Responding to Arguments Against Corporal Punishment

Mike Painter · Joined: 15 Aug 2007 Posts: 87

pohaku.kane@gmail.com wrote:
> Opinions wrote:
>> Shelters are generally considered to be temporary housing rather than
>> great places for kids to live until the age of emancipation.
>
This was a battered woman's shelter and the kids usually came along.

Archived from group: misc>kids

70AD · Joined: 15 Aug 2007 Posts: 1

On Tue, 03 Jan 2006 18:42:17 -0600, Carlson LaVonne
spake thusly:

>This is too priceless to miss!
>
>Opinions wrote:
>>
>> Much like those who oppose wife beating or various forms of
>> discrimination, no-spanks require laws to perpetuate their agenda.
>
>Darn those individuals that oppose wife beating and discrimination
>anyway. They had the nerve to actually fight for laws that gave legal
>protection to previously unprotected individuals. There was a time when
>they actually fought for laws that eliminated slavery, lead to women's
>rights, and helped decrease discrimination.

To lie and paint people who spank their children as
slave owners and beaters, only shows that you know
you don't have an argument to make. A person who
relies on facts and right, doesn't need to use those
tactics.

>> When those laws prove inadequate, the solution is always to pass more
>> laws and more laws until the whole scheme becomes unworkable because
>> the panoply of laws begin to conflict with one another.
>
>Are the laws inadequate? Yes. Is the scheme unworkable? I don't know.
> I do know that slavery is no longer legal. I know that I can vote,
>hold property, and can no longer be legally beaten by my husband.
>Because of laws, I am no longer considered property of of my husband.
>
>I know that my children can sit anywhere they choose when riding a bus.
> They can drink out of a public fountain. They can frequent any
>restaurant. They can hold public office.
>
>Women and minorities still experience discrimination. Children still
>have extremely inadequate protection from school and parental physical
>assault. However, things are better than in days past and things will
>continue to improve. Laws make a difference.

What is clear, is that your husband is an unhappy man
and that you are either childless, or the parent of a
brat and fight your husband because he wants to
discipline the child.

Now go ahead and tell some lies about me. You can
enjoy writing to yourself. You go into my kill file,
just like all other idiots who rely on lies. One thing
is clear, you're a paper tiger. You wouldn't dare
speak to people this way to their face.

Have a nice life now.

--

"Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass,
till all these things be fulfilled." - Matthew 24:34

The Last Days were in the first century:

1 cORINTHIANS 1:7-8

7) So that YE come behind in no gift; waiting
for the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ:
Cool

Who shall also confirm YOU unto the end,
that YE may be blameless in the day of our
Lord Jesus Christ.

This signature was made by SigChanger.
You can find SigChanger at: http://www.phranc.nl/

Catherine Woodgold · Joined: 15 Aug 2007 Posts: 1506

Ananias917 (_-_Ananias917_-_@gmail.com) writes:
> No, that would make me a former canoeist. And your
> rant won't help you. Your false labeling of me as a
> child abuser, which is exactly what you are trying to
> say, is just that. A false labeling.

Let me get this straight: do you mean that calling
someone a "spanker" is tantamount to calling them
a "child abuser"? How do you feel about saying about
someone, "this person has spanked children"?
Would you also consider that to be equivalent to
saying that the person had abused children?

To me, saying "spanker" has a rather similar meaning
to "someone who has spanked", and doesn't have the
judgemental meaning of "abuser". Words mean
different things to different people.

Catherine Woodgold · Joined: 15 Aug 2007 Posts: 1506

Ananias917 (_-_Ananias917_-_@gmail.com) writes:
> On Wed, 28 Dec 2005 18:10:52 -0800, Doan
> And one can be sure, that they did not include
> people who have a reasonable approach to
> spanking, since they would not have asked
> anyone to spank their child for this test and
> therefore, it is impossible that it was a fair
> testing procedure. But hey, some liberals
> stacking the deck, is, to liberals, "fair". (:

Do you mean that you think that in a large number
of families filling out a questionnaire, there is probabily
not a single family with a reasonable approach to spanking?
Do you think most people who spank don't have a
reasonable approach to spanking?

Catherine Woodgold · Joined: 15 Aug 2007 Posts: 1506

(pohaku.kane@gmail.com) writes:
> If you'd like to explain what you do, in fact, when spanking doesn't
> work, please do.
>
> For you see, spanking doesn't. And it will come to you sooner or later,
> one way or the other, easy or hard. I pity the child, and you, when
> they reach their teens and you have only two choices: give up, or beat
> them to death to force compliance.
>
> Think it won't happen?
>
> Many a parent didn't wait for the teen years.
>
> We see them in the news day to day.

That only happens in some cases. Some spanked children
grow up just fine. Only in some cases, the parents find
themselves spanking harder and harder, or more and more
often, and perhaps one day look at what they're doing
and are shocked. The spanking tends to lead to more
misbehaviour in the long run, which leads to more spanking,
etc. etc.

