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 |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
| Parenting Suggestions-
On 12 Nov 2004 08:22:34 -0800, (Chris C.) wrote:
...........and posted, obviously trolling for support, to alt.christian.religion... You'll find, Chris C., that not all Christians agree with assaulting children and calling it "love." http://parentinginjesusfootsteps.org/ http://stoptherod.net/ In the absence of any regular advice --here is some that doesn't support punishing parents who don't follow them to the letter. -Special notes to new posters: I do not support the reform of reasonable force statutes There is no such thing as "reasonable force statutes" regarding corporal punishment of children. "reasonable force" is a statutory concept relating to criminal law regarding the use of force in situations where one is protecting self or others. It is used to judge the use of force by police...who, by the way, are only allowed to use force in three ways; to arrest someone's progress who resists, to protect the officer, and to protect the suspect or others. Police are not allowed by law to use force to "punish" as in "corporal punishment." Any such attempt is prosecutable as "assault" except.....in the instance of a parent assaulting a child physically. Morally this is recognized in many nations as assault and a crime. While I do not, at this time, presuming my neighbors and fellow citizens to be morally progressive and cabable of responding to ethics and logic in argument, support the use of statute to correct this very sick practice of spanking. that lead to punitive measures for parents who may use discipline within the current legal limits (this would include but is not limited to physical restraint to protect a child from harm of self or others). How does spanking "physically restrain"[t] a child? That is, ostensibly, not it's purpose. Or it wouldn't be labeled as corporal "punishment." You are confusing one with the other to obscure the issue of spanking being the moral equivalent of assault. Your logic is badly flawed and you have not progressed, personally, for as long as I've seen you post here. You fail to defend your so-called "choice" and you have failed logically repeatedly to defend spanking as not being assaultive. -also do not post any personal information on this site. Often participants in this n.g. will use/abuse the information and conti nue to do so if you return. Interestingly I find that you and your cronies are most often the perpetrators of such abuse. Upon my first visit to the ng a couple of years back I was stunned to see Chris Dugan, who I could find NO posts written by the used ad hom in any of his arguments, being repeatedly and viciously attacked by a whole slew of low-lifes such as you (I'm not as polite as Chris D.) From "LaChrissy" to YOU, to Fern, to Observer, to Doan and the occasional asshole troll. You, Chris C., are a phony. And any google of your posting history here makes it plain you talk out of both sides of your mouth. You pretend to an ethic you do not practice, and try to project your own sick attacks as being done TO you rather than BY you. 48 Suggestions: R R R ... in it's original, it is "Positive Discipline: 50 Principles & Alternatives to Punishment" Positive Discipline: 48 Principles & Alternatives to Punishment Principle #1: Decode the message behind the misbehavior And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #2: Understand WHY the behavior is occurring And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #3: Help the child calm down by staying calm and speaking calmly And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #4: Explain to the child how his/her behavior affects others And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #5: If possible, alter the precipitating factors that led to the behavior And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #6: Discuss together a non-punitive consequence for the behavior that is logical to the behavior And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? And what the hell is a "non-punitive consequence?" A hug? I doubt you assholes that obvious hate, distrust, and are frightened by little children have it in you to respond to unwanted behavior with positive consequences...though I've proven again and again, and taught others how to do it, even with children that were so far gone that they were diagnosed as mentally ill. Principle #7: Carry out what you promised to carry out when you promised to do so And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #8: Do not nag, lecture, threaten or use sarcasm And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #9: Praise efforts and reward success And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #10: If the behavior begins to occur again, give a reminder of why the behavior is not appropriate- you will need to be consistent over time And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #11: Unless the behavior involves harming self, others or property, give three warnings "1,2,3..." And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #12: Immediately follow through with the consequence with a brief restating of the infraction in a firm (but friendly) tone And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #13: Discuss with the child what occurred, why it wasn't acceptable and how it can be prevented in the future. And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #14: Let the child voice his/her feelings freely without judgment And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #15: Help the child to understand that he/she is a good, acceptable person and that the behavior, not the child, is unacceptable- accept young people unconditionally regardless of their behavior And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #16: Remember what it was like to be at the child's age. Refrain from tacking adult meanings and connotations onto childish behavior And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #17: Read up on child and adolescent development and find out if what you are expecting is developmentally appropriate- or if the misbehavior is age-appropriate behavior And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #18: Understand each child's individual capabilities, needs and circumstances and modify your expectations and approaches accordingly And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #19: If the child has multiple negative behaviors, only focus on modifying those that are most destructive to self, others and property And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #20: Empower children with acceptable choices- don't just tell them what they CAN'T do- give them acceptable alternatives And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #21: Use re-direction, distraction and selective ignoring for minor infractions And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #22: Use of the toilet should be viewed as a necessary right, not a privilege- promote health and healthy attitudes towards the body by honoring this right- if children misuse the bathroom pass in school, have them use the toilet in the nurse's office for one week as a consequence And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #23: Decode the need the child is trying to meet by his/her misbehavior and help them meet that need by acceptable means And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #24: If the child is out of control, guide them to a quiet area to calm down before discussing the problem And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #25: If a child must be placed in a "time out", do not impose a time limit- let the child come out when he/she is ready- never leave a young child unsupervised- never close a child into a frightening room- do not banish the child And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #26: If the child comes out of a "time out" prematurely, state that it looks as if he/she is ready to behave appropriately and give them that chance- avoid forcing them back in unless the behavior starts up again And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #27: Children often misbehave when they lack attention- give them the attention they need and deserve- including hugging, patting the back, ruffling the hair, high fives, etc. And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #28: Rather than give "do not" messages, state what you would like to see instead And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #29: If physical restraint is necessary to avoid an attack against the self or others, do so progressively, in stages beginning with a verbal warning, increased physical proximity, followed by a hand on the shoulder and then a gentle hand on the arm, progressing with as little restraint as possible to keep the child from harming self or others And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #30: If the child shows lack of attention and restlessness, evaluate whether the activities you provide are stimulating, exciting, involving and appropriate to the learning style and intelligence needs of the child And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #31: Discuss the importance of verbalizing feelings rather than acting on impulses- model this! And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #32: Model the behaviors you want to see your children emulate And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #33: Do not engage in conduct that you don't allow in your children Then I can't have sex with consenting adults, smoke, drink alcohol, cross the street by myself, or stay out after curfew. Get real you simp. And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #34: If your child has consistent behavioral problems do your best to alleviate the causes- enforce only necessary limits and cut away unnecessary rules and inflexible ways of doing things And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #35: Teach and model positive, healthy guilt and remorse that leads to restitution and