by Victor Smith
Some of us FATHERS, (I'm sure) believe that there was an opportunity offered in the form of a STAGE in front of the Courthouse bldg, NYC for FATHERS RIGHTS ACTIVISTS to make a point about the definition of fathers.Fathers generally do not want to be known as Mr. Money Baggs, and only Mr. Money Baggs. However, that is the theme that is being played out there.
The woman who claims to be Cosby's daughter see Cosby as "Money Baggs" and that she wants her money. The question needs to be ask, why wasn't a "paternity" claim filed within the past 20 years? David Troop, Tx suggested that such a claim can only be made by the mother, and not the daughter herein.
Whatever, your take on this issue, Cosby was not the "bad guy", and the daughter should not be allowed to think, as many children do, that all dads are good for is to extort money from.The proper legal process was not used, showing no respect for the legal system as wellas dad.
If we let children and/or those who think that they are our children make claims like that with total disregard for the rest of the system, then we are truly at the bottom of life's pile of crap.
I for one hope that this is not true, and that the Fathers' Rights movement has not gone downhill to focus only on the political concept of "joint custody". For if that is the case, the "fathers" accross this land are lost. Please be clear that fathers are NOT just about....joint custody, and nothing else.
Gentlemen, if you do not define "father", then the rest of society will. Fathers are already defined out of the word "family" in all government programs. Fathers are being ignored in the new tax plans, because there is no $500 per child tax credit that goes to fathers unless he has the mother with the kid, but on the other hand she can get the credtit without the father. In fact the great debate is what to do with the $500 per child tax credit for welfare moms? See how fathers never enter into the picture?
How about a new idea?
Fathers of children whose moms are on welfare, and that father being current on child support payments should receive the $500 per child tax credit.
Gentlemen, Fathers' Rights is about his rights to sole custody of his children prior to a woman placing his kids on welfare, and/or prior to the State's removal of his children from an unfit mother. Joint Custody, is fine if both parents want it , but is "hell" if they don't.
As Father's Day, 1997 comes into focus, those of us who are interested in fathers or dads should have a plan to offer the public that shows the importance of fathers in society, (even our own society). Please allow me to remind you that Fathers' Day is a day set aside to honor fathers and perhaps show our respect for fathers in family life.
Putting our war stories on a purple wall, and claiming to be a victim (suggesting "look at poor me") is a very "self-centered" act and does not show honor or respect for fathers. Letting balloons fly into the air likewise does not show honor or respect for fathers. In fact, these acts miss the whole point of Father's Day, and these acts fail to show the family value of having a father at home.
Unfortunately, many industrialized societies have created Government sponsored (socialist) programs that seem to provide for displacing and/or replacing fathers in a families' day-to-day life. At the same time that these Government sponsored (socialist) programs are created they are sold and promoted to the public as good programs by using sales "code-word" language. However, government sales "code word" language for promoting its programs always are berating, demonizing, vilifying and/or avoiding the use of the word "father" altogether.
For example, the Federal Government and the 50 States have defined the word "family," so that fathers are not necessarily included. Please remember that socialist funding programs offered by the government are to displace and/or replace fathers, and never to support a father and his family. This point is made very clear when one considers that the Federal government, and the 50 States offer no funded programs that help do anything, but in contrast, there are so many government programs for women that no one knows how many there and/or how much we spend on them, even thought treating men and women differently with government funded programs (as in separate but equal) is unconstitutional. (see Brown vs. Board of Education)
"Joint Custody" activists, who by the way, are not fathers' rights activists, seem to be very silent on these points.
The purpose for NOT including "father" in the definition of "family" is purely for government funding reasons. The government, both State and Federal have no programs that set aside money for fathers and their children.
Here are a few examples, of government sponsored(socialist) programs "code-words" used against fathers, or substituted for the word "father": "deadbeat dad," "male role model," "mentor," "responsible parent," "obligor," "visitor," "other parent." The government sponsored word "access" is very popular this year, because it sort of takes away the harsh reality of it all, and government people love a good deception. That is why our Capitol is called Washington, D.C. (Deception Center).
Another method of government sponsored program and "double speak" is the 1997 model of the US Postal Service being used with its stamps for a "public awareness" double speak meaning sales and promotion of domestic violence programs that the Federal Government has bought into and wasted millions on. The government will tell us (wrongly) the number of calls that it receives, but will not say what percent of the calls have no basis in fact, because 90% of the calls are worthless.
Again, joint custody activists do not approach theses issues.
Gentlemen, since we know that there can be no government program that could ever replace fathers, we need to keep the government's hoaxes in mind as we create plans to show honor and respect for fathers on Father's Day.
Government programs for children fail to offer children love, care and daily guidance as the children grow up. Government programs for children fail to offer the loving open arms to run to for personal security when a child feels a need for such security. Government programs for children fail to direct children as to "right" and "wrong." Government programs for children fail to offer any moral basis in life. In short, government programs for children is the same as planting seeds in a garden that will grow into weeds in the future, and destroy the garden. (Garden here means society.)
Perhaps we should suggest or demand that the Federal Government show its respect and honor fathers by placing into law some or all of the following: Washington D.C. 800-972-3524:>/p>
The above simple question would save tax payers money. The above simple question would allow for "Due Process" and "Equal Treatment" under the law for both parents and the children, while using our tax dollars. The above simple question would save millions of children from being welfare cases. The above simple question would place children with a "Working Parent," showing the child an example of what society expects of them as an adult.
These are a few of the thoughts that Fathers' Rights activists should examine that joint custody activists never seem to see. Also, the so-called Men's Rights activists with their focus on non-fathers issues seem to miss these same points. This is why fathers make little headway, because everybody else is misdirecting their efforts.
| Home | July | Features | Columns | OrgNews | Boutique | Directory | Links | Definitions |
The Backlash! is a feature of New Chivalry Press
Copyright © 1997 by New Chivalry Press
Email to the Editor -- If you don't want it published in the "Email to the Editor" column, say so. Otherwise, it may be published.