From the National Post and Vanier Institute of the Family discuss the real Canadian family

I offered some comments based on quotes in the article following:

"...fewer than half of Canadians believe a married or common-law couple with no children counts as a family." 

The perception that childless couples are not a family is correct. Both the definition of family and the aforesaid perception is : A group consisting of parents and children living together in a household. A family has parents and children. A couple living together married or not is a couple.

"Clarence Lochhead, executive director of the Ottawa-based research and advocacy organization.

There's "no question" that families have changed profoundly over the past 50 years, the report says, but it also highlights surprising stability lying beneath the surface."

I think this person is "wishing" it were so rather than actually showing direct solid peer reviewed evidence. I say this is just left wing social engineering propaganda. The most unstable of relationships is common law which the study admits is growing faster than marriage , which they also admit is on the decline. A married family is far more stable but their are many incentives in place for one party of this marriage to end it. These incentives are part of today's gendered politics. Is there no mention of this?

"...and 88% said they expected to stay with the same partner for life."

I think we all know expectations and reality are divergent rather than convergent. Close to 40% of marriages end in divorce. Second marriages end at a greater rate and common law relationships end much faster in greater numbers.

 

"We didn't invent single-parent families. They've always been part of the cultural fabric of  Canadian society," Mr. Glossop said. "There was a period when Canadians thought that was a function of feminism in the late '60s and kids growing up and overthrowing the traditional family, as though lone-parent families had never existed before."

Well Mr. Glossup I suggest you do more research. I have and it disproves your assertion. For example here is a prominent feminist quote": 

"Since marriage constitutes slavery for women, it is clear that the Women's Movement must concentrate on attacking this institution. Freedom for women cannot be won without the abolition of marriage."

"Sheila Cronin, in Radical Feminism - "Marriage" (1970), Koedt, Levine, and Rapone, eds., HarperCollins, 1973, p. 219)"
 

This is left wing, feminist sociology revising history. The single families of the past were the result of economic and war conditions not systematic dismantling of the foundation of our country, the family, by feminist ideology translated into law. Seventy five percent of divorces in Canada are initiated by the wife and 90% of sole physical custody goes to mom starting a chain reaction of negative outcomes for children.

In the USA 40% of children are born to single moms and its a growing trend.

Here are some of the hundreds of negative outcomes in today's modern single family, mostly involving single moms, the largest deadbeat group in Canada needing welfare from the state. Most of these welfare recipients are getting this through choices they made either by getting out of a marriage or not getting married at all.

Dr. Edward Kruk found: Sole maternal custody often leads to parental alienation and father absence, and father absence is associated with negative child outcomes. Eighty five per cent of youth in prison are fatherless; 71 per cent of high school dropouts are fatherless; 90 per cent of runaway children are fatherless; and fatherless youth exhibit higher levels of depression and suicide, delinquency, promiscuity and teen pregnancy, behavioural problems and illicit and licit substance abuse (Statistics Canada, 2005; Crowder and Teachman, 2004; Ellis et al., 2003; Ringback Weitoft et al., 2003; Jeynes, 2001; Leonard et al., 2005; McCue Horwitz et al,, 2003; McMunn, 2001; Margolin and Craft, 1989; Blankenhorn, 1995; Popenoe, 1996; Vitz, 2000; Alexander, 2003). These studies also found that fatherless youth are more likely to be victims of exploitation and abuse, as father absence through divorce is strongly associated with diminished self-concepts in children (Parish, 1987).

 

Single moms in the USA and Australia are the most likely to kill or injure their child. The family is becoming more unstable and it shows in many facets including the rise of gangs many of whose members have no solid male role model. Look to the Family Courts for a good portion of this result.

Read more: http://www.nationalpost.com/real+Canadian+family/3618697/story.html#ixzz11y8KJqRf

Shannon Proudfoot, Postmedia News · Monday, Oct. 4, 2010

 

Michelle and David Huck married in 2000, and since then life has been a blur of backpacks, lunch kits and homework. As parents to Indira, 10, Soleil, 9, Saul, 8, and Samuel, 6, the couple's Calgary life is one long domestic balancing act — and they wouldn't have it any other way.

