Father at his wits end.

[Murphoid]

I have an eight year old daughter who attends a private school. School
just started less than a month ago, but every day there has been
problems. She has been lieing to her teacher and being a pest to other
student. She has pushed other students and taken some thing from them.

I don't understand her behavior at all. She has always been a handful
but this year her beavior has just been awful.

I don't think my parenting is inconsistent. I use 1-2-3 and then send
her to her room. If she won't go she gets a spanking and then gets
carred to her room.

Today she lied to her teacher and she cheated on a spelling test.
Since when do third graders cheat on tests?

When I got home from work and learned about it. I told her this meant
she would spend all weekend in her room. Then she started to talk back
to me. I discussed it with my wife and said that I thought she should
be spanked with a belt. My wife didn't disagree. I gave her three
spanks with a belt and sent her to her room.

It wasn't an act of rage, I felt bad while doing it, I just knew the
current line of punishments weren't gettting through. Her behaviour
warranted an extreme punishment. I didn't know what else to do.

I will see and post if this improves her bahavior or not.

[0:->]

Murphoid wrote:
> I have an eight year old daughter who attends a private school. School
> just started less than a month ago, but every day there has been
> problems. She has been lieing to her teacher and being a pest to other
> student. She has pushed other students and taken some thing from them.
>
> I don't understand her behavior at all. She has always been a handful
> but this year her beavior has just been awful.
>
> I don't think my parenting is inconsistent. I use 1-2-3 and then send
> her to her room. If she won't go she gets a spanking and then gets
> carred to her room.
>
> Today she lied to her teacher and she cheated on a spelling test.
> Since when do third graders cheat on tests?
>
> When I got home from work and learned about it. I told her this meant
> she would spend all weekend in her room. Then she started to talk back
> to me. I discussed it with my wife and said that I thought she should
> be spanked with a belt. My wife didn't disagree. I gave her three
> spanks with a belt and sent her to her room.
>
> It wasn't an act of rage, I felt bad while doing it, I just knew the
> current line of punishments weren't gettting through. Her behaviour
> warranted an extreme punishment. I didn't know what else to do.
>
> I will see and post if this improves her bahavior or not.

Yes, it will be interesting to see if spanking will work.

Just be careful and don't leave any marks that last. You might want to
check your state's statutes on 'spanking,' your child. If you leave
marks it can be claimed that you are abusing, but if not you are
protected by law in every state.

The court holds it is your right to spank. There have even been recent
cases (the tide changed for a time, I guess) where children left with
marks did not result in a conviction for child abuse. But YOUR state
may differ. So check.

And you will have plenty of support from people in this newsgroup. Some
of them, at any rate.

0:->

[Murphoid]

0:-> wrote:
> Murphoid wrote:
> > I have an eight year old daughter who attends a private school. School
> > just started less than a month ago, but every day there has been
> > problems. She has been lieing to her teacher and being a pest to other
> > student. She has pushed other students and taken some thing from them.
> >
> > I don't understand her behavior at all. She has always been a handful
> > but this year her beavior has just been awful.
> >
> > I don't think my parenting is inconsistent. I use 1-2-3 and then send
> > her to her room. If she won't go she gets a spanking and then gets
> > carred to her room.
> >
> > Today she lied to her teacher and she cheated on a spelling test.
> > Since when do third graders cheat on tests?
> >
> > When I got home from work and learned about it. I told her this meant
> > she would spend all weekend in her room. Then she started to talk back
> > to me. I discussed it with my wife and said that I thought she should
> > be spanked with a belt. My wife didn't disagree. I gave her three
> > spanks with a belt and sent her to her room.
> >
> > It wasn't an act of rage, I felt bad while doing it, I just knew the
> > current line of punishments weren't gettting through. Her behaviour
> > warranted an extreme punishment. I didn't know what else to do.
> >
> > I will see and post if this improves her bahavior or not.
>
> Yes, it will be interesting to see if spanking will work.
>
> Just be careful and don't leave any marks that last. You might want to
> check your state's statutes on 'spanking,' your child. If you leave
> marks it can be claimed that you are abusing, but if not you are
> protected by law in every state.
>
> The court holds it is your right to spank. There have even been recent
> cases (the tide changed for a time, I guess) where children left with
> marks did not result in a conviction for child abuse. But YOUR state
> may differ. So check.
>
> And you will have plenty of support from people in this newsgroup. Some
> of them, at any rate.
>
> 0:->

Thankfully Indiana is a sane conservative state without a bunch of
crazy laws against reasonable puishments:

IC 31-34-1-15
Effect of chapter on use of corporal punishment or religious practices
31-34-1-15 Sec. 15. This chapter does not do any of the following:
(1) Limit the right of a parent, guardian, or custodian of a
child to use reasonable corporal punishment when disciplining the
child.
(2) Limit the lawful practice or teaching of religious beliefs.
As added by P.L.1-1997, SEC.17.

[0:->]

Murphoid wrote:
> 0:-> wrote:
> > Murphoid wrote:
> > > I have an eight year old daughter who attends a private school. School
> > > just started less than a month ago, but every day there has been
> > > problems. She has been lieing to her teacher and being a pest to other
> > > student. She has pushed other students and taken some thing from them.
> > >
> > > I don't understand her behavior at all. She has always been a handful
> > > but this year her beavior has just been awful.
> > >
> > > I don't think my parenting is inconsistent. I use 1-2-3 and then send
> > > her to her room. If she won't go she gets a spanking and then gets
> > > carred to her room.
> > >
> > > Today she lied to her teacher and she cheated on a spelling test.
> > > Since when do third graders cheat on tests?
> > >
> > > When I got home from work and learned about it. I told her this meant
> > > she would spend all weekend in her room. Then she started to talk back
> > > to me. I discussed it with my wife and said that I thought she should
> > > be spanked with a belt. My wife didn't disagree. I gave her three
> > > spanks with a belt and sent her to her room.
> > >
> > > It wasn't an act of rage, I felt bad while doing it, I just knew the
> > > current line of punishments weren't gettting through. Her behaviour
> > > warranted an extreme punishment. I didn't know what else to do.
> > >
> > > I will see and post if this improves her bahavior or not.
> >
> > Yes, it will be interesting to see if spanking will work.
> >
> > Just be careful and don't leave any marks that last. You might want to
> > check your state's statutes on 'spanking,' your child. If you leave
> > marks it can be claimed that you are abusing, but if not you are
> > protected by law in every state.
> >
> > The court holds it is your right to spank. There have even been recent
> > cases (the tide changed for a time, I guess) where children left with
> > marks did not result in a conviction for child abuse. But YOUR state
> > may differ. So check.
> >
> > And you will have plenty of support from people in this newsgroup. Some
> > of them, at any rate.
> >
> > 0:->
>
> Thankfully Indiana is a sane conservative state without a bunch of
> crazy laws against reasonable puishments:
>
> IC 31-34-1-15
> Effect of chapter on use of corporal punishment or religious practices
> 31-34-1-15 Sec. 15. This chapter does not do any of the following:
> (1) Limit the right of a parent, guardian, or custodian of a
> child to use reasonable corporal punishment when disciplining the
> child.
> (2) Limit the lawful practice or teaching of religious beliefs.
> As added by P.L.1-1997, SEC.17.

"Reasonable," seems to leave a lot of grey area, doesn't it?

How are parents supposed to define "reasonable?"

Kane

[[email protected]]

Missed opportunities for consistency were your only mistakes. I would
have spanked as well. The belt is a question to me, but you sound like
a parent whose judgment should be trusted implicitly.

[0:->]

wrote:
> Missed opportunities for consistency were your only mistakes. I would
> have spanked as well. The belt is a question to me, but you sound like
> a parent whose judgment should be trusted implicitly.

Child abuse by overuse of physical punishment is common. It's rare that
a child is seen by CPS where physical abuse is the issue that the
parent doesn't claim they were just "disciplining' and unruly child.

This case seems a classic one of doing more of what isn't working. An
escalation of force to the point of higher risk of injury to the
child....abuse.

Possibly another tactic would be more appropriate.

We've posters here with better ways than simply "go for broke."

But if they speak up you can be sure they will be attacked.

Anyone that advocates non-spanking methods can expect that here.

Of as one of our posters here likes to scream hysterically, "get a
policeman to hit him with a baton. It's legal."

0:->

[Kevin]

Just like the liberals, they only care about privacy when they want to
enable their children to murder a fetus, or give children rampant
sexual freedom. Then they wonder why their children don't behave, so
they give them an ADHD drug. Then they wonder why their children have
cancer, when "he never smoked a cigerette in his life." Clueless.

No freedom of choice for conservative parents who spank their children,
only freedom of choice for the children who can't properly discern good
from evil. That's the motto of the libs.


0:-> wrote:
> This case seems a classic one of doing more of what isn't working. An
> escalation of force to the point of higher risk of injury to the
> child....abuse.
>
> Possibly another tactic would be more appropriate.

[Murphoid]

0:-> wrote:
> wrote:
> > Missed opportunities for consistency were your only mistakes. I would
> > have spanked as well. The belt is a question to me, but you sound like
> > a parent whose judgment should be trusted implicitly.
>
> Child abuse by overuse of physical punishment is common. It's rare that
> a child is seen by CPS where physical abuse is the issue that the
> parent doesn't claim they were just "disciplining' and unruly child.
>
> This case seems a classic one of doing more of what isn't working. An
> escalation of force to the point of higher risk of injury to the
> child....abuse.
>
> Possibly another tactic would be more appropriate.
>
> We've posters here with better ways than simply "go for broke."
>
> But if they speak up you can be sure they will be attacked.
>
> Anyone that advocates non-spanking methods can expect that here.
>
> Of as one of our posters here likes to scream hysterically, "get a
> policeman to hit him with a baton. It's legal."
>
> 0:->

Thanks for the replys to my post. My Daughters behavior has improved
and now she is no longer getting in trouble at school. I have not even
had to punish her since except for very minor infractions (Thank God!)

I guess the question is was the belt the catalyst or not? Honestly, I
have not altered my parenting at all. I still use 1-2-3 and then a
spank and carry to the room. I have since let her know that the belt
will be used again if her behavior gets seriously out of line again.
It hasn't yet.

I think she was testing her limits and trying non-conformity to rules
to see if she could get away with it. I honestly don't know why.

I see this posters point about more of what doesn't work. However I
don't think that was what the situation was. I am not father of the
year, who is? I do have a consistent parenting method and up till that
point it was working. I was concerned because I was being consistent
and she was rebelling. It was becoming a struggle between us. That
was I think the core of the problem was.

This time I was able to lay down the law and it restored order. It
worked. I don't like saying it but it did.

[Greegor]

Beware, Using a belt is illegal in many states.
Telling Kane you used a belt is like lighting a match
to see into a gas can.

Murphoid wrote:
> 0:-> wrote:
> > wrote:
> > > Missed opportunities for consistency were your only mistakes. I would
> > > have spanked as well. The belt is a question to me, but you sound like
> > > a parent whose judgment should be trusted implicitly.
> >
> > Child abuse by overuse of physical punishment is common. It's rare that
> > a child is seen by CPS where physical abuse is the issue that the
> > parent doesn't claim they were just "disciplining' and unruly child.
> >
> > This case seems a classic one of doing more of what isn't working. An
> > escalation of force to the point of higher risk of injury to the
> > child....abuse.
> >
> > Possibly another tactic would be more appropriate.
> >
> > We've posters here with better ways than simply "go for broke."
> >
> > But if they speak up you can be sure they will be attacked.
> >
> > Anyone that advocates non-spanking methods can expect that here.
> >
> > Of as one of our posters here likes to scream hysterically, "get a
> > policeman to hit him with a baton. It's legal."
> >
> > 0:->
>
> Thanks for the replys to my post. My Daughters behavior has improved
> and now she is no longer getting in trouble at school. I have not even
> had to punish her since except for very minor infractions (Thank God!)
>
> I guess the question is was the belt the catalyst or not? Honestly, I
> have not altered my parenting at all. I still use 1-2-3 and then a
> spank and carry to the room. I have since let her know that the belt
> will be used again if her behavior gets seriously out of line again.
> It hasn't yet.
>
> I think she was testing her limits and trying non-conformity to rules
> to see if she could get away with it. I honestly don't know why.
>
> I see this posters point about more of what doesn't work. However I
> don't think that was what the situation was. I am not father of the
> year, who is? I do have a consistent parenting method and up till that
> point it was working. I was concerned because I was being consistent
> and she was rebelling. It was becoming a struggle between us. That
> was I think the core of the problem was.
>
> This time I was able to lay down the law and it restored order. It
> worked. I don't like saying it but it did.

[0:->]

Greegor wrote:
> Beware, Using a belt is illegal in many states.

Name them.

> Telling Kane you used a belt is like lighting a match
> to see into a gas can.

Why would you say that?

Physical punishment works, Greg.

I've never denied that.

The problem is that it is a short term solution with long term
consequences that aren't worth the temporary outcome.

Anyone that has worked with children, especially troubled children,
knows what the risks are in such a scenario as described.

Unless the child if fully cowed, there will be further testing, until
that time comes when the child does find a way around the threat.

Think of all the ways children can do that.

Heck, think of all the ways adults get around the threat of punishment.
Kids are much better at it, just resource poor..which will not always be
the case as they age out of childhood.

Your insinuation that I would call and report him fails on the issue of
which state he's in. Do you know?

I don't.

And besides, the USE of a belt is NOT the question.

For legal intervention there would have to be marks left. He did not say
there were, nor have I seen the child. And in some states that's not
even enough, as recent court cases have shown.

So what were you insinuating, Greg, other than your usual sick and
perverted posting methods don't fly?

This is a sad case, Greg. Very.

He has gotten temporary compliance.

Are you prepared to defend that there is little likelihood of it turning
bad in the future?

Children have a number of options in such cases. They can become careful
sneaks, and do what they wish anyway. They can wait until they are
capable of leaving home and running away. They can wait until they are
big enough to physically defend themselves and strike back.

The option that they cannot do alone is this: they cannot develop a
trusting relationship of such value to them that compliance is voluntary
and desired by them.

THAT option is denied by the use of pain and humiliation...and that is
the adult's choice.

I'm sorry that our poster resorted to it.

You, apparently, are not.

0:-[

>
> Murphoid wrote:
>> 0:-> wrote:
>>> wrote:
>>>> Missed opportunities for consistency were your only mistakes. I would
>>>> have spanked as well. The belt is a question to me, but you sound like
>>>> a parent whose judgment should be trusted implicitly.
>>> Child abuse by overuse of physical punishment is common. It's rare that
>>> a child is seen by CPS where physical abuse is the issue that the
>>> parent doesn't claim they were just "disciplining' and unruly child.
>>>
>>> This case seems a classic one of doing more of what isn't working. An
>>> escalation of force to the point of higher risk of injury to the
>>> child....abuse.
>>>
>>> Possibly another tactic would be more appropriate.
>>>
>>> We've posters here with better ways than simply "go for broke."
>>>
>>> But if they speak up you can be sure they will be attacked.
>>>
>>> Anyone that advocates non-spanking methods can expect that here.
>>>
>>> Of as one of our posters here likes to scream hysterically, "get a
>>> policeman to hit him with a baton. It's legal."
>>>
>>> 0:->
>> Thanks for the replys to my post. My Daughters behavior has improved
>> and now she is no longer getting in trouble at school. I have not even
>> had to punish her since except for very minor infractions (Thank God!)
>>
>> I guess the question is was the belt the catalyst or not? Honestly, I
>> have not altered my parenting at all. I still use 1-2-3 and then a
>> spank and carry to the room. I have since let her know that the belt
>> will be used again if her behavior gets seriously out of line again.
>> It hasn't yet.
>>
>> I think she was testing her limits and trying non-conformity to rules
>> to see if she could get away with it. I honestly don't know why.
>>
>> I see this posters point about more of what doesn't work. However I
>> don't think that was what the situation was. I am not father of the
>> year, who is? I do have a consistent parenting method and up till that
>> point it was working. I was concerned because I was being consistent
>> and she was rebelling. It was becoming a struggle between us. That
>> was I think the core of the problem was.
>>
>> This time I was able to lay down the law and it restored order. It
>> worked. I don't like saying it but it did.
>


