And again he strikes........ Doan strikes ...... again! was Kids should work...

On Thu, 4 Dec 2003 12:01:55 -0800, Doan wrote:

On 4 Dec 2003, Kane wrote:

On Thu, 4 Dec 2003 10:38:43 -0800, Doan wrote:

And others may disagree with you! ;-)

But then what happens to that "standard" in "reasonable standard,"
eh?

Reasonable doesn't mean no disagreement! Are you so stupid??? ;-)

Thank you for the help with my growing stupidity.

Reasonable means:
1. Capable of reasoning; rational: a reasonable person.

Yes, that sounds correct, but I don't recall disagreeing one what
reasonable is. Please point out my stupidity in doing so.

2. Governed by or being in accordance with reason or sound thinking:
a
reasonable solution to the problem.

Same......

3. Being within the bounds of common sense: arrive home at a
reasonable
hour.

Same.....

4. Not excessive or extreme; fair: reasonable prices.

Same......


Aaaaah....Does this mean then that the exact point on the spanking to
abuse continuimn is very very broad, since all the "reasonable" folks
on the planet would likely have a very broad range between the upper
and lowermost?

If so, could we establish, for the sake of the poor parents chaffing
in anticipation for your answer, and mine of course, and for the sake
of all those logic impaired ASZ's to finally get the skinny on this
old quandry, what the bottom most point is on the broad boundry...so
that NO one will inadvertently cross it and injure their child and
wind up with allegations of abuse?

I'm afraid just defining what a reasonable person is didn't work. My
apologies for sending you on a wild goose chase. It must have been my
failure to define the elements of the question adequately.

But, I have to admit, being the stupid person that I am, I was unable
to refine my question further. Do you mind continuing though I have
failed?

Thanks in advance.

Apparently you wish to refute yourself rather than refute me.

Apparently, you're too stupid to understand.

To understand what?

That even reasonable people can't agree on a sufficiently clear and
definable boundary narrow enough for use out side your world of
"science" {:-]} for the practical applications we have all sought
in aps for so very many years?

I guess I'm rightly identified as stupid then. Smart folks like you
are trying so hard to educate me.

Would you mind working your way through all the explanations now and
get to the practical applicable answer, the definative one, for our
use?

Some kind of border where spankers, (remember we ASZs only have a
logic problem, and a defining problem...we don't have the following
problem) can be assured they will not cross over into abuse.

If one is to have a "standard," one is stretching credulity just a
tad
to claim that "others" might not agree with it, don't you think?

No!

When one says standard I would hope they were referring to something
that could be used for other than weasel debating. Something that can
be applied with some hope that it will serve a purpose.

I think your definition leaves a lot to be desired, especially since
all you did was cut and paste definitions of "reasonable" which I
think, stupid me, isn't going to answer the original question. You
KNOW what that is of course.

And your reply of "reasonable standards" by a "reasonable person" just
doesn't cut it.

I admit, and I think my fellow ASZs will have to agree, we are very
very very stupid when it comes to figuring what is and isn't a
spanking when it is NOT at the furtherist extreme of either end of the
spectrum.

And I know, being the honest caring considerate soul you so often
prove you are, that you don't want have any of us take up spanking
wihtout the sage advice you offer, to spank only in a "reasonable"
manner.

I admit I would be totally at sea if I had a child over my lap and
whatever instrument to strike her with if I had to use your "standard"
to decide how hard, and when to stop.

Now please lend us your wonderful scientific mind and help us out.
Children's safety could depend on you.

I mean, it immediately becomes NOT a standard because two or more
folks that have a similar characteristic of "reasonable" "may
disagree
with you."

Right?

Nope!

Well, okay if you say so.

Would you mind then, since MY problem, my stupidity, remains. I cannot
find in your answer a way for spankers to decide were to stop...I know
THYE think they are being "reasonable" so often when they have flaid
hide off their children and broken bones.

Apparently, they too....though I'd hesitate to call them stupid or
logic impaired as we ASZs seem to be.....lack the necessary standards
of reasonableness you are holding out so tantilizingly to us.

Gosh, this feels just like the first day in Algebra...I'm soooo
confused.

Help us Doan. Help us.

I mean, after all, your answer could even resolve the age old question
of what is and isn't pornography.

I have a hunch you are just saying, as you have so many times in the
past, 'let the parent decide, no matter what.'

But no, you wouldn't, would you? R R R R R

Do you grease your butt before you stick your head up there, and what
will we do when you disappear....we can't do without Doan?

Doan


Kane




Doan


I'm sure you can find scientific support for your two somewhat
paradoxical stances on this issue.

I love being educated. Educate me.

Kane



I consider myself a reasonable person.

As a reasonable person, I think that more or less any form of
violence
against children and child beating, is not reasonable and is
child
abuse, at the very least when it is applied to toddlers.

i

On Wed, 3 Dec 2003 14:19:18 -0800, Doan wrote:
So Doan, you think that spanking is not a form of beating. I
think
that you have been asked a valid question:

Just what is the difference between spanking and beating?

It is based on the "reasonable person" standard.

Just where does the boundary lie?


It is where a "reasonable" person said it is. The is the
same
question
in the 80's with regard to pornography. Where do draw the
line?

