WHY IS THE DEBATE ON SPANKING SILLY? — UPDATE

Children’s Games Pieter Brueghel the Elder (1526/1530–1569) (explanation here)
Children’s Games by Pieter Brueghel the Elder (1526/1530–1569) (explanation here)

UPDATEvioletwisp has just posted evidence for the benefits of spanking. Supposedly, we Christians have not provided any evident for benefits of spanking. Since I never could figure out exactly what it was, I could say the same about ‘s “technique”. I did not even think to ask for evidence. Evidence of what?

However, that’s not why I gave up debating the issue with her.  My motivation was more along these lines. Imagine you are dealing with an ISIS terrorist, and that terrorist asks you to justify your continued existence.

Here is where is coming from. Here is her reply to my comment here.

violetwisp on February 12, 2017 at 10:41 am said:

“she disapproves of punishing children when they do wrong”
Absolutely! It’s all about setting good examples and providing reasons for behaving in a socialised manner that takes other people’s feelings into consideration. Children aren’t ‘bad’, they’re just clueless about social norms until they’re sufficiently exposed to them, and they have some very basic needs (food, rest, comfort) that people tend to overlook before they launch into counter-productive disciplining. And this is one of the reasons I can never accept the Christian god in the Bible – the caricature of this omniscient being punishing its puny creation is disgusting.

is not an ISIS terrorist, but obviously does not think highly of Christianity. I think it suffices to say she prefers Christians were extinct. There is no point in debating your right to exist and that’s the debate wants.

BACK TO THE ORIGINAL POST

Do you want to get an inkling of the sheer silliness of some people’s priorities? May I suggest you read some of the comments to this post:  punishing children. Because the conversation is so shallow, I have given up commenting.

Our ancestors struggled to survive. Pain was unavoidable, but we are so modern. For us spanking is suppose to be a grand tragedy, but it really isn’t. We still cannot completely avoid pain.

  • There is still physical pain. Many a cancer patient can tell you about that, and bullies still beat up their classmates.
  • There is emotional pain. Failed dreams. Rejection. A death in the family.

What is different from the past? I am not certain anything really is different. I just know people who insist upon making an issue of spanking apparently don’t have anything better to do.

What follows are some are some of the comments from punishing children.

So My Neighbor Spanks His Child? That’s A Problem?

violetwisp on February 17, 2017 at 6:57 pm said:

“Some how, some way parents must teach a child to control that belief, that pride in self. More often than not before a child can learn the rewards of loving someone, that child must learn the consequences of arrogance the hard way.”

Where’s the ‘must’? Tildeb and Barry, quite calmly, have explained to you how gentle, reasonable techniques have more positive effects on children. If you take issue with that, show me somewhere (there must be somewhere, right?) that can demonstrate the positive effects of parenting with violence (or physical discipline, if you prefer). I can’t find any.

  • @violetwisp

    What Tildeb’s and Barry’s explanation comes down to is that they have different ways of punishing a disobedient child. The notion that we can always reason with a wilful two-year old is just silly. Moreover, as you suggested your post, “punishing children”, ANY form of punishment can be taken to an extreme.

    The Bible doesn’t actually say we have to spank a child, and that is not really the issue. What the Bible says is that if we punish a child because we love that child and want them to behave, that child will survive and be better off for it.

    What you are preoccupied with is making other parents raise their children your way. Not my problem.

    Spanking a child is not child abuse. Child neglect — not teaching a child to behave — is child abuse. Yet silly people get all worked up about spanking. That’s mostly just because a few people lose it, and the bruises and broken bones are obvious. Newspapers can get vivid photos, and the virtue signalers can tell us how they would never do that.
    🙄

    I suppose stupid sadists also beat kids half to death, but abuse has many other, more subtle forms.

    Neglect, I suspect is a more common problem. Even if we feed, cloth, and shelter a child, we still neglect that child if we don’t teach that child self-discipline. Until we learn self-discipline, we are not prepared for life.

Setting The Threshold Way Too Low

violetwisp on February 17, 2017 at 9:28 pm said:

This is a real problem. I hate seeing children needlessly suffering. There’s simply no reason to approach parenting with any form of violence.

  • When people speak of virtue signaling and a bleeding heart, what are they talking about? It is about setting the threshold for suffering so low it is an insult to those who actually are suffering.

    You want to understand pain? Then study the matter. Imagine being skinned alive. Then compare that to a spanking.

So what is the point of this post? Is it about spanking? No. It is about priorities. People were spanking their children long before recorded history. That does not make it right, but spanking works well. Perfectly? No. For example, as an child grows older spanking becomes a greater offense to his or her dignity, and we are big into self-esteem these days. Hence, spanking is not as popular as once was.  Still, children need to be disciplined.

So what is the point of this post? If you are represented by a politician who advocates a complete ban of spanking, even within the privacy of your neighbors’ homes, you have my sincere pity. That man has no sense of proportion. What he wants is simply a waste of government resources and a good example of why government should not be in the businesses of educating our children. Do we need such busybodies sticking their noses into our lives and interfering with how we raise our children? No.

When we vote, we need to vote for someone who can tell the difference between a real crime and a difference of opinion that offends his ever so superior sensibilities.

EVIDENCE OF VOTER FRAUD

vote for americaWhat is the problem of proving voter fraud? We have to have people running our voting systems who are willing to look for it.

Consider the irony. What’s the big news? Democrats, without any evidence, claim Russia fixed the presidential election.  Yet Democrats are unwilling to: ensure that only citizens can register to vote, clean up the voter registration rolls, or require proof of identity when people vote. No one except the Russians are trying to cheat in our elections?

What are Democrats doing to our voter registration and vote tallying systems? They are working to eliminate any effort to verify people vote honestly. Instead the are diligently working to make it as easy and as convenient as possible to register and to vote.  How do we know someone is who they say they are when they register to vote? Who cares? Isn’t everyone honest? Are you who you say you are when you vote? Who cares? Isn’t everyone honest?

If we don’t even look for cheating, we will not find it. It is cinch the cheaters will not inform on themselves.

Is there evidence of fraud? Yes, but you won’t find much of it in the Modern Liberal news media. So you have to dig deeply for the evidence, but your can find examples.

Really, most of the evidence is in our local news. That’s why Delegate Rob Bell sent out this email in November 2016.

Dear Citizen,

Still don’t believe in voter fraud?

In Alexandria, a campaign worker for a Democratic-aligned group was arrested and charged for registering fictitious voters.

In Newport News, a man received a voter registration at his address, but with a different name.  He brought it to prosecutors, who identified 32 others cases where this may have happened.

In Harrisonburg, a canvasser working for a group organized by a local Democrat was caught after attempting to register 19 dead Virginians.

Honest elections should be a priority for everyone.  But Mark Herring is still refusing to defend Virginia’s photo ID law in court. And Terry McAuliffe vetoed photo ID requirements for absentee ballots and a second bill to help keep non-citizens off Virginia’s voter rolls.  Democratic leaders are fighting our commonsense efforts to stop voter fraud in the first place.

After the last few weeks, not even Democrats can credibly argue that voter fraud doesn’t exist.

If you have evidence of voter fraud, be sure to report it to authorities. And as we try to move forward, we need your help. If you haven’t already, join the fight — sign the online petition by clicking here.

Sincerely,

Delegate Rob Bell
Republican Candidate for Attorney General

What will you find easily find online when you google voter fraud evidence. To prevent a proper investigation, the largely Liberal News media is ridiculing reports of voter fraud.  This behavior looks much like the Wizard in the “Wizard of Oz” telling Dorothy not to look behind the curtain. The only proper description for it is suspiciously weird. Why wouldn’t the news media love to see such an investigation? If nothing is found, then the president they hate looks bad. If something is found, it makes for fascinating news. They cannot lose — unless they care more about getting Democrats elected than what is good for the country.

