"Charlie Morgan" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 17 May 2007 19:28:39 -0700, "Capt. JG"
wrote:

"Maxprop" wrote in message
news

"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
"Bart" wrote in message
oups.com...
On May 16, 7:13 am, "jlrogers" wrote:
New Zealand effectively outlawed smacking children on Wednesday...
"It is about our children and what I believe is their God-given right
to
grow up secure in the love of their family, valued as equal citizens
to
the
rest of us and without the constant threat of legalised violence
being
used
against them," the law's sponsor, Sue Bradford of the Green Party,
said
in
parliament.

The law change, first proposed in 2005, had been strongly opposed by
conservative family and church groups, who said it would make
criminals
of
parents.

Opponents held public marches and rallies outside parliament.

Mainstream church groups and child welfare organisations had strongly
supported the change.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/new...acking-of-chil...

What if one good smack at the right time is all that is
needed to straighten out a kid.

This is another example of liberalism at it's worst. Parents
won't stop smacking their kids if they deserve it. And worse
what happens if the kids call the cops. If I was a parent and
they did that, I'd say sure, your take him and support him.




Beating a child is never effective as a solution to behavior problems.
While outlawing it is stupid, the concept of doing it is also stupid.

What do you qualify as "beating a child?" Is a quick swat to the butt
"beating" in your vernacular? If so, I'm beginning to see what went
wrong
with you. g



A quick swat on the butt for a baby/toddler might be excessively harsh and
painful. Hitting a child is never a good idea.

Children learn exactly what you teach them. Hitting them teaches them
that that
is the way to get what you want from others.

So who was it that beat the **** outta you? Mom? Dad? Your siblings?

Max