"We're at the dance studio, we're playing the piano before school — it's a gong show," Ms. Huck said.

Indira and Saul are the Hucks' biological children, while Samuel was adopted from Sierra Leone and Soleil from Ethiopia. The Hucks have met both of their adopted children's biological mothers and consider them part of their extended family.

The Hucks are a typical Canadian family — in that they don't fit the definition of what once passed for typical. But the results of a new poll conducted exclusively for Postmedia News and Global TV suggest public perceptions of what makes up a family lag behind the reality around kitchen tables across the country.

For example:

-Couples without children now outnumber those with children in Canada, but fewer than half of Canadians believe a married or common-law couple with no children counts as a family. A similar minority considers a same-sex married couple and their children to be a family.

-For the first time, there are more unmarried than married people in Canada, according to the most recent census data (2006), and common-law families — particularly those with children — are the fastest-growing family type in Canada. Yet poll results from Ipsos Reid show that while 80% of Canadians believe two married, heterosexual parents and their children constitute a family, just 66% consider a common-law couple and their children to be a family.

Today, the Vanier Institute of the Family releases Families Count, an encyclopedic book of Canadian family trends and statistics published every five years. The release coincides this year with National Family Week in Canada.

"When people are asked to think about families, they think about their own families; they think back to what their family looked like," said Clarence Lochhead, executive director of the Ottawa-based research and advocacy organization.

There's "no question" that families have changed profoundly over the past 50 years, the report says, but it also highlights surprising stability lying beneath the surface.

In 2006, the most recent year for which census data are available, 85% of Canadians lived with a relative — similar to the nearly nine in 10 who were living with family when it came time for the 1901 census count. The proportion of people living in married or common-law families has held steady at about 84% over the past few decades, census data show, although the proportion of married couples is declining while the ranks of common-law couple families are growing rapidly.

Vanier Institute research conducted by Reginald Bibby, a sociologist at the University of Lethbridge who has extensively studied Canada's Baby Boomers and up-and-coming millennial generation, revealed that people's family aspirations remain buoyant in the face of upheaval and change. Fully 90% of those aged 15 to 19 said they expect to get married, Mr. Bibby found in the "Canadian Hopes and Dreams" project in 2004, and 88% said they expected to stay with the same partner for life.

Public perception hasn't quite caught up to contemporary family life, but our collective notions of what families used to be and how they have changed are equally misguided.

"I think we have a very, very bad historical sense of what family looked like in the past, what it did, how it functioned," said Robert Glossop, former executive director of the Vanier Institute.

Lone-parent families may be increasingly common but they're nothing new, he said. That family type was widespread in the 1930s, he said, although in that era it was created most often by death or family desertion during the Great Depression rather than through divorce.

"We didn't invent single-parent families. They've always been part of the cultural fabric of Canadian society," Mr. Glossop said. "There was a period when Canadians thought that was a function of feminism in the late '60s and kids growing up and overthrowing the traditional family, as though lone-parent families had never existed before."

If there is one constant in the shifting, changing family portraits of Canada and other countries over the past century, the experts agree it's the family's adaptability and elasticity in weathering these changes and remaining intact.

In Calgary, meanwhile, Ms. Huck still can't get used to the adulation of strangers she suspects might be influenced by celebrity adoption stories.

"It's kind of cute. I think people idolize the adoption process or people who adopt," she said. "I'm like, 'We're just a family. I yell at my kids,' but I get quite nice comments."

http://www.nationalpost.com/real+Canadian+family/3618697/story.html

Not all Dads are Deadbeats is on the move again

Equal parenting advocate offering more resources

Posted 1 day ago

Dave Flook is taking his website www.notalldadsaredeadbeats.comto a new level thanks to social networking over the Internet.

The Chatham resident said he is re-launching the website on Sunday as an online magazine, which will feature guest columnists and submissions from prominent figures in the equal parenting movement, as well as a parent of the week feature.

The website will also retain such features as user forums and social networking, he added.
Flook is also introducing an online live support system, which includes him and four other people
"If people have any immediate questions, they will be able to click on the live support and talk to a live support agent," he said.

