About the CFSM/
Expose, ETA & More
Canadian Mission Senate/Human Rights
Contact us
CFSM Bulletin Board/
Opinion Feedback

CAS Baby for sale?

CPS "Equal Justice?"

CFSM - Citizens for Social Morality

An Expose on the Current State of Protection Personified:

As a pretext to the following content, I’d like the reader to consider this expose” merely as an extrapolation of how we perceive the “current” protection climate. Therefore and in the CFSM’s desire to redirect “real & actualabuse back into the forefront, I must or will respectfully refrain from probing cites, legal opinion and more specifically, “state” required submissions to the AFCARS data base and for obvious reasons. Why? Simple. Child “protection” is neither about numbers crunching, nor is it about categorizing “children” by line--item and as a compartmental standard for measuring success. And for a lack of better baseline terminology, let’s just call it, a rubric anomaly of compensatory reimbursement, for children in care. Excuse me, I meant “fostered” care and let’s not forget “adoptions”, as yet another form of subsidiary privatization. Only, and please don’t take this the wrong way folks, as we do concur with fostering and adoptions, as being of the utmost importance. Absolutely, unequivocally! However and yet where we differ, well it’s plain as day. As in, blatantly obvious. As in, why has child protection taken a back seat to indifference and profitable motivations? Good question, and the answer? Probably, because we’ve allowed this to become an acceptable norm. Acquieced to the situation at hand, like in what problem, just take the kid, simple. And, or as opposed to considering another possibility, or other, “less disruptive” options. Hell no. Don’t even think about entertaining that idea, as to cause or origin.

Determine what manifested the element of danger. Find the “root cause”, maybe even ‘craft a repair plan?. Nope, bad business decision here, as the protective fix is in and consider it done. Yet and again, on and on, “just another family” rendered defenseless by ignorance, by simple minded solutions. Where you’ve gone and created a situation and one which abrogates the peeling away of a childs innocence, and for whatever the market exchange rate of $’s for child can fetch. Because in application and real dollars, it’s more or less, initiate an action and open the coffer. Take 2, 3 kids, get promoted. Adopt one out, collect a bonus. Presuming of course, you exceed quotas and surpass YTD goal, plus the perk, adoptions. And congratulations once again, as you, you’ve qualified and have been selected for that prestigious award. Child & family terrorist, worker/agency, of the year. Sad but true and certainly not amusing in the least. Wherein and in an exercise of our deference to, in either awarding or by congratulating others for abuse, and I suppose, as kind of a protest, we will not publish appropriations, funding, nor “accounting formulations”. You know, like in paying homage to, or as acknowledgment of, an “opportunistic enterprise”, and of one, which sees fit to prey on the weak. This diabolical hypocrisy, “the business”, it’s exploitative aspirations, the whole enchilada. All of it, evolving. With much of it’s shear existence, both predicated and dependant upon and as a matter of it’s continued survival, by bigger numbers, as in, “increased headcounts”. Treating children as cattle, like commodities. Or in short, removal for profit. To that extent, some may view portions of this content as offensive, while others may find it a bit redundant and as well, somewhat peppered with cliches.

