Thank whatever gods!!

I thought maybe I was the only one who noticed that

What always blows my mind about these debates is how those who advocate sticking with the old ways such as adhering to Religion, Warfare and Survival of the Fittest as being the only adequate means of International Dialogue and a means for structuring a Society . . . Those of you who advocate these Constructs try to sound so full of hearty, rustic Wisdom. You deliver an ultimatum of "That's the Way it is. Things are like this due to Human Nature and Human Nature won't change. So we have to carry on as we always have and hope for the best." Then you posture and try to look so tough but you know what I see? I see way to many people in this World hiding behind one Big, Lame, Fucking Cop-out.
Reality and our own lack of knowledge can be such a frightening thing. So many people lack the security and sense of self to admit to their own Vulnerability, to just breathe and be a Dynamic Living Thing that can Move and adapt and flow like Water. Instead of standing there rigid and immobile like a Child holding it's breath and waiting for someone or something to acquiesce and accommodate you instead of taking action and using your Will and Mind.
Even if, on the off chance you are right and the World will never change. I'm still going to Live and Think and Breathe; If Static Entropy really is the Rule of Human Nature, I care not. I will still Defy it with all my Being.

I don't know what the fuck soapbox you got on or why. But no one is saying "that's just the way it is; human nature is this." I'm stating that reasoning with children obviously doesn't work unless you've got a genius child capable of logic and born with the reasoning skills necessary to know right from wrong automatically. I see nothing wrong with a swift pop on the butt when a child is way out of line. I don't deny that there is a line that's often crossed, but that happens with absolutely everything. From jokes to public speaking to interrogation to consuming food. THAT is human nature: excess. But if you curb all things that could eventually be used to excess, what does that leave us? There are good people and bad people. Bad people sometimes use good things in bad ways. THAT is human nature. Children need discipline. THAT is a fact. The government and schools should have nothing to do with disciplining children to that extent. The fundamentals of right and wrong should be ingrained in a child before they're old enough for school. A 5 year old has the capacity to know that hitting in anger is wrong. That stealing is wrong. That certain words are wrong. That all these basic things are wrong. If they're not knowledgeable enough to know these things, that's the fault of the parent.

An entire generation of baby boomers were brought up where a swat on the ass was the norm. Arguably generation X, as well. It's the latter generations where we have all this school violence shit. All this calling the cops when you get punished and claiming abuse or molestation. Lawsuits for everything. That's something to think about.

You disagree with me. Therefore, you are an idiot.

That's exactly the Mindset that I'm referring to: This is why I don't normally write things like that anymore. The people who should gain something from it; don't and then they go around in circles over semantics to avoid facing the core of the thesis.

Oh poor you, you are just a misunderstood cleric of logic, and all these heathens are just being barberous beasts not listening to you... awwwwwww.

What mindset? That people can be bad? That children should know right from wrong? Oh what a horrible opinion to have. Put aside the sword, Kool-Aid, and think it through. You disagree that people can be bad? You disagree that children need discipline?

im not listening to him

yeah, it causes you to go underground, to not be seen, to rob, steal, cheat, lie, do anything not to get caught.

but ive never done that shit, i have no idea what im talking about.

Nigger.

There we go, just like I just noted. Now we have you driving the point of my statement into an argument about Semantics over something that I in no way actually implied. Please reread my little Rant and debate it on statements that I clearly made.

You deliberately ignored my question. What were you on about? Who said anything about what you were ranting about?

nigger? nigger, huh? how about your just shoot in the face and buried in the fucking yard beside fido. you want to argue semantics, how about i call you a worthless shit, and then retract it and call you a helpless member of society and then retract that and call you a victem of the free market. or i could just call you a piece of shit and just keep moving...its easier that way.

No, this is what you said.



There's no should. You unequivocally say that this is what a spanking is, and if someone is doing something other than your One True Way of spanking, they are beating their kids. If that's the case, then the vast, vast majority of Americans who use corporal punishment on children are beating their kids. I note that you also, incidentally, use this phrase right before making the above quotes:

You might want to work on your consistency.

It's as this latter generation grew up that violent crime has dipped down to a low point since we've begun keeping accurate records. Something for you to think about. If you want to pull this "kids today cause trouble because they're not spanked enough" tactic, you're going to run into two very hard brick walls of logic.

1) Kids today aren't worse than kids in the past. Statistically, they're better.

2) The kids who are causing shit today are very disproportionately, almost universally, subjected to corporal punishment at home. Try to find a rapist or murderer who wasn't physically punished in their life. It's difficult.

I disagree with neither of these things, but in no way does that explain a need to hit children.

give them a toaster and let them be happy. or not, you'll fucking see, meg. happy fucking wedding, seriously.

Holy Jesus God! you said something intelligent for the first time ever! congratulations pappy!

get out the prayer books! it'll be raining frogs next. :-)

Fuck ar eyou on about??

Sometimes I think DM reads what he wants to reads and then twists it to suit whatever purpose of proving whomever wrong. It's more useless than arguing with Billy. Actually it's a lot like arguing with Billy. Only Billy isn't a condescending dick.