"Greg Hanson" wrote in message
om...
LaVonne Carlson wrote

Neal said
in message deal with issues of child abuse
That's what you get for calling spanking BEATING, LaVonne.

and since several extreme position posters continue to
claim that all spanking is child abuse, even that which
is clearly legal in all fifty states of the union, the
discussion of CPS is entirely on topic, because people
should be entirely aware of what exactly they are doing
and causing if they report someone to one of these
agencies.


However, many of your posts have absolutely nothing
to do with spanking, and are nothing but rants
against CPS. These posts belong on
alt.support.child-protective-services.

If Neal did not say this I will:
Parenting does not happen in a vacuum.
Spanking or not spanking happens under the scrutiny
of big brother CPS. To avoid that CONTEXT would
be a NONSENSICAL view of spanking or not spanking.

Who appointed YOU to play Net Nazi, LaVonne?

LaVonne wrote,

"However, many of your posts have absolutely nothing to do with spanking,
and are nothing but rants against CPS. These posts belong on
alt.support.child-protective-services."

Sounds fair to me.

Did you know THAT violates general newsgroup rules?

Which rules?

Besides, you seem to complain SELECTIVELY, so I
can have NO RESPECT for this little tactic on your part.

LaVonne is selective because some posts may be appropriate to both NGs and
some may not.

Sounds fair to me.

You defend CPS and bureaucracy at every turn,

If that's true, that's her opinion and she's entitled to it..

but I haven't seen you SAY MUCH about the wonderful
Foster Parents who starved 4 boys to emaciation
while getting regular visits from CPS.

How can any discussion of the context and environment
not include the horror stories about what might happen
to kids removed for spanking or spanking gone wrong?

Those kids were removed for spanking?

To ignore the complexities of the issues is to be
idiotically simplistic about parenting, as if
there is some place where you can parent in a vacuum.

So should every NG that has anything to do with children or parenting get
cross posted from asCPS?

LaVonne wrote
alternative forms of discipline

As in making child wash off pee with cold water
after discovering that happy warm guilt free showers
were causing the frequency of wetting at school
to INCREASE?
(Positive reinforcement of a negative behavior)?

Greg can't help but practice his lies.

He forced the little girl to take COLD SHOWERS... unhappy cold guilt-ridden
showers.

sole purpose to rant

Whatever you say herr Doktor!

YOU, Greg, are the "Doktor."

What qualifications do you have to determine that cold showers are the
appropriate punishment for someone else's little girl wetting their pants?

Especially when YOU could be the reason she's wetting her pants to begin
with!

What if a psychologist determined that all the little girl needed to stop
wetting her pants was for you to get out of her life and out of her home?

Did you allow her to see a psych for a professional opinion???

Those who object most strenuously to posts

Neal was talking about you, LaVonne!

Neal (continued)
in the newsgroup about CPS are those who tend
to advocate or play apologist for those agencies
and do not wish the general public to know the
truth about these agencies.

Yep, that's LaVonne!

snip

Fern does not post EVERYTHING on both newsgroups, and
I suspect that when people cross post things it is
often out of excitement or outrage and often perhaps
not because spanking is involved.

As Neal pointed out, you seem to want to conceal the
truth about child abuse agencies and how they actually
work.

Recently you demanded proof of me for something that
was WELL KNOWN, that every state CPS agency had
failed Federal Audits for compliance with regulations.

Greg, how many times do you ask questions whose answers are already included
in the very post that you're responding to?

It is crucial to understanding the capricious willy
nilly behavior of CPS and therefore the political
environment in which a spanking or non-spanking parent
may be constrained. Crucial to SOCIAL CONTEXT.

Or do you wish to assert that SOCIAL CONTEXT has
nothing to do with spanking or not spanking?

If you wish to usurp parents rights to choose
whether or not to spank, which IS clearly your goal,
understanding CPS in the real world as opposed
to intent or theory seems germain.

You lobby for anti-spanking laws while you naively
state that they would not be used for child removals.
Any such law would most definately be automatically
and broadly be used to remove children to Foster
Homes where the kids are 10 TIMES more likely to be
sexually abused, and twice as likely to DIE.

How do you honestly dare pretend that real world
reports about how the Child Protection Industry
functions are not totally germain to the
anti-spanking laws you advocate?

While the Hatch act may not stop you a state
paid employee from such lobbying, that lobbying
on your part ETHICALLY justifies the presentation
of real world information about how CPS works,
or more precisely, how CPS would MISUSE the sort
of law you are lobbying for.

In Summary:
You dragged the camels nose into the tent
( with spanking == beating )
( and proposing new child abuse law! )
( ignorance of crucial info on failed Audits )
( naive theory FAR from actual results. )
( Your expression that it's not political
further proves how naive you are. )
Who appointed you to keep pushing your idea
of net etiquette? That's bad form.

And if any one knows about bad form, it's Greg.

He's the king of it.

Dan