Church of the Subgenius - a threat to children?

[lectrobyte]

Rachel Bevilacqua (an active SubGenius known as "Rev. Magdalen") had her son, Kohl removed from her custody and was barred from even writing to her child due to her bawdy and satirically blasphemous participation in Subgenius festivals (at which the son was never present). Not only was the son never present at these adult-oriented festivals, but she has been barred since 2000 from "exposing" her son to any information or activities related to the Church of the SubGenius.


http://www.wildhunt.org/2006/02/it-is-happening-again-child-custody.html

[mdmc]

1. custody is determined in family court in terms of permanency,

safety and success.

Without knowledge of the case specifics, this OP is without meaning (was this lady a drug addict? why was there a custody battle?)

Custody is a big deal. I doubt any judge would decide a case based on membership of a group, unless the group effects a child's permanence, safety, and success.

[pocket]

2. "was this lady a drug addict?" YES

she was seen abusing frop, which is common among subgenii.

or kill me.

[mdmc]

9. from my family court experience

only permanency, safety, and success should be used to determine custody.

Let this be a lesson for all of us freaks - be careful who you fuck / reproduce with. Your conformist significant other might end up takin your kids. She should have stuck with the freaks!:kick:

From the little that I know of this case, it sounds like this poor mom got off on the wrong foot with the judge. If she said, "I am a FROP addict, as per my religion" in front of the judge, I can understand his ruling.

I have seen some very nice parents end up looking silly in front of a family court judge (I never handled a custody case between parents. I worked on cases between the parents and DSS (Dept. of Social Service).

Did this lady's kid end up in foster care, or with a relative:kick:?

[mdmc]

18. is frop - herb? what is frop?

[shanti]

19. i want to know too!

*scratching my head*...."frop"???

[mdmc]

21. So far, this seems to be based on lies

it seems some artist lost her child in a custody battle, and blames her membership in subgenius. I can't get any more info except from links that simply "tell" her side of the story... no news articles, no court documents...

At this time I think that this lady was not a fit mother, and blamed her 'outsider' status for her inability to regain custody of her child.

[pocket]

29. FROP

is the official drug of the Church of the Subgenius

[mdmc]

30. is it something real

I am starting to think this is all a fund raising gimmick.

[Dorian Gray]

33. What exactly is Frop?

and who are the subgenii. I've never heard of this organization, and I'm fascinated to learn.

[lectrobyte]

35. Frop varies from person to person. It's more just folks having fun,

in framework of a religious parody, but the music and artists are the attraction for me. Not sure I'd heard of Blackloud or the Goodyear Pimps without them...

http://www.subgenius.com/

[mdmc]

38. ok...so frop isn't meth, coke, herb, alcohol..

I am trying to find out whether this is real, or if it is a fundraising scheme for bob. I know this lady lost her son, I dont know why.

Based on the available info, this is an outrage.

I DO NOT THINK THAT THIS STORY IS TRUE.

[pocket]

62. the story is true, she did lose custody. frop is a joke

as is the church. She did lose custody for participating in a parody church.

[SheWhoMustBeObeyed]

42. Me, I'm just a Slackhead

[toddaa]

6. The Church of the Subgenius dangerous?

You're kidding, right? The history of the case can be found at Rev Ivan Stang's Blog http://revstang.blogspot.com/

[Xeric]

8. Read the story

"The judge, a very outspoken Catholic, became outraged at the photos of the X-Day parody of Mel Gibson's movie The Passion of the Christ -- especially the photo where Jesus is wearing clown makeup and carrying a crucifix with a pool-noodle dollar sign on it while being beaten by a crowd of SubGenii, including a topless woman with a dildo.

His Honor also strongly disapproved of the photos of Mary Magdalen in a bondage dress and papier mache goat's head, asking repeatedly "Why a goat? What's so significant about a goat's head?" in a transparent effort to reveal the hidden Satanism Judge Punch obviously believes is behind this satirical comedy."

While I wouldn't want to get into the middle of child custody cases myself, this judge was obviously biased due to his own religious beliefs. He should have recused himself if he felt so strongly about the event this woman went to that he'd take her custody rights away merely because he was offended by the parody.

