• Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.

Private marriage contracts

from andrews post, may 10 2018, 10:46am:
The courts in every state have "the child's best interest" (as interpreted by the civil/secular regime, as interpreted by a host of expensive psychologists, counselors, financial analysts, and social workers) as the standard for making those decisions.

these are not just words, people are *living* the effects of government employees/contractors (psychologists/analysts) deciding how the family SHOULD function in relation to raising children.
its terrifying to me. does anyone else feel there is a change thats occurred that resembles certain past human history, in the mindset of 'basically good' people moving along in the accepted ranks, unaware that they are marching toward an evil end?
 
This documentary explains just about everything anyone would care to know about the corrupt family law system here. It also goes into detail about how the Scandinavians model the way family law should be done. So it is possible.

https://www.divorcecorp.com/
 
its terrifying to me. does anyone else feel there is a change thats occurred that resembles certain past human history, in the mindset of 'basically good' people moving along in the accepted ranks, unaware that they are marching toward an evil end?
I stumbled across this article about Israel's alleged treatment of Yemeni children back in the '50's, and it makes the same point. By way of background, it has long been alleged that potentially thousands of children of Middle Eastern (Mizrahi) immigrants to Israel went missing in the early days of the state, and were adopted by European (Ashkenazi) parents (the truth or not of this I won't debate here). The argument being that the Ashkenazi had been through an enormous amount in WW2 and many could not have children, while the Mizrahi had many children and could afford to lose a few for the benefit of the nation as a whole. In the middle of going through many different personal stories about this, the article states:
"Mizrahi parents were seen as bad, primitive people who were a lost cause. The dominant view then was that, by placing the children with Ashkenazi families, they could be saved - unlike their parents. They would be re-educated and made into suitable material for the new Zionist state," Tzadok said.

"The hospital staff and officials probably didn't think they were doing something wrong. They thought it was their patriotic duty."
This is very plausible because at the exact same time, this was happening in Australia. Aboriginal children were taken from their parents and placed with parents of European descent. This is well-documented and now publicly acknowledged by the Australian government (summary here). In this case too, the Aborigines were considered inferior parents, and it was considered to be in the child's best interests to be placed with "better" white parents who would give them a decent future.

There are historical allegations of the same sort of thing happening in many Western countries for many generations. Even New Zealand had such issues from the 40's to 70's (e.g. this article). Similar allegations have emerged in the UK and Ireland. In many cases, young underprivileged women out of wedlock have been pressured to give up their children for adoption, because the authorities at the time (sometimes government, sometimes church authorities) have felt that was in the best interests of the child. In Germany kids are kidnapped because their parents are homeschooling. In the USA, they can e kidnapped because their parents use natural medicine. Always "in the best interests of the child".

This has happened over and over again in the past, and in many different countries. In every case people genuinely believed that they have good reason to do it. But that has never made it right.

There's no difference between taking children from an unfavoured race (e.g. Australian Aborigines) and placing them with "better" paernts, and taking them from parents with an unfavoured religion (e.g. conservative Christians) and placing them with parents deemed "better" for the same reason.

And of course it happens. Because the same evil spirit has been at work throughout the West for generations. It has been particularly evident in the past when European peoples move to a land including those of other races they consider inferior (e.g. Australia and allegedly Israel), and now manifests itself in religious persecution instead. But it's the same spirit.
 
This reminds me of the Bodnariu family. The Norwegian government took their kids from them because they spanked their kids and taught them about Christ. Both of which the Norwegian government concidered harmful to the children.

http://thefederalist.com/2016/06/06...-norway-reunites-seized-children-with-family/

It took international pressure to have Norway return their children to them. It was all because Norway was doing what they deemed was in the "best interest" of the kids.
 
@Paulsen, have you seen any recorded opinion in which a court says it does not have jurisdiction over a child it would otherwise have personal jurisdiction over because either that child does not have a birth certificate (SSN is irrelevant) or because that child "belongs" to a private international entity?

Our advice at the retreat will be structured in terms of predictable results based on traditional legal theories. The Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (law in every state but Massachusetts) determines personal jurisdiction in child custody cases, so we'll start there.

Most often when the court is presented with evidence that a private international entity has the controlling interest in a person (or child) the case is dismissed. I have seen this happen first hand several times. A dismissed case often does not carry any recorded opionion.

Also when a court determines it does not have jurisdiction (most courts will fight against this), dismissal is often the outcome.

It is a considerable education to be able to present the interests of a private international entity in court. I think your approach with trusts will probably yield a much more useable solution for people.

The reason I mention private international entities and the like is because they can stand outside of the public court system and be free from the millions of laws, statutes and court opinions that can be cherry picked to support the states desires.

For those who are not going to make a long term study of the law in regards to family it makes a lot of sense to fine tune a trust solution and know how to stand on it. For those who are going to learn man's law and how to interact with it while not mearly being under its rule I have to say the long term study of private international entities and the limited jurisdictions of particular courts is invaluable.


None of this is legal advice. I never give legal advice.
 
For those who are going to learn man's law and how to interact with it while not mearly being under its rule I have to say the long term study of private international entities and the limited jurisdictions of particular courts is invaluable.


None of this is legal advice. I never give legal advice.


Mega Dittos
 
Mass numbers of ordinary folks committing evil as discussed above are to be expected.

What I don't understand, is why when discussing said evil so many folks seeks to justify it. I see this especially in America and our present treatment of parents. It's like they'd rather justify why its necessary to steal a kid because he got dirty playing outside than deal with the fact that their country is evil and kidnapping children for profit and people they know and like are part of it.
 
Mass numbers of ordinary folks committing evil as discussed above are to be expected.

What I don't understand, is why when discussing said evil so many folks seeks to justify it. I see this especially in America and our present treatment of parents. It's like they'd rather justify why its necessary to steal a kid because he got dirty playing outside than deal with the fact that their country is evil and kidnapping children for profit and people they know and like are part of it.

"very high proportion of people would fully obey the instructions, albeit reluctantly." Milgram experiment from Wikipedia

I somehow feel that those who have come to understand PM, don't fall into this category.
 
Back
Top