 

IS IT REALLY ABOUT BEING A GOOD SAMARITAN OR A SUCKER?

heartbleedHere some questions for commenters. What’s the issue? We have a bunch of Americans prominently displaying their hearts decrying the xenophobia of their fellow Americans. They tell us all about what the Good Samaritan and Jesus would do. What is their interpretation of scripture?  Apparently, they want open borders.

Those with their hearts prominently displayed excuse their position by pointing to the needs of the immigrants. They say nothing about the needs of America. After all, are we not a rich country? Are we not a nation of immigrants? How could open borders be a problem?

  • What makes immigration today different from the past BEFORE we had a BIG GOVERNMENT with humongous health, education, and welfare programs?
  • Are there reasonable alternatives? Can we help the world’s poor without bringing everyone and his uncle to the United States?
  • What are those with their hearts prominently displayed for all to see getting out of all those dirt poor immigrants coming to the United States. That is, are their motives as pure as they pretend?
  • What are the people opposed to unfettered immigration more scared of? Is it  immigrants or out-of-control government?
  • With respect to immigration, do Americans have any legitimate right to control immigration? That is, do non-citizens and citizen have equal rights under our Constitution?
  • How did we get into this silly mess?

Are you under the delusion that the men in black robes are always just? Do you think the lawyers who lead our nation are always thinking of our best interests? Read this =>Protecting consumers from swindlers

No. It not related to the subject at hand. It is just a great example of how professional politicians have rigged the system to line the pockets of their buddies.

A CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC IN DECLINE

preamble to the constitutionDo I hate the US Catholic Bishops? No. Do I think they are especially bad people? No.  Nevertheless, I think their stance on immigration is stupidly immoral. What is their stance? See for yourself: Catholic Church’s Position on Immigration Reform.

How did I come across the statement the US Catholic Bishops made on immigration. A commenter (here) cited them as some kind of authority and posted a link. I replied (here). Here is the gist of what I said.

The Democratic Party advocates open borders; it just calls it something else. You pointed to a naive front group like the US Catholic Bishops. At the same time those bishops are suppose to be fighting against the killing of babies, abortion, they are working to guarantee Democrat victories at the polls. I don’t have to mock the authority of those men. They do it themselves.

What the US Catholic Bishops want is effectively a second immigration amnesty. SECOND immigration amnesty. We need a second one because the last one worked so well? For whom?

We have always had controlled immigration into this country. Now it is far more difficult. What is different now? People can travel more easily, of course, but what is crucial is our health, education, and welfare programs. Need I say the obvious? Democrats are eager to use these programs to buy the votes of gullible immigrants. (from here)

The US Catholic Bishops have a similar stance with respect to refugees. That is, they disliked President Trump’s Executive Order halting immigration from seven nations that are currently ungovernable. The US Catholic Bishops’ statement on the executive order is available at this post: US Catholic Bishops Publicly Shame President Trump Today At Church by Silence of Mind.

Disgusted, I commented that too. Here is the gist of what I said in my first comment.

What do we call people who substitute weeping emotion for rational thought? Helen Thomas, a White House reporter, ironically invented the expression when she told us how much her heart bleeds.

It is an unfortunate fact of life, but lots of clerics are bleeding hearts. Europe is being overrun by people who do not have any use for democracy. Once their government collapses, where are the Europeans supposed to go? Here? Why would want more brainless fools? Don’t we have enough already?

Seriously, when you play chess, to win you have to think 4 – 5 moves ahead. If we accept millions of refugees, I agree that solves the immediate problem. We have already put who even knows how many such people on welfare, and we are still not bankrupt. Just the same, if we keep accepting refugees and putting them on welfare, the consequences are readily predictable. The refugees will vote Democrat. That’s why the Democrats want them.

