Tags:

Cake take two
January 14, 2009 6:40 AM   Subscribe

Adolf Hitler taken from family home. Previously.

A little follow up on the no cake story.
posted by fixedgear to MetaFilter-Related at 6:40 AM (163 comments total) 1 user marked this as a favorite

The cake is a lie.
posted by b1tr0t at 6:46 AM on January 14, 2009 [1 favorite]


Man, even though the foster system is a bitch, I can only imagine it will improve the lives of these poor children.
posted by Afroblanco at 6:49 AM on January 14, 2009


well. there's pretty much no real info in that story, is there?
posted by msconduct at 6:50 AM on January 14, 2009


The cake is a lie.

"In the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods."
posted by Joe Beese at 6:57 AM on January 14, 2009


No one gave reports of negligence or abuse and they removed them anyway? From just the information given, I think that sucks.
posted by sondrialiac at 6:58 AM on January 14, 2009


More.
posted by fixedgear at 7:01 AM on January 14, 2009


Wouldn't it have been easier to just make the bakery give them their damn cake?
posted by sambosambo at 7:01 AM on January 14, 2009


oh, msnbc, how I admire your cutesy, pop-eyed jackass headlines: "'Nein' Cake for You, Little Adolf". I wish American media weren't so eager to roll around in the News-of-the-Weird trough. Philly and N.C. are hardly near each other, I don't know why this would be "Local News" for people in Philadelphia.
posted by boo_radley at 7:03 AM on January 14, 2009 [2 favorites]


DYFS had to know this would be a high profile case, curious to see how this turns out.
posted by The Straightener at 7:06 AM on January 14, 2009


Errr, you might want to check a map. It's NJ, which I'm pretty sure = New Jersey. A river separates the two states.
posted by fixedgear at 7:06 AM on January 14, 2009 [1 favorite]


Philly and N.C. are hardly near each other, I don't know why this would be "Local News" for people in Philadelphia.

They are both "east coastish" so for all us heartland folks, it's the same thing.
posted by Pants! at 7:08 AM on January 14, 2009


In a more-or-less straight shot, Google maps walking directions list Greenwich, NJ (where the grocery store was) as a mere 57 miles from Philly.

Personally, I would consider that local.
posted by paisley henosis at 7:14 AM on January 14, 2009


"'Nein' Cake for You, Little Adolf"

Whoever wrote that headline deserves a kick in the shins.
If they really wanted to use a German word there to be clever, they could have said "Kein Cake", but since the average American's German vocabulary is limited to "Ja", Nein" and "Sieg Heil" they had to shoehorn in a word that people would get.
Ham-fisted attempts at being funny like that make me grimace.
posted by dunkadunc at 7:23 AM on January 14, 2009 [5 favorites]


oh, msnbc, how I admire your cutesy, pop-eyed jackass headlines: "'Nein' Cake for You, Little Adolf"

On top of that, the 'nein' is completely wrong here, as 'nein' is only used to answer negatively to a question ("Are you a German spy?" "Nein!"). "No" in this sentence would have to be translated as "Kein". But maybe that's too difficult for the hur-hurring public.
posted by Skyanth at 7:25 AM on January 14, 2009 [1 favorite]


I can only imagine it will improve the lives of these poor children.

Will it? Not that I want kids raised as Nazis, but is being ripped away from your family really that great for kids? Were they being abused or neglected? Presumably their day-to-day lives were fairly normal, modulo a little swastika saluting.

Granted, if they'd been *born* in another family, they'd probably be better off. But *moving* them to another family may be just as bad as leaving them be. (For Adolph himself anyway--the others are too young to have any clue.)

I honestly don't know and neither do any of you, unless you know more than the brief news articles have told us.
posted by DU at 7:26 AM on January 14, 2009 [1 favorite]


*waves at dunkadunc*
posted by Skyanth at 7:26 AM on January 14, 2009 [1 favorite]


Will it? Not that I want kids raised as Nazis, but is being ripped away from your family really that great for kids?

Uh...yeah, sometimes, yeah. Like if your family names you "Aryan Nation Campbell." I mean, what the fuck, obviously they're better off.
posted by kittens for breakfast at 7:28 AM on January 14, 2009 [1 favorite]


Presumably their day-to-day lives were fairly normal, modulo a little swastika saluting.

Quoted to emphasize irony unnoticed by poster.
posted by Afroblanco at 7:29 AM on January 14, 2009 [1 favorite]


Man I am wicked tired of Hitler. And the next one of you dongs that makes that "You know who else...?" joke gets a sockfull of nickles right in the trachea. Shit!
posted by Divine_Wino at 7:30 AM on January 14, 2009 [7 favorites]


As an anecdote, I met my first neonazi today. he had a full collection of "white power" pins and Iron Crosses, and was talking to some otherwise likable and respectable students outside my school. I was kind of appalled they were giving the monkey the time of day, since i was having a hard time not decking him right then and there.
posted by dunkadunc at 7:31 AM on January 14, 2009


You know who else was taken from his family home?
posted by grouse at 7:31 AM on January 14, 2009


Yep -- NBC Philadelphia (WCAU) covers Philadelphia and portions of New Jersey (Camden), etc. -- just across the river. Their broadcast area includes those two states. Just as here in Boston, our local news stations cover NH and RI -- and consider news there to be "local."
posted by ericb at 7:31 AM on January 14, 2009


nickels, cocksucker! FUCK!
posted by Divine_Wino at 7:31 AM on January 14, 2009 [4 favorites]


That's it grouse, I'm on my way, where are you right now? Someone call me a cab and get me a double handfull of nickels, I've got a sock already.
posted by Divine_Wino at 7:33 AM on January 14, 2009


I honestly don't know and neither do any of you, unless you know more than the brief news articles have told us.

You're not going to get any more details about the agency's reasoning unless someone within the agency leaks something, these cases are confidential and the agency won't comment about them even after the case is closed. It will go to court and from the court proceding you'll get some details but child welfare agencies don't publicly state their cases in order to justify their actions to the press. Which isn't to say their actions weren't unjustified, but there's a possibility that there was something unreported happening in the home that was revealed after the initial media attention caused someone to open an investigation. You don't know, though, and you won't for a while yet.
posted by The Straightener at 7:34 AM on January 14, 2009 [4 favorites]


obviously they're better off

In what ways, specifically? Better nutrition? Happier? Possibly better socialization, although that's not a given. Consider apparently normal people you work with who turned out to have some wacko opinion.

irony unnoticed by poster.

Incorrect.
posted by DU at 7:36 AM on January 14, 2009


I knew a kid named Lazarus, his mother (Raven Watersnake) decided not to talk around him and to teach him a sign language of her own invention instead.

Kid was the angriest little four-year-old I ever met.
posted by dunkadunc at 7:37 AM on January 14, 2009 [3 favorites]


There is a KKK enclave out in that part of NJ.
posted by caddis at 7:38 AM on January 14, 2009


You know who else advocated physical violence against those who said things he didn't like?
posted by Navelgazer at 7:41 AM on January 14, 2009 [10 favorites]


It is unclear why the children were removed from their parent’s home. Gilson said his department did not receive any reports of abuse or negligence.

