Home
Basic Dirt Bike How-To's - Video
Dirt Bike How-To's - Video
Living The Moto Life - Video
Bike Tests | Shoot-Outs - Video
Forums
What's new
Latest activity
Log-In
Join
What's new
Menu
Log-In
Join
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Close Menu
Forums
MX, SX & Off-Road Discussions
General Moto | Off-Topic Posts
Did you know Palm Trees are as dangerous as tigers?
Reply to thread
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Message
[QUOTE="robwbright, post: 1069080, member: 60515"] Oh yeah - I forgot - the government can always cite the legal doctrine of [I]parens patriae[/I] to do whatever they want to "protect" your children. The government's interpretation of what is within its authority under this legal doctrine has been expanding at a rather high rate of speed in recent times. [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parens_patriae[/url] "In law, it refers to the public policy power of the state to usurp the rights of the natural parent, legal guardian or informal carer, and to act as the parent of any child or individual who is in need of protection, such as a child whose parents are unable or unwilling to take care of him or her, or an incapacitated and dependent individual." For those that are interested in the fact that Court's have held that the government has sovereign power over your children: [url]http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/chapters/6e.htm[/url] "The 1840 case Mercein v. People produced a stunning opinion by Connecticut’s Justice Paige—a strain of radical strong-state faith straight out of Hegel: "The moment a child is born it owes allegiance to the government of the country of its birth, and is entitled to the protection of the government. . . with the coming of civil society the father’s sovereign power passed to the chief or government of the nation." A part of this power was then transferred back to both parents for the convenience of the State. But their guardianship was limited to the legal duty of maintenance and education, while absolute sovereignty remained with the State." [url]http://www.mises.org/rothbard/ethics/fourteen.asp[/url] "Supreme Court Justice Abe Fortas in his decision in the Gault case: The idea of crime and punishment was to be abandoned. The child was to be “treated” and “rehabilitated and the procedures, from apprehension through institutionalization, were to be “clinical” rather than punitive. These results were to be achieved, without coming to conceptual and constitutional grief, [B]by insisting that the proceedings were not adversary[/B], but that the State was proceeding as parens patriae (the State as parent). The Latin phrase proved to be a great help to those who sought to rationalize the exclusion of juveniles from the constitutional scheme; but its meaning is murky and its historical credentials are of dubious relevance. . . . The right of the State, as parens patriae, to deny the child procedural rights available to his elders was elaborated by the assertion that a child, unlike an adult, has a right “not to liberty but to custody.” . . . If his parents default in effectively performing their custodial functions—that is if the child is “delinquent”—the state may interfere. In [B]doing so, it does not deprive the child of any rights, because he has none.[/B] It merely provides the “custody” to which the child is entitled. On this basis, proceedings involving juveniles were described as “civil” not “criminal” and therefore not subject to the requirements which restrict the State when it seeks to deprive a person of his liberty." [url]http://www.familycourtreform.org/id9.html[/url] "Under the English common law, the father was entitled to the custody of his children by legal right." "The Illinois Supreme Court, in a sweeping judgement, ruled in 1882: It is the unquestioned right and imperative duty of every enlightened government, in its character of parens patriae, to protect and provide for the comfort and well-being of such of it's citizens as, by reason of infancy, defective understanding, or other misfortune or infirmity, are unable to take care of themselves. The performance of this duty is justly regarded as one of the most important of governmental functions, and all constitutional limitations must be so understood and construed so as not to interfere with --- its proper and legitimate exercise. (6). [B]With the Constitutional floodgates down and the family legally disarmed, the welfare state began seeping in."[/B] And also - an interesting take on the development of the law . . . [url]http://usa-the-republic.com/emergency%20powers/Who%20Is%20Running%20America_files/parensp.html[/url] [/QUOTE]
Verification
Which ocean is California closest to?
Post reply
Forums
MX, SX & Off-Road Discussions
General Moto | Off-Topic Posts
Did you know Palm Trees are as dangerous as tigers?
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top
Bottom