Is it shocking that another story is coming out about Peterson and then 4 year old son (another one) got a whooping in the car and sustained facial injuries? Yeah you're right JFC, he is just doing this out of love. He is a model citizen on how to raise your kids.

 

I don't think anyone is disagreeing that Peterson is a dirtbag who, if this is proven in court, should do some serious time. That doesn't mean that everyone who uses corporal punishment is wrong to use that tactic to achieve parental results. It also doesn't meant that CP is the only option, but one of many that have been effective over time.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

Okay...my bad.


No one is vilifying spanking.


People are taking issue with a grown man using a weapon on his four year old child to the point that he has marks a weak later. A four year old. A vulnerable, defenseless baby person, who's entire world is his parents. One of which is causing him severe bodily harm with a foreign object.


Tell me you see the difference.

 

There are a couple people who posted that spanking is just as bad. See the post where the person calls me an "idiot".

---

Whether someone has a liberal, or conservative viewpoint, a authoritative figure should not lock a thread for the sole purpose to get the last word in all the while prohibiting someone else from being able to respond.

Is it shocking that another story is coming out about Peterson and then 4 year old son (another one) got a whooping in the car and sustained facial injuries? Yeah you're right JFC, he is just doing this out of love. He is a model citizen on how to raise your kids.

 

It's clear that if the allegations are true, Peterson has serious mental and anger issues, and needs to be out of the league.  

 

I guess you are pushing the agenda that spanking should be banned because its considered abuse since it involves hitting a child right?

---

Whether someone has a liberal, or conservative viewpoint, a authoritative figure should not lock a thread for the sole purpose to get the last word in all the while prohibiting someone else from being able to respond.

Maybe we should have some thinking in a "thought" experiment? Death is the inevitable outcome of your actions there, it's not when corporal punishment is involved. In fact, human history tells us that it's turned out well for hundreds of millions of people over time. Just because you don't like that truth (as all "But that's just an annnneeeccccote" stuff shows) doesn't make it less true.

 

<sigh>

 

Death isn't the inevitable outcome of playing Russian roulette any more than serious psychological damage is the inevitable outcome of corporal punishment. In both cases research shows it's a very real likelihood.

 

"I was beaten as a child and it didn't do me any harm" is a largely worthless position for a number of reasons:

 

1. There's no actual measurement of the harm. In the research linked above, there is, and it demonstrates that the chance of that harm is vastly higher.

2. Just because one person isn't harmed by it, doesn't mean it's safe. Russian roulette is an extreme example of that that makes it very easy to understand.

---

 

<sigh>

 

Death isn't the inevitable outcome of playing Russian roulette any more than serious psychological damage is the inevitable outcome of corporal punishment. In both cases research shows it's a very real likelihood.

 

"I was beaten as a child and it didn't do me any harm" is a largely worthless position for a number of reasons:

 

1. There's no actual measurement of the harm. In the research linked above, there is, and it demonstrates that the chance of that harm is vastly higher.

2. Just because one person isn't harmed by it, doesn't mean it's safe. Russian roulette is an extreme example of that that makes it very easy to understand.

 

Research can say whatever the researcher wants it to.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

There are a couple people who posted that spanking is just as bad. See the post where the person calls me an "idiot".

 

I'm against spanking.  I don't think it should be illegal.  But I certainly think that leaving marks and bruises is where the line should be drawn.  My grandfather was as old fashioned as they come, and he only had one occasion to have to whip one of his seven kids.  I'd only call someone an 'idiot' on the matter if they thought that the problem with society today is that there aren't enough spankings.

 

A friend of mine was a victim of physical and sexual abuse growing up.  She managed to turn out okay (she's not a criminal in any case).  But I don't think that's proof that every victim of those abuses will turn out fine. Some will.  Some won't.  That's how it is.  Just because some turn out alright, doesn't make it right IMO.

---

I was wrong about Trent Baalke. 

There are a couple people who posted that spanking is just as bad. See the post where the person calls me an "idiot".

You must've been hit in the head too much as a child. My post said "abuse and whippings" and not spanking or other much lesser forms of corporal punishment. The fact that you support whipping four year old children is what makes you an idiot.

---

And it's idiots like you that equate all corporal punishment with "abuse" because you disagree with the concept.

 

See how it works when you just call names?

Might want to read my post again, I never said that I was against the use of some lesser forms of CP.  In fact I think a single open handed spank to a clothed bottom can be effective for some children in certain age ranges.  "Whippings and abuse" is what I said.  The fact that anyone could support whipping of children so fervently is mind blowing to me.  Furthermore having to resort to whipping and abusing a four year old to me points to a severe lack of basic parenting skills.

---

Show this "idiot" a post where I "supported" child abuse.

 

Again, this "idiot" said time out work for some kids, spanking work for some, and whippings work for others.

 

I gave you a like for your mature response if you are wondering the reason.

Are you serious?  OK I will show you a post where you support child abuse.  It's in your very next sentence.  "Whippings work for others".  Whipping a child is abuse.  Is whipping your adult wife not domestic abuse?  Yet let's take that same action and apply it to a four year old and it somehow in your mind magically becomes acceptable.

