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

| U.N. rules Canada should ban spanking



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old October 10th 03, 08:44 PM
Julie Pascal
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default U.N. rules Canada should ban spanking


"Kane" wrote in message
m...
On Thu, 9 Oct 2003 17:53:15 -0400, "Ray Drouillard"
wrote:

It looks like one of those crusaders who google for certain key words
and start stirring up the mud.


No, actually I've been a serial lurker to this ng for some time now.
And I do think it unwise of you to equate your comments and opinions
about spanking with "mud," don't you.


Which newsgroup? Crossposting is *always* rude. People who
don't care about being rude, and who post on purpose to a list of
newsgroups in order to start a fight are trolls. Saying you aren't
is like spammers who send a "this is not spam" disclaimer to your
e-mail box, proving nothing except that they are a spammer *and*
a liar both.

Some trolls do it for fun... some trolls do it because it is
their nature. Being sincere is not an excuse.

--Julie



  #12  
Old October 11th 03, 05:05 AM
Kane
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default U.N. rules Canada should ban spanking

"Michael S. Morris" wrote in message
...
Thursday, the 9th of October, 2003


....to once again try and go around the issue by misquoting and
claiming something not in evidence and then try to build an argument
upon it.

Kane:
Basically, Ray, you are a coward. You are afraid to defend your
brutal
practice of spanking in a larger arena so try to confine it to this
small one where you know there will be plenty of supporters.
Ray:
I don't need to defend it. The practice needs no defence -- though
Michael S Morris did a very good job while simultaneously tearing
your
arguments into tiny little pieces. I was quite impressed, actually.


First of all, if it didn't need defending you wouldn't and you have.
That
nullifies your current claim that it doesn't need defending.

Secondly, the sentence you use to try and deny your need to defend
"don't need
to defend" is defensive.

Ray, I don't think I began to tear any arguments up yet---


You may try, It won't fly.

I feel
in fact that all I really did was stake out a position.


Weasel Word Play...not today.

Staking "out a position" differs from an "argument" how?

You are arguing. Don't be shy. I don't mind. I like good arguments.
Let's see
some. The stuff you came up with below is lame. Just as the prior
"stuff."

I am especially
embarassed when,


Heaven'stobetsyIshouldhopeso.

driving around this evening,


How many wrecks will it take for you to stop that day dreaming while
you
drive? Or should we spank you?

I got to thinking about
some of the things Kane has said, and I realized how much utter hokum
and
nonsense they are.


That was our shame based neurosis from your own childhood cp reshaping
your
thinking to rationalize your beliefs and actions.

The last thing you can do is accuse our parents of not loving you, or
of being
bad parents....and they weren't of course, and I've no idea if they
loved you
or not, but that small frightened pain filled and betrayed child still
resides
within you and cannot let go of the self protection it was taught WITH
PAIN
and humiliation.

It was that "utter hokum and nonsense" remark that tipped me off.

I don't consider your position as such. I think it derives from
identifiable
events and known common human reactions to pain, both physical and
psychological. You are spouting nonsense, but it isn't utter and it
isn't
hokum. It was taught to you and you believe it faithfully as taught.
You are a
good boy.

He did say---did he not?


He did NOT say the statement you try and attribute to him below. It
was not
that limited. I expanded the subject adequately for a reasonable
person, not
driven into sniveling whining, to understand the broader implications
of ALL
distraction while learning.

---that science has somehow
shown that pain can't teach children anything.


I said no such thing. I said that distraction interfers with learning
the
thing to be learned. Are you going to try and claim that pain isn't a
distraction?

Tell you what. Assuming you've never had any training in calculus,
let's set
up a little experiment. You crack the books and at random times I'll
swat your
ass with a small board.

Let's see how well you learn, compared to another calculus ignorant
person
that is instead assisted when they are stuck with support,
information, and
paitence by the teacher.

Now, the "science" of
brain scans or no,


Why do I get the feeling you don't really want to know what the brain
scan
studies show?

One of the most interesting to me was the one that showed that in
children who
had experienced abuse that section of the brain that is the locus for
indications of moral choices is black...dead...no neurons firing.
Thought
provoking and immediately jumped on by the word twisters with
"spanking isn't
abuse."

Well, the human body and brain do not know that. Certainly not a
child's body
and brain.