[mdmc]

12. hey now! welcome to DU, xeric!

Not for nothing, but I don't believe a family court judge would make a ruling based on subgenus membership, based solely on the threat of overturn (the last thing that a family court judge wants is a custody ruling overturned...especially if a kid was taken away from a parent and put in the governments custody).

How did this subgenius stuff end up in front of the judge? How did (the state, her husband, whoever was opposing her) gain access to these photos? Did the child have access to these photos?

It sounds like this mom got off on the wrong foot in family court. It sounds like, perhaps, she was more interested in her performance art then she was securing the custody of her child. It is impossible to understand the ruling without being privy to the court record.

Either this ruling will be overturned (based on the info here at DU, this case should be overturned) or it will be upheld (based on info not presented to us here at DU).

We don't have the whole story.

[SmokingJacket]

20. Custody is one thing; barring a parent from contact is WRONG. nt

[mdmc]

22. unless the parent will harm the safety and success of the child

:kick: looking for info!

[SmokingJacket]

23. There are very, very few situations in which I believe there should be

no contact at all. Even imprisoned parents should have regular contact with their children.

I think the only times parents should be barred from contact are cases of extreme abuse.

[mdmc]

25. Here are a few situations

incest - (no contact at all).
abuse - (no contact until it can be deemed 'therapeutically beneficial')
and a few more-

a consenting child (Family Court Judge decides whether a minor has the capacity to consent) can refuse contact.

a parent may need to complete certain court orders before visitation can occur.

I think that we really don't know the facts of this case. I think that when the facts are known, this family court judge will be vindicated. This (as stated here at DU, links) is an OUTRAGE!

[Poll_Blind]

3. This is wildly unConstitutional, illegal and downright wrong.

Read the article. Amazing. Disgusting.

I was introduced to the Church of Bob about 20 years ago. It's very clever satire with well-hidden jabs at organized religion, consumerism and the lack of humanity that seems to plague this country. In short, it's strong medicine in a very sugary pill. X-Day is a celebration, not all that unline Burning Man, where people can let go and feel free to be theirselves, however freaky or unusual that may be.

This child was not even exposed to those celebrations but they choose to take the child out of her custody becase...she attended the events?

Fuck that noise.

PB

[mdmc]

24. I read the article, but it makes no sense

If this happened to me, I would post my court order and transcripts on line. I checked the NYS Court of Appeals website, but found nothing related to this case.

Is this a subgunius fundraiser, or is it for real?:kick:

[DBoon]

4. Are we not men?

[Yollam]

5. How much of an out of touch idiot can this judge be?

I'm not into that subculture, but I've seen pics of devivals, I "get" it, and I certainly wouldn't make an assumption of mental illness based on that.

Did she not explain to the judge that Subgenius is basically a parody of other religions?

[noonwitch]

11. Obviously, the judge has no sense of humor

The ruling will get overturned by a higher court, if not by a presiding judge of this court. A court cannot tell a parent to raise his or her kid in any particular religion.

Even if the parent is at orgies on Beltaine, if the kid isn't involved in that particular ritual, it shouldn't be an issue in a custody case. In this case, it's particularly bizarre because both parents are pagans. Unless we are talking about an older kid who told the judge he was embarrassed by his parents' paganism. Then the judge is recognizing the kid's right to freedom of religion.

[mdmc]

31. I think that this is all fake

why hasn't it made it up the the supreme court or the NYS Court of Appeals (highest court in NYS)?

[mdmc]

41. The judge must have other reasons

I would love to get to the bottom of this.:kick:

[mdmc]

52. the lady kidnapped her child, her ex filed charges against her

the Judge wasn't Catholic. SubGenius had nothing to do with it.:kick:

[soothsayer]

7. WWBD?

What would Bob do?

[realisticphish]

10. i fly into a rage

whenever psychology is co-opted to rationalize the supression of freedom. This is ridiculous, and if it isn't overturned, the last remaining shred of respect I have for our legal system will be blown away

[mdmc]

44. we don't have all the facts

there is no way this happened in NYS. This lady is most likely nuts...

