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. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
What has hapenned to this group?
Opinions wrote: Deep inside, older no-spanks are usually very wrath-filled people. What an odd speculation. Often they were mistreated as children and never got over it. I venture that no one every really get's over it. Anytime Absolutes...hmmm...what could that mean, I wonder? they are confronted with a parent who does not agree with their extremist point of view, It's extremist to not want children hit? What would non-extremist be? To want them hit? painful memories emerge from their childhood. Pure, refined, Maple Projection. No Additives or Extenders. The angry child within lashes out at the new proxy parent in their life. Funny, you and monkeyboy seem to be the best examples here. Yet we have no desire to be your parent, proxy or otherwise. And you've misused the term "proxy,' in this context. Much like antisocial children, no-spanks take great delight in antagonizing parents who do not cater to their whim. I'm sure it's just horrible for you to have your assualtive behaviors pointed out to you. I'll try to be more gentle next time. Really, I will. Really. Whether in person or in a newsgroup, trying to communicate to a no-spank is much like trying to talk to a grizzly that feels cornered. Hmmm....feeling that threatened are you? Now what would that indicate? Oh, I know. That you have good reason to feel that way. You and those like you will, in the not too distant future (and already if they are teachers in some states), face fines, and possible imprisonment for assualting children. The rubric of "spanking" is not going to continue fooling anyone, and even your delusional denying selves will have to face it when look up at the judge on the bench. Spanking will be seen as what it is not...that you claim it is, "discipline." The word has been a place to hide. But no longer. The act you now know as "spanking" will receive it's proper name: "ASSAULT." Or you can quit spanking now. Watching you in your despiration reminds us this isn't an easy task, and that we need to keep pressing forward. There are no state laws against spanking, although 27 states have policies against the practice and this year Pennsylvania has become the 28th. These apply to schools. One state already has a statute that is more on the side of the child being protected than the parent's "right" to hit them. I wonder what would happen to an American parent that was traveling in one of the countries that ban spanking as criminal and were caught by authorities spanking their child? To a child, a parent that hits, is simply a big terrorist. Eventually they'll get you back, just like YOU are using US as your surrogate parent. Poor boy. You go ahead and pour your heart out. We understand. 0:- Jeremy James wrote: Fellow parents: What has happenned to this newsgroup? It used to consist primarily of parenets like myself, parents that know that when spanking is used as a loving discliplinary tool, it is very effective. Parents that wanted to be able to discuss this with other parents that felt the same way. Recently however it seems to consist more of people that simply want to argue with each other. I.E. people like Kane and LaVonne. These two people have somehow managed to convince themselves that they are enlightened in some way, or that they are intellectually superior to the other members here, or some other thing. They are neither of course. When I first joined this group I tried to debate with them, however they do not debate, they dictate. Debating means that you are willing to listen to ther other person's opinion, however they are totally obtuse. They are so convinced that their own opinion is right that your opinion must be wrong. If you disagree with them you must be a horrible person and you are abusive toward your children. When they run out of logical arguments, they resort to insults. In their world if you spank your children it means that you are an ingorant redneck, and probably a pedophile with latent homesexual tendencies as well. Kane has even implied that I spank my children because I get sexually aroused when I do so. I have an 8year old and a 5 year old daughter and a 2 year old son. I use spanking for all three of them because it works. And this drives them crazy because I refuse to convert over to their narrow point of view. From their viewpoint, if I am spanking my children I must have some alterior motive, they cannot accept the fact that there are times when spanking is the best way to handle the situation. And that I spank my children because I love them and because IT WORKS! I have stopped reading anything by either of them and I refuse to reply to anything they say. I am sure they will have something to say about this post but I will not read or respond to it. Not because I am admitting that they must be right or because I can't think of anything to say, I simply refuse to discuss anything with either of them because they refuse to listen. I encourage others to follow suit. Jeremy J |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
What has hapenned to this group?
