Can Children Be Taken from Parents Suspected of Being Racists?
| AR Articles on Canada |
|---|
| The Great White North (Mar. 1991) |
| Immigration and the Election (Dec. 2000) |
| Search AmRen.com for Canada |
| More news stories on Canada |
A case of two youngsters seized from a couple suspected of being racist has raised the question of how far parents can go in teaching their children what they think is right.
“I think it’s really a tough issue,” Harvey Frankel, a professor of social work at the University of Manitoba, said Monday.
“I’m not aware of the courts giving a whole lot of guidance here in (this) area of child welfare.”
A seven-year-old girl and a boy, 2, were recently taken by child welfare workers from a home in south Winnipeg after the girl showed up at school with “hate-related drawings on her body,” police Const. Blair Good said Monday. Good would not confirm a media report that quoted unnamed sources as saying the girl was sporting a swastika and a white supremacy slogan.
Manitoba Child and Family Services is before the courts looking to obtain permanent guardianship of the children. The move is based partly on “concerns that the parents’ conduct might endanger the emotional well-being of the children … and that the children may be at risk of harm due to the parents’ behaviour and associations,” according to an affidavit from a child welfare worker.
The affidavit also says “there were concerns regarding drug and alcohol use.”
A Crown lawyer is reviewing the case to see whether criminal charges are warranted.
The couple, who cannot be named under provincial law, were not reachable at their home Monday. They have not yet filed affidavits outlining their position.
Manitoba guidelines allow child welfare workers to investigate any situation where there is concern for the safety or well-being of a child, including cases involving “religious or political practices … if those practices could be harmful to the child,” said Nadine Delisle, communications co-ordinator for Family Services and Housing.
Whether a judge would permanently remove kids from parents with racist beliefs could be a different matter, according to Frankel.
“It’s tough for me to imagine parents who are preaching sort of a neo-Nazi philosophy to also be providing a safe, nurturing environment for their child. This is a philosophy that talks about hate, talks about much of the world being a dangerous place,” he said.
“At the same, time, I don’t think just on the face of it, you can say it’s an environment that requires you to remove the child. Kids grow up in all sorts of situations that you or I or someone may not agree with.”
A hearing is set for later this month that could determine who will care for the children.
(Posted on June 11, 2008)
Comments
I’m voting for Obama. That’s my story, and I’m sticking to it. No, I did not pull the lever for Ron Paul. Or send him money. Of course not, don’t be silly. Ha ha ha ha ha. Yes, McCain does look ‘inhuman,’ as you say, my diverse friend. Ho ho ho ho ho. I would never get back at you for that remark by voting for McCain. Shucks. Sure, some poeple ‘aren’t ready’ to vote for a black man, as Oprah told you. Not me though, I’m ready, willing and able. Just listen to the words coming out of my mouth and ignore what I do in the privacy of that there voting booth when I go in there and… whoops, my hand just slipped. Wow, did I go in here and not vote for Obama? Darn it, well, too late to go back now. It’ll just be our little secret then, won’t it?
Posted by Guilty Liberal at 5:57 PM on June 11
“talks about much of the world being a dangerous place”…
Sounds like my Dad remembering Torpedo Junction. Or the Nanty-Glo coal mines for that matter.
Posted by Tim Mc Hugh at 6:06 PM on June 11
I suppose if you swallow the party line, and are racist against whites, that makes you a model parent.
Posted by at 6:06 PM on June 11
Oh my G-d. Having lived under oppression of communists in Russia for over forty years, they could do you a lot of harm for being a dissident, but to take away your kids? I would not call it fascism, because even Hitler did not do that.
In such case they must take kids from all blacks who teach and PRACTICE hatred to white people.
Posted by alex at 6:18 PM on June 11
“Including cases involving religious or political practices…” Wow, would the child protective services staff yank every muslim girl from her home on the probability that she will have to undergo “genital cutting?” What is worse, having some not too well thought out slogan painted on a girl’s arm or clitorectomy? I would guess that no muslim girl will ever be spirited out of her home due to this or any other pronouncement based on a Sura.
