HOUSE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 182

OCTOBER 30, 1997

This page was last updated on Thursday, 01 October 2009 12:24 AM

INTRODUCTION

Before I begin, I want to explain what a concurrent resolution is and how it works. It is much like a personal New Years resolution for there is no punishment for failure. It must be passed by both houses, the House of Representatives and the Senate but it is not presented to the President for approval or veto. So it does not have the force of law.

A joint resolution or bill must be passed by both houses and must be presented to the President for approval or veto. A veto is a Presidential power to prevent the enactment of a bill passed by the Congress and the President may inform Congress of the reasons for vetoing the bill. Once signed by the President or approved by House of Representatives and the Senate over a Presidential veto, the bill has the power of law.

THE GENESIS

Seven years ago, March 13, 2002, I read House Concurrent Resolution 182 by Ms. Constance A. Morella of Maryland. According to the best information, twelve other representatives sponsored this resolution that Morella submitted to the House of Representatives (105th Congress, 1st Session) on October 30, 1997. Later, Mr. Davis of Virginia removed his support as cosponsor of the resolution.

EGALITARIANISM

I use this term, egalitarianism, to express my belief in human equality as a personal commitment to the economic, political, social imperatives and personal rights that must function. This is necessary so that people who strive to be free can remain free. In doing so, an egalitarian strives to remove inequalities and iniquities among people. Imagine that, the word ‘egalitarian’ and its variants were coined in 1885 and ‘feminism’ that could be a synonym for egalitarianism was coined in 1895.

WHAT HAPPENED TO FEMINISM?

Feminism is the belief in the political, economic, and social equality of the genders. Unfortunately a few women decided to pervert this term for their own purposes. So they wrote books and told of a nonexistent feminist paradise where women ruled the world as beneficent despots. So the term ‘feminism’ became oxymoronic and those who stole feminism want to shape the word ‘feminism’ into their own narcissistic self image.  Some writers had a problem in distinguishing the egalitarian form of feminism from the despotic form of feminism. So they had to coin a few new terms and the only templates that they had could not properly express the concepts of the ‘new authoritarian feminism’ (my emphasis added).

So these writers had to use other models such as ‘redfem’ that was popularly coined to express that many Neo Feminists were devotees of Chairman Mao Zedong and his little red book. I used Radical Feminist and Radical Feminism to associate these women with their political extremism and their violent acts. Robbing banks and blowing up news trucks are not peaceful acts.  Joseph Goebbels, the official propagandist of Nazi Germany offered this advice. If you tell a lie, make it big, and keep repeating it so that others will come to believe it. Repress dissent for the truth is the mortal and moral enemy of lies. In 1989, the term ‘feminazi’ entered our lexicon and this term refers to an extreme or militant feminist.

However, many persons objected to this word because its perceived association with the beliefs and policies of the German Nazi party and Fascism though ‘feminazi’ is the correct term. Radical feminism is a relatively small group of people who want to control others for their own purposes. This makes radical feminism an ‘oligarchy’ and this is what happened to feminism.

HOW TO LIE WITH FALSE STATISTICS

Actually Darrell Huff wrote a book called ‘How to Lie with Statistics’. Often, lying is a matter of semantics. For an example is a half glass of water half empty or half full? The question is moot when an ample supply of water is yours to have. The question is not moot when a supply of water is not nearby or yours to have. Saying anything different is a lie. The people who have caused most trouble were the pseudo feminists and their sycophants who create false statistics about almost anything.

A syllogism is a formal logical argument that has two premises: a major premise and a minor premise, and a conclusion. This is an example: all persons are mortal; Allen is a person; therefore, Allen is mortal. Another example is this: all violent persons have a heart beat. Mary’s heart beats and therefore Mary is violent. The problem with syllogisms is that they can be truthful, but if misused, they can be highly and wrongfully suggestive. The rebuttal to a syllogism is a reduction to an absurdity (reduction to the absurd). It is the disproof of a proposition that, when carried to its logical ends, leads to an absurdity.

Last year, in 2008, a female author claimed that one in three women will be abused or murdered by their husbands or male friends within the year (San Francisco Chronicle). According to the World Almanac 2009 (page 598) there were nearly 117 million females in the United States in 2007 aged 18 years and older. According to her claim, 39 million women would be abused by their husbands or male friends. Of course this never occurred and the female author lied.

Last Wednesday, (July 8, 2009) I updated my essay on blood testing. When I first wrote this paper, there were several issues that I had to resolve. The most important issue was prior priority of paternity at 50 percent and I thought this was nonsense. So I cited a reference and continued with my work. The recent update (July 8, 2009) appears below.

