By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General Discussion - where does it end ?

Kasz216 on 10 June 2008
fkusumot said:
Kasz216 said:
The_vagabond7 said:
Plus it may very well be illegal. Looking at the story again, this is the criteria for removing the children.

"the children may be at risk due to the parents' behavior and associates. The parents might endanger the emotional well-being of the children"

Now this could apply to a number of situations, not just on where somebody holds an unpopular belief. But if that unpopular belief does put your children in danger due to being around violent neo-nazis, and being irrevocably harmed emotionally, then it still applies. Kind of a "if the shoe fits" sort of thing.

You can use that kind of reasoning to keep children away from all sorts of groups. Like the poor.

Well sure. It happens every day in family court. Although I don't think being poor is an unpopular "belief".


You miss my point. Poorer people live in poorer neighberhoods and tend to deal with other such perople. As such compared to the rich the children may be at risk due to the parents behavior and assosiates.

Having to work long hours and assosiating with other poor people. (Poor people being more likely to commit crimes then the rich.)

It has nothing to do with beliefs but to show how such loose definitions that don't actually lead to any actual physical proof can lead to almost anyones kids being taken by the state.

Hence why you need to show physical proof more often then not. 



Around the Network
Kasz216 on 10 June 2008
The_vagabond7 said:
Yeah, they actually will take your children away if you can't take care of them for financial reasons. But like Fkusumot said, that's not really a belief system.

As for jehovah's witness's they won't necessarily take their kids away, but in some instances they will overrule the parents decisions that they impose on their children, such as their refusal for blood transfusions. It's come up in a number of instances where they refuse to let their child have a blood transfusion in order to save their life (blood transfusions are considered disrespectful to life, since blood symbolizes life in god's eyes according to their interpretation of the bible). But if they are willing to let their kid die in order to uphold their own religious belief, then they can be over ruled to save the child's life. Though they have their legal teams continue to fight that tooth and nail. But that is neither here nor there.

The point is, if a system of beliefs is legitimately endangering a child's well being then the state has the right to remove the child from the harmful situation. I mean I can claim that my belief system dictates that I can come home to my kids get coked up, do some shrooms, after a few shots of Pure grain alcohol, but if my "beliefs" endanger my child then the state can take them away.

Neo-nazism isn't just some passive "oh I think the jews are in the wrong" sort of belief system, it's extremely violent, oppressive and harsh. I don't think I've ever read an experience of a well adjusted family man that happens to be a neo-nazi, and if such an experience exists it is an outlier, and not a common experience. They aren't removing the child because they think it's a bad system of beliefs, they are removing the child because it's a terrible home environment that is endangering the children's well being, the belief system is just what is causing that environment and isn't in an of itself the reason for removal.

In the case of the Jehovah's witness the person is activly refusing to save the childs life. That's a bit different then teaching your child ignorant and hateful things.

If that was the case... a good portion of America wouldn't be able to raise their kids because of various forms of racism.

Your thoughts on Neo Nazism are also somewhat... well stupid. What racistism is passive? Also who the hell would write something about a well adjusted Neo Nazi.

1. Books about well adjusted people don't sell.

2. An author who wrote something about a well adjusted Neo Nazi (or any racist) would be totally ostracized for being a racist themselvse as people woud accuse him of trying to say it's ok to be a Neo Nazi because they are fine in everything except for their hate of non white people.

3. They are a very small segement of society anway. I could say the same thing about any group.

How much have you heard about well adjusted family man Eskimos? Nothing right? While Eskimo's have nothing positive or negative going for them.

4. What group of racists do you picture as "well adjusted" family men anyway. When you picture a "normal" racist do you picture someone coming home, having dinner with his wife and kids, tucking his children into bed and saying "Remember, black people are porch monkeys that are ruining this country!"

