Hear about a CA legislator who wants to criminalize the beating of children under three years of age?
I am all about that and would support similar measures in OK. We need to send a clear message that hitting little children does not help them learn proper behavior.
quote:
Originally posted by tim huntzinger
Hear about a CA legislator who wants to criminalize the beating of children under three years of age?
I am all about that and would support similar measures in OK. We need to send a clear message that hitting little children does not help them learn proper behavior.
Well...what a grand oversimplification that was. Go away and stir the pot somewhere else troll.
Troll! Takes one to know one Mr. Big Dufus Picture! Thanks for your stimulating participation!
I have lost count of the number of little children who have been abused to death in the state. Similar measures may not save the life of a neonate in the hands of a meth-crazed breeder but it may help borderline parents realize that babies who are spanked as infants grow up to be . . . intellectual property attorneys!
So now spanking is abuse...
The only people stupid enough to actually think this would be a efficacious law are morons that think people can't differentiate between discipline and child abuse in the first place, though it probably goes without saying that you don't support any type of corporal punishment. Too bad laws can't cure stupidity, though people who write laws like this would be serving life sentences. This issue is so ignorant there's actually no reason to debate it. Have fun though!
Yeah child abuse is pretty dumb. Especially with the legislature in session when such laws would be passed this is pretty dumb to talk about.
No. What's ignorant are people who think spanking and child abuse are fungible issues. There are already laws on the books that punish actual abuse.
Yeah I would like to clarify that spanking and child abuse are two discernable activities. One can argue the usefulness of spanking but criminalizing it and categorizing it with child abuse is a stretch.
Whuts ignerint are trolls in drag as stoopid loyyers using wurds like fungible out of contechx.
And context does play a role in when a child is struck. Many would argue that any hitting of children is abuse.
quote:
Originally posted by sgrizzle
Yeah I would like to clarify that spanking and child abuse are two discernable activities. One can argue the usefulness of spanking but criminalizing it and categorizing it with child abuse is a stretch.
I agree. Spanking that only inflicts discomfort, when non-physical measures have failed, is a normal and appropriate part of discipline and parenting. Beating that inflicts bodily damage is another matter and we have laws that deal with this.
In my opinion, if more kids were spanked today and taught proper discipline and respect for property and authority, we would have far, far less problems with delinquency and youth crimes. I received my fair share of spankings, but never was abused, and I don't recall ever receiving a spanking that was not deserved. I think I turned out just fine, (although there may be some that think otherwise!)
I agree, Steve.
Tim, I'm curious. Have you ever dealt with an unruly 3 or 4 year old? If so how have you gotten them to mind consistently without the use of an occasional "swat"?
I'd really love to hear if there is some miracle parenting measure that has eluded me for the past twenty years.
Thanks
quote:
Whuts ignerint are trolls in drag as stoopid loyyers using wurds like fungible out of contechx.
Maybe this (//%22http://www.thefreedictionary.com/fungible%22) will be of assistance.
Fun·gi·ble 2. Interchangeable.
quote:
Many would argue that any hitting of children is abuse.
There are a lot of people that still argue the earth is flat (//%22www.theflatearthsociety.org/%20%22)too...
My child is a perfect angel and my wife is a saint. The neonate appears on track to be equally divine. Reason. Patience. Love.
There is a huge difference between swatting a two-year old and beating a six-month old to death. Got it.
Spanking only teaches that bigger people can hit smaller people to solve differences. MLK said that laws cannot change the heart of man[kind] but certainly changes his[her] habits.
quote:
Originally posted by tim huntzinger
And context does play a role in when a child is struck. Many would argue that any hitting of children is abuse.
They are entitled to their opinions. I would argue that allowing undiciplined children to run amok, trying to be your child's "friend" rather than an authority figure and responsible parent, and raising kids to be future residents of juvenille detention and state prisons, are much worse forms of child abuse than an occasional deserved swat on the butt could ever be.
I guess we all should agree to disagree on the subject of spanking. We already have assault and battery laws and laws to protect citizens from physical abuse. The state should stay out of it and let parents discipline their children as they see fit, without fear of incarceration.
quote:
My child is a perfect angel and my wife is a saint. The neonate appears on track to be equally divine. Reason. Patience. Love.
Why do we care if your wife is a saint? I'm sure no one is talking about spanking her. As far as your kids, I'm sure you think ther're right as rain, but I'd be interested in hearing what their teacher's unvarnished opinion is.
quote:
Spanking only teaches that bigger people can hit smaller people to solve differences.