Fact is, you can interpret it in any manner you choose. Yet going away, it will either lead you to believe, one, either this guys nuts, or two, that he’s plain ole fed up. Tired, disgusted, angry, pissed off, all of that. Certainly ashamed of our governing bodies, now that’s a “fact”! The blind, deaf and dumb, “star chambers” of the world. Judiciaries, oblivious to the deafening silence of a child’s removal, kicking and “ ”. Where audi alteram partem, “the right to be heard”, has been plead out and once again, to ” no contest”. Lost in the adversarial bowels of a legal system in disguise. And by what, another scheduled hearing? Of more of the same, apostolical, “good faith, best interest”? Child abuse by proxy, being what it is. The whatever ya say master, case management alternative of choice. That be it and let’s press on, and oh yes, three. Review all or part of this opinion, critique, ignore or simply just blow it off. As that is your choice. To draw whatever conclusions you might. Or maybe just enjoy the reading, have a burger and beer, and we’ll just let it go at that. But make no mistake, we, CFSM will not STOP, regardless. And then again, maybe, possibly you’ll just find this littletenpage articulation, somewhat intriguing. Either way, our intent is really all about motivation. Implore, inspire, engage, and even force you however necessary, into some contemplation of the fate of these kids, 100's, 1000's, the tens of 1000's. Really, it, the denial, abuse, it’s beyond the pale in scope. Newborns, children of all ages, families, all caught up in a web of hopeless despair. This the epitome of emotional servitude. That said, it is, or should be imperative, that we come full circle in returning back and to center stage, this issue of “real” and “verifiable”, child abuse. Get back to the basics. A rehabilitation of “the system”, if you will and by the decontamination of prior “bad” policy, protocols and legislation. A reversal of self-inflicted trends, which have lost sight of the “paramount purpose” and with a total lack of empathy and for those in dire need of help. Of abusing the abused in order to justify cost. In other words, for profit, in the name of the almighty DOLLAR. That said, we must approach the situation cautiously and with the, a proportionate response. Just get to that place in time, and where one can or will simply put their foot down and exclaim. I’m as mad as hell, and I’m not going to take this anymore! Network, 1976.

Let us proceed. Child Abuse v. Family Rights, or shall we say, “the business of protection”. For this has now become the ultimate litmus test, in mankind’s willingness to defend its most vulnerable. As what we have before us, is this struggle, between an archaic concept, that “children should be seen and not heard” and with those who would intertwine protection neatly around abuse, and as a most “lucrative” opportunity. Though, what’s really been created here, is this dilemma, which has elevated a “child’s best interest”, beyond that of, repairing a situation which relates to a, or some form of, “problematic behavior within the family”. Whereas, you could summarily perceive this viewpoint , as societal corrosion v. moral capacity, or on the opposite edge of the sword, as a front line failure on the “citizens” part. Yes, failure! Letting our guard down or moreover, conveniently turning a blinds eye to yesterdays tragedy. This forget you, I got “my” own life concept of self, of convenience and by simply deflecting responsibility elsewhere, the let someone else deal with it school of thought. You all know, that old rendition of, it ain’t botherin’ me, so why should I give a dam anyway theory of passive non-confrontation. And all things being equal, maybe we ought just “bend over and take it”. For, or as in terms of fighting back, someone must be willing to take the ball, instead of the “bucks”. Money, I mean big cash-ola, this the core obstacle. Since in complicating matters worse and by placating bureaucratic doctrine with more regurgitated opinion, we only galvanize this legitimization of the C.P.S position. Where abuse has become synonymous with protection. Kids, families, as easy targets, more or less like deer caught in the headlights. Frozen and defenseless. Only with the kids, the vehicle of destruction comes equipped with an emblem on the vehicle, and the weapon of choice? A protector knocking at your door. Anyway and for now, it’s best we sidestep that landmine and get on with the matter at hand. Or how best to ETA / End the Abuse and from both sides. Since just as “excuses” or opinions are like a--holes”“, not “everyone’s got one”, that however justifies abusing his or her child.

While on the flip side of kicking due process to the curb, due diligence can or certainly must assume, that we be cognizant of governmental accountability, and for any flagrant/contravening act or action, which occurs on their watch. While then, and in even taking it a step further. Some would espouse the position, whereby criminal charges are and or should be considered applicable for “racketeering”, for “intentional fraud”, and against provinces or states, where applicable.

But is it really as simple as that? As for the CFSM, we are not so naive, as to think that we can just wave some magic wand and rescue all of the worlds children from abuse. Though we are, in at least for now, satisfied, by our willingness, to assist but “one”, of what we hope to be, numerous families. Yet, when I look back at the 1000's of hours of research and try to conceptualize what an advocate is suppose to do, I for one, now foresee significant obstacles, questions and doubts, which didn’t exist at the onset of our involvement and as well, simply were not contemplated.

