“Child protection” in Germany

This just in from Germany:

Recently we informed already some of you about the plight of the 15 years old boy in the Oberpfalz- area/ Bavaria, whose mother had asked the Youth Welfare Office for help and finally lost the custody. For those, who are reading this first time today: The teenager was opposed to extreme bullying by other pupils and got no help by the school and others. Finally he couldn`t go to school now and then, but always confirmed by his doctor, that he was sick. The “Welfare Office” made the diagnosis “motherly over- care, social phobia etc.
The boy`s family is very thankful for your reactions; encouraging letters to him into the children`s home, helpful hints or promises of financial help. It is so good to have people behind you in such a terrible situation. We know that.
There are almost no further news. The teenager is allowed to visit his mother for some hours at the weekend, twice a month overnight. How bad he is feeling at the moment you can read in his attached (German) letter. Since the last hearing ( 4th of October) the judge didn`t decide, but( hopefully) waits for an expertise opinion of an independent expert, whom the boy`s attorney fortunately found. After that the court will probably wait for the reactions of the other side to this paper.
The absurdity of this case and the boy`s suffering in his situation urges us to look for sudden help. We suspect, that the German Youth Welfare Office often acts like this with victims of bullying. Because of fear these families don`t raise their voice in the public.
Following is important:
1. Because the attorney, the independent expert and others have to be paid , the( alone educating) mother is politely asking for financial help. In the near future around 10000 Euro will probably be needed. Some of you offered already some hundred Euros as gift and around 3000 Euros lented. Thanks so much! Mrs. Jordan wants to keep these matters transparent and tries to pay back the lented money as soon as possible.
The boy`s uncle opened a trustee account (right word in English?) for that:
Harald Jordan, wegen Sven :Raiffeisenbank Seebachgrund, Kontonummer (accountnumber) :58033, Bankleitzahl (Bank number): 76069602
2.The Jordan- family has decided to go into the public, but a bit anonymised (look attachments, sorry, we lack of time to translate it now). If possible, help to spread these informations, where help could be expected!
3. If you have questions or good ideas, please contact the family ,they can speak English.
Mother of Sven : Ellen Jordan, Tel.: 09662 702399                                      E-mail: jordankind1@web.de
Aunt and uncle of Sven: Renate and Harald Jordan: Tel.: 09195/ 7811           E-mail: Jordan.renate@web.de , Jordan.harald@web.de 
4. If teenagers like to write an encouraging letter to Sven into the children`s home, here is his address:
Sven Jordan persönlich (personally)
Ernst- Nägelsbach Haus
Wichernstr. 9-11
92237 Sulzbach-Rosenberg
Thanks a lot!
Kind regards / Mit freundlichen Grüßen ?
Und im Übrigen bin ich mit dem Grundgesetz der Meinung:
Der Staat hat keinen eigenständigen  Erziehungsauftrag !
Gudrun & Hubert Busekros (Tel +49 9131 934760)

D-91056 Erlangen, Schallershofer Straße 72a
mailto:Familie.Busekros@gmx.de   (max.: 1GByte  HTML)

Intelligent Design to be banned in Europe?

Intelligent Design to Be Banned in Europe?
Ever wonder what all the fuss is about over the SPP (Security and Prosperity Partnership) and other supranational government schemes that would enable Mexico and Canada to get in on governing America?
Look no further than the European Union. These progressive folks came up with this brilliant idea first, and now the Big Brothers of Brussels are telling them what they may and may not teach their kids in 27 countries. Isn’t dictatorship just grand? Here is the link to this week’s resolution to discourage all European secondary schools from teaching Intelligent Design:
I love the sacrosanct Belgian official and her little speech about how anyone who writes a text accepting ID is disqualified.
But look at that second link below the video window entitled “Creation or Evolution.”
How are the thought police in Europe going to stop the masses from clicking? Scary, isn’t it? They might have to accept a few Christians diluting the effect of the Muslims in matters of religion.
Ann Coulter endorses Duncan Hunter
Ann says he is the obvious choice.
To tell the truth, I watched the early Values Voters Debates moderated by Joseph Farah, and here are a few observations:
Hunter was the only one who really convinced me that he is serious about stopping illegal immigration and sending home the lawbreakers. Some hemmed and hawed a bit too much for me.
The no-shows left a very sour taste in my mouth. Fred Thompson has made it plain he does not want our vote, both on that occasion and in response to James Dobson’s concerns.  I am more than happy to oblige Fred. Besides, I can foresee him working feverishly to involve us more deeply in supranational government schemes.
Ron Paul might have tempted me a bit because I love the Constitution, but I got the impression he may legalize some really dangerous drugs. Maybe I read too many articles on this in Dutch newspapers (hard drugs are legal in Holland and parents are wringing their hands). My impression is that banning drugs, while limited, is at least a start. Not banning them is suicidal.
I will tell you why I want them banned. Suppose your teenager comes up to you and says, “aw, come on, Mom, heroine is legal, for crying out loud!”
No thanks.

