A Parenting & kids forum. ParentingBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » ParentingBanter.com forum » alt.parenting » Spanking
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Dennis was U.N. rules Canada should ban spanking



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #61  
Old November 16th 03, 06:10 AM
Dennis Hancock
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Dennis was U.N. rules Canada should ban spanking

Don't bother doan, Jerry, like his alter ego kane has been thrown into the
iggy bin for now.

He apparently wants ME to prove kane's allegations wrong, which many have
done continually, and wants me to repost what I dispute, even after using
direct quotes of Kane's posts when I post.

Amazing how blind and stupid some people are. Truly unbelievable that they
manage to survive in this world.

"Doan" wrote in message
...

On Thu, 13 Nov 2003, Gerald Alborn wrote:

Dennis Hancock wrote:

"Gerald Alborn" wrote in message
...
Dennis Hancock wrote:

DUH... Kane's assertions are so lame and weak that they defeat
themselves.

Thank you for further demonstrating that you can provide no basis

for what
you've asserted.


And thank you for showing that you accept Kane's nonsense with

absolutely no
question.


Tell me Dennis, what words of Kane's do you regard as nonsense? Ah,

don't tell
me. You can't post them but would like me to go into google and try to

find them
myself. :-) :-) :-) :-)

I will be glad to google them for you, Gerald. Just say the word. :-)

Doan



  #62  
Old November 16th 03, 06:13 AM
Dennis Hancock
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Dennis was U.N. rules Canada should ban spanking

More nonsense from Gerald.... he considers a parent's RESPONSIBILITY to
teach, control and discipline their child as forcing their will upon
someone.. LOL..

Amazing that a person can even begin to argue that EVERYONE who attempts to
discipline their own children is an abusive jerk who is imposing their will
on them. Not worth the bother as he is either a liar, a teenager who has
never had kids, or a complete idiot.


Almost turned my stomach to read the nonsense below
"Gerald Alborn" wrote in message
...
Dennis Hancock wrote:

I don't even have a problem with your decision to use other methods on

your
children, and in fact have stated many times that most parents do

attempt
many different methods and find what works for THEIR child.


Works for their child? You mean what "works for them."

I seem to recall asking you what you mean by "works." I never did see an

answer.

Lot's of things may "work" if compliance to your every demand, or blind
obedience is your only objective. Is that your only concern? Now that

you're the
adult, do you mean by "works," "finally getting your way with others -

namely
children?" I have greater concern for children's healthy emotional

development
than what "works" to make life easier for parents. Why is this so far

beyond
your grasp?

and quite
often, use different methods for different siblins.


Why do so many, like you, decide that abuse works, and convince yourself

that it
isn't really abuse?

My whole problem with Kane is that he is attempting to portray ANYONE

who
uses any sort of physical discipline on their children as a monster who
abuses children,


How are you able to accept that physical discipline is not abuse? What

logic
do you use to convince yourself that it's okay to hurt children in ways

that are
illegal to use on adults? Do you honestly believe there is no affect from
punitively inflicted pain on children, upon their young developing

emotions?

and without that, his logic falls apart, which is why he
refuses to accept any definitions given to him.


You mean definitions you create to give yourself the illusion that hurting

young
children is somehow good and has no damaging effects?

He cannot understand that many parents use different levels of both

positive
and negative reinforcement on their children until they hopefully come

up
with what works. I tire of his nonsense and after reading this group of
posts, will most assuredly filter his name out of my reading list and

let
him continue his rantings and ravings.


You may get that way with me, too. There are real reasons (rooted in your

own
painful childhood) why you want to deny the truth about the harmfulness of
hurting children in the name of disciple. It's simply too painful to bear.
Having people point your head at the truth and make you see it must simply

be
too much of an overload.

-Jerry-



  #63  
Old November 16th 03, 06:17 AM
Dennis Hancock
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Dennis was U.N. rules Canada should ban spanking

Doan you can't reach him. He, like Kane is stuck in their own self
righeousness hell which they made for themselves.

The ONLY way their 'truth' has any validity is by villifying every other
opinion and portraying anyone who disagrees with them as evil or abusive.

