Of course we have laws for removing kids from their home. I think in to many cases they leave children in homes where they shouldn't. What we don't have is laws designed solely to keep parents from having control of the morals and values their children are taught. There are limits of course, if you teach your children to steal or sell drugs you are at risk of losing them or at least being put in some sort of supervised situation with in home visits. Typically when you have parents who are that bad or you get the skin heads that Silver Warder mentioned they are such piss poor parents that you can find any number of reasons to intervene.



Yeah my German is a little weak Mostly it comes from watching Hogan’s Heroes and old WWII movies

I am basing my entire defense of the ruling on the idea that they had justification to feel their kids could be taken away. Without that I think their case would be much weaker. I admit to my ignorance of the specifics here and I know nothing not in the original article. I do give some weight to their fear since a court in Germany very recently ruled that it was justified.

For all I know these people are crap parents who never should be allowed with in 50 feet of children but based on what I seen they are simply sincere parents who are willing to fight for what they believe in. I think personal liberty is the foundation of a free society and I support people who fight for even if I don't support the choices they are fighting for. Maybe it is just me but I consider personal liberty to paramount and believe we should always strive to expand where it possible. There must be limits of course to protect other peoples liberty but I think you error on more liberty not more control.



And that is why it makes sense to give these people political asylum. We have a society and culture that values people who are willing to fight the system for their beliefs and I would guess they will be greeted with much more open arms here then they would have with any of the other countries people felt they should have moved to.

Sorry but it will be a very long haul to convince me that limits to what people can think and say is the best path forward. I think the light of day and honest debate is the best path. I do not support hate laws of any sort and believe that a crime is crime. I think Mill's had it right when he wrote On Liberty and I believe we lessen ourselves as a whole when we try and define what can and can't be thought. It is messy at times but then again what isn't and don’t believe that you can create tolerance through intolerance.

As for the rest of we can leave that locked and if you want to discuss it further feel free to NB but I really don’t want to start another pissing contest further down the thread.