White Pride Mom Loses Kid via Swastika

RedGlitter
Posts: 15777
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 3:51 am

White Pride Mom Loses Kid via Swastika

Post by RedGlitter »

What do you think? :confused:

Winnipeg 'white pride' mother regrets redrawing swastika on child's arm

Last Updated: Thursday, July 10, 2008 |

cbc news





A Winnipeg mother whose children were seized by authorities after she sent her daughter to school with a swastika on her arm says she regrets redrawing the Nazi symbol after a teacher scrubbed it off.

The mother, who considers herself a white nationalist, is fighting the child welfare system to regain custody of her daughter, 7, and son, 2. They were taken away after the girl was sent to school with the swastika drawn on her arm.

Four months ago, her daughter drew a swastika on her arm and went to school, where her teacher scrubbed it off. The mother helped her daughter draw it on her arm again, an act she regrets.

"It was one of the stupidest things I've done in my life but it's no reason to take my kids," the mother told CBC News.

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.

Although she proudly wears a silver necklace that includes a swastika and has "white pride" flags in her home, the mother, who can't be named to avoid identifying her children, denies she's a neo-Nazi or white supremacist.

"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."

The mother has been fighting in court for four months to get back her children, who are living with extended family. The mother can see her children for two hours a week.

"It's been gut-wrenching. I didn't get off the couch for the first eight days; I just cried. I laid in their bed and held their stuffed animals and just cried. Last few nights, I've been sleeping in my daughter's bed."

She's outraged that the police and child welfare authorities could take her children away because of her beliefs.

"I'm willing to jump through their hoops," she said. "If they want me to deny my beliefs, I'll tell them that, but at the same time, I'm not a traitor to my politics, my beliefs. I just want my kids back."

Case sparks debate

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."

If the two sides can't resolve their differences next week, they'll go to family court, likely in the fall.
Richard Bell
Posts: 1228
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2005 8:56 am

White Pride Mom Loses Kid via Swastika

Post by Richard Bell »

RedGlitter;915773 wrote:

"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."






Wearing a swastika is a pretty good sign you're a Nazi. It's a sure sign you're an a$$hole.

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




Damn right !

Drawing a swastika on your kid's arm is child abuse.
User avatar
spot
Posts: 41720
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

White Pride Mom Loses Kid via Swastika

Post by spot »

Richard Bell;915775 wrote: Drawing a swastika on your kid's arm is child abuse.What tosh. The powers available to state organs in the Western World is terrifying. Taking a child from its parents for their political belief is outrageous.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
User avatar
Galbally
Posts: 9755
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2005 5:26 pm

White Pride Mom Loses Kid via Swastika

Post by Galbally »

It does open up an apalling vista, where you could take children from fundamentalist Christians because of their extreme views, or children from atheists, or children from people involved in Black or Hispanic racist groups, or of course children from muslim fundamentalists, or the children of people in the communist party. How do you decide which view is tolerable and which one isn't? I am not saying that people with neo-nazi views should be endorsed for having those views, or that this woman is not an idiot, (she is and she seems to admit that herself), and I would certainly agree that drawing swastikas on your childs arm is not good for the child's welfare, (but then so is allowing children to eat terrible food, allowing them to watch TV all day, and not allowing them out to play also damages them as well, but a lot of people do that) but I would question on what basis they took her children away. There may be other factors that are not being reported here as well.
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"



Le Rochefoucauld.



"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."



My dad 1986.
pantsonfire321@aol.com
Posts: 2920
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 8:26 am

White Pride Mom Loses Kid via Swastika

Post by pantsonfire321@aol.com »

I don't agree with what she did but i'm dam sure they wouldn't of pulled that stunt had the family been anything other than White ....saying that, not that long ago we had some Muslim fanatics here take to the streets waving banners and calling for death and be-heading to anyone who insulted Islam and, they had their kids with them too .... where were social services then i wonder :thinking::thinking:
Can go from 0 - to bitch in 3.0 seconds .:D







Smile people :yh_bigsmi







yep, this bitch bites back .;)
User avatar
spot
Posts: 41720
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

White Pride Mom Loses Kid via Swastika

Post by spot »

I'm delighted there's at least some communities with sufficient clout to tell those bastard social workers when to take a hike. One can only hope their more mealy-mouthed supine tread-on-me neighbours learn something about refusing to be pushed around by local government fascists.

I didn't have both my legs shot off in the war just so some jumped-up trench-coated Gestapo lookalike from Social Services could force my kids off to a state-run child brothel for regular rogerings up the jacksie by local Members of Parliament and their Old Etonian boyfriends, on a baseless claim that I used to run the local coven which would never stand up in court and which probably isn't even illegal any longer. Where does it say you can't conjure Beelzebub at the Equinoxes anyhow so long as he consents in advance, eh?
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
User avatar
Accountable
Posts: 24818
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am

White Pride Mom Loses Kid via Swastika

Post by Accountable »

Bigot-Mom;915773 wrote: "It was one of the stupidest things I've done in my life but it's no reason to take my kids," the mother told CBC News.
Agreed.
User avatar
Accountable
Posts: 24818
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am

White Pride Mom Loses Kid via Swastika

Post by Accountable »

spot;915866 wrote: I'm delighted there at least some communities with sufficient clout to tell those bastard social workers when to take a hike. One can only hope their more mealy-mouthed supine tread-on-me neighbours learn something about refusing to be pushed around by local government fascists.



