NSBC is lying again....was.....Spanking Debate (Flame-free)

On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 11:14:48 -0400, "cdc0038"
wrote:

Catherine,

You have not included Catherine's attributed post. You appear to be
posting a private message to "Catherine" when in fact all this is a
thinly diguised "flame" of your own against anti spanking posters to
this ng. Not even cleverly disguised.

I agree 100% with your position and don't believe many would disagree
with
it.

Unless we know what "it" is it's plain that you are being highly
dishonest and unwilling to debate directly on the issue, the subject
of this ng. But then that has been your posting style as long as I've
seen you here and your google Usenet history shows us.

I'm glad you are posting in an attempt to spark open and honest
dialogue--something that has been missing for several years on this
n.g.

that is a lie. Open and honest dialogue has been the key component of
anti spanking posters to this ng. They have provided logical and
thoughtful arguments based on science and research and decades of
discussion by all kinds of interested parties, parents, social
scientists, medicine, and psychology.

What has come back to us from you pro spank compulsives is nonsense
and childish attempts to invoke a sordid history of brutality toward
children under the guise of "it was good enough for my parents and
theirs, etc. so of course it's proven to work and do no harm."

And just such nonsense in the face of a society burdened by the
results of harsh, punitive parenting methods you insist on supporting
and encouraging...just as you did in the school fight officer
intervention suit. The implication that failure to use force results
in out of control children was quite obvious.

Unless of course you meants something else, which you wouldn't discuss
with "open and honest dialogue" you now pretend to be championing.

There seems to be no limit to the devious ways of the spanking
compulsives.

It would be nice to set up some rules, etc..to give this discussion
some
boundaries.

That would constitute a moderated newsgroup. Usually certain death to
any more open and honest dialogue on an issue.

What you really are saying is that you want a forum where only pro
spank cant is allowed and real debate will fade away.

As is usual for spanking compulsives, who are of course control
freaks, is that you want it your way or no way.

I would like to see parents revisit and seek honest/open
feedback and not be run off when they speak their minds.

No one has to leave. They do so simply because they have not presented
defensible argument, logically, and honestly. They rely on
superstitution and the clever weaseling of folks like Doan, which runs
out on them soon enough, when confronted with open and honest debate
in return.

This should have
been a place they could come for help, support, advise and education
on
the use of C.P. not the propaganda forum it currently is.

Those were offered and refused regularly by YOU people. Every
suggestion of methods of non CP was met with derisive hooting and
generally stupid responses by people that had never actually learned
them, and a few that had tried them, but of course kept major painful
components of harsh parenting in tact by the use of psychological pain
on their children.

Where my position differs from the "cohorts"

And you an advocate of "flame free" open and honest debate, still
using pejoratives to define and dehumanize your opponents. So much for
YOUR honesty, Chris C. non-spanker by choice, of TX.

is in the process.

Yer a liar, as I just proved. You want no such thing as open and
honest debate. You want to win at all costs. and it's obvious.

I support
educating parents to use more appropriate forms of child management

You support the use of punitive means and CP in particular. You are a
liar when you claim otherwise.

The very use of weasel words such as "more appropriate forms" makes it
clear about your "open debate" support. If you mean NON CP say NON CP,
and of course you don't or you wouldn't weasel.

while
they would outlaw and punish families through statutes fuzzing the
line of
abuse and further alienating those that need to be brought into this
discussion the most.

Though I'm personally an opponent of anti spanking statutes I am
calling you a liar on this, openly and honestly. That is not what
those that advocate statutes barring something YOU couldn't even bring
yourself to name. Notice you didn't even include the word CP or
spanking in that sentence?

Typical mindless babbling, and anything but open and honest dialogue.

In fact what pro statute people are asking for is a clarification of
the line between abuse and discipline...and you lie when you claim
they wish to fuzz it.

Thanks for trying to open this up!

You are terrified of real open and honest debate, as is clearly
apparent in your writing style to post this bit of nonsense, and
obvious lying.

Non-spanker by choice,

And please. Don't leave. We don't want you to claim you were run off,
when really it would be a final admission that you have run out
tomfoolery and lies.

Chris C.
TX

Kane

LOL!

On 7 Sep 2004, Kane wrote:

On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 11:14:48 -0400, "cdc0038"
wrote:

Catherine,

You have not included Catherine's attributed post. You appear to be
posting a private message to "Catherine" when in fact all this is a
thinly diguised "flame" of your own against anti spanking posters to
this ng. Not even cleverly disguised.

I agree 100% with your position and don't believe many would disagree
with
it.

