A Father's Suicide Note

The love that my daughter and I shared was truly special.  She is a such a sweet, kind and gentle spirit. I am so sorry that I will not be there to see her grow into a beautiful woman.  It absolutely crushed me to not be in her life over the last three years. I worked very hard as a father to build her confidence and self-esteem.  She is smart, funny and considerate, but she didn't know it yet.  I pray that she realizes her strengths and her confidence in herself will continue to grow.  I love you dearly, Lily.

My son Jack was just entering Kindergarten, when I lost access to him. He is gregarious, outgoing and a great athlete.  He is smart and fearless.  He could have just as much fun by himself as he could with other kids.  Even the older boys in our A Father's Suicide Note

"The love that my daughter and I shared was truly special.  She is a such a sweet, kind and gentle spirit. I am so sorry that I will not be there to see her grow into a beautiful woman.  It absolutely crushed me to not be in her life over the last three years. I worked very hard as a father to build her confidence and self-esteem.  She is smart, funny and considerate, but she didn't know it yet.  I pray that she realizes her strengths and her confidence in herself will continue to grow.  I love you dearly, Lily.

My son Jack was just entering Kindergarten, when I lost access to him. He is gregarious, outgoing and a great athlete.  He is smart and fearless.  He could have just as much fun by himself as he could with other kids.  Even the older boys in our neighbourhood wanted to play with Jack.  It absolutely breaks my heart that I will not be able to help him grow into a man. I love you to, Jack. I miss you both so much.

My identity was taken from me, as result of this process.  When it began, I was a commercial real estate broker with CB Richard Ellis.  I lived by the Golden rule and made a living by bringing parties together and finding the common ground.  My reputation as a broker was built on my honesty and integrity. When it ended, I was broke, homeless, unemployed and had no visitation with my own children.  

I had no confidence and was paralyzed with fear that I would be going to jail whenever my ex-wife wanted.  Nothing I could say or do would stop it. This is what being to death or 'targeted' by a psychopath looks like.  This is the outcome.  I didn't somehow change into a 'high-conflict' person or lose my ability to steer clear of the law. 

I've had never been arrested, depressed, homeless or suicidal before this process. The stress and pressure applied to me was deliberate and nothing I could do or say would get me any relief.  Nothing I or my attorneys said to my ex-wife's attorney or to the Court made any difference.  Truth, facts, evidence or even the best interest of my children had no affect on the outcome.

The family court system is broken, but from my experience, it is not the laws, its the lawyers.  They feed off of the conflict.  They are not hired to reduce conflict or protect the best interest of children, which is why third parties need to be involved.  It should be mandatory for children to have a guardian ad litem, with extensive training in abuse and aggression. 

It is absolutely shameful that the Fairfax County Court did nothing to intervene or understand the ongoing conflict.  Judge Randy Bellows also used the Children as punishment, by withholding access for failing to fax a receipt.  The entire conflict centered around the denial of access to the children, it was inconceivable to me that he would use children like this.  This is exactly what my ex-wife was doing and now Judge Bellows was doing it for her.

To all my family, friends and the people that supported me through this process, I am so sorry.  I know my reactions and behavior throughout this process did not always make sense.  None of this made sense to me either.  I had no help and the only suggestion I got from my attorneys was to remain silent.  

At first, I did what I was told, remained silent and listened to my attorneys.  Then after I had given my ex-wife full custody to try and appease her, I learned about Psychopathy and emailed Dr. Samenow about my concerns and asked him for help.  Of course, I was ignored.  As the conflict continued, I was forced to defend myself. When that didn't work, I thought I could get the help I needed by speaking out. There is no right or wrong way to defend yourself from abuse.  Naively, I thought that abuse was abuse and it would be recognized and something would be done.  I thought speaking out would end the abuse or at least get them to back off.  It didn't. When no one did anything they were emboldened.

I took my own life because I had come to the conclusion that there was nothing I could do or say to end the abuse.  Every time I got up off my knees, I would get knocked back down.  They were not going to let me be the father I wanted to be to my children. People may think I am a coward for giving up on my children, but I didn't see how I was going to heal from this. I have no money for an attorney, therapy or medication. I have lost four jobs because of this process. I was going to be at their mercy for the rest of my life and they had shown me none.  

