CPS/Family Court

De facto judges, CPS and APS workers are operating a state sanctioned kidnaping racket [RICO]. These predators operating under the color of law are kidnaping our children and seniors for money. They demoralize and destroy the developing mind of our children during their most tender years and our vulnerable parents during their twilight years turning the beginning and end of their lives into nightmares, leaving shattered and distraught families in their wake.

Because our elected and appointed servants refuse to protect and champion our most precious and hallowed resource, our children, We the People through the Unified United States Common Law Grand Jury will champion this holy cause with a relentless determination to bring justice upon these wicked stewards. We Promise!

"Lo, children are an heritage of the LORD: and the fruit of the womb is his reward. As arrows are in the hand of a mighty man; so are children of the youth. Happy is the man that hath his quiver full of them: they shall not be ashamed, but they shall speak with the enemies in the gate." Governor of the Universe. Psa 127:3-5

CLICK HERE TO FILE A PETITION FOR HABEAS CORPUS

Comments

annette33's picture

How can I file a Habeas Corpus to get my child back? I haven't got any help in getting a habeas corpus in since. When I click on to file a habeas corpus with NLA It says "denied."

Jan@NLA's picture

We are not currently filing hapeas corpuses.

mkphillips's picture

NLA is not currently doing Habeas Corpus which is probably why you are getting the "denied"...???

Injured Party's picture

Our habeas corpus was queued and now we can't find it? Anyone can tell us what to do or if it's still being processed? Please we want A Chance at getting our children back? Help please.

Injured Party's picture

She promised one day to have Liberty again.

chelsie68's picture

I was just checking up on the case I have filed with you. I sent you all the papers was just wondering when i will hear something it's been awhile now. I have to cases one with me and my children that was stolen from me 20 yrs ago. and now a case where I am the grandmother of my oldest daughter and CPS is doing the same thing to her. took her two boys and now she is 8 months pregnant and going to take that one too. Can someone tell me whats going on?

Injured Party's picture

I hope you do get answers & help soon.

Watch Dog's picture

http://www.thelibertybeacon.com/2015/11/29/grandparents-come-forward-rep...

Prayers needed for Sabrina, her husband Tony and their 7 children due to the CPS kidnap of her family.
Sabrina is now a new NLA member and finally finds others who care and are willing to help them.
Check out her story and add them with all the others who have lost their prodigy. If anyone is in Alabama and can help contact me for contact info for Sabrina. Her husband is constantly being jailed for not being able to pay the Child Support Extortion Racket over $600.00 per week in support for the children in care of the kidnappers. The CPS seeks retaliation for the exposure of this case against the children and parents and the family is in dire need of help from above.
Thank you and may "God" Bless you all and Blessed be to NLA
michael - anthony 'Watch Dog'
ugotmlanthony@aol.com

Injured Party's picture

I do hope you get the answers & help needed.

Watch Dog's picture

http://www.thelibertybeacon.com/2015/11/29/grandparents-come-forward-rep...
Prayers needed for Sabrina, her husband Tony and their 7 children due to the CPS kidnap of her family.
Sabrina is now a new NLA member and finally finds others who care and are willing to help them.
Check out her story and add them with all the others who have lost their prodigy. If anyone is in Alabama and can help contact me for contact info for Sabrina. Her husband is constantly being jailed for not being able to pay the Child Support Extortion Racket over $600.00 per week in support for the children in care of the kidnappers. The CPS seeks retaliation for the exposure of this case against the children and parents and the family is in dire need of help from above.
michael - anthony 'Watch Dog'
ugotmlanthony@aol.com

Leighabella7's picture

does this lawsuit demand monetary compensation for damages done by these violations of constitutional rights? and if it is class action, how many other people are included in the claim?

Injured Party's picture

I wonder who has a answer

ritakempton's picture

First the cost was a request of approx. $30.00 for supplies..ink, paper, fax seal...What transpired in the last four weeks to double the price to $60.00?..There goes the widows mite!

Jan@NLA's picture

The first rough cost estimate was $30 on a Monday night call. As noted above the the cost was calculated more exactly as $40.04 if there were only 6 respondents. The case I worked on had 14 respondents which would add $40 more to the costs. If a case goes into resistance, there will be additional mailing costs for certified follow-up letters which will vary for each individual case, so the actual costs incurred by NLA may be considerably more than $60.