That's a good analogy. The 'no spank radicals' on this group remind me of
the old saying "My mind is made up so don't confuse me with the facts". They are so determined to be right that anyone that dares to have a different opinion infuriates them. Yes, I choose spanking as a form of disclipline for my children as a lot of parents do. That is my decision to make, not the government's and certainly not anyone else's either. If another parent chooses NOT to use spanking as a form of disclipline, that is their decision to make. I would never question another parent's decision not to use it, and no one has any place questioning my decisions. If the parents of my children's friends have choosen to allow me to spank their child while that child is at my house, then again that is those individuals' decision to make and no one elses. So once again...I am NOTopposed to another parent's decision to not use spanking, what I have an issue with is people trying to tell me how to raise my children. Yes, this is a news group and you have a right to state your opinion. Debating an issue means to view it from all angles, not attacking the other person. "Opinions" wrote in message ups.com... Deep inside, older no-spanks are usually very wrath-filled people. Often they were mistreated as children and never got over it. Anytime they are confronted with a parent who does not agree with their extremist point of view, painful memories emerge from their childhood. The angry child within lashes out at the new proxy parent in their life. Much like antisocial children, no-spanks take great delight in antagonizing parents who do not cater to their whim. Whether in person or in a newsgroup, trying to communicate to a no-spank is much like trying to talk to a grizzly that feels cornered. Jeremy James wrote: Fellow parents: What has happenned to this newsgroup? It used to consist primarily of parenets like myself, parents that know that when spanking is used as a loving discliplinary tool, it is very effective. Parents that wanted to be able to discuss this with other parents that felt the same way. Recently however it seems to consist more of people that simply want to argue with each other. I.E. people like Kane and LaVonne. These two people have somehow managed to convince themselves that they are enlightened in some way, or that they are intellectually superior to the other members here, or some other thing. They are neither of course. When I first joined this group I tried to debate with them, however they do not debate, they dictate. Debating means that you are willing to listen to ther other person's opinion, however they are totally obtuse. They are so convinced that their own opinion is right that your opinion must be wrong. If you disagree with them you must be a horrible person and you are abusive toward your children. When they run out of logical arguments, they resort to insults. In their world if you spank your children it means that you are an ingorant redneck, and probably a pedophile with latent homesexual tendencies as well. Kane has even implied that I spank my children because I get sexually aroused when I do so. I have an 8year old and a 5 year old daughter and a 2 year old son. I use spanking for all three of them because it works. And this drives them crazy because I refuse to convert over to their narrow point of view. From their viewpoint, if I am spanking my children I must have some alterior motive, they cannot accept the fact that there are times when spanking is the best way to handle the situation. And that I spank my children because I love them and because IT WORKS! I have stopped reading anything by either of them and I refuse to reply to anything they say. I am sure they will have something to say about this post but I will not read or respond to it. Not because I am admitting that they must be right or because I can't think of anything to say, I simply refuse to discuss anything with either of them because they refuse to listen. I encourage others to follow suit. Jeremy J |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
What has hapenned to this group?
Yes of course you are welcome to join the discussion. It is unfortionate
that people confuse these two issues. There is no "fine line" between spanking and abuse, there is a broad valley. Spanking is a loving and effective form of disclipline. Abuse is cruel and a criminal act. Hitting a child with an impliment such as a cat-of-nine-tails is definetely abuse. If you are leaving bruises, welts or anything like that it is abusive. "kathleen" wrote in message oups.com... Can anyone join this discussion? We were brutalized as kids. My parents were among the most violent people in the neighborhood. Physical discipline took place on a daily basis. But they were *usually* light-weight assaults. A cat of nine tails. Plenty of pain. No broken bones. You could call this "the fine art of child abuse." They were also Church people. Few people knew about it. I felt vindicated when the gym teacher asked my brother (in the 1960s) if he wanted to press charges when he saw the welts. Jim knew such an action would bring even more welts. And the violence wasn't just about the violence, you know? The other family in our neighborhood who was high-ranking for violence used a baseball bat. I think it is regrettable that people think child abuse is helpful. I don't know how they think this is a good thing. I truly believe it is ignorance, lack of self-control, and in especially our case, I can tell you no one was ever "bad" enough to deserve a beating. I think there was a lot of transferred hatred going on there. Anger towards the spouse, running both ways, was taken out on the kids. For example, my sister was LOUD a lot. This was a definitely a crime in that house. I had the good fortune of being naturally quiet. In modern times being banished to the bedroom, or some assignment of toil, with exclusion of some desirable activity seems so much more logical. Nobody, none of my siblings, ever got over this abuse. And when my brother was killed when he 18, my father deeply regretted his tactics. Then *he* never got over it. I never saw the man cry before in my life or since. And the extreme abuse towards this boy was what the tears were about. Now he knows he, alone, should not have felt so guilty. 