NJ kids with Nazi-inspired names removed from home

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

I'm sure they weren't removed for their names only, but I'm sure the names set off a HUGE red flag and they were investigated accordingly.

Because Government/DSS only acts on rational and good motives. gotcha

or another possibility, a DSS worker read the story, thought this was so hurtful and made a case to prove it.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

Because Government/DSS only acts on rational and good motives. gotcha

or another possibility, a DSS worker read the story, thought this was so hurtful and made a case to prove it.

Well I think your almost right and I think the reason it was postponed is because they are still trying to make a case and at this point don't have enough evidence for removing the children. I'm not sure why they could not just leave the children in the home until they had a full investigation and gathered all the facts. If this comes out they are not abusive they have put these children through something they did not need to go through.

[724Skinsfan]

Once again, you're specifically naming a child after a man that tried to exterminate a group of humans. I think you're just paying devil's advocate. It's a bad name. You're just opening the doors wide open for that child to be constantly ridiculed everyday for the rest of his life. If the parents can't see that then what else are they subjecting their kids to? I'm leaning heavily towards the assumption that this is just the icing on the cake. The kids are probably in an environment that is dangerous to their well-being, whether it be physical, mental, emotional, whatever.

[saden1]

There's a problem with the kids names but the bigger problem lies with the notion that the state can and should bar Neo Nazis from raising their kids. If the state can take these kids away on the grounds of their names and their parents affinity for Nazism what's next? Take all the kids from racist households? What about people like Tom Cruise?

[MTK]

Originally Posted by saden1

There's a problem with the kids names but the bigger problem lies with the notion that the state can and should bar Neo Nazis from raising their kids. If the state can take these kids away on the grounds of their names and their parents affinity for Nazism what's next? Take all the kids from racist households? What about people like Tom Cruise?

I really don't know. There's not a simple answer.

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

I really don't know. There's not a simple answer.

See I think there is a simple answer. You and I don t tell other people how to raise their kids. If the kids are being endangered clearly and objectively then I am all for removal. If the kids are being taught something that a lot people think sucks then that's part of living in the land of the free in my opinion. We need to realize that everything can't always be peaches and cream when people have the freedoms we do in this country. A lot of people abuse them but when we look at the whole picture and our freedoms, our country rocks.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by FRPLG

See I think there is a simple answer. You and I don t tell other people how to raise their kids. If the kids are being endangered clearly and objectively then I am all for removal. If the kids are being taught something that a lot people think sucks then that's part of living in the land of the free in my opinion. We need to realize that everything can't always be peaches and cream when people have the freedoms we do in this country. A lot of people abuse them but when we look at the whole picture and our freedoms, our country rocks.

So if the kids are being taught hate, antisemitism, racism, etc., that doesn't constitute an unsafe environment or borderline abuse?

What are we defining as "endangering" here?

[Trample the Elderly]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

So if the kids are being taught hate, antisemitism, racism, etc., that doesn't constitute an unsafe environment or borderline abuse?

What are we defining as "endangering" here?

It shouldn't matter what society deems safe? What should matter is that we are a country of laws. Unless they we're beating their children or teaching them how to fight dogs it doesn't matter what ideology they teach they're children.
Who are we to tell these people what to think? What if I thought Communism was the greatest ever and that filthy Anglo-Americans need to be exterminated along with Capitalism? If I named my son Pol Pot Stalin would you say I'm abusive? No, you'd elect me to Congress and I'd give you national health care just like they have in Cuba. he he he. I'm just kidding.

Perhaps if I told my children that the Earth was created in seven days and that they'll live forever if they drink the blood of a Jewish carpenter?

It seems almost all of our freedoms are gone. The last two to go will be our freedom to bear arms and the unwritten freedom of thought. Imagine if you felt that global warming was a ponzie scheme and that people who smoke aren't stupid. Well that's how I feel when I watch TV.
Just like the Weimar Germans back then we think we are free. When they can come in and take your children or nationalize the banks and industry it's over. Republic = Done.
It really doesn't matter. THE MOB RULES!

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

So if the kids are being taught hate, antisemitism, racism, etc., that doesn't constitute an unsafe environment or borderline abuse?

What are we defining as "endangering" here?

What about children raised in extreme fundamentalist Islamic households? Many of these children are being taught hate and raised in an anti-semitic / anti-christian, racist environment.

[757SkinsGirl]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

So if the kids are being taught hate, antisemitism, racism, etc., that doesn't constitute an unsafe environment or borderline abuse?

What are we defining as "endangering" here?

This goes on more than most people are aware of, and is not necessarily limited to white folks.

Should the gov't go in and take custody of all kids named, Joseph (Stalin) or Harry (Truman, I mean, c'mon, the atomic bomb), Jean (of the Rawanda genocide)...or any other mass murderer? A name is a name. Granted, it's plainly obvious the parents beliefs, but I don't believe that, and that alone, should be cause to take the kids from their parents. Do I think they (the parents) are wrong? Of course. Maybe they should be monitored? Idk. I'm sure that these kids, will always be on the eyes and ears of the local Childrens advocacy groups, and, unless they move away, will always be under scrutiny.

Apparently, The Nazi Twins are still with their racist parents...

The only reason we know about this case, in particular, is because the media got hold of it.

...if it was all about one's name, Obama would never have been elected. IMPO.

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by saden1

There's a problem with the kids names but the bigger problem lies with the notion that the state can and should bar Neo Nazis from raising their kids. If the state can take these kids away on the grounds of their names and their parents affinity for Nazism what's next? Take all the kids from racist households? What about people like Tom Cruise?

You and I rarely agree on things but we do on this. The names do suck and the parents are awful for a variety of reasons in my opinion. But my opinion shouldn't matter, and nor should anyone else's. If the basis for removal was just the names it is a disgrace. But I agree with you Matty that the names are a good indication that they should be looked at.

[CRedskinsRule]

^^well said

[firstdown]

One thing I thought of is people write and sell books that teach how to build bombs and other thing that if done are against the law. Are we now going to throw these people in jail.

[saden1]

Originally Posted by firstdown

One thing I thought of is people write and sell books that teach how to build bombs and other thing that if done are against the law. Are we now going to throw these people in jail.

Free speech is not without bounds. Your speech must pass the "imminent lawless action" test otherwise your ass is headed to the pen. You might be able to get away with writing and distributing a pamphlet that describes how to build a fertilizer bomb because that information is common knowledge, try publishing a material on "How to Build a Dirty Bomb" and you'll be well on your way to pleasuring Big Bob in the pen.

[Hog1]

Originally Posted by saden1

Free speech is not without bounds. Your speech must pass the "imminent lawless action" test otherwise your ass is headed to the pen. You might be able to get away with writing and distributing a pamphlet that describes how to build a fertilizer bomb because that information is common knowledge, try publishing a material on "How to Build a Dirty Bomb" and you'll be well on your way to pleasuring Big Bob in the pen.

That must not apply to the www, or perhaps it is the difficulty in the catch and prosecution. That type of info is readily available on the web