We don need no steenkin' CPS.

Greegor wrote:
Instead of the word "maltreatment" can we
switch to the word "bureaucratic rescue fantasy"?

YOU may do ANYTHING you want, Greg, and be judged by it.

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 (or someone else)

Greegor wrote:
How stupid can Kane be?

When did you stop beating your wife?

He is willing to lie or deny complicity with
anything as long as he thinks it suits
his purposes.

Please list those instances you think this occurred.

To Kane his IMAGINED ends justify any evil means.

What imagined end? The one the medical researchers into morbidity and
mortality and the law enforcement people estimate?

It really seems like he is merely a stockholder
in the CPS INDUSTRY attempting to manipulate the
price of his own stock.

I make not a penny from any source related to child protection or
welfare. In fact it costs me nearly every time I involve myself in
efforts to try and improve the situation.

At present, just as on other issues in the past, I have expenses,
considerable ones because I often have to fly, to attend meetings,
seminars, and conferences. If offered a stipend I turn it down because
the problems demand that we direct all funding sources to solutions, not
to volunteers like myself for my per diem.

You are in a dream, child.

Wake up.

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 (or someone else)

Damn! Doug caught Kane lying again!

Doan


On Sun, 21 May 2006, Doug wrote:

I wrote:

The subject of this thread was your claim, citing USDHHS figures that
actually proved the opposite, that 1,000 children died yearly because of
physical abuse that began with spanking.

To which, Kane replies:

I cited the nearest information available. I did not claim that any one of
these were the result of escalating from spanking, Doug.

Hi, Kane,

You cited USDHHS and claimed 1,000 children died as the result of abuse that
had escalated from spanking.

You were caught at it.

On May 10, 2006, in a post to this thread, you pasted USDHHS data...

Nearly 1,500 a year kill their children. Pretty much year in and year
out. Think how that mounts up in totals.

http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/p...four.htm#child

"Number of Child Fatalities

During 2004, an estimated 1,490 children died (compared to 1,460
children for 2003) from abuse or neglect ..."

And made this claim:

"About a thousand children a year that die at the hands of their parents
do so because of 'discipline' that escalated to murder. In other words,
two thirds of the total each year were 'disciplined to death.'"

Your claim above in this post?

"I cited the nearest information available. I did not claim that any one
of these were the result of escalating from spanking, Doug."

You claimed "about a thousand children a year that die at the hands of their
parents do so because of discipline that escalated to murder." Not one, but
1,000.

No. It simply proved that the data we LOOKED at did not sort it that fine.

You pasted the USDHHS data showing a total of 1,490 fatalities due to
neglect and abuse in 2004 and claimed that 2/3 of that total (1,000) were
"disciplined to death." Actually, the data showed 421 of those child
fatalities were the result of all forms of physical abuse. So, your claim
is clearly false.

Your misstatement stands unsubstantiated. False. Not true. Bogus.

It wasn't MY misstatement. I was a quote of someone else's statement and
we do not KNOW if it a misstatement yet or not.

It WAS your misstatement. Again, from your post of May 10 in this thread:

"About a thousand children a year that die at the hands of their parents
do so because of 'discipline' that escalated to murder. In other words,
two thirds of the total each year were 'disciplined to death.'"

That was not a quotation from a source. It was your statement.

YOU are the one who pasted NCANDS data in your post claiming that 1,000
children died annually as the result of abuse that started with spanking.
The NCANDS data actually disproved your claim.

Nope. I made NO SUCH claim. They are two separate issues. The 1,000 COULD
reside within the number from NCANDS. They're not sorting them out
precisely as to cause is a problem, but not MY problem.

You did make such a claim. It has been quoted twice in this post for you.
You wrote that about a thousand children a year that die at the hands of
their parents do so because of discipline that escalated to murder.

Your claim remains unsubstantiated.

No, just unproven. That does not prove it is NOT true. Only not proven as
yet.

YOUR claim was disproven by the very USDHHS data you pasted into the same
post.

