Bad News for the A2K Anti-Spanking Lobby

The purpose of discipline isn't to injure your child, it's to modify the child's behavior

Quote:

I don't think that reasonable people have trouble reading the law and interpreting it.

the two people here... who are questioning the child abuse laws, may not be reasonable people.

Purposefully writing law to be vague is an abuse of the citizen at the hands of the state.

Try following this as a general rule of thumb, Hawkeye--if you have to worry about whether you are violating child abuse laws with your methods of disciplining your children, you probably are violating them

and if corporal punishment is used effectively a certain amount of pain must be applied. If you are going to demand that no damage is done you will in effect be outlawing corporal punishment through that back door and without applying honesty because you make it impossible to apply the required amount of pain

Most normal people don't want to injure or damage their children.

The purpose of discipline isn't to injure your child, it's to modify the child's behavior.

And you've yet to come up with research that demonstrates the positive benefits of corporal punishment,

A statute that fails to give such a person fair notice that the particular conduct is forbidden is indefinite and therefore void.

An once more it is you who wish to interfere with parents raising their own children so it is your task to prove such interfere is needed not mine to prove that the parents know what they are doing

Most normal people think that a red mark after a spanking is normal expected damage...some however consider evidence of abuse. If we had a just and moral government the law would tell us which view is correct, but alas we do not.

You are missing the point--methods of disipline are not supposed to inflict damage on the child.

As you know damn well Bill Firefly's position is that the state has the right to run over the citizens when ever it wants, for what ever flimsy reason it decides to give. We the citizens are entitled to no rights to be free from government interference or abuse.

That's my position too. As long as we have free elections at reasonable intervals. WE are the state. We are only entitled to the rights we collectively decide to grant ourselves.

says who?

You posted a quote from a CPS spokesperson in Texas who said you can use force, but you cannot inflict injury on your child. Read your own posts

Child abuse may take the form of physical or emotional injury, sexual abuse, sexual exploitation, physical neglect, medical neglect, or inadequate supervision.

The law specifically excludes “reasonable” discipline by the child’s parent, guardian, or conservator; corporal punishment is not in itself abusive under the law.

...

Physical abuse typically occurs when a frustrated parent or caregiver strikes, shakes, or throws a child because of anger. Other forms of deliberate assault that may be physically abusive include burning, scalding,biting, kicking, cutting, poking, twisting a child’s limbs, deliberately withholding food, binding, gagging, choking, or hitting the child with a closed fist or other instrument. Any form of corporal punishment may be abusive if it results in injury.

The indicators described below may be helpful in identifying possible child abuse victims. However, suspicious-looking injuries can occur accidentally, as the result of an unusual medical condition or birthmark, or even sometimes as the result of a non-abusive folk remedy for a medical condition. The investigation of child abuse should be performed by specially trained professionals. The indicators below can be used advisedly by persons who have frequent contact with children to identify possible victims.

...

Physical injuries resulting from child abuse can run the gamut from bruises, burns, and lacerations, to head injuries, broken bones, broken teeth, and damage to internal organs. Symptoms may include pain, swelling, internal or external bleeding, impaired mobility, delayed development, malnutrition, convulsions, coma, or even death. Any of these injuries or symptoms can occur because of accidents or medical conditions. Context, circumstances, and the exact nature of the wounds usually set apart the injuries resulting from abuse. Specially trained professionals must make the determination whether a child has actually been abused or not.

...

corporal punishment is not in itself abusive under the law.

You are missing the point--methods of disipline are not supposed to inflict damage on the child.

says who? Is it in the Bible? The Constitution? From what authority does your assertion flow?