i agree with you...although parents may teach the wrong stuff but still they shouldnt have their children removed...its a hard question,,but i agree there comes a line but theres many racist ppl out there,,so what we take all the racists ppls children off them ,,i think not..
The one entity that has absolutely no right to dictate what is and isn't acceptable is government. If no law has been broken, the government has the right to remain silent.
I'm 22 and I have a cat. She's like a child to me. Whenever she kills birds I ask her if what she did was for the good of the universe. She never replies. I've killed her six times already.
Rights are not absolute; rights end when they injure others or infringe on the rights of others. One must ask oneself whether the parents injure the child. As Homer Simpson likes to say:
parents in a democracy have a duty of care and that means teaching their children to obey the law , preaching race hate in the uk is a crime , so my answer is no they do not have the right to teach hatred to their children .
parents in a democracy have a duty of care and that means teaching their children to obey the law , preaching race hate in the uk is a crime , so my answer is no they do not have the right to teach hatred to their children .
Dependent on the exact circumstances? I agree with both your daughters.
t caught my attention at the end of the vid:
"If I was God for a day?"
Hmmm....
I thought about all the various and sundry Gods, and dammit! I still think I would do a much better job at fucking with the truely wicked and rewarding those who give to the greater good, ...I'd also insist on being an anonymous deity = no worship necessary, in fact, I'd punish the self-concerned brown-noser, douchebags who made requests.
A good anology is, if the parents have the right to teach whatever they want, would a line be drawn at teaching a child to hate others enough to kill? Those who are "enablers" in the commission of a crime can be charged with conspiracy. Would it be fair to charge the parents of children who commit heinous acts? Thorny issues, indeed, but then the school has to be given the right to refuse this child the lattitude to spread her hatred to others. She's not the other childrens *parent*, now is she?
This is a troubling case, but what worries me is that a lot of busy-bodies would be very happy to extend their child-rearing advice to me. I have made a point of raising my children according to my own conscience. Yes. I know that the cost of my being able to raise my children according to my own judgment is that dumb-asses like this get to do the same.
Raising a child is a life long project that begins with the first breath and doesn't end untill your last. I "believe" that a parent should not have any limits placed on them as to what morals they are allowed to teach because that is not freedom. However I also "believe" that parents should be responsible enough to know when the lines are crossed. They should also be responsible legally for any damage the child does for an entire life time. That would make them teach their children well.
I taught my dog not to jump on people or bite them or chase them. This is a life long teaching as I am responsible for her actions if she ever does any damage. There is no age limit where I'm off the hook. The same should be true for parents of children....
As an educator, I feel it's my societal obligation to bring truth into my classroom to help remove any bullshit that their parents, clergy or anyone else without an education, has instilled(brainwashed) into that child's mind. I am honoured to be in my position to help remove these falsehoods from their abused minds. Pick any untruth, like religion(read-hatred,bigotry,misogyny, indoctrination, false dogma) or any reality denying group-think, those are my targets to eliminate. Science does that.
I believe in free speech, even disgusting speech such as the drivel espoused by racists should be protected. It follows then, that the parents have the right to share their ideas with their children.
However, I also believe people should obtain a license for each child they would like to have, to demonstrate the mental and economic capacity to raise their children in a healthy and safe environment.
We license damn near everything else, but any dumbass can be entrusted with children. Insane.
(continued) but we can provide a counter point to such hate speech. For at-risk kids, add as part of the curricula the facts of common ancestry and descent from African forebearers. Intensive study about the effects of hate on peoples lives and through out history. Education opens minds.
At first thought that you were going to discuss the story of the kid and his family who were refusing chemo due to religious beliefs. Had a wonderful reply about how the family's rights ended when the life of child came into risk. But hearing this, are we not addressing the same issue? Is not the intellectual and social life of this kid in jeopardy? Perhaps we cannot (and definitely should not) curtail free speech. (continued)
I, too, am with your first daughter. If we are to decide what is right for other people then we are, by implication, accepting that others know what's best for us. Education and exposure to reasoned argument are the best way to overcome ignorance and prejudice.
That's a tough one but I agree with you. When I watch things like "Jesus Camp" or hear about stories like this, i get knee-jerk reaction that these children should be taken from their parents. Reason prevails, however, and I realize the freedom to teach your children what you believe is a fundamental right in this country no matter what I think of the teachings.
I agree that we cannot tell people what is right to think and what is wrong to think. That's what religion does and it's sort of like resorting to terrorism in order to combat terrorism. What's the point?