So says the man who thinks that a 3 year old is capable of "Reason"...
quote:
Originally posted by lsimmons
I agree, Steve.
Tim, I'm curious. Have you ever dealt with an unruly 3 or 4 year old? If so how have you gotten them to mind consistently without the use of an occasional "swat"?
I'd really love to hear if there is some miracle parenting measure that has eluded me for the past twenty years.
Thanks
I have no miracles in my bag but I raised three boys, typical boys, and never once needed to spank them. I did receive many spankings as a child, with belts, with switches, with the back of a hand. My parents regret every one of them. I vowed to never utilize the method.
The problem is defining just what constitutes (abusive) spanking. A swat on the butt to get attention may not qualify. A belt that leaves welts probably should. It is so easy to be in favor of a little disciplin and a good spanking when you don't define the practice.
The problem with anecdotal evidence when dealing with an issue like this is that every child and situation is unique. What works for one may not work for all, as we aren't robots...
The bottom line is the SCOTUS has ruled that corporal punishment by parents and even schools is legal.
Spanking works .... end of question.
quote:
Originally posted by Cubs
Spanking works .... end of question.
Reminds me of a bit of case law I did at uni. R v Brown (//%22http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanner_case%22)
Slightly different I know, but its a very interesting legal matter. Do you have the right to hurt a child?
quote:
Originally posted by si_uk_lon_ok
quote:
Originally posted by Cubs
Spanking works .... end of question.
Reminds me of a bit of case law I did at uni. R v Brown (//%22http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanner_case%22)
Slightly different I know, but its a very interesting legal matter. Do you have the right to hurt a child?
Yes. Ingraham v. Wright (1977)
Maybe the mods should introduce spanking on the forum. Keep the n'er-do-wells at bay.
quote:
Originally posted by sgrizzle
Maybe the mods should introduce spanking on the forum. Keep the n'er-do-wells at bay.
Cubs gets spanked around here all the time.
Personally, I enjoy being spanked[:O]
This has been floating around for a few weeks and isn't new news.
I can count on less than ten fingers how many times I had to spank my daughters when they were younger. Sensing or seeing my disapproval was usually enough to get their attention, but when that was not enough, they got a swat on the behind and sent to their room.
I have two very well-adjusted, polite, and respectful young women I'm proud to say are mine. They are my proudest accomplishment in life.
I resent the idea of the government sticking it's big schnozz into how I choose to discipline my children.
When I was growing up, I got swats at home and at school for mis-behaving. I have to say, I rarely repeated the same behavior twice and I never resented my parents or school officials for administering it.
The only side effect I can see is it must have turned me into a forum troll. [:D]
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
I resent the idea of the government sticking it's big schnozz into how I choose to discipline my children.
I believe discipline reaches a point though where it becomes abuse and the government has the right to define that.
quote:
Originally posted by si_uk_lon_ok
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
I resent the idea of the government sticking it's big schnozz into how I choose to discipline my children.
I believe discipline reaches a point though where it becomes abuse and the government has the right to define that.
Most people with a modicum of common sense can differentiate between punishment and abuse and can readily recognize the latter. We already have laws on the books to deal with those people.
Trying to develop a comprehensive corporal punishment law to cover every possible scenario is impossible. How could we even enforce such a policy?
IP and Cubs: I gotta disagree with you on this one. Corporal punishment to children is barbaric, ineffective, and sends a terrible message.
Interestingly IP, since you brought it up, Oklahoma's criminal statute that discusses spanking states:
21 O.S. § 844. Ordinary force as means of discipline not prohibited
Provided, however, that nothing contained in this act shall prohibit any parent, teacher or other person from using ordinary force as a means of discipline, including but not limited to spanking, switching or paddling.
Apparently in Oklahoma, you can still go out to the weeping willow tree in grandma's back yard, cut down a "switch," and whip away on your kids.
How far do you want to allow the government into your homes?
You're right Guido, I bet that guy that beat the crap out of his kid and left her out in the cold to die was spanked as a kid...he was just repeating the cycle.[;)]
Here is a good website (//%22http://www.nospank.net/main.htm%22) for more information.
Apparently spanking is merely a hold-over from slave days and is somehow linked to lynching of slaves.
quote:
Originally posted by iplaw
quote:
Originally posted by si_uk_lon_ok
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
I resent the idea of the government sticking it's big schnozz into how I choose to discipline my children.
I believe discipline reaches a point though where it becomes abuse and the government has the right to define that.
Most people with a modicum of common sense can differentiate between punishment and abuse and can readily recognize the latter. We already have laws on the books to deal with those people.
