There isn’t actually. There’s plenty of evidence that abusive and neglectful parenting is harmful but that’s not what I’m talking about. And I don’t need scientific evidence to show that abusive and neglectful parenting is harmful. It’s another one of those common sense things that I already know like the consequences of permissive parenting. These things are part of our culture; we have a culture of permissive, soft parenting in the West. It began with the baby boomers but really went overboard in the 70’s. A resurgence of permissive parenting occurred in the mid to late 90’s. I’ve observed, as have others, how the one child urban families in China are succumbing to Western-style permissive parenting creating a generation of obese, spoiled children.
[quote]TooHuman wrote:
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
[quote]TooHuman wrote:
Jumping to conclusions by thinking the only way to “eliminate” is through violence… [/quote]
The conclusion I reached is that using the word “eliminate” is indicative of an extremist. Yeah, sure you didn’t mean “violence” when you talked about “eliminating” people. However, the phrase was clearly intended to shock and convey a radical/extreme position on the matter. That’s my conclusion.
Edited[/quote]
My conclusion is that you are actually insane because you’re incapable of separating your personal biases from the objective definition of a word.
[/quote]
I’m “insane” and exhibiting “bias” because I called you out on talk of “eliminating” people? Okay fella. Whatever you say.
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
There isn’t actually. There’s plenty of evidence that abusive and neglectful parenting is harmful but that’s not what I’m talking about. And I don’t need scientific evidence to show that abusive and neglectful parenting is harmful. It’s another one of those common sense things that I already know like the consequences of permissive parenting. These things are part of our culture; we have a culture of permissive, soft parenting in the West. It began with the baby boomers but really went overboard in the 70’s. A resurgence of permissive parenting occurred in the mid to late 90’s. I’ve observed, as have others, how the one child urban families in China are succumbing to Western-style permissive parenting creating a generation of obese, spoiled children.[/quote]
Yes there is.
Here are a few examples from a 10 second search on google for “studies on spanking”.
http://www.human.cornell.edu/pam/outreach/parenting/research/upload/Spanking-Research-Brief.pdf
http://www.cnn.com/2014/07/23/health/effects-spanking-brain/
So again. Where is your evidence?
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
[quote]TooHuman wrote:
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
[quote]TooHuman wrote:
Jumping to conclusions by thinking the only way to “eliminate” is through violence… [/quote]
The conclusion I reached is that using the word “eliminate” is indicative of an extremist. Yeah, sure you didn’t mean “violence” when you talked about “eliminating” people. However, the phrase was clearly intended to shock and convey a radical/extreme position on the matter. That’s my conclusion.
Edited[/quote]
My conclusion is that you are actually insane because you’re incapable of separating your personal biases from the objective definition of a word.
[/quote]
I’m “insane” and exhibiting “bias” because I called you out on talk of “eliminating” people? Okay fella. Whatever you say.[/quote]
That’s correct. I clearly enumerated that the raising children through peaceful parenting is the vehicle for eliminating most sociopathic and violent individuals.
Instead of reasoning that raising children in such a manor would eventually get rid of those individuals through replacement(people eventually die) you concluded I was suggesting to do so violently or “radically” in some way.
It has to start at the local level.
It’s going to take some small town mayor and sheriff that basically tells the Feds FU! And force the damn Feds to do something. A showdown. A mayor and a town and it’s police force willing to go to jail over their beliefs. I thought you would see something like this with the illegals. It won’t happen in my state. It could happen.
Look at Gov. Perry. Imagine a state that told the Fed gov’t to go pound sand? THAT is what is it’s going to take. Then other states would fall in, creating a rift and a divide in this country, where eventually concessions will be made and the country will return where it needs to be: the center.
[quote]TooHuman wrote:
Yes there is.