--
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin (or someone else)

[Doan]

On 25 Sep 2006, Murphoid wrote:

>
> 0:-> wrote:
> > wrote:
> > > Missed opportunities for consistency were your only mistakes. I would
> > > have spanked as well. The belt is a question to me, but you sound like
> > > a parent whose judgment should be trusted implicitly.
> >
> > Child abuse by overuse of physical punishment is common. It's rare that
> > a child is seen by CPS where physical abuse is the issue that the
> > parent doesn't claim they were just "disciplining' and unruly child.
> >
> > This case seems a classic one of doing more of what isn't working. An
> > escalation of force to the point of higher risk of injury to the
> > child....abuse.
> >
> > Possibly another tactic would be more appropriate.
> >
> > We've posters here with better ways than simply "go for broke."
> >
> > But if they speak up you can be sure they will be attacked.
> >
> > Anyone that advocates non-spanking methods can expect that here.
> >
> > Of as one of our posters here likes to scream hysterically, "get a
> > policeman to hit him with a baton. It's legal."
> >
> > 0:->
>
> Thanks for the replys to my post. My Daughters behavior has improved
> and now she is no longer getting in trouble at school. I have not even
> had to punish her since except for very minor infractions (Thank God!)
>
> I guess the question is was the belt the catalyst or not? Honestly, I
> have not altered my parenting at all. I still use 1-2-3 and then a
> spank and carry to the room. I have since let her know that the belt
> will be used again if her behavior gets seriously out of line again.
> It hasn't yet.
>
> I think she was testing her limits and trying non-conformity to rules
> to see if she could get away with it. I honestly don't know why.
>
> I see this posters point about more of what doesn't work. However I
> don't think that was what the situation was. I am not father of the
> year, who is? I do have a consistent parenting method and up till that
> point it was working. I was concerned because I was being consistent
> and she was rebelling. It was becoming a struggle between us. That
> was I think the core of the problem was.
>
> This time I was able to lay down the law and it restored order. It
> worked. I don't like saying it but it did.
>
Only you know your daughter best. I am glad to see that you have found
what work for you and your daughter. It's your choice to parent your
children the way you see fit. Don't let others take that right away
from you.

Doan

[Doan]

On Tue, 26 Sep 2006, 0:-> wrote:

> Greegor wrote:
> > Beware, Using a belt is illegal in many states.
>
> Name them.
>
> > Telling Kane you used a belt is like lighting a match
> > to see into a gas can.
>
> Why would you say that?
>
> Physical punishment works, Greg.
>
> I've never denied that.
>
> The problem is that it is a short term solution with long term
> consequences that aren't worth the temporary outcome.
>
> Anyone that has worked with children, especially troubled children,
> knows what the risks are in such a scenario as described.
>
> Unless the child if fully cowed, there will be further testing, until
> that time comes when the child does find a way around the threat.
>
> Think of all the ways children can do that.
>
> Heck, think of all the ways adults get around the threat of punishment.
> Kids are much better at it, just resource poor..which will not always be
> the case as they age out of childhood.
>
> Your insinuation that I would call and report him fails on the issue of
> which state he's in. Do you know?
>
> I don't.
>
> And besides, the USE of a belt is NOT the question.
>
> For legal intervention there would have to be marks left. He did not say
> there were, nor have I seen the child. And in some states that's not
> even enough, as recent court cases have shown.
>
> So what were you insinuating, Greg, other than your usual sick and
> perverted posting methods don't fly?
>
> This is a sad case, Greg. Very.
>
> He has gotten temporary compliance.
>
> Are you prepared to defend that there is little likelihood of it turning
> bad in the future?
>
> Children have a number of options in such cases. They can become careful
> sneaks, and do what they wish anyway. They can wait until they are
> capable of leaving home and running away. They can wait until they are
> big enough to physically defend themselves and strike back.
>
> The option that they cannot do alone is this: they cannot develop a
> trusting relationship of such value to them that compliance is voluntary
> and desired by them.
>
> THAT option is denied by the use of pain and humiliation...and that is
> the adult's choice.
>
> I'm sorry that our poster resorted to it.
>
> You, apparently, are not.
>
> 0:-[
>
And you know his daughter better than him right, Kane? ;-)

AF

[0:->]

Doan wrote:
> On 25 Sep 2006, Murphoid wrote:
>
>> 0:-> wrote:
>>> wrote:
>>>> Missed opportunities for consistency were your only mistakes. I would
>>>> have spanked as well. The belt is a question to me, but you sound like
>>>> a parent whose judgment should be trusted implicitly.
>>> Child abuse by overuse of physical punishment is common. It's rare that
>>> a child is seen by CPS where physical abuse is the issue that the
>>> parent doesn't claim they were just "disciplining' and unruly child.
>>>
>>> This case seems a classic one of doing more of what isn't working. An
>>> escalation of force to the point of higher risk of injury to the
>>> child....abuse.
>>>
>>> Possibly another tactic would be more appropriate.
>>>
>>> We've posters here with better ways than simply "go for broke."
>>>
>>> But if they speak up you can be sure they will be attacked.
>>>
>>> Anyone that advocates non-spanking methods can expect that here.
>>>
>>> Of as one of our posters here likes to scream hysterically, "get a
>>> policeman to hit him with a baton. It's legal."
>>>
>>> 0:->
>> Thanks for the replys to my post. My Daughters behavior has improved
>> and now she is no longer getting in trouble at school. I have not even
>> had to punish her since except for very minor infractions (Thank God!)
>>
>> I guess the question is was the belt the catalyst or not? Honestly, I
>> have not altered my parenting at all. I still use 1-2-3 and then a
>> spank and carry to the room. I have since let her know that the belt
>> will be used again if her behavior gets seriously out of line again.
>> It hasn't yet.
>>
>> I think she was testing her limits and trying non-conformity to rules
>> to see if she could get away with it. I honestly don't know why.
>>
>> I see this posters point about more of what doesn't work. However I
>> don't think that was what the situation was. I am not father of the
>> year, who is? I do have a consistent parenting method and up till that
>> point it was working. I was concerned because I was being consistent
>> and she was rebelling. It was becoming a struggle between us. That
>> was I think the core of the problem was.
>>
>> This time I was able to lay down the law and it restored order. It
>> worked. I don't like saying it but it did.
>>
> Only you know your daughter best. I am glad to see that you have found
> what work for you and your daughter. It's your choice to parent your
> children the way you see fit. Don't let others take that right away
> from you.

Who's trying to take it away?

And who will have to live with the consequences?

>
> Doan
>

Just about the time some teen does something criminal or violent, the
parent will say one or both of two things, "I thought I had taught
(punished) her better than that," and or "I guess I didn't know her as
well as I thought."

You live in a little dreamworld, Droaner. A sad one.

How many children have you raised?

0:->




--
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin (or someone else)

[0:->]

Doan wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Sep 2006, 0:-> wrote:
>
>> Greegor wrote:
>>> Beware, Using a belt is illegal in many states.
>> Name them.
>>
>>> Telling Kane you used a belt is like lighting a match
>>> to see into a gas can.
>> Why would you say that?
>>
>> Physical punishment works, Greg.
>>
>> I've never denied that.
>>
>> The problem is that it is a short term solution with long term
>> consequences that aren't worth the temporary outcome.
>>
>> Anyone that has worked with children, especially troubled children,
>> knows what the risks are in such a scenario as described.
>>
>> Unless the child if fully cowed, there will be further testing, until
>> that time comes when the child does find a way around the threat.
>>
>> Think of all the ways children can do that.
>>
>> Heck, think of all the ways adults get around the threat of punishment.
>> Kids are much better at it, just resource poor..which will not always be
>> the case as they age out of childhood.
>>
>> Your insinuation that I would call and report him fails on the issue of
>> which state he's in. Do you know?
>>
>> I don't.
>>
>> And besides, the USE of a belt is NOT the question.
>>
>> For legal intervention there would have to be marks left. He did not say
>> there were, nor have I seen the child. And in some states that's not
>> even enough, as recent court cases have shown.
>>
>> So what were you insinuating, Greg, other than your usual sick and
>> perverted posting methods don't fly?
>>
>> This is a sad case, Greg. Very.
>>
>> He has gotten temporary compliance.
>>
>> Are you prepared to defend that there is little likelihood of it turning
>> bad in the future?
>>
>> Children have a number of options in such cases. They can become careful
>> sneaks, and do what they wish anyway. They can wait until they are
>> capable of leaving home and running away. They can wait until they are
>> big enough to physically defend themselves and strike back.
>>
>> The option that they cannot do alone is this: they cannot develop a
>> trusting relationship of such value to them that compliance is voluntary
>> and desired by them.
>>
>> THAT option is denied by the use of pain and humiliation...and that is
>> the adult's choice.
>>
>> I'm sorry that our poster resorted to it.
>>
>> You, apparently, are not.
>>
>> 0:-[
>>
> And you know his daughter better than him right, Kane? ;-)

I know kids better than him. I made no claim about knowing his daughter
better.

I've seen how kids that are spanked turn out, Doan. So have you. 0:->

You just suppress the memory.

>
> AF
>

0:->


--
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin (or someone else)

[Doan]

On Tue, 26 Sep 2006, 0:-> wrote:

> Doan wrote:
> > On 25 Sep 2006, Murphoid wrote:
> >
> >> 0:-> wrote:
> >>> wrote:
> >>>> Missed opportunities for consistency were your only mistakes. I would
> >>>> have spanked as well. The belt is a question to me, but you sound like
> >>>> a parent whose judgment should be trusted implicitly.
> >>> Child abuse by overuse of physical punishment is common. It's rare that
> >>> a child is seen by CPS where physical abuse is the issue that the
> >>> parent doesn't claim they were just "disciplining' and unruly child.
> >>>
> >>> This case seems a classic one of doing more of what isn't working. An
> >>> escalation of force to the point of higher risk of injury to the
> >>> child....abuse.
> >>>
> >>> Possibly another tactic would be more appropriate.
> >>>
> >>> We've posters here with better ways than simply "go for broke."
> >>>
> >>> But if they speak up you can be sure they will be attacked.
> >>>
> >>> Anyone that advocates non-spanking methods can expect that here.
> >>>
> >>> Of as one of our posters here likes to scream hysterically, "get a
> >>> policeman to hit him with a baton. It's legal."
> >>>
> >>> 0:->
> >> Thanks for the replys to my post. My Daughters behavior has improved
> >> and now she is no longer getting in trouble at school. I have not even
> >> had to punish her since except for very minor infractions (Thank God!)
> >>
> >> I guess the question is was the belt the catalyst or not? Honestly, I
> >> have not altered my parenting at all. I still use 1-2-3 and then a
> >> spank and carry to the room. I have since let her know that the belt
> >> will be used again if her behavior gets seriously out of line again.
> >> It hasn't yet.
> >>
> >> I think she was testing her limits and trying non-conformity to rules
> >> to see if she could get away with it. I honestly don't know why.
> >>
> >> I see this posters point about more of what doesn't work. However I
> >> don't think that was what the situation was. I am not father of the
> >> year, who is? I do have a consistent parenting method and up till that
> >> point it was working. I was concerned because I was being consistent
> >> and she was rebelling. It was becoming a struggle between us. That
> >> was I think the core of the problem was.
> >>
> >> This time I was able to lay down the law and it restored order. It
> >> worked. I don't like saying it but it did.
> >>
> > Only you know your daughter best. I am glad to see that you have found
> > what work for you and your daughter. It's your choice to parent your
> > children the way you see fit. Don't let others take that right away
> > from you.
>
> Who's trying to take it away?
>
The anti-spankin zealotS!

> And who will have to live with the consequences?

The people of Sweden?

>
> Just about the time some teen does something criminal or violent, the
> parent will say one or both of two things, "I thought I had taught
> (punished) her better than that," and or "I guess I didn't know her as
> well as I thought."
>
Have you checked on Columbine?

> You live in a little dreamworld, Droaner. A sad one.
>
I live in the real world. Not perfect but real.

> How many children have you raised?
>
How many have you raised, Kane?

AF

> 0:->
>
>
>
>
> --
> "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
> to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
> contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin (or someone else)
>

[0:->]

Doan wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Sep 2006, 0:-> wrote:
>
>> Doan wrote:
>>> On 25 Sep 2006, Murphoid wrote:
>>>
>>>> 0:-> wrote:
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> Missed opportunities for consistency were your only mistakes. I would
>>>>>> have spanked as well. The belt is a question to me, but you sound like
>>>>>> a parent whose judgment should be trusted implicitly.
>>>>> Child abuse by overuse of physical punishment is common. It's rare that
>>>>> a child is seen by CPS where physical abuse is the issue that the
>>>>> parent doesn't claim they were just "disciplining' and unruly child.
>>>>>
>>>>> This case seems a classic one of doing more of what isn't working. An
>>>>> escalation of force to the point of higher risk of injury to the
>>>>> child....abuse.
>>>>>
>>>>> Possibly another tactic would be more appropriate.
>>>>>
>>>>> We've posters here with better ways than simply "go for broke."
>>>>>
>>>>> But if they speak up you can be sure they will be attacked.
>>>>>
>>>>> Anyone that advocates non-spanking methods can expect that here.
>>>>>
>>>>> Of as one of our posters here likes to scream hysterically, "get a
>>>>> policeman to hit him with a baton. It's legal."
>>>>>
>>>>> 0:->
>>>> Thanks for the replys to my post. My Daughters behavior has improved
>>>> and now she is no longer getting in trouble at school. I have not even
>>>> had to punish her since except for very minor infractions (Thank God!)
>>>>
>>>> I guess the question is was the belt the catalyst or not? Honestly, I
>>>> have not altered my parenting at all. I still use 1-2-3 and then a
>>>> spank and carry to the room. I have since let her know that the belt
>>>> will be used again if her behavior gets seriously out of line again.
>>>> It hasn't yet.
>>>>
>>>> I think she was testing her limits and trying non-conformity to rules
>>>> to see if she could get away with it. I honestly don't know why.
>>>>
>>>> I see this posters point about more of what doesn't work. However I
>>>> don't think that was what the situation was. I am not father of the
>>>> year, who is? I do have a consistent parenting method and up till that
>>>> point it was working. I was concerned because I was being consistent
>>>> and she was rebelling. It was becoming a struggle between us. That
>>>> was I think the core of the problem was.
>>>>
>>>> This time I was able to lay down the law and it restored order. It
>>>> worked. I don't like saying it but it did.
>>>>
>>> Only you know your daughter best. I am glad to see that you have found
>>> what work for you and your daughter. It's your choice to parent your
>>> children the way you see fit. Don't let others take that right away
>>> from you.
>> Who's trying to take it away?
>>
> The anti-spankin zealotS!

Or the humane and those with well founded longitudinal studies and other
research.

>> And who will have to live with the consequences?
>
> The people of Sweden?

Interestingly the people of Sweden have indeed benefited by this change
in parenting direction. The current levels of crime seem to be more
related to an open door immigration policy and massive numbers of
immigrants from societies that indeed will not respect this law banning
corporal punishment.

>> Just about the time some teen does something criminal or violent, the
>> parent will say one or both of two things, "I thought I had taught
>> (punished) her better than that," and or "I guess I didn't know her as
>> well as I thought."
>>
> Have you checked on Columbine?

Sure have. According to your claims there is an over 90% chance the
shooters where in fact subjected to corporal punishment as little
children. Do you know otherwise?

>> You live in a little dreamworld, Droaner. A sad one.
>>
> I live in the real world. Not perfect but real.

That is the first thing the nut cases claim.

>> How many children have you raised?
>>
> How many have you raised, Kane?

Four directly. Dozens by proxy from their parents. And worked with
hundreds of children and their families in various clinical settings.

Why didn't you answer the question, Doan?
>
> AF
>
Try answering the question asked, Doan, instead of resorting to the
sneaking ploys you learned by way of being spanked as a child.