Flook cautioned that they are not lawyers, so they can't give legal advice.

But he noted they can help with answering questions and providing emotional support and directing them to resources.

Flook credits the expansion of the website to social networking online.

"I got on Facebook and started promoting it very heavily and now we have members from Australia, we have members from the (United) States," he said, adding people from the United Kingdom have also signed up.

Flook said it is exciting to see how the website has grown to the point people are contacting him from other countries who want to start chapters.

Plans are in the works to set up new chapters in Australia, the United Kingdom, and across the border in Minnesota and Pittsburgh in the next month or so, he said.

Flook said Not All Dads are Deadbeats has more than 4,500 Facebook members, which is growing by about a few hundred members daily.

Most of the members on the website are guests, so the real number can't be determined, he said, adding the website hits are growing.

"Our make up of our organization is over 50 per cent women," he said, noting the group also deals with grandparent issues. "So we're not just talking about single dads."

Flook said he hasn't seen a single website that is free, which caters to divorce and equal parenting with a live support group.

"We're starting something that is pretty unprecedented," he said.

In explaining the growth of his website, Flook said, "I think at the end of the day people need to know that they're not alone."

The issue is not as taboo as it once was and people can talk about issues that are affecting their lives, he said.
"We're talking about proud parents who just want to have that relationship with their children and not have it compromised," Flook said.

http://www.chathamdailynews.ca/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=2793298

A lesson for Socialists, Dippers, Liberals and the Left in general

 Bar Stool Economics

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100 and if they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.)

So, that's what they decided to do.

The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. "Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20." So drinks for the ten now cost just $80.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men - the paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his 'fair share?' They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.

And so:
The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings).
The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28%savings).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).

 

Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.

"I only got a dollar out of the $20,"declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man," but he got $10!"

"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a dollar, too. It's unfair that he got ten times more than I!"

 
"That's true!!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!"

"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison. "We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!"

The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

 
The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!

And that, ladies and gentlemen, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

For those who understand, no explanation is needed.
For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible.

Thanks to Rhonda for forwarding this little gem.

In Ireland misandry and misplaced Chivalry affects men as it does in Canada and other western democracies

In Ireland, as in most Western Democracies, misandry mixed with an insatiable desire by judges, politicians and many lawyers to use a misguided and hateful manner of chivalry, passing ownership of children to the mom, and marginalizing the dad to visitor status or worse. It will be seen in hindsight this manner of child division is not in their best interests at all but does extreme damage for a cornucopia of reasons I have stated elsewhere in this blog.  note this quote in the article "There is “no deliberate bias” against men in the family law courts, believes Anne Egan".  A common definition of bias is as follows: 

1. A preference or an inclination, especially one that inhibits impartial judgment.
2. An unfair act or policy stemming from prejudice.

The article then states immediately following moms have 88% of sole physical custody in Ireland.  Some how I think this is on the low side. One can never believe some researchers no matter what they see with their own eyes. They are either perceptually blind or ideologues. MJM

 

 

 

 

 What happens to dads after a split?

Tue, Oct 05, 2010

Recent research shows that when a marriage ends, most fathers are left without the family home or primary care of the children. Men who feel they were mistreated by the system tell their stories to KATE HOLMQUIST

EVERY NIGHT before he goes to sleep, Joe, a separated father, looks at a picture of his children on his computer screen and tells them he loves them.

When Tom’s marriage broke up, he slept in his car near the family home because he wanted to be close by in case something happened to the children.

Cathal weeps when he speaks of how he came home from hospital after being stabbed by his wife to find his house emptied of “everything” – including his children. His wife had left a solicitor’s letter on the counter accusing him of being mentally ill and telling him she wanted a divorce.

All three men have struggled for years in the courts to gain access to their children and believe that they should have been made primary carers, in their children’s best interests. They tell of being so alienated from their children by their ex-wives, they’ve had to watch their children’s first holy communions and confirmations from the back of the church. They speak of telling social workers about their ex-wives’ abusive behaviour and of not being believed.

“I was really, really depressed before the separation, sleeping in the back sitting room. You weren’t walking on eggshells, you were walking on razor blades,” says Cathal, who showed The Irish Times an extensive psychiatrist’s report that declares him under stress due to the separation, but well mentally otherwise.

“I know men who killed themselves because they lost contact with their children,” says Declan Keaveney, a retired garda who spent €50,000 fighting through the courts to be made primary carer of his two children and even contemplated suicide himself. He eventually succeeded in becoming primary carer.“Men have no voice – we have nothing,” he says.

Keaveney, who is now is a volunteer with Amen, a support group for male victims of domestic abuse. He listens on a daily basis to men driven to the edge by rancorous separation wars in which children are often used as ammunition. “Parental alienation syndrome”, where one parent turns the children against another, is common, he says.

A report by One Family, an advocacy group for one-parent families, finds some fathers who, despite contact orders, are refused contact with their children by their wives and cannot get the HSE to intervene and enforce their rights.

Court delays also mean fathers can go months without seeing their children. One father says he “just gave up because it was too stressful . . . [my ex-wife] was on legal aid and I had a private solicitor which cost a lot of money and I just gave up”.

There is “no deliberate bias” against men in the family law courts, believes Anne Egan, a researcher who sat in on 158 in camera cases (where cases are heard in private) for her PhD, though the court “reinforces stereotypical views” that children need to be with their mother as primary carer – the result in 88 per cent of cases.

Another PhD researcher, Róisín O’Shea, found only 2.23 per cent of 493 cases had the children living with their father. While many fathers asked for 50/50 living arrangements, O’Shea saw this ordered by the court in just two cases.

Egan, who also interviewed fathers, says most accepted the mother as primary carer, but “they would have liked more contact rather than specific times and dates”. These fathers missed the daily informal involvement with their children over breakfast, the school run or even just a few minutes in the evening to hear about a child’s day.

The second major complaint was being left out of decision-making. “Most were not happy with the situation but it was working for them,” she says.

If a father wants to be primary carer, “it’s not always fair. There’s a battle royale if you are acting for a father,” says Marion Campbell, a private family law solicitor who has been dealing with separation cases since 1981, when she started her career in the legal aid board.

Due to the recession, a growing number of men have become stay-at-home fathers whose wives work full-time. It’s often the wife who wants to separate, yet if the father wants to remain in the home as primary carer, he needs maintenance paid by the wife and her agreement to leave the family home, which is practically unheard of (O’Shea’s study found not one case of fathers receiving maintenance).

Jobless and rejected men may have no choice but to move home to their parents’ house, Campbell says. Would a stay-at-home mother be asked to leave her house with no maintenance and limited access to her children because her husband wanted a separation? The question just doesn’t arise, Campbell points out.
Another unfair perception is that men are not physically assaulted by their wives, she adds. “I’ve come across a lot of cases, but women are much stronger and more proactive in issuing proceedings. Men bury their heads and come in at the last minute and quite a number are upset because they don’t want the separation,” says Campbell.

ONE FATHER WHO WAS physically abused says he never told anyone because “it’s embarrassing”. When parents fight in court over property and children, lawyers’ briefcases heave with psychiatrists’ and social workers’ reports, although hearings can be so brief that judges don’t always see everything.

Keaveney says the men he hears from often feel social workers have sided with their wives and barely listen to them, and that the wives’ allegations are always believed.

Joe says he experienced years of false accusations by his ex-wife before he finally received a verbal apology from a social worker who said he’d been right about his wife’s fragile mental state all along. For example, his wife went to gardaí accusing Joe of exposing their son to pornography during an access visit. Gardaí investigated and The Irish Times has seen a copy of a letter from An Garda Síochana telling Joe they found no basis for the allegations. For Joe, this was just one episode in a long campaign by his ex-wife to “destroy” him, even though she had left him for another man.

“Because she’s a woman she can say what she likes, do what she likes and is getting away with it. Because I’ve moved on, the only way she can get to me is through the kids. I know guys who have not seen their kids in five to 10 years.

“One father I know, hadn’t seen his son for eight years. Then he got a call through a solicitor to say his son had attempted suicide. Can you imagine how he feels?”