Trying to develop a comprehensive corporal punishment law to cover every possible scenario is impossible. How could we even enforce such a policy?
I think the fact there is a debate on this issue highlights that people do not have the same definitions of the difference between abuse and discipline.
I have no idea how such a policy would be enforced, but I'm saying I feel there is a thin line.
I used to work in a supermarket as a student and there you would see parents disciplining there kids. You could tell that a lot of people there felt they were going too far. Maybe the simplest way of dealing with such a complex matter is an outright ban to rid the grey area. I don't feel I'm disagreeing with you iplaw.
quote:
I think the fact there is a debate on this issue highlights that people do not have the same definitions of the difference between abuse and discipline.
I don't believe there is debate about the issue. I think there are kooks who want all corporal punishment banned, that's what started the thread. How would you even write such a law?
quote:
I have no idea how such a policy would be enforced, but I'm saying I feel there is a thin line.
As with most everything in life, but we can't legislate everything, especially in areas where most people with a smidge of common sense can make the right call on their own.
quote:
I used to work in a supermarket as a student and there you would see parents disciplining there kids. You could tell that a lot of people there felt they were going too far. Maybe the simplest way of dealing with such a complex matter is an outright ban to rid the grey area. I don't feel I'm disagreeing with you iplaw.
If you're asking for a complete ban...we couldn't be more polar opposite.
A childs donkey should be spanked when he misbehaves...period!!Thats the way it was for centurys and we didnt have little hoodlums running around shooting each other...
quote:
Originally posted by iplaw
quote:
I think the fact there is a debate on this issue highlights that people do not have the same definitions of the difference between abuse and discipline.
I don't believe there is debate about the issue. I think there are kooks who want all corporal punishment banned, that's what started the thread. How would you even write such a law?
quote:
I have no idea how such a policy would be enforced, but I'm saying I feel there is a thin line.
As with most everything in life, but we can't legislate everything, especially in areas where most people with a smidge of common sense can make the right call on their own.
quote:
I used to work in a supermarket as a student and there you would see parents disciplining there kids. You could tell that a lot of people there felt they were going too far. Maybe the simplest way of dealing with such a complex matter is an outright ban to rid the grey area. I don't feel I'm disagreeing with you iplaw.
If you're asking for a complete ban...we couldn't be more polar opposite.
I said maybe the simplist way is. I was not calling for a ban, but a debate. A ban is always the simplist way around an issue and is always an option.
I have no idea what a law would look like as I'm not a legislator, just someone with an opinion.
I think while most people can make the right call, the people who don't can really damage children. I really don't trust everyones common sense when it comes to such an important issue.
I'm agreeing with you on the complexities of the issue both morally and trying to frame it legally.
quote:
I think while most people can make the right call, the people who don't can really damage children. I really don't trust everyones common sense when it comes to such an important issue.
Isn't this case with every crime on the books? We already have laws to deal with those who take things too far, even government agencies like DHS who's sole reason for existing is to deal with these issues. Another law won't keep unstable people from beating kids, it would just serve to muddy the waters futher for those who are using the practice in a legal manner.
Enforcement would be by sight, like a seat belt violation. The punishment would not be horrific, probably just a ticket. The benefits are that we will send a clear signal that hitting toddlers is inappropriate.
quote:
Originally posted by iplaw
quote:
I think while most people can make the right call, the people who don't can really damage children. I really don't trust everyones common sense when it comes to such an important issue.
Isn't this case with every crime on the books? We already have laws to deal with those who take things too far, even government agencies like DHS who's sole reason for existing is to deal with these issues. Another law won't keep unstable people from beating kids, it would just serve to muddy the waters futher for those who are using the practice in a legal manner.
That sounds like a good solution as long as the existing laws provide enough coverage and highlight the additional seriousness of beating children compared to the man on the street.
It would only be worth writing new laws if the old ones were ineffective in stopping over zealous corporal punishment.
quote:
Originally posted by tim huntzinger
Enforcement would be by sight, like a seat belt violation. The punishment would not be horrific, probably just a ticket. The benefits are that we will send a clear signal that hitting toddlers is inappropriate.
Move to Norway.
I personally have never spanked a child,and dont believe in spanking them under 3,but after that I got my rear tanned if I misbehaved as well as most kids,its not abuse to smack thier rears a few times,face anywhere else..yes.
I hate that spoil the child spare the rod mentality!
quote:
That sounds like a good solution as long as the existing laws provide enough coverage and highlight the additional seriousness of beating children compared to the man on the street.
