You can't legislate morality...right?

1/27/2007 8:14:12 PM

Spanking is not a moral issue.

You know that.

1/27/2007 8:22:11 PM

Why isn't it? Is it moral to spank your children or not...that seems like a moral issue.

I wasn't spanked growing up, and I don't plan to spank my own children, but negative reinforcement is a legitimate teaching strategy and if parents want to use it (certainly within reason) then the government can shut the fuck up about it.

1/27/2007 8:31:47 PM

It isn't a moral issue when they support it, duh.

1/27/2007 8:38:45 PM

Quote :

"I wasn't spanked growing up, and I don't plan to spank my own children, but negative reinforcement is a legitimate teaching strategy and if parents want to use it (certainly within reason) then the government can shut the fuck up about it."

1. What does any of that have to do with morality?
2. Spanking your kids is not "negative reinforcement." It's "positive punishment." If you don't know that, how do you expect us to trust you when you say it's a legitimate teaching strategy?

I assumed this law was designed to make it easier for social services/workers to force people to take parenting classes.

[Edited on January 27, 2007 at 8:42 PM. Reason : sss]

1/27/2007 8:40:25 PM

Spanking your kids is, by definition, negative reinforcement.

1/27/2007 8:41:26 PM

^ Who gives a shit?

If you touch a hot stove that's negative reinforcement as well, but I guaran-damn-tee ya that you won't touch it again.

1/27/2007 8:42:24 PM

^^No, it isn't. When you spank your kids, are you trying to reinforce a behavior? No, you're not, and that's why it's not called reinforcement. It's called punishment.

[Edited on January 27, 2007 at 8:44 PM. Reason : sss]

1/27/2007 8:43:47 PM

AHA, SPOOKYJON AND BGMIMS DIDN'T KNOW SOMETHING I DO!

^And you don't know shit about operant conditioning. At least the other two know something.

[Edited on January 27, 2007 at 8:53 PM. Reason : WOO HOO, FOR ONCE!!!]

1/27/2007 8:52:19 PM

Tubby please. Unless you're a glutton for punishment, most people will not touch a hot stove twice.

What's funny is that in your rush to be a smartass you ^ yourself, and while I'm not surprised that you probably do talk to the voices in your head on a regular basis, it's still humorous nonetheless.

1/27/2007 8:58:37 PM

AHA, I've been in a silly mood all day.

Touching a stove is not "negative reinforcement." Look it up and think about it. It's not my job to teach you shit.

1/27/2007 9:01:57 PM

i dont care what it is, the government needs to step the fuck back from this because it's crossing WAY too many lines. If this passes i hope it gets pulled down as unconstitutional - not becausue I think you ought to go whallop newborns mind you but because it implies a right to go into peoples homes and lock them up for something that's not even REMOTELY abuse (abuse being a different story of course).

Damn, I cheated once in 3rd grade and I got such an ass whupping for it it wasn't even FUNNY.
Did I EVER even think about doing it again? You fucking bet I didn't...

1/27/2007 11:09:06 PM

I dunno, guys.

If you resort to hitting a two-year-old, I think you need to take a parenting class or two.

It looks like that is what this law aims to do.

I mean, I'm gonna be really pissed if this is all a scam to make more money.

And I already see some enforcement issues with this as well. Rich people who smack their kids at home won't be affected by this. But the single parent of four who smacks a kid in the checkout line might get slammed.

1/27/2007 11:19:26 PM

^ It's not really *about* hitting a 2 year old is the thing, i mean the law is, but the issues people are presenting aren't.

i think that spanking can be effective but that issue aside, the enforcement is ..a HUGE problem.

1/27/2007 11:24:07 PM

I understand that people don't want the government telling them how to raise their kids and curbing the very freedom this country was founded on or whatever...

I get that.

But I'm not sure I value your freedom to hit a two year-old.

1/27/2007 11:41:47 PM

How many two year olds have you raised, exactly?

Nobody is for beating the ever loving shit out of a 2 year old, to the point where there are bruises and such.

But sometimes that butt needs to be beaten red, because they need to know right from wrong.

I am amazed that the ones that are so big on privacy and keeping the gov't out of our bedrooms are the biggest advocates of dictating how to raise children 101...

1/27/2007 11:44:59 PM

Quote :

"I am amazed that the ones that are so big on privacy and keeping the gov't out of our bedrooms are the biggest advocates of dictating how to raise children 101..."

