KJK and the neo-nazis video

So this is another allegation based on supposition and someone’s false conclusions?

And the chairman of CPAC Australia is ex national chair of the Australian Labor Party, plus a respected indigenous advisor….

Negative.

Has anyone seen confirmation that CPAC did anything more than pay for printed material organised by the NSW Standing for Women organisers?

Did KJK have any say in that print run?

The phrase far right just makes me think of Gary Larson's Far side cartoons now.

Indeed. And if you want people to believe them when they say they've given her money, it's probably better to not call them nutty conspiracy theorists in the same post 😄

What still stands, however, is that KJK is marketing herself to the far right (e.g. by going on their shows - a verifiable fact) and refusing to say people like Hearts of Oak are not welcome.

People really, really, really, really and I mean, really do have an issue with other people's rights and freedoms of association, don't they?

In a public space, anyone can talk.

On an internet forum, anyone can join.

You people who keep saying 'Goodie Keen associated with/collaborating with/marketing to' really need to get your heads around the fact that you do not own people and they are free to do what they want and you are free to do what you want.

Don't want to have Hearts of Oak at open events, then sell your own tickets to your own event and ask people if they are from Hearts of Oak on the application forms. Show us all how easy it is to get Left Wing coverage or Left Wing organisations to cover your insurance...By Left Wing of course I mean PURE and HONEST.

“Do you know anything about CPAC”

CPAC Australia you mean?

The CPAC Australia with Warren Mundine as chairman? The ex-National Australian Labour Party chairman and MP?

And one of the speakers from last year’s event was Mark Latham? You know, the ex- ALP leader who took Labour to a federal election and lost?

It is remarkable the roots of the people involved isn’t it?

What's been debunked is that KJK organised the Nazi salute, or deliberately arranged for then to be there. Which was obviously not true.

What still stands, however, is that KJK is marketing herself to the far right (e.g. by going on their shows - a verifiable fact) and refusing to say people like Hearts of Oak are not welcome.

So, it's not a surprise these people turn up.

And KJK aligned herself with the religious right by collaborating with CPAC. CPACs logo appeared on her publicity and they say they gave her money.

Do you know anything about CPAC and why associating with them is such a bad idea?

Since I got involved with this issue (many years ago now), we have been accused if being funded / in league with the Religious Right. This was total bollocks. Or, used to be.

CPAC is well funded, anti- women's rights and the very definition of the religious right. Their followers include alt-right misogynists, racists, forced birthers, homophobes and nutty conspiracy theorists.

Why on earth would any self respecting women"s rights campaigner want anything to do with them?

And why, when we come under fire - wrongly - for associating with / accepting money from the religious right would anyone in their right mind go and make this lie true? What the fuck us she playing at?

Now this has been debunked, maybe ask for it to be removed?

Payout and apology from inewspaper and Patrick Strudwick for defamation
https://www.youtube.com/live/m21_LEX9KJU?feature=share

Inspired by KJK:

Jolly helpful link for retweeting.

Wholly agree.

A second certificate is now probably the answer. The one that goes in the file for the child in adulthood as wanted/needed, and the practical, functional one naming their adults with parental responsibility.

It is important to me that adult wishes and feelings are not prioritised over the right of a person to their own information and history.

Yes I agree.

I think the crux of it is some posters can’t see the nuances in the different types of LGBT families.

Mother wanting to appear on the birth certificate as father - unreality and no benefit to child.

Mother wanting her female partner to be named as the second parent - unconventional and does benefit the child.

I don't mean that to sound uncaring about your experiences, I fully understand why you would want your rapist to be denied the privilege of involvement with your child or to have to tolerate the sight of his name on your children's documents, but it should be about the lifetime right of the person to know their origins and names uncomplicated by their parents situations.

In such sensitive cases perhaps situations such as for adoption about sealed information the child may access if they choose after the age of 18. The point is that I feel the situation needs to evolve and separate this information regarding parental responsibility and child's biological parents as things are very much more complicated and getting so very fast with surrogacy etc. It is important to me that adult wishes and feelings are not prioritised over the right of a person to their own information and history.

It's the child's right, not the parent's right. That's the point. You are supporting the right to deny a person their own information so that you can express disapproval at an adult by denying or confer their being on a birth certificate as a prize for the right kind of parents and people.

Hence as I said above, the need to separate the information the person has an entitlement to about their origins, and parental responsibility. I don't agree in adults making the birth certificate reflect what they want as an extension of their feelings and identity rather than it being something that belongs to their child free of the control and editing created by adults' biases and feelings and wishes. YMMV.

I thought there was already a thread running about lesbians and a child's birth certificate? Might be good to keep the discussion over here? Although I'm happy to keep this batshit thread bumped with all the nuanced takedowns of the saddos who have KJK so clearly lodged inside their heads.

How is it hidden? Where the couple is lesbian and have used a donor, the child has a right to find out details of their donor at 18. We already have the system that people seem to be arguing for. Nobody is being deceived about anything and children are not being denied information about their genetics. The risk for deceit is far higher for heterosexual couples where the parents can opt not to tell the child they are donor conceived or where incorrect information about the father can be recorded.

Is there not the option for the mother to leave blank in this case? If not there should be. The mother's rights should always take precedence over the rapist's rights.

is currently possible to have a separate document that records the birth mother's partner as "parent".

It's not a separate document, it's the birth certificate. My own kids have this. You think this right should be removed from lesbians? Like it has just been removed for lesbians in Italy?

If they were married to the rapist then he’d automatically have PR.

SapphosRock · Today 09:05

If it is so essential for children to have details of their biological parents on their birth certificates, I assume this is still the case if the mother is raped?

There was the case of a child conceived by the rape of his young mother in Rotherham whose father was deliberately involved in the child’s life by social services. It was appalling. I am not sure whether or not the law was changed after that.

Rapist fathers probably do end up with parental rights (especially as most rapes cannot be proven even though they actually happened). The mother can decide not to name the man on the birth certificate in order to delay them getting parental rights, but he could most likely get it through a court if there was ‘no proof’.

In that situation you put "unnamed" in the box. You can record the information separately for the child to access at an appropriate age. That is being honest and preparing for the child's questions at a future date.
I listened to a solicitor talking about this on the radio the other night and my understanding is that it
is currently possible to have a separate document that records the birth mother's partner as "parent".

As a lesbian and a rape survivor I have biases and I am not a supporter of men's rights or rapists' rights. Yes even the rights of these men to be on their biological child's birth certificate.

I assume then you feel that there are circumstances in which it is ok to deny a person (who will be a child for a very small part of their lifetime really) the name and identity of their parent?

I have a friend who would like to have the name of his mother's rapist on his birth certificate, as his mother died without telling him the name of the man who raped her.

Friend is now in his 60s and he still doesn't know who his father is. It's had a profound effect on him.

He's aware of how he was conceived but even so feels cheated out of his own family history.

I'm really appalled you're using rape victims as some kind of gotcha.