On Sun, 21 May 2006, 0:- wrote:

Doug wrote:
I wrote:

The subject of this thread was your claim, citing USDHHS figures that
actually proved the opposite, that 1,000 children died yearly because of
physical abuse that began with spanking.

To which, Kane replies:

I cited the nearest information available. I did not claim that any one of
these were the result of escalating from spanking, Doug.

Hi, Kane,

You cited USDHHS and claimed 1,000 children died as the result of abuse that
had escalated from spanking.

You were caught at it.

On May 10, 2006, in a post to this thread, you pasted USDHHS data...

Nearly 1,500 a year kill their children. Pretty much year in and year
out. Think how that mounts up in totals.

http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/p...four.htm#child

"Number of Child Fatalities

During 2004, an estimated 1,490 children died (compared to 1,460
children for 2003) from abuse or neglect ..."

And made this claim:

"About a thousand children a year that die at the hands of their parents
do so because of 'discipline' that escalated to murder. In other words,
two thirds of the total each year were 'disciplined to death.'"

Your claim above in this post?

"I cited the nearest information available. I did not claim that any one
of these were the result of escalating from spanking, Doug."

You claimed "about a thousand children a year that die at the hands of their
parents do so because of discipline that escalated to murder." Not one, but
1,000.

No. It simply proved that the data we LOOKED at did not sort it that fine.

You pasted the USDHHS data showing a total of 1,490 fatalities due to
neglect and abuse in 2004 and claimed that 2/3 of that total (1,000) were
"disciplined to death." Actually, the data showed 421 of those child
fatalities were the result of all forms of physical abuse. So, your claim
is clearly false.

Your misstatement stands unsubstantiated. False. Not true. Bogus.
It wasn't MY misstatement. I was a quote of someone else's statement and
we do not KNOW if it a misstatement yet or not.

It WAS your misstatement. Again, from your post of May 10 in this thread:

"About a thousand children a year that die at the hands of their parents
do so because of 'discipline' that escalated to murder. In other words,
two thirds of the total each year were 'disciplined to death.'"

That was not a quotation from a source. It was your statement.

YOU are the one who pasted NCANDS data in your post claiming that 1,000
children died annually as the result of abuse that started with spanking.
The NCANDS data actually disproved your claim.
Nope. I made NO SUCH claim. They are two separate issues. The 1,000 COULD
reside within the number from NCANDS. They're not sorting them out
precisely as to cause is a problem, but not MY problem.

You did make such a claim. It has been quoted twice in this post for you.
You wrote that about a thousand children a year that die at the hands of
their parents do so because of discipline that escalated to murder.

Your claim remains unsubstantiated.
No, just unproven. That does not prove it is NOT true. Only not proven as
yet.

YOUR claim was disproven by the very USDHHS data you pasted into the same
post.

So far. And you STILL are avoiding other posts I've made that estimate
that as many as fifteen times more children are abused than are
officially listed.

That wasn't the point! The point was you claiming 1000 children died
as a result of spanking that "escalated"!

Doan

Why is that Doug?

You seem quite happy in your arguments on various issues to insist that
"surveys" and "reports" based on partial information be used for policy
decisions (Like the Pew Reports).

Why are you avoiding my other posting on this subject and insisting that
ONLY this one statement of mine be considered?

Is it because you are a liar?

I'd say so.

I could, but refuse to use YOUR lying tactics, find numerous things yo
have said over time, take them from context and make the same kinds of
claims you are hung up on right now.

You know and any honest reader knows that I have posted MORE information
than you are claiming.

Hence, you are a liar. Your deception consists of holding the opponent
to only PART of what he has claimed.

Liar.

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

Gee! Why no response from Kane?