Tom weeps when he speaks of living “in limbo”. After years of court battles costing in the region of €50,000, he has good access to his children but still worries about their safety. At the height of the conflict, he would drive by a place where he knew his children would be, just to see them from a distance. “I’m trying to move on, but last week, I broke down leaving the kids back to their mother. I was leaving them to somebody I don’t trust.” Sleepless nights have become routine, but he keeps going, trying to rebuild his life and his business, “for my kids”.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/features/2010/1005/1224280399159.html

---

Some names have been changed

• The Canadian-Irish Family Law conference will discuss family law reform on October 8 and 9 at Carton House Hotel, Maynooth.

See familylaw2010.com
© 2010 The Irish Times

A novel way to deal with an intransigent Ex wanting to "own" the children

This is a novel and excellent way to get attention on a serious matter. We have the traditional Gold Digging wife selfishly keeping sole "possession" and "ownership" of the children while bleeding dad dry with tax free earnings from him of $48,000. per year.  In addition, it is alleged, she has alienated the children from him.  It's not enough to have sole custody and his money but she also wants to steal them from him emotionally through Parental Alienation, which is child abuse.

I believe this man's story on its merits. No one does this sort of thing unless they are totally frustrated by the misandrist court system.  This man is a Doctor of Dentistry and would not risk his reputation and the lies of the feminist law system and their apparatchiks who will try to denigrate him with the abuser label.

I wish him well and wish I had his resources as do many dads sidelined by chivalrous and wrong headed judges.  The lawyer who dropped out of the case no doubt is not using the "best interest of the children" mantra anymore. These guys are in it for the money not the children. Money is everything.  I wonder why he did not recommend shared parenting to the wife. It would have saved everyone tons of money and heart ache.  The following video explains some of the issues in the case and the horrendous financial cost. The emotional cost to all is incalculable, and long term. Many of us will live with the latter for the rest of our lives and the children may bear non-healable psychic scars for life.MJM

Father in lengthy custody battle hires protesters to vent 

By JAY STAPLETON, Staff writer

 September 29, 2010 12:05 AM

• Dr. James Wardner

Picketers paid by a dentist mired in a custody battle hold signs protesting the court system at the corner of East New York Avenue and North Amelia Avenue in DeLand on Thursday. N-J | Peter Bauer

Wardner

DAYTONA BEACH -- Frustrated by what he sees as a court system unfairly slanted against fathers in custody cases, a dentist has hired more than a dozen day laborers to picket courthouses and a law office between here and DeLand.

Dr. James Wardner, 61, of Mims started paying picketers to stand outside the Daytona Beach courthouse annex on Orange Avenue last year.

About a week ago, the men (and a few women) started standing on the sidewalk at the Volusia County Courthouse in DeLand. They carry signs that say things like, "Fathers Have No Rights in This Courthouse."
Wardner, who is frustrated by his lengthy -- and expensive -- court battle, said this week he's decided to use his resources to spread the word on how courts allow mothers to make "dads the bad parent." The key issue, he said, is a condition called "parental alienation."

"It's bad enough if you have one (child) that hates you," he said. "I have five. None of them want anything to do with me."

Wardner said parental alienation includes a systematic campaign to make the children hate one of the parents. "Mostly," he said, "it's the men" who are alienated in this way. "I'm finished with it."

Picketers paid by Wardner have also been seen outside the Ballough Road offices of the lawyers who last represented Wardner's ex-wife. Wardner, who is fighting for custody of his five children, said the issue is larger than his own case.

"The guys are making a statement, that you can't go to court and have a fair say," Wardner said in a telephone interview. "If you're a father, you're doomed because that little guy in the robe is going to cast you into visitor status."

Wardner and his ex-wife, Carol Stillwagon, 47, of Edgewater divorced in 2004. At first, Wardner was ordered to pay $1,800 a month for child support but the amount was increased over time to just under $4,000.

A couple of years ago, he started a court fight to pay less child support or get full custody. He claimed in court documents that his ex-wife systematically tried to cut him out of their children's lives.

According to court filings, Wardner hired a psychologist who is of the opinion Stillwagon "engaged in a deliberate campaign to alienate the children from their father."

