Parents tattoo kids....

[terryl965]

Naming your kid after Hitler is one of the stupiest things I have ever heard. Sorry I know lets stay on topic but someone needed to say it.

 

[Cryozombie]

Ok, so let me ask this:

You run a Successful... i dunno... accounting firm. You lose an employee for whatever reason, and need someone fast. Your local headhunter says "Good news! We have a guy, just came back on the market, he has 20 years experience, some of his clients are fortune 500 companies and he draws more and more in everyday because his knowledge of tax laws is exemplary... he got bored with his last company and came to me looking for somthing new"

He sounds great, but walks in to your office to interview and has a slew of earrings and two full tattoo sleeves and they bleed over onto his hands. Do you do the foolish thing and turn him down?

 

[Cryozombie]

While those ideas are changing with virtually everyone becoming inked and pierced, there is a certain power in a person feeling so confident in who they are that they require no physical alteration.

I don't always think it's about confidence. While for some people it may be, just like driving a fast sportscar or owning a gun might be a "phallic substitute" for some people... there are other reasons that go beyond confidence and a desire to show off.

 

[Blade96]

Naming your kid after Hitler is one of the stupiest things I have ever heard. Sorry I know lets stay on topic but someone needed to say it.

i know =]

another case of a parent who's brain is a couple cards short of a full deck.

 

[Twin Fist]

i know =]

another case of a parent who's brain is a couple cards short of a full deck.

sure, but should that be illegal?

does that constitute abuse?

I dont think so.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

There's a thread in the Study on that Hitler kid issue I think.

 

[Blade96]

sure, but should that be illegal?

does that constitute abuse?

I dont think so.

I think it could be yes. There is a stigma attached to having the name of the worlds poster child for the word evil.

Consider that German's today still have to live with their history. I knew a young german woman I went to university with, she told me once it was only in the last five years or so that people had stopped calling her nazi.

I just think there are some things that simply should not be done. and sometimes the government does need to get involved (even though politicians are known for screwing up a lot lol) Some things minors shouldnt do. I do believe that.

We all were kids once. Were we capable of thinking ahead, into the future, of possible consequences?

Thats one reason we have parents

and even parents can have few brain cells, which is why we have to havegovernments and laws despite what anarchists say =]

 

[Twin Fist]

once they can tell you what you can or cant name your kids, it is a small step to them being able to decide what you can teach your kids.

 

[Gordon Nore]

As for the folks who named their kid Adolf Hitler, the issue was that staff at a cake store refused to put the name on a birthday cake, not that the government was deciding how children should be named. Ultimately, it was a matter between those parents and that store.

Cake request for 3-year-old Hitler namesake denied

 

[Drac]

I tell the young cadets in the academy to avoid getting additional tats until they get appointed and the Chief explains the departments tat policy...Many departments have a policy that forbids tats below the level of a shirt sleeve shirt...

 

[shesulsa]

Ok, so let me ask this:

You run a Successful... i dunno... accounting firm. You lose an employee for whatever reason, and need someone fast. Your local headhunter says "Good news! We have a guy, just came back on the market, he has 20 years experience, some of his clients are fortune 500 companies and he draws more and more in everyday because his knowledge of tax laws is exemplary... he got bored with his last company and came to me looking for somthing new"

He sounds great, but walks in to your office to interview and has a slew of earrings and two full tattoo sleeves and they bleed over onto his hands. Do you do the foolish thing and turn him down?

Me? No. But that's ... ME.

I don't always think it's about confidence. While for some people it may be, just like driving a fast sportscar or owning a gun might be a "phallic substitute" for some people... there are other reasons that go beyond confidence and a desire to show off.

Agreed - and part of my point was that it's all in the perception of the *assuming* viewer (beauty in the eye of the beholder?).

Come on Geo, I think you know that was simply an example. Anything could be put in, in place of lack of hygiene. For example....an office job. Person shows up with full sleeves on their arms, huge holes in their ears, and ink on their face...they may not get that job. Again, to each their own. I'm not against tats, despite what some may think.

Then, with all due respect, let's please use comparable analogies rather than converse comparisons, such as wild hair color/style, clean but different clothing, audacious makeup, etcetera - things that are more geared to a non-traditional appearance rather than a lack of personal hygiene. I'm sorry you can't see the problem in comparing someone with ink to a dirty, stinking mental case, but others *do.* I will concede, however, that is this very comparison we have to deal with on a very real level. :asian:

 

[Ken Morgan]

As a libertarian I understand the need to keep government out of our lives as much as possible. However I don’t believe in some huge government conspiracy wanting to take our rights away a little bit at a time, until we live in a communist society. The government just doesn’t care enough about you, to want to. That being said, yes we must remain vigilant against any limitations of our basic rights. The government may not be your friend, but they are not your enemy.

The greatest enemy of the government and of the people equally, are a bloated bureaucracy in my opinion.

Anything you do to your children physically, emotionally or physiologically that can damage or hinder them when they are older can be construed as abuse. Naming your child Adolph Hitler falls into that category, tattooing your children fall into that category, not educating or staving your children fall into that category. Some think that religion can be construed as abuse, while I sympathize with the sediment, I disagree with that one.