Obstacles? Yes. Insurmountable, possibly. As the issue of “child abuse” and for whatever reason, has just now crept over the horizon. Brought to us, courtesy of the media. Television, radio, newspapers, the internet. “Child beaten, drowned, molested, caged,,,,,,,”. Front page stuff, as if this is the first time it’s ever happened! Say what, “caged “? Fact of the matter is, that if you were to ask the parent or kid, about a ‘child in care’, you might hear terms like, “hostage”. Oh really? Probably, as I, you, we all know what time it is and so do they, the bureaucracy, C.P.Services. Cause you can call it “in care” til the cows come home, but that’s putting perfume on a pig. As it is what it is, for good reason or not. “Held hostage Day 1, 2,3,30, 60,,,365,,,-“. Like forever, or so it seems. And then what? Our legislators, these “esteemed colleagues” and acting in our best interests, draft legislation, give C.P. the go-ahead, and the family destructive frenzy begins. Help save all of the kids! With this miraculous cure all, “protection”. From “abuse”, as vaguely defined. One which has slithered its way into families and as an infection, while manipulated by some and to their benefit, but by way of deception. A quagmire, which has invariably coupled the “protective” issue, with “neglect”. Where business opportunity has taken a firm grip on the issue and for the most part, by leaving in it’s wake, the family and as the victim.

So then and what is the answer? What sort or form of strategy must be developed and how best does one go forward? As our resolve may be admirable, but can or will it be enough? As at the end of the day, can there be an effective resolution/solution, over this stark, devious, collusive, enemy? Though be as it may and when looking at the flagrant manipulation of law and most notably, by fabricated ‘policy and protocol’, one must be a realist. And surely, not by any such modes of deception or belief, which proclaim the existence of some magic pill, quick fix solution, or by any legislative stroke of imagination or pen and by more of the same. Convenient suggestions, left unanswered. Lost somewhere amongst the internal workings of, “how best to repair the problem”. By a child protective arrogance, exhilarated by delusional authority. This prevention mandated victimization of the “child” concept of C.P.“Services”. Or in other words, the philosophy of “good faith”, authenticated. That and in order for you to right this sinking ship, we need become more like minded in our motives, missions, platforms, and methodology of confrontation. Significantly accelerate our level of “cooperation” and in an efficiently, engaging adversarial and tactical application of “a/our joint activism”. Where we act in conjunction with other groups, partners, government, or as a coalition, and within some asset base of operatives, or otherwise. Or in the long and short, by whatever means necessary.

This having been said, and as a founder of CFSM, I submit, and as well as an advocate, that “we”, and along with others, can only be successful, if the cause is both ‘right and just’. Secondly, if those actions which need be taken, fail to address and effectively counter weight all levels of opposition and at every turn, that these battles, “if unsuccessfully fought, will be forever lost”. Nevertheless and dashed away, along with the very hope, dreams and aspirations, of the few, our desperate brethren, the “little” ones. These “silenced” lambs, of humanities social and moral ignorance. What, “lost”, L-O-S-T? Yes and drifting away into a more palatable, passive and “submissive” exercise in, “citizenship”.

Then, in going forward and with “a plan”. We, as part of a/the silenced minority, must at least, use to our advantage, this wide diversification of our cumulative, vast expertise. And accordingly, we need reflect upon those backward trends of the past, which have led us to this blackened hole and therein, by staking a “fresh look” into these injustices. For at the epicenter of the protective issue, stands a/this “bureaucracy, intent on securing it’s own survival and by protecting unlimited growth”. An enemy to us all, which arbitrarily perpetuates this destruction upon the “family unit” and by a C.P.S monster, who feasts on as it’s bread and butter, “the children”. Expecting, thriving on and even dependant upon, this, our tendency to avoid confrontation.

