It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Adolf Hitler, Sisters Taken from Parents' Home

page: 5
13
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 04:45 PM
link   
reply to post by GamerGal
 





No. If you name your kids Hitler, Aryan Nation, and Hinler, you are a NAZI and that right there is abusive.


First off giving your kids a particular name does not make you a member of the Nazi party. And second please point to the legislation that makes it unlawful to name your child anything you see fit.

I don't believe you will be able to find one. What you are a proponent of (knowingly or unknowingly) is creating more oppressive legislation that will further the states role in parenting the child. This is anti-American ideology.




posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 04:47 PM
link   
reply to post by harvib
 


Again, if it was just Hitler, maybe. But ALL of the kids have NAZI names and live in a house surrounded by NAZI items while their parents have NAZI tattoos.



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 04:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by GamerGal
reply to post by Harassment101
 


Naming him Hitler doesn't make them NAZIs. Naming the rest after NAZIs, with NAZI stuff in the house and NAZI tattoos does! BTW, after the hell they raised because of the cake deal don't you think they'd be screaming about this if it was for the names? They know they're guilty and are staying quiet.

[edit on 14-1-2009 by GamerGal]


No that is where you are wrong. You can have the Nazi memorabilia, and tattos, and not be a Nazi, we would want to assume if he went to this much trouble that he is, or that he is lying, which might be true, but we still do not have proof.

Just because you stay quite does not mean that you are guilty. It is a horror and a shock to the system to have your children taken from you, it's a shock if you are poor and have no means, these parents in the article that I read, said they don't know why the kids have been taken, and the police couldn't comment or claimed that they don't know.

If it's for the names, then it's wrong. These people sound like they have been targeted ever since they made the news last month for the cake thing, and some people will say it's well deserved, and who knows, but in a free society, you can not take away people's kids for what they choose to name them.

So if these kids were not being sexually abused, pulled to the gun range and taught to shoot at people, or whatever, then it's hard to proove hatred. What I will be looking for is any previous reports of abuse? If not then why between December and now January were these kids taken?

In a free country I don't see this as a light issue, the say way I don't see taking kids because you refuse to have them medicated by the state as a light thing. If we let this happen to these people, then our kids could be taken tomorrow for views the state disapproves of, or for names that become unpopular.

What if in Iraq you name your kid George Bush, and have a shoe thrown at you or something? People to a degree have the right to name their kids what they want. Where I would really disaprove is is naming kids after some body parts.



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 04:52 PM
link   
reply to post by GamerGal
 





Again, if it was just Hitler, maybe. But ALL of the kids have NAZI names and live in a house surrounded by NAZI items while their parents have NAZI tattoos.


Understood. But again what legislation makes this unlawful.



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 04:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by GamerGal
reply to post by Harassment101
 


They have NAZI tattoos! They have NAZI stuff in the house! They named all their kids after NAZIS! THEY ARE NAZIS! If Ted Bundy and Jeffery Dahmer adopted children and taught them too kill people guess what? I'd want the CPS to take the children away from them to!


If Dahmer were alive, I would not want to see him adopt a child, that's just me. Second if such a person did adopt a child and taught them to kill, then yes I would want to try to put a stop to it, but where do you see that these parents were teaching the kids to kill, or even to hate?

We know that the dad collects Nazi stuff, but it does not make him a Nazi, to be a Nazi you have to subscribe to the idology of the Nazis, these people claim that they don't. I don't know if this is true or not. (I mean why get the tattoos?) But even if they do have these views, and name the kids after Hitler or the Aryan Nation, if the kids are taken just because of the names, then it's wrong in a free society.

Once the state can dictate taken away kids from families, because they don't like what they named them, then tomorrow other kids can be taken for the same reasons, and it's a slippery slope that should not even be attempted.

The family seemed not well off, so maybe they are just trying to get a lawyer, or figure out what to do next. Silence does not equal guilty, and until I know more, I will not judge them.



