|
Couldn't watch the whole video, too painful to listen to 
|
On November 02 2011 13:13 matjlav wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2011 13:00 pandaBee wrote:On November 02 2011 12:56 matjlav wrote:On November 02 2011 12:52 pandaBee wrote:
And why is a 16 yo girl getting a booty spanking a big deal? spanking is getting off easy. Honestly it's not the physical acts that bother me as much as the whole psychology of it. The fact that he is using his daughter as a punching bag to let out his anger. This is how 6-year-olds should be dealing with anger, not grown men who are supposed to be role models for their children. daughter breaks rules >>> daddy gets angry >>> booty spanking i don't think there's a problem with this. Nope, I completely disagree. There is definitely a problem with that. No one would ever suggest that it's okay for a civilized person to violently react to someone else making them angry, unless it's their child, then people seem to think that it's okay. That's fucked up. As a grown person, it is your job to ignore your instincts to start swinging your fists when you get angry. Grown adults generally understand that they can't violently react to people who make them angry outside of their family, but shitbags like this guy do it when they're at home with their children because they know they'll get away with it and that their children are too weak to fight back. This is different from somberly spanking an 8-year-old post "this hurts you more than it hurts me." This is a coward abusing his power dynamic in the family. And there are tons of parents (including my dad) who have done this, though usually not to such an egregious extent.
Ofc there is a "Ideal" that you believe in that parents should strive for but that doesn't confine the freedoms and choices of parents just because you think so in that way.
also how do u know that he's not whipping out the belt just because he's angry? how do u know that he has no justification for doing so (i.e. breaking pre established rules) ? im not talking about the guys personal life in general im talking about the act of disciplining your child.
|
On November 02 2011 13:06 Maxtor wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2011 12:47 Geosensation wrote:On November 02 2011 12:43 Maxtor wrote:On November 02 2011 12:30 Geosensation wrote:On November 02 2011 12:26 r.Evo wrote:On November 02 2011 12:22 Geosensation wrote:
Glad to see a bit more sense here on TL compared to youtube and reddit. Disciplining your children like this may not be considered the right way to parent now, but it is perfectly legal. I snooped around the Texas Attorney General's website on child abuse and found this:
The law specifically excludes “reasonable” discipline by the child’s parent, guardian, or conservator; corporal punishment is not in itself abusive under the law. An act or omission is abusive only if “observable and material impairment” occurs as a result, or if it causes “substantial harm,” or exposes the child to risk of substantial harm.
Doesn't seem to me like it caused substantial harm or material impairment. YES it is hard to watch and pretty cruel, but parents have the discretion to discipline their children as they see fit.
Also it's just a belt, not a bat. It's not like he's going to kill her or break all the bones in her body. It's superficial harm.
He doesn't deserve to get thrown in jail, disbarred, or any other punishment because he has done nothing illegal based on the video alone. Stop freaking out everyone.
If I slap an adult in the face on the street, will he hit me back? Most likely. If a teacher hits a kid with the flat hand in the face to "teach him/her a lesson", will it go all over the place and will the teacher face consequences? Yes, most likely. If I beat my kid with a belt, multiple times just for the fun of it (HE KEEPS FUCKING COMING BACK IN FOR MORE. THEY USE TWO FUCKING BELTS AT ONE POINT), I can get away with it because "it was reasonable"? If that's the law, the law has to be changed. Why? Because it's inhumane. Plain and simple. So you feel like parents should be told by the government how to raise their kids? I'm sorry I just don't agree with that. The parent/child relationship is a special one and is treated as such by the law. If the government starts telling parents they can't discipline their children reasonably then the next thing you know children are suing their parents when they don't let them go to a concert they wanted or because they grounded them for a weekend for breaking some rule they set down. Sorry if it seems harsh to you but that's the way it is. I really dont understand this point of view, the marital relationship is a special one, so the husband can beat the wife for X,Y,Z? No because society views this as terribly wrong, and to make sure there are no misunderstandings the government legislates to stop domestic abuse. (im sorry for the bad example but its the only way i feel i can explain how illogical i find your statement) Your argument regarding the floodgates being open on litigation of parents by their kids is also flawed as corporal punishment is prohibited in the majority of the EU and i've yet to see a case on the issues you raise. Haha you twisted what I said pretty bad. Husband/wife relationship is not the same as parent/child. One set is equal partners the other is not. Also corporal punishment is not prohibited in the USA so you are comparing apples to oranges. Equal partners? it certainly didnt use to be that way, its become like that due to feminist movements and the like because of the unfair treatments suffered by women, People used to treat women like property, which by todays standards in modern society is unthinkable but used to be ok back then. Society learns over time and this learning improves the world we live in. Look, the fact that so many people object today to this man's actions does not strike you as odd, do you not believe your view of methods of child dicipline to be somewhat outdated? Also im not comparing USA and EU, im simply stating that legislation regarding corporal punishment exists in countries, the government is telling people how not parent, and it hasnt caused any issues that you're voicing, i dont see how it will cause these issues in the USA, if it appears fine in Spain, Germany etc.