I do not know how things work in canada but in the US i believe neo-nazis are considered a terror group and they would be punished for doing something like this.
I'd agree they have the right to teach their children whatever they want. However, they also have a responsibility to teach them how to engage in their beliefs within our society.
So with the girl, the parents have the right to teach her these beliefs, but they have the responsiblity to teach her that voicing her beliefs in that manner is unacceptable in this society.
Or you have the right to believe that human sacrifice is acceptable, but you're still not allowed to do it.
I really admire your videos, hairyreasoner. I love how you obviously think sincerely about the things you discuss, and what I appreciate most: You consider multiple points of view. That approach echoes my own.
I think you're right hairy.. Parents are the first teachers but not the only and certainly not the last. I grew up in the South where racism, homophobia and myth addled dumbfuckery were the norm.. education and life experience revealed these things to me for what they are. Teach your kids what you want.. but know that when they bring that nonsense to the World At Large the World at Large will be ruthless in it's smackdown of that goofy shit.. and they'll realize that their parents were dicks.
If Nephilimfree had ever gotten out of Mississippi, had afforded himself the benefits of a real education, had traveled and seen the World with his own eyes instead of on a computer screen or filtered through his buybull.. I'm certain he would not be making these goofy creationist videos on Ewetoob.
I don't think parents should be allowed to indoctrinate their kids with impunity. There should be rules against that in order to protect the kids that aren't smart enough to know better.
For example my parents are slightly racist towards Native Canadians and black people. They have tried to indoctrinate me with those beliefs, but I am smart enough to know that racism is bullshit.
letting people voice their belifs will expose you to many things you disagree with and do not believe but making rules about what you can say will create many more problems than it will solve., unless of course I am the one who gets to write the rules.
In *bible country*, being atheist makes you a terrible parent in the eyes of the majority. But so far there is no one who says your kids should be taken away.
Of course parents should have the right to teach whatever they believe in (including their prejudices) otherwise the state will *own* all the kids. I can see it now: one big orphanage>:an Orwellian thought that makes me shudder.
Really, when kids get into the world they will learn to either defend or revise their beliefs: a good thing.
In a country like ours, where there are so many guns that there are enough for every citizen to have one....even several, the government ONLY has authority to the extent that people are willing to cooperate with them.
And if they keep doing shit like this, that cooperation is going to end.
The girl's homemade tats are self expression. Leave it. However, be just as vocal about how ridiculous her attitude is. Fight hate speech with reasonable speech.
If she incites others to acts of violence based on her hatred, that's when the line between speech and action is crossed and counter action is necessary.
Punishing the parents would make them martyrs and all the bigots would rally and say, "See, we're being oppressed!"
Fine utilization of 6 minutes. if the state declared moral's then soon after the people would have know objectivity and only be subjugated to what a ruling class said. therefor muting the voices of many therefor stifling progress as your daughter said let education show people the er of the ways.
also if i was god for a day i would commit suicide cause i would realize what an asshole i am. LOL
I think that in almost all cases you shouldnt go down the road of legislating what parents can and cannot teach their children.
However there should be a limit. There comes a point when certain teaching amounts to severe emotional abuse (example: children who are taught to be constantly terrified of demons and hell to the point of having nervous breakdowns). However I confess that finding the line between disgusting but legal and emotional abuse is very difficult.
this one is simple. the parent has the right to teach their children as they see fit. freedom of speech should overrule hate speech. however... the question of capitol punishment... im really torn on that issue. i just haven't heard arguments on either side strong enough to convince me either way.
Then might you also believe it is a right for a parent to abuse their children sexually if it was part of their personal beliefs? How is sexual abuse different than mental abuse? Mental abuse like you describe is a leading contributor to mental illness. I don't have the answer, but it is interesting that we put people in prison for abusing their children's bodies but make no provision for protecting the child's mind and spirit.
I agree expose the views to the light of day and only then will people understand how stupid they are. Now if you tell someone that blacks are inferior then rightly most people look at you as if you have just crawled from under a stone.