I would suggest that nearly every one of us
has had some experience of doing something really stupid---like putting
your hand on a hot burner or touching a "hot" wire or slamming
a car door on your hand---and being rewarded for it with an immediate,
and possibly longlasting, painful feedback which feedback has taught us
never
to do that again.


Those are called logical consequences. Perfectly natural. No problem,
except
of course that given the child being young enough you have the
responsibility
(or not as you see fit) of protecting the child. Keep the child away
from the
hot stove with barriers and proper supervision until you can teach the
child
about the dangers. Same goes with electrical outlets.

And supervise your too young child around things that slam.

By the way, I love your examples.....they are a perfect argument for
me to
"stake out my position."

Let me demonstrate how well pain taught you to avoid a behavior.

Ever touched anything hot and burned yourself yet again since the very
first
experience you had with being burned?

Only slammed your fingers in something once, did you?

Only been zapped by an electrical current once in your life?

If you answered "yes" to any of the above questions you are extremely
rare or
a very sheltered person that goes nowhere and does nothing.

The truth is that if you allow your child to be too "consequenced" by
her
environment she will either be killed or so inhibited from learning
that she
will be as disabled from learning more (exploring and experimenting)
as her
constitution and pain tolerance will allow.

Is that your goal?

Is so, spanking is a wonderful tool to inhibit the child.

I applaud your desire to keep her alive. I abhor your methods as
damaging to
the child and possibly to society.

But most parents have to, or know to, (you are likely one of the "have
tos")
let their child out little by little so the environment won't
overwhelm them.
You mistake spanking for supervision. Or you try to substitute one for
the
other.

My most recent case was rolling a riding lawn a couple
summers ago, throwing myself off it to get clear, and snapping my left
humerus in two as a result. I now have a much healthier respect for the
design envelope of a riding mower.


If you were three years old would the same example apply? Of course
not. You
would pull the child off the lawn mower seat and whack her bottom and
think
you had taught her not to get on the lawn mower. I would lift her
gently down
and explore with her why mowers are dangerous, discuss how she can
ride the
toy mower I'm going to buy her, and look for other ways to encourage
her
climbing and exploring behaviors that are safer.

She's obviously, if she can climb, had enough experience with falling
and pain
to listen to my lesson with some understanding. I don't need to give
her MORE
pain.

Your child will need more lessons, in fact, since nature drives her,
compels
her, to explore, and you'll have to do YOUR lesson again and again,
and she
NEVER WILL COME TO YOU FOR HELP WHEN SHE IS FACED WITH A CHOICE of
exploring
something potentially dangerous. At 38 my daughter felt perfectly
comfortable
coming to me and asking my opinion of an ethical business question she
was
confronted with by her company.

I DID NOT SOLVE IT FOR HER. I did the same thing I did when she was
young. I
respected her desire to explore and experiment and acted as consultant
and
supporter as she did so. She chose the moral and ethically safer path,
just as
she chose the safer path as child.

And it involved no pain.

Now had she taken the less moral path I would have given her my own
opinion
ONCE, and left her to live with the consequences, because she's a big
girl
now....mentally probably my superior...and can take care of her self.

Your path creates the teens you would like to claim are the
"undisciplined"
when in fact they are the most self disciplined of all. The don't fear
their
parent....and are tempted to defiance. They love and trust their
parent so
that bad choices are extremely hard to make. It hurts their hearts to
go
against their parents.

Works far better than a short thought of a pained butt at three with
immediately rejection and moving right on to sex, drugs and rock and
roll in
an effort to blot out the ugly painful parentl....... r r r r r

If Kane's claim *really* is that pain
blocks learning,


It isn't. Had you read more carefully, ....or should I say your
neurotic
terrified inner child had allowed you....you'd have seen I didn't say
that
pain blocks learning, as in all learning about something. I said it
blocks the
learning of the desired skill or ability. It teaches alright, but not
the
skill.

What it blocks is full access to the desired lesson. Enthusiastic
focus and
determination to learn the desired ability. Did you spank your child
to teach
them to ride a bicycle? Jeez, I hope not.

That same patience and understanding about needing to learn balance
and
coordination applies absolutely to the lesson of why we don't hit our
little
sister with the sauce pan.

