Stop That Spanking!

Spanking to be made illegal in Massachusetts?

http://www.bostonherald.com/news/reg...icleid=1047241

Some Christian groups are claiming doom and gloom if they can't beat their children: "This bill equates loving, corrective discipline with hateful, harmful abuse"

http://www.christiannewswire.com/news/216304881.html

From where I sit (and I can):

Spanking teaches a child that if you get frustrated, resorting to violence is OK.

I was spanked and paddled as a child. It didn't teach me anything other than many adults can't control their temper and become violent. Every time it happened, I lost more and more respect for these people.

If someone decides to discipline me via a spanking (unrequested for those of you... oh, never mind), that's assault and can lead to arrest. If it's done to someone under 18, it's "loving care". Huh?

None of my kids were ever beaten, sorry, "spanked", and turned out fine. Same with my nephews.

Tell me whether y'all think that violence on a child is a good or a bad thing. Not that I have any strong opinions about the matter... :-)

Good God.

Since when is a a quick swat a horrible beating. There is a huge difference between beating a child, and spanking them. Most reasonable people who spank their children are not beating them.

For the record, my kids were rarely spanked. Why? Because it didn't do anything. They don't learn from it, and it was a pointless exercise, and we chose not to do it. Just like I choose not to try and reason with them when they are throwing a tantrum. They haven't been spanked in years, and probably won't be in the future. We've found other methods of disipline work better for us.

I do know lots of people who were spanked as children and who spank their children, and they all turned out fine as well.

Do I think you should spank someone because you are angry and frustrated? No, because there is the possibliity for things to get out of hand, emotions are high.

Is spanking "violence on a child" or "beating" them? Normally, no. There are always exceptions to the rules.

Frankly, I'm an adult, and am capable of making reasonable decisions regarding how I raise my kid.

Quote:

---

Frankly, I'm an adult, and am capable of making reasonable decisions regarding how I raise my kid.

---

Unfortunately a lot of parents have only passed the physical, and aren't capable or adult in behaviour.

For me and my family it's a no go. I detest spankings. My Dad was fond of hitting until it left marks. Even to this day when he raises his voice I cringe. I've used him as a reverse parenting model.

I cannot think of one instance in my kids lives that inflicting physical pain would have worked better the discipline. Sure, hitting them would have given me some immediate gratification, but it would have done nothing positive for them. It did nothing positive for me being hit other then being scared spitless of my Dad. I learned he was big, therefore hurt me. That's the last mark I want to leave on my childrens lives.

The spanking debate is probably bigger then the abortion debate on the web. Scary topic and you won't find me debating it. Just stating what works for me and spanking doesn't.

<i>Wait, this doesn't apply to adults does it?! :D</i>

Ok, so from a psychological perspective all the evidence indicates that the best way to mold behavior is rewarding good behavior rather than punishing bad behavior. To my knowledge this has been demonstrated with numerous clinical trials with everything from teaching kids to getting rats to push a button. So parenting should consist primarily of rewarding the behavior they want to see in their child.

However, I know that kids can be unruly and sometimes the only way to quickly bring them back into line is a swift shot on the rear. Most parents are reasonable and would not make it a violent beating but sometimes a swat does seem the fastest way to bring them into line.

FWIW, to the group:

I do NOT support a new law about this. I DO support consequences for actions taken with free will. Assault is assault and should be taken as such.

It really gets back to what to a comment I made above. I can get unruly at times, spank me and you'd not be surprised to have cops handcuffing you and hauling you away. Hitting a child should not be a free pass.

I didn't spank any of my four kids but my concern with all this is where does it stop?

I believe parents who smoke around their children are causing much more health and long term problems than a swat on the butt. People who smoke around their kids in the home or a vehicle should be charged with abuse and the children removed from the homes and the parents jailed. We know without a doubt that second hand smoke is a killer, leads to asthma, and a host to other health problems in children and adults. I wonder why the Senators aren't pushing a bill to outlaw tobacco products.

I believe parents who allow their children to become overweight and sit on their butts all day long are causing more long term health problems to their children than a swat on the butt. We know this leads to early heart disease and diabetes. So why is the government not doing something about it?

And then there are parents who are drinking alcohol around their kids, watching violent television, feeding them fast food, or swearing around them. Come on, let's pass some more bills in the Senate.

Just seems like there is a lot more important stuff that affects kids besides a parent swatting their butt.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oldfireguy

I didn't spank any of my four kids but my concern with all this is where does it stop?

