Child Rights

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

...only where the peril of a life threat NEEDS to be stressed, is striking a child an option for me.

...there are plenty of other things to do other than smack a child that are very effective repercussions

..seriously, you are remenicant of my step-father with this, "smack on the ass"...

...if the hand sins, you smack the hand...if the mouth, then, the mouth...

..WHY...do peoples always go for the ass? THEN, you just have a tuff-assed-kid, that thinks your a hard handed asshole with little to no self control...not you personally, you know what I mean.

...once again..in in the "I don't give a shit" camp...I don't drive

The school was ATTEMPTING to use it as a point that it is hard to teach te children moral values & structure & rules when they have shitty examples at home.

Dont take me so literally. Nor assume I spank on a whim.

This is another fine example of us aggreeing. My children have only ever been spanked when they have done something that could cause great bodily harm or death to another person.

It's the hand that keeps reaching in the cookie jar that gets a little whack after the attached head has been told over and over that it can't have anymore cookies.

As for why that ass... I think it's because it's safe. Just a large group opf muscle and fat. No organs to accidently damage.

[jynxxxedangel]

Thank you but no thanks on any spin doctor job. I try try my best to find some middle ground on all issues. I don't think the left or the right has any of the answers we need.

but on this treaty.

I am opposed to ratifieing the main body if it would cause us to have to change our Constitution. Why? We, as in the USA, don't need this. We already have laws the cover just about everything in the treaty. Our children are treated like people... they are also treated like children but the main point is they are treated like people rather than proterties. This treaty was designed to enforce OUR morals (Western) on countries that treat their children like objects of little value. That offends me. As much as I would love to protect every child on the planet I must balance that with my need to respect the culture of other peoples.

..and this is my stance, in so many words. It's all so confusing, and yet, it all makes sense.

Having been around, and having lived with/as the "Romans," there are so many other objectives, aside from those that Western Culture account for as "correct."

I'ma shaddap, now.

Edited November 24, 2009 by jynxxxedangel

[Rev.Reverence]

Dont take me so literally. Nor assume I spank on a whim. I did not, nor would I.

This is another fine example of us aggreeing. My children have only ever been spanked when they have done something that could cause great bodily harm or death to another person. (or themselves? that's why mine got it twice, goin' fer the electricity.)

It's the hand that keeps reaching in the cookie jar that gets a little whack after the attached head has been told over and over that it can't have anymore cookies. (Shit, there are shelves only I can reach.)

As for why that ass... I think it's because it's safe. Just a large group opf muscle and fat. No organs to accidently damage.

...yeah, that's what I mean...it just made me TUFF.

[Rev.Reverence]

Thank you but no thanks on any spin doctor job. I try try my best to find some middle ground on all issues. I don't think the left or the right has any of the answers we need.

but on this treaty.

I am opposed to ratifieing the main body if it would cause us to have to change our Constitution. Why? We, as in the USA, don't need this. We already have laws the cover just about everything in the treaty. Our children are treated like people... they are also treated like children but the main point is they are treated like people rather than proterties. This treaty was designed to enforce OUR morals (Western) on countries that treat their children like objects of little value. That offends me. As much as I would love to protect every child on the planet I must balance that with my need to respect the culture of other peoples.

I still don't see anything that has to do with anything that would go against the Constitution.

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

I still don't see anything that has to do with anything that would go against the Constitution.

Neither do I, but I am reading a watered down laymens version of it. I have not read the actuall treaty and the legalize it is written in.

[jynxxxedangel]

Legalese is mostly illegible. They count on folks like us not being able to translate, as ignorant people will sign their names upon just about any official-looking document, with no questions.

Edited November 25, 2009 by jynxxxedangel