Why would you spank if you didn't have to?

On 5 Mar 2004 12:00:26 -0800, (Chris C.) wrote:

Fern--This is the classic moron Kane talking his typical tripe below.

As compared to classic Chris from Tx who doesn't spank but doesn't
care if others do? Sure, Chris.

In otherwords, you have no moral principles.

No response is even needed.

Like It has one?

He doesn't warrant one.

My heart is broken.

He reminds me of
Ivan (maybe it is).

I consider that a rare compliment.

Did you follow the recent replies of Ivan to The Plant on The Plant
crowing about The Win in Canada for the spankers? R R R R

Like spankers in Canada could beat their children before, as long as
they called it spanking, but now they can barely touch them, and
severe age restrictions, and NO objects...that means, unlike before,
no belts, paddles, switches, or other instruments of child torture.

Yeah, that's a win alright....R R R R . .

This needs to be crossposted just so others
(cohort included---because they wouldn't even have him) won't waist
their time or energy on him. He doesn't even matter in the equation
(I
believe they call that "less than zero").

Let me do it for you. I want to be SURE that people see the tripe you
post and your responses.

Non-spanker by choice,

With no moral position on spanking other than let others torture their
children, I don't care.

Chris C.
TX

And let's hope that all those people that find my post below offensive
take the time and trouble to google both you and The Plant, a pair of
circlejerking morons that hate families and children.

And below that my message that The Plant already failed to respond to
and you had nothing to say but this tripe you just posted.

Kane


Why don't yah go read Sugenor and whack off.

And call for your friends. We haven't done a good asswhuppin'
around
here in a long time...three or four days so far.

Bring'em on. I looooove the arguments and debate of those that got
whacked too high up the backside too often by their parents.
Naturally
occuring reactionary ******s.

Kane


(Kane) wrote in message . com...
On 24 Feb 2004 13:47:26 -0800, (Chris C.) wrote:

And cross posted to groups Chris C. hoped would come galloping to the
rescue...many spanking compulsives out there in those ngs Chris C.?

What the "cohort" fails to mention is that their real agenda isn't to
educate parents about not using "reasonable force",

Our real agenda is to take over the WOOOOOORRRRLLLLLLLLDDDDD, and make
you spanking compulsives watch children grow up non-violent,
productive free of substance abuse, and reaching more of their
potential, and grinding your teeth. I think we'll probably have to
lock you in cages...I know you sometimes rage now and lie like rugs
when you see happy unpunished children thriving.

Makes yah nuts, dudnit? R R R R R R

which is currently
acceptable use of force to maintain a safe home or school environment
(supported in the US courts)

Male Bovine Excrement in Pottery. There is NO such case law or SC
decision that does that. There is a single case you silly fundaments
keep citing that was NOT about parental or school rights to spank, but
was in fact a matter of whether or not a child had been abused by
spanking and could or could not sue.

The law already says schools can spanking and so can parents...but
states have limits and that was a single state, not the US.

but to over-turn the laws through local
efforts.

Gosh, sounds like we are arming for insurrection. Do you know any
anti-spank folks that are that rapid? Or do you think we might just
use the exisiting processes patently but energetically and drive you
poor things MAD MAD MAD as we march closer and closer?

Recently in Houston, TX they attempted to do so. Of course
they failed.

You seem a tad paranoid? It's odd that you'd think spanking folks are
the level headed ones, and that those that do not wish to see children
subjected to CP, pain and humilation, are the "cohort" with secret
evil motives.

Just define "reasonable force" in applicable terms so that people know
how little or how much force to use for legal CP and you've got a
convert here.

And please, no more of this silly, "well if you can't tell the
difference," and the courts decide. Yah betcha they do.....after the
fact of injure. Kinda little late. But right in line with what some
non-spanking folks are asking for...the courts to decide. You keep
pushing to the courts and you'll get a Canadian solution.

You can't define "reasonable force," and no one else can. The
Canadians have cut it down to the bone...trifling and transistory and
no child two and under and none of 16. Looks like the definition for
"reasonable" in CP is moving downward.

How do you like them apples, bubbah? Trifling and transistory...sounds
like a love tap to me..and there WILL be test cases and there will be
further constraint's on the spankers. Imagine those church folks up
there getting away now with what The Plant defended....R R R R

Do you suppose it was us "cohort" that influenced that? R R R R R

Over-turning "reasonable force" statutes (better known as CP)

So you too are going to try to answer The Question with "reasonable"
eh? Everyone in the world could say "reasonable" but no one can point
to the amount, even with close approximation that would not risk
injury...if not physical, psychic.

Give it a try.

would
mean further undermining the safety of the family

Yah know. I agree. Families that us CP are far more likely to than
families that don't use any punishment of any kind, verbal or
physical, to produce a child they might have to defend themselves from
and from each other. Happens all the time.

Great self fulfilling prophecy. The spanking compulsives get to
pretend all kids are that way and claim we non-punishers can't
"control" our children and they'll all turn into druggies and
criminals.

The only kids I've ever visited in jail were spanked children. I've
never know an unspanked child to be in prison. Must be some somewhere.
Would you mind checking the TX prisons for us.

and those that work
with our children.

I think you are right. People that work with your children had best
learn some good martial arts skills. They need them working with
children that have been turned into reactive little frightened and
rage filled beasts. Sad, isn't it?

But the we didn't need to "overturn" laws in Canada and you folks that
are spanking compulsives (active spankers or not) are inviting the
Canadian solution......a decision at the federal level.

Tell me you don't want the feds in MORE state's business, please. I'd
hate to think you are entirely without wit?

This would include stopping a child from harming
himself/herself

How would it do that? I can stop a child easily without hitting them.
I did it all the time from infant to teen with my own and with other
peoples children in mental health facilities. I used LESS force than
any other person there that did line work with children, I ended up
teaching the simple skills (more a mindset thing than any complicated
set of actions).

My kids had an extremely low incidence of self harm or harm to others.
They simply never got filled with rage from my humiliating or injuring
them. Happy kids. And productive. And busy. And intelligent. And fun
to be with. Still are, in their 40s.

or others and property destruction issues.

Nonsense. Male Bovine Excrement in Pottery.

Same applies as above. Children that are raised with gentleness and a
mind to supporting their development progess/exploration learn quickly
there isn't anything to worry about...they'll get their needs met
without having to go nutso under the hand of a spanker. They don't
need no steeeein' neurosis.

Keeping a
child out of the street

If Doan makes it by tomorrow morning you will be treated to the
content, debate wise, of the study report that Dr. Dennis Embry was
quoted in a parent's magazine about. The study is 25 years + - and
still valid. Children went into the street or toward LESS with the
lest punitive methods, and came close to zero entries when they were
instructed structed and positively reinforced for following the
instructions. And you'd be amazed at the sample demographics. These
weren't easy kids that had already had non-punitive methods used.

or even the use of therpeutic restraint.

YOU might be confused between spanking as in hitting, switching,
strapping, paddling, and all the other euphonisms for assault of a
child and therapeutic restraint, but I am not and neither is the
court, or anyone else, other than desperate spanking compulsives that
they might lose their hobby and relief valve.

Breaking up a fight, which has already lead to legal actions against
those that work with children,

Unless something else was up the courts were wrong. Probably a jury of
saps that could be conned into confusing the issue....or you are
leaving a few things out.

would be further complicated with their
efforts.

And did they lose? If so you wouldn't mind citing would you, just so
we can check and see what ALL the circumstances were?

You could now be sued of fired for acting or failure to act.

Hogwash.

YOU CAN BE SUED FOR BLINKING TOO FAST AT SOMEONE AND TRIGGERING A
SEIZURE...R R R , in other words, suits are based on one's actions,
but on another's perceptions of ones actions. What a silly argument.

What you need to make a claim for, to be credible, is that we can be
criminally charged.

Try to make that one fly.

A cop can sit in her patrol car and watch you beaten to a pulp and do
nothing. No crimimal charge can be brought and suit would fail on
caselaw.

Time after time some sucker has bitten on that one and paid a retainer
only to discover it was money down the drain.

And YOU, and I are NOT required to save peoples lives.

Try to bring criminal charges against anyone that is loco parentis of
a child that didn't cause the injury death themselves. Look it up.

This, of course, is no secret to the clique.

Of course not. We know it to all be just a silly construct of the
spanking compulsives. Seen it for years. Never washed before, won't
now.

Spanking's going down, Cris C in Tx


***Alternative they ignore---

Now that is a flat out lie. I haven't seen a single person in this ng
that advocates for non-spanking that hasn't contributed links and or
citations to just such alternatives. And or commentary on better
methods.

Go ahead, name me one, you who hardly blows. I'll name you half a
dozen pdq that do so advocate.

Support educating parents to the
alternatives

Been done. There are tons of book. Courses. Easy to access. Parks
departments include such things in parenting courses, community
colleges, PET, STEP, a dozen more in the last two decades. Many are
cheap or free when sponsored by public agencies and a few private ones
as well. Even businesses big enough to offer and provide child care
pay for free parent trainings.

so that they make the best decisions for themselves--

Yep. Many chose not to make a change no matter how attractive the
offer. They are compulsives and strongly bonded to the activities and
habits around assaulting a child. They do NOT line up at the sign in
table for parenting classes.

not
creating laws that take control away from local courts and
communities.

