All I have to say about the following article is that I am so thankful to God that my parents loved me enough to spank me.
Pro 13:24 He that spareth his rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes.
Pro 22:15 Foolishness [is] bound in the heart of a child; [but] the rod of correction shall drive it far from him.
Pro 23:13-14 Withhold not correction from the child: for [if] thou punish him with the rod, he shall not die. Thou shalt punish him with the rod, and shalt deliver his soul from hell.
Pro 29:15 The rod and reproof give wisdom: but a child left [to himself] bringeth his mother to shame.
Pro 20:30 The blueness of a wound cleanseth away evil: so [do] stripes the inward parts of the belly.
_______________________________________________
(AP) SACRAMENTO, Calif. California parents could face jail and a fine for spanking their young children under legislation a state lawmaker has promised to introduce next week.
Democratic Assemblywoman Sally Lieber said such a law is needed because spanking victimizes helpless children and breeds violence in society.
"I think it's pretty hard to argue you need to beat a child," Lieber said. "Is it OK to whip a 1-year-old or a 6-month-old or a newborn?"
Lieber said her proposal would make spanking, hitting and slapping a child under 4 years old a misdemeanor. Adults could face up to a year in jail and a $1,000 fine.
Aides to the assemblywoman said they are still working on a definition for spanking.
Some Republican lawmakers called the idea ridiculous. But Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger said he may be receptive to it even though he has concerns about how the ban would be enforced.
The governor said he and his wife, Maria Shriver, did not spank their four children and used alternative methods for discipline. For example, Schwarzenegger said they found it more effective to threaten to take away their children's play time if they didn't do school work.
"They hate that much more than getting spanked," he told reporters Friday in Los Angeles.
California law permits spanking by parents unless the degree of force is excessive or not appropriate for the child's age.
20 comments:
If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son who does not obey his father and mother and will not listen to them when they discipline him, his father and mother shall take hold of him and bring him to the elders at the gate of his town. They shall say to the elders, "This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious. He will not obey us. He is a profligate and a drunkard." Then all the men of his town shall stone him to death. You must purge the evil from among you. All Israel will hear of it and be afraid.
Deuteronomy 21:18-21
The reponse the first comes to my head is:
Pro 26:4 "Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him."
But at the same time, I wouldn't want you to 'be wise in your own conceit" (v5) either.
I can't stand legalism. And it is exactly legalism that would bring up this reponse.
The harsh commandments of the law are what constitute "religion." And "religion" is a substitute for a true relationship with Jesus Christ.
People point a the harshness of the law and they scream at the church. They don't understand that the people who are living under that harsh law are the very people that Jesus came to save. He came to save the legalistic Jews from the law and give them grace.
Jesus teaches us that the fruit of the Spirit is kindness, gentelness etc... and THAT is what constitutes the true Christian character -- not legalism, not law.
It is an UNKINDNESS to raise kids without any limits or boundaries. It leads them to dispair, not to what everybody likes to call "freedom." True freedom is the ability to do the right thing all the time; not the ability to do whatever you want.
A parent's job is to lead & train a child in the right way. Just think - if the parents in this scripture had trained and disciplined their child, there would be no need for a purging of evil from the community.
Besides all of that - the son in this passage is not a child under the age of four (which is the age group that the CA proposal is trying to "protect"), but a grown son who is practicing gluttony and drunkenness. So the whole concept doesn't really apply.
The point is - Jesus came to set legalistic people FREE from this law. The original intent was to purge evil from the community, showing just how important righteousness is. But now there is GRACE.
Quit responding out of legalism. Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is FREEDOM.
I'm just curious, how is spanking a logical consequence/punishment for a child's behavior? A woman I know once told me the story of how she was discplining a child for hitting. The child hit his sister and so she said to the child, "stop hitting her, hitting is not okay. If you hit her again, I will give you a spanking." The child was about 3 or 4. What is this teaching the child? To me it looked like it was teaching him that hitting his sister gave his mother the right to hit him. Why would you hit a child as a means of getting them to stop hitting?
