|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"This is a major human rights violation. The courts are so quick to protect women (that) they forget men are human, too."
The "re-humanization of man" will be key in bringing back civility. Good choice of words, Ray!
Dan Lynch's Self-Defence (519) 774-2121
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Friday October 17, @02:14PM EST (#3)
|
|
|
|
|
"Evidently Code Section 11139 exempts "programs benefiting women" from the ban on discrimination.."
Yep, discrimination is illegal unless the victims are male in which case it is not only legal, but is to be actively encouraged.
If men are content to be treated like s...e, they deserve to be treated like s...e.
( s...e rhymes with bite)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Friday October 17, @02:22PM EST (#4)
|
|
|
|
|
Yes it is unconstitutional, that's why we're challenging it and appealing. The judge refused to respond to our constitutional challenge. We've already filed an appeal.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Friday October 17, @07:31PM EST (#5)
|
|
|
|
|
Today a hate crime was committed in the City of the Angeles. No, there were no crosses burned, no swastikas were painted on buildings, and to the average citizen it looked just like any other day, but today in the superior court of Judge Jon Mayeda a gross injustice, that was nothing short of a “hate crime,” was committed against all the men in California.
A court proceeding occurred today in Los Angeles, CA, in a case were 10 domestic violence shelters are accused of violating the constitutional rights of a man who sought shelter at their facilities.
Attorney Marc Angelucci, representing Eldon Ray Blumhorst addressed Judge Jon Mayeda concerning the law(s) in question in this matter.
On the Los Angeles City Attorney’s web page a hate crime has been described as a violation of law that, when based on gender, race, etc., is deemed motivated by hate and thereby a “hate crime.”
Judge Jon Mayeda ruled today, that in a case were a man was denied access to 10 domestic violence shelters, JUST BECAUSE HE WAS A MAN, he would not consider the constitution. To Judge Jon Mayeda Equal Justice and Equal Protection for men were irrelevant. To Judge Jon Mayeda it was O.K. to discriminate against men, because it was O.K. to make an exception for women under a current California law.
In this reporter's opinion, for a battered man to be denied access to a domestic violence shelter based on his gender the vilest of hate must be employed. In this reporter's opinion it appears that Judge Jon Mayeda employed that hate in his decision today, and should incur the harsh censure of “We the people,” who still are, the last time I checked, the real government empowered to lead this country.
October is domestic violence month indeed, except for battered men. For battered the battering never ends. Judge Jon Mayeda has seen sure to that. When it comes to feminist special interest in our courts, "there is a law beneath the law."
When the Nuremberg trials were held for the Nazi war criminals after W.W.II, many of them used the excuse that they were "just being good German soldiers." The courts rebuttal to this argument was, "There is a law above the law." Clearly those who follow the feminist agenda in our courts today subscribe to the antithesis of this doctrine
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe it is time to picket this black robed tyrnnical, misandric, self-hating, effeminate bastard's home?
Taking a cue from our English brothers in the Fathers 4 Justice movement in England. This tactic seems to be very effective.
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