Posted by at 6:27 PM on June 11
My jaw dropped when I read the headline, but it wasn’t what I thought. Getting in trouble for getting drunk and sending your children to school with swatstikas drawn on their bodies isn’t political persecution. The parents sound disturbed, like a lot of people drawn to Nazi symbolism are.
Posted by Dmytro Kornilov at 6:30 PM on June 11
Good I cannot wait until they take Barack Obamas kids away from their parents.Actually in the books by H.A. Covington the war of independence fought by white nationalist against the american goverment is sparked by an attempt by the government to take children away from racist parents.I think the recent incident by the state of texas where they take away children from Mormon fundamedalist is another abuse of the state over how we should raise our children.The only crime they commited was that they were white and avoided watching television.Believe me if i could do it all over again I would not let my kid watch T.V.
Posted by Tony Soprano at 6:31 PM on June 11
“A hearing is set for later this month that could determine who will care for the children.”
These socialist/liberals just refuse to stop until they control every facet of your life and every thought in your head. Apparently now, if you dont sing the praises of multiculturalism you will lose your kids.
We all here know who the most racist people on the planet are. Anyone care to guess if these people will have their kids taken away? My guess is this only applies to whites. I predict violence in Canada’s future.
Posted by at 6:45 PM on June 11
The courts have no say in what a parent should teach their children in regards to race, religion, politics, etc. If that ruling flies then that would go against every preconceived notion of freedom in the west. Now, if the parents are somehow physically, emotionally, sexually, etc abusing their child then by all means take the child from them. However, to say that the parents are somehow putting their child at risk because their teaching her this or that ideology is completely ridiculous. It is not a stretch to say that that is the ultimate form of tyranny. The ability for the state to regulate what a parent can teach his children. There probably is not a form of tyranny that is more in your face, or more upfront than that. It is my personal opinion that the west as we know it does not have much longer to go. Just my personal opinion. Everyday I read the newspaper I read things that are happening that one could only visualize in a horror movie. Anyway, my rant is over.
Posted by Robert at 6:59 PM on June 11
Once again our socialist masters crack the whip. Drink the Kool-aid and don’t rock the boat. Just 50 more years and all your problems will be over. Trust us we are your global government and we have a plan. Please don’t deviate from the states master educational plan or we will be forced to take your children.
Since when did common folk believe that government social workers care more about our children than we do? What will they do if we don’t comply? You know what they will do, come with the men with guns to shoot your son in the back and your wife in the throat. Never forget Ruby Ridge, never surrender.
Posted by Enough at 7:02 PM on June 11
I don’t agree with gays raising children but the state won’t intervene despite the fact that these “parents” indoctrinate theses kids and warp their sense of morality. What’s the difference?
Posted by at 7:05 PM on June 11
Canada does not have a 2nd Ammendment does it?
Its time to start sharpening our pitch forks.
Posted by the Soviet Republic of New Jersey at 7:11 PM on June 11
“This is a philosophy that talks about hate, talks about much of the world being a dangerous place,” he said.
Oh I’m sorry….I was under the impression that the world was a dangerous place. Guess I was wrong again. I forgot that we live in the multicultural “paradise” called Canada.
Posted by at 7:18 PM on June 11
I’m sure they’ll do the same for anti-white muslims and black parents, right????
Posted by at 7:29 PM on June 11
“Manitoba guidelines allow child welfare workers to investigate any situation where there is concern for the safety or well-being of a child, including cases involving “religious or political practices … if those practices could be harmful to the child,” said Nadine Delisle, communications co-ordinator for Family Services and Housing.”