On 4 Dec 2003, Kane wrote:

On Thu, 4 Dec 2003 12:01:55 -0800, Doan wrote:

On 4 Dec 2003, Kane wrote:

On Thu, 4 Dec 2003 10:38:43 -0800, Doan wrote:

And others may disagree with you! ;-)

But then what happens to that "standard" in "reasonable standard,"
eh?

Reasonable doesn't mean no disagreement! Are you so stupid??? ;-)

Thank you for the help with my growing stupidity.

No thanks from me. Either you inherited from your parents or you managed
to gain it all by yourself! ;-) Which is it?

Reasonable means:
1. Capable of reasoning; rational: a reasonable person.

Yes, that sounds correct, but I don't recall disagreeing one what
reasonable is. Please point out my stupidity in doing so.

Did it say anything about agreement? See your stupidity, now. :-)

2. Governed by or being in accordance with reason or sound thinking:
a
reasonable solution to the problem.

Same......

Stupid!

3. Being within the bounds of common sense: arrive home at a
reasonable
hour.

Same.....

Stupid!

4. Not excessive or extreme; fair: reasonable prices.

Same......

Stupid!


Aaaaah....Does this mean then that the exact point on the spanking to
abuse continuimn is very very broad, since all the "reasonable" folks
on the planet would likely have a very broad range between the upper
and lowermost?

Yup! It probably looks something like a bell curve distribution. The
"reasonable" people are somewhere in the middle. The extremes on both
sides are people like you and the religious nuts! ;-)

If so, could we establish, for the sake of the poor parents chaffing
in anticipation for your answer, and mine of course, and for the sake
of all those logic impaired ASZ's to finally get the skinny on this
old quandry, what the bottom most point is on the broad boundry...so
that NO one will inadvertently cross it and injure their child and
wind up with allegations of abuse?

Already explained above. See it now, stupid! :-)

I'm afraid just defining what a reasonable person is didn't work. My
apologies for sending you on a wild goose chase. It must have been my
failure to define the elements of the question adequately.

Nope! Just stupidity on your part. :-)

But, I have to admit, being the stupid person that I am, I was unable
to refine my question further. Do you mind continuing though I have
failed?

Sure. At least now, we all know that you are a stupid person. Since you
can't blame it on spanking (you did claimed to be "never-spanked",
right?), it must be inherited then. ;-)

Thanks in advance.

You're welcome.

Apparently you wish to refute yourself rather than refute me.

Apparently, you're too stupid to understand.

To understand what?

The "reasonable person" standard!

That even reasonable people can't agree on a sufficiently clear and
definable boundary narrow enough for use out side your world of
"science" {:-]} for the practical applications we have all sought
in aps for so very many years?

Yes, reasonable people can disagree. Haven't you got that yet?

I guess I'm rightly identified as stupid then. Smart folks like you
are trying so hard to educate me.

I am in no position to educate you. That is the job of your parents!
Did they teach you that it is right to call other women "smelly-****"???

Would you mind working your way through all the explanations now and
get to the practical applicable answer, the definative one, for our
use?

I don't mind at all. ;-)

Some kind of border where spankers, (remember we ASZs only have a
logic problem, and a defining problem...we don't have the following
problem) can be assured they will not cross over into abuse.

Yup! Call the local DA office or CPS agency! Ever heard of the
"community standard"?

If one is to have a "standard," one is stretching credulity just a
tad
to claim that "others" might not agree with it, don't you think?

No!

When one says standard I would hope they were referring to something
that could be used for other than weasel debating. Something that can
be applied with some hope that it will serve a purpose.

Are we dealing with a reasonable person? ;-)

I think your definition leaves a lot to be desired, especially since
all you did was cut and paste definitions of "reasonable" which I
think, stupid me, isn't going to answer the original question. You
KNOW what that is of course.

I can lead you to the water, but I cannot make you drink!

And your reply of "reasonable standards" by a "reasonable person" just
doesn't cut it.

It is to all the reasonable people I met. Why do you the police use the
"reasonable force" standard. It could mean knocking you to the ground
to blowing your off with a gun. Ask LaVonne to ask the night sergeant
where the police draw the line, will you? :-)

I admit, and I think my fellow ASZs will have to agree, we are very
very very stupid when it comes to figuring what is and isn't a
spanking when it is NOT at the furtherist extreme of either end of the
spectrum.

True! But anti-spanking zealotS are not "reasonable" now, are they? ;-)

And I know, being the honest caring considerate soul you so often
prove you are, that you don't want have any of us take up spanking
wihtout the sage advice you offer, to spank only in a "reasonable"
manner.

I never want anyone to "take up spanking"! I tell everyone to consider
all the options and make up his/her own mind. You see, unlike you, I
do believe that parents know what is best for their own kids. I learned
that from my own parents! :-)

I admit I would be totally at sea if I had a child over my lap and
whatever instrument to strike her with if I had to use your "standard"
to decide how hard, and when to stop.

Then you shouldn't do it! You do have a brain, right? USE IT! ;-)

Now please lend us your wonderful scientific mind and help us out.
Children's safety could depend on you.

I would rather have the parents make up their own mind. How about you?
;-)

I mean, it immediately becomes NOT a standard because two or more
folks that have a similar characteristic of "reasonable" "may
disagree
with you."

Right?

Nope!

Well, okay if you say so.

Would you mind then, since MY problem, my stupidity, remains. I cannot
find in your answer a way for spankers to decide were to stop...I know
THYE think they are being "reasonable" so often when they have flaid
hide off their children and broken bones.

Really? Do a jury of their peers also think it "reasonable"???

Apparently, they too....though I'd hesitate to call them stupid or
logic impaired as we ASZs seem to be.....lack the necessary standards
of reasonableness you are holding out so tantilizingly to us.

True!

Gosh, this feels just like the first day in Algebra...I'm soooo
confused.

It will help if you stop frequenting those anti-spanking zealotS websites!
;-)

Help us Doan. Help us.

I'll try but I am just one person. I can't help you if you don't help
yourself. ;-)

I mean, after all, your answer could even resolve the age old question
of what is and isn't pornography.

They already have, stupid! It's called the "community standard".

I have a hunch you are just saying, as you have so many times in the
past, 'let the parent decide, no matter what.'

If not the parents, then who?

But no, you wouldn't, would you? R R R R R

Of course, using the "reasonable person" standard!

Do you grease your butt before you stick your head up there, and what
will we do when you disappear....we can't do without Doan?

Nope! I wiped it every time I think of you! :-)

Doan

Doan


Kane




Doan


I'm sure you can find scientific support for your two somewhat
paradoxical stances on this issue.

I love being educated. Educate me.

Kane



I consider myself a reasonable person.

As a reasonable person, I think that more or less any form of
violence
against children and child beating, is not reasonable and is
child
abuse, at the very least when it is applied to toddlers.

i

On Wed, 3 Dec 2003 14:19:18 -0800, Doan wrote:
So Doan, you think that spanking is not a form of beating. I
think
that you have been asked a valid question:

Just what is the difference between spanking and beating?

It is based on the "reasonable person" standard.

Just where does the boundary lie?


It is where a "reasonable" person said it is. The is the
same
question
in the 80's with regard to pornography. Where do draw the
line?

On Fri, 5 Dec 2003 12:05:24 -0800, Doan wrote:


On 5 Dec 2003, Kane wrote:

On Thu, 4 Dec 2003 18:32:46 -0800, Doan wrote:

I'm considering your [subject] field for my signature line. May I
have
reprint rights, and full citation?

Thanks in advance.

Actually this is a public forum and no rights assume. You are free
to
do as you wish. :-)

So, thanks in advance.


On 4 Dec 2003, Kane wrote:

On Thu, 4 Dec 2003 12:01:55 -0800, Doan wrote:

On 4 Dec 2003, Kane wrote:

On Thu, 4 Dec 2003 10:38:43 -0800, Doan wrote:

And others may disagree with you! ;-)

But then what happens to that "standard" in "reasonable
standard,"
eh?

Reasonable doesn't mean no disagreement! Are you so stupid???
;-)

Thank you for the help with my growing stupidity.

No thanks from me. Either you inherited from your parents or you
managed
to gain it all by yourself! ;-) Which is it?

Eh? You squeeked?

Refuse to answer my question, Kane? ;-)

Yes. I did. It's not a question, despite the question mark.

Reasonable means:
1. Capable of reasoning; rational: a reasonable person.

Yes, that sounds correct, but I don't recall disagreeing one
what
reasonable is. Please point out my stupidity in doing so.

Did it say anything about agreement?

Gosh, it's so nice to be able to help out a genius. Are you just
letting me win this one out of kindness?

I am not a member of MENSA, Kane.

Who woulda guessed?

You really wanna win? ;-)

I want more parents chosing not to spank and use non-pain based
parenting methods. And that's all I really want.

If winning is part of that fine. But win or lose it's how the winner
or losing takes place and what it reveals about each of us that
matters.

No, IT didn't say anything about agreement. I did.

Yup! That is why I said you are so stupid! ;-)

I didn't bring up agreement. It was disagreement and the key to the
problem with your answer, that "reasonable standards" by "reasonable
people."

Reasonable people disagree on what spanking is let alone where the
line of demarcation is crossed into abuse.

My question asked for the answer in a form that would allow parents
who do not know (as evidenced by all those who do abuse while
"spanking") to have a point they can stop at that would be safe.

If you can't answer the question as asked that is perfectly alright.
No harm to we ASZs, but of course still a problem to be solved in the
real world of child abuse.

More especially with those not caught at it and continuing.

See your stupidity, now. :-)

I guess if I am going to move the discussion forward I must use
only
your words? Gosh I must be stupid.

You admitted to being stupid,

Yes, if I must use your reasoning.

why take offense now? :-)

Offended?

What did I say that makes you think I'm offended?

I asked you if I could only move the argument forward using your
words. Can I use my own then?

2. Governed by or being in accordance with reason or sound
thinking:
a
reasonable solution to the problem.

Same......

Stupid!

Same.

Stupid!

3. Being within the bounds of common sense: arrive home at a
reasonable
hour.

Same.....

Stupid!

Same.

Stupid!

4. Not excessive or extreme; fair: reasonable prices.

Same......

Stupid!

Same.

Stupid!

This was not an offering of an answer to the question asked. I asked
where the line is, not the Atlantic ocean of boundaries.

Your answer is useless to anyone trying to apply it to a choice of
spanking or not....the choice you defend, but cannot come up with any
answer to what spanking IS based on it's limits, and I've only asked
you one simple question.

And nothing but disengenuous prattle is your response.

