Five Letters Support Baskerville Article

The Fredericksburg Free Lance Star has published at least 5 replies to Thomas Savage, including one from me (below). As you can see, they all testify to the truth the divorce industry is trying to suppress. This debate should be taking place in every newspaper in the America and the Western world.

http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2009/042009/04102009/457702
Bravo for Baskerville expose of divorce court
Date published: 4/10/2009

Thank you for publishing Stephen Baskerville's op-ed. It's quite accurate in describing the injustices that are perpetrated in divorce courts in the U.S. and many other countries.

I find it strange that even though there are so many divorces, no one seems to notice how unjust they are, especially to the men.

Sadly, most men--including legislators and judges--believe it is their duty to protect the poor woman and children at the cost of the men being divorced.
Perhaps they do not realize they are ruining the lives of these men along with our society and usually the women and children they are purporting to protect.
Bringing this information into public view can hopefully create the social will to change it.

Everyone can see the problems in society. Few are able to correlate the root cause.

Mr. Baskerville clearly describes how the unilateral divorce-at-will laws criminalize innocent men.

Norbert Holz
Tampa, Fla.

*****************************

http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2009/042009/04102009/457709
Divorce regime ignores kids' 'best interest'
Date published: 4/10/2009

I have seen the lack of justice firsthand relative to family law, and I am incensed that anyone--let alone a lawyer--would say otherwise.

I totally agree with Stephen Baskerville and am shocked by the comments of Thomas Savage. What planet is Mr. Savage from?

Let's face it. The deck is stacked in favor of the mothers. There is no such thing as equal parenting or doing what is in the "best interest of the children."

I congratulate Mr. Baskerville for a very well-written and accurate op-ed.

John Marois
Ontario, Canada

*****************************

http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2009/042009/04102009/457466
Many profit from unfair 'divorce industry'
Date published: 4/10/2009

Thank you for printing the March 29 op-ed by Stephen Baskerville about the divorce industry.

If ever good intentions paved the way to hell, this is the case.

This is a moneymaker for government, lawyers, social workers the list goes on and on, at the ultimate expense of children.

Truly we have painted ourselves into a corner, and few see a way out.

Robert Thomas
Arlington

********************************

http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2009/042009/04102009/457711
Kangaroos preside in divorce-custody cases
Date published: 4/10/2009

It was with some amusement that I read Thomas Savage's feeble attempt to rebut Stephen Baskerville's fine op-ed ["An unmarried husband: Unwelcome reality," Viewpoints, March 29].

Then I realized that some people actually believe lawyers.

Mr. Savage's main point is that people receive trials in divorce-custody court. The truth is, they are not trials, they are kangaroo courts.

In Virginia, they will not grant a jury trial in divorce-custody cases. Also, the proceedings cannot be recorded or videotaped. Why?

Most of what the lawyer said is not true. I do agree with Mr. Savage that everyone should spend time observing what goes on in divorce-custody court to see the complete disregard of the Constitution, the law, common sense, and fairness.

I sat through three years of divorce-custody proceedings, and throughout I kept saying to myself, "They can't do that," but they did, and they still do.

Don Delaney
St. Petersburg, Fla.

*****************************

http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2009/042009/04102009/458017
Penalties are endless for 'crime' of being divorced
Date published: 4/10/2009

Thomas Savage's sneer at my college and my alleged political affiliations (and the inaccuracy of his facts) offers a small glimpse of the kind of personal attacks and unscrupulous methods used by his profession against parents in family court ["Baskerville bays nonsense on divorce and dads," April 4].

According to Mr. Savage, family court is so fair that defendants receive not one trial but two. And before being incarcerated over child support, parents are apparently tried twice more.

Surely Mr. Savage understates his case. In family court, parents can get dozens, even hundreds, of "trials," if we count, as he does, every time an innocent parent is hauled into court without having committed any legal infraction and issued with some "order" about how he must conduct his private life if he wants to stay out of jail.

Many parents are forced to appear in court on a regular basis, each time ordered to open their wallets to attorneys like Mr. Savage, even if they have not hired them, and pay other exorbitant "debts" they have done nothing to incur.
Indeed, family court has so many ways to criminalize parents that they can just keep "trying" them until they are found guilty of something.

Do any of these numerous trials involve a jury? Is there ever a formal charge? Are parents ever declared innocent and left in peace?

Or are these quickly improvised hearings, in which parents are barely permitted to speak before the judge takes away their children, confiscates their savings, seizes their homes, attaches their wages, and jails them without any semblance of what most Americans consider a fair trial or due process of law?

America's family courts are ideologically driven kangaroo courts. These feminist tribunals are the shame of American justice.

They are creating a police state that will only expand along with the federal funding that drives them until other media follow The Free Lance-Star and expose this appalling abuse of government power.

Stephen Baskerville
Purcellville

The author is associate professor of government at Patrick Henry College.