http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090114/ap_on_re_us/hitler_cake

saw the story on yahoo a few months back about how some store wouldn't write "happy birthday adolf hitler campbell" on a cake for their son, just saw this article now. as ignorant as those parents' views are, i sure hope there was an actual reason behind taking their kids away. i mean if they were providing them with a nurturing home, food, clothes, no mistreatment, you can't really take them away now can you? at least not in the united states.

I agree that if what the Newspapers say they said is true, those parents are fucking retarded. This doesn't give the government the right to kidnap their children because some Marxist social worker thinks they should.

I posted this in IFOTW though because they had the original cake thread and this was a follow up.

Fucking bullshit. What kind of country do I live in?

no mistreatment

This certainly raises an interesting ethical question. Sure maybe they weren't mistreating their own child, but were they advocating the mistreatment of others? And if so, should that type of enviornment be considered hazardous for a child to grow up in?

Those names are cool. What's the big deal :confused:

they probably had a good reason. i mean, if it wasnt, theyre setting themselves up to have the pants sued off them

This certainly raises an interesting ethical question. Sure maybe they weren't mistreating their own child, but were they advocating the mistreatment of others? And if so, should that type of enviornment be considered hazardous for a child to grow up in?

I think we have to respect the parent's rights here. It would be different if there was evidence of the parents giving the kids a direct order to do something illegal and then they did it. But just telling your kids "ya we don't like niggers and kikes" isn't really all that far out there. I mean my dad has said racist shit before. I've said racist shit before. Even if this lead me to go to a KKK rally, I'd still be within my rights. It only changes if an illegal or violent act occurred.

I think we have to respect the parent's rights here.

The right to psychologically abuse their child by giving them a retarded name like Adolf Hitler?

The right to psychologically abuse their child by giving them a retarded name like Adolf Hitler?

You can't tell parents what they can and can't name their children. Just because they named him after someone who is disliked by more people than he is liked, what the fuck does that mean? The kid will either grow up loving the nazi philosophy and his name, or rebel and change his name and go on with life.

You can't tell parents what they can and can't name their children.

I disagree. I think society has a duty of care to the children of irresponsible morons, due to the fact that society allows morons to breed in the first place.

Just because they named him after someone who is disliked by more people than he is liked, what the fuck does that mean? The kid will either grow up loving the nazi philosophy and his name, or rebel and change his name and go on with life.

He could do both of those anyway, without the torment he will no doubt suffer from his peers as he grows up.

You ever see clerks 2? And they try to reclaim the word porch monkey? Maybe this was all a misunderstanding and the parents were just trying to reclaim the name Adolf Hitler? You know...bring it back.

You ever see clerks 2? And they try to reclaim the word porch monkey? Maybe this was all a misunderstanding and the parents were just trying to reclaim the name Adolf Hitler? You know...bring it back.

In that case I wonder what they'll call their next son, Josef Mengele?

I'm not saying they shouldn't have named their kids Hitler, or that they shouldn't be allowed to. But would it be ok, and should it be okay, for me to name my kid Imafuckingdouchebag Andacunt Smith?

Does naming a kid Adolf Hitler demonstrate a lack of sanity? Maybe in some people's eyes, but probably not. Does naming a kid Imafuckingdouchebag Andacunt Smith demonstrate a lack of sanity? Yeah, probably. Social services can take kids away if they deem the parents "unfit" to raise children. My cousin is a coke addict, has been to jail, and is married to another coke addict. The second of their two kids was born addicted to crack (hey, times are tight, gotta make cuts), and they still got to keep their kids.

Maybe it is a very poor act of parenting to name a kid Hitler, especially in the U.S. given our culture animosity (not that it doesn't exist in other places) toward him. If you knew a kid named Hitler wouldn't you kick his ass or at least make fun of him? And if you wouldn't because you're an ultra-enlightened, liberal thinking, free-world-anarchist totse member, you can't tell me that you don't know someone who WOULD kick his ass.

In France, parents have to pick their kids' names from an approved list (it was an attempt to prevent teasing). That's fucked up. And it is equally fucked up that the government has a right to dictate who and who we cannot name our children after based on ideological differences. But we all must admit that living in the U.S. and naming you kid Adolf Hitler Whateverthefucktheirlastnameis is pretty fucking stupid. Is it a demonstration of a failure to be a competant parent? I don't know, I don't know the people. They could be perfectly nice or they could be fucked up.

But if my cousins can be born addicted to crack and still have their parents considered responsible enough to be parents, and the U.S. government is willing to take kids away because of their NAMES....then does that mean that the government would rather you get your kids hooked on crack than name them after a prominent, albiet contraversal figure in history? Correct me if I'm wrong, but WWII ended a long fucking time ago and the (alleged) war on drugs is still going on.