We have to give up a certain percentage of our freedom to our government, to live reasonably harmoniously in a society with others. That was political science 101 during my first year of school.

We all know whack jobs, we all know people who should not be parents, but until everyone is willing to stand up and raise those children as their own in a loving home, we pass the ball to the government to take care of the nuts and their children. Part of raising a child properly is rules, and that is what the government does best.

 

[Blade96]

As for the folks who named their kid Adolf Hitler, the issue was that staff at a cake store refused to put the name on a birthday cake, not that the government was deciding how children should be named. Ultimately, it was a matter between those parents and that store.

Cake request for 3-year-old Hitler namesake denied

I know. twin fist though brought it up as a 'what if' kind of thing, what if the gov decided what u could name your kids, and i just used it as a potentially harmful example as that kid is going to have a hard time in life because of his name and the stigma attached to it.

 

[MJS]

My opinion and only mine follows.

Reasonable ink wont influence my immediate opinion of you one way or another. If you have sleeve tats with face and neck ink/brands and piercings, those huge barrel earnings and tongue studs...well then it does. For right or wrong it sort of does.

I have a little ink. You will only see it if I decide to roll up my sleeves or wear a short sleeve shirt. Many of my co-workers have the same. However we have a policy that less than one third of a showing limb can show ink or the whole limb must be covered and no facial tats or brands. It has become a serious concern with hiring of the new generation of officers.

At some point, the volume of ink and the physical appearance issue sort of becomes a statement of "screw conventions man! Im an original...I can look however I want...I don't care what you or society think of me..."

Which is all well and good. But I then find it odd that these people take offense when they are treated differently.

Not saying that that is a "fact" or that anybody here is saying this. It's just my.02.

We ALL have some responsibility for the way we "read" others AND for how we present ourselves to others.

My thoughts exactly. This is what I've been trying to get at, however, I think some of this may have been lost in traslation, as we so often see on message boards.

 

[MJS]

Ok, so let me ask this:

You run a Successful... i dunno... accounting firm. You lose an employee for whatever reason, and need someone fast. Your local headhunter says "Good news! We have a guy, just came back on the market, he has 20 years experience, some of his clients are fortune 500 companies and he draws more and more in everyday because his knowledge of tax laws is exemplary... he got bored with his last company and came to me looking for somthing new"

He sounds great, but walks in to your office to interview and has a slew of earrings and two full tattoo sleeves and they bleed over onto his hands. Do you do the foolish thing and turn him down?

Yup, I'd probably turn him down. Why? For reasons I've already listed. Many companies have some sort of dress code policy. Does this company have one? If so, and how this person looks, violates that, then I guess he wouldn't be hired.

Is that the popular view? Probably not. Is that the reality? In some cases yes.

 

[MJS]

Then, with all due respect, let's please use comparable analogies rather than converse comparisons, such as wild hair color/style, clean but different clothing, audacious makeup, etcetera - things that are more geared to a non-traditional appearance rather than a lack of personal hygiene. I'm sorry you can't see the problem in comparing someone with ink to a dirty, stinking mental case, but others *do.* I will concede, however, that is this very comparison we have to deal with on a very real level. :asian:

I think people are reading a bit too much into it, but sure, I'll try. Again, as I said, it was a simple example. IIRC, I think I've also been clear that I am not anti tattoo. I believe I've simply said that anyone is free to do what they want with their body, as long as they're willing to accept the after effects of whatever it is that they do.

 

[MJS]

Anything you do to your children physically, emotionally or physiologically that can damage or hinder them when they are older can be construed as abuse. Naming your child Adolph Hitler falls into that category, tattooing your children fall into that category, not educating or staving your children fall into that category. Some think that religion can be construed as abuse, while I sympathize with the sediment, I disagree with that one.

QFT!! This is what I touched on in an earlier post. TF made some interesting points here:

"as long as the parents do not HARM thier kids, the parents have the right to raise them as they see fit without government interference."

So, here, we can look at what falls into the 'harm' category. So, while calling your kid Hitler may not physically hamr then...then again, he may get his *** kicked...or while doing, shall I say, stupid things such as tattooing their child, may not physically harm them, the mental harm very well may be there.

 

[Twin Fist]

you know what would have to be outlawed if "it might cause the kid some mental angina later on" is the standard?

 

[MJS]

you know what would have to be outlawed if "it might cause the kid some mental angina later on" is the standard?

So, am I safe to assume that as long as the tats dont physically harm the kid, then its ok in your eyes? Is it ok, as long as there's no physical harm, to name your kid Hitler, as long as it doesnt physically harm the kid? And seeing that kids can be cruel, what happens when the kid gets his *** kicked because of his name, how he looks, what he's wearing, etc.? So, now, you have a kid, who goes thru life, with a ****ed up name, and ink all over him...all because the parents think its cool and that they should be able to do whatever they choose.

 

[Archangel M]

I don't know how far I want to stretch individual rights into the ability to do something TO another human being. Even your own kid. I can see the slippery slope, but there needs to be some reasonable limitations.