'Because of the beatings that when on when Dad wasn't there. That's when the assaults were no longer what you could call "light-weight." These are church people. 'Wouldn't think of missing a Holy Day of Obligation. Small time hypocrites, I imagine you could call them. Look at what Bush has done. There are a lot of variables to this equation, obviously, and your kid is your kid, but anyone who says violence is a good way to raise kids is very, very ignorant- I would declare that ignorance is primary. But it's when ignorance and pure hatred combine, in my opinion, that you can't expect a good outcome. It's hard to *find* or see this hatred, because usually the abusers do a better job of explaining why the kid deserved it, than the kid explaining why he didn't. And Mom and Dad pay the Psychiatrist's bills. If the Psychiatrist says "STOP ABUSING THE KID," the parents will simply take the child to someone else who agrees to see the kid as the problem. Once in a while the kid *is* the problem 1% of the time in females and 6% of the time in males. Therefore it's a better bet that the parents are not telling the whole story. It seems that only the people who did not survive a violent childhood think physical discipline is a good idea. Maybe it's a function of orders of magnitude. The current social era suffers an undeniable dearth of love and an undeniable excessive degree of violence in the media. We are a violent nation, no doubt about it. Note also that there isn't an entry in the DSM for "SURVIVED INSANELY VIOLENT PARENTS." The victim gets the assignment of the "mental illness" diagnosis. So we can thank the APA for serving their own ends and their clear lack of success in helping people, across the board. Remember Freud started out with the premise that his "hysterical" patients were victims of childhood sexual abuse. Later this became the notion that these women were "sexually repressed," because the fathers of these abused women were not fond of the notion of being discovered to be the cause of the "hysteria." Freud even performed nasal surgery on a woman because somehow he thought the nose was connected to the... libido? I kid you not. Anyway, "blame the victim," seems to be the perceptual framework of psychiatry and that is probably why we are still having this discussion today. It's the lack of love, and things don't appear to be taking a course for a correction. "BRING EM ON!!!" That's our fearless leader- George W. AWOL during the Swift Boat Years Bush. Anyone who thinks violent discipline of children is a good idea should experience it themselves. Tie the person down. Face down. Get a cat of nine tails... Then throw them in a cage for a while until the evidence of the welts is gone. Then, when the person complains, everyone together say the abusee is lying. Repeat... Kathleen wrote: Opinions wrote: Deep inside, older no-spanks are usually very wrath-filled people. What an odd speculation. Often they were mistreated as children and never got over it. I venture that no one every really get's over it. Anytime Absolutes...hmmm...what could that mean, I wonder? they are confronted with a parent who does not agree with their extremist point of view, It's extremist to not want children hit? What would non-extremist be? To want them hit? painful memories emerge from their childhood. Pure, refined, Maple Projection. No Additives or Extenders. The angry child within lashes out at the new proxy parent in their life. Funny, you and monkeyboy seem to be the best examples here. Yet we have no desire to be your parent, proxy or otherwise. And you've misused the term "proxy,' in this context. Much like antisocial children, no-spanks take great delight in antagonizing parents who do not cater to their whim. I'm sure it's just horrible for you to have your assualtive behaviors pointed out to you. I'll try to be more gentle next time. Really, I will. Really. Whether in person or in a newsgroup, trying to communicate to a no-spank is much like trying to talk to a grizzly that feels cornered. Hmmm....feeling that threatened are you? Now what would that indicate? Oh, I know. That you have good reason to feel that way. You and those like you will, in the not too distant future (and already if they are teachers in some states), face fines, and possible imprisonment for assualting children. The rubric of "spanking" is not going to continue fooling anyone, and even your delusional denying selves will have to face it when look up at the judge on the bench. Spanking will be seen as what it is not...that you claim it is, "discipline." The word has been a place to hide. But no longer. The act you now know as "spanking" will receive it's proper name: "ASSAULT." Or you can quit spanking now. Watching you in your despiration reminds us this isn't an easy task, and that we need to keep pressing forward. There are no state laws against spanking, although 27 states have policies against the practice and this year Pennsylvania has become the 28th. These apply to schools. One state already has a statute that is more on the side of the child being protected than the parent's "right" to hit them. I wonder what would happen to an American parent that was traveling in one of the countries that ban spanking as criminal and were caught by authorities spanking their child? To a child, a parent that hits, is simply a big terrorist. Eventually they'll get you back, just like YOU are using US as your surrogate parent. Poor boy. You go ahead and pour your heart out. We understand. 