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 |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Dennis was U.N. rules Canada should ban spanking
"LaVonne Carlson" wrote in message ... Dennis Hancock wrote: Again Kane, you are showing your lack of ability to discuss this issue. One cannot ignore the fine lines between spanking and abusive behavior in dealing with this issue than they can in refusing to deal with emotional or psychological abuse. In the US, corporal punishment is considered cruel and unusual punmishment for any individual over the age of 18. Why? Corporal punishment is considered physically abusive, emotionally abusive, and psychololgically abusive. For some strange and bizarre reason, anyone under the age of 18 is exempt from this protection. What does this mean, Dennis? It means that the US allows little children to be victimized by the exact same behavior that is considered physically, emotionally, and psychologically abusive once that little child turns 18. This is weird logic, Dennis. LaVonne LaVonne.. not true at all. Corporal punishment is considered cruel and unusual punishment by anyone outside the family, at ANY age. Our judicial system does not use corporal punishment as a punishment for crimes, nor does our juvenile system. But take a closer look. Pain and suffering IS an acceptable method of discipline in the armed forces and guess what, the majority are at the adult stages of their lives. So, to be honest, your assertions simply are not well founded here. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Dennis was U.N. rules Canada should ban spanking
"Doan" wrote in message ... On Mon, 27 Oct 2003, LaVonne Carlson wrote: Dennis Hancock wrote: Again Kane, you are showing your lack of ability to discuss this issue. One cannot ignore the fine lines between spanking and abusive behavior in dealing with this issue than they can in refusing to deal with emotional or psychological abuse. In the US, corporal punishment is considered cruel and unusual punmishment for any individual over the age of 18. Why? Corporal punishment is considered physically abusive, emotionally abusive, and psychololgically abusive. For some strange and bizarre reason, anyone under the age of 18 is exempt from this protection. LOL! Are you saying that cp is allowed in the juvenile justice system???? Doan, that was LaVonne Carleson's statement, not mine. What does this mean, Dennis? It means that the US allows little children to be victimized by the exact same behavior that is considered physically, emotionally, and psychologically abusive once that little child turns 18. So spanking is the same as being flogged as a criminal??? This is weird logic, Dennis. Doan, again you are attributing Lavonne's ludicrous statements to me and they are not mine. Yup! Logic and the anti-spanking zealotS, are they mutually exclusive??? :-) Doan Hardly. Especially when the anti spanking zealots try to attribute the nonsense of one of their own to me. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Dennis was U.N. rules Canada should ban spanking
Sorry Doan, I thought you were trying to put Lavonne's words into my mouth.
I misread your intentions there. "Doan" wrote in message ... On Mon, 27 Oct 2003, LaVonne Carlson wrote: Dennis Hancock wrote: Again Kane, you are showing your lack of ability to discuss this issue. One cannot ignore the fine lines between spanking and abusive behavior in dealing with this issue than they can in refusing to deal with emotional or psychological abuse. In the US, corporal punishment is considered cruel and unusual punmishment for any individual over the age of 18. Why? Corporal punishment is considered physically abusive, emotionally abusive, and psychololgically abusive. For some strange and bizarre reason, anyone under the age of 18 is exempt from this protection. LOL! Are you saying that cp is allowed in the juvenile justice system???? What does this mean, Dennis? It means that the US allows little children to be victimized by the exact same behavior that is considered physically, emotionally, and psychologically abusive once that little child turns 18. So spanking is the same as being flogged as a criminal??? This is weird logic, Dennis. Yup! Logic and the anti-spanking zealotS, are they mutually exclusive??? :-) Doan |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Dennis was U.N. rules Canada should ban spanking
On Fri, 31 Oct 2003 15:50:17 GMT, "Dennis Hancock"
wrote: "Gerald Alborn" wrote in message ... Dennis Hancock wrote: "Kane" wrote in message No Kane, it's apparent that only YOU see direct links which do not exist. No, I am not the only person to see such links. Those doing research in brain scans and behavioral observation research are my sources. As well as my own long history of observation and treatment of abused children. Your knowledge of brain scans has already been proven faulty and you continue with it? I must have missed what you thought was proof, Dennis. Care to post it again? *I* didn't -post it Gerald, someone else did and Kane effectively backed down on his claims. "Effectively backdown?" Is that weaselspeak for "I couldn't debate him fairly" Just as his 'wealth' of experience eventually boiled down to his reading of parenting books and personal observations upon further questioning by myself and others. Apparently you missed the many citations of researchers, but that's okay. It's common for the victims of intergenerational cp to be neurotically selective and hysterically blind to anything that brings into question their carefully built artifice that preserves their world view. Just as there is a long history of nonsense from people who claim that spanking is abusive. Again you're making assertions for which I've seen no proof offered. Care to back up your words? Can you even read? Kane has said all along that he considers spanking as abusive, in fact at one point, called one 'cruel' for punishing a toddler who could not comprehend right from wrong. You are correct. I do not think Alborn was asking you to give proof of what I said. Obviously you have some crawfish DNA grafted into yours. They are too caught up in their own self righeousness that they cannot comprehend the damage that they are creating. Damage, caused by people who advocate against hurting children? So it's people who strongly advocate and practice only kind and respectful treatment of children and NOT those who think nothing of dishing out pain, punishment, humiliation and disrespect, who are the ones causing damage? Again, anything to back up what you insist upon believing? Take a good hard long look at the public school system, the complete breakdown in discipline and you can see EXACTLY what damage has been done. A good long hard look will show you that there is NO such thing at all. Children are safer in school than they are at home. There are more injuries and deaths that take place at the hands of their parents and caregivers than by school personnel or fellow students. You are a media casualty. Don't feel bad we all fall for it from time to time. Any search of relevant data on the safety of children, mortality tables, etc. especially from the CDC and the DOJ will show you to be miles from the truth. Now just like Alborn I'm going to ask you to support your contention that there is a "complete breakdown in discipline" vis a vis the schools with some proof. You make the claim, you accept responsibility for proof or show yourself as ignorant or a liar. Your choice. The fact that people like yourself and Kane equate any and all punishment which may involve some sort of humiliation or pain as 'cruel and unusual' punishment has led to an utter breakdown of discipline throughout society. I do not recall using the "cruel and unusual" punishment argument. I will say it is cruel. It isn't hard to see that it is when you take a 150 to 200 pound adult whalin' on a 30 to 40, or less, child. It's bullying. As for "unusual" I don't think spanking is unusual. I think it is far too usual. I suppose you, like Kane are going to make the stretch that after centuries of acceptable spanking, even at the extremes in the past, that THAT is now responsible for the condition of society today, even considering the fact that non-spanking has gained a lot of following over the past thirty or forty years, and the psychobabble that anyone who decides their child may need some discipline is somehow abusive has attempted to put a stigma on even the mildest of discipline? I have seen postings again and again that even in the US, a supposedly enlightened nation, over 90 percent, sometimes even 98 percent of parents spank or adults say they were spanked. With numbers like that how can you possibly defend that non-spanking is the culprit for yoru imagined breakdown in discipline? In fact