Va. woman fails to give up child to ex-partner

iWon News ^ | January 1 2010 | BEN NUCKOLS

[fwdude]

And the aforementioned Conservative Justices of the Supreme Court made the right decision to not hear this case.

Why the the decision "right?"

[trumandogz]

“Why the the decision “right?”

Because, I'm a conservative as are the SCOTUS Justices that I named.

And as conservatives, we believe that contracts between adults should be fulfilled and that the SCOTUS should respect State's Rights.

[trumandogz]

“Why the the decision “right?”

Because, I'm a conservative as are the SCOTUS Justices that I named.

And as conservatives, we believe that contracts between adults should be fulfilled and that the SCOTUS should respect State's Rights.

[FreepShop1]

“I believe the woman NEVER exercised visitation from the time the child was a year old until some gay rights group got her to start making a fuss.”

Absolutely Correct. She showed NO interest whatever in the child until she was approached by radical homosexual activists, who had to convince her to fight for custody. The whole goal was, obviously to get the girl exposed to homosexual lifestyles as early as possible. They saw it as a huge opportunity and Jenkins went along w/it. It was also reported that Jenkins forced the child to take baths w/her, where she (Jenkins) had started “openly masturbating.”. Jenkins also reportedly denigrates her religion on these visits.

There is apparently a pending case in the Virginia Appeals Court where Miller’s side is attempting to have the judgments against Miller vacated, by arguing that since VA does not recognize civil unions, it cannot recognize any judgments that stem from these invalid relationships. Therefore the judgment of transferring custody to Jenkins is not enforceable at all in Virginia. Sounds interesting, we will see what happens.

Here is the background info: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2148502/posts