Your attempt to answer the question by focusing on the meaning of the
word reasonable and ignoring the need for specificity about the line
shows that you chase your tail up your asshole.

Which leads us back.

Show us the line, not an unanswered "standard" with a modifier of
limited use. If a carpenter built a house using your measure it would
fall before completion.

The Line, Define the upper limits of spanking so children can be safe
or admit that you don't care if children are abused as long as the
spanker gets to decide for themselves until the moment of harm, IF
THEY ARE CAUGHT.

If they aren't, of course, the abuse will continue, and only a
sociopath would claim it's not their concern.

At what point would you wait to call CPS. Or would you?


Aaaaah....Does this mean then that the exact point on the
spanking
to
abuse continuimn is very very broad, since all the "reasonable"
folks
on the planet would likely have a very broad range between the
upper
and lowermost?

Yup!

Gosh, that's going to play hell with years and years of posting by
the
apologists, now isn't it. They insist they can tell where that
limit
is and that they don't cross it, despite so much evidence to the
contrary.

What evidence?

Your own posts. These you write now. You support the parent deciding
the limit. Hence a "limit" has to exist.

If there is a limit, how can you give others support to decide for
themselves where it is if they can't demonstrate to you where it is?

Have they? Have you shared that with us? What is it.

It probably looks something like a bell curve distribution.

Do you mean "they look"?

We are talking about reasonable "people" not reasonable "things."

So "they look" it is! :-)

And they shall spank on the bell curve and that will give adequate
protection against injury. I see.

The
"reasonable" people are somewhere in the middle.

"Somewhere?" I'm stuck again. I have never been able to positive
about
where "somewhere" is unless someone turns it into a "here."

Where is "here"? :-)

Here is where the line is. You are still pointing somewhere....the
nonspecific "standard" that is defined by its reasonableness which
proves upon evidence you proved to be nothing more than people
agreeing that here is somewhere yonder, from about the to about there,
and anyplace you point to from inner edge to inner edge is, "here."

Apparently you don't know the limit.

Can you do that for us...the poor spanking parents chomping at the
bit
to get back to their parental spanking duties and we logic
impaired,
and "Don't know spanking from beating" folks?

I can't do miracles! ;-)

Translation:

I can't tell you where the limit of spanking is that it turns to
abuse, but I'll defend the spankers to decide for themselves...they
must know, after all they are P A R E N T!"

The extremes on both
sides are people like you and the religious nuts! ;-)

They don't spank? Oh, wait I see. Well if I was a spanking parent,
I'd
have no trouble using your explanation to avoid being on the
religious
nut end of the spectrum.

If you are "reasonable"! ;-)

Yep. And I am. But that doesn't suffice when I tell you things that
are reasonable. You apparently feel justified in asking me to be
specific. You ask for citations, and data. You ask for a logical
answer.

Now I am asking you for the simplest of answers. And you can use any
criteria that would give a parent who choses to spank a safe guideline
to follow.

Otherwise you have to admit you are supporting the possible injury of
his child and possible loss of that child to the state, and possible
incarceration of that parent, along with the expense of legal defense.

A lot is riding on your, "I let the parent decide for himself."

And if you think your not being responsible is defensible then that
tells us your character is deeply flawed. I'd put my money on the
childhood spankings.

Trouble is to spank I have to start somewhere, and avoid going
somewhere, to avoid injury to the child, and or having my ass
slammed
in jail and my kids lost.

You do have a brain, right? ;-)

Yep. And it never has automatically told me something I didn't know. I
had to measure. I do not know, for instance the precise distance to
that door over there, but I know the tape measure in my desk drawer
and a bit of effort from me can give me the answer.

If I buy furniture I know now to measure it so it will turn in that
space I wish to get through.

I am one for measurements, as you seem to be by your requests of
others for measurements.

Are you telling us there IS not accurage measurement for determining
the point at which spanking becomes abuse?

And that brain you asked me about solved all this long ago, and I
decided that the absolute smartest, as well as beneficial thing I
could do in this dilemma was to not spank. Paid off bigtime too.

Never a CPS investigation. No violence in my children as children or
adults. No crime either. Accomplished, happy, and I think their
incomes just moves past my own. And in about half the time it took me
to get where I am.

And oddly the spankers who have come roaring in here to tell us
just
where that line is seemed to, with a blustering "you just better
look
out fellah," tossed over their shoulders as the door hit them in
the
ass, not be around much these days.

Who are you talking about?

You haven't been reading the ng for the past 3 years or more?
The posters that defend spanking are all still here?
They didn't leave in a huff? R R R R R

If so, could we establish, for the sake of the poor parents
chaffing
in anticipation for your answer, and mine of course, and for the
sake
of all those logic impaired ASZ's to finally get the skinny on
this
old quandry, what the bottom most point is on the broad
boundry...so
that NO one will inadvertently cross it and injure their child
and
wind up with allegations of abuse?

Already explained above. See it now, stupid! :-)

Yep. Stupid me. I just can't get from your explaination how I can,
if
I decide to join the ranks of spankers that you are just inches
away
from convincing me to join, where I should stop to avoid abuse.

There is your problem! I am not here to convice you, OR ANYBODY FOR
that matter, to "join". I want you to look at everything and MAKE UP
YOUR OWN MIND!

No you don't. That's a ploy. All one has to do is see your defense of
spanking as evidence in questions and citations.