teens, a good indicator, have shown a steady decline in criminal behavior over the past decade and before...all the while as non-spanking grows and teachers and others, including parents, strive to develop skills at non-punitive parenting. People who were physically abused generally resort to physical abuse themselves. It's a never ending cycle, yet you still refuse to differentiate between abuse and spanking, Did you ever wonder how or why spanking is propogated from one generation to the next in spanking families, just as severe physical abuse is propogated multigenerationally in other families? Do you think spanking somehow propogates itself because it's such a good idea, rather than because abuse works that way? Yawn.. again, you try to confuse spanking with abuse. Non of us are confused except you spanking freaks in denial. You and other just like you continually claim that pain teachs, yet deny that spanking is painful. Or you seem to when you claim it isn't "abuse." Pain inflicted to get your way is nothing BUT abuse. More especially non-pain, non-punitive methods have been shown to be superior repeatedly. Your denial of Embry's work is a perfect example of your frantic scramble to protect your sick model of parenting. Then please explain how, with the disappearance of corporal punishment in the public schools, that any and all respect and discipline has vanished along with it. Do you not think it odd that exactly where cp in the schools prevail they have the worst records of behavior and the lowest academic scores? Take a look at Texas, one of the hot for paddling state, for instance. Or try Alabama, Arkansas, or Oklahoma. Yes, everyone knows that abuse propogates from generation to generation, but any parent worth their salt also knows how their own children react to outside stimuli. Some children never need to suffer a spanking while others may well need a physical reinforcement. But of course, to you and Kane, you can use 'reason' and set guidelines which have absolutely no consequences for the child. You neglected, in the beginning of this article to acknowledge my claims to have worked with children who had been spanked and punished. I noticed that. I worked with children so screwed up by parenting NOT fit or allowed to be used on animals that they had become dangerous to themselves and others. I turned them around with gentle and non-punitive methods. They were so screwed up it took longer for them to get that I wasn't punishing them than it did for them to turn around when they finally accepted I wasn't. The hardest part was getting them over thugs like you. or show proof that those who spank for disciplinary reasons or teaching their child correct behavior at a very young age What's wrong with modelling correct behavior, giving an abundance of time and loving attention to young children, treating them respectfully, and catering to their genuine needs so that they have no pent-up emotional energy motivating them to exhibit bad behavior? WHO said it was wrong? You want to pick apart every statement and try to put words into my mouth? He isn't suggesting it's wrong or not. He's suggesting using it, and if you missed that you are truly in sad shape. Although I think I can see how you just managed to weasel out of answering the meat of his question. Why spank if you have all those other things going for you? Sounds like he expects you to be a good parent that DOES use those things. Me, I'm not so sure about you at this point. You are too wedded to abuse for my taste, and trying to deny it by calling it something else. They used to say that slavery was good for the darkies too. And that women, by their natures, just couldn't think for themselves. We seem to have gotten over that, but it took a damn war. I'd like you assholes to wake up before the there has to be laws to do it for you. In other words the spanked child tends to have reactions that interfer with them getting what they need and want without a lot of pain involved. Sometimes for themselves and sometimes for others. Where does that inference come in? My observations have been that the non spanked child has very little awareness of the consequences of his/her actions and becomes quite manipulative, and that becomes quite problematic as they grow older. Instead of manipulative, don't you really mean "going after their own needs and interests instead of caving to the needs of the self-centered authoritative adult's?" NOPE.. not at all. Bull**** plain and simple. You certainly are. If you do not understand that children learn, at a very young age to manipulate their parents to get what they want, then I pity your child. Awww...poor widdle parents. It's not always the needs of a self centered authoritive adult, it's called PROTECTING a child and teaching them right from wrong. I have taught many children and protected them at the same time without using punishment, pain, humiliation. They want to learn but the first time you hit them or punish them you start the clock on them becoming manipulative to try and survive your nonsense and still learn what nature compelles them to learn. IF spanking on a limited basis achieves this, then so be it, but you are trying the exact same nonsense that Kane is and it isn't working. What in heaven's name is "spanking on a limited basis?" Is that like getting just a little bit pregnant? You cannot differentiate between abuse and discipline, I have, and I suspect Alborn is even more skilled at, no trouble differentiating between them. I disciplined every child I worked with and the children I raised. And I am one tough disciplinarian. I am as tough on me and other caregivers of children as I was on the children. One has to have a clear moral purpose and a deep understanding of child development to satisfy me if they are going to claim to be disciplining. You do NOT discipline when you spank. YOu simply punish. The two even come from different root words. There is NO connection between them. and therefore are just as intellectually dishonest Someone who claims that hitting a child to cause pain is just "spanking" therefor something different is calling others "intellectually dishonest?" Pot, kettle, black. as he is by attempting to put down any and all efforts by parents to maintain what they feel is best for their own child. I don't put down any and all efforts by parents. I put down the idea that pain teaches what we want to teach....well, unless we are busy raising the next generation of failures, emotionally crippled, and criminal thinkers. I've noticed that it's often problematic to neurotic adults when they see people (kids and adults) who don't share in their neurosis. Like those who find it problematic when kids openly express their real feelings instead of covering them up, for the benefit of the neurotic adult [who couldn't express his real feelings as a child and, hence, now can't stand it when other children do express their feelings (displeasure, etc.) appropriately]. Oh, so now anyone who disagree's with your position is neurotic? LOL. No, not anyone. I have some people that disagree with me on this issue who I consider very healthy and thoughtful people. It depends on how honest they are. You aren't. That appears neurotic to me. Quite a stretch. No, I followed this thread for a long time before I stepped in, watching Kane attempt to impress others with questionable credentials and contradict himself time and time again in order to somehow put himself on moral high ground. And what do you have to offer in the way of credentials or experience? Or even cogent argument? You've just babbled away about your beliefs and continually offered attacks against the one you debate. To attempt to portray any and all spanking as abuse is simply not being honest Is unecessary pain administered to someone involuntarily abusive? and to attempt to being condescending as Kane has tried to be does indeed cause one to respond in kind. I don't condescend except to those that earn it. You are building up a huge account. I've done a great deal of animal training, and some of my most interesting work was undoing the bad training of others. I did a great deal of it. Animals do not have the reasoning ability that humans do. Does this mean you don't believe in spanking children whose minds are still developing and are too young to reason very well - like those who are ~3 and younger? Since all the above quotes were by Kane, why don't you ask him that question. What question? Why don't you answer my questions? If you've followed the thread closely, you'll note that he even allowed his young daughter to be in direct danger (didn't supervise her close enough) and did nothing but talk to her afterwards. All children will sooner or later get out of the direct control of their parents. That was, you might