Neat info on Wade Phillips

[hairic]

Reason to not spank your kids: http://psychcentral.com/news/2009/09/27/spanked-children-have-lower-iq/8620.html

 

[ArmyCowboy]

In your scenario - a child molester would also be more qualified to talk about what it takes to raise children than me - so long as he has children of his own. It's a ridiculous argument, and a poor debate tactic.

You claim logical falacies, yet answer with an appeal to emotion and ridicule all wrapped up in one.

 

[jterrell]

I didn't miss it. I just didn't understand the relevance, so I ignored it. (It's an ad hominem fallacy - if you can't attack the argument, find something personal to attack)

Is there some sort of ratio wherein the more kids you have, the more you understand why it's important and beneficial to assault them?

Actually that's totally inaccurate.

He is not attacking you so much as stating your argument lacks experience from which to speak. That's a wholly credible debate tactic and his logic is spot on.

Most 'experts' on kids do not have them... until they do then they realize they weren't really experts at all.

While a parent should never 'beat' their kids being afraid to hand down any corporal punishment ever is just as foolhardy.

I agree that you should never physically punish a kid that isn't your own so from that stand point, you being without kids, should feel exactly as you do.

If you have kids please do come back and tell us how that works out.

 

[superpunk]

You claim logical falacies, yet answer with an appeal to emotion and ridicule all wrapped up in one.

Come on - a child (at least one whose IQ hasn't been stunted by spanking, hairic) could see the point that was being made. My post was just a mirror of yours, to illustrate why yours was ridiculous. You've noticed why MINE is ridiculous, all that's left is for you to realize the same about yours.

 

[superpunk]

He is not attacking you so much as stating your argument lacks experience from which to speak. That's a wholly credible debate tactic and his logic is spot on.

No. It's an entirely possible to have an informed opinion on hundreds of subjects while having no PERSONAL experience in any of them. You know this.

 

[ArmyCowboy]

Come on - a child (at least one whose IQ hasn't been stunted by spanking, hairic) could see the point that was being made. My post was just a mirror of yours, to illustrate why yours was ridiculous. You've noticed why MINE is ridiculous, all that's left is for you to realize the same about yours.

Where's that tap dancing smilie when you need it.

 

[Rackat]

Opinion is based on knowledge or experience, or a combination of the two. It is when the opinion is a combnination of knowledge and experience that it is most beneficial.

 

[jterrell]

Reason to not spank your kids: http://psychcentral.com/news/2009/09/27/spanked-children-have-lower-iq/8620.html

these are the kinds of studies that prove absolutely nothing....

the exact bleeding heart equivalent of think tank studies....

a group funds studies and ... shockingly ... ends up producing the results they were seeking all along!!!

both of my kids have been spanked and both are straight A students.
i was spanked fairly routinely and graduated with high honors, 8th in my class.


kids who are less bright tend do more things that are less bright probably leading to more punishment. that isn't exactly a shocker!

and 2.8 points in IQ is statistically irrelevant. compare how those students fared in college and that may actually hold some water.

 

[jterrell]

No. It's an entirely possible to have an informed opinion on hundreds of subjects while having no PERSONAL experience in any of them. You know this.

you said it yourself... opinion....

opinion isn't knowledge.

 

[Idgit]

Reason to not spank your kids: http://psychcentral.com/news/2009/09/27/spanked-children-have-lower-iq/8620.html

Sorry, but this conclusion is hilarious:

No matter where you live, if you spank your child, you risk lowering his or her intelligence (or IQ). That’s according to new research presented on Friday at an international conference.​

What that study says is that smarter people, on average, don't spank their children as much. Not that spanking stunts intellect.

I spank my kids when appropriate, and only with my hand. I've deemed circumstances appropriate probably three or four times in their lives.

That said, I don't see why superpunk not having kids invalidates his opinion on the matter in any way. Is there something about actually having children that makes us want to spank them more? Yes, because kids are annoying. Is there something about having children that makes spanking them more appropriate? Not at all.

This is akin to telling my my opinion on abortion isn't relevant because I don't have a uterus or that SLATE shouldn't talk football because he's a wangzta who doesn't know anything about sports.

 

[adbutcher]

Reason to not spank your kids: http://psychcentral.com/news/2009/09/27/spanked-children-have-lower-iq/8620.html

The study is very flawed from a research and data perspective. I work with some of the brightest people on the planet and unsurprisingly when we discuss our childhoods, the majority have said that they were spanked, not beaten up or had the crap kicked out of them, but spanked.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

IMO the whole problem here -- like Chief said -- is this crazy idea there's no distinction in how you "hit" a kid. Of course there's a difference in hitting him in the head with a 2x4 vs. paddling him on the padded backside. That's just beyond obvious.

I'm sure most will agree with me that the actual paddling didn't even really hurt much. The worst thing about getting padded was the whole procedure. Whether it was getting called to the principal's office or waiting until dad got home, the dreading of being in trouble was what did the trick. The actual spanking was nothing. In school, they pretty much just tapped us.

Though I will say that my 97-lb mother spanked me a lot harder than my 220-lb dad ever did. :laugh2:

So it's not even about the pain of being hit in the buttocks. That's why you spank them there in the first place -- because you know you can't really hurt anything there.

So this idea that paddling is child abuse is just crazy.

And for the record, I don't have kids and have never spanked a child. But I know in living through it, there's nothing wrong at all with it.

 

[Signals]

Except that Flozell Adams ate the paddle.

That explains his inability to control his false starts.

 

[superpunk]

The thread took a predictable course. "Your opinion is wrong" quickly changed to "You aren't qualified to have an opinion" once it became difficult to espouse the virtues of hitting a child.

Whatevs.

My wife was hinting about what she wanted for our upcoming anniversary.

She said, 'I want something shiny that goes from 0 to 200 in about 3 seconds.

I bought her a scale.

And that's how the fight started...

SLATE shouldn't talk football because he's a wangzta who doesn't know anything about sports.

lmao

 

[Rackat]

What you fail, epically, to understand is that there is a distinct difference between abuse and discipline. Paddling a child is not abuse. Wailing on the child with an electric cord is. 3 swats on the backside is discipline. Repeatedly pounding a kid with your fists is abuse.

Your argument is that it is all or nothing when the truth actually resides in between the extremes.

 

[adbutcher]

IMO the whole problem here -- like Chief said -- is this crazy idea there's no distinction in how you "hit" a kid. Of course there's a difference in hitting him in the head with a 2x4 vs. paddling him on the padded backside. That's just beyond obvious.

I'm sure most will agree with me that the actual paddling didn't even really hurt much. The worst thing about getting padded was the whole procedure. Whether it was getting called to the principal's office or waiting until dad got home, the dreading of being in trouble was what did the trick. The actual spanking was nothing. In school, they pretty much just tapped us.

Though I will say that my 97-lb mother spanked me a lot harder than my 220-lb dad ever did. :laugh2:

So it's not even about the pain of being hit in the buttocks. That's why you spank them there in the first place -- because you know you can't really hurt anything there.

So this idea that paddling is child abuse is just crazy.

And for the record, I don't have kids and have never spanked a child. But I know in living through it, there's nothing wrong at all with it.

Perfectly stated.

Some are acting as if you wake up in the morning get your daily beating then go about your business, lol.

My dad only spanked me twice and my mother was the one that routinely corrected me and even then it wasn't the 3 times a week, like the nonsense that was quoted in the bogus agenda laced IQ/Spanking study. I would go months without a spanking, then incidents like burning up a back yard would occur and a good stern talking to just was not going to cut it. As a rule of thumb, if a fire truck is involved somebody is going to get a whipping, lol.

 

[Rackat]

As a rule of thumb, if a fire truck is involved somebody is going to get a whipping, lol.

LMAO! You, too? The worst paddling I ever got was for starting the grass on fire in the backyard. We were cold (winter) and decided we'd warm up. My cousin got some matches from the kitchen and we all huddled around one spot in the backyard. Well, the wind picked up and the rest is history. Amazingly, I never did that again, lol!

 

[Alexander]

I can't hate on the guy. Of course anyone would want to take a head coaching position in the NFL if offered. He was just destined to fail with the GM that he took the job under.

Correct. Even Lombardi would fail if he took a job for Jerry Jones.

That still doesn't excuse his flaws, which are the same now as they were in Buffalo and Denver.

 

[adbutcher]

LMAO! You, too? The worst paddling I ever got was for starting the grass on fire in the backyard. We were cold (winter) and decided we'd warm up. My cousin got some matches from the kitchen and we all huddled around one spot in the backyard. Well, the wind picked up and the rest is history. Amazingly, I never did that again, lol!

LOL, my incident was a little more foolish. I guess all of those spanking made us stupid. We were blowing up cans of roach spray, paint, or any other can that had flammable on it. Needless to say, the residue spread to the grass and once the fire hit it, it spread so fast that we were lucky to not have burn down all of Louisiana, lol. That was one of two of the spankings that I received from my dad.

 

[theebs]

Absolutely there was. The point being made was that you can't understand why it's important to be able to hit your kids if you don't have any. Aside from being nonsense, it is also debate fallacy. (For instance we can be "qualified" to talk about the NFL, even if we've never had anything to do with it)

Hit another man with a piece of wood because he won't listen to you - it's assault.

Hit a child with a piece of wood because he won't listen to you - well, that's just good ol' fashioned parenting. Kids don't get enough of it nowadays.

Chief was right - agree to disagree. I can't have a rational conversation about this with anyone who thinks hitting kids for any reason (especially with the aid of a weapon - what? Your adult hand isn't good enough? You need to employ wood? Really?) is a good idea. I understand alot of people cherish this right, and passionately defend their right to hit their kids. Whatever. I can't get behind that movement.

I agree with you. And I have two kids and I am with them 24/7 everyday which wear's you out pretty quick. I am not a fan of even spanking, I do it when their is a need, which is rare.

But in a million years I wouldnt use a paddle or anything else on either of my kids. There are plenty of ways to get your point across without hitting kids.