Your own life experience blocks you from seeing that. The examples
from your
own childhood rarely, if ever, included that understanding and
patience, and
your being hooked, as I presume your are (correct me if I'm wrong), on
the
inherent "evil" in humans, requires you to think in terms of
punishment.

"Disere" the latin root for the world "discipline" and "disciple" has
a
beautiful meaning when it comes to human learning....it means to
"bring out,"
and that is not what happens when a child who is busy experimenting
and
exploring (no matter how YOU interpret that behavior) is met with pain
from
the one person that she should be able to trust as a teacher...a true
teacher.


Pain does not bring out the ability to ride a bicycle, nor to ponder
the moral
issues in hitting one's sister, or the empathy that is the basis for
the
development of conscience. Empathy is retarded by distraction, built
by focus
on the other person.

You can't even get a child to pay attention to YOUR feelings, let
alone
another's feelings, by the use of pain.

Now this conversation may well end if you are one of those that
believes that
morality is not human based but rule based. I don't follow rules
because they
are rules and they come from some authority. I follow rules because
they have
proven to be the wisest choice of all in how I feel if I break them,
and how I
feel if I keep them.

If we all did that there would be need for enforcement, and whackin'
away on
kids butts.

then he has just ruled out all of our common sense and
common experience.


R R R R, I've ruled out nothing but your neurosis and your lack of
common
sense. Common sense based on ignorance is not sense, it is just
ignorance.

How common sense is built is by observing. How it turns into valuable
knowledge that can be applied is by never closing the loop....always
being
open to new interpretations and new views being considered.

Consider this.....everything the child does, no matter how YOU might
interpret
it, is no more or less than an experiment to learn how to live.

When you, their assigned guardian and protector, their trusted teacher
of how
to tie shoelaced, feed themselves, bake a cupcake, think their
throwing of
objects out of their play pen is defiance and just to make you pick up
after
them, and you resort to the shocking act of hitting them, they just
were
betrayed.

Do you KNOW why little children throw things out of their playpen or
off their
highchair tray, again and again and again...ad neauseum?

Think about it in learning terms.

The answer is here.

Whey does a child keep repeating new words over and over and over?

What natural phenomena is the child experimenting with in the object
throwing?


Children are compelled to be practical physicists. They MUST
experiment, and
it has to be replicated to be believed. And they must do it for
themselves.
Hitting inhibits that learning.

He is probably also at odds with any and every
evolutionary biological explanation for pain that I've ever run across.


No, only with the ones based on ignorance of learning theory. I'm not
against
learning from pain. I'm against the deliberate application of pain by
(from
his point of view) a child's protector. Children get more than enough
naturally consequential pain to learn about what does and doesn't
cause pain.

Why would you want to create an artificial application of pain that to
the
child is so often impossible to connect to the exploritory behavior
they were
performing?

Are you so insistent on them developing a sense of guilt, shame, fear,
about
their environment and insistent on them being challenged with the
thought that
they may in fact be evil creatures deserving torture?

A child believes the parenting they get is the parenting they deserve.
The
parent is all powerful to the child, even in defining who the child
is.

Consider: A child treated with respect, even when they make mistakes,
then
would believe they deserve what?

Now substitute "pain" for "respect."

And either is, for the child, what they will grow to seek for
themselves, as
it honors the beloved parent. They will do it until they die of old
age. A
life of self induced pain, or one of self respect. Your choice.

The power that parents have awes me, still.

Also, think about it for a moment: Whence brain scans "proving" that
pain blocks learning?


That is not what I said. I said it blocks the learning of the desired
task.
One can still learn....it just becomes exceedingly difficult and other
things,
not intended, are learned as well.

How good are your math skills? Or writing. What subjects were hard for
you in
school? Were they taught by your favorite teacher? Did you parent
"assist" in
your learning with punishments involved with your attempts to learn?
Did you
feel stupid when they "helped" you?

One of the toughest teachers I had was extremely respectful, but
still,
insisted quietly and respectfully, that one applied themselves. I had
flunked
algebra twice until him. Both prior teachers were insulting martinets.

I aced his class. And he graded hard, very. I learned about learning
from
him. I picked my teachers with care in college. Aced it too, all of
it. And I
was barely a C student in highschool. Lousy teachers until the algebra
teacher.

I mean, I've read Milgram's summary of his
psychological experiments in _Obedience to Authority_. Those experiments
*simulated* pain in a "victim" in order to observe a subject's
reaction to it.


That is something of a departure from my position...but let's see if
it is
worthy of the frightened child that forced that to the surface of your
consciousness to avoid my point.

And that kind of experimental procedure has long since
been declared unethical.


Okay. Let's see where this goes.

So, I'd say it's pretty obvious that no
one in recent history has run experiments subjecting people to
pain


Wrong. It's common still. All it takes is consent of the subject. Go
to your
nearest college or university psych department and ask. Or try
neurological
departments of medical schools.

Besides, the question isn't "pain" alone. It's any distraction up to
and
including pain.

in order to test whether or not people (and certainly not kids)
can learn under the influence of pain.


And I was working, as I pointed out clearly, backward from pain to any
distraction. Any distraction changes learning from more easily done to
more
difficultly done and has unwanted side effects, such as the learning
of things
that might even interfer with performance of the desired skill.

Dr. Thomas Gordon, when a young man, was a military flight instructor.
He
observed that a lot of young student pilots were flying their aircraft
into
the ground and dying. He noted also that the instructor's, an a
misguided by
sincere attempt to save lives, were screaming at the students more and
more
and calling them more names and insults.

Gordon turned that around and developed a supportive approach. His
students
lived. The others continued to die.

Later he counseled parents and eventually wrote a book that is a
standard for
supportive parenting...that is supportive of the child learning, not
being
tortured.

So, any "brain scan" claims
there could be would have to be just wild extrapolation,


Nice try. No cigar. As I said. Consent allows for the use of
distraction up to
and including pain. But distraction alone is sufficient to support my
position. Unless you would care to label pain as not being a
distraction.

making
all kinds of assumptions about what causes what and what activity
here or there in the brain might mean in terms of learning or not
learning something.


Well, that usually IS the point of experimenting.

Just as children do it. They are trying, no matter what you think they
are
doing, to find out about the world and how it works. They are, by our
adult
view, terribly ignorant and clumsy, even doing things we've come to
label as
"bad," or "evil," "perverse," and even "sinful" but to them, in their
ignorance and nature driven compulsion to learn, those actions are not
labeled
as yet.

Again, all one has to do is talk to an older teacher who remembers the
days in public school when he had a wooden paddle and the authority
to use it if students misbehaved. Guess what? Those were days when
he shooting at Columbine, not to mention metal detectors at the
entrances
to schools, and armed policemen to patrol the halls, were unthinkable.


My very favorite. I've seen this come up so many times on the
talk.politics.guns website I grow weary of it.

You do know that children that were spanked were the ones doing the
shooting,
did you not? Check out all the school shootings in recent years. These
weren't
"unspanked" children.

Do you know how far back kids were walking into classrooms and
shooting
people? Try the 30's. The shooting at Columbine was not caused by the
failure
to spank. It was caused by the failure to inculcate a conscience.

That is the product of pain based parenting, whether it is physically
based,
or psychologically based. My take on the boys that did the shooting
was more
of the psychologically based, but I doubt anyone is going to get out
of the
families of the boys how they were parented. I've certainly seen more
than
enough mental illness in teens whose histories I did have access to to
tell
you that pain based parenting...even when done with cold precision....
results
in less conscience and morals, not more.

You are spouting like a Scientologist.

"One panel reads: *Since psychiatrists and psychologists entered the
classroom
in the 1960s, SAT scores have plummeted.* A huge line graph beside
this
statement illustrates the dramatic plunge. And yet, what do these two
things
have to do with each other? And what do they mean *since psychiatrists
entered
the classroom* anyway? The panel goes on to list shocking, but
uncited,
statistics about the dire state of American education: A 1999 study
showed
that 10% of college graduates could not read the back of a cereal box.
It
drums up experts with fancy-sounding pedigrees to testify on their
behalf:
*Dr. Fred A. Baughman Jr., a pediatric neurologist and Fellow of the
Academy of Neurology, says ADHD and other childhood psychiatric
disorders and
*learning disabilities* are *inventions, contrivances,* and *100%
fraud.**
Pictures of child killers like Eric Harris have captions like, *Took
Prozac
prior to killing 14 of his classmates.*
"

The lack of the paddle hasn't increased the school shootings. In fact
school
shootings are down, and have been for years. Even the year of the
Columbine
shootings school was still the safest place for children. And I say
that with
my teeth gritted as I am a dedicated homeschooling champion.