Seems he didn't remember the articles about the kids' names.
posted by ORthey at 7:47 AM on January 14, 2009



You know who else advocated physical violence against those who said things he didn't like?


Was it that tedious asshole Hitler?
posted by Divine_Wino at 7:49 AM on January 14, 2009 [11 favorites]


You know who else advocated physical violence against those who said things he didn't like?

Macho Man Randy Savage?
OH YEAHHHHHHHHHH!
posted by inigo2 at 7:51 AM on January 14, 2009 [16 favorites]


In what ways, specifically? Better nutrition? Happier? Possibly better socialization, although that's not a given. Consider apparently normal people you work with who turned out to have some wacko opinion.

Dude, I don't know where the hell you've worked, but I've never had coworkers who thought the genocide of millions was acceptable.

And I don't think that it's too much of a jump to assume that people in favor of genocide would make for incredibly fucked-up parents. In fact, I don't see how they could not be incredibly fucked up parents.

Just because these parents fed and clothed their children and took them for regular doctors' visits doesn't mean that they were good or even acceptable parents. Abuse takes many forms, and parents who don't emotionally or mentally prepare their children for the world in which they will live are neglecting their children in a very important, albeit nonphysical way.

In fact, I think you could argue that these kids would be better off with dirt-poor, yet sane, parents.
posted by Afroblanco at 7:51 AM on January 14, 2009 [1 favorite]


Was it that tedious asshole Hitler?

Yep.

Christ, what an asshole.
posted by Joe Beese at 7:53 AM on January 14, 2009


You know who else advocated physical violence against those who said things he didn't like?

Was it that tedious asshole Hitler?


You bet. He totally punched little Aryannation after she called him "stupidhead."
posted by Navelgazer at 7:55 AM on January 14, 2009 [1 favorite]


Macho Man Randy Savage?

ART THOU BORED?
posted by cortex (staff) at 7:55 AM on January 14, 2009 [4 favorites]


You know who else advocated physical violence against those who said things he didn't like?

- Macho Man Randy Savage?


You mean this?
posted by Joe Beese at 7:55 AM on January 14, 2009


In what ways, specifically? Better nutrition? Happier?

They have cake.
posted by Combustible Edison Lighthouse at 7:56 AM on January 14, 2009 [22 favorites]


This might not end well. Lil'Adolph might grow up with an insatiable desire to return to his homeland, and to unite his disparate family. Pretty soon we'll have tanks rolling into New Jersey.

Wait, maybe it's not such a bad idea.
posted by blue_beetle at 8:00 AM on January 14, 2009


We don't know the whole story, of course, but I really doubt the child welfare people could possibly justify removing these children from their home on the grounds of their being named something wildly inappropriate. It's more likely that the brou-ha-ha over the cake fiasco alterted the child welfare people, and got them to go looking for abuse within this family.
posted by orange swan at 8:03 AM on January 14, 2009


Abuse takes many forms, and parents who don't emotionally or mentally prepare their children for the world in which they will live are neglecting their children in a very important, albeit nonphysical way.

The standards for child welfare foster care placements tend not to rely on the more subjective qualities of good and bad parenting you're talking about Afroblanco, though I'm not saying I have any position on your statement. If the agency pulled the kids based solely on the fact that the parents have fucked up ideologies then I think they'll have an extremely hard case to make in court and I fully expect that as we speak some Stormfront sympathetic lawyer is conferencing with the family hoping to take advantage of the media attention to advance their common cause by filing some kind of civil liberties law suit against the agency. That's why I'm going to wager the agency has some type of hard evidence to support their decision. As I stated, they had to know this would be all over the news and the blogs, a super high profile case, and they would want their ducks in a row before taking this action. But, who knows, big child welfare agencies are also known to be horribly ass-backwards bureaucracies that regularly do dumb shit with no good reason at all.

As I said, it will be interesting to see where this winds up.
posted by The Straightener at 8:04 AM on January 14, 2009 [5 favorites]


We don't know the whole story, of course

It involves nonconsensual rectal exam porn.

'Nuff said.
posted by Joe Beese at 8:06 AM on January 14, 2009


Isn't this just going to cement in their minds the idea that the white aryan race is being oppressed?
posted by Deathalicious at 8:18 AM on January 14, 2009


Dude, I don't know where the hell you've worked, but I've never had coworkers who thought the genocide of millions was acceptable.

I live in the US. Admittedly, we're a little messed up, but there are many with not just secret opinions but actual bumper stickers such as "nuke 'em all and let God sort it out". Think of that crazy uncle you have who wants to kill all Muslims. Or a recent Presidential candidate who wanted to bomb Iran. (And another that merely wanted to deport all Mexicans.)

Just because these parents fed and clothed their children and took them for regular doctors' visits doesn't mean that they were good or even acceptable parents. Abuse takes many forms, and parents who don't emotionally or mentally prepare their children for the world in which they will live are neglecting their children in a very important, albeit nonphysical way.

I agree. But the only datapoints we have from this family is the names of the kids and the fact that they are Nazis, which is not enough to conclude that the children are emotionally or mentally abused or neglected.

Consider actual Nazi children raised in Germany before and during WWII. Children of death camp guards, even. Yes, I'm sure some of these have been a little messed up by the legacy of their family history. But the vast majority are probably normal sane adults with a deep regret (or even not that much, if they have separated from their families). Crazy opinions are not enough to determine that a family situation requires intervention.
posted by DU at 8:19 AM on January 14, 2009 [1 favorite]


If these kids grow up to be well-adjusted, normal people, I'm not sure which endlessly repeated question I feel most sorry for:

"Your parents named you after Hitler?"

"Your parents were nuts for Nazi stuff, but couldn't spell Himmler correctly?"
posted by CKmtl at 8:23 AM on January 14, 2009 [2 favorites]


Just because these parents fed and clothed their children and took them for regular doctors' visits doesn't mean that they were good or even acceptable parents. Abuse takes many forms, and parents who don't emotionally or mentally prepare their children for the world in which they will live are neglecting their children in a very important, albeit nonphysical way.

Having a fringe belief is child abuse and justifies the removal of a child from his or her home?

:(
posted by prefpara at 8:23 AM on January 14, 2009 [3 favorites]


many with not just secret opinions but actual bumper stickers

Oh, but my point was not that there are a lot of genocidal racists in the US. My point is that having genocidal racist opinions does not automatically bar you from participating more or less normally in open society. You just have to keep it secret.

When I was in HS there was an adult that I knew who was virulently racist. He was a normal guy otherwise, but couldn't use the drive-thru, which is how I found out about the racism. He had to actually SEE his food being prepared to make sure a black person didn't touch it.