Absolutely correct. But that's the way it is now because our society's moral view on that has shifted thanks to the feminist movements. Maybe this video will lead to a child's rights movement and parents will be able to exercise sufficient dominion over children without having the right to use corporal punishment. Still, lawmakers are hesitant to make those changes here. As a country we are still more conservative across the board than across the pond.
|
On November 02 2011 13:15 Jaxtyk wrote:
I'm surprised she put up with the shit they did for quite a while.
Beating her into submission worked out well after all. Actually in a load of cases of physical abuse within the family the people put up with it for incredibly long times. The combination of "I'm afraid of getting a beating worse than the last one", "It was all my own fault anyway" and "They're family, I love them" is awesome to make people shut up.
|
On November 02 2011 13:08 pandaBee wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2011 13:05 vasculaR wrote:On November 02 2011 13:00 pandaBee wrote:On November 02 2011 12:56 matjlav wrote:On November 02 2011 12:52 pandaBee wrote:
And why is a 16 yo girl getting a booty spanking a big deal? spanking is getting off easy. Honestly it's not the physical acts that bother me as much as the whole psychology of it. The fact that he is using his daughter as a punching bag to let out his anger. This is how 6-year-olds should be dealing with anger, not grown men who are supposed to be role models for their children. daughter breaks rules >>> daddy gets angry >>> booty spanking i don't think there's a problem with this. daddy gets angry >> finds excuse to booty spank daughter >> finds excuse >> booty spanking this is a different matter entirely and i would argue that the process above is "wrong" but how do u know that it was the 2nd and not the 1st process? yeah it could be the first but there should be a more rational punishment, esp at that age (16 i believe?) well i can turn what u said around and say something like: the punishment should be more severe BECAUSE she is 16 (she is old enough to know to follow the rules and is less likely to be traumatized by a certain level of abuse than when she is a infant/child per se). and besides life isn't fair man. some parents are super strict. some parents are really lax. its up to them to decide to what degree they want to take their parenting whether its harsh/relaxed/somewhere in between.
well what would you do in this scenario then? You would rather beat a 16 yr old child than 10 yr old? I'm thinking that when you're older, you are able to know from right and wrong than when you're a kid the only thing you want to avoid is that asswhooping so you do the right thing.
|
On November 02 2011 13:16 hytonight wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2011 13:14 pandaBee wrote:On November 02 2011 13:12 hytonight wrote:On November 02 2011 13:09 pandaBee wrote:On November 02 2011 13:06 hytonight wrote:On November 02 2011 13:04 pandaBee wrote:On November 02 2011 13:03 hytonight wrote:On November 02 2011 13:01 pandaBee wrote:On November 02 2011 13:00 hytonight wrote:On November 02 2011 12:56 pandaBee wrote:
[quote]
you're missing a point, in a household breaking the rules is breaking the rules now i have no idea about what went on before this incident or how it escalated to that point but rules are rules man and sometimes u have to lay them down. whether its for taking a cookie from the shelf or getting expelled from school im pretty sure you are missing the point here. he beat the shit out of her.....for playing internet games. thats not "laying down the law," thats beating the shit out of her. it would be just "beating the shit out of her" if he didn't specify that she was not supposed to play internet games but how do u know that there was never such a mentioning? so he has to threaten her before he can beat the shit out of her..then its justified. good to know you're missing the point what i said isn't about the father making threats. if by threats u mean rules then i guess that would be true but then are u saying that all rules are threats? in a sense yes they are - break the law/rules u get punished. but are they necessary? ask society man. well we have an amendment against cruel and unusual punnishment..id kinda expect a judge to know about that. just because a guy litters a few times doesnt mean you can throw him in prison for life. doing something as small as playing games shouldnt be punished by beating the crap out of her. there is nothing "unusual" about getting spanked for breaking the rules also there is nothing "cruel" about getting spanked for breaking the rules either she didn't suffer any permanent damage and the pain is temporary, also from my knowledge the spanking only lasted a minute or two and she is sixteen years old ffs she should know better at that age. you could say the same thing about rape....and dont even pretend you can justify that rape is not the same thing as getting a light booty spanking with a belt don't even try to make that comparison in this context first off "rape" is by no means a physical punishment, it is a type of attack/assault that devastates both a victim's (yes, victim) mind and body. light booty spanking? bro thats bullshit. and id call her a victim there who suffered an assault which did devastate her body and possibly her mind.
