I am a knave whose only mission in life is to please the Queen.
__________________ "It is inhumane, in my opinion, to force people who have a genuine medical need for coffee to wait in line behind people who apparently view it as some kind of recreational activity." Dave Barry 2005
I am a firm believer in the Old Paths
Articles on such subjects as "The New Birth," will be accepted, whether they teach that the new birth takes place before baptism in water and Spirit, or that the new birth consists of baptism of water and Spirit. - THE PENTECOSTAL HERALD Dec. 1945
"It is doubtful if any Trinitarian Pentecostals have ever professed to believe in three gods, and Oneness Pentecostals should not claim that they do." - Daniel Segraves
I believe that corporal punishment can be used in some instances with some children. However, it doesn't work with every child, and with some children, it simply isn't necessary.
It ought to be a LAST resort, imo, but too many parents use it first.
It should be limited, and not given out of anger, but too many parents spank when they're too angry to discipline properly, or when a child is simply trying their patience.
Small children should not be spanked. In my opinion, spanking ANY child under the age of 1 IS abusive, but unfortunately I have seen it happen way too many times. Under 2, it's questionable, because I think children can learn to respond to pain, but they don't truly understand WHY they are being subjected to the pain, which makes it unnecessary. Spanking a child 2 and under is more often the result of lazy parenting, rather than a misbehaving child.
In our home, we only spank for three things:
1. Direct or open disobedience.
2. Actions that place the child in immediate danger.
3. Lying, stealing or any other [deliberately] sinful activity.
AND, we don't always spank them even for those things, or I should say, we rarely spank our kids at all--because there are so many other methods of discipline that just work better.
We do not EVER spank our children for acting childish. Period. And we do not spank out of anger. If one of us is too angry to be calm, the other parent steps in.
Further, I do not believe in slapping a child in the face. It accomplishes nothing but humiliation.
Bottom line: Corporal punishment is not a bad thing, but it is not a universal solution for all children, and it is NOT usable for all parents, especially those prone to a quick temper.
"Fathers provoke not your children to anger, but bring them up in the NURTURE and admonition of the Lord." Ephesians 4:6
Nurture and admonition are not harsh terms--they mean, respectively, "tutelage, education & training", and "calling attention to [by] mild warning or rebuke."
"Fathers, provoke not your children to anger, lest they be discouraged." Colossians 3:21
Via Strong's: "Fathers, don't stimulate your children to anger, lest they be disheartened or spiritless."
I have seen so many IGNORANT parents in the Apostolic church be abusive, verbally and physically, that while I support [a parent's right to use] corporal punishment in general, I am disinclined to recommend it wholeheartedly.
Then you have the other end of the spectrum--those who don't discipline at all, but when they're in public, and their kids embarrass them, they spank the fire out of their surprised children. Please. No one is fooled. LOL!!!!
It is consistency and attentive parenting that will turn out well-behaved children. Lazy parenting never works.
Even though I'm a non-spanker, I must say that once again Miss B has shown wisdom beyond her years.
If you are going to spank, at least follow her guidelines. I HATE seeing kids in church spanked for every little thing, and the parents thinking they need to spank because it's Biblical.
And pastors, PLEASE, if you are going to encourage spanking from the pulpit, be wise enough to include appropriate guidelines. In fact, don't mention it, unless you're doing a series on parenting and giving specifics.
I believe that corporal punishment can be used in some instances with some children. However, it doesn't work with every child, and with some children, it simply isn't necessary.
It ought to be a LAST resort, imo, but too many parents use it first.
It should be limited, and not given out of anger, but too many parents spank when they're too angry to discipline properly, or when a child is simply trying their patience.
Small children should not be spanked. In my opinion, spanking ANY child under the age of 1 IS abusive, but unfortunately I have seen it happen way too many times. Under 2, it's questionable, because I think children can learn to respond to pain, but they don't truly understand WHY they are being subjected to the pain, which makes it unnecessary. Spanking a child 2 and under is more often the result of lazy parenting, rather than a misbehaving child.
In our home, we only spank for three things:
1. Direct or open disobedience.
2. Actions that place the child in immediate danger.
3. Lying, stealing or any other [deliberately] sinful activity.
AND, we don't always spank them even for those things, or I should say, we rarely spank our kids at all--because there are so many other methods of discipline that just work better.
We do not EVER spank our children for acting childish. Period. And we do not spank out of anger. If one of us is too angry to be calm, the other parent steps in.
Further, I do not believe in slapping a child in the face. It accomplishes nothing but humiliation.
Bottom line: Corporal punishment is not a bad thing, but it is not a universal solution for all children, and it is NOT usable for all parents, especially those prone to a quick temper.
"Fathers provoke not your children to anger, but bring them up in the NURTURE and admonition of the Lord." Ephesians 4:6
Nurture and admonition are not harsh terms--they mean, respectively, "tutelage, education & training", and "calling attention to [by] mild warning or rebuke."
"Fathers, provoke not your children to anger, lest they be discouraged." Colossians 3:21
Via Strong's: "Fathers, don't stimulate your children to anger, lest they be disheartened or spiritless."
I have seen so many IGNORANT parents in the Apostolic church be abusive, verbally and physically, that while I support [a parent's right to use] corporal punishment in general, I am disinclined to recommend it wholeheartedly.
Then you have the other end of the spectrum--those who don't discipline at all, but when they're in public, and their kids embarrass them, they spank the fire out of their surprised children. Please. No one is fooled. LOL!!!!
It is consistency and attentive parenting that will turn out well-behaved children. Lazy parenting never works.
While you have compiled guidelines that are wise, commendable, and excellent, I would like to remind everybody that the freedom to raise children as one sees fit is a self-evident, unalienable right. If you observe and disapprove of another parents' methods, that is one thing, but when you encourage the state to step in, you have joined company with Karl Marx.
__________________
Engineering solutions for theological problems.
Despite today's rising cost of living, it remains popular.
"It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried." - Sir Winston Churchill
"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter." - Sir Winston Churchill
"They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security." - Benjamin Franklin
While you have compiled guidelines that are wise, commendable, and excellent, I would like to remind everybody that the freedom to raise children as one sees fit is a self-evident, unalienable right. If you observe and disapprove of another parents' methods, that is one thing, but when you encourage the state to step in, you have joined company with Karl Marx.
Everyone has the right to raise their child as they see fit, mistakes and all, unless there is real abuse occurring. If I stand idly by and allow a child to be abused under the umbrella of "parental rights", what kind of person does that make me? Their rights are more important than a child's safety and wellbeing?
If someone is causing actual physical injury to a child, the child should be protected. To be clear, I'm not calling "red marks" left from spanking "real abuse" (necessarily), although my FIL spanked my husband and his brother so hard one time that their backside and legs bled. I'd call that abusive.
That's like saying a man has the right to treat his wife however he wishes, whether he's a jerk or not. Well, sure. Unless I happen to witness him punching her in the face. Then I'm going to call the police.
Abusing a child puts one in much worse company than Karl Marx. I wouldn't report someone just for spanking their child--even if they did it when the child didn't really need a spanking. That's bad judgment--not abuse. But if a child was actually being harmed, I most certainly would report them. Absolutely. Karl Marx or not. The Law is for the Lawless.
__________________
"God, send me anywhere, only go with me. Lay any burden on me, only sustain me. And sever any tie in my heart except the tie that binds my heart to Yours."
--David Livingstone
"To see no being, not God’s or any, but you also go thither,
To see no possession but you may possess it—enjoying all without labor or purchase—
abstracting the feast, yet not abstracting one particle of it;…."
--Walt Whitman, Leaves of Grass, Song of the Open Road
If I stand idly by and allow a child to be abused under the umbrella of "parental rights", what kind of person does that make me? Their rights are more important than a child's safety and wellbeing?
If someone is causing actual physical injury to a child, the child should be protected. To be clear, I'm not calling "red marks" left from spanking "real abuse" (necessarily), although my FIL spanked my husband and his brother so hard one time that their backside and legs bled. I'd call that abusive. The Law is for the Lawless.
Amen Sister. I think the below scripture certainly supports the idea of 3rd party involvement when abuse is evident:
Quote:
Exo 23:4 If thou meet thine enemy's ox or his ass going astray, thou shalt surely bring it back to him again. Exo 23:5 If thou see the ass of him that hateth thee lying under his burden, and wouldest forbear to help him, thou shalt surely help with him.
1Co 9:9 For it is written in the law of Moses, Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn. Doth God take care for oxen?
1Co 9:10 Or saith he it altogether for our sakes? For our sakes, no doubt, this is written: that he that ploweth should plow in hope; and that he that thresheth in hope should be partaker of his hope.
Apprently God draws the line of physical abuse at that which would leave some mark:
Quote:
Lev 24:19 And if a man cause a blemish in his neighbor; as he hath done, so shall it be done to him: Lev 24:20 breach for breach, eye for eye, tooth for tooth; as he hath caused a blemish in a man, so shall it be rendered unto him.
Here are the rules my wife and I have chosen to observe when disciplining our son:
1.) Time out system. We warn him sternly, reminding him of a coming time out, counting to 3. Between each count we warn him clearly. If on the third warning he doesn't listen we mercilessly sweep him from whatever he's doing and sit him in a chair. We then ignore him for an entire minute. At first he would get up and we'd just immediately place him back with some force (starting the minute over again) until he learned that he would never be allowed to get up. Today I can sit him down and put my finger in his chest and growl, "You're in TIME OUT. DON'T move." And he will sit there and cry like a beat the daylights out of him. And you'd be amazed...he'll be doing something he shouldn't and we'll tell him to stop...he might ignore us, then we say, "Daddy said stop, if you don't you get a time out, 1." Most of the time he hears the words "time out" and "1" and immediately complies. But on occasion we'll get to "2". And every now an again we get to "3" and sit him down, and he'll cry and sob like crazy. I'm really proud of him. The little dude's going on two years old and when in time out he'll sit where we sit him and while he'll cry...he doesn't move. I have to confess...I was with a few of the guys with kids at church and their kids were being little hellions. My son was being rowdy with them and while other fathers were running, tracking their kid down, and wrestling with their crying child, I jerked Noah up and without even counting to three I sat him in a chair and told him with a low growl, "Your in TIME OUT. DON'T move." And he cried like crazy...but the entire time other dads were wrestling their kids and scolding...my kid sat still sobbing. He's younger than they were and I didn't have to wrestle him or say another word. He sat their for an entire minute and didn't get up until I knelt down and said, "Come to daddy and give me a hug. You know I don't want you running in church. No run." And he huggled me and wiped his eyes...he didn't run again that night. One dad said, "That's great. How old is he?" I said, "He's one and a half." He's kid was about the same age and nearly unmanageable. I was so proud...I was beaming. lol
2.) A firm swat on the hand or on the bottom. If he does something that can injure himself or someone else he gets no privilege of a warning. We immediately give him a stern, "NO!" and *SWAT*. We will firmly smack the hand or the bottom...whichever is most available. We manage him pretty well so it's not very often we have to do this. But we have no issue with doing it when necessary. For example, we were on the porch and I turned my back for a moment. He walked off the porch and down the walk toward the street. Like Flash Gordon I caught up to him, jerked him up by one arm and gave him a SOLID swat right on his bottom, growling, "Don't you EVER walk off the porch!". You'd a thought I beat him silly the way he cried. But so far I've only had to say, "Don't you leave porch." and he stopped cold. A few times I've watched him stand at the steps like he wanted to walk...but bless the little guy...he turned and walked back over to us.
He's only two years old right now. But those are the rules we use at the moment and he's pretty well behaved. We turned to using "time outs" from regular swatting because he started swatting us and other children when they didn't something undesirable. The more we swatted him over it, the more it seemed he'd using hitting when we told him no or when with other children. So I prayed about it and the Lord spoke to my heart and impressed upon me that my boy was too young to understand the cause and effect relationship in relation to our swatting him, the words "controlled confinement" came to my heart. And I talked to my wife about it. She said, "Ah, time outs. I've seen that used and it works on some kids. Let's try it." So far it's worked real well...and he's no longer hitting kids. Sometimes he he'll now shake his finger like we do and say, "No. No. No." lol
We're blessed, he's really a good kid.
I never "swatted" my kids. They only received spankings. They were told to go to my room and to wait for me to get there. This assured that I never spanked in anger. It gave me a "cooling off" time to consider the discipline. Sometimes they got a spanking and sometimes they got a good "talking to". The kids knew that they were in trouble. I explained what they did and then proceeded to tell them that that was what they were being spanked for. I feel that constant "swatting" promotes children to hit and that it also makes them desensitized (sp?) to the whole discipline process. Swatting also teaches the child to "react" to situations and not to "respond".
I never counted to 3 for my children either. I felt like that taught them to learn how to "push the limits". If I wanted them to do something 3 seconds from now, then I would have asked them 3 seconds later. Worked for me.
However, my kids were fairly easy to raise and pretty compliant. Usually, the "look" took care of many things before any discipline had to be done. I feel bad for people with very strong willed children. I know these parents work so hard, if not harder, than most. I think alot has to do with the temperment of the child. Glad I don't have to deal with the things (fears of CPS) that parents do today.
All I have to say is I'm glad mine are raised. It was hard work but worth the effort. I have learned to not judge others because we are not in their shoes living with their child. Pretty soon, your motto becomes: "Whatever Works"
from what i see in kids today, i believe in bigger paddles and longer belts, lol
Honestly, DT, kids today need involved parents. Intact families and stay at home mothers would go a long way toward correcting a lot of behavioral issues.
Children are exhibiting the symptoms of a breakdown in family values, and instead of repairing the family, people want to punish the kids.
Believe me, I'm FOR discipline. We still ask our children to say "Yes Ma'am", use good manners at the table, and to do chores. But I think it's unfair of us to blame children for behaving badly, when their parents essentially destroyed their safety net at home with their own brand of bad behavior.
__________________
"God, send me anywhere, only go with me. Lay any burden on me, only sustain me. And sever any tie in my heart except the tie that binds my heart to Yours."
--David Livingstone
"To see no being, not God’s or any, but you also go thither,
To see no possession but you may possess it—enjoying all without labor or purchase—
abstracting the feast, yet not abstracting one particle of it;…."
--Walt Whitman, Leaves of Grass, Song of the Open Road
Linear Mode