I didn't have both my legs shot off in the war just so some jumped-up trench-coated Gestapo lookalike from Social Services could force my kids off to a state-run child brothel for regular rogerings up the jacksie by local Members of Parliament and their Old Etonian boyfriends, on a baseless claim that I used to run the local coven which would never stand up in court and which probably isn't even illegal any longer. Where does it say you can't conjure Beelzebub at the Equinoxes anyhow so long as he consents in advance, eh?
I take it by your sarcastic rant that Child and Family Services were right for taking the child from her mother?
User avatar
spot
Posts: 41720
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

White Pride Mom Loses Kid via Swastika

Post by spot »

Accountable;915934 wrote: I take it by your sarcastic rant that Child and Family Services were right for taking the child from her mother?


Quite the reverse. We're rather more sophisticated in our use of sarcasm over here.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
User avatar
Accountable
Posts: 24818
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am

White Pride Mom Loses Kid via Swastika

Post by Accountable »

spot;915938 wrote: Quite the reverse. We're rather more sophisticated in our use of sarcasm over here.
'kay
User avatar
Chezzie
Posts: 14615
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2007 9:41 am

White Pride Mom Loses Kid via Swastika

Post by Chezzie »

Bit extreme to take her children off her. She was silly to redraw it on and allow her to go back to school with it on as she knew they didnt approve. Im sure she realises that without making her and the children suffer even more for a makeshift tattoo. End of the day, their are worse sickos in the world brainwashing their children with much worse evils...IN MY OPINION OF COURSE...
User avatar
Galbally
Posts: 9755
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2005 5:26 pm

White Pride Mom Loses Kid via Swastika

Post by Galbally »

spot;915866 wrote: I'm delighted there's at least some communities with sufficient clout to tell those bastard social workers when to take a hike. One can only hope their more mealy-mouthed supine tread-on-me neighbours learn something about refusing to be pushed around by local government fascists.

I didn't have both my legs shot off in the war just so some jumped-up trench-coated Gestapo lookalike from Social Services could force my kids off to a state-run child brothel for regular rogerings up the jacksie by local Members of Parliament and their Old Etonian boyfriends, on a baseless claim that I used to run the local coven which would never stand up in court and which probably isn't even illegal any longer. Where does it say you can't conjure Beelzebub at the Equinoxes anyhow so long as he consents in advance, eh?


Where did you get your legs shot off?

Your nearly as ranty as me! :wah:
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"



Le Rochefoucauld.



"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."



My dad 1986.
RedGlitter
Posts: 15777
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 3:51 am

White Pride Mom Loses Kid via Swastika

Post by RedGlitter »

i agree it's stupid to have drawn the swastika on her kid but I don't feel that was any reason to remove the kid from her. That was not abuse as much as it was stupidity. I agree with Richard Bell that wearing a Nazi symbol makes one surely an ass but last I checked, people were free to be asses if they chose. I would agree with this:

"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."


except for the fact that there is a big difference between being proud of one's heritage and dang near being a Klux.
User avatar
Accountable
Posts: 24818
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am

White Pride Mom Loses Kid via Swastika

Post by Accountable »

RedGlitter;916261 wrote: i agree it's stupid to have drawn the swastika on her kid but I don't feel that was any reason to remove the kid from her. That was not abuse as much as it was stupidity. I agree with Richard Bell that wearing a Nazi symbol makes one surely an ass but last I checked, people were free to be asses if they chose. I would agree with this:







except for the fact that there is a big difference between being proud of one's heritage and dang near being a Klux.
I didn't notice anything that indicated that she tripped or dropped anything. :-2
Richard Bell
Posts: 1228
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2005 8:56 am

White Pride Mom Loses Kid via Swastika

Post by Richard Bell »

RedGlitter;916261 wrote: I agree with Richard Bell that wearing a Nazi symbol makes one surely an ass but last I checked, people were free to be asses if they chose.


What choice does the child have in this matter?

The mother defaced her child with a swastika. It wasn't a free choice of the kid (as if a kid could have any concept of the hate contained in such a symbol, anyway).

Poisoning a young mind with hatred is just as damaging and horrible as poisoning a young mind with pornography. It's child abuse, plain and simple.

All those who claim freedom of expression, individual rights,etc. should pause and think what kind of monster this woman is creating out of an innocent child.

Where are all the platitudes that come out of the woodwork when somebody starts a thread about a child molester, or is everybody here so fired up about doing their own thing, and damn the consequences and the meddling government that they are ready to sacrifice an innocent for their beliefs?
User avatar
spot
Posts: 41720
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

White Pride Mom Loses Kid via Swastika

Post by spot »

I was so outraged by that last post that I went downstairs and drew a swastika on the arm of my boy who's now sat there wondering what on earth will take biro marks out before the morning. He's immensely puzzled at this point but it's all educational.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
RedGlitter
Posts: 15777
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 3:51 am

White Pride Mom Loses Kid via Swastika

Post by RedGlitter »

Accountable;916269 wrote: I didn't notice anything that indicated that she tripped or dropped anything. :-2
I read that four times before I understood. :wah:

Richard Bell;916327 wrote: What choice does the child have in this matter?

The mother defaced her child with a swastika. It wasn't a free choice of the kid (as if a kid could have any concept of the hate contained in such a symbol, anyway).