In the same sense, if a child doesn't clean their room/pick up their toys, how is spanking going to solve the issue?
As a parent, I will set limits and boundries for my daughter. At 1 yr. she already knows that "no" means stop, and will stop when asked.
I also know that as a kindergarten teacher I have 17 children (some who have never been told no in their lives) following directions and respecting my authority and it's not because I've ever laid a finger on them, I've simply set up my expectations and insist that those expectations are followed.
If the fruits of the Spirit are kindness, gentleness, self-control, etc...then how does spanking a child (especially one younger than 4) fit with that?
I could very easily respond and discuss the difference between spanking/disciplining your child and "hitting" your child. But I get the feeling that you don't really want to discuss - you just want to argue. Your mind is already made up and therefore I'm not going to spend time trying to go back and forth about everything.
I will say this, though - that if you don't understand the difference between spanking a child (which is a loving thing) and "hitting" a child then you will never understand why anyone spanks. There is a huge difference between spanking and hitting.
It's unfortunate that you don't want to discuss this, because I actually do understand that there is a difference between hitting a child and spanking a child. And maybe I wasn't clear in my comment, but my main issue with spanking is that I want to understand why you believe that spanking is an effective way of dicipling.
Before my daughter was born had truly thought I would use spanking as a form of discipline but now that she is here, I have rethought that choice as I have discovered other ways to stop her from touching things she shouldn't, throwing her food on the floor, etc.
I believe spanking is an effective way of disciplining children because it releases a child from his guilt or rebellion. When administered properly, spanking is a form of restoration, not of rejection, and when it's over, it's over. The child is restored fully.
Making a child go to his room, sit in a corner, have a "time out" or lose some privilege leaves the child suffering through guilt and self-accusation. The child sits in the corner, unable to find repentance, becoming shamed and angry.
Obedience performed out of guilt only deepens guilt, putting the child further out of touch with true repentance and healing.
With spanking, the parent holds the power to absolve the child of guilt, instruct his spirit, strengthen his resolve and give him a fresh start, knowing that his debt is paid in full.
I can look back on my childhood and recall some of the sweetest times of fellowship with my parents during times of discipline.
Your profile says "soon to be parents". At what point do you plan to start with spankings for your child - 1 month, 2 months, 1 year? And what is a spanking in your definition? A swat on the butt or several smacks with a belt leaving bruises and marks? Just curious-
I think it is different for every child, so it is difficult to "set" an age when disciplining will begin.
I think generally when a child is crawling around able to "get into things," that's an appropriate time to beging TRAINING - not SPANKING. This would be like a flick or swat on the hand when he or she is going for something they can't have, along with a gentle "no."
As far as spanking goes, I again think that's going to vary from child to child, but I would say whenever the child is WILLFULLY being disobedient (doing something they know they are not supposed to do). At this stage, I would imagine a few swats on the back of the thigh would get the message across. It's all going to depend on the child.
I don't really think that spanking a child can be a form of restoration. I understand what you are saying and I follow your logic (and I truly believe that you have very wisely thought out how you want to discpline your child and do NOT feel that your form/definition of spanking is in any way, shape or form abuse) however, I don't think that after recieving a spanking a child is going to be thanking his/her parents. I think there is still a time of being upset about the spanking, thinking about what they did, etc.
But, like spanking, I don't think that sending a child to his room, time-outs, etc. are effective...how am I going to enforce a child to "think about what they did". My idea of an effective punishment is the child somehow making ammends for whatever wrong doing has happened. Some examples - you dump out toys, you clean them up; you hit a friend/sibbling, you have to make them feel better (holding an icepack on the injury, etc); I want my children to be responsible for their actions and to know that part of that responsibility is try and make the situation right.
I hope this makes sense. I guess I am trying to say that I firmly beleive that children need rules and limits but I feel that those rules and limits can be set without the need for spanking.
Also, along the same question as the other annonymous poster, when do you feel is an appropriate age to spank a child?