Yeah, black Americans went for a century waiting for things to
progess. Patience the were told. Even their parents told them
patience.

I guess they figgered, sort of like us non-spanking "cohort" and
"clique," that nothing much is going to happen. That the non-bigots
already are non-bigots and there's only those who hang on to the old
outmoded savagry left....and offering them classes in understanding
racial bigotry didn't seem to make much headway....unless one wanted
to wait 500 years more.

Now if you want to inspire us to that kind of activism go ahead and
keep lying to yourself, and about us. Me, I've got a strong stomach
and do not want to have a law. I WANT parents to decide to stop the
carnage on their own, but you folks could corrupt a saint.

Non-spanker by choice,

Yep, which you proudly display while giving tacit permission to others
to spank...not to make a choice....but to continue NOT considering any
other choice.

You put that after your name to let yourself off the hook with your
own conscience and so that you can stand for choice...yet I've never
seen you post one thing pointing directly to alternatives as useful.

Yah kinda forgot that in your little years long tirade, no?

What I wrote below stands. And there is no evil cohort or clique
threatening parents. We simple want the assault, that so often ends in
injury to the child, to stop.

Assuming you believe YOU shouldn't be hit..........

It seems you think wanting pain and humilation to stop even if by law
for adults is a good thing, but for children, a bad thing if it stops
by law.

I wonder why? I think you are logic impaired for a reason, but darned
if I know who. You ever consider it?

Chris C.
TX

I can't imagine that any of the anti spankers here wouldn't much
prefer NO law being writen on spanking. They are just realists,
understand history, and recognize the same kind of preservation of
privilege that spanking is as were other exploitations and humilations
of humans in the past.

A few slave owners freed their slaves...very few...and few more freed
a few slaves (I put YOU in that category....an apologist and fake
abolishionist)...but the vast majority of slaves, just like the 90% +
children in this country, were not going to enjoy freedom until there
was a bloodly campaign to break slave owner's privilege.

Between abolishionists and states rights pro-slave which would YOU
have been?

A northerner that said, "let them all make up their own minds?"

Kane

(Kane) wrote in message . com...
When people defend the choice of parents to spank as a discipline
tool
it would be fair to those parents to mention the risks, both to the
child and the parent themselves, and additionally, to society.

When one attacks the alternatives by claiming they don't work
without
noting that there are two classifications of alternatives to CP,
punitive and non-punitive discipline, it has to be assumed that the
claimant either is unaware of the non-punitive methods or seriously
wishes to contend and defend that non-punitive methods have the
same
result as punitive methods.

From:

http://www.stopspanking.com/

"At least 1,200 children are killed every year at the hands of
their
parents in the name of physical punishment"

Eighty Five percent of parents surveyed expressed moderate to high
anger, remorse, and agitation while punishing their children. This
challenges the notion that parents can spank in a calm, planned
manner. (Graziano AM, Hamblen JL, Plante WA. Subabusive violence in
child rearing in middle-class American families. Pediatrics.
1996;98:845-848 )

Half of all 13- and 14-year-olds are still being hit an average
eight
times per year. (Eron LD. Research and public policy. Pediatrics.
1996;98:821-823)

Corporal punishment in two-parent, middle class families occurred
weekly in 25%, caused considerable pain at times in 12%, and
inflicted lasting marks at times in 5%. Striking children in the
abusive range is neither rare nor confined to families of lower
socioeconomic class, as has been asserted. (Graziano AM, Hamblen
JL,
Plante WA. Subabusive violence in child rearing in middle-class
American families. Pediatrics. 1996;98:845-848 )

The more children are hit, the more anger they report as adults and
the more they hit their own children. (Straus MA. Spanking and the
making of a violent society. Pediatrics. 1996;98:837-842)

Although 93% of parents justify spanking, 85% say that they would
rather not if they had an alternative in which they believed.
(Graziano AM, Hamblen JL, Plante WA. Subabusive violence in child
rearing in middle-class American families. Pediatrics.
1996;98:845-848)

Parents who spank are more likely to use other forms of corporal
punishment and a greater variety of verbal and other punitive
methods.
(Cohen P. How can generative theories of the effects of punishment
be
tested? Pediatrics. 1996;98:834-836)

Note: Most of these Statistics were drawn from the Policy Statement
(Guidance for Effective Discipline (RE9740) of the
AMERICAN ACADEMY OF PEDIATRICS
Committee on Psychosocial Aspects of Child and Family Health.

http://www.stopspanking.com/