Considering the time and place, I'm assuming he got, or at least shared, these opinions with his parents. Should he have been removed from their care at an early age?
posted by DU at 8:24 AM on January 14, 2009


Here's hoping the New Jersey Division of Youth and Family Services is the final solution for young Adolf Hitler.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 8:27 AM on January 14, 2009


My Cake Is a Liar shirt just came in the mail yesterday. Synchronicity in the hizzouse.
posted by nomisxid at 8:28 AM on January 14, 2009


No one gave reports of negligence or abuse and they removed them anyway?

It's possible that negligence and abuse were found without any outside reports. I'm not sure of what-all can trigger a CPS visit, but it's not necessarily due to a neighbor phoning in about the kids in cages next door.

Case in point: When my son was about 16 months old, he managed to cut his finger grabbing after a shiny object that happened to be a knife. (He's quick!) After his sisters stopped screaming and running in circles (boy, does that help a calm assessment & triage by mom & dad) we ran him down to the emergency room that's two blocks from the house, signed him in, and took our place in line. After about half an hour of waiting, the wait-station nurse (or whatever you call the desk lady in an ER) suggested that since the wait was going to be quite long, that perhaps we should drive the little guy to their S.W. branch, which had just opened a few days before, and was empty -- no wait. She'd called to check for us, and it was a 15 minute drive, so we said sure. Before we could leave though, we had to sign a form saying we'd declined to consent to treatment, (or refused treatment, I forget the exact wording) since we'd already signed him in. It worked out great, Seton SW stitched the little guy up in no time flat, (he was soooo brave holding out his tiny finger for the doctor -- 'scuse me while I... *snif*)

Anyway, two days later, the phone rings. It's Child Protective Services. The declining to consent to treatment form for a toddler rang their bell pretty darn quick. We had to give them the name of the attending physician at the ER that we'd taken him to subsequent to the first ER trip to head off a home visit.

So who knows what could have triggered a trip to lil' ol' Adolph's happy trailer in the woods. Whatever happens, I sure hope he gets a normal name out of the deal.
posted by Devils Rancher at 8:29 AM on January 14, 2009


Man, this story would be so much better if lil Baby Adolf was actually a full grown mountain gorilla, except that nowhere in the reporting that fact is made a big deal of. We'd just have picture after picture of White Trash Dad standing, smiling with his arm around a hulking beast, each captioned like "Adolf Hitler At Home" and "Nein Cake For Fuhrer" and so on.

Man, what a world that would be.
posted by robocop is bleeding at 8:29 AM on January 14, 2009 [5 favorites]


Actually, DU, unless I'm mis-remembering, wasn't there recently a documentary about a woman who was the daughter of [random high level Nazi, possibly a doctor] who met up with one of his victims [possibly the housekeeper]? As I recall, the daughter of the Nazi father was absolutely messed up and upset about her childhood.

Yes! This NPR story has the details. Admittedly, the woman wasn't raised by her father for very long (he died when she was one), but she speaks about being having a *very* difficult childhood. So sometimes, a parent's state of mind (without any emotional or physical abuse) can have a negative effect on a child.
posted by librarylis at 8:33 AM on January 14, 2009


I'll point out that the person quoted as not having "receive[d] any reports of abuse or negligence" is the township police chief, not a DYFS representative.
posted by Doofus Magoo at 8:33 AM on January 14, 2009 [1 favorite]


No one gave reports of negligence or abuse and they removed them anyway? From just the information given, I think that sucks.

Note that the one giving the quote is the police chief, but that they were removed by Family Services. From this, I would conclude that the police chief may not have heard anything, but Family Services has - and they won't disclose that information.
posted by never used baby shoes at 8:37 AM on January 14, 2009


Crazy opinions are not enough to determine that a family situation requires intervention.

Yeah, and I'm not saying the kids should be taken away on the basis of their names alone. I guess what I'm saying is that I would not be in a state of shock if it turned out that these parents were seriously fucking up their kids. In fact, I'd be surprised if they weren't. They named their one of their kids Adolf Hitler, for crying out loud.
posted by Afroblanco at 8:41 AM on January 14, 2009


So sometimes, a parent's state of mind (without any emotional or physical abuse) can have a negative effect on a child.

I'm not disputing this, but I draw your attention to "sometimes".

In fact, I'd be surprised if they weren't.

That's because you are committing a logical fallacy. Say that it is true that all screwed up kids come from screwed up parents. Is it then true that all screwed up parents have screwed up kids? No. Not only is that logically invalid, it is factually incorrect.
posted by DU at 8:49 AM on January 14, 2009


MetaFilter: I honestly don't know and neither do any of you.
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 8:59 AM on January 14, 2009 [2 favorites]


I knew a kid named Lazarus, his mother (Raven Watersnake) decided not to talk around him and to teach him a sign language of her own invention instead.

Kid was the angriest little four-year-old I ever met.

What? Can you explain more about this, it sounds fascinating. Did the kid pick up language from other people?

Also, it's not just a question of being taken away from one family and put in another; its being taken away from one family and put in foster care. Foster care fucks kids up, although I suppose it differs from state to state but I suspect being raised a Nazi is probably not as bad as growing up in foster care.
posted by delmoi at 8:59 AM on January 14, 2009 [1 favorite]


That's because you are committing a logical fallacy.

Not true.

I never said that the kids would definitely turn out to be fuckups like their parents. There's a good chance that the kids will overcome the difficulties that their parents purposefully placed in their way, especially if they're taken out of that poisonous environment. That still doesn't make it acceptable for their parents to attempt to fuck them up. That's like saying it's okay to beat a child because you think they'll probably get over it.

Anyway, I'm really tired of your (increasingly sophistic) argument, and I've got work to do. So I'm done with this thread for now.
posted by Afroblanco at 9:02 AM on January 14, 2009 [1 favorite]


The government should not be in the business of saying, if you have belief X, you cannot raise children, and any children you produce will be taken away from you.

We have found ways to draw the line when a parent's belief puts the child in physical danger (such as assuming temporary custody over the children of Christian Scientists when they require medical attention) without removing the child from the home.

It's not likely that what's happening here is solely a reaction to the Nazi name, but if that was indeed what motivated the removal, I stand by my sadface emoticon.
posted by prefpara at 9:04 AM on January 14, 2009 [2 favorites]


The children's father, Heath Campbell, reached Tuesday evening at a relative's home, first declined comment and later said the children were not removed.

If Heath Campbell really wants to Honour German Ancestry, why doesn't he change his own name to, say, Joseph Mengele Campbell. He could go and do that this afternoon, if he was motivated. And had the balls.
Or, just the courage of his convictions.
Or, was really crazy, and not just a mean and ignorant douchebag.
posted by Rumple at 9:04 AM on January 14, 2009


What a weirdly uninformative news story.

"This thing happened. Nobody we tried to contact about it was available or would explain why. Also, Hitler."

