Jump to content

Man may lose custody of children because of political beliefs... kinda...


Tentacruel

Recommended Posts

 Now, those political beliefs happen to be Nazism, and he named his child Adolf Hitler, so...

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/06/04/heath-campbell-nazi-father-child-named-adolf-hitler-custody-heinrich-hons_n_3382822.html

 

Anyway, **** the Nazi's.  The only thing they're good for is target practice, but this is unacceptable.  You can't just make an exception of free speech and expression for Nazi's, and the man seems to really care about his children, saying he would give up his beliefs if he had to.

 

 

Discuss. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a very dangerous line to cross, but it does make me wonder how much of an impact his beliefs would have on the child if he does win custody. Society has stil not quite moved on from religious, racism, etc (Russia is a very good example of such things (no offense to any Russians here)), Nazi will always be a very dirty word.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is quite sad, really. The guy clearly loves his children. We can't discriminate against people because of their political beliefs the same way we can't stop parents from raising their kids to be Catholics or Orthodox Jews. It's just wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is quite sad, really. The guy clearly loves his children. We can't discriminate against people because of their political beliefs the same way we can't stop parents from raising their kids to be Catholics or Orthodox Jews. It's just wrong.

 

The sad part is, people will always try to stop parents from raising their kids to be whatever they aren't. 

 

It's completely wrong. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As long as he doesn't teach his children to harm others, unfortunately there isn't any grounds to take them away. I'm horrified, but until actual abuse or anything like that happens, he does have the right to his kids.(I personally believe him instructing how to be a good Nazi could be damaging.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As long as he doesn't teach his children to harm others, unfortunately there isn't any grounds to take them away. I'm horrified, but until actual abuse or anything like that happens, he does have the right to his kids.(I personally believe him instructing how to be a good Nazi could be damaging.)

Wow, you took the complete opposite side.

Anyhow, people have definitely lost custody over more stupid things, so really.

And it's not like hunting people down for their beliefs is a new thing in America.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Freedom of expression is absolute for absolutely nobody. There are penalties in life for not being able to compromise with the ideological norms of one's environment, the nature of which depend on the degree of the ideological conflict. Heath Campbell's decision to name his children after Nazi leaders is an expression of such passionate commitment to an ideaology so averse to universal norms that it demonstrates an unwillingness to compromise so extreme that he poses a threat to those around him, including his children. It is, in my opinion, necessary to restrict freedom of speech/expression to an extent, not for the sake of fearmongering/thought policing (I know we have some avid Orwell fans here on YCM), but for the sake of maintaining a reasonable consideration for the basic human needs of other people. Ideas are the mothers of actions, and actions based on Nazist beliefs have destructive potential. If he is willing to give up Nazism for love of his children, I see his being made to do so as fair.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Freedom of expression is absolute for absolutely nobody. There are penalties in life for not being able to compromise with the ideological norms of one's environment, the nature of which depend on the degree of the ideological conflict. Heath Campbell's decision to name his children after Nazi leaders is an expression of such passionate commitment to an ideaology so averse to universal norms that it demonstrates an unwillingness to compromise so extreme that he poses a threat to those around him, including his children. It is, in my opinion, necessary to restrict freedom of speech/expression to an extent, not for the sake of fearmongering/thought policing (I know we have some avid Orwell fans here on YCM), but for the sake of maintaining a reasonable consideration for the basic human needs of other people. Ideas are the mothers of actions, and actions based on Nazist beliefs have destructive potential. If he is willing to give up Nazism for love of his children, I see his being made to do so as fair.

Absolutism only works in a society that has accepted it and willing concedes ALL power, not just the power of some, to an autocratic or otherwise monolithic government

 

Restricting the freedom of expression to certain individuals in a society that prides itself in being free is just as bad as any Nazi regime. Or at least and Nazi regime that doesn't hide its blatant discrimination

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...