I believe parents who smoke around their children are causing much more health and long term problems than a swat on the butt. People who smoke around their kids in the home or a vehicle should be charged with abuse and the children removed from the homes and the parents jailed. We know without a doubt that second hand smoke is a killer, leads to asthma, and a host to other health problems in children and adults. I wonder why the Senators aren't pushing a bill to outlaw tobacco products.

I believe parents who allow their children to become overweight and sit on their butts all day long are causing more long term health problems to their children than a swat on the butt. We know this leads to early heart disease and diabetes. So why is the government not doing something about it?

And then there are parents who are drinking alcohol around their kids, watching violent television, feeding them fast food, or swearing around them. Come on, let's pass some more bills in the Senate.

Just seems like there is a lot more important stuff that affects kids besides a parent swatting their butt.

---

Already happening. Pretty sure Commiefornia already made it illegal to smoke in your own car if a child is present. Couple near here got hit with child abuse charges after giving their kid a "time out".:rolleyes: Kids need a good old fashion smack in the back of the head from a parent once in a while. If I told my mother when I was 13-14 "F You Bitch" in a crowded store like that brat I seen last week, I would had been knocked out cold. Kids dont see any reprecussions to their actions anymore. They know how to play the system to get whatever the hell they want. "Touch me and I'll have you arrested" garbage.

Some people really need to go out in the REAL WORLD and see that their "darling precious little angel" isnt so "darling". Yeah your "never do anything wrong" kid wouldnt smash car windows even though WE HAVE HIM ON VIDEO doing it.:rolleyes: Or my favorite, lets not keep score at (insert sport played) because he/she may develop a lack of self esteem if they lose. 4-5 yr olds sports is one thing, but at 12 they should had learned by then that not everyone wins. I should find that story where some guys mother is SUING a business because her 21 yr old son didnt get the job he applied for there and his feelings were crushed.

Ahh Rob, we must shop at the same stores....

You're in southern WI? Where at? Are you coming to Chicago on the 15th?

Spanking teaches a child that if you get frustrated, resorting to violence is OK.

Or, it teaches a child that there are sometimes severe and swift consequences for bad conduct, a lesson that just may serve them well at some later point in life when they contemplate doing something really stupid, dangerous, or could possibly result in harming an innocent person.

I was spanked and paddled as a child. It didn't teach me anything other than many adults can't control their temper and become violent. Every time it happened, I lost more and more respect for these people

Well, there will always be some children upon whom no amount or type of discipline will ever be effective, simply because those children choose to be what people used to call incorrigible.

We don't hear that word anymore, but it would certainly suit many children (and even adults) today.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by adina

Ahh Rob, we must shop at the same stores....

You're in southern WI? Where at? Are you coming to Chicago on the 15th?

---

South of Madison in a hell called Janesville.:D Usually up in Madison though when I need something since Janesville doesnt have much for anything here. No chicago. Have another party that day in Fort Atkinson.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by schrackman

Or, it teaches a child that there are sometimes severe and swift consequences for bad conduct, a lesson that just may serve them well at some later point in life when they contemplate doing something really stupid, dangerous, or could possibly result in harming an innocent person.

---

Or that they are free to administer violence to get the action they want at some later point in life. I wonder how bullies are made? Once again, the elephant in the room that everyone wants to ignore is: if its OK to hit a child, why is it a criminal act to hit me? What if I am going to do something dangerous, stupid, or might hurt someone? That is so broad and encompassing that it could include every extreme.

Quote:

---

Well, there will always be some children upon whom no amount or type of discipline will ever be effective, simply because those children choose to be what people used to call incorrigible.

---

I am hardly "incorrigible"! I was and still am intelligent. I knew then, as I know now, that a bigger person hitting a smaller person out of frustration shows a distinct lack of control, a predilection towards violence, poor judgment, and exhibits the worst that every human possesses. Respect is earned, not attained by beating on someone.

Quote:

---

We don't hear that word anymore, but it would certainly suit many children (and even adults) today.

---

The true phrase we don't hear anymore is "personal responsibility." Hit me, go to jail. Hit a child, go to jail. Oops, there's that elephant again!

Massachusettes has the right idea but is going about it the wrong way. Assault is assault, use existing laws evenly, we don't need new ones.

Funny. Most bullies I deal with come from homes where the parents never spank. Theres also a BIG difference between corporal punishment and assault.

