The Study on International Spanking - China, the Philippines, Italy,India, and Kenya

On Mon, 17 Apr 2006, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
It's obvious that you haven't read the study. You are just demonstrating
your STUPIDITY, as usual. ;-)

Apparently you didn't read my challenges to your assumptions that have
nothing to do with "reading the study" but simply reading the reported
information LaVonne offered and is available from many sources.

So you haven't read the study? ;-)

You quoted some, I quoted some. You made assumptions, I challenged your
assumption and you Doan'd Out, as per your long illustrious posting
history of lies and evasions.

I quoted from the study, STUPID! You wanna debate me, then read the
study. I won't fall for your LIES! Remembered the Embry study? ;-)

You are stupid to think I and others do not know this as a matter of
course.

We can read. We can think. We can assess.

And you can be STUPID, which you have demonstrated so publicly! Even
Chris Dunga saw your STUPIDITY and publicly said so! ;-)

You are a consummate skilled but stupid liar weasel all too easily
uncovered, just as in this case.

Hihihi! Th LIARS who have been exposed here is YOU!

Care to clean up your act and answer my challenges and questions from my
reply to you, or are you going to continue with your unethical and
dishonest responses to dodge issues?

Showing your stupidity again? ;-)

Or could it be that you have once again provided a concession by dodge,
as is also a common method of yours, that you deny by coming back and
trying to take up the same stupid argument then once again dodging when
challenged?

Hihihi! You are describing yourself again!

I'd like to see you answer The Fern question on church beatings.

Hihihi! What you called her again?

Going to?

Disneyland? ;-)

Probably not. You are a coward, a fraud, and dishonest. And you hate
children and parents. Your posts drip of it.

You are describing yourself to a tee! ;-)

AF

Kane



AFfromDreamLand

On Mon, 17 Apr 2006, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
You might want to read the source FIRST! In particular, what they defined
as physical discipline. Do you wonder why LaVonne is so afraid
You are a presumptuous twit. How do YOU know what others are afraid of
or not?

When did you stop kicking your dog?

to go
into the details of this study? Could it be that she is SMARTER than
you? ;-)
I just posted the estimates of US deaths and injury from people that
escalated spanking to abuse.

Why would CULTURALLY ACCEPTED PRACTICE not be normal corporal
punishment in those instances?

You yourself have claimed that the legal definition should be The Line,
and what do we have in the US as legally "normal?"

A city councilman that is acquitted after beating his son with a belt
hard enough to leave marks from the buckle.

You can't pull a Baumrind, Doan. It's way too obvious.

If it's normal in a culture by custom or law, pal, it's 'spanking' by
definition. Unless of course you wish to extend beating practices there
to beating practices and claim they aren't CP. Wanna try that, stupid?

Odd that you'd find these severe foreign practices something to make
presumptions about but you yourself would not ever, past or present,
speak out when Fern defended the church whippings.

Any thoughts, or just more stupidity from you?

0:-



AFfromDreamLand

On Mon, 17 Apr 2006, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
Gee! I see that you conveniently left out:

"One implication of our findings is the need for caution in making
recommendations about parenting practices across different cultural
groups," said lead researcher Jennifer Lansford, Ph.D., a research
scientist at the Center for Child and Family Policy at Duke University. "A
particular parenting practice may become a problem only if parents use it
in a cultural context that does not support the practice (for example, if
they migrate from one country to another)."
I left out everything else as well.

People leave lots of things out if the article is long enough. I
included a citation just so people can look for themselves.

Now let's consider something from above. What do YOU think this
means?:"A particular parenting practice may become a problem"

In the context of moving to another culture, I take that as meaning
problems with the authorities, neighbors, and even family members who
have resided in the new culture longer and assimilated and acculturated.

I'd say it's a fair warning they could get in trouble.

It has, apparently, nothing to do with whether the parenting method of
CP will work better or worse.