So here and again, we sit at the abyss of complacency, where we have as yet to redefine these all important issues . And having come this far, I/we must wonder aloud. Just ask and answer ourselves, this all important question. Can we bridge this gap between isolating [abuse], from [protection]? Can we conclude, or is the time ripe, for making an objective determination, as to which is most important. Is it, or shall I say, “is this” controversy implicitly all about the “paramount” interest of the child, or as a component “gold standard” of or for abuse? Or should the gist of the matter be, more or less, all about the retooling of our thinking and in such a way, where it falls more along the lines of, a revival of sorts. As a referendum on the issue. Into bringing together a world community, one which unites itself in it’s embrace of but one common theme, and where all are duly bound in their recognition of the “family”, and at the “pinnacle of the protective issue”. Better yet, maybe we should merely stipulate, as to both of these perceptions/values, as conforming, or “equal”. That is in real terms of an individuals or for “any” citizens rights, one must or should perceive, child=family though arguably, as an acceptable dominion, equation, and as a benchmark. Or at a minimum, as an acceptable policy or standard of practice, and one which transcends unreasonably corrosive, poorly regulated government protective mechanisms. Or what we’ll so eloquently refer to as, a/the C.P.S purgatory of punitive vendettas, or else.

Now I must submit, that in terms of “taking issue”, what comes before an “advocate or activist”, is a/the unmitigated proposition, of trying to strike a balance, in real world terms, between “child & family” and this huge “cottage welfare industry”, as manifested by abuse. Abuse, child, protection, family. Anyway and what, which is it? Who decides? In whom’s arms, has the good lord chosen to entrust, these, his children? A C.P.S. or foster parent? No, I think not. As God, Allah or whomever you place your faith in, would not be so deceitful, as to allow any such wedge of division, which perpetuates a breakdown of this covenant hierarchy. “The family”. And most certainly, not along the lines of a society, which views the child and parents, as inexplicably unattached entities. So then, ergo, what we have, in coming full circle into this quagmire, is this precarious situation, and one that’s yet to be properly addressed and unfortunately, one which remains dangerously fluid/allusive.

Anyway and what is “child abuse”? A young person at any age less than maturity, that has been violated. As in physical, emotional, sexual, or maltreatment. I mean really and that’s it, abuse by word recognition? Take a kid away from a mom or dad and based on what, a concept, guideline, or by some other discretionary notation. Oh, we can go look it up in Webster, in state or federal statute and elsewhere. Wrap it up in a neat little word package, I don’t know, maybe call it, Abuse Dissociative Profiled Syndrome, or A.D.P.S. Whatever fits the mold. However and when you cut to the chase, any reasonable person must view any such terminology, as somewhat circumspect, vague and obviously design specific in it’s intent to provide for a plethora of interpretations. Though it does remain, as the catch-all phrase of choice, that is and as it percolates its way into any number of reactionary conclusions. But as to it’s meaning, in simplest terms and based on a childhood perspective? Bad things big people do to children. That is the connotation. So, does or can it merely exist, by propagating terms, such as in the above-mentioned and as a basis in unsubstantiated “fact”, “hearsay”, or as some inconspicuously acceptable procedural matter of law? Or, have we just surrendered our children’s ‘care and custody’, to some new-fangled millennium, of high profiled, media driven off road, legislative mechanisms. Such as the CFSA, Canada or CAPTA here in the states. This as the preeminent lawful defense of “the child”? That’s it, ambiguous as it is. The federal carrot & stick approach to protectionism and one which authenticates foster funding, ‘carte blanche’. A legalized mandating of agencies and by those who are of the opinion, that “we” simply acquiesce, be subordinate, relinquish our rights, throw our hands up, say uncle, and submit to whatever. Conveniently, step aside and allow a C.P.S., this ‘certified right’, to peremptory vilification of the family. And not at all due to their “good faith” effort’s, but rather and moreover as a best interest “doctrine”. One which in the aggregate, values the “child” and simply as nothing else, but a, or just another “business unit”. More appropriately and as the norm, child plus ‘care giver’, equals “family unit”. Or, CAPTA/CFSA, CPS/CAS, S.O.S --- different country.