IMO, there is a big difference between spanking a child to discipline, and beating a child out of anger. Ever heard the saying "spare the rod, and spoil the child"? I see nothing wrong with a swat across the backside to the point of stinging a little. It will get their attention and they may think twice before replicating the actions that brought on the smack. However, I don't think it should be severe enough to cause welts or make it tough for the child to sit down for the whole day. At that point, it can get to the point of abuse. It seems like less and less parents discipline their children anymore, and it shows. Idle threats do nothing.

See, and the bullies I'm seeing at school and at extra curricular activies are the ones who don't get ANY disciple, or the parents who are waiting for someone else to do it.

Is spanking the best form of disciplne? No, not imo. But is it better than no discipline? Yes. And I'm refering to spanking, not beating, which to me are two different things. If I hauled off and punched a child, or an adult, yes, that is abuse, and should be treated as such.

Absolutely amazing. There seems to be binary thinking here: no discipline or violence. You know, there is a wide range of options other than those two.

FWIW, child bullies most often come from dysfunctional families where abuse, mental and physical, are common. My current girlfriend is a shrink who works with problem kids all the time.

Tell me whether y'all think that violence on a child is a good or a bad thing. Not that I have any strong opinions about the matter... :-)

I love your choice of words. It's like asking the question, "Hey, are you still beating your wife"?

You really are not interested in what others think, you are looking for an argument. Your answers are peppered with beat, hit, violence, frustration, lack of control all pointed towards the people who think corporal punishment is OK. I can't believe anyone condones abusive behavior towards a child and how a swat on the butt is being construed as that is beyond me.

I want to see the articles that show Christians are supporting child abuse and that beating children is OK. I'm not getting that in link you posted. This is what I found, "Appropriate spanking is not 'beating' or 'abusing' a child, which is a ridiculous and offensive comparison," continued Thomasson. "When appropriate spanking is lovingly administered, it greatly helps a disobedient youngster to become a well-adjusted adult who respects authority."

If you don't spank then so be it but come on, please don't treat those who do as child abusers, there is a major difference and you know that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mwfanelli2

Absolutely amazing. There seems to be binary thinking here: no discipline or violence. You know, there is a wide range of options other than those two.

---

You actually consider spanking, violence?

Yes, there are a million options in between. As a parent, you find which one works best for your child. Do I spank? No, it doesn't work on my kids. Are they disciplined? Yup.

But the point being discussed is spanking, which, again, to me, is not violence on a child.

Some children will respond to a spanking, some will not. I will use a spanking as a LAST resort and only for what I consider to be a serious offence. There have been times though, with my older daughter, that she wouldn't respond to ANYTHING until I gave her a good swat on the tushie.

A spanking should be one to three quick swats on the butt. No where else and no more or I would consider it abuse.

I NEVER spank out of anger. If my child does something and I am angry about it, I send them to their room for a time out (so *I* can calm down) before dishing out a punishment. I would never want to hit my child out of anger. If I spank them, it needs to be to teach them, not because I'm angry.

My children are rarely spanked. Time outs work well for them. There also comes a time when spankings should be stopped, as they get older. I still remember the last time that I was spanked. I was 9 and it was for a bad report card... the spanking did nothing but :confused: me.

I can say though, that there were some times when I would much rather have just been spanked than the punishment that I did have. Like the time when I was 17 and I pissed my mom off and she did not say one word to me for a week unless she absolutely had to. Just knowing that she was so upset with me that she couldn't even speak to me... that was 100 times worse than a spanking!!!!! (I got her to talk to me after a week by writing her a letter lol, then we talked about the issue)

Amber

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mwfanelli2

Or that they are free to administer violence to get the action they want at some later point in life. I wonder how bullies are made? Once again, the elephant in the room that everyone wants to ignore is: if its OK to hit a child, why is it a criminal act to hit me? What if I am going to do something dangerous, stupid, or might hurt someone? That is so broad and encompassing that it could include every extreme.

---

It is illegal because you are old enough now to know better and the person hitting you would most likely not be your parent.

Quote:

---

I am hardly "incorrigible"! I was and still am intelligent. I knew then, as I know now, that a bigger person hitting a smaller person out of frustration shows a distinct lack of control, a predilection towards violence, poor judgment, and exhibits the worst that every human possesses. Respect is earned, not attained by beating on someone.

---

Correct. Respect needs to be earned. And if my parents had not spanked me for some of the stunts I pulled when I was a kid I am sure I would have lost respect for them right then and there. Some children simply do not respond to time outs / corner sitting / warning them of consequences / ETC. Hitting out of frustration is simply wrong. I have and will continue to spank my children if it reaches the point where they deserve it... but it isn't like it is a daily thing and it is NEVER done out of frustration or anger.

Quote:

---

The true phrase we don't hear anymore is "personal responsibility." Hit me, go to jail. Hit a child, go to jail. Oops, there's that elephant again!

Massachusettes has the right idea but is going about it the wrong way. Assault is assault, use existing laws evenly, we don't need new ones.

---

Spank a child and go to jail?? No. Hit a child and go to jail agreed. There's a difference. A spank (as Amber said earlier) should consist of a few smacks on the butt, leave no marks, and ONLY ever be done with an open hand.... not with whatever happens to be handy at that moment. A spank is not assault when it is properly handled. It is NOT properly handled when it is done in anger or out of frustration.

I have seen the results of kids that needed a spanking or some stricter form of discipline that did not get it when required and most of those kids are either in Jail or on the way there. I have also seen the results of a kid who did not need to be spanked but was beaten by their parents "just in case" they had done something that they did not get caught for. Most of those kids are in therapy or in jail getting therapy.

My point is that spanking may not always be required, but when done properly as a last resort by a loving parent who recognizes when that point has been reached, it is a useful tool that a parent should have at their disposal. Let me tell you , when my son starts heading down the course of doing something that my end up requiring a spanking, a warning is usually more than sufficient as he knows I am more than capable of dishing one out when required.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mwfanelli2

Or that they are free to administer violence to get the action they want at some later point in life. I wonder how bullies are made?

That's a slippery slope, my friend. The same kind of logic can be used to imply that imprisonment makes a criminal more criminal. But the fact of the matter is it's not the punishment or discipline that makes a person worse, it's how a person chooses to respond to that punishment or discipline that makes him what he is.

[qoute]Once again, the elephant in the room that everyone wants to ignore is: if its OK to hit a child, why is it a criminal act to hit me?

---

It's not being ignored, it's that you ignore the explanations given you. Spanking is intended to be punitive and corrective and is therefore tolerated, while hitting you would be malicious intent and should therefore not be tolerated.

Quote:

---

What if I am going to do something dangerous, stupid, or might hurt someone? That is so broad and encompassing that it could include every extreme.

---

I'll let you use your imagination on this one.

Quote:

---

I am hardly "incorrigible"! I was and still am intelligent.

---

I didn't say you were incorrigible. Besides, being incorrigible has nothing to do with lacking intelligence; rather, it simply means one is bad beyond reform or impervious to punishment. That is more befitting a rebel and a fool, not an idiot.

Quote:

---

I knew then, as I know now, that a bigger person hitting a smaller person out of frustration shows a distinct lack of control, a predilection towards violence, poor judgment, and exhibits the worst that every human possesses. Respect is earned, not attained by beating on someone.

---

So let me get this straight...you had the sense to discern all this as a child, but lacked the sense to choose behavior that would have avoided your getting spanked?

Quote:

---

The true phrase we don't hear anymore is "personal responsibility." Hit me, go to jail. Hit a child, go to jail. Oops, there's that elephant again!

---

And where was your personal responsibility? Rather than choose behavior that would have kept you from getting spanked, you instead chose to rebel and suffered the consequences. And now you complain about the discipline that was meted out to you?

You know, I now agree with you...spanking didn't teach you anything. Not that it couldn't have taught you anything, it's just that you weren't willing to receive the lesson. Some kids are just that way, though.

One last thing...how do you suppose it is that I've now come to appreciate my parents' harsh discipline for my behavior while you've come to despise yours?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RP Racing

Funny. Most bullies I deal with come from homes where the parents never spank. Theres also a BIG difference between corporal punishment and assault.

---

My response isn't to this quote personally. It just made me brain start moving.....

The two biggest bullies I know are smacked upside the head as often as I hug my kids. It works both ways and I don't think spanking or not spanking creates bullies. The two boys I speak of are never given a natural consequence and their bad behaviors are ignored. Not only are they ignored but the parents hit and bully them for being bullies. They are never held accountable for what they do and the Mom's line of thinking is there are worse kids out there. So what is that teaching?

Personal responsibility came up. Those are the two words that are the most important. Nobody in the above mentioned family EVER takes responsibility for their behaviors and actions. Are we teaching our kids about personal responsibility? My kids know if they are big enough to do something wrong they will own it. Period. We are always talking about personal responsibility. It's the mantra here. One particular parent that bugs the ever living h#ll out of me is one who thinks their child can do no wrong. They are kids and going to act like such. KIDS WILL ACT THEIR AGE. It's my job to help them along in their journey of growing up and letting them know when they are doing wrong.

The best way they learn is by example. My kids are going to mimic my behaviors. The good ones and the bad. The best way for me to parent is to be the best person I can be.

My kids are given boundaries where they can freely move. If they go outside those boundaries we reel them. The more responsible they get the bigger the boundaries.

My oldest are 19 & 18. They'd never yell, sass or are disrespectful to me. If they are going there it just takes one look from me and they stop. If the truth be told and you can ask them for yourselves.... They adore me. lol

Personally, I would love to spank out of anger and if I'm calm I never could. So I choose not to spank. My older two were swatted a few times. It never did a thing other then make me physically sick. It isn't in my personality to be calm and then call the kids over so I can hit them. That would never work for me. Unless I want my head in the toilet all day. :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RP Racing

Some people really need to go out in the REAL WORLD and see that their "darling precious little angel" isnt so "darling". Yeah your "never do anything wrong" kid wouldnt smash car windows even though WE HAVE HIM ON VIDEO doing it.:rolleyes: Or my favorite, lets not keep score at (insert sport played) because he/she may develop a lack of self esteem if they lose. 4-5 yr olds sports is one thing, but at 12 they should had learned by then that not everyone wins.

---

Amen to all of this!!

I'm going to start spanking my dog. I wonder if that will help....she's such a butthead.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by adina

I'm going to start spanking my dog. I wonder if that will help....she's such a butthead.

---

It's a beagle! Of course. BEAT HER! :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oldfireguy

I love your choice of words. It's like asking the question, "Hey, are you still beating your wife"?

You really are not interested in what others think, you are looking for an argument. Your answers are peppered with beat, hit, violence, frustration, lack of control all pointed towards the people who think corporal punishment is OK. I can't believe anyone condones abusive behavior towards a child and how a swat on the butt is being construed as that is beyond me.

---

Yeah, right. If you can't understand sarcasm then, at a minimum, don't make yourself look foolish advertising it. By the way, DO you still beat your wife?

Quote:

---

I want to see the articles that show Christians are supporting child abuse and that beating children is OK. I'm not getting that in link you posted. This is what I found, "Appropriate spanking is not 'beating' or 'abusing' a child, which is a ridiculous and offensive comparison," continued Thomasson. "When appropriate spanking is lovingly administered, it greatly helps a disobedient youngster to become a well-adjusted adult who respects authority."

---

Wow, a loving act of violence. Once again, for the millionth time, if you spank me you get arrested. If you spanked me when I was 17, its "loving discipline." If nothing else, that is hypocritical.

If parents want to say "a little violence is necessary", I'm OK with that. It's honest and it might work for some children although I might not agree. However, where is the line, what constitutes a "little", "a bit more", "too much"? That's left up to the imagination of the parent.

For every parent who gives their kid a slap on the butt there is another one who uses a strap to help raise a child right. I guess you aren't old enough to remember when beating kids with a belt and using a thick wooden paddle were acceptable and loving forms of discipline. It wasn't that long ago when teachers in schools were also allowed to do that. Was that loving discipline as well?

Yes, government intervention would only muck things up more. But it's still violence regardless of how much you might want to hide your actions behind more "appropriate" words.

Quote:

---

If you don't spank then so be it but come on, please don't treat those who do as child abusers, there is a major difference and you know that.

---

Please don't tell me what I know and don't know. For me, child abuse runs along a very thin line, there is no "major difference" between loving violence and abusive violence as you'd like us to believe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by schrackman

So let me get this straight...you had the sense to discern all this as a child, but lacked the sense to choose behavior that would have avoided your getting spanked?

---

Well, lets see...uh...um... I WAS A KID!!!

For me, being hit or paddled was counter-productive. But yes, by high school I had learned how to easily outwit adults and not get caught. Hardly the lesson they intended. I have no idea why I was wild as a kid, but I do remember that there were some adults I never messed with. Why? Not the threat of violence, but because they engaged me, challenged me, and treated me as if I was more than just a pain in the butt. FWIW, I was also an "A" student in spite of my wildness which made many adults even angrier.

Quote:

---

And where was your personal responsibility? Rather than choose behavior that would have kept you from getting spanked, you instead chose to rebel and suffered the consequences. And now you complain about the discipline that was meted out to you?

---

Good grief. Besides the obvious repeat of "I was a kid", it is because VIOLENCE DOESN"T WORK! It's like saying the death penalty helps prevent murders. You can't modify behavior in a good way through the use or threat of violence. At least, that's my opinion.

Quote:

---

You know, I now agree with you...spanking didn't teach you anything. Not that it couldn't have taught you anything, it's just that you weren't willing to receive the lesson. Some kids are just that way, though.

---

I wasn't willing to accept that violence was a good or proper thing. Wow, pity me!

Quote:

---

One last thing...how do you suppose it is that I've now come to appreciate my parents' harsh discipline for my behavior while you've come to despise yours?

---

An excellent question that I won't answer. As much as I like this discussion, I'm afraid my answer would not be taken in the way it was meant.

Quote:

---

where is the line, what constitutes a "little", "a bit more", "too much"?

---

This is what I'd like to know. Where's the line? At what point is it crossed? Are there only certain areas to hit? Can we hit as long as we don't leave marks? When is it abusive?

Quote:

---

An excellent question that I won't answer. As much as I like this discussion, I'm afraid my answer would not be taken in the way it was meant.

---

Don't worry, I don't get offended easily or take things the wrong way. I'd like to hear your answer.

What great timing!

Last night (on WBT-AM, North Carolina) Neal Boortz told the tale of a Jacksonville, Fla. parent and teacher who were arrested. Why? The teacher called the parent and demanded he bring a belt to school and discipline his 13-year old boy. The father did, took the kid to an empty classroom, and beat the kid with the belt. Wonders of wonders, both were arrested.

Neal Boortz was stunned and amazed that anyone would be arrested for getting a child to conform. He called it the "wussification" of America's youth. What is happening to this country when parents can't discipline their children? Not beating children turns them into wimpy adults. How many callers do you think agreed with him and bemoaned the "liberal conspiracy"?

I'd bet, without proof of course, just a hunch, that the vast majority of Americans would agree with Neal Boortz's opinion. So it goes...

and you don't see a differnce between a quick swat with an open hand and a BELT ?

There is a difference between spanking and beating. Whipping your child with a belt, to me, constitutes beating.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mwfanelli2

Well, lets see...uh...um... I WAS A KID!!!

---

So are you suggesting kids can't be held personally responsible for their actions just because they are kids? If so, I highly disagree. If anything, parents need to hold their children accountable. After all, the real world will.

Quote:

---

For me, being hit or paddled was counter-productive. But yes, by high school I had learned how to easily outwit adults and not get caught. Hardly the lesson they intended.

---

It's not the lesson that failed, it's what one chooses to do with the lesson that made all the difference in whether or not he or she continues in bad behavior.

Quote:

---

I have no idea why I was wild as a kid, but I do remember that there were some adults I never messed with. Why? Not the threat of violence, but because they engaged me, challenged me, and treated me as if I was more than just a pain in the butt.

---

Well, we shouldn't expect that adults other than your parents would resort to corporeal punishment to correct you. It's not their place.

Quote:

---

FWIW, I was also an "A" student in spite of my wildness which made many adults even angrier.

---

That's great that you got good grades, but it doesn't excuse or make up for any bad behavior. Your parents were probably bewildered as to why you could get good grades but couldn't or wouldn't show the same enthusiasm with good behavior. So I can understand their frustration.

Quote:

---

Good grief. Besides the obvious repeat of "I was a kid", it is because VIOLENCE DOESN"T WORK! It's like saying the death penalty helps prevent murders

---

You can't avoid personal responsibility by claiming "I was just a kid." Kids make choices, good or bad, knowing the consequences laid down by their parents. That makes them accountable for how they behave. Yes, kids do stupid things without thinking sometimes, but that is what discipline is for...to remind them that they can't act stupid and get away with it, that they need to modify their behavior. Spanking isn't the only means to accomplish that, but I fully support a parent's right to resort to it should they feel it necessary.

By the way, the death penalty is 100% effective in preventing murders, as the one put to death can never harm another human being again.

Quote:

---

You can't modify behavior in a good way through the use or threat of violence. At least, that's my opinion.

---

Wanna bet? The very reason for which we have laws and punishments is to curb bad human behavior and prevent anarchy. And it works for the most part, excepting those of course who fear no consequences–you know, the incorrigible.

Quote:

---

I wasn't willing to accept that violence was a good or proper thing. Wow, pity me!

---

Of course you weren't willing to accept it. What kid likes to get spanked? But this doesn't negate that spanking is a good thing in that it instills in the child a sense of right and wrong, that there are boundaries to behavior, and that bad behavior can sometimes have a swift and harsh consequence.

I still would like you to answer my question. Don't worry, you're not gonna shock or upset me.

Shrackman - You're the first person in this discussion to use the word "boundaries" and it is excellently timed. Without knowing where the limits are and what the boundaries are how is a kid going to know the difference between right and wrong.

I know that this discussion is not about changing others minds but when entering a conversation like this you must be able to see the other side of the conversation without taking offense. It seems to me that MWFanelli is just itching for a fight.... which is entirely contradictory to his abhorance of violence. A spanking is not violence in any sense of the word. Reacting in anger and reaching for whatever is at hand, be it a belt, wooden spoon, hockey stick, etc. is violence without question. If my child is reaching for a hot stove and I slap his hand and tell him "No ..Hot" is that violence? Is that child abuse? If I let him burn himself on the stove just because I am afraid to slap his hand for fear of being labled a child abuser I am worse off that if I let him burn his hand on the hot stove. If my child is caught playing with a lighter and I spank him so that he understands the serious nature of his offense is that child abuse? Or should I just let him burn down the house and my entire family with it? Some offenses need dire consequences in order to get the point across. If I spanked my child because he accidentally flipped a single green pea off his plate and onto the floor at dinner time... then absolutely that is going to far. Sure the "line" is subjective to each individual parent, but most reasonable people know where that line is.

I feel for you MWFanelli that you seem not to have had that positive influence in your life and that you cannot grasp the concept. No I do not know your upbringing other than what you keep mentioning above, but simply based on that (and nothing else to go on) I feel correct in my statement.

Since I see this thread going nowhere other than into the depths of infighting, I am walking away with this post.

Peace be with you all.

I wouldn't be too hard on Michael, Jaedon. I think he and I are a lot alike–passionate about a subject and enjoy debating it with one another! lol

But I essentially agree...children need boundaries to know right from wrong, and consequences for when they cross the line. Spanking, for the most part, is an effective consequence for most children that are on the receiving end, but not necessarily the first line of discipline one might persue. Oftentimes a stern voice, the denial of privileges, or an extra serving of yard duty just might do the trick. :-)

Oh, and rewarding good behavior is essential too. Praising your children, giving them extra privileges, a raise in the allowance, are all things that both reward and encourage good behavior in children.

OK, here it goes. Please remember that, regardless of how things are worded, it is not meant as an insult!

Your question was: "One last thing...how do you suppose it is that I've now come to appreciate my parents' harsh discipline for my behavior while you've come to despise yours?"

There are two extremes in this world, one represented by you, the other by me. Some people believe that conforming to the norm is good for them and good for society. Japan is like this, although the traditional thought is starting to waver. People such as this tend to be religious, searching for absolutes, and arguing for the status quo in most things. They are the foundation of any society.

I am on the opposite side. I grew up questioning everything, challenging every action and thought. People such as myself are often non-religious as religion doesn't accept real questioning. When teachers told me something, I asked for proof. I attack dogma, conformists, the "do it for the greater good" types. It is no wonder I went into physics where this is the norm for most! Many artists and writers are like this as well.

For you, being hit was a good thing because it taught you what was acceptable and what was not. For me, it was counter-productive because the excuses I got for violenec were lame ("It's for your own good" garbage) teaching me that people tend to be illogical and irrational. You can't run a society with people such as myself but you don't get progress from those who toe the line.

As for other questions:

As of this moment, 22 states allow corporal punishment using a wooden paddle. I wonder if that constitutes abuse as it isn't even the parent comitting the violent act. I was paddled in school. As stated previously, all it did was focus my disgust on that teacher. Yes, my father took a belt to me sometimes, not in anger, but because it was considered good parenting. That just created resentment.

Kids do studid things because their brains are not fully formed until their early 20s. They may know what is right and wrong but the centers of the brain that act on that knowlege are not fully there yet. This is why children are wild, do stupid things they know are stupid, start on risky behaviors, and also why the bulk of our military are very young. A kid will often answer "I don't know" when asked why they did something dumb. This is not a dodge, in most cases they really don't know why.

Two people have accused me of being a troll! What they are really saying is "You don't agree with us so you are an idiot." That is the mark of a static thinker. You only learn when your beliefs are challenged, not by singing to the choir.

Hi Michael,

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mwfanelli2

OK, here it goes. Please remember that, regardless of how things are worded, it is not meant as an insult!

---

In the first place, I don't know why anyone would find what you wrote insulting. Mistaken, perhaps, but not insulting. :-)

Secondly, I think some people tend to get too emotional about a subject and thus disable themselves from being able to debate it in a calm and rational way. That's what generally takes away value from a discussion like this.

Quote:

---

There are two extremes in this world, one represented by you, the other by me.

---

Well this is a matter of opinion, and not necessarily the fact of the matter. I do not view my position as extreme but one that permits incorporating of a type of discipline that has been in used for millennia by many different cultures and is not, therefore, unique to American culture. So how can it be logically labeled "extreme"?

Quote:

---

Some people believe that conforming to the norm is good for them and good for society. Japan is like this, although the traditional thought is starting to waver. People such as this tend to be religious, searching for absolutes, and arguing for the status quo in most things. They are the foundation of any society.

---

But even many non-religious parents use corporeal punishment on their children. My parents were not religious, but they religiously believed in spanking. And yes, I got my fair share of it. So I don't think it is accurate to say that spanking is a matter of searching for absolutes or even conforming to the norm, but rather a parent setting their own boundaries for their children and then exercising consequences for crossing those boundaries.

Quote:

---

I am on the opposite side. I grew up questioning everything, challenging every action and thought. People such as myself are often non-religious as religion doesn't accept real questioning. When teachers told me something, I asked for proof. I attack dogma, conformists, the "do it for the greater good" types. It is no wonder I went into physics where this is the norm for most! Many artists and writers are like this as well.

---

I must say that you are over-generalizing religion. Religion (at least Christianity) does not deny a person to question why. On the contrary, it actually anticipates that men will question why, and then it goes on to provide the answer. And once the answer is known, it then expects conformity to God's will. We are not mindless sheep, you know, and neither do we expect others to not understand why it is God commands our faith and obedience.

Quote:

---

For you, being hit was a good thing because it taught you what was acceptable and what was not. For me, it was counter-productive because the excuses I got for violenec were lame ("It's for your own good" garbage) teaching me that people tend to be illogical and irrational.

---

But again this boils down to how you perceived the punishment. Your parents meant it one way, but you interpreted it another way. That is not the fault of your parents, but of your perception. You do realize that many criminals often think the same way of their sentences, don't you? Some are often angry at those who put them behind bars, but such an anger is really unjustified because in reality they ARE accountable for their actions. And it matters not to us that they don't like their punishment.

Quote:

---

You can't run a society with people such as myself but you don't get progress from those who toe the line.

---

Well this is a very interesting admission of yourself. You might wish to contemplate a little deeper on why it is a society can't be run by people such as yourself, but it can be run with people such as myself.

8< snip...I don't have much time left to comment on this part.

Quote:

---

Two people have accused me of being a troll! What they are really saying is "You don't agree with us so you are an idiot." That is the mark of a static thinker. You only learn when your beliefs are challenged, not by singing to the choir.

---

Well again, this is letting one's passions get the best of him. I prefer to argue my case rationally in hopes of persuading another to my view, as name calling rarely gets the job done.

I would just like to say that everyone sees their way of thinking as the right and rational way. I could not live if I had to conform to the norm in most ways. You could probably not survive thinking as I do. Perception is everything! Uh oh, sounds sort of like Popular Buddhism for Americans (a phrase from one of my foreign students).

Societies need both types to survive. I love to read about the true rebels, Galieo, Newton, Einstein, Pauling, Feyman, Joyce, Shaw, Baudlaire, Picasso, Dali, (sp?), etc. These were people who could never be the backbone of society yet; as rebels and questioners, they were able to not only think outside the box but destroy the box all together! These are my "heros", not politicians, world leaders, bankers, my accountant, stock broker, doctor, etc.

Although religion is a discussion in itself, let me say that faith is just that: accept what you are told without proof. Raised as a Christian, it didn't take with me even as a small child, it does so even less today. For others, it provides a comfort and a way to make life worth living. Rebels are almost never religious. Even Mother Theresa gave up faith in the latter portion of her life (diaries released this year). No, it doesn't make her any less of a heroic figure but it does say something about the nature of the rebel vs the majority.

I think this thread has gone about as far as it can at this point. So, unless something really riles me up (!), I'm going to take a back seat.

Oops, the time! I'm off to class!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mwfanelli2

I think this thread has gone about as far as it can at this point. So, unless something really riles me up (!), I'm going to take a back seat.

---

Well I tend to agree with you and end this discussion here. But there is something else you said that I would like to take up in another thread:

Quote:

---

Although religion is a discussion in itself, let me say that faith is just that: accept what you are told without proof. Raised as a Christian, it didn't take with me even as a small child, it does so even less today.

---

Do you mind having a discussion on this?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by schrackman

Do you mind having a discussion on this?

---

Sounds like fun. Of course... never mind! I'll let you start the new thread this time!