• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

No-spank bill on the way (Edited)

Little-Acorn

Banned
Joined
Apr 19, 2006
Messages
216
Reaction score
5
Location
San Diego
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
The govt-uber-alles types aren't wasting any time starting their fibs. The article already uses "spanking" and "hitting" a child interchangeably, as though they were the same thing. As though parents were nailing their 3-year-old with a left cross and knocking him across the room. And this article even mentions "whipping", as though that had anything to do with spanking. They must be REALLY desperate to lie that badly.

Spanking is a swat on the butt with an open palm. Works on some kids, not on others, when very young to let them know the parent is boss, and usually never needs to be used again, and is completely legitimate. Only parents can decide what will work on their kid, and proceed appropriately. It would sure be nice if govt would stick to truthful definitions of "abuse, for a change.

When a kid too young to talk, learns to crawl and starts fiddling with an electrical outlet, are you going to "explain" to him that electricity can kill him? Or just gently pull him away every time, trusting yourself to be the savior until the one time your back is turned? Or do something that convinces him that fiddling with electrical sockets is a bad thing so that HE will avoid them?

But, government knows better than parents, once again. Interestingly, even most Californians oppose this bill. That doesn't faze the govt-uber-alles types, of course, they will impose it anyway. For the children.

------------------------------------------

MercuryNews.com | 01/18/2007 | No-spank bill on way

No-spank bill on way

by Mike Zapler
MediaNews Sacramento Bureau

SACRAMENTO - The state Legislature is about to weigh in on a question that stirs impassioned debate among moms and dads: Should parents spank their children?

Assemblywoman Sally Lieber, D-Mountain View, wants to outlaw spanking children up to 3 years old. If she succeeds, California would become the first state in the nation to explicitly ban parents from smacking their kids.

Making a swat on the behind a misdemeanor might seem a bit much for some -- and the chances of the idea becoming law appear slim, at best -- but Lieber begs to differ.

``I think it's pretty hard to argue you need to beat a child 3 years old or younger,'' Lieber said. ``Is it OK to whip a 1-year-old or a 6-month-old or a newborn?''

The bill, which is still being drafted, will be written broadly, she added, prohibiting ``any striking of a child, any corporal punishment, smacking, hitting, punching, any of that.'' Lieber said it would be a misdemeanor, punishable by up to a year in jail or a fine up to $1,000, although a legal expert advising her on the proposal said first-time offenders would probably only have to attend parenting classes.

The idea is encountering skepticism even before it's been formally introduced. Beyond the debate among child psychologists -- many of whom believe limited spanking can be effective -- the bill is sure to face questions over how practical it is to enforce and opposition from some legislators who generally oppose what they consider ``nanny government.''

``Where do you stop?'' asked Assemblyman Chuck DeVore, R-Irvine, who said he personally agrees children under 3 shouldn't be spanked but has no desire to make it the law. ``At what point are we going to say we should pass a bill that every parent has to read a minimum of 30 minutes every night to their child? This is right along those same lines.''

One San Jose mother of three said she believes spanking is a poor way to discipline children, but she also wondered whether a legislative ban makes sense. Should a mom who slaps her misbehaving kid in the supermarket, she asked, be liable for a crime?

``If my 6-year-old doesn't put his clothes in the hamper, I'm not going to whack him. He just won't get his clothes washed,'' said Peggy Hertzberg, 38, who teaches parenting classes at the YWCA. ``I think instead of banning spanking, parents need to learn different ways of disciplining and redirecting their children.''

Lieber conceived the idea while chatting with a family friend and legal expert in children's issues worldwide. The friend, Thomas Nazario, said that while banning spanking might seem like a radical step for the United States, more than 10 European countries already do so. Sweden was the first, in 1979.

Nazario said there's no good rationale for hitting a child under 3, so the state should draw a ``bright line'' in the law making it clear.
 
Re: Govt taking over role as parents: Calif may forbid spanking

:roll: craziness at it's best. Big difference between beating a kid and giving them a swap on the butt or hands if they do something bad.


Little-Acorn said:
Spanking is a swat on the butt with an open palm. Works on some kids, not on others, when very young to let them know the parent is boss, and usually never needs to be used again, and is completely legitimate. Only parents can decide what will work on their kid, and proceed appropriately. It would sure be nice if govt would stick to truthful definitions of "abuse, for a change.



agreed!
 
Re: Govt taking over role as parents: Calif may forbid spanking

Well my wife and I are expecting our first child in about 3 weeks. I will probably spank my child when he does something wrong. However I will not use a boat oar like my fullblooded German dad did on me.
I am a strict disciplinarian however, because when we did the ultrasound, he was not cooperating with the ultrasound nurse, by turning the right way. His little *** is grounded for 2 weeks when he gets here. Doesn't warrant a spanking, but he needs to know who the boss is, right out the gate :2razz:
 
Re: Govt taking over role as parents: Calif may forbid spanking

The law doesn't seem to have much chance of passage.

I've never spanked my child, and she's beyond the age that most people consider appropriate to spank. There are other ways to discipline kids that are effective. I don't believe it is necessary, and it does sometimes cross the line into abuse. It sends the message to the kid, "I'll make you do what I want, because I'm bigger and stronger than you are." instead of teaching them right from wrong. Good way to create bullies...the schools are full of them. JMHO
 
Re: Govt taking over role as parents: Calif may forbid spanking

His little *** is grounded for 2 weeks when he gets here.
Attaboy! No nintendo or TV for the little cuss! That's something he sure won't forget! :lol:

More seriously, as I said, spanking works on some kids, not on others. Parents must decide, not some overbearing government.

And for the ones on which it does work, it must be done EARLY, as I also pointed out. The purpose is to deliver the message that Mommy or Daddy mean what they say and must be obeyed. Once that's delivered, the kid WILL remember it, and subsequent spankings are usually not needed at all.

But a kid who grows up used to doing bad things and NOT getting any meaningful correction ("explaining" things to him at that later age works for some, but not for others as we've all seen), won't get any benefit from being spanked at age 5 or whatever. Then it's not a result of his bad behavior - he already knows there are no consequences to his behavior. Then it is only Mommy or Daddy getting angry and being mean. Very little corrective effect.

That bureaucrat in the article who said kids under 3 shouldn't be spanked, doesn't understand the purpose and effect of spanking on kids where it works. Many parents don't either. In fact, if a kid hasn't been spanked before that time, doing it afterward has much LESS chance of working, and is probably useless.

But putting government in charge of child discipline is about the worst possible solution to the problem. They should limit their intrusiveness to genuine child ABUSE, which spanking isn't.
 
Re: Govt taking over role as parents: Calif may forbid spanking

But a kid who grows up used to doing bad things and NOT getting any meaningful correction ("explaining" things to him at that later age works for some, but not for others as we've all seen), won't get any benefit from being spanked at age 5 or whatever. Then it's not a result of his bad behavior - he already knows there are no consequences to his behavior. Then it is only Mommy or Daddy getting angry and being mean. Very little corrective effect.

This is evident with my nephew. His parents don't spank him. All they do is tell him no, or make him stand in the corner. He is a hellion. his grandpa gives him little swats on the ***, and it changes nothing. he just gets mad that he was spanked and does not understand nor care why he did. One thing my parents always did with me after a spanking, was to hold me and tell me that they still loved me and ask me if I knew why I got spanked. It made me think about what I did, and although my spankings were hellaciously hard, I did not get spanked often.
 
Re: Govt taking over role as parents: Calif may forbid spanking

That's a good example of a sissy California liberal-freak right there. >_< (Note: Not to be confused with regular democrats) I was spanked AND explained why I was spanked, and it worked great. It taught me that Mom and Dad were the boss, and there were consequences for my actions, AND that violence HURTS so I wouldn't do it to other people. Not what the nuts say "If you get spanked it'll make you turn violent"

What works best is Spanking AND communication, both together. People who don't spank wonder why their kids get out of control...

I don't mean beating, the worst I ever got was a belt strap (the leather part) but mostly by hand. My parents signed a thing that said they could paddle me in school, and guess what? I did my best to follow all the school rules.
 
Quote
(he needs to know who the boss is, right out the gate )
Typical teutonic arrogance.
He / she wont even be able to understand your language when it emerges from what you say is the (gate) but already you are threatening the little thing.
On such behaviour are wars started.
What is required is that the child is able to understand what you are trying to teach it, next you tell the child exactly what it is that you think it has done incorrectly or wrongly.
If you do feel the need for physical chastisement, that is up to you.
This idiotic law needs at worst to be more clearly defined otherwise it is a nonsense.
Children do need to learn discipline, but not necessarily through violence.
 
Quote
(he needs to know who the boss is, right out the gate )
Typical teutonic arrogance.
He / she wont even be able to understand your language when it emerges from what you say is the (gate) but already you are threatening the little thing.

Maybe you need to learn how to tell a joke from a serious statement. As if the kid could be possibly grounded from doing anything for the first two weeks.
 
I have a friend whose children have never been spanked. They are the amazing children of very skilled parenting. They have grown up well-behaved, getting in very little trouble, and have gone on to good colleges where they have been successful.

I used to say that spanking is the strategy of parents who don't know how to obtain obedience any other way. I also fully advocated spanking if you don't have the skills to do otherwise. Better to have your children safe and well-mannered than otherwise, even if you have to resort to spanking.

Lately, I have decided that inborn temperament plays a role as well. I believe that the parent I mentioned in the first paragraph was somewhat lucky.

It should be up to the parent.
 
Spanking is a swat on the butt with an open palm. Works on some kids, not on others, when very young to let them know the parent is boss, and usually never needs to be used again, and is completely legitimate.


I think the last three words of this statement are the crux of the problem; apparently, some people beg to differ.
 
Back
Top Bottom