A Parenting & kids forum. ParentingBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » ParentingBanter.com forum » alt.parenting » Spanking
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Don's View of Parents



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old December 29th 06, 04:44 PM posted to alt.support.child-protective-services,alt.parenting.spanking
0:->
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,968
Default Don's View of Parents

Greegor wrote:
Kane wrote
Fern's the one that defended the "rights" of the preacher already
convicted before (and happily admitting to) for savagely beating a child
bloody for 20 minutes.


Are you referring to the case where the JURY AQUITTED the accused?
I would think you would stop calling it a BEATING knowing that
a jury did so aquit.


Actually juries "aquit"[sic] the obviously guilty, from time to time,
Greg. Do you, for instance, think OJ didn't do it?

There is much more than "guilt" by facts in a juried trial.


Your exaggeration and zealotry become obvious when you do that, [lie redacted].


I don't exaggerate. The preacher got off on swaying public opinion Greg.

Around those parts a bloody thrashing tends to be considered "spanking."
They call it "switchin'" in those parts. Or a "good lickin'."

The fact is that children were beaten severely, both by their own
descriptions AND BY THE PREACHER HIMSELF who justified them as
biblically mandated. And by the congregation members.

You, who constantly claim the court is corrupt, Greg, suddenly want to
use the court's process to support your claim I exaggerate when I say
Fern supported the rights of a child abuser...a self admitted one?

She thus defended the right to beat children bloody. It's not a legal
question at all, Greg. It's a moral one. Most spankers would be shocked
to learn what he and his flock did to the children of the church. Even
most Christian ones.

Did you read how he chortled over beating a 17 year old girl for twenty
minutes or more until she was bloody, for "trying to take over the church?"

Go back, review the case.

I didn't argue he was innocent or guilty by law, Greg, but only by his
OWN admission and that of the parishioners, who insist beating children
bloody is okay, according to their faith.

It's you and Fern and others that are zealots. Hairsplitters that want
the law to decide if an injured child is actually injured or not,
despite blood and bruises, when the perps themselves have admitted to
injuring, deliberately so, the child, who damn well knows they are in pain.

0:-
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
NFJA Position Statement: Child Support Enforcement Funding Dusty Child Support 0 March 2nd 06 01:49 AM
OT The "Child's" Point Of View Pop Foster Parents 7 June 20th 05 03:13 AM
| | Kids should work... Kane Foster Parents 3 December 9th 03 12:53 AM
Kids should work. ChrisScaife Foster Parents 16 December 7th 03 05:27 AM
The Determination of Child Custody in the USA Fighting for kids Child Support 21 November 17th 03 02:35 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:28 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 ParentingBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.