I'm not the biggest advocate of dictating how to raise children 101. I think everybody could benefit from taking a parenting class. But if you think you have all the answers and you just wanna do what your parents did or what comes easy or naturally or whatever, I support your right to do that, and I also think you're lame as fuck.

I don't give a shit about this law one way or the other. If they wanted to pass a law saying you couldn't show your two-year-old R-rated movies, I'd be all against that. But spanking a two-year-old? I'm not gonna get all riled up to defend your right to smack a child.

[Edited on January 27, 2007 at 11:51 PM. Reason : sss]

1/27/2007 11:51:20 PM

Psssh, how will I sleep at night, knowing that Bridget thinks that I am lame as fuck?

It has nothing to do with what my parents did or whatever bullshit you want to tell yourself, it has to do with knowing right from wrong.

1/27/2007 11:54:29 PM

Quote :

"And I already see some enforcement issues with this as well. Rich people who smack their kids at home won't be affected by this. But the single parent of four who smacks a kid in the checkout line might get slammed. "

But the rich people don't spank their kids.

1/27/2007 11:57:08 PM

Quote :

"It has nothing to do with what my parents did or whatever bullshit you want to tell yourself, it has to do with knowing right from wrong."

I wasn't talking about spanking there. I was talking about parenting in general.

^I was afraid someone would say that.

1/27/2007 11:59:03 PM

I'm not surprised that, even though you're not a parent, you claim to know what is best for the chilluns...

1/28/2007 12:03:11 AM

^I think it's best that people take parenting classes.

OH, HOW PRESUMPTUOUS OF ME!

1/28/2007 12:09:33 AM

I don't necessarily disagree, doesn't rule out spanking however.

1/28/2007 12:10:10 AM

Quote :

"But sometimes that butt needs to be beaten red, because they need to know right from wrong. "

Whether or not this works to achieve your goal depends on the kid. Some kids, this could have the opposite affect.

From a clinical standpoint, spanking is the laziest way to teach a lesson, and the one most likely to have negative side affects, but it can work.

1/28/2007 12:24:17 AM

I agree, it varies from child to child. But it shouldn't be ruled out for some gay ass pansy reason.

1/28/2007 12:26:05 AM

That's true, it's moronic to ban spanking completely.

1/28/2007 12:29:11 AM

i'm of the opinion it depends on the child. spanking works very well for some, they won't ever do it again and learn their lesson when other methods fail. others it just pisses them off and eventually will cause larger issues between parent/child. i think it's up to the parent to have the discrection on what works and what doesn't. there is no standard guide to go by.

i'm definitely of the opinion the government shouldn't have to right to tell me whether it's right or wrong. if you want to cry abuse about a spanking, then lets ban every other disciplinary method. are alternative forms of enforcement not emotional abuse to a certain extent?

Quote :

"California requires a single smog check to register your car. North Carolina requires year-over-year inspections"

uh, emmissions standards and requirements are MUCH stricter and more regulated than nc. that is definitely one thing ca has regulated to death. i mean hell, manufactuers have even had to have specific seperate models to meet ca requirements for the past 2.5 decades. we actually have it pretty easy in nc. nothing older than 96 requires emission testing, safety only.

[Edited on January 28, 2007 at 7:07 AM. Reason : .]

1/28/2007 7:00:06 AM

Quote :

"2. Spanking your kids is not "negative reinforcement." It's "positive punishment." If you don't know that, how do you expect us to trust you when you say it's a legitimate teaching strategy?"

You are right. In psychology terms (which I got an A+ in) it is positive punishment.

In the way the term "negative reinforcement" is used in conversation, it is absolutely negative reinforcement. But you are correct in that in scientific terms it is not considered as such.

I still stand by my statement that it is a legitimate teaching strategy. Also, I'd like to know why we shouldn't be allowed to spank kids if it isn't a moral issue. Mind you, I think we legislate morality all the time and am ok with it as long as its something we can ALL agree on (e.g. that stealing is wrong).

1/28/2007 10:33:07 AM

Quote :

"Also, I'd like to know why we shouldn't be allowed to spank kids if it isn't a moral issue. Mind you, I think we legislate morality all the time and am ok with it as long as its something we can ALL agree on (e.g. that stealing is wrong)."

