Is it okay for parents to hit their children?

Are you dense? You're doing it again.

Stop skipping over my points. You've done this 5 different times. I responded to all your points.

I responded to your post about my bleach correlation, but I'm not addressing your points?

I responded to your post about sleep deprivation, even gave you 3 different articles supporting my position, but I'm not addressing your points?

I responded to your post about subjective evidence, even gave you a link clearly detailing the difference between the two, but I'm not addressing your points?

I asked you to give me proof that says immediate reactions to being hit has nothing to do with the negative effects. You skipped over this.

You're comparing slavery to hitting your child? Are you trolling?

If hitting your child is not very effective, why are asians doing so well? They receive corporal punishment the most, at a more severe rate than other countries, including the US.

The damn question asks if hitting your child is okay. How do you measure what's okay and what isn't okay?

 

"I didn't fail to understand. It's just so stupid of a logical connection that it's irrelevant. Let's use your example. If you drink bleach(hitting children) and gasoline(sleep issues etc), just because you prove gasoline(sleep) is causing issues, it doesn't disprove that the bleach is harming you as well."

You didn't reply to this at all. You just repeated what you had already said. LOL. Just because the gasoline(sleep issues) are bad, it doesn't mean the bleach(hitting) isn't.

This is one example of you not responding to my points. You just repeat some random as shiit and try to pass it as a rebuttal. Retard.

Because it's so obvious. It says in the article I linked. I wasn't saying ALL the negative effects. I was referring to the ones I was talking about.

It doesn't matter what I compare it to, the point is that just because it's generally accepted now because of misinformation, bias, and lack of information doesn't mean it's right.

If hitting isn't very effective why are they doing so well? LOL, this argument is so dumb I almost wonder if you're mentally handicapped. Let's say I drink 5 drops of bleach a day and become a millionaire. You're argument is like saying that the drinking bleach is the reason I was successful.

What's ok and whats not? Beating the grey matter out of your child is not. Easy.

 

It's not accurate to attribute the success of a continent to the rate of corporal punishment used on their youth population. I could make the same argument about backwards communism and a lack of freedom of speech.

 

5char

 

First, you must be trolling or be so fking stupid its ridiculous. My making the comparison to bleach has nothing to do with you doing it. It was a separate comparison to make my point, unrelated to yours. So you still haven't answered it. You keep saying it has to do with your comparison or something. I jsut used it because it was a handy comparison, not because it had anything to do with yours. So again: "Just because the gasoline(sleep issues) are bad, it doesn't mean the bleach(hitting) isn't."

It does give inevitable negative effects to some degree every time. How well a country is doing has very little to nothing to do with forms of punishment. You keep making that connection and it's just flat stupid.

No it's not LOL. Are you dumb? You just linked articles that say things about sleeping using the same logical methods, so first you're a hypocrite. It's more like feeding one group of kids a specific amount of corn chips and another no corn chips and controlling the other aspects of their life. Then collecting and analyzing the difference between those that did and those that didn't. And this is spread over thousands of people, so in the average a few special cases can't effect the results. Then, if the corn chip eaters are performing badly in school you have proof they are bad. This is not subjective.

I'm sorry you being so wrong it's silly, feels like you're being trolled.

I have. Plain idiocy.

It was correct in context. I was referring to the effects including decreased grey matter when I made the statement. Sorry bud. In the article it says they lose grey matter.

I never said it wasn't always accepted LOL? This is your way of skirting my point? Saying "now" was implying that in the future it wouldn't be.

Firstly, the success of a nation can't be attributed to how they punish children. So your point is invalid. THAT'S subjective. Show me proof if you can.

I wasn't twisting your point, I was making a separate analogy using the same terms. Keep skirting my points with these tangents.

I never said you beat it unconscious LOL? I said "beating the grey matter out of it" which is the title of the article I linked to. Thought you'd be smart enough to make that connection, but now I realize you probably never read a line of the article and aren't very bright.

 

This will be my last reply to you and on this thread. Your failure to understand what's shown and explained to you is staggering, not to mention the constant jumping of my own points, only to complain about me doing what you're doing.

Do you know how idiotic this sounds?

"Doesn't mean bleach(hitting) isn't"

Is drinking bleach suppose to be good? That's like me saying, just because smoking(global warming) is bad, it doesn't mean drugs(addictions) are. This is a failsafe analogy that only has one answer. I'm not looking at this straightforward as you are. Once again, I already acknowledged the negative effects, but to retort that, I responded by saying it doesn't inevitably produce bad effects. I'm proof of that. If you cannot wrap this around your miniscule point of view, then there is nothing more for me to say to you.

How am I a hypocrite? This is pure fact. Lack of sleep produces negative effects. Your mind functions at a fraction of it's full capacity. I just have articles delving deeper into it.

Here is the quote from the article you provided;

This means anything that triggers the same reactionary effect as getting spanked would also result in loss of grey matter, one of which is crying.

They do not expose these significant correlations. It's subjective evidence, not something you can evaluate yourself. Back to my previous point. How would spanking trigger a different effect than crying or getting hurt resulting in loss of grey matter? They do not explain this.

This is very ambiguous. Does this mean the children who got spanked do not have these other problems? Is it only spanking that causes this? How many children fall under this in the research? THIS IS SUBJECTIVE EVIDENCE.

To some degree every time? How is this measured?

This is how most asians kids are raised on the eastern hemisphere of the planet. Hard work ethic, encouraged by discpline. Do you not want me to mention it because it obstructs your idea, thus making it moot?

"generally accepted now because of misinformation, bias, and lack of information doesn't mean it's right."

Your comment implies that it's now accepted because of lack of information. It's always been accepted. In the areas in which it currently is not, laws have been passed to obstruct it because it was legal. If you said "it's been accepted because", it wouldn't have been so vague.

You're taking it too literally. Discipline is a supporting backbone in the structure of hard work ethic. How does one reach higher education and a positive surplus? Hard work. How does hard work become a country motto? Through strict regimen. There are documentaries on asian culture, you should take a look.

The analogy is piss poor. I explain why above.

I did read the article the first time. "Harsh punishment" is detailed in it. This is how "gray matter is lost".

 

Full on punching? naw

But when you're young I think you have to be conditioned to have some sort of moral compass of what is and isn't acceptable

So spanking = yeah sure

 

Great. Stop hearing your retarded argument. LOL. You provide no proof of anything. You attach things to your argument as if they compliment it when they don't. It's silly, really. I've only not addressed your points when it came to the point of impossibility of a cohesive argument because of you blatantly skirting my points. Even then I addressed all your points at a later time.

Because you don't get it haha. It's so obvious every time you respond to this analogy you don't understand my point no matter how many times I break it down to kindergarten level for you.

The bleach(hitting) is bad is the point. And just because gasoline(sleep problems) is also bad doesn't negate the fact of the bleach hurting(hitting) you. You aren't proof of anything.

If anything your lack of ability to understand and create a logical argument is a testament to you seeing the negative outcome of being beat.(Joking)

What counts as proof is doing controlled tests that are compared over thousands and then analyzed.

Because you linked to an article that used the same logic to conclude that sleep affects learning as the article I linked that you said was subjective. Hypocritical.

Uh, lol, no it doesn't. Some things might. But not as a rule.

If you follow the links to the case studies they do. And do a bit more research otherwise.

And they don't need to explain it, they results speak for themselves. It's irrelevant to know why it happens, just that it happens. In this argument at least.

"These other problems"? I'll guess at what you were trying to say. First, asking a bunch of questions you could easily find answers to, doesn't make it subjective. Secondly they found that beating children caused these problems to some degree. Point blank.

Yes, read the case study articles.

It doesn't obstruct anything. Two other people commented on this thread when you made that point just to call it out as bogus. Because that's what it is, unsubstantiated bogus.

Maybe it was a little vague and I can see the confusion, but doesn't diminish my point any. It could have been taken either way, but in the context of the position of my argument it made sense to assume the point I was making.

You make this claim but provide no evidence. Not to mention there couldn't be evidence of this because claiming a country is successful from beating their children is downright silly.

You're entitled to your opinion. I think your opinion is biased because you don't understand my analogy though. You didn't make a argument against it that would suggest you even knew what it meant.

You can pull a couple lines. Still doubt you read it or the case studies.

GL beating your kids buddy. LOL

 

The problem in this topic is that spanking isn't considered. It's implied that you either beat the living shit out of your children, or you don't touch them what-so-ever. The problem is, any logical reasoning for anything in between is disregarded and compared to throwing monkey shit and/or drinking bleach.

 

No point in convincing Ghast that spanking is bad, he was spanked (prolly something even worse) as a child and doesn't want to admit that he is damaged goods.

If you have to use force to make something clear to a child then you are doing it wrong, simple as that. I'm sorry Ghast that your parents were so keen on using force. I'm sorry they were too lazy to explain why something was wrong. I'm sorry your parents were stupid. But I hope you will take the time to explain to your children why they should not do some things and won't rely on using your size and strength to make your case. By beating children all you are telling them is "Do not do that or the giant will hit you", that's it. You are not making them into "better" people.

 

You state your case like;

Child does wrong = Parent beats child

Rather than;

Child does wrong = child is warned
Child does wrong again = child is warned a second time and made aware of physical punishment for it again.
Child does wrong again (x2) = child is spanked and sent to bed for the remainder of the evening.

You can talk like reasoning will work in every scenario. However, it just isn't the case.

 

Or you could replace 2 and 3 with non-violent punishments and achieve the same results.

 

Okay I agree, that is a possibility.

However, when the punishment isn't severe is it not likely that the child will grow to know the consequences are futile compared to the joy they get out of being bad?

For example in school I was throwing stones and broke somebodies greenhouse glass. My parents were made aware of it and I was punished as the third category on that list. When I then returned to school, I was questioned by all my friends on the punishment I received which led to a blatant "won't be doing that again!" as opposed to, oh we just had a reasonable conversation about it? I just cannot see how that would've been enough to make me not do it again.


I understand your point, I really do. However, I think a spanking or tap on the hand cannot have any serious impact later on.

Also, I think it is only appropriate when they are "children" spanking when they're teenagers in unnecessary and will lead to the adolescent rebellion against the parent.

EDIT:

A lot of choices I made in my early years were weighing up whether it was worth doing with the consequences. Most things that would be bad, were denied and I'd walk away and let the other kids carry on. As the punishment I'd receive for being caught wasn't worth it.

 

This thread is a joke, how else would your child respect you? here in the middle-east, some parents hit the shit out of their children so they can learn the consequences of what they have done. Well not physically damage them, but a few slaps won't hurt.
On the other hand, in the USA, when a parent hits a teen he can call the police and prison the parents? HAHA i wonder how much you respect your parents there. i love it when teens say "im 18, im free now leave me alone!"
gotta love it

 

Keep insulting the USA when at least there's freedom of speech and we don't execute homosexuals. Please don't post here with this shit.

 

Freedom of Speech? Let's try if someone goes out and speaks about the CIA interrogation which involves taking torture to the next level and lets see if he'll be vanished or not. What about classifying Hasan Nasrallah as a terrorist because he defended Lebanon from israel in 2006? Why is it wrong to defend ourselves and we get classified as terrorists! I live in Lebanon and here, we have over 6-7 religions. We can say whatever we want about anything or anyone, even the government, so idk about freedom of speech.
Your media is so shit bro you need to dig deeper than fox/bbc/cnn and see what a shit/cruel country you live in.

Tell me a country at the middle-east where homos are executed

 

To me this all comes down to lazy parenting or no parenting. If you do it wrong from the start then at 1 point the child won't respect you enough and the only thing that will help is threats of violence or just violence. Parenting isn't something you think up on the fly, there are clear rules which people should follow. Unfortunately very few people actualy do the research, cause using violence is just that much easier.

 

However, I was raised this way and had massive amounts of respect for my parents / still do?

 

If you are yourself an adult, making a point to a child shouldn't be that hard

 

Fuck that, beat his/her ass. That talkin shit don't work, especially where I live at, we need physical discipline around here.

What? by taking away their games and tell them to stand in a corner? boo hoo......hell naw, im whoopin that dude/girl's ass. They gonna learn today, yall goin soft on these kids nowadays that's exactly why they disrespectful as hell.