Pope Francis: parents can smack their children for bad behaviour

  • Thread starter Thread starter SWolf
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Robert_Sock said:
I used to get spanked with a strap and I feel an ever present scare that remains in my memory. It was psychologically traumatic for me, and the spanking did absolutely nothing positive. I can’t help but think that many people using corporal punishment are worshipers of parental power and get off in inflicting severe pain. There are more productive parenting methods that encourage LOVE!
Click to expand...
Yeah, my dad told me the same thing basically about his experience with a strap. I don’t think you are alone. (I’ve never been there.)
 
Re the type of discipline used,I think it is important to view it within the context of the particular era. What was considered within the norm,prior to the sixties,while it does look like abuse today,that was not the case then.
I don’t recall my Dad ever lashing out in anger.It was usually a few swats with the belt,after we were told of the impending spanking.
That is a huge difference in terms of how the punishment is viewed and received. Again,I and my siblings knew we were loved and cared for.The occasional spanking was taken in that vein.
Having said that,I don’t condone that type if discipline,as a good time out on the stairs always was effective for my kids, when they were small I rarely swatted their bottoms.Yet,attempts at verbal reasoning at certain age is ineffective.There has to be something more concrete with younger kids.
 
The Bible also says we should sell our daughters into slavery (Exodus 21:7), but we don’t still do that…do we? :confused:
 
eatpraylove11 said:
The Bible also says we should sell our daughters into slavery (Exodus 21:7), but we don’t still do that…do we? :confused:
Click to expand...
Well, I am sure that Pope Francis would not want you to sell your daughters into slavery either.
Nevertherless, it sounds like he is okay with a smack on the bottom when they are naughty.

I am pretty sure though, that he is considered much more than the Bible for direction.
 
Mystical_Seeker said:
But for mammals, “memory” is almost entirely contingent upon activity of the brain, which we call “thinking.” Their frontal cortex is not as developed as humans, although some are larger than others; I presume this is what you are referring to but I can’t really tell. There is something called “muscle memory” but mostly that is now thought to also be a cognitive process. Even pigeons can learn – they even know how to take “delayed gratification” into account, to get a higher reward. Like investing in a 402(k) plan or something.
Click to expand...
Rational thought is not entirely an act of memory or thought only. It is a structured way of thinking in more advanced/critical/systematic forms that generally focus on deriving truth or accuracy in our conceptualization of the reality in which we exist.

Not only are animals incapable of this kind of thought, but I suspect that the majority of humanity is also without training. Since animals cannot form more complex and systematic forms of thinking, rational thought is beyond their capabilities regardless of the training given to them.
 
eatpraylove11 said:
The Bible also says we should sell our daughters into slavery (Exodus 21:7), but we don’t still do that…do we? :confused:
Click to expand...
No, the Bible does NOT tell us to sell our daughters into slavery there or anywhere else.

Exodus 21: 7-11

“7 “And if a man sells his daughter to be a female slave, she shall not go out as the male slaves do. 8 If she does not please her master, who has betrothed her to himself, then he shall let her be redeemed. He shall have no right to sell her to a foreign people, since he has dealt deceitfully with her. 9 And if he has betrothed her to his son, he shall deal with her according to the custom of daughters. 10 If he takes another wife, he shall not diminish her food, her clothing, and her marriage rights. 11 And if he does not do these three for her, then she shall go out free, without paying money.”

This passage limits the way in which a man can sell his daughter, which was a practice of that time, sort of a reverse dowery.

Why do post without distinguishing the difference between placing such a limitation vrs issuing an imperative command to do the thing being limited?
 
Parents who use corporal punishment must be mindful that they do not take away their children’s dignity and self-respect. ‘Spanking’, after a certain age, which can be much younger than many parents think, is for many children an excruciating sexual humiliation. I have never understood how parents and teachers feel they had the right to violate the sexual privacy of children as a kind of punishment. It seems to me to be grossly immodest, particularly during puberty.
 
recentrevert said:
Parents who use corporal punishment must be mindful that they do not take away their children’s dignity and self-respect. ‘Spanking’, after a certain age, which can be much younger than many parents think, is for many children an excruciating sexual humiliation. I have never understood how parents and teachers feel they had the right to violate the sexual privacy of children as a kind of punishment. It seems to me to be grossly immodest, particularly during puberty.
Click to expand...
While agree that the dignity of the child is a limitation to the use of corporal punishment, you really lost me on how spanking is a sexual thing at all.