Again, do you think laws keep people like that (those that can't differentiate the two) from beating kids? Standard child abuse laws are strict and have heavy penalties. Lastly, I don't think anyone here has condoned beating anyone...
quote:
Originally posted by iplaw
quote:
That sounds like a good solution as long as the existing laws provide enough coverage and highlight the additional seriousness of beating children compared to the man on the street.
Again, do you think laws keep people like that (those that can't differentiate the two) from beating kids? Standard child abuse laws are strict and have heavy penalties. Lastly, I don't think anyone here has condoned beating anyone...
Just retroactive beatings for the forum trolls...
quote:
Originally posted by iplaw
Quote
Again, do you think laws keep people like that (those that can't differentiate the two) from beating kids? Standard child abuse laws are strict and have heavy penalties. Lastly, I don't think anyone here has condoned beating anyone...
Again, hitting a child is beating them. The severity of the beating is the gray area.
Hmmmmm.... there was a girl in high school from Norway that was sweet on me (Wenche!) but I do not think I will move there. The two countries are not fungible.
We need to send a clear message to at-risk parents (read: all of us) that hitting little kids is unnecessary.
quote:
Originally posted by iplaw
quote:
Originally posted by tim huntzinger
Enforcement would be by sight, like a seat belt violation. The punishment would not be horrific, probably just a ticket. The benefits are that we will send a clear signal that hitting toddlers is inappropriate.
Move to Norway.
Why? Do they have laws against hitting children?
That's what it is anyway. Hitting. Or in your terms, assault and battery. We make an exception to the law. We won't allow such hitting on adults, but kids? Wail away and be good parents! The difference in the Middle East is they make an exception to allow hitting women too. We're too sophisticated for that. Women might buy a gun and shoot us so we include them as adults.
People make a decision early on about hitting their children. They either accept it as good general parenting if not used to excess (after all your parents might be suspect if you didn't believe that) or they remember how it felt and that it usually had more to do with frustration than discipline and refuse to carry on the tradition. Kind of like one's politics I guess.
IP: "...there are kooks who want all corporal punishment banned..."
Since I oppose corporal punishment, I suppose I am a kook too.
As for the language of a potential law banning that activity, I think the first step would be to remove the term "switching" from Oklahoma's criminal statute. Beating someone with tree limbs is criminal and I do not care who is doing it.
quote:
Why? Do they have laws against hitting children?
No. They have laws against corporal punishment.
quote:
That's what it is anyway. Hitting. Or in your terms, assault and battery. We make an exception to the law. We won't allow such hitting on adults, but kids?
Yes.
quote:
Wail away and be good parents! The difference in the Middle East is they make an exception to allow hitting women too. We're too sophisticated for that.
Non-sequitor. No one is saying we should be able to beat children...Again, I'm surprised that anyone with more than a 3rd grade education can't see the difference between behavior corrective punishment and abuse...
quote:
People make a decision early on about hitting their children. They either accept it as good general parenting if not used to excess (after all your parents might be suspect if you didn't believe that) or they remember how it felt and that it usually had more to do with frustration than discipline and refuse to carry on the tradition. Kind of like one's politics I guess.
Well, politics have nothing to do with it, other than the idea that government has no business telling me how to raise my children.
Often I find the worst behaved children to be those from homes where spanking is a taboo. I have a cousin who's husband was afraid to spank their children...and counter to your position, I can't stand to be in the same room with their children. The mighty specter of TIME OUT is the only deterrent to poor behavior.
My wife teaches ED/LD children and almost, down to a child, she is able to point out the ones with parents who don't discipline their children, and most often the ones who don't allow the school to employ corporal punishment.
What I love to see are those parents who THINK their children are angels, but in reality they are deluded and their kids are monsters...
Raise your children however you see if, but stay the hell out of my house please.
Guido:Yes, on this issue, you're a kook if you believe that the government has a right to tell me I can't discipline my child by spanking them. Do what you want in your own home, but stay out of my business.
On a side note, I'd like to ask another question. The SCOTUS has ruled that corporal punishment is an acceptable form of discipline, period. They apparently are intelligent enough to see the difference between punishment and abuse. They have also upheld, for almost the same amount of time, a woman's right to choose, period.
Why aren't people (especially liberals like you waterboy) here speaking with the same fervor towards ensuring that our right to spank our children is upheld just like our right to choose? Why the double standard?
If you think spanking is repulsive...imagine what abortion seems like to a person who thinks it's murder.
IP you're ridiculous. If that s$*t works for you and yours have at it. I marvel at your ability to destroy line by line others arguments but seldom apply the same sharp knife to your own remarks.