It’ll be highly interesting to see if the Marxist elite intend to include Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs, Jews and every other variety of black and brown-skinned enricher besides suspected white Nazis, in this latest self-appointed dictatorial power sweep they’ve granted themselves. After all, they’ve decreed it be applied to both racist and religious influencing of children, presumably without fear or favour motivated only by sincere and genuine concern for the psychological welfare of all children regardless of race, colour and creed.
Time will certainly tell on the question of their true motives!
Posted by A Swain at 7:39 PM on June 11
Governments and their schools abhor a competing indoctrination scheme.
Posted by at 7:55 PM on June 11
These parents are likely not very bright—sending their 7 year old to school wearing a swastika and ” a white supremacy slogan”, whatever that is. However, the state has no business investigating the racial views of the parents. Nor does it have the right to concern itself with their religious or philosophical beliefs. As long as they do not physically harm the children, their rights as parents should trump any state sponsored agency’s rights. Notice how quickly they insert “concerns about drugs and alcohol” into the picture to make the parents out to be criminals. This appears to be standard operating procedure for state childhood protection agencies, both in the US and Canada. The parents have committed the one true thought crime in the West by having the gall to believe that their own race is superior. When such a belief is held by blacks, hispanics and any third world immigrant, it suddenly becomes a thing of great value. So we have what is now the same old double standard, the same old anti-white thought crimes and the same old tyrannical state.
Posted by at 8:03 PM on June 11
I suppose the argument is that racism can get you killed by blacks or whomever (if you’re white, of course)?
Then how can homosexuals be allowed children, when they’ll clearly be potential targets for haters? How can blacks be allowed to have children at all, when they’re clearly targets for haters?
“It’s tough for me to imagine parents who are preaching sort of a neo-Nazi philosophy to also be providing a safe, nurturing environment for their child. This is a philosophy that talks about hate, talks about much of the world being a dangerous place,” he said.
Lol! Canada is one loopy joint! Liberalism is a philosophy that talks about hate, talks about much of the world being a dangerous place (filled with fascists like Bush, with white racism lurking in every hedge, with the threat of Nazism omnipresent and just waiting for a momentary lapse of vigilance so it can pounce on unsuspecting humanity, teeming with sexist, homophobic, misogynistic, misanthropic racist white males…).
Posted by at 8:05 PM on June 11
The more I think about it, the crazier this gets! It’s hard for Frankelbergstein or whatever his name is to imagine a safe home environment including (fill in here stuff he doesn’t like, but isn’t actually actionable). So he just makes up, then implies, a bunch of nonsense straight out of his imagination! Huh? Kanuckistan is really off the deep end! You couldn’t pay me to live there!
Posted by Svigor at 8:09 PM on June 11
Racialists should NOT drink.
How do you think our countries got this way? The ones who make these anti-white laws do NOT drink. They remain clear-headed and organized.
Do you think the Bolsheviks were drunkards?
Posted by noname at 8:27 PM on June 11
If the government, any government, takes a child from its parents do to the pro-white political beliefs of the parents then this sort of problem SHOULD be resolved over the barrel of a gun(s). However these parents sound like a couple of nuts. More information is needed.
Posted by Conrad at 9:00 PM on June 11
Unless you live here you could never understand the “Marxist utopia” we must conduct ourselves in each and every day. Canada is no longer the country our forefathers envisioned! It makes it very hard to contemplate raising white children! It is a catch 22, if we have white children they are at the mercy of these deranged psychopaths. but if we have no white children we allow them to destroy everything western man has created!
Posted by Vancouver Steve at 9:33 PM on June 11
What sickens me is how many(white)people would likely support this draconian activity - no doubt many of whom would be hysterical if the government suddenly decided it was “dangerous” to teach your children that they are created and ruled by a mystical diety or afflicted by devils or what have you. Be careful of what you wish for and be just as careful of what you condone!!
Posted by Hank at 10:03 PM on June 11
Would the Canadian courts remove a child growing up in a home that subscribes to Islamic jihad? Is that love or hate? Would Canadian courts remove a daughter from a home where the parents expected her to marry her first-cousin in Iraq or Pakistan? Who determines what “hate” means? Is the traditional Christian gospel which preaches against homosexual unions not hate?
These parents seem troubled, but such cases are what pave the way for the complete re-edication of society along left-liberal lines. The news coming out of Canada recently scares me.
Posted by An Ally in NYC at 10:07 PM on June 11
I believe that were children to be taken from their parents because of their political beliefs (ie, being racist), as opposed to actual abusive acts and/or neglect, then an armed response would be approriate.
I don’t think they will go that far, at least not until whites are clearly outnumbered.
I wouldn’t worry about kids being taken from racist blacks or jihadist Muslims. 1) Impossible because it would overwhelm the system and 2) they really don’t care about that anyway. They are after the whites.
Posted by John at 5:19 AM on June 12
If, in fact, the trouble coming to this family is a result of their foolishness (drinking, etc.) then obviously they deserve what they get.
But regardless of the “whys” of this situation, the fact that this family is in the courts puts us all at risk. It’s simply a sign of the times.
We’re told to be wise as serpents…
Posted by Mai Opinion at 9:35 AM on June 12
The odd part of Steve Lambert’s article is, who is Harvey Frankel?
A mister nobody, yet he’s pop into the picture. I like his style: “I am a very wise person; I weigh all the facts and I am on the parents’ side.” But then, “Sorry the parents teach hate. Send the kids to the concentration camp until a couple of gays can take them home with them.”
These Harvey Frankels pop up all the time. A Harvey Frankel is against gun control. He’s an expert on the 2nd Amendment. He’s interviewed about some gun-control legislation. He expresses grave doubts, but then gives his blessing to pass the law. Gun control nuts use him to help pass the gun-control law.
The lesson of this article isn’t that the state thinks it’s bad for kids to be with moms and dads that love them, but just fine and dandy for kids to live with sex perverted two mommies or two daddies. No, the lesson of this article is watch out for the Harvey Frankles and Steve Lamberts.
Posted by Walter Lewkowski at 11:39 AM on June 12
I am surprised no one has mentioned the connection with the recent action by the Texas child protective services to round up all the children (over 400 of them!) of the Fundamentalist Mormon (polygamist) group in Eldorado - a group which just happened to be on the SPLC’s “hate list” due to their leader’s preaching against blacks. The Texas Supreme court recently ordered all the children returned to their parents, but to those who say such a thing could never happen in the US, I would urge them to read about this story. The motivation advanced by the child care workers in that case, also, was the “beliefs” of the community.
Posted by at 1:22 PM on June 12
This will ultimately come back to haunt these do-gooders.
What are these children going to think of their government when they’ve been taken from their birth parents? When they become adults, are they going to thank the government for saving them?
If putting native children in white schools is now considered an historic crime, is this any different?
The future is going to be angry and bitter adults demanding compensation and reparations. The next generation is going to end up paying for and apologizing to the victims of this crime.
Posted by sbuffalonative at 3:07 PM on June 12
The idea of white nationalism has been around for centuries, but it has always failed (World War II being a notable example) and always will for the following reasons:
1. The movement is supported overwhelmingly by less educated, blue collar or former convicted people. These groups have traditionally lacked political power.
2. The movement will always remain fractured because its supporters cannot agree on who is white and what should be done.
Posted by at 3:44 PM on June 12
“The idea of white nationalism has been around for centuries, but it has always failed”
It prevailed in the United States until 1965.
“The movement is supported overwhelmingly by less educated, blue collar or former convicted people”
A slur, and untrue; it would be a far more accurate assessment of black nationalism.
Posted by Cassiodorus at 10:39 PM on June 12
Children should not have things drawn on their bodies.
As for the Texas case involving children abducted by the state from the parents who loved them, nobody was charged with any crimes after two months. One of the “13 year-old girls” described in the news turned out to be 27. The “girl” who claimed to have been raped was actually a 30-ish woman in Colorado who attempted to make an anonymous police tip.
One wife is enough for me, but so long as the people involved know what they are doing, I have no problem with polygamy or polyandry.
Posted by Michael C. Scott at 5:14 AM on June 13
“The idea of white nationalism has been around for centuries, but it has always failed (World War II being a notable example) and always will for the following reasons:
1. The movement is supported overwhelmingly by less educated, blue collar or former convicted people. These groups have traditionally lacked political power.
2. The movement will always remain fractured because its supporters cannot agree on who is white and what should be done”
This may have well been true in the past but the past didn’t have the same problems ie.mass immigration and crime, that we have today. Today things are changing and the definition of white nationalism is changing and taking a different form. There are far more educated people than in the past for one thing and as more people are adversely affected by immgration, crime and other things. Today are society and its’ culture is being gravely threatened. There will of course always be fringe groups but anti-immigration etc. is much more mainstream.
Posted by at 8:40 AM on June 13
There is something obviously wrong with those parents. But if a court systems slaps a ‘racist’ label on the wrongdoing, this defense could be used on anyone deemed a racist. Bad idea. One bad apple spoils the bunch.
Posted by at 1:09 PM on June 13
Canada is not the only place that targets children of white realists.
Leftists “need to hit [nationalists] where
it hurts most, like close and personal with their kids”
EAU correspondents
A leftist blog site affiliated with the Labour Party and the Jewish Searchlight hate group, the UK equivalent of the Southern Poverty Law Center, has a post advocating the targeting of the children of nationalists. The sick terrorist threat comes as part of a campaign to stop the British National Party’s annual outdoor event, the Red, White and Blue festival, which an observer from European Americans United attended in 2007.
The post says, “Although anti-fascists in Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire have been working together to harass the BNP, we need to hit them where it hurts most, like close and personal with their kids. These Nazis try to maintain the appearance of a family fun celebration just like an old style Butlins holiday camp when actually its like the Hitler youth.
If they bring their children along to such conflict-provoking events then it wouldn’t be surprising if some of them got accidentally injured in the conflict. Spread this news around and see how the attendance drops off.”
In a totally political ploy, police in the area officially have opposed a license for the BNP, BECAUSE OF THESE THREATS FROM ITS OPPONENTS! In other words, because some thugs have threatened violence, then the victims of those threats should lose their freedom of assembly and speech!
Posted by at 7:14 PM on June 13
And Jesse Dirkhising, who was brutally sexually murdered by two neighbors who were homosexual predators, was probably a ‘model multicultural’ student in the Public Indoctrination Centers,…err. Schools.
What right does a state have over a parent’s children? NONE.
What racially aware/religiously aware/sexually normal parents send their children to Public Schools, anyway?
But, most of all, What fool of a parent sends a child to school with vile and inflammatory ‘hate’ symbols?
Oh, wait. Rock and Roll t-shirts, Black power raised fists, rainbow flags about ‘two mommies/daddies’ and Obama t-shirts….. I forgot.
It’s only WHITE symbols that are not allowed…. Yes- now I understand.
If people want to see hate in the ‘stars and bars’, or in a swastika, it is but a small step from the underlying ‘cross’ embedded in each historically verifiable symbol, to the hatred of Christians for merely BEING Christians.
And don’t think those that worship inverted triangles DON’T ‘hate’ just as deeply as those they accuse of being ‘haters.’ No one is as fueled by hatred as a jilted lover, even if it was the Almighty who threw them over for a prettier ‘bride.’ [Gal. 4:30]
Posted by Fr. John at 7:34 AM on June 14
The Texas Mormon group that had their children abducted by Child Protective Services was mentioned above, so I think it fair to post a few additional relevant facts about the case:
Sleeping with a lot of women is not illegal. If it were, our prisons would be full of college students.