note, an extreme rarity. And you'll also note that they not only never did it again, after we talked about it, but she increased her vigilance of ME when exploring, to see if she was on the right track or could use some help. Had I spanked her the Embry effect likely would have been put in place...as nature intended....exploring is in a child's nature. They will do it when you are there and can help, or if they are afraid of you, when you are NOT there later when you can't stop them. That is the cause of all that lack of discipline you whine about. Spanked children being forced to explore dangerously on their own by YOU and the other spankers and punishers. I think this makes my point that his continual 'close supervision' statements which attempt to portray any parent whose child receives any kind of pain (such as touching something hot) is somehow negligent is quite incorrect on his part. I made no such claim. I merely stated it is the responsibility to supervise, not that it was required they be perfect. How neurotic of you. By 'stupid' behavior, in the very young, it's behavior that causes pain to them. EXACTLY as many animals react by avoiding that situation. As a child grows older, he learns that there are consequences to his actions. Something many of your thinking cannot comprehend because you have taken away all the consequences. Are you speaking of consequences for not gracefully caving to an adult's needs? What adult's needs? You act as if you personally have been the victim of a brutal adult. Certainly. Not intentionally but because most adults do not KNOW they are being brutal when they punish. MOST adult's don't have a 'need' to punish their child, R R R R sure. but anyone who cannot understand setting limits and teaching the child there are consequences for exceeding those limits is fooling themselves. I had not the least difficulting in doing just that. My logical and natural consequence was simply that they had to attend my talk with them..which they willingly did because there was NO shaming, humiliting, hurtful namecalling, nothing painful in talking with me. We worked out limits that they either followed, younger, because they trusted me, or later in life because they understood the information I shared with them and helped them explore. I have yet to see ANY child who does not test the limits. Me either. I've also never seen a child, and that includes the very sick ones I worked with, that couldn't operate inside the limits if I thoughtfully parented him or her respectfully. It's called being a parent and teaching your child right from wrong. Tell me about it. I did tons of it. You seem to be speaking of imposing consequences rather than allowing natural consequences to occur. What do imposed consequences teach, other than that larger, stronger and more powerful beings get to have their way over the smaller, weaker and less powerful? Like the toddler who gets a sore butt for complaining that he has to miss out on the last half of Sesame Street (so that the mother could bend him to her needs and get him to the sitter in time to make her bridge game). Or the child who is so used to getting their way that they dart out into a busy street, Wherever did you get the idea that children that aren't punished get their own way all the time, or even most of the time? One of the first things I teach children is how to negotiate fairly and equitabley with others. They love it. They don't feel powerless and overwhelmed but empowered and respected within the limits of their capacity. or the natural consequences of letting them go ahead and put their finger in a light socket and see if it hurts them? YOU might do that. Neither Alborn or I would. Nor would we need to hit them to make them stop. If they are too little to know we simple don't have any light sockets handy. If they are older we can demonstrate with batteries in series or a transformer. I've done that with a child. But then we homeschooled and our lives were filled with all kinds of experiments that included risks we taught the child to attend to. It's very easy when the child trusts you. It's very HARD when they don't. Get real... the world is fraught with dangers, and to attempt to make it somehow an adult's 'need' to punish for the hell of it is ignoring the issue and attempting to do the same thing that Kane is doing. The need to punish you exhibit is very plain. Your belief that children can't learn without, obvious. You are simply wrong. You taught your own children NOT to learn without pain. Nice work. IF you let your child follow 'natural consequences' then you most assuredly are negligent in your duties as a parent in teaching them to avoid many things which are harmful. Where did you see Alborn or myself make such a claim? Why would I mention supervision at all if I believed that unfettered natural consequences were the only way to teach a child not to do something risky? You complained about others putting words in your mouth. Are you unaware of how blatantly you just did that? some snippage It has only been in recent history where 'spanking' or any type of corporal punsihment has been looked down upon. YOU want to blame the condition of society upon the 'spankers' of the past, but if you take note, we've actually come to the point where the lack of spanking has been much more prevalent over the past 30 years or so than at any time in past history. In ancient times, whipping, and caning were quite prevalent.. Now, for the most part in most societies, they are considered barbaric. Haven't you ever wondered why humankind hasn't yet gotten to the point where the majority sees the painful treatment of children the same way - barbaric? Nope, not at all. I am quite willing to distinguish the difference between 'spanking' as a teaching method and later as a disciplinary tool, and outright abuse. Of course you are. That is the nature of neurosis. You have to protect yourself from the knowledge that spanking is pain and pain is abusive. YOu do it by considering, I'd wager, that since children learn from natural consequences that YOU can apply consequences (but you of course forget the "natural" part). OF COURSE 'painful' treatment of children is barbaric, but for the most part, a reasonable parent's disciplinary action of swatting a child's butt usually results more in a mild reinforcement than outright pain. Oh please. You just refuted, or attempted to refute, the whole point of using spanking. Spankers that start this nonsense prove conclusively they are out of their ****ing minds. "Don't try to call spanking hitting." I've heard it again and again. When I ask if they will give me permission to "spank" them they seem to back right off and start babbling this bull**** you just came up with. To a child what you think is a mild little swat is as jarring as if a linebacker nailed you with his fist. Again, keep on trying to use the words to portray any and all spanking as abuse and you continue to ignore the real issues. Please. Not this old saw again. If it isn't painful what is the point? I can get a child's attention in many ways that do not include "spanking." A simple touch on the shoulder, her name, stepping in front of them...but then I have the child's trust. I wonder why YOU have to use spanking to get that attention I get so easily? When I went to public schools, one would expect to be punished by a swat with a wooden paddle on the rear end if you misbehaved. Take a good hard long look at the condition of the public schools since corporal punishment has been banned. What do you think the percentage of non-spanked kids (non-spanked at home) is in an average public school? Doesn't matter what the percentage is. The plain fact is they can tell you to go to hell, and there are no consequences at school. You have reinforced a complete breakdown in discipline, and it shows. What they "can" do and what they do are two different things. My children, and the children I worked with, once turned around, wouldn't think of speaking to others that way. Well, unless they were nutcases that were going to try and spank them. I did have one child leave school and come and find me when he was told he was going to be spanked. Smart little kid. 4th grader. We put a stop to that, and the supposed bad behavior, which he hadn't done anyway (got the wrong kid), never happened. Do you think school kids who enjoy freedom from cp in school are unaffected by the pain and punishment they grew up with at home. Has no bearing. Beg your pardon? What planet are you living on? Children who are abused at home will still bear that stigma. Those who have been taught discipline, either thru spankings or non spankings will show that same discipline at school. R R R R You really are a dunce aren't you? The worst acting kids I knew when I was a schoolboy were the kids MOST spanked at home. But I will grant you, if the discipline is NOT punishment based, but true discipline...teaching....you are correct. I proved that repeatedly and taught other parents to do it as well, and they too succeeded. But many will bow to peer pressure, I love this one. It's the punished child that will, when confronted with the fear of punishment from their parent, take that toke, let the boy in her pants, spray graffiti, steal that lipstick. It's the parent that has raised the child with a constantly growing trust that the child will hear and see in her mind when tempted and who she cannot bear to cause pain to. By the time a child is a teen they aren't afraid of their parents no matter how much "disciplining" by pain and fear they have had. It is the child that lives free of fear of pain that can't bear to hurt others, and most especially their parent. and those that don't have just been as abused by the system because they have been subjected to complete chaos, brought on by those who cannot distinguish between discipline and abuse who have set the standards. You just indicted yourself completely. YOU are unable to distinguish between discipline and punishment. And that is the problem. Big time. That is the chaos that you set upon your children. Just when they need to think you want them to do a kneejerk conditioned response to you...and as a teen they WILL NOT DO IT FOR LONG. They will fight it...even younger children will, and they will learn to sneak or they will wait until they are bigger than you. Do you think non-cp at school is either supposed to be a cure-all that will fix the problems the child brings from home, or should be again replaced with cp? What about the child who brings NO problems from home??? Check out who is bringing the problems from home. It's isn't the punished child. It is the much punished child that is the most disruptive in the classroom. Isn't he or she allowed to get an education, Yes, so stop spanking your children and driving them to act out away from you in their desparation to learn what they are trying to learn. or are they to simply sit back and watch the complete breakdown of discipline ruin their chances at an education? Tell me again about this complete breakdown and the 90% of children that are spanked. See if you can sort out your logic just a bit. Only a fool could refuse to see the obvious. That we have created a generation which has absolutely no respect for authority and no fear of retribution. There are no consequences. Try your approach with teenagers and they'll tell you to go to hell just as quickly as not. For why not, all it will do is get them out of school for a day. No punishment, no discipline. And I suppose you'll assert that such kids were raised in a non-spank, non-punitive environment in their earliest years when their attitudes and values were being firmly established? Many were indeed. Bull****. There are so few that are so raised that the odds are extremely against you ever seeing one. Or knowing one when you did. I wasn't raised in a vacuum. Again, you seem to be following the same logic as Kane and beleive that somehow each and every child can be treated in the exact same manner. Odd you should mention that yet again. I answered you once on this. It is YOU that think that. That pain is applicable to teaching. Fear and humiliation are not required for teaching. It's a construct of the neurotic that is a product of intergenerational cp. Sorry, this is the real world. Just ask anyone who has dealt with hyperactive children or children who have truly been abused. YOU? Tell us your experience. Those are the very children that will react the most dramatically by acting out MORE if they are spanked. Even punishment is virtually useless with them...they are eitehr incapable of reacting in the way you want (hyperactivity) or they are abused and have had it all done to them. They'll just keep you on a cycle with them in charge. You'll punish for some transgression, usually some apparently wanton destruction or injury to others...everything will calm down for a few days, they slowly the tension will build to the next event of wanton destruction or disobedience, and you'll whack'em again, and congratulate yourself because things will be calm again...and the ... well, you get the idea. The child owns your behavior at that point. They can MAKE you spank them any time they wish it...and an abused child wishes to have control over that very much...that way they can plan their life with much more of a feeling of control. Of course it is sick and they'll do it to their kids. Even those who weren't, be it spanked or non spanked children, they all need an individual approach. Your one size fits all approach doesn't work, and the attempt to portray anyone who disciplines their child as abusive doesn't work well either. So tell us how leaving out spanking and punishment and using the vast repertoire of non-punitive methods is a one size fits all approach? Some of the children I raised I would never even gently jostle..they were so sensitive, while others I had to do "airplane" and "buzzybee" with daily or they wondered if I loved them...r r r Some I'd have to chase down and grab up to talk with, while others the mere lifting of my eyebrow was enough to get their attention. Don't you think it's about time you stopped the nonsense with this 'one size fits all' nonsense? We've listened to the psychobabble that we must never say anything negative to a child as it might hurt their psyche. What do you mean by negative? Care to give a couple examples? Never criticize a child.. always use positive reinforcement. I beg your pardon? I don't know what you have found from Gerald's posts but I defy you to find any such claim in any of mine. My criticism isn't, just like with adults, meant to hurt or punish though. It would be pointless. With an adult it might get me a poke in the nose, but with the child all it does it shut them down..they can't think, they can't chose a better action, they can't trust me. And as for reinforcement...r r r r . You forget, I'm quite content with natural consequences as long as their is no psychic or physical injury involved. And I have been known, when a child is doing something I don't like and watching me out of the corner of their eye, to simply turn away. Children are tuned into adults. The lighter the touch the more reactive the child, if one knows what one is doing. I learned that doing Dressage work with horses. You don't get a horse into a Levade, Passage, or even Capriole with brutality. You do it with gradually decreasing intensity of cues so the horse is watching you like a hawk for the next cue. Children are, if their sensitivity isn't dulled by cp, even more reactive than horses. It is quite true that one's self esteem can be greatly damaged by continual put down's, but it's come to the point that if you do not use some kind of positive reinforcment or praise for every thing a child does, then one is some kind of abusive creature. Don't know where you get your information, but I suspect you are looking at what you read with **** colored glasses. Dobson the dog trainer does that a lot. A child performing a simple act of exploratory behavior is transformed into a guerilla warrior out to carry off your entire fortune and rape you to boot. I detect just a bit of that viewpoint in you. "manipulate the parent" r r r r ....poor widdle parent. Kane has pointed that out quite well in his ramblings.. note he has stated that he never tells his children what to do or where to play, or that something is wrong, but always tries to 'give them a safe place to play, a grassy playground' etc.. or tells them how good they were (even when his child was in a very dangerous situation).. how many 'examples' do you need? You need to reread that. Of course I told her she was good at what she was doing...climbing...because that is the truth. Now was that the only thing I told her, or discussed with her? Hmmmm...now was it? **** colored glasses viewpoint. Nice going. but what we have created is a generation of children who are emotional cripples who cannot deal with even the slightest bit of criticism without going off on tantrums. I'm not sure what children you think you're talking about. FYI, to the best of my knowledge, the majorityof children in the US are still spanked in early childhood. How far does that knowledge extend? If you listen to Kane, he's been around many non spanking parents for all his 70 years. Nope, but most of it. You are putting words in my mouth...tsk tsk tsk. Over the past twenty or thirty years, we've been bombarded with 'parenting' books and 'studies' which attempt to portray spanking as completely abusive. You are such a big strong man to resist this horrible attack on you. I