AF

Doan wrote:
On Sun, 21 May 2006, 0:- wrote:

Doug wrote:
I wrote:

The subject of this thread was your claim, citing USDHHS figures that
actually proved the opposite, that 1,000 children died yearly because of
physical abuse that began with spanking.
To which, Kane replies:

I cited the nearest information available. I did not claim that any one of
these were the result of escalating from spanking, Doug.
Hi, Kane,

You cited USDHHS and claimed 1,000 children died as the result of abuse that
had escalated from spanking.

You were caught at it.

On May 10, 2006, in a post to this thread, you pasted USDHHS data...

Nearly 1,500 a year kill their children. Pretty much year in and year
out. Think how that mounts up in totals.

http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/p...four.htm#child

"Number of Child Fatalities

During 2004, an estimated 1,490 children died (compared to 1,460
children for 2003) from abuse or neglect ..."

And made this claim:

"About a thousand children a year that die at the hands of their parents
do so because of 'discipline' that escalated to murder. In other words,
two thirds of the total each year were 'disciplined to death.'"

Your claim above in this post?

"I cited the nearest information available. I did not claim that any one
of these were the result of escalating from spanking, Doug."

You claimed "about a thousand children a year that die at the hands of their
parents do so because of discipline that escalated to murder." Not one, but
1,000.

No. It simply proved that the data we LOOKED at did not sort it that fine.
You pasted the USDHHS data showing a total of 1,490 fatalities due to
neglect and abuse in 2004 and claimed that 2/3 of that total (1,000) were
"disciplined to death." Actually, the data showed 421 of those child
fatalities were the result of all forms of physical abuse. So, your claim
is clearly false.

Your misstatement stands unsubstantiated. False. Not true. Bogus.
It wasn't MY misstatement. I was a quote of someone else's statement and
we do not KNOW if it a misstatement yet or not.
It WAS your misstatement. Again, from your post of May 10 in this thread:

"About a thousand children a year that die at the hands of their parents
do so because of 'discipline' that escalated to murder. In other words,
two thirds of the total each year were 'disciplined to death.'"

That was not a quotation from a source. It was your statement.

YOU are the one who pasted NCANDS data in your post claiming that 1,000
children died annually as the result of abuse that started with spanking.
The NCANDS data actually disproved your claim.
Nope. I made NO SUCH claim. They are two separate issues. The 1,000 COULD
reside within the number from NCANDS. They're not sorting them out
precisely as to cause is a problem, but not MY problem.
You did make such a claim. It has been quoted twice in this post for you.
You wrote that about a thousand children a year that die at the hands of
their parents do so because of discipline that escalated to murder.

Your claim remains unsubstantiated.
No, just unproven. That does not prove it is NOT true. Only not proven as
yet.
YOUR claim was disproven by the very USDHHS data you pasted into the same
post.
So far. And you STILL are avoiding other posts I've made that estimate
that as many as fifteen times more children are abused than are
officially listed.

That wasn't the point! The point was you claiming 1000 children died
as a result of spanking that "escalated"!

No, the entire issue of parents killing their children was THE POINT and
always will be.

Would you care to provide us with an exact number on how many thought
they were disciplining their children?

2? 10? 500? What's YOUR number, Doan?

What would be logical, or don't you read the comments made by those that
have killed their children and the excuses they provide?

Doan

The best dodge of all is to insist that some PART of the issue is the
whole of the issue.

It isn't.

Live with your immorality, Doan. Your parents taught it to you with
swats on your butt.

0:-




Why is that Doug?

You seem quite happy in your arguments on various issues to insist that
"surveys" and "reports" based on partial information be used for policy
decisions (Like the Pew Reports).

Why are you avoiding my other posting on this subject and insisting that
ONLY this one statement of mine be considered?

Is it because you are a liar?

I'd say so.

I could, but refuse to use YOUR lying tactics, find numerous things yo
have said over time, take them from context and make the same kinds of
claims you are hung up on right now.

You know and any honest reader knows that I have posted MORE information
than you are claiming.

Hence, you are a liar. Your deception consists of holding the opponent
to only PART of what he has claimed.

Liar.

