Even Offensive speech

You may not agree with the message, but at least here you could express it.

A Winnipeg mother whose children were seized by authorities after she sent her daughter to school with a swastika on her arm says she regrets redrawing the Nazi symbol after a teacher scrubbed it off.

Yes, you read that right. They saw the swastika and then went to the house and saw neo-nazi stuff and seized the kids. The thing is, it sparked "debate" as to wether this was right or wrong.

The case has sparked questions about whether the state has the right to protect children from their parents' beliefs.
University of Winnipeg professor Helmut-Harry Loewen, an expert on hate groups, said while he disagrees with the ideology, he fears taking custody based on beliefs is draconian.
"If children are apprehended based on parents' political or religious beliefs, then one is opening a kind of slippery slope," he said.
But University of Manitoba professor Harvy Frankel, dean of the faculty of social work, said officials did the right thing.
"We should be reassured that this is child welfare practice as it should be."

Again, as I have always said the regulation of speech, no matter how offensive, should not be regulated. The real reason is not because it is offensive, but who is to determine what is offensive? I will always maintain that it is a small step from regulating offensive speech, to regulating other speech that people find offensive. What is to stop one of those Government workers from saying they find opposition to Global warming offensive,or Politcal thought offensive? Be glad we still have free speech here.....for now.