responsibility- teach and model good social skills And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #36: Never shame, belittle or humiliate your child- help them build a positive self-image and a healthy self-esteem And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #37: Admit when you've made mistakes and apologize to your child And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #38: Teach and model that violence is not acceptable, including that it is never acceptable for adults to hit children And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #39: Be involved with the media your child is viewing and discuss what they see and why it is positive or negative And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #40: The rule about gaining respect is to earn it- you earn it from a child by giving it to them And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #41: Help a frequently errant child succeed by giving him/her small steps towards a goal that ensures success- never give up on a kid! And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #42: Do guide children and do not leave them to regulate their own behavior- children feel unsafe when there are no limits at all- spend more time with them And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #43: Tune in to, rather than ignore, physical and verbal cues that something is bothering a child And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #44: Deescalate a problem before the child gets out of control- be aware of the warning signs of escalating behavior And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #45: Treat boys with the same dignity and caring, gentle, loving concern that you treat girls with- do not discipline boys for a behavior that you allow girls to get away with- do not tolerate sexist attitudes in girls that you wouldn't allow boys to get away with- do not put gender restrictions on toys, emotions, hobbies and activities And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #46: Avoid power struggles and verbal fights with older kids- negotiate democratically when possible And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #47: Honor a child's need for autonomy and power over some aspects of his/her decisions- let them make decisions where appropriate And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #48: Above all, treat all children with dignity and respect by refraining from using negative, punitive and violent methods of control- Use positive methods that promote critical thinking and show love, caring, empathy, understanding and patience towards all children And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? --I'm interested in hearing from those of you who are not supportive of the "cohort" agenda to punish parents through revoking the reasonable force statutes on the books. There are not "reasonable force" statutes regarding parent child discipline. CP is CP. Here in TX we are keeping an eye on them when they try to harm families by extending the control of laws to further limit family rights and by putting kids at greater risk through the use of spurious data/research.--I am not interested in any contact with the"cohort" What is a 'cohort'?" and have boycotted any conversations with them for several years now. You are a reasonable then in your "debate" of the subject as all the other little dim twits that show up here and move on because they fail to put forward logic and ethical argument. In other words they fail to defend the practice of spanking as a reasonable means of treating children. Their agenda is all to obvious and very harmful to families. The making of peaceful families that do not use pain and humiliation is not a harmful agenda. --The only point we agree on is that spanking is not needed to discipline kids--beyond that they beat the drum for their singular cause (spanking = child abuse---no matter what and parents who use it should be punished). Your definition does not apply to everyone in this ng that disagrees with you, Chris. That is only one point some of us make. We have other points we make as well. And punishment is not universally agreed upon by us. Notice how often one of us mentions the Swedish model...their law against child abuse. Then recall what the "punishment" is for breaking the law in Sweden. ***I would like to add that they owe an apology to those adults who grew up with "real" abuse (as in most current legal definitions). No we don't. Not a single person here that is against the practice of assaulting children and calling it CP, or "spanking," has ever minimized or otherwise denied the difference. Their attempt to fuzz the lines does great disservice to you and all those who have been harmed. WE have not attempted to "fuzz the lines" the least bit. In fact I've requested repeatedly that YOU folks clarify the line...which by it's nature and reality IS FUZZY. Even the law cannot and has not clarified the line between child abuse and acceptable corporal punishment. In time, as law makers in other countries have done, if YOU and YOUR cohorts do not stop defending child assault and make a moral choice to end it, law makers here will come to see that there IS NO LINE...that the use of pain and humiliation for parenting IS assaultive..and the reason we have laws to protect adults from assault are exactly the same reason we should not assault children. Because it is immoral, and it proven to not work. I would also like to see poster return to the n.g. that have been chased off by the bullying tactics of this group (they have violated and continue to do so most rules of netiquette). We have stood up to the bullying tactics of you and your cohort. Fighting back is not bullying. You are, by your willingness to allow and support parental choice to assault their children, a complicite bully. I'm sure they have used these type of tactics in their own homes, with their families (and friends). How can you be sure, other than to make a veiled by obvious personal attack on them by that statement and claim? The behavior of a bully. I learned as a child there is only one cure for a bully who will not listen to reason, logic, and exhortation to stop.....kick their butt thoroughly. Then switch to the more civilized offerings to discuss the issue. We do not advocate their example... Then why did you just do it, and why do those in your camp use ad hom and lies? Fern is the most blatant example of a liar, Doan of an ad hom name caller. And you, of a slimy word twister that pretends to saintliness while using ad hom yourself, as you are doing in this post. A few of your cohort's various attacks, lies, and immoral rants: Doan: "I have already proved that you were on the punishment component in the Embry study. You are either stupid or a very bad liar. Which is it? :-)" In another, I accused him of dodging a question...by a device you are using now....I said "Dodger." He replied with: "Stupid dog! :-)" I then said he was behaving like a child, calling him "little boy." He replied with: "You don't see them hurling obscenities, do you stupid dog? :-0" See the lies and escalation of ad hom? He's an obvious bully. I stated: When you took on answering the question your answers, as always in honest debate, became YOUR responsibility to provide proof. You haven't. You've simply sited other poor examples of logic and honesty. He replied: "I used your logic against you, stupid dog! ;-)" This is a tiny sample, by the way, the last three entries from just ONE post, of hundreds and hundreds of posts by Doan that shows who is and isn't the bully in these exchanges. Fern has posted 295 posts with LaVonne as the subject...and I found none that were not derisive, and few that did not contain lies concerning LaVonne. Then there was this silly twit: " From: ) Subject: Reply to Chris C View this article only Newsgroups: alt.parenting.spanking Date: 2001-11-19 10:15:43 PST Little osama dugan is crabwalking about as fast as his namesake.....The little weasel is clearly on the run and here's a classic portrait him " LaChrissie went on for hundreds of such posts, obviously obsessed with Chris D. and your cohort's inability to defeat his logic and facts. Observer, "LaChrissie," and other abusive twits long gone from here have similar posting histories. YOU Chris C, have posted the following comments: From your most recent putting words in LaVonne's mouth, "'Everybody Look at Me'" To; "The clique displays obsessive tendencies" "waiving her somewhat tattered diploma" To making unproven, bogus claims about me and my posting: " -Mind reading -Making up histories of posters and backgrounds -Placing his words and actions on others -Misrepresenting the data -Misrepresenting other posters " None of which I do, and exactly what YOU do. To this lie (Gowtch) and ad hom (Chris Dugan) combined: " It's nice to see the only "ex-cohort" (thrown out for his usual behavior) member back spewing forth his rantings for which he knows nothing! I hope he follows up with some choice phrases as usual (I still think he's Chris Duggie in hiding). " and; " Fern--This is the classic moron Kane talking his typical tripe below. No response is even needed. He doesn't warrant one. He reminds me of Ivan (maybe it is). This needs to be crossposted just so others (cohort included---because they wouldn't even have him) won't waist [sic] their time or energy on him. He doesn't even matter in the equation (I believe they call that "less than zero"). " And Chris C., these all came from just the sequential first 7 or 8 of the hits in google when I clicked on your addy. You post like this constantly. You cannot post without ad hom and lies, apparently. And hom and facts would be interesting and colorful. But lies? Tsk. They support full equal--political, social rights for kids and have posted as much. Nonsense. A simple lie. No such advocacy has happened. What has happened is that the "cohort" individuals have each expressed their own views. For instance some are for laws against spanking. I, personally am not, and stated so, and given the reasons why not many times. Some are for some punitive child teaching, I happen to not be. Some are to a degree and others less. You are clearly a bigot..by the use of classifying us into a group so you can belittle and insinuate as less grand than you. Trying to make a connection to our claims, statements, arguments, debate, that is not up to your lofty ideals of reasoned discussion of this issue. As I said you are a phony. Here's some more for folks to see what you are really up to, and your lack of ethics: Taking my statement out of context, by unethical snipping, you commented: " His intellect is obviously limited so he feels the need to add such verbiage to legitimize his lack of scholarship. -Keep posting.