Here’s something that means more than it looks like it means.
A divorced emergency room physician lost custody of her 4-year-old daughter after a Florida judge ruled the child’s “safety and welfare” were compromised because of potential exposure to coronavirus due to the mother’s occupation.
Dr. Theresa Greene told NBC News that her ex-husband, Eric Greene, asked for an emergency order for sole custody of their daughter — who they had shared joint custody — for the duration of the coronavirus pandemic and his order was granted.
“I feel like the family court system now is stressing me almost more than the virus. I mean this is a very stressful time for health care professionals,” Greene said.
Despite testing negative for coronavirus and following the American Medical Association’s guidance for first responders and frontline physicians during this global health crisis — which states that health care professionals can interact and live with their families if they take necessary health precautions — Circuit Judge Bernard Shapiro ruled that the child’s health is in danger and gave the father sole custody.
“In order to protect the best interests of the minor child, including but not limited to the minor child’s safety and welfare, this Court temporarily suspends the Former Wife’s timesharing until further Order of Court,” Shapiro wrote in his ruling. “The suspension is solely related to the outbreak of COVID-19.”
“I was just shocked that the judge would take this stance without talking to medical experts and knowing the facts and take it so lightly, take my child from me and not think of the effect on her, her mental and psychological well-being,” Greene told NBC.
Firstly: not only is the judge Jewish, but the Greenes almost certainly are as well.
Secondly: obviously, I support dads having full custody in any situation, as there is no possible situation where it is better for a child to live with a single mother than with their father.
However, this is more complicated than that. The sad legal reality is that women have de facto custody of children in virtually every case, and this isn’t a situation of “oh we decided the father’s home is a better place for children,” it is specifically and exclusively because of the virus. So what this does is establish a precedent for this flu virus to be used as a potential defining factor in determining custody of children.
This connects back to something that Tucker Carlson recently highlighted: a WHO official has announced that they want to take people’s kids from them, “to protect them from the virus.”
Dr. Mike Ryan said: “in most parts of the world, due to lockdown, most of the transmission that’s actually happening in many countries now is happening in the household, at family level. In some senses, transmission has been taken off the streets and pushed back into family units, now we need to go and look in families and find those people who may be sick and remove them, and isolate them, in a safe and dignified manner.”
I think with the custody decision, we may be looking at a situation similar to that of Harvey Weinstein, where Jews do a thing within their own community that can later be applied to the whole society. Because the woman is (presumably) Jewish, and the judge is Jewish, she is not likely to push back very hard against this, because in this situation the judge is basically acting as a rabbinical authority.
Dr. Greene went on CNN, where she served as a foil for the Jew John Berman to insidiously promote the idea that this is good.
She said she was appealing, but was clearly on Xanax and didn’t appear to be ready to put up much of a fight. And the mere fact that CNN, which of course holds the position that this is good, had her on demonstrates that they don’t think people will find her position sympathetic.
CNN is very good at presenting a story in which you come to the conclusion they want you to come to while thinking you came up with it yourself. The entire setup of the segment was designed for the viewer to react with: “that’s sad for that woman, but she needs to understand that this is serious and millions of kids are dying all over the world and she needs to put the health of her child first.”
If the ruling doesn’t get overturned, then it will keep happening. There are a lot of divorced fathers in this country with nurse wives who would like to get their kids back, I’m sure, and they’re going to start filing.
From there, it’s a very small hop to taking children out of two-parent homes and putting them in some kind of government facility, or shipping them off to be injected with tranny hormones and used as sex slaves for rich Jews.
Of course, at this point all law is de facto martial law, as the entire Constitution has been burned because people are afraid of the flu. So it is much more about simply getting people to accept the idea of taking children from their parents because of coronavirus than it is about figuring out a way to make it legal.
Never mind that even according to the ridiculous statistics that we’re being presented with, children who get the virus have a 0.0% chance of dying.
But remember: nothing about the response to the corona flu virus makes any sense whatsoever if you view it as the government and media genuinely trying to save lives. All of it only makes sense in terms of a bizarre agenda that has nothing at all to do with public health.
You may well live to see a time when soldiers in full hazmat roll up to people’s houses, tell them “I’m sorry, ma’am, but there’s been some COVID-19 activity in this area, and your children are going to need to come with us.”