I saw in your post anecdotal remarks (your wife, your cousins, homes without spanking having poor behaved children). I saw inconsistencies (hitting vs. corporal punishment; behavior corrective punishment...Clinton could have used your spin to describe blow job). And I saw educated naivete (non-sequitor: politics not involved) but by god, keep the gub'mnt out of my home. Yeah, where have I heard that. Of course your group doesn't mind the idea of govt. allowing corporal punishment (hitting) in schools. Thats not political.
I spent a couple hours yesterday with a school psychologist friend of mine with direct experience in testing and counseling in South Tulsa schools. Surprisingly she had very little to say that you would agree with. She sees the result of the extremes in child disciplin from laissez faire to "smackem" and they are both similar. She did make the same remark your wife did about judging the kids at an early age as to their possible home environments. Common practice I suppose but just as helpful as horoscopes or psychics.
We discussed the many different methods we had employed, successfully, in correcting our kids (without hitting). Time out was one. What we all agreed on was that the reason we knew these other methods (besides hitting) was through education. Developmental pscyh classes, reading different sources from Piaget to Dobson and sharing with other parents. All prospective parents should receive such education.
Good luck with your plan for raising kids. You only get one chance and you have to learn fast. It ain't as easy as carving up others plans.
quote:
Originally posted by iplaw
On a side note, I'd like to ask another question. The SCOTUS has ruled that corporal punishment is an acceptable form of discipline, period. They apparently are intelligent enough to see the difference between punishment and abuse. They have also upheld, for almost the same amount of time, a woman's right to choose, period.
Why aren't people (especially liberals like you waterboy) here speaking with the same fervor towards ensuring that our right to spank our children is upheld just like our right to choose? Why the double standard?
If you think spanking is repulsive...imagine what abortion seems like to a person who thinks it's murder.
Yeah, everything eventually comes back to abortion. Sorry, not biting.
As far as the Supreme Court, it isn't a group of saintly, infallible, divinely inspired leaders of men. They are politically chosen, usually focused more on law than humanity and struggle to reconcile those viewpoints. They upheld separate but equal too as well as protection for baseball from the anti-trust. When the public has as much education as they do, child abuse will subside.
IP: "Yes, on this issue, you're a kook if you believe that the government has a right to tell me I can't discipline my child by spanking them. Do what you want in your own home, but stay out of my business."
You know darn well government can prohibit/criminalize certain conduct or get in your "business" in your home.
My kookie opinions regarding corporal punishment are not only from being a parent but also as a foster parent. I have seen up close the results of other parents' beatings of their children and the effect it has on those kids. It does not work, in many cases it is hypocritical, and absolutely sends the wrong message. Incidentally, who decides where the line is separating spanking from child abuse?
Last, what I consider kookie is anyone who believes beating children with cut tree limbs is proper discipline.
lol at "TIME OUT"!!!..Yes we had that as kids,it was time out in the corner for a few hours.to let our butts cool down!
quote:
If that s$*t works for you and yours have at it.
That's the only thing you've said all day that makes some sense!
quote:
I saw in your post anecdotal remarks (your wife, your cousins, homes without spanking having poor behaved children).
What's good for the goose...I happened to notice the last half of this email is stuffed with nothing but anecdotal crap.
quote:
I saw inconsistencies (hitting vs. corporal punishment; behavior corrective punishment...Clinton could have used your spin to describe blow job).
None of the above can be categorized as a "logical inconsistency", maybe you should take some time to refresh yourself as to what one actually is. Start with reading your own posts, they're full of them.
quote:
And I saw educated naivete (non-sequitor: politics not involved) but by god, keep the gub'mnt out of my home. Yeah, where have I heard that.
I think you just made this one up for good measure.
quote:
Of course your group doesn't mind the idea of govt. allowing corporal punishment (hitting) in schools. Thats not political.
Schools are only allowed to do so if parental permission is obtained so that point's down the crapper.
quote:
I spent a couple hours yesterday with a school psychologist friend of mine with direct experience in testing and counseling in South Tulsa schools. Surprisingly she had very little to say that you would agree with. She sees the result of the extremes in child disciplin from laissez faire to "smackem" and they are both similar. She did make the same remark your wife did about judging the kids at an early age as to their possible home environments. Common practice I suppose but just as helpful as horoscopes or psychics.
We discussed the many different methods we had employed, successfully, in correcting our kids (without hitting). Time out was one. What we all agreed on was that the reason we knew these other methods (besides hitting) was through education. Developmental pscyh classes, reading different sources from Piaget to Dobson and sharing with other parents. All prospective parents should receive such education.
Good luck with your plan for raising kids. You only get one chance and you have to learn fast. It ain't as easy as carving up others plans.
Hey, I'm all for you not spanking your kids, just leave me alone when it comes to raising mine.
quote:
Yeah, everything eventually comes back to abortion. Sorry, not biting.
Quote
If I were about to adopt a position that resembled logical Swiss Cheese I'd decline to debate the issue as well, that's a good call on your part.
Quote
As far as the Supreme Court, it isn't a group of saintly, infallible, divinely inspired leaders of men. They are politically chosen, usually focused more on law than humanity and struggle to reconcile those viewpoints. They upheld separate but equal too as well as protection for baseball from the anti-trust. When the public has as much education as they do, child abuse will subside.
Nice job conflating child abuse and corporal punishment again. Saying it over and over again won't make it true...
Fortunately for us, the grown-ups who do make the decisions understand and appreciate the difference.
quote:
You know darn well government can prohibit/criminalize certain conduct or get in your "business" in your home.
Sure. What happens when they decide that religion is harmful or what you feed your kids is harmful to them...when does the regulation stop? Because I can assure you there are people who would love to regulate both of those.
quote:
My kookie opinions regarding corporal punishment are not only from being a parent but also as a foster parent. I have seen up close the results of other parents' beatings of their children and the effect it has on those kids.
Again, more conflation of child abuse and corporal punishment...
quote:
It does not work, in many cases it is hypocritical, and absolutely sends the wrong message. Incidentally, who decides where the line is separating spanking from child abuse?
Not the government for damn sure. I can give you opinions from many experts who would vehimently disagree with you.
First, the slippery slope argument does not work. There is no linkage between prohibiting corporal punishment and the government telling you what religion your children can be.
Second, contrary to your belief, butgovernment absolutely decides when corporal punishment amounts to child abuse. That's one of the functions of DHS. If the agency determines the bruises on your child's rear or anywhere else is from abuse, they can initiate deprived child actions. You can then explain to the juvenile court that the bruises were from a spanking.
I guess I will not get an answer on the subject of switching kids, which is a protected form of punishment in Oklahoma.
Simple question IP. You have kids?
Simple observation: sometimes you can win the battle and lose the war. You can argue like you do in court and take our remarks apart piece by piece but you still lose the argument. Until you see, experience or have to deal with the aftermath of what some call "spanking", your arguments are landing on fallow ground. The fact that OK law allows a switch as acceptable corporal punishment method says alot about the state and its values.
No one wants the fed in our bedrooms, (unless its to stop gay behavior, or flag burning or something important like that) but when you use that as a weapon to blunt the education of the masses its a bad thing. And thats where strengthening child abuse laws could make a difference. Educating people that there are better ways to correct behavior. No way that it could be an invitation to the fed to come in and observe your child rearing skills. Simply a nudge towards enlightening masses. As long as hitting with a switch is legal, its considered efficacious.
I suppose you don't like seat belt laws, helmet laws stuff like that? They served as an eduction tool to let people know the dangers involved with non use.
Btw, I never used the term "logical inconsistencies". You keep adding to my vocab.[8D] I'm not that current. Just plain old inconsistencies.
quote:
First, the slippery slope argument does not work. There is no linkage between prohibiting corporal punishment and the government telling you what religion your children can be.
It isn't a slippery slope in terms of one leading to another. It is a gradual degredation of our right to bring up our children as we see fit. The government will take as much power from you as your willing to give it.
quote:
Second, contrary to your belief, butgovernment absolutely decides when corporal punishment amounts to child abuse. That's one of the functions of DHS. If the agency determines the bruises on your child's rear or anywhere else is from abuse, they can initiate deprived child actions. You can then explain to the juvenile court that the bruises were from a spanking.
Yes. That system is already established and working well...which begs the question of why we need to abolish corporal punishment. Do you honestly think more laws will prevent people from beating their kids. Not a chance in hell. It's only going to prevent average joe from swatting his kid on the butt after he's run out in the street three times...
quote:
I guess I will not get an answer on the subject of switching kids, which is a protected form of punishment in Oklahoma.
No. Because it's a red herring not worth discussion. I still haven't had either one of you addressed even half of my points yet, so join the club.
quote:
Simple question IP. You have kids?
Why, do you want to come over and show me the ways of the force and enlighten me?
quote:
Simple observation: sometimes you can win the battle and lose the war. You can argue like you do in court and take our remarks apart piece by piece but you still lose the argument.