to the degree of rape? if a belting like the one i saw in the video is enough to psychologically damage her to an extent for which legal action would be required then she must be one fragile girl. and by fragile i mean she must be in the mind of a 5 year old child.
|
Seeker
Where dat snitch at?37103 Posts
......... wow this video/situation/people sicken(s) me.....
|
On November 02 2011 13:17 pandaBee wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2011 13:13 matjlav wrote:On November 02 2011 13:00 pandaBee wrote:On November 02 2011 12:56 matjlav wrote:On November 02 2011 12:52 pandaBee wrote:
And why is a 16 yo girl getting a booty spanking a big deal? spanking is getting off easy. Honestly it's not the physical acts that bother me as much as the whole psychology of it. The fact that he is using his daughter as a punching bag to let out his anger. This is how 6-year-olds should be dealing with anger, not grown men who are supposed to be role models for their children. daughter breaks rules >>> daddy gets angry >>> booty spanking i don't think there's a problem with this. Nope, I completely disagree. There is definitely a problem with that. No one would ever suggest that it's okay for a civilized person to violently react to someone else making them angry, unless it's their child, then people seem to think that it's okay. That's fucked up. As a grown person, it is your job to ignore your instincts to start swinging your fists when you get angry. Grown adults generally understand that they can't violently react to people who make them angry outside of their family, but shitbags like this guy do it when they're at home with their children because they know they'll get away with it and that their children are too weak to fight back. This is different from somberly spanking an 8-year-old post "this hurts you more than it hurts me." This is a coward abusing his power dynamic in the family. And there are tons of parents (including my dad) who have done this, though usually not to such an egregious extent. Ofc there is a "Ideal" that you believe in that parents should strive for but that doesn't confine the freedoms and choices of parents just because you think so in that way. also how do u know that he's not whipping out the belt just because he's angry? how do u know that he has no justification for doing so (i.e. breaking pre established rules) ? im not talking about the guys personal life in general im talking about the act of disciplining your child.
There seem to be two camps on this, I'm in the camp of it doesn't fucking matter if he's beating her because he's angry or because he thinks it's good parenting. It's child abuse regardless, beating the shit out of a defenseless individual isn't okay in any other regard, why should it be alright when dealing with children, I don't see the reasoning here. Because it's their child? Doesn't fucking matter, birthing someone should not give you the liberty to abuse them.
|
On November 02 2011 13:19 pandaBee wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2011 13:16 hytonight wrote:On November 02 2011 13:14 pandaBee wrote:On November 02 2011 13:12 hytonight wrote:On November 02 2011 13:09 pandaBee wrote:On November 02 2011 13:06 hytonight wrote:On November 02 2011 13:04 pandaBee wrote:On November 02 2011 13:03 hytonight wrote:On November 02 2011 13:01 pandaBee wrote:On November 02 2011 13:00 hytonight wrote:
[quote]
im pretty sure you are missing the point here.