Poisoning a young mind with hatred is just as damaging and horrible as poisoning a young mind with pornography. It's child abuse, plain and simple.

All those who claim freedom of expression, individual rights,etc. should pause and think what kind of monster this woman is creating out of an innocent child.

Where are all the platitudes that come out of the woodwork when somebody starts a thread about a child molester, or is everybody here so fired up about doing their own thing, and damn the consequences and the meddling government that they are ready to sacrifice an innocent for their beliefs?
I see your whole point, Richard, clearly, but let me turn it around. It's the parent's belief...what if she drew a cross (as in crucifix) on the kid's arm- wouldn't that be inflicting her beliefs onto her child? Few would agree but is religion not often a form of brainwash or at least suggestive thinking? No one would take her child away for that and the child would have had no say on that either. Your thoughts??
User avatar
Chezzie
Posts: 14615
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2007 9:41 am

White Pride Mom Loses Kid via Swastika

Post by Chezzie »

Richard Bell;916327 wrote: What choice does the child have in this matter?

The mother defaced her child with a swastika. It wasn't a free choice of the kid (as if a kid could have any concept of the hate contained in such a symbol, anyway).

Poisoning a young mind with hatred is just as damaging and horrible as poisoning a young mind with pornography. It's child abuse, plain and simple.

All those who claim freedom of expression, individual rights,etc. should pause and think what kind of monster this woman is creating out of an innocent child.

Where are all the platitudes that come out of the woodwork when somebody starts a thread about a child molester, or is everybody here so fired up about doing their own thing, and damn the consequences and the meddling government that they are ready to sacrifice an innocent for their beliefs?


Not that Im condoning what she did, you did read that the young girl drew the sign on her arm herself first time round, the mother only redrew what had been rubbed off. Of course thats the mothers views and seeing her child upset she sided with her daughter feelings and not those outside of their beliefs. She has expressed that she was sorry etc.

Their are people brainwashing their kids everyday in all different forms, some vegetarians I know of ,who actually called their child Mushroom, dont allow them to eat meat even though they want to try it, they also dont send them to a state school even though the children have expressed that they would like to. If thats against their wishes, is it right???
Richard Bell
Posts: 1228
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2005 8:56 am

White Pride Mom Loses Kid via Swastika

Post by Richard Bell »

spot;916342 wrote: I was so outraged by that last post that I went downstairs and drew a swastika on the arm of my boy who's now sat there wondering what on earth will take biro marks out before the morning. He's immensely puzzled at this point but it's all educational.


Well, you'll certainly have a lot of supporters here.

Great way to "stick it to the man", innit?
User avatar
spot
Posts: 41720
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

White Pride Mom Loses Kid via Swastika

Post by spot »

Richard Bell;916362 wrote: Well, you'll certainly have a lot of supporters here.

Great way to "stick it to the man", innit?


If he was planning on an hour in the pub I've definitely screwed up his evening.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Richard Bell
Posts: 1228
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2005 8:56 am

White Pride Mom Loses Kid via Swastika

Post by Richard Bell »

RedGlitter;916355 wrote: It's the parent's belief...what if she drew a cross (as in crucifix) on the kid's arm- wouldn't that be inflicting her beliefs onto her child? Few would agree but is religion not often a form of brainwash or at least suggestive thinking? No one would take her child away for that and the child would have had no say on that either. Your thoughts??


I don't know what goes in the USA, where rugged individuality seems to trump everything else, but in Canada (and Germany, for that matter) , displaying a swastika is against the law, as it promotes hate and violence against others.

Religious symbols are not intended as hate symbols, and though they have been used and are being used as such, their display is not assumed as a malevolent act.

I'm aware that the swastika was an ancient symbol in many societies, and it was a symbol of good things, but it has been corrupted in the twentieth century by the Nazis. I've seen Buddhist swastikas in Falun Gong material (the Nazis reversed it, BTW).

I'm the last person to defend religion (I think it's all a crock), but I cannot fathom how a symbol of genocide can be equated to a symbol of religion, even though they too have been used to justify such acts.



The mother didn't "adorn" her kid with a swastika to represent the Buddhist Wheel Of Life. It was an act of provocation, and fits the definition of a hate crime in my country. If it doesn't in your nation, well then, that's one of the things that make our societies different..

RedGlitter;916355 wrote: It's the parent's belief...


Exactly my point !
User avatar
Accountable
Posts: 24818
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am

White Pride Mom Loses Kid via Swastika

Post by Accountable »

Richard Bell;916327 wrote: What choice does the child have in this matter?



The mother defaced her child with a swastika. It wasn't a free choice of the kid (as if a kid could have any concept of the hate contained in such a symbol, anyway).



Poisoning a young mind with hatred is just as damaging and horrible as poisoning a young mind with pornography. It's child abuse, plain and simple.



All those who claim freedom of expression, individual rights,etc. should pause and think what kind of monster this woman is creating out of an innocent child.



Where are all the platitudes that come out of the woodwork when somebody starts a thread about a child molester, or is everybody here so fired up about doing their own thing, and damn the consequences and the meddling government that they are ready to sacrifice an innocent for their beliefs?
Maybe the gov't should take all children to distribute them to adults with acceptable outlooks. You clearly have too much anger in you to qualify, but I'm sure they can find someone to deprogram that out of your kids and bring them up in the acceptable fashion, as determined by a committee approved through proper channels.
Richard Bell
Posts: 1228
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2005 8:56 am

White Pride Mom Loses Kid via Swastika

Post by Richard Bell »

Accountable;916394 wrote: You clearly have too much anger in you to qualify,


Well, yes...child abuse makes me angry.
User avatar
Accountable
Posts: 24818
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am

White Pride Mom Loses Kid via Swastika

Post by Accountable »

Richard Bell;916392 wrote: I don't know what goes in the USA, where rugged individuality seems to trump everything else, but in Canada (and Germany, for that matter) , displaying a swastika is against the law, as it promotes hate and violence against others.
Excellent idea! Dirty good-for-nuthin swastikas! Ptooie!!








User avatar
spot
Posts: 41720
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

White Pride Mom Loses Kid via Swastika

Post by spot »

Richard Bell;916392 wrote: I don't know what goes in the USA, where rugged individuality seems to trump everything else, but in Canada (and Germany, for that matter) , displaying a swastika is against the law, as it promotes hate and violence against others.


I'm aware that you live there and I don't, Richard, but I doubt your facts. Displaying a swastika is against the law in Canada if and only if it promotes hate and violence against others and it's often displayed in contexts where that doesn't happen. If you know what law you're talking about and it agrees with you and not with me then I'd be grateful if you'd identify it for me.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Richard Bell
Posts: 1228
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2005 8:56 am

White Pride Mom Loses Kid via Swastika

Post by Richard Bell »

spot;916409 wrote: I'm aware that you live there and I don't, Richard, but I doubt your facts. Displaying a swastika is against the law in Canada if and only if it promotes hate and violence against others and it's often displayed in contexts where that doesn't happen. If you know what law you're talking about and it agrees with you and not with me then I'd be grateful if you'd identify it for me.


Of course, you can display it in a historical context.

Unless the kid was playing the part of a Nazi in a school production, there is no rational or legal reason to apply a swastika to their person in this country.

If Americans and Brits aren't unduly upset about it, that's your business.

At the very least, it's an insult to those who fought against and suffered under such a symbol, which would be every nation represented on FG.

The italics in the following quote are mine :

Criminal Code Of Canada - Hate Provisions

Section 319(1): Public Incitement of Hatred

The crime of "publicly inciting hatred" has four main elements. To contravene the Code, a person must:

communicate statements,

in a public place,

incite hatred against an identifiable group,

in such a way that there will likely be a breach of the peace.

Under section 319, "communicating" includes communicating by telephone, broadcasting or other audible or visible means; a "public place" is one to which the public has access by right or invitation, express or implied; and "statements" means words (spoken, written or recorded), gestures, and signs or other visible representations.
Richard Bell
Posts: 1228
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2005 8:56 am

White Pride Mom Loses Kid via Swastika

Post by Richard Bell »

Accountable;916405 wrote: Excellent idea! Dirty good-for-nuthin swastikas! Ptooie!!










I've already addressed the issue of the swastika in other cultures, but thank you for the illustrations.
User avatar
spot
Posts: 41720
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

White Pride Mom Loses Kid via Swastika

Post by spot »

Richard Bell;916411 wrote: Of course, you can display it in a historical context.


I still don't think it exists. If you know what law you're talking about and it agrees with you and not with me then I'd be grateful if you'd identify it for me. There are hundreds of Hindu temples in Canada up to their armpits in swastikas.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
User avatar
Accountable
Posts: 24818
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am

White Pride Mom Loses Kid via Swastika

Post by Accountable »

Symbols mean what we decide they mean. Making a form of speech illegal does nothing to change the mind of the speaker, it merely sends the message underground, where it can spread like mold. Promoting ignorance of opposing views makes you as bad as the other guy. The only way to ensure the kids make the right choices as adults is for us to model the right behavior. So long as most of us do that, most kids will too, even if their own parents don't.
RedGlitter
Posts: 15777
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 3:51 am

White Pride Mom Loses Kid via Swastika

Post by RedGlitter »

Richard Bell;916392 wrote: I don't know what goes in the USA, where rugged individuality seems to trump everything else, but in Canada (and Germany, for that matter) , displaying a swastika is against the law, as it promotes hate and violence against others.

Religious symbols are not intended as hate symbols, and though they have been used and are being used as such, their display is not assumed as a malevolent act.

I'm aware that the swastika was an ancient symbol in many societies, and it was a symbol of good things, but it has been corrupted in the twentieth century by the Nazis. I've seen Buddhist swastikas in Falun Gong material (the Nazis reversed it, BTW).

I'm the last person to defend religion (I think it's all a crock), but I cannot fathom how a symbol of genocide can be equated to a symbol of religion, even though they too have been used to justify such acts.



The mother didn't "adorn" her kid with a swastika to represent the Buddhist Wheel Of Life. It was an act of provocation, and fits the definition of a hate crime in my country. If it doesn't in your nation, well then, that's one of the things that make our societies different..



Exactly my point !


Hi Richard. I'm not in complete disagreement with you. Was just tossing out a slightly different view. Well, we do differ on hate crime, because I see crime as crime and don't believe in labeling it hate- since there's no such thing as crime committed out of love.

I think the mother must surely be a jerk for her beliefs. And had she tattooed or branded the kid with that symbol, then I would definitely consider that abuse if not outright assault. I think it's more than just the swastika itself. What is she teaching the girl behind closed doors? That to me is the scary part.
User avatar
Accountable
Posts: 24818
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am

White Pride Mom Loses Kid via Swastika

Post by Accountable »

RedGlitter;916655 wrote: Hi Richard. I'm not in complete disagreement with you. Was just tossing out a slightly different view. Well, we do differ on hate crime, because I see crime as crime and don't believe in labeling it hate- since there's no such thing as crime committed out of love.



I think the mother must surely be a jerk for her beliefs. And had she tattooed or branded the kid with that symbol, then I would definitely consider that abuse if not outright assault. I think it's more than just the swastika itself. What is she teaching the girl behind closed doors? That to me is the scary part.
So one's beliefs should be examined for social acceptance, witch??
RedGlitter
Posts: 15777
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 3:51 am

White Pride Mom Loses Kid via Swastika

Post by RedGlitter »

Accountable;916659 wrote: So one's beliefs should be examined for social acceptance, witch??


I caught that, Acc. ;)

Well where would you personally draw the line? I tend to think ethically or morally acceptable rather than socially acceptable. And yes we'd still have to decide what would be acceptable. So what is? Is it okay for people to teach their kids that all Mexicans are no good freeloading wetbacks? Or all blacks are on crack and welfare? That whites are the supreme ethnicity? That a woman in a bar in a short skirt talking to an unknown man is "asking for it?" That it's okay to roughhouse elderly people? That witches are of the devil and need be burned? It can go on forever.

Here's my short form:




Personally speaking, the swastika offends me. As a German-American, as a human and as a woman. As a thinking person.

The woman has a right to express her beliefs no matter how crappy I find them to be.

She does not have the right to draw symbols of her belief onto her child because the child is her own person, not her mother's property.

User avatar
Accountable
Posts: 24818
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am

White Pride Mom Loses Kid via Swastika

Post by Accountable »

RedGlitter;916661 wrote: I caught that, Acc. ;)

Well where would you personally draw the line?At unacceptable behavior, not beliefs.



RedGlitter wrote: I tend to think ethically or morally acceptable rather than socially acceptable. And yes we'd still have to decide what would be acceptable. So what is? Is it okay for people to teach their kids that all Mexicans are no good freeloading wetbacks? Or all blacks are on crack and welfare? That whites are the supreme ethnicity? That a woman in a bar in a short skirt talking to an unknown man is "asking for it?" That it's okay to roughhouse elderly people? That witches are of the devil and need be burned? It can go on forever. The parent-child relationship is special and needs to be handled with kid gloves. So yes, it is okay for parents to try and teach their kids all those things you list, because the parent-child relationship trumps that. It has to unless we want the courts and legislature to hand down detailed instructions on the acceptable techniques of raising children.



The only way to ensure the kids make the right choices as adults is for us to model the right behavior. So long as most of us do that, most kids will too, even if their own parents don't.



RedGlitter wrote: Here's my short form:




Personally speaking, the swastika offends me. As a German-American, as a human and as a woman. As a thinking person.

The woman has a right to express her beliefs no matter how crappy I find them to be.

She does not have the right to draw symbols of her belief onto her child because the child is her own person, not her mother's property.She has the right to dress her child in ways that signal her beliefs, such as T-shirts supporting recycling. Why not body paint?

User avatar
mrsK
Posts: 3342
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 2:23 pm

White Pride Mom Loses Kid via Swastika

Post by mrsK »

fuzzy butt;916644 wrote: i dont' believe the teacher had any right to wash it off the child. In fact had no right to even touch the child. I think mum might have been upset about that, and in a defiant way that's why she has redrawn it. Which in some ways makes the child an eventual pawn of differing beliefs.

Send the child home by all means but physiclly removing an item from a child is assault. Could you imagine a teacher physically removing an item like a necklace or bracelet from your child? You wouldn't stand for it.


No touching anything on a child,no taking anything of a child.

The parent has to be in charge of all that kind of thing.if the parent can't be found the principal steps in.

If the child is in danger of hurting itself & none of the above works the police are called.

I don't agree with the swastika being worn , that is my thoughts.:-6
It's nice to be important,but more important to be nice.
RedGlitter
Posts: 15777
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 3:51 am

White Pride Mom Loses Kid via Swastika

Post by RedGlitter »

Accountable;916667 wrote: At unacceptable behavior, not beliefs.



The parent-child relationship is special and needs to be handled with kid gloves. So yes, it is okay for parents to try and teach their kids all those things you list, because the parent-child relationship trumps that. It has to unless we want the courts and legislature to hand down detailed instructions on the acceptable techniques of raising children.



The only way to ensure the kids make the right choices as adults is for us to model the right behavior. So long as most of us do that, most kids will too, even if their own parents don't.



She has the right to dress her child in ways that signal her beliefs, such as T-shirts supporting recycling. Why not body paint?





Arrrrrgh!!!! I hate when you make sense!!! :wah:

I will be back after I form my argument!
RedGlitter
Posts: 15777
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 3:51 am

White Pride Mom Loses Kid via Swastika

Post by RedGlitter »

At unacceptable behavior, not beliefs.


Okay...I find drawing a symbol of human oppression on another person, including one's child, to be unacceptable behavior.



The parent-child relationship is special and needs to be handled with kid gloves. So yes, it is okay for parents to try and teach their kids all those things you list, because the parent-child relationship trumps that. It has to unless we want the courts and legislature to hand down detailed instructions on the acceptable techniques of raising children.

