Monday, 30 November 2009

Government's Feminist Tyranny Exists Denying Men Their Constitutional Due Process

Government's Feminist Tyranny Exists Denying Men Their Constitutional Due Process
Author: Shane Flait

Tyrannies begin by promulgating policies of good
intentions. Such intentions fool the public into allowing
government to fund such programs. Feminism was accepted by
most as simply fostering equal opportunity for women. So,
government-funded programs began.

And so began the tyranny against fathers, family and
freedom both here and throughout the western world. This
article is a first of a series exposing the nature of this
tyranny and how we must take back government's tyrannical
control of society to secure freedom for all.

...But the funding grew more programs which supported
lobbying for more and for perverse changes in the laws -
changes that denied men and fathers their fundamental
rights. Feminist-instigated government policies and laws
viewed their intentions as a 'greater good' than the rights
that keep us all free - a view which is the hallmark of

With 'feminist jurisprudence' established, especially
within domestic-related jurisdictions, 'greater good'
intentions like 'best interest of the child' or 'safety of
women' are now used to deny the constitutional rights and
protections of all - but most especially of men and fathers.

Based on both denials of rights and constitutional
protections, fit fathers under divorce or paternity actions
and men accused of specious domestic violence become the
excuse and fodder for government control over their lives
and their earnings. This tyranny has fostered the growth of
a $100+ billion government-affiliated industry feeding off
constitutionally deprived fit fathers and the public for
its ever-increasing control and demands.

In a nutshell, this government's feminist tyranny employs
the noble-sounding greater good intentions as 'best
interest of the child' and 'safety of women' for reason to
justify denying men their rights and protections. The
'best interest of the child' principle is used in divorce
and paternity actions to deny a fit father his parental
rights to legal and physical custody of his child - at
least equal to the mother's.

This allows the court- and thereby the state- to virtually
kidnap his child and, then demand extortion payments
euphemistically called 'child support' for up to 20 years
or more. The government-affiliated industry feeds off these
payments, the continual litigation for more, and a host of
other government-assisted programs to control and
manipulate the father's life, earnings, property and his
pursuit of happiness for himself and his child.

If the father won't - or most often can't - comply with the
extortion payments (perhaps 30% or more of his gross
income), he's jailed without constitutional due process
under feminist-perverted contempt judgments. He can have
his state license to practice his profession revoked, his
driver's license revoked by any administrator of his
state's revenue department and his passport taken to extort
payments from him. If he leaves his country to secure
freedom, he becomes a felon subject to 10 years in jail.
The system reduces him to the status of a slave. And
remember, he's never done anything wrong - but he has been
seriously 'wronged'.

The 'safety of women' principle is used both in divorce and
paternity suits and in any domestic circumstance to throw a
man out of his house and restrict where he can go. It only
takes an 'accusation of abuse' - no trial, i.e. no rules of
evidence to punish him. By law, 'abuse' can be a
subjective - and not even physical - state of the 'woman's
(read victim's) mind. He can be thrown in jail until a
hearing - perhaps for 3 months; but if he admits he abused,
he'll be let out so he can keep his job. That's a good way
to get those phony 'abuse numbers' up to justify more abuse
programs; extortion works wonders.

No constitutional due process to protect against false
accusations means that innocent men are thrown out of their
houses, lose their possessions, denied seeing their kids,
and go to jail - all the time. And, of course, it means a
malicious woman can count on the feminist's government
tyranny to help her steal a man's rights, property, income
and children.

Is what I've quickly summarized about the circumstance that
men and fathers face true?

Yes. But why should you believe it to be true? You should
because the constitutional protections - i.e. our
fundamental rights and the high standard of due process
protecting them is wholly ignored for men and fathers put
into divorce, paternity actions and domestic violence

The aptly named government-affiliated child support and
domestic violence industry's enormous funding allows it to
propagandize the inherent 'badness of men'. That fathers
run away from marriage or don't want to support their
children. That they don't have the best interest of their
child at heart nor the safety of women.

That's phony propaganda. But it's important to vilify those
who you'll deny rights to. That's the way tyrannies always

About the Author:

Shane Flait gives you the capability you need to fight for
your rights.
Get his FREE Court Process Sheet at
Read his ebook: 'Wise Way to Financial Independence' =>