-Caveat Lector-
Remember:More people have died in Ted Kennedy's car than have died in United States Commercial Nuclear Power plant operations visit my web site at http://www.info-quest.org Visit my energy page at http://www.info-quest.org/Energy.html Check out the latest on the anwr drilling project http://www.anwr.org visit my blog at http://info-spectrum.blogspot.com My ICQ# is 79071904 See the Pledge of alleginace to the flag that the 9th circuit court of appeals doesn't want you to say. for a precise list of the powers of the Federal Government linkto: http://www.info-quest.org/Enumerated.html ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 21:24:44 -0500 (Central Daylight Time) From: Chad W. McBride <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Chad W. McBride <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [JBirch] PBS to Air Biased Domestic Violence and Child Custody Film The letter below was written by father's rights activist Teri Stoddard in response to PBS' intended showing of a biased film on domestic violence and child custody. There are many other great articles to read at her blog below. http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/10/13/051045.php The following is my letter to Pat Mitchell, President of PBS, regarding the planned showing of a film on domestic violence and child custody. Dear Pat, I was shocked, then disappointed to hear, "My dad doesn't love me", right at the beginning of the promo for Breaking The Silence, the Children's Stories. You say Breaking The Silence, the Children's Stories is about Domestic Violence. That includes child abuse. Since mothers commit most child abuse, are any of the stories about mothers? Many cases of domestic violence involve co-combatants, but men are prosecuted far more than women. I fear every case you expose in this film will be of a man who abuses his wife and kids. I wonder, do you even mention female abusers? It is not right to air this film without telling the whole story. PBS meant HONESTY to me. It has always meant TRUTH. Guess what, not anymore. This film is likely political propaganda to counter the swelling family rights movement that is championing the cause of joint custody. Research has shown that co-parenting is good for children, 85% of the population supports equal shared parenting, and those who are in power now don't want to give it up. What better way to protect their place than to put fear in the hearts of voters? Representatives of N.O.W. and the domestic violence industry used false statistics when they testified against AB 1307 in Sacramento recently. It worked that day, why not keep misleading people? As far as PAS, I don't care what you call it, the truth is many noncustodial parents, usually fathers but sometimes mothers, are alienated by the custodial parent and the family court system. I'm sure everyone reading this knows of someone this has happened to. Come to think of it, maybe they don't realize how common it is. Men don't usually speak of heartache. THIS is the world's dirty little secret. Even if this film was made with the best of intentions, it still shouldn't be shown. You owe it to your viewers to tell the WHOLE truth. Posted by Teri Stoddard on October 13, 2005 05:10 AM (See all posts by Teri Stoddard) Filed under: Politics, Politics: World, Politics: U.S., Culture/Tech: Family Comment on this post and/or leave a message for the author here. Comment 1 posted by T A Dodger on October 13, 2005 10:36 AM: Teri, My comments are more directed at the fatehrs' rights movement in general than to your comment in particular. First, I support 100% a presumption for joint custody, and I am always pleased to see fathers wanting to take responsability for their children. That said, while I genrally support the things that the "Fathers' rights" movement wants, I am deeply offended by its tendancy to minimize violence against women and to blame women for the breakdown of families. Feminists and fathers who want custody should be on the same side. We both want to break down the traditional gender role stereotype that says fathers are bread winners only and women are the naturally nurturing ones that should care for the children. But you're not going to win over feminists by blaming women or suggesting that we're overblowing domestic violence committed against women. I'm sorry, but men ARE more likely to abandon their children than women. Men DO abuse women more than women abuse men. In fact, if a woman is murdered, her killer is more likely to be her domestic partner than any other person. These things weren't invented by feminsits to make men feel bad, and they should be taken very seriously. Comment 2 posted by Gaurav on October 13, 2005 12:28 PM: This is an impassioned article but filled with factual inaccuracies. I would say that your purpose would be better served by remaining true to facts. Here's a sample - "Contrary to common belief, males and females perpetrate abuse against their own children at surprisingly similar rates. "Among all abused children, those abused by their birth parents were about equally likely to have been abused by mothers as by fathers (50% and 58%, respectively), but those abused by other parents, parent-substitutes, or other, nonparental perpetrators were much more likely to be abused by males (80 to 90% by males versus 14 to 15% by females)." http://www.therapistfinder.net/Child-Abuse/Abusers.html contrary to your claim that "mothers commit most abuse" Once again abuse is a very subjectively defined term though the effects of abuse are all to real. I am not nitpicking about facts on this important issue but correct information is needed for right policy initiatives to solve the problem of child abuse. Comment 3 posted by Teri In Cali on October 13, 2005 12:41 PM: Please know that I do not minimize abuse of any type, by either gender. The facts, according to reputable studies, are that mothers acting alone are, by far, more likely to absue children than fathers acting alone. According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Administration on Children, Youth and Families, approximately two-fifths (40.8 percent) of child victims were neglected or abused by ?their mothers acting alone.? Just 18.8 percent were maltreated by their fathers acting alone, (and 1 7 percent of children were abused or neglected by both their mothers and fathers). Yes, I know what you're saying about males, they are usually the men that mother brings into the household to replace the real father. Biological fathers are the LEAST likely to harm children. All I'm asking for is that the TRUTH be told, not the propaganda everyone has been fed for decades. One day we'll all be on the same side. I'm doing everything I can to make that happen sooner than later. Comment 4 posted by Jeremy Swanson on October 13, 2005 01:27 PM: Well Done Kudos and 'massive pats on the back' to Teri Stoddard for having the guts to tell PBS where she-and we Dads-stand on the outrageius and almost criminal PBS support of radical hate feminists in the documentary series "Breaking the Silence". She is not afraid to stand up for Dads against this virtual tyranny and even less afraid to tell the ferminist mercenaries in PBS what she thinks of them. Good for you Teri. You are indeed one of us. its always good to have a woman who stands for truth and justice first-on our side. Teri