0:->


>> 0:->
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
>> to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
>> contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin (or someone else)
>>
>


--
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin (or someone else)

[Doan]

On Tue, 26 Sep 2006, 0:-> wrote:

> Doan wrote:
> > On Tue, 26 Sep 2006, 0:-> wrote:
> >
> >> Greegor wrote:
> >>> Beware, Using a belt is illegal in many states.
> >> Name them.
> >>
> >>> Telling Kane you used a belt is like lighting a match
> >>> to see into a gas can.
> >> Why would you say that?
> >>
> >> Physical punishment works, Greg.
> >>
> >> I've never denied that.
> >>
> >> The problem is that it is a short term solution with long term
> >> consequences that aren't worth the temporary outcome.
> >>
> >> Anyone that has worked with children, especially troubled children,
> >> knows what the risks are in such a scenario as described.
> >>
> >> Unless the child if fully cowed, there will be further testing, until
> >> that time comes when the child does find a way around the threat.
> >>
> >> Think of all the ways children can do that.
> >>
> >> Heck, think of all the ways adults get around the threat of punishment.
> >> Kids are much better at it, just resource poor..which will not always be
> >> the case as they age out of childhood.
> >>
> >> Your insinuation that I would call and report him fails on the issue of
> >> which state he's in. Do you know?
> >>
> >> I don't.
> >>
> >> And besides, the USE of a belt is NOT the question.
> >>
> >> For legal intervention there would have to be marks left. He did not say
> >> there were, nor have I seen the child. And in some states that's not
> >> even enough, as recent court cases have shown.
> >>
> >> So what were you insinuating, Greg, other than your usual sick and
> >> perverted posting methods don't fly?
> >>
> >> This is a sad case, Greg. Very.
> >>
> >> He has gotten temporary compliance.
> >>
> >> Are you prepared to defend that there is little likelihood of it turning
> >> bad in the future?
> >>
> >> Children have a number of options in such cases. They can become careful
> >> sneaks, and do what they wish anyway. They can wait until they are
> >> capable of leaving home and running away. They can wait until they are
> >> big enough to physically defend themselves and strike back.
> >>
> >> The option that they cannot do alone is this: they cannot develop a
> >> trusting relationship of such value to them that compliance is voluntary
> >> and desired by them.
> >>
> >> THAT option is denied by the use of pain and humiliation...and that is
> >> the adult's choice.
> >>
> >> I'm sorry that our poster resorted to it.
> >>
> >> You, apparently, are not.
> >>
> >> 0:-[
> >>
> > And you know his daughter better than him right, Kane? ;-)
>
> I know kids better than him. I made no claim about knowing his daughter
> better.
>
You know kids better than him??? I doubted that! You were the one that
admitted to abusing your own kid, remembered? You said you were too
stupid to know where the line is and may have crossed it when you hit
your kid, remembered?

> I've seen how kids that are spanked turn out, Doan. So have you. 0:->
>
Yup! Albert Einstien, Mother Theresa, Martin L. King Jr.... and you.
Oops! Scratch that. You were "never-spanked"! ;-)

> You just suppress the memory.
>
How's that? Did I ever denied that I was spanked?

AF

[[email protected]]

0:-> wrote:
> Doan wrote:
> > On Tue, 26 Sep 2006, 0:-> wrote:
> >
> >> Doan wrote:
> >>> On 25 Sep 2006, Murphoid wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> 0:-> wrote:
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>> Missed opportunities for consistency were your only mistakes. I would
> >>>>>> have spanked as well. The belt is a question to me, but you sound like
> >>>>>> a parent whose judgment should be trusted implicitly.
> >>>>> Child abuse by overuse of physical punishment is common. It's rare that
> >>>>> a child is seen by CPS where physical abuse is the issue that the
> >>>>> parent doesn't claim they were just "disciplining' and unruly child.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> This case seems a classic one of doing more of what isn't working. An
> >>>>> escalation of force to the point of higher risk of injury to the
> >>>>> child....abuse.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Possibly another tactic would be more appropriate.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> We've posters here with better ways than simply "go for broke."
> >>>>>
> >>>>> But if they speak up you can be sure they will be attacked.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Anyone that advocates non-spanking methods can expect that here.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Of as one of our posters here likes to scream hysterically, "get a
> >>>>> policeman to hit him with a baton. It's legal."
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 0:->
> >>>> Thanks for the replys to my post. My Daughters behavior has improved
> >>>> and now she is no longer getting in trouble at school. I have not even
> >>>> had to punish her since except for very minor infractions (Thank God!)
> >>>>
> >>>> I guess the question is was the belt the catalyst or not? Honestly, I
> >>>> have not altered my parenting at all. I still use 1-2-3 and then a
> >>>> spank and carry to the room. I have since let her know that the belt
> >>>> will be used again if her behavior gets seriously out of line again.
> >>>> It hasn't yet.
> >>>>
> >>>> I think she was testing her limits and trying non-conformity to rules
> >>>> to see if she could get away with it. I honestly don't know why.
> >>>>
> >>>> I see this posters point about more of what doesn't work. However I
> >>>> don't think that was what the situation was. I am not father of the
> >>>> year, who is? I do have a consistent parenting method and up till that
> >>>> point it was working. I was concerned because I was being consistent
> >>>> and she was rebelling. It was becoming a struggle between us. That
> >>>> was I think the core of the problem was.
> >>>>
> >>>> This time I was able to lay down the law and it restored order. It
> >>>> worked. I don't like saying it but it did.
> >>>>
> >>> Only you know your daughter best. I am glad to see that you have found
> >>> what work for you and your daughter. It's your choice to parent your
> >>> children the way you see fit. Don't let others take that right away
> >>> from you.
> >> Who's trying to take it away?
> >>
> > The anti-spankin zealotS!
>
> Or the humane and those with well founded longitudinal studies and other
> research.
>
And which ones are those?

> >> And who will have to live with the consequences?
> >
> > The people of Sweden?
>
> Interestingly the people of Sweden have indeed benefited by this change
> in parenting direction. The current levels of crime seem to be more
> related to an open door immigration policy and massive numbers of
> immigrants from societies that indeed will not respect this law banning
> corporal punishment.
>
Hahaha! And the crime rates in the USA have been declining for the past
30 years right, Kane0?

> >> Just about the time some teen does something criminal or violent, the
> >> parent will say one or both of two things, "I thought I had taught
> >> (punished) her better than that," and or "I guess I didn't know her as
> >> well as I thought."
> >>
> > Have you checked on Columbine?
>
> Sure have. According to your claims there is an over 90% chance the
> shooters where in fact subjected to corporal punishment as little
> children. Do you know otherwise?
>
Hahaha! The same 90% also applied to all the great men in history!
Know
of any great "never-spanked" person, Kane0?

> >> You live in a little dreamworld, Droaner. A sad one.
> >>
> > I live in the real world. Not perfect but real.
>
> That is the first thing the nut cases claim.
>
You should know since you are one of the nut cases. ;-)

> >> How many children have you raised?
> >>
> > How many have you raised, Kane?
>
> Four directly. Dozens by proxy from their parents. And worked with
> hundreds of children and their families in various clinical settings.
>
And how many have you abused, Kaneo?

> Why didn't you answer the question, Doan?

Because it's not relevant!

> >
> > AF
> >
> Try answering the question asked, Doan, instead of resorting to the
> sneaking ploys you learned by way of being spanked as a child.
>
Hihihi! What about you, Kane0?

