Girl told police her parents praised Hitler for killing

Post Reply New Topic

1) Again you have completely missed the point. I am expressing surprise that you seem more concerned about civil liberties than the disturbing idea of raising a child as a white supremacist. I am also surprised at this as you initially expressed your dislike of it, yet seemed ok with these people being allowed by society to continue with their teaching this to a child. I am not saying you are a racist, I dont think you are, but I cant understand the order of your priorities.

This child was taking her teachings to school with her and the teachers are to just accept this? A child doesn't grow up in an isolated little bubble, they have to interact with other members of society. A white supremacist child can cause a lot of friction in a school, and I am sure non-white students would benefit from an environment free of racism where they could just get on with their school work and play. I dont just see this as a matter for 2 parents and 2 children.

2) Your initial post in response to my post was a personal attack, and you are the one who has been criticising my posts piece by piece. I have very good reasons to be upset at the idea of white supremacy, you dont know me, or my history, yet you seem to think I should hold your opinions or I am wrong. I saw your post before I posted and I was happy to let you have your opinion, until you got stuck into me.

Which-again-ignores-what-I-did-say-and-replaces-it-with-what-I-did-not-say.

If-in-fact-I-were-more-concerned-with-civil-liberties-then-why-would-any-such-situation-be-a-conundrum?

I-have-never-stated-or-implied-that-I-am-ok-with-such-a-thing.--Can-you-not-argue-your-own-case-without-attempting-to-discredit-others-by-falsely-attributing-negative-positions-to-them?

The-law-works-on-generalities.--Either-it-is-or-is-not-acceptable-to-remove-children-from-their-parents-on-the-basis-of-parental-teachings-about-social-and-political-issues.--If-it-is-legally-acceptable-then-there-must-be-answers-to-hard-questions-such-as-how-to-differentiate-between-legal-teaching-of-parental-values,-and-illegal-child-abusive-teachings.

Emotive-hand-wringing-does-not-change-the-fact-that-if-society-is-to-remove-children-from-their-parents-either-it-does-so-arbitrarily-or-according-to-clear-rules-of-law.--If-the-latter-(and-who-would-want-arbitrary-removal-of-children-by-the-state),-then-how-are-we-to-legally-test-when-views-are-illegal-to-teach-to-children?--The-complexity-and-difficulty-and-lack-of-empirical-testing-(of-the-answer)-that-characterizes-this-question-is-what-concerns-me.

I-do-not-see-where-I-have-suggested-that-it-is.

I-cannot-see-how.

Even-if-you-choose-to-call-responding-"criticizing",-there-is-a-difference-between-criticizing-someone's-comments'-and-making-up-nasty-associations-about-them-(such-as-implying-they-are-ok-with-some-rather-nasty-opinions-to-associate-them-with-racists)-that-are-contrary-to-their-comments.

There-is-a-difference-between-addressing-the-actual-stated-views-or-comments-made-by-another,-and-trying-to-shift-the-discussion-to-commentary-that-intentionally-and-falsely-associates-negative-views-with-the-other-person-for-the-purpose-of-attacking-them-personally-rather-than-addressing-their-actual-comments-or-arguments.

No,-I-just-assumed-you-could-discuss-your-opinions-in-an-adult-like-manner.

If-you-do-not-wish-to-discuss-your-opinion-it-is-somewhat-mysterious-to-me-why-you-would-post-it-on-a-public-discussion-forum.

Its a bastard when the space bar stops working!

Yes,-I-wonder-if-I-can-assign-the-spacebar-function-to-some-other-key....

I guess I am, not only able to type without dashes between every word, probably at a disadvantage, I am not easily able to be objective when it comes to the idea of bringing up children with a belief system that condones and admires the idea of genocide.

Maybe I am very emotional. I happen to care a lot about people of different races being comfortable in this world, including myself, though I know that at times issues may be raised and feelings may be hurt.

I do not look at an article like this with an analytical eye because that is not who I am, and I do respond emotionally to many situations, though I know that many other people in the world are also built like me.

I dont believe I am better or worse than people who are more analytical but this is the way I am. I also believe that I am not irrational in feeling that white supremacy groups are a problem that belongs to a whole society.

It can be brought into question how things like this are handled but I think ultimately I support the idea of teachers and social workers being involved with the situation.

Im sure the social workers would be in there if the child brought hard-core porn to school, and people would have less objection to social workers intervening, but people seem rather desensitised to violence and violent ideas at times.

I agree. They may hold awful terrible views, but they obviously aren't crazy like the parents of baby Adolf Hitler...

There are loads of interesting comments on the news article from people who hold all sorts of views. This comment in particular sums up how I feel:

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/manitoba/story ... alcomments

Signing off from this debate.

What Hitler's parents have to do with this?


I was not aware either that saying someone is nuts necesarily or absolutely means that they are doing a psychiatric evaluation on other people, heck! I never heard any doctor using the term nuts to their patients, much less anyone here implying the mental condition of the parents in a clinical way, I believe, and correct me if I'm wrong, most people would understand what the term "nuts" actually implies.


well, I don't think the law already does that based on the indoctrination, but, I think I understand why some would like that, and well, what I can say about it is this, things we defend like freedom and rights, they seem to come with a catch, that is, there seems to be a price to pay for the sake of freedom.

Neither-am-I,-which-is-why-it-seemed-prudent-to-ask;-as-it-transpires-there-does-appear-to-have-been-some-psychiatric-input-questioning-the-mental-health-status-of-the-parents.--Whether-or-not-zen_mistress-was-referring-to-this-or-not-in-her-original-comments-I-do-not-know,-but-I-do-know-more-than-I-would-if-I-had-not-asked.

I-have-encountered-examples-of-people-using-it-to-describe-someone-they-believe-has-a-clinical-psychiatric-condition,-and-to-describe-someone-who-holds-a-different-opinion-to-them-(but-who-they-do-not-perceive-as-mentally-ill).


I-do-not-perceive-that-anyone-is-suggesting-otherwise.

I am just writing another post to say that I have been thinking and I regret the original post I made with the word "nuts" in it. It was judgemental of me, though I do feel that a person who thinks the Holocaust was a good idea must have had some kind of psychological damaging that has occurred to them somewhere down the track.

I guess that we all have our hot buttons and this is one of mine. I get very angry when reading about white supremacists, hate groups, etc... I guess there are reasons for this. But anyway I shouldnt use a forum to vent these feelings.

I do still feel that people should get involved in these issues and that people shouldnt just stand aside and let people run cults and groups that harm or pose a threat to other people, or involve children in such things. Not that I think anyone else in this thread is condoning this themselves.

I think I also misinterpreted the meaning of some of the comments that were made in this thread, and reacted in a way which wasnt good, and for that I am sorry.

How the case is progressing, it seems pretty clear how this is going to end.

Basically, the step-father and the aunt are fighting to have the kids. The step-father is a proud skinhead, the aunt is a social worker. The step-father and bio mother (when they lived together) spent most of their time drinking, smoking pot, and watching white supremacist videos. The children have been living with the aunt, and the toddler is apparently doing much better.

Both of the biological parents are deadbeats at this point. The biological father shows up to court hearings, and makes it clear that while he doesn't want the children with the step-father, HE doesn't want anything to do with them himself.

The biological mother has buggered off to Quebec to escape this conflict, but still insists that she wants her kids back.

It seems like a no-brainer that the aunt will receive full custody.

How sad.

People like that should not be allowed to have children.

For my two cents, infringing on civil liberties is a greater evil than teaching a kid white supremacy. If nothing else, think how many people who are brought up a certain way later reject it entirely, the many former Catholic atheists being but one example. Involving the state in what is and is not OK to teach your children is just too dangerous, it's far too slippery a slope and far too prone to abuse to even think about going down that road.

Is it wrong if you believe in creationism and tell your children what you believe?

Is it wrong if you are pro/anti abortion or pro/anti gay marriage and try to raise your children to share your views and moral standard?

What is next? Do we lock up Republicans because they don't raise their children as Democrats?

Being a "white supremacist" is a bad thing, right?

So why do the Mexicans have an organization called La Raza which means "the race"?

They openly talk about reconquista which means taking back America.

But THEY aren't racist, right?

"Is it wrong if you believe in creationism and tell your children what you believe?"

No, even though creationism is fairy tale nonsense.


"Being a "white supremacist" is a bad thing, right?"

Yes, it is.


"So why do the Mexicans have an organization called La Raza which means "the race"?
They openly talk about reconquista which means taking back America.
But THEY aren't racist, right?"

Yes, they are just as racist. Racial supremacy is racial supremacy.