he beat the shit out of her.....for playing internet games. thats not "laying down the law," thats beating the shit out of her. it would be just "beating the shit out of her" if he didn't specify that she was not supposed to play internet games but how do u know that there was never such a mentioning? so he has to threaten her before he can beat the shit out of her..then its justified. good to know you're missing the point what i said isn't about the father making threats. if by threats u mean rules then i guess that would be true but then are u saying that all rules are threats? in a sense yes they are - break the law/rules u get punished. but are they necessary? ask society man. well we have an amendment against cruel and unusual punnishment..id kinda expect a judge to know about that. just because a guy litters a few times doesnt mean you can throw him in prison for life. doing something as small as playing games shouldnt be punished by beating the crap out of her. there is nothing "unusual" about getting spanked for breaking the rules also there is nothing "cruel" about getting spanked for breaking the rules either she didn't suffer any permanent damage and the pain is temporary, also from my knowledge the spanking only lasted a minute or two and she is sixteen years old ffs she should know better at that age. you could say the same thing about rape....and dont even pretend you can justify that rape is not the same thing as getting a light booty spanking with a belt don't even try to make that comparison in this context first off "rape" is by no means a physical punishment, it is a type of attack/assault that devastates both a victim's (yes, victim) mind and body. light booty spanking? bro thats bullshit. and id call her a victim there who suffered an assault which did devastate her body and possibly her mind. to the degree of rape? if a belting like the one i saw in the video is enough to psychologically damage her to an extent for which legal action would be required then she must be one fragile girl. and by fragile i mean she must be in the mind of a 5 year old child.
your father telling you to bend over and whipping you with a belt telling you to submit to him isn't psychologically damaging?
|
On November 02 2011 13:18 vasculaR wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2011 13:08 pandaBee wrote:On November 02 2011 13:05 vasculaR wrote:On November 02 2011 13:00 pandaBee wrote:On November 02 2011 12:56 matjlav wrote:On November 02 2011 12:52 pandaBee wrote:
And why is a 16 yo girl getting a booty spanking a big deal? spanking is getting off easy. Honestly it's not the physical acts that bother me as much as the whole psychology of it. The fact that he is using his daughter as a punching bag to let out his anger. This is how 6-year-olds should be dealing with anger, not grown men who are supposed to be role models for their children. daughter breaks rules >>> daddy gets angry >>> booty spanking i don't think there's a problem with this. daddy gets angry >> finds excuse to booty spank daughter >> finds excuse >> booty spanking this is a different matter entirely and i would argue that the process above is "wrong" but how do u know that it was the 2nd and not the 1st process? yeah it could be the first but there should be a more rational punishment, esp at that age (16 i believe?) well i can turn what u said around and say something like: the punishment should be more severe BECAUSE she is 16 (she is old enough to know to follow the rules and is less likely to be traumatized by a certain level of abuse than when she is a infant/child per se). and besides life isn't fair man. some parents are super strict. some parents are really lax. its up to them to decide to what degree they want to take their parenting whether its harsh/relaxed/somewhere in between. well what would you do in this scenario then? You would rather beat a 16 yr old child than 10 yr old? I'm thinking that when you're older, you are able to know from right and wrong than when you're a kid the only thing you want to avoid is that asswhooping so you do the right thing.
no what i was saying is that the guy who replied to me was saying that the older you are the more rational punishments should be. i said that someone could add a twist to that and say that the older you are the more severe punishments should be (since severity with age makes sense right think about getting arrested when ur a child vs legal adult age). i wasn't saying that punishments should be more severe i was trying to say that punishments are variable according to the person dishing them out. even our own law system made the distinction to make punishments "harsher" the older / more responsible a person becomes so why can't a parent?
|
I feel really bad for this girl.. there really should be a test people have to take before they can become parents. Is she going to be safe when this shit blows up in their face on the news//at work?
|
On November 02 2011 13:19 pandaBee wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2011 13:16 hytonight wrote:On November 02 2011 13:14 pandaBee wrote:On November 02 2011 13:12 hytonight wrote:On November 02 2011 13:09 pandaBee wrote:On November 02 2011 13:06 hytonight wrote:On November 02 2011 13:04 pandaBee wrote:On November 02 2011 13:03 hytonight wrote:On November 02 2011 13:01 pandaBee wrote:On November 02 2011 13:00 hytonight wrote:
[quote]
im pretty sure you are missing the point here.