In terms of the government, I don't think they should be involved in moral issues at all. Stealing is not a moral issue; by not tolerating theft, we create order and hold shit together and whatnot. It's very important to society, particularly ours, that theft not be tolerated because money, property, and the guarantee of those things are vital to our economy. I wouldn't rob somebody because I don't want anybody robbing me.

As far as spanking goes, I'm not positive how I feel about it. It weirds me out that somebody would spank these guys:







I'm not trying for pathos here. I'm just reminding you how small these kids really are. I've yet to see anyone present any evidence that spanking two-year-olds is effective and not damaging. This isn't a moral issue. If our children are being harmed, that's bad for society...there are no moral judgements there.

And, again, I think this is really just a way for them to force some shitty parents into parenting classes. If you can't get em for abuse; you can get em for spanking.

1/28/2007 3:50:49 PM

Quote :

"I'm not trying for pathos here. I'm just reminding you how small these kids really are."

I'm calling BS. You put those pictures there for pathos.

1/28/2007 4:02:18 PM

I promise I didn't.

I don't get upset or emotional when I think about any of those children being spanked, but I do get annoyed at how stupid that would be.

No pathos. I swear.

1/28/2007 4:05:36 PM

NO PATHOS, I SWEAR

1/28/2007 4:18:57 PM

Quote :

"bgmims: You are right. In psychology terms (which I got an A+ in) it is positive punishment"

i think Wolfpack2K already demonstrated the fallacy of appealing to (your own) authority as an argumentative tool.

1/28/2007 4:22:48 PM

Quote :

"uh, emmissions standards and requirements are MUCH stricter and more regulated than nc. that is definitely one thing ca has regulated to death. i mean hell, manufactuers have even had to have specific seperate models to meet ca requirements for the past 2.5 decades. we actually have it pretty easy in nc. nothing older than 96 requires emission testing, safety only."

I disagree with your statement. The amount of regulation necessary is relative to impact. It'd be stupid for me to compare the emissions standards themselves because what's appropriate for NC is not appropriate for California.

Consider: the Bay Area (where I live) has over 10 million residents packed into a relatively small space. That's nearly 2/3 of NC's population, in a single urban zone. And that's not counting the other 20 million people in California, also in similarly dense urban areas. That's a lot of smog in one place!

The question in my mind is ongoing regulation. Once your car meets the standards once, you never have to physically get it tested again (except in a few special circumstances).

North Carolina, by contrast, basically beats you over the head with pointless inspections every year. The emissions standards are pretty lax, but they vary by county.

In California the DMV is basically just a revenue-generating machine (and it's still pretty cheap). In NC it's another strong arm of the state. In general it''s been my experience that NC is stricter about pretty much everything car-related. For example: police roadblocks every other Tuesday on major roads. The constant beating of the ALE drums and the DUI brigades (ok, ok, we get it already). Click it or Ticket! banners everywhere.

It's pretty hilarious, really, when you consider that ultimately most cities in NC barely have cab services.

1/29/2007 3:37:03 AM

Quote :

" I am amazed that the ones that are so big on privacy and keeping the gov't out of our bedrooms are the biggest advocates of dictating how to raise children 101..."

See, I don't know ... right now the government requires us to receive at least primary education. It also requires of us education to drive on our public roads.

Personally I don't find the idea unappealing that people should be required to know something about raising kids before they become a legal guardian.

The government shouldn't ban spanking, for sure. But there are a lot of dumb people out there with kids. Maybe that's the bigger problem this woman from Mountain View should be looking to solve.

Even if you do choose to spank your two-year-old, it's something you do carefully and with great consideration. Given the number of moronic parents I see in public, somehow I don't think that's usually the case. My faith in humanity is just not that great.

Granted, if the government had to educate people away from every stupid/classless move they make, we'd spend more on schools than everything else combined.

1/29/2007 4:14:22 AM

Quote :

"Personally I don't find the idea unappealing that people should be required to know something about raising kids before they become a legal guardian."

I know the feeling, but the problem comes from the fact that there are many different, and successful, paths for raising children. Do we have to legislate the "better" or every choice a parent has? Should we ban grounding, because lecturing is more productive?

Also, Bridget, I'd like to ask for some evidence that spanking is overwhelmingly harmful to youth. I'm not denying that it exists, but I think that there should be some burden of proof for the matter. Much of what I have found on the subject is conflicted at best.