Injured Party's picture

I would also like to know about success stories.

gary@NLA's picture

We have just started the process and have not filed with the Federal Court yet. When we do the world will know. The NLA is providing an opportunity previously unavailable and we pray this ends this abusive over-reach by our government.

prov2828's picture

Does anybody have the Dean Steven Habeas Corpus that was filed and was posted as successful so we can review what happened??? that would be a WEALTH of help.
Please contact me if you do..
Thanks
Rosanna
740-969-2468

PS The correct definition is an "enterprise engaging in a pattern of corrupt activity".

ms.jerren's picture

Hi I have sent in all my paperwork and wondering who I would need to contact please....I was dealing with John and my paperwork was "in the pipeline" but, he said he is no longer the contact. Thank you much for your help:)

wwdovew's picture

I am totally confused. I thought I joined IRC, but my request to be part of the committee remains pending. If there is a need for people to help on committees, then what is taking so long to accept help? What committee is doing paperwork for the CPS lawsuit? Is there one?

Jan@NLA's picture

I checked the IRC page and find you are both a Member and an Apprentice in IRC.

PatAZMaricopa's picture

I believe it is much easier to get to the page you are trying to find.
Great improvement

PatAZMaricopa's picture

“There are cultural myths that are easy to overturn. People see through them quickly. But the prevailing core myths are tougher. Much tougher. Most people resist even discussing them. In the old days, the Church tortured and burned people who discussed them. Now, it’s social ostracism. Now, in some cases, it’s the State kidnapping children to send a message.” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

Since none of the 300 official mental disorders has any defining physical test for diagnosis, there is no proof they exist. Period.
https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2015/08/17/psychiatry-erase-the-uniqu...

TheCourtWatcher.com's picture

Nick Honey
Division Director
Family, Youth and Children's Services
Human Services Department
Fax: (707) 565-4399
http://faxzero.com/

There was a young lady FALSELY arrested without a warrant, forced to give birth and her child taken from her and she was placed into jail for "resisting arrest" when there was NO WARRANT.
Her name is Alicia Kindman, August 21, 2015.
YOU are Responsible and you have a policy that violated her rights per Macias v. Ihde 1999. 1343, you as the director are able to prevent these wrongs and have failed to do so. Therefore you are indeed FIRED. There is no excuse.

Nick Honey Division Director You MUST submit your resignation.
YOU ARE FIRED!
The President, Vice President and ALL CIVIL OFFICERS of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.
Aiding and abetting in a kidnapping without a grand jury indictment is A HIGH CRIME!

TITLE 5 PART III Subpart B CHAPTER 33 SUBCHAPTER II § 3331 Oath of office “I, AB, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against ALL enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same;

Job Description: UPHOLD THE CONSTITUTION AGAINST ALL ENEMIES

You are summarily dismissed without benefit of any type. Your misconduct is a high misdemeanor and may be charged for treason. Just following orders to commit a crime is not a defense, nor is ignorance.
You have sworn not to violate the Constitution of the United States of America.

TITLE 18 USC § 1918 Disloyalty and asserting the right to strike against the Government
Whoever violates the provision of section 7311 of title 5 that an individual may not accept or hold a position in the Government of the United States or the government of the District of Columbia if he—
(1) advocates the overthrow of our constitutional form of government;

TITLE 28 USC § 1343.
(1) To recover damages for injury to his person or property, or because of the deprivation of any right or privilege of a citizen of the United States, by any act done in furtherance of any conspiracy mentioned in section 1985 of Title 42;
(2) To recover damages from any person WHO FAILS TO PREVENT or to aid in preventing any wrongs mentioned in section 1985 of Title 42 which he had knowledge were about to occur and power to prevent;
(3) To redress the deprivation, under color of any State law, statute, ordinance, regulation, custom or usage, of any right, privilege or immunity secured by the Constitution of 18 USC § 242 Deprivation of rights under color of law
Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or to different punishments, pains, or penalties, on account of such person being an alien, or by reason of his color, or race, than are prescribed for the punishment of citizens, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.

Because the child was taken by use of a dangerous weapon, the arrest was actually KIDNAPPING without the grand jury indictment and you have NO immunity to your OATH!

Sacramento County official steps down amid
CPS controversy
mlundstrom@sacbee.com
Published Wednesday, Apr. 15, 2009Lynn Frank, the embattled head of the Sacramento County agency that oversees Child Protective
Services, announced Tuesday that she is resigning. Her resignation came on the eve of the release of a county grand jury report that is expected to be harshly critical of CPS management and of the Department of Health and Human Services, the agency Frank ran for three years.

TITLE 42 > CHAPTER 136 > SUBCHAPTER IX > Part B > § 14141 Cause of action
(a) Unlawful conduct It shall be unlawful for any governmental authority, or any agent thereof, or any person acting on behalf of a governmental authority, to engage in a pattern or practice of conduct by law enforcement officers or by officials or employees of any governmental agency with responsibility for the administration of juvenile justice or the incarceration of juveniles that deprives persons of rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States.