[Solly Mack]

13. Watch out believers of the noodly appendage - your kids are next!

I'm serious. If being a subgenii causes you to lose your kids - the FSM damn sure will.

[soothsayer]

15. Ramen!

[Solly Mack]

16. You medium rare noodly liberal you!

:)

[lectrobyte]

14. Sorry if my breathless headline confused anyone. I guess I shouldn't

be surprised by anything that happens in this country, but like Lily Tomlin, no matter how cynical I get I can't keep up. And fuck 'em if they can't take a joke.

[mdmc]

26. Is this a joke, or is it real?

:kick:

[lectrobyte]

32. The child custody case appears to be real, sadly. The Subgenius Church

is meant to be an ironic satire of just about everything.

[mdmc]

34. thank you for the clarification

I suspect that this lady is a wacko that should never be allowed near her son. I think that this judge did the right thing by keeping her away from her son. The only way I can prove this is to look at the court transcripts or court order.
I've noticed that there are no newspaper accounts of this court case. As far as I can tell, the NYS court of appeals has not heard the case. Did this mom even appeal the judges decision?

It seems that the mother was not suitable to be a parent, and that she is blaming her counterculture ties for the courts ruling.

Based on the info here and links, this is an outrage!

[mdmc]

17. Been looking in to this

How come there is no newspaper articles regarding this court ruling?
How come this case hasn't received an review? If it did, why not NYS court of appeals?
This case is from 1997. It is now 2006. Since I don't have the court calender...why is this not settled?

Rachel Bevilacqua received court orders from this judge. Are these orders posted online anywhere?

My guess (I am interested in this situation. I want more info.) is that this lady put on an awful "performance" in front of the family court judge. My guess is that there were all sorts of conditions that she needed to meet to ensure that her child would be safe and successful while in her custody. My guess is that instead of doing what she needed to regain custody of her child, she played "performance artist". I want to know what happened.

I would like to know the following:

Did Rachel Bevilacqua have full time employment?
Did Rachel Bevilacqua have permanent housing?
Did Rachel Bevilacqua have a recognized substance abuse issue?
Did Rachel Bevilacqua's child successfully attend an education program?
Why were the pictures in question allowed in court (did hubby or DSS offer them as evidence?)?
Did Rachel Bevilacqua comply with her family court orders.
There should have been a family court review of this ruling 6 months after the ruling. Did this happen?



I've looked on line and I cannot find a link to a newspaper regarding this issue.

[lectrobyte]

37. google news turns up this:

http://www.theopenpress.com/index.php?a=press&id=7659

February 22, 2006 -- A local judge in Upstate New York has stripped a mother of visitation rights to her son, based on her appearance in several comedy skits, including one parodying Mel Gibson's hit movie, "The Passion of The Christ."

Rachel Knight Bevilacqua, who performs as Reverend Magdalen, was stripped of all visitation rights to her son by an enraged Judge James P. Punch, a County Court Judge in Orleans County after he saw photos of Bevilacqua's performance at "X-Day," an annual satire and performance art festival held in Sherman, New York at the Brushwood Folklore Center by the Church of the SubGenius.

"The judge called me a pervert from the bench in open court,” said Bevilacqua. This action by the judge was the latest outrage in a custody case that has stretched out since 1997, and has involved Judge Punch retaining jurisdiction of the case under highly questionable circumstances including a demand that Bevilacqua explain her religious views on the stand.

[mdmc]

39. I saw that too, but no real news sources

Two local newspapers, The daily news Batavia and The journal register, have nothing. The NYS Court of Appeals does not seem to have heard this case. I can't think of a family court case that has existed since 1997 that has not been review by a higher court.

[mdmc]

27. nothing on snopes...

www.snopes.com

[Kazak]

28. There's no prob with Bob!

:shrug:

[mongo]

36. Some say judge punch is a genius

others say he is a shithead!

All Hail Discordia!

[mdmc]

53. the lady kidnapped her son. Her ex- filed charges

The judge acted on her ex's accusations. No bigotry or hatred...

[politicat]

59. And where did you find that information?

It's not in any of the articles linked.