Did Jeffrey Dahmer commit a hate crime?

By Donald Hank
Recently, senators put aside your objections and passed a defense authorization bill with an incongruous hate crimes addendum tacked onto it which would elevate several groups, including gays, to the coveted and lucrative status of victims. This is to make these groups safer, they say, since crimes committed by these groups would be handled by the FBI, not by those bungling local enforcement agencies who wouldn’t recognize a killer if they tripped over one.
But in the event this bill somehow escapes President Bush’s promised veto, I want to know how they would handle a case like Jeffrey Dahmer’s.
Jeffrey Dahmer had the ones he loved, so to speak, in more ways than one. His modus operandi was to spike the drinks of his victims with debilitating drugs, have sex with them and then kill them and eat their flesh, although not always in that order. Sometimes he would kill them before having sex with them. He killed 17 men and boys between 1978 and 1991.
Before you go categorizing Jeffrey as a homosexual, you need to know that the establishment may not agree. Years ago, gay activists pressured the APA (American Psychological Association) into massaging the definition of “homosexual” to exclude pedophiles who rape boys. Their twisted logic is that these are exclusively pedophiles, who crave sex with youngsters but are not interested in what sex they happen to be. They further assert that the gender of a child is not clearly defined anyway and can change later according to the child’s “orientation.” If you say pedophiles who have sex with boys are homosexuals, they may smile condescendingly and say “no, no, they’re pedophiles, not homosexuals.” This is what we little people refer to as psychobabble, and it is based purely on politics, not science. But the APA and their activist cohorts know that most don’t know this and can be easily bludgeoned into submission by a Harvard diploma.
The ulterior reason for this linguistic sleight-of-hand is to eliminate the otherwise damaging link that exists between homosexuality and criminal behavior.
So what would the APA say if a link appeared to exist between homosexuality and cannibalism, as it did in the case of Jeffrey Dahmer? Would they then declare that men having sex with men and then killing them and eating their flesh are not really homosexuals but exclusively cannibals? (The possibility of such a link may seem far-fetched, but there was a copy-cat case in Germany a few years after Dahmer’s conviction. And let’s not forget the father of modern gay cannibalism, Tobias Schneebaum).
If the APA made this minor change to natural language, in keeping with its past behavior, then a Jeffrey Dahmer imitator could still be said to have committed a hate crime. Chances are that would not be the case, since the press had already blessed the designation of Jeffrey as a homosexual. So no judge could call this a hate crime, and gays who get flayed and eaten by other gays are probably out of luck. Who’s going to warn them?

I want to show herein that by drafting and passing “hate crime” legislation, and hence, catapulting gays to the official status of victims, the government is once again cynically harming the very group they purport to help. I say “again,” because we have seen the fallout of awarding victim status and should really know better by now. We have seen how welfare, which, de facto, made a victim group predominantly out of poor minority women, hurt those women by turning the inner cities into their worst nightmare; how radical 60s feminists hurt women by seducing them into abandoning good enough husbands for the promise of “self fulfillment,” thereby saddling them with a lifetime of endless workaday and child care stress—slavery in fact—that could have been shared with their mates, and also into aborting their children, leaving emotional scars, depression, guilt and oftentimes physical sequelae. Likewise we have seen how affirmative action seduced many minority young people into going to college after being pushed through the grades in high school on the basis of a pass-all system, only to find they couldn’t cope on campus.  Despite these bitter lessons, we are now being conned again into believing that another victimization scam is going to somehow help another community, the gay one. What we will inevitably do is make deluded gays think they are above the law, or that they can persuade judges and lawmakers into accepting their behavior, even if it is currently viewed as unlawful, and even when it strays far beyond mere homosexuality.

Jeffrey Dahmer himself and the gay men he enjoyed, both sexually and gustatorily, were hurt by a laissez-faire policy toward gays in law enforcement. Regarding one of Jeffrey’s victims, Konerak Sinthasomphone, one source says:

Sandra Smith, 18, and Nicole Childress, 18 her cousin, witnessed an incoherent Asian boy running around naked, and bleeding. Even though he couldn’t speak English it was obvious that he was frightened of the white man following him out into the street trying to get him to return to the apartment. Dahmer, 31, told police the boy was his 19 year old lover, and they were having a lover’s quarrel. After police escorted the child to Dahmer’s apartment, they left him to die, despite the concerns of the two women who reported the incident.

This is exactly the kind of tragedy that hurts “protected” groups when you treat them as “special” and grant them more rights than others. Does anyone doubt that had the boy been, for example, a naked and bleeding woman, intervention would have been swift and decisive? In fact, Dahmer’s killing streak may have ended then and there and the other gays he later murdered would still be alive. But Jeffrey was emboldened by the double standard. He knew that because he was gay, no official in town would interfere with his plans. He was immune. And that thanks to gay activism, the worst thing that ever happened to gays!