has pointed out that PBS used to be associated with truth and honesty. But not now. I think she is quite right. I think its time the FCC pulled the PBS licence. It is no longer a service to the people it accepts resource money from. It has become a tool for the radical left and a disgrace to families everywhere. it is certainly an enemy of American and Canadian Fathers. I have to wonder what the Board of Directors is doing about it. All I can think is that they are just happy that they are still getting funding from the public and therefor say nothing. So maybe we should stop that funding. They certainly don't deserve it. If there is even an ounce of the same kind of decency (that Teri Stoddard has in abundance)in CEO Pat Mitchells body she should resign and allow others to take PBS back to its common sense-family oriented roots. JS Comment 5 posted by tom porter on October 13, 2005 01:32 PM: The general disregard for the necessity of children having access to both parents is a focal point for the ever increasing loss of good parenting arrangements. Good parenting environments in the form of well understood and accepted family values is required to establish the means to achieve stable children who have the temperament and capacity to respect human dignity and enjoy loving relationships. A presumption of equal parenting between wed or unwed or separating or separated parents is necessary for children to learn to get along with others in a fair and equitable manner. Emotional and instructional stability is difficult to establish when both parents, having access to readily available adversarial social and justice systems, are unable to collaborate effectively in an atmosphere of cooperation. Estranged parents are not the only concern .The problem extends to all those who represent a positive influence and a loving and secure environment for our children. We need to dissolve all barriers to include race, gender and religious belief This is a grave social issue whose importance cannot be emphasized enough. What is required is a social environment where the values of both parents will be respected. Where the right to both parents to equal decision-making authority is defended. Where equal responsibility is enforced fairly and where equal time sharing with the children is facilitated and encouraged where ever possible. The ultimate goal is to create a working environment where both parents are valued and required to ensure the best possible conditions for the upbringing of every child for the benefit of the future. There are many issues that contribute to the deterioration of equal parenting. All issues need to be addressed in various ways. To that end, everyone who supports equal parenting will be invited in an effort to both understand the complexities and extent of the problem and the issues. Together we will be able to devise effective means of improving the parenting environment for the benefit of the children, the parents and ultimately for all of society. Comment 6 posted by tom porter on October 13, 2005 01:36 PM: The focus of my belief is the need for change in the current system such as to allow those who wish to be parents to have the opportunity. I believe that parenting should be shared both economically and personally. This requires both parents to subscribe to a co-parenting plan which includes a split of time as close to 50/50 as possible. In addition those who chose to relinquish any part of that time should compensate the other parent monetarily within reason. Clearly this split of time refers to in person parenting time not the ability to find a third party to care for the child. By working from this point we eliminate any battle in court for great financial gain as this is the primary goal of the divorce industry. The parent who has the extra 1 or more percent is determined by that parent?s ability to provide a superior environment not determined by their lawyer?s ability to assassinate the other parent?s character. Simply put the common thread I find among all true parents is their focus in life? raising future citizens who embody all the base values that we as a collective humanity cherish. Including but not limited to? Honesty, respect, compassion , caring, kindness, generosity, a capacity for love, responsibility, dedication and the ability and desire to instill these values in their offspring. To do this we must not waste their formidable years bickering in court about who the worse human being is but rather offering them the opportunity to experience the best qualities offered by each of the parents who jointly created this life. To this end we must work to create an environment that allows each parent to be those qualities and the time and resources to impart them. By weighting the court battle either way the system creates an environment of win / lose which creates financial devastation and emotional burden which ultimately takes time and financial resources away from the child. This cycle is perpetuated by the divorce industry . I believe that if an umbrella set of guidelines is set prior to divorce and it is made less lucrative to fight then we as a society would spend our time connecting with our kids instead of our lawyers .We as a collective group of humans should value humanity and it?s future (our children) not the fight for financial superiority which destroys our children. I believe that?.all cultures believe that children are the greatest gift in the world and to be a parent is the one thing in life that guarantees our immortality. To be remembered generations from now for being a positive influence is in itself immortality. Every child deserves love , guidance, and positive reinforcement. Those should be given by the 2 lives that created the child and despite the differences of those parties the responsibility should be given equally. The parties desire to raise children without the stresses imposed on them by an industry which serves only itself should be the concern of all citizens of the planet. Anyone who argues that children do not need positive interaction with both parents equally has an agenda other than raising good kids. Post a comment (Or ping: http://blogcritics.org/mt/tb/37683) [ Please read the Official Comment Policy.] Name: Email Address: (The email address will be displayed using special encoding for spam-protection, and is not displayed at all if an URL is supplied.) URL: Comments: Remember info? www.ctrl.org DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance???not soap-boxing???please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'???with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds???is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/ctrl@listserv.aol.com/ <A HREF="http://www.mail-archive.com/ctrl@listserv.aol.com/";>ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
-Caveat Lector- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.11.14/131 - Release Date: 10/12/2005 www.ctrl.org DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substanceânot soap-boxingâplease! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'âwith its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright fraudsâis used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/ctrl@listserv.aol.com/ <A HREF="http://www.mail-archive.com/ctrl@listserv.aol.com/";>ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