 

As an aside, things like slavery, drunk driving, smoking cigarettes while pregnant, no voting rights for women, child labor, etc. were once thought to be socially acceptable.  Our culture changes and grows over time and through the generations.  Whippings and other severe forms of corporal punishment were widely accepted in the past and the proponents of these tactics today use bible verses and historical anecdotes as their main reasons why it should still be OK to whip a small child.  Perhaps the past generations had it wrong and there are more effective ways to discipline a child?  And there are more options than a simple timeout or the whip.

 

People love to say that they were whipped like AP's child and they turned out just fine.  In fact no you did not turn out just fine.  You developed into an adult that believes it is OK to whip a 4 year old child.  This fact alone tells me that you are not "fine".

---

vikes msg board closed permanently.

 

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-shutdo...59347.html

---

Research can say whatever the researcher wants it to.

Do you understand the phrase 'peer reviewed'?

---

Are you serious?  OK I will show you a post where you support child abuse.  It's in your very next sentence.  "Whippings work for others".  Whipping a child is abuse.  Is whipping your adult wife not domestic abuse?  Yet let's take that same action and apply it to a four year old and it somehow in your mind magically becomes acceptable.

 

As an aside, things like slavery, drunk driving, smoking cigarettes while pregnant, no voting rights for women, child labor, etc. were once thought to be socially acceptable.  Our culture changes and grows over time and through the generations.  Whippings and other severe forms of corporal punishment were widely accepted in the past and the proponents of these tactics today use bible verses and historical anecdotes as their main reasons why it should still be OK to whip a small child.  Perhaps the past generations had it wrong and there are more effective ways to discipline a child?  And there are more options than a simple timeout or the whip.

 

People love to say that they were whipped like AP's child and they turned out just fine.  In fact no you did not turn out just fine.  You developed into an adult that believes it is OK to whip a 4 year old child.  This fact alone tells me that you are not "fine".

 

This

---

Oh dear, this is your quote from earlier.......

 

"The CDC also released a report that shows that teens (you know, the ones that have been spoiled by the lack of "whippings") are less likely to get pregnant, more likely to practice safe sex, less likely to use "illicit substances" and more likely to exercise than previous generations"

 

The point is, last time I checked, it wasnt illegal to give my child a spanking.

That quote specifically says less likely, more likely, less likely, and more likely. Do you not understand the concept of likelihood?


We each have a bag of 10 marbles. 5 are red, 5 are blue. You and I both really want a blue marble. As it stands we both have a 50% chance of getting a blue marble and 50% chance of getting a red marble.


I, however, appropriately complete some necessary task and can replace two of the red marbles with blue ones. You are unable to complete this task and have to replace two blue marbles with two red marbles.


Now I have a 70% chance of getting a blue marble, and you just have a 30% chance. This means that it is more likely that I will get a blue marble and you will get a red marble. It's still entirely possible that I will pull a red marble and you will pull a blue one. Replacing blue marbles with red marbles is still a bad idea if you're trying to get blue marbles, even if it worked out for you this time.


I never said spanking was - or should be - illegal just that I don't think it's particularly effective. Also, if "it's not illegal" is the best defense that you have for your own actions you may want to really consider whether or not its the best course of action.

---

Are you serious?  OK I will show you a post where you support child abuse.  It's in your very next sentence.  "Whippings work for others".  Whipping a child is abuse.  Is whipping your adult wife not domestic abuse?  Yet let's take that same action and apply it to a four year old and it somehow in your mind magically becomes acceptable.

 

As an aside, things like slavery, drunk driving, smoking cigarettes while pregnant, no voting rights for women, child labor, etc. were once thought to be socially acceptable.  Our culture changes and grows over time and through the generations.  Whippings and other severe forms of corporal punishment were widely accepted in the past and the proponents of these tactics today use bible verses and historical anecdotes as their main reasons why it should still be OK to whip a small child.  Perhaps the past generations had it wrong and there are more effective ways to discipline a child?  And there are more options than a simple timeout or the whip.

 

People love to say that they were whipped like AP's child and they turned out just fine.  In fact no you did not turn out just fine.  You developed into an adult that believes it is OK to whip a 4 year old child.  This fact alone tells me that you are not "fine".

 

I 100% want to bring back public whippings and hangings of criminals.

 

Whipping of kids is excessive.   Spanking (out of love) is not abuse.  If done correctly, it does not harm your kids mentally or physically.  Unfortunately there are too many stupid people out there who don't do it right, and they should be held accountable.

 

---

Do you understand the phrase 'peer reviewed'?

 

Much better than you understand Confirmation Bias, Groupthink, Pre-determined Outcomes,  and Echo Chamber apparently.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

Much better than you understand Confirmation Bias, Groupthink, Pre-determined Outcomes,  and Echo Chamber apparently.

I guess we take that as a 'no', then.

---

I guess we take that as a 'no', then.

 

Take it however you want, that's what this is all about. Just like most peer-reviewed research.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

It's clear that if the allegations are true, Peterson has serious mental and anger issues, and needs to be out of the league.


I guess you are pushing the agenda that spanking should be banned because its considered abuse since it involves hitting a child right?

Feel free to quote me where I've said such. I've tried to keep this about AP and what HE did as much as possible.


You also seem to support AP. I said several times if your parents did to you what AP did to his 4 year old then you were abused. You started getting defensive saying you weren't abused. You either agree with AP's position or you just completely disregarded what I said.

---

Take it however you want, that's what this is all about. Just like most peer-reviewed research.

So studies mean nothing?

---

So studies mean nothing?

 

---