so admire your resiliance and persistence. The numbers of those who use absolutely no spanking has been growing steadily. Oh, not nearly as fast as it will be comin' at you soon. It's about like the long struggle for abolishion. All the real action took place in about 20 years, after a couple of hundred years of agitatin' And it's going to happen with spanking. Soon afterward, when parents are forced to give more thought to dropping cp they'll have to then look at non-cp punishment...because it doesn't work all that well either unless backed by the threat of cp. And the gain will be immense. More and more people will understand the need to pursue peaceful means of resolving human conflict. I suspect I'll be dead and gone, but I'm heartened to see the progress made, and the strong likelihood of success just a small way ahead. Did you ever wonder why criticism is painful to some people and not to others? Criticism when done constructively should never be painful. When one has never experienced criticism in their entire life, then they don't know how to deal with it. Do you think that children that haven't been spanked and haven't been punished then have not experienced criticism? The only way criticism is painful is when one has been so abused mentally that their self esteem is at an all time low. No, it is more likely to be a difference in perception and reaction to the environment. I was remarking to a collegue not long ago that when I ran the physical plant in a small hospital I was always stopping by the nursery to gaze at the newborns. Not much meds used for childbirth in the out of the way place I lived. And the children were as different from each other as adults are. Some were sleepy and dreamy. Some where wide awake and wiggling like they couldn't get to exploring soon enough. Others were looking about silently like it was all too much stimuli for them. Others were so ****ed off they were livid with rage and screamed about it. Hardly what we are talking about here, taking things to the extreme as Kane has attempted throughout this entire thread. I have taken things to extremes? r r r It's extreme to call spanking for pain abusive? I think I have been very self controlled. My rage at you assholes is monumental, but I contain myself for the most part. I can understand how YOU might feel, what with your sick views being attacked, as though it's extreme. I should hope you'd have some extreme feelings. Children that are hit do, with varying negative results. While positive reinforcement is always preferable, one also has to learn to deal with reality and that there are negatives which arise. Those who are denied that, are emotionally crippled for life. Again, care to back up your belief with some kind of substantiation? -Jerry- Not a belief but a fact of life which should be apparent to anyone with a bit of common sense. What "common sense" are you referring to here...that spanking is not hitting? How many more school shootings, or attempted school shootings will convince you? It would take about 10 done by children that were raised without pain parenting to convince me. Line them up. I'll bet with careful examination we'll find in fact there was pain parenting involved. Are you aware that at least two of the instances of school shootings included a recent school paddling of the perps? Are you aware that some were children that had no real parenting...no one home...parents already violent people? The kids at Columbine, and the growing numbers of those who attempt to wreck havoc on classmates because of being ridiculed or outcast by their peers has been growing by leaps and bounds in the past few years. All spanked I'd wager. All punished. Do you think this is a new concept? Have we only recently had cliques in schools, or kids who have been ridiculed or outcast by others? Nope. We've always had them and they have shot up the schools before. You need to do a little history checking. Or could it be that we are creating a generation of emotional cripples as I suggest. Yes, spanking does that. I consider you a great example. No, of course not. Let's ignore the fact that in times past, we had the exact same conditions and kids learned to deal with it. Why do you suppose that is? R R R R R Look up how old most of the most notorious cut throats, highwaymen, and otherwise badass in the Old West were when they started. They came right out of those old schoolhouses where the paddled ruled. Germany prior to its adventure in fascism was a notoriously pain parenting state. Maybe they didn't have everything sugarcoated and spoon fed to them that the world was such a great place, and they were such good people and that the world revolves around them. I don't recall that children currently have such treatment. Maybe they realized that there would be consequences for their actions if they decided to act upon their egotistical delights. And yet they produced their own murderers, bandits, and big time colonizing thugs that exploited others heavily. Read some history. Were is this utopian past you claim? I lived in much of it and I don't recall seeing all this sweetness and light you claim. The jails were full. Murder was common, and in many instances more so than today. We had no lack of violence back then, nor of children that were out of control. Again, learn to distinguish between abuse and discipline and teaching a child right from wrong and we can have a meaningful discourse. Learn to distinguish between discipline and punishment and you could be right. Kane |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Dennis was U.N. rules Canada should ban spanking
On Fri, 31 Oct 2003 15:53:34 GMT, "Dennis Hancock"
wrote: "LaVonne Carlson" wrote in message ... Dennis Hancock wrote: Again Kane, you are showing your lack of ability to discuss this issue. One cannot ignore the fine lines between spanking and abusive behavior in dealing with this issue than they can in refusing to deal with emotional or psychological abuse. In the US, corporal punishment is considered cruel and unusual punmishment for any individual over the age of 18. Why? Corporal punishment is considered physically abusive, emotionally abusive, and psychololgically abusive. For some strange and bizarre reason, anyone under the age of 18 is exempt from this protection. What does this mean, Dennis? It means that the US allows little children to be victimized by the exact same behavior that is considered physically, emotionally, and psychologically abusive once that little child turns 18. This is weird logic, Dennis. LaVonne LaVonne.. not true at all. Corporal punishment is considered cruel and unusual punishment by anyone outside the family, at ANY age. Our judicial system does not use corporal punishment as a punishment for crimes, nor does our juvenile system. LaVonne, in all her posts, and I've read most, has never claimed that it does. Her point is that it DOESN'T and that is one of the things that makes the use of pain on children so barbaric. But take a closer look. Pain and suffering IS an acceptable method of discipline in the armed forces and guess what, the majority are at the adult stages of their lives. One: no superior, officer or non-com or trainer may even touch the clothing of a recruit, let alone hit or otherwise inflict unjury, no matter how slight. Two: until there is conscription all such are volunteers. Three: Since they are adults they have recourse. Children do not. So, to be honest, your assertions simply are not well founded here. So be honest, your assertions are simply more bs. Kane |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Dennis was U.N. rules Canada should ban spanking
Dennis Hancock wrote:
"Gerald Alborn" wrote in message ... Dennis Hancock wrote: "Kane" wrote in message I've noticed that you make a lot of claims, yet offer nothing to substantiate any of them, even claiming that Kane's knowledge is faulty and that he's backed down on all his claims, etc. You offer nothing to support your positions except for a tight (even seemingly desperate) grip on your beliefs. Did you ever consider taking a long hard look at why you are so compelled to simply accept your beliefs about parenting and spanking, etc., without coming out into the fresh air, smelling the coffee and asking yourself why you must simply accept, without question, that your beliefs constitute a model of pure, unadultrated truth that all should live by? Twenty years ago, I had essentially the same attitude you have. I was a spanking parent. I saw no reason to question it or my belief that it was the way children needed to be parented. Then, at a friend's urging, I ended up in a Parenting Effectiveness Training (PET) class. A short time afterward, I started to ask questions about my firmly rooted beliefs. I started to look into the whys and the hows of parenting, etc. I must admit that I didn't have an open mind about this before then. Since then, I have had a yearning to know more about it, how emotions work, what developmental and emotional needs are, how children's needs are so often violated by traditional parenting methods, what motivates people (including children) to behave as they do, and how parenting is blindly passed from one generation to the next without so much as a question or a passing thought about it. These and many more questions never come to the surface of a person's mind when one has a grip on beliefs that is as firm as yours. In all fields of life, a firm grip on preserving the ways of the past offers little benefit for the future. We didn't go to the moon using the technology of the 1800's. People are creative beings with energy, imagination, and drive for the advancement of knowledge to better understand our world and to better our lives. We spend trillions on learning about the world, about the universe, and about life and how to make it better - in many ways. But, when it comes to raising children, the ways of past generations is good enough and no one has any business questioning any of it. Apparently it might offend one's parents and grandparents to not blindly accept their ways and carry those ways forward into future generations. So, knowledge about parenting, and how the minds of little children work during their crucial years of early development, is not an arena where most people want to or care to visit or to make any changes or advancements? Dennis, are all your beliefs so firmly rooted that I may as well assume they are cast in concrete, such that there is no chance for changing them? Is everything you disbelieve "nonsense?" -Jerry- |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Dennis was U.N. rules Canada should ban spanking
No Gerald, it is KANE who has made a lot of claims. Consider the absolute
nonsense of what you propose.. KANE claims that a practice which has been acceptable throughout history is harmful, yet you want ME to substantiate that it is not??? KANE claims that he has so damned much 'experience' when it eventually boiled down to his own limited observations. KANE claimed that rich or powerful people never spanked their children, (based upon his own fraternizing with a few in his lifetime) and wants proof that throughout history of ANY of the great leaders being spanked. Common sense would tell you that the wealthy and powerful would not stray from acceptable practices of the period, and in fact, most literature points out that many were schooled in private institutions, most of which DID in fact, use corporal punishment for disciplinary actions. Then, both you and he avoid the separation between a swat on the behind with the open hand as a means of teaching a young child to avoid a dangerous situation, and the use of spanking for older children to instill discipline, with outright abuse. I have dealt with hundreds and hundreds of children, both abused and non abused, and I can assure you, most of the parents in this group can tell you that each child responds differently and no one single method works for every child, even within the same family. No one is proposing abusive treatment of children, as you and Kane seem to try to portray and you cannot capture the high moral ground by avoiding the distinction between abuse and spanking. I argue vehemently because it is precisely this nonsense that people like yourself and Kane try to imply that all spanking is abusive by avoiding the separation of such and attempt to put yourselves upon high moral ground. And I DO take a long hard look at the truth and how people like you have created a generation of children who lack respect or discipline in their lives simply because you've coddled them to the point of not being able to deal with reality. "Gerald Alborn" wrote in message ... Dennis Hancock wrote: "Gerald Alborn" wrote in message ... Dennis Hancock wrote: "Kane" wrote in message I've noticed that you make a lot of claims, yet offer nothing to substantiate any of them, even claiming that Kane's knowledge is faulty and that he's backed down on all his claims, etc. You offer nothing to support your positions except for a tight (even seemingly desperate) grip on your beliefs. Did you ever consider taking a long hard look at why you are so compelled to simply accept your beliefs about parenting and spanking, etc., without coming out into the fresh air, smelling the coffee and asking yourself why you must simply accept, without question, that your beliefs constitute a model of pure, unadultrated truth that all should live by? Twenty years ago, I had essentially the same attitude you have. I was a spanking parent. I saw no reason to question it or my belief that it was the way children needed to be parented. Then, at a friend's urging, I ended up in a Parenting Effectiveness Training (PET) class. A short time afterward, I started to ask questions about my firmly rooted beliefs. I started to look into the whys and the hows of parenting, etc. I must admit that I didn't have an open mind about this before then. Since then, I have had a yearning to know more about it, how emotions work, what developmental and emotional needs are, how children's needs are so often violated by traditional parenting methods, what motivates people (including children) to behave as they do, and how parenting is blindly passed from one generation to the next without so much as a question or a passing thought about it. These and many more questions never come to the surface of a person's mind when one has a grip on beliefs that is as firm as yours. In all fields of life, a firm grip on preserving the ways of the past offers little benefit for the future. We didn't go to the moon using the technology of the 1800's. People are creative beings with energy, imagination, and drive for the advancement of knowledge to better understand our world and to better our lives. We spend trillions on learning about the world, about the universe, and about life and how to make it better - in many ways. But, when it comes to raising children, the ways of past generations is good enough and no one has any business questioning any of it. Apparently it might offend one's parents and grandparents to not blindly accept their ways and carry those ways forward into future generations. So, knowledge about parenting, and how the minds of little children work during their crucial years of early development, is not an arena where most people want to or care to visit or to make any changes or advancements? Dennis, are all your beliefs so firmly rooted that I may as well assume they are cast in concrete, such that there is no chance for changing them? Is everything you disbelieve "nonsense?" -Jerry- |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Dennis was U.N. rules Canada should ban spanking
Kane, if all you can do is spout insults, then you have truly lost your
argument. "Kane" wrote in message om... On Fri, 31 Oct 2003 15:50:17 GMT, "Dennis Hancock" wrote: "Gerald Alborn" wrote in message ... Dennis Hancock wrote: "Kane" wrote in message No Kane, it's apparent that only YOU see direct links which do not exist. No, I am not the only person to see such links. Those doing research in brain scans and behavioral observation research are my sources. As well as my own long history of observation and treatment of abused children. Your knowledge of brain scans has already been proven faulty and you continue with it? I must have missed what you thought was proof, Dennis. Care to post it again? *I* didn't -post it Gerald, someone else did and Kane effectively backed down on his claims. "Effectively backdown?" Is that weaselspeak for "I couldn't debate him fairly" EXACTLY. You've attempted to twist at every turn, you've attempted to put words into the mouths of others, and in fact backpeddled on many issues. Just as his 'wealth' of experience eventually boiled down to his reading of parenting books and personal observations upon further questioning by myself and others. Apparently you missed the many citations of researchers, but that's okay. It's common for the victims of intergenerational cp to be neurotically selective and hysterically blind to anything that brings into question their carefully built artifice that preserves their world view. Your research was shown to be nothing but nonsense, brain scans cannot measure emotions or other factors. And it's blindness not to see the generation of misfits your thinking has brought into being. Just as there is a long history of nonsense from people who claim that spanking is abusive. Again you're making assertions for which I've seen no proof offered. Care to back up your words? Can you even read? Kane has said all along that he considers spanking as abusive, in fact at one point, called one 'cruel' for punishing a toddler who could not comprehend right from wrong. You are correct. I do not think Alborn was asking you to give proof of what I said. Obviously you have some crawfish DNA grafted into yours. Bull**** Kane, he WAS asking ME to give proof, which has already been posted here by others. As for crawfish, you'll note that I haven't backed down a bit in my position, nor have I weaseled around and contradicted myself as many times as you have in this debate. They are too caught up in their own self righeousness that they cannot comprehend the damage that they are creating. Damage, caused by people who advocate against hurting children? So it's people who strongly advocate and practice only kind and respectful treatment of children and NOT those who think nothing of dishing out pain, punishment, humiliation and disrespect, who are the ones causing damage? Again, anything to back up what you insist upon believing? Take a good hard long look at the public school system, the complete breakdown in discipline and you can see EXACTLY what damage has been done. A good long hard look will show you that there is NO such thing at all. Children are safer in school than they are at home. There are more injuries and deaths that take place at the hands of their parents and caregivers than by school personnel or fellow students. Again, your ignorance of the facts are showing Kane. Children are NOT safer in school, not even with the narcs on campus, or the metal detectors at the entrance ways. This is the typical liberal bull**** that is attempting to take away ALL parental rights by the bogus claims that children are injured more at home by 'caregivers' and parents than at school. How about the schools which cover up incidents of abuse? I personally know of several cases involving lawsuits where children have been abused in the schools. We've had several incidents recently where a teacher taped children's mouths shut with duct tape. And then you tend to forget the emotional abuse which occurs.. No Kane, some parents DO abuse their children and injure them, but you cannot possibly show any true statistics to back up those claims that they are 'safer' in the public schools. Nor even in the private schools, given the history of abuse by priests in the Catholic church in this country. You are a media casualty. Don't feel bad we all fall for it from time to time. *I* am a media casualty?? LOL.. YOU my friend are a casualty of nonsensical doublespeak by psychologists who think they can analyze children and apply a single rule to all. Anyone who thinks they can learn parenting from a book is bound to eventually realize that they can throw the book away once they realize their children are not exactly alike. Perhaps you lack some bit of common sense in your background because apparently, you failed to learn that lesson. Any search of relevant data on the safety of children, mortality tables, etc. especially from the CDC and the DOJ will show you to be miles from the truth. Post your facts then if you have them. It is YOU who are making the claim. Now just like Alborn I'm going to ask you to support your contention that there is a "complete breakdown in discipline" vis a vis the schools with some proof. How many metal detectors did you see when you were in school? How many 'narcs' and school police were routinely placed on campus as a matter of common nature? How many riots took place on campus in our day? How many shootings by students occurred. I can tell you, EXACTLY NONE. Nationwide. And you need more proof? You make the claim, you accept responsibility for proof or show yourself as ignorant or a liar. Your choice. NO, you are showing yourself as a complete ass who cannot face reality. The fact that people like yourself and Kane equate any and all punishment which may involve some sort of humiliation or pain as 'cruel and unusual' punishment has led to an utter breakdown of discipline throughout society. I do not recall using the "cruel and unusual" punishment argument. I will say it is cruel. It isn't hard to see that it is when you take a 150 to 200 pound adult whalin' on a 30 to 40, or less, child. It's bullying. Bull**** Kane.. You are again confusing spanking and abuse. Quite a difference. You are dishonest and your ONLY reason for posting your nonsense is to attempt to take away parental rights. I consider it abusive NOT to instill discipline in a child or to give a small child a swat to keep them out of harms way. As for "unusual" I don't think spanking is unusual. I think it is far too usual. I suppose you, like Kane are going to make the stretch that after centuries of acceptable spanking, even at the extremes in the past, that THAT is now responsible for the condition of society today, even considering the fact that non-spanking has gained a lot of following over the past thirty or forty years, and the psychobabble that anyone who decides their child may need some discipline is somehow abusive has attempted to put a stigma on even the mildest of discipline? I have seen postings again and again that even in the US, a supposedly enlightened nation, over 90 percent, sometimes even 98 percent of parents spank or adults say they were spanked. With numbers like that how can you possibly defend that non-spanking is the culprit for yoru imagined breakdown in discipline? Where are those statistics Kane? Apparently, you are backpeddling again since YOU personally have claimed that the rich and powerful do not spank, and doubt they ever spanked throughout history. You've been around non spanking parents for most of your nearly 70 years.. YOUR OWN WORDS. Now then, you either admit you are a damned liar, or your 'experience' and 'observations' were very limited indeed. In fact teens, a good indicator, have shown a steady decline in criminal behavior over the past decade and before...all the while as non-spanking grows and teachers and others, including parents, strive to develop skills at non-punitive parenting. Actually, the stats I recall from memory is that crime has declined steadily overall, but teen crime has risen slightly. People who were physically abused generally resort to physical abuse themselves. It's a never ending cycle, yet you still refuse to differentiate between abuse and spanking, Did you ever wonder how or why spanking is propogated from one generation to the next in spanking families, just as severe physical abuse is propogated multigenerationally in other families? Do you think spanking somehow propogates itself because it's such a good idea, rather than because abuse works that way? Yawn.. again, you try to confuse spanking with abuse. Non of us are confused except you spanking freaks in denial. You and other just like you continually claim that pain teachs, yet deny that spanking is painful. Or you seem to when you claim it isn't "abuse." Pain inflicted to get your way is nothing BUT abuse. More especially non-pain, non-punitive methods have been shown to be superior repeatedly. Bull**** and your use of the word 'freaks' shows how truly biased and bull headed you are. Your losing it dude. Your denial of Embry's work is a perfect example of your frantic scramble to protect your sick model of parenting. LOL.. your denial of Pavlov's work shows that you consider young children not as intelligent as a dog. Then please explain how, with the disappearance of corporal punishment in the public schools, that any and all respect and discipline has vanished along with it. Do you not think it odd that exactly where cp in the schools prevail they have the worst records of behavior and the lowest academic scores? Take a look at Texas, one of the hot for paddling state, for instance. Or try Alabama, Arkansas, or Oklahoma. Sorry, again another outright lie. CP has been banned in ALL states of the union. Nice try but it aint working. And before your lil buddy jumps in wanting my proof, again, it is YOU who made the outlandish claim, not I. Yes, everyone knows that abuse propogates from generation to generation, but any parent worth their salt also knows how their own children react to outside stimuli. Some children never need to suffer a spanking while others may well need a physical reinforcement. But of course, to you and Kane, you can use 'reason' and set guidelines which have absolutely no consequences for the child. You neglected, in the beginning of this article to acknowledge my claims to have worked with children who had been spanked and punished. I noticed that. And you neglected all along to ignore my claims that I too have worked with children from both sides of the fence.. also with abused children as well. And I WAS in a position where I had complete control and had to instill discipline in a class setting and