Gagged Dad has posted the following comment on
Parent vetted for political correctness – should the trial be in private?
I would like to thank the 21 who wrote to the judge and the 17 who attended the hearing, of whom four or more, three of them journalists, addressed the court. I would like especially to thank Stephen Green for his coverage before the hearing, in Christian Voice.
The hearing was bedevilled by the following problem: That the application for a private hearing was founded upon (I say) a false premiss, that my case was an attempt to have reconsidered family court proceedings that were properly held in private, in which the Defendant had played an expert witness role. I have not impugned in this case the outcome in the family court. It was said that the Defendant could not defend my claim without referring to those other matters, which ought not to be aired in public. The judge appeared to me to be taken in by this protestation, and to have insinuated that there was far more to this case than John Allman had brought to public attention.
CORNWALL SOCIAL SERVICES WANTS A SECRET TRIAL IN GAGGED DAD CASE
Please act now. Hearing is on 23rd October 2015.
Question 1: Should social services separate a child from his mum or dad, when mum or dad openly opposes a government policy that he or she considers to be morally wrong?
Question 2: If social services does this, and that parent sues the council under the Human Rights Act for interference with his family life and discrimination on the grounds of his beliefs, should the trial be held in secret?
The court in A v Cornwall (case number A88YJ875) will hold a three day trial in December to decide Question 1, as it applies to Gagged Dad. He disagrees with same sex marriage and abortion. Cornwall Council has therefore prevented Gagged Dad from seeing his son for just short of two and a half years. Cornwall didn’t want Gagged Dad to “indoctrinate” his two year-old son in his own pro-life and homophobic beliefs.
I bet Alexander Carter-Silk wishes he had watched the Feminist Makeup Tutorial, before he got caught!
Q. What do you call it when a woman thanks or lambastes those who make compliments about her appearance, on the basis of their gender or age?
Please follow me on Twitter – and please follow this blog too, to be informed of new posts by email.
Other posts you may like
Masculism, Feminism and the Euro Tunnel
Marxist Feminism’s Ruined Lives
Children screaming to be heard
Let every child have both parents
9/11 anniversary guest post by Dr Chuck Balwin, Montana
Big Government toadies can pooh-pooh the existence of a conspiracy by elitists to create a global government (aka a New World Order) all they want to, but that doesn’t change the fact that they are. Over the last several decades, proponents of global government have been quite outspoken about their intention to create a New World Order. In fact, former President George H.W. Bush (NOT so-called “right wing conspiracy nuts”) was the one who popularized the term “New World Order” in modern times.
For those who haven’t taken the time to educate themselves on the reality of the elite’s intention to create a New World Order, please take a few minutes to review this documentation:
A Chronological History: The New World Order
That pastors and Christians would question the existence of a modern conspiracy to construct global government is somewhat surprising to me, as such a conspiracy can be traced all the way back to the story of the Tower of Babel as recorded in the Book of Genesis. Plus, the Biblical record is replete with examples of ancient empires that embarked on world domination.
Affectionate parody of Westboro Baptist Church’s own witty parodies of popular songs.
I was on my cell phone to a journalist, trying to arrange media coverage of a certain court hearing a few days later, in an organised stalking case in which I had by then been involved for about 18 months, and in which I took the next step in the litigation last week. A “wrong number” call on my home phone, from an unknown stranger, interrupted me. I put the journalist on hold to take the land line call. The stranger asked very deliberately if this was the right number for “Sidney [pause] John A [pause] Gabriel“.
Hmm. Could this be a piece of “theatre”, a little dig, from “them”? After all, I was John A myself. Who was Sidney Gabriel? Later that evening that I easily discovered The Bad Chicken (in Portuguese, A Galinha Do Mau) in the only You Tube video of Sidney Gabriel.
The Bad Chicken appeared to be having considerable difficulty solving the easiest of puzzles set by his higher power, to win a particle of food, whilst distracted by a barking dog. Please compare the chicken with the bird of superior intelligence called Double-Oh-Seven. 007 is a master of puzzle solving, albeit equally motivated by his own quest to consume, in peace, a scrap of food left for him by his higher power, if only he works out how to execute, in the right order, eight different tasks that he has already learnt separately.
It struck me that if The Bad Chicken ever defeated 007 in a tournament of wits, this would be akin to David slaying Goliath.
Philip Kerr -v- MI5
Rooks -v- Crooks
Stephen Fry once observed that the name of the British politician Virginia Bottomley was an anagram of “I’m an evil Tory bigot”. Fry went on to claim (tongue-in-cheek) that this comical coincidence amounted to proof of the existence of God. I continue this blog’s long and noble tradition of what I like to call “humorphobia”, by reminding readers that the title of the recent case in the Supreme Court of the United States that imposed same sex marriage throughout the entire U.S.A. was Obergefell v. Hodges.
I have noticed that “Obergefell versus Hodges” just happens to be an anagram of the title of this blog post: “U.S. begs God for severe hell“.
Need I say more?