posted on March 7, 2005 11:48:15 PM new
Has anyone noticed the trend in this thread....the neocons believe in violence against children and the more liberal posters or Demos believe in using your brain to raise children.......kinda like out in the big world.
lala comes up with another doozy....."The child is more protected than adult. "
Ya, see, they're children so they need more protection.....DUH!
posted on March 8, 2005 03:03:38 AM new
I suspect that those who are totally against spanking are against any form of spanking. But it also appears to me that those most against it are the ones that connect a more violent connotation to the word.
For example, what Fenix described as a spanking I would call beating. The spanks I received as a small child (and they were not common occurrences) involved my mother swatting my behind with her hand. I don't think anyone here would advocate beating children - at least I hope not.
posted on March 8, 2005 06:30:11 AM new
Cherished - I would reffer to them as beatings too. The problem is that the person that imposed them did not.
Unlike someone who beats their wife, people that beat their kids are rarely full of remorse and appologies and promises afterwards. They just gave "a little disipline" and they use the same "Spare the rod, Spoil the child" justification as the person who uses a light pat. No parent says "I beat my child".
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
posted on March 8, 2005 06:54:54 AM new "I'm a shy lurker, but feel strongly enough to take the plunge. Children learn by example not by the "do as I say not as I do" school of discipline. If your child hit his brother or his dog or a friend--how do you teach him not to hit? By hitting him??? Regarding the comment that a child cries when spanked because he/she is humiliated, not from the pain. Why on earth would you want to humiliate your precious child? Discipline is to teach your child right from wrong, not to humiliate or cause pain."
Right, coincoach! Humiliation is the worse kind of pain especially when it comes from someone as significant to a child as their parents..
posted on March 8, 2005 07:24:57 AM new
...Why on earth would you want to humiliate your precious child?... And, humiliation is the worst kind of pain.,........
oh, gimme a break. Coincoach, I dont know if you've ever spent any length of time around kids, esp. when they're tired, cranky, or they've been given lots and lots of rope all along. They are not quite so precious in those moments.
The effect of spanking on the butt is the same humilation as being verbally admonished. The kid is embarrassed because he/she tries to rule the roost and the parent says, "no, I'm in charge here, and you dont get to do whatever you feel like doing."
fenix, this thread is about spanking on the buttocks, which doesnt hurt, and you're talking about child abuse.
Crowfarm is an idiot breaking it down to dems and republicans. She obviously never had children in her care.
posted on March 8, 2005 07:56:07 AM new
""""They are not quite so precious in those moments.
The effect of spanking on the butt is the same humilation as being verbally admonished. The kid is embarrassed because he/she tries to rule the roost and the parent says, "no, I'm in charge here, and you dont get to do whatever you feel like doing."""""
Children are always precious ! Dblfug, she's NOT talking about them being cute she means how PRECIOUS they are....we're not talking about "Precious Moments" crap! We're talking about children and how some people have to use pain and humiliation rather than an INTELLIGENT way to raise children.
And your total lack of reasoning ability is displayed in """Crowfarm is an idiot breaking it down to dems and republicans. She obviously never had children in her care."
I make a comparison (very accurate one) of Dems and Repugs and you decide I never had children in my care....??????...are you morphing into libra?
posted on March 8, 2005 08:03:26 AM new
Very accurate my foot. So everybody who spanks (or doesnt spank) their child has a political leaning or affiliation??? pffstt! What an idiotic remark!
cf, the more you post, the more you reveal what an isolated and wacked-out world you travel in.
posted on March 8, 2005 08:19:03 AM new
No, dble , I didn't say, "" So everybody who spanks (or doesnt spank) their child has a political leaning or affiliation??? ""
I didn't say that.
I said,now read slowly,
""the neocons believe in violence against children and the more liberal posters or Demos believe in using your brain to raise children.......kinda like out in the big world.""
I was referring to this thread, what posters in HERE have said.