learned quite readily which ones been spanked, which ones had been abused, and which ones were adapt at dealing with control and discipline. I worked with children so screwed up by parenting NOT fit or allowed to be used on animals that they had become dangerous to themselves and others. I turned them around with gentle and non-punitive methods. Ahh, there's the kicker Kane, and you are too stupid to see it. I have a nephew who was physically abused by his father. He did not respond to spanking, even light spanking it only made him angrier, so yes, your approach did work quite well with him. That is where you are screwed up, you cannot differentiate between children and their needs. You seem to think that the exact same treatment can be used on all.. believe me, it cannot. You have never worked with hyperactive children have you, well I have. They were so screwed up it took longer for them to get that I wasn't punishing them than it did for them to turn around when they finally accepted I wasn't. Of course it will work with some. Especially those who were abused. But try it with a child who has merely been swatted on the butt with the open hand as punishement and it seldom works. They learn they can 'get away' with something. You seem confused Kane. You don't realize that children learn at a very young age how to play parents against each other. If one is of your ilk, and the other a spanker, they would drive you crazy. No, I seriously doubt you've had very much 'experience' in dealing with children, perhaps a few, but not the 'wealth' of experience you try to lead us to believe. The hardest part was getting them over thugs like you. LOL.. there you go, losing it again guy. For a supposed retired Air Force Colonel, I suppose you kissed the guys asses to get em to do their work. or show proof that those who spank for disciplinary reasons or teaching their child correct behavior at a very young age What's wrong with modelling correct behavior, giving an abundance of time and loving attention to young children, treating them respectfully, and catering to their genuine needs so that they have no pent-up emotional energy motivating them to exhibit bad behavior? LOL.. what a moron you are proving to be. Treat them respectfully and they will have no pent up energy? LOL You truly keep digging yourself deeper into a hole here. WHO said it was wrong? You want to pick apart every statement and try to put words into my mouth? He isn't suggesting it's wrong or not. He's suggesting using it, and if you missed that you are truly in sad shape. Apparently, you cannot read well,OR comprehend. Although I think I can see how you just managed to weasel out of answering the meat of his question. Why spank if you have all those other things going for you? Sounds like he expects you to be a good parent that DOES use those things. Me, I'm not so sure about you at this point. You are too wedded to abuse for my taste, and trying to deny it by calling it something else. LOL.. you are a moron Kane. You still confuse spanking with abuse. You are so dead in your mindset that you cannot possibly see reality. They used to say that slavery was good for the darkies too. And that women, by their natures, just couldn't think for themselves. There you go again, wild, outlandish claims attempting to claim the high moral ground by being dishonest. I wondered when the race issue would enter the picture. We seem to have gotten over that, but it took a damn war. I'd like you assholes to wake up before the there has to be laws to do it for you. LOL.. DUH.. there should be a law against assholes like yourself who haven't got enough sense to deal with the real world. You do more damage than good and are too stupid to relaize it. There ARE laws against abuse Kane. But YOU apparently seem to want to control everyone's ability to rear their children as they see fit and consider anything other than what you consider acceptable as unacceptable. You are a closed minded asshole who deserves no further responses. **rest snipped and unread as being the irrelevent rantings of a luncatic** Have a nice day asshole. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Dennis was U.N. rules Canada should ban spanking
Yawn.
"Kane" wrote in message om... On Fri, 31 Oct 2003 15:53:34 GMT, "Dennis Hancock" wrote: "LaVonne Carlson" wrote in message ... Dennis Hancock wrote: Again Kane, you are showing your lack of ability to discuss this issue. One cannot ignore the fine lines between spanking and abusive behavior in dealing with this issue than they can in refusing to deal with emotional or psychological abuse. In the US, corporal punishment is considered cruel and unusual punmishment for any individual over the age of 18. Why? Corporal punishment is considered physically abusive, emotionally abusive, and psychololgically abusive. For some strange and bizarre reason, anyone under the age of 18 is exempt from this protection. What does this mean, Dennis? It means that the US allows little children to be victimized by the exact same behavior that is considered physically, emotionally, and psychologically abusive once that little child turns 18. This is weird logic, Dennis. LaVonne LaVonne.. not true at all. Corporal punishment is considered cruel and unusual punishment by anyone outside the family, at ANY age. Our judicial system does not use corporal punishment as a punishment for crimes, nor does our juvenile system. LaVonne, in all her posts, and I've read most, has never claimed that it does. Her point is that it DOESN'T and that is one of the things that makes the use of pain on children so barbaric. But take a closer look. Pain and suffering IS an acceptable method of discipline in the armed forces and guess what, the majority are at the adult stages of their lives. One: no superior, officer or non-com or trainer may even touch the clothing of a recruit, let alone hit or otherwise inflict unjury, no matter how slight. Two: until there is conscription all such are volunteers. Three: Since they are adults they have recourse. Children do not. So, to be honest, your assertions simply are not well founded here. So be honest, your assertions are simply more bs. Kane |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Dennis was U.N. rules Canada should ban spanking
Putting a heavy backpack and forced twenty mile hikes is not a 'pysical
punishment'.. lol "Kane" wrote in message om... On Fri, 31 Oct 2003 15:53:34 GMT, "Dennis Hancock" wrote: "LaVonne Carlson" wrote in message ... Dennis Hancock wrote: Again Kane, you are showing your lack of ability to discuss this issue. One cannot ignore the fine lines between spanking and abusive behavior in dealing with this issue than they can in refusing to deal with emotional or psychological abuse. In the US, corporal punishment is considered cruel and unusual punmishment for any individual over the age of 18. Why? Corporal punishment is considered physically abusive, emotionally abusive, and psychololgically abusive. For some strange and bizarre reason, anyone under the age of 18 is exempt from this protection. What does this mean, Dennis? It means that the US allows little children to be victimized by the exact same behavior that is considered physically, emotionally, and psychologically abusive once that little child turns 18. This is weird logic, Dennis. LaVonne LaVonne.. not true at all. Corporal punishment is considered cruel and unusual punishment by anyone outside the family, at ANY age. Our judicial system does not use corporal punishment as a punishment for crimes, nor does our juvenile system. LaVonne, in all her posts, and I've read most, has never claimed that it does. Her point is that it DOESN'T and that is one of the things that makes the use of pain on children so barbaric. But take a closer look. Pain and suffering IS an acceptable method of discipline in the armed forces and guess what, the majority are at the adult stages of their lives. One: no superior, officer or non-com or trainer may even touch the clothing of a recruit, let alone hit or otherwise inflict unjury, no matter how slight. Two: until there is conscription all such are volunteers. Three: Since they are adults they have recourse. Children do not. So, to be honest, your assertions simply are not well founded here. So be honest, your assertions are simply more bs. Kane |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Debate on spanking | Doan | General | 0 | June 12th 04 08:30 PM |
| | Kids should work... | Kane | General | 13 | December 10th 03 02:30 AM |
Kids should work. | LaVonne Carlson | General | 22 | December 7th 03 04:27 AM |
Dennis was U.N. rules Canada should ban spanking | Kane | Spanking | 1 | October 25th 03 10:41 PM |
|| U.N. rules Canada should ban spanking | Kane | Spanking | 0 | October 9th 03 08:35 PM |