1/29/2007 10:47:39 AM

nm point made after the statement already.. I didn't read through the whole thread..

[Edited on January 29, 2007 at 4:21 PM. Reason : x]

1/29/2007 4:20:12 PM

Quote :

"which I got an A+ in"

well aren't you just the well qualified expert then! sorry, just joking.

Quote :

"The amount of regulation necessary is relative to impact"

i agree. when i said regulated to death, i didn't mean it wasn't neccessary. the only real issue i have with ca code is their views and practices on aftermarket modifications.

Quote :

"Once your car meets the standards once, you never have to physically get it tested again (except in a few special circumstances)."

yes, but ca is MUCH more active about enforcing their codes than nc. having your car's emissions equipment, etc. inspected is routine during a traffic stop in alot of cases. the fines/penalties for violating their codes is also much stiffer. i've never heard of that happen to anyone in nc, unless there was just some blatant issue.

also, thanks to "the fast and the furious" crowd, the required inspections will probably be increased in the coming years for ca.

Quote :

"The emissions standards are pretty lax, but they vary by county."

not any more, it's standardized now. every county in nc now requires emissions testing for vehicles 1996 and newer (obd II). anything older than 1996 is safety only. in some ways it's better, some worse.

Quote :

"For example: police roadblocks every other Tuesday on major roads. The constant beating of the ALE drums and the DUI brigades (ok, ok, we get it already). Click it or Ticket! banners everywhere."

i agree. don't even get me started on all that, lol.

[Edited on January 29, 2007 at 4:55 PM. Reason : .]

1/29/2007 4:53:45 PM

Quote :

" I know the feeling, but the problem comes from the fact that there are many different, and successful, paths for raising children. Do we have to legislate the "better" or every choice a parent has? Should we ban grounding, because lecturing is more productive? "

I'm not saying we ban anything. I was suggesting that public education in parenting makes sense.

1/30/2007 12:50:26 AM

Quote :

"Also, Bridget, I'd like to ask for some evidence that spanking is overwhelmingly harmful to youth. I'm not denying that it exists, but I think that there should be some burden of proof for the matter. Much of what I have found on the subject is conflicted at best."

It's absolutely conflicted. chembob hinted at one reason why it's very difficult to study this...people who make less money and are less educated are more likely to be toddler spankers. So we don't know whether we should associate their children's future behavioral problems with the spankings or any of the other environmental factors. I've read study summarries from back in the day when spanking was more common among all groups, and they are conflicting.

Here's another thing we haven't discussed: does spanking actually work? Everybody says it does; when all else fails, you gotta bust out the spanking, right? I think I'll pick on wolfpack0122:

Quote :

"^^ I do. When my 2 1/2 yr old son repeatedly throws things at you, repeatedly tries to hit you, or is doing something over and over that he knows is wrong and always stoppped doing them before when we told him to stop."

I'm gonna go out on a limb and say the spanking isn't working. It sounds like he's tried telling him to stop and also tried spanking--nothing else. And it also sounds like his kid continues to misbehave.

But, for some reason, wp0122 is sold on the idea that these spankings are working.

And he's also missed the fact that TODDLERS MISBEHAVE!!! They're fucking toddlers. If you get your toddler to stop doing something, using any discipline method, it's pretty much guaranteed that he will be back at it within an hour to a couple days. But parents forget this and they get all frustrated and exasperated, talking about how nothing works...of course they keep misbehaving...they're toddlers, remember?

Here's 15 pages on why children should never be spanked (pg. 12 puts it all together):
http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2/CP67Chap-9.pdf

There's some in there about how spanking is damaging. But they also focus on why spanking doesn't even work very well so why take the risk of hurting your children if it's less effective anyway. Oh, that's right, reasoning with your children and coming up with creative punishments is harder than just hitting them until they cry and beg you to stop and tell you they hate you. Or is it?

[Edited on January 30, 2007 at 4:23 PM. Reason : sss]

1/30/2007 4:15:35 PM

Quote :

"Oh, that's right, reasoning with your children and coming up with creative punishments is harder than just hitting them until they cry and beg you to stop and tell you they hate you. Or is it?"

Just so we're clear...you say toddlers misbehave because they are toddlers, and yet your solution is reasoning with them?


