Master Debater
I don't think the State (or even Children's Services...) should seize the children of parents who hold political views considered abhorrent by "decent" society (heheh - or all Rightwingers would have their children seized...) but I was under the impression that the girl's step-father drew the swastika on her arm and sent her to school.
Now, I suppose the school could have ignored that act of bodily vandalism, but... I'm not sure why it would. If I was a teacher at the school, I'd bring it to the attention of the principal, too - and it would then, by law, have to be reported to Children's Services. Should Children's Services have seized the children? Well, the girl's mom is married to her step-dad and clearly wasn't protecting her daughter from what I would say was a boundary cross.
The fact is, and lots of Rightwingers don't like it, kids have rights recognized in law nowadays. That's a good thing because it means parents no longer have the absolute right of control and ownership over their children they once had simply because they're their children. And that's a good thing because anyone can have children and as a society, we have to ensure that those children are protected under the same laws that protect the rest of us. I mean, imagine some other kid's dad drawing a swastika on the little girl's arm on her way to school. Would that be okay with Rightwingers so keen on protecting what they see as parental rights?