PatAZMaricopa's picture

Fax sent

TheCourtWatcher.com's picture

Dear Lady PJ Stewart,

Your fax to Nick Honey at 7075654399 has been sent successfully!...See More

Free Fax • Free Internet Faxing
Free Internet Faxing - Send faxes to anywhere in the U.S. and Canada for free
FAXZERO.COM

PatAZMaricopa's picture

I have an unlawful "Summary Judgement" against me. Yes I could file a lawsuit against the perpetrators of this fraud, but I seriously doubt that I could succeed without a common law court. I can wait because there is no statute of limitations on fraud. In fact, the common law does not recognize statutes.

Kim Hogan's picture

Some NLA Member is SPAMing my personal email with URGENT requests for Donations and I do NOT appreciate it! I need my own donations right now, since my daughter & I being rendered Homeless for over two years now! This is abuse of our site for people to use our member's emails for personal gains. I have requested to be removed from their email list, yet the SPAM continues to come in to my inbox. I want it to stop IMMEDIATELY! If not, I may be forced to cancel my membership & donations here. This isn't the first time this has happened!

karol424's picture

Kim, you can block the person spamming you in your email software. This just throws the email out when it comes in, you are not even notified. Check you software next time you receive an email from that person, in mine all I have to do is right click the senders email address, a pop up shows with choices of what I want to do with that email. Just click block and that will end it for you. Good luck and God bless.

John57's picture

Kim , I'm also getting e-mail , I don't think NLA can do anything about it since Greg Todd defected and took NLA member e-mail info , as far as donations you would have to go through your pay pal account to get donations stopped

gary@NLA's picture

Please ignore these emails and DO NOT reply all as it will increase the mementum.

Liberty Now's picture

I've received e-mail from this boob. I think the thing that irritated me the most was the fact that he presumed to abscond with people's e-mail addresses and then put them on his list. From what he says, he sounds like someone who is going to take some kind of action and I find that worrisome. The spamming is unforgivable.

Ron Flick's picture

That group is in back-biting melt down mode....divided they fall. Everyone wants off their mailing list. His email theft has led no where but south. Let it go. Hit the delete (their unsolicited emails) button and don't give his fiction any more credit than we give the state's fiction. They reap what they sew.

PatAZMaricopa's picture

http://fixcps.com/
How Funding by the Federal Government has Caused Corruption in Child Protective Services

Out of every 10 foster children taken, 1 will NEVER AGAIN have a home
Child Protective Services or CPS has become a very corrupt government agency. From time to time problems with CPS (such as Justina Pelletier) make the news. However, these are but symptoms of a very large disease. The deep down problems with CPS are not reported on a large scale, and therefore are not addressed. Scandals about the IRS and the VA have been in the news, but the corruption within CPS is far worse. The victims are the most innocent; our nation’s children.

Nylonheart's picture

Elderly Protection Service EPS should be included in this suit.
World Elder Abuse Awareness Day was held June 15th 2015
Over 10,000 elders are turning 65 each day in this country due to the baby boom after WWII.
The elderly are being stripped of there dignity with false guardianship's in addition to there wealth intended for there offspring.
According to Dept of Justice it is a 7-trillion dollar business.
There have been recent studies that prove the greatest dollar amount stolen is from Lawyers using the facilities of the Probate & Family Court along with there counterparts (EPS) to erode the family and redistribute the assets to non entitled individuals.

Natural Law's picture

Here are some sections from my book The Lawful Remedy to Tyranny (www.naturallawremedy.com) pertaining to CPS, child abuse, and parental government, that may be useful. Footnotes have been removed as not compatible with this comment box:

105. Parental Government
Parental government must be given due regard as a legitimate form of government. “Be home by 10 o'clock” is valid parental law, and traditional forms of punishment such as grounding and spanking cannot be outlawed by the state because it is outside the state's jurisdiction. If the state outlaws spanking which has been acceptable for the last several thousand years, the proper remedy is nullification.

If the state can through enforcement of the protection of children instead cause them harm, then the state would be hypocritical to argue that any parental punishment of children is equivalent to harm that would justify removing them from the parents.
Just as we respect the laws of other countries that we may think are abusive, unless parental action shocks the conscience of the community, the parental laws of numerous households must be respected.
The state, via Child Protective Services (described below), is not set up to act as the community's conscience or judge of parental government because there is no trial by jury, and the proceedings are kept private. The CPS, being an administrative agency, is executive (enforcer), legislative (writes regulations), and judicial (judges your guilt) all rolled into one, and your rights as against the CPS are secured only by the ruling of a family court judge. This violates natural law as being unreasonable.

