Father charged in son's spanking.

[SirJosephPorter]

T

If one said it is wrong to be a catholic, because I am an atheist, I would
agree with you.
The subject is only about 'hitting' another, or 'spanking', just another word
for hitting, sounds cuter.

Indeed talloola, spanking is just a euphemism, it sounds better than beating or hitting. And ironically, this same crowd, the prolife crowd (most of the pro spanking crowd is also prolife) accuses the other side of using euphemisms, to them ‘fetus’ is a euphemism, one must say ‘baby’.

Or a politician may call himself a Libertarian, that sounds better than Conservative (though many libertarians are really conservatives masquerading under a different label).

It is just that euphemism sounds better, washes away any guilt associated with the action, and denies responsibility for the consequences (my son had to be hospitalized because of the spanking? Well, I only had the best interests of the child at heart; I was doing what was best for him. It was only spanking, after all, not a beating).

 

[SirJosephPorter]

You nailed it in one short paragraph. Parenthood is a dictatorship. The parent has no choice in the matter. If the parent abdicates his/her position as dictator, the child will become the dictator.

In a sense you are right Extrafire, but it is a benevolent dictatorship. The big difference is that a dictator has only his interests at heart. He will look after his subjects only to the extent that it will permit his to stay in power and put away huge stashes of money abroad. So he will torture, main, kill etc., but not to excess (at least not until he has put away a few billion dollars in a Swiss bank).

Parenthood by contrast, must have the interest of the child at heart, and it must be a benevolent dictatorship. To that end, spanking is totally counterproductive; you may be doing long term damage to gain short term results. Now it won’t matter to a dictator, all he is interested in is short term results, but it should matter, it must matter to a parent.

 

[TenPenny]

You nailed it in one short paragraph. Parenthood is a dictatorship. The parent has no choice in the matter. If the parent abdicates his/her position as dictator, the child will become the dictator.

In a sense you are right Extrafire, but it is a benevolent dictatorship. The big difference is that a dictator has only his interests at heart. He will look after his subjects only to the extent that it will permit his to stay in power and put away huge stashes of money abroad. So he will torture, main, kill etc., but not to excess (at least not until he has put away a few billion dollars in a Swiss bank).

Parenthood by contrast, must have the interest of the child at heart, and it must be a benevolent dictatorship. To that end, spanking is totally counterproductive; you may be doing long term damage to gain short term results. Now it won’t matter to a dictator, all he is interested in is short term results, but it should matter, it must matter to a parent.

I'm interested in your ideas of punishment. What forms of punishment are acceptable, and which are not? Why is a physical punishment different from a psychological punishment?

 

[karrie]

I'm interested in your ideas of punishment. What forms of punishment are acceptable, and which are not? Why is a physical punishment different from a psychological punishment?

there are a lot of people who overlook emotional abuse and focus strictly on what they can see.

 

[talloola]

No it isn't. And if being snotty is the goal to duck out of reconsiling on one hand saying that hitting it something only a moron would do then the next that hitting is fun and people like it, it won't work.

Firstly, I didn't say the 'moron' thing, and secondly, you don't have the ability
to differentiate life from a game.
Children are very intelligent, and can do that.

 

[TenPenny]

No it isn't. And if being snotty is the goal to duck out of reconsiling on one hand saying that hitting it something only a moron would do then the next that hitting is fun and people like it, it won't work.

Firstly, I didn't say the 'moron' thing, and secondly, you don't have the ability
to differentiate life from a game.
Children are very intelligent, and can do that.

Indeed they can.

You, however, made a blanket statement that hitting is wrong.

 

[Unforgiven]

No it isn't. And if being snotty is the goal to duck out of reconsiling on one hand saying that hitting it something only a moron would do then the next that hitting is fun and people like it, it won't work.

Firstly, I didn't say the 'moron' thing, and secondly, you don't have the ability
to differentiate life from a game.
Children are very intelligent, and can do that.

Of course I do. Are you hostile because of the trap your own hypocracy has you caught up in? You made it clear that anyone that spanked a child was in your estimation a stupid person. Bertuzzi and Moore didn't think it was a game when one was in the hospital and the other jail. Real life is what it was. Some insider you. :roll:

Children aren't intelligent. This is why they need to be taught and go through an education. So that they become inteligent at which point they leave the protection of their parents and make a life of their own.

So much for your insight into children as well.

Face the facts, some kids from time to time need a firm hand to get them back into a reasonable state. Sir dumberth's guesstimate that it's best just to ignore children while they hurl cans of peaches at shoppers and your own support of that ignorant position expose your own lack of understanding when it comes to authority and education.

 

[AnnaG]

And ironically, this same crowd, the prolife crowd (most of the pro spanking crowd is also prolife)

Evidence? Or are you just talking through your hat again?

Or a politician may call himself a Libertarian, that sounds better than Conservative (though many libertarians are really conservatives masquerading under a different label).

It is just that euphemism sounds better, washes away any guilt associated with the action, and denies responsibility for the consequences (my son had to be hospitalized because of the spanking? Well, I only had the best interests of the child at heart; I was doing what was best for him. It was only spanking, after all, not a beating).

So in your view, there are no varying degrees of impact. That a punch that decks someone is the same as a thwack on the ear with a finger.:roll:

 

[AnnaG]

By the Kraft Dinner.

It's only called that in Canada.

What do you lot call it?
I can't stand the stuff myself. I think it's because of the powder that Kraft calls "cheese". I make mac and cheese with grated cheddar and bake it in the oven.