[mdmc]

60. it is directly from her blog and from the subgenius fundraising

What happened was her ex knew that she had taken her son across state line (he knew where they were, he had contact with her). She didn't inform the upstate NYS court (this would be no problem, unless her ex wanted to hurt her.

Her ex made allegations against her, and the judge acted on these allegations. She now has visitation, and will soon regain custody of her son.

There are only subgenius links listed on google. There are no newspaper,radio, or tv news coverage of this case. If a judge had done what these blogs have stated, he would have been disbarred.

In NYS, if a judge had taken a child from a mother based on subgenius membership, he would have quickly been recused, and disbarred.

ps- her blog has scans of all her court papers. This case has been going on since 1997. There were a lot of non subgenius aspects of this case.

[mongo]

61. Sorry --- that was actually a misquote from a bit of the

Principia Discordia -- one of the subgenious holy books.

The actual quote should have been

Some say he is a holy man -- others say he is a shithead.

[meganmonkey]

40. JR Bob Dobbs!

Wow - that's a name I haven't thought of in years!

:rofl:



(this case, however, seems kind of mesed up :( )

[mdmc]

43. I think that it is fake...

:kick:

[meganmonkey]

45. I don't know -

:hi: mdmc!

Her name got 70,000 hits on google, including many references to this. Most custody cases don't make the papers, so I can see why it isn't in the news.

i wish I had more time to look into it. A friend had the copy of the Church of the Subgenius book when I was in high school and it was hilarious. I can see why an ultra-conservative religious judge would find it objectionable in a certain context (not LEGALLY though). I don't know.

I gotta go, otherwise I'd look deeper into it!

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Rachel+Bevilacqua++&btnG=Google+Search

[mdmc]

46. I'm lookin now

no newspaper stories, no nys court review... nothing... this case is from 1997.. how can it be that 9 years later there is no review or no real news?

I am still looking re: google. My thought is that this is some money making scheme based on this lady's inability to regain custody of her son...

[mdmc]

58. most custody case don't make the paper

but if a judge takes away a kid for the sole reason that his mom is in a cult, that judge should be removed from the bench. If you lost your kid due to membership at PI or DU, you would raise holy hell about it and would inform everyone, newspapers and tv stations worldwide.

[Bridget Burke]

47. Here's the mom's Blog...

"A blog raising awareness about a woman who lost custody of her child because of her performance art."

http://rbevilacqua.blogspot.com/2006_02_01_rbevilacqua_archive.html

The situation seems real enough, but a bit of Performance Art is definitely involved. And she's asking for donations.

Apparently, the Judge is not Catholic. Hey, Catholics are used to weird imagery...

[lectrobyte]

50. The blog does appear to have legitimate looking scans of

documents, and she's promised to put up a transcript of the hearing when it's available.

[mdmc]

51. while she is in custody court, and she has lost her child

there is much more to this. For starters, she kidnapped (took her son without getting permission from the court with jurisdiction) her son and took him to Texas.

It seems that the father "told some lies" (didn't give her permission to take the kid, didn't know where she was, had no contact with her) to the judge, and tipped off the cops when his son was home for the holidays.

Basically, this lady is a Catholic bashing (although she does concede that the judge is in fact, not Catholic) opportunist that has used her art as an excuse to raise money under false pretenses.

The bottom line, subgenius seems to have absolutely nothing to do with the judges decision. The judge based his decision on the fact the the father (plaintiff) brought charges against this women for kidnapping his kid (this charge my be utterly false).

[readmoreoften]

54. A Catholic-bashing opportunist?

She's a performance artist. She doesn't have to respect catholicism or any other religion in order to be a good parent. I've witnessed christian parents referring to Islam as a demon-inspired heresy and no one took their children away.

She has custody of the child. She can take him on a road trip to Texas. Those are not grounds for revoking this woman's right to see her child. The child sounds well adjusted and well-cared for.

I also know of a performance poet who had her children taken out of her home in NYC on a baseless accusation. They even rifled through her drawers brought her 'thong underwear' up as evidence that she may be sexually deviant. Her and her current husband were able to have their children returned quickly, but her lawyer advised her to keep full-back underwear in her drawers while social workers were visiting.

