Children need families, not 50/50 parenting

What children need – not 50/50 shared parenting but to be raised in the Family founded on Marriage and for the State to stop attacking the institution and instead obey the law and assist it when asked.

By Roger Eldridge
Feb. 2, 2009

I am writing this to Charles, who asked how the Council could help him achieve the presumption of 50/50 shared parenting after a “split.”

If you go to our website http://www.family-men.com you will see our position. Read it all, not just the “About Us” section which was put up seven years ago. It remains accurate but we have moved on.

You won’t find support for “equal custody” on there because we have found after ten years serious research and experience in this that the solution to children suffering from the Family being disintegrated is something else and we know, as men, that once you analyse the problem the solution pops out.

For a start there is no such thing as a “split”. This euphemism is used because it is not politically correct in the feminist state to allocate any reasons for relationship or Marriage breakdown – except that it is caused by men. In fact, under this regime, the fundamental principle of the Courts and government policy is the extraordinary presumption that relationships break down spontaneously by mutual agreement. This allows the State to promote the myth of “no-fault” separation and divorce. The state then claims that it is just facilitating the couple who wish to separate.

The spontaneous and free movement of two halves of formerly integral matter away from each other does not happen in Nature, has never been recorded in Science and does not happen in human relationships.

Until the last fifty years and the advent of feminism with its abhorrence of anything rational, it was accepted that relationship breakdown begins with one of the spouses losing their commitment to the promises they made when they became one flesh.

Like you and many others I was seduced into joining in the victim game and campaigned for many years for the “equality” panacea on the basis that women would not initiate a separation if it meant they would lose time with their children and would not be provided for financially.

Sadly, whilst it would deter some women, it might and probably would encourage many more fathers and mothers by the predictable outcome, to give up on their commitment to the Family they took on when they first opened themselves to the procreation of children.

All the evidence – and there is volumes of it – show that children suffer from EVERY separation, not just the “bad ones” where they are ripped from one parent but from all separations, including those where mercifully one parent is not encouraged and enticed by the corrupt family Law system to destroy the other parent and his relationship with his children.

If you think about it, your duty, whether you are Married or not, is to provide for, educate and protect your child. That means every day until the day you die.

Doing it as much as 50% of the time means you are failing your child the other 50% of the time and they suffer, believe me.

What a child wants and needs is security, stability and predictability in their life. The evidence shows that they don’t care if you and their mother argue all the time and it also shows they prosper better if you stay together despite the rows. They basically want their daddy and their mummy in their life EVERY MINUTE OF THEIR LIVES, not at weekends, not for an hour in the evening three times a week and neither do they want one or two weeks with one parent and then the reverse.

The 50/50 may be good for the parents because they can get on with their life and may be marginally better for children than a lop-sided arrangement but it will never be “good for them”.

As parents – see below the report by the Family Rights Institute of Ireland – we are expected to give our lives for our children and until the last forty years that is what parents did.

Marxism, the ideology of the subversive Statists/Fabians/Feminists, requires an atomised society so that the State can easily control its every move. The Family with its Christian values and extended family “in law” creates bonds that can never be shaken and represents an enormous barrier to their plans. The radical left-wing inflitrators have clandestinely subverted the organs of the State in the Western world and have mercilessly attacked the institution of the Family founded on Marriage.

You can, of course, succumb to their devilish plot or fight them back. We have chosen to do the latter. What aids our position is that we have the Rule of Law and the Constitution on our side. The changes that we all perceive to have taken place are all illusory and merely propaganda put out by their allies in the media. The law has not changed from its founding roots. It can’t so we see our job as restoring the law and ousting the subversives who are side-stepping the democratic process. When was the last time you heard any politician or political party talk about Family law in their manifesto. I guess it is never because they never have.

These so-called reforms were instigated by shadowy persons behind the scenes. Fortunately despite their claims and rhetoric the law can be used to protect Families and children.

We just need a critical mass of the untapped power of men in the Fathers/Family Movement to see the error of being led by the nose towards 50/50 which translates into leaving our kids unprotected and undirected for half their lives and to row in behind the law so that they can again ask a woman to be their wife, safe in the knowledge that the law works as shown below and will defend their right, as long as they conduct themselves appropriately, to properly parent their child EVERY MINUTE OF THEIR LIFE!

If you have any questions please ask

God bless, Roger Eldridge
Chairman, National Mens Council of Ireland, Knockvicar, Boyle, Co. Roscommon
familymen@eircom.net www.family-men.com 07196-67138 086-8180146

***

What children need – to be raised in the Family founded on Marriage and for the State to stop attacking the institution and instead obey the law and assist it when asked.

The Family founded on Marriage is the embodiment of Christian teaching in action.

The institution of the Family founded on Marriage existed prior to the State.

The Family founded on Marriage is a unit and by definition has its own sovereignty with its own Constitution and authority.

The State is not a parent.

Therefore the institution of the Family founded on Marriage is antecedent to and morally superior to the State and to all positive law. The legitimate role of the State relative to the Family founded on Marriage must respect the Subsidiarity Principle and be confined to providing assistance – and only where voluntarily required – by the heads of the Family – the Husband and Wife – acting with the joint power and authority vested bin them to carry out their duties on behalf of the Family.

The purpose and intention of parliament in the context of Family Law must be consistent with the foundational principles outlined above.