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 04:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by ShatteredSkies
Well whatever abuse the child receives due to his/her name, is because the people around that child are oppressive by nature.



thats plain ignorance...



the child will be abused soley because of his name which is due to the parents.



would this same child be ridiculed at school if his name was gary smith? if you answer no, then it is clearly the parents fault.



if the parents drop the child off in the middle of the freeway and he gets hit by a car, is it the drivers fault who hit him?



[edit on 14-1-2009 by wheazy]



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 05:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by wiredamerican
There is more to the story in which is not told. I have no proof. There is no reason somebody can take a child away because of a name. I am sure the parents are subject of an investigation or something. Don't you love my speculation.


I fully agree that the state opened an investigation on them after the cake thing last month, but I am going to wait and see if they had any real reasons for taking those kids, and if they didn't then I want to see them given back.

I bet the state used some frumped up thing to get those kids taken, the parents are pretty young, and the kids are young too, right now they are probably in shock, and maybe even thinking that if they keep quite and play along the kids will be retured to them. They already know that people were unhappy with what they named their kids, and if I don't miss my guess, they are discovering just how unfree the country really is.

To stand up for these people and the right to not have your kids taken, is to stand up for familes tomorrow. I have no doubt that if the state took these kids on frumped up charges, then the same will be used on others tomorrow, and that's why this should be stopped now.

The kids look like they are three and younger.



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 05:01 PM
link   
What a mess.
I hate seeing the government getting involved in raising someone's children.

What a mess. Felt a need to say this again.

When people, in this case, the parents, act so irresponsibly, it invites the governments interference. Let me rephrase, it gives the government an excuse to interfere with ones rights.

This is a no win situation

If the government does nothing, this child will most likely have an incredibly miserable life.

If the government get's involved, they violate the rights of the parents.

Now we have to ask ourselves where will the child be most safe, protected and happy? What I mean is, how do we protect the rights of the child to grow up as a healthy, happy individual?

I've personally seen what happens to children who grow up in very racist households and they typically don't turn out very well as they propigate the hatred to their generation.

Frankly, those parents are incredibly irresponsible, ignorant people who will more then likely ruin there children's lives but if we allow the government to step in here, what do we allow next? It's a slippery slope.



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 05:02 PM
link   
I agree with Gamer.
It's not about the name... I think that the names probably led to an investigation of groups that the parents are involved in. Since they are probably Neo-Nazis based on the names and also I think it was stated in the original News segment that I saw, that does give authorities the right to take away the children, as they could be psychologically harmed from whatever their parents are getting involved in.

Kind of like a cult. It's not cool to expose your kids to cults.



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 05:02 PM
link   
My daughter shares her middle name with an infamous British child murderer. Does this mean I condone murder or does this mean her parents chose to honour her Grandfather's sister who died when still a child and happened to have the same name?

Frankly even if they had named him after some testicularly-challenged Austrian I don't see the problem, except from the rabid P.C. brigade...


again.

[edit on 14-1-2009 by Nirgal]



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 05:08 PM
link   
reply to post by wheazy
 


Ignorance? So it is someone's name that draws people to bash them and abuse them?

Or is it someone's unwillingness to accept that person's name that draws them to bash and abuse them?

Think you're argument through clearly please, because you've just told me that a person's name is going to determine whether or not they will have a good life.

My name never came out at me and strangled me, or beat me up, mean kids in the schoolyard with one track minds did.

Shattered OUT...



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 05:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by wheazy
thats plain ignorance...



the child will be abused soley because of his name which is due to the parents.



would this same child be ridiculed at school if his name was gary smith? if you answer no, then it is clearly the parents fault.



if the parents drop the child off in the middle of the freeway and he gets hit by a car, is it the drivers fault who hit him?



[edit on 14-1-2009 by wheazy]


Actually what you are saying is where the ignorance lies. If someone hits or abuses someone, or makes fun of them due to the name, then it's not the fault of the parents, or the child, but an ignorant society. I mean what if people make fun of some of these celebrity kids. Talk about names that are just begging to be made fun of. Yet if people do this, we would say it's the fault of the society and hopefully not blame the parents too much, ok maybe blame the parents a little and shake your head and say what were they thinking?