And in that vein...let's not forget that REGARDLESS OF CULTURE AND
ACCEPTANCE WE STILL HAVE THIS RESULT...

"In all countries, however, higher use of physical discipline was
associated with more child aggression and anxiety. ... "

Now tell us, what is the significance of the statement you just posted
as per this bit that I did NOT leave out?

If it negates it, please explain how.

If the two are not inclusive, admit it and concede.

0:-





AFfromDreamLand

On Sun, 16 Apr 2006, 0:- wrote:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...1114110820.htm

" ... The researchers found differences in how often mothers used
physical discipline and the mothers' perceptions of how often other
parents used physical discipline. Specifically:

* Mothers in Thailand were least likely to physically discipline
their children, followed by mothers in China, the Philippines, Italy,
India, and Kenya, with mothers in Kenya most likely to physically
discipline their children.
* More frequent use of physical discipline was less strongly
associated with child aggression and anxiety when it was perceived as
being more culturally accepted, but physical discipline was also
associated with more aggression and anxiety regardless of the perception
of cultural acceptance.
* In countries in which physical discipline was more common and
culturally accepted, children who were physically disciplined were less
aggressive and less anxious than children who were physically
disciplined in countries where physical discipline was rarely used.
* In all countries, however, higher use of physical discipline was
associated with more child aggression and anxiety. ... "



--
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin

--
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin


--
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin




--
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin

On Tue, 18 Apr 2006, 0:- wrote:

Greegor wrote:
Is Kane arguing using the ABSTRACT of a study again?

Sure. If you wish to argue based on the full study, please feel free.

What point in the full study would you like to discuss?

Which point in the "abstract" (which you are misusing as a term) is it
that you are avoiding discussing by labeling the media pieces instead of
discussing content?

Feel free to state your position on the questions I ask and Doan avoided
so very carefully.

0:-

The abstract doesn't include all the HOLES in the study that the
researchers themselves acknowledged in study. If you want to debate,
READ THE STUDY! Stop making a fool of yourself! ;-)

Doan

Doan wrote:
On Mon, 17 Apr 2006, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
You might want to read the source FIRST! In particular, what they defined
as physical discipline. Do you wonder why LaVonne is so afraid
You are a presumptuous twit. How do YOU know what others are afraid of
or not?

By their action, STUPID! LaVonne was the one who challenged me to debate
and then ran!

No stupid. She posted the article. You are supposed to, if invited make
a comment about it to HER. YOU are stupid, and vicious and a lowlife
lying scumbag.

What's she supposed to do, pick some with in the article and start off?
What MORE could she do but post and invite you.

WERE IT YOUR POST TO HER OPENING A DEBATE ON A POINT OR ISSUE IN WHAT
SHE POSTED?

YOU WANT HER TO BEG?


When did you stop kicking your dog?

Hihihi! When did I thought as a dog?

Every time you post.

to go
into the details of this study? Could it be that she is SMARTER than
you? ;-)
I just posted the estimates of US deaths and injury from people that
escalated spanking to abuse.

Why would CULTURALLY ACCEPTED PRACTICE not be normal corporal
punishment in those instances?

Because the researcher themself said so, STUPID!

So, dummy. What does that mean?

This is your idea of "DEBATE?"

In other words you weaseling dodging like scum sucking ****ant, if it's
a culturally accepted practice BUT STILL HAS OUTCOMES THAT ARE NEGATIVE
THERE GOES YEARS OF YOUR AND YOUR CRONIES BULL **** THAT WITHIN A
CULTURE IF IT'S ACCEPTED THEN THERE IS NOT ANY NEGATIVE OUTCOME.

You yourself have claimed that the legal definition should be The Line,
and what do we have in the US as legally "normal?"

The study did talk about the legal definition, STUPID!

Asshole, that IS the point, you stupid ****ant. Your arguments FOR
spanking being harmless are challenged by this study. Why do you not
respond to THAT INSTEAD OF THIS DODGING ****?