Maybe next time hold off on printing the story until you've done some actual reporting work, MSNBC?
posted by ook at 9:09 AM on January 14, 2009 [4 favorites]


New Jersey Division of Youth and Family Services removes Adolf Hitler Campbell, sisters from parents' home

Man, what a bunch of fucking fascists! The kids should fit right in.
posted by Pollomacho at 9:11 AM on January 14, 2009


And I don't think that it's too much of a jump to assume that people in favor of genocide would make for incredibly fucked-up parents. In fact, I don't see how they could not be incredibly fucked up parents.

The weirdest thing about the original articles was that the quotes from the parents seemed to be actively distancing themselves from the violent and racist aspects of Nazism. I'm not sure if they were just trying to look good for the media or what, but they seemed to be embracing Nazi symbols without actually believing in the ideology.

I hope those kids are alright. The fact that the authorities have stepped in suggests that there is something seriously wrong in that home other than their parents profoundly messed-up way of thinking.
posted by burnmp3s at 9:13 AM on January 14, 2009


My Cake Is a Liar shirt just came in the mail yesterday. Synchronicity in the hizzouse.

You're behind the curve; I've had mine for months! Get a lot of comments when I wear it, too.
posted by owtytrof at 9:14 AM on January 14, 2009


God whatever we do just admire little Hitler's artwork and tell him it's fantastic.
posted by pianomover at 9:17 AM on January 14, 2009 [14 favorites]


but since the average American's German vocabulary is limited to "Ja", Nein" and "Sieg Heil" they had to shoehorn in a word that people would get.

Reading Commado comics encourages a broader vocabulary like "Achtung", "Swienhund" and "Gott in himmel!"
posted by Artw at 9:34 AM on January 14, 2009 [2 favorites]


Anyway, two days later, the phone rings. It's Child Protective Services. The declining to consent to treatment form for a toddler rang their bell pretty darn quick. We had to give them the name of the attending physician at the ER that we'd taken him to subsequent to the first ER trip to head off a home visit.

So who knows what could have triggered a trip to lil' ol' Adolph's happy trailer in the woods.


Word. Child and Family Services in my home town were constantly in the paper for seizing kids on questionable provocation, and having left kids in place when it turned out they were in actual danger. The former likely being overcompensation for the latter, but the resulting see-saw had parents of all competencies and inclinations running scared.
posted by Durn Bronzefist at 9:40 AM on January 14, 2009


Swienhund?
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 9:46 AM on January 14, 2009


Another case of fringe beliefs causing the loss of custody was discussed previously on the blue. Note however that she has since gotten her kid back, but she still has some pretty hefty legal bills to pay off.
posted by waraw at 9:50 AM on January 14, 2009 [1 favorite]


Schweinhund!
posted by Artw at 9:50 AM on January 14, 2009


Zwei hunden.
posted by Pollomacho at 9:55 AM on January 14, 2009


But they can still make more right?
posted by chugg at 10:01 AM on January 14, 2009


First they came for the Nazis, and I did not speak out, for I was not a Nazi. After that, I never really heard anything else about it.
posted by anazgnos at 10:05 AM on January 14, 2009 [9 favorites]


Why update on MeTa when the FPP is still open?

*Door gets kicked in, keyboard gets taken away and placed in a non-whiny home*
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 10:05 AM on January 14, 2009 [1 favorite]


DYFS isn’t talking much about the Campbell’s situation, but the kids being taken away has nothing to do with the names and birthday cake issue in December, according to Sgt. John Harris, Holland Twp. Police in Milford, N.J.

RTFA, folks.
posted by Sys Rq at 10:06 AM on January 14, 2009


Barring reports of abuse (though drug use wasn't mentioned, unless I missed it), is it possible that this is a custody fight on behalf of some of their saner relatives who think the kids would be better off with Grandma/their aunt/their cousin? I suppose that's the best possible spin on it...
posted by jokeefe at 10:08 AM on January 14, 2009


So what about Lynx and Lamb Gaede the nazi twins? Why weren't they removed from their mother?
posted by Sailormom at 10:11 AM on January 14, 2009


There was an update to the original article that gives a hint as to why the children might have been removed.
posted by crataegus at 10:14 AM on January 14, 2009


Ich wünschte das ich zwei Hunde wäre, dann könnte ich zusammen spielen.

(Dann werde ich Schwein haben.)
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 10:15 AM on January 14, 2009


If these kids grow up to be well-adjusted, normal people, I'm not sure which endlessly repeated question I feel most sorry for:

"Your parents named you after Hitler?"

"Your parents were nuts for Nazi stuff, but couldn't spell Himmler correctly?"


If these kids grow up to be well-adjusted, normal people, they'll change their names. Or just write a punk rock version of a "Boy Named Sue" type ballad.
posted by orange swan at 10:29 AM on January 14, 2009


In the update:

"We don't know if that person realizes he's targeting the wrong people or not," Van Gilson said. "But if he does something stupid, our problem is somebody innocent is going to be targeted."

WTF?
posted by gaspode at 10:34 AM on January 14, 2009


Afroblanco : Yeah, and I'm not saying the kids should be taken away on the basis of their names alone. I guess what I'm saying is that I would not be in a state of shock if it turned out that these parents were seriously fucking up their kids. In fact, I'd be surprised if they weren't. They named their one of their kids Adolf Hitler, for crying out loud.

Exactly. The names themselves shouldn't be the final straw, but they should be a tolling bell in terms of getting protective services to keep an eye on the family. Parent who name their kids something like this are parents who are knowingly putting their children into the harm's way that is everyone who takes offense at it later. Which is to say, they are people who are putting their own ideology above the safety of their kids. Watch the parents and odds are good that you'll find plenty of more legit reasons to separate them.

That said, since kids tend to rebel against stupid shit like this, I look forward to the day that JoyceLynn Aryan Nation Campbell finds a nice black/ Jewish boyfriend/ girlfriend and happily watches her parents blow a gasket when they decide not to come to Christmas dinner.
posted by quin at 10:38 AM on January 14, 2009


I think this is great. I for one can't wait until Family Services pulls kids out of amish and hasidic jewish homes as well. Like many of you said, we don't need these kids growing up with fucked up ideologies. Did you know that jews chop off the tips of their baby boys penises? That kind of brutal child abuse has no place in America. Same goes for denying the children electric power, whether it's every day or just on Saturdays.

While we're at it, let's take the kids away from casual pot-smoking parents (criminals), single parents (sorry, two is better than one), communists (we fought them longer than we fought the nazis), illiterates, and fat parents as well.