R. Steve Walz · Joined: 15 Aug 2007 Posts: 1906

Opinions wrote:
>
> Shelters are generally considered to be temporary housing rather than
> great places for kids to live until the age of emancipation. A radical
> change in environment found in shelters, where newcomers are showered
> with attention from strangers, may have as much influence on bewildered
> kids from a conflicted households as anything else. Kids in a shelter
> are sometimes victims of rampant abuse. Any kindness is welcome in
> much the same way that a few slices from a can of peaches can seem like
> a feast to a neglected child.
--------------------
You're mistaking poverty for neglect and avoiding abuse altogether.
You're a systematic liar.
Steve

Doan · Joined: 15 Aug 2007 Posts: 1571

Do you where that line is when you hit your kid, Kane0? Wink

How about the line between talking to your kid and verbal-abuse?

Doan

On 8 Jan 2006 pohaku.kane@gmail.com wrote:

> Moving right along to the more san approaches to this issue.... 0:->
>
> http://www.argusleader.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060107/OPINION01/60107005/1052
>
> Apparently there still is no official answer to the question, where IS
> that blasted LINE.
>
>
> Al the authorities could answer, after convicting a mother of child
> abuse for using a belt on her daughter was, "use your common sense."
>
> Talk about a cop-out.
>
> It's quite obvious the mother was sure she was using her "common
> sense," and she got busted for what she did to her daughter.
>
> Pretty soon things will move along to the obvious. Don't take the risk,
> the risks of many kinds that go with corporal punishment.
>
> A some magical point I do not know, there will be enough people of the
> opinion that this is good sense and needs to be made law, it will be.
>
> I don't think that time is all that far off, since one doesn't need a
> majority to create a law in this country.
>
> 0:->
>
>

Doan · Joined: 15 Aug 2007 Posts: 1571

On 9 Jan 2006 pohaku.kane@gmail.com wrote:

>
> Doan wrote:
> > Do you where that line is when you hit your kid, Kane0? Wink

>
> Nope, that's why I never did it again. Just once. Very lightly really,
> through a heavy quilt, blanket and sheet. In my mind I obviously was
> across the line into abusiveness though. Actually mental abuse.
>
So you are an admitted "child-abuser"?

> Have you seen me claim I know where the line is by the way?
>
Nope! You are stupid, however! Wink

> It's you folks that claim you know and justify spanking and support of
> spanking thereby. So? Where is it?
>
"Reasonable standard"!

> > How about the line between talking to your kid and verbal-abuse?
>
> Of course not. That's humanly impossible. But I can choose not to hit.
> I cannot chose not to
> speak, or communicate.
>
Are you so stupid? Of course you can chose not to speak. Deaf people
have been using sign language for years! You can also chose to pass notes
to your kids.

> I'm sure I've crossed that line as well, since I must speak to my child
> and I cannot know where the line is for them, or the circumstances,
> exactly.
>
What? You called your kid a "smelly-cunt" also?

> I suspect though, given my way of parenting they received the minimum
> possible damage possible in a parent child relationship.
>
You suspect?

> I can chose to not spank and do no harm whatsoever.
>
It's your choice!

> I can chose not the speak, and that would be harmful.
>
Not if use your common-sense and be "reasonable".

> So between the two, I spoke.
>
You have a choice.

> Now shall we look at walking with my child? Eating with my child?
> Singing with my child? Playing catch with my child?
>
Sure. Is your child growing up to be an Einstein, a MLK or a mother
Theresa? Wait a minute, you said Einstein was not spanked, right? Wink

Doan

> 0:->
>
> > Doan
>
> Such a pitiful little wretch you are. All pretense and posturing. Is it
> possible, since you think spanking isn't harmful, that they did
> something else to you that made you lacking in morals and ethics,
> little monkeyboy?
>
> Kane
>
> >
> > On 8 Jan 2006 pohaku.kane@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> > > Moving right along to the more san approaches to this issue.... 0:->
> > >
> > > http://www.argusleader.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060107/OPINION01/60107005/1052
> > >
> > > Apparently there still is no official answer to the question, where IS
> > > that blasted LINE.
> > >
> > >
> > > Al the authorities could answer, after convicting a mother of child
> > > abuse for using a belt on her daughter was, "use your common sense."
> > >
> > > Talk about a cop-out.
> > >
> > > It's quite obvious the mother was sure she was using her "common
> > > sense," and she got busted for what she did to her daughter.
> > >
> > > Pretty soon things will move along to the obvious. Don't take the risk,
> > > the risks of many kinds that go with corporal punishment.
> > >
> > > A some magical point I do not know, there will be enough people of the
> > > opinion that this is good sense and needs to be made law, it will be.
> > >
> > > I don't think that time is all that far off, since one doesn't need a
> > > majority to create a law in this country.
> > >
> > > 0:->
> > >
> > >
>
>