-Chris " "As you have already figured out by now that Kane is a member of the notorious "think-a-likes" that camp out here in this ng. Many of us refer to them as the"cohort" because of their love of the fight. They can't see that the narrow focus of their agenda will actually harm parents and families in the long-term. Keep giving them hell (they deserve it for the neophyte propaganda they push).-Chris " " Fern--it's sad to say that these cases are all to often allowed to occur. Of course the rights of any individual, according to the "cohort', doesn't compare to even 1 child receiving a single swat (I remember reading a post like this from several members of that liberal elitist group). " Rather than go on with this sad litany of your phoniness let's take a closer look at your more recent attempt to "take the high ground" from those you call, "the cohort." You, who claim to be a researcher and degreed scholar......posted the work of another without citation and credit, so it might appear to the reader as your own work..did you not? All you did was leave off the last two suggestions. Was that supposed to allow you to take others intellectual property? Not without a citation it's not. YOU, allowed to read other's work for scholarly content? R R R R R R Now go and apologize to Ms. Coutu Positive Discipline: 50 Principles & Alternatives to Punishment © 2000-2003 by Laurie A. Couture, M.Ed, LMHC http://www.childadvocate.org/2e.htm That's our name calling twit, Chris C. A LAZY TAKER OF OTHER'S WORK. Do you bring this same ethical standing to your arguments with those you disagree with here? Keep an eye on them in your community they have no practical understanding of what they propose. Who among us have you ever seen steal another's work deliberately and post it unattributed, with the assumption or implication very possibly made by the reader, that it was our own work? Who needs watching? Parents are the true advocates of their children---not neo-social constructionist. I'm stunned by your fair mindedness, and your lack of name calling and blaming. I've never seen a single poster here, as you insinuate above, that you refer to as "the cohort" and "they," claim that parents aren't the best advocate for their children. Their argument, that you attempt to change by putting words and political motivations on them they have not said or is exhibited by any of us. "The cohort," and "they," have argued that some parents are not good advocates for their children. And some are not, obviously, as some have abused, neglected, and killed their own children. Usually we referred to abusive parents, and of course, to parents that are not logically clear about the connection between hitting and spanking and assault. That is the central argument here, and you attempt to reframe it into a bogus argument. Who needs watching here? I DO consider them, and you, as poor advocates for children. By the way, what is it in the belief of ending assault of children extrapolates to the larger question of social reform? Does this mean you are against social reform? That IS, as far as I can tell, all that "neo-" as in "new," "social" as in "society," and "constructionist," as in "builder," could mean, unless of course you were name calling...a practice you claim is the exclusive game of "the cohort." By the way, the website you "borrowed" the list of parenting disciplines from: http://www.childadvocate.org/2e.htm , Bills itself as "The Web Site that Brings Attention to the Human Rights of Young People," A quick read of the site shows it to be exactly what you attempt to use as a derisive attack on "the cohort." And among the comments on the use of punishment is this short sentence of description: "Physically and verbally violent and aggressive." You should read Ms Coutre's personal info page at: http://www.childadvocate.org/6a.htm And her position on CP: At http://www.childadvocate.org/1a.htm " Definitions © 2000-2003 by Laurie A. Couture, M.Ed, LMHC Corporal Punishment is any action on the part of an adult or caretaker that intentionally inflicts, or causes to result, pain or physiological discomfort in a person under the age of 18 for the purposes of punishment or containment. Corporal punishment is generally referred to as spanking, slapping, smacking, hitting or paddling a child in a way that does not meet the legal requirements for a definition of child abuse. However, corporal punishment also includes: Biting, shaking, shoving or pulling a child; denying, restricting or rationing a child's use of the toilet; denying any other physiological need or forcing physical exertion and fixed positions as a means of punishment or containment. " By the way, your combining of the last three "principles" into a single one, does not constitute a defensible taking of others work and not citing them with credit...as in: " Principle #49: Honor a child's need for autonomy and power over some aspects of his/her decisions- let them make decisions where appropriate Principle #50: Above all, treat all children with dignity and respect by refraining from using negative, punitive and violent methods of control- Use positive methods that promote critical thinking and show love, caring, empathy, understanding and patience towards all children " I suspect you jambed the together to confuse the readers perception of what they really say....for they clearly say, "don't spank." When you a looking for parenting principles to list to attempt to take the moral highground in this debate, Chris C., you might want to avoid someone that has the strong opinions of "the cohort" you attempt to ridicule and bully by these tactics of yours. You are really funny, Chris C. and of course a three dollar bill. This post is just one in a series of attempts from time to time from you to try and legitimize you and your little "cohort." Sorry. No cigar. Anyone that can read can figure you out in a moment, unless they to suffer from the compulsion to assault children, or defend others doing so. Non-spanker by choice How many children have you raised, or are you raising, in your home? I have a choice not to eat icecream too. I am a non-icecream eater by choice. I don't keep any in my home so of what importance is my "choice?" Chris C. ....the phony. You aren't one of those texans given to exaggeration, are yah, Chris C.? TX Kane |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Mr. Kane--after looking through many of your posts it appears you like
to see yourself talk. You seem to modify posts to fit your personal needs and use the approach you accuse others of. I've never been spanked but you are a fool! You either like yourself very much or even hate yourself (are you by chance bi-polar?).-Jim Non-spanker by choice How many children have you raised, or are you raising, in your home? I have a choice not to eat icecream too. I am a non-icecream eater by choice. I don't keep any in my home so of what importance is my "choice?" Chris C. ...th |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Kane,
Thank you for posting the websites below. Parenting In Jesus' Footsteps is a wonderful website. Not all Christians do aggree with assaulting children and calling it love. There are many fundamentalist, born-again Christians that hitting or hurting children in any way in the name of discipline. These individuals are becoming more vocal and their numbers are growing. LaVonne kane wrote: On 12 Nov 2004 08:22:34 -0800, (Chris C.) wrote: ..........and posted, obviously trolling for support, to alt.christian.religion... You'll find, Chris C., that not all Christians agree with assaulting children and calling it "love." http://parentinginjesusfootsteps.org/ http://stoptherod.net/ In the absence of any regular advice --here is some that doesn't support punishing parents who don't follow them to the letter. -Special notes to new posters: I do not support the reform of reasonable force statutes There is no such thing as "reasonable force statutes" regarding corporal punishment of children. "reasonable force" is a statutory concept relating to criminal law regarding the use of force in situations where one is protecting self or others. It is used to judge the use of force by police...who, by the way, are only allowed to use force in three ways; to arrest someone's progress who resists, to protect the officer, and to protect the suspect or others. Police are not allowed by law to use force to "punish" as in "corporal punishment." Any such attempt is prosecutable as "assault" except.....in the instance of a parent assaulting a child physically. Morally this is recognized in many nations as assault and a crime. While I do not, at this time, presuming my neighbors and fellow citizens to be morally progressive and cabable of responding to ethics and logic in argument, support the use of statute to correct this very sick practice of spanking. that lead to punitive measures for parents who may use discipline within the current legal limits (this would include but is not limited to physical restraint to protect a child from harm of self or others). How does spanking "physically restrain"[t] a child? That is, ostensibly, not it's purpose. Or it wouldn't be labeled as corporal "punishment." You are confusing one with the other to obscure the issue of spanking being the moral equivalent of assault. Your logic is badly flawed and you have not progressed, personally, for as long