Being alienated, legally abused, emotionally abused, isolated and financially ruined are all a recipe for suicide.  I wish I were stronger to keep going, but the emotional pain and fear of going to court and jail [because of exorbitant child support] became overwhelming. I became paralyzed with fear.  I couldn't flee and I could not fight. I was never going to be allowed to heal or recover. I wish I were better at articulating the psychological and emotional trauma I experienced.

I could fill a book with all the lies and mysterious rulings of the Court.  Never have I experienced this kind of pain.  I asked for help, but good men did nothing and evil prevailed.  All I wanted was a Guardian Ad Litem for my children. Any third party would have been easily been able to confirm or refute all of my allegations, which is why none was ever appointed to protect the children or reduce the conflict.

Abuse is about power and control. Stand up for the abused and speak out.  If someone speaks out about abuse, believe them.

Please teach my children empathy and about emotional invalidation and 'gas-lighting' or they may end up like me.

God have mercy on my soul.

Chris Mackney"

Source

Read More

All It Requires To Get David Shuster To Accurately Report the Facts Is A Libel Lawsuit

—Ace

Shuster claimed, for the sixty bazillionth time, that James O'Keefe was a "convicted felon."

No. Misdemeanor. It was a prank, dude. And the judge threw the book at him, because, conservative.

But that book was still only a misdemeanor. That was the most this out-for-blood judge could get him for.

O'Keefe slapped him with a libel suit.

Resulting in Shuster claiming he "misspoke."

Correction; when reporting on James Okeefe's arrest, I misspoke and said OKeefe is a convicted felon. He's not. I apologize for the error.

That's on Twitter. We'll see if he corrects on Olbermann's show, where he's guest hosting, and where he made his libelous remark.

Shuster, of course, has been claiming this for years. No matter how many times people informed him he was factually inaccurate, he kept on claiming it.

Because he's not a journalist, and realizes his reputation is too stinky to ever work in that field again. He's now just a rabble-rouser in a suit.

The Leftist Media

We'll report the truth. If under court order

Read More

‘I promised God that if he would save my baby, I would leave the homosexual lifestyle’

Source

February 6, 2012 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Lisa Miller, an ex-lesbian who made national headlines during her battle to protect her daughter from a custody transfer to her former sex partner, is now telling the story of her struggle through a book by one of her attorneys, Rina Lindevaldsen.

“Only One Mommy: A Woman’s Battle for Her Life, Her Daughter, and Her Freedom” (New Revolution Publishers, 2011), gives readers new insights into Miller’s inspiring odyssey from abused and neglected child, through the horrors of sexual and chemical addictions, to redemption through faith in Jesus Christ.

Miller’s final act of bravery was her decision to enter into hiding with her child, Isabella, to escape her former lesbian partner Janet Jenkins, who was successfully seeking to transfer custody of Miller’s daughter, Isabella, to herself. Although Miller remains in hiding, she speaks to readers through journals and letters left with her attorney, and through Lindevaldsen’s own narrative.

At the root of Miller’s nightmarish childhood were two elements: contraception and divorce. Miller’s early memories are filled with the bitter reminder that her mother, who was using birth control at the time she conceived Miller, had not wanted her.

“Whenever my mother was mad at me, she would pull out the oval peach colored pack of birth control pills that she had saved all those years to show me that only one week was missing, and that was the week she got pregnant,” Miller writes.

At age seven, Miller’s parents divorced, leaving herself and her brother alone with an increasingly mentally ill, distant, and cruel mother. Miller’s isolation and lack of affirmation from her parents led her to seek solace in unhealthy fixations on food, diet pills, and pornography. In order to relieve herself of emotional pain, she began to cut herself, which added to the scars that her body already held from her mother’s beatings

However, Miller was also the recipient of positive influences through friendships with leaders in her church and schoolteachers, who took an interest in her and provided her with adult role models. Her religious education would come back to her in her darkest days, providing a way out of her seemingly impossible situation.

After entering a troubled marriage, and finally making a suicide attempt that left her in intensive care for days, Miller received another major blow. During her recovery in a psychiatric ward in Virginia, a counselor informed her that she was a lesbian and must seek the sexual companionship of other women.

“As part of my treatment, in order to be released, I had to meet with my immediate family, including my husband, and tell them I was a ‘lesbian.’ I complied, and not surprisingly, my marriage ended. Even though I had left behind all of my childhood addictions at that time, sadly, I entered into the addiction of homosexuality,” writes Miller.