Stillwagon, who works as a housekeeper at the Atlantic Center for the Arts in New Smyrna Beach, denies that claim.

"That's not my goal," she said. "But I can't work with someone who just wants me out of the picture. I'm in a fight to keep them, but to keep them in order to maintain a more normal life."

She pointed out that Wardner pays for the protesters, while remaining behind in his child support. According to court records, Wardner was more than $13,000 behind in child support payments last December. Stillwagon said Tuesday he's paid most of that off.

At Wardner's request, four other judges removed themselves from the case. He says he's spent "hundreds of thousands of dollars" on legal bills.

Wardner says the picketers he's paying to spread the word of "parental alienation" are being heard as far away as Spain and France on the Internet.

"People are sick and tired of being alienated and separated from their kids," Wardner said.
Some of the protesters, none of whom wanted to be named for this story, were versed on the issue of parental alienation. Most of them weren't.

The condition, which is essentially defined as a child being pitted against one parent by the other to the point of hatred, is not recognized by the American Psychiatric Association or American Medical Association as a medical syndrome. But the term has become more common in custody battles, divorce lawyers say.

Attorney Richard J. D'Amico had to remove himself from representing Wardner's ex-wife earlier this year because she ran out of money to fight Wardner's request to gain custody of the couples five children.

According to court records, Stillwagon owes $80,000 in legal fees. She's trying to find a new lawyer. But if she can't, Stillwagon said she's preparing to represent herself in court against her ex, who earned between $300,000 and $400,000 in recent years. He's now spending thousands to keep the protesters in front of the courthouse -- and in front of D'Amico's office, which is something D'Amico doesn't quite get.

"I don't want to get into the middle of it," he said. "She can't afford to litigate this and he's pummeled her into the ground."

D'Amico said there's nothing that looks like parental alienation going on in this case. According to court records, Wardner is allowed to see his children three times a month. But, Wardner said, his children do not want to see him.

As an attorney whose handled divorce cases for over 30 years, D'Amico has seen it all. "In every divorce, to a certain degree, there's posturing, and some take it too far," he said. "But not Carol. It's sad, this case is sad for a lot of reasons."

Wardner said he's doing what he can to fight against what he sees as an unjust system. "I can't get it done," he said. "(Lawyers and judges) keep working behind the scenes to make sure the attorneys get paid, and the kids stay where they are. It's nonsense."

Carol Stillwagon said she's preparing for what could be her last month with the children, ages 9 to 15.
"I might lose my kids in a month," she said. "Whether I have an attorney or not, I have to reply with interrogatories. I have to mount a defense."

Her motion to continue the case is scheduled to be heard by Circuit Judge Randall Rowe on Monday.
Like many people, Stillwagon said she drove past the protesters for months before realizing they were paid by her ex-husband.

"I assumed those men with the signs were impacted by the issue in one way or another," she said. "I never thought they were day laborers being paid to be out there."

http://www.news-journalonline.com/news/local/east-volusia/2010/09/29/father-in-lengthy-custody-battle-hires-protesters-to-vent.html

---

© 2010 The Daytona Beach News-Journal.

Feminist influence has reduced men's freedom once again with the retention of the Canadian Gun Registry

Keep these names in the forefront when going to the polls in the next federal election in Canada. Each one of them are feminist sycophants who drank the kool aid we men are a dangerous lot and the only way to keep the fembots safe is to maintain a useless and inefficient gun registry.  After all we are only men the last bastion of bigotry and bias for the MSM and others to pillory.MJM

Larry Bagnell, Lib, Yukon
Fin Donnelly, NDP, BC
Keith Martin, Lib, BC
Charlie Angus, NDP, ON
Carol Hughes, NDP, ON
Claude Gravelle, NDP, ON
Anthony Rota, Lib, ON
Malcom Allen, NDP, ON
Jim Karygiannis, Lib, ON
Albina Guarnieria, Lib, ON
Todd Russel, Lib, Labrador
Scott Simma, Lib, gander
Andrew Scott, Lib, Avalon
Jean-Claude Damours, Lib, Madawaska
Wayne Easter, Lib, Malpeque
Peter Stoffer, NDP, Sackville