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




--
"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 (or someone else)

wrote:
Gee! Why no response from Kane?

To what? Have you counted my posts in this thread?

AF

Alinafromdreamland.

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 (or someone else)

On Mon, 22 May 2006, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Sun, 21 May 2006, 0:- wrote:

Doug wrote:
I wrote:

The subject of this thread was your claim, citing USDHHS figures that
actually proved the opposite, that 1,000 children died yearly because of
physical abuse that began with spanking.
To which, Kane replies:

I cited the nearest information available. I did not claim that any one of
these were the result of escalating from spanking, Doug.
Hi, Kane,

You cited USDHHS and claimed 1,000 children died as the result of abuse that
had escalated from spanking.

You were caught at it.

On May 10, 2006, in a post to this thread, you pasted USDHHS data...

Nearly 1,500 a year kill their children. Pretty much year in and year
out. Think how that mounts up in totals.

http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/p...four.htm#child

"Number of Child Fatalities

During 2004, an estimated 1,490 children died (compared to 1,460
children for 2003) from abuse or neglect ..."

And made this claim:

"About a thousand children a year that die at the hands of their parents
do so because of 'discipline' that escalated to murder. In other words,
two thirds of the total each year were 'disciplined to death.'"

Your claim above in this post?

"I cited the nearest information available. I did not claim that any one
of these were the result of escalating from spanking, Doug."

You claimed "about a thousand children a year that die at the hands of their
parents do so because of discipline that escalated to murder." Not one, but
1,000.

No. It simply proved that the data we LOOKED at did not sort it that fine.
You pasted the USDHHS data showing a total of 1,490 fatalities due to
neglect and abuse in 2004 and claimed that 2/3 of that total (1,000) were
"disciplined to death." Actually, the data showed 421 of those child
fatalities were the result of all forms of physical abuse. So, your claim
is clearly false.

Your misstatement stands unsubstantiated. False. Not true. Bogus.
It wasn't MY misstatement. I was a quote of someone else's statement and
we do not KNOW if it a misstatement yet or not.
It WAS your misstatement. Again, from your post of May 10 in this thread:

"About a thousand children a year that die at the hands of their parents
do so because of 'discipline' that escalated to murder. In other words,
two thirds of the total each year were 'disciplined to death.'"

That was not a quotation from a source. It was your statement.

YOU are the one who pasted NCANDS data in your post claiming that 1,000
children died annually as the result of abuse that started with spanking.
The NCANDS data actually disproved your claim.
Nope. I made NO SUCH claim. They are two separate issues. The 1,000 COULD
reside within the number from NCANDS. They're not sorting them out
precisely as to cause is a problem, but not MY problem.
You did make such a claim. It has been quoted twice in this post for you.
You wrote that about a thousand children a year that die at the hands of
their parents do so because of discipline that escalated to murder.

Your claim remains unsubstantiated.
No, just unproven. That does not prove it is NOT true. Only not proven as
yet.
YOUR claim was disproven by the very USDHHS data you pasted into the same
post.
So far. And you STILL are avoiding other posts I've made that estimate
that as many as fifteen times more children are abused than are
officially listed.

That wasn't the point! The point was you claiming 1000 children died
as a result of spanking that "escalated"!

No, the entire issue of parents killing their children was THE POINT and
always will be.

Which is already illegal, STUPID!

Would you care to provide us with an exact number on how many thought
they were disciplining their children?

2? 10? 500? What's YOUR number, Doan?

I don't know. I am not the one claiming 1000!

What would be logical, or don't you read the comments made by those that
have killed their children and the excuses they provide?

And you believe them?


Doan

The best dodge of all is to insist that some PART of the issue is the
whole of the issue.

The lies is claiming 1000 where no such number exists! ;-)

It isn't.

Live with your immorality, Doan. Your parents taught it to you with
swats on your butt.

Hihihi! Resorting to adhom again. And your mom taught you that?

Doan

0:-




Why is that Doug?