The only way to ensure the kids make the right choices as adults is for us to model the right behavior. So long as most of us do that, most kids will too, even if their own parents don't.


Fair enough.



She has the right to dress her child in ways that signal her beliefs, such as T-shirts supporting recycling. Why not body paint?




She may have a legal right to put her kid into an Earth Day shirt but ethically, she's still smearing her beliefs onto another person. We just don't mind because most of us are for good things like recycling and helping Earth. Most, not all. And I'm having a really difficult time with this because as you probably know, I want people to have the freedom to say what they want no matter how hateful or ignorant it is, so that you and I may have that freedom as well, but it's danged hard when it's something like this. To clarify, I still think she can wear swastikas or draw them on her own property or herself but not on that kid. Not because it's obnoxious to me, but because I see that child as a separate person. In the same vein, as an example, I don't like to see baby girls with pierced ears because their parents wanted it done. Maybe the girl wil grow up not to want holes in her ears.

Okay Acc, I await you. :wah: ;)
User avatar
AussiePam
Posts: 9898
Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2006 8:57 pm

White Pride Mom Loses Kid via Swastika

Post by AussiePam »

I find this case very worrying. In a free country, one should be able to hold political views, even if most of ForumGarden, including me, find them abhorrent. To me, thought police are anathema. All children are influenced by parents, consciously or not, and will probably rebel in due course. If I want my child to wear a cross to school, or have a spot on their forehead, or a headscarf, or a wiccan symbol or a swastika - why not?. Freedom of thought, of speech, of religion, of political views are ideas western countries cherish. Are the homeschooled children of fundamentalist Christians being abused? Didn't some court recently decide that children of pluralistc marriages were not per se subject to abuse? Maybe you or I approve of these things. Maybe we don't. Personally I don't like the idea of some kid having a white supremacy symbol on her, or of kids being kept from normal school experiences, or living in multimummed families.. or being forcefed clench fist black power ideas... but unless the law of the land is actually being broken....

Rousseau, the French philosopher and champion of liberty was hunted and pursued from one place to another because of his opinions. When Voltaire, another philosopher and writer heard of it, he invited Rousseau to come and live in his house. When Rousseau finally arrived, Voltaire said, "I do not agree with a word you say, but I will fight to the death for your right to say it"

That is democracy



(Remember McCarthyism)
"Life is too short to ski with ugly men"

RedGlitter
Posts: 15777
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 3:51 am

White Pride Mom Loses Kid via Swastika

Post by RedGlitter »

If I want my child to wear a cross to school, or have a spot on their forehead, or a headscarf, or a wiccan symbol or a swastika - why not?.


Does your child want to wear it? That's what it comes down to for me.
Richard Bell
Posts: 1228
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2005 8:56 am

White Pride Mom Loses Kid via Swastika

Post by Richard Bell »

RedGlitter;916731 wrote: Does your child want to wear it? That's what it comes down to for me.


..Precisely.

It's immoral to use a child as a billboard for such hateful purposes.

Several years ago, I saw parents with their two toddlers decked out in campaign buttons for a mayoral candidate.

Now, this guy was just a regular Joe, running for mayor in my small town, but I was still annoyed that little kids were used in such a way.

Drawing a symbol of hatred on a kid is inexcusable.

I'm somewhat taken aback that swastikas and hatred are worthy of debate on FG. If this was stormfront.org, then, yeah, that would be par for the course.

All this misdirected blather about freedom of speech and individual rights doesn't wash with me. A child is being morally poisoned for life, yet some here still think the bigoted views of the parent reign supreme.
User avatar
Galbally
Posts: 9755
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2005 5:26 pm

White Pride Mom Loses Kid via Swastika

Post by Galbally »

I think that the debate here throws some interesting questions back at us. One of the major problems in Western societies in modern times, is actually in determining what our moral and ethical standards actually are. Sure, we have laws, but laws are not immutable things, and are only useful if they are actually observed by the mass of people they regulate. The basis of our societies historically was Christian, whether Protestant or Catholic, and the prevailing religions provided a defacto moral code that didn't need to be defined by government, only enforced. The various churches did the work of reinforcing the ideas, while the government reaped the benefit of societies that were kept in line via religious beliefs as opposed to police forces and prisons.

In more modern times those old and rather authoritarian codes have come under extreme pressure from an increase in secularism, the change from agricultural to urban societies, the rise of individualism and the consumer society, the breakdown the the nuclear (and extended) family, the general emancipation of women, multiculturalism, the changing demographics of western societies, which are no longer exclusively white and christian, and a generally more permissive approach to society from the top down. Most people would agree that many of these changes have been positive for the individuals involved.

However, and there is always a "however" the problem now becomes apparent that societies that once were more or less self-regulating morally and ethically are seriously fraying at the edges, the unspoken social consensus that once existed in a society such as (for example) Britain (about what was acceptable and not acceptable behaviour, what being "British" was, and the general goals that ordinary people aspired to), can no longer be taken for granted, and governments find that they do not have the ability or authority to stop this process of what appears to be a slow (but quite profound) atomization of society. In fact no liberal democracy can do much to effect trends like these without adopting a far more authoritarian approach to governance, which would probably require retracting the democratic franchise from many that now have it (a worrying thought).