Except for the wonder of incongruence, California, it is consistently
the
states WITH school house paddling that has the most child perps of
shootings.
I'm damned if can explain California, but then who can? smile

You don't have your facts Mike. You come up with speculations you
haven't
researched adequately to use them as support for the position you have
staked
out. Keep trying.

Mike Morris
)


It's been fun Mike.

And no, I'm not a troll. If you haven't figured that out by now, well,
tough
****.

Kane
  #13  
Old October 11th 03, 05:40 AM
Jayne Kulikauskas
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default U.N. rules Canada should ban spanking


"Kane" wrote in message
...

[]
You have developed a strawman ("no one likes trolls"). And you have
failed to establish that I am a troll and I am here just to start a
fight.

I give this evidence that I am not here for either:

I am passionate about and dedicated to exposing the pointlessness, the
wrong thinking, and perpetration of pain and humiliation on children
with the misleading and false name of "discipline."


I would find your protestations of passion and sincerity much more
convincing if you has posted to just one group. I'm not ruling out the
possibility that you are sincere. Perhaps you are simply new to Usenet and
do not realize that you have posted your comments to groups with
diametrically opposed views. Perhaps you do not realize the participants of
these groups are virtually guaranteed to engage in an acrimonious
interchange. If you truly wish a productive debate on the subject that is
of such interest to you, you will avoid cross-posting. (BTW, it would also
be conducive to a more fruitful conversation if you refrained from using
such highly emotional language.)

I have no objections at all to discussing this topic if the discussion is
posted to only one newsgroup. If you feel too outnumbered on mehsc, then
suggest another group where you will be more comfortable and I will come to
discuss it with you there. If you insist on cross-posting now that I have
explained its significance, I will consider that evidence that your goal is
strife rather than intelligent debate.

Jayne






  #14  
Old October 11th 03, 05:44 AM
Jon Houts
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default U.N. rules Canada should ban spanking


On 10 Oct 2003, Kane wrote:

"Michael S. Morris" wrote


Staking "out a position" differs from an "argument" how?


Much as "debate" differs from "fight," I suspect.

I am especially
embarassed when,


Heaven'stobetsyIshouldhopeso.

driving around this evening,


How many wrecks will it take for you to stop that day dreaming while
you
drive? Or should we spank you?


Is this the level of debate that can be expected by those who wish to
debate you?

Now, the "science" of
brain scans or no,


Why do I get the feeling you don't really want to know what the brain
scan studies show?

One of the most interesting to me was the one that showed that in
children who
had experienced abuse that section of the brain that is the locus for
indications of moral choices is black...dead...no neurons firing.
Thought
provoking and immediately jumped on by the word twisters with
"spanking isn't
abuse."


It's all fine and dandy for you to consider spanking to be abuse,
but,but...if the researchers didn't include the type/frequency of spanking
that most children receive to be abuse, then it's just downright dishonest
for you to say that what these researchers concluded has anything to do
with spanking.




  #15  
Old October 11th 03, 07:55 AM
Kane
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default U.N. rules Canada should ban spanking

On Fri, 10 Oct 2003 23:57:54 -0500, Jon Houts
wrote:


On 10 Oct 2003, Kane wrote:

"Ray Drouillard" wrote
"Kane" wrote
"Ray Drouillard" wrote:

I wonder if Kane has a standard rant
that is saved to his or her hard drive.

I wonder what made YOU think of that particular tactic though?

I never
have.


The fact is, there is one troll who uses that tactic, and another

who I
strongly suspect uses that tactic. Both currently occupy my

killfile.
I killfile very few people, but some sound like broken records

and tend
to splatter garbage all over the place. For the sake of

cleanliness, I
have chosen to ignore their posts.


Do I appear to be either? Do they continue the debate?


I don't abuse them.


Legally you may not. It is legal to spank a child in all 50 states

if
you are they legal caregiver, guardian, parent.


What about Minnesota?


Thank you again sir. You are correct. I have read the law. It is very
shakey. I am unaware of case law pertaining. Do you know of any? It
might help settle my questions about Minnesota law.


http://www.nospank.net/n-g02.htm



SUSAN H. BITENSKY points out that it's a well kept secret. Since she
is, I believe, a professor of law, I'd like very much to see her say
more (she simply said it against the law, no argument) before I buy
it.

