If you hit your children you are guilty of child abuse. That's it really. There is no oh but it was only a spanking. The bruises went away after a couple of days... It's abuse. Full stop. Anyone who hits their kids deserves to be prosecuted and have their children taken into care.

Child abuse does more than impair mental health. New research reveals that childhood abuse or neglect increases the risk of obesity, diabetes or other metabolic disorders in adulthood.

http://www.counselheal.com/articles/9075/20140320/child-abuse-raises-risk-obesity-diabetes.htm

Why do you hate christianity so much? Why do you want to outlaw scripture?



A study about child abuse, not spanking.

This post was edited by Goomshill on Sep 13 2014 10:39am

where do you draw the line?

Non-deadly force reasonably necessary to discipline or safeguard a child to promote his welfare.

Clearly, a line that is drawn far removed from the study quoted, which was not at all about spanking

that's hella ambiguous

I don't want to outlaw scripture. I want to outlaw teaching it as historical fact to children.

Because its a monotheistic death cult that threatens violence and eternal damnation if you believe in another dogma, or none at all. It deals in divinely revealed wisdom instead of what empirically can be validated and proven thru the scientific method. It preaches that one must subjugate themselves to our parents, the state and the invisible sky-daddy. I however would not advocate outlawing scripture, only that it be knocked off the pedestal that it hasnt justly earned.

So looking to scripture certainly has juicy bits of morality , however in regards to the rod and corporal punishment, this is not one of them if you care about the well being of your offspring. For a philosophy to be valid is must be universally true. The adage of a man not hitting a women is because of the unjust balance of physical power between the two. In the man's case in the faith books of the desert, one ~would be striking the women to modify behavior or as an infraction for some perceived slighting and not as a self defense action. That is the same context one allegedly "spanks" their child. As a society we generally accept the non aggression principle of not hitting another individual , taking their property and not harming them. What greater disparity of unbalance exists then that of a child and their parent? The Women at least has the option to leave the relationship, something a kid cannot do.

Now one might claim that spanking their kid because the child is irrational and is not very good at discerning logic yet, for this to hold up under scrutiny, you the Parent and adult must also apply this same analysis to your parenting. When massive amounts of data and studies exists that show incredibly high rates of issues that happen because of child spanking then you must change your habits. Not all smoking leads to cancer, just like some of us who grew up getting spanked in some cases turned out to be semi well adjusted individuals, that still doesnt justify the habit when presented with "facts".

If you actually want some more involved data points and metrics and want to rationally consider the issue instead of trying to score hypothetical "wins" on the forums here, do watch that short presentation I posted earlier by S.M. If you can refute his analysis, I'd love to hear it.

This post was edited by Master_Zappy on Sep 13 2014 12:04pm

Fully agree 100%

clearly to mention "non deadly force" when talking about spanking delineates that the line between spanking and child abuse is much closer than you care to admit.

This post was edited by card_sultan on Sep 13 2014 12:19pm