For me personally, I would not want to be the type of parent who teaches my child to hate another child based strickly on their name, and also if the kid named gary smith turned out to be a hateful little monster, then i would want that to be addressed as well.

If people are going to ignorantly hate people for their names, then it's a pretty silly society we live in. Hate for the character of the person.

I remember when Obama was running for presisdent and they tried to poke fun at his name, cause it was close to Osame and then he has Hussain, which is like Saddam, but that's just his name. People looked past that and they love Obama.

A name does not make a person bad or good, it's their actions that count. Also these parents might have, no they showed questionable judgment in choosing to give the kids these names, but in a free society, it's still their right to do so.



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 05:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by wheazy

Originally posted by ShatteredSkies
Well whatever abuse the child receives due to his/her name, is because the people around that child are oppressive by nature.



thats plain ignorance...



the child will be abused soley because of his name which is due to the parents.



would this same child be ridiculed at school if his name was gary smith? if you answer no, then it is clearly the parents fault.



if the parents drop the child off in the middle of the freeway and he gets hit by a car, is it the drivers fault who hit him?



[edit on 14-1-2009 by wheazy]


Who gives the children at school the right to abuse someone? Children need to be taught to not abuse others. Makes no sense to blame the child's parent just because other parents failed to properly teach children not to abuse others.

As for your question as to whether a child would be ridiculed for having the name Gary Smith, why not? Oppressive people find ways to ridicule others. If it's not the name it'll be something else that's different about the person for example clothes or weight or height or skin color or skin blemishes or physical blemishes etc.

As for your question as to who is to blame for a kid being hit by a car in the freeway after the kid's parents dropped him off in the middle of the freeway, well of course it's the parents fault but this analogy is irrelevant for the reasons I and others have already stated.

There had to be a good reason to take these children away, that reason has not yet been provided.

[edit on 14-1-2009 by Leto]



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 05:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by jfj123I've personally seen what happens to children who grow up in very racist households and they typically don't turn out very well as they propigate the hatred to their generation.

Frankly, those parents are incredibly irresponsible, ignorant people who will more then likely ruin there children's lives but if we allow the government to step in here, what do we allow next? It's a slippery slope.


See I don't approve of children being taught racist idology of any sort, against anyone. Yet with this family we have to proove that they are currently Nazi's, second even if they are, where does the state have the right to step in and take the children away because of your views? The last time I checked they don't. If they took the kids because of the names they have no ground, if they took the kids because they found out that this family does have Nazi views, then they will have to take every other child out of every home belonging to a Nazi, white Arayan family. When they finish there, they will have to go after the New Black Panthers, any family that is anti gay, (many religious families, teach these views and they would also be targeted), anyone who teaches their kids to hate Muslins, since 9/11 that could be quite a few people in America and other countries. (Just saying.)

So where does the slippery slope end? Can we also assume that the state can raise these kids? I have heard horror stories about what happens to kids in foster homes, away from their parents. If these parents love the kids, are not physically, sexually, or mentally abusing them, and have not violated any other legislation, then the kids should be returned.

It sets a presidence for the christian child, who is taught beliefs that the state does not approve of, to be taken from the home tomorrow, if that's the reason they took these people's kids.

We also still don't know the reason. So I want to wait and see.



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 05:25 PM
link   
It isn’t that there is anything wrong with the names.
It is peoples interpretation of them.
The names have become buzz words.
Reacting to buzz words is irrational.
Anyone with an IQ over 80 can chooze not to be a slave to buzz words.



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 05:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by ravenshadow13
I agree with Gamer.
It's not about the name... I think that the names probably led to an investigation of groups that the parents are involved in. Since they are probably Neo-Nazis based on the names and also I think it was stated in the original News segment that I saw, that does give authorities the right to take away the children, as they could be psychologically harmed from whatever their parents are getting involved in.

Kind of like a cult. It's not cool to expose your kids to cults.


Many religions could be viewed as a cult, and these rules could be used on those families tomorrow. We saw this with the kids being taken away from those paligamist on frumped up charges of abuse, and then they got a good lawyer and the mothers got their kids back. I clearly don't approve of the multiple marriage thing, but I approve less of taking away kids from families on frumped up charges.

Maybe the family are Nazi's, but then it's not illegal is it? Cause if it's illegal to be a Nazi and have kids, then they are going to have to conduct a lot of raids in the near future, and if this is the reason, then what other groups will they go after?

That's why I do not wish to make assumptions about these people, their guilt or innocence, until I learn more about why the kids were taken.



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 05:27 PM
link   
What I find most disturbing is that the State took the children without an explanation to the police. According to one article the officer stated that dyfus did not tell them why they were removing the child, he said we usually take their word for it in these situations. That is a crime in itself!
How can the state take children without a warrant or a charge?



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 05:35 PM
link   
This has been an interesting thread.

I don't think it is out of line considering the name we are discussing, to assume the parents intent or that they themselves are Nazi's. The evidence is so overwhelming as to make it almost laughable to suggest that their intentions were anything other than what is being assumed.

I still go back to the children and the harm they will suffer. Look at the abuse any child who is even slightly different has to endure. You can be sure that young Adolf will endure ten times as much and more. They may as well have named him Hit-me-kick-me Make-me-eat-dirt.

You can also assume that the parents are Nazi's based on the evidence available. Even in court I think there would be ample circumstantial evidence.

Rights are one thing but equating the right to name your child something that will ruin his future and teaching Nazi values to a right worth protecting, is carrying it into the silly zone. Arguing for that is just arguing for the sake of arguing and any semblance of common sense has left the building.



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 05:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by wheazy

Originally posted by ShatteredSkies
Well whatever abuse the child receives due to his/her name, is because the people around that child are oppressive by nature.



thats plain ignorance...



the child will be abused soley because of his name which is due to the parents.



would this same child be ridiculed at school if his name was gary smith? if you answer no, then it is clearly the parents fault.



if the parents drop the child off in the middle of the freeway and he gets hit by a car, is it the drivers fault who hit him?



[edit on 14-1-2009 by wheazy]


Okay, so you say it is abuse because the child is going to be ridiculed in school, right? So now lets look at "real" last names people and children have - which I am sure causes huge amounts of ridicule from other kids.

Sexfinger
Butkus
Shorthose
Buttram
Clothesoff
Hugginkiss

Okay so those are some very weird last names - there are many more.
So, then should those parents then not have kids, due to the fact the kids will be teased in school?

Also just a note. someone named their kid "Rusty Pipes"

Slyvester Stallone named his kid:
Sage Moonblood

So the point is, people have names and lots of kids have names that will get them teased. Should every child then be taken away from their parents for that reason?

Also I have 2 sisters, and guess what?

My parents rhymed all three of us with our first and middle names.

For the reason alone of having a child's name others may not agree with, is not a valid reason to take the kids away.

People are saying "Oh, there must be something the parents did", well if there is something they did, the authorities should come out fast and say what it is. Otherwise, we are being led to believe the only reason is the child's name.



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 05:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blaine91555
This has been an interesting thread.

I don't think it is out of line considering the name we are discussing, to assume the parents intent or that they themselves are Nazi's. The evidence is so overwhelming as to make it almost laughable to suggest that their intentions were anything other than what is being assumed.

I still go back to the children and the harm they will suffer. Look at the abuse any child who is even slightly different has to endure. You can be sure that young Adolf will endure ten times as much and more. They may as well have named him Hit-me-kick-me Make-me-eat-dirt.

You can also assume that the parents are Nazi's based on the evidence available. Even in court I think there would be ample circumstantial evidence.

Rights are one thing but equating the right to name your child something that will ruin his future and teaching Nazi values to a right worth protecting, is carrying it into the silly zone. Arguing for that is just arguing for the sake of arguing and any semblance of common sense has left the building.


You are assuming it would ruin the child's future. How about giving the child's community a chance? As the article says the police had not received any reports of problems or grievances, the police chief has no idea why the children were removed.



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join