But claiming only one state isn't exactly a winning argument. It's a
50th of an argument, if you get my meaning.

http://www.law.msu.edu/faculty/bitensky/i_h.pdf


If you actually read the pdf file you will see that it doesn't say
parents may not spank. In fact it outlines wherein they may do so.

One could extrapolate, very possibly if they stretched really hard,
that giving the outline of when and why there might be some NO and
NOT.

But that isn't the case in the cited section. As I said. I'm not
decided on this yet. I would like it to, for debate sake, but I would
HATE it to for parent and child's sake.

The only really kind and gentle parent will be one that lovingly
endorses, commits, and learns for him or herself how to parent gently.

A parent forced into not spanking, by law, will simply devise other
punishments, and cruel those will be. I've seen them. I've seen what
they can do.

Given the two as choices (and there are more that two of course),
spanking or psychological abuse, I'd go for spanking as the lessor of
two evils.

That's not an endorsement of cp. Cp runs a very close second to pa for
damanging human beings.

Uncharacteristically, I am not for laws against spanking. I am for
laws against assault, whether adult or child. If I hit, for instance,
your child with the exact same intent you would (calling it "spanking
to teach" of course to ease my conscience) I would be charged with
assault and arrested. You would not.

I do not want such laws. I want people of good conscience to continue
these debates with those that spank.

but,but...


Try Rislone (TM)

Jon


Kane
  #16  
Old October 11th 03, 07:59 AM
Kane
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default U.N. rules Canada should ban spanking

On Thu, 9 Oct 2003 23:09:38 -0500, Jon Houts
wrote:


On 9 Oct 2003, Kane wrote:

"Ray Drouillard" wrote:

It looks like one of those crusaders who google for certain key

words
and start stirring up the mud.


No, actually I've been a serial lurker to this ng for some time

now.

I wonder if Kane has a standard rant
that is saved to his or her hard drive.


I wonder what made YOU think of that particular tactic though? I

never
have.


If you *really* were a "serial lurker" in meh-sc, you'd know why he
thought that.


No, actually I wouldn't. Serial lurkers are, by virtue of being
"serial," not privy to everything that is posted. Didn't you know
that?

Still don't want to discuss spanking, I take it?

Makes me think you're lying about your ng habits.


I don't particular care what you think when I know you are wrong.
Unless it damages a child in some why.

Care to discuss spanking?


but,but...


Maybe some Castrol (tm)

Jon


Kane
  #17  
Old October 11th 03, 12:13 PM
Greg Hanson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default | U.N. rules Canada should ban spanking

It's pronounced nothing like the former.

As in "Raising Cane" but he has also gone by Kane9

Basically, Ray, you are a coward. You are afraid
to defend your brutal practice of spanking in a
larger arena so try to confine it to this small
one where you know there will be plenty of
supporters.


The MRI guy posted one short message asking you
to cite your references. You respond WITHOUT
citing your sources and throw this little 12 year
old temper tantrum response?

Cowardice over your ignorance, and cowardice
in child rearing practices.


Where did he say a darn thing about child rearing?
You think EVERYBODY is ignorant except you.

It looks more like he just didn't like your MISUSE
of so-called information from his field of research.

I wonder if he saw you get laughed out for trying
the old "I asked my [unnamed] psychiatrist friend
to read your messages and they diagnosed you as.."
thing? Another way you attempted to MISUSE or
coopt some supposed scientific authority.

Ray, Google the archive of this newsgroup for
"Telemetric" and notice that one was tried and
laughed out two different times.

If Kane ever provides and specific citations, watch
to see if it equates spanking to "beating".

Spankers are doomed, Ray. If we don't stop it in
this generation we will in the next. If you don't
volunteer to learn better eventually the cure that
even I don't want will come into play. The law will
stop you.


It's interesting to see you acknowledge that
you do NOT have the constituency you'd like
for your totalitarian wish to IMPOSE anti-spanking.

So tell us, Ray, why do little children defy their parents?


Trick question without giving an age?
Different issues at different stages.