Named your kid Shaniqua? Not on our watch. From now on it's Besty. And I know there are no kids running around named Osama, right?
posted by Pastabagel at 10:42 AM on January 14, 2009


I'm going to have a rock thrown at me for this one but:

(now if abuse was going on.... serious abuse not just a stupid set of ideologies and naming your kid after one of history's greatest douche bags, then they had a right to remove the kids) BUT

From what I get from the article is Child Services saw the kids' names, assumed they were white supremacists, and rushed in there. IF this is the case then this is flat out wrong! Who the hell is NJ Child Services to tell someone what to name their child or what to teach them? It is their personal freedoms to raise their children however they see fit. (Obviously as long as it does not involve domestic terrorist acts or random acts of hate crimes.) In America we have civil rights to be who we want to be. Just because someone doesn't agree with the general public does not make general public right. This is how KKK and Neo Nazis can be around and not thrown in jail. As wrong and hate filled as their philosophies might be they have a right to think the way they do. They have the right to raise their children as they see fit. Just because a child was told something when they were little does not mean that they will believe it and take it to the grave. For all we know little adolf might read what Nazi Germany did to many innocent people and have his name changed later on in life. When we allow a government agency to do something of this nature we are starting a slippy slope. When the government oversteps their boundaries as they have here, we have to stop them at the inch before they take a mile. I know it is hard to do. I don't like Neo Nazis. I think they are racist jerks but their personal freedoms help to ensure my own.
posted by Mastercheddaar at 10:49 AM on January 14, 2009


I blame the Blues Brothers.
posted by Durn Bronzefist at 10:54 AM on January 14, 2009


DYFS isn’t talking much about the Campbell’s situation, but the kids being taken away has nothing to do with the names and birthday cake issue in December, according to Sgt. John Harris, Holland Twp. Police in Milford, N.J.

Repeat: THE KIDS BEING TAKEN AWAY HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE NAMES
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 10:56 AM on January 14, 2009 [3 favorites]


Barring any evidence of actual abuse, there is no justification for taking the kids away. Of course, it's possible that the kids are being abused and we don't know about it but DFS does, but a lot of people here are condoning this simply because they don't like their parents' ideology.

The rule that protects them is the same rule that protects you. This thread illustrates that the glib phrase "I disagree with what you say but will defend to the death your right to say it" is utter bullshit. The reality is that if people disagree with you, they won't defend you, and if they disagree with you strongly enough, they'll stand by and nod their heads while the government kidnaps your children. Nice.

And they shouldn't have to wait for a "white supremacist lawyer" to defend them as someone upthread mentioned. The case isn't about defending the nazis. It's about stopping the government from overstepping it's authority. It's about defending everyone's rights and liberties.

Nazis have the same rights as you. If they don't get to name their children whatever they want, neither do you.
posted by Pastabagel at 10:57 AM on January 14, 2009 [1 favorite]


My wild guess is that it has something to do with the death threats the family received.
posted by deborah at 10:57 AM on January 14, 2009



Repeat: THE KIDS BEING TAKEN AWAY HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE NAMES
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 1:56 PM on January 14


And yet, so many people in this thread approve of taking the kids away (or at least having DFS keep an eye on the family) ONLY BECAUSE OF THE NAMES.
posted by Pastabagel at 10:58 AM on January 14, 2009


Has anybody considered the possibility that the name is just a coincidence?
posted by Astro Zombie at 11:01 AM on January 14, 2009 [4 favorites]


I look forward to the day that JoyceLynn Aryan Nation Campbell finds a nice black/ Jewish boyfriend/ girlfriend and happily watches her parents blow a gasket when they decide not to come to Christmas dinner.

"Mom, Dad, this is my new boyfriend, Sammy Davis IV."

"Groovy, Mrs. Campbell, you're looking ma-velous tonight, baby. And Mr. C, man, you look like a real swingin' cat."
posted by Pollomacho at 11:03 AM on January 14, 2009 [1 favorite]


And yet, so many people in this thread approve of taking the kids away (or at least having DFS keep an eye on the family) ONLY BECAUSE OF THE NAMES.

And yet, the counter hand-wringing is about whether the state has the right to take the kids away for purely ideological reasons, which they clearly don't, and which there is absolutely no indication that the state has done, and which they have actually, to whatever extent they've provided any explanation at all, denied doing. We should just rename the kid ADOLF STRAWMAN.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 11:05 AM on January 14, 2009 [3 favorites]


Exactly. The names themselves shouldn't be the final straw, but they should be a tolling bell in terms of getting protective services to keep an eye on the family.

So the state should be able to keep an eye on you because of your politics and what you choose to name your children?

For all the people who thought that the mash-up of google maps with prop 8 donor records wasn't a horrible invasion of privacy, AND who think this family merits special attention from the state because of what is publicly known about that family consider the following:

Should the police make their own mashup of google maps and donor records to pot legalization groups to know which people to "keep an eye on"?
posted by Pastabagel at 11:07 AM on January 14, 2009


And yet, the counter hand-wringing is about whether the state has the right to take the kids away for purely ideological reasons,

That isn't my argument. I know that the state does not have the authority to do this. I'm arguing with people in this thread who think they should have the authority to do this.
posted by Pastabagel at 11:10 AM on January 14, 2009


Should the police make their own mashup of google maps and donor records to pot legalization groups to know which people to "keep an eye on"?

I'd be very surprised if they haven't already done this.
posted by theroadahead at 11:12 AM on January 14, 2009


You all are missing the strategy here.

The state isn't taking the kid away. The state is renaming him David Ben-Gurion and giving him back.
posted by Durn Bronzefist at 11:12 AM on January 14, 2009 [2 favorites]


So the state should be able to keep an eye on you because of your politics and what you choose to name your children?

The state has always done this. My own family have files in various government organizations because relatives on one side are socialists and have occasionally run for office on the Communist ticket. Also, being a Muslim is pretty much grounds for a wire tap these days.

Not saying it's right. Just saying it's reality.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 11:13 AM on January 14, 2009


I'm arguing with people in this thread who think they should have the authority to do this.

Fair enough. Your comments read to me like you were assuming the government was overstepping its bounds. I agree completely that anyone calling for the government to interfere on the basis of the parent's noxious ideology isn't thinking through the ramifications. Sorry for the misread.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 11:18 AM on January 14, 2009


"So the state should be able to keep an eye on you because of your politics and what you choose to name your children?

The state has always done this. My own family have files in various government organizations because relatives on one side are socialists and have occasionally run for office on the Communist ticket. Also, being a Muslim is pretty much grounds for a wire tap these days.

Not saying it's right. Just saying it's reality.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 11:13 AM on January 14 [+] [!] "

Then why are we as a society accepting this? I know 8 years of conservatism had something to do with this. I think it is time we took these new found "guilty until we decide to release you" and "we are the government we do as we please" powers away. Criminals and terrorists are scary but a government that does as it pleases with zero regard for anyone's civil rights scares the shit out of me!
posted by Mastercheddaar at 11:20 AM on January 14, 2009


Yeah, I think it's a bit disingenuous to say that these people are being persecuted for their beliefs. It's one thing to have some weird-ass fringe belief. Its another thing to name a kid Adolf Hitler. While it may not be tantamount to beating the child, I think it's definitely abusive. He can't even get a cake made for him without causing a stir. How's he going to go through life with that name? I don't even think parents should be allowed to give their kids names like that. I know a number of countries have a pre-approved list of names that are allowed, and parents are forbidden from giving their kids names that aren't on that list. I'm not saying that we need to do something like this, but I can definitely understand the reasoning behind it.