They are too stupid to understand that their methods are MUCH MORE abusive
than what most consider discipline and teaching because it can cause more
emotional distress on a child because they feel the parent' doesn't care
enough to set limits and teach their children. Oh yeah, they TRY to say
they set limits, but limits without any logical reinforcement are as good as
none at all.



"Doan" wrote in message
...

On Fri, 14 Nov 2003, Gerald Alborn wrote:

Dennis Hancock wrote:

I don't even have a problem with your decision to use other methods on

your
children, and in fact have stated many times that most parents do

attempt
many different methods and find what works for THEIR child.


Works for their child? You mean what "works for them."

And you are the judge right, Jerry?

I seem to recall asking you what you mean by "works." I never did see an

answer.

Lot's of things may "work" if compliance to your every demand, or blind
obedience is your only objective. Is that your only concern? Now that

you're the
adult, do you mean by "works," "finally getting your way with others -

namely
children?" I have greater concern for children's healthy emotional

development
than what "works" to make life easier for parents. Why is this so far

beyond
your grasp?

Because it is none of your business, Jerry. Are you saying that your care
for other people's children MORE THAN THEIR OWN PARENTS?

and quite
often, use different methods for different siblins.


Why do so many, like you, decide that abuse works, and convince yourself

that it
isn't really abuse?

WHY DO YOU THINK IT IS ABUSE?

My whole problem with Kane is that he is attempting to portray ANYONE

who
uses any sort of physical discipline on their children as a monster

who
abuses children,


How are you able to accept that physical discipline is not abuse?

What logic
do you use to convince yourself that it's okay to hurt children in ways

that are
illegal to use on adults?


Are you saying that it is illegal for the police to use his batons???

Do you honestly believe there is no affect from
punitively inflicted pain on children, upon their young developing

emotions?

AND YOU THINK THERE IS? Let's me see you prove this, Jerry?

and without that, his logic falls apart, which is why he
refuses to accept any definitions given to him.


You mean definitions you create to give yourself the illusion that

hurting young
children is somehow good and has no damaging effects?

Do you think removing children from their parents is good and have no
damaging effects? Can you show me one "peer-reviewed" study in which
the non-cp alternatives are better under the same conditions???

He cannot understand that many parents use different levels of both

positive
and negative reinforcement on their children until they hopefully come

up
with what works. I tire of his nonsense and after reading this group

of
posts, will most assuredly filter his name out of my reading list and

let
him continue his rantings and ravings.


You may get that way with me, too. There are real reasons (rooted in

your own
painful childhood) why you want to deny the truth about the harmfulness

of
hurting children in the name of disciple. It's simply too painful to

bear.
Having people point your head at the truth and make you see it must

simply be
too much of an overload.

The problem is people like you who think that that they have the "truth".
But when pressed, it is nothing more than opinion. Tell me, Jerry, is
your childhood that "painful"???

Doan



  #64  
Old November 17th 03, 11:12 PM
Gerald Alborn
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Dennis was U.N. rules Canada should ban spanking

Dennis Hancock wrote:

"Gerald Alborn" wrote in message
...
Dennis Hancock wrote:

"Gerald Alborn" wrote in message
...
Dennis Hancock wrote:

DUH... Kane's assertions are so lame and weak that they defeat
themselves.

Thank you for further demonstrating that you can provide no basis for

what
you've asserted.

And thank you for showing that you accept Kane's nonsense with

absolutely no
question.


Tell me Dennis, what words of Kane's do you regard as nonsense? Ah, don't

tell
me. You can't post them but would like me to go into google and try to

find them
myself. :-) :-) :-) :-)

You make a whole lot of statements without ever clarifying what it is

you're
talking about. I guess even you know that you're in a position where

that's your
only option.


Damn Gerald, how many times must I QUOTE his post and post DIRECTLY under
the EXACT words I consider nonsense.


At least once would be nice.

I've asked you numerous times but you've yet to come through. Of course, I
realize that you have a good reason for not doing so...

What pleasure do you get from attempting to keep asking the same lame
questions,


Apparently it's displeasureable to be asked questions you cannot answer? Is it
really all that lame to ask you to prove your credibility when it's in serious
doubt? For a while I was thinking that it might be possible for you to provide
details about your assertions, which we could then discuss. Instead, you keep
running for cover. Why is that? If your statements and beliefs can't stand up to
critical scrutiny, why do you insist upon maintaining them?

and keep believing every word Kane posts as the absolute truth?