You seem quite happy in your arguments on various issues to insist that
"surveys" and "reports" based on partial information be used for policy
decisions (Like the Pew Reports).

Why are you avoiding my other posting on this subject and insisting that
ONLY this one statement of mine be considered?

Is it because you are a liar?

I'd say so.

I could, but refuse to use YOUR lying tactics, find numerous things yo
have said over time, take them from context and make the same kinds of
claims you are hung up on right now.

You know and any honest reader knows that I have posted MORE information
than you are claiming.

Hence, you are a liar. Your deception consists of holding the opponent
to only PART of what he has claimed.

Liar.

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




--
"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 (or someone else)

Doan wrote:
On Mon, 22 May 2006, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Sun, 21 May 2006, 0:- wrote:

Doug wrote:
I wrote:

The subject of this thread was your claim, citing USDHHS figures that
actually proved the opposite, that 1,000 children died yearly because of
physical abuse that began with spanking.
To which, Kane replies:

I cited the nearest information available. I did not claim that any one of
these were the result of escalating from spanking, Doug.
Hi, Kane,

You cited USDHHS and claimed 1,000 children died as the result of abuse that
had escalated from spanking.

You were caught at it.

On May 10, 2006, in a post to this thread, you pasted USDHHS data...

Nearly 1,500 a year kill their children. Pretty much year in and year
out. Think how that mounts up in totals.

http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/p...four.htm#child

"Number of Child Fatalities

During 2004, an estimated 1,490 children died (compared to 1,460
children for 2003) from abuse or neglect ..."

And made this claim:

"About a thousand children a year that die at the hands of their parents
do so because of 'discipline' that escalated to murder. In other words,
two thirds of the total each year were 'disciplined to death.'"

Your claim above in this post?

"I cited the nearest information available. I did not claim that any one
of these were the result of escalating from spanking, Doug."

You claimed "about a thousand children a year that die at the hands of their
parents do so because of discipline that escalated to murder." Not one, but
1,000.

No. It simply proved that the data we LOOKED at did not sort it that fine.
You pasted the USDHHS data showing a total of 1,490 fatalities due to
neglect and abuse in 2004 and claimed that 2/3 of that total (1,000) were
"disciplined to death." Actually, the data showed 421 of those child
fatalities were the result of all forms of physical abuse. So, your claim
is clearly false.

Your misstatement stands unsubstantiated. False. Not true. Bogus.
It wasn't MY misstatement. I was a quote of someone else's statement and
we do not KNOW if it a misstatement yet or not.
It WAS your misstatement. Again, from your post of May 10 in this thread:

"About a thousand children a year that die at the hands of their parents
do so because of 'discipline' that escalated to murder. In other words,
two thirds of the total each year were 'disciplined to death.'"

That was not a quotation from a source. It was your statement.

YOU are the one who pasted NCANDS data in your post claiming that 1,000
children died annually as the result of abuse that started with spanking.
The NCANDS data actually disproved your claim.
Nope. I made NO SUCH claim. They are two separate issues. The 1,000 COULD
reside within the number from NCANDS. They're not sorting them out
precisely as to cause is a problem, but not MY problem.
You did make such a claim. It has been quoted twice in this post for you.
You wrote that about a thousand children a year that die at the hands of
their parents do so because of discipline that escalated to murder.

Your claim remains unsubstantiated.
No, just unproven. That does not prove it is NOT true. Only not proven as
yet.
YOUR claim was disproven by the very USDHHS data you pasted into the same
post.
So far. And you STILL are avoiding other posts I've made that estimate
that as many as fifteen times more children are abused than are
officially listed.

That wasn't the point! The point was you claiming 1000 children died
as a result of spanking that "escalated"!
No, the entire issue of parents killing their children was THE POINT and
always will be.

Which is already illegal, STUPID!

If you think either I didn't know that, or was arguing against that
fact, then Doan, YOU are the one with the intellectual problems.

Would you care to provide us with an exact number on how many thought
they were disciplining their children?