AF

> 0:->
>
>
> >> 0:->
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
> >> to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
> >> contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin (or someone else)
> >>
> >
>
>
> --
> "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
> to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
> contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin (or someone else)

[0:->]

Doan wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Sep 2006, 0:-> wrote:
>
>> Doan wrote:
>>> On Tue, 26 Sep 2006, 0:-> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Greegor wrote:
>>>>> Beware, Using a belt is illegal in many states.
>>>> Name them.
>>>>
>>>>> Telling Kane you used a belt is like lighting a match
>>>>> to see into a gas can.
>>>> Why would you say that?
>>>>
>>>> Physical punishment works, Greg.
>>>>
>>>> I've never denied that.
>>>>
>>>> The problem is that it is a short term solution with long term
>>>> consequences that aren't worth the temporary outcome.
>>>>
>>>> Anyone that has worked with children, especially troubled children,
>>>> knows what the risks are in such a scenario as described.
>>>>
>>>> Unless the child if fully cowed, there will be further testing, until
>>>> that time comes when the child does find a way around the threat.
>>>>
>>>> Think of all the ways children can do that.
>>>>
>>>> Heck, think of all the ways adults get around the threat of punishment.
>>>> Kids are much better at it, just resource poor..which will not always be
>>>> the case as they age out of childhood.
>>>>
>>>> Your insinuation that I would call and report him fails on the issue of
>>>> which state he's in. Do you know?
>>>>
>>>> I don't.
>>>>
>>>> And besides, the USE of a belt is NOT the question.
>>>>
>>>> For legal intervention there would have to be marks left. He did not say
>>>> there were, nor have I seen the child. And in some states that's not
>>>> even enough, as recent court cases have shown.
>>>>
>>>> So what were you insinuating, Greg, other than your usual sick and
>>>> perverted posting methods don't fly?
>>>>
>>>> This is a sad case, Greg. Very.
>>>>
>>>> He has gotten temporary compliance.
>>>>
>>>> Are you prepared to defend that there is little likelihood of it turning
>>>> bad in the future?
>>>>
>>>> Children have a number of options in such cases. They can become careful
>>>> sneaks, and do what they wish anyway. They can wait until they are
>>>> capable of leaving home and running away. They can wait until they are
>>>> big enough to physically defend themselves and strike back.
>>>>
>>>> The option that they cannot do alone is this: they cannot develop a
>>>> trusting relationship of such value to them that compliance is voluntary
>>>> and desired by them.
>>>>
>>>> THAT option is denied by the use of pain and humiliation...and that is
>>>> the adult's choice.
>>>>
>>>> I'm sorry that our poster resorted to it.
>>>>
>>>> You, apparently, are not.
>>>>
>>>> 0:-[
>>>>
>>> And you know his daughter better than him right, Kane? ;-)
>> I know kids better than him. I made no claim about knowing his daughter
>> better.
>>
> You know kids better than him???

The odds are that unless he's raised them to adults, yes. The odds are
also that he has not worked in a professional capacity with children
that were subjected to corporal punishment.

> I doubted that!

Of course you do. You have not answered my question about how many
children you have raised. 0:->

> You were the one that
> admitted to abusing your own kid, remembered?

Nope. That's not what I said. You have taken my comment out of context,
as usual, and reframed it to mislead a reader. That's called 'lying.'

That is the kind of sneakiness and lying that spanked children often
resort to, and carry on into adulthood, Doan.

> You said you were too
> stupid to know where the line is

No I didn't.

> and may have crossed it

Of course I crossed it. That was the point of my speaking of it.

> when you hit
> your kid, remembered?

Nope. I didn't say that. I'll bet you are too caught up in your
childhood trauma and what you learned from it, sadly, to actually post
my words in full on this subject, aren't you, Doan?

Interesting that when one of your spankers do it it 'spanking' but when
I did it it became 'hitting.' How consistent you are.

You apparently aren't willing to have me 'decide for myself,' while
claiming that is your position. Why is that, Doan?

>> I've seen how kids that are spanked turn out, Doan. So have you. 0:->
>>
> Yup! Albert Einstien, Mother Theresa, Martin L. King Jr.... and you.

Prove the others were spanked, Doan.

Prove the Columbine kids YOU brought up as examples were not spanked.

> Oops! Scratch that. You were "never-spanked"! ;-)

That too is a lie. That is not what I said. Go and look it up. Show the
reader where I said I was "never-spanked" and did not qualify it.

If I said I fell off a bridge would you assume that I fell off a
particular bridge? And if I named the bridge, would call me a "bridge
faller offer?" Especially if that bridge had no handrails, while all
others do?

You are a liar, Doan.

>> You just suppress the memory.
>>
> How's that?

See? What did I tell you? R R R R R R R

> Did I ever denied that I was spanked?

Nope. I didn't make the claim you suppressed the memory of being
spanked, but instead the memory of what it taught you and made you do
that you demonstrate almost daily here. Lie, sneak.

You have forgotten how it taught you to lie and cheat and become a sneak.

Or are you lying to protect your family? I could accept that without
criticism. 0:->

>
> AF
>

You are a sneak. And a liar. And badly brought up. Obviously. Some can
get over it. Some cannot. You apparently could not. By the way, the
character of those you listed, Albert Einstien, Mother Theresa, Martin
L. King Jr., had some serious flaws. Einstein was not faithful to his
wife, King..well let's say he too, in considerable measure.

As for your misuse of Mother Teresa:

http://www.goodradioshows.org/peaceTalksL01.htm

.... Mother Theresa said: "If there is no peace in the world today, it
is because there is no peace in the family. Help your families to become
centers of compassion and forgive constantly and so bring peace." ...

You a war monger, boy?

http://www.request.org.uk/main/history/teresa/teresa02.htm
.... happy family.'

When Agnes was eight years old her father died. Her mother worked very
hard to make sure the children were happy and Mother Teresa remembered
her childhood as being 'exceptionally happy.' ...

Sound like CP was a common part of parenting for M. Theresa to you?

http://simonsays.com/content/book.cfm?tab=25&pid=514270
.... Description

Born Agnes Gonxha Bojaxhiu in 1910, Mother Teresa grew up in a small
war-torn town in Macedonia. The youngest of three children, Mother
Teresa was called Gonxha, which means "flower bud," by her family
because of her cheerful disposition. ...

You think this gentle little girl was spanked, do you?

If you really knew anything about what you are talking about you'd also
know that M. Theresa was not without salacious attacks on her honesty
and integrity.

Using her is pointless, because YOU don't know if she was or was not
spanked, stupid little lying boy.

Look it up. Any of it.

0:->





--
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin (or someone else)

[0:->]

wrote:
> 0:-> wrote:
>> Doan wrote:
>>> On Tue, 26 Sep 2006, 0:-> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Doan wrote:
>>>>> On 25 Sep 2006, Murphoid wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> 0:-> wrote:
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Missed opportunities for consistency were your only mistakes. I would
>>>>>>>> have spanked as well. The belt is a question to me, but you sound like
>>>>>>>> a parent whose judgment should be trusted implicitly.
>>>>>>> Child abuse by overuse of physical punishment is common. It's rare that
>>>>>>> a child is seen by CPS where physical abuse is the issue that the
>>>>>>> parent doesn't claim they were just "disciplining' and unruly child.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This case seems a classic one of doing more of what isn't working. An
>>>>>>> escalation of force to the point of higher risk of injury to the
>>>>>>> child....abuse.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Possibly another tactic would be more appropriate.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We've posters here with better ways than simply "go for broke."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But if they speak up you can be sure they will be attacked.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Anyone that advocates non-spanking methods can expect that here.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Of as one of our posters here likes to scream hysterically, "get a
>>>>>>> policeman to hit him with a baton. It's legal."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 0:->
>>>>>> Thanks for the replys to my post. My Daughters behavior has improved
>>>>>> and now she is no longer getting in trouble at school. I have not even
>>>>>> had to punish her since except for very minor infractions (Thank God!)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I guess the question is was the belt the catalyst or not? Honestly, I
>>>>>> have not altered my parenting at all. I still use 1-2-3 and then a
>>>>>> spank and carry to the room. I have since let her know that the belt
>>>>>> will be used again if her behavior gets seriously out of line again.
>>>>>> It hasn't yet.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think she was testing her limits and trying non-conformity to rules
>>>>>> to see if she could get away with it. I honestly don't know why.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I see this posters point about more of what doesn't work. However I
>>>>>> don't think that was what the situation was. I am not father of the
>>>>>> year, who is? I do have a consistent parenting method and up till that
>>>>>> point it was working. I was concerned because I was being consistent
>>>>>> and she was rebelling. It was becoming a struggle between us. That
>>>>>> was I think the core of the problem was.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This time I was able to lay down the law and it restored order. It
>>>>>> worked. I don't like saying it but it did.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Only you know your daughter best. I am glad to see that you have found
>>>>> what work for you and your daughter. It's your choice to parent your
>>>>> children the way you see fit. Don't let others take that right away
>>>>> from you.
>>>> Who's trying to take it away?
>>>>
>>> The anti-spankin zealotS!
>> Or the humane and those with well founded longitudinal studies and other
>> research.
>>
> And which ones are those?

The hundreds cited in this ng over the years. Weren't you watching?