In practice this means that all primary legislation – in the form of statute, all secondary legislation – in the form of statutory instruments, court rules and regulations and all tertiary legislation – in the form of government policy and guidelines must act, in a moral manner consistent with Christian teaching, to facilitate the better functioning and continuation as a unit of the Family founded on Marriage.

Thus it can be shown that every action of government must be “Married Family Mainstreamed” – it must form the basis for all policy planning and decision making. Currently “Gender Equality mainstreamed” controls all such policy formation despite it being inconsistent with and repugnant to the Common Good, which allows for policy to discriminate positively, as it must, on the basis of a person or group’s capacity and social function.

For all these reasons the institution of the Family founded on Marriage possesses rights which are inalienable and imprescriptible and superior to all positive law. This simply means that these rights can not be ceded or transferred to third parties and can not be superseded and regulated by the State through its organs, including the Courts. The single exception to this is where the parents have failed for moral or physical reasons and the State is obliged to step in to replace the parents – but only until the family can be rehabilitated.

On Marriage (from the French word meaning to take a Husband – “mari”) the couple become wedded and form “one flesh”. From that point they are obliged to act as one and this is acknowledged in the Law where it recognises that the heads of the Family jointly control all the assets that they have accrued together during the lifetime of the Marriage since their wedlock. These assets necessarily include the Family Home, any land or other property, all material goods and savings. The most important asset however is any children they are blessed with.

The Married Family, like all institutions has its own Constitution and authority where its sovereignty is given expression. It necessarily must have a structure and a hierarchy of responsibility and government. The heads of the Family are a committee of 2 which must make all decisions jointly that involve a third party, especially any organ of the State. Each of them individually, if they believe the children’s welfare and safety requires their intervention, also have the right, at any time, to veto any prior decision jointly made but can not unilaterally initiate the involvement of a third party.

As one would expect, where Marriage is the daily theatre in which we act out our Christian faith and teaching, the most important duty of a spouse flows from the covenant made with God in the Marriage ceremony where we vow to “love” each other and any children we might receive by the Grace of God.

This “love”, what we call unconditional love, is the authentic Christian love that was shown to us by God sending his own son Jesus Christ to sacrifice himself so that we might be saved. In the same way spouses are expected “for richer, for poorer, for better for worse, in sickness and in health” to sacrifice their own comfort, their own welfare and safety and in fact their own lives for the benefit of their spouse and children and the Family Unit as a whole.

Jesus reminds us that the two most important of God’s commandments are that we should love Him above all else – that material and selfish desires should be resisted – and that we should love our neighbour and our enemy as we love ourselves. This second commandment directs that the most important duty of a spouse, apart from the duty to self-sacrifice for the rest of the Family that flows from the first commandment, is to be open to reconciliation in these troubled times when it is all too easy tfor the other spouse to be painted as “the enemy”.

It is falsely stated that the primary duty of a spouse is to co-habit. Plainly, whilst for practical purposes it is usually the case that the Family all live together, the principles of family law do not support it as being critical. Many families exist and function well whilst the members of the Family reside in different locations. For example where the Husband may be in the services or in the merchant navy etc.

The genuine key principles that distinguish a Marriage are:

The spouses act jointly as a single unit in decision-making involving any third party;

The spouse act selflessly for the benefit of the Family as a whole and subordinate their own individual needs and wishes;

The spouses are continuously open to reconciliation.

The act of living together, ie merely co-habiting, has been falsely promoted as a defining duty of spouses precisely to create the potential for any pairing of two people – of opposite sex or same-sex – to co-habit in a Marriage-like manner and so blur the real requirement for the love – self control, submission to regulation and openness to reconciliation – characterised by the authentic Family founded on Marriage.

Family Rights Institute of Ireland, Knockvicar, Boyle, Co. Roscommon
familyrightsinstitute@eircom.net 07196-67138 086-8180146

***

In order to pay the wages and make a profit the media has learnt that their clients – readers, viewers, listeners, must be good consumers or else the advertisers will go elsewhere. The best consumers are overwhelmingly women – Maureen Gaffney of the National Economic and Social Forum estimates that at least 90% of financial decisions and purchases are now made by women – so to survive and be successful editors everywhere must fill the spaces between the ads with content (what in the old days used to be called “News”) labelled WAWMAA – stories that reinforce what women like to hear – ones that say Women Are Wonderful, Men Are Awful.

It’s not that editors like women and dislike men, it’s just good for business.

The mantra of big business is growth so their strategy has to be always to maximise profit through sales. For every cent they pay to a woman they know they will get it back immediately in sales. For them to hire women rather than men, wherever it is feasible, suits their purpose.

It’s not that managers and company directors like women and dislike men, it’s just good for business.

Since the seventies governments have acted exactly like big business. They now claim taxes from virtually every purchase made so, if they want to expand their empire, they have a vested interest in ensuring consumerism is maximised.

That means it makes sense for government, like the media and big business, to have policies which use WAWMAA to justify the transfer of control of the Family income from the man to the woman. Hence the built-in bias in the governments family Courts – both in Custody and Domestic Violence cases – and Child Support laws and decisions.

It’s not that governments like women and dislike men, it’s just good for business.

God bless, Roger Eldridge
Executive Director, Family Rights Institute of Ireland, Knockvicar, Boyle, Co. Roscommon
familyrightsinstitute@eircom.net 07196-67138 086-8180146

This entry was posted in Civil Rights, Divorce, Family, Feminism, Feminist Jurisprudence, Health, Media Bias, Organizational News, Propaganda Exposed, Social-Destruction Enterprise. Bookmark the permalink.