the language to find reason to find you in error. If there is any > place where that right needs to be protected, it would be in the Federal > Building. And you are definitely going through channels. > So please understand, that the ground you are standing on is sacred, > as regarding the freedom to access. Your long perseverance to > pursue that ground in a non-violent manner is the essence of your > defense... --- Doi <theedge@xtra.co.nz> > Kia ora and greetings John > I appreciated your latest post. Well said. > Best wishes Doi of Dunedin Aotearoa/New Zealand, on the top of the > world. --- Samuel cCisp <samcrisp@zapo.net> > JOHN: YOU STRIKE ME AS BEING VERY STUPID! AS WISE AS YOU ARE YOU DONT > GET WHAT HILAROUS IS SAYING TO YOU! WHY DON'T WE GET TOGETHER AND FORM > OUR FAMILY RIGHTS PARTY. YOUR NONSENSE WITH HER IS DRIVING ME TO THE > WHORE HOUSE. NOT BECAUSE OF THE 30TH.... but because of your stupidity i > implore you to help us get up our own party of our cause. please start > the family rights party with us. I am covering your blind side!!!!!!! > roger out!!!!!!! --- Stanley Greene <greest@bmi.net> http://www.safe4all.org/ > I wish you courage, Mr. Murtari. > I want you to know that I am one who "does", not merely talks. > I have been in jail and have otherwise followed methodologies of > peaceful protest. A judge, ruling in another case, cited my > presence in the gallery as he gave his order. He said: "Why was > Stanley Green in this courtroom? He was here to ensure that I made > a gender-equitable ruling." Which he did, in THAT case and his > ruling survived the appeal of the woman who was hoping for a > more-traditional, pro-woman, ruling. > On Oct. 17, I participated in the first-ever public discussion of abused > men in the nation's largest city, see: > http://safe4all.org/news/item?item_id=3192 > Steve Osborne has invited me to be an expert witness at his trial in New > Brunswick, which I plan to devote time to doing, if the resources become > available for me to make the trip to Saint John. http://www.nobiglies.org/ > I agree that we need to have more people participate in our action. --- Gregg <WIREPALLADIN@aol.com> > Be advised that the judge is right. You are demanding a personal meeting -- > no public figure personally owes you specifically a personal meeting. > ... She is a representative of the public, not a specific public --- > and her representatives meeting with you is enough. Now you may say > that is not enough because you feel it may be an issue/goal never > raised by that aide with her ---but with you persistence you must > know by now that she knows about you and your goal -- a worthy one. > A worthy one -- but one politically untouchable --- too many votes > lost i\or indecisive on one side or the other could be the result > for her embracing your goal ---your personal goal that is shared by > many other people personally involved with a like problem. > See your goal is not personally embraceable by all in toto. For > example -- we all may agree to eat a hot dog -- but you want mustard > --my neighbor wants ketchup --- i want it plain and the other gal > wants to eat it only if its kosher or devoured in a ball park... > If you want to make a last ditch attempt for Clinton personally to > get your message -- send her a personal, non threatening, non > condemnatory, handwritten letter thru the us postal service > --Certified mail, Return Receipt requested, ... In America that is > the best you can do ---and its a lot.... > I am tired of your frustration loss and jailing ---while you can > fight "city hall " you cannot accost the members within it --which > is what you are doing by demanding a personal meeting---just because > she is a public representative--- you are not entitled to a personal > John to Hillary meeting nor am I I quite agree with you on the "right" matter and I didn't mean to present it that way. I would "like" her to meet with a group of parents hurt by the system because I think it is a very important issue. She doesn't have to do that (and I don't believe as a group we have called her names for not meeting with us, nor should we). But this is also a political matter and she is our representative. Hopefully enough parents outside her doors would encourage her to be responsive and meet with them? I like what you had to say about family law reform being an "untouchable" issues for politicians. You lose either way. But I think if southern politicans could vote for the Civil Rights act, we can accomplish the same now. --- Joe <JMargrabia@aol.com> > All of the below are what is need to affect any kind of change in > the law. You efforts are applauded, however, study the civil rights > marches when blacks were fighting for their rights. Much is to be > learned from those efforts. Government will only change the laws > when they know ALL of us want change. One person, I believe, will > change little at best. > > Are the previous three enough -- or do we need to add: > > 4) A letter writing campaign of thousands. > > 5) A million parent march on Washington. > > 6) Contributions of hundreds of thousands of dollars. > > 7) Positive Publicity in the media. --- Jeff Golden <JeffFACE@aol.com> > You know that I full support your efforts. Please allow me to comment on > your seven points that need to be demonstrated: >> 1) Faith in a loving God, > I have ultimate respect for your and others' religious beliefs, but > I believe people's beliefs are highly personal and people should not > be judged by their beliefs or lack thereof. >> 2) Love for their children, former spouses, and other "brothers and sisters", > and > No one needs to have "love" for a former spouse who has commited > acts that equate to child abuse. One need have no more fellings for > that person than "Have a wonderful life, but leave me out of it." >> 3) willingness to make Personal Sacrifice, > I completely agree. > Are the previous three enough -- or do we need to add: >> 4) A letter writing campaign of thousands. > Yes, but not letters to Hillary Clinton. She has already proven her > disinterest in you, us and our goals. Lets just hope she will slink > away back to Arkansas (or further) at the end of her senate tern (or > sooner). I would prefer a letter writing campaign to Judge > DiBianco. He needs to learn of widespread public support for your > efforts, and that he is out of touch with public sentiment. >> 5) A million parent march on Washington. > ... and we all know of the likelihood of being able to orchestrate that! >> 6) Contributions of hundreds of thousands of dollars. > ... Yeah! You and I can contribute the first million! >> 7) Positive Publicity in the media. > That we can work on. --- Stanley Posthumus <stanp@bellatlantic.net> > Please reflect on your own words > "if a couple of more mothers and fathers were involved in this -- > everything would change." > A thought. In conflict people are either talking or waiting to > talk. And sometimes we cannot hear others until we have been heard. > What is the answer . . . Reflect on your own words --- hear > yourself. > Another thought. You are not the only one who cares about your > child. In fact it pisses those who support your efforts and stops > you making them our efforts. The answer . . . is listen first. --- Ed Myers <mr-ed@gci.net> > Civil disobedience is one way to achieve your goals. At present, I > sense that what you are doing is not the one best way. Consider > others. > Barbara Johnson (below) bought a fire truck and toured Massachusetts > advocating court reform as a candidate for governor. She's a top > lawyer for family rights. ================================================================== To unsubscribe from this list at anytime, send email to Majordomo@kids-right.org with the following 1 line in the BODY of the message (Subject is ignored). unsubscribe members
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Jan 02 2003 - 03:12:02 EST |