Unless we know what "it" is it's plain that you are being highly
dishonest and unwilling to debate directly on the issue, the subject
of this ng. But then that has been your posting style as long as I've
seen you here and your google Usenet history shows us.

I'm glad you are posting in an attempt to spark open and honest
dialogue--something that has been missing for several years on this
n.g.

that is a lie. Open and honest dialogue has been the key component of
anti spanking posters to this ng. They have provided logical and
thoughtful arguments based on science and research and decades of
discussion by all kinds of interested parties, parents, social
scientists, medicine, and psychology.

LOL! You meant anti-spanking zealotS like yourself don't use
"smelly-****" and "****-you"??? Chris Dugan must be jumping for
joy since he is the one that practically call you STUPID for using
such tactic. So much for "open and honest dialogue"!

What has come back to us from you pro spank compulsives is nonsense
and childish attempts to invoke a sordid history of brutality toward
children under the guise of "it was good enough for my parents and
theirs, etc. so of course it's proven to work and do no harm."

A lie!

And just such nonsense in the face of a society burdened by the
results of harsh, punitive parenting methods you insist on supporting
and encouraging...just as you did in the school fight officer
intervention suit. The implication that failure to use force results
in out of control children was quite obvious.

Are you voting for Bush? ;-)

Unless of course you meants something else, which you wouldn't discuss
with "open and honest dialogue" you now pretend to be championing.

There seems to be no limit to the devious ways of the spanking
compulsives.

LOL!

It would be nice to set up some rules, etc..to give this discussion
some
boundaries.

That would constitute a moderated newsgroup. Usually certain death to
any more open and honest dialogue on an issue.

Yup! No more "smelly-****" allowed. :-)

What you really are saying is that you want a forum where only pro
spank cant is allowed and real debate will fade away.

LOL!

As is usual for spanking compulsives, who are of course control
freaks, is that you want it your way or no way.

Looking in the mirror again, Kane0?

I would like to see parents revisit and seek honest/open
feedback and not be run off when they speak their minds.

No one has to leave. They do so simply because they have not presented
defensible argument, logically, and honestly. They rely on
superstitution and the clever weaseling of folks like Doan, which runs
out on them soon enough, when confronted with open and honest debate
in return.

LOL! Chris Dugan and LaVonne are the one the run away. And you,
yourself refused to debate me on the Embry study! What a hypocrite
you are! :-)

This should have
been a place they could come for help, support, advise and education
on
the use of C.P. not the propaganda forum it currently is.

Those were offered and refused regularly by YOU people. Every
suggestion of methods of non CP was met with derisive hooting and
generally stupid responses by people that had never actually learned
them, and a few that had tried them, but of course kept major painful
components of harsh parenting in tact by the use of psychological pain
on their children.

LOL! Where is the beef?

Where my position differs from the "cohorts"

And you an advocate of "flame free" open and honest debate, still
using pejoratives to define and dehumanize your opponents. So much for
YOUR honesty, Chris C. non-spanker by choice, of TX.

Kane0 is an advocate of "flame free" open and honest debate???

is in the process.

Yer a liar, as I just proved. You want no such thing as open and
honest debate. You want to win at all costs. and it's obvious.

Describing yourself, Kane0?

I support
educating parents to use more appropriate forms of child management

You support the use of punitive means and CP in particular. You are a
liar when you claim otherwise.

Looking in the mirror again, Kane0?

The very use of weasel words such as "more appropriate forms" makes it
clear about your "open debate" support. If you mean NON CP say NON CP,
and of course you don't or you wouldn't weasel.

LOL!

while
they would outlaw and punish families through statutes fuzzing the
line of
abuse and further alienating those that need to be brought into this
discussion the most.

Though I'm personally an opponent of anti spanking statutes I am
calling you a liar on this, openly and honestly. That is not what
those that advocate statutes barring something YOU couldn't even bring
yourself to name. Notice you didn't even include the word CP or
spanking in that sentence?

LOL! Speaking like a "never-spanked" boy.

Typical mindless babbling, and anything but open and honest dialogue.

Kane0 describing himself! :-)

In fact what pro statute people are asking for is a clarification of
the line between abuse and discipline...and you lie when you claim
they wish to fuzz it.

But they said there is no line! Can't have it both ways, Kane0! :-)

Thanks for trying to open this up!

You are terrified of real open and honest debate, as is clearly
apparent in your writing style to post this bit of nonsense, and
obvious lying.

And Kane0 is honest because his mother said so! :-)

Non-spanker by choice,

And please. Don't leave. We don't want you to claim you were run off,
when really it would be a final admission that you have run out
tomfoolery and lies.

LOL!

Doan