A city councilman that is acquitted after beating his son with a belt
hard enough to leave marks from the buckle.

You can't pull a Baumrind, Doan. It's way too obvious.

But you can be stupid! ;-)

Stupid lying asshole.

If it's normal in a culture by custom or law, pal, it's 'spanking' by
definition. Unless of course you wish to extend beating practices there
to beating practices and claim they aren't CP. Wanna try that, stupid?

You obviously have read the study, STUPID!

No STUPID DANCING MONKEY BOY. Have YOU?

Do you wish to continue to claim that spanking is harmless?

Odd that you'd find these severe foreign practices something to make
presumptions about but you yourself would not ever, past or present,
speak out when Fern defended the church whippings.

Any thoughts, or just more stupidity from you?

Read the STUDY, stupid! ;-0

Not until YOU have it you little monkeyboy.

I trust the article to be accurate. It says that across cultures even
where spanking is an accepted practice there were negative outcomes.

Deal with it STUPID MONKEY BOY.

AF

0:-



0:-



AFfromDreamLand

On Mon, 17 Apr 2006, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
Gee! I see that you conveniently left out:

"One implication of our findings is the need for caution in making
recommendations about parenting practices across different cultural
groups," said lead researcher Jennifer Lansford, Ph.D., a research
scientist at the Center for Child and Family Policy at Duke University. "A
particular parenting practice may become a problem only if parents use it
in a cultural context that does not support the practice (for example, if
they migrate from one country to another)."
I left out everything else as well.

People leave lots of things out if the article is long enough. I
included a citation just so people can look for themselves.

Now let's consider something from above. What do YOU think this
means?:"A particular parenting practice may become a problem"

In the context of moving to another culture, I take that as meaning
problems with the authorities, neighbors, and even family members who
have resided in the new culture longer and assimilated and acculturated.

I'd say it's a fair warning they could get in trouble.

It has, apparently, nothing to do with whether the parenting method of
CP will work better or worse.

And in that vein...let's not forget that REGARDLESS OF CULTURE AND
ACCEPTANCE WE STILL HAVE THIS RESULT...

"In all countries, however, higher use of physical discipline was
associated with more child aggression and anxiety. ... "

Now tell us, what is the significance of the statement you just posted
as per this bit that I did NOT leave out?

If it negates it, please explain how.

If the two are not inclusive, admit it and concede.

0:-





AFfromDreamLand

On Sun, 16 Apr 2006, 0:- wrote:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...1114110820.htm

" ... The researchers found differences in how often mothers used
physical discipline and the mothers' perceptions of how often other
parents used physical discipline. Specifically:

* Mothers in Thailand were least likely to physically discipline
their children, followed by mothers in China, the Philippines, Italy,
India, and Kenya, with mothers in Kenya most likely to physically
discipline their children.
* More frequent use of physical discipline was less strongly
associated with child aggression and anxiety when it was perceived as
being more culturally accepted, but physical discipline was also
associated with more aggression and anxiety regardless of the perception
of cultural acceptance.
* In countries in which physical discipline was more common and
culturally accepted, children who were physically disciplined were less
aggressive and less anxious than children who were physically
disciplined in countries where physical discipline was rarely used.
* In all countries, however, higher use of physical discipline was
associated with more child aggression and anxiety. ... "



--
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin

--
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin


--
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin




--
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin

Doan wrote:
On Mon, 17 Apr 2006, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
It's obvious that you haven't read the study. You are just demonstrating
your STUPIDITY, as usual. ;-)
Apparently you didn't read my challenges to your assumptions that have
nothing to do with "reading the study" but simply reading the reported
information LaVonne offered and is available from many sources.

So you haven't read the study? ;-)

So you haven't read the study. 0:-

You quoted some, I quoted some. You made assumptions, I challenged your
assumption and you Doan'd Out, as per your long illustrious posting
history of lies and evasions.