Personally I feel that if you want to go and raise your child alone on a desert island then feel free to raise your children how you see fit but we are apart of a community, one which abides by certain rules, and to raise your children to disregard those rules - including the ones that provide for social cohesion - then you don't get to raise your children the way you want. You wouldn't raise children to believe that murder is ok, so why is bigotry ok?
one thought occured after my last posts that i thought i'd share as well. regarding the girl with the nazi scribblings i'm not sure if that is actually covered under free speech or not considering it is advocating hate and/or harm to other people of a different ethnic group. so what these parents are doing may actually be illegal in some countries. depends on local laws.
i know this does not tie directly to your question i just thought it worth mentioning...
now with that family i think it was something to do with thier religious beliefs. but in my opinion your religious beliefs also end if they threaten the life of a child.
after all freedom of religion would not cover human sacrifice right? so freedom of religion would have some limits if it threatens a life especially a child.....
it's a hard question for sure hairy, but you have to give the parents their rights in this matter whether you agree with the teachings or not. otherwise what's to stop others from doing the same to you?
i will say that parents rights with a child end where the childs life is threatened by the parents decisions, like the cancer kid just recently whose mom ran away with him because the family does not believe in medical care and wanted to use "home remedies" to cure the cancer.
there has to be a better way to decide what rights people should have when it comes to holding and disseminating beliefs. Some third option outside of the dichotomy between the slippery slope of imposed authority and the libertarian chaos that permits fuckwits to abuse their childrens' minds this way. Could it ever become possible to simply forbid the teaching of any belief which lacks evidence to support its validity?
Unfortunately parents have the right to teach their children what they like. As long as they care for them and don't abuse them (physically, mentally), that is their right. It's a tough one. There are many things which we all come to disagree with our parents as we grow older. I hope school, friends & curiosity will help this child become a better person that her parents.
been thinking this over in the form of religious teachings, and what constitutes as child abuse...they want rating systems on public media, but the same 'rating' system would place the bible in a NC-17 category, where's the line drawn...sigh, i dont know, nor do I expect a answer or chance these days to start a family myself
I tend toward the maximum liberty option. I am uncomfortable with a government being able to suppress points of view, even (especially?) abhorrent ones. At the same time, the school has an obligation to ensure a civil and secure environment for all students, so discipline for the swastika emblazoned girl is in order. You don't have a right to free speech in an environment where people are compelled to be.
I believe the parents have the right to teach those views but it is also the right of the school and the education authority to suspend the child and prosecute the parent for the child expressing such extreme and unacceptable(by common consent) views in the way she did.
So in a nutshell, teaching the views is ok but she should have been taught to keep them to herself (imagine if 90% of the kids were taught such views and were allowed to express them).
To address this case: yes, they can teach their children whatever they want. I truly hope that the child will not go down that path, but it is not my child to raise. Without the unfavorable views you eliminate the point of free speech altogether. It is unfortunate, but necessary.
My next point addresses both cases (the murdered child and the neonazi): I do not think your views are contradictory. (continued)
Wanting something and saying it should happen are different things. Example: I want a new car. This does not mean I should get a new car. Buying a new car would be unwise in my financial situation...stealing would be worse. I think people want those responsible to get the max punishment...but that does not mean that they should (government killing is no better, etc). Hope that makes sense or helps- Heather,
Parents should have the right to teach their kids whatever they want, even horrible views like this. Freedom has it's prices. Putting up with assholes like this is one of them.
Yeah, unfortunately they have the right to teach their children what they want. The child doesn't have to accept it. One of my parents made racist comments a lot and tried to get me to feel that way. It never took. I like to think I was smarter than the average kid though. Then again, maybe he didn't start early enough, perhaps I'd say something in public and embarrass him. He started saying these things frequently when I was about 10.
Just to make myself clear I don't think there should be any legislation about what parents can teach other than they would be responsible for any actions their teaching has caused.
I know you didn't say anything about action but it is not the words that are the problem but what they directly cause. For example if a parent taught that *insert group here* should be physically harmed if they "get out of line" and the child acts on that the parents should not get away with saying that they should teach anything they want.
Having views and beliefs is fine and even speaking on those is good but once action on others comes into play you can not say we can teach anything we want.
I would agree with your first daughter as well. Calling it a "slippery slope" is an understatement of the highest degree.
And I have always thought, like you, that while I think religion is a terrible thing, I would never legislate against it. I think my neighbors have every right to worship their god, and I think I have every right to call that god a false-god, their religion a false-religion.
At one end of the spectrum, we have laws protecting children from physical and psychological abuse. At the other end, we have parental rights. Where do these conflict with one another?
