Court rules hidings for kids officially illegal

[SmartKit]

That is an interesting take on it. You think it is a good thing to teach children that if they want someone else to do something, they must beat them until that person does it?

Some people do. Best you be prepared.

 

[hungrymamba]

I do not spank, I give a beating. So, I am not affected by this ruling .

 

[MidnightWizard]

Well that is hypocritical?
What happens between private citizens will remain the same, barring of course what I bolded. Giving a hiding can be seen as violence and child neglect but hey.

"Spare the rod and spoil the Child"
People look at a very few cases of REAL child violence -- conflate this with a "hiding" and claim that disciplining your child is "violence"
What this whole saga has elucidated for me is that the Concourt -- HAVE LOST THEIR MARBLES
Gone COMPLETELY "New-Age" -- "New-Dawn"

 

[konfab]

Paternalistic system -- what about MATERNALISTIC ?
Mothers are normally the first to smack kiddywinks

Dude...

Paternalism is action that limits a person's or group's liberty or autonomy and is intended to promote their own good.[1] Paternalism can also imply that the behavior is against or regardless of the will of a person, or also that the behavior expresses an attitude of superiority.[2] Paternalism, paternalistic and paternalist have all been used as a pejorative.[3]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paternalism

It the term as I used it has nothing to do with the sex of the parent.

Natural rights -- the only rights I know about are these

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

The Declaration of Independence The Want, Will, and Hopes of the People

Thank you for posting that.

Lets start:
that all men are created equal.
If all men are created equal, then why is it morally permissible to hit children, but not woman or adult men? Would you find it morally abhorrent to hit your grandmother when she is being a bitch, but not your 3 year old child? According to the natural rights formulation you posted, your grandmother has the same natural rights as your child.

that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed

This means that the correct and just function of a government is to protect unalienable rights, like the right to not be assaulted for example.

The human animal is naturally aggressive
Projects to change human nature ( Communism ) generally end up destroying humans

The human animal has natural aggression, but has also evolved social behaviours to regulate that aggression. Behaviour like empathy and reason for example.

 

[RickMaver47]

I think the problem here is that some parents can't differentiate between a spanking (which I see as an openhanded smack on the bum) and unleashing your anger/frustration/whatever on the child's body.

I got beaten as a child. My mother broke wooden spoons on me. Not on my bum, on wherever she could. That, in my mind, is wrong.
I've given my son a smack on his bum once or twice. I felt like a right a*hole afterwards, but I don't think that it is wrong to do so.

If we blindly allow people to discipline their kids whichever way they deem right, then we will have parents beating the living sh*t out of their kids.
How do we control this?

I feel that this judgement is perhaps the wrong way to do this. Have a law in place, that protects children, but from abuse, not from discipline.

 

[The_Mowgs]

I think the problem here is that some parents can't differentiate between a spanking (which I see as an openhanded smack on the bum) and unleashing your anger/frustration/whatever on the child's body.

I got beaten as a child. My mother broke wooden spoons on me. Not on my bum, on wherever she could. That, in my mind, is wrong.
I've given my son a smack on his bum once or twice. I felt like a right a*hole afterwards, but I don't think that it is wrong to do so.

If we blindly allow people to discipline their kids whichever way they deem right, then we will have parents beating the living sh*t out of their kids.
How do we control this?

I feel that this judgement is perhaps the wrong way to do this. Have a law in place, that protects children, but from abuse, not from discipline.

But there are already such a law and the offence is called assualt.

 

[Lupus]

"Spare the rod and spoil the Child"
People look at a very few cases of REAL child violence -- conflate this with a "hiding" and claim that disciplining your child is "violence"
What this whole saga has elucidated for me is that the Concourt -- HAVE LOST THEIR MARBLES
Gone COMPLETELY "New-Age" -- "New-Dawn"

Quoting the bible is idiotic, do you also stone your daughter if she doesn't listen to you? Or kill your neighbour if he doesn't believe in your religion?

 

[Toxxyc]

None of those are legal by any definition, if you could actually point to the story and not just hearsay.

I don't have a story. Cops never even arrested the father who beat his son and the guy who married the 14-year old girls was let go because it's "in his culture". Her parents rejected his lobola, so he kidnapped her. This **** happens IRL.

 

[Mk786]

Naughty corner just does not work.

 

[Lupus]

I don't have a story. Cops never even arrested the father who beat his son and the guy who married the 14-year old girls was let go because it's "in his culture". Her parents rejected his lobola, so he kidnapped her. This **** happens IRL.

Those cops should be arrested, because culture doesn't bypass the law.

 

[MidnightWizard]

If all men are created equal, then why is it morally permissible to hit children, but not woman or adult men?

I think that you are terribly conflicted
A CHILD is NOT yet a MAN ( Adult )
My grandmother ( bless her soul ) was capable of applying ADULT REASON -- as are most ADULTS
Children are NOT -- they have not yet developed enough to understand or be able to apply reason -- as understood -- BY A COURT OF LAW
WHY do the courts apply a distinction ?
WHY is a child not able to conclude a LEGAL document / transaction ?
WHY can a child only apply for ID when at a certain age ?

A correction ( hiding ) done in love is the NORMAL means of disciplne in a NORMAL families life !

THE END

 

[My_King]

Is reg so.

As die regeering beter na die vokkers kan kyk, dan is dit maar so.
Net onthou....as hulle die klein vokkers vat, moet hulle, hulle hou.

 

[RickMaver47]

But there are already such a law and the offence is called assualt.

How about focusing more on the discipline side of things.
Something like, "discipline with intent to commit ABH" or something to that effect.
I'm no lawyer, nor do I pretend to know laws, but I think blanket judgements are not the right way to do things

 

[Toxxyc]

Those cops should be arrested, because culture doesn't bypass the law.

Lots of cops should be arrested. I know in some of these cases not even the social workers at these LSEN schools get involved, out of fear for what happens in the townships. **** gets REALLY ugly, man. REALLY ugly.

 

[ponder]

Strange that the courts are ok with kids getting mutilated but not a spanking.

 

[konfab]

Children are NOT -- they have not yet developed enough to understand or be able to apply reason -- as understood -- BY A COURT OF LAW

If they are incapable of applying reason, then surely it is fruitless in hitting them?
I would assume you wouldn't hit a 2 month old baby because it is crying?

What about a 14 year old teenager? Are they incapable of applying reason?

At last we are coming to the core of the problem and where we fundamentally differ. I hold the view that small children do have reason(and this is not unsubstanciated btw). What they don't have is the socialisation to deal with their emotions, and thus get frustrated about it.

Watch this video and tell me that children are not yet developed enough to understand or be able to apply reason:

You can see it on the older one's face as she is coming to grips with her emotions. Simply turning it into a game, where they should cry on demand in turn, then showing them how it is done, made it understandable to them. That is nothing else but reason.

 

[konfab]

Strange that the courts are ok with kids getting mutilated but not a spanking.

Yet...

That is another thing that needs to get stamped out.

 

[MidnightWizard]

Quoting the bible is idiotic, do you also stone your daughter if she doesn't listen to you? Or kill your neighbour if he doesn't believe in your religion?

Would you prefer I quote

The Quran ?
The Mishnah ?
The Talmud ?
The Torah ?
The Vedics ?
The Tipitaka ?
The Malleus Maleficarum

The collected works of Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov

A few others ..........

There is SO MUCH idiocy in the World -- this ruling of the ConCourt is just another example ......

 

[access]

If they are incapable of applying reason, then surely it is fruitless in hitting them?
I would assume you wouldn't hit a 2 month old baby because it is crying?

What about a 14 year old teenager? Are they incapable of applying reason?

At last we are coming to the core of the problem and where we fundamentally differ. I hold the view that small children do have reason(and this is not unsubstanciated btw). What they don't have is the socialisation to deal with their emotions, and thus get frustrated about it.

Watch this video and tell me that children are not yet developed enough to understand or be able to apply reason:

bwhahahaha. as if all kids will just stop crying to give their clever dad a turn. or as if all dads are "clever". another kid might start crying that youre making fun of them. then later cry about the original thing, then cant remember what the crying was about and just scream blue murder.

the only things kids want to know, is what they can do and what they cant do. it all boils down to that.

 

[Lupus]

bwhahahaha. as if all kids will just stop crying to give their clever dad a turn. or as if all dads are "clever". another kid might start crying that youre making fun of them. then later cry about the original thing, then cant remember what the crying was about and just scream blue murder.

the only things kids want to know, is what they can do and what they cant do. it all boils down to that.

So smacking them is the way to get them to know the difference?