You can bring up bad scenarios all day, but none of them take away the simple fact that it is right to consider a child's interests in child custody. A parent who abandons their child is hardly an example of why parents' rights should be the trump card over the interests of a child, but at least you tried a new approach.
"We need the state to protect us when the other parent wishes to deny us any involvement in our child's life."
I agree, but just remember which of us is calling to the "authorities" for "intervention".
"You would hold that the child needs the state to uphold it's interest/rights by preventing one parent denying the other any parenting time."
Yes, the child has a right to both parents. This right may not be usurped by a hateful parent in collusion with a weak or biased family court.
"But the child cannot talk when it is born, may express it's hatred for one of it's parents and so on."
What the child has to say is of no consequence. Parenting isn't their decision to make. Child's interests are not served by children having authority over their parents.
"I know you say you will make the courts deny them as children whatever it is, the authority to reject a parent or however you desribe it, because you will tell them it isn't in their interests and so on."
Yes, but this needs the power of law behind it, so that a rebuttable presumption replaces the involvement of children.
"If I provide you with care as my child, and yet you owe me nothing as a parent for doing that"
"Nothing" is another absolutist word. Parents have rights. Children have rights. But parenting is essentially a giving role, not one of debts owed. Hopefully, your child will see to your care when you are old and feeble. Until then, expect to give more than you receive.
"The child owes the parent who treats them well respect, or even love, and our family courts need to be able to recognise that fact and tell the child so (and tell the ex partner the child owes the other parent these things)."
While I agree with your premise, I don't think it is the role of the courts to enforce respect. The role of the courts is to show respect to both parents. The court should ignore it if a child is showing disrespect or hate for a parent.
"Keep fighting Frank, for all those authoritarian bodies and institutions who will be applauding you all the way."
As long as they keep applauding with votes in committee and on the House floor, we will keep carrying the fight. Thanks.
However, I am as far from authoritarian as it gets. You, not I, believe that the government should have the power to deem one parent inferior and thus, of less value to the child.