[QUOTE]No I disagree- kids these days are much worse. I spoken to multiple teachers at my school and- one of them who'd been working there 20+ years and has said she's never seen it worse than this in the past couple of years. It's awful- and our school is the leading one in the county.[/QUOTE]

this is a function of old people being bitchy, not anything she says being true.

[QUOTE]That and the worst they got in the 19 and 1860's were race riots, not cursing out a teacher because it was "cool."[/QUOTE]

cursing is worse than riots

[QUOTE=Knifeboy]I love how alot of people in this thread seem to think that kids are less respectfull than they were a generation ago.. just like the previous generation thought their kids were less respectfull than their earlier generation, and so on, and so on..[/QUOTE]

Maybe not, but I know a hell of a lot of members of my generation are less respectful than me.

[QUOTE]this is a function of old people being bitchy, not anything she says being true. [/QUOTE]
Why the hell would she lie about that? She was telling the truth. It's not just her either- a lot of the teachers I've spoken to have been saying it aswell.

[QUOTE=Herbert_da_fish]Why the hell would she lie about that? She was telling the truth. It's not just her either- a lot of the teachers I've spoken to have been saying it aswell.[/QUOTE]

Generally when people say things were better in the 'old days' they seem to be looking back at things through rose-tainted glasses. If kids were so much better in those days, then how come punishments like caning were put to use?

As for the thread's original topic, lightly smacking a child should only be used when they listen to reason and other punishments have failed, and only then when they're old enough to understand that they're messing around and shouldn't be.

[QUOTE=The_Passenger]Generally when people say things were better in the 'old days' they seem to be looking back at things through rose-tainted glasses. If kids were so much better in those days, then how come punishments like caning were put to use?

As for the thread's original topic, lightly smacking a child should only be used when they listen to reason and other punishments have failed, and only then when they're old enough to understand that they're messing around and shouldn't be.[/QUOTE]
No it's not like that. Trust me. The kids we have at our school now- they just make me sick.

If you honestly believe that kids now a days are that much worse than 50 years ago, you're honestly quite naive..

[QUOTE=Knifeboy]If you honestly believe that kids now a days are that much worse than 50 years ago, you're honestly quite naive..[/QUOTE]
I wasn't alive 50 years ago. I'm speaking from the time I've been in school- 12 years. Just out of interest what country do you live in?

[QUOTE]Why the hell would she lie about that? She was telling the truth. It's not just her either- a lot of the teachers I've spoken to have been saying it aswell.[/QUOTE]

old people are bitchy. She doesn't mean to lie, she's just bitter.

[QUOTE=Herbert_da_fish]Why the hell would she lie about that? She was telling the truth. It's not just her either- a lot of the teachers I've spoken to have been saying it aswell.[/QUOTE]
Not lie, but perceive things in a nostalgic, distorted way.

[QUOTE=Knifeboy]If you honestly believe that kids now a days are that much worse than 50 years ago, you're honestly quite naive..[/QUOTE]
Quite. Read any book about boys/teenagers written in the 40s or 50s, including any that are required high school reading.

[QUOTE=Knifeboy]If you honestly believe that kids now a days are that much worse than 50 years ago, you're honestly quite naive..[/QUOTE]

Fine, would I be naïve to say that they're still delinquent little sh[size=2]its[/size] and they need to get a real hobby and find something that they're good at other than kicking a soccer ball and drinking to the edge of death?

It doesn't matter whether kids are worse now compared to before, the point is that they're bad any way you roll it and some improvement would be appreciated by the mature people left in this country.

who the hell plays soccer?

[QUOTE=The Tway]who the hell plays soccer?[/QUOTE]

The jocks at my old high school.

I don't think kids who are actually in high school are really that much of a problem in the grand scheme of things.

and what makes you think that regular parental beatings would change the way 'jocks' are?

...

[QUOTE=The Tway]and what makes you think that regular parental beatings would change the way 'jocks' are?[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Cain]As other large-scale social issues, a blanket policy of pain infliction for percieved "disrespect" will not solve the problem of disrespectful attitudes but will only force them to simmer under the surface, which could lead to much more dangerous territory.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=The Tway]who the hell plays soccer?[/QUOTE]

The entire world bar America. Bloody yanks.

"spare the rod and spoil the child"
I think spankings and what not are needed...in moderation. I'm not saying leave bruises or cuts or make the kid bleed but i'm all for a spanking or two when a kid does something wrong. Now to do that at school...i think the principle (or whoever does the spanking) should call the parents and have permission first but i'm all for it.