0:- Jeremy James wrote: Fellow parents: What has happenned to this newsgroup? It used to consist primarily of parenets like myself, parents that know that when spanking is used as a loving discliplinary tool, it is very effective. Parents that wanted to be able to discuss this with other parents that felt the same way. Recently however it seems to consist more of people that simply want to argue with each other. I.E. people like Kane and LaVonne. These two people have somehow managed to convince themselves that they are enlightened in some way, or that they are intellectually superior to the other members here, or some other thing. They are neither of course. When I first joined this group I tried to debate with them, however they do not debate, they dictate. Debating means that you are willing to listen to ther other person's opinion, however they are totally obtuse. They are so convinced that their own opinion is right that your opinion must be wrong. If you disagree with them you must be a horrible person and you are abusive toward your children. When they run out of logical arguments, they resort to insults. In their world if you spank your children it means that you are an ingorant redneck, and probably a pedophile with latent homesexual tendencies as well. Kane has even implied that I spank my children because I get sexually aroused when I do so. I have an 8year old and a 5 year old daughter and a 2 year old son. I use spanking for all three of them because it works. And this drives them crazy because I refuse to convert over to their narrow point of view. From their viewpoint, if I am spanking my children I must have some alterior motive, they cannot accept the fact that there are times when spanking is the best way to handle the situation. And that I spank my children because I love them and because IT WORKS! I have stopped reading anything by either of them and I refuse to reply to anything they say. I am sure they will have something to say about this post but I will not read or respond to it. Not because I am admitting that they must be right or because I can't think of anything to say, I simply refuse to discuss anything with either of them because they refuse to listen. I encourage others to follow suit. Jeremy J |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
What has hapenned to this group?
Jeremy James wrote: Yes of course you are welcome to join the discussion. It is unfortionate that people confuse these two issues. There is no "fine line" between spanking and abuse, there is a broad valley. It's the easiest thing in the world to define the difference by using two extremes. There is a fine line, Jeremy. And those that claim they know where it is are unable to describe it except in the morally questionable terms you just did. But more important, the line is variable. It moves. According to circumstances. The child, the parent, the relationship. Health. The events. The desired outcomes. The mental state of both parties. The culture. Each of these have some variation in theselves, for each involved individual. Of course parents who spank, such as yourself, can claim they don't abuse, but we know, but interviewing grownups that were "spanked" that this is simply rationalization. Spanking is a loving and effective form of disclipline. Then why do you not use it on your wife when she needs to learn something? How is it that teachers have successfully given it up in the discipline of learning and teaching? Abuse is cruel and a criminal act. Yes, it certainly is. Is it abusive to hit anyone not a child? Is it abusive to hit and animal? Is it criminal to hit anyone not a child, an animal? WE don't really need to debate you on this, Jeremy. For YOU have the answers yourself if you use logic, and facts. Hitting a child with an impliment such as a cat-of-nine-tails is definetely abuse. If you are leaving bruises, welts or anything like that it is abusive. I see every day arguments to the contrary, even legal ones, where judges have decided that leaving marks is perfectly okay. That is why we need laws, Jeremey; because even judges can't judge. You have such strong opinions for someone so rigorously ignorant. I think the capacity to delude one's self may one day be traced right back to childhood trauma, like having the person who holds your life in their hands, that you are so vulnerable to, that you love and who says loves you, hits you. The paradox doesn't escape the child the first time or two, but too retain one's life, the love of and for the parent, the child then must somehow detach from the reality of love equating with pain. You are deluded, Jeremey. And I'm sorry your parents "loved" you in this way, and that you are perpetuating this on your chidlren. Ask yourself this. If you saw a man hitting his wife and asked why and he said he was doing it out of love for her, would you not wonder if he was deluded? You have to live with this, Jeremey and to preserve your delusion that hitting=love, you should have never come here. Or is it that you are looking to actually love your children and want to be talked out of this delusion of yours? Stop hitting them Jeremey. However, since you never read anything that LaVonne or I post you'll never see this and our children will continue to have the strange delusion that hitting euals love delivered to them and then to their children. And along the way humans will suffer because you could not break the cycle as so many others have. Kane |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
What has hapenned to this group?