YOU have NEVER posted a defense of nonspanking in any form other than
by the occasional passive comment as above.

You have actively promoted spanking by defense of it. And you have
actively gone after non spanking studies and research, while posting,
as you JUST did, citations that defend spanking and CP.

I may have dozens of kids to spank. I've got the problem with them
each being different....some easy to make comply, and some very
hard,
and then there is this: some of the very hard to get to comply are
fragile and delicate, while some of the very strong and hardy are
the
easiest to get to comply.

How easy should I tap the hardy to "discipline them corporally" and
how hard can I vigorously spank the highly recalcitrant, but
extremely
delicate ones?

That is up to you! Why must I parent your "dozens of kids"???
I certainly don't claim to know them better than you!

But I want to make a choice. I am looking for help. I consider you
immoral if you give me choices by no information to go by to make
those choices.

What is the line, or where can I find someone that can tell me?

I got your permission to spank, after all.

Do you support someone not knowing the answer to where the line is
then chosing, because of that missing information, not to spank?

I'm afraid just defining what a reasonable person is didn't
work.
My
apologies for sending you on a wild goose chase. It must have
been
my
failure to define the elements of the question adequately.

Nope! Just stupidity on your part. :-)

If I we hadn't established, by your sincere efforts to help
parentkind, I'd think you were just, like some posters, weaseling.

I don't think parents need my help. They have been doing a good job
for centuries without me, OR YOU!

On the contrary. Not only have some been injuring their children and
society by their actions, they do so with implicite permission, and
explicite support from you.

You are in fact advising parents. You do not say, and stick to, "I
don't know, you decide." You actively support one side over the other.

And many parents themselves express a need for help in these matters.

If you don't know where the line is say so.

I'm really serious here, Doan. Of all the people that have come her
as
spankers or apoligists, claiming, when asked, that they knew the
answer, YOU are the only one left that is consistently here.
Obviously
you want to help spanking parents or you wouldn't be here.

I want every parents to use their own brain and make their own
decisions!

Even if they are wrong, or have that potential and ask you for help?

Unlike you, I DON'T and can't tell them what to do.

That is a lie. If I tell someone who asks, "is this a dangerous road"
"you make up your own decision" and there is evidence I have seen that
people have fallen off that road, it is as much a deliberat act to
send the down that road as if you told them NO, there is no danger.

But from my own
experience, parents are the most wonderful people in the world.

Stroke stroke.

They
know their kids better than me or YOU!

Some do. I'm not addressing those and you know it.

THEY LOVE THEIR KIDS MORE THAN
ME OR YOU.

That is a highly questionable claim. Read the abuse stats. While many
PROFESS to some show clear signs that they do not have the same
definition of love as others of us do. Treating a child as a posession
falls outside my definition.

Why do think differently? Is your experience different
from mine???

I don't really think so. I think you, being a much spanked child, see
through different glasses than I.

You know there are those that abuse their children and call it
spanking, but to those that want to spank, you say "it's your
decision."

They, and I, and all the ASZs, want to know. Now is your big
chance.
Please don't blow it.

Only if you are open to logic! But that would be asking too much! ;-)

I guess it would be if I were to accept what you call logic.

We'll be so disappointed.

I am so sorry! ;-)

Of course you are. The same kind of sorry you would feel should
someone take you at your word and feel encouraged to chose to spank
and ended up in jail for child abuse and or killing them. "Not MY
responsibility."

But, I have to admit, being the stupid person that I am, I was
unable
to refine my question further. Do you mind continuing though I
have
failed?

Sure. At least now, we all know that you are a stupid person.

Well, if I was truly unable to refine the question so you
understood
that it was the question about limits, rather than broad, weasely
"reasonable standards" then I am truly stupid.

Since you
can't blame it on spanking (you did claimed to be "never-spanked",
right?),

I must be stupid. I can't find that post. And illogical too.


Excuse me, you just offered a few paragraphs up, to answer the
question. I see no answer.

Here is your chance to clarify it. Come on, Kane. Your problem
is you spewed so much that you can't keep track. Tell that I am
wrong in saying you were "never-spanked", Kane.

I noticed that you asked that question out of the blue when I was
asking you to answer a question. I'm as intrigued with why you
diverted to whether or not I've been spanked as to were you found a
post I could not.

Dare to take the
bait? I dare you! I DOUBLE dare you! ;-)

We were at this point in the discussion:
copy and paste from above:
Well, if I was truly unable to refine the question so you
understood
that it was the question about limits, rather than broad, weasely
"reasonable standards" then I am truly stupid.

Since you
can't blame it on spanking (you did claimed to be "never-spanked",
right?),

You suddenly changed the subject. I wasn't blaming my stupidity on me
or anything else but you ability to obfuscate to an extremely absurd
level, and here you've done it again.

We are after a difinitive answer to the question of where the line of
spanking demarcation is...and suddenly my un or spanked status has
relevance? How I wonder.

Bit.....You have to have some fun. I'll be as delighted as you if you
find I made a claim that I don't remember making.

I might have said certain individuals never spanked me, but that's
hardly proof I was never spanked or spanked. I think you are
stretching waaaay beyond your capacity...though I can see you don't
and never do understand that.

