-20 votes

New study exposes the uncomfortable truth about spanking

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

I find some libertarians,

I find some libertarians, especially Stefan, to be tools, unintentionally perhaps, for greater state authority in our lives, or at least officious busybodies. He constantly attacks those institutions, especially the family, that serve as bulwarks against the state’s power. He peddles ideas that have the effect of creating the condition for greater state control. He’s deeply embedded into the hyper-individualism that aids in diminishing the natural institutions that protect the individual from, and nourishes against, the state. He is of a certain species of libertarians who see no difference between family authority and state power. To him, all authority is suspect. But by attacking the natural authorities to which we are born into, he acts as a liberator. But, in this case, it is the liberation from the family into the clutches of the state. In fact, all liberation of the individual from those natural ties we are embedded to, acts, paradoxically it may seem, to enlarge the state’s sphere over the private sphere. It is why it is not uncommon to come across a species of libertarians who call for greater control of the private sphere in the name of liberating the individual from the family, the church, the village, etc. That Stefan would deny granting the state to step in means nil when it is he who creates the very conditions he claims to be against.

malo periculosam libertatem quam quietum servitium

I am an aristocrat. I love liberty; I hate equality. - John Randolph of Roanoke

Logged in just to down vote

Logged in just to down vote this crap.

"Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters." Benjamin Franklin

I remember getting my ass whooped with a belt many times...

and it didn't phase me a bit. As a matter of fact, I wised up.

When I knew I did something that was going to get me a belt-spankin', I would put on two pair of pants and long johns, then I'd put on an Oscar-award winning performance on how bad it hurt. I hardly felt it.

My brothers would be in the other room laughing.

As I grew older and my parents saw it had no affect, they started grounding me. I'd beg for a spanking instead.

Yeah, a couple of times I got caught off-guard and didn't have time to prepare, and yeah, it hurt but sometimes you have to man-up. As long as I didn't get grounded, it was all good.

One Really Has To Appreciate

when the very proponents of something wholly undermine that which they advocate with their own personal testimony. Case in point:

"I wised up."

This is the kind of testimony advocates of spanking have been waiting for. We have been hearing about how much moral character spanking builds. Please good sir, tell us more about this acquired wisdom:

"When I knew I did something that was going to get me a belt-spankin', I would put on two pair of pants and long johns, then I'd put on an Oscar-award winning performance on how bad it hurt. I hardly felt it.

My brothers would be in the other room laughing."

Now that is some character!!! :/ roflol ...

Ah!...I think you missed what I meant...

"I wised up" meant I wised up on how to avoid the pain of receiving a spanking, not building moral character.

I'm still working on that, everyday.

My brothers were laughing "with" (though I was fake crying) me, not at me.

If I had kids, I doubt I'd spank them because I know they would have my hard-head gene and it wouldn't do any good. No, thinking back, what would have worked on me would've been encouraging me with cash for good behavior. Works today as well.

I should have authored

my entire post in purple.

Gotcha...I thought you were serious...

My bad.

Every now and then a new study comes out

that "proves" that children who grow up in day care are no different than children who grow up in their own home with their mother. And studies that prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that children who grow up in homes with two lesbians or gay guys end up no different than children who grow up with a married mother and father. And then there are the studies that prove that children of divorce are not harmed, and that boys who grow up with no father in the home are not harmed in the slightest. Remember the study Alfred Kinsey did, the one that proved that sex is good for babies?

egapele's picture

The uncomfortable truth about this thread

is that the same people keep talking to themselves.

Wasn't there a hard-to-die thread up here a few weeks ago on this very same topic?

I generally think these kinds of conversations are pointless

Much like there is/aint a God. The real issue for me is people need to keep their noses out my family's affairs. Whether I choose to spank my kids or not spank my kids is none of your business.

I politely disagree.

The issue of "force" is behind this argument. Behind most of the topics we discuss here is the question of who has authority to use force and when. I've enjoyed this debate because its given me a good chance to really delve into my own ideas about what force is, what aggression is and why I do or do not believe that the relationship between a parent and child is vastly different than the relationship between two random people.
Although I don't see anyone here getting their mind changed on this topic through the debate here, I think it is very important to furthering liberty that we all really grasp the concept of force and authority so we can more properly apply it to the topics we regularly discuss.

Free market capitalism isn't right for America because it works better. It's right because it's free (and it works better).

fellow arker Indoctrination has been indoctrinated

and it's clear in his comment here:

"If you don't have universal moral principles to stand on, any rules you come up with are just going to be manipulative bull...."


So 'Holy' Moly comes up with what he calls 'Universal Moral Principles' or his 'Universal Preferable Behavior' and everyone is supposed to accept it/them without question or independent thought? If Stefan says 'JUMP!" how high do you go, Indoctrination?

I don't like that pompous a$$ or his new religion. I also ask that any future videos featuring that egomaniac be clearly marked. I almost got suckered into watching that video but when I saw it was him quickly shut it down. Not everyone on this forum subscribes to his religion, thank God. He may sometimes say something reasonable, but even a clock is... yadda blah.

How many children do you have, Indoctrination? Better yet, how many children does Stefan have? I can't seem to find that answer. If neither you or Stefan have children, neither of you can speak from the experience of a parent.

Read this letter from a parent who knows what it's like to expereince Stefan's 'wrath' against the family then tell me how great your guy is.

If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy.
James Madison

Stefan has one child, if you were genuinely curious.

And I don't think he would have written so many books if we were supposed to just accept what he says without question. The books and videos are there for you to read and evaluate the arguments yourself if you choose.

But, I can see you prefer the easy route of not looking at his arguments and resorting to character assassination. Its much easier to crap into your hand and throw it than make rational counterpoints.

I have seen a few of his videos

and if you take any notes at all then you find a lot of logical inconsistencies in what he says. For instance in this video he claims children are spanked for trivial misdeeds and ten minutes later they are misbehaving again and that they are punished far more often than we ever thought, but when he tells the numbers they are 33 families that spank their kids 41 times in 6 days. If you do the math that means that out of 33 families if they all have only one child then only a third of the families spanked a child twice in one week.
I work with young people, that is outstanding behavior and self control.

There was another video he did a while back about the Bible and in it he said to point out any mistake, and after listing five minutes I had like ten extremely basic mistakes, when I pointed them out he said it doesnt matter because everything about the Bible is wrong and a myth so who cares if he's accurate or not. All I am thinking is apparently you cared since you asked for people to point out your extremely basic doctrinal mistakes.

I dont see why

the study implies spanking doesnt get the job done.

33 families had 41 spankings in 6 days.

Trust me...

...it works! ;)

"Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters." Benjamin Franklin

LvMI's David Gordon dissects

LvMI's David Gordon dissects Moly...

It never ceases to amaze,

the level to which statists, even small variety limited ones will stoop. What does the article have to do with the topic? I see intellectual libertarians write rebuttals, critiques, or other responses to fellow intellectual libertarians all the time. I have seen intellectual libertarians passionately debate one another on issues they disagree (ie. intellectual property). What I do not see are any articles on Mises.org written to address anything BILL3 has ever produced. Jealous?

I think everyone who has taken notice of your comments in this thread understands you do not like Stefan. If you are going to show up with that kind of bias at least demonstrate common civilized statist decency to keep one's character assassination attacks on topic or at least related to the topic in some way.

I don't even know why I am defending the guy when I am not a fan. Actually I do know ... because I value on topic discussion and do not value unrelated BS.

It's relative because

the Mises critique points to Moly's moral belief system which in turns points to Moly's critique on 'spanking' or whatever the video is about, which I don't know because I won't watch anything Moly says so must defer to the subject of this thread for insight.

If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy.
James Madison

The Article

argues against universal preferable behavior based on the very arguments Stefan has presented for it in the affirmative. A completely different conversation than one about a singular behavior.

The logical fallacy gushing non-fan girl hater is trying to advance here would be akin to arguing the entire ten commandments must be invalid if one of them is invalid. Or the reverse in that if the entire ten commandments can not be universally preferable we need not consider whether any single one of them is ethically valid. For instance, if the first commandment to worship God before all others is not universally preferable because some consider it ethically invalid does that in and of itself nullify the ethical validity of all others including commandments against murder or theft? Do murder or theft become ethical merely if the source of the ten commandments were deemed not logically credible?

Ignore the gushing fan girl.

Ignore the gushing fan girl.

People are such asses.

I don't remember my dad ever being mad when he spanked me. He just did it because it had to be done.

People who think they need to follow some dork's guidelines for correcting their children aren't mature enough to have kids.

On Facebook:
Personal ProfilePolitical GroupPolitical Page

The human tool's wife is a

The human tool's wife is a professionally disgraced pseudo psychologist hack and probably has Moly by the nuts. Can't help it. Hopefully they don't have any real kids to mismanage, and divorce soon since she's he's not a powerful new age enough guru.

Stop comparing spanking to hitting some random adult.

I did not "create" my neighbor. I don't have any natural responsibility for him and I don't have any logical or natural authority over him. I did create my child. I created a human who is not ready to fend for himself. I created a helpless human being who does not survive unless I serve him. Likewise, he doesn't survive unless he submits to my authority until he is old enough to survive on his own. That natural dynamic puts me in a place of authority over him. That by itself doesn't mean spanking is the best option, but it does mean that the relationship I have to my child can never be logically compared to the relationship I should have with other people. Parenting is not libertarian.

Free market capitalism isn't right for America because it works better. It's right because it's free (and it works better).

I'm curious about your views

I'm curious about your views on abortion, given everything you've said above.

Not sure if I want to spend that much time on it here but....

...here are the basics.
1. I'm atheist but when it comes to abortion, I wish I wasn't because I believe it is wrong and I believe that if there was a god, he would punish you for doing it. I don't believe in God however so my views come from a standpoint of "what can we do to save as many lives as possible". Having said that, I don't believe laws will save lives in this case.
2. Just like treating substance abuse as a crime only makes life more hopeless for the addict, treating a woman who wants an abortion like a criminal only makes her more hopeless and likely to still have the abortion, but to do so in a dangerous manner. Just like illegal prostitution only ensures that very bad people are in charge of the prostitutes, making abortion illegal just ensures that very bad people run the abortion business.
3. Having said that, I think that any money spent on enforcing anti-abortion laws would be better spent helping provide options for expectant mothers and marketing the idea of the value of life and the availability of options other than abortion.
I think that if the national view was "There are better options than abortion and there are more support options" rather than "You will follow our laws and our laws prevent you from killing your baby", then there would be more of a stigma against abortion.
Right now, the women's movement feels like they are saying "damn the man" by telling the government and the religious right that they can't control women's bodies. I think that if everyone was supporting options for women to give up babies for adoption and the emphasis was on that rather than using the strong had of the government to prevent them, then that feminist "my body, my choice" argument would fade and more women would be forced to really look at what they are doing rather than being blinded by their distain for the government wanting to control them.

Free market capitalism isn't right for America because it works better. It's right because it's free (and it works better).

The nature of abortion ensures that very bad people

run the abortion business. A good person would never do such a thing.

I can't argue with that at all.

Good point.

Free market capitalism isn't right for America because it works better. It's right because it's free (and it works better).

Interesting. I am probably

Interesting. I am probably pretty similar to you in terms of my views on abortion.

Why, does the truth make you uncomfortable?

But let's go ahead and address your dependency / caretaker argument, since it seems to be the crux of what you're arguing. A candystriper takes care of someone with dementia at an old folk's home. The candystriper MUST take care of them, or the elderly person could die. They have to prevent the patient from leaving, even when they are delusional and want to leave. They must use FORCE to keep them in certain rooms, or get them from place to place if they cannot move around, or don't want to.

So the question is this: can the candystriper spank an elderly person with dementia? All of the same elements are there, so the caretaker is justified in spanking the dependent, correct?