It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Everything you are all saying is correct. But I think we are missing the bigger picture here. A father who abuses his children, even if he has been prevented from having unsupervised visits, is still his father. Child services and child court cannot take away his fatherhood/parental status. They can limit or completely exclude any contact with the children. They can even acknowledge voluntary surrender of parental rights. They can even try to force surrender of parental rights but they cannot make the biological father a non-father. And even if civil courts could legally remove a person's family status (which no state, national or local sovereignty has even tried to the best of my knowledge), there is a natural law that can't be tampered with. That natural law says that no matter how evil a father is, he will always be a father. Some may argue that moral behavior triumphs over natural law (i.e., a good person who acts like a father is more of a father than an evil abusive biological father). There is some legitimacy to this argument. But moral behavior (and civil laws) cannot remove natural law. Ever.
The only way one can remove natural law is natural death. Look at Romans 7:2-3, "For example, by law a married woman is bound to her husband as long as he is alive, but if her husband dies, she is released from the law that binds her to him.B)" data-cr="#cen-NIV-28094B" style="box-sizing: border-box; line-height: 22px; position: relative; vertical-align: top; top: 0px;"> So then, if she has sexual relations with another man while her husband is still alive, she is called an adulteress.C)" data-cr="#cen-NIV-28095C" style="box-sizing: border-box; line-height: 22px; position: relative; vertical-align: top; top: 0px;"> But if her husband dies, she is released from that law and is not an adulteress if she marries another man."