PSYCHOLOGICAL PROJECTION

My web site has a constant theme that is based on psychological projection. It is the attribution of one’s own ideas, feelings, or attitudes to other persons. It is the externalization of guilt, blame, or responsibility as a defense against anxiety caused by one’s own beliefs and activities. Friedrich Nietzsche explained it this way, if you gaze long into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.

Consider this example. A wife has thoughts of abusing her husband. She does not consciously face these undesirable thoughts. Instead, she subconsciously projects her thoughts onto her husband. Psychological denial is closely related to psychological projection. In this sense, denial is simpler than projection. This phenomenon is easily observed in young children (I don’t know) and Flip Wilson, the famous comedian, described projection with his wonderful punch line - the devil made me do it.

THE PHONEY PATRIARCHAL CONSPIRACY

Radical feminism is based their own quixotic propaganda that a patriarchal conspiracy exists and the patriarchy seeks to enslave or destroy their imaginary matriarchy. This is why radical feminists see what they want to see and hear what they want to hear while seeking the nonexistent cause of nonexistent oppression. Despotic absolutism is a form of government where one or more persons rule with unlimited power. In the former Soviet Union this was called a Troika. The problem with the Troika was that unlimited power cannot be divided and is impractical and extremely difficult to administer. It is similar to three gourmet cooks who have their own recipe for making soup.

FOOTNOTES AND CITATIONS

Some years ago, a woman wrote that I failed to add proper footnotes and citations to my writing. Most of my work is embodied by précis that are actual statements of fact or concise summaries of essential points. I supply specific references to the writing of another author when I am writing about very extensive or very technical topics. This is much better than using ‘loc cit.’, ‘op cit.’, ‘ibidem’, ‘ibid.’, ‘et al’, ‘et a seq.’, or ‘ect’ and keeping tract of the foot notes. I cannot remember the source of this quotation but I thought about it on more than once, ‘we are people divided by different spellings, different grammar, a common language, and different rules of citation’.

WHAT IS A LIE?

The most common definition of a lie is an assertion known or believed to be untrue with the intent to deceive. A lie is also the omission of some fact that is designed to deceive or mislead another in believing that something was so when it was not. The elements of omission and deception are not exclusionary for lies can, and often do, consist of omission and deception.

DUPES AND LACKEYS

A dupe is easily deceived (a fool) and a lackey is a subservient slave (a toady). The problem is that law enforcement agencies and judges have become the dupes and lackeys of the radical feminists. DNA testing has been available to test for true accusations of spousal abuse for some time. The problem is that there has been almost no effort to use Touch DNA and Splatter Back DNA testing to prove that a crime was actually committed. This is why I support the use of DNA testing in matters involving claims of domestic violence; either the evidence is there or the evidence is not there.

The problem is that many law enforcement agencies are nothing more than dupes, lackeys, and puppets of the radical feminists. In other words, their choices and actions are controlled by a ruthless movement who endangers the liberties and lives of everyone who opposes them. So these persons and agencies deserve title and the designation of those who betrayed their duty and in doing so, they have become traitors.

BANNED FROM THE LIBRARY

Years ago, a Public Library had pamphlets from the California State Attorney General’s Office promoting the notion that all females are victims abuse and all males are perpetrators of abuse.  So I made several hundred pamphlets that debunked this notion and had them placed in the library. These pamphlets told the truth about false allegations of spousal abuse and one pamphlet was devoted to five personality disorders that could lead to child and spousal abuse. Eventually my pamphlets were banned from the library because the librarians claimed that they had no room for either set of pamphlets. However, they did have room for Susan Murphy-Milano’s book and K. J. Wilson’s book.

FALSE CHARGES OF ABUSE

Susan Murphy-Milano’s book is titled ‘Defending our Lives’ and K. J. Wilson’s book is titled ‘When Violence Begins at Home’. Both books were nothing more than misandrious feminazi propaganda where both authors complained about a nonexistent patriarchy while promoting their own concept of a mythical matriarchal Shangri-la. Their books reflected the feminazi propaganda that men are evil and are inferior to women; hence, women had the right to make a false claim of abuse.

So K. J. Wilson, Susan Murphy-Milano, countless others have encouraged women to falsely claim spousal abuse, child abuse, and to attack their self-imagined bastions of nonexistent male privilege. The myth of ‘male privilege’ was invented by the radical feminists who were driven by misplaced envy and malice (once envy and malice were synonymous). In other words, the lack of personal restraint comes from the awareness that some females seem to enjoy as they perceive advantages of being male. This perception leads to feelings of inferiority and gender envy. So their creation of false statistics reflects their own desire to possess those advantages that they perceive to be enjoyed by others (men).