Whizadre · Joined: 15 Aug 2007 Posts: 21

all i know is i got the belt and got smacked when i done things wrong or
bad and that made me into a polite , considerate person , that
understands that doing certain things is incorrect unlike 70% of
teenagers and older are like today , ive witnessed uncontrolable ,
inpolite , awful , very abusive to their parents because they had no
punnishment when they where younger

dragonlady · Joined: 15 Aug 2007 Posts: 2193

In article ,
"Opinions" wrote:

> One thing has become readily apparent since Stephen waltzed into the
> discussion. No-spanks are so comfortable with verbal abuse of others
> that, as with Kane, not a single no-spank bothered to tell him to put a
> lid on it. This could go a long way in explaining why the no-spank
> agenda has largely gone nowhere with middle of the road parents.

An alternative explanation is that SW is NOT one of our kids, we've read
much of what he has to say, and know that there IS no approach that will
change him -- so we simply choose to say nothing.

Many, many already have him kill-filed.

>For
> most parents, taking advice from potty-mouthed no-spanks has all the
> appeal of feeding kids the contents of an unflushed toilet. Along
> with Kane, Waltz is now in my killfile.
>
--
Children won't care how much you know until they know how much you care

R. Steve Walz · Joined: 15 Aug 2007 Posts: 1906

Whizadre wrote:
>
> all i know is i got the belt and got smacked when i done things wrong or
> bad and that made me into a polite , considerate person ,
------------------
Not if you want to hit children you're not, you're lying.

> ive witnessed uncontrolable ,
> inpolite , awful , very abusive to their parents because they had no
> punnishment when they where younger
------------------------
Wrong, that only occurs where they ARE abused.
Steve

R. Steve Walz · Joined: 15 Aug 2007 Posts: 1906

Doan wrote:
>
> On 9 Jan 2006 pohaku.kane@gmail.com wrote:
>
> >
> > Doan wrote:
> > > Do you where that line is when you hit your kid, Kane0? Wink

> >
> > Nope, that's why I never did it again. Just once. Very lightly really,
> > through a heavy quilt, blanket and sheet. In my mind I obviously was
> > across the line into abusiveness though. Actually mental abuse.
> >
> So you are an admitted "child-abuser"?
--------------------
No. Instead you're a lying piece of filth.
Steve

R. Steve Walz · Joined: 15 Aug 2007 Posts: 1906

dragonlady wrote:
>
> In article ,
> "Opinions" wrote:
>
> > One thing has become readily apparent since Stephen waltzed into the
> > discussion. No-spanks are so comfortable with verbal abuse of others
> > that, as with Kane, not a single no-spank bothered to tell him to put a
> > lid on it. This could go a long way in explaining why the no-spank
> > agenda has largely gone nowhere with middle of the road parents.
>
> An alternative explanation is that SW is NOT one of our kids, we've read
> much of what he has to say, and know that there IS no approach that will
> change him -- so we simply choose to say nothing.
-------------------
The Truth is immutable, AND UN-MUTABLE!

> Many, many already have him kill-filed.
--------------------
You don't, and you know no others either.
Steve

Doan · Joined: 15 Aug 2007 Posts: 1571

On 10 Jan 2006 pohaku.kane@gmail.com wrote:

>
> Opinions wrote:
> > Last fall, an Associated Press-Ipsos poll on public attitudes about
> > rudeness asked:
> >
> > "Compared to 20 or 30 years ago, do you think people are more rude,
> > less rude, or about the same?"
> >
> > 69% said "more rude." An equal number of respondents blamed "parents
> > not teaching good manners to children."
>
> Having learned to and have experience in developing and administering
> survey questionaires, lil 'o' I can assure you that a pollster can get
> whatever results he or she wants by but the nature of the questions,
> and the cues and prompts in delivery, even to a handout written survey
> instrument. An Associated Press poll is very likely to attract those
> that will signon with something to say in agreement with question.
>
So much for all those anti-spanking research! Let's see, 90% of
parents in Canada are NON-PUNITIVE! Wink

Doan

Mike Painter · Joined: 15 Aug 2007 Posts: 87

Opinions wrote:
> Last fall, an Associated Press-Ipsos poll on public attitudes about
> rudeness asked:
>
> "Compared to 20 or 30 years ago, do you think people are more rude,
> less rude, or about the same?"
>
> 69% said "more rude." An equal number of respondents blamed "parents
> not teaching good manners to children."

They said that 50 years ago when I was a kid and it's fairly easy to find
2800+ year old comments that lament the manners of the younger generation.

"I see no hope for the future of our people if they are dependent on
frivolous youth of today, for certainly all youth are reckless beyond
words... When I was young, we were taught to be discreet and
respectful of elders, but the present youth are exceedingly wise
[disrespectful] and impatient of restraint" (Hesiod, 8th century BC).