IS A 'PILE OF OLD STONES' MORE VALUABLE THAN OUR CHILDREN?
Today, 3 men dressed as the Flintstones climbed on top of Stonehenge.
Such actions have become so familiar over the last 3 years, that no-one need ask what the protest is about; climbing, dressed in comic outfits, has become an icon of disenfranchised fathers. Dads protesting about access to their children and the sense of injustice they feel as a result.
Of course, Stonehenge is a national archaeological treasure which no-one wishes to see put at risk by stunts such as this, but the protest begs one obvious question.
Should we place a higher value on protecting the remnants of a 3000 year old culture (that we know very little about), than on protecting the rights of tens of thousands of children who have a parent needlessly stripped away every year, through no fault of their own?
Politicians find it convenient to distract attention from the failings of their own family policies by demonising fathers, and misrepresenting them as abandoning their responsibilities. Those who work in Family Law also have a vested interest in retaining the status quo, because dealing with the aftermath of family break-up has now become a multi-billion pound industry. It is no wonder that politicians and lawyers sit back and allow the removal of fathers from their families, and then blame them for abandoning their children. As for the rest of the country, few would dispute that these unjust laws are long overdue for radical reform.
We wonder. Will the only relic our society leaves in 3000 years time be a history of cultural breakdown after many years of failed social policies have completely destroyed family life?
It seems we have more respect for a 'pile of old stones' than for the emotional welfare of these thousands of forgotten children.