106. The State As Your Marriage Partner
If you're planning on getting married, you may be interested to know that a marriage license is a three party contract between husband, wife, and the state:
"The state is a party in interest to the marriage contract, together with the husband and wife, and the relationship is one in which the state is deeply concerned and over which it exercises a jealous dominion." Dakin v. Dakin, 197 Or. 69, 72; 251 P. 2d 462 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1952).

The state will pronounce any marriage contract void if it tends to corrupt the marriage status:

"The welfare of society is so deeply interested in the preservation of the marriage relation, and so fraught with evil is regarded whatever is calculated to impair its usefulness, or designed to terminate it, that it has long been the settled policy of the law to guard and maintain it with a watchful vigilance.
"[A]ll contrivances or agreements, having for their object the termination of the marriage contract, or designed to facilitate or procure it, will be declared illegal and void as against public policy." Giddings v. Giddings, 114 P. 2d 1009, 1013; 167 Or. 504, 513; 119 P.2d 280 (1941).

The state gains its power to regulate marriage under the police powers to protect the morals and safety of society. The state can regulate matrimonial contracts, the qualifications of the parties, the forms, duties, and obligations, and the causes for divorce.

...

If I was having an issue with the CPS trying to take my kids (described below), I might want to bring an action against the state for breach of (marriage) contract. Since the state claims to be a party at interest to the marriage contract, and since the state instead of protecting the family is attempting to tear it apart by taking the children, it has breached the contract and I and my wife want out (after the state is removed from the marriage, I would then enter into a common law or patriarchal marriage), or we want monetary damages, or we want an injunction for them to cease and desist. I might be able to claim the children as property in a common law action (not equity in a family court jurisdiction), asking for damages under my Seventh Amendment right to trial by jury since their value is in excess of $20.

...

The court also said that the state may not interfere with the raising of children which is obviously much less serious than abortion:

"... [T]here is a certain zone of individual privacy which is protected by the Constitution. Unless the State has a compelling subordinating interest that outweighs the individual rights of human beings, it may not interfere with a person's marriage, home, children and day-to-day living habits. This is one of the most fundamental concepts that the Founding Fathers had in mind when they drafted the Constitution." Roe v. Wade, 314 F. Supp. 1222, (1970).

On a final note, if you sign anything the CPS asks you to sign, you are probably waiving your rights. They are asking you to sign because they do not have the power under the law to force you. If you sign, you have created private law and have to accept the consequences.

...

108. The Natural Law Position
The natural law position is based on the concept that children are a gift from God, and parents are thereby given original jurisdiction over them. This position is in accord with the Roe decision, supra. Religious free exercise can be used to bar state infringement of parental rights, and because the Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997 is a federal act which provides federal funding for compliance, 96 Stat. 1211 can be used instead (presuming that your state is accepting funds from the federal government to protect children under any act, including Social Security).

For a law to be just under the police power, it must be necessary to protect the rights of others, and it cannot invade your preexisting rights beyond what will remedy the perceived harm. The state considers your children to be in the category of “others” that it is protecting, but they are not in that category because it is in the nature of things that your children are under your guidance and protection, not the state's. They are under the jurisdiction of parental government, and unless you do something to your children that shocks the conscience, a state law infringing upon parental government needs to be challenged as to necessity, and the violation of your preexisting rights, and the child's preexisting right to be under parental government. Why should it be presumed that a child has the right to the protection of the state, instead of a right to the protection of the parents?

What would be considered a tort if you did it to someone on the street, is and has been considered a normal part of child rearing. Children are not adults and cannot be treated like adults; they don't necessarily listen or behave, and we have a right to follow traditional methods of child rearing. Corporal punishment of miscreant children which has been the recommended approach the last several thousand years, may be necessary or they will end up running the family. The following are Bible citations to be used as the basis of First Amendment religious free exercise, or 96 Stat. 1211:

Children are to be regarded as a gift from God, not a gift from the state:

Gen. 33:5 And he lifted up his eyes, and saw the women and the children, and said, “Who are those with thee?” And he said, “The children which God hath graciously given thy servant.”

Gen. 48:9 And Joseph said unto his father, “They are my sons, whom God hath given me in this place.”

Psalm 127:3 Lo, children are a heritage of the LORD, and the fruit of the womb is His reward.
Isaiah 8:18 Behold, I and the children whom the LORD hath given me are for signs and for wonders in Israel from the LORD of hosts, who dwelleth in Mount Zion.