I quoted from the study, STUPID! You wanna debate me, then read the
study. I won't fall for your LIES! Remembered the Embry study? ;-)

Yes, you lied for two years that you had the study.

So tell me, what lies are there in the information I quoted, Doan?

You are lying again, just as you always do.

You are stupid to think I and others do not know this as a matter of
course.

We can read. We can think. We can assess.

And you can be STUPID, which you have demonstrated so publicly! Even
Chris Dunga saw your STUPIDITY and publicly said so! ;-)

That's all yah got, eh?

Can't debate the issue so it's back to ad hom. Brilliant, Doan.

You are a consummate skilled but stupid liar weasel all too easily
uncovered, just as in this case.

Hihihi! Th LIARS who have been exposed here is YOU!

What have I lied about concerning this study?

All I've done is quote it, and you, as usual are dodging.

Care to clean up your act and answer my challenges and questions from my
reply to you, or are you going to continue with your unethical and
dishonest responses to dodge issues?

Showing your stupidity again? ;-)

You are certainly showing your lack of ethics and dishonesty.

You WON'T DEBATE. When challenged you run, just as you are doing now.

Or could it be that you have once again provided a concession by dodge,
as is also a common method of yours, that you deny by coming back and
trying to take up the same stupid argument then once again dodging when
challenged?

Hihihi! You are describing yourself again!

Answer the challenges to your defense of spanking Doan. Stop insulting
your good family name. You are shaming them.

I'd like to see you answer The Fern question on church beatings.

Hihihi! What you called her again?

Then we can presume you approve of Fern's position on hanging children
up naked and letting one's church congregation beat them with objects.

You are a sick little monkeyboy.

Going to?

Disneyland? ;-)

Probably not. You are a coward, a fraud, and dishonest. And you hate
children and parents. Your posts drip of it.

You are describing yourself to a tee! ;-)

Nope. I stood up to Fern, you ATTACKED ME FOR ATTACKING UNETHICAL
IMMORAL DANGEROUS stand on beating children.

AF

And the above proves how sick you are. All you do is harass and dodge,
never debating, always running.

You KNOW spanking is a disproven lost cause and this is ALL you have left.

0:-

Kane


AFfromDreamLand

On Mon, 17 Apr 2006, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
You might want to read the source FIRST! In particular, what they defined
as physical discipline. Do you wonder why LaVonne is so afraid
You are a presumptuous twit. How do YOU know what others are afraid of
or not?

When did you stop kicking your dog?

to go
into the details of this study? Could it be that she is SMARTER than
you? ;-)
I just posted the estimates of US deaths and injury from people that
escalated spanking to abuse.

Why would CULTURALLY ACCEPTED PRACTICE not be normal corporal
punishment in those instances?

You yourself have claimed that the legal definition should be The Line,
and what do we have in the US as legally "normal?"

A city councilman that is acquitted after beating his son with a belt
hard enough to leave marks from the buckle.

You can't pull a Baumrind, Doan. It's way too obvious.

If it's normal in a culture by custom or law, pal, it's 'spanking' by
definition. Unless of course you wish to extend beating practices there
to beating practices and claim they aren't CP. Wanna try that, stupid?

Odd that you'd find these severe foreign practices something to make
presumptions about but you yourself would not ever, past or present,
speak out when Fern defended the church whippings.

Any thoughts, or just more stupidity from you?

0:-



AFfromDreamLand

On Mon, 17 Apr 2006, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
Gee! I see that you conveniently left out:

"One implication of our findings is the need for caution in making
recommendations about parenting practices across different cultural
groups," said lead researcher Jennifer Lansford, Ph.D., a research
scientist at the Center for Child and Family Policy at Duke University. "A
particular parenting practice may become a problem only if parents use it
in a cultural context that does not support the practice (for example, if
they migrate from one country to another)."
I left out everything else as well.

People leave lots of things out if the article is long enough. I
included a citation just so people can look for themselves.

Now let's consider something from above. What do YOU think this
means?:"A particular parenting practice may become a problem"

In the context of moving to another culture, I take that as meaning
problems with the authorities, neighbors, and even family members who
have resided in the new culture longer and assimilated and acculturated.

I'd say it's a fair warning they could get in trouble.

It has, apparently, nothing to do with whether the parenting method of
CP will work better or worse.

And in that vein...let's not forget that REGARDLESS OF CULTURE AND
ACCEPTANCE WE STILL HAVE THIS RESULT...

"In all countries, however, higher use of physical discipline was
associated with more child aggression and anxiety. ... "

Now tell us, what is the significance of the statement you just posted
as per this bit that I did NOT leave out?

If it negates it, please explain how.

If the two are not inclusive, admit it and concede.

0:-





AFfromDreamLand

On Sun, 16 Apr 2006, 0:- wrote:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...1114110820.htm

" ... The researchers found differences in how often mothers used
physical discipline and the mothers' perceptions of how often other
parents used physical discipline. Specifically:

* Mothers in Thailand were least likely to physically discipline
their children, followed by mothers in China, the Philippines, Italy,
India, and Kenya, with mothers in Kenya most likely to physically
discipline their children.
* More frequent use of physical discipline was less strongly
associated with child aggression and anxiety when it was perceived as
being more culturally accepted, but physical discipline was also
associated with more aggression and anxiety regardless of the perception
of cultural acceptance.
* In countries in which physical discipline was more common and
culturally accepted, children who were physically disciplined were less
aggressive and less anxious than children who were physically
disciplined in countries where physical discipline was rarely used.
* In all countries, however, higher use of physical discipline was
associated with more child aggression and anxiety. ... "



--
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin

--
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin

--
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin


--
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin




--
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin

Doan wrote:
On Tue, 18 Apr 2006, 0:- wrote:

Greegor wrote:
Is Kane arguing using the ABSTRACT of a study again?
Sure. If you wish to argue based on the full study, please feel free.

What point in the full study would you like to discuss?

Which point in the "abstract" (which you are misusing as a term) is it
that you are avoiding discussing by labeling the media pieces instead of
discussing content?

Feel free to state your position on the questions I ask and Doan avoided
so very carefully.

0:-

The abstract doesn't include all the HOLES in the study that the
researchers themselves acknowledged in study. If you want to debate,
READ THE STUDY! Stop making a fool of yourself! ;-)

What holes in the study?

Show them and I might be inspired to read it.

You don't have the study, you are bluffing again.

Remember the Embry study liar?

Doan

Who is a Mexican Nun. R R R R R

0:-




--
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin

Kane again plays the drama queen by calling
spanking BEATING and engages in demagoguery
by yapping about BEATINGS OF CHILDREN.

You DO resemble some sicko teenager with
over-the-top adolescent rebellion going on!

You're obsessed,
you never get over it,
you exaggerate it,
you definately have some anti-parent psych issues dude!

Have you got a severe case of arrested development?

Greegor wrote:
Kane again plays the drama queen by calling
spanking BEATING and engages in demagoguery
by yapping about BEATINGS OF CHILDREN.

Do you deny that Fern supported the beating of children by church members?

You DO resemble some sicko teenager with
over-the-top adolescent rebellion going on!

You are fantasizing.

You're obsessed,

You have a longer posting history than I do in this ng, do you not, Greg?

you never get over it,

I seem to have held your attention for a very long time. 0:-

you exaggerate it,

Not to a child and their experiencing the pain. You have difficulty
identifying with the child. Why is that?

you definately have some anti-parent psych issues dude!

You are now lying. Anyone that has read my posts knows better.

Have you got a severe case of arrested development?

Yes. My chronological age is sometimes not my mental and psychological age.

It has to do with the capacity for empathy.