I didn't say "everybody" who does or doesn't spank HAS a political affilliation.
Now think it through , dbl.
And I do feel very badly for children who are spanked and/or humiliated as a form of discipline.....very primitive
posted on March 8, 2005 08:20:53 AM new
Dbl - I know what the thread is about. Thing is that I also know that a spank depends entirely on the person that executes it. Some may give a painless tap, others may leave bruises but invaribly both use the same descrption and justificatons. Again - no child abuser labels themselves as such and most also insist that they don't actually inflict real pain.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
posted on March 8, 2005 08:25:48 AM new
dblfugger - Give me a break is right. Some who post here, are are against spanking, have never had children...and look at the verbal abuse some [CF] give to others. His/her constant verbal abuse would be MUCH more damaging to a child than a quick swat on the rear. I think those who oppose a swat on the rear are the same ones who believe [in the political realm] that we can 'talk' the terrorists out of their wishes for our Nation.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Four More Years....YES!!!
posted on March 8, 2005 08:31:16 AM new
Oh linDUH! YOU give ME a break.....what an explicit display of total non-logic...you are at your best with....
"His/her constant verbal abuse would be MUCH more damaging to a child than a quick swat on the rear. I think those who oppose a swat on the rear are the same ones who believe [in the political realm] that we can 'talk' the terrorists out of their wishes for our Nation.""
Why do you ASSume I talk to children like I talk to you ? Very stupid assumption. Although if I ever met a child as vicious and nasty as you I probably would.
Ha! And only you can equate children with terrorists.....Thank you, you proved my point!
[ edited by crowfarm on Mar 8, 2005 08:32 AM ]
posted on March 8, 2005 08:48:01 AM new
"Think it through"... lol! Maybe YOU should try that before you type.
Has anyone noticed the trend in this thread....the neocons believe in violence against children and the more liberal posters or Demos believe in using your brain to raise children.......kinda like out in the big world.
Think I got your train of thought right the first time, crowfarm. If you're not a neocon, you'll use your brain in disciplining you child - and if you are, you'll probably spank them, like out in the big world. -Right? That is what you wrote.
I have to wonder how many welfare moms, drug addict moms, or just plain poorly skilled and equipped parents would ever think of themselves as a neocon (or affiliate with any neocon, i.e. political thinking) when they are hitting their child? Your statement was so stupid and totally false as it pertains to the real world.
Now maybe if you had said 'religious' vs. non religious I might accept there is some common denominator of belief system there. But its not a democrat or republican drawn issue. I know many a staunch democrat who spanked or hit their children.
posted on March 8, 2005 08:57:19 AM new
Great answer, dble....can't reason ?....just give up, but never, ever think, reason or, heaven forbid...change your mind.
posted on March 8, 2005 09:05:28 AM new
Great answer, dble....can't reason ?....just give up, but never, ever think, reason or, heaven forbid...change your mind.
Dble, you accuse me of being an idiot and a goof ball yet you can't answer any of my posts explaining what I said.....and you are NOT an idiot ?????????
posted on March 8, 2005 09:08:59 AM new
When a child is born they are born to rule your house. If you have never had children you wouldn't know anything about it. From day one you are at their beckon call. If you don't start showing them who is the boss then you have lost control of that child. now I don't say spank or beat them but parents are the boss not the child. "Try and convenience that child of that.
Wouldn't you know that politics has to get into every thread. Crowfarm and her backwards way wouldn't know diddly squat about discipline because she shows none here.
Notice she is just like a child, always wants attention and always wants her way. Well it doesn't work with a child.
posted on March 8, 2005 09:14:29 AM new
I agree with the statements made by coincoach and fenix and I don't believe that spanking a child teaches them anything positive.
Children in eleven countries are growing up without being hit in homes, in daycare or in schools. Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Austria, Finland and other countries that have banned corporal punishment of children have remarkably low rates of interpersonal violence compared to the United States.
