We don need no steenkin' CPS.

Where's the NEJM in there?

On Tue, 23 May 2006, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Tue, 23 May 2006, 0:- wrote:

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

Doan wrote:
....snip....asked and responded to in attribution......

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

Nonsense. I've pointed out that it will do NO SUCH THING, but that it
will reduce it. No LAW stops those things cited as violations COMPLETELY.

Hihihi! It is already ILLEGAL to abuse your child, STUPID!
Yep. And that allows for a child to be taken and protected. Or the
perpetrator removed. Without that law the abuse can continue.

Which is current law, STUPID!

Since we agree, you then are calling who "stupid?"

YOU!

Your claim was that laws against spanking won't stop child abuse, is
that not correct?

Not in Sweden nor in any other country!

Do you wish to debate, or dodge?

Debate? With a liar like you? Now, that's is funny! ;-)

The same goes for corporal. Various penalties would ensue. Up to and
including removing the perp or the child.

So it would be up to removing over 90% of children from their parents???

And you have produced this percentage from where? You can see into the
future, can you?

It's you that like to look into the crystal ball! ;-)

ARE YOU SO STUPDI???

No, are you? You think 90% of the people will still continue to spank
their children, and that laws don't effect behaviors?

Have you checked Sweden lately? ;-)

How many black Americans are still slaves?

Being a slave is still legal???

How many women cannot enter into a financial contract without a male
representative?

How many times may a man hit his wife with a stick no thicker than his
thumb?

And you think that domestic violence is gone??? Man, you are STUPID! ;-)

Laws do work.

Not if the people don't believe int them. Remember Prohibition?

And we will see civil suits following criminal charges and convictions,
or even acquittals, because children deserve as much right to protection
from assault as an adult.

Hihihi! They are already protected from "assault", STUPID! Spanking
is not assault!

How stupid are you to depart from the point that the law would make it
assault?

What law is that? Who would vote for that?

Are you stupid, or just simple?

YOU ARE STUPID! ;-)


See my endnotes**

More lies??? ;-)

Why ask? Why not read and comment?

So just to see you spread more lies? ;-)

You are out of your mind again. Take your meds.

Hihihi! What meds are you on?
None.

There is your problem! ;-)

No, it's yours. You are compromised, apparently, and I'm not.

You are! You're just too STUPID to know it! ;-)

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

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

I don't know. I am not the one claiming 1000!
No, you don't want to even think about it because you KNOW the number
has to be very high, given human nature, and the various resources I've
provided that discuss this problem from various perspectives.

Hihihi! You meant the sources that turned out to be false?
How can a source be "false" if it exists?

Hihihi! Existence and being false is not mutually exclusive, STUPID!
Non sequitur. The issue is a source false, or is the information at the
source false.

BOTH, STUPID!

Illogical. How is the source "false?" If it exists it cannot be "false."

It is when it's coming from anti-spanking zealotS like you! ;-)

Which did you mean? If the source exists, it is not false. It's just a
source. If the information is false, then you can make THAT claim.

See, you were unable to respond.

See you are being STUPID! ;-)


I get tired of giving you language lessons.

Hahaha! The same as effects without cause? You are too STUPID to give
anyone language lessons! What is that about "average" and "every" again?

What is it you claim by that question?

See you are too STUPID to understand simple sentence! ;-)

I'd say double your dose, or stop taking those things. They aren't working.

I see you dodged the question though. Again.

Hihihi! I see you lying again!
Oh, you answered the question? Where?

You didn't see it, STUPID? It's in the "archives"! ;-)

URL please.

Hihihi! Look it up, STUPID!

Doan


....snip, outdated .....

Hihihi! Can't handle fact, can you? Dodge like a stupid liar that you
are!

Doan

Yer a phony, Doan.

...snip....completed correspondence.......


** The Rationale of The Spanking Compulsive Doan

If I understand Doan correctly the reason hitting and adult and hitting
a child are different and the latter can be called legally sanctioned
'spanking' is the age difference.