Dude,
I've seen your posts on other ng's and I agree w/you. But this is a foster parenting group wherein your trip is an ancillary concern. Also, fighting for no-spanking is like F!@%^#&^ for abstinence. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
What has hapenned to this group?
SRplus wrote: Dude, I've seen your posts on other ng's and I agree w/you. But this is a foster parenting group wherein your trip is an ancillary concern. Also, fighting for no-spanking is like F!@%^#&^ for abstinence. What is there about an "ancillary concern" to foster parenting that would make this subject unsuitable for the foster parenting group? May I presume that the last line refers to "fighting" for no-spank is using the tactics of the spanker? Yes, you noticed. Pacifism works with those who are moral, ethical, and have a limited self delusion. It should have become apparent to me long ago that spankers are not in that category. No fault of their own, for the most part. If you have something to contribute? I understand foster parents are restrained from spanking and the children they parent usually have been before. Folks with such experience might have a lot to offer on this subject. Or were you just trolling? 0:- |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
What has hapenned to this group?
Scratch a no-spank and there is a good chance of finding either a hurt
child or a childless idealist dazzled with a utopian dream. They often have a heavily alternative mindset. Many are aging antiestablishment flower children. Others have acquired some higher education and think themselves in the mold of some latter day Lord Byron with his condescending view of the common man. In many ways no-spanks are snake oil peddlers. Mankind is infected with the disease of spanking for they have the cure - for a price. The new bottle of elixir is a course, a book, a counselor, or a degree. Implied promises abound. Like mythical Lake Woebegone, all children will be above average. Wars will cease. Crime will disappear. Of course, ask for a written guarantee for these hollow promises and no-spanks will rapidly back peddle as they hurl invectives. Jeremy James wrote: That's a good analogy. The 'no spank radicals' on this group remind me of the old saying "My mind is made up so don't confuse me with the facts". They are so determined to be right that anyone that dares to have a different opinion infuriates them. Yes, I choose spanking as a form of disclipline for my children as a lot of parents do. That is my decision to make, not the government's and certainly not anyone else's either. If another parent chooses NOT to use spanking as a form of disclipline, that is their decision to make. I would never question another parent's decision not to use it, and no one has any place questioning my decisions. If the parents of my children's friends have choosen to allow me to spank their child while that child is at my house, then again that is those individuals' decision to make and no one elses. So once again...I am NOTopposed to another parent's decision to not use spanking, what I have an issue with is people trying to tell me how to raise my children. Yes, this is a news group and you have a right to state your opinion. Debating an issue means to view it from all angles, not attacking the other person. "Opinions" wrote in message ups.com... Deep inside, older no-spanks are usually very wrath-filled people. Often they were mistreated as children and never got over it. Anytime they are confronted with a parent who does not agree with their extremist point of view, painful memories emerge from their childhood. The angry child within lashes out at the new proxy parent in their life. Much like antisocial children, no-spanks take great delight in antagonizing parents who do not cater to their whim. Whether in person or in a newsgroup, trying to communicate to a no-spank is much like trying to talk to a grizzly that feels cornered. Jeremy James wrote: Fellow parents: What has happenned to this newsgroup? It used to consist primarily of parenets like myself, parents that know that when spanking is used as a loving discliplinary tool, it is very effective. Parents that wanted to be able to discuss this with other parents that felt the same way. Recently however it seems to consist more of people that simply want to argue with each other. I.E. people like Kane and LaVonne. These two people have somehow managed to convince themselves that they are enlightened in some way, or that they are intellectually superior to the other members here, or some other thing. They are neither of course. When I first joined this group I tried to debate with them, however they do not debate, they dictate. Debating means that you are willing to listen to ther other person's opinion, however they are totally obtuse. They are so convinced that their own opinion is right that your opinion must be wrong. If you disagree with them you must be a horrible person and you are abusive toward your children. When they run out of logical arguments, they resort to insults. In their world if you spank your children it means that you are an ingorant redneck, and probably a pedophile with latent homesexual tendencies as