The problem is that the Radical Feminist Dogma tells women that they cannot be safe unless they embrace and support radical feminism. This is how their way of their control is passed from one abuser to their succeeding abuser. In other words, radical feminists are a group of people of similar interests or backgrounds prominent in a particular field or enterprise and that enterprise is fallacious feminism.

AID AND ABET

Aid and abet means to knowingly encourage or assist another in the commission or the attempted commission of a crime. While radical feminists insist that they are peaceful; robbing banks and blowing up news trucks are not peaceful acts.  The word ‘attempt’ stresses the beginning or initiation of an effort but ‘attempt’ does not include the element of complete success. In other words, an attempt can be unsuccessful, a qualified success, or a success. This is why an attempt at committing a crime can be treated as a separate crime. Usually, an attempt at committing a crime and the successful commission of a crime can be treated as one crime. Similarly, if a person assists another in the commission of a crime then they aided and abetted a crime although it was unsuccessful. Such a person could be an accessory, an accomplice, a conspirator, or a coconspirator depending on their role in a crime or a series of crimes. Some books written by radical feminists include advice and suggestions on creating false evidence. The key element in creating false evidence is to ensure that the victim does not have an honest and reliable witness. Their advice is to call 911, break several things, scream, and throw the phone through a window or against a wall. When the police arrive, all they see is the wreckage and the damage supposedly caused by the missing spouse (husband).

TOUCH AND SPLATTER BACK DNA

Today, Touch DNA, Splatter Back DNA, color photographic analysis and fingerprint analysis can help in solving many crimes. Touch DNA exchange occurs when a person touches something or is touched by something. When one person touches another person, both persons receive DNA from the other person and this is called DNA exchange. DNA exchange can occur with an inanimate object where the object has been previously touched by another person. See my essay on testing for false allegations of domestic violence.

BRUISES

Bruises do not move. As the body produces endorphins to ease the pain, changes in shape, size, color, and position can be detected and recorded. As the bruise heals, the blood breaks down to pigments from red to blue to cyan and to yellow that are gradually absorbed into the bloodstream. By recording the progress of a bruise or a set of bruises, a technician can determine whether the bruise was self-inflicted, a result drug abuse including aspirin and warfarin, or inflicted by another person. That is why touch and splatter back DNA testing is important.

SAME GENDER CONFLICTS

Much attention has been devoted to inter-gender conflicts but more attention should be devoted to same gender conflicts. Same gender conflicts do occur and so the phenomena of false claims of violence and abuse transcend the supposed gender barrier. The radical feminists claim that only women are victims and men are perpetrators of domestic violence. However, same gender violence among women belies those claims and same gender violence among men shows that men are victims of domestic violence.

PARENTAL ALIENATION SYNDROME

Writing about Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS) can be difficult because most thoughts must be qualified. For an example the concepts of ‘child’ and ‘children’ can be hard to express so I will use the word ‘child’ instead of ‘children’ to mean one or more children.

There is a difference between child support and spousal support. Spousal support is a payment to an ex-spouse that becomes a deduction for the payer of spousal support and becomes income to the recipient of spousal support. Certain circumstances may permit that the recipient of spousal support can be treated as a dependent of the other spouse for income tax purposes.

Child support is a payment to an ex-spouse that does not become a deduction for the payer of child support. But the spouse who receives child support may claim a deduction for each dependent child. Such deductions and funds are not treated as taxable income to the recipient and there is the actuarial problem of accountability. Child support has become a no-lose opportunity where women can become instant sand and sea surfers, ski bunnies, and spandex queens.

So Parental Alienation Syndrome is collection of behaviors and ploys that a parent uses to alienate their child from the other parent. False allegations of child abuse are very common and most are made by women. The reason for this phenomenon may be that the more time the non custodial parent shares with their child, the less money they have to pay. When the alienation is successful, the non custodial parent faces additional court intervention that may lead to greater restrictions and higher child support payments.

The insult is that the payer of child support cannot send payments to the child’s parent. Instead state governments use mandatory garnishment programs to collect child support and then deposit that money into an account established for a child’s parent. This leads a process called the ‘float’, the time between the presentation of a check and the actual withdrawal of funds to cover it. So in these cases the go-betweens are state governments, who can and many do, make money from the float.

I have devoted a separate essays on Parental Alienation Syndrome, Child Abuse, and Spousal Abuse. From time-to-time, I hope to make improvements. Biology can create children but biology cannot make good parents.