Therefore, and as described by this next sequence of events, we who know this scenario all too well, recognize the common threads, which bind this seamless “business” side of child protection, and in this day and age, of dysfunctional institutions. A child is removed/apprehended. More often than not, from a “single mom”. Counsel advises client to waive probable cause, though as exampled in Canada, this issue is set aside at the onset of the ‘cause of action’, or application if you will. Just skip the reason the kids were taken and go straight on and right up into, a or some judicially orchestrated, “best interest”, protection personified resolution. Most commonly referred to, as the P.O.C. Though and as evidenced, in the U.S. framing of the due process clause and within the Canadian Charter, fundamental justice, we find no “transparency” in either application , or in terms of relevance that is. In this, the “fair” adjudication of “most, if not all” child protection cases. And oh yes, of course, all of this plus more, as we are assured right to counsel, and purportedly ‘free of charge’. Most certainly and only the very best of the best, absolutely, just ask em’, and qualified too. Truly high end lawyering, no billing required. And of course, free, if indigent that is, although subject to reimbursement. As these usually unfortunate, uneducated and culpable individuals, who have placed their unwavering trust in “the system”, will soon come to discover. Realize all too late, about this, a systematic con job, the one that’s just dumped them and their kids off into oblivion. If only someone could have forewarned them, helped them to see all about this evil that lurks within. Only now to find themselves, grasping, searching and in their darkest hours, for that glimmer of hope, a supportive voice. The little “due” voice, that will never get heard. As engagement, a vigorous defense and sympathy, was never intended to be a part of this equation, not today, next week, nor any month forthcoming. And that my friend we’ll call “protocol”. Or more of the same, and again. When counsel, our delegate protectors in charge and judicial bias, “rubber stamp”, defendant (U.R.F,,,,, case#XXXX), P.A. or P.O.C., “next”, next victim !

Yes, sold down the river without a prayer and without ever having one centile of a clue, as to what has just been done to them. So thereto, once the process takes hold, the nightmares begun, and the case is all but settled. Over before it’s started. Roger that and just forget about it. The cannon of ethics, “zealously, impropriety, competently”, all of that used car sales/lawyering up styled hype. Let’s just call it, say, the thank you, f— you, one way school of lawful accommodation. Cause dear respondent, sorry, but it’s better you find out now, rather than later. As it’s ineffective counsel and pick your poison time. Go along with the “plan” or “don’t” and face the consequences, of. The, a lawyer, who perceives his “only“ obligation, as just showing up for the “hearing mill routine”, and as counsel, who seldom or “never”, contradicts or takes issue with, the plaintiff or applicant and on the defendants behalf. Due process? An absolute biased/partial court of jurisdiction. The C.P.S. manipulation of all circumstances and “always”, in favor of the “best interest” of their investment. In a nutshell, the lawyer, judge and child protectors have become all for one and one for all, and in what is or was suppose to be, the development of a system whose mandate was, the protection of “our” children, not “their investments “. Fact is, on one side of the aisle, the conscience has left the courtroom.

And then again, what we have here, is a conundrum of which there is no good, one-size fits all solution. Though and know matter how you cut it, the veiled deceit represented here and by all C.P. is and remains, contemptuously punitive and deeply rooted. Yet and let’s not be mistaken, as was opined in the opening paragraph, where it is us, we and as “citizens”, who must shoulder much of the blame, in “our” ignorance and in “our” failing to reign-in these designated protectors. Oh, most definitely. Then again, there are those who would have us believe, and in their “all omnipotent” wisdom, that, how they are more able and capable than we, in caring for “our” children. These God-sends, appointees, indignant, self-righteous pragmatic types, screwed up ideologues, we know all too well, who truly believe in their cause. Those that are firmly entrenched in their belief, whereby they have concluded, that alleviating “unacceptable” circumstances in a home and in a/the least intrusive or disruptive manner, is not subject to any singular interpretation, as to which or whose method can be deemed, “appropriate”. Where compliance or should I say, “non-compliance” has become the preferred, hold -8- your feet to the fire method of, an all too familiar “spin the wheel”, point the finger of C.P. blame games. That is at least in their skewed mind set anyway. Unfortunately though, the why and how best to fix a family, of CP totalitarianism remains fully entrenched. And therefore, as it stands, both opponents and proponents remain at odds in this search for a common ground. Conflicted and with no real consensus of popular opinion and as to whose, or even what concept is most likely to succeed.