as I've seen you post here. You fail to defend your so-called "choice" and you have failed logically repeatedly to defend spanking as not being assaultive. -also do not post any personal information on this site. Often participants in this n.g. will use/abuse the information and conti nue to do so if you return. Interestingly I find that you and your cronies are most often the perpetrators of such abuse. Upon my first visit to the ng a couple of years back I was stunned to see Chris Dugan, who I could find NO posts written by the used ad hom in any of his arguments, being repeatedly and viciously attacked by a whole slew of low-lifes such as you (I'm not as polite as Chris D.) From "LaChrissy" to YOU, to Fern, to Observer, to Doan and the occasional asshole troll. You, Chris C., are a phony. And any google of your posting history here makes it plain you talk out of both sides of your mouth. You pretend to an ethic you do not practice, and try to project your own sick attacks as being done TO you rather than BY you. 48 Suggestions: R R R ... in it's original, it is "Positive Discipline: 50 Principles & Alternatives to Punishment" Positive Discipline: 48 Principles & Alternatives to Punishment Principle #1: Decode the message behind the misbehavior And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #2: Understand WHY the behavior is occurring And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #3: Help the child calm down by staying calm and speaking calmly And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #4: Explain to the child how his/her behavior affects others And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #5: If possible, alter the precipitating factors that led to the behavior And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #6: Discuss together a non-punitive consequence for the behavior that is logical to the behavior And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? And what the hell is a "non-punitive consequence?" A hug? I doubt you assholes that obvious hate, distrust, and are frightened by little children have it in you to respond to unwanted behavior with positive consequences...though I've proven again and again, and taught others how to do it, even with children that were so far gone that they were diagnosed as mentally ill. Principle #7: Carry out what you promised to carry out when you promised to do so And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #8: Do not nag, lecture, threaten or use sarcasm And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #9: Praise efforts and reward success And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #10: If the behavior begins to occur again, give a reminder of why the behavior is not appropriate- you will need to be consistent over time And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #11: Unless the behavior involves harming self, others or property, give three warnings "1,2,3..." And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #12: Immediately follow through with the consequence with a brief restating of the infraction in a firm (but friendly) tone And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #13: Discuss with the child what occurred, why it wasn't acceptable and how it can be prevented in the future. And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #14: Let the child voice his/her feelings freely without judgment And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #15: Help the child to understand that he/she is a good, acceptable person and that the behavior, not the child, is unacceptable- accept young people unconditionally regardless of their behavior And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #16: Remember what it was like to be at the child's age. Refrain from tacking adult meanings and connotations onto childish behavior And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #17: Read up on child and adolescent development and find out if what you are expecting is developmentally appropriate- or if the misbehavior is age-appropriate behavior And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #18: Understand each child's individual capabilities, needs and circumstances and modify your expectations and approaches accordingly And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #19: If the child has multiple negative behaviors, only focus on modifying those that are most destructive to self, others and property And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #20: Empower children with acceptable choices- don't just tell them what they CAN'T do- give them acceptable alternatives And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #21: Use re-direction, distraction and selective ignoring for minor infractions And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #22: Use of the toilet should be viewed as a necessary right, not a privilege- promote health and healthy attitudes towards the body by honoring this right- if children misuse the bathroom pass in school, have them use the toilet in the nurse's office for one week as a consequence And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #23: Decode the need the child is trying to meet by his/her misbehavior and help them meet that need by acceptable means And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #24: If the child is out of control, guide them to a quiet area to calm down before discussing the problem And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #25: If a child must be placed in a "time out", do not impose a time limit- let the child come out when he/she is ready- never leave a young child unsupervised- never close a child into a frightening room- do not banish the child And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #26: If the child comes out of a "time out" prematurely, state that it looks as if he/she is ready to behave appropriately and give them that chance- avoid forcing them back in unless the behavior starts up again And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #27: Children often misbehave when they lack attention- give them the attention they need and deserve- including hugging, patting the back, ruffling the hair, high fives, etc. And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #28: Rather than give "do not" messages, state what you would like to see instead And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #29: If physical restraint is necessary to avoid an attack against the self or others, do so progressively, in stages beginning with a verbal warning, increased physical proximity, followed by a hand on the shoulder and then a gentle hand on the arm, progressing with as little restraint as possible to keep the child from harming self or others And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #30: If the child shows lack of attention and restlessness, evaluate whether the activities you provide are stimulating, exciting, involving and appropriate to the learning style and intelligence needs of the child And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #31: Discuss the importance of verbalizing feelings rather than acting on impulses- model this! And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #32: Model the behaviors you want to see your children emulate And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #33: Do not engage in conduct that you don't allow in your children Then I can't have sex with consenting adults, smoke, drink alcohol, cross the street by myself, or stay out after curfew. Get real you simp. And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #34: If your child has consistent behavioral problems do your best to alleviate the causes- enforce only necessary limits and cut away unnecessary rules and inflexible ways of doing things And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #35: Teach and model positive, healthy guilt and remorse that leads to restitution and responsibility- teach and model good social skills And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #36: Never shame, belittle or humiliate your child- help them build a positive self-image and a healthy self-esteem And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #37: Admit when you've made mistakes and apologize to your child And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #38: Teach and model that violence is not acceptable, including that it is never acceptable for adults to hit children And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #39: Be involved with the media your child is viewing and discuss what they see and why it is positive or negative And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #40: The rule about gaining respect is to earn it- you earn it from a child by giving it to them And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #41: Help a frequently errant child succeed by giving him/her small steps towards a goal that ensures success- never give up on a kid! And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #42: Do guide children and do not leave them to regulate their own behavior- children feel unsafe when there are no limits at all- spend more time with them And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #43: Tune in to, rather than ignore, physical and verbal cues that something is bothering a child And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #44: Deescalate a problem before the child gets out of control- be aware of the warning signs of escalating behavior And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #45: Treat boys with the same dignity and caring, gentle, loving concern that you treat girls with- do not discipline boys for a behavior that you allow girls to get away with- do not tolerate sexist attitudes in girls that you wouldn't allow boys to get away with- do not put gender restrictions on toys, emotions, hobbies and activities And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #46: Avoid power struggles and verbal fights with older kids- negotiate democratically when possible And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #47: Honor a child's need for autonomy and power over some aspects of his/her decisions- let them make decisions where appropriate And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? Principle #48: Above all, treat all children with dignity and respect by refraining from using negative, punitive and violent methods of control- Use positive methods that promote critical thinking and show love, caring, empathy, understanding and patience towards all children And pick spanking as a reasonable response if you fail or fail to respond effectively without force? --I'm interested in hearing from those of you who are not supportive of the "cohort" agenda to punish parents through revoking the reasonable force statutes on the books. There are not "reasonable force" statutes regarding parent child discipline. CP is CP. Here in TX we are keeping an eye on them when they try to harm families by extending the control of laws to further limit family rights and by putting kids at greater risk through the use of spurious data/research.