Two months after the raid, nobody had been charged with anything at all.
The “16 year-old girl” who allegedly called authorities was actually a woman in her thirties living in Colorado.
One of the so-called “13 year-old mothers” was actually 27 years old.
These people are very lucky in one respect; since the FBI was not involved, they avoided being burned to death.
Posted by Michael C. Scott at 4:08 PM on June 14
This meshes with a story I saw a few days ago about McLeans magazine (a Canadian magazine much like Time magazine in the US) being sued by Muslims because of supposed anti-Muslim publishings. Canada has no First Amendment and has vicious, almost unbelievable hate speech laws. You can go to jail for merely suggesting that there is truth in some anti-Black criticisms, for example. Canadians for a long time patted themselves on the back as being superior to the US. They looked down on us for our racial problems, all the time when they had no other races in their country but White. Now they have imported other races at a furious pace. Finally White Canadians are starting to see what all the fuss in the US was about. But it is too late. The Marxists have control of the Government bureacracy and the media and academia. They are out of their freaking minds and are destroying the nation they live in.
Posted by Victor Gerhard at 4:37 PM on June 14
While I do agree with Dmytro Kornilov’s post wholeheartedly, I also remember when the Marxists used to remove children from their parents if they weren’t ideologically pure. Christian children, for example, were pulled from their loving mother’s hands and placed into state run atheistic marxist orphanges while the parents were systematically persecuted. Those were the good old days of Soviet Marxism. Russian society still bears the scars today of the psychopathism they endured.
Posted by Unemployed WASP at 12:33 AM on June 15
“The Texas Mormon group that had their children abducted by Child Protective Services was mentioned above, so I think it fair to post a few additional relevant facts about the case:
Sleeping with a lot of women is not illegal. If it were, our prisons would be full of college students.
Two months after the raid, nobody had been charged with anything at all.
The “16 year-old girl” who allegedly called authorities was actually a woman in her thirties living in Colorado.
One of the so-called “13 year-old mothers” was actually 27 years old.
These people are very lucky in one respect; since the FBI was not involved, they avoided being burned to death.”
I live in Texas so know a lot about this case. I am very much against polygamy of course but feel that as long as people are consenting adults, they have the right to live with and sleep with as many as they want, no matter how disgusting. However, marriage to more than one is illegal so these are not multiple wives but multiple women they live with. Many of these polygamist cult women get welfare, food stamps and handouts because in the eyes of the state, they are single parents. I don’t agree with this. The taxpayers shouldn’t subsidize these lifesyles. Also, there were underage teenage girls being forced to “marry” these men and several girls below the age of consent were indeed pregnant, so I do agree with the states removal of underage kids in these “polygamist” cults. As long as you are an adult, you have the right to choose you lifestyle but you don’t have the right to force your sexual/marriage beliefs on kids or endanger them. Also, the government doesnt’ have the right to do what it did in Waco and burn people up like that.
Posted by at 2:07 AM on June 16
“The WN movement is supported overwhelmingly by less educated, blue collar or former convicted people”
— — — — — —
If that is so (and I’m not sure), then it is because those people or classes are the ones most affected by the social engineering that is being done to white society.
The rich and powerful who make the laws that impose integration and forced “equality” upon the rest of us, have arranged so that those laws will have no affect upon them. How many Kennedy’s or Bush’s do you see living in integrated communities or getting bussed to integrated schools?
Posted by browser at 8:02 PM on June 16
“such cases are what pave the way for the complete re-edication of society along left-liberal lines. The news coming out of Canada recently scares me.”
Posted by An Ally in NYC
— — — — — —
The news coming from most of the world scares me. More and more, we in the US are becoming isolated, as traditional notions of personal freedom and free speech are eroded everywhere. And make no mistake, the leftist totalitarians are nibbling at our feet too!
Posted by browser at 8:04 PM on June 16