War on Gender!!!

In the beginning, God created man and woman. He created them in their image.

Ever since the fall of man, women and men have been at odds. The Gen. 3:16 was a punishment that put man in charge. And that charge was not always kind.

In the Book of Genesis, marriage was always designed to be unilateral. Meaning, the man went to the potential girl’s home and ask her father for permission to marry her. This is where we get Gen. 2 “a man shall leave his father and mother and cleave to his wife.”

In steps Gender equality. We read in the Bible that there was a constant struggle with headship and submission in the New Testament. Paul had to often correct the women (1 Tim. 2, 1 Cor. 14, Eph. 5) to obey their husband.

This was because the Graeco-Roman laws were bilateral. Meaning, men and women married and divorced at will. They were considered equals. This obviously squashed any patriarchy in the home.

Believers mostly originate from these Gentile cultures. We say, poo-poo to bride prices, betrothal and the like creating a equally shared authority in the home. This was how America was founded. A land of the free and a home of the “fair” practice acts.

As the war for patriarchy fought in the home under Christian and other religious practices became out-dated, a new movement emerged. Feminism.

Feminism fought back. They fought to be equal. They fought for their freedom.

This created a problem for divorces. Divorce in America was based on the English laws. The Matrimony Clause of 1857 was the first time divorce was legislated outside of the church. This gave men the right to initiate a divorce if his wife committed adultery. However, the woman was not allowed to initiate a divorce for adultery alone. There had to be other extenuating evidences.

However, feminism was not going to have this! They pushed to have freedoms to divorce from a man at will. This “at will” freedom was soon put into law by Ronald Reagan in 1969. It was the unilateral “no-fault” divorce. This allowed divorce to be equal, less argumentative, and gave the women the ability to divorce her husband without proving abuse. She was now Free!

This came at a cost. In 1970 other States soon adopted this statue and with it, the “best interest of the Child” standards. This created a whirlwind of devastation across America. The Best interest of the child was to replace the Tender years doctrine. This gave preference to the women if the child was young.

The “best interest of the Child” was a doctrine that came from both Hitler’s reign to America in the 18th century. This was to give power to the Government to decided custody of a child in emergency situations. This, however, was no emergency situation.

This, flipped the script, if you will. Instead of giving more equality to both men and women it gave all authority to the Government. CPS and the United Nations soon caught on to this WONDERFUL, all powerful doctrine and incorporated it into their ligature.

What now?

Now, men fight for equal rights and the woman has all the money, authority and custody. Men have put their tails between their legs and now they are finally paying for it. There are many women in this shared parenting movement but the government is too financially and morally invested. The Title IV-D and Adoption and Safe Families Act has given governmental facilities now financial incentives to carry on.

Is this unfair? Yes!

Can we do anything about it? Maybe.

As the movement continues to fight for shared parenting and repealing unilateral no-fault divorce that started this, they are getting much push-back from those in Government benefiting for Federal funded programs made to support those children taken from the homes.

May God help us!!!

 

 

Advertisements
Posted in bible, Christian, Christian living, complementarian, divorce, Divorce and remarriage, Jesus, Marriage divorce and remarriage, Matt. 19:9, Matthew 19:9, Objections, Paul, Sales | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Inalienable Rights

The Supreme Court reluctantly admitted that inalienable rights can be taken away by due process. This was evident in the case of the inalienable right to life vs the case of the death row penalty. Stating there was a time to end a life. The inalienable right to life argument was also unsuccessfully used in Roe vs Wade being that they judged life begins outside of the womb.

What that means to us…

Although a parents rights are “natural” and inalienable, the Supreme Court will always say “due process” can take your custody away. Even if you are not found “unfit”. And since Family court is a court of equity (no jury), due process will always be according to the family court judge that is presiding over your case.

While trying to come up with a legal argument regarding parents inalienable rights, I have fallen short due to the constitution’s lack of acknowledging any natural, God-given rights of the parent and the low accountability (oversight) of a judge. The judges will always use the “best interest of the child” standards to justify their decision and the appellate courts will accept these statues as evidence.

The truth of the matter is, there are some inalienable rights that can not be touched by the government and some that can. Liberty is one of those rights that cross over (imprisonment for breaking laws). We must always go through Scripture to know the difference.

So, where do Parental rights fall? Scriptually, the mother always gets full custody of a child if she had that child out of wedlock. Nevertheless, custody always stayed with the father after a divorce. He was the only one who could initiate a divorce according to Scripture and all authority remained with him (Gen. 3:16). The writ of divorcement (Deut. 24:1) said a man puts his wife out of the home, not the children.

Custody cannot be taken away from what was already established as inalienable by God.

The only way a parent who has authority over their child could give away their children was through adoption. But the Bible shows adoption is a voluntary action, otherwise this is called Governmental seizure. If the Government goes against your God-given right as parents, the Declaration of Independence would say you have rights outside of anyone interference to take your children back by the same measures they used against Great Britain.

Let’s go get our kids, parents!

I hope this helps!

Michael Sayen

Posted in bible, Christian, Christian living, complementarian, divorce, Divorce and remarriage, If not for fornication, Jesus, Marriage divorce and remarriage, Matt. 19:9, Matthew 19:9, Objections, Sales | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Your Rights as Parents

The United States recognizes that you have “inalienable” rights.

What are inalienable rights? Well, the Declaration of Independence itself gives us an idea. The Declaration of Independence declared our rebellion against Great Britain as “We the People.” This was OUR inalienable right, if you will.

The Declaration of Independence not only gave reasons why we were rebelling, but it also stated that we are now an independent Nation free of corruption and free of tyranny. We no longer bend-a-knee, so to speak, to another power greater than ourselves.

Yes, this was our “Dear John” letter to Great Britain. Why is this letter important? Because, it states that we have a God, and being there is a God we have a purpose. What purpose is that you ask? It is to live and thrive as humans just as God intended.

The Declaration of Independence lists several of those inalienable rights. So, what does inalienable mean again? It means, God-given freedoms. God is mentioned 4 times in this most important Document.

We have a God-given right to breath. No one can take our life from us without our permission. We have a God-given right to Liberty. We have a right to be free and not under the forced bondage of another. And lastly, we have a right to pursue our own personal happiness and not the happiness of others.

But are these are only “inalienable” rights? No. These were just inalienable rights that we used to justify our rebellion. A parent would use other inalienable reasons.

God tells us in His word that what God has given us, no man can take away. And God opens up doors that no man can close. What God has given us, no man can harm without His involvement.

The Constitution never mentions “God” or “inalienable” rights. Why? Well, because the United States recognizes that a government can not create or take away one’s inalienable rights. It can only acknowledge them. The Declaration “acknowledge” some of those God-given rights, but now we needed to write a list of laws that governed those that were not. This is what makes the Constitution so incredibly different.

A parent’s rights were not created by man, so they are not directly mentioned in the Constitution to regulate. A parent’s right to their child are so natural and inalienable that it never entered the founding father’s minds to address. The writers of the Constitution understood this. Since then, we have lost touch with that understanding. Only God governs that He gives. Parents are but stewards of his precious gifts.

Although a parent may be able to give their children up for adoption, per se, a parent can never, ever be forced to given them up. The writers of the Constitution and Declaration of Independence would not disagree.

Don’t let the government fool you into thinking that your parental rights fall under the 14th Amendment. They do not. They fall under the spirit of the Declaration of Independence as “inalienable.” Something the government was never meant to decide through “due process.”

No one decides the custody of your child but you. And if someone, anyone tries to take your children away from you I can confidently says you have 56 signers who would tell you to take up your arms, get back your children and create a new Government (free from tyranny).

Government should never take a parent’s right to their children away, unless it said otherwise by Scripture. But, what about a divorce? The Bible says that a man could put his wife out of the home, leaving with nothing but a signed paper. But this was the only reason a parent should be separated from their child. Even in this, the Government was not directly involved.

May God help us!

 

Hope this helps!

Michael Sayen

Posted in bible, Christian, Christian living, complementarian, divorce, Divorce and remarriage, If not for fornication, Jesus, Marriage divorce and remarriage, Matt. 19:9, Matthew 19:9, Sales | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Family Court, CPS and Best Interest of the Child

If you want to know what happen to America’s family law system, follow the Money! It all started with the unilateral no-fault divorce. Since then, millions of dollars are given to fund the State and CPS in custody cases every year.

This is why…

In the fault based system, the focus was on the parent and who breached the contract (apart from abuse, neglect, and a few other important reasons). It basically focused on giving the child to the parent who obeyed the law. This kept the focus on the parent’s constitutional rights and not the court’s discretionary opinion. When the courts did away with contract law (who was at fault) the system needed a way to decide what was in the Best Interest of the Child (and not why a divorce occurred or who was at fault).

These are the heavy-hitters:

1969 – Unilateral no-fault divorce
1970 – Best Interest of the Child Standards
1974 – CAPTA authorizes federal funding for abuse that shaped CPS
1975 – Title IV-D funding for Child Support collections by the Social Security Act
1989 – UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (Best Interest of the Child)
1994 – VAWA (Violence Against Woman’s Act)
1997 – Adoption and Safe Families Act (federal funding for CPS)

The Best Interest of the Child is not new, it was from an old American law in the 18th Century. It was called the Best Interest of the Infant. The Best Interest of the Infant was created because in the 18th Century all Children went to the father. Or, better yet, all children were considered under the custody of the father. When a father had an extreme case of abuse or neglect, the Best Interest of the Infant was used to take these kids out of the home. Therefore, CPS and United Nations (rights of the child – article 3) both adopted the “Best Interest of the Child” principles to logically debate safety concerns.

Remember, these principles were not designed to have a “fair” hearing but they were designed for safeguarding all children from an abusive home. So, in five years from 1969-1974 there was an explosive focus on “Abuse and Neglect” in America (AND) a focus change from the parent’s or child’s constitutional rights to the best interest of the child standards. Therefore, the Best Interest of the Child laws were designed to supersede the Parent’s rights in the courtroom in keeping with the unilateral no-fault divorce premise.

The Best Interest factors are used by Family Court, CPS and the UN to seize control of a child from a parent. Your children are no longer your own at that point (ward of the state). They belong to the government anytime they want because the Federal Government gave this right. That is why Abuse or Neglect does not need to be proved in either the UN, CPS or Family court. It is fully discretionary.

These governing agencies simply want what is best for your child. Since, in their minds, most cases can be seen with the eye (observational) or heard from the tail (testimonies) they still focus on different forms of abuse. Meaning discretion of the case workers or judge is deemed sufficient in most courts of law. Otherwise, there would be more parents arrested for these “claims” of abuse or neglect and less abduction of the children out of the homes with neither, in their eyes, require a search warrant or claims of eminent danger.

I hope this helps!

Michael Sayen

Posted in bible, Christian, Christian living, Christian sales, complementarian, divorce, Divorce and remarriage, If not for fornication, Jesus, Marriage divorce and remarriage, Paul, remarriage, remarry, what does the bible say about divorce | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Child Support Payments

Has anyone found it interesting that the courts will punish a father either by taking their time away from their children or jail, but they will not give punish them by excess fines?

The reason why is, the State is more interested in continued support of the child from the father and want to do nothing that would hinder that support. They say the father is still the traditional supporter of the child. Therefore, he is more than likely still providing for the family even after a divorce.

If the court affects the father’s ability to pay child support, then the mother is more than likely going to ask the State for funds and welfare. The Child Support Office (and State) gets a cut of every child support case (and amount) so it is their utmost priority to keep the father’s paychecks coming! This is one of the only ways the United States violates a citizen right with debtors prison. Going to jail over a debt which is considered illegal.