That being said, there can and must be, but one and only one, ultimate goal. The protection of the “family unit”. Or in the least, one which allows for a C.P.S. organization, that does their job in a way that is most conducive to the overall “best interest” of a child. Though ultimately and when considering or determining, if a child “who may be, or might have been”, in need of protection, needs to be protected. And most certainly, not as a “pretext for job opportunism”. Since, vilifying a ‘care giver’ into “penal servitude”, in as far as I’m concerned, serves no useful purpose. Just as and no more than, sending some scared little kid off to a strangers home and in many cases, because mom has little money or food. And what is that all about anyway? How and why did we get to a point, where poverty became “neglect” and “neglect” was officially annotated as “abuse”. Fair and impartial? Well of course. Rather, let’s just call a spade a spade. For today’s quid pro quo of C.P. remains firmly intact, as it is what it is. Utterly repugnant and gestapolistic. Excuse my German, for a lack of better terms. Remember, it was not I that apostatized the principles of the P.S., in C.P.S., as in the abstract nature of infecting the “abuse” issue and as by an acronym, which has or is now vastly recognized as synonymous with a, or this, the “Cancer” in C.P.Services.

Though, lets take a deep breath, think on it for a minute, not quite rush to judgment and for the sake of argument, be too overly contemptuous of those given charge and as relegated to serve on our behalf. Cause fact is, far too many “sick” individuals abuse children and most certainly, deserve to be held accountable. Point being, kids do in fact, need our adult help and supervision, however and not at the expense of causing or creating irreparable harm, while in the name of some ‘protective repair job’. For most certainly, “hair-trigger child protection”, is and can by no means, be the appropriate recourse, nor will we continue to permit its application unchecked. Though, this still remains to be the case and as a pre-disposed guidance for removal/apprehension. As such, I/we, are of the following expressed opinion.

That if the ‘burden of proof’ cannot meet a threshold, and at a minimum, of “clear and convincing evidence” v. “preponderance-more likely than not”, then one can only ascertain, that a states interest, “parens patriae”, does not meet our requirement for an intervene and on behalf of the child(ren).

Therefore, we offer this CFSM policy statement. “It is a fact of life that the dynamics of the family is by nature an ongoing, evolving process of introspective evaluation and adjustments. Accordingly, we submit , that there are situations that present themselves, which require the necessary and authoritative protection of the “child/children”.

- In conclusion. The definitive nature of child abuse & protection, is such, that one can merely attempt to extrapolate from its narrowest of interpretations, some intended directive. While on the onerous side of the equation, I would contend, that these issues are more about perception than guidance. That in the context, of any nexus one could attach to these “phrases”, there is an underlying theme, just waiting to surface. An ideology, long overdue, which equates a moral necessity to protect, with an obligation to stem “real” abuse. Yes, “real” not manifested. As such, while we follow this course, whose path is yet undetermined, it remains imperative that all of us, you, I, a care giver, parent, adults, each and every one, hold dear and embrace this noblest of all causes, “the children”. Do all that we can, until we’ve accomplished all that has been placed before us. Stop, discontinue advancing more of the same old same old. This rhetorical prognostitizing, of chasing down another one of yesterdays inconveniences. Ya all know, be part of the blame game and simply rest on ones laurels, or just do what comes easiest. Go along with the status quo and let somebody else carry the flame. Complacency, I think is the term or in other words. Either bluff your way through, or let others deal with the bad hand they’ve been dealt and as an act of disrespect, just get up from the table and walk. Leave them stuck in a real world game, where there exists no “reasonable” propensity for success. No, don’t be pro-active or stand with them shoulder to shoulder! Why and what the hell for, and for that matter, why get involved at all? Simply sidestep any “real, positive” dialogue and just keep on, keepin’ on, driving those same ole beat up opinions in neutral. All the time considering, that on both sides of the aisle of this problematic issue, there exists a common thread of systemic vulnerability. Understanding, knowing all to well, “these voices, the small, helpless, those unassuming few, who cry out from the darkest corners of loneliness”. Children of all origins, race and nationalities. Your friends and neighbors children. A community of “the protected” which has permitted itself to be cornered into submissive persecution. These and along with other such misguided infringements and by “those who would abuse” and while in the name of “protection”.