Something about the child being hittable because they are different than
adults.

I have offered to debate this by asking Doan what the details and
reasoning are for spanking being a useful and legal tool when used on
children, but if used without consent on an adult illegal.

Like The Question of where the line between abuse and non-injurious
disciplinary CP might be, this too has gone unanswered.

My own view?

Between the two, it would be more likely to get intellectual
understanding from the adult than from the child, were spanking used on
both.

But we hit the child, knowing she is less likely to understand (actually
children do NOT have full understanding...or we could not call them
children and treat them differently at all than an adult).

Kane

As I suspected. Unable to enter in to debate, answer challenges, or
behave with any honor.

And obviously here for no other reason that to harass and play at the
same narcissistic games of the typical Troll.

Sad case, Doan. I'm sorry for you.

0:-



--
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin (or someone else)

You quoted a shady source.

Greegor wrote:
You quoted a shady source.

And you quoted nothing to indicate to whom you are replying and to what
they were writing.

Have we reduced you to this, Greg? This posting somnambulism where you
cannot gather your thoughts, present the content of the thread, and
actually argue?

0:-


--
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin (or someone else)

Who is WE Kane?
You're doing that again!
ROFL!

Doan wrote:
On Tue, 23 May 2006, 0:- wrote:

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

Doan wrote:
....snip....asked and responded to in attribution......

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

Nonsense. I've pointed out that it will do NO SUCH THING, but that it
will reduce it. No LAW stops those things cited as violations COMPLETELY.

Hihihi! It is already ILLEGAL to abuse your child, STUPID!

Yep. And that allows for a child to be taken and protected. Or the
perpetrator removed. Without that law the abuse can continue.

Which is current law, STUPID!

The same goes for corporal. Various penalties would ensue. Up to and
including removing the perp or the child.

So it would be up to removing over 90% of children from their parents???
ARE YOU SO STUPDI???

I found this extraordinarily amusing.

Why would a family have their child removed for spanking?

Fewer than 50% now have their children removed for unjuries and severe
neglect NOW. They are offerred a chance to learn how to parent better,
and the child stays in the home.

Who's being "STUPDI???" here, Doan?

"Spanking" abuse would result in likely even fewer removals. It's not
hard to teach people how to parent without spanking them. It just takes
a little motivation.

Too bad your parents escaped the new law.

0:-

On 27 May 2006, 0:- wrote:


Doan wrote:
On Tue, 23 May 2006, 0:- wrote:

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

Doan wrote:
....snip....asked and responded to in attribution......

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

Nonsense. I've pointed out that it will do NO SUCH THING, but that it
will reduce it. No LAW stops those things cited as violations COMPLETELY.

Hihihi! It is already ILLEGAL to abuse your child, STUPID!

Yep. And that allows for a child to be taken and protected. Or the
perpetrator removed. Without that law the abuse can continue.

Which is current law, STUPID!

The same goes for corporal. Various penalties would ensue. Up to and
including removing the perp or the child.

So it would be up to removing over 90% of children from their parents???
ARE YOU SO STUPDI???

I found this extraordinarily amusing.

Why would a family have their child removed for spanking?

Because if the anti-spanking zealotS have their way, spanking will be
considered abuse.

Fewer than 50% now have their children removed for unjuries and severe
neglect NOW. They are offerred a chance to learn how to parent better,
and the child stays in the home.

That is NOW! But we are talking about anti-law, where you said:
"Various penalties would ensue. Up to and including removing the perp or
the child."

Who's being "STUPDI???" here, Doan?

YOU ARE! Hihihi!

"Spanking" abuse would result in likely even fewer removals. It's not
hard to teach people how to parent without spanking them. It just takes
a little motivation.

Hihihi! That is why child abuse is on the decline for the past 30 years
right, ignoranus kane0?

Too bad your parents escaped the new law.