he beat the shit out of her.....for playing internet games. thats not "laying down the law," thats beating the shit out of her. it would be just "beating the shit out of her" if he didn't specify that she was not supposed to play internet games but how do u know that there was never such a mentioning? so he has to threaten her before he can beat the shit out of her..then its justified. good to know you're missing the point what i said isn't about the father making threats. if by threats u mean rules then i guess that would be true but then are u saying that all rules are threats? in a sense yes they are - break the law/rules u get punished. but are they necessary? ask society man. well we have an amendment against cruel and unusual punnishment..id kinda expect a judge to know about that. just because a guy litters a few times doesnt mean you can throw him in prison for life. doing something as small as playing games shouldnt be punished by beating the crap out of her. there is nothing "unusual" about getting spanked for breaking the rules also there is nothing "cruel" about getting spanked for breaking the rules either she didn't suffer any permanent damage and the pain is temporary, also from my knowledge the spanking only lasted a minute or two and she is sixteen years old ffs she should know better at that age. you could say the same thing about rape....and dont even pretend you can justify that rape is not the same thing as getting a light booty spanking with a belt don't even try to make that comparison in this context first off "rape" is by no means a physical punishment, it is a type of attack/assault that devastates both a victim's (yes, victim) mind and body. light booty spanking? bro thats bullshit. and id call her a victim there who suffered an assault which did devastate her body and possibly her mind. to the degree of rape? if a belting like the one i saw in the video is enough to psychologically damage her to an extent for which legal action would be required then she must be one fragile girl. and by fragile i mean she must be in the mind of a 5 year old child.
If your rolemodel shows you that beating someone with a belt for "disobediance" is the way to go is not psychologically damaging, I don't know what is.
Also where the heck do you keep pulling your age comparisons from? In your mind a 16 year old rape victim is more damaged than a 30 year old one? What kind of logic is this?
|
On November 02 2011 13:17 pandaBee wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2011 13:13 matjlav wrote:On November 02 2011 13:00 pandaBee wrote:On November 02 2011 12:56 matjlav wrote:On November 02 2011 12:52 pandaBee wrote:
And why is a 16 yo girl getting a booty spanking a big deal? spanking is getting off easy. Honestly it's not the physical acts that bother me as much as the whole psychology of it. The fact that he is using his daughter as a punching bag to let out his anger. This is how 6-year-olds should be dealing with anger, not grown men who are supposed to be role models for their children. daughter breaks rules >>> daddy gets angry >>> booty spanking i don't think there's a problem with this. Nope, I completely disagree. There is definitely a problem with that. No one would ever suggest that it's okay for a civilized person to violently react to someone else making them angry, unless it's their child, then people seem to think that it's okay. That's fucked up. As a grown person, it is your job to ignore your instincts to start swinging your fists when you get angry. Grown adults generally understand that they can't violently react to people who make them angry outside of their family, but shitbags like this guy do it when they're at home with their children because they know they'll get away with it and that their children are too weak to fight back. This is different from somberly spanking an 8-year-old post "this hurts you more than it hurts me." This is a coward abusing his power dynamic in the family. And there are tons of parents (including my dad) who have done this, though usually not to such an egregious extent. Ofc there is a "Ideal" that you believe in that parents should strive for but that doesn't confine the freedoms and choices of parents just because you think so in that way. also how do u know that he's not whipping out the belt just because he's angry? how do u know that he has no justification for doing so (i.e. breaking pre established rules) ? im not talking about the guys personal life in general im talking about the act of disciplining your child.
Just look at the guy. That is not how someone acts when they just want to discipline their child so that they will grow up to be a better person. Watching 5 seconds of the video that I randomly picked just now, he says "Bend over or I'll slap your fucking face" and then grabs his daughters face before throwing her toward the wall. That's not parenting; that's a man assaulting someone out of immature rage.
And no, assault is not a "freedom" of a parent.
(I really hope you never become a parent if you find this at all justifiable.)
|
This guys a Judge.... wtf? Must not be like that when he's on the Job.