Actually I also saw something on educational TV
about how repeated extreme traumas can rewire the
brain, inhibit growth of certain centers, etc. but
if spanking is traumatic enough to cause this, you
must remember that many children seem to turn lots
of small things into big traumas. Do you think
badly behaved kids who demand that checkout aisle
candy bar and then throw a COW of a temper tantrum..
Is that also traumatic enough to cause "damage" if
it goes that far? Some kids learn no discipline
and are nasty little manipulators. Parents who
allow or reward this may be doing the kid a disservice.

And spare me the textbook parent skills "take them out
of the store" answer with a half hour invested in a
full grocery cart. Forget leaving the bratty kid
sitting in the car stewing to themself. (illegal)

Some other kids act like big time drama queens,
exaggerated pathos. I've seen kids throw giant
temper tantrums over the stupidest crap,
obviously the manipulation WORKED before.

I was oldest of four, and we had empathy and sympathy
for each other all the time, BUT when we recognized a
sibling was pouring on the pathos, we'd all pour on
fake dramatic sympathy to ridicule the one who
started it. They'd often crack a smile, realize how
dumb it was and we'd all end up laughing our butts off
together.

If we got spanked, on the sly we would be sarcastic
about spankings through blue jeans.
"What're ya trying to do, tickle me?" we'd wisper among us.
The token was understood, however.

If the trauma of spanking causes brain problems, then
what about other traumas like needle vaccinations,
falling down, playground fights, or CPS child removal?
Healthy Kids normally have many "owies" worse than spanking.

Please go back to calling all spanking "beating"
because most of the general public will recognize
immediately what kooks you anti-spanking zealots are.
  #18  
Old October 11th 03, 12:27 PM
Greg Hanson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default | U.N. rules Canada should ban spanking

Why would the UN single out Canada as needing a ban on spanking?
As physical discipline goes, half the world is ten times worse!
Caning and strapping are still used in MANY places.

No wonder they can't act to prevent real death,
rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.

Just like Child Protection agencies.
  #19  
Old October 11th 03, 12:49 PM
Greg Hanson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default U.N. rules Canada should ban spanking

Crossposting complaints
1. Most FAQ's imply that TELLING people not to flame is as bad
as flaming itself. Doesn't that apply to the crossposting ""issue""
as well?

2. All of the newsgroups I see listed SEEM to all be legit places for
this thread about the UN ruling Canada should bad spanking. Germain
to all newsgroups I'm seeing listed.

3. If crossposting is a no-no, then WHY do newsgroups even HAVE
facilities for crossposting? Conversely, When would it ever BE
appropriate to cross post to several newsgroups where the subject
would seem to be germain?

4. Are there technical problems with this thread that cause
fragmentation?
A message from the MRI guy is missing from the incarnation I'm reading
now.

5. How can we decide where to shift this entire thread without
fragmentation?
I hereby nominate alt.parenting.spanking if LaVonne will allow.
  #20  
Old October 11th 03, 01:51 PM
tj
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default U.N. rules Canada should ban spanking


"Julie Pascal" wrote in message
...



Which newsgroup? Crossposting is *always* rude.


I'm sorry, Julie, but that is not correct. Crossposting is and has always
been part of the design of Usenet. It was designed that way to allow
discussions (and even arguments) to happen between groups. Using that
design, in and of itself, rude. It is using the Usenet as it was designed
to be used. You may not like it. You may not like the groups to which he
posted. That does not make his behavior rude either. If the thread is
offensive to you (for any reason).... well, that's what filters are for. If
you're using MS Outlook Express, you can simply click on Ignore Thread.

If he had picked a gazillion unrelated ngs and the thread had little to do
with any of the ngs' themes, then you would have a point. This is not the
case here. The fact that the groups included may (or may not) have
diametrically opposed viewpoints is also irrelevant. If people here only
want a select viewpoint to be included in the conversations, then they are
using the wrong medium. They should be making use of invitation-only email
lists.



 




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
Debate on spanking Doan General 0 June 12th 04 08:30 PM
A great article on spanking Doan General 0 February 28th 04 12:27 PM
| | Kids should work... Kane General 13 December 10th 03 03:30 AM
Kids should work. LaVonne Carlson General 22 December 7th 03 05:27 AM
And again he strikes........ Doan strikes ...... again! was Kids should work... Kane General 2 December 6th 03 04:28 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:12 PM.


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.