Anyway, as has been stated, the kids are not being taken away because of their names, so that is pretty much a moot point. However, I agree with quin that naming a kid Adolf Hitler is definitely a justification to take a closer look at the parents. Naming a kid Adolf Hitler is abusive, and it makes me wonder what else the parents are capable of.
posted by Afroblanco at 11:22 AM on January 14, 2009


Without reading the thread, I'm going to guess three "You know who…" jokes prior to this comment.
posted by klangklangston at 11:24 AM on January 14, 2009 [1 favorite]


Then why are we as a society accepting this? I know 8 years of conservatism had something to do with this.

When I said The state has always done this, I meant literally always. This is not something new. The files on my family go back to the 50's, but history is quite clear that government has been keeping tabs on potential malcontents for as long as there has been government. We may, as a society, tolerate more or less open infringement on our neighbor's freedoms as the times seem to dictate, but there is no reason to believe that we will ever even try to rid ourselves of those branches of the government dedicated to spying on our own population.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 11:31 AM on January 14, 2009


Only two! I was over! I lose Hitler Joke Is Right!
posted by klangklangston at 11:35 AM on January 14, 2009


You know who else lost Hitler Joke Is Right?
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 11:36 AM on January 14, 2009


You know who else was taken from his family home?
posted by grouse at 7:31 AM on January 14 [+] [!]


NO JUSTICE NO PEACE

god im bored
posted by Potomac Avenue at 11:39 AM on January 14, 2009 [2 favorites]


I suspect "did not receive any reports of abuse or negligence" just means that nobody outside the agency (teacher, doctor, etc.) made a report of suspected abuse. It doesn't mean abuse or negligence isn't alleged.
posted by thirteenkiller at 11:51 AM on January 14, 2009


For those asking "by what right?":

parens patriae
But the family itself is not beyond regulation in the public interest, as against a claim of religious liberty. And neither rights of religion nor rights of parenthood are beyond limitation. Acting to guard the general interest in youth's wellbeing, the state, as parens patriae, may restrict the parent's control by requiring school attendance, regulating or prohibiting the child's labor and in many other ways. Its authority is not nullified merely because the parent grounds his claim to control the child's course of conduct on religion or conscience. Thus, he cannot claim freedom from compulsory vaccination for the child more than for himself on religious grounds. The right to practice religion freely does not include liberty to expose the community or the child to communicable disease or the latter to ill health or death. The catalogue need not be lengthened. It is sufficient to show what indeed appellant hardly disputes, that the state has a wide range of power for limiting parental freedom and authority in things affecting the child's welfare, and that this includes, to some extent, matters of conscience and religious conviction....A democratic society rests, for its continuance, upon the healthy, well rounded growth of young people into full maturity as citizens, with all that implies. It may secure this against impeding restraints and dangers within a broad range of selection. Among evils most appropriate for such action are the crippling effects of child employment, more especially in public places, and the possible harms arising from other activities subject to all the diverse influences of the street. It is too late now to doubt that legislation appropriately designed to reach such evils is within the state's police power, whether against the parent's claim to control of the child or one that religious scruples dictate contrary action.
Prince v. Massachusetts, 312 U.S. 158 (1944) (internal citations omitted).
posted by dios at 11:52 AM on January 14, 2009


Hitler liked clams.
posted by Joe Beese at 11:53 AM on January 14, 2009


Thus, he cannot claim freedom from compulsory vaccination for the child more than for himself on religious grounds.

Hmm. As many times as this and other issues of religious belief vs. medical needs of the child have been in the news over the last 60 years or so, I assume you're listing this as an example, not as the most relevant ruling? Not a lawyer myself, of course, but I have to think there have been more definitive decisions since 1944 on the subject of state vs. parental rights. Just clarifying for my own curiosity.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 12:07 PM on January 14, 2009


God whatever we do just admire little Hitler's artwork and tell him it's fantastic.

You realize that we tried this with Thomas Kinkade, right?

Personally I'm starting to wish that someone just gave him an Easy-Bake oven and took away his paints.
posted by loquacious at 12:14 PM on January 14, 2009 [2 favorites]


I assume you're listing this as an example, not as the most relevant ruling? Not a lawyer myself, of course, but I have to think there have been more definitive decisions since 1944 on the subject of state vs. parental rights.

There are lots of cases since that have nudged the line between parental rights and the parens patriae power of state this way and that. So there are plenty of cases which distinguish or decline to extend the reasoning on a given topic. The most relevant law here is the statutes governing the NJ Child Protective Services actions and any cases interpreting those--I did not bother to look those up.

I was just noting the reasoning behind and the answer to the question "by what right"? I occasionally (luckily it does not come up very often) represent hospitals in fights with Jehovah's Witnesses who refuse blood products for their children, and the Court usually asks the question "can the state do this?" and the answer, while multifactorial, includes the analysis that claiming religious belief of the family is not a talisman that prohibits the state from interfering and Prince and other cases come up.

Like any issue involving conflicting rights and therefore where to draw the line when balancing the interests, the line is going to change over time and between states. But the question was, as I understand it, what was the basis of state's right to do such a thing. And that's the basis of the state's right to intrude on the family in matters of conscience. At the end of the day, any particular intrusion may not be appropriate or pass scrutiny. But it is not as if the state has no claim of right to intrude at law. I make no comment on whether this particular intrusion is appropriate. I just am commenting on what is the justification as to why the state has the right to intrude.
posted by dios at 12:26 PM on January 14, 2009


Yeah, and I'm not saying the kids should be taken away on the basis of their names alone. I guess what I'm saying is that I would not be in a state of shock if it turned out that these parents were seriously fucking up their kids. In fact, I'd be surprised if they weren't.

i wouldn't be a bit surprised if people didn't say the same thing about frank & gail zappa & the names they gave their kids (Moon Unit, Dweezil, Ahmet Emuukha Rodan, & Diva Thin Muffin Pigeen Zappa). and in fact, zappa did give Ian Donald Calvin Euclid as dweezil's 'official' name at the hospital because the nurse wouldn't accept dweezil.

in other news, i know the name we're talking about is ADOLPH HITLER, but seriously ... when they start taking people's kids away because they don't like the names with which they've been conferred, we're in a whole fuckload of trouble.
posted by msconduct at 12:33 PM on January 14, 2009


Thanks, dios.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 12:34 PM on January 14, 2009


Personally I'm starting to wish that someone just gave him an Easy-Bake oven and took away his paints.

Read as "gave him an Easy-Bake oven and took away his pants."

Carry on.
posted by Durn Bronzefist at 12:37 PM on January 14, 2009 [1 favorite]


DYFS isn’t talking much about the Campbell’s situation, but the kids being taken away has nothing to do with the names and birthday cake issue in December, according to Sgt. John Harris, Holland Twp. Police in Milford, N.J.

Repeat: THE KIDS BEING TAKEN AWAY HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE NAMES


YES. The statement "Gilson said his department did not receive any reports of abuse or negligence" means, simply, that child protective services' investigation was not triggered by a police report, but by a report directly to CPS. And CPS cannot disclose the contents of such reports. THAT'S ALL THAT IS GOING ON HERE.