--I am not interested in any contact with the"cohort" What is a 'cohort'?" and have boycotted any conversations with them for several years now. You are a reasonable then in your "debate" of the subject as all the other little dim twits that show up here and move on because they fail to put forward logic and ethical argument. In other words they fail to defend the practice of spanking as a reasonable means of treating children. Their agenda is all to obvious and very harmful to families. The making of peaceful families that do not use pain and humiliation is not a harmful agenda. --The only point we agree on is that spanking is not needed to discipline kids--beyond that they beat the drum for their singular cause (spanking = child abuse---no matter what and parents who use it should be punished). Your definition does not apply to everyone in this ng that disagrees with you, Chris. That is only one point some of us make. We have other points we make as well. And punishment is not universally agreed upon by us. Notice how often one of us mentions the Swedish model...their law against child abuse. Then recall what the "punishment" is for breaking the law in Sweden. ***I would like to add that they owe an apology to those adults who grew up with "real" abuse (as in most current legal definitions). No we don't. Not a single person here that is against the practice of assaulting children and calling it CP, or "spanking," has ever minimized or otherwise denied the difference. Their attempt to fuzz the lines does great disservice to you and all those who have been harmed. WE have not attempted to "fuzz the lines" the least bit. In fact I've requested repeatedly that YOU folks clarify the line...which by it's nature and reality IS FUZZY. Even the law cannot and has not clarified the line between child abuse and acceptable corporal punishment. In time, as law makers in other countries have done, if YOU and YOUR cohorts do not stop defending child assault and make a moral choice to end it, law makers here will come to see that there IS NO LINE...that the use of pain and humiliation for parenting IS assaultive..and the reason we have laws to protect adults from assault are exactly the same reason we should not assault children. Because it is immoral, and it proven to not work. I would also like to see poster return to the n.g. that have been chased off by the bullying tactics of this group (they have violated and continue to do so most rules of netiquette). We have stood up to the bullying tactics of you and your cohort. Fighting back is not bullying. You are, by your willingness to allow and support parental choice to assault their children, a complicite bully. I'm sure they have used these type of tactics in their own homes, with their families (and friends). How can you be sure, other than to make a veiled by obvious personal attack on them by that statement and claim? The behavior of a bully. I learned as a child there is only one cure for a bully who will not listen to reason, logic, and exhortation to stop.....kick their butt thoroughly. Then switch to the more civilized offerings to discuss the issue. We do not advocate their example... Then why did you just do it, and why do those in your camp use ad hom and lies? Fern is the most blatant example of a liar, Doan of an ad hom name caller. And you, of a slimy word twister that pretends to saintliness while using ad hom yourself, as you are doing in this post. A few of your cohort's various attacks, lies, and immoral rants: Doan: "I have already proved that you were on the punishment component in the Embry study. You are either stupid or a very bad liar. Which is it? :-)" In another, I accused him of dodging a question...by a device you are using now....I said "Dodger." He replied with: "Stupid dog! :-)" I then said he was behaving like a child, calling him "little boy." He replied with: "You don't see them hurling obscenities, do you stupid dog? :-0" See the lies and escalation of ad hom? He's an obvious bully. I stated: When you took on answering the question your answers, as always in honest debate, became YOUR responsibility to provide proof. You haven't. You've simply sited other poor examples of logic and honesty. He replied: "I used your logic against you, stupid dog! ;-)" This is a tiny sample, by the way, the last three entries from just ONE post, of hundreds and hundreds of posts by Doan that shows who is and isn't the bully in these exchanges. Fern has posted 295 posts with LaVonne as the subject...and I found none that were not derisive, and few that did not contain lies concerning LaVonne. Then there was this silly twit: " From: ) Subject: Reply to Chris C View this article only Newsgroups: alt.parenting.spanking Date: 2001-11-19 10:15:43 PST Little osama dugan is crabwalking about as fast as his namesake.....The little weasel is clearly on the run and here's a classic portrait him " LaChrissie went on for hundreds of such posts, obviously obsessed with Chris D. and your cohort's inability to defeat his logic and facts. Observer, "LaChrissie," and other abusive twits long gone from here have similar posting histories. YOU Chris C, have posted the following comments: From your most recent putting words in LaVonne's mouth, "'Everybody Look at Me'" To; "The clique displays obsessive tendencies" "waiving her somewhat tattered diploma" To making unproven, bogus claims about me and my posting: " -Mind reading -Making up histories of posters and backgrounds -Placing his words and actions on others -Misrepresenting the data -Misrepresenting other posters " None of which I do, and exactly what YOU do. To this lie (Gowtch) and ad hom (Chris Dugan) combined: " It's nice to see the only "ex-cohort" (thrown out for his usual behavior) member back spewing forth his rantings for which he knows nothing! I hope he follows up with some choice phrases as usual (I still think he's Chris Duggie in hiding). " and; " Fern--This is the classic moron Kane talking his typical tripe below. No response is even needed. He doesn't warrant one. He reminds me of Ivan (maybe it is). This needs to be crossposted just so others (cohort included---because they wouldn't even have him) won't waist [sic] their time or energy on him. He doesn't even matter in the equation (I believe they call that "less than zero"). " And Chris C., these all came from just the sequential first 7 or 8 of the hits in google when I clicked on your addy. You post like this constantly. You cannot post without ad hom and lies, apparently. And hom and facts would be interesting and colorful. But lies? Tsk. They support full equal--political, social rights for kids and have posted as much. Nonsense. A simple lie. No such advocacy has happened. What has happened is that the "cohort" individuals have each expressed their own views. For instance some are for laws against spanking. I, personally am not, and stated so, and given the reasons why not many times. Some are for some punitive child teaching, I happen to not be. Some are to a degree and others less. You are clearly a bigot..by the use of classifying us into a group so you can belittle and insinuate as less grand than you. Trying to make a connection to our claims, statements, arguments, debate, that is not up to your lofty ideals of reasoned discussion of this issue. As I said you are a phony. Here's some more for folks to see what you are really up to, and your lack of ethics: Taking my statement out of context, by unethical snipping, you commented: " His intellect is obviously limited so he feels the need to add such verbiage to legitimize his lack of scholarship. -Keep posting.-Chris " "As you have already figured out by now that Kane is a member of the notorious "think-a-likes" that camp out here in this ng. Many of us refer to them as the"cohort" because of their love of the fight. They can't see that the narrow focus of their agenda will actually harm parents and families in the long-term. Keep giving them hell (they deserve it for the neophyte propaganda they push).