Last week’s gay bash in San Francisco’s Folsom Street further illustrates how laws that apply to others simply do not apply to gays when officials grant them victim status.
But this Folsom Street bash serendipitously makes another point as well, namely, that the gay agenda will not stop with just gay marriage, hate crimes legislation and ENDA (Employment Non-Discrimination Act). Gay activists are busy breaking down barriers not only to private but also to public homosexual behavior. The same people fighting on the vanguard of gay marriage rights also think they have a right to have sex on your sidewalk in your town in broad daylight. If you think that is an exaggeration, then click on the next link below regarding the Folsom Street bash in San Francisco. But be forewarned: this is the most graphic, disgusting, lewd imagery I have ever seen anywhere, and if you have a weak stomach, please don’t click. If you are a minor or if there is a minor nearby, don’t click. And if you do intend to click, despite these warnings, make sure a barf bag is within reach.
As a prelude to this I received an email from an internet friend. It is a copy of an email she received in turn from a friend of hers. The following is the first part, and I urge readers to make the requested call to Nancy Pelosi, for whom gays can do no wrong and who has excused this filth:
This past weekend, Sunday, in San Francisco two of my relatives were trying to leave the city and they had a two and one half hour delay.  They came to a halt due to the fact that a group of homosexual men were parading their nude wares and doing many obscene things to the point of some having intercourse on the streets.  After that part was over they did some kind of homage to bondage. 
Think of the people who live near this filth.  Think of the children in the cars that could see any of this.  My kids would have been told to sit on the floor boards of the car.
Why did no one take action?  At least all the cars should have laid on their horns. 
My one relative got up close and saw only three police officers and they were not doing one thing to stop [my emphasis] any of this, then again I am told there are homosexual police in Sanny Fran.
Now I understand all of us watch our pennies but I should think making two phone calls today would not break your bank.  The first call would be to Rep. Nancy Pelosi’s office in Sanny Fran.  They only answer with a recording machine, guess she has been getting a lot of calls on various things.  The number for her is:
Obviously, this lewd party wasn’t cordoned off. It was deliberately held in the open air in a busy street so that visitors would be forced to watch. America, you are being prepared for a major invasion of your privacy under the thin guise of “safety” for homosexuals.
If you need convincing, and have read my warnings above, you may click here.
How will gays ultimately be hurt by all the legislative pandering to their every whim?
The same ways women were hurt by the feminist agenda. Aside from encouraging people to embark on a dangerous, empty lifestyle, this agenda will make people so sick and tired of seeing these misguided crusaders everywhere, demanding a litany of new “rights” no one else is entitled to, stealing the spotlight from legitimate causes, with lewd “gay parades” and “outfests” encroaching on every nook and cranny of our nation and with educators and public officials repeating the mantra that your child may be gay and need protection and by all means must “come out” so he or she can get help or figure out if he or she is a he or she. People will eventually realize it is just another government authorized protection racket.
Feminism taught us that people can only take so much obnoxiousness. By the early 90s, younger women on internet forums on women’s topics were overwhelmingly prefacing their more contentious postings with “I’m not a feminist, but…”
Thus we learned the little lesson, namely, that radical feminism was an exercise in futility and hurt America.
But we didn’t learn the big lesson, and that is that all movements that treat any collective as a special victim group will inevitably fail, causing great harm to everyone, particularly the group they purport to assist.  For while we can fear the collective power of a group and can pass laws that give them special privileges, we can never love a group. And what is done without love will always come to naught, while what we do out of love will endure forever.
Some day, gays as a group will wake up and realize they’re just Americans like the rest of us. They will put aside their rhetoric and start going about the business of simply being regular guys and gals. For the most part, they won’t stop feeling that attraction for others of the same sex, but they’ll be a lot more humble, and likeable, the way they used to be, the way they truly are down inside. Some will become ex-gays, and their old cronies won’t mind that. Many will even be happy for them.
And then, Fellow American, with a little help from you and me, they’ll find out they don’t have to worry about people hating them any more.  What a wonderful day that will be!
I hope readers will pass along a link to this column (you are the new media; the old media are useless) and join in the discussion of this topic (see “Add Comments” below), with stories and anecdotes of their own as well as their views.

Reader, the floor is yours!

Dear Reader,

Today’s  column (which we would like to keep up for about a week or at least until the debate seems to have subsided) is dedicated to a debate on the conservative candidates of the upcoming election.
It was stimulated by a person who wrote us with some very strong views supporting Ron Paul.
I hope as many as possible will participate in this debate and tell us your views on the Republican and independent candidates you like or dislike.

We want to know who you prefer and why.

Laigle’s Forum will refrain from endorsing any candidate at this point but will listen to all sides and ask questions, sometimes possibly pointing out facts.

Just go to the bottom of this article and find “Comments.” Fill out the form and tell us whom, if anyone, you endorse, and why.

The floor is yours.


Laigle’s Forum Editors