When I used corporal punishment, I first explained what the child did wrong, gave them a chance to explain their actions, and if I still felt they were wrong, I then told them exactly what the punishment would be, grounding, loss of privs, how many swats they would get, etc and I administered the corporal punishment at the same place each time, pants up and bent over the bed in our bedroom. After the punishment, I gave them a hug and explained that this was for their training and helping them to be a better adult when they grew up.

I didn’t have to spank my daughter after about the age of nine nor my son after the age of 14 or so. As they matured we gave them responsibilities and corresponding privileges.

The sequence of punishment was to try:
  1. explanation and admonishment, i.e. scolding, and future consequences were also explained should they repeat the offense. This could be done anywhere and immediately. This was 90% of our disciplining of our children.
  2. grounding them for a day. This was usually after the scolding proved ineffectual for that incidence, like acting up or goofing off.
  3. removal of privileges, some or all, coupled with grounding for the day.
  4. grounding for a week with loss of all privileges as well. This was generally the nuclear option. Grounding for longer than a week seemed to have no additional impact than a week long grounding, and since further grounding was off the table while they were still grounded it was an inconvenient obstacle to more granularity when punishing them.
  5. Corporal punishment, which was always with a belt once they started school, and they would be hit on the glutes. Usually it was just one swat, but with my son a couple of times I did three swats because it was a repeated violation and more egregious.
My son preferred getting the swats to getting nuked for a week. My daughter would modify anything about her behavior to not get a swat.

I fail to see how any of this is even remotely sexual.

Perhaps you could explain that to me.
 
RGCheek said:
No, the Bible does NOT tell us to sell our daughters into slavery there or anywhere else.

Exodus 21: 7-11

“7 “And if a man sells his daughter to be a female slave, she shall not go out as the male slaves do. 8 If she does not please her master, who has betrothed her to himself, then he shall let her be redeemed. He shall have no right to sell her to a foreign people, since he has dealt deceitfully with her. 9 And if he has betrothed her to his son, he shall deal with her according to the custom of daughters. 10 If he takes another wife, he shall not diminish her food, her clothing, and her marriage rights. 11 And if he does not do these three for her, then she shall go out free, without paying money.”

This passage limits the way in which a man can sell his daughter, which was a practice of that time, sort of a reverse dowery.

Why do post without distinguishing the difference between placing such a limitation vrs issuing an imperative command to do the thing being limited?
Click to expand...
If you ask Jewish rabbis who are familiar with these kinds of laws in a way that no Christian needs to be, what you will find is that slavery when it came to young women was nothing like slavery as it exists today, or as it exists in the popular imagination of today either.

What female slavery involved was a social mechanism for the social mobility, where the goal would be to join the poorer family of the young girl with the richer family who buys her, with the objective of marriage being the ultimate goal.
People tend to fly into fits of hysteria when the word slavery is even mentioned, so discussion is pretty much fruitless. Still, those who distress over increasing levels of disparity in our own societies might have something to learn from the Bible as to how a tribe from the Bronze Age dealt with similar problems in their own society.
 
RGCheek said:
Rational thought is not entirely an act of memory or thought only. It is a structured way of thinking in more advanced/critical/systematic forms that generally focus on deriving truth or accuracy in our conceptualization of the reality in which we exist.

Not only are animals incapable of this kind of thought, but I suspect that the majority of humanity is also without training. Since animals cannot form more complex and systematic forms of thinking, rational thought is beyond their capabilities regardless of the training given to them.
Click to expand...
Ok. :coolinoff:

You may be right. 👍

:tiphat:
 
RGCheek said:
I’m not sure what you mean.