-Chris " " Fern--it's sad to say that these cases are all to often allowed to occur. Of course the rights of any individual, according to the "cohort', doesn't compare to even 1 child receiving a single swat (I remember reading a post like this from several members of that liberal elitist group). " Rather than go on with this sad litany of your phoniness let's take a closer look at your more recent attempt to "take the high ground" from those you call, "the cohort." You, who claim to be a researcher and degreed scholar......posted the work of another without citation and credit, so it might appear to the reader as your own work..did you not? All you did was leave off the last two suggestions. Was that supposed to allow you to take others intellectual property? Not without a citation it's not. YOU, allowed to read other's work for scholarly content? R R R R R R Now go and apologize to Ms. Coutu Positive Discipline: 50 Principles & Alternatives to Punishment © 2000-2003 by Laurie A. Couture, M.Ed, LMHC http://www.childadvocate.org/2e.htm That's our name calling twit, Chris C. A LAZY TAKER OF OTHER'S WORK. Do you bring this same ethical standing to your arguments with those you disagree with here? Keep an eye on them in your community they have no practical understanding of what they propose. Who among us have you ever seen steal another's work deliberately and post it unattributed, with the assumption or implication very possibly made by the reader, that it was our own work? Who needs watching? Parents are the true advocates of their children---not neo-social constructionist. I'm stunned by your fair mindedness, and your lack of name calling and blaming. I've never seen a single poster here, as you insinuate above, that you refer to as "the cohort" and "they," claim that parents aren't the best advocate for their children. Their argument, that you attempt to change by putting words and political motivations on them they have not said or is exhibited by any of us. "The cohort," and "they," have argued that some parents are not good advocates for their children. And some are not, obviously, as some have abused, neglected, and killed their own children. Usually we referred to abusive parents, and of course, to parents that are not logically clear about the connection between hitting and spanking and assault. That is the central argument here, and you attempt to reframe it into a bogus argument. Who needs watching here? I DO consider them, and you, as poor advocates for children. By the way, what is it in the belief of ending assault of children extrapolates to the larger question of social reform? Does this mean you are against social reform? That IS, as far as I can tell, all that "neo-" as in "new," "social" as in "society," and "constructionist," as in "builder," could mean, unless of course you were name calling...a practice you claim is the exclusive game of "the cohort." By the way, the website you "borrowed" the list of parenting disciplines from: http://www.childadvocate.org/2e.htm , Bills itself as "The Web Site that Brings Attention to the Human Rights of Young People," A quick read of the site shows it to be exactly what you attempt to use as a derisive attack on "the cohort." And among the comments on the use of punishment is this short sentence of description: "Physically and verbally violent and aggressive." You should read Ms Coutre's personal info page at: http://www.childadvocate.org/6a.htm And her position on CP: At http://www.childadvocate.org/1a.htm " Definitions © 2000-2003 by Laurie A. Couture, M.Ed, LMHC Corporal Punishment is any action on the part of an adult or caretaker that intentionally inflicts, or causes to result, pain or physiological discomfort in a person under the age of 18 for the purposes of punishment or containment. Corporal punishment is generally referred to as spanking, slapping, smacking, hitting or paddling a child in a way that does not meet the legal requirements for a definition of child abuse. However, corporal punishment also includes: Biting, shaking, shoving or pulling a child; denying, restricting or rationing a child's use of the toilet; denying any other physiological need or forcing physical exertion and fixed positions as a means of punishment or containment. " By the way, your combining of the last three "principles" into a single one, does not constitute a defensible taking of others work and not citing them with credit...as in: " Principle #49: Honor a child's need for autonomy and power over some aspects of his/her decisions- let them make decisions where appropriate Principle #50: Above all, treat all children with dignity and respect by refraining from using negative, punitive and violent methods of control- Use positive methods that promote critical thinking and show love, caring, empathy, understanding and patience towards all children " I suspect you jambed the together to confuse the readers perception of what they really say....for they clearly say, "don't spank." When you a looking for parenting principles to list to attempt to take the moral highground in this debate, Chris C., you might want to avoid someone that has the strong opinions of "the cohort" you attempt to ridicule and bully by these tactics of yours. You are really funny, Chris C. and of course a three dollar bill. This post is just one in a series of attempts from time to time from you to try and legitimize you and your little "cohort." Sorry. No cigar. Anyone that can read can figure you out in a moment, unless they to suffer from the compulsion to assault children, or defend others doing so. Non-spanker by choice How many children have you raised, or are you raising, in your home? I have a choice not to eat icecream too. I am a non-icecream eater by choice. I don't keep any in my home so of what importance is my "choice?" Chris C. ...the phony. You aren't one of those texans given to exaggeration, are yah, Chris C.? TX Kane |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Jim,
Kane has been a regular poster on alt.parenting.spanking for years, as have I. While Kane and I have a different posting style, I have yet to read a post from him that demonstrates anything other than the utmost respect for children. LaVonne jcalhoun wrote: Mr. Kane--after looking through many of your posts it appears you like to see yourself talk. You seem to modify posts to fit your personal needs and use the approach you accuse others of. I've never been spanked but you are a fool! You either like yourself very much or even hate yourself (are you by chance bi-polar?).-Jim Non-spanker by choice How many children have you raised, or are you raising, in your home? I have a choice not to eat icecream too. I am a non-icecream eater by choice. I don't keep any in my home so of what importance is my "choice?" Chris C. ...th |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
jcalhoun wrote:
Mr. Kane--after looking through many of your posts it appears you like to see yourself talk. ---------------- You're just a impotently defensive spanker who can't handle the Truth. Quit the ad hominem, get back on topic and prove that you actually have something to say, and are not merely an ignorant knee-jerk! Steve Non-spanker by choice How many children have you raised, or are you raising, in your home? I have a choice not to eat icecream too. I am a non-icecream eater by choice. I don't keep any in my home so of what importance is my "choice?" Chris C. ...th |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Jim--You'll have to excuse the name calling clique here. They don't
won't new posters entering their private propaganda domain. In their world if you don't prosecute parents who may have spanked a child then they will attack you rather than welcome you to this n.g. It is my hope you will continue to post here regardless of their rantings. BTW I strongly agree with your assertion with regards to kane (lower case intentional). Please continue to exercise your free will (and right) here. Many non-spankers post here that don't agree with the fascist approach! Welcome... Non-spanker by choice, Chris C. TX (jcalhoun) wrote in message . com... Mr. Kane--after looking through many of your posts it appears you like to see yourself talk. You seem to modify posts to fit your personal needs and use the approach you accuse others of. I've never been spanked but you are a fool! You either like yourself very much or even hate yourself (are you by chance bi-polar?).-Jim Non-spanker by choice How many children have you raised, or are you raising, in your home? I have a choice not to eat icecream too. I am a non-icecream eater by choice. I don't keep any in my home so of what importance is my "choice?" Chris C. ...th |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Pastor Dave wrote: On 14 Dec 2004 16:31:32 -0800, while scaling the Mt. Everest, "Kane" pontificated: Carlson LaVonne wrote: You say, "Spanking your kids is not child abuse" (see your post below) Spanking involves raising one's hand and hitting a child, with or without an implement, in the name of discipline. In the US, striking anyone over the age of 18 for any reason other than self-protection when there is no other alternative, is considered assault and battery. Every state in the US has a clause that exempts children from this legal protection. Are you assaulting your children when you spank them? I think so. When adults are legally protected from action considered abusive, and children are exempt from that protection, I would have to conclude that when you spank children you are abusing children. LaVonne But LaVonne, the poster is simply claiming it's not abuse. And of course the use of CP (including spanking) is not abuse. I have it both from a man of God, as some of the posters here claim they are, and apparently somewhere in the New Testament, Actually, the Old Testament. Do you think the New Testament then was not the new way to follow, under Christ? What in Christ's message said to follow the ways of the old testament? And what did he say regarding those that would hurt children? Do the words "sea bottom" and "millstone" bring anything to mind, Pastor? "Foolishness is bound in the heart of a child; but the rod of correction shall drive it far from him." - Proverbs 22:15 And the Hebrew word for"rod"is actually the same word used in the O.T. for tribe, scepter, and authority. First used in Genesis 49:10. And it is also used for a shepherds staff. That is not used to beat the sheep, but to protect and guide them. "Withhold not correction from the child: for if thou beatest him with the rod, he shall not die." - Proverbs 23:13 And these are from the Proverbs of who? I have a hunch the interpretation of "beatest" might well be open to interpretation as well. In fact, even what a "child" is has been examined in the context of The OT usage. Age being the critical issue. The hebrew words used for "child" differ according to age. And very much the circumstances. http://www.angelfire.com/md2/moodyfa...nclusions.html Have you read Laurie Moody's essay on her study of this issue of biblical discipline? Do. The answer's you are coming up with for Christian's are anything but universally accepted by them. Some reject it vehemently, with good cause. The live the New Testament, as was intended. The old, was a story. The new, a way of life. Was Solomon not the most ghastly despot in the Old Testament? One who raised a son himself so harshly that when that son came to the throne, and exercised his revenge over his fathers cruel upbringing on his own people so despotically, the people ran him out? Do you doubt in the least, for instance, given what we know of Solomon, that he would NOT have had the guard cleave the child in two had the two women both held their tongues? And you wish to follow HIS proverbs? Is there a personage in the Old Testament more damaging to and in conflict over the relationship between parents and children than him? Can you say he cared for children or their rights in any way at all? That he did not consider them disposable other than chattel? And when he said, or the translators said he said, "child" could he not have meant a grown son. I still say, "Bill and Mary are my children." Have a little peek. http://www.topical-bible-studies.org/18-0001.htm " The Proverbs of Solomon Thy Father and Thy Mother Proverbs 1:1 The proverbs of Solomon the son of David, king of Israel; 2 To know wisdom and instruction; to perceive the words of understanding; 3 To receive the instruction of wisdom, justice, and judgment, and equity; 4 To give subtilty to the simple, to the young man knowledge and discretion. Proverbs 1:8 My son, hear the instruction of thy father, and forsake not the law of thy mother: 9 For they shall be an ornament of grace unto thy head, and chains about thy neck. Proverbs 3:1 My son, forget not my law; but let thine heart keep my commandments: 2 For length of days, and long life, and peace, shall they add to thee. 3 Let not mercy and truth forsake thee: bind them about thy neck; write them upon the table of thine heart: 4 So shalt thou find favour and good understanding in the sight of God and man. Proverbs 3:11 My son, despise not the chastening of the LORD; neither be weary of his correction: 12 For whom the LORD loveth he correcteth; even as a father the son in whom he delighteth. Proverbs 4:1 Hear, ye children, the instruction of a father, and attend to know understanding. 2 For I give you good doctrine, forsake ye not my law. 3 For I was my father's son, tender and only beloved in the sight of my mother. 4 He taught me also, and said unto me, Let thine heart retain my words: keep my commandments, and live. Proverbs 4:10 Hear, O my son, and receive my sayings; and the years of thy life shall be many. 11 I have taught thee in the way of wisdom; I have led thee in right paths. 12 When thou goest, thy steps shall not be straitened; and when thou runnest, thou shalt not stumble. 13 Take fast hold of instruction; let her not go: keep her; for she is thy life. Proverbs 4:20 My son, attend to my words; incline thine ear unto my sayings. 21 Let them not depart from thine eyes; keep them in the midst of thine heart. 22 For they are life unto those that find them, and health to all their flesh. 23 Keep thy heart with all diligence; for out of it are the issues of life. Proverbs 5:1 My son, attend unto my wisdom, and bow thine ear to my understanding: 2 That thou mayest regard discretion, and that thy lips may keep knowledge. Proverbs 5:7 Hear me now therefore, O ye children, and depart not from the words of my mouth. Proverbs 6:20 My son, keep thy father's commandment, and forsake not the law of thy mother: 21 Bind them continually upon thine heart, and tie them about thy neck. 22 When thou goest, it shall lead thee; when thou sleepest, it shall keep thee; and when thou awakest, it shall talk with thee. 23 For the commandment is a lamp; and the law is light; and reproofs of instruction are the way of life: 24 To keep thee from the evil woman, from the flattery of the tongue of a strange woman. Proverbs 7:1 My son, keep my words, and lay up my commandments with thee. 2 Keep my commandments, and live; and my law as the apple of thine eye. 3 Bind them upon thy fingers, write them upon the table of thine heart. Proverbs 7:24 Hearken unto me now therefore, O ye children, and attend to the words of my mouth. Proverbs 10:1 The proverbs of Solomon. A wise son maketh a glad father: but a foolish son is the heaviness of his mother. Proverbs 13:1 A wise son heareth his father's instruction: but a scorner heareth not rebuke. Proverbs 13:24 He that spareth his rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes. Proverbs 15:5 A fool despiseth his father's instruction: but he that regardeth reproof is prudent. Proverbs 15:20 A wise son maketh a glad father: but a foolish man despiseth his mother. Proverbs 16:31 The hoary head is a crown of glory, if it be found in the way of righteousness. Proverbs 17:6 Children's children are the crown of old men; and the glory of children are their fathers. Proverbs 17:21 He that begetteth a fool doeth it to his sorrow: and the father of a fool hath no joy. Proverbs 17:25 A foolish son is a grief to his father, and bitterness to her that bare him. Proverbs 19:18 Chasten thy son while there is hope, and let not thy soul spare for his crying. Proverbs 19:26 He that wasteth his father, and chaseth away his mother, is a son that causeth shame, and bringeth reproach. Proverbs 20:11 Even a child is known by his doings, whether his work be pure, and whether it be right. 12 The hearing ear, and the seeing eye, the LORD hath made even both of them. Proverbs 20:20 Whoso curseth his father or his mother, his lamp shall be put out in obscure darkness. Proverbs 20:29 The glory of young men is their strength: and the beauty of old men is the grey head. Proverbs 20:30 The blueness of a wound cleanseth away evil: so do stripes the inward parts of the belly. Proverbs 22:6 Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it. Proverbs 22:15 Foolishness is bound in the heart of a child; but the rod of correction shall drive it far from him. Proverbs 23:13 Withhold not correction from the child: for if thou beatest him with the rod, he shall not die. 14 Thou shalt beat him with the rod, and shalt deliver his soul from hell. Proverbs 23:15 My son, if thine heart be wise, my heart shall rejoice, even mine. 16 Yea, my reins shall rejoice, when thy lips speak right things. Proverbs 23:22 Hearken unto thy father that begat thee, and despise not thy mother when she is old. Proverbs 23:24 The father of the righteous shall greatly rejoice: and he that begetteth a wise child shall have joy of him. 25 Thy father and thy mother shall be glad, and she that bare thee shall rejoice. Proverbs 23:26 My son, give me thine heart, and let thine eyes observe my ways. Proverbs 27:11 My son, be wise, and make my heart glad, that I may answer him that reproacheth me. Proverbs 28:7 Whoso keepeth the law is a wise son: but he that is a companion of riotous men shameth his father. Proverbs 28:24 Whoso robbeth his father or his mother, and saith, It is no transgression; the same is the companion of a destroyer. Proverbs 29:3 Whoso loveth wisdom rejoiceth his father: but he that keepeth company with harlots spendeth his substance. Proverbs 29:15 The rod and reproof give wisdom: but a child left to himself bringeth his mother to shame. Proverbs 29:17 Correct thy son, and he shall give thee rest; yea, he shall give delight unto thy soul. Proverbs 30:11 There is a generation that curseth their father, and doth not bless their mother. 12 There is a generation that are pure in their own eyes, and yet is not washed from their filthiness. 13 There is a generation, O how lofty are their eyes! and their eyelids are lifted up. Proverbs 30:17 The eye that mocketh at his father, and despiseth to obey his mother, the ravens of the valley shall pick it out, and the young eagles shall eat it. " Ol' Solomon seemed, if these are chronologically created, to be getting meaner and crankier and more hatefilled toward children as he aged. This, Pastor, is a clear testament, where it points to bad behavior by the son, to how YOUR kind of parenting results in children that do harm, even to their parents. It may be saying something entirely the contrary to what you think it says. and besides, I'm sure someone from the Spanking Compulsives Collective can answer the simple question: When does "spanking" become abuse? x While anger can and usually will play a role in it, that anger needs to be checked at a certain point, You seem unable to understand that I just asked for that exact "point." as spanking is for correction and not to satisfy a desire to get said anger out. Also, if it is done for self enjoyment, then it is abuse. Pontificating. Unclear. Typical. And if the child fails to be corrected by one spanking? Or by a spanking of fewer strokes? Or by a spanking of less intensity? What then? Inquirying minds want to know. Any of you folks contributing to this or other threads care to help us non-spankers, The Cohort of Non-Spankers, understand this better? Seems we have some kind of inability to comprehend this simple thing. There are times when discussion, or other forms of response simply will not work. That is correct. Those "times" don't indictate to decent loving parents that they child is defiant, evil, sin filled, but simply wrong. He or she does not know. We have many alternatives at that moment, not the least of which is to do nothing at all, and wait for a better time, an older child, a less tired or distracted child, a child that not in the circumstances that caused them to react in a way we consider misbehavior...like tempted by cookies on the coffee table, or something shiny set down low. Other alternatives are equally as simple. Move things. Set up proper barriers so a child can't get to the traffic filled street. Simply pick the child up and hug them even as they try to hit another. It's amazing what attention one can get from a child by the simple act of repeating what they always expected when they were in destress at an earlier