For many years I've noticed that these children are also more considerate and polite when in the homes of others or in public places like stores and restaurants compared to many kids from Canada and the US.
For those who believe in spanking, I think if they take time to read this short page they will better understand the viewpoints of others.
Spanking: Facts and Fiction
Parents who support spanking often use one of the following arguments:
1. Spanking is an effective way to manage behavior.
2. I got hit when I was a kid and I turned out OK.
3. If we don’t spank children, they’ll grow up rotten.
4. The bible says, “Spare the rod and spoil the child”
posted on March 8, 2005 09:14:50 AM new
Thanks for telling me about that phrase Double - I had no idea!
Don't you think spanking is more for the parent than the child? It's like a last resort when the parent is out of control and can't think of any other way to communicate so they lash out. The time to learn about how to discipline your child is BEFORE you have them. If you can't control one child, PLEASE use your brain and don't have any more until you learn.
posted on March 8, 2005 09:21:25 AM new
From the Tower of Babble:""When a child is born they are born to rule your house. If you have never had children you wouldn't know anything about it. From day one you are at their beckon call. If you don't start showing them who is the boss then you have lost control of that child. now I don't say spank or beat them but parents are the boss not the child. "Try and convenience that child of that.
Wouldn't you know that politics has to get into every thread. Crowfarm and her backwards way wouldn't know diddly squat about discipline because she shows none here.
Notice she is just like a child, always wants attention and always wants her way. Well it doesn't work with a child.""
First: It's "beck and call"
Second: It's "CONVINCE" NOT "convenience" although you get points for spelling convenience correctly.
Notice libra posts and posts but never wants attention ????????
Why would anyone post in here if they didn't want anyone to read what they post....more total "illogic" from lala.
Then the dumbest statement:"If you have never had children you wouldn't know anything about it. "
You don't need to have children to be around them, be related to them, have them in your family, be in charge of them, interact with them, talk to them, discipline them, play with them, entertain them, enjoy them, feed them, fix their "owies", teach them, care for them.
Libra, try thinking. It really doesn't cause pain.
posted on March 8, 2005 09:22:59 AM new
KD - Spoken like a person who hasn't ever had children....and thinks it can all be 'learned' in books. It can't.
Spanking is to stop the behavior NOW. After talking didn't work....after they won't stay in a time-out place as a consequence. It works and as mentioned before I'd bet there are few who can honestly say that their lives were changed in a negative way because their parents spanked them on occassion.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Four More Years....YES!!!
posted on March 8, 2005 09:30:00 AM newYou don't need to have children to be around them, be related to them, have them in your family, be in charge of them, interact with them, talk to them, discipline them, play with them, entertain them, enjoy them, feed them, fix their "owies", teach them, care for them.
Spoken like another childless person who thinks that's the same as having a child 24/7.
edited to change parent to person
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Four More Years....YES!!!
[ edited by Linda_K on Mar 8, 2005 09:38 AM ]
posted on March 8, 2005 09:30:02 AM new
You don't need to have children to be around them, be related to them, have them in your family, be in charge of them, interact with them, talk to them, discipline them, play with them, entertain them, enjoy them, feed them, fix their "owies", teach them, care for them.
On the other hand....
HAVING children does NOT automatically make you a competent parent....
did you pass a test to become a parent?
NO, you didn't.
Did the act of giving birth make you a child raising expert? No.
Have you ever read a book or tried to LEARN anything....no.
posted on March 8, 2005 09:43:09 AM new
I think all we need to see if the current way of never swatting is working is to look to our school systems. Way too many kids totally out of control. Teachers complain about all the dicipline problems all the time.
And just as in this mentioned story...this kids is only 6 years old and from Sept. to February he's had 20 infractions of behavior. Now that he's been removed by a parent whose 'diciplinary' actions certainly AREN'T WORKING...the class can settle down to the job of learning.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Four More Years....YES!!!
This topic is 6 pages long: 1new2new3new4new5new6new