Disregard my last question - I guess we posted at the same time.
Making your child pick up the toys is a good idea - but what happens if the child crosses her arms and refuses to do it? That is where I would say discipline needs to be involved.
I can honestly say that even as a child I understood and appreciated the importance of spankings because my parents took the time to explain to me why I was getting a spanking, that they loved me, and that they were doing this to help me be a good girl. At the end of every spanking was a time of prayer and hugs - and we'd leave the event hand in hand, closer than ever and restored to perfect fellowship. My parents wouldn't let me leave the spanking upset. The training session wasn't over until there was repentance and restoration.
This has been a great conversation.
Unfortunately, I believe that a lot of spankings are a result of a parent's frustration and thus there is no dialog about what happened, etc. Sometimes a parent may discipline too much or too quickly, and thus the "punishment does not fit the crime". The child does not even know why they got punished because it happens all too often. Eventually the child does any little thing wrong and gets a spanking, resulting in a lack of effectiveness on the punishment. They become numb and don't even realize what they have done wrong. I believe you have to be careful on how, when and how you discipline. Is the punishment the same for any infraction? Plus, both parents must be on the same page as far as when, why and how to punish. Do you agree?
I absolutely agree, and I think spanking should never be done out of anger or frustration. That would be retaliation, which would be uneffective for training.
And yes, I wholeheartedly agree that the parents need to be in agreement about when and how to discipline. Without consistency the child would grow insecure.
"Repentance and restoration"--what a perfect way to put it! No matter how one disciplines, that should be the end result.
It's a joy to see the Godly young woman you've become Audra, but it's no surprise considering your parents. Once upon a time, I taught you on occasion in Children's Church, but I'm learning a lot from you now!
:)
Thank you, Chinafleur - but who are you?!!? :)
Taking the time before and after any punishment is very important. They need to know they are loved, they need to know why they are being punished and they need to know how to avoid the problem in the future.
Spanking is a form of punishment that can help it, however it must be used with care and love. The problem is today, there are to many parents that do this and are borderline abusing their kids.
We've swatted each of our children a few times...however most of the time there are much better ways to dicipline your child. It might also be that we as adults don't always recognize when we've just trained our kids wrong (conflicting TV, parents, other adults on what the rules really are). Granted my kids are only almost 2 and the other is 3.
I find that through the rasing of my children I see more deeply into who I am and what I need to change.
My main point being...reserve the harshest punishment for the worst offences and do it in and through love.
First, let me say that I have always appreciated the desire of this blog to glorify God. It is rare for young people to have such conviction. I agree with you more often than not.
With that being said, I would like to comment on your response to the first anonymous comment.
First, the person leaves a scripture verse. At this point, you are faced with three options: You can disregard the comment and not respond at all, you can judge the person's motive and disregard the verse, or, you can give a reasoned response that explains the verse in detail and show why the verse applies or doesn't apply to the current dialogue. You chose to essentially call the person a fool and respond to what you believe is the person’s motive, and not the actual verse presented (except for one sentence), which is quite interesting since the commenter didn't leave anything BUT the verse. You again judge the person's motive by calling him/her wise in his/her own conceit.
The problem with using verses as you have done is that you have used God’s word to justify your own assumption of the person’s heart. Unfortunately, finite minds are often unable to accurately discern another’s heart. I would encourage you to answer people on your blog in a manner more fitting of Ephesians 4:15 “…speaking the truth in love…” The word agape indicates not just a love that is a choice, but also an affection and a charitable spirit. Assume the best of the people commenting and allow God to deal with the person’s motives. You never know when a searching person might pose a legitimate question. You would hate to dissuade them from the faith that is so precious to you with a hasty answer.
Now, back to the conversation at hand: spanking.
Jeremy
Thanks, Jeremy.
You're right - I could have gotten my point across without the sass. It just gets me going when that sort of legalistic, knee-jerk response is presented.
Thanks, too, for reading and encouraging.
www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16773655/
Interesting story.
Where is Welch whe ya need him?
Post a Comment