In addition, because our taxes are already out of sight because of expensive heath, education, and welfare programs, absorbing endless refugees will just cause our economy will fold up and close shop. We will also become a multilingual nation, a tower of Babel (That’s why the European Union never had a chance.). The collapse will be complete when our government becomes tyrannical. That is the only way it will be able to maintain order. If you have any doubts about the tyrannical part, consider all the disruptions the Democrats are causing Trump. The jackasses are deliberately trying to make the country ungovernable, and they think that is a smart move. The Nazis did the same sort of thing to the Weimar Republic.
🙄 (from here)

The US Catholic Bishops are ignoring the teachings of the Bible.  What is our basic problem? We don’t love each other enough, right? Does putting on a big show that supposedly shows how much we care solve that problem? No. Does overloading our health, education, and welfare systems solve that problem? No. Does electing a bunch of Democrats solve that problem? No. Does creating a situation that is guaranteed to foment immense social strife solve that problem? No.

Here is the other comment I left behind.

Hypocrites, people who only pretend to be highly and even perfectly moral, cannot make a constitutional republic work. The reason is simple enough. They won’t truly abide by the constitution. They will only make the pretense that that is what they are doing. Meanwhile, they will accuse their opponents of every damned thing they can imagine.

Still, the proof of their duplicity comes from their own lips. It is they, to excuse their lies, who call the Constitution a “living document”. With those two words they render the Constitution meaningless, and they think themselves clever. Yet with those two words they also expose the proof of all their own lies. (from here)

The modern Democratic Party and many in the Republican Party engage in legalism.  Like the Pharisees of old, they supposedly uphold a complex legalistic code. This code they tell us is quite honorable, but unlike the nonsense the Pharisees taught their lie can be easily seen. Their code is living; it conforms to the politics of the moment.  As they say, IT IS ALIVE! It is in truth a dishonorable monstrosity.

Should we help refugees from war zones? Of course, we should, but destroying our own culture and almost deliberately sowing social strife into our society will not help anyone. It just spreads the problems the refugees are trying to flee. Don’t we already have enough trouble getting along with each other? Isn’t adding bunches and bunches of poorly educated refugees, many accustomed to violence, like adding fuel to a fire?

Here is the order President Donald Trump issued: EXECUTIVE ORDER: PROTECTING THE NATION FROM FOREIGN TERRORIST ENTRY INTO THE UNITED STATES. As you read it, consider what the Constitution says in Article I, Section 8. It explicitly authorizes Congress to control immigration policy. Effectively, the Federal Government (unless a Republican is in office) has plenary power over immigration policy.

To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States; (from here)

Therefore, the only question before a court should be whether Congress has authorized the president to deny restrict travel to our nation from nations that are deemed threats. In fact, since the president’s primary job is commander-in-chief, doesn’t he have that responsibility already?

So what did the Ninth Circuit Court decide when the Trump administration appealed to it and asked it to stay District Court Judge James L. Robart’s order which had ruled Trump’s unconstitutional and effectively revoked it.  The Ninth Circuit Court let Robart’s order stand.  See Motion for Stay of an Order of the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington James L. Robart, District Judge, Presiding. Why? Here are a couple of examples of the ridiculous logic.

  • Foreigners have 5th Amendment rights. Effectively, using such logic, foreigners have the right to enter the United States any time they want to do so. We may as well call them citizens.
  • Foreigners have 1st Amendment rights. Does that mean foreigners have freedom of assembly in the United States. Why don’t we just lay out the welcome mat for foreign armies? Congress has in the past favored immigration from certain nations over others. Why? We shared a similar cultural heritage, including religious heritage. Commonsense, now seemingly in short supply, dictates that immigration from such nations would be less disruptive.

So, do foreigners, foreigners who are not even in our country, have rights under our Constitution? Well, the Framers made it explicitly clear whose rights they wrote OUR Constitution to protect.  See the Preamble at the beginning of this post.

This is not just bad law. It is insane. Those judges need to be removed from the bench. This decision is legal malpractice. If the judges on the Supreme Court don’t have enough good sense to overturn such blatant BS, God help us.  Hopefully, our new Attorney General will take the case over and devise a successful strategy.

Other Views