Discussions
White Pride and Motherhood.
Posted by gingerbeer25 • 7/17/08 • Subscribe to this Discussion [RSS] • Report This Topic
Topics: children, family, parenting, racism
A Winnipeg mother had her two daughters removed from her custody after she drew a swastika on the arm of her child, and sent her to school. The children have been placed with relatives and she has two hours a week supervised visitation. According to CBC she wears a necklace with a swastika and has "white pride" flags in her home, yet she expects us to believe that she is not a neo-Nazi or a white supremacist.
Should teaching childern racism be grounds to remove them from the home?
www.womanist-musings.com/2008/07/white-pride-and-motherhood.html
User Comments
-
No, you should be able to teach your kids whatever you want. -
I went to the news article about it
www.cbc.ca/canada/manitoba/story/2008/07/10/swastika-child.html?ref=rss
I agree with the professor Helmut-Harry Loewen, we would be stepping on very dangerous territory if we started removing children from their parents because of the parents beliefs (no matter how offensive they are). -
Racism is one thing you should never teach your child.-
I agree, but should people lose their children because they are bigots, racists, communists, gays, vegetarians, mormons etc? Very scary prospect.
-
@jafabrit My thoughts exactly
-
No, It's not like she's beating the child. I don't think getting rid of hatred is possible. There will always be something color, race, ethnicity, how much you weigh.
-
Oops. Wrong place.
-
-
Geeze, hadn't heard about that. Removing kids from a parent's custody is tricky, I'm sure there were many reasons why it was done. Certainly drawing a swastika on their arm leads one to believe she may not be the best role model and care taker of her children.-
Does it make her not a good role model? Who is to decide? And why would it make her a bad caretaker? And who says you have to be the best? Who is the best?
This happened in Texas when they raided the FLDS church compound in San Angelo on a tick from a prankster in Colorado (I believe, I can check on that).
They took over 200 kids and found that most were well adjusted and well taken care of. There was allegations of sexual abuse but does that mean you take all of the kids? Why not just prosecute the ones you find evidence for? -
Here is what the social workers said:"Child and Family Services case workers were alerted and went to the family's apartment, where they found neo-Nazi symbols and flags, and took custody of her son. Her daughter was taken from school.
In court documents, social workers say they're worried the parents' conduct and associations might harm the emotional well-being of the children and put them at risk."
www.cbc.ca/canada/manitoba/story/2008/07/10/swastika-child.html?ref=rss
That seems to be the primary factor in removal of her children. As awful as her beliefs are there are those who would use the same argument about communists or gays or evangelical christians who want their children to be warriors for god. -
@dlowe - yeah, I didn't agree with the FDLS raid thing, only because it was so massive and they had no proof.
In my opinion, and thankfully in the opinion of the law, sending a kid to school with a swastika is a huge mis-judgement and a sign of a pretty crappy parent. We have 'hate laws' here in Canada, I know you don't have that in the US ... but I'm glad we have them here.
And as for all the comparisons that many here have already made, and I'm sure many more will make ... we all know what that symbol means to people today, it's in reference to Hitler, the holocaust .. there's no place for it in our society and anyone who wants to give me some speech on freedom of speech is missing the point.
If more people had stood up for the rights of others prior the holocaust ... then maybe it would not have happened. Perpetuating hate in the name of free speech is a losing argument as far as I'm concerned. -
I never agreed with the term "hate laws". I think every human being has the right to hate if they want to. A crime is a crime and I don't think anyone should be punished any more based on whether or not they committed the crime for "hate" reasons.
This amounts to "thought crime". Ever read George Orwell's 1984? that is pretty much what hate crimes amount to.
Hate is a motive. Should we make greed and jealousy a crime? -
give me a break dlowe ... I don't agree with you at all. So we should just let people perpetuate this crap and sit back and do absoluetly nothing about it? For fear we may end up like the ending in some science fiction book?
I find it interesting that you have a blog about christianity and I'm an athiest, yet you don't seem to have a problem with this. That's very odd to me. -
And you can't compare greed to the holocaust.
-
Because I believe one of the biggest component of God's love is freedom.
I am not FOR racists or hate of any kind. You can't stop people from hating. They hate and the world would be a better place without hate.
But I think people should be able to think whatever they want. I think to start putting people in prison because of their thoughts is a bad idea.
Who is comparing greed to the holocaust? I think Genocide should be prosecuted. -
I can't even debate this with you or others who think like you do. It's mind boggling to me. Go and read lettershome's comments below.
And you are talking about making thoughts illegal, I'm not. I think it should be illegal to promote a symbol that represents the holocaust ... which is what the swastika does.
No one is putting anyone in jail for their thoughts. They took her kid from her because of what she was promoting ... which is hate and glorification of the holocaust. You'd think as a practicing christian you'd think that was a good idea. -
-
I'm with you on this one, dlowe. I think the concepts of "hate crimes" and "hate speech" are among the most dangerous and destructive notions this country has ever entertained--and we've entertained some doozies.
The idea that how serious a crime is varies based PURELY on what is imputed to have been in your head at the time is nonsensical, and the increasing idea that anything anyone finds offensive is "hate speech" in a country where some of the most important political and cultural developments have been the result of unpopular speech is mind-boggling.
-
-
I believe that purposeful teaching hate is child abuse.
-
Some people don't believe they are teaching hate when they say gays are an abomination and are wrong and evil, so do we take their kids away from them too.
-
Some believe feeding their kids McDonald's is child abuse.
-
some people believe teaching their children to be vegetarians or vegans is child abuse.
-
-
The swatizka was once a beautiful Buddhist symbol and still remains so, although most people are ignorant of this fact. Hitler had a Vatican concordat, although most people are ignorant of that fact as well.
Any mother or father has the right to be a white supremest or a religious zealot if they so choose (gag me). The mothers and fathers of children who brainwash them with religion are likewise allowed to do so (gag me).
The governments of 2 nations took 500 children away from their polygamous mothers on the basis of one unsubstantiated complaint by a minor, forced them into DNA testing, and is currently treating them like criminals due to their parents religious beliefs (in this case it's the government that gags me).
Governments removing children from parents because they are unable to take proper care of their children (alcoholic, drug addicted, abusive) is one thing. This is quite another. Removing children because their parents ideas, beliefs and politics do not coincide with political correctness is a dangerous path to go down.
Once begun, where will it end? And who gave society the right to interfere in what parents teach their children, provided it's not criminal instruction that they are receiving.-
I am gagging along with you!!
-
"(in this case it's the government that gags me)"
I am gagging in Texas.
-
-
What happened to freedom of speech, freedom of association, freedom in general?-
@flamingpoodle
Indeed wtf happened to them? It would appear that they have been replaced by political correctness of the day.
From the OP: According to CBC she wears a necklace with a swastika and has "white pride" flags in her home, yet she expects us to believe that she is not a neo-Nazi or a white supremacist.
(1) If the mother had worn a Roman Catholic rosary around her neck would this be a topical issue at all?
(2) If the mother had Buddhist prayer flags decorating her walls would this be a topical issue at all?
(3) If the mother had drawn a dying Jesus hanging from a cross on her kid's arm would this be a topical issue at all? -
"(1) If the mother had worn a Roman Catholic rosary around her neck would this be a topical issue at all?
(2) If the mother had Buddhist prayer flags decorating her walls would this be a topical issue at all?
(3) If the mother had drawn a dying Jesus hanging from a cross on her kid's arm would this be a topical issue at all?"
I have to say yes--not to the degree of taking her children away in most places (though Canada seems to be moving in that direction), but my daughter attends a U.S. public school and was reprimanded for taping a small picture of Mary to the inside of her desk, where it was not visible to anyone unless they sat at her desk and opened it.
-
-
There have been some studies which have come to the conclusion teaching hate is child abuse, but these studies involved the teachings of religions which promoted terroristic murders, suicide bombings etc. I believe the studies were out of Northwestern University.
There is also cause to believe that teaching children that violent acts are ok in the name of a certain set of ideals is child abuse. I have not read enough about this case to know if these people were teaching such things.
I can't quite equate teaching vegetarianism to teaching hate, but it is even difficult to take children aways from parents who do not seek medical care for life threatening illnesses of their children – because of their religious beliefs, though it is done.
It would be quite a precedent to set barring any evidence which suggests the kids were being taught that murder was ok. And even that is pretty subjective.-
Well if that's the case then all the parents of kids that have been raised in so-called Christian households, wherein they have taught:
hatred of gays;
hatred doctors & nurses who perform abortions;
hatred of Muslims, Iraqis, Iranians;
hatred of members of any religious group other than Christian;
hatred of those who believe in Christian doctrine different than their own particular denomination's spin (eg catholic & Protestants, etc.);
glorification of dying for your country in a war, achieved by killing others, who have different belief systems;
had better step up to the head of the line and surrender their kids to the government. -
That's such a huge stretch TT. No comparison AT ALL.
-
I agree TT
To some the cross is a symbol of hatred and death (inquisition, crusades, etc.)
How about the word "hate"? If I say I hate cops, should I be put in jail? -
@dlow ... um no. But if you sent your kid to school with a swatika I would hope the authorities would look into your parenting abilities. You don't see the difference? If you really don't ... that's very sad.
-
What about these parents that let their children where Che t-shirts to school, or Mao hats. Should they be investigated?
-
while I don't disagree about the swastika inspiring social workers investigating, I just feel really queasy about children being taken away from their parents because of their beliefs (no matter how reprehensible they are).
There are all sorts of people teaching hate, so yes, where do you draw the line. I say when a child is taught to express that hate with acts of violence, but thought crimes are not against the law yet are they? Or maybe yes! -
I'm glad I live in Canada.
-
Your type might not like it here in Texas. YEE HAW!!!! (pulls out six shooters and shoots into the air.)
-
dlowe - based on another thread here ... where that old man killed a guy by shooting him in the back ... because in his opinion he was robbing his neighbour's home ... yeah, you're right, I wouldn't like it there.
-
So we are all gun toting, back woods hill billy's huh? I wish I could be as open-minded and enlightened as the Canadians.
(By the way, I grew in Southern California and only lived out here two years. I don't own a gun and I thought shooting a man in the back is cowardly as does most of the people I talked to about it here in Texas) -
good to know, too bad you weren't involved in the other discussion thread where everyone agreed with him. Not to mention that the law agreed with him too.
And I am pretty open minded ... you're the one who made the original remark about stereotypical Texans, not me. -
I live in Austin though. I don't really know if you can call it Texas. When my son played soccer, our son was one of the only kids on the team that didn't have two moms. They used to give us funny looks.
-
Timethief, Christians don't teach hate, period. If someone is teaching hate in the name of Christianity, he is either confused or maliciously using religion as a cover for his own evils.
-
TT, I am not sure what offshoot of "Christianity" teaches **hatred** for PEOPLE... but I am not familiar with them. Hatred of behaviors, yes, but not PEOPLE. I venture to say these so-called "Christian" groups are cults.
Did you grow up in a cult (you have mentioned in other posts, I believe, that you grew up in a "Christian" home)? What branch of "Christianity" were you exposed to?
-
-
Here in Germany the woman would have been thrown in jail long ago. This country went through nearly two decades of terror at the hands of the Nazis and every citizen with the exception of a few knuckle-dragging Neo-nazis still leaving their slug-trails around are glad they're dead and gone.
Well, not quite. There are still people out there within Germany and without willing to preach hatred to all who will listen. Like Canada, we have laws against preaching Nazi hatred, denying that the Nazis killed six million Jews because they were Jews, thousands of homosexuals because they were homosexuals, enslaved hundreds of thousands to feed their war machine.
You Americans can lecture us about freedom all you want but the freedom to say what you want ends before you keep a defenseless child in the dark and teach him to hate another human being. Where do you draw the line? Before or after that kid bashes a Jewish kid's head in at kindergarten?-
Well said, and I agree with you 100%
-
Thats great. So all the neo nazis are gone now?
-
See, it's pretty alarming to me that you can pass a law that says you can't deny something happened. What if there are people who sincerely believe that it didn't? That could be important political speech. I realize not all countries place the value on political speech that the U.S. once did and claims to, but if it's considered reasonable to pass a law that says you can't express an honest opinion about the accuracy of one historical report, it would be just as easy to make it illegal to claim that there was ever racial segregation in the U.S. or any kind of historical revision that was handy. 1984, anyone?
-
-
No, not by a long shot unfortunately.
-
I figured with the laws and all they'd all be gone and there would be no hate in Germany.
-
So you figure it's OK to teach kids to hate?
-
I wouldn't teach my kids to hate but I don't think it is child abuse.
-
Of course not, but should a child be taken from a parent because of their parents hate gays, communists, whites, blacks, obese, muslims, christians, etc?
-
-
I actually didn't say it was.
-
OK then, let me rephrase:
I wouldn't teach my kids to hate but I don't think it is the governments job to decide that.
-
-
Sure. That's the way one society has decided it wants to have things run. Let freedom reign, damn the consequences. The majority in Canada, Germany and many other countries have come to the conclusion that there should be laws against hate speech. I prefer to live here.
-
And me here.
-
So err, what if they hate american's and say so
does that count. -
Jafa you just twist that knife. Me and letters start talking about weather and there you are. LOL!!!
-
oops, sorry, err, well yes the weather, hahem, it is hot and humid and I can't play frisbee with the dog.
-
Awww jafa, you in Texas also?
-
-
So how's the weather?
-
Hot, but beautiful.
-
-
When you think about how harmful hate is, how can it be appropriate to pass that on to a child. I am not saying that woman should change her beliefs but in a world that is becoming more and more global each day the inability to interact with others will be problematic for these children.
-
It goes without saying doesn't it that teaching hate is a terrbible thing, BUT do you think a parent should lose her child if she hates muslims, or christians, or communists, or capitalists, or gays, the french, or in this case jews etc?
-
What about a single mother who trashes men in front of her children. Should those kids be taken away?
-
good grief, now we're comparing women who hate men to the holocaust? Are you serious? Okay, can't take this discussion thread seriously anymore. Y'all are missing the point.
-
I didn't make that comparison.
"the inability to interact with others will be problematic for these children"
This constitutes abuse? So warping a child's view of men is not grounds for abuse? -
@drowseymonkey
I don't believe I am missing the point. The point is that the mother has done nothing criminal . Any other point is beside the point. -
I don't feel I am missing the point at all drowsey. Did she break the law? If there is a law against hate speech then by all means punish her, but taking the kids away from their mother is draconian. Would it not be better to arrange for the family to attend sensitivity counseling?
-
-
@dlowe is it really necessary to lay the MRA card...seriously
-
Not familiar with that term.
-
-
www.cbc.ca/canada/manitoba/story/2008/07/10/swastika-child.html#articlecomm...
""A black person has a right to say black power or black pride and yet they're turning around on us and saying we're racists and bigots and neo-Nazis because we say white pride. It's hypocrisy at its finest."
IMO this is not about "child abuse" at all. It's about the government invading homes and snatching children when there has been no illegal and/or criminal act on the part of the parents. -
At last count ignorance was not a crime so maybe the school should accept the child and maybe teach what they preach to the child so the child can go home and teach the parents. You take away the child all you teach is my Mother was right you are all out to get us and thus reinforce the beliefs their parents are teaching them. -
I read about half this thread and there is a word being thrown around with such recklessness that I just couldnt read anymore. Freedom. People use that term as if it is justification for anything we do. Like that word makes anything and everything ok to do. With Freedom comes Responsibility people, get a freakin' clue. You cant just say, oh we have freedom and freedom to do what we want so then let them do what they want. NO! We have freedom to make bad choices and good choices and responsible choices. Just because we have the freedom to make bad choices doesnt give us the right to make those choices. Just because we have the freedom doesnt give us the right to be irresponsible. Get a clue people and stop throwing the word freedom in this discussion because you are using it irresponsibly.-
"Just because we have the freedom to make bad choices doesnt give us the right to make those choices. Just because we have the freedom doesnt give us the right to be irresponsible."
Actually it does.
-
-
unfortunately, no! this is such a slippery slope. as much as your stomach churns, you can not go there.
-
What kind of person could take pride in this fiasco? Stupid!
-
On the one hand I'm deeply troubled by anything "neo nazi" and am gravely concerned for the children being taught such offensiveness - however, as others have opined - you can't take the child away from the parent just because someone finds the teachings/beliefs of the parents offensive - or even revolting.
I'd hate to think how "offensive" or "disgusting" some might find certain religious beliefs that are not congruent with their own. It's a slope we cannot go down.
Sadly, people have a right to be nazi's if they wish - they just can't go around committing crimes in the name of nazism. If they assault folks, commit murders, etc - then we can and should punish them. But, you can't legislate what people wish to think. And therein lies the inherent folly of all things "hate crime." The crime isn't the thought or feeling - it's the action.
There have been some comparisons to the Texas children taken from the "compound" in recent months. I think this is a bit apples to oranges in that in the Texas situation - the concern was that "minors" were being wed (and ostensibly having sexual relations) with older men. I didn't follow the story very closely, but that's at least what I got from it.
In this case it's more of a revulsion to the symbols and assumed beliefs/teachings of the parent - but there isn't any sexual crimes being committed.
I suppose we could argue what is child abuse and what is not - but realize that once you do that - you're proceeding down a path where it's not a far stretch to imagine people crying child abuse if the parent doesn't believe in global warming - or isn't the most outspoken recycler. Not to mention of course, individual political and religious beliefs that may or not be popular.
I guess what I'm getting at is this. Wanna be a black panther? Fine - just don't assault me. Wanna be a nazi in your living room? Fine - I don't personally condone those views - but whatever floats your boat - just don't expect to be able to go out and recreate Krystalnacht without encountering the utmost rigor of the law.
I know nazism begot quite a lot of evils - but let's be clear that one cook espousing nazism is not quite the same thing as a militarized industrial super power embracing the national socialist doctrine. WHile she may fly nazi flags, it's not like she has the 15th panzer division poised to envelope the Polish army. -
Wow, people are very passionate about this issue. Taking away someone's child is very drastic. Don't like the Nazi stuff and I am very sure I would not be welcome at her house. But it is a free country like it or not. -
While I find this woman's beliefs disgusting, I also find it scary that she could lose her kids over a difference of beliefs. -
I figure if the KKK can throw a rally and walk down the streets of State College PA this lady can put a swazi on her kid and send him/her to school.
We may not like it but we don't have the right to take her kid away from her. Of course her kid will probably grow up to be a hate filled little creaton but that's what makes the world go round...we're all different.-
We may not like it but we don't have the right to take her kid away from her.
Exactly. Once you start persecuting children for the beliefs of their parents, it's a slippery slope. What next? The government decides Muslims grow up as extremist suicide bombers, so all Muslim children get kidnapped? It's ridiculous. That lady should get a good lawyer and take the feds to the cleaners.
-
-
Really not easy to teach kid now. Guide to be vigilant should be the first step.
-
What's in the best interest of the child? I think that you could make an argument that it is destructive, perhaps even abusive, to put a child in the position of having to espouse its parent's extreme and controversial viewpoints in a public school. Then, I think you balance that harm against the harm that it would cause a child to be taken away from his or her parents. I'd say that as awful as it is to paint a swastika on a child and then send the kid to school, I don't know the harm to the child is enough to require that the child be removed from the situation. -
Facts of Life
1. When we are born, we become the property of our government. Try moving to another country without being paid up in taxes to Uncle Sam. Freedom is purchased with tax dollars.
2. The government decides how children will be raised. Parents are allowed to raise their children, only when guidelines are followed. -
For those who did not read the news story this is a Canadian woman. She is on welfare. Her children were removed 4 months ago because she drew a swastika on her daughter's arm, after a teacher has scrubbed off the previous one the daughter had drawn. She's outraged that the police and child welfare authorities could take her children away because of her beliefs. www.cbc.ca/canada/manitoba/story/2008/07/10/swastika-child.html?ref=rss
Since when did teachers have the right to scrub ink drawings of any child's arm? -
Have you ever read a story in the newspaper of which you yourself have personal knowledge, maybe a story where you know the people involved, and noticed all the errors and omissions? My hunch is there is one hell of a lot more in this story that didn't come out in the CBC report. Social workers don't concentrate on one incident, they look at the whole situation, then make a decision whether to intervene.
If you look at the number of cases of neglected and abused children in Canada and elsewhere, cases like that Fritzl case in Austria where he held his own children as sex slaves for years, or here in Hamburg where a child was found starved to death after nobody noticed she'd failed to show up to school for three years...
Then someone comes along and tries to improve the lot of a kid who's obviously not in the best of care, and people scream breach of parental rights, freedom, dignity and what have you. Really, who's left to speak up for the most defenceless among us?-
Keeping children as sex slaves is a criminal offence. Holding extreme beliefs is not.
You do make a valid point though. The lady is on welfare, and perhaps there is more to this story. Maybe she can't take proper care of the kids. Drawing a swastika on a kid's arm is no different from giving a child a crucifix to wear. If there are other factors involved, like the state of their food, clothes or shelter, or if the mother is on drugs, then the state would have valid reasons for taking the children away. -
My experience working as a guardian ad litem to children who had been removed from their homes was quite the opposite--it takes (at least in some areas), one event that "photographs" to remove a child from the home, and often the worst cases go ignored because they don't provide a clear evidence point on which to hang removal while easily documentable incidents that pale by comparison are acted upon swiftly.
-
-
What I have found to be of interest so far is the attitude that children have no minds of their own. That because a parent thinks Hitler is the bees knees or that white people are genetically superior, the children will soak it up and become idealogical clones of the parent. That, in a nutshell, a child will be to thick to reject its own parents teachings.
Funny really. Both my parents were military and did tours in Africa back when Zimbabwe was Rhodesia. The experience left them card carrying racists and they weren't quiet about it either. This of course was back when you did have freedom of speech and gollywog toys weren't deemed offensive and teacher wrote on 'black boards' not 'marker boards'. In Rhodesia they also socialised with people of the same mind, some of whom were armed in preparation for when the 'blacks' kicked off, one in particular offering a bounty in the form of pocket money for every one they killed.
Although I grew up with it and was surrounded by it, I find racism utterly repugnant. I made that decision on my own at a very very early age.
To exclude a child from such a situation as this topic describes is a tad arrogant. If an adult has a mind of its own, it must have come from somewhere.
At the end of the day it is dangerous with regards to the future to sanitize the present. -
Why should anyone take pride in the color of their skin? Beauty is only skin deep. The mind is what counts.
After rethinking this and rereading the post, I believe the relatives might be the best judges of this situation and for the time being, the supervised visitations are correct. How would we all feel if she were allowed to destroy or kill her children? It is a wise choice to make, to make sure the mother is mentally competent to care for her children. I am not for taking anyone's children away but the relatives are handling this matter and it should be left to them to make the best decision.
When we rid the world of hate, greed and jealousy, only then will most things be balanced and agreeable. Peace to you all
-
Absolutely. Brainwashing children should be considered child abuse. Frankly, I don't like it when religious zealots home school their kids and/or force them into gated compounds -- just another form of brainwashing.
Teaching your kids is one thing. Eliminating any possibility that they can think and make decisions for themselves is quite another.-
"Eliminating any possibility that they can think and make decisions for themselves is quite another."
We are talking about a human being, not a pet. Are you exactly the person your parents wanted you to be? Have you ever seen a child come out of a home completly different than their parents? Do you believe children can make up their own minds about what is wrong and what is right?
-
-
If this story was a movie script, I'd probably cheer when the heroes came onscreen and took this twisted woman's children from her. But in real life, it's not Christian to legislate thoughts or tell people how or what to teach their own children. I have the right to force this woman not to let her children come to school bearing swastikas in front of my kids, but what she does with them at home, short of sexual or physical abuse, should not be under my control. (Notice I didn't say it's none of my concern, just that I don't have the right to exercise control over her parenting.) OK, maybe MY control would be a good thing. But then half the children in America might be parentless if I got to choose. Seriously, some of us can't be less equal than others no matter how (insert euphemism for moronic) we are. I for one will pray for the enlightenment of this poor woman and her unfortunate babies.
Diane L. Harris
www.steppingintothelight.net -
That's WILD!!!
She was definitely wrong, but they shouldn't have taken her children. Maybe she should have to go to counseling or parenting classes, but she should keep her kids... -
remind me of Prussian Blue: The Olsen Twins of the White Nationalist Movement
more info
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prussian_Blue_(American_duo)-
Saw an interesting documentary on youtube about these two. They were not taken away from their mother, who is responsible for the white supremacist slant of their music. However, the documentary clearly shows the girls as being in conflict with her mother over her beliefs. Their newer songs centre around topics most ordinary teenage girls are obsessed with - teen alienation and boys.
Would they be better off in a foster home? I doubt it. -
Awww, thats adorable.
-
-
I agree with most of the people here who have said it is a bad road to wander down with regards to taking children away from families who have beliefs different than our own - even if they are hateful beliefs.
I would not be opposed however, to asking parents teaching this sort of hatred (racism) to attend some counseling, family counseling, to help maybe...er, teach them not to hate so much, and certainly not to teach hatred to their children. -
I think parents, however moronic, have the right to teach their children what they want to teach them (it will be the children who have to make their decisions when they get older). However, if it comes down to the families causing harm through their children (i.e. telling/making a child beat up a black kid, etc) then I think that's ground for removal. Your children aren't tools-
I agree with that. At that point is abuse by remote contorl. I knew a white kid in middle school that was harrased by some black kids. His dad beat him when he found out about him and told him if he didn't beat up the black kid that he'd get beat again.
The older I get, the more messed up the old neighborhood seems. LOL! -
Damn O__O
However, with this story I could understand her kids being taken away (at least for a bit). She drew a swastica on her child's arm and sent her to school. that's pretty much putting her daughter in a position to get her ass beat. :\ I'll never understand people like this, honestly. -
In some places a kid wearing a cross around their neck is looking to get their ass beat.
-
-
Well, I think if you paid people with an IQ of below 100 to get sterilised voluntarily, you wouldn't have these problems to begin with.
-
You think eugenics is the answer? Maybe you can get a bill passed. Planned Parenthood would certainly like to help, but they would want to start with the black people first. Oops, they already have.
-
@flaming: this isn't fair in the slightest, and is actually moving towards what hitler tried to do: control the sort of people a country had. Teaching people to be responsible would be another way. A lot of very intelligent people have been born from people who are mentally retarded.
I've seen worse parents who are "genius's" honestly. -
No, Hitler did not have a voluntary eugenics program. It's not the same thing at all. It's a numbers game. Someone with below average intelligence who sits on welfare his entire life is costing the state x amount of money. You give the guy a sum that's less than x once off, and you prevent them from having offspring who also sit on welfare.
Again, voluntary, paid sterilisation. It's something completely different than state enforced, compulsory eugenics.
By the way, eugenics still happens. It's called genetic counselling. The difference is that it is voluntary, and it works pretty well. -
So who decides who gets offered the money?
-
Flamingpoodle, people of above average intelligence who sit on their butts and don't do anything cost just as much money as those below--probably more, since they're more likely to come up with ways to game the system. If you want to address that problem, you'd be better off sterilizing the people who want to get rich splogging than honest people who happen not to be all that bright.
-
Ok, so how about equal opportunity voluntary paid sterilisations?
-
Well, I really can't respond to that, since I don't believe in artificial birth control at all, but I suspect that it would impact the struggling economic class in a way that might not be to the long-term benefit of society.
-
-
When I read the article, it seems as if the mom was helping the child make a statement, the child drew it on herself first, the teacher washed it off, and I am sure she didn't just wash it off either, I bet there was some comments made about it, the child probably complained to mom, so the mom drew it back...to show the teacher. Immature maybe...but not reason enough to have the children removed from the home.
I can't see how forcing someone to agree with you, by removing their children is not changing thier standards, it is just forcing them to hide what they truely feel and possibly adding to it. And teaching the children the same!
It doesn't go into too much detail as to why the teacher washed it off. Who the teacher was etc. That would be where my questions start. Because when something happens in the schools in the America I live in, the parents are called to come and pick up the child and not to return until the offensive whatever has been removed.
No teacher that I know of here would even think of removing an offensive symbol be it drawn on, or on clothing, on their own accord. The parents would be involved.
None of this article makes sense. -
I think its sad that racism still exists toda but children should not be removed from homes because of their parents beliefs. That is overstepping too many boundaries. -
The mother has the right to indoctrinate her kids anyway that she sees fit. I don't like it, but it is what it is. -
I wonder if the family members that the children were given to also hold her beliefs...
And here's a question I pose to the group after reading (some) of the article... Do most people really believe that when Black people take pride in their culture that it is racist ranting?
I'm really curious about race relations in America these days. I have believed for a while, and discussed on my show, the fact that I believe America is headed for another Civil Rights upheaval and possibly even a mild "race war". Not that I am militant or anything, I'm just curious about it, being a young Black woman in a post-civil rights era America...
I think it's interesting that news outlets like CNN have been really taking a look at race relations in America... Anyone else agree?
Add Your Comment
Login to leave a message.