Did I go into too much detail?
Click to expand...
No. I just got weary of caring whether our discussion was going to go anywhere productive. :rolleyes:

But, you may be right, and that’s ok with me. 👍
 
Mystical_Seeker said:
No. I just got weary of caring whether our discussion was going to go anywhere productive. :rolleyes:

But, you may be right, and that’s ok with me. 👍
Click to expand...
And I think you are wrong, and that is OK with me too.

😃

Seriously, we are all making our way through life by the best lights we have available to us.

As long as we have the freedom to pursue our lives as we believe we should I am happy all things considered.

Have fun.
 
recentrevert said:
Parents who use corporal punishment must be mindful that they do not take away their children’s dignity and self-respect. ‘Spanking’, after a certain age, which can be much younger than many parents think, is for many children an excruciating sexual humiliation. I have never understood how parents and teachers feel they had the right to violate the sexual privacy of children as a kind of punishment. It seems to me to be grossly immodest, particularly during puberty.
Click to expand...
:confused:
 
GEddie said:
I agree that one should never hit a spouse. But we do not have corrective authority to do so.
Children are a different matter. Scripture itself teaches that “beating with the rod” will save children’s “soul from Hell.”

I wouldn’t presume to disagree with the word of God.

If I had children, and if it remained legal in this country (it might not), they would get paddled.

BTW, it is possible to hurt a child deeply without physical force of any kind, and it is likewise very possible to spank wisely without inflicting harm.

ICXC NIKA.
Click to expand...
Please… I am not here to discuss Bible inerrancy…
The Bible has a lot of precepts that I don’t keep all the time. Especially ones in the Old Testament.
What you are basically saying is that the only reason why one shouldn’t beat ones spouse is because it’s not mentioned in the Bible?
How about reading the examples of studies I linked to and seeing the fruits of spanking?
“By their fruits you will recognize them”

To all the other people that think that now there’s more people in prison and disrespect because there’s less spanking… I just have 2 phrases:
1-Correlation does not mean causation.
2-In the last 50 years we also saw changes in other things… like technology, vaccination, divorce… it’s not like one single factor can affect children’s outcome.

God bless,
D.
 
RGCheek said:
While agree that the dignity of the child is a limitation to the use of corporal punishment, you really lost me on how spanking is a sexual thing at all.

When I used corporal punishment, I first explained what the child did wrong, gave them a chance to explain their actions, and if I still felt they were wrong, I then told them exactly what the punishment would be, grounding, loss of privs, how many swats they would get, etc and I administered the corporal punishment at the same place each time, pants up and bent over the bed in our bedroom. After the punishment, I gave them a hug and explained that this was for their training and helping them to be a better adult when they grew up.

I didn’t have to spank my daughter after about the age of nine nor my son after the age of 14 or so. As they matured we gave them responsibilities and corresponding privileges.

The sequence of punishment was to try:
  1. explanation and admonishment, i.e. scolding, and future consequences were also explained should they repeat the offense. This could be done anywhere and immediately. This was 90% of our disciplining of our children.
  2. grounding them for a day. This was usually after the scolding proved ineffectual for that incidence, like acting up or goofing off.
  3. removal of privileges, some or all, coupled with grounding for the day.
  4. grounding for a week with loss of all privileges as well. This was generally the nuclear option. Grounding for longer than a week seemed to have no additional impact than a week long grounding, and since further grounding was off the table while they were still grounded it was an inconvenient obstacle to more granularity when punishing them.
  5. Corporal punishment, which was always with a belt once they started school, and they would be hit on the glutes. Usually it was just one swat, but with my son a couple of times I did three swats because it was a repeated violation and more egregious.
My son preferred getting the swats to getting nuked for a week. My daughter would modify anything about her behavior to not get a swat.

I fail to see how any of this is even remotely sexual.

Perhaps you could explain that to me.
Click to expand...
It is sexually humiliating because the buttocks are a private, sexual part of the body. Bending over so that someone can hit you on them is sexually humiliating. Being forced to remove clothing to suffer this is an ever greater invasion of sexual privacy. Parents are not supposed to interfere with their children’s sexual privacy. Ask yourself whether you would feel grossly violated if someone did this to you.

If corporal punishment is inflicted, it can be done on a non-sexual part of the body.

I would also add that this bizarre form of beating is extremely indecent.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top