Is it not harmful to feed children too much sugar? Could this be construed as physical abuse? Could teaching your children that God will send them to Hell, or teaching them to hate others, be construed as psychological abuse? Perhaps, but do we really want to go there? :/
The freedom of speech should be held as sacred. As much as I wish creationists would shut up. I have remember they have the right to speak. For if I could force another opposing opinion to be quite then the door has been opened for me to be silenced.
If my strong beliefs were that we should go around killing every 3rd person we walk past and i taught this to my children, I would be teaching them to break the law also. As stupid and harmful as that kind of belief would be, so is racism.
As distasteful as hate speech is, it is still speech, and should therefore be free. If anything, unpopular speech should be protected more, not less, than popular speech. I agree with your first daughter. Education if the key.
Is the spreading of racial hatred not illegal? Well then as much as we have the right to teach our children our beliefs we also have the responsibility to teach them when to share opinions and when not too. In effect these parents are teaching their children to break the law..I am all for free speech, but it comes very much with the price of responsibility. And if the parents can't take that on board they do not deserve to have children.
I am very opposed to the idea of sensorship, but i also believe there is a point in which something may need to be done.
Now to answer your question, i'm pretty sure that legally, yes they absolutely have the right. But morally, no I think someone should step in. If the kid's parents want to teach her that "niggers" are bad ppl or w/e then oh well, one more loser in the world. But when a little girl starts saying things like blacks should be beaten to death, then it gets dangerous.
I agree with you completely. Prosecution of thought-crime is wrong. You can't tell parents what values to instill in their children, but you can convince intelligent children that their parents are wrong.
I've had a problem with hate crime leg. ever since I first heard of it. To quote an old Johnny Cash song, "You can't hang a man for the thoughts in his head." You prosecute for the actions themselves, not the motivation.
Geez, another hard one hairy. I guess morality, whats right and wrong, is all relative to individual people. What i think is wrong you might think is right. Very hard question, In the end i think, like you that education is answer, educate the children the best you can through schools and other facilities, ultimately children idolise their parents but if you can equip them with knowledge, ie, there is no difference between the races, we all came from Africa, it might help.
i agree with you...although parents may teach the wrong stuff but still they shouldnt have their children removed...its a hard question,,but i agree there comes a line but theres many racist ppl out there,,so what we take all the racists ppls children off them ,,i think not..
lynnej1970 1 year ago
The one entity that has absolutely no right to dictate what is and isn't acceptable is government. If no law has been broken, the government has the right to remain silent.
act6629 2 years ago
Mate are you in a bat cave filming.
batmanmatrixzero 2 years ago
Education... Is Awesome . Religion ... Stop trying to blend in.. Blend out ;-)
kat5ft2 2 years ago
I'm 22 and I have a cat. She's like a child to me. Whenever she kills birds I ask her if what she did was for the good of the universe. She never replies. I've killed her six times already.
nathanrlyne 2 years ago
u should talk about SBS that would be cool
bookworm13130 2 years ago
Rights are not absolute; rights end when they injure others or infringe on the rights of others. One must ask oneself whether the parents injure the child. As Homer Simpson likes to say:
"This is one for the courts to decide."
--
Homer Simpson
Walabio 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
parents in a democracy have a duty of care and that means teaching their children to obey the law , preaching race hate in the uk is a crime , so my answer is no they do not have the right to teach hatred to their children .
just my view ;)
sausage4mash 2 years ago
parents in a democracy have a duty of care and that means teaching their children to obey the law , preaching race hate in the uk is a crime , so my answer is no they do not have the right to teach hatred to their children .
just my view ;)
sausage4mash 2 years ago
Dependent on the exact circumstances? I agree with both your daughters.
t caught my attention at the end of the vid:
"If I was God for a day?"
Hmmm....
I thought about all the various and sundry Gods, and dammit! I still think I would do a much better job at fucking with the truely wicked and rewarding those who give to the greater good, ...I'd also insist on being an anonymous deity = no worship necessary, in fact, I'd punish the self-concerned brown-noser, douchebags who made requests.
beerijuana 2 years ago
A good anology is, if the parents have the right to teach whatever they want, would a line be drawn at teaching a child to hate others enough to kill? Those who are "enablers" in the commission of a crime can be charged with conspiracy. Would it be fair to charge the parents of children who commit heinous acts? Thorny issues, indeed, but then the school has to be given the right to refuse this child the lattitude to spread her hatred to others. She's not the other childrens *parent*, now is she?