age...comfort. It will put thim in the more receptive frame of mind that it did back then...for it's just using old patterns to learn new things. The child will defy you no matter what you do and so, at that point, spanking becomes the only option. R R R R . .. . "defy you." That's a silly to see in writing as when I hear it, and when I see a parent doing their spanking. What do parents spank for? Tired children that cannot listen. Ignorant children that are not ready for cause and effect reasoning. Frightened children that strike out protectively. Selfish children that defend their toys and space against other children, at 3 and younger.....when they cannot, because of the limits of brain development, do anything else. Children that talk back and say "NO!" emphatically just as they are taught the word, but cannot really know the meanings involved. If they could think, for spanking them at moments such as that they'd think you were crasy. They are trying to learn, and like all learners are going to stumble and do many things incorrectly....but defiance? R R R R R... They are simply TRYING HARDER. Often they have no idea what you wish or want. Adults frequently overestimate, or incorrectly estimate, the child's capacity to understand, and their actual motives. It's ALWAYS to learn, no matter what the ignorant, such as you think you are seeing. If you back down at that point, the child will run the house. I never had to "back down." It was never a control struggle. When they were too little to resist me physically I'd just pick them up, remove them from the areas, or to the area I wanted them in, and keep it loving and fun. Very quickly if I wanted a change of scenery they learned to go for it with a word. These were a few: "bath time?" "wanna popcicle?" "mommy's home," "watermelon?" "waterfight," etc. When the were five, and six, and seven, and seventeen, the words changed, the intent did not. Raising my kids was so pleasant and easy that I used to not tell all the child haters I saw around me who called themselves parents. I was afraid they'd kill me. And I more than enough excitement too, as my kids were tremendously brave and exploratory. Man did I run alot if they were out of earshot. On the flip side, if you spank all of the time, the child no longer fears it and is used to it and it does not have the desired effect. You have a spanking machine then, that is set on random acts of punishment? You see to forget the fear is not of the spanking. It's of the spanker. If I was around your children they'd quickly learn, I do not hit, humiliate, shame, children. And they would never need to fear me doing so. They would come to me to learn, as my children did, without fear. I'll bet your children came to you a lot for "instruction." Fear based parenting creates that kind of dependency, and makes monsters that look like good citizens, but can be easily directed to do horrible things to others and themselves by people that knew or sense instinctively how you raised them. Cults know how to use that well. They are kind and gentle and supportive at first....that pulls the kid in who thinks they have finally found a "parent" that is gentle. Once in the pain and humiliation starts, and because you taught them to be compliant using pain, they will obey and not question. And they will in fact ask for more indoctrination and more punishment with it..because it is a familiar pattern that makes them feel comfortable because it's predictable. It should be a last resort and not one that is often employed and properly done, it won't have to be. Oddly, I found that no matter how often I used laughter, gentle direction and information sharing, even backing down when I could see the child wasn't ready, it never wore out. The child never developed any resistance to by its frequency. And my children never had any fear connected to it to wear out or become harden to, and so my parenting, no matter how frequently, or vigorously, or intensely I applied it, even produced the slightest reduction in effect. Weird, eh? In fact...and promise not to tell anyone. I got better at it, it was more and more effective, to the point my kids were powerful self learners at very young ages..much younger than other kids, spanked kids, and they are to this day..in their 40's. It will be a rare thing, because the child knows that you will, if necessary, take it to whatever level the child decides to take it to. My kids knew the same thing. If I could not get through to them I'd take it to the level of asking them to help me find a way for them to understand. That was the bottom line for us. The Big Threat! "Dad's stuck, what should we do?" They always had elegantly constructed responses. "Maybe when I'm older?" "Maybe after snack time, I'm hungry." "Could we try it my way once to see daddy?" "Yes, I think I'll try sharing and see if that works." "I still can't say that word right, sniff so I'll try again tomorrow." "I won't climb up on the fence again unless you are holding my hand?" That circumstances in that last one damn near gave me a heart attack, but hit my kid? I don't think so. And that is the key. No, it's more frequent that last straw. The one the camel hates. The child knows that he/she takes it to that level and not the parent. The parent is simply responding to said level. The parent should not relish having to spank a child and should try other options first. I prefer instead of. And I do not have, nor do the parents I've known, have a bit of trouble with that. The lies that children that aren't "spanked" leaves out the truth that in fact they were, and the fact that they were punished with other methods as well, instead of taught by a loving supportive gentle parent. Most parent think they are gentle, but are in fact brutes from the child's perspective. And a great by product of this kind of parenting? Well the gently raised child can hardly wait to give some of it back. I used to have to ask my kids to get back to their growing up tasks. They wanted, at 5 and 6 and after to do housework, the laundry, and fetch and carry for adults to the point I had to forbid friends and family to take advantage of their generous spirits. -- Pastor Dave Raymond "I have more understanding than all my teachers: for thy testimonies are my meditation." - Psalm 119:99 I do believe I've heard reference to a Teacher before. And you missed His message, Pastor. What do you think of the parenting methods of The Pearls. Does it seem to you they follow your method of withhold spanking as a last resort? They seem terribly popular with some Christian parents. http://www.gospeltruth.net/children/pearl_tuac.htm this page shows how they create violent monsters of children before the fact by doing it in their minds, as a rationale for what will come.....the whipping they advocate. http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg...48656?v=glance or: http://tinyurl.com/433mu Seems some folks take exception to such methods. / \ 888 o{}xxxxx[]:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::888 \ 888 "And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God:" - Ephesians 6:17 You sure like that violent imagery, don'tcha? My kids gave that up early in life as they successfully transversed the normal human facination with violence as 6 year olds. By eleven my son was so gentle, but a very strong kid, and still is, that he put his bb gun down forever when he shot a little birdy. He told me with a very thoughtful face, much as he wore whenever he learned something new, from a math problem to how to climb a rope, that he had killed the bird and didn't want to use his bb gun anymore. I think he was apologizing to me for the cost of it and his setting it aside. Now he shoots paper only, and is competitive grade. But nothing alive. I put a nice fresh daisy on the end of your blade. Like it? Kane |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
On 14 Dec 2004 18:31:34 -0800, while scaling the Mt.
Everest, "Kane" pontificated: Actually, the Old Testament. Do you think the New Testament then was not the new way to follow, under Christ? What in Christ's message said to follow the ways of the old testament? And what did he say regarding those that would hurt children? Do the words "sea bottom" and "millstone" bring anything to mind, Pastor? You assume that to discipline a child is to harm a child. That is not a logical assumption. Harm comes to a child when you do not discipline a child. Jesus did not address disciplining a child at all. And btw, He was the one who inspired Solomon. "Foolishness is bound in the heart of a child; but the rod of correction shall drive it far from him." - Proverbs 22:15 And the Hebrew word for"rod"is actually the same word used in the O.T. for tribe, scepter, and authority. First used in Genesis 49:10. And it is also used for a shepherds staff. That is not used to beat the sheep, but to protect and guide them. Actually, the word does not appear in Genesis 49:10 and in Proverbs, it means, "a stick". And you forget, it says, "the rod of correction" (correction as in chastisement). "Withhold not correction from the child: for if thou beatest him with the rod, he shall not die." - Proverbs 23:13 And these are from the Proverbs of who? I have a hunch the interpretation of "beatest" might well be open to interpretation as well. Beatest = nakah - to strike Strike with the rod. You can dance all you want, but physical discipline, only when absolutely necessary as a last resort, of course, is prescribed in the Bible. -- Pastor Dave Raymond "I have more understanding than all my teachers: for thy testimonies are my meditation." - Psalm 119:99 / o{}xxxxx[]:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: \ "And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God:" - Ephesians 6:17 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| | Kids should work... | Kane | Spanking | 12 | December 10th 03 02:30 AM |
| | Kids should work... | Kane | Foster Parents | 3 | December 8th 03 11:53 PM |
Kids should work. | ChrisScaife | Foster Parents | 16 | December 7th 03 04:27 AM |