0

I agree that neither should be legislated. However, religious belief is only ONE motivation. To say it is THE motivation is simplistic and false.
Unless, of course, atheist have absolutely no opinion on the subject.
Any atheists flipping through the channels?

I'm an atheist and do not believe feelings on the effectiveness or appropriateness of corporal punishment have the least to do with religion. Many religions may have proscriptions regarding discipline, but that does not relegate the entire matter to one of religious belief.

0

My "attitude" was influenced by my misreading a challenge; and an exaggerated reflex to the challenge and it's (perceived) tone.
If you or anyone else wishes, I will leave.

Nah, it's good you're back.

My first posts here drew a LOT of flak. What I quickly learned is: don't insult while disagreeing, and, when seemingly attacked, answer the challenge within the attack but don't respond to the sense of being attacked. Most such challenges are just the difficulty of the medium.

I personally engage in quite a bit of verbal shorthand, I'm sure others do too. Such is bound to be misinterpreted.

0

If you or anyone else wishes, I will leave.

Are you nuts? I'd stay if only it were just for the satisfaction of knowing they didn't wan't me around.

0

Well, the grown-up in me appreciates the words of Bender; but the kid in me still values what Felix has to say. And since even atheists (it would be a contradiction to capitalize it, wouldn't it?) are contributing to the discussion, well;
how shall I say this???

DOOOOOOOH!

Sorry jasimp. Just haven't even got a guess. And scru, I still don't have a cause, I just don't have fun being a rebel anymore.

-1

I'm telling you if I was a parent I would just ground my kids. That's what most parents *cough* Chuck Norris *cough* do.

Votes + Comments
Chuck Norris sucks
0

Religious beliefs, eh? While I might be getting your drift, I don't know what you mean.

Your statement depends on what you mean by "religious". I do agree that religious beliefs should not become part of law.

I'm don't know how you see spanking as a religious belief. Unless you call whatever anyone holds to be true, or reality, or important, religion. I could go with that if it's what you mean. Certainly not everyone who spanks or is against spanking thinks of their attitude as a religious belief as they think of religion in general.

Please elaborate

The Bible prescribes corporal punishment for misbehaving kids (Proverbs 13:24; 22:15; 23:13-14; 29:15)

The Baha'i Faith is an Asian religion that prohibits corporal punishment. The rules of Political Correctness are plagiarized from the Baha'i Faith.

Because both are religious beliefs, neither may be made part of the law without violating the First Amendment.

0

Because both are religious beliefs, neither may be made part of the law without violating the First Amendment.

It also could be considered assault if they did wish to make it illegal. Killing is against the law and is also prohibited by the ten commandments. I don't think anyone ever challenged that on the basis of separation of church and state.

Assuming anything that is mentioned in any religion is off limits to legislate is just myopic. Whether you can admit it or not, morality and ethics are still applicable outside the bounds of religion.

0

It also could be considered assault if they did wish to make it illegal. Killing is against the law and is also prohibited by the ten commandments. I don't think anyone ever challenged that on the basis of separation of church and state.

Assuming anything that is mentioned in any religion is off limits to legislate is just myopic. Whether you can admit it or not, morality and ethics are still applicable outside the bounds of religion.

So which is it with you, spanking good, spanking bad? Spanking with intent to kill bad?

The question at hand was "Should kids be spanked?" .. My interpretation would be that the question asks if it does any good, if it appropriate, regardless of religion or the law.

Obviously there is a crossover between spanking and abuse which really does not need to be discussed if all you want to know is whether spanking yields desired results.

Most of us over 40 have been spanked. We have a right to an opinion, we have a perspective that incorporates personal experience of cause and effect.. Those of us over 30 who are parents have an even greater body of experience. We have, perhaps, a more complete view, we can see a bigger picture than the child.

Bias plays in to how this question generally gets answered. Your bias may be a religious belief, or a belief in social attitude, or regarding pain and the causing of it.

And it is largely bias that dictates our answers.

0

Bias even affects how the question is asked.

1. Should parents be allowed to beat or inflict physical violence on their children?
2. Should parents be permitted to include punishment in "socializing" and "teaching" life skills to their offspring, like most mammals and many other animals?

Did your answers match?

Does it do any "good"; and which of us gets to define good? Is it "appropriate"? Others ask, is it "justified"? Right? Acceptable? And not one of these questions has an objectively demonstrable correct answer. Which SHOULD mean, you do it your way, I'll do it mine, and the gov't. should stick to protecting children from genuine malice and harm (of more than their "feelings"); but NOT punishment.

"Should kids be spanked?" is an academic, philosophical question.
"Should parents be ALLOWED to spank?" goes directly to our social contract; and the question that actually needs to be answered.

0

Does it do any "good"; and which of us gets to define good? Is it "appropriate"? Others ask, is it "justified"? Right? Acceptable? And not one of these questions has an objectively demonstrable correct answer. Which SHOULD mean, you do it your way, I'll do it mine, and the gov't. should stick to protecting children from genuine malice and harm (of more than their "feelings"); but NOT punishment.

"Should kids be spanked?" is an academic, philosophical question.
"Should parents be ALLOWED to spank?" goes directly to our social contract; and the question that actually needs to be answered.

I agree with this. My post regarding government establishing law guided by religious principal was a direct response to Midi's assertion that the government can't make any laws about it. I feel that itself is a silly assertion and has no basis in fact. That post has nothing to do with my position as to whether the government should make any laws on the matter.

0

The first amendment prohibits government from restricting the free exercise of religion.

Should government have the right to inflict the politically correct religion's belief that all violence is wrong upon the rest of us.

I contend that all violence is NOT wrong:
- It is not wrong to use self defense.
- It is not wrong to use violence to enforce the law. Police do it all the time.
- Violence is necessary to defend a country from invasion.
- Violence is the only way to stop terrorism.
- Spanking is a necessary part of discipline for children. Those silly timeouts and other methods don't work.

Violence is wrong only when it is used against other people for wrong purposes.

0

The first amendment prohibits government from restricting the free exercise of religion.

Should government have the right to inflict the politically correct religion's belief that all violence is wrong upon the rest of us.

I contend that all violence is NOT wrong:
- It is not wrong to use self defense.
- It is not wrong to use violence to enforce the law. Police do it all the time.
- Violence is necessary to defend a country from invasion.
- Violence is the only way to stop terrorism.
- Spanking is a necessary part of discipline for children. Those silly timeouts and other methods don't work.

Violence is wrong only when it is used against other people for wrong purposes.

Indeed, and of course, but only insofar as the social contract goes. Violence is integral to all of nature, including the nature of man. How a man exerts his violence is between him and how (well) he wants to fit with his culture. If he feels himself to be an island, then any degree of violence will do, he can live or die by his choice.

The question of whether violence is acceptable or not is a question of concurrence within a social group, or the collective belief of that group. Violence is much bigger than religion, and religion cannot claim any right to it, whether pro or con.

0

I recently heard on the news that a man was arrasted for battery after he spanked his child....but i think he did more than just spanking, although the news didn't show any physical scars on the child. The father was accustomed to being spanked when he was a child.

0

So then what evidence is there to prove his did more than spank the child? Please tell me that you're not going off the term "battery"

0

Scru...i'm only mentioning what the news report said, they had no proof that the child had physical scars....and yes...they charged him with 'battery'.

0

Just becasue you can't see a physical "scar" doesn't mean he didn't do anything. Bones heal and bruises fade.

0

jasimp....i do agree with you, the cops went based on what the mom said, but he has been accused of it before, but only spent a few days in prison. Again, I'm just going by what the news said.

0

We know that the government WILL get involved if there is excess violence, no matter what we call it .. spanking, street fight, spousal abuse ... all of these things can result in anything from turning a blind eye to a jail term.

There's no news in the fact that some unknown person did some unknown thing and was punished for it.

Why not talk about something / someone real? Such as:

Who among us has been spanked? How do we feel about it?

Who among us actually knows someone who spanks?

Who among us knows someone who takes it / has taken it too far?

Who among us has done spanking? (Does anyone dare admit it?)

DID IT WORK?

Did you ever over-do it out of frustration?

Did you ever feel remorse for doing it?

Will you keep doing it?

Will you suggest to your children that they do it?

0

I'll look on the news website and get the article from their archives. To answer your questions:
1. I did get spanking, also from teachers at school. I feel it's necessary at times. Most of my friends also received spankings when they were kids years ago. With regards to limits, my maid threw a stone a busted her son's head (theres a gash/scar over his eye)...now thats too far. True, exessive things like those will cause kids to resent you later in life. I do spank and would tell my kids to do it. My bad genes are so strong...its gonna take centuries a beat it out(i'm just being sarcastic)...but hopefully my grand-kids will only have to see my son's facial expression or actually listen to do what they're told. I also must say that some do it out of anger, i don't agree with discipling a child when your in rage or if you've had a tuff day at work or you feel you need to vent.

1

Two words ;) :Spare the rod, spoil the child.IMO those who don't know what they are doing REALLY screw it up. Whether that entails spankings or lack thereof, dunno.

Votes + Comments
Isn't that really five words?
0

Scru...i'm only mentioning what the news report said, they had no proof that the child had physical scars....and yes...they charged him with 'battery'.

The problem is that those who want spanking banned exaggerate the report so it looks like more than spanking. The phoned report to police on a battery charge for a spanking I witnessed was a "savage beating."

0

I was recently reading that they'll charge you only if the beatings leaves marks on the body.

0

Scru...i'm only mentioning what the news report said, they had no proof that the child had physical scars....and yes...they charged him with 'battery'.

You said, and I quote "but i think he did more than just spanking". That is an opinion, not just what the news report says. That opinion was what I was challenging.

0

Those who oppose spanking refuse to acknowledge, and 99% of those who were spanked know; it typically only had to be done a couple of times. I'm not talking about getting "swatted" or slapped. I'm talking genuine "I promise, I'll never do it again", whooping. Even "time-outs" actually worked when it was "go sit in the corner and don't get up until I say you can"; versus the current method where grandma or someone else sits and reads to you so you will accept your so-called punishment.
When the grown-ups won't take charge, the children DO. And this is understood universally by all creatures, but one.

0

When the grown-ups won't take charge, the children DO. And this is understood universally by all creatures, but one.

Very well put, and I'd agree if the human condition were not so different from the other creatures. It's too easy to fall into the fallacy of comparing human behavior with that of the other creatures in an attempt to solidify a point.

Any other creature you can name has but one "way" of life, evolved even as they evolved. Although any given group of other creatures may be impacted by outside influences, they deal with "life" in exactly the same way that they have done from their beginnings. Lets call this behavior "evolved responses".

Such evolution takes thousands upon thousands of years. But humans have changed their conditions so radically and so quickly in the last 10,000 years that their thus evolved responses no longer are in sync with thier conditions. External change is not the same as evolution of the creature, human or otherwise.

What worked in cave man days is no longer workable. While such "taking charge" will work in some conditions, there are gad-zillions of other conditions which we are all subject to that work against our evolved responses.

We aren't raising our kids in caves, with maybe 20 to 10 tribe members. We are raising them in cities with 10s of thousands, or millions of tribe members.

0

Uhm...so 5, 10 or 20 years ago you lived in a cave? That explains a lot more than you'll ever know, brainsmall.

This topic has been dead for over six months. Start a new discussion instead.
Have something to contribute to this discussion? Please be thoughtful, detailed and courteous, and be sure to adhere to our posting rules.