Secular baby captured?

Although according to that ridiculous video, the fate of the Mizronikins should be discussed more than the fate of the secular ones. Are they babies who were captured or are they mistaken (certainly not mischievous, after all they are not Haredi).

A. Thank you, I'll take a look.
B. We recently discussed the categorical imperative. Does it not belong here?
C. Why is a secular person who lives around religious people, and is not afraid that they are foolish fools, not obligated to try a little and see if they are right, and is he different from a captive infant who is unaware that there is Judaism, or who sees Judaism as just another religion of many kinds, because he was simply born in China, and does not see any belonging to this alienated people, whom he accuses in barely half a sentence of coming from there because his mother is Jewish.

Regarding the Dalits.
He sees the Mizrahi Jews (probably), either as fools who should be judged for their actions. Or as criminals for their appetites..?

Tam, regarding J’.
The baby is highly influenced by the education and values he received, a standard person continues in the path of his parents, even when exploring other paths.
And there is no greater proof than the absolute majority of people who were born religious will remain so and the same applies to secular people, it is clear that education has an effect.
Therefore, even if it were precisely the case of a baby who was taken captive among the Gentiles and did not know any Jews, the guiding principle exists here as well.

Honorable Harrar.
According to your words, there is no place for the concept of ignorance of the law does not exempt?

The guiding principle is different, and I referred to this, with regard to the traditionalists, a person who believes that there is a leader for the capital, and therefore is careful not to eat, it would be appropriate for him to clarify more things about which he repents in the Lord, therefore in my opinion it is obligatory.

Another matter that must be clarified in your opinion is what is appropriate to punish a person who acts according to what he saw in his home and did not think to be arrogant, the question also applies to the Nazi Germans, as well as to Arab countries and militias of various kinds.

Tam,
The concept of ignorance of the law is meant where the law exists. And it is a norm imposed on people who punish those who live in their society, because within a society that has determined for itself a way of life, all its members are expected to know the way of society.
Regarding traditionalists, the sentence is indeed a little different, and one must look more closely at the boundaries, divisions, and implications, I was talking about a complete secularist.
Regarding Nazis and the like, one must indeed look at each person according to their situation, indeed I do not judge Nazis, children, and the like, as the wisest of all people said, “He refines silver and refines gold, and tests the hearts of God”. I do not pretend to know the inner content of each person.