The father, not the state, is to have authority over the children:

Deut. 8:5 Thou shalt also consider in thine heart that as a man chasteneth his son, so the LORD thy God chasteneth thee.

Prov. 3:11-12 My son, despise not the chastening of the LORD, neither be weary of His correction; for whom the LORD loveth, He correcteth, even as a father the son in whom he delighteth.

Prov. 13:24 He that spareth his rod hateth his son, but he that loveth him chasteneth him in good season.

Prov. 17:6 Children’s children are a crown to the aged, and parents are the pride of their children.

Prov. 19:18 Discipline your children, for in that there is hope; do not be a willing party to their death.

Prov. 22:6 Start children off on the way they should go, and even when they are old they will not turn from it.

Prov. 23:13-14 Do not withhold discipline from a child; if you punish them with the rod, they will not die. Punish them with the rod and save them from death.

Prov. 29:15-17 A rod and a reprimand impart wisdom, but a child left undisciplined disgraces its mother. When the wicked thrive, so does sin, but the righteous will see their downfall. Discipline your children, and they will give you peace; they will bring you the delights you desire.

Parents are to educate the children:

Gen. 18:19 “... For I have chosen him, so that he will direct his children and his household after him to keep the way of the LORD by doing what is right and just, so that the LORD will bring about for Abraham what he has promised him.”

Deut. 4:9-10 Only be careful, and watch yourselves closely so that you do not forget the things your eyes have seen or let them fade from your heart as long as you live. Teach them to your children and to their children after them. Remember the day you stood before the LORD your God at Horeb, when he said to me, “Assemble the people before me to hear my words so that they may learn to revere me as long as they live in the land and may teach them to their children.”

Deut. 6:6-7 These commandments that I give you today are to be on your hearts. Impress them on your children. Talk about them when you sit at home and when you walk along the road, when you lie down and when you get up.

Deut. 11:18-19 Fix these words of mine in your hearts and minds; tie them as symbols on your hands and bind them on your foreheads. Teach them to your children, talking about them when you sit at home and when you walk along the road, when you lie down and when you get up.

Prov. 1:8-9 Listen, my son, to your father’s instruction and do not forsake your mother’s teaching. They are a garland to grace your head and a chain to adorn your neck.

Prov. 22:6 Start children off on the way they should go, and even when they are old they will not turn from it.

Parents are to provide for the children:

1 Tim. 5:8 Anyone who does not provide for their relatives, and especially for their own household, has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.

109. Spanking and Child Abuse Laws
This section concerns the appropriateness of government involvement in family matters, whether or not anti-spanking laws are appropriate. If they are evolutionary and thereby in accord with natural law, they will not cause other problems but will work in perfect harmony.