Here are a few examples from a 10 second search on google for “studies on spanking”.
http://www.human.cornell.edu/pam/outreach/parenting/research/upload/Spanking-Research-Brief.pdf
[/quote]
I’m going to try to educate you so pay attention. When you read an opinion piece by a journalist always look into the basis of their opinions - ie, check sources and the methodologies of the studies cited. For example, in the CNN link to an opinion piece by Sarah Kovac in which she alleges that “spanking” causes brain damage in children. So, I went to the trouble of checking her sources for you. Here’s the study she cited as evidence for her claims:
Spanking causes brain damage huh? But wait a minute…this is a study of young adults(21 in total) who have been exposed to years of “Harsh Corporal Punishment” that “frequently involved objects”.
So, what have we learned? We’ve learned that Ms Kovac misled her readers by cited a study of young adults who had been subject to years of severe physical abuse in contrast to regular, common place “spanking.”
This is why I said I’m not interested in your statistics. You either don’t have the requisite skills and/or intellectual honesty to critically evaluate your own sources, and it’s left to me to do your work for you.
[quote]
So again. Where is your evidence?[/quote]
Again, as I stated the social sciences employ a wide array of methodologies of which statistical studies are just one part. I’m not making any wild claims. I’m making common sense, axiomatic assertions about spoiling children. This is what’s known as “common knowledge” and as I said it’s part of our culture and has been for millennia. “Those who spare the rod of discipline hate their children” - Proverbs 13:24. You are the one making radical claims; claims that are at odds with thousands of years of people actually raising children. And the first link of yours I went to is an opinion piece that misleads the reader and uses a study of severe physical abuse to back her claims about “spanking”. Again, I’m not interested in your statistics because it’s left to me then to critically analyse them and I’ve got better things to do than analyse opinion pieces by radicals expressing opinions that I know to be idiotic.
Here’s a tip. Why not think for yourself and develop your own ideas rather than slavishly following everything Master Molyneux tells you? Or at least find someone else to slavishly follow because Molyneux is a nut; a quack; a pseudo-intellectual.
Here we go:
“We defined harsh CP (HCP) as a severe form of CP, in which an object (e.g., belt, paddle, hair brush)”
And the actual control group they’re comparing them with has some exposure to (milder) corporal punishment themselves - ie, many of the control group were spanked but were not subjected to years of “harsh” punishment involving objects and so on. So the authors of the study clearly believed that minimal corporal punishment in the form of regular spanking is not detrimental.
And I had a quick look at the American Psychiatric Association piece in your link. The “studies” cited and “experts” interviewed are biased in that they are activists in the field. Kazdin is even a non-violent parenting guru who sells his “Kazdin Method” of parenting. These are the kinds of nutty parenting self help gurus that I mentioned were particularly popular in the 70’s. One reviewer summed up the Kazdin Method; ‘his method of “positive reinforcement” essentially boils down to rewarding your children for not behaving badly.’
As I said, the radical new age permissive parenting models produce spoilt, indulgent, egotistical, entitled little twerps. I’ve known plenty of people brought up like this.
And the next “expert” cited is a psychologist named Elizabeth Gershoff who just happens to be an anti-spanking activist. No dispassionate, disinterested observers here. They’re anti-spanking activists and non-violent parenting gurus.
And your first link to Cornell University? A three page pamphlet - the kind of thing you’d find in the waiting room of a medical centre - the same studies cited; Gershoff the radical anti-spanking activist.
There you go. I’ve done your homework for you.
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
Education is a joke, as long as teachers unions prevent bad teachers from being fired and good teachers from being rewarded. I recently had to interact with my youngest son’s school/teachers/principal and I was just appalled at the level of incompetence… I mean ONE competent person could do the job of FIVE of those idiots. Education is a lost cause. I’m actually looking at homeschooling and/or private school because it’s so pathetic.
De-funding won’t happen. It’s too painful. Politicians won’t TAKE AWAY from their constituents. So the band will keep marching on.
Morality is a double edged sword. I’m not prepared to open that can of worms here right now. I’ll just say that it’s a slippery slope…
I agree that in a perfect world, those things would come to pass and the pendulum would begin to swing the other way. But in a perfect world, a frog would have wings so it didn’t bump it’s ass every time it jumped (I’m LOVING all the frog analogies lately! LOL)
[/quote]
CountingBeans actually had a solid point with the response he gave me earlier.
The House was never meant to do anything. It was simply the playing ground for the masses to feel like they’re involved. The real power remained in the hands of the Senate, and the Senate was ideally governed by the greatest and brightest of each state.
The House speaks for the masses, which the framers considered an utter cacophony and essentially not worth listening to lest you want to lose your mind, and the Senate speaks for the people who are genuinely invested in the country.
The system never quite worked as planned, for obvious reasons (people), but it is at least sound in principle.
And then Jackson came along and fucked it all up.
Now the Senate and the House essentially do the same thing. The system literally doesn’t work as intended right now.
So it doesn’t even have to do with corruption and people voting purely for their self interest and shit. The House was meant for that. The Senate was meant to be the counteracting power that rendered it irrelevant for the most part and let “rational” (Honestly- it means elitist and the faux-nobility, but at that point in time they equated the two) voices really take charge of the situation.
It’s just that the system isn’t working as intended, and if it DID work as intended, then the masses would (rightly) say that their voices mean little. Which goes against this whole claim of the U.S. being the bastion of democracy and shit (never mind that we are NOT A FUCKING DEMOCRACY), and as such fixing it is essentially impossible.
We’re in a fucked up situation, in other words, and you can’t fix it without admitting that democracy doesn’t work.
Edit-
Wow, this post really exemplifies how horrible I am when it comes to stream of consciousness writing. So many repeated points.
[quote]TooHuman wrote:
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
There isn’t actually. There’s plenty of evidence that abusive and neglectful parenting is harmful but that’s not what I’m talking about. And I don’t need scientific evidence to show that abusive and neglectful parenting is harmful. It’s another one of those common sense things that I already know like the consequences of permissive parenting. These things are part of our culture; we have a culture of permissive, soft parenting in the West. It began with the baby boomers but really went overboard in the 70’s. A resurgence of permissive parenting occurred in the mid to late 90’s. I’ve observed, as have others, how the one child urban families in China are succumbing to Western-style permissive parenting creating a generation of obese, spoiled children.[/quote]
Yes there is.
Here are a few examples from a 10 second search on google for “studies on spanking”.
http://www.human.cornell.edu/pam/outreach/parenting/research/upload/Spanking-Research-Brief.pdf
http://www.cnn.com/2014/07/23/health/effects-spanking-brain/
So again. Where is your evidence?[/quote]
If be interested in the sample pool. If you have the right pool, the questions are a moot point. Liberal university research at its finest: to validate their own bias.
In response to AC’s original question and post:
I don’t know what it takes to get a ship this far gone to turn around. Some people have proposed revolution, and while I don’t entirely disagree, the point needs to be made that even in the grand old American Revolution, I believe it has been stated that less than 10-15 percent of people actively participated in that.
It’s odd…it seems that MOST Americans seem to think along similar lines. (Or maybe it’s just most of the people I talk to.)
-
Government should be small…there to serve me, not the other way around.
-
Congressmen should vote based on how their constituents feel…not on how they personally feel, or who pays them the most. They are supposed to be “representing”, after all.
-
The law really should have a small footprint on people’s lives. We don’t need to criminalize every little thing to get people to comply.
-
ALL elected officials should have term limits…and no permanent perks based on the fact that you served as a Congressman or elected official. They are not royalty, and shouldn’t be treated as such.
-
The proposed Constitutional Ammendment regarding Congress passing no law that doesn’t apply to them, and making them immune from no law, needs to be passed. Not likely to happen, though.
So…the question is…if it seems that most people want these kinds of things, then why can’t they happen? Or, how do we make it happen?? I honestly believe it would take an event of such massive proportion that the American way of life as we know it would change (i.e; a pandemic flu, or something).
How does one hit the reset button without taking all the current game players off the screen? I’m not so sure it can be done.