Chicago Judge Strips Mother Of Parental Rights For Being Unvaccinated

a reply to: Krakatoa

What about the child? Is foster care less dangerous to the child than being with an unvaccinated mother????

Who said anything about foster care? The mother has (for now) lost shared custody rights. The child will be with the father.

originally posted by: Krakatoa

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: CrazeeWorld777

surely the judge has no rights to do this and should lose his job!

Actually, family court judges have very wide authority.

This does not preclude appeals.

If this stands, and they file an appeal, does the judge's order stand while the appeal is processed (perhaps taking years)? What about the child? Is foster care less dangerous to the child than being with an unvaccinated mother????

Wow.

The mother isn't even infected.

If this isn't a line in the sand for people, I don't know what will be.

From the looks of it, you can just line people up to be shot and they will agree that it's in their best interest.

Maybe de-population isn't such a bad idea.

This judge is plain nuts. I'm worried about him. I mean he should really think about wearing body armor pulling a stunt like this. Of course that won't help his noggin much.

If judges start getting really out of control like this I'm worried that even worse things might happen. Oh, SARC/off

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed
This judge is plain nuts. I'm worried about him. I mean he should really think about wearing body armor pulling a stunt like this. Of course that won't help his noggin much.

If judges start getting really out of control like this I'm worried that even worse things might happen.

You're worried for a piece of # like that?

I'm not.

I'm happy he's likely in danger.

These types of actions SHOULD put the fear of God into people.

He is separating a family.

It's akin to murder in my book.

The mother could die tomorrow and never see her child again because of this guy.

If I were to start a new nation, family separation would be a capital crime. It's literally State-coordinated kidnapping.

You want to know HOW we got to this point where judges are keeping kids away from HEALTHY parents?

It's because we give an inch here and then another inch there.

Say some kid is abused at home. Should that kid be separated from the family? Only a rational person would say yes.

However, you've JUST granted the State the power it needed to (eventually) keep kids away from healthy parents.

Every grant of power will be abused. EVERY SINGLE ONE. It's why governments are evil.

Now, if you REALLY want to stop this, you've got to be willing to let that abused kid suffer. Rationalize it any way you want, but FIND a reason to let that abused kid stay in the abusive home. Because if you don't, you will get this.

My rationale is evil people are far and few between and the rights of others must NOT be infringed upon, no matter what.


With that reason alone and armed with enough people that believe in it, Tempter-Nation would NEVER separate a family.

a reply to: SeventhChapter

It was gonna be this sooner or later.

a reply to: Phage

ANY defense of these kinds of actions are wrong and disgusting. And in my experience anyone that starts with "Actually" is a self-important ,wannbe know it all. There is ZERO defense of taking a child from their parent because they are not jabbed. Have fun on this one buddy, you are on your own here.

Who knows what Evil lurks in the hearts of men...

a reply to: Tempter

a reply to: norhoc

The person to whom I replied seems to believe that the judge exceeded their authority.

I said that family court judges have wide authority. This is a simple fact, not a "defense."

Can a family judge make a decision based on their interpretation of the situation and that decision stands unless taken to a higher court then?



a reply to: Phage

a reply to: nonspecific

That is what any sort of judge does. Makes decisions based upon their understanding of the law and the circumstances.

Any such decision is subject to appeal. As I said.

a reply to: Phage

You can not even admit that this is beyond the authority of a court. I have seen drug addicts keep their kids, but you are ok with NO JAB, NO KID policy

a reply to: norhoc

but you are ok with NO JAB, NO KID policy

Please show where I expressed this.

a reply to: SeventhChapter


I am going to reference this post instead of repeat the warnings..
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Read my comment at the bottom. "Democrats aren't masters of racism but slavery". This will be happening more and more, and the reasons I already posted are there. It's the super long one because it addresses several issues.

As long as we keep giving them the results they desire, they will keep pushing for more.

Your a bad bad meany.

You've upset everyone now.


a reply to: Phage

a reply to: Tempter

I forgot to say SARC/off at the end of that. Figured most would see that anyways. Fixed it for you.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Krakatoa

What about the child? Is foster care less dangerous to the child than being with an unvaccinated mother????

Who said anything about foster care? The mother has (for now) lost shared custody rights. The child will be with the father.

Is the father vaccinated??? Seems odd that only one parent would be vaccinated only.
What about other family members that child will now come in contact with that they did not before?
Will the judge rule that the child cannot be in a home where nobody is vaccinated?
Who gave him that power???

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: norhoc

Yeah. Facts are sycophancy. No doubt.

Look at the post I replied to.

Whose facts?