Honey, i have some really bad news for oyu. Lisa “forced” her “lifestyle” on her child. she also made a public and legal agreement whic she has reneged on. It has nothing to do with the “gay community’ whatever that may be.

If Lisa Miller did not want to share custody with Ms. Jenkins, perhaps she should not have deliberately gotten pregnant and born a child during their civil union.

Unfortunately, the gay community has been empowered by the state to act as a bucket of crabs, viciously detaining any of their number who attempts to escape.

If we continue to empower the gay community through bad legislation, they will force their alternate lifestyle on countless people such as Lisa and Isabella.

If Jenkins wants a child, she should have her own child. Stealing Lisa’s child is evil. No amount of rhetoric makes it right.

Ask any parent if they’d comply with a law that said they had to give up their child, or compel their child to spend time with someone whose values were counter to their own. Do you really think any parent would put up with this? Of course not. They wouldn’t be parents if they did.

Please clarify: Is this judge an activist against the law, or against your personal opinion (which has nothing to do with the law)?

If against the law, then provide legal backing, if against your personal opinion, then please explain why this judge should follow your advice over our nation’s existing legal framework.

The biological mother — Lisa Miller — has always had the ‘right to her own child’. She was awarded primary custody and that could have continued indefinitely.

However, what Lisa Miller has also done is completely deny the child access to the other parent for over 5 years. Janet Jenkins is a legal parent to the child, regardless of whether you recognise or agree with that fact.

What is “pure insanity” is that this situation is wholly of Lisa Miller’s making.

Miller first broke the visitation schedule in June 2004 — a date before she had even attempted to circumvent her responsibilities by starting a parallel process in Virginia. Even in spite of all her obstructive behaviour, Miller was rejected by Virginia over 3 years ago and has been in contempt of the Vermont court for over 5 years.

By her own destructive wilfulness Miller has turned a completely routine case involving separated parents into firstly a damaging circus and then deliberate disobedience of the Court and now, sadly, into a very serious offence.

Miller’s behaviour is inexcusable. The law will eventually catch up with her and I fear she will now face the risk of losing all but closely monitored contact with her child. If even that.

Miller appears to be stupid enough to be able make her own fool choices in life. She can certainly do without people like you egging her on.

In a heterosexual situation there would be no argument that the father would have just as much a right to the child as the mother even if she was artifically inseminated. The only exception would be, of course, if it could be proved the father was a danger to the child.

A family member of mine got divorced and the mother was restricted to 90 miles of the original residence for 6 months until the divorce was finalized. This happened in Oregon. The mother was awarded the kids, but because she decided to move to Texas, she had to pay out of pocket to send the kids to their dad every summer and every other Christmas. The family judge who made this decision was hereby labeled as a “Woman Hating Judge” but the truth is he was following the law.

Divorce can be an ugly ordeal, but to blame a judge for following the law, as I believe the judge did in the case of Lisa and Janet, To call him a “liberal activist,” assuming they are used as an insult, is not understanding the law and how our judicial system works, especially our family court system.

It was my understanding that Justices were trained in the Law and (by the very nature of the *name* of their post) are therefor trained to pass *judgment* on cases presented to them.

So since you are obviously more highly trained in legal matters than this particular Justice of the Court, please present to us your reasoning (backed with legal precedent) as to why the ruling was incorrect.