well. Kane has even implied that I spank my children because I get sexually aroused when I do so. I have an 8year old and a 5 year old daughter and a 2 year old son. I use spanking for all three of them because it works. And this drives them crazy because I refuse to convert over to their narrow point of view. From their viewpoint, if I am spanking my children I must have some alterior motive, they cannot accept the fact that there are times when spanking is the best way to handle the situation. And that I spank my children because I love them and because IT WORKS! I have stopped reading anything by either of them and I refuse to reply to anything they say. I am sure they will have something to say about this post but I will not read or respond to it. Not because I am admitting that they must be right or because I can't think of anything to say, I simply refuse to discuss anything with either of them because they refuse to listen. I encourage others to follow suit. Jeremy J |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Spanking is Excessive Force. You can gain compliance without using physical aggression...it's been proven to work time and time again by us "radicals" If Spanking is so loving why don't you go Smack your Wife on the bottom when she goes over the Grocery budget for the week. Since you obviously don't spank with an Implement because Implement = Abuse, the you strike your children with the same hands that tuck them in at night, the same hands that wipe away tears, blow noses, The hands that are mean to show love...and I'm sure your hands have never left bright red imprints on little kid skin. Because leaving a mark = Abuse.
__________________
Becca Momma to two boys Big Guy 3/02 and Wuvy-Buv 8/05 |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
What has hapenned to this group?
Well, let's have some fun to start.
You've accused me of claiming you are a former poster you claim you are not. That it's typical of antispank folks to make such accusations. Let's establish this clearly...you are lil 'o' and observer. Stop lying about it. Note the three posts that turned up when I searched the aps ng: To raise superior kids--move to Sweden "Clearly all concerned parents should move to Sweden to ensure that their child is 'above average.'" It might be easier to just move to Lake Woebegone Oct 21 2001, 11:36 am by observer - 6 messages - 3 authors Answered Question .... Of course, what I really love is the Lake Woebegone way of putting local school districts above the national average in high stakes standardized testing. ... Sep 28 2001, 2:50 am by observer - 168 messages - 18 authors What has hapenned to this group? .... Implied promises abound. Like mythical Lake Woebegone, all children will be above average. Wars will cease. Crime will disappear. ... Jan 3, 11:25 am by Opinions - 28 messages - 8 authors" Just a coincidence? R R R R R Now for the fun of it, let's look at your post, and Jeremey's to see all the logical fallacy and disinformation you both have posted. Opinions wrote: Scratch a no-spank and there is a good chance of finding either a hurt child or a childless idealist dazzled with a utopian dream. Yes, that certainly fits your new name, observer. Just an opinion. Or possibly you can collect a series of posts from us and point out where we are "dazzled" or have a "utopian dream?" Frankly everyone can see you are reduced to frantic babbling. So just how "good" is a "good chance," eh? My own experience with both spanked children and unspanked children and the adults each has grown into show you have it backward. The spanked were in treatment centers, jails, and sadly, a few graveyards. The unspanked...which I've never found in a single mental health facility...and I've been professionally involved with many, nor once in a single jail, and I've done various services in those settings. Not once, lil 'o' They often have a heavily alternative mindset. "Heavily alternative mindset?" What is that I wonder? They don't believe in hitting kids so they are out of the mainstream? R R R R R Many are aging antiestablishment flower children. Odd, I'm a conservative that defends the "establishment" to the point I'm often labled as being an apologist by the opposition. Yet, here I am, with decades of experience with the establishment, and especially around child and families issues, and a moderate conservative. I'm anti Drug, (and an activist), pro Homeschooling, (and an activist) and just an all around well rounded guy. Others have acquired some higher education My goodness. You graduated only 7th grade then? What is it about education that bothers you so, lil ~'o'? Afraid of facts and information and logic? and think themselves in the mold of some latter day Lord Byron with his condescending view of the common man. Nothing in this post so far but ad hom, lil~'o' not a thing. In many ways no-spanks are snake oil peddlers. No, we are what came after the snake oil peddlers. You spanking compulsives are right out of the middleages, and we are the civilized that came after you. Mankind is infected with the disease of spanking for they have the cure - for a price. I've posted lots of information here, and I'm always available. Ever seen me