Unfortunately the sum of the parts is greater than the whole when it comes to dealing with issues like this, and there is far too much gray area to create a law that would encompass the issue. Thankfully for America my sentiments are shared by most of the country (//%22http://cbs5.com/local/local_story_018210510.html%22)and this issue is only important to the relative fringe...even San Franciscans get it.
quote:
No one wants the fed in our bedrooms, (unless its to stop gay behavior, or flag burning or something important like that) but when you use that as a weapon to blunt the education of the masses its a bad thing.
And outlawing corporal punishment educates how...
quote:
And thats where strengthening child abuse laws could make a difference.
Again, conflating
child abuse and
corporal punishment.
quote:
Simply a nudge towards enlightening masses.
I suppose "reasoning" with a two year old would be considered enlightened. I could think of a few more adjective to describe the practice as well.
quote:
As long as hitting with a switch is legal, its considered efficacious.
Huh?
quote:
I suppose you don't like seat belt laws, helmet laws stuff like that? They served as an eduction tool to let people know the dangers involved with non use.
Nope. I don't think it's the government's job to protect every aspect of our human existence. I also give the average American a whole hell of a lot more credit than you do to make their own choices. We know alcohol is dangerous in any quantity when you are behind the wheel...why not outlaw its sale in restaurants, that would be the SAFE thing to do wouldn't it?
It's funny how we don't want anyone legislating their morality for us until some practice we don't agree with offends our sense of morality, and then all of a sudden...something MUST be done about this!
IP: What points of yours should I have addressed?
The "switching" point is not a red herring. It's a term in a criminal statute. Under this statute, a person cannot be criminally prosecuted for using an object to cause injury to a child.
As for the morality argument, I do not think I ever claimed that corporal punishment was morally objectionable. My points are that using violence as a means to correct behavior is hypocritical and ineffective.
In any case, we are at an impasse, You clearly are the one in favor of brutalizing children and I am clearly the one who cares for children. /guilt trip off.
efficacious- effective.
conflation- to fuse into one entity (like they did with the laws regarding child abuse)
I give up. You are solidly entrenched within the dark side and quite happy there.
Is it okay to drive drunk? No, what about driving .07? Is it ok for the underage to drink alkeehaul? No, what about a dad giving his son a beer on his 18th? Is it ok to shoot an unarmed man with a shotgun at close range, what if he has just kicked in your door?
Gotta draw a line somewhere. MLK said that laws may not change the heart of man but can change his habits. If someone wants to hit their child in their home, as long as there are no marks and no objecting witnesses no foul, I suppose.
Anti-spanking measures would give us one more tool to help at-risk parents to not even come close to that line.
quote:
You clearly are the one in favor of brutalizing children and I am clearly the one who cares for children. /guilt trip off.
Yes waterboy, you hit the nail right on the head, I love to
BRUTALIZE children and love it when others do it. Thanks for winning the debate for me without me even having to respond.
I don't know whether you're just frustrated with debating at this point, or you actually believe that spanking is
BRUTALIZING children, but either way I think you've clearly exposed yourself as an extremist on the subject.
quote:
efficacious- effective.
Waterboy. Soory if you thought I was critcizing your word choice. I really didn't understand the point you were making...
quote:
Is it okay to drive drunk? No, what about driving .07? Is it ok for the underage to drink alkeehaul? No, what about a dad giving his son a beer on his 18th...
Gotta draw a line somewhere.
Yes, and as any good OHP officer will tell you, even ONE drink will impair you, so shouldn't we BAN alcohol completely so that "at-risk" drunks won't be tempted to drink?
I think sgrizzle had is right from the beginning:
quote:
Originally posted by sgrizzle
Yeah I would like to clarify that spanking and child abuse are two discernable activities. One can argue the usefulness of spanking but criminalizing it and categorizing it with child abuse is a stretch.
You tell me, does the OHP want to ban alkeehaul en toto? If they did I might agree with them. Ask AA members if they would advocate prohibition - not them either. No reputable school of social work teaches or advocates spanking toddlers as an effective parenting tool.
Is it okay to drive drunk? No, what about driving .07? Is it ok for the underage to drink alkeehaul? No, what about a dad giving his son a beer on his 18th? Is it ok to shoot an unarmed man with a shotgun at close range, what if he has just kicked in your door?
Gotta draw a line somewhere. MLK said that laws may not change the heart of man but can change his habits. If someone wants to hit their child in their home, as long as there are no marks and no objecting witnesses no foul, I suppose.
Anti-spanking measures would give us one more tool to help at-risk parents to not even come close to that line.