How is it YOU cannot identify the feelings of a child being beaten,
while the parent routinely excuses and minimizes what he or she is
actually doing, and calling it "love?"

I'd say that can turn a child into...well...into a Greggor.

But then only some of you succumb. Other's rise above it, remarkably.

You certainly put a lot of effort into avoiding any real debate or
discussion about spanking issues.

The subject bother you?

0:-


--
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin

On Tue, 18 Apr 2006, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Mon, 17 Apr 2006, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
You might want to read the source FIRST! In particular, what they defined
as physical discipline. Do you wonder why LaVonne is so afraid
You are a presumptuous twit. How do YOU know what others are afraid of
or not?

By their action, STUPID! LaVonne was the one who challenged me to debate
and then ran!

No stupid. She posted the article. You are supposed to, if invited make
a comment about it to HER. YOU are stupid, and vicious and a lowlife
lying scumbag.

Oops, resorting to adhoms again! What a hypocrite! ;-)

What's she supposed to do, pick some with in the article and start off?
What MORE could she do but post and invite you.

WERE IT YOUR POST TO HER OPENING A DEBATE ON A POINT OR ISSUE IN WHAT
SHE POSTED?

YOU WANT HER TO BEG?

Coming to the defense of your master? ;-)


When did you stop kicking your dog?

Hihihi! When did I thought as a dog?

Every time you post.

Nope! I have better respect for your mom! ;-)

to go
into the details of this study? Could it be that she is SMARTER than
you? ;-)
I just posted the estimates of US deaths and injury from people that
escalated spanking to abuse.

Why would CULTURALLY ACCEPTED PRACTICE not be normal corporal
punishment in those instances?

Because the researcher themself said so, STUPID!

So, dummy. What does that mean?

Read the study, STUPID! ;-)

This is your idea of "DEBATE?"

In other words you weaseling dodging like scum sucking ****ant, if it's
a culturally accepted practice BUT STILL HAS OUTCOMES THAT ARE NEGATIVE
THERE GOES YEARS OF YOUR AND YOUR CRONIES BULL **** THAT WITHIN A
CULTURE IF IT'S ACCEPTED THEN THERE IS NOT ANY NEGATIVE OUTCOME.

Oops! More adhoms! ;-) And SHOUTING won't help you, STUPID! ;-)

You yourself have claimed that the legal definition should be The Line,
and what do we have in the US as legally "normal?"

The study did talk about the legal definition, STUPID!

Asshole, that IS the point, you stupid ****ant. Your arguments FOR
spanking being harmless are challenged by this study. Why do you not
respond to THAT INSTEAD OF THIS DODGING ****?

hahaha! Sticked your nose in my ass again. You liked it? ;-)

A city councilman that is acquitted after beating his son with a belt
hard enough to leave marks from the buckle.

You can't pull a Baumrind, Doan. It's way too obvious.

But you can be stupid! ;-)

Stupid lying asshole.

Hihihi! That where your nose is! Liked it? ;-)

If it's normal in a culture by custom or law, pal, it's 'spanking' by
definition. Unless of course you wish to extend beating practices there
to beating practices and claim they aren't CP. Wanna try that, stupid?

You obviously have read the study, STUPID!

No STUPID DANCING MONKEY BOY. Have YOU?

Yup. I read it from beginning to end, STUPID! ;-)

Do you wish to continue to claim that spanking is harmless?

Hihihi! Sure. Read the Baumrind study! It's the best one out there! ;-)

Odd that you'd find these severe foreign practices something to make
presumptions about but you yourself would not ever, past or present,
speak out when Fern defended the church whippings.

Any thoughts, or just more stupidity from you?

Read the STUDY, stupid! ;-0

Not until YOU have it you little monkeyboy.

Hihihi!

I trust the article to be accurate. It says that across cultures even
where spanking is an accepted practice there were negative outcomes.

Deal with it STUPID MONKEY BOY.