put up a fee schedule? Heck, you can google up non-punitive child rearing information on the Web, and join groups that support each other in finding ways to parent without hitting. I'm a member of one of them, and advisor to many others. So far, not a nickel have I earned. The new bottle of elixir is a course, a book, a counselor, or a degree. Implied promises abound. Naw, and in fact what's most surprising to folks is that so much of it is attitude, that they can recall some of the relatives having, like grandmas. Gentleness, support, guidance, giving up force and obsessive controlling. Like mythical Lake Woebegone, all children will be above average. Odd, I've seen that somewhere before, I think. R R R R R R But you are right on this one. If all the children of the world were raised gently without having to fear pain and humiliation as they tried to learn, this would be a peaceful world. In fact that's a common characteristic of the adults I know that were not spanked as children. They are gentle. Wars will cease. Crime will disappear. Probably, or very near to zero. But then, we are a long way from getting the entire world on board here....but notice the progress. So many countries that have outlawed spanking. Of course, ask for a written guarantee for these hollow promises What promises? No promises were made. and no-spanks will rapidly back peddle as they hurl invectives. I'll tell you what, I'll draw up a list of promises I'll post right here, a few days after you or any one of you compulsives posts your guarantee for the effectiveness of spanking. After all, that's what this ng is about, no? Now let's see how he who never reads my posts but oddly manages to coincidently respond to things in them fares with a little simple critical thinking and analysis. Jeremy James wrote: That's a good analogy. The 'no spank radicals' No, a radical would seek you out and beat you to a bloody pulp if they caught you hitting a child. We are peaceful and just use words. Or are you haven't a fantasy? on this group remind me of the old saying "My mind is made up so don't confuse me with the facts". You got to be kidding. The major arguments for spanking are solidly based on that mindset. "I turned out okay," "spanking is not abuse," "............" the silence there is for all the times facts have been presented and ignored. They are so determined to be right that anyone that dares to have a different opinion infuriates them. Actually some of us differ with each other. It took two years posting here and lifetime of observations to finally decide you folks are too warped to be fixed by persuasion and I moved to the same position I disagreed with LaVonne about.....that there needs to be law to back up banning the practice of assaulting children under the banner of "spanking them with love." Yes, I choose spanking as a form of disclipline for my children as a lot of parents do. That is my decision to make, not the government's and certainly not anyone else's either. And if you should choose starvation, death, beatings, would that not be of interest to 'the government?" We, all of us in this country, Jeremey, are "the government." And we say no, you may not hit your child anymore and call it love. And we are going to win. You can see it in the trends if you have the intelligence to look at data and believe in the facts presented. More and more countries have done it, even Canada with a long tradition of BEATING under law now has it so restricted there's hardly anything left to hit and call it spanking. If another parent chooses NOT to use spanking as a form of disclipline, that is their decision to make. Oh I see. And if another parent choses trail by fire that's okay too? I would never question another parent's decision not to use it, and no one has any place questioning my decisions. Well of course, and you should question someone choosing not to hurt their child. But you are wrong about "no one has any place questioning my decisions." Of you really believed that you wouldn't be here defending them. Your decisions that is. And unless you live on a desert island in your own country, or you live in a country that allows members of it's society to be beaten then no, you cannot stop us from interferring in your decision to risk making another misfit in OUR society. Everytime you hit, and for all the times between you child fears you, even if they say nothing, the potential to make a criminal, or a mental patient goes up, and up, and up. You want to be a thug, and treat your children like thugs, go find your own planet. If the parents of my children's friends have choosen to allow me to spank their child while that child is at my house, then again that is those individuals' decision to make and no one elses. I wonder at your obtuseness. You live in a litigenous society. That child could sue you one day, and the chances are better all the time. Expecially when we add civil penalties to the new banning law. 0:- YOu can be sure they'll be there. We aren't wimpy like the Swedes. So once again...I am NOTopposed to another parent's decision to not use spanking, If you really believed spanking was a superior, and much needed tool for child rearing, why would you not be opposed to others not spanking? Aren't they then harming their children, and according to some, putting violent children out in society to run amuck? You don't care about society, and the safety of yourself and your family in it? Imagine all those wildeyed, violent, acting out, unspanked children running around out there doing crime...tsk. what I have an issue with is people trying to tell me how to raise my children. Easy cure. Just leave society. Don't let your kids ever leave the house. Or find your own country or planet where people agree with you, or you are alone. Here, you have to put up with us. And we are gonna getcha, trust me. Yes, this is a news group and you have a right to state your opinion. Boy, you have no idea what a relief that is. Thanks. Debating an issue means to view it from all angles, not attacking the other person. You might hurt lil 'o's feelings if you criticize his posting habits like that, JJ. The lengths compulsives will go to to protect themselves from reality still, after all these years, and an extensive background in mental health, with a strong grounding in learning theory and methods, amazes the hell out me. I should know and expect you to be stuck where you are, but reality seems to escape you, no matter what. It's as though you hold a light in front of them yet they are so deeply imbedded in the delusion smacked into them as a child they frantically declare, "it's dark in here." Why can't you spank your child when he's one day older than 17 years, 364 days old? That there should even have to be a law is proof of the madness you folks have been involved in for all these centuries of drinking your own snake oil. When you spank your child her heart hurts. No matter if she smiles and you feel good. And, you are a coward to hit someone that cannot fight back. Of course one day............................... Kane "Opinions" wrote in message ups.com... Deep inside, older no-spanks are usually very wrath-filled people. Often they were mistreated as children and never got over it. Anytime they are confronted with a parent who does not agree with their extremist point of view, painful memories emerge from their childhood. The angry child within lashes out at the new proxy parent in their life. Much like antisocial children, no-spanks take great delight in antagonizing parents who do not cater to their whim. Whether in person or in a newsgroup, trying to communicate to a no-spank is much like trying to talk to a grizzly that feels cornered. Jeremy James wrote: Fellow parents: What has happenned to this newsgroup? It used to consist primarily of parenets like myself, parents that know that when spanking is used as a loving discliplinary tool, it is very effective. Parents that wanted to be able to discuss this with other parents that felt the same way. Recently however it seems to consist more of people that simply want to argue with each other. I.E. people like Kane and LaVonne. These two people have somehow managed to convince themselves that they are enlightened in some way, or that they are intellectually superior to the other members here, or some other thing. They are neither of course. When I first joined this group I tried to debate with them, however they do not debate, they dictate. Debating means that you are willing to listen to ther other person's opinion, however they are totally obtuse. They are so convinced that their own opinion is right that your opinion must be wrong. If you disagree with them you must be a horrible person and you are abusive toward your children. When they run out of logical arguments, they resort to insults. In their world if you spank your children it means that you are an ingorant redneck, and probably a pedophile with latent homesexual tendencies as well. Kane has even implied that I spank my children because I get sexually aroused when I do so. I have an 8year old and a 5 year old daughter and a 2 year old son. I use spanking for all three of them because it works. And this drives them crazy because I refuse to convert over to their narrow point of view. From their viewpoint, if I am spanking my children I must have some alterior motive, they cannot accept the fact that there are times when spanking is the best way to handle the situation. And that I spank my children because I love them and because IT WORKS! I have stopped reading anything by either of them and I refuse to reply to anything they say. I am sure they will have something to say about this post but I will not read or respond to it. Not because I am admitting that they must be right or because I can't think of anything to say, I simply refuse to discuss anything with either of them because they refuse to listen. I encourage others to follow suit. Jeremy J |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Group B Strep FAQ | Cheryl Sandberg | Info and FAQ's | 0 | December 19th 05 06:36 AM |
Group B Strep FAQ | Cheryl Sandberg | Pregnancy | 0 | June 30th 05 05:29 AM |
Group B Strep FAQ | Cheryl Sandberg | Pregnancy | 0 | December 29th 04 06:27 AM |
Group B Strep FAQ | Cheryl Sandberg | Pregnancy | 0 | June 28th 04 07:42 PM |
Yet another "ready for solids?" | Akuvikate | Breastfeeding | 30 | November 18th 03 03:15 AM |