poster children for mandatory sterilization.

Why is it that most fans of Nazism and Aryan race ideals would have been flushed down the drain as “unwertes Leben” in the actual Third Reich?

Some waste of protoplasm in New Jersey named his kids JoyceLynn Aryan Nation Campbell, Honszlynn Hinler Jeannie Campbell and Adolf Hitler Campbell.  Now the Campbells are all in a snit because the local grocery store won’t put little Adolf Hitler Campbell’s full name on a birthday cake. Gee, I wonder why?

Look: you have the right to name your kids (and thereby fuck them up for life.)  With that right comes the responsibility to live with the consequences of your decision.  One of those consequences may be that sane and normal people look at your kids’ birth certificates and conclude that you’re a racist, bigoted, inbred shitbag with the IQ of a bucket of flatworms.

When I read stuff like this, it’s hard to cling to my libertarian philosophy.  There is a part of me that just wants to have the Gummint send some Health & Human Services commandos up there, kick down their door, remove their kids and wipe their memories before placing them in foster care with brand new, non-repulsive names, and then forcibly sterilize the parents with a rusty spork and a soldering iron.

(Yes, they have the right to free speech, and the right to be Nazi-loving retards, but at what point do the rights of the kids kick in not to get a name and an upbringing that will guarantee they’ll never be gainfully employed, or afforded any sort of respect?)

Of course, the real fun will start when little Adolf hits the teenage years, gets all contrary and rebellious, and brings home a girlfriend named Shamiqua or Esther…

(Via Scalzi.)


28 thoughts on “poster children for mandatory sterilization.

  1. theflatwhite says:

    I want a metal spork.

  2. Aaron says:

    Something to keep in mine when you have a new child:

    While you do have the ability to choose their names when they are young and helpless and don’t really have a say in the matter, your children have the ability to choose your nursing home when you are old and feeble and really don’t have a say in the matter.

    So the choice really should be viewed as: Bedsore Meadows or Happy Acres?

  3. Kristopher says:

    I think the best way to attack this is for “racially inferior” parents to encourage their kids to make friends of these children, and deliberately get them to turn on their parents.

    End goal being a manumission lawsuit initiated by said children against their parents.

    Extra bonus points if said kids marries one and starts turning out “mongrel” children immediately.

    You can find a libertarian solution to this if you work hard enough.

  4. Tam says:

    I want a metal spork.

    Pffft. I have a folding titanium spork. Don’t you wish you were cool like me now? 😉

  5. Sigivald says:

    Now, now. The name isn’t what’s going to ruin the kids’ lives (they can, after all, have them legally changed – given the names they have I can’t imagine the judge even asking twice).

    Their parents’ modes of raising them are going to do the real damage.

    The names are just a warning to the rest of us, like the stripes on a coral snake.

  6. Chris Byrne says:

    If it ever becomes illegal to be an asshole, it means the time for revolution has come… and unfortunately, most likely passed.

  7. crankylitprof says:

    I’m beginning to think that it’s damn near MANDATORY to be an asshole in some areas/jobs.

  8. Rusty P. Bucket says:

    This is exactly where the childish libertarian ideology falls apart and you asre right to question it. Clearly, some kind of intervention is called for.

    No, you do not have the right to be an asshole that raises psychotic children. A mature adult realizes there are limits to freedom, usually where responsibility begins. Citizens have a duty of care to their communities and their fellow citizens and raising kids in this manner poses a hazard for citizens of color and minority groups.

  9. keepbreathing says:

    I have a hard time holding to the ideals of personal liberty sometimes due to the things I see at work.

    I’ve never seen a child named “Adolf Hitler,” but not too long ago we had some ghetto trash mother who named her child “I’llkillya.”

    That’s right: she named her child after the threat of a violent felony because she thought it was funny. I can’t say I shed any tears when that woman died…

  10. Tam says:

    Best Kid Name Story, from roomie’s niece, who works in a neo-natal ICU:

    “How do you pronounce this, ma’am?”

    What do you mean?

    “Well, ‘La-a’? Ell, ay, hyphen, ay? How do you pronounce that?”

    What’s a ‘hyphen’?

    “The dash. In your daughter’s name.”

    Well the dash ain’t silent!

    Her daughter’s name, “La-a”, was pronounced “Ladasha”.