Hihihi! I've the study and there are more HOLES in it than swiss chesse!
;-) Keep on showing your STUPIDITY, kane0. It's very funny! ;-)

AF

Doan wrote:
On Tue, 18 Apr 2006, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Mon, 17 Apr 2006, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
You might want to read the source FIRST! In particular, what they defined
as physical discipline. Do you wonder why LaVonne is so afraid
You are a presumptuous twit. How do YOU know what others are afraid of
or not?

By their action, STUPID! LaVonne was the one who challenged me to debate
and then ran!
No stupid. She posted the article. You are supposed to, if invited make
a comment about it to HER. YOU are stupid, and vicious and a lowlife
lying scumbag.

Oops, resorting to adhoms again! What a hypocrite! ;-)

What's she supposed to do, pick some with in the article and start off?
What MORE could she do but post and invite you.

WERE IT YOUR POST TO HER OPENING A DEBATE ON A POINT OR ISSUE IN WHAT
SHE POSTED?

YOU WANT HER TO BEG?

Coming to the defense of your master? ;-)

When did you stop kicking your dog?

Hihihi! When did I thought as a dog?
Every time you post.

Nope! I have better respect for your mom! ;-)

to go
into the details of this study? Could it be that she is SMARTER than
you? ;-)
I just posted the estimates of US deaths and injury from people that
escalated spanking to abuse.

Why would CULTURALLY ACCEPTED PRACTICE not be normal corporal
punishment in those instances?

Because the researcher themself said so, STUPID!
So, dummy. What does that mean?

Read the study, STUPID! ;-)

This is your idea of "DEBATE?"

In other words you weaseling dodging like scum sucking ****ant, if it's
a culturally accepted practice BUT STILL HAS OUTCOMES THAT ARE NEGATIVE
THERE GOES YEARS OF YOUR AND YOUR CRONIES BULL **** THAT WITHIN A
CULTURE IF IT'S ACCEPTED THEN THERE IS NOT ANY NEGATIVE OUTCOME.

Oops! More adhoms! ;-) And SHOUTING won't help you, STUPID! ;-)

You yourself have claimed that the legal definition should be The Line,
and what do we have in the US as legally "normal?"

The study did talk about the legal definition, STUPID!
Asshole, that IS the point, you stupid ****ant. Your arguments FOR
spanking being harmless are challenged by this study. Why do you not
respond to THAT INSTEAD OF THIS DODGING ****?

hahaha! Sticked your nose in my ass again. You liked it? ;-)

A city councilman that is acquitted after beating his son with a belt
hard enough to leave marks from the buckle.

You can't pull a Baumrind, Doan. It's way too obvious.

But you can be stupid! ;-)
Stupid lying asshole.

Hihihi! That where your nose is! Liked it? ;-)

If it's normal in a culture by custom or law, pal, it's 'spanking' by
definition. Unless of course you wish to extend beating practices there
to beating practices and claim they aren't CP. Wanna try that, stupid?

You obviously have read the study, STUPID!
No STUPID DANCING MONKEY BOY. Have YOU?

Yup. I read it from beginning to end, STUPID! ;-)

Do you wish to continue to claim that spanking is harmless?

Hihihi! Sure. Read the Baumrind study! It's the best one out there! ;-)

Odd that you'd find these severe foreign practices something to make
presumptions about but you yourself would not ever, past or present,
speak out when Fern defended the church whippings.

Any thoughts, or just more stupidity from you?

Read the STUDY, stupid! ;-0
Not until YOU have it you little monkeyboy.

Hihihi!

I trust the article to be accurate. It says that across cultures even
where spanking is an accepted practice there were negative outcomes.

Deal with it STUPID MONKEY BOY.

Hihihi! I've the study and there are more HOLES in it than swiss chesse!
;-) Keep on showing your STUPIDITY, kane0. It's very funny! ;-)

I notice you are careful not to provide proof by quoting the study.