Did CPS act faster than they might have on a tip because of the kids' notoriety? Maybe. But if you think they have to power to just traipse in and take your kids on a whim, you're very wrong.

This is not an abuse of power. It's only even in the paper because of the previous story, which was also not newsworthy.
posted by showbiz_liz at 12:41 PM on January 14, 2009 [1 favorite]


"Can a strongly-held belief prevent the state from interfering?" is not the same question as "Can the state interfere solely on the basis of a strongly-held belief?"
posted by naju at 12:44 PM on January 14, 2009


Why update on MeTa when the FPP is still open?

Sorry, alvy, didn't realize the FFP was still open. In the excitement of the holidays I thought more than a month had passed.

I guess the same question could be asked about BART cop shooter arrest, though. Two threads open in that case, but poster chose to make a new FFP.
posted by fixedgear at 12:58 PM on January 14, 2009


Yeah, I thought this had been well over a month, too. Huh. Ship has flown here, I guess.

The newer BART thread was just a few days ago, though, and people were actively discussing it in the existing thread before he ever made the post. Poster just didn't really look first, I guess.
posted by cortex (staff) at 1:02 PM on January 14, 2009


Yes, the ship has flown. I need some coffee.
posted by cortex (staff) at 1:03 PM on January 14, 2009


Maybe it's an airship.
posted by Astro Zombie at 1:08 PM on January 14, 2009


lil'Hitler Campbell's Hero's Journey.
posted by blue_beetle at 1:19 PM on January 14, 2009


For all the people who thought that the mash-up of google maps with prop 8 donor records wasn't a horrible invasion of privacy

Anyone who thinks the Prop 8 Google map was an invasion of privacy doesn't know what the word "privacy" actually means, with respect to that specific application, and should rethink their ignorant assumptions.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 1:23 PM on January 14, 2009


cortex: The newer BART thread was just a few days ago, though, and people were actively discussing it in the existing thread before he ever made the post. Poster just didn't really look first, I guess.

The thread about the cops arrest that was deleted this morning? I wouldn't have even heard about it unless someone had mentioned it here, as it fell off the media's radar also. Opening up a can of worms, but that old "please don't delete important doubles/no one reads old threads regardless of them being open once it falls off the front page" comes to mind.

Your deletion reason also is wierd: Previous thread is only six days old and folks are discussing it there. Really? After January 8th there was one post announcing the arrest (this morning) and me thanking the person posting it. I would say that thread is dead.

Just sayin'
posted by Big_B at 1:36 PM on January 14, 2009


Ok yeah my bad - I forgot about the other thread, and couldn't find it via search.

I SORRY!
posted by Big_B at 1:37 PM on January 14, 2009


Thank you for following up and saving me the YOU ARE TOTALLY CRAZY research I was about to get into. Heh.
posted by cortex (staff) at 1:57 PM on January 14, 2009


Honestly, I'm not even sure why the police officer is commenting that the report has nothing to do with the names. He's not in a position to know that information unless someone from his department was called to escort the investigating social worker into the home, which would only happen if the family refused the social worker entrance on arrival.
posted by The Straightener at 2:08 PM on January 14, 2009


The correct search
posted by Artw at 2:09 PM on January 14, 2009


What are some other names that could get your children taken into custody?
posted by empath at 2:24 PM on January 14, 2009


I Have a Bomb Johnson
Fire in the Theater! Run for Your Lives! Garcia
Twenty Bucks, Same as in Town Hayes
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 2:30 PM on January 14, 2009 [7 favorites]


I plan to name my child Take Me Into Custody.

Take Me Into Custody Zombie.
posted by Astro Zombie at 2:30 PM on January 14, 2009 [1 favorite]


The thread about the cops arrest that was deleted this morning? I wouldn't have even heard about it unless someone had mentioned it here, as it fell off the media's radar also.

Oh, really? The shooting death (January 1), last Wednesday's Oakland (January 7) riots and today's arrest have all been reported nationally and internationally on television, in print and online -- extensively. Among many sources -- ABC, AP, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, MTV, New York Times, UPI, USA Today, Wall Street Journal.
posted by ericb at 2:31 PM on January 14, 2009


These (not very smart) parents don't care about anything besides making their kids a national news story. That's why they try to buy the same stupid cake every year. They were thrilled when child services showed up.
posted by roll truck roll at 2:32 PM on January 14, 2009


After January 8th there was one post announcing the arrest (this morning) and me thanking the person posting it. I would say that thread is dead.

The original January 5 thread (Don't murder me bro.) was superceded by the Riots in Oakland thread on January 8. Such was noted in the original January 5 thread: "It appears that the discussion has moved to a new thread."

There's been an active discussion from January 8 through today in the Riots in Oakland thread.
posted by ericb at 2:38 PM on January 14, 2009


Y'know that sock full of nickels that was referenced upthread? I'm gonna borrow it and use it on the next person who claims that the national media is ignoring the BART shooting.

These (not very smart) parents don't care about anything besides making their kids a national news story.

I'm not sure I follow this. What does it do for the parents? Bring attention to their neo-Nazi views?
posted by fixedgear at 2:41 PM on January 14, 2009


Theres a place in
Your heart
And I know that it is love
And this place could
Be much
Brighter than tomorrow
And if you really try
Youll find theres no need
To cry
In this place youll feel
Theres no hurt or sorrow

There are ways
To get there
If you care enough
For the living
Make a little space
Make a better place...
posted by turgid dahlia at 2:50 PM on January 14, 2009


ericb - I posted a correction becuase I AM TOTALLY NOT CRAZY, but yes hopefully it will be all over the tv when I am finally released from the prison that is my tiny office.
posted by Big_B at 3:03 PM on January 14, 2009


Adolf, what a Hitlerhole.
posted by ob at 3:32 PM on January 14, 2009


oh goody, something else to get OUTRAGED over and make several what the hell? comments demonstrating how morally superior I am to Everybody Else.


gosh I hope my sarcasm is showing these past few days.
posted by dawson at 4:10 PM on January 14, 2009


I'm not sure I follow this. What does it do for the parents? Bring attention to their neo-Nazi views?

I'd make it a little more general: it brings attention to them. I don't think these people are Nazis, really, just racists.

There's a certain breed of people who gradually shut off their self-control mechanisms and replace them with a misguided faith in free speech. They feel genuinely put-upon by society, and feel like being an ass is their only defense. You get a little shot of adrenaline when you act like an asshole. These people thrive on that feeling. Whenever a little voice tells them they're being an asshole, a louder voice comes in and yells, "FREE SPEECH!"

Look at Fred Phelps. If you really look at how a respected civil rights lawyer turned into what he is today, it's largely a story of unchecked mental illness, but it's also the story of a man who used each bad thing that happened in his life as an excuse to let go of a little self-control. His legal expertise made him especially susceptible: he replaced his conscience, little by little, with a shrewd understanding of what he could and couldn't be arrested for.