  11. Larry says:

    I can see a dumpster outside the back door in some parent’s future. After all, why waste a perfectly good nursing home?

  12. Larry says:

    And, for the record, I’ve always wished I was cool like Tam. Spork or no spork.

  13. perlhaqr says:

    “ShopRite can’t even make a cake for a 3-year-old,” said Deborah Campbell, 25, who is Heath’s wife of three years and the mother of the children. “That’s sad.”

    No, ShopRite didn’t make a cake for your kid. I’m sure they could have, but chose not to.

  14. ASM826 says:

    You have to tolerate the outliers, on the left and the right. You may not like the choices they are making, but the price for your freedom is theirs. There are plenty of people who would join you for the sporking of these parents, and turn on you the next day.

    Once they had cleared out those racists, removed their rights, taken the children, they would look around for the next thing to make them feel good and righteous. Eliminate home schooling, we need all the children to socialize with others. Parents who keep guns in the house are unfit. Think of the children! And so on.

  15. Marko says:


    I agree with you on that, actually. After all, I want the village to keep their hands off *my* kids, too. What do you want to bet there are people out there who consider Libertarians or atheists “childish morons” or hell-bound scum who shouldn’t be allowed to raise their kids the way they want?

    After all, if it only saves one child/soul, etcetera.

  16. Rusty P. Bucket says:

    I suppose that cheap shot was aimed at me Munchkin. Much as I enjoy stirring the pot and playing the Devil’s Advocate…I said you were childish, not a moron, Ha ha!

    All philosophies break down at some point. That point usually occurs with marginal people like the ones we are discussing here. Who can argue the rights of these children to a decent childhood are being violated? A libertarian? By doing nothing, you are also enabling this attack on the children. A libertarian will not think so; which is one of the fundamental flaws in the theory.

    Christianity has been used to defend all kinds of scumbags too and it don’t make it right. Commiting or enabling a crime is all the same thing whether you justify it with christianity or libertarianism. At some point common sense has to prevail. There is a difference between you raising your kids and educating them beyond national standrds and this guy raising his kid to be racist psychotics – or at least, that is what common sense is telling me. When we start devoting ourselves to philosophies even when they so obviously fail, we are no different from the Germans that sent the Jews to the gas chambers or the Branch Davidians that set their wives and kids on fire.

    I suppose the degree of stupidity in that is different…but not by much as you would think. When you cross the line on common sense, it is time to drop the rhetoric and reconsider your philosophy or ideology…and be prepared to go beyond it if necessary.

  17. Marko says:


    the problem with the “common sense” approach is that it’s a really shifty and inaccurate benchmark. A significant percentage of the population thinks it’s common sense that guns don’t belong in a house with children, for example. “Common sense” usually means “stuff I like/agree with”. It’s not a hard definition that can be objectively enforced, and therefore it’s a poor yardstick for measuring whether we can force people to do stuff they don’t want to do.

    You have to have a more clear-cut, objective standard than that before you break out the pitchforks, torches, or sporks. Otherwise you’re just rationalizing your own preferences.

  18. ChrisB says:

    Seriously, if a kid doesn’t want to be called something he’ll just select a nickname to go by. I went to school with a kid name “Clarence” and really didn’t like being called that so he had people call him “Jake”, and eventually everyone called him that.

    I also know many immigrants with damn near unpronounceable names that just go by something else, the name isn’t nearly as much of a deal as bening raised by nutjobs, but I also know a boatload of Obama supporters who are just as crazy in the other direction. Getting govt. involved here just decides which version of nutjob gets to force their nonsense on everyone else.

  19. ChrisB says:


    Want to know what’s childish? Being rude while a guest in someone else’s house, not exactly the way to make friends and influence people.

  20. Rusty P. Bucket says:

    Mark that is what we do anyways: rationalize stuff we agree with whether we do it through christianity or libertarianism or some other code of morals and ethics. Shifty cretins have abused christianity, socialism, capitalism and all the other political and religous philosophies for ever – in open defiance of common sense! Common sense tells us that some people should not have guns in their homes – and libertarianism can be used to insist to the contrary. Your ideology is no defence against immoral behaviour as we see here.

    Chris, to me this is just a good discussion – and a damned good one for men to have. My experience with libertarians is that most are crazier than chit house rats…but some, like our Wrangler here, are truly intelligent men and can handle themselves in debate. Intelligent libertarians are actually fascinating people. I am sorry if you find my remarks offensive. I do not seriously expect to influence anyone here.

