The Imperfect Community

Jessica · Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2007 12:06 pm Post subject:

Oh, and perhaps this is a Republican vs. Democrats issue.

As reported in the Chicago Trib., Lieber, the Ca. lawmaker putting forth this bill says:

"Most of the bills that we've done," said Lieber, author of a law that raised the state's minimum wage this month, "people say, 'You'll never get it out of the first committee.' "

She will be hard-pressed to get support from Republican lawmakers, who are typically wary of expanding government's role in family life.

So, let's get the vote out! This is my big beef in life. Parents need to ask themselves, do they want government to raise their kids?

Petulant Pixie · Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2007 12:11 pm Post subject:

Jessica · Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2007 12:23 pm Post subject:

mammaX3_MOD · Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2007 12:32 pm Post subject:

Pixie wrote:

TreeMom · Slightly Flawed Joined: 09 Jan 2007 Posts: 109

I am pretty sure I never said you should be thrown in jail Jessica. I think that included in sentence was parenting classes OR a year in jail. However, I think I said I wished adults who should have had acted against my parents.

The difference being you and I might have philosophical differences in parenting, my parents were abusers and neglectful. I am not comparing a swat on the butt to what they did. So you may hope that people will stand up against me, but since I am the one with the scars (physical included) I wish there were more people like me.

I do however think that hitting a child at any time under 3 is a very bad thing. I also realize what PP said that just because you take away the hitting you don't solve the problem that parent was facing. You have to do both.

Also, PP I think this law is clear, more clear that current laws on the books.

TreeMom · Slightly Flawed Joined: 09 Jan 2007 Posts: 109

I am sort of catching up to the posts as I respond which is a horrible thing to do, but I am a little chagrined regarding your rant about the left Jessica. Somehow I don't think I could or would be allowed to draw those same sweeping conclusions about the right.

Last time I checked as a card carrying member of the ACLU I had not been asked to support placing pedophiles in daycare...did i miss a letter from them at some point? Oh, and I was a card carrying member of the ACLU back when I was part of the disgruntled Republicans club, er I mean Libertarians.

Kelly

Jessica · Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2007 2:50 pm Post subject:

Petulant Pixie · Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2007 2:55 pm Post subject:

Sewingsiren · Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2007 2:59 pm Post subject:

How could a law like this be inforced? Not many under 3 could call the police and report their parents for spanking them. Is it really a law against spanking in public? What good would that do.

Petulant Pixie · Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2007 2:59 pm Post subject:

OK, the liberal bashing is getting bad. I don't know about the child-molestor-in-the-parks thing, but seriously, Jessica, how many liberals are on this board? And how many of us do you seriously think would advocate for pedophiles to be employed in day care centers? It's just insulting. Is that what you mean it to be--personally insulting, based on one's politcal standing? Because that's what it is.

Here, you have me, a liberal--pretty damn close to being a socialist, economically--side by side arguing with you, yet you continue to bash liberals in this thread. Why?

TreeMom · Slightly Flawed Joined: 09 Jan 2007 Posts: 109

Hmm...well all I saw was the the ACLU said Due Process had been violated. Without looking up their actual arguments I can't say that what you say is correct. This is my problem with people and their issue with the ACLU. the ACLU says that EVERY person in America has the right to Due Process even pedophiles. You say that means the ACLU wants predators to roam parks. Not exactly the same thing.

My next question being, does it have to be abuse to be illegal? Those who oppose this law, do you think it has to be such clear abuse for something to be illegal. Marks and what not?

Kelly

Petulant Pixie · Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2007 3:02 pm Post subject:

SS, that's the other thing I questioned. Unless you have neighbors and family members calling the police on spankers, which is kinda what the, ahem, you know who's did, well, I won't say it Laughing

It is just a silly, space taking bill that isn't going to help anyone.

TreeMom · Slightly Flawed Joined: 09 Jan 2007 Posts: 109

PP - I don't disagree with you that it probably is silly in the fact that it will never ever get passed. There are obviously bigger issues to deal with and this is going to take time (and the ever present media o'crap to blow it out of proportion) and energy to deal with.

However I am also struck by the idea that a great many good laws were considered frivolous at the outset.

Kelly

Petulant Pixie · Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2007 3:06 pm Post subject:

Marks don't equal abuse. Abuse doesn't always leave marks. But, yes, I do think that it needs to be actual abuse for something regarding child welfare to be considered illegal.

Petulant Pixie · Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2007 3:10 pm Post subject:

Well, I've got to ask, do YOU think that spanking is a big issue? Do YOU think that the welfare of children in our country would be measurably better if they weren't spanked? Not talking about any other abuse at all, just spanking by itself.

I don't. I can count a whole lot of things that have a bigger impact on a child's quality of life before I get to spanking. So, IMO, I can't see any real GOOD that this law would do, but I can see how it's a foot in the door to get other special interest groups (pro-vaccinators, anti-circers, religious zealots) on the law books insisting that their cause is just as critical.