These people have literally nothing to say, but very urgently need to piss you off.
posted by roll truck roll at 4:17 PM on January 14, 2009 [4 favorites]


Hitler had a lousy childhood as a victim of physical abuse, who then beat his sister. That said, not everyone grows up embracing a psychotic worldview condemning millions to a horrific death. I'm not saying the 'regular' cycle of abuse is okay, nor is the 'natural' phenomenon of playground bullying and name-calling trivial. But think how fucked-up youth will be, mentally and emotionally, growing up in regions of US military action. What about child soldiers in Africa? It doesn't command the same headlines, shock value as instances of egregious abuse in 'civilised' countries, but I sincerely hope kids in North America, South America, Europe, Asia, Africa, Australia (Antartica?) get a better chance at happiness than powerless kids who died without a chance.
posted by woodway at 4:22 PM on January 14, 2009 [1 favorite]


not to belabor woodway's point but my father and aunt grew up in a terribly abusive home and both went on to be loving and (relatively!!) sane parents.
posted by supermedusa at 5:23 PM on January 14, 2009


And I grew up in a loving household, but have a totally psychotic worldview!
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 5:27 PM on January 14, 2009


Fixedgear, why did you post this to MeTa instead of the MeFi thread? The thread is still open (and, indeed, I posted this news to it yesterday).
posted by five fresh fish at 5:28 PM on January 14, 2009


...sorry, missed your explanation late in the thread.
posted by five fresh fish at 5:45 PM on January 14, 2009


I don't want to hear those dumb ugly motherfuckers complaining about the actions of an authoritarian government. This is what you wanted, remember? This is the fascism you begged for! So fucking enjoy it.
posted by Optimus Chyme at 5:53 PM on January 14, 2009


What are some other names that could get your children taken into custody?

Lolita 'Daddiesgirl' Humbert
Lynnette 'Squeaky' Manson
Barack Hussein Bin Laden
posted by PeterMcDermott at 5:56 PM on January 14, 2009 [3 favorites]


I work with a guy named Hitler and another guy named Stalin. Both are from indigenous Malaysian tribes that have taken to giving aspirational English names in the last generation or so, so I figure their parents just chose them for their strength and fame. It still feels very strange to ring his department and ask for Hitler though.
posted by BinGregory at 9:27 PM on January 14, 2009


I bet their first names aren't Adolf or Joseph... nor their last name Campbell!
posted by crossoverman at 10:11 PM on January 14, 2009


You know who else liked Campbell's Soup?
posted by not_on_display at 10:26 PM on January 14, 2009


The Straightener: the first link says "Sgt. John Harris with Holland Township Police was asked to escort staff from the NJ Division of Youth and Family Services to the Cambell’s home in Holland Township".
posted by jacalata at 12:59 AM on January 15, 2009


You know who else liked Campbell's Soup?

Andy Warhol?
posted by fixedgear at 4:12 AM on January 15, 2009 [3 favorites]


So I dunno about this thread... is it LOL Nazis, or LOL Jersey hicks, or LOL cake, or what? Please advise on where to direct my lullic energy.
posted by Mister_A at 7:09 AM on January 15, 2009 [1 favorite]


THE KIDS BEING TAKEN AWAY HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE NAMES

After I finish with this strawman, you're next, pal.
posted by electroboy at 7:24 AM on January 15, 2009


Dios thanks for the info. However I think that "parens patriae" was drawn up to be vague on purpose. It seems at it's core that is was designed to protect children from abuse, child labor, unsafe conditions, etc. Not saying that it couldn't apply here (it easily could) but again to me it seems that Child Services saw Neo Nazi jerk off parents and thought they could move in and no one would care. I do not agree with naming your kids after genocidal douche bags, however, I also do not agree with the government telling anyone how they can raise their children. If someone wants to tell their kid hate everyone that isn't you then well that is their right. (again as long as no actual acts of violence are done nothing should be done). Do their ideologies match up with ours? No. However they do have the right to have them. I try to put myself in their shoes. What if I had a daughter and named her Joan of Arc? I'm catholic and we name our children after saints. I want her name on a cake, same story applies and CS takes her from me because they don't like the name or me teaching my kids Jesus died for our sins. Should the government have that right to deny me or any parents the ability to teach my children what I think is right?

Then again this all might be a mute point if evidence is leaked that they are in fact bad, abusive parents.
posted by Mastercheddaar at 7:41 AM on January 15, 2009


Dulce et decoum est pro nominis moria.
posted by blue_beetle at 7:53 AM on January 15, 2009


If someone wants to tell their kid hate everyone that isn't you then well that is their right.

Obviously, the state feels that raising your child to be a racist asshole is more a privilege...
posted by kittens for breakfast at 8:44 AM on January 15, 2009


The Straightener: the first link says "Sgt. John Harris with Holland Township Police was asked to escort staff from the NJ Division of Youth and Family Services to the Cambell’s home in Holland Township".

There you go, missed that part. Wonder why the police escort, other than a refusal of entry they only send a police escort in Philly if there's a real concern for physical safety on entering, for example if the building is a known drug location and there's dealers all mobbed up on the front steps. The only hypothesis I can come up with, and this is obviously purely conjecture, is that maybe the family regularly has White Power associates who are known to the local authorities on their property and DYFS thought it was better to play it safe. I don't really see the solution to the death threat angle being a child welfare intervention, that still leaves the parents at risk and would be far more easily and cheaply remedied by simply getting the family an undisclosed hotel room until the initial heat blew over.
posted by The Straightener at 9:06 AM on January 15, 2009


The Holland Township police chief is named Mussolini–COINCIDENCE???!!!?!?!?!

MUST CONSULT TIME CUBE TO CONSTRUE MEANINGS.
posted by Mister_A at 9:59 AM on January 15, 2009


Time Cube is passé.
posted by five fresh fish at 5:37 PM on January 15, 2009


Someone please tell me these kids have an Uncle Godwin. I need this to be true.
posted by Mikey-San at 1:54 AM on January 16, 2009


“Hitler” mother speaks to TV reporter


Deborah Campbell, of Milford, said she doesn't understand why the DCF workers removed her three kids from her house and doesn't know if she'll see them again, according to the report on NBC10.

The DCF took custody of Adolf Hitler Campbell, 3, JoyceLynn Aryan Nation Campbell, 1 and Honszlynn Hinler Jeannie Campbell, 8 months, saying only that they felt the children were in danger. Campbell pleaded for the return of the children in an interview with NBC10's Mike Strug. "The names, I believe are the problems. But they just don't want to come out and say that," Campbell said.

posted by The Straightener at 8:05 AM on January 21, 2009


Hitler's Grammy Drunk During Cop Stop, Says Mom. Family was on its way to court hearing.
posted by Sailormom at 11:58 AM on January 21, 2009


« Older Is there a preference setting ...  |  Why is this AskMe question, wh... Newer »

You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments