Spanking ban abandoned

[0:->]

....stay tuned, however... it won't be long now.


http://www.sacbee.com/102/story/127398.html

Spanking ban abandoned
By Jim Sanders - Bee Capitol Bureau
Published 9:52 am PST Thursday, February 22, 2007

The California Legislature won't be cracking down on spanking after
all.

Assemblywoman Sally Lieber has abandoned her plans to push for a
legislative prohibition on parents spanking their children under age
4.

Lieber, D-Mountain View, will introduce a bill Thursday morning that
will target the use of physical force on children, but not spanking,
an aide said.

The measure proposes a "rebuttable presumption" that certain acts
against children under 18 are unjustifiable, including throwing,
kicking or hitting them with a cord or other instrument.

For children younger than four, Lieber's bill will target vigorous
shaking and the act of hitting or slapping on the head or face.

Judges could impose penalties ranging up to a misdemeanor, subject to
a maximum one-year jail term and $1,000 fine.

Lieber's bill also would allow judges to require violators to attend
parenting classes.

[Doan]

Poor anti-spanking zealotS... they can't seem to get a break. ;-)

Doan


On 22 Feb 2007, 0:-> wrote:

> ...stay tuned, however... it won't be long now.
>
>
> http://www.sacbee.com/102/story/127398.html
>
> Spanking ban abandoned
> By Jim Sanders - Bee Capitol Bureau
> Published 9:52 am PST Thursday, February 22, 2007
>
> The California Legislature won't be cracking down on spanking after
> all.
>
> Assemblywoman Sally Lieber has abandoned her plans to push for a
> legislative prohibition on parents spanking their children under age
> 4.
>
> Lieber, D-Mountain View, will introduce a bill Thursday morning that
> will target the use of physical force on children, but not spanking,
> an aide said.
>
> The measure proposes a "rebuttable presumption" that certain acts
> against children under 18 are unjustifiable, including throwing,
> kicking or hitting them with a cord or other instrument.
>
> For children younger than four, Lieber's bill will target vigorous
> shaking and the act of hitting or slapping on the head or face.
>
> Judges could impose penalties ranging up to a misdemeanor, subject to
> a maximum one-year jail term and $1,000 fine.
>
> Lieber's bill also would allow judges to require violators to attend
> parenting classes.
>
>

[0:->]

On Feb 22, 4:08 pm, Doan > wrote:
> Poor anti-spanking zealotS... they can't seem to get a break. ;-)

Just a few years ago no one would even consider presenting such an
idea.

Canada, for instance, changed their laws to make spanking nearly
impossible now. And knowing the Brits, and Canadians, and their
political thinking, I can assure you this was but a step to a total
ban.

Not only do we get a break, we are going to break this evil of hitting
children and claiming it's for their own good.

It's your poor spanking enthusiasts that have lost, Doan.

As surely as women's sufferage and and end to slavery and child labor
there is an end in sight to this evil.

Europe did it. So will we.

You are, as usual, whistling past the graveyard, about all you've got
left..."Hihihi!"

0:-]

>
> Doan
>
> On 22 Feb 2007, 0:-> wrote:
>
> > ...stay tuned, however... it won't be long now.
>
> >http://www.sacbee.com/102/story/127398.html
>
> > Spanking ban abandoned
> > By Jim Sanders - Bee Capitol Bureau
> > Published 9:52 am PST Thursday, February 22, 2007
>
> > The California Legislature won't be cracking down on spanking after
> > all.
>
> > Assemblywoman Sally Lieber has abandoned her plans to push for a
> > legislative prohibition on parents spanking their children under age
> > 4.
>
> > Lieber, D-Mountain View, will introduce a bill Thursday morning that
> > will target the use of physical force on children, but not spanking,
> > an aide said.
>
> > The measure proposes a "rebuttable presumption" that certain acts
> > against children under 18 are unjustifiable, including throwing,
> > kicking or hitting them with a cord or other instrument.
>
> > For children younger than four, Lieber's bill will target vigorous
> > shaking and the act of hitting or slapping on the head or face.
>
> > Judges could impose penalties ranging up to a misdemeanor, subject to
> > a maximum one-year jail term and $1,000 fine.
>
> > Lieber's bill also would allow judges to require violators to attend
> > parenting classes.

[Doan]

On 22 Feb 2007, 0:-> wrote:

> On Feb 22, 4:08 pm, Doan > wrote:
> > Poor anti-spanking zealotS... they can't seem to get a break. ;-)
>
> Just a few years ago no one would even consider presenting such an
> idea.
>
They did, STUPID! They tried it in OAKLAND and failed!

> Canada, for instance, changed their laws to make spanking nearly
> impossible now. And knowing the Brits, and Canadians, and their
> political thinking, I can assure you this was but a step to a total
> ban.
>
Yup! Anytime now. ;-)

> Not only do we get a break, we are going to break this evil of hitting
> children and claiming it's for their own good.
>
> It's your poor spanking enthusiasts that have lost, Doan.
>
Hihihi! You sure have a weird understanding of "lost"!

> As surely as women's sufferage and and end to slavery and child labor
> there is an end in sight to this evil.
>
> Europe did it. So will we.
>
Anytime time now, Kane!

> You are, as usual, whistling past the graveyard, about all you've got
> left..."Hihihi!"
>
Not only I am whistling past the graveyard of the anti-spanking zealotS,
I've also watered their grave! Hihihi!

> 0:-]
>
> >
> > Doan
> >
> > On 22 Feb 2007, 0:-> wrote:
> >
> > > ...stay tuned, however... it won't be long now.
> >
> > >http://www.sacbee.com/102/story/127398.html
> >
> > > Spanking ban abandoned
> > > By Jim Sanders - Bee Capitol Bureau
> > > Published 9:52 am PST Thursday, February 22, 2007
> >
> > > The California Legislature won't be cracking down on spanking after
> > > all.
> >
> > > Assemblywoman Sally Lieber has abandoned her plans to push for a
> > > legislative prohibition on parents spanking their children under age
> > > 4.
> >
> > > Lieber, D-Mountain View, will introduce a bill Thursday morning that
> > > will target the use of physical force on children, but not spanking,
> > > an aide said.
> >
> > > The measure proposes a "rebuttable presumption" that certain acts
> > > against children under 18 are unjustifiable, including throwing,
> > > kicking or hitting them with a cord or other instrument.
> >
> > > For children younger than four, Lieber's bill will target vigorous
> > > shaking and the act of hitting or slapping on the head or face.
> >
> > > Judges could impose penalties ranging up to a misdemeanor, subject to
> > > a maximum one-year jail term and $1,000 fine.
> >
> > > Lieber's bill also would allow judges to require violators to attend
> > > parenting classes.
>
>
>

[0:->]

On Feb 23, 10:13 am, Doan > wrote:
> On 22 Feb 2007, 0:-> wrote:
>
> > On Feb 22, 4:08 pm, Doan > wrote:
> > > Poor anti-spanking zealotS... they can't seem to get a break. ;-)
>
> > Just a few years ago no one would even consider presenting such an
> > idea.
>
> They did, STUPID! They tried it in OAKLAND and failed!

Yep, and we will keep doing it until it passes.

You seem to forget that the schools have led the way.

> > Canada, for instance, changed their laws to make spanking nearly
> > impossible now. And knowing the Brits, and Canadians, and their
> > political thinking, I can assure you this was but a step to a total
> > ban.
>
> Yup! Anytime now. ;-)

How long is "anytime?"

0:-]


>
> > Not only do we get a break, we are going to break this evil of hitting
> > children and claiming it's for their own good.
>
> > It's your poor spanking enthusiasts that have lost, Doan.
>
> Hihihi! You sure have a weird understanding of "lost"!

Nope. The evidence is overwhelming. Look at the data for the past 20
years or so. Fewer and fewer parents spanking less and less, and more
and more of them admitting it is the pressure of the public opinion
that discourages them from spanking.

Hell, even the outspoken spankers suggest HIDING THEIR ACT.

Tell you anything, stupid?

> > As surely as women's sufferage and and end to slavery and child labor
> > there is an end in sight to this evil.
>
> > Europe did it. So will we.
>
> Anytime time now, Kane!

Yep. Nice to see you agree.

And considering the progress, I'd say we are closing in on it very
rapidly.

20 years ago there was no such thing as a movement to stop spanking or
any kind of world wide notice of it to speak of. Nothing public. Today
it's a UN mandate, stupid.

> > You are, as usual, whistling past the graveyard, about all you've got
> > left..."Hihihi!"
>
> Not only I am whistling past the graveyard of the anti-spanking zealotS,
> I've also watered their grave! Hihihi!

No you haven't. You know perfectly well you nuts are doomed.

That's why you and others like you are so frantic.

0;-]


>
> > 0:-]
>
> > > Doan
>
> > > On 22 Feb 2007, 0:-> wrote:
>
> > > > ...stay tuned, however... it won't be long now.
>
> > > >http://www.sacbee.com/102/story/127398.html
>
> > > > Spanking ban abandoned
> > > > By Jim Sanders - Bee Capitol Bureau
> > > > Published 9:52 am PST Thursday, February 22, 2007
>
> > > > The California Legislature won't be cracking down on spanking after
> > > > all.
>
> > > > Assemblywoman Sally Lieber has abandoned her plans to push for a
> > > > legislative prohibition on parents spanking their children under age
> > > > 4.
>
> > > > Lieber, D-Mountain View, will introduce a bill Thursday morning that
> > > > will target the use of physical force on children, but not spanking,
> > > > an aide said.
>
> > > > The measure proposes a "rebuttable presumption" that certain acts
> > > > against children under 18 are unjustifiable, including throwing,
> > > > kicking or hitting them with a cord or other instrument.
>
> > > > For children younger than four, Lieber's bill will target vigorous
> > > > shaking and the act of hitting or slapping on the head or face.
>
> > > > Judges could impose penalties ranging up to a misdemeanor, subject to
> > > > a maximum one-year jail term and $1,000 fine.
>
> > > > Lieber's bill also would allow judges to require violators to attend
> > > > parenting classes.

[Doan]

On 23 Feb 2007, 0:-> wrote:

> On Feb 23, 10:13 am, Doan > wrote:
> > On 22 Feb 2007, 0:-> wrote:
> >
> > > On Feb 22, 4:08 pm, Doan > wrote:
> > > > Poor anti-spanking zealotS... they can't seem to get a break. ;-)
> >
> > > Just a few years ago no one would even consider presenting such an
> > > idea.
> >
> > They did, STUPID! They tried it in OAKLAND and failed!
>
> Yep, and we will keep doing it until it passes.
>
But you said "Just a few years ago no one would even consider..."
Why are you such a STUPID LIAR?

> You seem to forget that the schools have led the way.
>
Have you seen how the schools performed lately? ;-)

> > > Canada, for instance, changed their laws to make spanking nearly
> > > impossible now. And knowing the Brits, and Canadians, and their
> > > political thinking, I can assure you this was but a step to a total
> > > ban.
> >
> > Yup! Anytime now. ;-)
>
> How long is "anytime?"
>
Pretty soon now! ;-)

> 0:-]
>
>
> >
> > > Not only do we get a break, we are going to break this evil of hitting
> > > children and claiming it's for their own good.
> >
> > > It's your poor spanking enthusiasts that have lost, Doan.
> >
> > Hihihi! You sure have a weird understanding of "lost"!
>
> Nope. The evidence is overwhelming. Look at the data for the past 20
> years or so. Fewer and fewer parents spanking less and less, and more
> and more of them admitting it is the pressure of the public opinion
> that discourages them from spanking.
>
It's still in the 90%+, STUPID!

> Hell, even the outspoken spankers suggest HIDING THEIR ACT.
>
> Tell you anything, stupid?
>
That you are STUPID! ;-)

> > > As surely as women's sufferage and and end to slavery and child labor
> > > there is an end in sight to this evil.
> >
> > > Europe did it. So will we.
> >
> > Anytime time now, Kane!
>
> Yep. Nice to see you agree.
>
Told you that you are STUPID!

> And considering the progress, I'd say we are closing in on it very
> rapidly.
>
Yup! I say in just 37 days!

> 20 years ago there was no such thing as a movement to stop spanking or
> any kind of world wide notice of it to speak of. Nothing public. Today
> it's a UN mandate, stupid.
>
Hahaha! UN mandate???

> > > You are, as usual, whistling past the graveyard, about all you've got
> > > left..."Hihihi!"
> >
> > Not only I am whistling past the graveyard of the anti-spanking zealotS,
> > I've also watered their grave! Hihihi!
>
> No you haven't. You know perfectly well you nuts are doomed.
>
Hihihi! That is why YOU ARE STUPID!

> That's why you and others like you are so frantic.
>
Hahaha!

> 0;-]
>
>
> >
> > > 0:-]
> >
> > > > Doan
> >
> > > > On 22 Feb 2007, 0:-> wrote:
> >
> > > > > ...stay tuned, however... it won't be long now.
> >
> > > > >http://www.sacbee.com/102/story/127398.html
> >
> > > > > Spanking ban abandoned
> > > > > By Jim Sanders - Bee Capitol Bureau
> > > > > Published 9:52 am PST Thursday, February 22, 2007
> >
> > > > > The California Legislature won't be cracking down on spanking after
> > > > > all.
> >
> > > > > Assemblywoman Sally Lieber has abandoned her plans to push for a
> > > > > legislative prohibition on parents spanking their children under age
> > > > > 4.
> >
> > > > > Lieber, D-Mountain View, will introduce a bill Thursday morning that
> > > > > will target the use of physical force on children, but not spanking,
> > > > > an aide said.
> >
> > > > > The measure proposes a "rebuttable presumption" that certain acts
> > > > > against children under 18 are unjustifiable, including throwing,
> > > > > kicking or hitting them with a cord or other instrument.
> >
> > > > > For children younger than four, Lieber's bill will target vigorous
> > > > > shaking and the act of hitting or slapping on the head or face.
> >
> > > > > Judges could impose penalties ranging up to a misdemeanor, subject to
> > > > > a maximum one-year jail term and $1,000 fine.
> >
> > > > > Lieber's bill also would allow judges to require violators to attend
> > > > > parenting classes.
>
>
>

[0:-]]

On Fri, 23 Feb 2007 15:05:22 -0800, Doan > wrote:

>On 23 Feb 2007, 0:-> wrote:
>
>> On Feb 23, 10:13 am, Doan > wrote:
>> > On 22 Feb 2007, 0:-> wrote:
>> >
>> > > On Feb 22, 4:08 pm, Doan > wrote:
>> > > > Poor anti-spanking zealotS... they can't seem to get a break. ;-)
>> >
>> > > Just a few years ago no one would even consider presenting such an
>> > > idea.
>> >
>> > They did, STUPID! They tried it in OAKLAND and failed!
>>
>> Yep, and we will keep doing it until it passes.
>>
>But you said "Just a few years ago no one would even consider..."
>Why are you such a STUPID LIAR?

That is what I said. How does that constitute a lie?

You haven't establish how many "a few" years is, Doan.

I might have meant 20 or thirty. You didn't ask, you assumed, like the
ass you most obviously are.
>
>> You seem to forget that the schools have led the way.
>>
>Have you seen how the schools performed lately? ;-)

Have you actually done the research? I have.

Where spanking is banned they have done better than were spanking is
not banned and it is used.

>> > > Canada, for instance, changed their laws to make spanking nearly
>> > > impossible now. And knowing the Brits, and Canadians, and their
>> > > political thinking, I can assure you this was but a step to a total
>> > > ban.
>> >
>> > Yup! Anytime now. ;-)
>>
>> How long is "anytime?"
>>
>Pretty soon now! ;-)

Since I'm not prone to your foolishness and ducking issues, I know
what I can predict accurately and when I cannot. Hence I'm not going
to give a precise number on an issue that has little precision in it.

I said in a recent thread you quickly ducked out of after a few of
your smart ass responses to someone that comes from YOUR side of the
argument, stupid, that this will be settled as it was with slavery,
child labor, and women's sufferage, as a moral issue, not a scientific
one.

That is my point.

Each time these laws are suggested we test the public. And we see
again and again they are moving more toward an end to spanking than
any increase of it.

All you have to do is look at the numbers and at history.

Beatings that left children bloody were once legal and in fact
supported by whole societies...this is NO LONGER TRUE for those
societies.

Take Sweden, for instance, where bloody beatings were common.

Or Germany.

In fact, nearly all European nations.

Take our own country.

It's not a long step, Doan, to a total ban.






>
>> 0:-]
>>
>>
>> >
>> > > Not only do we get a break, we are going to break this evil of hitting
>> > > children and claiming it's for their own good.
>> >
>> > > It's your poor spanking enthusiasts that have lost, Doan.
>> >
>> > Hihihi! You sure have a weird understanding of "lost"!
>>
>> Nope. The evidence is overwhelming. Look at the data for the past 20
>> years or so. Fewer and fewer parents spanking less and less, and more
>> and more of them admitting it is the pressure of the public opinion
>> that discourages them from spanking.
>>
>It's still in the 90%+, STUPID!

Again with the contextual deceit, Doan?

While 90% may still spank...toddlers, they stop sooner, and use
objects less, and for older children it's approaching the lowest
numbers of all time since records have been kept.

You are simply lying again, Doan.

>> Hell, even the outspoken spankers suggest HIDING THEIR ACT.
>>
>> Tell you anything, stupid?
>>
>That you are STUPID! ;-)

Oh, based on observing that this is true...that people that spank give
each other advice to hide the act?

>> > > As surely as women's sufferage and and end to slavery and child labor
>> > > there is an end in sight to this evil.
>> >
>> > > Europe did it. So will we.
>> >
>> > Anytime time now, Kane!
>>
>> Yep. Nice to see you agree.
>>
>Told you that you are STUPID!

Reduced to nothing but ad hom, I see.

>> And considering the progress, I'd say we are closing in on it very
>> rapidly.
>>
>Yup! I say in just 37 days!

I'll mark the calendar.

>> 20 years ago there was no such thing as a movement to stop spanking or
>> any kind of world wide notice of it to speak of. Nothing public. Today
>> it's a UN mandate, stupid.
>>
>Hahaha! UN mandate???

Yep.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=UN+Mandate+%22corporal+punishment+%22on+the+chil d+and+child+abuse&btnG=Search

>> > > You are, as usual, whistling past the graveyard, about all you've got
>> > > left..."Hihihi!"
>> >
>> > Not only I am whistling past the graveyard of the anti-spanking zealotS,
>> > I've also watered their grave! Hihihi!
>>
>> No you haven't. You know perfectly well you nuts are doomed.
>>
>Hihihi! That is why YOU ARE STUPID!

Because you nuts are doomed in your cause of keeping hitting of
children legal?

>> That's why you and others like you are so frantic.
>>
>Hahaha!

No, Doan, when you are nervious, frightened, and lying, it's "Hihihi!"
remember?

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=UN+Mandate+%22corporal+punishment+%22on+the+chil d+and+child+abuse&btnG=Search

And there is much more out there that 20 or 30 years ago would never
have even been brought up in the US.

Be afraid, Doan. Be very afraid.

R RRRR R R R R R OOOOooooOOOOooooOOOOOooo000000000000



>> 0;-]
>>
>>
>> >
>> > > 0:-]
>> >
>> > > > Doan
>> >
>> > > > On 22 Feb 2007, 0:-> wrote:
>> >
>> > > > > ...stay tuned, however... it won't be long now.
>> >
>> > > > >http://www.sacbee.com/102/story/127398.html
>> >
>> > > > > Spanking ban abandoned
>> > > > > By Jim Sanders - Bee Capitol Bureau
>> > > > > Published 9:52 am PST Thursday, February 22, 2007
>> >
>> > > > > The California Legislature won't be cracking down on spanking after
>> > > > > all.
>> >
>> > > > > Assemblywoman Sally Lieber has abandoned her plans to push for a
>> > > > > legislative prohibition on parents spanking their children under age
>> > > > > 4.
>> >
>> > > > > Lieber, D-Mountain View, will introduce a bill Thursday morning that
>> > > > > will target the use of physical force on children, but not spanking,
>> > > > > an aide said.
>> >
>> > > > > The measure proposes a "rebuttable presumption" that certain acts
>> > > > > against children under 18 are unjustifiable, including throwing,
>> > > > > kicking or hitting them with a cord or other instrument.
>> >
>> > > > > For children younger than four, Lieber's bill will target vigorous
>> > > > > shaking and the act of hitting or slapping on the head or face.
>> >
>> > > > > Judges could impose penalties ranging up to a misdemeanor, subject to
>> > > > > a maximum one-year jail term and $1,000 fine.
>> >
>> > > > > Lieber's bill also would allow judges to require violators to attend
>> > > > > parenting classes.
>>
>>
>>

[Doan]

On Fri, 23 Feb 2007, 0:-] wrote:

> On Fri, 23 Feb 2007 15:05:22 -0800, Doan > wrote:
>
> >On 23 Feb 2007, 0:-> wrote:
> >
> >> On Feb 23, 10:13 am, Doan > wrote:
> >> > On 22 Feb 2007, 0:-> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > On Feb 22, 4:08 pm, Doan > wrote:
> >> > > > Poor anti-spanking zealotS... they can't seem to get a break. ;-)
> >> >
> >> > > Just a few years ago no one would even consider presenting such an
> >> > > idea.
> >> >
> >> > They did, STUPID! They tried it in OAKLAND and failed!
> >>
> >> Yep, and we will keep doing it until it passes.
> >>
> >But you said "Just a few years ago no one would even consider..."
> >Why are you such a STUPID LIAR?
>
> That is what I said. How does that constitute a lie?
>
> You haven't establish how many "a few" years is, Doan.
>
> I might have meant 20 or thirty. You didn't ask, you assumed, like the
> ass you most obviously are.

Hihihi! It depends on what the definition of "is" is, right Kane?

> >
> >> You seem to forget that the schools have led the way.
> >>
> >Have you seen how the schools performed lately? ;-)
>
> Have you actually done the research? I have.
>
Oh, I forgot! You said you were a "published researcher"! ;-)

> Where spanking is banned they have done better than were spanking is
> not banned and it is used.
>
I like to see the research, Kane. Give me a before and after picture
please. I don't think they banned CP in schools back in the 50's.
Are you saying the schools are better now than then?

> >> > > Canada, for instance, changed their laws to make spanking nearly
> >> > > impossible now. And knowing the Brits, and Canadians, and their
> >> > > political thinking, I can assure you this was but a step to a total
> >> > > ban.
> >> >
> >> > Yup! Anytime now. ;-)
> >>
> >> How long is "anytime?"
> >>
> >Pretty soon now! ;-)
>
> Since I'm not prone to your foolishness and ducking issues, I know
> what I can predict accurately and when I cannot. Hence I'm not going
> to give a precise number on an issue that has little precision in it.
>
> I said in a recent thread you quickly ducked out of after a few of
> your smart ass responses to someone that comes from YOUR side of the
> argument, stupid, that this will be settled as it was with slavery,
> child labor, and women's sufferage, as a moral issue, not a scientific
> one.
>
> That is my point.
>
Yup! Your STUPIDITY shows! ;-)

> Each time these laws are suggested we test the public. And we see
> again and again they are moving more toward an end to spanking than
> any increase of it.
>
> All you have to do is look at the numbers and at history.
>
> Beatings that left children bloody were once legal and in fact
> supported by whole societies...this is NO LONGER TRUE for those
> societies.
>
Show me the laws, Kane?

> Take Sweden, for instance, where bloody beatings were common.
>
Really?

> Or Germany.
>
> In fact, nearly all European nations.
>
Really? Show me the laws, Kane.

> Take our own country.
>
> It's not a long step, Doan, to a total ban.
>
Yup! In 37 days!


>
>
>
>
>
> >
> >> 0:-]
> >>
> >>
> >> >
> >> > > Not only do we get a break, we are going to break this evil of hitting
> >> > > children and claiming it's for their own good.
> >> >
> >> > > It's your poor spanking enthusiasts that have lost, Doan.
> >> >
> >> > Hihihi! You sure have a weird understanding of "lost"!
> >>
> >> Nope. The evidence is overwhelming. Look at the data for the past 20
> >> years or so. Fewer and fewer parents spanking less and less, and more
> >> and more of them admitting it is the pressure of the public opinion
> >> that discourages them from spanking.
> >>
> >It's still in the 90%+, STUPID!
>
> Again with the contextual deceit, Doan?
>
> While 90% may still spank...toddlers, they stop sooner, and use
> objects less, and for older children it's approaching the lowest
> numbers of all time since records have been kept.
>
> You are simply lying again, Doan.
>
> >> Hell, even the outspoken spankers suggest HIDING THEIR ACT.
> >>
> >> Tell you anything, stupid?
> >>
> >That you are STUPID! ;-)
>
> Oh, based on observing that this is true...that people that spank give
> each other advice to hide the act?
>
> >> > > As surely as women's sufferage and and end to slavery and child labor
> >> > > there is an end in sight to this evil.
> >> >
> >> > > Europe did it. So will we.
> >> >
> >> > Anytime time now, Kane!
> >>
> >> Yep. Nice to see you agree.
> >>
> >Told you that you are STUPID!
>
> Reduced to nothing but ad hom, I see.
>
> >> And considering the progress, I'd say we are closing in on it very
> >> rapidly.
> >>
> >Yup! I say in just 37 days!
>
> I'll mark the calendar.
>
> >> 20 years ago there was no such thing as a movement to stop spanking or
> >> any kind of world wide notice of it to speak of. Nothing public. Today
> >> it's a UN mandate, stupid.
> >>
> >Hahaha! UN mandate???
>
> Yep.
>
> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=UN+Mandate+%22corporal+punishment+%22on+the+chil d+and+child+abuse&btnG=Search
>
> >> > > You are, as usual, whistling past the graveyard, about all you've got
> >> > > left..."Hihihi!"
> >> >
> >> > Not only I am whistling past the graveyard of the anti-spanking zealotS,
> >> > I've also watered their grave! Hihihi!
> >>
> >> No you haven't. You know perfectly well you nuts are doomed.
> >>
> >Hihihi! That is why YOU ARE STUPID!
>
> Because you nuts are doomed in your cause of keeping hitting of
> children legal?
>
> >> That's why you and others like you are so frantic.
> >>
> >Hahaha!
>
> No, Doan, when you are nervious, frightened, and lying, it's "Hihihi!"
> remember?
>
> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=UN+Mandate+%22corporal+punishment+%22on+the+chil d+and+child+abuse&btnG=Search
>
> And there is much more out there that 20 or 30 years ago would never
> have even been brought up in the US.
>
> Be afraid, Doan. Be very afraid.
>
> R RRRR R R R R R OOOOooooOOOOooooOOOOOooo000000000000
>
>
>
> >> 0;-]
> >>
> >>
> >> >
> >> > > 0:-]
> >> >
> >> > > > Doan
> >> >
> >> > > > On 22 Feb 2007, 0:-> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > > > ...stay tuned, however... it won't be long now.
> >> >
> >> > > > >http://www.sacbee.com/102/story/127398.html
> >> >
> >> > > > > Spanking ban abandoned
> >> > > > > By Jim Sanders - Bee Capitol Bureau
> >> > > > > Published 9:52 am PST Thursday, February 22, 2007
> >> >
> >> > > > > The California Legislature won't be cracking down on spanking after
> >> > > > > all.
> >> >
> >> > > > > Assemblywoman Sally Lieber has abandoned her plans to push for a
> >> > > > > legislative prohibition on parents spanking their children under age
> >> > > > > 4.
> >> >
> >> > > > > Lieber, D-Mountain View, will introduce a bill Thursday morning that
> >> > > > > will target the use of physical force on children, but not spanking,
> >> > > > > an aide said.
> >> >
> >> > > > > The measure proposes a "rebuttable presumption" that certain acts
> >> > > > > against children under 18 are unjustifiable, including throwing,
> >> > > > > kicking or hitting them with a cord or other instrument.
> >> >
> >> > > > > For children younger than four, Lieber's bill will target vigorous
> >> > > > > shaking and the act of hitting or slapping on the head or face.
> >> >
> >> > > > > Judges could impose penalties ranging up to a misdemeanor, subject to
> >> > > > > a maximum one-year jail term and $1,000 fine.
> >> >
> >> > > > > Lieber's bill also would allow judges to require violators to attend
> >> > > > > parenting classes.
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>

[0:-]]

On Fri, 23 Feb 2007 16:57:24 -0800, Doan > wrote:

>On Fri, 23 Feb 2007, 0:-] wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 23 Feb 2007 15:05:22 -0800, Doan > wrote:
>>
>> >On 23 Feb 2007, 0:-> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Feb 23, 10:13 am, Doan > wrote:
>> >> > On 22 Feb 2007, 0:-> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > > On Feb 22, 4:08 pm, Doan > wrote:
>> >> > > > Poor anti-spanking zealotS... they can't seem to get a break. ;-)
>> >> >
>> >> > > Just a few years ago no one would even consider presenting such an
>> >> > > idea.
>> >> >
>> >> > They did, STUPID! They tried it in OAKLAND and failed!
>> >>
>> >> Yep, and we will keep doing it until it passes.
>> >>
>> >But you said "Just a few years ago no one would even consider..."
>> >Why are you such a STUPID LIAR?
>>
>> That is what I said. How does that constitute a lie?
>>
>> You haven't establish how many "a few" years is, Doan.
>>
>> I might have meant 20 or thirty. You didn't ask, you assumed, like the
>> ass you most obviously are.
>
>Hihihi! It depends on what the definition of "is" is, right Kane?

Nope. It's what "a few" means. Very different.

>> >
>> >> You seem to forget that the schools have led the way.
>> >>
>> >Have you seen how the schools performed lately? ;-)
>>
>> Have you actually done the research? I have.
>>
>Oh, I forgot! You said you were a "published researcher"! ;-)

I am. I am not published on research. I simply research to publish.

Not in peer reviewed journals, and never made the claim, so you are
making a lying ass of yourself again, Doan.

>
>> Where spanking is banned they have done better than were spanking is
>> not banned and it is used.
>>
>I like to see the research, Kane. Give me a before and after picture
>please. I don't think they banned CP in schools back in the 50's.

Nope. And you think the schools were doing a better job then, don't
you.

>Are you saying the schools are better now than then?

Yes. They are in fact over all.

Especially in states that have banned spanking.

>> >> > > Canada, for instance, changed their laws to make spanking nearly
>> >> > > impossible now. And knowing the Brits, and Canadians, and their
>> >> > > political thinking, I can assure you this was but a step to a total
>> >> > > ban.
>> >> >
>> >> > Yup! Anytime now. ;-)
>> >>
>> >> How long is "anytime?"
>> >>
>> >Pretty soon now! ;-)
>>
>> Since I'm not prone to your foolishness and ducking issues, I know
>> what I can predict accurately and when I cannot. Hence I'm not going
>> to give a precise number on an issue that has little precision in it.
>>
>> I said in a recent thread you quickly ducked out of after a few of
>> your smart ass responses to someone that comes from YOUR side of the
>> argument, stupid, that this will be settled as it was with slavery,
>> child labor, and women's sufferage, as a moral issue, not a scientific
>> one.
>>
>> That is my point.
>>
>Yup! Your STUPIDITY shows! ;-)

Yup, your inability to argue the point shows when you ad hom. Rather
than show some logical argument against mine. Nice going, stupid.

>> Each time these laws are suggested we test the public. And we see
>> again and again they are moving more toward an end to spanking than
>> any increase of it.
>>
>> All you have to do is look at the numbers and at history.
>>
>> Beatings that left children bloody were once legal and in fact
>> supported by whole societies...this is NO LONGER TRUE for those
>> societies.
>>
>Show me the laws, Kane?

Our own, Doan. As recent as last year.

>> Take Sweden, for instance, where bloody beatings were common.
>>
>Really?
>
>> Or Germany.
>>
>> In fact, nearly all European nations.
>>
>Really? Show me the laws, Kane.

Which laws, Doan?

If there was no law against it, it was legal. Stupid.

>> Take our own country.
>>
>> It's not a long step, Doan, to a total ban.
>>
>Yup! In 37 days!

I've marked my calendar, stupid little childish twit.




>
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >
>> >> 0:-]
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > > Not only do we get a break, we are going to break this evil of hitting
>> >> > > children and claiming it's for their own good.
>> >> >
>> >> > > It's your poor spanking enthusiasts that have lost, Doan.
>> >> >
>> >> > Hihihi! You sure have a weird understanding of "lost"!
>> >>
>> >> Nope. The evidence is overwhelming. Look at the data for the past 20
>> >> years or so. Fewer and fewer parents spanking less and less, and more
>> >> and more of them admitting it is the pressure of the public opinion
>> >> that discourages them from spanking.
>> >>
>> >It's still in the 90%+, STUPID!
>>
>> Again with the contextual deceit, Doan?
>>
>> While 90% may still spank...toddlers, they stop sooner, and use
>> objects less, and for older children it's approaching the lowest
>> numbers of all time since records have been kept.
>>
>> You are simply lying again, Doan.
>>
>> >> Hell, even the outspoken spankers suggest HIDING THEIR ACT.
>> >>
>> >> Tell you anything, stupid?
>> >>
>> >That you are STUPID! ;-)
>>
>> Oh, based on observing that this is true...that people that spank give
>> each other advice to hide the act?
>>
>> >> > > As surely as women's sufferage and and end to slavery and child labor
>> >> > > there is an end in sight to this evil.
>> >> >
>> >> > > Europe did it. So will we.
>> >> >
>> >> > Anytime time now, Kane!
>> >>
>> >> Yep. Nice to see you agree.
>> >>
>> >Told you that you are STUPID!
>>
>> Reduced to nothing but ad hom, I see.
>>
>> >> And considering the progress, I'd say we are closing in on it very
>> >> rapidly.
>> >>
>> >Yup! I say in just 37 days!
>>
>> I'll mark the calendar.
>>
>> >> 20 years ago there was no such thing as a movement to stop spanking or
>> >> any kind of world wide notice of it to speak of. Nothing public. Today
>> >> it's a UN mandate, stupid.
>> >>
>> >Hahaha! UN mandate???
>>
>> Yep.
>>
>> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=UN+Mandate+%22corporal+punishment+%22on+the+chil d+and+child+abuse&btnG=Search
>>
>> >> > > You are, as usual, whistling past the graveyard, about all you've got
>> >> > > left..."Hihihi!"
>> >> >
>> >> > Not only I am whistling past the graveyard of the anti-spanking zealotS,
>> >> > I've also watered their grave! Hihihi!
>> >>
>> >> No you haven't. You know perfectly well you nuts are doomed.
>> >>
>> >Hihihi! That is why YOU ARE STUPID!
>>
>> Because you nuts are doomed in your cause of keeping hitting of
>> children legal?
>>
>> >> That's why you and others like you are so frantic.
>> >>
>> >Hahaha!
>>
>> No, Doan, when you are nervious, frightened, and lying, it's "Hihihi!"
>> remember?
>>
>> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=UN+Mandate+%22corporal+punishment+%22on+the+chil d+and+child+abuse&btnG=Search
>>
>> And there is much more out there that 20 or 30 years ago would never
>> have even been brought up in the US.
>>
>> Be afraid, Doan. Be very afraid.
>>
>> R RRRR R R R R R OOOOooooOOOOooooOOOOOooo000000000000
>>
>>
>>
>> >> 0;-]
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > > 0:-]
>> >> >
>> >> > > > Doan
>> >> >
>> >> > > > On 22 Feb 2007, 0:-> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > > > > ...stay tuned, however... it won't be long now.
>> >> >
>> >> > > > >http://www.sacbee.com/102/story/127398.html
>> >> >
>> >> > > > > Spanking ban abandoned
>> >> > > > > By Jim Sanders - Bee Capitol Bureau
>> >> > > > > Published 9:52 am PST Thursday, February 22, 2007
>> >> >
>> >> > > > > The California Legislature won't be cracking down on spanking after
>> >> > > > > all.
>> >> >
>> >> > > > > Assemblywoman Sally Lieber has abandoned her plans to push for a
>> >> > > > > legislative prohibition on parents spanking their children under age
>> >> > > > > 4.
>> >> >
>> >> > > > > Lieber, D-Mountain View, will introduce a bill Thursday morning that
>> >> > > > > will target the use of physical force on children, but not spanking,
>> >> > > > > an aide said.
>> >> >
>> >> > > > > The measure proposes a "rebuttable presumption" that certain acts
>> >> > > > > against children under 18 are unjustifiable, including throwing,
>> >> > > > > kicking or hitting them with a cord or other instrument.
>> >> >
>> >> > > > > For children younger than four, Lieber's bill will target vigorous
>> >> > > > > shaking and the act of hitting or slapping on the head or face.
>> >> >
>> >> > > > > Judges could impose penalties ranging up to a misdemeanor, subject to
>> >> > > > > a maximum one-year jail term and $1,000 fine.
>> >> >
>> >> > > > > Lieber's bill also would allow judges to require violators to attend
>> >> > > > > parenting classes.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>>
>>

[Doan]

On Fri, 23 Feb 2007, 0:-] wrote:

> On Fri, 23 Feb 2007 16:57:24 -0800, Doan > wrote:
>
> >On Fri, 23 Feb 2007, 0:-] wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, 23 Feb 2007 15:05:22 -0800, Doan > wrote:
> >>
> >> >On 23 Feb 2007, 0:-> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> On Feb 23, 10:13 am, Doan > wrote:
> >> >> > On 22 Feb 2007, 0:-> wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > > On Feb 22, 4:08 pm, Doan > wrote:
> >> >> > > > Poor anti-spanking zealotS... they can't seem to get a break. ;-)
> >> >> >
> >> >> > > Just a few years ago no one would even consider presenting such an
> >> >> > > idea.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > They did, STUPID! They tried it in OAKLAND and failed!
> >> >>
> >> >> Yep, and we will keep doing it until it passes.
> >> >>
> >> >But you said "Just a few years ago no one would even consider..."
> >> >Why are you such a STUPID LIAR?
> >>
> >> That is what I said. How does that constitute a lie?
> >>
> >> You haven't establish how many "a few" years is, Doan.
> >>
> >> I might have meant 20 or thirty. You didn't ask, you assumed, like the
> >> ass you most obviously are.
> >
> >Hihihi! It depends on what the definition of "is" is, right Kane?
>
> Nope. It's what "a few" means. Very different.
>
Hihihi! So what "a few" means, Kane? 20 or 30 years?

> >> >
> >> >> You seem to forget that the schools have led the way.
> >> >>
> >> >Have you seen how the schools performed lately? ;-)
> >>
> >> Have you actually done the research? I have.
> >>
> >Oh, I forgot! You said you were a "published researcher"! ;-)
>
> I am. I am not published on research. I simply research to publish.
>
Hihihi! What a tangled mess you weaved!

> Not in peer reviewed journals, and never made the claim, so you are
> making a lying ass of yourself again, Doan.
>
I have said NOTHING about "peer reviewed journals" with regard to you so
the "lying ass" is YOU! Show me where I said you published anything
in a "peer reviewed journals", Kane!

> >
> >> Where spanking is banned they have done better than were spanking is
> >> not banned and it is used.
> >>
> >I like to see the research, Kane. Give me a before and after picture
> >please. I don't think they banned CP in schools back in the 50's.
>
> Nope. And you think the schools were doing a better job then, don't
> you.
>
Not in the California. It went from "First to WORST"!

> >Are you saying the schools are better now than then?
>
> Yes. They are in fact over all.
>
Then you are STUPID!

> Especially in states that have banned spanking.
>
Then you should look at California!

> >> >> > > Canada, for instance, changed their laws to make spanking nearly
> >> >> > > impossible now. And knowing the Brits, and Canadians, and their
> >> >> > > political thinking, I can assure you this was but a step to a total
> >> >> > > ban.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Yup! Anytime now. ;-)
> >> >>
> >> >> How long is "anytime?"
> >> >>
> >> >Pretty soon now! ;-)
> >>
> >> Since I'm not prone to your foolishness and ducking issues, I know
> >> what I can predict accurately and when I cannot. Hence I'm not going
> >> to give a precise number on an issue that has little precision in it.
> >>
> >> I said in a recent thread you quickly ducked out of after a few of
> >> your smart ass responses to someone that comes from YOUR side of the
> >> argument, stupid, that this will be settled as it was with slavery,
> >> child labor, and women's sufferage, as a moral issue, not a scientific
> >> one.
> >>
> >> That is my point.
> >>
> >Yup! Your STUPIDITY shows! ;-)
>
> Yup, your inability to argue the point shows when you ad hom. Rather
> than show some logical argument against mine. Nice going, stupid.
>
Hihihi! The master at ad hom is you, Kane! Your STUPIDITY shows again!

> >> Each time these laws are suggested we test the public. And we see
> >> again and again they are moving more toward an end to spanking than
> >> any increase of it.
> >>
> >> All you have to do is look at the numbers and at history.
> >>
> >> Beatings that left children bloody were once legal and in fact
> >> supported by whole societies...this is NO LONGER TRUE for those
> >> societies.
> >>
> >Show me the laws, Kane?
>
> Our own, Doan. As recent as last year.
>
Show me!

> >> Take Sweden, for instance, where bloody beatings were common.
> >>
> >Really?
> >
> >> Or Germany.
> >>
> >> In fact, nearly all European nations.
> >>
> >Really? Show me the laws, Kane.
>
> Which laws, Doan?
>
The laws that allowed bloody beatings as you claimed!

> If there was no law against it, it was legal. Stupid.
>
Hihihi! THe proven STUPID LIAR is YOU, Kane!

> >> Take our own country.
> >>
> >> It's not a long step, Doan, to a total ban.
> >>
> >Yup! In 37 days!
>
> I've marked my calendar, stupid little childish twit.
>
Hihihi! More Ad hom, Kane? You are losing it! Hihihi!
>
>
>
> >
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> >
> >> >> 0:-]
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> > > Not only do we get a break, we are going to break this evil of hitting
> >> >> > > children and claiming it's for their own good.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > > It's your poor spanking enthusiasts that have lost, Doan.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Hihihi! You sure have a weird understanding of "lost"!
> >> >>
> >> >> Nope. The evidence is overwhelming. Look at the data for the past 20
> >> >> years or so. Fewer and fewer parents spanking less and less, and more
> >> >> and more of them admitting it is the pressure of the public opinion
> >> >> that discourages them from spanking.
> >> >>
> >> >It's still in the 90%+, STUPID!
> >>
> >> Again with the contextual deceit, Doan?
> >>
> >> While 90% may still spank...toddlers, they stop sooner, and use
> >> objects less, and for older children it's approaching the lowest
> >> numbers of all time since records have been kept.
> >>
> >> You are simply lying again, Doan.
> >>
> >> >> Hell, even the outspoken spankers suggest HIDING THEIR ACT.
> >> >>
> >> >> Tell you anything, stupid?
> >> >>
> >> >That you are STUPID! ;-)
> >>
> >> Oh, based on observing that this is true...that people that spank give
> >> each other advice to hide the act?
> >>
> >> >> > > As surely as women's sufferage and and end to slavery and child labor
> >> >> > > there is an end in sight to this evil.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > > Europe did it. So will we.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Anytime time now, Kane!
> >> >>
> >> >> Yep. Nice to see you agree.
> >> >>
> >> >Told you that you are STUPID!
> >>
> >> Reduced to nothing but ad hom, I see.
> >>
> >> >> And considering the progress, I'd say we are closing in on it very
> >> >> rapidly.
> >> >>
> >> >Yup! I say in just 37 days!
> >>
> >> I'll mark the calendar.
> >>
> >> >> 20 years ago there was no such thing as a movement to stop spanking or
> >> >> any kind of world wide notice of it to speak of. Nothing public. Today
> >> >> it's a UN mandate, stupid.
> >> >>
> >> >Hahaha! UN mandate???
> >>
> >> Yep.
> >>
> >> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=UN+Mandate+%22corporal+punishment+%22on+the+chil d+and+child+abuse&btnG=Search
> >>
> >> >> > > You are, as usual, whistling past the graveyard, about all you've got
> >> >> > > left..."Hihihi!"
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Not only I am whistling past the graveyard of the anti-spanking zealotS,
> >> >> > I've also watered their grave! Hihihi!
> >> >>
> >> >> No you haven't. You know perfectly well you nuts are doomed.
> >> >>
> >> >Hihihi! That is why YOU ARE STUPID!
> >>
> >> Because you nuts are doomed in your cause of keeping hitting of
> >> children legal?
> >>
> >> >> That's why you and others like you are so frantic.
> >> >>
> >> >Hahaha!
> >>
> >> No, Doan, when you are nervious, frightened, and lying, it's "Hihihi!"
> >> remember?
> >>
> >> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=UN+Mandate+%22corporal+punishment+%22on+the+chil d+and+child+abuse&btnG=Search
> >>
> >> And there is much more out there that 20 or 30 years ago would never
> >> have even been brought up in the US.
> >>
> >> Be afraid, Doan. Be very afraid.
> >>
> >> R RRRR R R R R R OOOOooooOOOOooooOOOOOooo000000000000
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> >> 0;-]
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> > > 0:-]
> >> >> >
> >> >> > > > Doan
> >> >> >
> >> >> > > > On 22 Feb 2007, 0:-> wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > > > > ...stay tuned, however... it won't be long now.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > > > >http://www.sacbee.com/102/story/127398.html
> >> >> >
> >> >> > > > > Spanking ban abandoned
> >> >> > > > > By Jim Sanders - Bee Capitol Bureau
> >> >> > > > > Published 9:52 am PST Thursday, February 22, 2007
> >> >> >
> >> >> > > > > The California Legislature won't be cracking down on spanking after
> >> >> > > > > all.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > > > > Assemblywoman Sally Lieber has abandoned her plans to push for a
> >> >> > > > > legislative prohibition on parents spanking their children under age
> >> >> > > > > 4.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > > > > Lieber, D-Mountain View, will introduce a bill Thursday morning that
> >> >> > > > > will target the use of physical force on children, but not spanking,
> >> >> > > > > an aide said.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > > > > The measure proposes a "rebuttable presumption" that certain acts
> >> >> > > > > against children under 18 are unjustifiable, including throwing,
> >> >> > > > > kicking or hitting them with a cord or other instrument.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > > > > For children younger than four, Lieber's bill will target vigorous
> >> >> > > > > shaking and the act of hitting or slapping on the head or face.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > > > > Judges could impose penalties ranging up to a misdemeanor, subject to
> >> >> > > > > a maximum one-year jail term and $1,000 fine.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > > > > Lieber's bill also would allow judges to require violators to attend
> >> >> > > > > parenting classes.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>

[0:-]]

On Mon, 26 Feb 2007 09:47:11 -0800, Doan > wrote:

>On Fri, 23 Feb 2007, 0:-] wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 23 Feb 2007 16:57:24 -0800, Doan > wrote:
>>
>> >On Fri, 23 Feb 2007, 0:-] wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Fri, 23 Feb 2007 15:05:22 -0800, Doan > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >On 23 Feb 2007, 0:-> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> On Feb 23, 10:13 am, Doan > wrote:
>> >> >> > On 22 Feb 2007, 0:-> wrote:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > > On Feb 22, 4:08 pm, Doan > wrote:
>> >> >> > > > Poor anti-spanking zealotS... they can't seem to get a break. ;-)
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > > Just a few years ago no one would even consider presenting such an
>> >> >> > > idea.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > They did, STUPID! They tried it in OAKLAND and failed!
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Yep, and we will keep doing it until it passes.
>> >> >>
>> >> >But you said "Just a few years ago no one would even consider..."
>> >> >Why are you such a STUPID LIAR?
>> >>
>> >> That is what I said. How does that constitute a lie?
>> >>
>> >> You haven't establish how many "a few" years is, Doan.
>> >>
>> >> I might have meant 20 or thirty. You didn't ask, you assumed, like the
>> >> ass you most obviously are.
>> >
>> >Hihihi! It depends on what the definition of "is" is, right Kane?
>>
>> Nope. It's what "a few" means. Very different.
>>
>Hihihi! So what "a few" means, Kane? 20 or 30 years?
>
>> >> >
>> >> >> You seem to forget that the schools have led the way.
>> >> >>
>> >> >Have you seen how the schools performed lately? ;-)
>> >>
>> >> Have you actually done the research? I have.
>> >>
>> >Oh, I forgot! You said you were a "published researcher"! ;-)
>>
>> I am. I am not published on research. I simply research to publish.
>>
>Hihihi! What a tangled mess you weaved!
>
>> Not in peer reviewed journals, and never made the claim, so you are
>> making a lying ass of yourself again, Doan.
>>
>I have said NOTHING about "peer reviewed journals" with regard to you so
>the "lying ass" is YOU! Show me where I said you published anything
>in a "peer reviewed journals", Kane!
>
>> >
>> >> Where spanking is banned they have done better than were spanking is
>> >> not banned and it is used.
>> >>
>> >I like to see the research, Kane. Give me a before and after picture
>> >please. I don't think they banned CP in schools back in the 50's.
>>
>> Nope. And you think the schools were doing a better job then, don't
>> you.
>>
>Not in the California. It went from "First to WORST"!
>
>> >Are you saying the schools are better now than then?
>>
>> Yes. They are in fact over all.
>>
>Then you are STUPID!
>
>> Especially in states that have banned spanking.
>>
>Then you should look at California!

Then you should look at other states, especially those with far fewer
new immigrants.

>> >> >> > > Canada, for instance, changed their laws to make spanking nearly
>> >> >> > > impossible now. And knowing the Brits, and Canadians, and their
>> >> >> > > political thinking, I can assure you this was but a step to a total
>> >> >> > > ban.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Yup! Anytime now. ;-)
>> >> >>
>> >> >> How long is "anytime?"
>> >> >>
>> >> >Pretty soon now! ;-)
>> >>
>> >> Since I'm not prone to your foolishness and ducking issues, I know
>> >> what I can predict accurately and when I cannot. Hence I'm not going
>> >> to give a precise number on an issue that has little precision in it.
>> >>
>> >> I said in a recent thread you quickly ducked out of after a few of
>> >> your smart ass responses to someone that comes from YOUR side of the
>> >> argument, stupid, that this will be settled as it was with slavery,
>> >> child labor, and women's sufferage, as a moral issue, not a scientific
>> >> one.
>> >>
>> >> That is my point.
>> >>
>> >Yup! Your STUPIDITY shows! ;-)
>>
>> Yup, your inability to argue the point shows when you ad hom. Rather
>> than show some logical argument against mine. Nice going, stupid.
>>
>Hihihi! The master at ad hom is you, Kane! Your STUPIDITY shows again!