You meant Lavone's parents? Were she spanked? ;-)

Doan

Doan wrote:
On 27 May 2006, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Tue, 23 May 2006, 0:- wrote:

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

Doan wrote:
....snip....asked and responded to in attribution......

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

Nonsense. I've pointed out that it will do NO SUCH THING, but that it
will reduce it. No LAW stops those things cited as violations COMPLETELY.

Hihihi! It is already ILLEGAL to abuse your child, STUPID!
Yep. And that allows for a child to be taken and protected. Or the
perpetrator removed. Without that law the abuse can continue.

Which is current law, STUPID!

The same goes for corporal. Various penalties would ensue. Up to and
including removing the perp or the child.

So it would be up to removing over 90% of children from their parents???
ARE YOU SO STUPDI???
I found this extraordinarily amusing.

Why would a family have their child removed for spanking?

Because if the anti-spanking zealotS have their way, spanking will be
considered abuse.

Abuse does not automatically equate with child removal. Many children
whose parents abuse them do not leave home, or return very shortly.

Sweden, for instance, does not remove for spanking. In fact there is NO
penalty involved for a violation. Just services offered.

Fewer than 50% now have their children removed for unjuries and severe
neglect NOW. They are offerred a chance to learn how to parent better,
and the child stays in the home.

That is NOW! But we are talking about anti-law, where you said:
"Various penalties would ensue. Up to and including removing the perp or
the child."

Up to, not always. In fact, rarely.


Who's being "STUPDI???" here, Doan?

YOU ARE! Hihihi!

You are if you think that people are going to have their children taken
away for spanking abuse. They don't now, for spanking that leaves marks.

Abuse has to be life threatening for the most part to include permanent
removal of the child.

"Spanking" abuse would result in likely even fewer removals. It's not
hard to teach people how to parent without spanking them. It just takes
a little motivation.

Hihihi! That is why child abuse is on the decline for the past 30 years
right, ignoranus kane0?

Yes, in fact that is the case.

We can see that spanking itself has decreased. Look it up. Both approval
for it and the practice of it, among NON-immigrant citizens has reduced
considerably over these past 30 years or so.

What pushes spanking abuse back up usually is an influx of immigrants
coming from severe corporal punishment cultures. That's been the case here.

In fact that is the problem in Sweden today. Swedish children have been
raised now for some time with non-spanking methods, and reaching
adulthood they are not the ones doing the violence you like to point to
there. Not native Swedes.

It's the immigrant population that refused to give up their abusive CP
practices. I'm afraid one day Sweden is going to have to put more teeth
in their law.

Too bad your parents escaped the new law.

You meant Lavone's parents?

No, I wouldn't make the mistake of leaving you out of my concern for
humanity, Doan. You are a cowardly immature self stimulating fool, but
you are human.

Were she spanked? ;-)

What does "were she spanked?" mean?

I meant your parents, and obviously I would not deny that same
protection to anyone being abused by spanking.

Doan

Still the little frightened cowardly bully I see.

Funny how one spanked child can turn out so well, and another turn out
like you.

0:-

--
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin (or someone else)

oooooooooooooh my, what a congenital dumb ass............get rid of
spanking and 70 percent of abuse cases will begin with something
else..............it is quite likely that something else will be more
difficult to detect...............the effect may well resemble the
apocryphal idiots accused to blocking the safety valve on the
boiler............they discovered there was a problem when the boiler
exploded...............

]:^ runs around her dog lot barking seventy percent of child abuse
cases begin as spanking.............seventy percent of child abuse
cases begin as spanking.............seventy percent of child abuse
cases begin as spanking.............seventy percent of child abuse
cases begin as spanking.............seventy percent of child abuse
cases begin as spanking.............seventy percent of child abuse
cases begin as spanking.............seventy percent of child abuse
cases begin as spanking.............seventy percent of child abuse
cases begin as spanking.............seventy percent of child abuse
cases begin as spanking.............

Please tell me how you really feel about agency corruption!