RyuDarragh 2 years ago
This is a troubling case, but what worries me is that a lot of busy-bodies would be very happy to extend their child-rearing advice to me. I have made a point of raising my children according to my own conscience. Yes. I know that the cost of my being able to raise my children according to my own judgment is that dumb-asses like this get to do the same.
TheFallibleFiend 2 years ago
I agree. As much as it sucks, it's not up to the government to tell people what they're allowed to teach their children.
But we should be allowed to teach their kids as well. They should make her watch American History X and Martin Luther King jr. speeches.
ubergossen 2 years ago
Raising a child is a life long project that begins with the first breath and doesn't end untill your last. I "believe" that a parent should not have any limits placed on them as to what morals they are allowed to teach because that is not freedom. However I also "believe" that parents should be responsible enough to know when the lines are crossed. They should also be responsible legally for any damage the child does for an entire life time. That would make them teach their children well.
mobiltec 2 years ago
I taught my dog not to jump on people or bite them or chase them. This is a life long teaching as I am responsible for her actions if she ever does any damage. There is no age limit where I'm off the hook. The same should be true for parents of children....
mobiltec 2 years ago
how do your children feel about your religious beliefs?
theanimal777 2 years ago
As an educator, I feel it's my societal obligation to bring truth into my classroom to help remove any bullshit that their parents, clergy or anyone else without an education, has instilled(brainwashed) into that child's mind. I am honoured to be in my position to help remove these falsehoods from their abused minds. Pick any untruth, like religion(read-hatred,bigotry,misogyny, indoctrination, false dogma) or any reality denying group-think, those are my targets to eliminate. Science does that.
saxmanchiro 2 years ago
The only solution: Abolish home schooling.
Kattarina98 2 years ago
I believe in free speech, even disgusting speech such as the drivel espoused by racists should be protected. It follows then, that the parents have the right to share their ideas with their children.
However, I also believe people should obtain a license for each child they would like to have, to demonstrate the mental and economic capacity to raise their children in a healthy and safe environment.
We license damn near everything else, but any dumbass can be entrusted with children. Insane.
feralshrew 2 years ago
(continued) but we can provide a counter point to such hate speech. For at-risk kids, add as part of the curricula the facts of common ancestry and descent from African forebearers. Intensive study about the effects of hate on peoples lives and through out history. Education opens minds.
magick205 2 years ago
At first thought that you were going to discuss the story of the kid and his family who were refusing chemo due to religious beliefs. Had a wonderful reply about how the family's rights ended when the life of child came into risk. But hearing this, are we not addressing the same issue? Is not the intellectual and social life of this kid in jeopardy? Perhaps we cannot (and definitely should not) curtail free speech. (continued)
magick205 2 years ago
I, too, am with your first daughter. If we are to decide what is right for other people then we are, by implication, accepting that others know what's best for us. Education and exposure to reasoned argument are the best way to overcome ignorance and prejudice.
thatgaybloke 2 years ago
That's a tough one but I agree with you. When I watch things like "Jesus Camp" or hear about stories like this, i get knee-jerk reaction that these children should be taken from their parents. Reason prevails, however, and I realize the freedom to teach your children what you believe is a fundamental right in this country no matter what I think of the teachings.
therach1025 2 years ago
I agree as well. I do believe however that the School should be able to saction the girl and then family from displaying her body art.
mtsac1 2 years ago
he lookz like a fag
blueeyeddevil1990 2 years ago
I agree that we cannot tell people what is right to think and what is wrong to think. That's what religion does and it's sort of like resorting to terrorism in order to combat terrorism. What's the point?
jbourget32 2 years ago
I do not know how things work in canada but in the US i believe neo-nazis are considered a terror group and they would be punished for doing something like this.
brandonclyon 2 years ago
I'd agree they have the right to teach their children whatever they want. However, they also have a responsibility to teach them how to engage in their beliefs within our society.
So with the girl, the parents have the right to teach her these beliefs, but they have the responsiblity to teach her that voicing her beliefs in that manner is unacceptable in this society.
Or you have the right to believe that human sacrifice is acceptable, but you're still not allowed to do it.
LectricNightConcepts 2 years ago
I really admire your videos, hairyreasoner. I love how you obviously think sincerely about the things you discuss, and what I appreciate most: You consider multiple points of view. That approach echoes my own.
zebruh 2 years ago
Comment removed
mrsugercrisp 2 years ago
I would love to say take kids from abusive families and give them loving homes. That's just not realistic unfortunately...
