A Parenting & kids forum. ParentingBanter.com

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

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

What has hapenned to this group?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old January 2nd 06, 11:22 PM posted to alt.parenting.spanking,alt.support.child-protective-services,alt.support.foster-parents,misc.kids
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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


  #22  
Old January 3rd 06, 12:06 PM posted to alt.parenting.spanking,alt.support.child-protective-services,alt.support.foster-parents,misc.kids
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default What has hapenned to this group?

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


  #23  
Old January 3rd 06, 12:14 PM posted to alt.parenting.spanking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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  
Old January 3rd 06, 12:27 PM posted to alt.parenting.spanking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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  
Old January 3rd 06, 04:45 PM posted to alt.parenting.spanking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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  
Old January 3rd 06, 04:50 PM posted to alt.parenting.spanking,alt.support.child-protective-services,alt.support.foster-parents,misc.kids
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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  
Old January 3rd 06, 05:16 PM posted to alt.parenting.spanking,alt.support.child-protective-services,alt.support.foster-parents,misc.kids
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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  
Old January 3rd 06, 08:25 PM posted to alt.parenting.spanking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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  
Old January 3rd 06, 08:49 PM
beccafromlalaland beccafromlalaland is offline
Senior Member
 
First recorded activity by ParentingBanter: Dec 2005
Posts: 108
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeremy James
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.
Lets look at this in a non personal view. Lets say Joe Shmoe is stopped by police. Joe is a bit tipsy and resists arrest. So the Cop Smacks Joe. Now Joe wants to press charges of Police Brutality/ Excessive Force. Sure a smack isn't as bad as being beaten with a stick or kicked...but it's still Excessive Force (that means not necessary) and that Police Officer would be reprimanded and Joe would be given some sort of token to appease his anger.

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  
Old January 3rd 06, 10:15 PM posted to alt.parenting.spanking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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

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

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

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
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


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:42 PM.


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