2? 10? 500? What's YOUR number, Doan?

I don't know. I am not the one claiming 1000!

No, you don't want to even think about it because you KNOW the number
has to be very high, given human nature, and the various resources I've
provided that discuss this problem from various perspectives.

What would be logical, or don't you read the comments made by those that
have killed their children and the excuses they provide?

And you believe them?

No, of course not. What I believe is that THEY BELIEVE themselves. Hell,
you've seen it argued in this ng.

Doan
The best dodge of all is to insist that some PART of the issue is the
whole of the issue.

The lies is claiming 1000 where no such number exists! ;-)

There was no lie. There was an estimate. My language is clear. And there
is such a number within the annual reports by authorities, and by
estimates from other sources.

I've listed them. Go and read.

It isn't.

Live with your immorality, Doan. Your parents taught it to you with
swats on your butt.

Hihihi! Resorting to adhom again. And your mom taught you that?

Nope. YOU give me license by your use of ad hom, lying, cheating, and
making up people to attempt to get from me a document you lied about
having.

NOW, scream "PROVE IT I DOUBLE DARE YOU."

Anyone that followed the exchange, that wasn't a liar or delusional, as
you are, could see through you easily.

Doan

Adios, muchacho.

0:-




0:-



Why is that Doug?

You seem quite happy in your arguments on various issues to insist that
"surveys" and "reports" based on partial information be used for policy
decisions (Like the Pew Reports).

Why are you avoiding my other posting on this subject and insisting that
ONLY this one statement of mine be considered?

Is it because you are a liar?

I'd say so.

I could, but refuse to use YOUR lying tactics, find numerous things yo
have said over time, take them from context and make the same kinds of
claims you are hung up on right now.

You know and any honest reader knows that I have posted MORE information
than you are claiming.

Hence, you are a liar. Your deception consists of holding the opponent
to only PART of what he has claimed.

Liar.

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


--
"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 (or someone else)




--
"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 (or someone else)

On Mon, 22 May 2006, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Mon, 22 May 2006, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Sun, 21 May 2006, 0:- wrote:

Doug wrote:
I wrote:

The subject of this thread was your claim, citing USDHHS figures that
actually proved the opposite, that 1,000 children died yearly because of
physical abuse that began with spanking.
To which, Kane replies:

I cited the nearest information available. I did not claim that any one of
these were the result of escalating from spanking, Doug.
Hi, Kane,

You cited USDHHS and claimed 1,000 children died as the result of abuse that
had escalated from spanking.

You were caught at it.

On May 10, 2006, in a post to this thread, you pasted USDHHS data...

Nearly 1,500 a year kill their children. Pretty much year in and year
out. Think how that mounts up in totals.

http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/p...four.htm#child

"Number of Child Fatalities

During 2004, an estimated 1,490 children died (compared to 1,460
children for 2003) from abuse or neglect ..."

And made this claim:

"About a thousand children a year that die at the hands of their parents
do so because of 'discipline' that escalated to murder. In other words,
two thirds of the total each year were 'disciplined to death.'"

Your claim above in this post?

"I cited the nearest information available. I did not claim that any one
of these were the result of escalating from spanking, Doug."

You claimed "about a thousand children a year that die at the hands of their
parents do so because of discipline that escalated to murder." Not one, but
1,000.

No. It simply proved that the data we LOOKED at did not sort it that fine.
You pasted the USDHHS data showing a total of 1,490 fatalities due to
neglect and abuse in 2004 and claimed that 2/3 of that total (1,000) were
"disciplined to death." Actually, the data showed 421 of those child
fatalities were the result of all forms of physical abuse. So, your claim
is clearly false.

Your misstatement stands unsubstantiated. False. Not true. Bogus.
It wasn't MY misstatement. I was a quote of someone else's statement and
we do not KNOW if it a misstatement yet or not.
It WAS your misstatement. Again, from your post of May 10 in this thread:

"About a thousand children a year that die at the hands of their parents
do so because of 'discipline' that escalated to murder. In other words,
two thirds of the total each year were 'disciplined to death.'"