The whole thing seems like they just wanted to stick it to this guy.  I mean I knew plenty of douchebags when i was younger who would right swastikas all over the place and on their bodies... nobody got taken away from their parents, they just got suspended.



hsrob on 10 June 2008

Hey this is not an easy one. I tend to be on the, "this is a slippery slope", side of the debate BUT do you think it's right for the kids to be indoctrinated with such an extreme belief at such a young age, allow them their innocence for a few years.



Rath on 10 June 2008
tarheel91 said:
 

I would assume sarcasm if he was quoting MrBubbles, however, he's quoting some random person. Not only that, but you have no idea how ignorant some people are about Jehovah's Witnesses. Some think it's some satanic cult, others thought it was, in fact, a form of neo-Nazism.


 You mean its not?



hsrob on 10 June 2008

p.s. I don't know if I'd advocate taking these kids from their parents though.



Around the Network
Slimebeast on 10 June 2008
The_vagabond7 said:

Neo-nazism isn't just some passive "oh I think the jews are in the wrong" sort of belief system, it's extremely violent, oppressive and harsh. I don't think I've ever read an experience of a well adjusted family man that happens to be a neo-nazi, and if such an experience exists it is an outlier, and not a common experience. They aren't removing the child because they think it's a bad system of beliefs, they are removing the child because it's a terrible home environment that is endangering the children's well being, the belief system is just what is causing that environment and isn't in an of itself the reason for removal.

In that case I hope you also want to take away the children of members of Louis Farrakhan's Nation of Islam.

Or else you're a hypocrite.



Rath on 10 June 2008

My opinion on this depends on how the markings got there and how bad the abuse of alcohol and drugs in the house.

If the Dad is a nutter who smokes P and draws swastikas on his daughter then yeah, I support the taking of the children. However if the Dad is just a neo-Nazi - what beliefs do you draw the line at?



PS360ForTheWin on 10 June 2008
rocketpig said:
PS360ForTheWin said:
i dont get it, there parents are nazi drug addicts, you honsestly think thats a safe enviroment for young children?

You're standing on a very slippery slope. You should be careful.


please elaborate rocketpig, do you think that hating jews and gays and being addicted to drugs is a good example to set for your kids?

 



Frodaddyg on 10 June 2008
PS360ForTheWin said:
rocketpig said:
PS360ForTheWin said:
i dont get it, there parents are nazi drug addicts, you honsestly think thats a safe enviroment for young children?

You're standing on a very slippery slope. You should be careful.


please elaborate rocketpig, do you think that hating jews and gays and being addicted to drugs is a good example to set for your kids?

 

What he's saying is that personal beliefs aren't something that the government should be deciding for you or your children.

Let's say I find religion ridiculous and damaging to the reality of a child's mind, should I then take them from their fundamentalist Christian family? (Not really a hypothetical either, since I think religion is ridiculous, but I'm not out abducting kids from Sunday school to "protect their best interests".)



The dedication you show to any particular console or company is inversely proportional to the number of times you have gotten laid. If you get laid enough, even if you prefer a certain brand, you just don't give enough of a shit to argue about it on the internet.

PS360ForTheWin on 10 June 2008
Frodaddyg said:
PS360ForTheWin said:
rocketpig said:
PS360ForTheWin said:
i dont get it, there parents are nazi drug addicts, you honsestly think thats a safe enviroment for young children?

You're standing on a very slippery slope. You should be careful.


please elaborate rocketpig, do you think that hating jews and gays and being addicted to drugs is a good example to set for your kids?

 

What he's saying is that personal beliefs aren't something that the government should be deciding for you or your children. they do that already, they have faith schools which are in effect indoctrination camps for kids.

Let's say I find religion ridiculous and damaging to the reality of a child's mind, should I then take them from their fundamentalist Christian family? (Not really a hypothetical either, since I think religion is ridiculous, but I'm not out abducting kids from Sunday school to "protect their best interests".)

these parents also do drugs, there kids were not taken away because of there nazi views alone.