AF

0:-

--
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin

On Wed, 19 Apr 2006, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Tue, 18 Apr 2006, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Mon, 17 Apr 2006, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
You might want to read the source FIRST! In particular, what they defined
as physical discipline. Do you wonder why LaVonne is so afraid
You are a presumptuous twit. How do YOU know what others are afraid of
or not?

By their action, STUPID! LaVonne was the one who challenged me to debate
and then ran!
No stupid. She posted the article. You are supposed to, if invited make
a comment about it to HER. YOU are stupid, and vicious and a lowlife
lying scumbag.

Oops, resorting to adhoms again! What a hypocrite! ;-)

What's she supposed to do, pick some with in the article and start off?
What MORE could she do but post and invite you.

WERE IT YOUR POST TO HER OPENING A DEBATE ON A POINT OR ISSUE IN WHAT
SHE POSTED?

YOU WANT HER TO BEG?

Coming to the defense of your master? ;-)

When did you stop kicking your dog?

Hihihi! When did I thought as a dog?
Every time you post.

Nope! I have better respect for your mom! ;-)

to go
into the details of this study? Could it be that she is SMARTER than
you? ;-)
I just posted the estimates of US deaths and injury from people that
escalated spanking to abuse.

Why would CULTURALLY ACCEPTED PRACTICE not be normal corporal
punishment in those instances?

Because the researcher themself said so, STUPID!
So, dummy. What does that mean?

Read the study, STUPID! ;-)

This is your idea of "DEBATE?"

In other words you weaseling dodging like scum sucking ****ant, if it's
a culturally accepted practice BUT STILL HAS OUTCOMES THAT ARE NEGATIVE
THERE GOES YEARS OF YOUR AND YOUR CRONIES BULL **** THAT WITHIN A
CULTURE IF IT'S ACCEPTED THEN THERE IS NOT ANY NEGATIVE OUTCOME.

Oops! More adhoms! ;-) And SHOUTING won't help you, STUPID! ;-)

You yourself have claimed that the legal definition should be The Line,
and what do we have in the US as legally "normal?"

The study did talk about the legal definition, STUPID!
Asshole, that IS the point, you stupid ****ant. Your arguments FOR
spanking being harmless are challenged by this study. Why do you not
respond to THAT INSTEAD OF THIS DODGING ****?

hahaha! Sticked your nose in my ass again. You liked it? ;-)

A city councilman that is acquitted after beating his son with a belt
hard enough to leave marks from the buckle.

You can't pull a Baumrind, Doan. It's way too obvious.

But you can be stupid! ;-)
Stupid lying asshole.

Hihihi! That where your nose is! Liked it? ;-)

If it's normal in a culture by custom or law, pal, it's 'spanking' by
definition. Unless of course you wish to extend beating practices there
to beating practices and claim they aren't CP. Wanna try that, stupid?

You obviously have read the study, STUPID!
No STUPID DANCING MONKEY BOY. Have YOU?

Yup. I read it from beginning to end, STUPID! ;-)

Do you wish to continue to claim that spanking is harmless?

Hihihi! Sure. Read the Baumrind study! It's the best one out there! ;-)

Odd that you'd find these severe foreign practices something to make
presumptions about but you yourself would not ever, past or present,
speak out when Fern defended the church whippings.

Any thoughts, or just more stupidity from you?

Read the STUDY, stupid! ;-0
Not until YOU have it you little monkeyboy.

Hihihi!

I trust the article to be accurate. It says that across cultures even
where spanking is an accepted practice there were negative outcomes.

Deal with it STUPID MONKEY BOY.

Hihihi! I've the study and there are more HOLES in it than swiss chesse!
;-) Keep on showing your STUPIDITY, kane0. It's very funny! ;-)

I notice you are careful not to provide proof by quoting the study.

I noticed that you just did another dodge! ;-)

AF