Soldiers aren't fit parents.....

Or so says' a "family" court. A Michigan judge has decreed that National Guard Spc. Joe McNeilly of Grand Ledge isn't fit to be a custodial parent because of his 'Abandonment" of his child while he serves in Iraq. Oh, and don't forget his other horrible offense as a parent - he wrote his child letters and enclosed pictures or postcards of soldiers - with guns. The horror.

What better way for the libs to demoralize the soldiers defending their children than by abusing the court's power to take those children from them, and make no mistake - that is their goal. They're not concerned about the welfare of the child but are simply concerned about the advancement of their agenda - that this country isn't worth defending ($1 to Cindy Sheehan and Ben and Jerry's Ice Cream) and being a soldier in the service of this country is morally repugnant.

In this case the court used it's own whimsy and it's power to abrogate parental rights, despite a 5 year joint custody with no problems or reports of abuse. Since when can a court overrule parental rights because the judge has a personal aversion to military service? Well, we now know that answer. This begs the question of what the courts will come up with next. Personally, I can't wait.

The mom's rationale? Who knows for sure, but now, since McNeilly no longer has custody, he has to pay child support. Can you say - follow the money?

If we'd had this kind of mentality/jurisprudence combined with the liberal's vitriolic hatred of all things American during WWII, would we have won? I seriously doubt it. Between this and eminent domain can most Americans desire anyone but conservative judges on the courts? How much rule by whimsy is enough?

You can read the Human Events article here.