I was kind of surprised to find myself nominated on mano's blog for "most obnoxious" joeuser. I decided, rather than pollute mano's blog, to respond here.

I know why the label was applied. It was applied because the individual who said it takes issue with my continual blogging of the faults of CPS. While I defer to him the right to his opinion, I have a pretty big problem with WHY he labels me as obnoxious. It makes me wonder if he'd have been harping on the "obnoxious" Martin Luther King Jr. in the 60's...after all, he was a "one trick pony", too, wasn't he?

Let me clarify a few things. I did not start my CPS series with the intent of slamming CPS. Truth be told, when I began my research (and if you read the relevant articles, there's quite a bit of research there), I thought that CPS was a well intentioned agency that made occasional mistakes in attempting to err on the side of the child.

What I found was systematic abuse of the Constitutional rights of the accused (tragically, that doesn't seem to matter; I foresee our Constitution being suspended within my lifetime because, frankly, most people don't CARE about routine violations of its protections), and a system in which 97% of the cases involve parents who have NEVER been convicted in ANY court of law of criminal wrondoing as regards their children...only 44% of those parents statistically will ever hold their children again without a case worker looking on.

I truly hope that nobody ever makes an attempt to steal this particular person's children from him, if he has any (I'm not sure). He's a decent fellow and wouldn't deserve to be such a target. But I wish that he, and others, could find empathy for parents that are routinely wrongfully accused by a system that devalues individuality.

I will reiterate my contention that when those charged with the enforcement of our laws fail to respect the rule of law, we are on the fast track to anarchy. I will ask how a child who has seen the county sheriff bust down the door with guns drawn on their parents without so much as a warrant can be expected to RESPECT that law once he reaches the age of majority. And I will ask why he continues to be an apologist for a system gone horribly wrong, to whom individual rights do not matter.

This particular individual belongs to a faith that was the direct target of systematic persecution throughout the late 19th and early 20th centuries. People who had much to fear from an irresponsible government that did not respect the law. And while I do not share his faith, I respect his right to practice it, as well as the right of his predecessors in the faith to do the same. It is ironic, then, that he would not stand up against systematic abuse of power when it is consistently proven.

But hey, that's just me. And this is my "high horse".