He's a Monster at home; not only that but he's a coward for beating a Girl like that
Now the Hammer of Justice gonna come down on him he's finished.
|
On November 02 2011 13:20 Mordiford wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2011 13:17 pandaBee wrote:On November 02 2011 13:13 matjlav wrote:On November 02 2011 13:00 pandaBee wrote:On November 02 2011 12:56 matjlav wrote:On November 02 2011 12:52 pandaBee wrote:
And why is a 16 yo girl getting a booty spanking a big deal? spanking is getting off easy. Honestly it's not the physical acts that bother me as much as the whole psychology of it. The fact that he is using his daughter as a punching bag to let out his anger. This is how 6-year-olds should be dealing with anger, not grown men who are supposed to be role models for their children. daughter breaks rules >>> daddy gets angry >>> booty spanking i don't think there's a problem with this. Nope, I completely disagree. There is definitely a problem with that. No one would ever suggest that it's okay for a civilized person to violently react to someone else making them angry, unless it's their child, then people seem to think that it's okay. That's fucked up. As a grown person, it is your job to ignore your instincts to start swinging your fists when you get angry. Grown adults generally understand that they can't violently react to people who make them angry outside of their family, but shitbags like this guy do it when they're at home with their children because they know they'll get away with it and that their children are too weak to fight back. This is different from somberly spanking an 8-year-old post "this hurts you more than it hurts me." This is a coward abusing his power dynamic in the family. And there are tons of parents (including my dad) who have done this, though usually not to such an egregious extent. also how do u know that he's not whipping out the belt just because he's angry? how do u know that he has no justification for doing so (i.e. breaking pre established rules) ? im not talking about the guys personal life in general im talking about the act of disciplining your child. There seem to be two camps on this, I'm in the camp of it doesn't fucking matter if he's beating her because he's angry or because he thinks it's good parenting. It's child abuse regardless, beating the shit out of a defenseless individual isn't okay in any other regard, why should it be alright when dealing with children, I don't see the reasoning here. Because it's their child? Doesn't fucking matter, birthing someone should not give you the liberty to abuse them.
there is a fine shade of gray between abuse and punishment my friend i can say that many punishments are in a sense partially abuse but that is a border that parents decide to cross, as long as it is within legal boundaries (i would argue that some legal boundaries are not lax enough on this matter but that's a different topic altogheter)
Ofc there is a "Ideal" that you believe in that parents should strive for but that doesn't confine the freedoms and choices of parents just because you think so in that way.
|
Go internet hate machine!
This is why it should be illegal to post personal information in the internet. No one has a clue if this is even real, let alone the back story in this. Hell, people on the internet don't even seem to care if they have the right guy in this video. As long as they share the same name, that close enough, right? There is some poor guy in Georgia getting harassed, and assaulted because his name is also Judge William Adams.
If this was illegal, the cops will deal with, if this wasn't illegal, then this is just as wrong as posting the names of Doctors that do abortions, or people that donated money to ban homosexual marriage (ect ect) with the intent of harm being done to them.
No matter how much you may hate someone, it never gives you the right to harm. And hell, it's the internet people, why would you ever believe anything on it with out a credible source first?
|
Canada5155 Posts
On November 02 2011 13:11 Geosensation wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2011 12:56 HawaiianPig wrote:On November 02 2011 12:30 Geosensation wrote:On November 02 2011 12:26 r.Evo wrote:On November 02 2011 12:22 Geosensation wrote:
Glad to see a bit more sense here on TL compared to youtube and reddit. Disciplining your children like this may not be considered the right way to parent now, but it is perfectly legal. I snooped around the Texas Attorney General's website on child abuse and found this:
The law specifically excludes “reasonable” discipline by the child’s parent, guardian, or conservator; corporal punishment is not in itself abusive under the law. An act or omission is abusive only if “observable and material impairment” occurs as a result, or if it causes “substantial harm,” or exposes the child to risk of substantial harm.
Doesn't seem to me like it caused substantial harm or material impairment. YES it is hard to watch and pretty cruel, but parents have the discretion to discipline their children as they see fit.
Also it's just a belt, not a bat. It's not like he's going to kill her or break all the bones in her body. It's superficial harm.
He doesn't deserve to get thrown in jail, disbarred, or any other punishment because he has done nothing illegal based on the video alone. Stop freaking out everyone.
If I slap an adult in the face on the street, will he hit me back? Most likely. If a teacher hits a kid with the flat hand in the face to "teach him/her a lesson", will it go all over the place and will the teacher face consequences? Yes, most likely. If I beat my kid with a belt, multiple times just for the fun of it (HE KEEPS FUCKING COMING BACK IN FOR MORE. THEY USE TWO FUCKING BELTS AT ONE POINT), I can get away with it because "it was reasonable"? If that's the law, the law has to be changed. Why? Because it's inhumane. Plain and simple. So you feel like parents should be told by the government how to raise their kids? Yes? There are certain things that the defence of "raising my kids" does not protect. That claim has always been absurd to me. "They're my kids and the government should butt out." This is such a dehumanizing claim. One would make this same argument for how they handle their personal property. "It's my land and I can do what I want with it." The difference between what you do with and on your private property and how you raise your child is that the latter is a human being. They eventually come of age and enter society. It is public concern. Obviously, how a child is raised greatly impacts how they conduct themselves when they grow up. It needs to be done "properly." What's proper in this case? Very debatable, but "humane" is probably one word I'd assume most people would agree upon. Sticking your genitals together with someone else and making a child does not suddenly deem you to be an authority on what is the best way to raise a child. If beating is okay as a form of punishment, why not sexual abuse? Every time you disobey, daddy sticks it in you? Putting it that way is pretty graphic, yes, but do we not treat assault and sexual abuse as crimes among human beings in any other context? This isn't a matter of how they turn out; there is an immediate wrong in the assault of a person. Why is it a defence to say, "This is how I raise my kids and the government should butt out!" The point here is that this is a matter of public concern. Children are both human and citizens of the country they are in. The reason they are deprived of basic rights, such as the security of person, is a matter of cultural customs. When else is custom a good reason to assault someone? I've already discussed this, but I can see no reasonable argument in favour of corporal punishment as an effective way to teach children. If it's not absolutely necessary to raising a child, why do we allow this infringement of rights to persist? Many people are effectively raised without being beaten. I can see no reasonable answer to this question. Sexual assault on children isn't allowed for parents, obviously. I think cultural custom is a good way to frame laws. That's why parents are given leeway in corporal punishment to their children. It's just the way parenting has traditionally been done. If everyone is doing something you can't make a law against it and turn the entire country into criminals (a good reason why cannabis shouldn't be criminalized) And as the custom moves away from corporal punishment and it is not longer accepted perhaps the law will change accordingly.
I agree with this, and I feel we are at a turning point with respect to the law. If you followed the link in my post, you'll see that my parents raised me with corporal punishment as well. Would I seek damages against my parents? No. Do I think it should be possible? Yes, I think we have come to a point in society where we feel that assault of a person in any form is "wrong."
Of course it isn't a good way to teach children, I absolutely agree with you 100%. Unfortunately, we allow people to make mistakes, and I guess it extends to raising children in the wrong way. I might think that raising a child to believe in creationism and that homosexuals are an affront to the lord, but I shouldn't be able to curtail a parent's right to teach them that. I'm not trying to equate the example I just gave to maliciously beating a child to within an inch of their life. Just that reasonable corporal punishment is a mistake that we allow parents to make.
Right, but the difference between teaching a child to hate homosexuals and hitting a child is that the latter would, in a different context, be a criminal act.
The "raising a child" term here obfuscates the point. When you "raise a child" to believe homosexuals are an abomination, you do so mostly orally. There is nothing society deems overwhelmingly wrong about expressing one's opinions. In fact we hold it dear as a right. Just in the same way we afford someone on the street the same liberty to (hopefully politely) express their viewpoint, whatever it may be, we afford parents the same right to do so to their child.
Consistency in the rule of law is something our society strives for. I simply find it glaringly inconsistent that assault is permitted in this context.
