Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old February 4th 10, 11:56 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc
sd sd is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Jun 2009
Posts: 922
Default Sam Sloan demands that Tanstaafl a/k/a Herbert Rodney Vaughn beremoved as moderator

On Feb 2, 2:08*am, "
* * *Finally, Sam's "felony" was to take his own child back against a
court order. *It was an issue that a few generations back would never
have been in a courtroom.



Wrong,

I've posted evidence to the contrary before, but Larry always simply
ignores it. Whether 1890 or 1990, these issues appear in courtrooms.

SBD
  #2   Report Post  
Old February 4th 10, 04:04 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 3,026
Default Sam Sloan demands that Tanstaafl a/k/a Herbert Rodney Vaughn beremoved as moderator

DOWD DIFFERS

I've posted evidence to the contrary before, but Larry always simply ignores it. Whether 1890 or 1990, these issues appear in courtrooms. -- SD



The creature who forged my name on a university website is back.

I spoke of an issue that in the old days would never have appeared in
the courts. It is true that, quite obviously, one can act horribly
enough to make it into a courtroom. The issue is whether a father
acting against a court order involving an issue of a kind that was
ignored in past generations makes one a lifelong criminal even after
the convicted felon has served his time.

For myself, I think that victimless crimes are, by and large,
family matters that do not belong in courts. The notion that Sam is a
felon because he took his own daughter is not in accord with natural
law -- if it can't be shown that he committed a traditional criminal
act against his daughter. (Any broken bones? Brain damage from
beating about the head? Etc. etc. I have read no such allegations.)

Of course, for those enamored with the social-worker state in
which the hearth is breached regularly by the state -- well, you can't
put enough fathers in jail.

Yours, Larry Parr




sd wrote:
On Feb 2, 2:08 am, "
Finally, Sam's "felony" was to take his own child back against a
court order. It was an issue that a few generations back would never
have been in a courtroom.



Wrong,

I've posted evidence to the contrary before, but Larry always simply
ignores it. Whether 1890 or 1990, these issues appear in courtrooms.

SBD

  #3   Report Post  
Old February 4th 10, 05:17 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2008
Posts: 451
Default Sam Sloan demands that Tanstaafl a/k/a Herbert Rodney Vaughn beremoved as moderator

On Feb 4, 10:04*am, " wrote:
DOWD DIFFERS

I've posted evidence to the contrary before, but Larry always simply ignores it. Whether 1890 or 1990, these issues appear in courtrooms. -- SD


*The creature who forged my name on a university website is back.

I spoke of an issue that in the old days would never have appeared in
the courts. It is true that, quite obviously, one can act horribly
enough to make it into a courtroom. *The issue is whether a father
acting against a court order involving an issue of a kind that was
ignored in past generations makes one a lifelong criminal even after
the convicted felon has served his time.

* * For myself, I think that victimless crimes are, by and large,
family matters that do not belong in courts. *The notion that Sam is a
felon because he took his own daughter is not in accord with natural
law -- if it can't be shown that he committed a traditional criminal
act against his daughter. *(Any broken bones? *Brain damage from
beating about the head? *Etc. etc. *I have read no such allegations.)


When one chooses board members for a national nonprofit organization
(Sloan is currently seeking such an office), should one give
preferential treatment to those who have "committed family offenses,
emotionally and sexually abused the mother [of their biological
children], abducted [their biological] child’s older siblings, and
intentionally exposed the child to graphic, sexually-explicit
materials" as long as they don't break any bones or inflict traumatic
brain injury?

I admit that the standard proposed by Mr. Parr insures that each board
member will have a certain degree of expertise.

Of course, for those enamored with the social-worker state in
which the hearth is breached regularly by the state -- well, you can't
put enough fathers in jail.


Some hearth.
  #4   Report Post  
Old February 4th 10, 06:29 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Oct 2007
Posts: 3,073
Default Sam Sloan demands that Tanstaafl a/k/a Herbert Rodney Vaughn beremoved as moderator

On Feb 4, 11:04*am, " wrote:
DOWD DIFFERS

I've posted evidence to the contrary before, but Larry always simply ignores it. Whether 1890 or 1990, these issues appear in courtrooms. -- SD


*The creature who forged my name on a university website is back.

I spoke of an issue that in the old days would never have appeared in
the courts. It is true that, quite obviously, one can act horribly
enough to make it into a courtroom. *The issue is whether a father
acting against a court order involving an issue of a kind that was
ignored in past generations makes one a lifelong criminal even after
the convicted felon has served his time.

