Children's Rights: "True compassion is not just an emotional response but a firm commitment founded on reason.

Saturday

"True compassion is not just an emotional response but a firm commitment founded on reason.

Therefore, our compassion for others does not change even if they behave negatively. Our feelings of responsibility for others gives rise to a wish to help them actively overcome their problems." ~ Dalai Lama originally shared:

Post by Children's Rights.

2 comments:

American Coalition for Fathers and ChildrenSeptember 29, 2014 at 9:27 PM
"CHILDREN OF DIVORCE DESERVE FULL ACCESS TO BOTH PARENTS, WHENEVER POSSIBLE."
Personally, I can’t find anyone willing to reject that statement publicly. It’s a fundamental truth. We now have a wealth of evidence demonstrating children are better off, in most situations, when they have something near equal time with each parent. So why are shared-parenting bills are being rejected throughout the country?

Do legislators believe mothers are more important to children than fathers? For the most part, I don’t think so. Politicians are, however, under quite a bit of pressure from some very powerful anti-shared parenting special interests. Recently, we’ve seen these opponents contribute to shared-parenting bills failing to pass in South Dakota and Minnesota.

Some would argue disappointments like those are clear signs that shared parenting legislation will not happen anytime soon. The opposite is true. The near victories in these states and others is an enormous indication politicians are beginning to understand the vast majority of American citizens believe children of divorce deserve equal access to both parents, whenever possible.

In fact, South Dakota’s bill lost in a 21-13 Senate vote. That’s a swing of 5 senators. If merely 5 senators felt more pressure from South Dakotans than they did from special interests, South Dakota would have a shared parenting statute. We should commend the remaining politicians in South Dakota’s Senate for doing the right thing.

In Minnesota … well, Minnesota is a travesty. That bill passed, and on May 24, 2012 Governor Mark Dayton vetoed it. Governor Dayton claimed that both sides made “compelling arguments,” but because the “ramifications” of the legislation were “uncertain,” he decided to single-handedly overrule the will of his constituents and their representatives. Mr. Governor, unless you are ending slavery or beginning women’s suffrage, you will likely never have the benefit of “certainty” in your political career. Again, we should praise the Minnesotan politicians who voted for the bill.

Six people. Six people stopped two states from enacting shared parenting. Six people do not indicate shared parenting is a distant hope – they indicate profoundly that it is an imminent inevitability.

Mike Haskell is a divorced dad, shared parenting supporter and practicing family law attorney in Grand Rapids, Michigan. Posting of this article is not an endorsement for, or recommendation of, Haskell Law.

ACFC is America's Shared Parenting Organization
The members of the American Coalition for Fathers and Children dedicate ourselves to the creation of a family law system and public awareness which promotes equal rights for ALL parties affected by issues of the modern family.

ACFC is challenging the current system of American family law and policy. Through a national system of local affiliates and in alliance with other pro-family and civil liberties groups, ACFC is shifting the public debate to the real causes of family dissolution.
ReplyDelete
Replies
FAMILY LAW REFORMOctober 19, 2014 at 5:12 PM
Another killer of the American family in Schlafly’s eyes is no-fault divorce, which she refers to as “unilateral divorce.” Women initiate two-thirds of all divorces, according to Schlafly, because they know they will usually get full custody of their children and a steady stream of child-support money from their ex-husbands.

“Wives who had tired of marriage and its obligations discovered that they could divorce with or without any reason, keep the kids and most of their ex-husbands’ income, and live a life free from marriage obligations,” she wrote.

Schlafly also writes about the tyranny of family courts, which she believes deny countless children access to their fathers through unnecessary restraining orders. She blasts family court judges for overruling the wishes of parents.

“[F]amily courts cling to the idea that a judge can act as a philosopher-king and decide what is in the best interest of a child,” she writes. “This cannot be done without punishing parents and others for acts that are not contrary to any laws, rules, regulations, or policies that are written anywhere.”

Attacked, debased, maligned and vilified: This foundational institution is fighting for its life. Order Phyllis Schlafly’s bran new book, “Who Killed the American Family?” Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2014/09/schlafly-war-on-women-real-target-is-fathers/#DkRTzDX0ErGGSqGJ.99
ReplyDelete
Replies

Add comment

SHARE YOUR STORY

We always encourage all parents and extended family to share experiences of Family Court horrors, or Parental Alienation and its impact on you, your children and family. That way the ripple effect of the information and experiences shared will create positive change for other people who are affected or who may be affected in the future.

Comment anonymously, call yourself whatever you want. Email addresses are strictly confidential, and providing one is optional (but will allow you to be notified of others’ responses and to dialogue immediately if you wish). This blog was viewed over a half a million times. For the public to be aware of procedural abuses, it has to hear about them. The blog author’s own story is here. Civility is the only constraint upon your speech.

The Communications Decency Act exempts this blog’s author from any liability for what you say.