Do you blog? There is currently a research survey out that seeks to know "why bloggers blog." The study is being performed by a graduate student at Appalachian State University in North Carolina. The survey takes less than 5 minutes to complete. Thanks for your time.

Click Here to take the survey

Posted by: Adam at March 16, 2005 02:52 PM

Hey Mitch,

Here's a few links I was able to find. They may or may not interest you. Didn't have time for a real intensive search, but it's a start...

Institute for Marriage and Public Policy

Family Scholars Blog

Lee's Divorce and Family Law Blog

Thanks again for your work.

Posted by: Jeff at March 16, 2005 03:25 PM

Ahhhh!!!!! I thought I could use html tags to make those links, but they got stripped. Here they are again (same order)...hope this works...

http://www.marriagedebate.com/

http://www.familyscholars.org/

http://divorceinfo.com/blog/index.php?cat=1

Posted by: Jeff at March 16, 2005 03:28 PM

Have you checked out R-Kids of Minnesota and a group called Center for Parental Responsibilities(CPR) also in MN

Posted by: William Ferris at March 16, 2005 07:54 PM

When it comes to family law, the vast majority of citizens are totally ignorant of the law, the "text", the revolution of divorce that occured 35 years ago and the constitution. You are a prime example.

You may be correct about the vast whining coming from fathers regarding family law. That was the response from many people who could not understand the problem of slavery in the 18th and 19th century. Those who were not slaves didn't know what it was like to have a master, good or bad. Those who didn't own slaves never experienced the purchase of a child that seperated "it" from it's parents. Those who knew just enough of the word of God to recite John 3:16, but knew little else of the Laws of God merely accepted what was generally practiced to be morally acceptable and legally executed. For a slave who didn't know if peonage, indentured servitude or submitting to your master was morally right, or simply "legal" was incapable of rational debate, thus they deserved to be enslaved where their needs could be determined who knew what was in the slave's "best interest". Jesus said "render under Caesar what is Caesars", he did NOT say give the tyrant what does not BELONG to the tyrant. Can you grasp that concept of law? Most people do, but only after the tyrant has lashed your ass. I'm from the John Adams, Jesus Christ school of law.... Adams said, "It's a duty to GOd to slit the throat of a tyrant."

From your initial commentary on family law, I know you are as dumb as they come.

1. You know nothing of the defintions in law and culture of what marriage, dissolusion, child custody, welfare law, child protection, Title 42, Title IV-D, TItle IV-A, Chapter 518, 260, 517 of Minnesota law. The development of this "system" in the U.S. has most of it's roots in Minnesota, home of modern socio-fascism (formerly named communist).

2. You probably have no idea what the defintion of marriage, child, mother and father as it applies to Public policy, God's law and the principles of freedom, liberty and the right to be let alone.

3. You probably are completely ignorant of the cultural history of the American family as it practiced by society andreligion as practiced and defined by the Minnesota Bar Association (lawyers in all three branches).

4. You have absolutely no idea what the Rules of Civil Procedure, Rules of Family Procedure (General Rules), Expedited Rules, Rules of Criminal, Juvenile Procedure and the newly created Guardian Ad Litum Procedure. Mn Lawyers just keeps on giving, corrupting and destroying (See Scalia Dissents).

5. Data Privacy - You have no clue what is public or private data and how the government handles that data. Can I post your divorce on-line for the whole world to see? Do you know how public officials hide their legal affairs and how ignorant fools don't?

6. Are you familiar with court practices?

I will debate any conservative (or Repugnican), and the socio-fascists (DFL)) on "family law" anywhere, anytime. I would cherish the opportunity to debate any Judge, retired or in practice on family law. Lawyers and Law professors will not. Lawyers know the system is a mess, corrupt and morally bankrupt. Law Professors couldn't debate, they just don't know enough to present anything constructive. Though it would be fun to pillary and mock a professor in front of his students, she'd be fired and disbarred by the end of debate.

RESOURCES:

The Center for Parental Responsibility and Parent Child Advocates are the VALID resources in Minnesota. R-kids has been around for years, and have discredited themselves.

For a small primer, a historical perspective on the law, go to www.legalactioncommittee.org
You must thoroughly read the information provided and THINK. Lawyers can't, can you?

The Howard Center in Rockford Illinois and the American Coalition of Fathers and Children are the leaders nationally. www.acfc.org

Republicans sold family down the river for economic reasons(employment for women and children and underemployment for fathers).

Democrats killed marriage for the women's vote and the power to control them. THey have been extremely succesful.

Let me know when you want to debate. I challenged some of your colleagues, and they won't.

Let's debate, so I can persuade you that conservatives named Republican are not doing their jobs.

Regards,

Jon S. Wood

Posted by: Jon S. Wood at March 17, 2005 08:48 AM

Yeah, Jon, you sound like you'd be quite a pleasure to "debate".

Posted by: Mitch at March 17, 2005 09:07 AM

Geez, Jon, you have an interesting way of trying to persuade people. I know it's always best to start by insulting them, as that is a wonderful way to show open minded and fair you are, not to mention how courteous and nice, and it proves you must know what you're talking about.

If I read correctly, Mitch was expressing an interest in learning more about this or finding resources to do so. Mitch, how dare you!?

If I asked somebody to teach me math, and they responded with "you're dumb, you know nothing of the order of operations, and you suck at math. Let's start learning," I don't think the session would be nearly as productive as it could have been. Same with you. I might have read your comments and taken them seriously, considering you as a person who possibly had some insight into the situation. Now, however, I read it and think, "Man, this guy is one crabby S.O.B."

Good job, I really can't imagine why anybody wouldn't want to debate you.

Posted by: jeffreyb at March 17, 2005 09:32 AM

Jon, Jeffrey did a much better job of responding than I did. What he said.

Posted by: mitch at March 17, 2005 09:35 AM

Jon from weird Hunter S Thompson like post above. You referenced a great resource but I don't think you get it. The subject is very simple. The blood sucking attorneys want to make it complicated. Perhaps you are one of them. Here are some of the key problems.
1) Government overreach.
2) Government waste.
3) Gender bias.
4) Gender biased media cover up.
5) Female only domestic violence Racketeering.
5) Failed social engineering.
6) Massive corruption with government and attorneys making policy.
7) Conflicts of interest every where you turn.

All things a Liberal would love. Do you?

Posted by: Lee Surma at March 24, 2005 07:56 PM

Name:


Email Address:


URL:

Remember personal info?
YesNo
Comments: