Soccer Mom: Unplugged

raves, rants, reviews and recounts of life in middle America

2008/7/13

Another example of government intrusion...

@ 03:15 PM (4 months, 24 days ago)

A Canadian mom has lost her children because she sent her daughter to school with a swastika drawn on her arm.  The mom, it appears from the news reports, is a "white nationalist". Yes, yes, I know... neo-naziism is not an acceptable ideology to most people, myself included, but the question remains, do you remove children from their home because their parents are racists?  Local news reports describe the mother as distraught at the loss of her two children and summarizes the two sides of this debate with the following quotes:

The case has sparked questions about whether the state has the right to protect children from their parents' beliefs.

University of Winnipeg professor Helmut-Harry Loewen, an expert on hate groups, said while he disagrees with the ideology, he fears taking custody based on beliefs is draconian.

"If children are apprehended based on parents' political or religious beliefs, then one is opening a kind of slippery slope," he said.

But University of Manitoba professor Harvy Frankel, dean of the faculty of social work, said officials did the right thing.

"We should be reassured that this is child welfare practice as it should be."

Does the government have the right to take away children whose parents teach them unpopular, incorrect, or even hateful traditions?  Who decides what's unpopular, incorrect, or hateful?  Canada isn't the US but as the FLDS case shows, the trend is the same all over... the government, the Nancy Grace media, or whoever has the most money sets the social agenda ,decides morality, and increasingly, defines parental rights.  Holding one's family for ransom until one conforms is social engineering at it's best and Western governments are increasingly using this vicious form of sociological terrorism.

 Note to John Leo, we are no longer one step ahead.  The thought police have overtaken us.

Comment(s) »

  1. Man o man if thats the case, jessie jackson should have any visitation rights to his illegitamate child revoked.....lol...riff

    Comment by riffran— 2008/07/13 @ 05:34 PM — (Reply)

  2. Everybody is rascist in some way or another and it doesnt matter the color of your skin or the nationality.

    Comment by jim— 2008/07/13 @ 05:55 PM — (Reply)

  3. Nancy Grace is a big fat 'ho.

    Comment by Ed— 2008/07/13 @ 07:23 PM — (Reply)

  4. Can I child be removed simply because the mother was stupid? After all, this was the second time the mother drew the swastika on the daughter's arm.

    I'm trying to imagine the scene... little Adolfa comes home crying, upset because her teacher scrubbed off the offensive swastika. Her mommy looks to console her : "I know the teacher scrubbed off the black ink, honey. This time, we'll use a Sharpie! Won't that look nice??"

    (note- there is no reason to suspect that a Sharpie, a trademarked brand of marker, was used in any propagation of hate speech, nor am I suggesting this in any legally actionable way, except as a rather humorless attempt at parody)

    What if for the third time, she decided to tattoo the swatiska on her daughter's arm? Would the school/provincial government have to order laser removal? Maybe they pulled the kids out just to save themselves from a visit to Dr.Nick, Canadian Rhinoplastist.






    Comment by Michael— 2008/07/14 @ 01:46 PM — (Reply)

  5. The stupidity of the parent is irrelevant. Stuipd parents feed their children too much fast food. Stupid parents let their kids watch too much t.v. Stupid parents allow their children to wear their boxers 4 inches higher than their pants and call each other "n*gg*r. Are we taking those children away? Should we?

    Where do you think the line should be drawn, Michael? I'm not absolutely sure where the line should be but I definitely know when it's been crossed.

    Comment by Cate— 2008/07/15 @ 11:26 AM — (Reply)

  6. Some stupid parents can't even type "stupid"... :lol: Please!!! Don't take my children.....

    Comment by Cate— 2008/07/15 @ 11:27 AM — (Reply)

  7. he he he...she typed "stooopid":mrgreen::mrgreen:....sorry ...just had a beavis and butthead moment...lol...riff

    Comment by riffran— 2008/10/16 @ 02:40 AM — (Reply)

  8. Well, what I wrote was facetious, of course... and it's important to note that what happened occured up in Canada not in our beloved nation. That all said, we all can easily see something like that happening down here I reckon.

    The line is pretty simple in my eyes- the immediate physical and emotional well-being of the child. Is the child being harmed, or likely to be so in the immediate future? Short of that, parents have to be given free rein to raise their children as they see fit.

    If someone wants to argue that being raised in a neo-Nazi household may harm the well-being, I'd have to hear a pretty convincing argument.

    Comment by Michael— 2008/07/17 @ 12:49 PM — (Reply)

  9. actually a tough question there cate, at what point do you let natural selection take it's toll, or save the idiots from themselves.....????.....and the big question is just who decides who is the idiot......or in a more proffesional sense. who decides what is the individuals rights and culture and what is abuse or neglect, or ....grounds to take a child from home........I think the situation was handled OK in this case, stop the circle of hate.....but then again I can be a hypocrite myself:mrgreen:.......lol....riff

    Comment by riffran— 2008/07/17 @ 01:42 AM — (Reply)

  10. Riff - the problem is that some people consider it a "cycle of hate" for people of faith to teach their children that fornication, adultery and homosexuality are morally wrong. Do we take away their kids?

    Some people consider "English only" proponents to be racist. Do we call CPS?

    The imminent danger concept that forced Texas to release the FLDS kids to their parents is a reasonable standard.

    Comment by Cate— 2008/07/17 @ 10:39 AM — (Reply)

  11. That would be what the brits would call a "sticky wicket, by jove"...My only answer to the problem, is to raise my child as I see fit, and in her best intrest, as I perceive it........which unfortunately starts us back at square one.....again...oh and by the way "michael"....your disclaimer, was funny as hell....rofl.....riff

    Comment by riffran— 2008/08/07 @ 04:08 AM — (Reply)

  12. Wow, that's frightening. The idea that a child could be removed for anything short of abuse. The swastika indicates beliefs that are far out of the mainstream, but there's no chance that raising the kid in that environment is inherently more harmful than, say, within some intense religion, or by gay parents, or with a dozen siblings on welfare, etc. What a backwards country Canada is turning out to be.

    Comment by Don— 2008/11/08 @ 12:11 AM — (Reply)

  13. The mother should be so sad!!!

    web design

    Comment by hosting service— 2008/11/12 @ 10:40 PM — (Reply)

» Leave a comment


:mrgreen: :neutral: :twisted: :arrow: :shock: :smile: :???: :cool: :evil: :grin: :idea: :oops: :razz: :roll: :wink: :cry: :eek: :lol: :mad: :sad: :!: :?:

Preview:

You say:

To prevent spam, please type in the exact word you see in this image: CAPTCHA
To refresh the image, click here. Otherwise, contact us.

  • Your E-mail address is never displayed. If you enter it, it will only be visible to the blog author
  • Since there already are comments to this post, your eventual comment might trigger a notification e-mail to the persons that commented before you.
  • The line and paragraph breaks automatically