|
On November 02 2011 13:22 matjlav wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2011 13:17 pandaBee wrote:On November 02 2011 13:13 matjlav wrote:On November 02 2011 13:00 pandaBee wrote:On November 02 2011 12:56 matjlav wrote:On November 02 2011 12:52 pandaBee wrote:
And why is a 16 yo girl getting a booty spanking a big deal? spanking is getting off easy. Honestly it's not the physical acts that bother me as much as the whole psychology of it. The fact that he is using his daughter as a punching bag to let out his anger. This is how 6-year-olds should be dealing with anger, not grown men who are supposed to be role models for their children. daughter breaks rules >>> daddy gets angry >>> booty spanking i don't think there's a problem with this. Nope, I completely disagree. There is definitely a problem with that. No one would ever suggest that it's okay for a civilized person to violently react to someone else making them angry, unless it's their child, then people seem to think that it's okay. That's fucked up. As a grown person, it is your job to ignore your instincts to start swinging your fists when you get angry. Grown adults generally understand that they can't violently react to people who make them angry outside of their family, but shitbags like this guy do it when they're at home with their children because they know they'll get away with it and that their children are too weak to fight back. This is different from somberly spanking an 8-year-old post "this hurts you more than it hurts me." This is a coward abusing his power dynamic in the family. And there are tons of parents (including my dad) who have done this, though usually not to such an egregious extent. Ofc there is a "Ideal" that you believe in that parents should strive for but that doesn't confine the freedoms and choices of parents just because you think so in that way. also how do u know that he's not whipping out the belt just because he's angry? how do u know that he has no justification for doing so (i.e. breaking pre established rules) ? im not talking about the guys personal life in general im talking about the act of disciplining your child. Just look at the guy. That is not how someone acts when they just want to discipline their child so that they will grow up to be a better person. Watching 5 seconds of the video that I randomly picked just now, he says "Bend over or I'll slap your fucking face" and then grabs his daughters face before throwing her toward the wall. That's not parenting; that's a man assaulting someone out of immature rage. And no, assault is not a "freedom" of a parent. (I really hope you never become a parent if you find this at all justifiable.)
In the video he was trying to make her turn over so he could slap her ass and NOT her face (obviously he did not awnt to damage her leave long lasting scars in cruelly visible areas of her body, what's wrong with that?)
|
it's a shame because you know that a lot of important people are going to dismiss this as 'merely' a domestic event with no bearing on the father's capacity as a judge. Hopefully, the other concern of the judiciary, i.e. cultivation of respect for and image of the judiciary, is overriding in that respect.
|
On November 02 2011 13:22 r.Evo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2011 13:19 pandaBee wrote:On November 02 2011 13:16 hytonight wrote:On November 02 2011 13:14 pandaBee wrote:On November 02 2011 13:12 hytonight wrote:On November 02 2011 13:09 pandaBee wrote:On November 02 2011 13:06 hytonight wrote:On November 02 2011 13:04 pandaBee wrote:On November 02 2011 13:03 hytonight wrote:On November 02 2011 13:01 pandaBee wrote:
[quote]
it would be just "beating the shit out of her" if he didn't specify that she was not supposed to play internet games
but how do u know that there was never such a mentioning? so he has to threaten her before he can beat the shit out of her..then its justified. good to know you're missing the point what i said isn't about the father making threats. if by threats u mean rules then i guess that would be true but then are u saying that all rules are threats? in a sense yes they are - break the law/rules u get punished. but are they necessary? ask society man. well we have an amendment against cruel and unusual punnishment..id kinda expect a judge to know about that. just because a guy litters a few times doesnt mean you can throw him in prison for life. doing something as small as playing games shouldnt be punished by beating the crap out of her. there is nothing "unusual" about getting spanked for breaking the rules also there is nothing "cruel" about getting spanked for breaking the rules either she didn't suffer any permanent damage and the pain is temporary, also from my knowledge the spanking only lasted a minute or two and she is sixteen years old ffs she should know better at that age. you could say the same thing about rape....and dont even pretend you can justify that rape is not the same thing as getting a light booty spanking with a belt don't even try to make that comparison in this context first off "rape" is by no means a physical punishment, it is a type of attack/assault that devastates both a victim's (yes, victim) mind and body. light booty spanking? bro thats bullshit. and id call her a victim there who suffered an assault which did devastate her body and possibly her mind. to the degree of rape? if a belting like the one i saw in the video is enough to psychologically damage her to an extent for which legal action would be required then she must be one fragile girl. and by fragile i mean she must be in the mind of a 5 year old child. If your rolemodel shows you that beating someone with a belt for "disobediance" is the way to go is not psychologically damaging, I don't know what is. Also where the heck do you keep pulling your age comparisons from? In your mind a 16 year old rape victim is more damaged than a 30 year old one? What kind of logic is this?
actually if its the same "degree" of rape i would say that a 30 year old is more likely to have a easier time dealing with trauma than a 16 year old since the 30 year old is more mature mentally and physically is more likely to have a bigger social circle to help them with the trauma, etc,.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