* * For myself, I think that victimless crimes are, by and large,
family matters that do not belong in courts. *The notion that Sam is a
felon because he took his own daughter is not in accord with natural
law -- if it can't be shown that he committed a traditional criminal
act against his daughter. *(Any broken bones? *Brain damage from
beating about the head? *Etc. etc. *I have read no such allegations.)

* * Of course, for those enamored with the social-worker state in
which the hearth is breached regularly by the state -- well, you can't
put enough fathers in jail.

Yours, Larry Parr



sd wrote:
On Feb 2, 2:08 am, "
* * *Finally, Sam's "felony" was to take his own child back against a
court order. *It was an issue that a few generations back would never
have been in a courtroom.


Wrong,


I've posted evidence to the contrary before, but Larry always simply
ignores it. Whether 1890 or 1990, these issues appear in courtrooms.


SBD- Hide quoted text -


- Show quoted text -


Did it ever occur to you, Larry, that the court order was for the
protection of the daughter from her father who was, shall we say, not
a sterling example of fatherhood and even less that of humanity. You
seem to think it is okay for a father to be able to maintain custody
even though the courts deemed him not the best choice because in the
old days divorce was rare and the matter seldom arose. Let us now turn
to your idols, the classical Greeks. In their days brothels stocked
with children, nymphs, raised no eyebrows. Times and public morals
change yet even so I doubt Jefferson who could not have forseen such
numerous divorce and custody battles, would have intended for the
courts to be barred from protecting children from abusive parents.
  #5   Report Post  
Old February 5th 10, 05:06 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 3,026
Default Sam Sloan demands that Tanstaafl a/k/a Herbert Rodney Vaughn beremoved as moderator

PARENTAL RIGHTS

Stan Booz ("None") makes an interesting statement. He writes that
the courts deemed Sam "not the best choice" to have custody of his
daughter. Does Sam, therefore, have parental rights?

My answer is that the courts should not be deciding what is
optimal and what is not. Defined criminal behavior under natural law
should be the only standard for the state crossing the hearth.

Yours, Larry




None wrote:
On Feb 4, 11:04 am, " wrote:
DOWD DIFFERS

I've posted evidence to the contrary before, but Larry always simply ignores it. Whether 1890 or 1990, these issues appear in courtrooms. -- SD


The creature who forged my name on a university website is back.

I spoke of an issue that in the old days would never have appeared in
the courts. It is true that, quite obviously, one can act horribly
enough to make it into a courtroom. The issue is whether a father
acting against a court order involving an issue of a kind that was
ignored in past generations makes one a lifelong criminal even after
the convicted felon has served his time.

For myself, I think that victimless crimes are, by and large,
family matters that do not belong in courts. The notion that Sam is a
felon because he took his own daughter is not in accord with natural
law -- if it can't be shown that he committed a traditional criminal
act against his daughter. (Any broken bones? Brain damage from
beating about the head? Etc. etc. I have read no such allegations.)

Of course, for those enamored with the social-worker state in
which the hearth is breached regularly by the state -- well, you can't
put enough fathers in jail.

Yours, Larry Parr



sd wrote:
On Feb 2, 2:08 am, "
Finally, Sam's "felony" was to take his own child back against a
court order. It was an issue that a few generations back would never
have been in a courtroom.


Wrong,


I've posted evidence to the contrary before, but Larry always simply
ignores it. Whether 1890 or 1990, these issues appear in courtrooms.


SBD- Hide quoted text -


- Show quoted text -


Did it ever occur to you, Larry, that the court order was for the
protection of the daughter from her father who was, shall we say, not
a sterling example of fatherhood and even less that of humanity. You
seem to think it is okay for a father to be able to maintain custody
even though the courts deemed him not the best choice because in the
old days divorce was rare and the matter seldom arose. Let us now turn
to your idols, the classical Greeks. In their days brothels stocked
with children, nymphs, raised no eyebrows. Times and public morals
change yet even so I doubt Jefferson who could not have forseen such
numerous divorce and custody battles, would have intended for the
courts to be barred from protecting children from abusive parents.



  #6   Report Post  
Old February 5th 10, 06:58 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Feb 2010
Posts: 2
Default Sam Sloan demands that Tanstaafl a/k/a Herbert Rodney Vaughn beremoved as moderator

On Feb 4, 11:06*pm, " wrote:
PARENTAL RIGHTS

* *Stan Booz ("None") makes an interesting statement. *He writes that
the courts deemed Sam "not the best choice" to have custody of his
daughter. *Does Sam, therefore, have parental rights?