InnerEnergy8 2 years ago
I think you're right hairy.. Parents are the first teachers but not the only and certainly not the last. I grew up in the South where racism, homophobia and myth addled dumbfuckery were the norm.. education and life experience revealed these things to me for what they are. Teach your kids what you want.. but know that when they bring that nonsense to the World At Large the World at Large will be ruthless in it's smackdown of that goofy shit.. and they'll realize that their parents were dicks.
SofaKingLoaded 2 years ago
If Nephilimfree had ever gotten out of Mississippi, had afforded himself the benefits of a real education, had traveled and seen the World with his own eyes instead of on a computer screen or filtered through his buybull.. I'm certain he would not be making these goofy creationist videos on Ewetoob.
SofaKingLoaded 2 years ago
Sofa:
Amen.
Why do I reply to so many of your comments with "Amen?"
hairyreasoner 2 years ago
I don't think parents should be allowed to indoctrinate their kids with impunity. There should be rules against that in order to protect the kids that aren't smart enough to know better.
For example my parents are slightly racist towards Native Canadians and black people. They have tried to indoctrinate me with those beliefs, but I am smart enough to know that racism is bullshit.
PheenixTears420 2 years ago
letting people voice their belifs will expose you to many things you disagree with and do not believe but making rules about what you can say will create many more problems than it will solve., unless of course I am the one who gets to write the rules.
wjkaiser65 2 years ago
In *bible country*, being atheist makes you a terrible parent in the eyes of the majority. But so far there is no one who says your kids should be taken away.
Of course parents should have the right to teach whatever they believe in (including their prejudices) otherwise the state will *own* all the kids. I can see it now: one big orphanage>:an Orwellian thought that makes me shudder.
Really, when kids get into the world they will learn to either defend or revise their beliefs: a good thing.
8journey8 2 years ago
In a country like ours, where there are so many guns that there are enough for every citizen to have one....even several, the government ONLY has authority to the extent that people are willing to cooperate with them.
And if they keep doing shit like this, that cooperation is going to end.
d2146498 2 years ago
The girl's homemade tats are self expression. Leave it. However, be just as vocal about how ridiculous her attitude is. Fight hate speech with reasonable speech.
If she incites others to acts of violence based on her hatred, that's when the line between speech and action is crossed and counter action is necessary.
Punishing the parents would make them martyrs and all the bigots would rally and say, "See, we're being oppressed!"
Lead by example.
Great vid.
dangerics 2 years ago
no*
CiphersSon 2 years ago
Fine utilization of 6 minutes. if the state declared moral's then soon after the people would have know objectivity and only be subjugated to what a ruling class said. therefor muting the voices of many therefor stifling progress as your daughter said let education show people the er of the ways.
also if i was god for a day i would commit suicide cause i would realize what an asshole i am. LOL
CiphersSon 2 years ago
I think that in almost all cases you shouldnt go down the road of legislating what parents can and cannot teach their children.
However there should be a limit. There comes a point when certain teaching amounts to severe emotional abuse (example: children who are taught to be constantly terrified of demons and hell to the point of having nervous breakdowns). However I confess that finding the line between disgusting but legal and emotional abuse is very difficult.
LynxChan 2 years ago
LynxChan:
"However I confess that finding the line between disgusting but legal and emotional abuse is very difficult. "
Wise, as always.
hairyreasoner 2 years ago
this one is simple. the parent has the right to teach their children as they see fit. freedom of speech should overrule hate speech. however... the question of capitol punishment... im really torn on that issue. i just haven't heard arguments on either side strong enough to convince me either way.
sheepwshotguns 2 years ago
Then might you also believe it is a right for a parent to abuse their children sexually if it was part of their personal beliefs? How is sexual abuse different than mental abuse? Mental abuse like you describe is a leading contributor to mental illness. I don't have the answer, but it is interesting that we put people in prison for abusing their children's bodies but make no provision for protecting the child's mind and spirit.
daleshankins 2 years ago
I agree expose the views to the light of day and only then will people understand how stupid they are. Now if you tell someone that blacks are inferior then rightly most people look at you as if you have just crawled from under a stone.
Tridhos 2 years ago
Personally I feel that if you want to go and raise your child alone on a desert island then feel free to raise your children how you see fit but we are apart of a community, one which abides by certain rules, and to raise your children to disregard those rules - including the ones that provide for social cohesion - then you don't get to raise your children the way you want. You wouldn't raise children to believe that murder is ok, so why is bigotry ok?