Lisa eventually entered into a relationship and a Vermont “civil union” with a recovering alcoholic named Janet Jenkins. During that time she was artificially inseminated, resulting in the birth of her daughter. She recalls that in the misery of her sexually immoral and conflictive relationship with Jenkins, she almost lost Isabella before she was born. It was then that she made a special petition to God, promising him that “if he saved my baby, I would leave the homosexual lifestyle.”

Isabella was born healthy, and although Miller did not keep her promise immediately, she recalled it as her relationship with Jenkins continued to deteriorate. “It was then that God brought to mind the covenant that I had made with him just months earlier. I knew enough from my religious background that one does not make covenants with God and not keep them without suffering negative consequences. When my daughter was 17 months old, I left the homosexual lifestyle and moved with my daughter back to my home state of Virginia, where she had been conceived and born.”

Judicial tyranny and the struggle to save Isabella from her lesbian “other mother”

After Lindevaldsen’s summary of Miller’s victory over homosexual vice and her other addictions, the attorney leads readers through the maze of legal arguments that have been used to justify giving parenthood rights, and ultimately guardianship, of Isabella to Jenkins. In the process she shows that no state is truly safe from the effects of homosexualist legislation in other jurisdictions.

Although Miller was artificially inseminated while in a civil union with Jenkins, Isabella was never adopted by her, and Jenkins’ name does not appear on Isabella’s birth certificate. Moreover, Miller and Jenkins were residents of Virginia when they entered into their Vermont “civil union,” and Virginia’s constitution explicitly denies all recognition to such unions.

In sum, while Jenkins appears to lack all standing to make a claim of “parenthood,” that did not prevent judges in Vermont and Virginia from twisting the law like a pretzel to ensure that Jenkins had access to Isabella.

Miller’s legal nightmare began when a Vermont judge decided to literally create a law where one did not exist. Vermont had no law giving parenthood rights to the spouse of a woman who is artificially inseminated - the spouse had to adopt the child. But despite the fact that civil unions were to be treated like marriages under Vermont law, Vermont Judge Richard Cohen decreed from the bench that Jenkins was Isabella’s “mother.”

Noting that “the court admitted that the legislature still hadn’t answered the question of how a child born by artificial insemination by an anonymous sperm donor would gain the legal status of a child to the spouse who was not biologically related to the child,” Lindevaldsen observes: “To its credit, the court at least admitted what it was doing—creating new law in order to reach its decision.”

However, despite all of the protections inserted into the Virginia constitution against the enforcement of civil union or homosexual “marriage” legislation from other states, prosecutors managed to make use of a federal law that was designed to stop one parent from denying custody to another: the Parental Kidnapping Prevention Act (FKPA).

Although the law was created to prevent parents from fleeing to another jurisdiction to get a better custody settlement through another set of courts, it was used in Miller’s case to claim that Virginia could not cancel the custody order issued by the Vermont court. Lindevaldsen argues that this is false reasoning because the federal Defense of Marriage Act protects states from the obligation of giving “full faith and credit” to homosexual unions formalized in other states, and even under the FKPA, states don’t have to enforce the decisions of other states’ courts. Nonetheless, the Virginia courts ruled in favor of Jenkins, and agreed to apply the Vermont decision.

Lindevaldsen goes on to discuss the destructive effects of the homosexual lifestyle, and documents the damage to children and teens caused by the movement’s influence in the school system.

The author, who is a an associate dean and professor of law at Liberty University, told LifeSiteNews that Christians need to be aware of the Obama administration’s relentless pursuit of Miller and her daughter, and the implications of their decisions at the voting booth with regard to family issues.

“I think certainly the current administration has obviously made a commitment that this is a high priority for them, that they are going to track down a biological mother and attempt to take this child away from her biological mother and I certainly think that there is some political pressure that could be taken,” Lindevaldsen said.

“I think the word needs to get out. Christians need to know that these things are happening, the idea that a woman apparently had to flee the country to protect her child, shouldn’t be happening in America, and I don’t think enough Christians know about that and don’t realize that the people they vote for in an election year, who they vote for has direct consequences on things like this.”

She added that, in addition to their involvement in the national political process, Christians can work at the state level to ensure that other children are not victimized by ant-family legislation. Lindevaldsen says she has handled dozens of other cases that are similar to Miller’s.

“We need to pass laws at the state level making it very clear that courts do not have the discretion to do this, to declare a child to have two parents, because we need to avoid these situations happening in the future, because they are happening on a regular basis.”