Therefore, thats the dilemma; the very very old one between private freedom and general security, personal liberty and social cohesion. I know of no political or secular doctrine that has the ability to replace the function that organized religion plays in human affairs. The Marxists tried to replace religion with worship of the people and science, the facists with worship of the state and the race, while capitalists try to replace religion with the worship of money and the individual. None of them seems quite capable of doing the trick.
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"



Le Rochefoucauld.



"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."



My dad 1986.
Richard Bell
Posts: 1228
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2005 8:56 am

White Pride Mom Loses Kid via Swastika

Post by Richard Bell »

AussiePam;916730 wrote:

(Remember McCarthyism)


McCarthyism was never an issue in our countries, but all of our nations (Australia, Canada, USA, Great Britain, amongst many others) fought Nazism at a great cost in lives, and I'll not abide the sullying of a child with such an evil symbol.

I have too much respect for those whose sacrifices defeated this hideous aberration, and for those who suffered under it's murderous hand to dismiss this incident .
User avatar
spot
Posts: 41720
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

White Pride Mom Loses Kid via Swastika

Post by spot »

RedGlitter;916726 wrote: Okay...I find drawing a symbol of human oppression on another person, including one's child, to be unacceptable behavior.There has been far more painful undeserved suffering and death caused to humanity by people wearing a Christian Cross as a symbol of their allegiance as there ever has been by people wearing a swastika. Banning crosses as adornment, worn or drawn, makes far more sense. The fact that a particular person's more bothered by swastikas is more an indication of that person's lack of historical sensitivity than in the truth behind swastikas and crosses. Put that person in a classroom and you can get all sorts of injustices like that of the OP.

Actually there's been more painful undeserved suffering caused to humanity by psychiatrists there ever has been by people wearing a swastika too, but that's taking the thread away from the point. The idea that a single symbol can stand for all of society's demons and that banning the swastika will cleanse the soul of humanity is sheer tokenism. Once society's allowed to say "nothing could ever be worse than X" as an enforced mantra rather than a reasonable statement then society can get on with all sorts of wickedness because "it might not be right but still and all it's not as bad as what those Nazis did". Israel's long-drawn-out crucifixion of the Palestinians is a case in point.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
User avatar
AussiePam
Posts: 9898
Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2006 8:57 pm

White Pride Mom Loses Kid via Swastika

Post by AussiePam »

Galbally;916738 wrote: .



Therefore, thats the dilemma; the very very old one between private freedom and general security, personal liberty and social cohesion. I know of no political or secular doctrine that has the ability to replace the function that organized religion plays in human affairs. The Marxists tried to replace religion with worship of the people and science, the facists with worship of the state and the race, while capitalists try to replace religion with the worship of money and the individual. None of them seems quite capable of doing the trick.


Agreed. It's a dilemma. I think the woman in question, as she has admitted, was stupid, stupid, stupid. She holds an unpopular view (it was quite an acceptable view at one time in a lot of Europe before Hitler's extremist madnesses) and expressed it via her child. She should have anticipated the school's reaction. And had she not been stupid, she would have.

It was one of the stupidest things I've done in my life

If the State started taking away the children, companion animals, etc of every person who was considered by the State to be stupid..... I think a lot of us would have empty houses.
"Life is too short to ski with ugly men"

User avatar
Accountable
Posts: 24818
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am

White Pride Mom Loses Kid via Swastika

Post by Accountable »

RedGlitter;916726 wrote: Okay...I find drawing a symbol of human oppression on another person, including one's child, to be unacceptable behavior.

The original was drawn by the daughter.

Opening Post wrote: Four months ago, her daughter drew a swastika on her arm and went to school, where her teacher scrubbed it off. The mother helped her daughter draw it on her arm again, an act she regrets.
RedGlitter wrote: She may have a legal right to put her kid into an Earth Day shirt but ethically, she's still smearing her beliefs onto another person. We just don't mind because most of us are for good things like recycling and helping Earth. Most, not all. And I'm having a really difficult time with this because as you probably know, I want people to have the freedom to say what they want no matter how hateful or ignorant it is, so that you and I may have that freedom as well, but it's danged hard when it's something like this. To clarify, I still think she can wear swastikas or draw them on her own property or herself but not on that kid. Not because it's obnoxious to me, but because I see that child as a separate person. In the same vein, as an example, I don't like to see baby girls with pierced ears because their parents wanted it done. Maybe the girl wil grow up not to want holes in her ears.



Okay Acc, I await you. :wah: ;)It's fine to be upset, angry, even livid about what the mother did, but to support legal action against her is a completely different thing. I won't get into the debate about a parent's rights or responsibilities regarding her children, because it becomes very close to ownership, but the child drew the first swastika on herself. It's reasonable to assume that she was okay with her mom re-drawing it.

ETA:

RedGlitter;916731 wrote: Does your child want to wear it? That's what it comes down to for me.
Apparently it doesn't. You never once stipulated that if the swastika was okay with the little girl (which it apparently was) then it's okay with you.
User avatar
Accountable
Posts: 24818
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am

White Pride Mom Loses Kid via Swastika

Post by Accountable »

AussiePam;916730 wrote: I find this case very worrying. In a free country, one should be able to hold political views, even if most of ForumGarden, including me, find them abhorrent. To me, thought police are anathema. All children are influenced by parents, consciously or not, and will probably rebel in due course. If I want my child to wear a cross to school, or have a spot on their forehead, or a headscarf, or a wiccan symbol or a swastika - why not?. Freedom of thought, of speech, of religion, of political views are ideas western countries cherish. Are the homeschooled children of fundamentalist Christians being abused? Didn't some court recently decide that children of pluralistc marriages were not per se subject to abuse? Maybe you or I approve of these things. Maybe we don't. Personally I don't like the idea of some kid having a white supremacy symbol on her, or of kids being kept from normal school experiences, or living in multimummed families.. or being forcefed clench fist black power ideas... but unless the law of the land is actually being broken....



