Party politics of holding children's parties in Sweden

A little 8 year old boy in Sweden was accused of discrimination because he handed out birthday party invitations at school and failed to invite 2 of the children in the class. Therefore, the invitations were confiscated.

One of the boys not invited had not invited the birthday boy to his own party, and the second one had had a falling out with the boy.

Talk about a Nanny State! :eek:

An exerpt from the article is below! I’m glad I don’t live in Sweden!

*It was supposed to be a party with balloons and a birthday cake but the eight-year-old Swedish boy had not reckoned on his country’s obsession with equality and inclusiveness. Two of his classmates were left off the invitation list – and that, deemed his school – was forbidden and a violation of their rights in the strictest “nanny state” in Europe.

The case has been sent to the Swedish parliament and has sparked a national debate about individual liberty. Does a child have the right to invite anyone he wants to a party, even if he risks hurting the feelings of those who were left out? *

I still love their nanny state. But the worst part in Sweden is their wiretapping law that was recently passed. But at least if you are unemployed you get sent to so-called “labor market political activities” whose only purpose is to reduce the headline unemployment number.

Now that’s just pathetic! What a bunch of wimps!

Hard to believe that the government gets involved in matters so mundane as to the guest list of a child’s birthday party. :rolleyes:

I believe infringing on the right of children to invite people to parties a good price to pay for their loving nanny state with unemployment insurance and health care and a lower vulnerability to poverty.

But what is different about this? Don’t conservatives want a nanny state that regulates the use of abortion and contraceptives. Liberals want a nanny state for the nobler goal of reducing the suffering of its citizens.

According to the article, one of the boys who was not invited had been mean to this boy for 6 month on a daily basis. Yet, you don’t want him to face the consequences of his negative behaviour? You think that it’s right to force an 8 year old boy to invite a mean boy who might ruin his birthday party?

That’s a ridiculous burden to place on an 8 yr old. That’s not reducing suffering at all, but is ruining a boy’s birthday party.

Congratulations to Sweden for not having more serious political concerns, that a boy’s birthday party could “spark national debate”.

I’d like to speak as a person who was excluded from a party. It was a party for graduating from the eighth grade of my Catholic school and hosted by one of the students. I was the only one not invited.

Since this was a private party on private property, the girl who hosted it had every right to invite only those she chose. (I was not chosen because she didn’t like me–I know this for certain because I accidentally overheard her talking about me to two other students, and she said she hated me because she thought I was pretty.)

My daughters’ Catholic school had a policy that party invitations could not be handed out at school unless all students in the class were invited. However, one could send invitations by any other method (such a postal mail, email, or phone) in order to invite only a few. This sounds like a good idea to me, since students who are excluded would not have to bear the humiliation of it in front of their classmates.

A student should have the right to invite whomever he pleases, but it would be considerate to do it in such a way that it doesn’t hurt the feelings of the other children.

Feel free to migrate there if you love it so much.

We may even pay for the one way ticket. :cool:

Kids get humiliated every day. They are made fun of because they are fat, skinny, have freckles, speak with an accent, wear the wrong clothes and a myrid of other things. Live with it! The mentality that we must not allow kids to ever be humiliated is what has brought us to the point were we don’t keep score at games. Sure we should not allow kids to be bullied but being bullied and not being invited to a party are a lot different.

Same policy in place when I attended Catholic grammar school, when my nieces attended same school one generation later and when son of oldest niece attended in the third generation.

Nobler goal? Nobler goal? You’re kidding, right?

Excuse me, but did you actually read my post?

I said the girl in question had the right to invite whomsoever she chose.

However, because we are Christians, I would think we would strive not to humiliate others. And if it isn’t possible to invite all to a party, the invitations should be handed out with some kind of discretion in order to avoid hurting feelings. That doesn’t mean the government should get involved. It does mean our Christian principles should get involved.

It doesn’t mean nobody comes in last at a competition. It does mean that a child isn’t deliberately targeted.

And if you think being the only one excluded from a graduation party for the entire class is not a form of bullying, you are utterly wrong. Humiliation is a form of bullying. Exclusion is a form of bullying.

Your comment “Live with it!” is also a form of bullying (although I am aware you may not have seen it as such). You’ve told me the problem is with *me, *that I should just suck it up when I’m mistreated. The problem is with the persons doing the mistreating, not with the victim.

Is that what you would tell a kid who’s mistreated because he’s black? Is that what you would tell a kid who’s mistreated because he’s disabled? Just “Live with it!”? Why is my pain accounted as something less than that?

My point was that t*he girl who excluded me from the party–and let everyone know I was excluded–had the right to do so. It was, however, downright **cruel. ***I should not have to just “Live with it!” when someone is cruel to me.

I expect an apology from you.

You know this is where the U.S. is headed, in our endless striving to not “offend” anybody. Apparently, somewhere in our Constitution (probably right next to the “right” to abortion :rolleyes: ) is the “right” to NEVER be offended or have our feelings hurt. A nativity scene on a lawn might offend nonChristians, can’t have it. Being referred to as “husband” and “wife” or “mother” & “father” on legal documents might offend same sex couples, have to change that to “party” or “parent”.Mentioning that the Bible condemns homosexual activity REALLY hurts homosexuals feelings, that’s a “hate crime”, can’t quote the Bible in public. Wearing a cross necklace or Muslim headscarf is “forcing” your religion on other people, and “intimidating” in the same way that gang colors are intimidating (too bad if your favorite color happens to be red or blue), and can’t be seen in public schools. It’s a slippery slope, and we’re on it.

To the PP: yes, being left out & humiliated hurts (even as an adult), I know, I was the “oddball” at school and had few friends. Schools have every right to forbid the passing out of party invites at school (after all, what’s that got to do w/ learning? Fork over money for stamps and mail them!). However, the GOVERNMENT shouldn’t be getting involved in such things. What’s next, branding someone a racist b/c they don’t want to take someone of a different race to the prom, and mandating that everyone has to dance w/ an “equal” number of people of all races? Legislating popularity is NOT the government’s (even a “nanny government” like Sweden) job.

In Christ,


So you should have been invited to a party where you were not wanted? Seems to me that would leave you open to even more humiliation.

That’s not what I said. And it wasn’t just being quietly excluded from the party. It was making darn sure everyone else in the class knew I was being excluded.

For your information, it wasn’t just this one incident. I was bullied all year by the class, including by the teacher–even though she was a nun. The kids told me I was stupid and ugly. When it came to picking teams for basketball, of couse I was the last one chosen, but it went beyond that. The team captains would then argue in front of everybody who had to take me on her team. And I wasn’t a bad player–we had smaller courts, and I could make a basket from center court, something even they couldn’t do. But popularity, not skill, was the deciding factor.

The teacher called all the other students by their first names, but I was always referred to by my last name. I remember her being red in the face, shaking with anger, and screaming at me over something as trivial as a book cover. (Interesting story. I knew I wasn’t good at covering books, so I had asked the girl in front of me if she would do it for me. Amazingly enough, she agreed. But when Sister, who was inspecting the book covers, came to me, she merely glanced at it, slammed the book on the floor, and went into a tirade about how lousy I was at covering books. She then picked up the other girl’s book and said, “Why couldn’t you have covered it like she did?” You have no idea how tempted I was to say, “But Sister, she did.” I didn’t because I thought it would humiliate her.) She was sweet as sugar to the other kids, but somehow I would get into trouble for something as innocent as saying, "Excuse me, Sister . . . " when I wanted to ask a question.

I am still waiting for your apology for saying I should just live with being mistreated. Is that your Christian attitude? That I should just lie down and be a doormat to anybody who wants to walk all over me? Is that what you would do, just take it like their behavior is okay? (BTW, I have turned the other cheek. I have turned it so many times my head was spinning.)

Please explain why you condemn me but don’t condemn the ones who mistreated me.

I don’t condon mistreatment of anyone. You won’t get an appology from me for what I perceive as whining. I am unable to help you with your anger problem so I think it best if we drop it.

Okay, fine. So the problem, once again, is with *me, *not the ones who mistreated me. According to you, a person who complains about being abused is a whiner with an anger problem.

Strange how you denigrate my behavior but never that of those who abused me.

That’s not very nice. She was just giving an example from her own experience. I think it’s very relavent to this topic.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit