I hope you don’t get tired of my apologies
and my changes in direction or even promises not kept—which is not the same in
my mind about breaking promises. The
document that I thought I would discuss in follow up from the last post is not
what I expected it to be. So, we will let it go and do something else today. However,
in case you’re curious, here’s URL that deals with issues somewhat related to
that of Post 151--
Yes, something else, but not something
completely different. While the last post talked about shooting and murdering,
this post will talk about spanking. To some people that’s in the same class as
shooting and murder—it’s all doing violence to people. Some time ago a friend of mine, Mark
Penninga, the Executive Director of the Association for Reformed Political
Action (ARPA) Canada published an opinion piece in the Vancouver Sun under the title”Time and Place for Spanking.” I’ve
written about this issue before, because I believe when a government gets
involved in ordinary family affairs, it is intrusive and goes far beyond its
legitimate reach. Government and family
exist in different spheres, each of which have their own laws and protocols.
Governments may only interfere in families when there is evidence of families
being highly dysfunctional. To some people, spanking, any kind of spanking, no
matter its severity, becomes the government’s business, for its mandate is to
protect its citizens, even infants, from violence, including parental violence.
Penninga’s main point is that the term
spanking covers a broad range of meaning, ranging from the gently corrective to
that of the cruel and abusive. Attempts to have government make every form of
spanking illegal in order to prevent the cruel type, has the opposite
effect. Then he demonstrates his point at
length, all of which you can read yourself by turning to the articles’ URL (see
below). One study, for example, that covered 50 years and examined 26 other
studies concluded, “Whether physical punishment compared favorably
or unfavorably with other tactics depended on the type of physical punishment.”
The study looked at what the researchers called an “optimal” type of physical
discipline — conditional spanking—and upheld it as legitimate.
Penninga wrote:
Sweden in 1979 became the first
nation to outlaw all physical discipline. Since then, criminal charges for
physical child abuse by relatives against children under age seven increased by
489 per cent between 1981 and 1994. There was also a shocking 519-per-cent
increase in criminal assaults by children under 15 against children aged 7-14.
Perhaps most devastating, 46-60 per cent of cases investigated under Sweden’s
law result in children being removed from homes. About 22,000 Swedish children
were removed from homes in 1981, compared with 1,900 in Germany, 710 in
Denmark, 552 in Finland, and 163 in Norway.
Consider
the 2010 case of a mother and father from Karlstad, Sweden, jailed for nine
months and ordered to pay 25,000 kronor ($11,000) to three of their children
who were spanked. More damaging than the jail and fines, all four of their
children were removed from their home. Although the court concluded that the
parents “had a loving and caring relationship to their children,” apparently
spanking is serious enough to merit such an extreme sentence.
And then he concluded,
Parents
will have a variety of opinions about the merits of physical discipline. But
problems arise when the state assumes the role of parent. The role of the state
is limited to preserving an orderly society and punishing wrongdoers (including
child There is much that the state can do to promote a society in which
children are safe and families can flourish. Banning physical discipline will
achieve neither.
Parents will
have a variety of opinions about the merits of physical discipline. But
problems arise when the state assumes the role of parent. The role of the state
is limited to preserving an orderly society and punishing wrongdoers (including
child abusers), so that the other institutions of society can flourish. The
institution of the family is an independent part of civil society accountable
directly to God (although the state increasingly understands itself to be a god
it seems). Parents are entrusted with the authority to lovingly raise their
children and the state may only interfere in exceptional circumstances, such as
real child abuse.
There is much
that the state can do to promote a society in which children are safe and
families can flourish. Banning physical discipline will achieve neither. So far my
friend Penninga.
The Vancouver Sun published an editorial
supporting Penninga’s main argument, while the highest court of the land agreed
as well, but not everyone did, as you can see on the last of the three websites
that appear below. As to myself, I am the product of a tradition of occasional
reasonable spanking when deserved and emerged a humane, highly educated and
successful person from a peasant background without any spanking baggage to
sour my life. The same holds true for all 9 of my siblings as well as for the
11 and 9 siblings of my father and mother respectively. As the Bible puts it, “Spare the rod and
spoil the child.” That’s ancient wisdom that liberals tend to deny, often
having contempt for the past and its ways.
So, here are three URLs for you to check out,
with the third one vigorously rejecting the point of this post.
See also www.keep43.can for supporting arguments.
See
www.nospank.net for opposing view.
No comments:
Post a Comment