That was not a quotation from a source. It was your statement.

YOU are the one who pasted NCANDS data in your post claiming that 1,000
children died annually as the result of abuse that started with spanking.
The NCANDS data actually disproved your claim.
Nope. I made NO SUCH claim. They are two separate issues. The 1,000 COULD
reside within the number from NCANDS. They're not sorting them out
precisely as to cause is a problem, but not MY problem.
You did make such a claim. It has been quoted twice in this post for you.
You wrote that about a thousand children a year that die at the hands of
their parents do so because of discipline that escalated to murder.

Your claim remains unsubstantiated.
No, just unproven. That does not prove it is NOT true. Only not proven as
yet.
YOUR claim was disproven by the very USDHHS data you pasted into the same
post.
So far. And you STILL are avoiding other posts I've made that estimate
that as many as fifteen times more children are abused than are
officially listed.

That wasn't the point! The point was you claiming 1000 children died
as a result of spanking that "escalated"!
No, the entire issue of parents killing their children was THE POINT and
always will be.

Which is already illegal, STUPID!

If you think either I didn't know that, or was arguing against that
fact, then Doan, YOU are the one with the intellectual problems.

And yet you wanted to outlaw spanking, as if it gonna stop
child-abuse. "Intellectual problems" is in your genes! ;-)

Would you care to provide us with an exact number on how many thought
they were disciplining their children?

2? 10? 500? What's YOUR number, Doan?

I don't know. I am not the one claiming 1000!

No, you don't want to even think about it because you KNOW the number
has to be very high, given human nature, and the various resources I've
provided that discuss this problem from various perspectives.

Hihihi! You meant the sources that turned out to be false?

What would be logical, or don't you read the comments made by those that
have killed their children and the excuses they provide?

And you believe them?

No, of course not. What I believe is that THEY BELIEVE themselves. Hell,
you've seen it argued in this ng.

Hihihi! So they are not lying?

Doan
The best dodge of all is to insist that some PART of the issue is the
whole of the issue.

The lies is claiming 1000 where no such number exists! ;-)

There was no lie. There was an estimate. My language is clear. And there
is such a number within the annual reports by authorities, and by
estimates from other sources.

Hihihi! First, it was "every year", then "average", now "estimate"! Oh!
What a tangled web we weaved!

I've listed them. Go and read.

Hihihi! And if they are false or non-existent, it is not your fault,
right?

It isn't.

Live with your immorality, Doan. Your parents taught it to you with
swats on your butt.

Hihihi! Resorting to adhom again. And your mom taught you that?

Nope. YOU give me license by your use of ad hom, lying, cheating, and
making up people to attempt to get from me a document you lied about
having.

Hihihi! And I PROVED that you lied! Doug knows your M.O.

NOW, scream "PROVE IT I DOUBLE DARE YOU."

Hihihi! Can you?

Anyone that followed the exchange, that wasn't a liar or delusional, as
you are, could see through you easily.

You might want to ask toto! Even she saw through your lies!


Doan

Adios, muchacho.

Adieu, le petit chien minus nuef!

Doan

0:-




0:-



Why is that Doug?

You seem quite happy in your arguments on various issues to insist that
"surveys" and "reports" based on partial information be used for policy
decisions (Like the Pew Reports).

Why are you avoiding my other posting on this subject and insisting that
ONLY this one statement of mine be considered?

Is it because you are a liar?

I'd say so.

I could, but refuse to use YOUR lying tactics, find numerous things yo
have said over time, take them from context and make the same kinds of
claims you are hung up on right now.

You know and any honest reader knows that I have posted MORE information
than you are claiming.

Hence, you are a liar. Your deception consists of holding the opponent
to only PART of what he has claimed.

Liar.

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


--
"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 (or someone else)




--
"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 (or someone else)