Spanking: Where do you draw the line?

[Maedar]

Perhaps, but then why do we have a military? That also teaches them that violence is the answer.

A country with no military will end up like Khwarezm. What? Never heard of it? Exactly.

And on the Bible and discipline. The Bible does not specifically mention disciplining physically...

Since we are in agreement, I rest my case. I was pointing out that the phrase most parents use as an excuse was not taken from the Bible at all.

Yes, children shouldn't disrespect or defy their parents, seeing as parents feed, clothe, and protect them, and hopefully teach them the laws of social behavior. And that last one is why striking a child should not be a way to discipline them. Parents who do it all too often have children who grow up to do it to their kids, and it often turns out much worse.

Call of Duty? Honestly, Spock, I played American McGee's Alice and I'm still okay.

 

[Archaewok1]

Parents should not spank their kids, ever. It teaches kids that violence is a solution.

^ This. Look at the studies done on spanking. They repeatedly show that spanking has negative effects on children, and that it encourages aggressive behavior. How many people would ever say that hitting a spouse for being noncompliant was acceptable? Yet as long as the person is younger, somehow it's okay. Why?

 

[Steampunk]

A country with no military will end up like Khwarezm. What? Never heard of it? Exactly.

I would just like to mention, that I do not support war in any shape or form, so, you will not see me actively supporting the military.

Almost every action has positive and negative effects. The military may very well protect us, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't also teach kids that disputes can be solved with violence.

Yes, children shouldn't disrespect or defy their parents, seeing as parents feed, clothe, and protect them, and hopefully teach them the laws of social behavior. And that last one is why striking a child should not be a way to discipline them. Parents who do it all too often have children who grow up to do it to their kids, and it often turns out much worse.

Okay, so we agree that children need discipline, that basically leaves you 2 options on how to go about it: Mental or Physical. Some people would argue that mental damage is worse than physical.

Call of Duty? Honestly, Spock, I played American McGee's Alice and I'm still okay.

This statement is a mixed bag for me to be honest. On the one hand, it showed the exposure to violence at a young age doesn't guarantee a violent nature later in life. On the other hand, that doesn't mean that exposure to violence as a child does absolutely nothing to effect them.

 

[LDSman]

^ This. Look at the studies done on spanking. They repeatedly show that spanking has negative effects on children, and that it encourages aggressive behavior. How many people would ever say that hitting a spouse for being noncompliant was acceptable? Yet as long as the person is younger, somehow it's okay. Why?

The studies on spanking bring up a chicken/egg problem. Is the child more aggressive because of the spanking, or is the child being spanked because he is more aggressive? Adults have learned that actions have consequences. Children have not.

I would just like to mention, that I do not support war in any shape or form, so, you will not see me actively supporting the military.

Almost every action has positive and negative effects. The military may very well protect us, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't also teach kids that disputes can be solved with violence.

Some disputes require violence to solve. How do you stop someone who is bent on wiping your family from the face of the earth and they are willing to use any means necessary to do so?

Okay, so we agree that children need discipline, that basically leaves you 2 options on how to go about it: Mental or Physical. Some people would argue that mental damage is worse than physical.


This statement is a mixed bag for me to be honest. One the one hand, it showd the exposure to violence at a young age doesn't guarantee a violent nature later in life. On the other hand, that doesn't mean that exposure to violence as a child does absolutely nothing to effect them.

True. And since children aren't exact duplicates and it's wrong to run experiments on them, studies can go either way.

 

[Maedar]

First of all, Spock, there is a third option: Education and Prevention. The key to not having to harshly disciplining your children is to simply not get to a point where it comes to that. Have "the talk" with them early, and don't avoid issues they ask you about. The more you keep something a secret from a kid, the more he'll want it! Parents just don't get it.

And I should have specified, I played that game when I was sixteen. (It was rated M, after all. A lot of kids back then my age were playing Mortal Kombat too. Honestly. Contrary to what soccer moms think, most kids can distinguish fantasy from reality.)

 

[Steampunk]

First of all, Spock, there is a third option: Education and Prevention. The key to not having to harshly disciplining your children is to simply not get to a point where it comes to that. Have "the talk" with them early, and don't avoid issues they ask you about. The more you keep something a secret from a kid, the more he'll want it! Parents just don't get it.

While this is definitely an important aspect of child raising, it isn't exactly a "Third option" to the scenario I was talking about. Think about this scenario: You teach your child right and wrong, but he still does something wrong anyways. (For this example, I'll use playing in the street) You teach them not to do it, and why. But something happens, and for whatever reason, the child goes in the street. The child knew beforehand that he shouldn't do this, yet he did it anyways. What do you do? You could explain it to him again, but if he disobeyed while knowing the reason the first time, odds are he'll do it again. Obviously, you need to discipline him/her in some way, and you have options of mental or physical discipline.

 

[Maedar]

Don't use "playing in the street". Talk about sex and drugs right away. Tell them what cigarettes really do, not some myth about them making your hair fall off. Don't tell them "TV rots your brain", tell them the REAL reason you'd rather have them be well-read.

The old sob-story about hungry children in Africa doesn't make a fussy children eat anymore. (They have the internet at their disposal, and they know that kids in Africa have much bigger problems.

The old stuff doesn't work anymore.

Ansem, I heard an old proverb somewhere, although I'm not sure who said it. It says, "The tree that does not bend will break." That means that you can't stay in the past and hope the old and antiquated methods will work. As the world evolves, you have to evolve with it, because you cannot make the world change to meet your preferences. If you try, you'll fail, just like a tree that won't bend in a strong wind will be blown over and broken.

Edit: You know, it's strange, SO many people here in this debate forum are trying to trick me into admitting that I, in some way, approve of violence.

On this thread, it's "hitting your child is a solution". On the others, we have "armed citizens can prevent crimes", and "the crime of rape is not serious".

The death penalty thread has been stagnant, but it seems the ghouls have been out nonstop pushing for the return of firing squads and gallows ever since there have been problems with the lethal injection, rather than considering outlawing the barbaric practice.

Dear LORD, is being non-violent and wanting peace such a bad thing these days?

 

[LDSman]

Don't use "playing in the street". Talk about sex and drugs right away. Tell them what cigarettes really do, not some myth about them making your hair fall off. Don't tell them "TV rots your brain", tell them the REAL reason you'd rather have them be well-read.

The sex and drug talk should wait until they are old enough to understand what you are talking about.

The old stuff doesn't work anymore.

Works well enough for some people.

Ansem, I heard an old proverb somewhere, although I'm not sure who said it. It says, "The tree that does not bend will break." That means that you can't stay in the past and hope the old and antiquated methods will work. As the world evolves, you have to evolve with it, because you cannot make the world change to meet your preferences. If you try, you'll fail, just like a tree that won't bend in a strong wind will be blown over and broken.

No it doesn't. It means to be flexible in times of hardship. Build your house on a firm foundation and not a foundation off sand. Providing appropriate discipline helps build that firm foundation.

Edit: You know, it's strange, SO many people here in this debate forum are trying to trick me into admitting that I, in some way, approve of violence.

On this thread, it's "hitting your child is a solution". On the others, we have "armed citizens can prevent crimes", and "the crime of rape is not serious".

No ones trying to "trick" you. There is a difference between hitting your child for the sake of hitting and disciplining your child. Armed citizen do prevent crimes. Feel free to return to the gun control debate you were losing and we can discuss it some more. And no one was saying rape is not serious.

The death penalty thread has been stagnant, but it seems the ghouls have been out nonstop pushing for the return of firing squads and gallows ever since there have been problems with the lethal injection, rather than considering outlawing the barbaric practice.

Only one state has considered it. The only problem lethal injection has been having is the activists who are attempting to circumvent the law(I thought you supported the law?) by getting the manufactorers to stop selling the drugs used. Can't use those drugs? The DP can be applied in a different manner.

Dear LORD, is being non-violent and wanting peace such a bad thing these days?

Nope. But expecting everyone to just stop being violent overnight is a pipedream.

 

[EmphaticPikachu]

I'd just like to note that the difference between media violence and spanking is that spanking is generally very emotionally charged for the kid, and can affect the kids in different ways.

I'm not sure of my side in this debate tbh, but I just wanted to point out that the mixed reception that violence in video games makes children violent may not even apply to this situation, given that the speculated reason why we seem to be okay with that violence is because we can seperate fantasy and reality and still enjoy the psychological benefits of it.

 

[Maedar]

The sex and drug talk should wait until they are old enough to understand what you are talking about.

Most modern child psychologists would disagree.

Only one state has considered it. The only problem lethal injection has been having is the activists who are attempting to circumvent the law(I thought you supported the law?)

I support the law, LDS, and I will not openly defy it, like some governors do.

But I am pushing to get laws that I don't agree with changed for the better. I ask you this, do you support the part of the Constitution that forbids Cruel and Unusual Punishment, because when a state outlaws it (which is what happens when there is a change in the policy, NEVER making it legal) that's the reason.

And no state is "considering it", it was suggested by one man, and he's a crackpot.

 

[Playful Latios]

I believe spanking is ok as long as it isn't excessive. I got it growing up and even the paddle once, but I would never say I was abused. It was always just 2-3 hits and everything was over. It didn't damage my relationship with my parents either. I actually live with my dad right now and he was the one who disciplined me more than my mom. I would really say no more than 5 hits if an implement is being used. Whether it is one hit or twenty, a person is going to associate pain with the behavior.

I believe it is more effective when administered to younger kids who simply can't understand. The ability to reason is one that is gained over time. It would be more of a last resort for a teen.

All the time I see teens and kids causing problems in my workplace. They will be bouncing balls, riding the electric carts, fighting with foam swords. You name it, I've seen it. That wasn't something I ever did in stores growing up or saw people doing. I believe the problem to be a lack of discipline on the parents part.

 

[Maedar]

"Bouncing balls"? "Playing with foam swords"? You want them to "associate pain" with playing with toys?

God forbid they ever have children of their own.

Be glad they aren't using slingshots and BB guns, two common toys from the 50s.

 

[Playful Latios]

BB Guns are locked up and my store doesn't sell slingshots so that doesn't really apply. I would never imagine a reputable retailer not keeping BB Guns locked up because they are age restricted.

There is a time and place for everything. At a retail store you don't start fighting one of your friends with a foam sword. What if merchandise got hit and then caused an injury? Things can also break. That is one of the fastest ways to get kicked out of a retail store. Do you have any idea how much it costs a store when an accident happens? At my store you're talking five figures. At home its all fine to be fighting with your friends with foam swords.

I don't necessarily want them to associate pain with playing with toys. I want them to be respectful of a store's rules.

 

[Steampunk]

Don't use "playing in the street". Talk about sex and drugs right away. Tell them what cigarettes really do, not some myth about them making your hair fall off. Don't tell them "TV rots your brain", tell them the REAL reason you'd rather have them be well-read.

...it was just an example, yes you should also educate them in other areas as well, I just had to pick one to use for an example.

The old stuff doesn't work anymore.

People say that and the world is not any better. Some would say its gotten worse.

Edit: You know, it's strange, SO many people here in this debate forum are trying to trick me into admitting that I, in some way, approve of violence.

On this thread, it's "hitting your child is a solution". On the others, we have "armed citizens can prevent crimes", and "the crime of rape is not serious".

The death penalty thread has been stagnant, but it seems the ghouls have been out nonstop pushing for the return of firing squads and gallows ever since there have been problems with the lethal injection, rather than considering outlawing the barbaric practice.

Dear LORD, is being non-violent and wanting peace such a bad thing these days?

I don't think anyone is trying to trick you, yes they may be disagreeing, but that's not the same thing. And for the record, I agree with you on the gun issue, and am against violence greatly. But when it comes to disciplining your child (And almost everyone will agree that children need discipline) physical discipline is the lesser of 2 necessaries in my opinon. Mental-Physical.