What is the 99

Originally posted by RJHinds
I am talking about that they have not received proper discipline. 😏

You are talking total Bull testicles.

physically 'disciplining' (abusing) children is neither a necessary nor-effective means of
instilling good behaviour or morality and certainly does nothing to reduce suicide rates
or accidental death rates. (in fact it contributes to increased rates of suicide and
perpetuates the cycle of abuse)

Actions have consequences, if your actions lead to your death then death is a consequence
of that action.
People don't die from a lack of consequences, they die from a surfeit of them.

Originally posted by FMF
And yet you advocate "spankings".

I fully endorse and support this line of questioning and argument.

Originally posted by jaywill

One night i was a Counsler and my biggest shock was the lack of people that did not know the Verse John 3:16.

Do you mean the lack of people who knew or the lack of people who did not know ?

The latter seems a double negative. It means many people knew John 3:16.

Am I right ?

They did not know the verse.

Originally posted by googlefudge
You are talking total Bull testicles.

physically 'disciplining' (abusing) children is neither a necessary nor-effective means of
instilling good behaviour or morality and certainly does nothing to reduce suicide rates
or accidental death rates. (in fact it contributes to increased rates of suicide and
perpetuates the cycle of abuse)

Actions h ...[text shortened]... that action.
People don't die from a lack of consequences, they die from a surfeit of them.

physically 'disciplining' (abusing) children is neither a necessary nor-effective means of instilling good behaviour or morality and certainly does nothing to reduce suicide rates

About how old are you ?

How many children have you raised ?

Married ?

Originally posted by jaywill

physically 'disciplining' (abusing) children is neither a necessary nor-effective means of instilling good behaviour or morality and certainly does nothing to reduce suicide rates

[b]About how old are you ?

How many children have you raised ?

Married ?[/b]

I think it is funny that he says that.

You know the children that respect their parents always thank them for disciplinging them.

Originally posted by jaywill

physically 'disciplining' (abusing) children is neither a necessary nor-effective means of instilling good behaviour or morality and certainly does nothing to reduce suicide rates

[b]About how old are you ?

How many children have you raised ?

Married ?[/b]

I am not who you asked, but in my 60s, with one daughter in her 30s, who is doing well. I swatted her to get her away from an electrical outlet she was playing with one time, but there no other use of physical force or so-called corporal discipline in her upbringing.

When I was 14 I told my father right after his latest striking of me, that the next time, I would hit him back. It wasn't a threat or warning, it was a fact, and he took it as such. (He was 55; I had just recently beat him at arm wrestling for the first time.) He said "I don't know what else to do." I said I would try to be better. We never had serious trouble after that. I was better behaved, he was reasonable. I have an older brother who never forgave my father because, I think, they never reached this point in their relationship.

Someone has to come along who breaks the cycle, or it continues through the generations. If that has not yet happened in your family tree, it will.

People don't hit because it is a necessary method of discipline, they hit because they lack better skills and training in parenting. At least, the ones who are forgivable, do it for this reason.

Originally posted by JS357
I am not who you asked, but in my 60s, with one daughter in her 30s, who is doing well. I swatted her to get her away from an electrical outlet she was playing with one time, but there no other use of physical force or so-called corporal discipline in her upbringing.

When I was 14 I told my father right after his latest striking of me, that the next time, I ...[text shortened]... ls and training in parenting. At least, the ones who are forgivable, do it for this reason.

Good post.

Originally posted by JS357
I am not who you asked, but in my 60s, with one daughter in her 30s, who is doing well. I swatted her to get her away from an electrical outlet she was playing with one time, but there no other use of physical force or so-called corporal discipline in her upbringing.

When I was 14 I told my father right after his latest striking of me, that the next time, I ...[text shortened]... ls and training in parenting. At least, the ones who are forgivable, do it for this reason.

Yeah, what LJ said, and thumbupped.

Originally posted by RBHILL
You know the children that respect their parents always thank them for disciplinging them.

And the rest of them saw sense, and no longer respect their parents.

As a parent, I believe that physical punishment is the easiest way to achieve control over children, but it is never the best way to be a parent. It is for lazy parents. And before you ask, yes, I have been a lazy parent from time to time.

I would also like you to provide some sort of actual statistics or other evidence to support your claim that physically disciplining children leads to fewer deaths - or even more sensible behaviour in general.

Originally posted by twhitehead
And the rest of them saw sense, and no longer respect their parents.

As a parent, I believe that physical punishment is the easiest way to achieve control over children, but it is never the best way to be a parent. It is for lazy parents. And before you ask, yes, I have been a lazy parent from time to time.

I would also like you to provide some sort ...[text shortened]... ically disciplining children leads to fewer deaths - or even more sensible behaviour in general.

I never said it leads to fewer deaths.

Originally posted by RBHILL
I think it is funny that he says that.

You know the children that respect their parents always thank them for disciplinging them.

As with most things there are extremes on either side. One should not fall into either extreme.

A very sad story was personally told to me by a school priniciple in Boston, Mass. USA. There was a woman with son whom she never disciplined. When he got in trouble in school she would go and fight with the teachers. She stuck up for the child no matter what he did. The teachers dreaded having run ins with that tough and loud mother. It was the child was right no matter what.

One day he brought a gun to school and they called police to apprehend him. He went running though the school yard. He fired the gun at one of the policemen. They then peppered him with bullets.

The mother arrived and held that boy in her arms in his last breaths. There he was, full of policemen bullets for shooting at a cop. He died in her loving arms.

A true story. A very sad story. I am not saying corporal punishment is always the answer. But if you love your child you have to discipline your child.

Originally posted by jaywill
...There was a woman with son whom she never disciplined. When he got in trouble in school she would go and fight with the teachers. She stuck up for the child no matter what he did. The teachers dreaded having run ins with that tough and loud mother. It was the child was right no matter what.....

Are you proposing this anecdote of clearly very poor parenting as support for corporal punishment?

Originally posted by jaywill
As with most things there are extremes on either side. One should not fall into either extreme.

A very sad story was personally told to me by a [b]school priniciple in Boston, Mass. USA. There was a woman with son whom she never disciplined. When he got in trouble in school she would go and fight with the teachers. She stuck up for the child no matte ...[text shortened]... l punishment is always the answer. But if you love your child you have to discipline your child.[/b]

It's a pitiable situation. Evidently she did not successfully teach him to refrain from violence and from threatening violence.

Originally posted by RBHILL
I think it is funny that he says that.

You know the children that respect their parents always thank them for disciplinging them.

Again, bull****.

First, not all children who respect their parents were 'physically disciplined' by them. (I would say the majority in fact)

Second, not all children 'physically disciplined' by their parents respect their parents.

Third, not all children who were 'physically disciplined' thank their parents for it.

Fourth, 'physically disciplined' children (read abused) are actually less likely to respect their parents and are more likely
to be maladjusted and abusive themselves.

Fifth, The more secular a society the less violent, more fair, and safer that society is (than an otherwise comparable theistic society)

Originally posted by avalanchethecat
Are you proposing this anecdote of clearly very poor parenting as support for corporal punishment?

The first sentence in that post read like this:

As with most things there are extremes on either side. One should not fall into either extreme.

My real purpose was to tell a very sad and true story of the wrong kind of "love" which failed to control a kid's wild behavior.

If the life could have been saved without spankings, that's OK by me. I think that is great. If spankings could have played a part, that is good too.