Zero tolerance in schls-Zero at home Results from rigid enforcement

http://www.rutherford.org/articles_d...?article_id=71

Anyone who suspects that their child is an unwitting victim of rigid zero
tolerance policies in schools should contact the Rutherford Institute.

Anyone who doubts that the no-punishment crowd is also of that ilk should fight
to keep Supreme Courts holdings still in existence.

Ingraham v Wright. Holding of Supreme Court in 1970's. Spanking legal in all
these United States.

Yup, Fern. Spanking is legal in all states. No argument here. It's a shame
though, isn't it? I can't discipline my college students by hitting them. When I
was an employer I couldn't discipline my employees by hitting them. But in many
states I can discipline little children in my classroom by hitting them. And in
all states I can discipline my birth and adoptive children by hitting.

Why are you so opposed to protecting children? You are protected. Everyone over
the age of 18 is protected from corporal punishment. What is it about you that
leads you to defend so vehemently the practice of corporal punishment for little
children?

LaVonne

Fern5827 wrote:

http://www.rutherford.org/articles_d...?article_id=71

Anyone who suspects that their child is an unwitting victim of rigid zero
tolerance policies in schools should contact the Rutherford Institute.

Anyone who doubts that the no-punishment crowd is also of that ilk should fight
to keep Supreme Courts holdings still in existence.

Ingraham v Wright. Holding of Supreme Court in 1970's. Spanking legal in all
these United States.

LaVonne: You and your ilk keep trying to impose
your morality onto other people.

There ARE cultural and belief differences between people.

The imposition you represent is a stepping stone
to a society where government runs people, not vice versa.
Orwell, Kafka, Goebbels, have a read!

For all of your liberalism, multiculturaalism, you are
trying to take us down a road of totalitarianism.

Please make a distinction between what you propose
and SOCIALISM, or USSR COMMUNISM....

- if you can.

You probably think you are for free thought, also,
but I have seen ultraliberals be the FIRST to try
using censorship.

You probably aren't a NAZI, but you forget that it
meant National Socialism.

It was a slippery slope for the Germans.
It made perfect sense to them.
Look up NAZI Judge Roland Friesler.
He was an impeccable legal mind.
Learn from the past, don't repeat it.

How can you possibly justify government second
guessing parents? Government has proven to be
so inept itself that government has no "high ground"
whatsoever to dictate such things.

Government has proven that even imperfect parents
are far superior to what GOVERNMENT can do.
Why should parents take advice from a government
that has proven to be INFERIOR at parenting?

Really, LaVonne, most bureaucrats know how STUPID
bureaucracy really is, and would shudder at the
thought of bureaucracy lording over parents about
how to DO IT RIGHT, since the agencies have proven
their own COMPLETE INCOMPETENCE at it.