Is it okay to hit your children?

[Draka]

Well, everybody else started to talk about spanking. But I also don't see a problem with giving a kid a cuffing on the ear, either, or hitting thier hand with a switch, or things of that nature. I definiltey woudn't condone punching a child. I don't think you can do that striclty in the sense of discipline as you can with the others.

a cuffing on the ear? That doesn't sound right to me...what exactly do you mean?

and a switch ??? you use something other than your open hand to physically discipline your child? I don't see that as in the "sense of discipline" at all.

 

[Darkdale]

By your reference to pacifists, are we to take it that you are a non-pacifist ?

I would appreciate your candidness on this, so we know where you are coming from.

Cheers

Actually, I am the one who made reference to pacifists; and no, I am not one.

 

[Aqualung]

a cuffing on the ear? That doesn't sound right to me...what exactly do you mean?

and a switch ??? you use something other than your open hand to physically discipline your child? I don't see that as in the "sense of discipline" at all.

Yeah. What's wrong with that? A switch acoss the hand. Not like whip them like he was claiming to be the son of god, or something.

 

[Kowalski]

Actually, I am the one who made reference to pacifists; and no, I am not one.

Whatever, I thought so it shows. Now we are clear about where we all stand.

Cheers
K

 

[Darkdale]

Whatever, I thought so it shows. Now we are clear about where we all stand.

Cheers
K

I can almost guarantee that you'll never run across a heathen pacifist. lol That'd be like running into a Buddhist who cares for nothing but possessions.

 

[michel]

Or a Buddhist activist.

 

[Draka]

Yeah. What's wrong with that? A switch acoss the hand. Not like whip them like he was claiming to be the son of god, or something.

What's wrong with that??? You have to ask??? It just seems reminiscent of the days that parents would send their kids out to cut a switch for their own whooping. WOW.

So if that is fine to you for an unruly child...how about an unruly spouse? Is it fine to physically punish a spouse as long as it is done "with love"???

My god you scare me.

 

[Aqualung]

What's wrong with that??? You have to ask??? It just seems reminiscent of the days that parents would send their kids out to cut a switch for their own whooping. WOW.

Yep. And were kids somehow more violent back then? Were they morally less? No. I'd say that if they weren't equal to kids now, that they were better.

So if that is fine to you for an unruly child...how about an unruly spouse? Is it fine to physically punish a spouse as long as it is done "with love"???

adults are different than children. They can respond to actually talkings-to, they can reason a lot better, and they know how to cooperate and to give up their wants for the common good. Children don't know how to do that.

 

[Draka]

adults are different than children. They can respond to actually talkings-to, they can reason a lot better, and they know how to cooperate and to give up their wants for the common good. Children don't know how to do that.

They do if you teach them.

 

[Aqualung]

They do if you teach them.

Nope. children are very personal. They don't care yet about other people. That's just developmental. Their brains haven't developed enough to do that. It's a fact. If you ask a child "would you rather save one rich man or 10 poor men, which would you do." Until a certain age (which is variable to a small degree) all children will say the rich man, because then they might get a reward. You might think that a little kid actually "cares" about other people, but until a certain age, he only cares about not getting punished for being mean to other people. It's all very personal, where the kid only thinks about himself.

 

[Draka]

Nope. children are very personal. They don't care yet about other people. That's just developmental. Their brains haven't developed enough to do that. It's a fact. If you ask a child "would you rather save one rich man or 10 poor men, which would you do." Until a certain age (which is variable to a small degree) all children will say the rich man, because then they might get a reward. You might think that a little kid actually "cares" about other people, but until a certain age, he only cares about not getting punished for being mean to other people. It's all very personal, where the kid only thinks about himself.

That is such a sad way to think. To believe you can't instill in your children the basics of humanity and compassion. Wow. I always have put things to my daughter to give her the means of reason and she cares deeply for others. I simply put it to her that if something affects her and she doesn't like it then doesn't she think that others don't as well? She understands quite a bit. Children have more capacity than you give them credit for. Parents have everything to do with that.

 

[Aqualung]

That is such a sad way to think. To believe you can't instill in your children the basics of humanity and compassion

It's true, though. Compassion is a developmental stage.

 

[Kowalski]

That is such a sad way to think. To believe you can't instill in your children the basics of humanity and compassion. Wow. I always have put things to my daughter to give her the means of reason and she cares deeply for others. I simply put it to her that if something affects her and she doesn't like it then doesn't she think that others don't as well? She understands quite a bit. Children have more capacity than you give them credit for. Parents have everything to do with that.

Good and sensible points Draka. Children are more than willing to respond to love and kindness. And I agree, they understand far better than some adults give them credit for. I always talked to my girls, and spoke to them as an equal.

Cheers

K

 

[michel]

Good and sensible points Draka. Children are more than willing to respond to love and kindness. And I agree, they understand far better than some adults give them credit for. I always talked to my girls, and spoke to them as an equal.

Cheers

K

You just watch a group of younsters (5 or 6 years old), playing; there's no discrimination, the kids don't look askance at other's deformities - they just 'accept' . Whast a pity we adults can't do the same.

 

[Darkdale]

You just watch a group of younsters (5 or 6 years old), playing; there's no discrimination, the kids don't look askance at other's deformities - they just 'accept' . Whast a pity we adults can't do the same.

I'm sorry. I've had the exact opposite experience. Children are often mean and much more self-centered than adults (they can afford to be; no bills and such).

 

[Aqualung]

from http://www.selfhelpmagazine.com/articles/child_behavior/moraldevchild.html

Kohlberg carried Piaget's work into adolescence and adulthood. He also told children moral dilemma stories, but he would ask them to tell him what they thought would be the right thing to do. Their answers led him to the discovery of three levels of moral development with two stages each:


The first level is called Preconventional. During this level children are concerned with avoiding punishment (Stage 1: Punishment-Obedience) and getting one's own needs met (Stage 2: Individualism). This level and its stages fit into the framework of young children, up to the age of ten years.

The second level is called Conventional. During this level children are more concerned with living up to the expectations of others (Stage 3: Interpersonal Conformity) and want to do the right thing because it is good for the group, family, or institution (Stage 4: Social System and Conscience). This level and its stages fit children over the age of ten years and on to adulthood.

The third level is called Postconventional. During this level individuals govern their behavior by the relative values and opinions of the groups they live and interact with. Right behavior is based on a "social contract" (Stage 5: Social Contract and Individual Rights) with others and in the validity of universal moral principles (Stage 6: Universal/Ethical Principles) which may or may not agree with societies laws. Laws that agree with universal moral principles are obeyed but when those laws violate these principles, the individual follows the principles instead.

 

[Darkdale]

You must spread some Karma around before giving it to Aqualung again.

 

[Aqualung]

I'm sorry. I've had the exact opposite experience. Children are often mean and much more self-centered than adults (they can afford to be; no bills and such).

Those are the experiences I've had. I never had friends until I was older, because the younger kids were just mean to me.

 

[Aqualung]

You must spread some Karma around before giving it to Aqualung again.

and I must spread some karma before giving it to Darkdale again.:banghead3

 

[lilithu]

Nope. children are very personal. They don't care yet about other people. That's just developmental. Their brains haven't developed enough to do that. It's a fact. If you ask a child "would you rather save one rich man or 10 poor men, which would you do." Until a certain age (which is variable to a small degree) all children will say the rich man, because then they might get a reward. You might think that a little kid actually "cares" about other people, but until a certain age, he only cares about not getting punished for being mean to other people. It's all very personal, where the kid only thinks about himself.

That is such a sad way to think. To believe you can't instill in your children the basics of humanity and compassion. Wow. I always have put things to my daughter to give her the means of reason and she cares deeply for others. I simply put it to her that if something affects her and she doesn't like it then doesn't she think that others don't as well? She understands quite a bit. Children have more capacity than you give them credit for. Parents have everything to do with that.

A couple of days ago, I posted my thoughts on the difference between conservatives and liberals.
http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/showthread.php?postid=233236#poststop
Put simply, conservatives believe that humans are innately bad and need to be forced into goodness. Liberals believe that humans are innately good and will express that goodness if given the chance. This conversation just further convinces me that this key difference in how we view humanity can explain most of the other differences of opinion that separate conservatives from liberals.

With that, I am bowing out of this conversation, especially since it seems that Aqualung has given up responding to my arguments.