http://hotair.com/archives/2009/01/14/new-jersey-official-we-didnt-take-the-kid-because-hes-named-after-hitler/

Seriously, I’ve worked close enough to the system in DC (just as socialist as NJ) and if the only crime that the parents of these otherwise happy children is naming their kid Adolph- it’s steps ahead from the abusive situations I saw where hate-filled (anti-white and anti-establishment) parents doomed their kids but did so under conventional naming criteria.

highhopes on January 14, 2009

The update thread noted that a spokesman for the child protective services said that they would NOT remove children from their home because of their names. The reason for the seizure of the children was NOT REVEALED.

We can what if until we’re blue in the face, but how about having some basic knowledge before we do so?

God’s sake before you go ripping families apart.
It’s crazy to let the govt have this kind of unchecked power.

Badger40 on January 15, 2009 at 5:09 PM

Like I said, it is a Catch 22, by time you get proof, the damage may be done…and you may have survived, but many don’t, at least as a whole person…and each abuse is different, on a different person, in different circumstances, etc.
We have to protect the least among us, yet we can’t…

right2bright on January 15, 2009 at 4:21

I remember Jones Town. And yes there are Nazis.
Acting on the premise that there might be abuse etc can be more harmful to society than waiting to have some actual proof before ripping children from the only home they’ve ever known.
Creating instability within the family unit by allowing govt agencies to run rampant unchecked is dangerous.
This kind of thinking is in step with the type where people don’t like to use corporal punishments bcs the guy might be innocent & killing one innocent is unacceptable, even if a murderer can go free to kill many more than that.
Sorry-but the Constitution is there for a reason.
Just bcs the neighbor, social worker, etc thinks you might be abusing your child (with no proof to back it up) doesn’t mean the govt has any right to usurp your Consitutional rights in the name of a ‘maybe’.

Abuse is horrible & I am a survivor of physical abuse during my childhood & teen years, but you gotta have some proof for God’s sake before you go ripping families apart.
It’s crazy to let the govt have this kind of unchecked power.

It happens all the time, you just don’t hear about it!

Badger40 on January 15, 2009 at 12:32 PM

With emphasis on “all the time”…it is a “cry wolf” scenario, the minute you decide not to follow through, it will be an actual case.
That is what makes this so emotionally charged.
If these “parents” decide to pull the Nazi stunt of killing the kids and them in a Nazi pact, then everyone would be hollering of why the state didn’t step in to protect the children…remember Jones Town?
So they overreact, with ill trained people…and you get chaos.
The road to hell is paved with good intentions

This is a scary and possibly unconstitutional action, on the part of the government.

If children who are given names that displease the government are going to be removed from their homes, in the future, than perhaps the Obama girls ought to be removed from Barrack “Hussein” Obama’s house, immediately for their own protection.. They will be ridiculed and compared to Saddam Hussein and his boys throughout their lives and Obama actually does have Muslim ties.

sinsing on January 14, 2009 at 2:08 PM

I was thinking the same thing.. or anyone naming their child after B Hussein Obama.

J.G. Thayer compares and contrasts Israel and the Palestinians:
Israelis make shelters for children.
Palestinian terrorists make shelters of children.
Click through to read the list, full of supporting links. The real question is why the media consist…

highhopes on January 14, 2009 at 8:12 PM

You aren’t wrong, but neither is the other side…we don’t want to end up supporting this family, then there kids, and then their kids…the odds of this guys kids not being in and out of jail is probably about 90% in jail, 10% out of jail.
That is why these things concern some of us, it is the long term affect…the counter to this is that the gov. is no more responsible then the parents, a true Catch 22.
Which is worse, abusive parents, or abusive Government…take your poison, either way we pay.

Shooting someone breaking into my house is the only answer. Just like every other liberal whack job, until your life is in danger, you’ll never figure out why.

And more ad hominem attacks from the guy with no argument. Bravo, kid, you’re a class act.

leetpriest on January 14, 2009 at 7:08 PM

Well kiddo, you state I am a liberal, but then you say “ad hominem”…so anyone who thinks that it is wrong to shoot a child who breaks into a house is the only answer, is now a liberal?
You’re a class act, lets hope some kid, like the one in Virginia in diabetes shock doesn’t stumble into your house…they won’t die of diabetes shock, they will be killed by you…
And my young naive friend, better check the court cases before you rely on statutes…I will assure you, shooting a 7 year old in your house will not garner you any medals…
I think you better check your “the Iraqis children are out to kill me” at the border, this is America, and guns are not the first resort, they are the last resort.

How on God’s green planet is this a tough call? This government intrusion if (as reported) the only reason for taking the children is the “unique” names given by their parents.

highhopes on January 14, 2009 at 8:12 PM

They aren’t just unconventional names, Highhopes. They’re names that will, without any doubt, subject these poor children to contempt and abuse. Any parent insensitive to that fact, and who also seem to have no appreciation as to how these highjinks might affect their children, could probably benefit from some sort of mental health intervention and/or parenting class.

But don’t fret. After some pitiful and unsuccessful attempt by NJ to make these pathetic deadbeats understand that you shouldn’t use your kids to act out your bizarre obsessions, they’ll be free to screw their kids as much as they want.

JannyMae on January 14, 2009 at 7:16 PM

Ah, but by law, the records and hearing will be sealed.

In fact, I bet the judge will slap an gag order on the parents… or at least warn them that talking to the public could jeopordize their case…

Saw it happen to a friend of mine… guy couldn’t even really defend himself as most of the case against him was hearsay… which family courts do allow…

It’s a tough call, but I can see where NJ is coming from.

Infidoll on January 14, 2009 at 7:03 PM

How on God’s green planet is this a tough call? This government intrusion if (as reported) the only reason for taking the children is the “unique” names given by their parents.

By your standards we should replace GITMO with a detention facility for children removed from “unfit” homes. The new detainees would include:

Most children of Hollywood stars who name their kids like most people name pets.

Kids with “ethnic” names like Tawana, Letisha, or other name that labels them black inner-city ghetto. Can’t get ahead in the world with a gang-banger name.

Seriously, I’ve worked close enough to the system in DC (just as socialist as NJ) and if the only crime that the parents of these otherwise happy children is naming their kid Adolph- it’s steps ahead from the abusive situations I saw where hate-filled (anti-white and anti-establishment) parents doomed their kids but did so under conventional naming criteria.

ONLY the government can stop this kind of tragedy!

ONLY the government can prevent this kind of abuse!

ONLY the government can get this mess straightened out!

Exit question: Did they trump up some other grounds as a pretext? Too much cussin’ by dad, maybe?

Short of physical abuse, no pretext is sufficient to warrant such action by the government.

Photo

Dude looks like a lady and lady looks like Karl Rove.

(Kid looks cute. Poor thing.)

From the linked article:

Harris says a family court hearing on the case is scheduled for Thursday in Hunterdon County.

He said the parents were not happy about the decision, but that there was nothing unusual about the procedure.

A spokeswoman for the state Division of Youth and Family Services, Kate Bernyk, said she would not comment on any specific case, but she said the state would not remove children from a home simply because of their names.

They’re going to get a hearing.

I think I’ll wait until I find out what the reason was for removing these children from their home before I make a judgment on this, unlike so many of you who jumped to conclusions.

No, I caught your ‘point.’

It was just neither interesting nor worthy of comment.

Religious_Zealot on January 14, 2009 at 5:57 PM

Could have fooled me:

Religious_Zealot on January 14, 2009 at 1:37 PM

Religious_Zealot on January 14, 2009 at 2:05 PM

Religious_Zealot on January 14, 2009 at 2:47 PM

Religious_Zealot on January 14, 2009 at 4:13 PM

Religious_Zealot on January 14, 2009 at 4:34 PM

Says the guy that commented back 5 times.