A young boy named Adolf Hitler, who attracted national attention when a local supermarket refused to make a birthday cake with his name on it, has been taken away from his parents by authorities, according to a local website.

[…snip…]

No reason was given for why the children were removed, however, and Holland Township police chief David Van Gilson told the site they had not received any reports of abuse or negligence. (From Dailynews.com)

Apparently, this child was removed from his parents’ care because of their ideology. While I certainly do not agree with their beliefs, I think it is a very dangerous threat to our First Amendment when authorities attempt to police thoughts.

I would be concerned about the criteria being used to determine at what point ideology becomes detrimental to a child’s welfare. If supportive beliefs about Hitler and the Nazi party become legally unacceptable, would not (or should not) similar beliefs about historical figures who share the same evil ideologies also be legally unacceptable? And who judges? How do you separate one person’s terrorist from another person’s “freedom fighter”?

If teaching a child that Hitler was a good person becomes criminal, why shouldn’t Muslim families face the same persecution? After all, Muhammad was as evil, if not more so, than Hitler. Of all the horrible atrocities committed by Adolph Hitler, I don’t recall history teaching that he advocated slavery for his own women, nor do I recall that he ever legitimized child rape for his own perverted pleasures. I don’t say this to excuse any of the evil acts he committed, or to minimize what he ultimately did. But if evil can be measured on any scale, certainly Muhammad would represent an equal, if not greater threat to humanity as a whole.

If teaching children that evil has some sort of justification or nobility is a crime, we cannot ignore an entire cult of believers who give divinity to one of the most evil, wicked men to ever live.