Therefore, and as to our continued tolerance of such treatment and in the simplest of terms. Well my friends, I submit, that our patience is wearing increasingly thin. Thus and accordingly, we will seek to reverse those circumstances, which have maliciously pilfered away our rights, and by those who would choose to deprive us of ‘fundamental liberty’ and ‘freedom’ of expression. And, in doing so, forward an ideology, and one with no other agenda, other than, a, the “covenant protection of the family domain”.

So then and in going forward, let us not shirk these or any other responsibilities that have come before us. Whether by smile, handshake, community service, donation &/or, as an advocate, worker or ‘care giver’. Yet and then above all else, let us be a more appreciative, compassionate and understanding people. Make a benevolent investment of due respect and gratitude, towards “family”, first and foremost. That and when all else seems hopeless and at the end of the day you find yourself staring aimlessly off into space. Wake up. Get back and refocus, keep your eye on the prize, the “child”, our legacy. Breath a crescendo, an uplifting spirit of dedication back into the struggle. Move forward a more positive, less antagonistic agenda, and one which breaches unacceptable norms and therein, by reconstituting a more “tantamount” admiration of and for the “family unit”, notwithstanding, and at the apex of humanity. Or as a standardized covenant of our moral heritage, if you will and for “all of Gods children”, past, present and future . . . .

CFSM, “Citizens for Social Morality” .org

P.S. This expose is dedicated, in part, to Mr. B. Bevans, WECAS, Ontario, Canada proper and for his and their continued abuse of child and family rights. In kind, we salute U.S. government, state, federal and it’s C.P.S. The agency, department, “the enterprise”, and one which has come to “epitomize mans ability to be inhumane”. In this, it’s inexplicable and vehement propensity to abuse its, “the citizens”, just because it can. By authority of law, by black letter permission. In this legislative capitally of the “family”, and by this, their “representative collateral destruction”. Of those, mom, dad, the child(ren), each and everyone, remember us “all”, and in your very worst of nightmares. For it has been long ago, simply forgotten, back in that place in time, in a day and age, and where both principles and values, were “paramount”. Then in reaching back, that is if you can or so choose, and in seeking, “in longing for a better life”, rediscover, reconvene and by your very deepest reflections, of the past. Memorialize those, the very principles, as set forth in their subtlest humility, that legacy, as left before us, by others, by ‘our forefathers’. Gather in the “spirit and intent”, the truest meaning, of “ We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity”“”“”“”“, and in doing so, cease this erosion of their ideals and give them that, their due respect. For I submit, if the “framers” could speak to this issue from the grave, they would not have voiced their approval. With that said, and in reverence to the struggle which formed this unions foundation, and if you don’t mind, that is, we thank “you” not, the current bureaucracy, and for your “indignant” lack of understanding and compassion. As being victims of bad government, is not at all what should have been expected. Whether in Lansing, D.C., nor anywhere else. So now and having said all that need be said, what’s indelibly etched and dry in my mind, is this, and that it is simple! ”Do what is right”. What you were suppose to do. As I submit my friends, that the P, as in Paycheck, is nor ever can equal, the value of the P, as in the “protective” mandate, once placed in your charge.......


“God Bless America



Print this page