Weaseling... LOUD AND CLEAR! ;-)

No, just saying I do not recall establishing if I made a claim one way
or the other. If I said I was unspanked would it be a giant revelation
to you? If I said I'd been spanked, would it be grist for some rice
you are grinding?

It's what gets you were you are right now.

Yeah. Laughing hesterically! :-)

You should see someone for that. You are laughing because you think
you've pulled of a Great Weasel of the West trick.

So you go ahead and pull a rabbit out of a hat. I've never been
concerned with the question of my claim one way or the other.

But...

In other words, you've been presented a question you can't answer
because it is unanswerable, but unlike YOUR strange questions that are
in defense of spanking (and you lie when you say you are leaving it up
to the parent...you wouldn't be here if that were true...saying
anything, unless you presented both sides equally) the answer to THIS
question is of great importance to children, possibly many
generations, and some maybe in danger at this moment, and certainly,
by my thinking, to society.

The fact you can't define it is highly important. I have never heard
anyone define it, but I m very open to them speaking up to do so.


it must be inherited then. ;-)

One never knows does one. I might be stupid, and I might not be.

But you've have publicly admitted so. Shall I read it back to you???

Of course I've admitted to being stupid. Everyone is stupid sometimes.
Some of the most intelligent folks I know do what I consider very
stupid things as an alarming rate.

You have been fishing for something and I'm wondering if you think you
have found it. It's your asshole, stupid, and you are trying
desperately to run up and hide.

My statement of my stupidity in the course of this discussion isn't
really relevant to the question accept as my inability to get you to
give an honest answer.

YOU will defeat me, Doan. You'll never give an answer, and yet, I'll
get the hysterical laughs by way of watching you squirm.

You on the other hand are sure of your superiority, by the tenor of
your posts.

I have never claimed superiority! I just know, from experience, that
anti-spanking zealotS don't dare to debate me. Wanna proof? ;-)

Sure. Lay out the the "proof" again. But don't be surprized if we
remark that you've shown nothing new. You keep demanding they debate
you after they have flattened you on some issues, not bothered to
reply to your boastful lies that YOU won the debate, and circled back
up your cloaca and put a laurel wreath of **** on your own head.

It's been a laugh riot watching you.

Even recently you have posted to "Citations" that were supposed to
prove your claim, and I'm sure, now that I've torn them down to the
bits of crap and off the point pieces of unrelated nonsense they are,
and chose not to indulge you further, we are going to hear, for years,
"Kane ran and wouldn't debate me."

Like what's to debate, little boy?

You even post things that blow YOUR own demands out of the water, like
a doctor that says you can't have a valid study if you don't do a
medical standard experiment....then you insist we provide peer
reviewed studies that meet the "same standards" of studies that don't
meet the doctor's standards.

See what I mean. The village idiot is on the loose when you chose to
post....and Doan, I imagine you don't look very attractive in your
dunce cap.

Thanks in advance.

You're welcome.

Don't mention it.

Apparently you wish to refute yourself rather than refute me.

Apparently, you're too stupid to understand.

To understand what?

The "reasonable person" standard!

Yep. Yah got me again. I am too stupid to understand the
"reasonable
person" "standard!"

Then you are PERMANENTLY EXCUSED from jury duty! Aren't you glad? ;-)

Yes. Because I didn't come here for jury duty. And it wasn't my
metaphor. And I doubt you have ever served jury duty. My last time was
a year ago October.

And reasonable standard was never discussed. Community standards were.

Had it been a criminal trial, especally assault of some kind with self
defense as a likely issue, I would have heard that, and what the judge
would have said in instruction to jury was that I had to decide for
myself in the end.

But all this crap you have shovelled doesn't answer my question. I'm
not interested in the fuzzy "reasonable standard" I want a standard
measure, or one that can be so adapted.

I want to know when to stop so that I can both use pain to teach, as
others that come here claim they are doing (or stragely, that it
doesn't hurt the child) and I can be assured of having good odds I
won't injure the child, as is claimed can be done, and you have
defended.

At least as it applies to someone whackin' away on a kid when so
many
folks are NOT reasonable at all, and their standard tends to be
more
when the kid is in enough pain to comply, and damn the injuries,
physical and psychological.

But how many of them are "there"? 1%, 5%, 10%, 50%, 99%????

The percentage of children injured is relevant to the request for a
measure of when spanking becomes injury?

If it was child in the entire country the question would have the same
relevance, in not less emotion loading.

I am not asking just for others. I want to know for myself. I am going
to become a safe spanker so I can teach others. How can they make up
their mind with insufficient information?

Last I look, neglect topped the list of child-abuse - not physical
abuse.

Injury and death from neglect took about as many lives as I recall.
It's all over the map. How is that relevant to my question, and you
not answering it now. I was discussing my reasons for wanting the
answer to the question, not inviting you to argue with me about my
reasons.

Do you wish to NOT provide the answer?

Do you not know the answer?

Can you direct me to those who do?

If not, why are you still supporting parents, I am one, making that
decision with no where to go but their own guess by way of their
deciding if the force is "reasonable." They have killed children doing
just that.

Do I have to define to you what neglect is now????

I did not ask you to answer any questions about neglect and abuse. I
just shared the information to support my reason for asking "The
Question."

It seems you were looking for your asshole to dart up and hide in.
This isn't it.

Leaving your child
alone 1 minute? How about 5 minutes? How about 18 years? Where is
the line, Kane. Wanna play this game with me? ;-)

No. I want you to answer THIS question, but I won't repeat it. You
know the one.

Why do you wish to change to your "game"? I am not playing a game.
This is serious business even if we have some fun with each other.

When you have answered The Question I may well decide your new "game"
is interesting enough to play, or I may not. Depends.

We have plenty of work right now with The Question.

If they have to be outside the zone of reasonable then we must know
the where the zone begins on the no abuse side of spanking. Can you
point out that starting point, for all children if you don't mind?
Or
the 90% that we can expect will be spanked by American parents.

Take a representative sampling poll of your community. Chart it! It
should resemble somewhat a bell-curve. Do the math to find out
where
the median is. Draw a line, let's day, within one standard deviation
to
the left or right. There you have it! ;-)

That is nice. But it isn't the answer to The Question! }:-}}

The question I asked, if this will help clarify for you a bit, is on
the spanking side of the curve, along the arch. It is the point where
spanking becomes abusive, the beginning of a "beating" as it were.

Sorry I didn't make this clearer, but you are helping with your
attempts to answer The Question. I'm proud to say I know you, Doan.

Now, the point on the bell curve please. Let's just stay with this
"game" for awhile, shall we?

Would it help if I jumped up and down a little and screamed, "I DARE
YAH, I DOUBLE DARE YAH?"

That even reasonable people can't agree on a sufficiently clear
and
definable boundary narrow enough for use out side your world of
"science" {:-]} for the practical applications we have all
sought
in aps for so very many years?

Yes, reasonable people can disagree. Haven't you got that yet?

Oh yes, I understand that just fine. How does reasonable
disagreement
by reasonable people reasonably going to tell me where to stop,
what
the limit of force is that will injure, not huge injury...that's
easy,
but when the injury first starts.

How abot you try on yourself to find out? That would be a good
start. :-)

Oh, I have, Doan. For many a year I've gone here, and I've gone there,
and I've gone everywhere, and when I found this ng I was delighted
because it appeared that someone could settle this for me, and I could
decide, with confidence, forever, whether or not to spank.

In the meantime, being under the pressure of parenthood and the
primary caregiver of two beautiful young people, I came down on the
side of caution, and didn't spank.

Now I have to worry that my children might have turned out even MORE
delightful if only I had found the answer to The Question earlier in
life.

Now all I can hope for are the grandkids. Now if I knew for certain
where that spot was, and trusting in the superiority of spanking as a
teaching tool, as I have it from so many helpful souls here, and with
the support implicite and explicite in your posts on the subject, I
could make my Grandchildren even better than my children.

We could take over the world, yes, TAKE OVER THE WORLD WITH THE USE OF
SPANKING... pant pant wheez gasp

After all, like all the fine spanking parents that have come here,
should I start, I TOO do not want to be accused of hurting my
child,
and in fact, being the loving parent I am, of course I DON'T want
to
hurt them in any way that might have effects beyond the moment.

Check with your local DA and CPS agency in your own town.

I have. No luck. I think I told you that before. Or was it in this
post...tsk, you are right, I really am losing track. I wonder if
someone could be leading me down the byways for that express purpose.

They didn't even do as well as you have. I insisted the show me on a
scale of some kind with the variables...force coeficients, angle of
attack, varying instruments of tort...discipline, age of child,
psychological profiles of my children (they balked, wouldn't pay for
those...so much for the helpful CPS), frequency, interval, number of,
time of day, humidity, windforce and direction.

I mean, after all, some have come here and claimed to know the line.
Surely they have some way of showing ME the line.

So, since you are the one that so frequently defends their right to
decide I have to assume you know exactly what they are deciding on!

HUH??? You want to decide but then have me to make the decision for
you??? Logic and anti-spanking zealotS...needs I say more? ;-)

No, why would I do that. I'm just asking for you to give as much
energy to helping them find information to make the decision as you do
for them making the decision.

Is that really too much to ask of you?

Do you wish to be left with your moral certitude and be left alone
then? No help forthcoming?

Okay with me if you want. I have plenty of others I can ask. Just
running out of time and looking for expert advice.

And that would be including the limits of spanking before it can
become abuse, would it not?

Again check with your own DA and CPS agency. Do I have to repeat
myselft?

No, I'd much rather you didn't.

It's not getting us anywhere.

Though I'll admit I'm running out of new ways to ask you for something
that should, by all rights, be very simple. After all parents know
their own children, as you say. They certainly should at least be able
to come up with measure of limit on THEIR child so that I might
extrapolate to my child in a beginning sort of way.

I guess I'm rightly identified as stupid then. Smart folks like
you
are trying so hard to educate me.

I am in no position to educate you.

I know. But I thought you were trying to, and I'm cooperative if
nothing else. Mind, you keep sending me to look for proof of YOUR
claims...as my Sensei used to. So I extend the same respect to you
as
he.

What claim? I thought you were claiming that crime rate is down
because
less parents spank now? Did you or did you not?

I'm sorry. You turned the corner again. There goes your tail.

No I didn't claim that though. I just claimed that crime isn't down
because parents spank. Who knows what factors come into play. I'd like
it if that were so. I might even speculate that less spanking is
starting to take effect, but I can't make a claim as to causality. I
leave that to the smart guys like you.

Correlation is the best I can do. So the word "because" doesn't apply
to whatever I said.

You claim things, wonderful things, like parents can spank without
hitting, know the limits wherein the child will not be injured, and
have such control over themselves they will not cross that line
(the
one I can't find).

Where did I claim that parents can spanking withou "hitting"?

Oh, sorry. You support the right of parents do decide when spanking
becomes hitting. Darn I keep getting mixed up. We need more acronyms.

DDUHOAH. Yeah, I like that one.

As to the right to decide support, I'll leave that acronym up to you
to create or you'll just have get tired of reading it over and over
written out in full.

The only thing holding me back, Doan, and I just KNOW you can
defeat
them, is the ASZ's simplistic solution of not spanking at all and
learning non punitive parenting methods.

And the proof is???

Oh, I just realized I don't have any proof of that claim. I DON'T KNOW
that you can defeat them. I submit to your superior logic.

Or is it that you want me to provide proof that the ASZ's have
simplistic solutions and learn non-punitive parenting methods?

That takes time, it doesn't relieve my own frustrations, if I, the
metaphorical "I" of course, were a pervert, it could not make me
happy
and jolly like spanking can for some folks, and I will, if I stay
with
them, and not go with you folks, never here those sweet and
poignant
words from my children:

And you are welcome to parent them as you see fit.

Thank You. I know that. Being a normal human though, before I make the
more important parenting decisions. like discipline methods I'll use,
I think information is important and I'm seeking it.

In your welcome to parent as I see fit could you include a measure
that will keep me from injuring or killing them, accidently?

"Well, it never hurt me, yup, not a bibp,..blip...ah....what was
the
question again?"

That is the job of your parents!

They did a great job.

Sure did!

I can tell by your moral stature.

Did they teach you that it is right to call other women
"smelly-****"???

No! How could you ask such a thing? I am shocked and offended.

And you don't think it offend other people when you said it???

What they think or feel is entirely up to them, don't you think?

Do you think a child whose parent just decided, based on the
encourgement they feel after reading your anti anti spanker attacks
coupled with explicit support of the parent making up their mind,
might feel some offense at the hand, or ruler, or belt, or coat hanger
strikes.

I think my offending is on something of a lessor scale than yours.

So sue me.

I learned to do that by them being so honest and straightforward as
to
call and asshole and asshole, asshole and smelly **** sucker.

And they must be proud of you! ;-)

I've no idea. My father's ashes are spread over his favorite lake. I
visit once a year on the anniversary of his death. A very kind and
loving man.

My mother is dealing with health concerns, and lifelong robust and
healthy sportswomen, golfer, hiker and fisherperson. I don't think
I'll disturb here with my adventures in Asswhoopin, right now, but I
can assure such things have made her roar with laughter.

Some of the most sophisticated and on the surface genteel ladies are
capable of some pretty raw language and expression. I hear Mr. Bush,
Senior, has a vocabulary like a sailor...and got really made at some
reporter that quoted her.

Great models. This kind of name calling came long after their time.
I
don't live in their time. I am in YOUR time, sucker, and you are
just
going to have to learn to live with being exposed. From now on.

And you should be proud. :-)

I'm not ashamed. You should be however.

I've never told anyone asking me if I thought it was okay to spank and
asking for information about the limits or risks, "You decide."

I have pointed them to information that would help them decide NOT to
spank. I consider that the morally superior response. And, yes, I am
proud to have done that hundreds of times.

I think the Plant is finally getting the idea I am not going away,
and
it's feeble attempts to cover up It's ugly hatred of children and
families isn't going to be ignored. Others may give up on you,
Dung,
but not me.

So now I am a "dung". Showing your character again, Kane. :-)

So now I'm not "Kane9"? Showing your character again, Doan. }:-}

Would you mind working your way through all the explanations now
and
get to the practical applicable answer, the definative one, for
our
use?

I don't mind at all. ;-)

Ah. It's coming. I've waited sooooo long. Not patiently I'll admit,
but tenaciously.

Happy to comply. :-)

You are going to explain the answer to The Question, with an answer
that will be applicable to to task of deciding when spanking becomes
abusive?

Ho boy! {:}

Some kind of border where spankers, (remember we ASZs only have
a
logic problem, and a defining problem...we don't have the
following
problem) can be assured they will not cross over into abuse.

Yup! Call the local DA office or CPS agency! Ever heard of the
"community standard"?

All the will tell me is very like what you tell me. They end up
with
an admonition on the order of, "leave no marks that last beyond x
amount of time, and no internal injuries." I mean that's all so
confusing to me, and I want to be a good spanker, honest.

So he is a reasonable person. He can't help it if you are stupid! ;-)

Hmmmm...well, not answer to The Question here. Did you forget, or did
you lie?

It's starting to look a little like I'm doomed to being an ASZ I
guess, and never getting to spank kids, having to fall back on my
non-punitive methods. I am going to miss the fun you folks have.

You are free to do what you wanted to!

That's an answer to MY question?

It's an answer to A question, but not MY question.

snip...my goodness the long list of questions you asked me that I
answered, and asked you to respond to and you didn't. You must be a
very busy fellow, what with all those parents at your knees asking you
to bless their spanking: "Go forth, decide for yourself, Aum mani
pandmi Aum"

Kane


" And again he barks........ Kane barks ...... again! was
Kids should work..."
Doan d t November, 2003