If a father goes to prison because he can not pay for child support the debt keeps on climbing. Up to $20,000.

Listen to what this court case says:

“The only U.S. Supreme Court case to examine the issue of contempt for failure to pay child support pivoted on this very question of whether the contempt was criminal or civil in nature [Hicks v. Fieock, 485 U.S. 624 (1988)]. The Court held that the California statute in question, which had a legal presumption that the obligated parent was able to pay the required child support, was an unconstitutional violation of the Due Process Clause of the U.S. Constitution if the proceeding was a criminal contempt proceeding. The statute’s legal presumption reduced the burden of proof on the government and transferred that burden to the delinquent parent, which is not permissible in a criminal trial. On the other hand, the Court reasoned, if the statute were being applied in a civil proceeding, the transfer of the burden of proof would be constitutionally valid. Therefore, the Court remanded the case back to the lower court to determine whether the contempt proceedings were civil or criminal in nature. The Supreme Court also offered guidance to the lower court by more clearly delineating some of the characteristics distinguishing civil and criminal contempt orders and outlining examples of both.”

http://www.ncsl.org/research/human-services/archive-case-in-brief-courts-uphold-criminal-pen.aspx

Posted in Sales | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

The biggest mistake of my life…

The biggest mistake of my life was thinking that my wife could take our child out of the home and out of State without my permission and there was NOTHING I could do to stop her. If you call the police after a parental abduction, they will simply turn you away and say that unless custody is decided that either parent can take the child out of the home and encourage you to call a lawyer. This happened to me.

Most of the time, the woman separates from her husband before she files for a divorce. She will take the children with her, or tries to force the husband out of his home during the divorce process. According to Deut. 24:1 the man keeps the home, children, and everything in it when he initiates the divorce. The woman returns back to her father’s home. It was unlawful, according to the Law of Moses for a woman to initiate the divorce.

The biggest mistake of my life was thinking that it would go better for me not to take back my child by force. Unless custody is decided by a court system, either spouse can take their child or “take back” their child. So many times us men believe that if we take back our child or out of school that we will get arrested. As long as there are no custody papers, this WILL NOT happen. Or, at least, it should not happen in theory.

During a separation, the police or the school will ask where the child sleeps at night. Tell them they live with you at your house (which is the truth). Do not tell them your child was abducted by the wife. The police or the school system always presumes that where the child sleeps at night is the defining custody point to any argument before an order is issued. Just because the wife has contacted the police or the DA’s office informing them of an emotionally abusive situation (which is usually not the case) you still have every legal right to take back your children.

Remember, without court papers the children are yours. Even with court papers, the children are yours but they will not have a legal reason for keeping your children from you. If the police arrive they will do everything in their power, influence, and authority to prevent you from taking your own children. This is illegal, but the police WILL NOT allow your children to go home with you simply because they were taken from your home. They will say that they will write it down in their report and encourage you to bring this up with the judge in court. They will try and convince you that the judge will look favorably at your compliance and negotiation. This is actually a lie. The judge will look at this as a neutral factor and still give credence to the Status Quo.

The School or Day Care has no legal right to withhold your children from you without an order from the judge. The school will call the police and tell you that if you take the child they will report it as a kidnapping, even if you can prove this child is yours. The police will order you to leave and tell you that you can be arrested for “trespassing”. This is true, but there is nothing preventing you from physically picking up your child and stepping out of the classroom before they get there. The school will usually tell you that whoever checked the child in MUST be the person to check the child out. This is legally inaccurate and false. This is usually just a school policy with parents that are separated. The teachers or day school providers are not lying, they are just doing what they have been taught in situations like this.

If you call the police and inform them of what you are planning to do they can not give you permission and you may not get arrested but know you are confessing that you are the non-custodial parent. To them, you are now the kidnapper. They will do everything to legally “discourage” you from doing anything like this, however, this is just a bully technique to keep the peace and status quo. The parent that took the child out of the home always has precedence in regards to the children.