You seem hell bent on painting this woman as an unfit parent when all the evidence is pointing in the opposite direction. Have an axe to grind yourself?

[mdmc]

56. I just finished looking through her blog

I have experience with Law Guardians and family Court, and I was having a hard time believing that a Catholic judge awarded custody to one parent over another based on pictures or belonging to a group.

It turns out that the ex of this women kinda set her up. She didn't comply with her court orders, and her ex stuck it to her.

From the information that was presented, THIS IS AN OUTRAGE! Once the information was made available, it started to make sense.

It appears that her membership in subgenius had no part in the judges orders. She will get her kid back as soon as all this ugliness between her and her ex gets settled. I looked at the court orders that she posted online - no mention of subgenius, just mentions where she violated her court orders.

If the judge said any of those things to her (re: her pictures) she should sue him and he WILL be disbarred.

Basically, my axe to grind was that someone could have their kid taken away based on nudey pics of them or membership in an odd group. I flipped out when I saw this and had to get to the bottom of it. It seems this is more likely a fight between two ex lovers that is being played out in family court.
Once I heard about the 1997 court custody orders, the "miscommunication" of her ex, and the taking of a kid across state lines (which is fine, unless the court orders you NOT to do it), this ruling made much more sense.

family court can be a nasty place. There is no room on a family court bench for a hot head judge that hates the counterculture. This story is about an ex that is telling lies in order to hurt his ex-wife through family court. I don't think that this judge is a bigot at all.

Lastly, why are there no newspaper articles about this judge? No local articles, no law review articles, no NYT, nadda. All those google posts are from blogs that say this lady lost her son "only because of subgenius". <-I have an axe to grind about that.

ps- I thought that she was trying to paint the judge as an evil Catholic. She states in her blog that the judge is christian, but not catholic.

pss- I'm glad that your friend was able to work things out with ACS (that is what they call DSS - child welfare down in the city, right?). Your friend temporarily lost her children to ACS not due to her panties, but rather due to an (improper, false) accusation against her. I would be pissed if you were out raising money for her stating "the city took her kids away cause she wears a thong". <- that isn't the real reason, the real reason is someone lied to ACS about her.

[sendero]

48. I say..

.... "beware the stark fist of removal".

[mdmc]

49. as of 5:30 pm 3-1-06

This lady is now having supervised visits with her son. She "kidnapped" her son and moved him to TX (kidnapped = did not get court approval to move)...
There is a lot more to this story then her sex pics.
http://subgenius.com/updates/maghelp.html

[readmoreoften]

55. Why are you so interested in spinning this information?

"The Texas court granted Rachel residential custody when Jeff failed to appear in answer to its summons. The Dallas County Court order provided that Rachel was under no obligation to send Kohl to Jeff until such time as Jeff mailed her tickets for Kohl's travel, which he did not do."

Hardly a 'kidnapping.'

And the issue is not "sex pics", but rather images that mock christianity. All the images were on the subgenius website, which is hardly pornography.

[mdmc]

57. didn't present my case well

I had a hard time believing that a mom could lose her custody due to belonging to subgenius. It turns out that there was a whole lot of additional circumstances to this case.

I had a hard time believing that she would "have NO visitation" (she did have no visitation, she posted the court order stating as much) based on pics. If your court orders state that you will inform the court prior to moving out of state, and you move without notification, it is kidnapping. Most "kidnappings" occur like this, by the way (parent in a custody battle goes on the lamb).

In this case, it sounds like the parents had a pretty good understanding, and that her ex fucked her up big time, using technical facts to mess with her in family court.

Texas didn't have jurisdiction over this custody case... again technical...

This women got screwed, and is fighting to get her son back. I am sure that she will get her son back.

She did not lose custody of her son due to sub genius, or due to an evil judge. She lost custody temporarily, due to her ex being an evil sob.

And now she is claiming that a judge took her kid due to sub genius. This seems like performance art.
How come there are no newspaper articles on this? If this judge was really this crazy, it would have made the local and national news sources.