* * *My answer is that the courts should not be deciding what is
optimal and what is not. *Defined criminal behavior under natural law
should be the only standard for the state crossing the hearth.

Yours, Larry


The appellate court characterized Sloan's behavior as "abusive and
criminal" in 2009.

  #7   Report Post  
Old February 5th 10, 07:05 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2008
Posts: 451
Default Sam Sloan demands that Tanstaafl a/k/a Herbert Rodney Vaughn beremoved as moderator

On Feb 4, 11:06 pm, " wrote:

PARENTAL RIGHTS


Stan Booz ("None") makes an interesting statement. He writes that
the courts deemed Sam "not the best choice" to have custody of his
daughter. Does Sam, therefore, have parental rights?


My answer is that the courts should not be deciding what is
optimal and what is not. Defined criminal behavior under natural law
should be the only standard for the state crossing the hearth.


Yours, Larry


The appellate court characterized Sloan's behavior as "abusive and
criminal" in 2009.

If I inadvertently post to rgcp under the spouse's ID a third time,
I'll be the one worrying about broken bones and traumatic brain injury.
  #8   Report Post  
Old February 5th 10, 03:58 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Oct 2007
Posts: 3,073
Default Sam Sloan demands that Tanstaafl a/k/a Herbert Rodney Vaughn beremoved as moderator

On Feb 5, 12:06*am, " wrote:
PARENTAL RIGHTS

* *Stan Booz ("None") makes an interesting statement. *He writes that
the courts deemed Sam "not the best choice" to have custody of his
daughter. *Does Sam, therefore, have parental rights?

* * *My answer is that the courts should not be deciding what is
optimal and what is not. *Defined criminal behavior under natural law
should be the only standard for the state crossing the hearth.

Yours, Larry


I believe the "criminal behavior" you use in your argument arose after
he defied the court. Really, if the court can't decide which parent is
best for custody then who. I'm sure Jefferson would answer the courts.
  #9   Report Post  
Old February 5th 10, 03:59 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 3,390
Default Sam Sloan demands that Tanstaafl a/k/a Herbert Rodney Vaughn be removed as moderator

On Thu, 4 Feb 2010 21:06:25 -0800 (PST), "
wrote:

Defined criminal behavior under natural law
should be the only standard for the state crossing the hearth.


Larry, where are the "natural law" statutes codified ? This could be
a long and interesting discussion.
  #10   Report Post  
Old February 5th 10, 04:11 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 3,026
Default Sam Sloan demands that Tanstaafl a/k/a Herbert Rodney Vaughn beremoved as moderator

THE INTRUSIVE STATE

Bill Brock replies to a different point than the one I made.

If one holds criminality and illegality as identical, then I
have no doubt that given the size of the federal and state legal
codes, everyone on this forum could be convicted of a felony. Many
federal laws are so loosely worded that loud remonstration with one of
the TSA goons at an airport could be interpreted as aiding and
abetting terrorism.

Everyone becomes a criminal.

I do not hold criminality and illegality as being identical and,
as the United States devolves into fascism, they may soon no longer
even be synonymous.

The difference between my views and, more than likely, those of
a Brock or a Booz, is that I place the threshold much higher when
interfering in family life.

There will always be injustices. But the greatest possible
injustice of all is to frighten millions of parents by intrusive legal
devices into raising their children according to a statist agenda.

Yours, Larry Parr



billbrock wrote:
On Feb 4, 11:06 pm, " wrote:

PARENTAL RIGHTS


Stan Booz ("None") makes an interesting statement. He writes that
the courts deemed Sam "not the best choice" to have custody of his
daughter. Does Sam, therefore, have parental rights?


My answer is that the courts should not be deciding what is
optimal and what is not. Defined criminal behavior under natural law
should be the only standard for the state crossing the hearth.


Yours, Larry


The appellate court characterized Sloan's behavior as "abusive and
criminal" in 2009.

If I inadvertently post to rgcp under the spouse's ID a third time,
I'll be the one worrying about broken bones and traumatic brain injury.

Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Introduction to The Model Architect by Sam Sloan samsloan rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 3 May 18th 07 02:49 AM
Introduction to The Model Architect by Sam Sloan samsloan alt.chess (Alternative Chess Group) 3 May 18th 07 02:49 AM
Introduction to The Model Architect by Sam Sloan samsloan alt.chess (Alternative Chess Group) 3 May 18th 07 01:41 AM
Introduction to The Model Architect by Sam Sloan samsloan rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 0 May 17th 07 04:42 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:27 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2019 ChessBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Chess"

 

Copyright © 2017