  21. ATLien says:

    The right to a decent childhood? No one has that right. It’s not a real “right”. You talk out your ass.

  22. Matt says:


    The point you’re missing is you are assuming the parents are engaging in an attack on children and by extension, must be stopped.

    Some countries have laws against parents saddling children with disgusting or foolish names. This one does not (to my knowledge).

    Last time I checked, no one had the right to a decent childhood. Care to point where that is enumerated in the Constitution? I self-identify as a libertarian (small ‘l’) and I get tired of hearing folks who think “something should be done about injustice X” claim it is a “right” being violated.

    We have no right to decide when we are born.
    We have no right to decide who are parents will be.
    We have no right to dictate the values and ideals parents may instill in a child even if socially distasteful or hateful to our values.

    It is unfortunate that kids are born to racist, ignorant assholes. Such is life. It is unfortunate those kids will be harassed, bullied and probably hold ignorant, racist views themselves courtesy of their environment. You want to know something? The real-world has a tendency to correct or at least minimize that unfortunate upbringing.

    Yes, the kids will suffer for that. For that, I am sorry. But life is like that. I think we all suffer lasting scars from our upbringing. The key is identifying such later in life and striving to put it behind us. I, like many, was bullied and taunted as a kid. I certainly didn’t enjoy and probably carrying scars from it but in the end, I endured and became a productive adult. For anyone, that it is all we can hope for.

    But what we DO NOT do is pass a law to make it illegal for a parent to be a dumbass. Provided the parent is not beating the child black-and-blue, sexually abusing them, starving or engaging in abuse most reasonable people would consider abusive (which existing law more than covers), they have the right as human being to mess up their children as much as possible and to our regret as a society. It is the price of being free.

    Sometimes, your only purpose in life is to serve as a warning to others. Sad but not something I would ever demand the Government do something about. To me, if you feel so offended by it and feel something needed to be done, find poor Adolf at 18 years of age and a legal adult and offer to pay for a legal name change.

    So how does my philosophy break down in the face of such “harmful” behavior? I find no conflict.

  23. ChrisB says:


    Would you like me to refer to Christianity as “childish”?

    Also, what, specifically, is libertarianism? What is the point of discussing something if you don’t even know exactly what that thing is? The beginning of wisdom is the definition of terms.

  24. MarkHB says:

    *raises a hand*

    Children have invisible friends. Ergo, Christianity is childish. Everyone who’s grown up knows that if they’re only visible to you, they ain’t really there.

    This is why I don’t talk to the miniature purple giraffe called Godfrey, no matter who he tells me to kill.

  25. Rusty P. Bucket says:

    Hey fellas, I admit classical Christianity has it’s flaws. That’s what common sense is for. And look at you guys – defending poor parenting! Way to go fellas. You may feel free to prove me correct at your convenience, and I sincerely thank you for it!

    Not only do children have a right to a decent childhood, it is the parent’s God given responsibility to provide it. Granted, that code of ethics comes from my invisible friend…but at least He doesn’t have me defending chitty parents that are screwing up their kids. This kind of zealotry should have you questioning libertarianism too!

    This world is filled with self proclaimed intellectuals that are merely parrots that read. Very few can actually think – and those that do often find themselves questioning their ideologies as our fella does here. It is a sign of maturity I guess. The young always seem to have all the answers…and so few have the ability to ask the right questions, never mind answer them.

    My guess, Munchkin is that you will find your fellow libertarians are much like the ones here that mock me with derisive laughter. They don’t like the tough questions, tough questions offend them and all they have going for them are slogans and rhetoric. We are all adults here MarkHB and you may act like one whenever you see fit.

    Matt, we have no right to dictate values? Seems to me some of your playmates are doing that here, are they not? That has got to be the worst rationalization I have ever seen on a blog yet! You will never be a man thinking like that, son.

  26. MarkHB says:

    I’m still not detecting actual adulthood here. Getting a lot of emo, and a faint tinge of zealotry.

    But, you have a great time now. It’s everybody’s interweb.

  27. […] that poor kid whose idiotic parents named him Adolf?  I was with Marko on the subject, who wrote: After all, I want the village to keep their hands off *my* kids, too. What do you want to bet […]

Comments are closed.