Ms. Morella's House Concurrent Resolution 182 is a factual falsehood and an act of misandry that so well expresses the ilk and trappings of the Feminazis. A copy of this resolution is on the Internet at http://thomas.loc.gov/. If available, please use this link to view the official copy.  A copy of the HTML text version of House Concurrent Resolution 182 appears below without the navigation tags for they are not a part of the resolution’s text.

Expressing the sense of Congress with respect to child custody,
child abuse, and victims of domestic and family violence.

October 30, 1997 

Expressing the sense of Congress with respect to child custody, child abuse, and victims of domestic and family violence.

Whereas domestic violence has serious detrimental effects on children, even when they do not directly witness such violence;

Whereas courts still hold women to higher standards of conduct than they do men;

Whereas gender bias still exists within the courts, particularly those making and affecting child custody determinations;

Whereas gender bias has long existed and still exists within the mental health system;

Whereas, as a result of this gender bias, many myths are that women make false allegations of domestic violence or child abuse, and most particularly of child sexual abuse, during divorce and custody proceedings;

Whereas false accusations by women are in fact rare, occurring no more often than do other false reports of crimes, such as bank robbery;

Whereas the myth that women make false accusations is so widely believed that many child protective service agents have policies of not bothering to investigate such allegations when made during the pendency (pending litigation) of divorce or custody proceedings or only superficially investigate such allegations;

Whereas there are many myths that fathers are discriminated against in custody proceedings, even though studies show that fathers fighting for custody actually win sole custody or joint custody in 40 to 70 percent of these disputes;

Whereas the American Psychological Association's Presidential Task Force on Violence and the Family has found in a 1996 Presidential Report that Congress views as authoritative on questions of domestic violence, child abuse, and custody determination that--

    (1) fathers who abuse their children's mothers are more likely to dispute custody and visitation than are fathers who are not violent;

    (2) there is no reliable data to support the phenomenon of `parental alienation' syndrome, although courts and custody evaluators
     frequently use that term and other inappropriate terms to discount the children's fear in hostile and psychologically abusive situations; and

    (3) psychological evaluators not trained in domestic violence ignore or minimize the violence and give inappropriate pathological labels
    to women's responses to chronic victimization, including `parental alienation' to blame mothers for their children's reasonable fear or
    anger toward their violent fathers.

Whereas many courts and professionals use the baseless parental alienation syndrome to force mothers into joint or shared parenting
arrangements or to give custody to fathers, especially when mothers try to protect themselves or their children from men who abuse them
or their children.  Whereas almost every custody evaluator or judge recognizes how important familiar routines and objects are to a child,
particularly in times of stress, but often fails to recognize the importance for the child of maintaining its living arrangement with the child's
primary caretaker parent.  Whereas Congress never intended that the Parental Kidnapping Prevention Act be used to

    (1) to encourage forcing shared parenting arrangements when it is not in the child's best interest;

    (2) to prohibit an abused or protective parent from protecting themselves or their child;

    (3) as a tool to punish a parent, without regard for the needs of the child, by removing physical custody of a child from a fit abused or
         protective parent; or

    (4) as a tool to punish abused or protective parents who act to protect themselves or their children;

Whereas when there is domestic or family violence or major discord between the parents, shared parenting arrangements, couples counseling, or mediation arrangements only exacerbate the difficulties of the children and give the abusive parent more tools with which to victimize the other members of the family;

Whereas children who grow up not seeing abusive parents clearly held accountable for their abuse are reinforced in believing that domestic and family violence are socially acceptable and effective means of behavior; and

Whereas every State has legislation or judicial decisions that base its custody determinations on what is in the best interests of the child: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That it is the sense of Congress that--

    (1) for purposes of determining child custody, it is in the best interest of children to have a presumption that children should have their main
         physical residence with their primary caretaker parent unless that  parent is unfit;

    (2) for purposes of determining child custody, it is not in the best interest of children to--

        (A) force parents to share custody over the objection of one or both parents or when there is a history of domestic or family violence;
        (B) punish abused or protective parents who protect themselves or their children;
        (C) presume that allegations of domestic and family violence are likely to be made falsely or for tactical advantage during custody and
             divorce proceedings; and
        (D) make `friendly parent' provisions a factor when there is abuse by one parent against the other or a child;

    (3) child abuse and child sexual abuse allegations should be fully and impartially investigated regardless of when they are raised or whether
          the child has recanted the allegation;

    (4) States should be far more protective of victims of domestic and family violence in custody and visitation determinations and not order
         mediation, couples counseling, shared custody,  mutual orders of protection, unsupervised visitation, or other measures when they
         may endanger victims of domestic and family violence;

Edward Steven Nunes

End of Page