I've never said whether or not I believed every word Kane posts. But, unlike
you, when asked, Kane backs up his statements with substantiating details.

Are you that truly that stupid and gullible, or are you just a parrot for
Kane,


Kane's been around this ng for 2 or 3 years perhaps. If you had comprehended my
previous posts in this thread, you'd know that I've been posting here since
about mid 1995, and prior to that, on a Prodigy parenting bulletin board with
some of the participants of this ng since about 1991. Because we've left no
stones unturned, my position and Kane's just happen to be very similar.

Unlike yours, my position does not rely upon an emotionally seated and deeply
rooted belief system, blindly passed on from one generation to the next.

attempting to somehow try to discredit any opposing viewpoint by
asking repeatedly the same things over and over again (interestingly enough,
the same thing kane keeps doing as well).


Actually, you're the one discrediting yourself by your inability to post
material supportive of your assertions. As long as you're unable to answer, I
may as well probe that until you either admit you were lying, or until you cave
and refuse to discuss it any further. Either way, I have nothing to lose. You're
doing a real good job discrediting yourself and your viewpoints all by yourself,
Dennis. Anyone who wants to look closely at what you write can see that your
credibility has plenty of holes in it. It's just fortunate that the spanking
side is so allied with people like you who can't be open and honest with
themselves, let alone with others.

If you haven't read the posts, why should I bother to go back and

repost
them for your benefit?

Well you shouldn't, actually. Aside from the fact that you can't

repost
what
isn't there, it helps to show everyone what your level of integrity

is.
Let's
just leave it at that.


DUH.. I can't repost what isn't there.. apparently you cannot read, or have
some lack of comprhension since I have used quoting his posts directly as a
means of posting my rebuttal to his lame nonsense.


If that's a fact, then why do you find it impossible to back up the claims
you've been making that I've read and have been questioning? I don't care if you
claim you've quoted posts directly in the past. The issue is, why can't you
substantiate specific claims, when they are questioned, now? The only plausible
explanation is that you know you can't backup statements you made that you know
are untrue.

Specifically what posts are you referring to? You've already demonstrated

that
you can't generally post more than two sentences without either stretching

the
truth way out of whack or outright lying.


*I* can't post more than two sentences without stretching the truth or
outright lying? WHERE ARE MY LIES? Kane has posted nothing but lies,


There's one. I've not seen a single lie Kane has posted. He might have posted
lies before (I rather doubt that), but everyone knows you're the one lying when
you state that Kane's never ever posted a truthful statement [i.e., has posted
nothing but lies].


and
stretch truth and flip flopped back and forth, and my calling him a liar is
stretching the truth or outright lies?


The latter. You calling him a liar is an outright lie. Thanks for asking.

Grow up asshole and smell the coffee
brewing.


I really don't think that's coffee brewing, Dennis. But I agree that there is an
odor. I'd really be surprised if that odor didn't turn out to be something
you're smoking.

YOu want some asshole like Kane TELLING you how to raise your kids, and
accusing people of being abusers because they don't follow his lame assed
ideology, fine, go for it.


My kids are already raised, Dennis. Kane's parenting philosophy is sound, and
supported by all available research on the subject.

But shut the **** up and keep it to yourself as you, like kane are now on
ignore for nonsensical bull****.


You don't want to be challenged or hear things that go against your beliefs.
That's one way of maintaining your fortress of denial. And we didn't even get to
the point where we could debate the real issue - hitting and hurting children in
the name of discipline.

And you have a bridge for sale too, right?


and you would surely buy it from your hero kane, simple because he 'tells'
you how great it is.


Once again, I adopted my parenting philosophy long before Kane arrived.

-Jerry-

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Debate on spanking Doan General 0 June 12th 04 08:30 PM
| | Kids should work... Kane General 13 December 10th 03 03:30 AM
Kids should work. LaVonne Carlson General 22 December 7th 03 05:27 AM
Dennis was U.N. rules Canada should ban spanking Kane Spanking 1 October 25th 03 10:41 PM
|| U.N. rules Canada should ban spanking Kane Spanking 0 October 9th 03 08:35 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:10 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 ParentingBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.