I can identify several problems with anti-spanking laws:
1) If “legal” punishment is not sufficient to control the child's behavior, he can run the family since he knows he won't be punished. This divides the family by pitting children against parents. Parents are liable for the property damages their kids cause, but are not allowed the means to control or adequately discipline them. And children are given the power to abuse the parents; there are already reported cases of children who have bruised themselves and turned their parents in for child abuse.
2) The law outlaws spanking, an act that is not by itself abusive; psychology, intent, and the situation must be considered. For example, a child may think a spanking game is great fun. Is breaking someone's bone abusive? I saw a show where firefighters wanted to break a person's leg (they didn't) in order to extract him from being pinned in his car to save his life. I have seen boys take turns hitting each other in fun, and bruises are a part of football. When the intent is not abuse, the act is not abusive. The same applies when it is done in love for disciplinary purposes; absent love, it could easily be abuse. Since abuse is more than just the act, prohibition of an act cannot affect abuse. Natural law is purposeful; if a law has no function, it should not exist. Spanking can, of course, be made to cause great harm; anything can be abused. If it turns into a crime, doesn't the current law handle it? If not, the law is not aligned to natural law and needs to be changed. If it can't be changed because of undesired side effects (e.g., replacing our form of government with a totalitarian form), then do nothing and let natural law take care of it; natural justice is a fundamental aspect of natural law and retribution will naturally be made.
3) Since spanking is not abusive per se, the government may be prohibiting right action. Natural law does not outlaw right action; there is no penalty for it, it is rewarded. Government does not have the power to prohibit right action because free will is a gift of the Creator, and we have a right to perform all possible actions (subject to certain conditions) for the purpose of learning life's lessons; any infringement violates the intent of the Creator. Nor can government compel wrong action; every situation is complex, and to not spank when it is necessary might be a sin of omission. If you argue that spanking is never necessary, well, if a boy pulls a knife on his sister (this happened in Europe), I wouldn't spank him; I'd cane him (just what his step father did). If government passes child discipline laws (spanking laws being the first step), spontaneous right action applied to the situation at hand will no longer be possible. A law to constrain abusers must not also constrain the virtuous; it must be discriminative enough to be able to tell the difference.
4) Jurisdiction vested in the parents by virtue of birth and consent of all parties, is transferred to the state in violation of that consent. The parents gave the children birth using the natural laws instituted by God. They are a gift of the Creator. That the parents are a jurisdictional unit seems to be lost from sight; they are being relegated to the status of baby sitters. Parents can and do make and enforce laws upon their children. “Be home by 10 PM or you will be grounded for a week” is parental law outside the jurisdiction of the state. Unfortunately, parental jurisdiction is being terminated by bringing family questions (in this particular case spanking) before the state. Just as we may disagree with the harshness or leniency of the laws of other countries, other states, or other parents, we have to respect their sovereignty because of the agreements they have made between themselves, and the lessons they are learning. As long as there is going to be abuse from a jurisdictional authority, I would rather have it be the parents with whom there is natural love and affinity, rather than an uncaring state. Government can dispense much more destruction on far more people, both virtuous and sinner alike, and is hard to keep under control. Any abuse by parents is at least localized, and at its worst if you could see the mechanics from cosmic perspective, is really a lesson to be learned by parent and child.
5) Violations of natural law by the state may be worse than the potential harm of spanking. If you bring in government to solve a problem, it is possible that it will tear apart or destroy the family. Regarding marriage, “What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.” Matt. 19:6. The state never imposes divorce, but always tries to protect the marriage. How much more are children placed into a family by God, but how casually government will remove them. And consider the damage upon the children ― imagine being stolen away from your parents. The possibility of losing your kids also provides a disincentive to get professional help if needed. Public policy should not be in conflict with itself; if parents need help, there should be no law to act as a disincentive.
6) Anti-spanking laws violate Christian precepts, and since this is a Christian nation, they will give rise to discord. Natural law brings harmony to the entire diversity of creation; it doesn't create discord. We have seen that the Bible promotes family, that children are to be regarded as a gift from God, not a gift from the state, and the father, not the state, is to have authority over the children. Those who believe in the Bible are entitled to follow it as a way of life, and Congress even passed a law asking us to voluntarily apply the teachings of the Bible and the Holy Scriptures (96 Stat. 1211).
7) If the police power can be invoked against religious beliefs regarding parental jurisdiction over children, then it won't stop there. The Jewish practice of circumcision, even though based upon covenant with God, will not be able to resist the police power protecting children against what an objective person (i.e., the state) would view as mutilation or sexual abuse. If spanking cannot stand, then by what theory of law can circumcision? What is the difference?
8) It gives rise to confusion about right and wrong. When a person does what he believes to be right (even to the point of telling the state to butt out), and you charge him with criminal conduct, you create confusion and resentment which may give rise to more problems than you solve. When one's own internal reference, one's conscience, one's link to natural law is in conflict with man's law, that law is inappropriate. Even if the law if right, if mankind is not ready for it, the law is inappropriate. Anti-spankers argue that it is common for abusers to tell the state to “butt out.” I disagree; it is the righteous that will tell the state to “butt out.” Thieves, murderers, rapists, arsonists, burglars, etc., do not tell the state to butt out; they know what they are doing is wrong.
9) If the theory of law is upheld that the state has the power to prevent spanking based upon the potential for harm, it won't stop there. Pregnant mothers could be placed on strict diets because of the potential harm that unsuitable food may have on the unborn. I heard on the news recently of a woman who wanted a regular birth, but the county prosecutor filed suit insisting that she get a C-section because a regular birth might endanger the unborn's life (she got the C-section and avoided a court case). Experts might specify the proper diet and living habits for each member of society, with fines shared with those who turn them in for violations. This would be based upon the cost of health care that society must pay due to bad living habits. Etc. etc. etc., all based upon a misunderstanding of the nature of state power, and what makes this a free country.
10) Those who are concerned about families and child abuse want to put that concern in the hands of the state ― an entity that deals in law, punishment, guns, jails, money, regulation, child kidnapping, slavery, and sales of children, but not concern. There are no bonds of affinity or affection between government and those it regulates. The general level of corruption in our society, reflected in our government, will be brought to bear against the virtuous, though the law is presumably targeted against the abusers. The virtuous will be caught in the same trap set to catch the abusers; it can't tell the difference. The tool (the state) needs to be more refined than the equipment (the family) it is being used on.
11) It conflicts with the right to privacy and creates a police state. In order to make determinations of day to day discipline (spanking being the first step), the state must become intimately involved with each family, requiring massive monitoring and intrusion into family life, and citizen police (“see something, say something”), contrary to the principles of a free society and the original design of this government.
12) You may argue that even though anti-spanking laws cause harmful side effects, this is a small price to pay to protect innocent children from injustice. First of all, price is a subjective value judgment, plus you are asking others to pay it. Freedom includes the ability to abuse that freedom; our founding fathers paid the price for both. If you want a free country, you have to put up with the potential for abuse. Second, justice is a law of nature; if you see injustice when you see an “innocent” child being spanked, your understanding about how life works is incomplete. But that's another story for another time. Third, natural law does not solve one problem by creating another. Any law in accord with natural law will not have this kind of price to pay.
Either rewrite the anti-spanking laws without these side effects, or leave it alone and let natural law and justice take care of it as it has done for several thousand years. Your desire to protect children, while laudable, is too shortsighted if it runs the risk of destroying the family and our way of life.

Address questions to Richard Walbaum, rew4455@gmail.com

Gary T's picture

I would like to join in your CPS Lawsuit.
I have had a hell of time dealing with those child stealing monsters.
What they do has ramifications to custody matters, even when you have proven your innocence.
I faced repeated attempts from CPS to impugn my good name, and disproved them all, but their timing for these charges was no accident, taking place during a custody trial.
So, while I am having a custody trial, I am under temporary orders of protection from seeing my child. Even after acquittal, the custody judge continues to deny me any access to my child.
I have filed a federal lawsuit against my local CPS, and I can share that with you all as well.
See their "interview" with me that I took by hidden camera:
https://youtu.be/NIsnbUxAPhs

SJL's picture

I just wrote an affidavit using the word “traitorously” over 100 times to describe the court officials' crimes and attempted crimes against me. I just realized that using “traitorously” as a word may be inappropriate for my affidavit in the joint action at law since the first round is only seeking remedies for lack of due process. Should I omit the word traitorously and use a different word that relates to lack of due process? If so, which ones?

Here is some information about the art of using terms in law:

2. There are certain terms of art used, so appropriated by the law to express the precise idea which it entertains of the offence, that no other terms, however synonymous they may seem, are capable of filling the same office: such, for example, as traitorously, (q. v.) in treason; feloniously, (q. v.) in felony; burglariously, (q. v.) in burglary; maim, (q. v.) in mayhem, &c. 7th. (INDICTMENT - 2.: Bouvier's Law Dictionary 1856)

SCRIBERE EST AGERE. To write is to act. Treasonable words set down in writing amount to
overt acts of treason. 2 Rolle, 89; 4 Bl.Comm. 80; Broom, Max. 312, 967. (Black's Law Dictionary 4th) (Nisi prius court documentation may be actual treasonable words set down in writing!)

PERIPHRASIS. Circumlocution; the use of other words to express the sense of one.
2. Some words are so technical in their meaning that in charging offences in indictments they must be used or the indictment will not be sustained; for example, an indictment for treason must contain the word traitorously; (q. v.) an indictment for burglary, burglariously; ( q. v.) and feloniously (q. v.) must be introduced into every indictment for felony. 1 Chitty's Cr. Law, 242; 3 Inst. 15; Carth. 319; 2 Hale , P. C. 172; 184;, 4 Bl. Com. 307; Hawk B. 2, c. 25, s. 55; 1 East P. C. 115; Bac. Ab. Indictment, G 1; Com. ]Dig. Indictment, G 6 Cro. C. C. 37. (Bouvier's 1856)

TRAITOROUSLY. In criminal pleading. An essential word in indictments for treason. The offense must be laid to have been committed traitorously. Whart.Crim.Law, 100. (Black's Law Dictionary 4th)

TREASON, crim. law. This word imports a betraying, treachery, or breach of allegiance
e. 4 Bl. Com. 75.
2. The constitution of the United States, art. 3, s. 3, defines treason against the United States to consist only in levying war (q. v.) against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid or comfort. This offence is punished with death. Act of April 30th, 1790, 1 Story's Laws U. S. 83. By the same article of the constitution, no person shall be convicted of treason, unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court. Vide, generally, 3 Story on the Const. ch. 39, p. 667; Serg. on the Const. ch. 30; United States v. Fries, Pamph.; 1 Tucker's Blackst. Comm. Appen. 275, 276; 3 Wils. Law Lect. 96 to 99;
Foster, Disc. I; Burr's Trial; 4 Cranch, R. 126, 469 to 508; 2 Dall. R. 246; 355; 1 Dall. Rep. 35; 3 Wash. C. C. Rep. 234; 1 John. Rep. 553 11 Johns. R. 549; Com. Dig. Justices, K; 1 East, P. C. 37 to 158; 2 Chit. Crim. Law, 60 to 102; Arch. Cr. Pl. 378 to 387. (Bouvier's Law Dictionary 1856)