Nothing wrong with a good butt-busting when needed.....
quote:
If they did I might agree with them.
I'll take ineffective laws for 100 Alex...
quote:
Originally posted by iplaw
quote:
You clearly are the one in favor of brutalizing children and I am clearly the one who cares for children. /guilt trip off.
Yes waterboy, you hit the nail right on the head, I love to BRUTALIZE children and love it when others do it. Thanks for winning the debate for me without me even having to respond.
I don't know whether you're just frustrated with debating at this point, or you actually believe that spanking is BRUTALIZING children, but either way I think you've clearly exposed yourself as an extremist on the subject.
Check back with Guido's posts. I didn't write that one.[;)] Actually I gave up around the same time though. It was my effort to share thoughts rather than debate. Everyone's dearly held beliefs should be challenged on occasion. Otherwise they pass on from generation to generation without thought.
Sorry about that Waterboy... I corrected it earlier to say Guido, but for some reason this forum won't update my posts unless I refresh the page....go figure. Maybe the new software will fix that.
Anyways, I would never, ever condone the beating of a child, any age. My wife and I volunteer time several times a year working with children at the Laura Dester shelter here in town. I too see the effect of child abuse and it sickens me.
I think spanking should always be a last resort and never done out of anger, and I think it has it's place and can be done in an appropriate matter.
I think stating that everyone who spanks is brutalizing their child is counterproductive and polarizing, but so is calling people who don't spank kooks...hyperbole never helps. I think we can all do with a bit of common sense on the issue.
quote:
Originally posted by iplaw
I think spanking should always be a last resort and never done out of anger, and I think it has it's place and can be done in an appropriate matter.
I actually agree with that. Wish that was a more common view. I swatted my boys once or twice when they were little to mostly get their undivided attention. I didn't think of it as spanking and it didn't need repeating.
Actually, IP, I was not being serious with my last post equating speanking with brutalizing children. I was trying to find a way out of this debate since neither of us was going to change the other's mind.
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
quote:
Originally posted by iplaw
I think spanking should always be a last resort and never done out of anger, and I think it has it's place and can be done in an appropriate matter.
I actually agree with that. Wish that was a more common view. I swatted my boys once or twice when they were little to mostly get their undivided attention. I didn't think of it as spanking and it didn't need repeating.
So all this has been for nothing...we actually are on the same page damn it...[8D]
that's funny. It took us three pages to realize that. MDunn?
I think spanking children under three should be a ticketable offense: out of sight, out of mind; do it in public while you are yelling at the baby, though, and I think an officer should be able to ask a few questions if his nose leads him in that direction.
No reputable schools of social work or psychology teach spanking as an instructional tool, all evidence points to at-risk parents needing guidelines, and any law that gives law enforcement more tools for preventing child abuse should be advanced.
Ugh...you've made those same 3 points umpteen times now. I think this issue is free to die now.
I think spanking children under three should be a ticketable offense: out of sight, out of mind; do it in public while you are yelling at the baby, though, and I think an officer should be able to ask a few questions if his nose leads him in that direction.
No reputable schools of social work or psychology teach spanking as an instructional tool, all evidence points to at-risk parents needing guidelines, and any law that gives law enforcement more tools for preventing child abuse should be advanced.
I trust in the police to sniff the difference between a child abuser and a swatter.
You finished yet?
I am unsure why your comments are not spam.
I started this thread because this is a political topic, and wanted to get some sense for the pros and cons.
It helped get to know more about other Board members and develop a concensus for the thoughts of folk that care about the issue.
I think reposting the same messages over and over again more meets the definition of SPAM than anything I've posted.
The conversation appears to be over, but you want to keep it alive. Have fun talking with yourself!
Summating the main point about why I would support spanking laws should be my option as the originator of the thread.
Your main point is just to get the last word, that is all. I appreciate your comments, though, found a few of them helpful, and thank you for the helpful link.
quote:
Summating the main point about why I would support spanking laws should be my option as the originator of the thread.
Wow. You learn something new every day. Apparently I skipped that day during Forum 101, but go ahead an repost it again since I just wanted the last word anyways...[xx(]
Spanking laws are designed to give at-risk parents some guidelines about the appropriatedness of corporal punishment. Swatting toddlers is not de facto child abuse, but then some people can handle their alkiehaul and some cannot.
They also would have the effect of allowing law enforcement to investigate their suspicions when they see a sketchy situation. The offense would be a misdemeanor.
Clearly, this is an important issue which people have strong opinions about.
spank away!!!!I likes it...Did I mention I also like my girlfriend to spank me too???...LOL