 

[DaSleeper]

People who don't believe in spanking ....and also some people who do (which is why it "can" be abused by some) ...they don't realize that spanking is just one of the many tools in rearing a child .
If it doesn't work after one or two tries, you reassess the situation and try something else, hoping that it will work...
Karrie is right...no two child are the same... and just because one method works on one does not necessarily mean it will work all the time. And to think so is delusional at best...
I have seen too many kids be little angels when their parents were around and regular devils when they were not around....another delusion that some parents have that their kid can do no wrong..
How many parents when faced with a video of their child caught shoplifting refuse to believe it's their little angel.....probably never been spanked either:lol:

 

[SirJosephPorter]

I'm interested in your ideas of punishment. What forms of punishment are acceptable, and which are not? Why is a physical punishment different from a psychological punishment?

That is easy, TenPenny. Punishment should entail withholding of privileges, like no television for one week (or as I punished my son when he was so taken up by bagel and cream cheese that he used to eat it for breakfast every day, his punishment was that he must eat cereal for breakfast for three days, he took it big).

But I agree, without the crutch of spanking to rely on, one must be creative in handing out the punishment.

As to why physical punishment is worse, there are a couple of reasons, one is that the child may grow up thinking that violence is an acceptable means to solve one’s problems. The other is that if it gets out of control, the parent may cause some serious physical harm to the child.

 

[talloola]

Indeed they can.

You, however, made a blanket statement that hitting is wrong.

And, it seems there are some that connected life to games, and can't figure
out, unless someone sits them down in a kindergarten room, and teaches
them, that we are talking about life, not games..

 

[SirJosephPorter]

there are a lot of people who overlook emotional abuse and focus strictly on what they can see.

Withholding of privileges is hardly emotional abuse, karrie.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

Indeed they can.

You, however, made a blanket statement that hitting is wrong.

Quite so, TenPenny, hitting is always wrong.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

Evidence? Or are you just talking through your hat again?

That is easy, Anna. Prolife position stems mainly from Bible, conservatives think that Bible forbids abortion. Same way, position on spanking mainly stems from bible, conservatives think that Bible permits, even mandates corporal punishment.

So usually the same crowd which wants to ban abortion supports the use of corporal punishment.

So in your view, there are no varying degrees of impact. That a punch that decks someone is the same as a thwack on the ear with a finger

The problem is that the thwack on the ear with a finger, if the child gives you the bird or otherwise remains defiant, can easily morph into a punch that decks the child.

 

[AnnaG]

Withholding of privileges is hardly emotional abuse, karrie.

:roll:Tell that to the 29 year old woman who had two children by her abductor (in the news recently).

 

[SirJosephPorter]

:roll:Tell that to the 29 year old woman who had two children by her abductor (in the news recently).

And just how is forcible abduction of a girl and confining her for so many years is equivalent to withholding of privileges (like saying the child cannot watch television for a week)?

 

[AnnaG]

Evidence? Or are you just talking through your hat again?

That is easy, Anna. Prolife position stems mainly from Bible, conservatives think that Bible forbids abortion. Same way, position on spanking mainly stems from bible, conservatives think that Bible permits, even mandates corporal punishment.

So usually the same crowd which wants to ban abortion supports the use of corporal punishment.

I said evidence (as in studies), not your opinion.

So in your view, there are no varying degrees of impact. That a punch that decks someone is the same as a thwack on the ear with a finger

The problem is that the thwack on the ear with a finger, if the child gives you the bird or otherwise remains defiant, can easily morph into a punch that decks the child.

That's besides the point. You basically said hitting is hitting and said the only difference between spanking and hitting is euphemistic. You are full of bovine fertilizer.

 

[talloola]

Of course I do. Are you hostile because of the trap your own hypocracy has you caught up in? You made it clear that anyone that spanked a child was in your estimation a stupid person. Bertuzzi and Moore didn't think it was a game when one was in the hospital and the other jail. Real life is what it was. Some insider you. :roll:
.

Children aren't intelligent. This is why they need to be taught and go through an education. So that they become inteligent at which point they leave the protection of their parents and make a life of their own.

So much for your insight into children as well.

Face the facts, some kids from time to time need a firm hand to get them back into a reasonable state. Sir dumberth's guesstimate that it's best just to ignore children while they hurl cans of peaches at shoppers and your own support of that ignorant position expose your own lack of understanding when it comes to authority and education.

Never called anyone stupid.

Children are very intelligent, they use that intelligence to learn.

One can pick out exceptions to a rule anywhere, in any walk of life.
There is a difference in a game between 'violence', and legal hitting, that
is the exception, in the case you referred to.
No children need to be hit/spanked, in my opinion, I think it is wrong.
I would never ignore my child while they are misbehaving.
I never supported ignoring children while they are misbehaving.
You take many statements and throw them into one post, as though
they belong to that person.
My opinion re: hitting/spanking is a general statement, if it applies to you
or anyone else, fine, but try to control your behavior, or you will probably
have a priviledge removed 'again', as I notice that happened previously, and
you deserved it.
I wouldn't spank/hit you though, but I'm sure glad I'm out of your reach.

 

[AnnaG]

And just how is forcible abduction of a girl and confining her for so many years is equivalent to withholding of privileges (like saying the child cannot watch television for a week)?

wow, you sure are being obtuse today. Confinement is the prevention of parts of a normal life, such as mobility, choice of food, choice of recreation, etc. If you confine someone you deprive them of things. If you take away a child's tv, you deprive them of that. The act is the same. The essential difference is the intent.