Nope. You beat me on that one, Doan.

>> >> Each time these laws are suggested we test the public. And we see
>> >> again and again they are moving more toward an end to spanking than
>> >> any increase of it.
>> >>
>> >> All you have to do is look at the numbers and at history.
>> >>
>> >> Beatings that left children bloody were once legal and in fact
>> >> supported by whole societies...this is NO LONGER TRUE for those
>> >> societies.
>> >>
>> >Show me the laws, Kane?
>>
>> Our own, Doan. As recent as last year.
>>
>Show me!

Just like always. You put words in my mouth, than challenge me to
prove them.

First show me where I claimed THE LAWS supported beating children.

We know what happened in Sweden. And that was my point. That the laws
on child abuse were NOT being enforced because beating children was
culturally accepted. The new law changed that.

>> >> Take Sweden, for instance, where bloody beatings were common.
>> >>
>> >Really?
>> >
>> >> Or Germany.
>> >>
>> >> In fact, nearly all European nations.
>> >>
>> >Really? Show me the laws, Kane.
>>
>> Which laws, Doan?
>>
>The laws that allowed bloody beatings as you claimed!

Where did I claim that there were laws that allowed bloody beatings?
My claim, as always, was that culture allowed it, hence in Sweden, as
you well know, liar, until the new law came into effect the old ones
weren't being enforced.

Suddenly the reported rate of child abuse went UP...because with the
new law a new conciousness about child abuse was created...and what
was once culturally accepted was now not.

>
>> If there was no law against it, it was legal. Stupid.
>>
>Hihihi! THe proven STUPID LIAR is YOU, Kane!

That's always your answer when you can't answer the challenge put to
you, Doan.

If there was no law against spanking, it was of course legal.


>
>> >> Take our own country.
>> >>
>> >> It's not a long step, Doan, to a total ban.
>> >>
>> >Yup! In 37 days!
>>
>> I've marked my calendar, stupid little childish twit.
>>
>Hihihi! More Ad hom, Kane? You are losing it! Hihihi!

Nope. You have.

Be afraid, Doan. Be very afraid.
R RRRR R R R R R OOOOooooOOOOooooOOOOOooo000000000000






> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >> 0:-]
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > > Not only do we get a break, we are going to break this evil of hitting
>> >> >> > > children and claiming it's for their own good.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > > It's your poor spanking enthusiasts that have lost, Doan.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Hihihi! You sure have a weird understanding of "lost"!
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Nope. The evidence is overwhelming. Look at the data for the past 20
>> >> >> years or so. Fewer and fewer parents spanking less and less, and more
>> >> >> and more of them admitting it is the pressure of the public opinion
>> >> >> that discourages them from spanking.
>> >> >>
>> >> >It's still in the 90%+, STUPID!
>> >>
>> >> Again with the contextual deceit, Doan?
>> >>
>> >> While 90% may still spank...toddlers, they stop sooner, and use
>> >> objects less, and for older children it's approaching the lowest
>> >> numbers of all time since records have been kept.
>> >>
>> >> You are simply lying again, Doan.
>> >>
>> >> >> Hell, even the outspoken spankers suggest HIDING THEIR ACT.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Tell you anything, stupid?
>> >> >>
>> >> >That you are STUPID! ;-)
>> >>
>> >> Oh, based on observing that this is true...that people that spank give
>> >> each other advice to hide the act?
>> >>
>> >> >> > > As surely as women's sufferage and and end to slavery and child labor
>> >> >> > > there is an end in sight to this evil.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > > Europe did it. So will we.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Anytime time now, Kane!
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Yep. Nice to see you agree.
>> >> >>
>> >> >Told you that you are STUPID!
>> >>
>> >> Reduced to nothing but ad hom, I see.
>> >>
>> >> >> And considering the progress, I'd say we are closing in on it very
>> >> >> rapidly.
>> >> >>
>> >> >Yup! I say in just 37 days!
>> >>
>> >> I'll mark the calendar.
>> >>
>> >> >> 20 years ago there was no such thing as a movement to stop spanking or
>> >> >> any kind of world wide notice of it to speak of. Nothing public. Today
>> >> >> it's a UN mandate, stupid.
>> >> >>
>> >> >Hahaha! UN mandate???
>> >>
>> >> Yep.
>> >>
>> >> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=UN+Mandate+%22corporal+punishment+%22on+the+chil d+and+child+abuse&btnG=Search
>> >>
>> >> >> > > You are, as usual, whistling past the graveyard, about all you've got
>> >> >> > > left..."Hihihi!"
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Not only I am whistling past the graveyard of the anti-spanking zealotS,
>> >> >> > I've also watered their grave! Hihihi!
>> >> >>
>> >> >> No you haven't. You know perfectly well you nuts are doomed.
>> >> >>
>> >> >Hihihi! That is why YOU ARE STUPID!
>> >>
>> >> Because you nuts are doomed in your cause of keeping hitting of
>> >> children legal?
>> >>
>> >> >> That's why you and others like you are so frantic.
>> >> >>
>> >> >Hahaha!
>> >>
>> >> No, Doan, when you are nervious, frightened, and lying, it's "Hihihi!"
>> >> remember?
>> >>
>> >> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=UN+Mandate+%22corporal+punishment+%22on+the+chil d+and+child+abuse&btnG=Search
>> >>
>> >> And there is much more out there that 20 or 30 years ago would never
>> >> have even been brought up in the US.
>> >>
>> >> Be afraid, Doan. Be very afraid.
>> >>
>> >> R RRRR R R R R R OOOOooooOOOOooooOOOOOooo000000000000
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> >> 0;-]
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > > 0:-]
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > > > Doan
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > > > On 22 Feb 2007, 0:-> wrote:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > > > > ...stay tuned, however... it won't be long now.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > > > >http://www.sacbee.com/102/story/127398.html
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > > > > Spanking ban abandoned
>> >> >> > > > > By Jim Sanders - Bee Capitol Bureau
>> >> >> > > > > Published 9:52 am PST Thursday, February 22, 2007
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > > > > The California Legislature won't be cracking down on spanking after
>> >> >> > > > > all.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > > > > Assemblywoman Sally Lieber has abandoned her plans to push for a
>> >> >> > > > > legislative prohibition on parents spanking their children under age
>> >> >> > > > > 4.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > > > > Lieber, D-Mountain View, will introduce a bill Thursday morning that
>> >> >> > > > > will target the use of physical force on children, but not spanking,
>> >> >> > > > > an aide said.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > > > > The measure proposes a "rebuttable presumption" that certain acts
>> >> >> > > > > against children under 18 are unjustifiable, including throwing,
>> >> >> > > > > kicking or hitting them with a cord or other instrument.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > > > > For children younger than four, Lieber's bill will target vigorous
>> >> >> > > > > shaking and the act of hitting or slapping on the head or face.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > > > > Judges could impose penalties ranging up to a misdemeanor, subject to
>> >> >> > > > > a maximum one-year jail term and $1,000 fine.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > > > > Lieber's bill also would allow judges to require violators to attend
>> >> >> > > > > parenting classes.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>>
>>