Unfortunately, possession is nine-tenths of the law. This is the same for children. By the time of the final trial, if the child has had more than a year at any school, home, relative’s home or any social function the court will deem that it is in the best interest of the child to continue there. This is called the Status Quo factor. Since divorce is a “unilateral no-fault divorce” system that means that the court does not look at the situation causing the divorce, or if a spouse took the children out of the home for selfish reasons. They simply look at where the children are currently living and if they are safe. Unless you can prove your wife unfit, chances are you are not ever going to get your children back in court.

This may turn into a cat and mouse game but know being passive when your child is abducted is never the right course of action to take. Once the child is returned back to their home of record the police cannot take them away from you without an order or probable cause. By doing everything in your means to have your children in your possession is the best thing you can do for your children. Take advantage of your legal and constitutional rights. Waiting around for court is usually the WORST thing you could ever do! I am not a lawyer, but I can tell you that in my experience the one who as the kid, in the end, wins.

STOP the “unilateral no-fault divorce” stature! A parent that abducts their child simply to escape an unwanted marriage should be held accountable for their actions. This system is not working and it is promoting child abduction while giving favor to the offending parent. Let there be consequences for at-fault divorce and illegal child abductions! The “at-fault” divorce punishes the parent who takes the child out of the home unnecessarily just as much as it punishes the spouse for abuse or neglect. The at-fault divorce evens the playing field and does what is truly in the best interest of the child.

 

I hope this helps!

Michael Sayen

 

Posted in bible, Christian, Christian living, Christian sales, complementarian, divorce, Divorce and remarriage, If not for fornication, Jesus, Marriage divorce and remarriage, remarriage, remarry | Tagged | Leave a comment

Who should get custody of the children?

According to the Bible, the man has all the authority in the home (1 Tim. 3:4) but who gets custody after a divorce?

According to Scripture, only the husband is allowed to initiate a divorce. In Deut. 24:1 it says he gives her a writ of divorcement and sends her out of the home. This is where we get the “put away” from Matt. 19:9. But, do the kids leave with her?

The answer is “no”.

Since the man puts the woman out of the home for breaking her covenant vow, he sends her out of the home with nothing. No kids, no furniture, no money (unless a dowry was discussed) but only a suitcase. The children stay with him. The woman went back home to live with her father in shame.

But what about America and other Western cultures? In Jewish marriages, the man paid a bride price for her. She was considered acquired by the husband. In almost all cultures that practice bride price this is the same from them. However, being in a “bilateral” culture where women are allowed to divorce the legal system looks at everything equally. Scripture does not support this. The man has rule over his wife and children regardless of the culture due to the punishment of the woman (Gen. 3:16).

Even if she did nothing wrong, or was wronged herself she does not get the children.

The problem with our culture is we allow bilateral marriages that practice bilateral divorces. This is unscriptural, unbiblical, and simply illogical. This is why so many men can’t handle a divorce where the kids are taken from them by the US Government. This is simply, unnatural and not according to God’s law. God assigns custody, not man.

There was a time when all men kept their children (back in the 1800’s and before) simply because they were the only ones who were looked at as being able to provide for them but now things are different. Educated women initiate 90% of all divorces in America, AND as long as they continue to get the children and child support there is really nothing preventing these statistics from changing.

In conclusion: Regardless of what others may say, know this, men – your children are your children as long as you were married. And unless you give your children away for adoption, sign away 50% custody or sign any other stipulation the Government can not take away your God-given authority over your children.

I would always recommend sharing your children with your spouse, but Scripture is clear, in a divorce or separation the decision of where the children sleep belongs to the father. Scripturally, man always has 100% custody of the children. The woman does not. Man can decide to share his children, but no one can take his custody from him.

 

love you guys, I hope this helps!

Michael

Posted in bible, Christian, Christian living, Christian sales, complementarian, divorce, Divorce and remarriage, If not for fornication, Jesus, Marriage divorce and remarriage, Matt. 19:9, Sales | Leave a comment