Click “like” if you want to defend true marriage.

Read More

PETA Asks Federal Court To Grant Killer Whales Constitutional Rights, Sues Sea World For “Enslavement”

Source

SAN DIEGO — A federal court is being asked to grant constitutional rights to five killer whales who perform at marine parks — an unprecedented and perhaps quixotic legal action that is nonetheless likely to stoke an ongoing, intense debate at America’s law schools over expansion of animal rights.

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals is accusing the SeaWorld parks of keeping five star-performer whales in conditions that violate the 13th Amendment ban on slavery. SeaWorld depicted the suit as baseless.

The chances of the suit succeeding are slim, according to legal experts not involved in the case; any judge who hews to the original intent of the authors of the amendment is unlikely to find that they wanted to protect animals. But PETA relishes engaging in the court of public opinion, as evidenced by its provocative anti-fur and pro-vegan campaigns.

The suit, which PETA says it will file Wednesday in U.S. District Court in San Diego, hinges on the fact that the 13th Amendment, while prohibiting slavery and involuntary servitude, does not specify that only humans can be victims.

Jeff Kerr, PETA’s general counsel, says his five-member legal team — which spent 18 months preparing the case — believes it’s the first federal court suit seeking constitutional rights for members of an animal species.

Read More

Anti-Christian school principal crumbles when faced with lawsuit

Source

You've got to confront these types. They'll make their own laws if you let them.

"It’s the same old song, out in California – a Christian child being discouraged from participating in a school talent show because the lyrics he wants to share celebrate Jesus Christ.

The show was held at Superior Street Elementary School in Los Angeles, and scheduled in the evening, outside school hours. No students were required to attend, and no restrictions were placed on the content of whatever songs those participating might elect to perform.

Several days after the January auditions, though, Superior Street Principal Jerilyn Schubert notified the 5th-grader’s mother that her son would not be allowed perform to the song, “We Shine” because of its religious message – a message the principal said she considered to be “offensive” and a violation of the “separation of church and state.”

The boy’s mother pointed out that audiences would understand that the song was her child’s choice, not the school’s … adding that he had personally selected the song and had been practicing it for months. She reminded the principal that no restrictions had been placed on musical content.

The principal, in turn, explained that other students who had selected songs with profane and vulgar lyrics had been told to select different material … the implication being that lyrics celebrating God were somehow equivalent to profanity and vulgarity. Finally, the true problem emerged: “Couldn’t he pick a song that doesn’t say ‘Jesus’ so many times?” the principal asked.

Of course he could – but he shouldn’t have to do so. Which was exactly the point made in a lawsuit filed against the Los Angeles Unified School District on January 28 by the Alliance Defense Fund, along with allied attorney Daniel R. Watkins, and reaffirmed in a request for a temporary restraining order filed on February 2.

After being served with the TRO, district officials suddenly changed their tune, announcing that the student would be allowed to perform to “We Shine” at the February 4 talent show after all.

Source

Read More

Courts Destroy Separation Between Church and State and Rule Against Christians

The 9th Circus: No breach of the "separation of church and state" if a government body involves itself in a religious matter and gives official support to an anti-Christian belief system

"When various religious groups sponsored an advertising campaign offering “healing for homosexuals”, the San Francisco board of supervisors sprang into action. It sent a letter to the groups “denounc[ing] your hateful rhetoric” and alleging a “direct correlation” between that rhetoric and the “horrible crimes committed against gays and lesbians,” including the brutal murder of Matthew Shepard.

It also adopted two formal resolutions. One called for the “Religious Right to take accountability for the impact of their long-standing rhetoric, which leads to a climate of mistrust and discrimination that can open the door to horrible crimes such as” a recent murder.

The second resolution stated that the groups’ ad campaign encouraged maltreatment of homosexuals and urged local television stations not to broadcast the groups’ ads.

In American Family Association v. City and County of San Francisco, a divided panel of the Ninth Circuit rules that the city government’s actions did not violate modern Establishment Clause doctrine.

But as Judge John T. Noonan observes in dissent: “To assert that a group’s religious message and religious categorization of conduct are responsible for murder is to attack the group’s religion.…

Here the city had a plausible, indeed laudable purpose, to decrease vicious violence on account of sexual orientation. [But it] used a means that officially stigmatized a religious belief as productive of murderous consequences.”

Source

Read More