FTLNewsFeed 2 years ago
one thought occured after my last posts that i thought i'd share as well. regarding the girl with the nazi scribblings i'm not sure if that is actually covered under free speech or not considering it is advocating hate and/or harm to other people of a different ethnic group. so what these parents are doing may actually be illegal in some countries. depends on local laws.
i know this does not tie directly to your question i just thought it worth mentioning...
hellshade2 2 years ago
oh and btw hairy excellent question. got the brain juices flowing a little ;)
hellshade2 2 years ago
cont...
now with that family i think it was something to do with thier religious beliefs. but in my opinion your religious beliefs also end if they threaten the life of a child.
after all freedom of religion would not cover human sacrifice right? so freedom of religion would have some limits if it threatens a life especially a child.....
hellshade2 2 years ago
it's a hard question for sure hairy, but you have to give the parents their rights in this matter whether you agree with the teachings or not. otherwise what's to stop others from doing the same to you?
i will say that parents rights with a child end where the childs life is threatened by the parents decisions, like the cancer kid just recently whose mom ran away with him because the family does not believe in medical care and wanted to use "home remedies" to cure the cancer.
hellshade2 2 years ago
there has to be a better way to decide what rights people should have when it comes to holding and disseminating beliefs. Some third option outside of the dichotomy between the slippery slope of imposed authority and the libertarian chaos that permits fuckwits to abuse their childrens' minds this way. Could it ever become possible to simply forbid the teaching of any belief which lacks evidence to support its validity?
Singebuggercat 2 years ago
Unfortunately parents have the right to teach their children what they like. As long as they care for them and don't abuse them (physically, mentally), that is their right. It's a tough one. There are many things which we all come to disagree with our parents as we grow older. I hope school, friends & curiosity will help this child become a better person that her parents.
Titania1 2 years ago
been thinking this over in the form of religious teachings, and what constitutes as child abuse...they want rating systems on public media, but the same 'rating' system would place the bible in a NC-17 category, where's the line drawn...sigh, i dont know, nor do I expect a answer or chance these days to start a family myself
sorry no answer yet for you, sir
Peace
JC
horny4bears 2 years ago
I tend toward the maximum liberty option. I am uncomfortable with a government being able to suppress points of view, even (especially?) abhorrent ones. At the same time, the school has an obligation to ensure a civil and secure environment for all students, so discipline for the swastika emblazoned girl is in order. You don't have a right to free speech in an environment where people are compelled to be.
ozmoroid 2 years ago
I believe the parents have the right to teach those views but it is also the right of the school and the education authority to suspend the child and prosecute the parent for the child expressing such extreme and unacceptable(by common consent) views in the way she did.
So in a nutshell, teaching the views is ok but she should have been taught to keep them to herself (imagine if 90% of the kids were taught such views and were allowed to express them).
noelplum99 2 years ago
To address this case: yes, they can teach their children whatever they want. I truly hope that the child will not go down that path, but it is not my child to raise. Without the unfavorable views you eliminate the point of free speech altogether. It is unfortunate, but necessary.
My next point addresses both cases (the murdered child and the neonazi): I do not think your views are contradictory. (continued)
FrogSplatScience 2 years ago
Wanting something and saying it should happen are different things. Example: I want a new car. This does not mean I should get a new car. Buying a new car would be unwise in my financial situation...stealing would be worse. I think people want those responsible to get the max punishment...but that does not mean that they should (government killing is no better, etc). Hope that makes sense or helps- Heather,
FrogSplatScience 2 years ago
Their beliefs are racist
but so is the bible and koran.
Since we cant stop people from being indoctrinated into hate, we shouldnt stop people from raising their children this way
Surathan 2 years ago
Parents should have the right to teach their kids whatever they want, even horrible views like this. Freedom has it's prices. Putting up with assholes like this is one of them.
coff328 2 years ago
Yeah, unfortunately they have the right to teach their children what they want. The child doesn't have to accept it. One of my parents made racist comments a lot and tried to get me to feel that way. It never took. I like to think I was smarter than the average kid though. Then again, maybe he didn't start early enough, perhaps I'd say something in public and embarrass him. He started saying these things frequently when I was about 10.
amberview30 2 years ago
Just to make myself clear I don't think there should be any legislation about what parents can teach other than they would be responsible for any actions their teaching has caused.
BetelsPeak 2 years ago
I know you didn't say anything about action but it is not the words that are the problem but what they directly cause. For example if a parent taught that *insert group here* should be physically harmed if they "get out of line" and the child acts on that the parents should not get away with saying that they should teach anything they want.
Having views and beliefs is fine and even speaking on those is good but once action on others comes into play you can not say we can teach anything we want.
BetelsPeak 2 years ago
I would agree with your first daughter as well. Calling it a "slippery slope" is an understatement of the highest degree.
And I have always thought, like you, that while I think religion is a terrible thing, I would never legislate against it. I think my neighbors have every right to worship their god, and I think I have every right to call that god a false-god, their religion a false-religion.
MotionFur 2 years ago
According to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, they don't have the right to raise their children with those views because it's insighting hate.
andrewrberkshire 2 years ago
My understanding is that Canadian free speech is different than U.S. free speech. That is, hate speech is much more limited in Canada.
That said, I agree with you. As disgusting as it is, the only true way to fight it is with education.
Hikerpunk 2 years ago
punk:
I think that's all we can do. The alternative is quite scary.
hairyreasoner 2 years ago
This is a slippery slope indeed.
At one end of the spectrum, we have laws protecting children from physical and psychological abuse. At the other end, we have parental rights. Where do these conflict with one another?
Is it not harmful to feed children too much sugar? Could this be construed as physical abuse? Could teaching your children that God will send them to Hell, or teaching them to hate others, be construed as psychological abuse? Perhaps, but do we really want to go there? :/
5avan10 2 years ago
Right in the godamned middle.
hairyreasoner 2 years ago
The only recourse for bad speech is more speech.
LuciousVBogeymanProd 2 years ago 3
"The only recourse for bad speech is more speech. "
That's a pretty damn good point.
hairyreasoner 2 years ago
The freedom of speech should be held as sacred. As much as I wish creationists would shut up. I have remember they have the right to speak. For if I could force another opposing opinion to be quite then the door has been opened for me to be silenced.
A4AgnstcFndmntlst 2 years ago
Very good point, too! About the rights vs. Obligation. I've never thought of it quite like that be4.
godonlyknows1101 2 years ago
If my strong beliefs were that we should go around killing every 3rd person we walk past and i taught this to my children, I would be teaching them to break the law also. As stupid and harmful as that kind of belief would be, so is racism.
oliesbw 2 years ago
As distasteful as hate speech is, it is still speech, and should therefore be free. If anything, unpopular speech should be protected more, not less, than popular speech. I agree with your first daughter. Education if the key.
hipmama715 2 years ago
Is the spreading of racial hatred not illegal? Well then as much as we have the right to teach our children our beliefs we also have the responsibility to teach them when to share opinions and when not too. In effect these parents are teaching their children to break the law..I am all for free speech, but it comes very much with the price of responsibility. And if the parents can't take that on board they do not deserve to have children.
oliesbw 2 years ago
Exactly. Where is the discussion of obligations?
hairyreasoner 2 years ago
I am very opposed to the idea of sensorship, but i also believe there is a point in which something may need to be done.
Now to answer your question, i'm pretty sure that legally, yes they absolutely have the right. But morally, no I think someone should step in. If the kid's parents want to teach her that "niggers" are bad ppl or w/e then oh well, one more loser in the world. But when a little girl starts saying things like blacks should be beaten to death, then it gets dangerous.
godonlyknows1101 2 years ago
I agree with you completely. Prosecution of thought-crime is wrong. You can't tell parents what values to instill in their children, but you can convince intelligent children that their parents are wrong.
I've had a problem with hate crime leg. ever since I first heard of it. To quote an old Johnny Cash song, "You can't hang a man for the thoughts in his head." You prosecute for the actions themselves, not the motivation.
bigjohnhamhock 2 years ago
Wow, this is a good topic.
You bring up some very awesome points and questions.
You trust in your parents to bring you up the best way they know how. But are they always the best ones to teach you?
I'm going to have to think about this one for a bit.
CptUnknown 2 years ago
One of the big ten.
Honour thy mother and father...
What if they have their heads up thier asses?
hairyreasoner 2 years ago
"What if they have their heads up thier asses? "
that is what is known as the $64,000 dollar question...
hellshade2 2 years ago
Geez, another hard one hairy. I guess morality, whats right and wrong, is all relative to individual people. What i think is wrong you might think is right. Very hard question, In the end i think, like you that education is answer, educate the children the best you can through schools and other facilities, ultimately children idolise their parents but if you can equip them with knowledge, ie, there is no difference between the races, we all came from Africa, it might help.
mar8les 2 years ago