The Sphere
General Garbage => Tropical Paradise of Hard Shelled Fruits => Topic started by: B E C K on Feb 12, 2010, 11:42:50 PM
-
No, not for adults, about children. :P This made the local news.
To spank or not to spank: What does Texas law say? (http://www.woai.com/content/troubleshooters/story/To-spank-or-not-to-spank-What-does-Texas-law-say/04q17j51tUi4NURs5oHuqw.cspx). Interesting until your realize this article utterly fails:
Some stories that make the news confuse things even further. Consider the case of Shanna Hartman.
"I slapped him right-handed, like that, it wasn't even all that hard." The young Elmendorf mom was arrested and charged with felony injury to a child a few weeks ago after slapping her 10-year-old son, Christopher, when he refused to clean up his room.
The next day a school nurse noticed red marks on the child's face and neck.
(1) slap != spank, dumbasses
(2) If she left red marks that remained the next day, she DID IT TOO FUCKING HARD. :nono:
-
Who slaps someone on the neck lol
If you dont wanna leave marks you should punch him in the stomach :-p
-
I say smack. I was, and I turned out fine.
-
Screw "spanking"...call it what it is: child beating.
That said, I'm all for parents beating on their children to correct behavior. Beatings are drastic and should be feared out of both pain and social stigma. That's why I believe in publicly beating children that publicly misbehave...they aren't so cool now that they can explain away their dad wearing them out in front of their pals.
Of course, there are limits. I wouldn't beat a kid for simple noncompliance. You don't clean your room? You obviously don't like your room, so you won't be spending quality time with the crap you left lying all over it, much less the TV that some people give to children these days to keep them quiet through video game hypnosis. Get backtalk? Quick, light backhand to the lips. Throw a tantrum? Belt on the butt.
But none of this crosses the abuse line. You don't have to abuse a child to beat them, just like you don't have to beat a child to abuse them.
-
If you dont wanna leave marks you should punch him in the stomach :-p
Aha ha ha, ROFL.
You don't clean your room? You obviously don't like your room, so you won't be spending quality time with the crap you left lying all over it, much less the TV that some people give to children these days to keep them quiet through video game hypnosis.
Yeah, I would take their things away one by one. All a kid needs in his/her room is a bed, a pillow, a sheet, a good pair of shoes and enough clothes to last the week. Everything else is a luxury and if you don't know how to have some respect for being able to have a luxury, then you don't deserve it. Yet, it seems as if this simple concept is so easily ignored.
-
Screw "spanking"...call it what it is: child beating.
Wrong. There is a definite difference between beating your chills senseless and spanking your child once or twice without the use of a weapon.
-
I'm not going to let my child watch TV as much as people let kids watch it nowadays. I've seen my little brother watching cartoon network when he came to visit, he was like a fucking zombie, didn't pay attention to ANYONE talking to him while he was watching tv. It was disgusting.
-
TV in the bedroom for little kids is definetely a bad idea. I think it stunts the imagination.
Wrong. There is a definite difference between beating your chills senseless and spanking your child once or twice without the use of a weapon.
OMG, weapon. Why are belts and hairbrushes okay anyway? I've never gotten a hairbrush before, but the belt fucking hurt. TRAUMATIZED. Use your hand or go fuck yourself.
-
LOL hairbrushes? who uses that! I remember my mom used to threaten us with pouring some water over a leather belt and spanking us, but she never did. The most she did was hit my bro once with a wooden spoon for god knows what. Fun times
TV in the bedroom for little kids is definetely a bad idea. I think it stunts the imagination.
You should tell my uncle that. His son (I think he's 13) has a pimped out bedroom. With a 40 something inches LCD TV, PS3, xbox360 and Wii and of course all the games he can think of. Oh and a brand new mac, and dj set
-
That little bastard. (http://www.rabbitinasuit.com/emoticons/R-T/shakefist.gif)
-
God damn little shit fucker.
Some parents will hit their child with whatever the closest implement is, hairbrush, powet cable, a dog, a younger child.
-
My brother hated that shit.
-
What, getting beaten by weapons?
-
Him being used as a blunt object to punish me for smoking pot.
-
Damn. Did he hurt?
-
No, because he was a Pachycephalosaurus.
-
My mom broke a wooden spoon in half hitting me with it. Of course I was 20 or so at the time and wrestling my sister. And it may have been cracked already. But still!
I only remember being spanked two or three times as a kid. It didn't really hurt, but it was enough to know that I screwed up enough to get my mom really pissed off.
-
HAHA Sammm my mom broke a wooden spoon hitting my brother too! It only made him laugh since my mom is petite so we have no idea how the spoon broke
-
Screw "spanking"...call it what it is: child beating.
Wrong. There is a definite difference between beating your chills senseless and spanking your child once or twice without the use of a weapon.
You just qualified your corrective statement by saying "beating your chills [sic] senseless". At no point did I advocate nor reference anything of the sort. Children may be beaten without being beaten senseless. Hence the following assertion I made in the post you referenced: "You don't have to abuse a child to beat them, just like you don't have to beat a child to abuse them."
Beating is exactly what "spanking" is. The second definition for "beating" given in WordWeb (http://wordweb.info/free/) is "the act of inflicting corporal punishment with repeated blows". "Spanking" is a substitute term for beating because of the negative connotation, much like "looting" is just stealing with a cute name to half excuse the losers who do it.
And this is regardless of the implement used, whether it's either side of your hand, a switch, a wooden spoon, a yard stick, a fly swatter, a paddle, a belt, a mattenklopper, or an Illudium Q-36 Space Modulator™. The error you make is in equating these to "weaponry", which is simultaneously uncharacteristically idiotic and needlessly incendiary. Well, with the possible exception of the latter two named above.
-
It is still different, exactly because of the negative implication. Not only does it change the implication, but the common meaning is different, at least where I am. Dictionary definitions are only good for legal reference and general understanding. To the common person a spanking is typically that, one spanking to show discipline. A beating is a horrible thing that should have the negative connotation, because it is typically very damaging to the recipient of the beating.
-
It is what it is, despite anyone's preconceived notions. Don't be too big of a pussy to call it what it really is.
And dictionary definitions are definitions, whether they support your argument or not. Just because people tend to be too simple to understand nuance doesn't mean we have to be.
-
The nuance is in the connotation.
-
I have to say, beating != spanking. A spanking can be kinky but I don't know anyone who wants a sexy beating.
-
I would find spanking kinky.
-
Yeah, but what about a sexy beating? I guess this is like Rosario Dawson in a catsuit taking a crowbar to your kneecaps or some shit.
-
Eh...make is a corset and lace thong and riding crop across the back and I might could go for that.
That crowbar part might be a bit much though.
-
Hello? Bueller? That's what makes it a beating.
-
Oh...then no.
-
The defense rests, your honor.
-
Nuri pwns again.
-
HIT HER!
-
I won't hit. I'll just spank her.
-
:nono:
-
That's not the safety word.
-
Is the safety phrase, "spank me?"
-
It's banana
-
(http://www.rabbitinasuit.com/emoticons/A-D/banana.gif)
-
Should change it to orange. You know..."Orange you glad I didn't say banana again?"
-
I'm trying to figure out what's with conservative Christians and beating the shit out of their kids. So much for being gentle and loving like Jesus wanted, we'll just go with some good old fashioned Old Testament ass kicking.
http://kdka.com/national/Parents.Accused.Of.2.1507239.html
CHICO (CBS) ― Prosecutors say parents used quarter inch plastic tubing to beat their seven-year-old adopted daughter to death, CBS station KOVR-TV reports. Apparently, they got the idea from a fundamentalist based Christian group, which promotes using this as a way of training children to be obedient.
Three years ago, Kevin Schatz and his wife Elizabeth decided to adopt three children from Liberia. Now, they are accused of killing one of them, allegedly because one child mispronounced a word.
Butte County District Attorney Mike Ramsey says the seven-year-old was held down for several hours by Elizabeth and beaten dozens of times by Kevin on the back of her body, causing massive tissue damage.
"It was torture," says Ramsey.
Another 11-year-old adopted child was critically beaten for "being a liar and a bad influence on the seven-year-old."
The District Attorney points to a book written by a Tennessee Evangelist named Michael Pearl, who the Schatz's have told police they were following.
Pearl's Web site, www.nogreaterjoy.org, suggests "A swift whack with the plastic tubing would sting but not bruise. Give ten licks at a time, more if the child resists."
"This is not a good ole' fashion spanking, it certainly is way beyond that," says Ramsey.
The alleged beating happened on a piece of property in Paradise, where the three adopted children and the Schatz's six biological children were homeschooled.
The family rarely left their property. Their six biological children were home schooled. They even grew their own food.
Kevin and Elizabeth Schatz now face life in prison.
The Schatz's nine children thought these alleged beatings were normal, and they can't understand why police have arrested their parents.
And a much longer article from Salon.com:
http://www.salon.com/life/feature/2010/02/22/no_greater_joy/index.html
So this philosophy by Pearl believes in whipping children to make them subservient little obedient slaves, perfect in every single way, like some kind of 1950s white picket fence family where the children are polite and perfect in every way. Well shit if you want that build some android kids or something. Children are hell-spawn and pain in the asses and that's just the way they are, and beating them half to death because Ye Ol Testament says to use the rod to chastise the child just shows you're stupid and easily brainwashed by religion.
-
I find it interesting how some Christians will pick and choose certain parts of the bible to justify their style of living.
-
Maybe this (http://www.amazon.com/Bible-Cliffs-Notes-Charles-Patterson/dp/076453811X) would help some of those misguided souls.
Butte County District Attorney Mike Ramsey says the seven-year-old was held down for several hours by Elizabeth and beaten dozens of times by Kevin on the back of her body, causing massive tissue damage.
If that's what really happened, those people were obviously sick, with or without a bible.
-
Best bible-related news story I saw this week.
From: http://www.christianpost.com/article/20100223/high-court-rejects-ex-lesbian-mother-s-appeal/ :aroused:
A family court judge in Vermont has issued a warrant for the arrest of a Virginia woman who disappeared with her daughter after being ordered to turn her over to her former lesbian partner.
Judge William Cohen, during a brief hearing Tuesday at the family court in Rutland County, Vt., ruled that Lisa Miller was in contempt of the court for failing to turn over custody of her daughter to Janet Jenkins by 1 p.m. on Jan. 1.
Cohen had awarded custody of 7-year-old Isabella to Jenkins on Nov. 20, 2009, after Miller repeatedly refused to abide by a court-ordered custody arrangement. The judge said the only way to ensure equal access to the girl was to switch custody. He also said the benefits to the child of having access to both parents would be worth the difficulties of the change.
Miller, however, had claimed that Isabella exhibited "violent reactions" to spending with Jenkins and was even forced at one time to bathe with her.
"I do not feel safe leaving my daughter with her, and I believe I have a God-given and constitutional right to raise my child as I see fit," Miller had told Newsweek prior to her disappearance.
Miller, who had renounced her homosexuality just a few years after entering into a civil union with Jenkins in Vermont in 2000, had requested for a delay of the transfer of Isabella to Jenkins in hopes of a favorable ruling from the Virginia Court of Appeals, which is expected to decide whether Virginia must enforce a custody order and visitation order arising from the dissolved Vermont same-sex civil union.
Cohen, however, turned down the request.
Presently, Virginia’s state law and constitution expressly ban enforcement of any right or order arising from same-sex marriage, civil unions, or domestic partnerships.
Miller had Isabella through artificial insemination after her civil union to Jenkins and prior to the end of their relationship.
Miller, who became a born-again Christian, alleged that Jenkins was abusive and controlling, and had consequently returned to her home in Virginia, where Isabella was born and where same-sex civil unions are not recognized.
Since last month, Miller has ceased communication with her attorneys.
-
I'm trying to figure out what's with conservative Christians and beating the shit out of their kids. So much for being gentle and loving like Jesus wanted, we'll just go with some good old fashioned Old Testament ass kicking.
As if the article you posted is representative of all. But that's par for the course around here. But these parents were simply idiots following another idiot. 1/4" tubing stings but won't bruise? Seriously? I guess it's like soap in a sock doesn't bruise, either. What, you think people who are beaten aren't injured unless they bleed? Try it on yourself and see. It's bad enough idiots put that out there, but it's worse when bigger idiots glom onto it.
Physical discipline is generally effective and ultimately harmless unless you're a dumbass who has no restraint or good sense to recognize at what point discipline becomes abuse well in advance. And I'm fairly certain not all Christians are child abusers, and not all child abusers are Christians (in fact, I'd view it as an indication against one being a Christian at all).
I find it interesting how some Christians will pick and choose certain parts of the bible to justify their style of living.
I find it interesting that you must be adept at interpreting and applying such things in order to make such a judgment.
Maybe this (http://www.amazon.com/Bible-Cliffs-Notes-Charles-Patterson/dp/076453811X) would help some of those misguided souls.
This (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide) would be better in the long run.
Best bible-related news story I saw this week.
One of the many reasons why state-sanctioned and licensed marriage, whether hetero or homo, should be abolished.
-
Best bible-related news story I saw this week.
One of the many reasons why state-sanctioned and licensed marriage, whether hetero or homo, should be abolished.
I agree with this whole heartedly. If there is a specific legal need to specify domestic partnerships, that is fine. Because the term 'marriage' is often defined by the religion of those involved in said partnership. The state should not define it.
-
Maybe this (http://www.amazon.com/Bible-Cliffs-Notes-Charles-Patterson/dp/076453811X) would help some of those misguided souls.
Or this: http://www.amazon.com/Bible-Dummies-Jeffrey-C-Geoghegan/dp/0764552961/ref=pd_sim_b_2
And those lesbians aren't hot, either. I'm disappointed.
I do find it funny that the woman "renounced" her lesbianism. Either she's lying or she was bisexual to begin with.
The way I see it, marriage really shouldn't be a religious institution because people of all religions, and people who have no religion, marry. First and foremost it should be civil, a contract of the state or government. Then, if you want to have a religious ceremony of whatever faith you have, or just a celebration if you have no faith, then have at it.
But the marriage will be a civil institution first and no religion would have any monopoly on it, and would not be able to say "these people can marry but these can't."
-
Spanking, like youth, is wasted on the young. ;D
-
I am starting to like this bernie person.
-
Giggity.
-
Best bible-related news story I saw this week.
One of the many reasons why state-sanctioned and licensed marriage, whether hetero or homo, should be abolished.
I agree with this whole heartedly. If there is a specific legal need to specify domestic partnerships, that is fine. Because the term 'marriage' is often defined by the religion of those involved in said partnership. The state should not define it.
Yes, by gum, yes. Marriage for nobody, civil unions for everybody! Alsooooo no divorces, then maybe people will think before jumping into a pact of lifelong bondage.
I just want everyone to suffer.
-
Most of them actually seem to suffer accordingly through divorce. At least that's what I've witnessed.