1. Subscriberjosephw
    Owner
    Scoffer Mocker
    Joined
    27 Sep '06
    Moves
    9958
    06 Mar '15 16:16
    Originally posted by robbie carrobie
    I think there is a rationale but understanding what it is and what its based on is not easy. It seems to be that there are a few arguments and if we cut away the flesh and get to the bone we are left with,

    1. That corporal punishment leads to other forms of physical abuse.

    2. That corporal punishment teaches that violence is a solution.

    There may be others but this is what i have understood so far.
    Well, to get to the 'bone' of the matter, if we didn't live in a sin cursed world there wouldn't be any need for any kind of punishment at all.

    The Bible is clear. Proverbs 22:15
    Foolishness [is] bound in the heart of a child; [but] the rod of correction shall drive it far from him.

    Notice it says "rod of correction" not rod of abuse. I've seen that form of discipline abused. I would no more strike my son with a rod than I would lash him with a whip. Corporal punishment should be administered with common sense and love. Never in anger.
  2. Account suspended
    Joined
    26 Aug '07
    Moves
    38239
    06 Mar '15 16:26
    Originally posted by josephw
    Well, to get to the 'bone' of the matter, if we didn't live in a sin cursed world there wouldn't be any need for any kind of punishment at all.

    The Bible is clear. Proverbs 22:15
    Foolishness [is] bound in the heart of a child; [but] the rod of correction shall drive it far from him.

    Notice it says "rod of correction" not rod of abuse. I've seen that ...[text shortened]... h a whip. Corporal punishment should be administered with common sense and love. Never in anger.
    yes but no one is disputes that the Bible makes for the provision of corporal punishment. I am trying to understand why it has been deemed illegal. What are the reasons for making it illegal.
  3. Cape Town
    Joined
    14 Apr '05
    Moves
    52945
    06 Mar '15 16:36
    I have to say that parents who don't use corporal punishment at all, still seem to raise reasonably good kids.
  4. Joined
    22 Sep '07
    Moves
    48406
    06 Mar '15 18:50
    I think MILD physical discipling of offspring may be natural, look to the animal kingdom, specifically mammals of which we are a part.
  5. Cape Town
    Joined
    14 Apr '05
    Moves
    52945
    06 Mar '15 19:00
    Originally posted by OdBod
    I think MILD physical discipling of offspring may be natural, look to the animal kingdom, specifically mammals of which we are a part.
    So is rape. That doesn't make it a good idea.
  6. Joined
    22 Sep '07
    Moves
    48406
    06 Mar '15 19:37
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    So is rape. That doesn't make it a good idea.
    I'm not sure what you mean by your post? Are you equating rape to MILD physical discipline?
  7. Account suspended
    Joined
    26 Aug '07
    Moves
    38239
    06 Mar '15 20:34
    Originally posted by OdBod
    I'm not sure what you mean by your post? Are you equating rape to MILD physical discipline?
    The 'look at the animal kingdom', argument is bordering on a fallacy - why ? because there are many aspects of animal behaviour that if practised by humans would have devastating consequences. There should be an animal equating to human behaviour logical fallacy category.
  8. Joined
    22 Sep '07
    Moves
    48406
    06 Mar '15 20:39
    Originally posted by robbie carrobie
    The 'look at the animal kingdom', argument is bordering on a fallacy - why ? because there are many aspects of animal behaviour that if practised by humans would have devastating consequences. There should be an animal equating to human behaviour logical fallacy category.
    I disagree totally, we are part of the animal kingdom, and our behaviours are sophisticated versions of more primitive forms.
  9. Account suspended
    Joined
    26 Aug '07
    Moves
    38239
    06 Mar '15 20:42
    Originally posted by OdBod
    I disagree totally, we are part of the animal kingdom, and our behaviours are sophisticated versions of more primitive forms.
    then may i suggest you attempt cannibalism and infanticide, let me know how you get on.
  10. Joined
    22 Sep '07
    Moves
    48406
    06 Mar '15 21:05
    Originally posted by robbie carrobie
    then may i suggest you attempt cannibalism and infanticide, let me know how you get on.
    Both of these acts are, and have been used by humans.
  11. Account suspended
    Joined
    26 Aug '07
    Moves
    38239
    06 Mar '15 21:07
    Originally posted by OdBod
    Both of these acts are, and have been used by humans.
    with devastating consequences.
  12. Joined
    22 Sep '07
    Moves
    48406
    06 Mar '15 21:18
    Originally posted by robbie carrobie
    with devastating consequences.
    I agree, but you could argue that unsavoury acts can act as a driver for social change and improvement.
  13. Cape Town
    Joined
    14 Apr '05
    Moves
    52945
    06 Mar '15 21:191 edit
    Originally posted by OdBod
    I'm not sure what you mean by your post? Are you equating rape to MILD physical discipline?
    No, I am saying that calling something 'natural' doesn't make it OK, nor does observing similar behavior in other animals.

    And why the emphasis on MILD physical discipline? Severe physical discipline also exists amoungst animals.
  14. Joined
    31 May '06
    Moves
    1795
    06 Mar '15 21:24
    Originally posted by robbie carrobie
    The 'look at the animal kingdom', argument is bordering on a fallacy - why ? because there are many aspects of animal behaviour that if practised by humans would have devastating consequences. There should be an animal equating to human behaviour logical fallacy category.
    It's actually more than bordering on a fallacy, it IS a fallacy...

    The Naturalistic Fallacy in point of fact.

    You ought to know this given the number of times you have been accused
    [often by me] of committing it. 😉
  15. Joined
    31 May '06
    Moves
    1795
    06 Mar '15 21:271 edit
    Originally posted by OdBod
    I disagree totally, we are part of the animal kingdom, and our behaviours are sophisticated versions of more primitive forms.
    RC is correct, Reveal Hidden Content
    [and you have no idea how much I hate saying that]
    the fact that a behaviour is found in the animal kingdom and/or has
    been selected for by evolution is not in any way evidence or reason that it is morally
    or ethically good, by any standards.

    To claim otherwise is to commit the naturalistic fallacy [among other flaws].

    EDIT: my mistake. appeal to nature fallacy.
Back to Top

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.I Agree