IcantC
Enlightened
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2007
- Messages
- 920
http://www.yungdrew.com/2008/06/28/gangster-***-laterian-milton-7-year-old-hijacks-grandmothers-suv/
His grandmother has a nice done up SUV.
He needs to be beaten within an inch of his life, just like in my day. Too bad child services would then say it's child abuse and lock up the parents. Then again who buys their kid GTA at 7. Terrible parents.
People should be evaluated before being allowed to have kids. Just like with driver licenses.
Anyone else here think the gene pool could use alittle more chlorine?
He needs to be beaten within an inch of his life, just like in my day. Too bad child services would then say it's child abuse and lock up the parents. Then again who buys their kid GTA at 7. Terrible parents.
People should be evaluated before being allowed to have kids. Just like with driver licenses.
You don't have to beat your children to be a good parent.
OTOH, "spare the rod, spoil the child"
Requiring some sort of evaluation before allowing people to have children is the first step in eugenics. Reproductive freedom is a basic human right.
IME, far too often, it IS the stupid, unfit, morally bankrupt, etal members of society who are wantonly exercising their "reproductive freedom"...
replies embedded
There's no doubt the child lacked discipline and supervision. But beating children is wrong.
And then there's "be fruitful and multiply", from Genesis 1:22, 1:28, 8:17, 9:1, 9:7 and 35:11.
Wrong according to who? A child cannot always be reasoned with, because their brain is not completely developed to have full logic capability. In order to correct their behavior it is NECESSARY to do it if verbal correction fails.
Wrong according to who? A child cannot always be reasoned with, because their brain is not completely developed to have full logic capability. In order to correct their behavior it is NECESSARY to do it if verbal correction fails.
Lots of good stuff in your post but some of it, although well-intentioned tends to draw some mistaken conclusions. Children do learn what they are taught, but it is not whether you spank a child, but more the manner in which it is done. Properly applied it teaches what cannot be taught with words alone, that actions carry consequences and that life can be painful (more painful than a spanking even) and that the same adults who are there to help protect them and show them how to become properly functioning and caring adults are the same ones who have the responsibility to show them what pain is, in a manner that does not damage them. If humans did not physically punish their offspring in a non-injury inducing manner, they would be some of the only mammals not to do so.Not a spanking, not a single swat to the rear (and even that is wrong, as it only teaches children that might makes right...
Children learn what they are taught. If you want to teach them German when they are young, speak German to them while they are young. If you want to teach them that discipline and chores are necessary, give them discipline and chores. If you want to teach them that it's OK to bully people, to hurt those weaker than themselves, and that one must obey without question those who are stronger than themselves, by all means beat your children.
Doing serious bodily harm to a child is necessary?
Wrong according to who? A child cannot always be reasoned with, because their brain is not completely developed to have full logic capability. In order to correct their behavior it is NECESSARY to do it if verbal correction fails.
This is the sort of generalization and hype that get anti-spank laws passed and people are no longer allowed to discipline their kids.