And I'm interested in this kind of thing, because I want to be a non-spanking parent one day. Can you help me understand this:

Quote :

"An example of an alternative to spanking for breaking time-out is what they call the “escape-barrier” method. For the escape-barrier method, a child who breaks time-out is placed in a room with a waist high piece of plywood held across the open door for a period of only one minute. The barrier method required an average of eight repetitions before the child was trained to stay in time-out by himself, but so did spanking."

So, like, the kid leaves time-out and then you stick him in a room with a two-by-four "blocking" his exit for 1 minute and then put him back in the time-out chair? I'm not trying to be demeaning to the method, I'm trying to understand how the hell it possibly works.

[Edited on January 30, 2007 at 4:39 PM. Reason : .]

1/30/2007 4:32:46 PM

Quote :

"Just so we're clear...you say toddlers misbehave because they are toddlers, and yet your solution is reasoning with them?"

Just because they're toddlers isn't a good reason to let em run wild and do whatever they want, but, when considering punishments and discipline methods, you should always remember that they're toddlers and they will misbehave again, generally no matter what you do. In the short-run, other methods are just as effective as spanking so we should recognize that it will be a very short short-run when it comes to toddlers and focus on the long-run. This is a good time to lay the preliminary groundwork for the development of a strong conscience. If you think spanking helps to achieve that (which I know you don't), then you're willfully ignorant and there's nothing I can say to help you.

So yes, reasoning/creative punishment...

Quote :

"So, like, the kid leaves time-out and then you stick him in a room with a two-by-four "blocking" his exit for 1 minute and then put him back in the time-out chair? I'm not trying to be demeaning to the method, I'm trying to understand how the hell it possibly works."

I have no idea how that's supposed to work. I'm not a big fan of time-out anyway.

[Edited on January 30, 2007 at 5:05 PM. Reason : sss]

1/30/2007 4:56:20 PM

I already said a few times that I wasn't spanked and don't plan to spank, but if you think that 18 month olds understand reasoning, but not pain, I'm not sure I can take you seriously.

That aside, can you help me with some of these alternative parenting methods for misbehavior. What books do you recommend that actually give the whole Nanny 911 guide to making them behave?

This might should be done through PM instead, so feel free if you'd rather.

1/30/2007 4:59:45 PM

Quote :

"I already said a few times that I wasn't spanked and don't plan to spank, but if you think that 18 month olds understand reasoning, but not pain, I'm not sure I can take you seriously."

I think they understand pain.

And I shouldn't have said reasoning the way I did because, you're right, they won't reason with you. But you can reason to them. Explain what they're doing that's wrong and why it's wrong.

1/30/2007 5:09:59 PM

^I see your point. I really just won't know how to deal with it until I am faced with a misbehaving 18 month old for whom I am responsible. I don't want to be one of those parents who's kid is a total terror and they simply keep saying "Daddy doesn't like it when you hit him, Sue. It makes daddy sad."

But, if you ever do bump into some book references, please PM them to me, I do actually care about this.

1/30/2007 5:13:44 PM

just as long as no one tells me I can't spank my wife

1/30/2007 8:56:18 PM

^lol

i was a holy terror as a child. nothing short of a severe ass beating with a belt got things through my head. i remember my parents, especially my mom, trying about every trick in the book.

i remember my dad telling me one time he'd put the fear of God in me with his hands if that's what it took. it did.

like i said before, i think it depends on personality. valid for some, bad idea for others.

of course, i think most of us can probably just shut up until we actually have kids of our own.

1/31/2007 1:47:48 AM

If severe ass beatings worked, you were not a holy terror. You were a total pussy.

2/2/2007 2:15:08 PM

Quote :

"If severe ass beatings worked, you were not a holy terror. You were a total pussy."

I doubt many people would call these guys pussies:

2/3/2007 8:06:23 PM

^I assumed he wasn't talking about himself when he was a toddler. Unless you really think his parents gave him a "severe ass beating with a belt" when he was 2-years-old.

And, yeah, if you're one of those guys who claims spanking was the only thing that worked cause you were such a badass kid, I would call you a pussy for giving in to a beating. If you think you're right about something and are willing to take it to the corporal punishment stage, a little pain ain't shit.

[Edited on February 3, 2007 at 9:11 PM. Reason : sss]

2/3/2007 9:11:01 PM