Rousseau, the French philosopher and champion of liberty was hunted and pursued from one place to another because of his opinions. When Voltaire, another philosopher and writer heard of it, he invited Rousseau to come and live in his house. When Rousseau finally arrived, Voltaire said, "I do not agree with a word you say, but I will fight to the death for your right to say it"



That is democracy







(Remember McCarthyism)
I agree with every word here. Thanks, Pam.
User avatar
Accountable
Posts: 24818
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am

White Pride Mom Loses Kid via Swastika

Post by Accountable »

Richard Bell;916735 wrote: ..Precisely.



It's immoral to use a child as a billboard for such hateful purposes.



Several years ago, I saw parents with their two toddlers decked out in campaign buttons for a mayoral candidate.



Now, this guy was just a regular Joe, running for mayor in my small town, but I was still annoyed that little kids were used in such a way.



Drawing a symbol of hatred on a kid is inexcusable.



I'm somewhat taken aback that swastikas and hatred are worthy of debate on FG. If this was stormfront.org, then, yeah, that would be par for the course.



All this misdirected blather about freedom of speech and individual rights doesn't wash with me. A child is being morally poisoned for life, yet some here still think the bigoted views of the parent reign supreme.The mom would likely argue the swastika is not a symbol of hate but a symbol of solidarity with other people who think like she does. You call it immoral, but I haven't seen you on many, if any, of the moral debates in the religious threads. Whose morality are we to use? Yours?



A free society cannot legislate morality, only model it. Can you put your morality in writing? That's what would be required to legislate it. And which symbols of hate would you ban? Would there be a debate or would you trust your oh-so-moral politician to decide? Would the ban be limited to public display or would it include public view? Maybe you think we may as well go whole hog and ban the symbols from private display as well.



You can't ban something simply because you don't agree with it. This is what happens when you discount the importance of the moral balance provided by churches. Sure, you may not agree with everything they say either, but they definitely help counter the other guys you don't agree with.
User avatar
Accountable
Posts: 24818
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am

White Pride Mom Loses Kid via Swastika

Post by Accountable »

Galbally;916738 wrote: I think that the debate here throws some interesting questions back at us. One of the major problems in Western societies in modern times, is actually in determining what our moral and ethical standards actually are. Sure, we have laws, but laws are not immutable things, and are only useful if they are actually observed by the mass of people they regulate. The basis of our societies historically was Christian, whether Protestant or Catholic, and the prevailing religions provided a defacto moral code that didn't need to be defined by government, only enforced. The various churches did the work of reinforcing the ideas, while the government reaped the benefit of societies that were kept in line via religious beliefs as opposed to police forces and prisons.



In more modern times those old and rather authoritarian codes have come under extreme pressure from an increase in secularism, the change from agricultural to urban societies, the rise of individualism and the consumer society, the breakdown the the nuclear (and extended) family, the general emancipation of women, multiculturalism, the changing demographics of western societies, which are no longer exclusively white and christian, and a generally more permissive approach to society from the top down. Most people would agree that many of these changes have been positive for the individuals involved.



However, and there is always a "however" the problem now becomes apparent that societies that once were more or less self-regulating morally and ethically are seriously fraying at the edges, the unspoken social consensus that once existed in a society such as (for example) Britain (about what was acceptable and not acceptable behaviour, what being "British" was, and the general goals that ordinary people aspired to), can no longer be taken for granted, and governments find that they do not have the ability or authority to stop this process of what appears to be a slow (but quite profound) atomization of society. In fact no liberal democracy can do much to effect trends like these without adopting a far more authoritarian approach to governance, which would probably require retracting the democratic franchise from many that now have it (a worrying thought).



Therefore, thats the dilemma; the very very old one between private freedom and general security, personal liberty and social cohesion. I know of no political or secular doctrine that has the ability to replace the function that organized religion plays in human affairs. The Marxists tried to replace religion with worship of the people and science, the facists with worship of the state and the race, while capitalists try to replace religion with the worship of money and the individual. None of them seems quite capable of doing the trick.
Exactly! One doesn't have to be religious to realize the important element religion brings to society.
User avatar
Accountable
Posts: 24818
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am

White Pride Mom Loses Kid via Swastika

Post by Accountable »

Richard Bell;916739 wrote: McCarthyism was never an issue in our countries, but all of our nations (Australia, Canada, USA, Great Britain, amongst many others) fought Nazism at a great cost in lives, and I'll not abide the sullying of a child with such an evil symbol.



I have too much respect for those whose sacrifices defeated this hideous aberration, and for those who suffered under it's murderous hand to dismiss this incident .
Hate it! Rale (rail?) against it! Find the woman's address and write her a letter berating it! But to support legislation against it goes too far. It takes a step that that very regime supported.
Post Reply

Return to “Current Events”