Most Worthy Pardon Petition

[ken_sylvania]

If you strip past the religiosity of this case, you’re left with a pretty typical high-conflict custody dispute with parental alienation that culminated in international parental kidnapping. This is not really an unusual case — what’s unusual is that it involved a same-sex couple and the religious argument.

Since the courts have been pretty consistent treating this as a regular custody dispute, I can’t imagine they’re going to change and give Miller a break.

Thou of little faith, wherefore dost thou doubt?

[Ken]

If you strip past the religiosity of this case, you’re left with a pretty typical high-conflict custody dispute with parental alienation that culminated in international parental kidnapping. This is not really an unusual case — what’s unusual is that it involved a same-sex couple and the religious argument.

Since the courts have been pretty consistent treating this as a regular custody dispute, I can’t imagine they’re going to change and give Miller a break.

Were there actually any religious arguments made in any of the court cases related to this dispute?

Not according to the news coverage of the case that I read here. The claims in court were all about child abuse and apparently the court did not find them persuasive. But then I only know what I've read based on the links provided here. I'm only speaking of the Lisa Miller custody case itself. I don't know what claims Ken Miller may have made when he was in court. He might well have made a religious liberty defense.

[Ken]

If you strip past the religiosity of this case, you’re left with a pretty typical high-conflict custody dispute with parental alienation that culminated in international parental kidnapping. This is not really an unusual case — what’s unusual is that it involved a same-sex couple and the religious argument.

Since the courts have been pretty consistent treating this as a regular custody dispute, I can’t imagine they’re going to change and give Miller a break.

Thou of little faith, wherefore dost thou doubt?

Courts EVERYWHERE are very consistent about expecting defendants to express remorse and contrition and make amends as a condition of leniency and parole. That mentality is absolutely built into the criminal justice system at every level. Defendants are trained to do that for every sentencing and parole hearing and it is what courts expect to hear. I expect that is going to be the sticking point here. If she is unwilling to do that, I expect she will quickly reach a standstill with any requests for leniency. But then what do I know.

[Szdfan]

If you strip past the religiosity of this case, you’re left with a pretty typical high-conflict custody dispute with parental alienation that culminated in international parental kidnapping. This is not really an unusual case — what’s unusual is that it involved a same-sex couple and the religious argument.

Since the courts have been pretty consistent treating this as a regular custody dispute, I can’t imagine they’re going to change and give Miller a break.

Were there actually any religious arguments made in any of the court cases related to this dispute?

I honestly don’t remember whether any religious arguments were made in court

The support out here for Lisa Miller is definitely religious. There are thousands of custody dispute cases like this a year — I suspect that this case wouldn’t have garnered the same level of attention in certain circles if it didn’t involve a same-sex couple and a conversion story.

[ken_sylvania]

If you strip past the religiosity of this case, you’re left with a pretty typical high-conflict custody dispute with parental alienation that culminated in international parental kidnapping. This is not really an unusual case — what’s unusual is that it involved a same-sex couple and the religious argument.

Since the courts have been pretty consistent treating this as a regular custody dispute, I can’t imagine they’re going to change and give Miller a break.

Thou of little faith, wherefore dost thou doubt?

Courts EVERYWHERE are very consistent about expecting defendants to express remorse and contrition and make amends as a condition of leniency and parole. That mentality is absolutely built into the criminal justice system at every level. Defendants are trained to do that for every sentencing and parole hearing and it is what courts expect to hear. I expect that is going to be the sticking point here. If she is unwilling to do that, I expect she will quickly reach a standstill with any requests for leniency. But then what do I know.

I believe in the power of prayer. And I believe that God may choose to honor himself by working on Lisa's behalf.

[temporal1]

ken_s:
I believe in the power of prayer.
And I believe that God may choose to honor himself by working on Lisa's behalf.

yes. this thread is about prayers and support for Lisa and Isabelle and all those affected.

without digging, i recall complications with interpreting existing laws, new+untested laws, which laws applied at which time, which place; the case(s) involved different states and jurisdictions. i recall empathy in Ken’s judge, and respect for Ken in the circumstances. within limits, judges have ability to interpret, to rule specially. some judges are able to accomplish great things with special rulings.

laws are passed, then tested IRL. it’s a process.
judges are not robots. no human law is perfect. thus appeals, etc.

there is no reason at all not to appeal to God.

human law, human reasoning, focus on the creation. believers focus on The Creator.

the courts are not the biggest problem here.

[Josh]

One thing is for sure: Isabelle has two parents, and doesn’t have two mothers; at question here is whether some random, unrelated person can somehow claim to be a child’s “parent” who has zero connection to that child at all.

[temporal1]

One thing is for sure: Isabelle has two parents, and doesn’t have two mothers;

at question here is whether some random, unrelated person can somehow claim to be a child’s “parent” who has zero connection to that child at all.

This case is a lot about testing new laws, the implications are great.
IVF laws are a big item in current law-making.

i’m pretty sure the child’s bio father can be determined, even if privacy laws hinder, DNA and the process of elimination could do it. i wonder about him in this case.

when i was very young, when divorce was rare, when fornication was still recognized as sin, my father, a man of few words, would show no patience with words like, “that poor fatherless child.”

he would say, “without exception, EVERY child has a father!” that was long before IVF.

as a child, this impressed me, because, yes, i did hear words like, “that poor fatherless child.” even in my innocence and ignorance, i was convinced my father was correct, without exception.

he is still correct.
there is tremendous medical science, including real time graphic medical photography, in those following decades; science readily available to every adult and child - all added proof of what was known ever-before. known on all continents, all cultures, all religions.

all the law school experts in crafting “winning” legal language cannot change the reality of God’s design. do not love human law. it’s so imperfect.
Law to love
http://forum.mennonet.com/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=3251

Regarding the OP.
i suppose the final pardons will soon be known.
i’m not sure how they might apply to this case, before trial and sentence.
nevertheless, praying for mercy, esp for release from misery, for all involved, including plaintiffs.

Hebrews 3:13
https://biblehub.com/hebrews/3-13.htm

The Peril of Unbelief

12See to it, brothers, that none of you has a wicked heart of unbelief that turns away from the living God.

13But exhort one another daily, as long as it is called today, so that none of you may be hardened by sin’s deceitfulness.

14We have come to share in Christ if we hold firmly to the end the assurance we had at first.…

5950 signatures, new goal is 6000.

[Ernie]

Looks like the Miller's and others didn't make the pardon list.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... -full-list

[Ernie]

at question here is whether some random, unrelated person can somehow claim to be a child’s “parent” who has zero connection to that child at all.

And this is a question regardless of whether it is a homosexual or heterosexual relationship, correct?