Oh Tway I forgot to ask. Why do you hate the freedom of a parent to spank their kids, if you don't hate the freedom to murder babies?

Kids dont really have the freedom to fight back quite as much. Plus its not killing babies, its killing fetuses

[QUOTE]"spare the rod and spoil the child"
I think spankings and what not are needed...in moderation. I'm not saying leave bruises or cuts or make the kid bleed but i'm all for a spanking or two when a kid does something wrong. Now to do that at school...i think the principle (or whoever does the spanking) should call the parents and have permission first but i'm all for it.[/QUOTE]uh, I wouldn't quote the OT as moral justification for anything.

[QUOTE=lfantwister]Kids dont really have the freedom to fight back quite as much. Plus its not killing babies, its killing fetuses[/QUOTE]

Sh I'm trying to nake a point.

oh sorry man ill be quiet now

[QUOTE=The Tway]I don't think kids who are actually in high school are really that much of a problem in the grand scheme of things.

and what makes you think that regular parental beatings would change the way 'jocks' are?[/QUOTE]

I don't think I once spoke in support of regular parental beatings in this thread. All I said was that the parents are, in the majority of cases, highly responsible for any delinquecy their children display and that a system of legal corporal punishment in school wouldn't adjust the delinquecy a bit.

EDIT: I see deadwalk has already taken care of the reminder.

wait you're concerned with the delinquency of students on high school sports teams?

[QUOTE]Oh Tway I forgot to ask. Why do you hate the freedom of a parent to spank their kids, if you don't hate the freedom to murder babies?[/QUOTE]

being allowed to beat someone else isn't freedom, it's oppression.

and I'm pro abortion because fetuses are ugly. And I hate the baby jesus.

[QUOTE=The Tway]wait you're concerned with the delinquency of students on high school sports teams?



being allowed to beat someone else isn't freedom, it's oppression.

and I'm pro abortion because fetuses are ugly. And I hate the baby jesus.[/QUOTE]

Yeah well you were ugly 20 years ago too

[QUOTE]
being allowed to beat someone else isn't freedom, it's oppression.
[/QUOTE]

Since when do children have the freedom to not be "oppressed"? Until they're 15 (it might vary state by state), a child can not legally withdraw from school. Hence compulsory education--the child is required to attend school. Oppression!

A parent is free to limit a child's time spent out of the house, time watching television, time spent browsing the internet, etc. All things that if one adult attempted to do another adult, would be considered oppression.

So how does a parent then lack the legal right to smack their child? Obviously we're not talking about savage beatings.

[QUOTE=Broadway Danny Rose]A parent is free to limit a child's time spent out of the house, time watching television, time spent browsing the internet, etc. All things that if one adult attempted to do another adult, would be considered oppression.

So how does a parent then lack the legal right to smack their child? Obviously we're not talking about savage beatings.[/QUOTE]
Children, by their very nature, need rules and limitations. They do not yet have the knowledge of the world around them and must be disciplined. However, you seem to be equating discipline to oppression which just isn't true. And furthermore, you're comparing non-violent limitations to physical enforcement of those limitations. If we don't allow the use of corporal punishment in the workplace, with full grown adults who know the conequences of their actions, why use force with children who are still developing?

[QUOTE]Since when do children have the freedom to not be "oppressed"? Until they're 15 (it might vary state by state), a child can not legally withdraw from school. Hence compulsory education--the child is required to attend school. Oppression! [/QUOTE] School is not by definition a humiliating and painful experience, though it often seems so. The purpose of an education is not to reinforce punishment, it's to instill knowledge that can be used in the future. School and physical punishment are completely different in their means. Plus, at school a kid is under the jurisdiction of many teachers, with whom the kid can have varying relationships, as opposed to the one or two parents who invoke a slap on the ***

[QUOTE]A parent is free to limit a child's time spent out of the house, time watching television, time spent browsing the internet, etc. All things that if one adult attempted to do another adult, would be considered oppression. [/QUOTE] But none of which include physical pain and humiliation for misdeed. Plus, the thing about oppression of adults is not really comparable--adults in the eyes of the law are free-thinking individuals who have the capabilities and probably the tendencies to move out and live on their own or otherwise reject the punishing forces imposed on them.

I think that hitting your kids is always wrong. It teaches that violence is ok. When I was growing up, my dad would beat the s**t out of me. It solved the problem of whatever I was doing, true.

But I saw how he got what he wanted through violence, so I started using violence to get what I wanted when I was little. Someone says the wrong thing to me, I would get in a fight with them, and win everytime, often hurting the person quite a bit. I was crazy back then, always fighting and hitting people. You know why? Because it worked. No one made fun of me or anything after I got in a few fights. If you teach kids violence is an acceptable solution to problems, they will believe it is.

[QUOTE=lfantwister]School is not by definition a [B]humiliating and painful [/B]experience, though it often seems so. The purpose of an education is not to reinforce punishment, it's to instill knowledge that can be used in the future. School and physical punishment are completely different in their means. Plus, at school a kid is under the jurisdiction of many teachers, with whom the kid can have varying relationships, as opposed to the one or two parents who invoke a slap on the ***

But none of which include physical pain and humiliation for misdeed. Plus, the thing about oppression of adults is not really comparable--adults in the eyes of the law are free-thinking individuals who have the capabilities and probably the tendencies to move out and live on their own or otherwise reject the punishing forces imposed on them.[/QUOTE]

Why is being spanked/slapped a humiliating experience? Sure it is painful but we often learn best through painful situations so i'm not even going there but the only time i ever recall being humiliated by being spanked is when it is was done in front of my friends. And even then, it was the fact that i was being spanked, it was the fact that i got in trouble and cried in front of them. Spanking/smacking isn't a humiliating act in and of itself, only in certain situations and that could be said about anything.

[QUOTE]Why is being spanked/slapped a humiliating experience? Sure it is painful but we often learn best through painful situations so i'm not even going there but the only time i ever recall being humiliated by being spanked is when it is was done in front of my friends. And even then, it was the fact that i was being spanked, it was the fact that i got in trouble and cried in front of them. Spanking/smacking isn't a humiliating act in and of itself, only in certain situations and that could be said about anything.[/QUOTE]

No. Having to give up any resistance so that someone more powerful can harm you is humiliating. It's in the very nature of the act. Do you really think kids learn more from a little tap or the humiliation that comes along with it?

[QUOTE=SubtleDagger]Here's the underlying factor:

If a child cannot discern between right and wrong, that is not the child's fault, s/he was more than likely raised incorrectly; it is the parents' fault for not instilling values in their child. If you are so unbelievably primitive as to suggest that a beating is a better way to instill those values then an actual conversation with your own child, then you have clearly failed as a parent.[/QUOTE]

[size=7][b]NOT BEATING[/b][/size]

[QUOTE]
No. Having to give up any resistance so that someone more powerful can harm you is humiliating. It's in the very nature of the act. Do you really think kids learn more from a little tap or the humiliation that comes along with it?
[/QUOTE]

Say you have a 7 year old, and he steals from your mother's house. You'd probably make him confess his wrongdoing to her and return the item. Isn't that humiliated? Put yourself in the kid's shoes--that'd be humiliating. Children don't have the right not to be humiliated. And there's no way that you can honestly say that a few whacks on the butt is more humiliating than the situation I outlined above.

[QUOTE]Since when do children have the freedom to not be "oppressed"? Until they're 15 (it might vary state by state), a child can not legally withdraw from school. Hence compulsory education--the child is required to attend school. Oppression!
[/QUOTE]
no one has the right to be free from all "oppression".

everyone should have the right to be free from all oppression that is done for no net benefit to anyone. Since many people have raised perfectly functional kids without battering them at any point this is oppression carried out for its own sake.

Some people are very sensitive. There are many kids that wont behave as you want them to, and even if you ground them, they wont listen, so a smack is necessary if you have that kind of a child. Its not humiliating, youre not going to hit a child in front of his friends or anything...

no a smack isn't necessary it accomplishes nothing

Maybe we're all wrong, maybe it's right for some kids to be hit and not for others (though i don't personally agree with this) but why can't some kids learn better from being hit and others not?

I don't see how anyone could possibily learn anything by being hit.

YOU don't see how anyone could possibly learn, that's you. Others do see and still, others learn from being hit.....i don't see what the problem is. Let parents raise there kids the way they want. Obviously i'm not saying lets, beat our kids, i'm not saying child abuse should be allowed either. If the abuse is extreme enough to leave bruises, cuts, bleeding then that should be stopped but a little red mark that goes away after a nights worth of sleep is ok. Parents need to raise there kids how they see fit, how they see best and other people should mind their own freakin' business and raise there kids the way they think is the best.

no others are too stupid to have anything to teach their kids anyway so they just slap them around instead.