4 ms·

A democratic society agrees on laws, that can be changed through a certain process. Germany decided that not only the parents are responsible for the education

by dakna 7y ago

A democratic society agrees on laws, that can be changed through a certain process. Germany decided that not only the parents are responsible for the education of the next generation, but also the government. Therefore the equivalent to the US child protective service has the right to enforce that law, just like in the US, where kids are separated from their parents if they break the child protection law. This has nothing to do with kidnapping.

RobertRoberts 7y ago
From the US perspective, where the refugees fled to, it is exactly state sponsored kidnapping. >Germany decided that not only the parents are responsible for the education of the next generation, but also the government. Not long ago Germany "decided" to make other laws that were used against Jews, were these just laws? Do you support the laws in Brunei that allow certain people to be killed based on their sexual preferences? These are not hypothetical situations, this is reality for people. A refugee family from modern Germany was granted asylum in the US based on US definition of freedom, not Germany's, which is historically horrific.
- aries1980 7y ago
  That “refugee” family could have moved to any European country without restriction. If the kids education is the main concern, Estonia or Finland could have been their main target: http://factsmaps.com/pisa-worldwide-ranking-average-score-of-math-science-reading http://factsmaps.com/pisa-worldwide-ranking-average-score-of... Calling any European state with “horrific” freedom is an exaggeration.
  - RobertRoberts 7y ago
    Yes, they could have, but they had to leave everything behind, and they just happen to have help from the government in the US. Not every country will help people. And if you don't think Germany's recent past is horrific, I suggest you read about the holocaust and some recent wars. Not an exaggeration at all. Germany's WWII era leader is considered to be one of the worst in known history.
    - dakna 7y ago
      Germany's recent past was the wall coming down and beeing reunited. That was already 30 years ago. Stop watching US shows about that time. Watch some footage from the Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville and think about what you can do to prevent totalitarian groups from gaining more ground, if you really want to be free. On a side note: Germany took in almost one million refugees from the war zone in Syria in _one_ year. It is about 1.5 million in total. Have fun looking up the number for the US per year. From what I remember it has only 5 digits. So much about not helping people.
- dakna 7y ago
  Ah, Godwins law again. The US perspective matters only in the US. That is my point. I'm also sure protecting children from the harmful actions of their parents has nothing to do with killing people. Children should have someone on their side if things go wrong, and they can't hire someone. That is where child protection laws come in. See also Article 19 of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.
  - RobertRoberts 7y ago
    My point was simple, the family fled one country's laws that were oppressive to "them" to another country where they were not. I think it's fair to argue that any country that has fewer restrictions on what you can do is more free than another. And any country that has more restrictions is less free. If you prefer restrictions that are justified to protect for yourself and others, it doesn't mean you free (or the kids living there), it just means you willing to accept control from others. Maybe you live in a totalitarian government yourself? And have gotten used to being "protected" by the government this way? edit: clarification.
    - dakna 7y ago
      If you give parents absolute control over their kids on something as fundamental as education, the kids themselves live in a what you call a "totalitarian government". That is why the UN convention lists education as one of the basic rights for children. I live in the US. And even though I don't agree with all the laws here, I respect them because that is what this society agreed too. Even though it makes this country, again according to your definition, a lot less free than Germany on plenty of issues. Except the right to homeschool. Btw, I do prefer restrictions that are justified to protect myself and others. Like stop lights, or the right of way, or the fact that the people treating me at the hospital have to pass a medical exam to do that. By the law that is enforced by the government. You can change that law in Germany if you want. You just have to convince enough people that your way is better. Good luck doing that. I won't support it, and I don't have to. That's the kind of freedom I like.
    - DanBC 7y ago
      > I think it's fair to argue that any country that has fewer restrictions on what you can do is more free than another. It's less free for the children, who are human and have their own rights, and deserve to have those rights enforced.

by dakna 7y ago

RobertRoberts 7y ago

From the US perspective, where the refugees fled to, it is exactly state sponsored kidnapping. >Germany decided that not only the parents are responsible for the education of the next generation, but also the government. Not long ago Germany "decided" to make other laws that were used against Jews, were these just laws? Do you support the laws in Brunei that allow certain people to be killed based on their sexual preferences? These are not hypothetical situations, this is reality for people. A refugee family from modern Germany was granted asylum in the US based on US definition of freedom, not Germany's, which is historically horrific.

aries1980 7y ago
That “refugee” family could have moved to any European country without restriction. If the kids education is the main concern, Estonia or Finland could have been their main target: http://factsmaps.com/pisa-worldwide-ranking-average-score-of-math-science-reading http://factsmaps.com/pisa-worldwide-ranking-average-score-of... Calling any European state with “horrific” freedom is an exaggeration.
- RobertRoberts 7y ago
  Yes, they could have, but they had to leave everything behind, and they just happen to have help from the government in the US. Not every country will help people. And if you don't think Germany's recent past is horrific, I suggest you read about the holocaust and some recent wars. Not an exaggeration at all. Germany's WWII era leader is considered to be one of the worst in known history.
  - dakna 7y ago
    Germany's recent past was the wall coming down and beeing reunited. That was already 30 years ago. Stop watching US shows about that time. Watch some footage from the Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville and think about what you can do to prevent totalitarian groups from gaining more ground, if you really want to be free. On a side note: Germany took in almost one million refugees from the war zone in Syria in _one_ year. It is about 1.5 million in total. Have fun looking up the number for the US per year. From what I remember it has only 5 digits. So much about not helping people.
dakna 7y ago
Ah, Godwins law again. The US perspective matters only in the US. That is my point. I'm also sure protecting children from the harmful actions of their parents has nothing to do with killing people. Children should have someone on their side if things go wrong, and they can't hire someone. That is where child protection laws come in. See also Article 19 of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.
- RobertRoberts 7y ago
  My point was simple, the family fled one country's laws that were oppressive to "them" to another country where they were not. I think it's fair to argue that any country that has fewer restrictions on what you can do is more free than another. And any country that has more restrictions is less free. If you prefer restrictions that are justified to protect for yourself and others, it doesn't mean you free (or the kids living there), it just means you willing to accept control from others. Maybe you live in a totalitarian government yourself? And have gotten used to being "protected" by the government this way? edit: clarification.
  - dakna 7y ago
    If you give parents absolute control over their kids on something as fundamental as education, the kids themselves live in a what you call a "totalitarian government". That is why the UN convention lists education as one of the basic rights for children. I live in the US. And even though I don't agree with all the laws here, I respect them because that is what this society agreed too. Even though it makes this country, again according to your definition, a lot less free than Germany on plenty of issues. Except the right to homeschool. Btw, I do prefer restrictions that are justified to protect myself and others. Like stop lights, or the right of way, or the fact that the people treating me at the hospital have to pass a medical exam to do that. By the law that is enforced by the government. You can change that law in Germany if you want. You just have to convince enough people that your way is better. Good luck doing that. I won't support it, and I don't have to. That's the kind of freedom I like.
  - DanBC 7y ago
    > I think it's fair to argue that any country that has fewer restrictions on what you can do is more free than another. It's less free for the children, who are human and have their own rights, and deserve to have those rights enforced.