>>>> And who will have to live with the consequences?
>>> The people of Sweden?
>> Interestingly the people of Sweden have indeed benefited by this change
>> in parenting direction. The current levels of crime seem to be more
>> related to an open door immigration policy and massive numbers of
>> immigrants from societies that indeed will not respect this law banning
>> corporal punishment.
>>
> Hahaha! And the crime rates in the USA have been declining for the past
> 30 years right, Kane0?

Yep, especially violent crime. Even as spanking falls into less and less
approval but the public. You like to cite the old 90% figures, but you
run like the fearful frightened little lying weasel you are when
confronted with more recent figures.

>>>> Just about the time some teen does something criminal or violent, the
>>>> parent will say one or both of two things, "I thought I had taught
>>>> (punished) her better than that," and or "I guess I didn't know her as
>>>> well as I thought."
>>>>
>>> Have you checked on Columbine?
>> Sure have. According to your claims there is an over 90% chance the
>> shooters where in fact subjected to corporal punishment as little
>> children. Do you know otherwise?
>>
> Hahaha! The same 90% also applied to all the great men in history!
> Know
> of any great "never-spanked" person, Kane0?

Nope. Know of any high profile bad man that wasn't spanked, Doan?

>>>> You live in a little dreamworld, Droaner. A sad one.
>>>>
>>> I live in the real world. Not perfect but real.
>> That is the first thing the nut cases claim.
>>
> You should know since you are one of the nut cases. ;-)

Projection.

>>>> How many children have you raised?
>>>>
>>> How many have you raised, Kane?
>> Four directly. Dozens by proxy from their parents. And worked with
>> hundreds of children and their families in various clinical settings.
>>
> And how many have you abused, Kaneo?

You haven't answered my question. I've abused none.

>> Why didn't you answer the question, Doan?
>
> Because it's not relevant!

Oh? YOU questioned whether or not I might know more than the poster
about children and raising them.

I answered your question.

YOU claim to know better than me, as is plain to see in your replies.
Now answer mine.

How do you come to know better than I?

Raised any children?


>
>>> AF
>>>
>> Try answering the question asked, Doan, instead of resorting to the
>> sneaking ploys you learned by way of being spanked as a child.
>>
> Hihihi! What about you, Kane0?

I answer your questions as asked, Doan. And you mine? Nope. Not so far.

Yer a frightened dodging weasel that pretends to yourself that you are
brave and clever to duck the questions.

Give that some thought.

0:->

>
> AF
>
>> 0:->
>>
>>
>>>> 0:->
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
>>>> to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
>>>> contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin (or someone else)
>>>>
>>
>> --
>> "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
>> to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
>> contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin (or someone else)
>


--
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin (or someone else)

[[email protected]]

0:-> wrote:
> wrote:
> > 0:-> wrote:
> >> Doan wrote:
> >>> On Tue, 26 Sep 2006, 0:-> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Doan wrote:
> >>>>> On 25 Sep 2006, Murphoid wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> 0:-> wrote:
> >>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> Missed opportunities for consistency were your only mistakes. I would
> >>>>>>>> have spanked as well. The belt is a question to me, but you sound like
> >>>>>>>> a parent whose judgment should be trusted implicitly.
> >>>>>>> Child abuse by overuse of physical punishment is common. It's rare that
> >>>>>>> a child is seen by CPS where physical abuse is the issue that the
> >>>>>>> parent doesn't claim they were just "disciplining' and unruly child.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> This case seems a classic one of doing more of what isn't working. An
> >>>>>>> escalation of force to the point of higher risk of injury to the
> >>>>>>> child....abuse.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Possibly another tactic would be more appropriate.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> We've posters here with better ways than simply "go for broke."
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> But if they speak up you can be sure they will be attacked.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Anyone that advocates non-spanking methods can expect that here.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Of as one of our posters here likes to scream hysterically, "get a
> >>>>>>> policeman to hit him with a baton. It's legal."
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> 0:->
> >>>>>> Thanks for the replys to my post. My Daughters behavior has improved
> >>>>>> and now she is no longer getting in trouble at school. I have not even
> >>>>>> had to punish her since except for very minor infractions (Thank God!)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I guess the question is was the belt the catalyst or not? Honestly, I
> >>>>>> have not altered my parenting at all. I still use 1-2-3 and then a
> >>>>>> spank and carry to the room. I have since let her know that the belt
> >>>>>> will be used again if her behavior gets seriously out of line again.
> >>>>>> It hasn't yet.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I think she was testing her limits and trying non-conformity to rules
> >>>>>> to see if she could get away with it. I honestly don't know why.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I see this posters point about more of what doesn't work. However I
> >>>>>> don't think that was what the situation was. I am not father of the
> >>>>>> year, who is? I do have a consistent parenting method and up till that
> >>>>>> point it was working. I was concerned because I was being consistent
> >>>>>> and she was rebelling. It was becoming a struggle between us. That
> >>>>>> was I think the core of the problem was.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> This time I was able to lay down the law and it restored order. It
> >>>>>> worked. I don't like saying it but it did.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> Only you know your daughter best. I am glad to see that you have found
> >>>>> what work for you and your daughter. It's your choice to parent your
> >>>>> children the way you see fit. Don't let others take that right away
> >>>>> from you.
> >>>> Who's trying to take it away?
> >>>>
> >>> The anti-spankin zealotS!
> >> Or the humane and those with well founded longitudinal studies and other
> >> research.
> >>
> > And which ones are those?
>
> The hundreds cited in this ng over the years. Weren't you watching?
>
> >>>> And who will have to live with the consequences?
> >>> The people of Sweden?
> >> Interestingly the people of Sweden have indeed benefited by this change
> >> in parenting direction. The current levels of crime seem to be more
> >> related to an open door immigration policy and massive numbers of
> >> immigrants from societies that indeed will not respect this law banning
> >> corporal punishment.
> >>
> > Hahaha! And the crime rates in the USA have been declining for the past
> > 30 years right, Kane0?
>
> Yep, especially violent crime. Even as spanking falls into less and less
> approval but the public. You like to cite the old 90% figures, but you
> run like the fearful frightened little lying weasel you are when
> confronted with more recent figures.
>
Hahaha! Still lying stupidly, Kane? Checked with the figures from the
DOJ. I DARE YOU. I DOUBLE DARE you.

> >>>> Just about the time some teen does something criminal or violent, the
> >>>> parent will say one or both of two things, "I thought I had taught
> >>>> (punished) her better than that," and or "I guess I didn't know her as
> >>>> well as I thought."
> >>>>
> >>> Have you checked on Columbine?
> >> Sure have. According to your claims there is an over 90% chance the
> >> shooters where in fact subjected to corporal punishment as little
> >> children. Do you know otherwise?
> >>
> > Hahaha! The same 90% also applied to all the great men in history!
> > Know
> > of any great "never-spanked" person, Kane0?
>
> Nope. Know of any high profile bad man that wasn't spanked, Doan?
>
Hihihi! There is a 90% that they were spanked.

> >>>> You live in a little dreamworld, Droaner. A sad one.
> >>>>
> >>> I live in the real world. Not perfect but real.
> >> That is the first thing the nut cases claim.
> >>
> > You should know since you are one of the nut cases. ;-)
>
> Projection.
>
It's you! ;-0

> >>>> How many children have you raised?
> >>>>
> >>> How many have you raised, Kane?
> >> Four directly. Dozens by proxy from their parents. And worked with
> >> hundreds of children and their families in various clinical settings.
> >>
> > And how many have you abused, Kaneo?
>
> You haven't answered my question. I've abused none.
>
Then you are a liar. Did you said you crossed the line?

> >> Why didn't you answer the question, Doan?
> >
> > Because it's not relevant!
>
> Oh? YOU questioned whether or not I might know more than the poster
> about children and raising them.
>
> I answered your question.
>
That is your choice, STUPID!

> YOU claim to know better than me, as is plain to see in your replies.
> Now answer mine.
>
> How do you come to know better than I?
>
I never claimed to know better than any one. STOP LYING, STUPID!

> Raised any children?
>
Hihihi!

AF
>
> >
> >>> AF
> >>>
> >> Try answering the question asked, Doan, instead of resorting to the
> >> sneaking ploys you learned by way of being spanked as a child.
> >>
> > Hihihi! What about you, Kane0?
>
> I answer your questions as asked, Doan. And you mine? Nope. Not so far.
>
> Yer a frightened dodging weasel that pretends to yourself that you are
> brave and clever to duck the questions.
>
> Give that some thought.
>
> 0:->
>
> >
> > AF
> >
> >> 0:->
> >>
> >>
> >>>> 0:->
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
> >>>> to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
> >>>> contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin (or someone else)
> >>>>
> >>
> >> --
> >> "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
> >> to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
> >> contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin (or someone else)
> >
>
>
> --
> "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
> to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
> contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin (or someone else)

[Greegor]

Doan wrote > And how many have you abused, Kaneo?

Kane wrote > You haven't answered my question. I've abused none.

Doan wrote > Then you are a liar. Did you said you crossed the line?

I recall also that Kane said he had crossed the line.

Perhaps now he will claim that was an ethical or moral lie
intended to build rapport, pretending to empathize.

Kane couldn't empathize with your big toe.

But he's obsessed with manipulating people to serve his ends.
His "ethical and moral" ends justify any means, in his mind.

[0:->]

Greegor wrote:
> Doan wrote > And how many have you abused, Kaneo?
>
> Kane wrote > You haven't answered my question. I've abused none.
>
> Doan wrote > Then you are a liar. Did you said you crossed the line?
>
> I recall also that Kane said he had crossed the line.

Did I claim I hadn't?

On the contrary I said I did. So you are again lying, Greg.
>
> Perhaps now he will claim that was an ethical or moral lie
> intended to build rapport, pretending to empathize.

What lie? I invited Doan to post the exchange between us regarding this
event and he has seen fit to prove how immoral he actually is by
refusing to do so.

I left it up to HIM to be honest and let the readers decide.

According to the spanking proponents here it would not have even
approached "abuse."

YOU are not interested in the truth, simply joining with you little pack
of hyenas, isn't that right, Greg?

What a coward.
>
> Kane couldn't empathize with your big toe.

Mmmm...I've never heard of that being done, nor there being any need.

Since I did not mention empathy, rapport, or pretense, and YOU inserted
into the thread I'd have to say again, you are a liar.

> But he's obsessed with manipulating people to serve his ends.

Really? Fascinating. What would my ends being served and who are the
people doing this service?


> His "ethical and moral" ends justify any means, in his mind.

You and Doan have collaborated in a lie by creative cutting and snipping
(abortion) of attributed remarks.

I asked him if he was brave enough to post the actual account by me of
what happened.

Obviously he likes his concocted story built on removing context by
isolating one word or sentence.

Obviously you, another person of low moral character are afraid to
actually review the incident he's referring to.

Aren't you Greg?

Feel free to find it, post it, and let everyone see it. If you do not
post it in full though, we'll know you have decided to remain a coward,
and a moral cretin, as always. And as Doan.

0:->

--
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin (or someone else)

[Doan]

On Fri, 6 Oct 2006, 0:-> wrote:

> Greegor wrote:
> > Doan wrote > And how many have you abused, Kaneo?
> >
> > Kane wrote > You haven't answered my question. I've abused none.
> >
> > Doan wrote > Then you are a liar. Did you said you crossed the line?
> >
> > I recall also that Kane said he had crossed the line.
>
> Did I claim I hadn't?
>
So you have abused your kid!

> On the contrary I said I did. So you are again lying, Greg.

Hihihi! But you said you abused none! Who's the liar here?

> >
> > Perhaps now he will claim that was an ethical or moral lie
> > intended to build rapport, pretending to empathize.
>
> What lie? I invited Doan to post the exchange between us regarding this
> event and he has seen fit to prove how immoral he actually is by
> refusing to do so.
>
No need. You just admitted you went over the line and abused your kid.

> I left it up to HIM to be honest and let the readers decide.
>
Hihihi! You just proved that I was right in saying you are a liar!

> According to the spanking proponents here it would not have even
> approached "abuse."
>
Hahaha! According to LaVonne, she wasn't abused!

> YOU are not interested in the truth, simply joining with you little pack
> of hyenas, isn't that right, Greg?
>
And you keep on lying!

> What a coward.

What a STUPID LIAR you are.

AF

[[email protected]]

Greegor wrote:
> Doan wrote > And how many have you abused, Kaneo?
>
> Kane wrote > You haven't answered my question. I've abused none.
>
> Doan wrote > Then you are a liar. Did you said you crossed the line?
>
> I recall also that Kane said he had crossed the line.
>
> Perhaps now he will claim that was an ethical or moral lie
> intended to build rapport, pretending to empathize.
>
> Kane couldn't empathize with your big toe.
>
> But he's obsessed with manipulating people to serve his ends.
> His "ethical and moral" ends justify any means, in his mind.

It's funny when he said LaVonne was abused and then LaVonne said no,
she wasn't
abused.

AF

[0:->]

Doan wrote:
> On Fri, 6 Oct 2006, 0:-> wrote:
>
>> Greegor wrote:
>>> Doan wrote > And how many have you abused, Kaneo?
>>>
>>> Kane wrote > You haven't answered my question. I've abused none.
>>>
>>> Doan wrote > Then you are a liar. Did you said you crossed the line?
>>>
>>> I recall also that Kane said he had crossed the line.
>> Did I claim I hadn't?
>>
> So you have abused your kid!
>
>> On the contrary I said I did. So you are again lying, Greg.
>
> Hihihi! But you said you abused none! Who's the liar here?
>
>>> Perhaps now he will claim that was an ethical or moral lie
>>> intended to build rapport, pretending to empathize.
>> What lie? I invited Doan to post the exchange between us regarding this
>> event and he has seen fit to prove how immoral he actually is by
>> refusing to do so.
>>
> No need. You just admitted you went over the line and abused your kid.
>
>> I left it up to HIM to be honest and let the readers decide.
>>
> Hihihi! You just proved that I was right in saying you are a liar!
>
>> According to the spanking proponents here it would not have even
>> approached "abuse."
>>
> Hahaha! According to LaVonne, she wasn't abused!
>
>> YOU are not interested in the truth, simply joining with you little pack
>> of hyenas, isn't that right, Greg?
>>
> And you keep on lying!
>
>> What a coward.
>
> What a STUPID LIAR you are.

I noticed you posted a link to the thread were this was discussed
originally. 0:->

What's the matter, you afraid to post it where people can see it in full?

>
> AF
>
R R R R ...

--
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin (or someone else)

[Doan]

On Fri, 6 Oct 2006, 0:-> wrote:

> Doan wrote:
> > On Fri, 6 Oct 2006, 0:-> wrote:
> >
> >> Greegor wrote:
> >>> Doan wrote > And how many have you abused, Kaneo?
> >>>
> >>> Kane wrote > You haven't answered my question. I've abused none.
> >>>
> >>> Doan wrote > Then you are a liar. Did you said you crossed the line?
> >>>
> >>> I recall also that Kane said he had crossed the line.
> >> Did I claim I hadn't?
> >>
> > So you have abused your kid!
> >
> >> On the contrary I said I did. So you are again lying, Greg.
> >
> > Hihihi! But you said you abused none! Who's the liar here?
> >
> >>> Perhaps now he will claim that was an ethical or moral lie
> >>> intended to build rapport, pretending to empathize.
> >> What lie? I invited Doan to post the exchange between us regarding this
> >> event and he has seen fit to prove how immoral he actually is by
> >> refusing to do so.
> >>
> > No need. You just admitted you went over the line and abused your kid.
> >
> >> I left it up to HIM to be honest and let the readers decide.
> >>
> > Hihihi! You just proved that I was right in saying you are a liar!
> >
> >> According to the spanking proponents here it would not have even
> >> approached "abuse."
> >>
> > Hahaha! According to LaVonne, she wasn't abused!
> >
> >> YOU are not interested in the truth, simply joining with you little pack
> >> of hyenas, isn't that right, Greg?
> >>
> > And you keep on lying!
> >
> >> What a coward.
> >
> > What a STUPID LIAR you are.
>
> I noticed you posted a link to the thread were this was discussed
> originally. 0:->

What link did I posted, STUPID LIAR?

> What's the matter, you afraid to post it where people can see it in full?
>
The question should be why didn't you? ;-)

AF