INNOVATION
. Change of a thing established for something new.
2. Innovations are said to be dangerous, as likely to unsettle the common law. Co. Litt. 370, b; Id. 282, b. Certainly no innovations ought to be made by the courts, but as every thing human, is mutable, no legislation can be, or ought to be immutable; changes are required by the alteration of circumstances; amendments, by the imperfections of all human institutions but laws ought never to be changed without great deliberation, and a due consideration of the reasons on which they were founded, as of the circumstances under which they were enacted. Many innovations have been made. in the common law, which philosophy, philanthropy and
common sense approve. The destruction of the benefit of clergy; of appeal, in felony; of trial by battle and ordeal; of the right of sanctuary; of the privilege to abjure the realm; of approvement, by which any criminal who could, in a judicial combat, by skill, force or fraud kill his accomplice, secured his own pardon of corruption of blood; of constructive treason; will be sanctioned; by all wise men, and none will desire a return to these barbarisms. The reader is referred to the case of James v. the Commo wealth, 12 Serg. & R. 220, and 225 to 2 Duncan, J., exposes the absurdity of some ancient laws, with much sarcasm. (Bouvier's 1856)

The rest is about treason from Black's Law Dictionary 4th Edition:

TREASON. The offense of attempting by overtacts to overthrow the government of the state to
which the offender owes allegiance; or of betraying the state into the hands of a foreign power.
Webster. "Treason" consists of two elements: Adherence to the enemy, and rendering him aid and comfort. Cramer v. U. S., U.S.N.Y., 65 S.Ct. 918, 932, 325 U.S. 1, 89 L.Ed. 1441.

In England, treason is an offense particularly directed against the person of the sovereign, and consists (1) in compassing or imagining the death of the king or queen, or their eldest son and heir; (2) in violating the king's companion, or the king's eldest daughter unmarried, or the
wife of the king's eldest son and heir; (3) in levying war against the king in his realm; (4) in adhering to the king's enemies in his realm, giving to them aid and comfort in the realm or elsewhere, and (5) slaying the chancellor, treasurer, or the king's justices of the one bench or the other, justices in eyre, or justices of assize, and all other justices assigned to hear and determine, being in their places doing their offices. 4 Steph.Comm. 185-193; 4 Bl. Comm. 76-84.

Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. U.S.Const. art. 3, § 3, cl. 1.
See Young v. U. S., 97 U.S. 62, 24 L.Ed. 992; U. S. v. Bollman, 1 Cranch, C.C. 373, Fed.Cas.No.14,622; U. S. v. Pryor, 3 Wash.C.C. 234, Fed.Cas.No.16,096.

Constructive Treason
Treason imputed to a person by law from his conduct or course of actions, though his deeds
taken severally do not amount to actual treason. This doctrine is not known in the United States.

High Treason
In English law. Treason against the king or sovereign, as distinguished from petit or petty
treason, which might formerly be committed against a subject. 4 Bl.Comm. 74, 75; 4 Steph.
Comm. 183, 184, note.

MISPRISION OF TREASON. The bare knowledge and concealment of an act of treason or
treasonable plot, that is, without any assent or participation therein, for if the latter elements be present the party becomes a principal. 4 Bl.Comm. 120; Pen.Code Cal. '§ 38.

Petit Treason
In English law. The crime committed by a wife in killing her husband, or a servant his lord or
master, or an ecclesiastic his lord or ordinary. 4 Bl.Comm. 75. Treason-felony Under the English statute 11 & 12 Vict. c. 12, passed in 1848, is the offense of compassing, devising, etc., to depose her majesty from the crown; or to levy war in order to intimidate either house of parliament, etc., or to stir up foreigners by any printing or writing to invade the kingdom. This offense is punishable with penal servitude for life, or for any term not less than five years, etc., under statutes 11 & 12 Vict. c. 12, § 3; 20 & 21 Vict. c. 3, § 2; 27 & 28 Vict. c. 47, § 2. By the statute first above mentioned, the government is enabled to treat as felony many offenses which must formerly have been treated as high treason. Mozley & Whitley.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Pages