Should parents exist?

Many here know who my abuser is - NOT y'all gentle parents, but the reverse. Punitive parents, of the authoritative strain. Many of us at children's rights say that our abuser shouldn't exist. We don't call them pedophiles anymore because that identity is now a victim identity - they removed the labels for me to clarify the removal, meaning within the movement itself, the switch is accepted. Anti-pedophile as a whole refuses to recognize it, so gridlock. Think bill stalled in the Senate. I believe the progress with creep up, and that will be a very subtle and un-noticeable change of wording, where ideally, news outlets refer to the child's "parents" as the abusers, as is the case in some European countries. It seems that's the direction that we are going. If you are a parent, you shall not exist. That doesn't mean, however, a license to murder parents, because when I am fully honest with myself, I recognize that we do need them, but not in their present form.

Abuser non-existence refers to sensory gaslighting, meaning there are people here who I wish to stay away from me in terms of periphery of perception. I do page onto Parenting Beyond Punishment (an enticing name, in terms of trauma security - I wanted those parents!), but I do not like who runs the page at all. She does not exist, except when I want her to, as when I don't perceive her presence, she doesn't exist, since all worldly existence can be sensed.

This is how I apply the doctrine of moral shunning. It says in 1 Corinthians 5:11 KJV:

But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolator, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with one an no not to eat.

The highest penalty under my law as a Christian is, therefore, refusing to eat a meal with out in pro-social defiance, because of something you said or did. I have never issued my mother or anyone this penalty. But. the Early Christians used sensory gaslighting, thus abusers infiltrating such churches existed while under collective investigation, in a scrutinized manner. Then, when the investigation was over, the offender was shunned by all, and chased off of the church complex, and presumed not to exist, even if he physically existed. They heard no evil, saw no evil, so there was no evil in the church...This is how I deal with abusers, meaning parents who identify themselves as such.

Parents do not exist in my life, in terms of identity. My mother exists, and I'm very grateful that she does. She's my best friend.  My father exists in an otherworldly context. 

The idea isn't murdering parents, which is sin under any circumstances, obviously, but living life in a way that shuns parents, as if they do not exist, until they identify themselves by their abuse, in which case I call them out on it if possible, or maybe judge silently in horror at their atrocities towards their children, most of the time protected by "legal defenses". That law itself, "reasonable chastisement", itself, doesn't exisr. Just a piece of paper that is an excuse for abuse. My trauma was more a legal trauma.

Yes, parents should physically exist. Murder is wrong. Just don't acknowledge their existence if they abuse children, which is always when identified.