Church abducts youths to show 'religious persecution'.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3
 

Bouncer:

Mortai Gravesend:

Bouncer:

Very obviously, observation and comparison. I've -seen- this happen and find it very difficult to beleive that it isn't the case.

You think you are somehow capable of telling the cause and effect of such things simply by the brief encounters you have with it? You think you're privy to all factors in the child's life that might affect their behavior or are you oversimplifying this?

Obviously you're simply trying to taunt me with this statement. My statement doesn't somehow claim that this is a universal constant that cannot be changed, I'm merely stating that this is my observation.

No, I'm pointing out that you lack sufficient knowledge to make the claims you do while maintaining any sort of intellectual integrity. 'My observation' is not much of an excuse, your observation is insufficient. The observation of someone not actively gathering information and not looking for the factors, making lazy assumptions is not good enough ever.

Mortai Gravesend:

I'm not saying that all parents who do not physically punish their kids will end up with misbehaving children. Some are lucky enough not to have encountered the wrong kind of influence. However there are many children who's parents openly claim to "Not know what to do with them" because of their horrendously unreasonable behaviour. I have found that in many of these cases, the parents fail to find suitable punishment for the child.

For example: If your parents punish you by sending you to your room... but you have an Xbox in your room, is that really going to teach you not to misbehave?

Physical punishment is an easy way to conduct authority, fear and intimidation are a valid substitute. If the child -Thinks- you might hurt them if they do something wrong, they are likely not to do it (Or do it in relative secrecy rather than openly IMO, is not as bad)

You're merely claiming they are a valid substitute. You have given me nothing to think it is particularly valid.

Obviously you're not taking the time to read what I wrote before responding. Clearly, a valid substitute to actually hurting the child is letting him beleive that they would be hurt should they misbehave. This is valid in the sense that it prevents the parent from actually having to hurt the child. IMO, this is a good thing.

I did. You seem to have issues reading, however. I said you are merely claiming it and not giving me a reason to think it is.

Also your argument is laughable. It makes the assumption that the only other option would be harming the child. It's as stupid as saying "Oh I hit my child so I didn't have to kill him, that makes it valid."

Mortai Gravesend:

Sure it might give immediate compliance. I do not see how that is a good lesson to teach. "I'll hurt you if you don't do what I like." I don't see why that should be instilled in children.

If the parent is simply educating the child to do things "That they like" Then the parent is clearly not in a position to be educating the child, whatsoever way they choose to do it. Sometimes the lesson is to protect the child himself or others. While this isn't necessarily effective as a long-term method of education, it would at least buy you the time to show them why what they are doing, or wanted to do, is wrong without them sticking a fork into the electrical outlet.

No, no matter what the intentions of the parent that is the message it sends. Clearly the child doesn't agree with the parent's point of view so the parent applies force.

Also you're making the same foolish assumptions as before. You're saying it will buy them time. Well that doesn't explain why no other method should be used. You seem to assume it is the most effective method, at least for the short term. You also seem to assume using it as a short term solution will just be forgotten.

Mortai Gravesend:

Your example doesn't even prove a point really. It'd be like saying "Oh I use physical punishment but it doesn't work. I throw an eclair at my child, but he just eats it!"

You are simply oversimplifying the education of a human being which is a highly complex thing. You cannot educate a child simply by punishing them neither can you educate them by simply rewarding them. There is a balance somewhere in the middle that is necessary to the development of any young mind.

I did not say that you could do either. You're mistaking your own wild imagination for what I actually said.

Mortai Gravesend:

And children of the past weren't like this simply because there were no child protection programs back then, therefore it wouldn't take very long for children to learn not to defy beings that were several times larger than they were.

Circular logic. Sloppy thinking. I asked you to show it's the cause. You're using assuming your conclusion to prove it.

There is no other way to conduct a logical statement without some amount of assumption. The physical punishment of children isn't something new to this day and age but child protection services are. The rest simply seems logical to me.

Yes, some amount of assumption. Some amount of assumption is not the same thing as circular logic. Try again.

Also lolwut? You really need to try to apply a bit real logic. You're looking at a single change and ignoring any other potential changes. Furthermore you haven't even proven there is a significant difference in behavior. You're simply not thinking at all.

Mortai Gravesend:

Mind you I'm not talking about misbehaving per-se, everyone misbehaves at one point or other, it's a natural thing. I'm talking about open defiance such as misbehaving right in front of your parents knowing that they are watching but aren't gonna do anything about it. For example: when your parents tell you to eat your vegetables but instead you toss them on the floor.

Alright, but doesn't validate a particular form of punishment, nor does it prove a cause and effect relationship.

I don't remember claiming to support any particular form of punishment, I am simply advocating punishment as a whole and associating physical punishment to any other kind of punishment.

You were arguing for the validity of intimidation and fear.

And to prove a cause an effect relationship I would have to conduct a study of a large amount of children who are, aren't and are partially punished physicall, non-physically, psycologically and non-psycologically. This is an endeavour that I do not have the time or ressources to conduct.

Then have some integrity and don't claim things you really don't know.

Asking me to prove this is simply an attempt to stump me, you and I both know that this is a discussion not a scientific study.

No, it's to point out that you're spewing bullshit that you don't actually know to be true. I could claim that Congress is full of shape shifting aliens then take your kind of stupid cop out and say "What?! It would be too hard to prove that!" when someone asked for proof.

Skeleon:
Heh, this whole side-discussion reminds me of a nice quote.

The children now love luxury; they have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place of exercise. Children are now tyrants, not the servants of their households. They no longer rise when elders enter the room. They contradict their parents, chatter before company, gobble up dainties at the table, cross their legs, and tyrannize their teachers.

Apparently misattributed to Socrates. Still a funny quote, though, and one I do not doubt has true content. "Today's youth" is always awful, regardless of what "today" actually means.

Derives a little bit from my point but undoubtedly more true than anything I've said.

I think you're missing the obvious implications of that quote. If they've been saying that for a couple thousand years, maybe you should rethink whether it's actually true and not just a skewed view of the past? Or do you think that a couple thousand years ago was the pinnacle of civilized behavior and we've just been going downhill since then?

@Bouncer: Look, Bouncer, I know you have your personal experience, but have you ever considered that your personal experience on the subject has as much weight as the opinion of the parent who is just sure that megadosing on Vitamin D3 will cure their kids of Lukemia? You might wanna look into the actual science and research, which apparently tells a very, very different story.

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/great-kids-great-parents/201008/spanking-and-other-physical-punishments-revisited
http://apsa.org/About_APsaA/Position_Statements/Physical_Punishment.aspx

There's in fact a very wide consensus in the various relevant psychological fields that corporal punishment is a fucking terrible idea. It leads to antisocial behavior, fosters an unfriendly home environment, and often doesn't even achieve what it sets out to achieve! Those "spare the rod, spoil the child" types are simply fucking wrong. I don't care how convinced you are; the plural of anecdote is not evidence. Spanking is a bad idea. End of story.

Bouncer:
snip

You know what, asshole? I went through physical abuse as a child and the only thing I got out of it was GAD and strained relationships. You know how long it took me to get past that? Ten fucking years, still counting by the way. If you feel like violence is the only way to properly raise your child then fuck right off the face of the Earth. Violence is never fucking justified, NEVER. Try and drill that into your thick fucking skull before making another bullshit statement about a subject you know jack shit about.

PercyBoleyn:

Bouncer:
snip

You know what, asshole? I went through physical abuse as a child and the only thing I got out of it was GAD and strained relationships. You know how long it took me to get past that? Ten fucking years, still counting by the way. If you feel like violence is the only way to properly raise your child then fuck right off the face of the Earth. Violence is never fucking justified, NEVER. Try and drill that into your thick fucking skull before making another bullshit statement about a subject you know jack shit about.

I am not going to justify, condone or approve of what you went through. There is a difference between some amount of pain and outright physical abuse.

That being said, Get over it already.

I did -not- say that the only way to raise a child is through physical abuse, you're just seeing what you want to see. I don't blame you, a traumatic experience will no doubt get you up in arms about anything resembling what you went through.

I have stated that pain and punishment are a tool by which raising a child is acceptable. If you think I mean, by this, that I think it's a good idea to beat a child consistantly and as a sole method of educating them, you're clearly not paying attention to what I've been saying.

As for the rest of you, perhaps you are right, perhaps not. I will not further this argument, clearly you're twisting what I am saying. So you're right, any and all kind of punishment is wrong and we should all have cake everytime we decide to egg the house of someone we don't like.

Bouncer:
I am not going to justify, condone or approve of what you went through. There is a difference between some amount of pain and outright physical abuse.

That being said, Get over it already.

I did -not- say that the only way to raise a child is through physical abuse, you're just seeing what you want to see. I don't blame you, a traumatic experience will no doubt get you up in arms about anything resembling what you went through.

I have stated that pain and punishment are a tool by which raising a child is acceptable. If you think I mean, by this, that I think it's a good idea to beat a child consistantly and as a sole method of educating them, you're clearly not paying attention to what I've been saying.

As for the rest of you, perhaps you are right, perhaps not. I will not further this argument, clearly you're twisting what I am saying. So you're right, any and all kind of punishment is wrong and we should all have cake everytime we decide to egg the house of someone we don't like.

You might wanna cut the crap and actually read what we're telling you. NOBODY is objecting to punishment. Taking away a kid's privileges, grounding him, giving him additional work to deal with - all perfectly suitable punishments. What we're objecting to is the use of physical pain and violence as a method. There's damn good science behind the idea that violence is a terrible way to raise a child, whether or not parents apply it reasonably or not. So my list of homework for you:
- Learn to read what we're saying, not what you want us to say
- Read up on the stance of organizations like the APA, APSA, and the like on corporal punishment
- Think about your conclusions and how you reached them, and why they run counter to most reputable psychological organizations.

I'm a fan of how the article switches the Pastor's name.

Bouncer:

As for the rest of you, perhaps you are right, perhaps not. I will not further this argument, clearly you're twisting what I am saying. So you're right, any and all kind of punishment is wrong and we should all have cake everytime we decide to egg the house of someone we don't like.

Well whatever methods were used on you apparently didn't instill integrity. Since, you know, no one said that all punishment was bad.

Bouncer:
I am not going to justify, condone or approve of what you went through. There is a difference between some amount of pain and outright physical abuse.

There is no difference between physical abuse and spanking.

Bouncer:
That being said, Get over it already.

How fucking dare you talk like that? Do you have any idea what me and numerous other people went through because of your bullshit ideas?

Bouncer:
I have stated that pain and punishment are a tool by which raising a child is acceptable.

Really? Where's your fucking proof?

Bouncer:
I did -not- say that the only way to raise a child is through physical abuse, you're just seeing what you want to see. I don't blame you, a traumatic experience will no doubt get you up in arms about anything resembling what you went through.

No, the only thing that will get me up in arms is morons like you who advocate physically abusing children.

Bouncer:
As for the rest of you, perhaps you are right, perhaps not. I will not further this argument, clearly you're twisting what I am saying. So you're right, any and all kind of punishment is wrong and we should all have cake everytime we decide to egg the house of someone we don't like.

No one is saying you shouldn't use punishments to discipline your child, altough even that's a fucking stretch. What we're against, and what numerous countries and psychological associations across the world are, is physically abusing children. There's no "right" way to use violence when raising a child but apparently, you're so fucking smart you've found a way even though the whole fucking world disagrees.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked