CNN Exploits Beating Death of 7 Year Old to Demonize Christians and Apologize for Criminals
At 11:10 a.m. on April 20, 1999, Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold arrived at Columbine High School. Nine minutes later, they began a killing spree that over ten years later stands as one of the most horrific acts of violence in American history. In less than an hour, they killed twelve students and one teacher and injured another twenty-four.
Before the dust was settled, stunned Americans wondered why it happened. Some found their answer in the entertainment the pair allegedly consumed. First-person shooter video games like Doom and Wolfenstein 3D were blamed. Marilyn Manson was labeled as somehow responsible for the massacre (even though it was later revealed the pair did not listen to the shock rocker).
Other headline-grabbing crimes followed the same pattern.
The assassination attempt on President Ronald Reagan is connected with the movie Taxi Driver due to John Hinckley, Jr.’s marathon viewing of the movie — which features a psychopath who attempts to kill a presidential candidate — and Hinckley’s infatuation with Jodie Foster, one of the stars of the movie.
In Hamilton, Ohio, Tonda Lynn Ansley shot her landlady in the head. Her response, dubbed the “Matrix Defense,” was to claim that she believed her landlady was “part of a conspiracy to brainwash and kill her.” Others have used the “Matrix Defense,” including a San Francisco man who offered a “Matrix” explanation when he chopped up his landlady.
Mark David Chapman “believed that he would become Holden Caulfield, the young protagonist of [Catcher in the Rye], when he killed [John] Lennon.”
And most recently, the brutal beating death of a seven-year-old adopted girl from Liberia is being blamed on the book To Train Up A Child, a book by a Christian minister and his wife. The book is an unapologetic defense of corporal punishment, advising the reader to “switch your kids” in order to train them to be obedient.
It was found in the home of Kevin and Elizabeth Schatz, who have been charged with the torture and murder of their adopted daughter Lydia. Mike and Debi Pearl, authors of To Train Up A Child, are now being tied to her death, with some going so far as to lay blame right at their feet:
Legal liability and moral responsibility however, are two different matters and there is no doubt that Pearl bears a measure of the latter whether he realizes it or not. Of course, the real challenge is not to Michael Pearl, it is to the rest of us, especially those who own Pearl’s book, believe, or teach, that hitting kids is a religious act. This is no longer a phenomenon about which any of us can plead ignorance, and we all bear a measure of moral responsibility for every slap and punch.
CNN’s Anderson Cooper 360 also focused on the Pearls’ book. In the segment, they interview District Attorney Mike Ramsey, who doesn’t hesitate to point fingers at the Pearls for the death of Lydia.
Next: What does a veteran clinical psychologist say about the influence of media on the criminal mind?
Remember, CNN admitted complicity in genocide when Eason Jordan said that they had covered up atrocities by Saddam Hussein, who killed tens of thousands, to “gain access”.
They broadcast lies in their Tailwind story about the US Army using poison gas.
They are lying genocidal mass murderers, and every GOP candidate should point this out every time a CNN personality challenges them.
Too bad they weren’t a Muslim family, they could have called it an honor killing and the libs would have had nothing to say.
If the book was so terrifyingly influential that someone may have committed murder by misinterpreting it, then CNN should also be guilty of the deaths of what must be hundreds of thousands. They reported stuff they thought they saw and people saw their reports on TV and acted upon their production.
Therefore, if this book author is guilty of anything, then CNN must be even more guilty. I propose that if they continue this argument, they should shut down, and they should imprison themselves and their stock-holders. They have much to apologize for.
Has anyone actually read the Pearl’s book? You can not get from there to beating a child to death.
We subscribe to the Pearl’s magazine, “No Greater Joy”. They never advocate beating, and much space is spent on *never* spanking while angry, never spanking except for deliberate defiance (not for spilled milk), using logical consequences instead where appropriate and understood by the child, *never* spanking for things that inconvenience the parent as opposed to endanger the child, how to talk to the child so they know exactly why they are getting spanked, etc. There are so many that never had proper discipline modelled for them, that such an in depth description is sorely needed.
There are some things that a child *must* be disciplined for that they do not understand. I think I got spanked twice – once for riding my tricycle in the street (in deliberate defiance of explicit orders to the contrary), and once for playing with matches and gasoline in the garage (in deliberate defiance of orders not to play in the garage whence fascinating but dangerous tools lay – which I was eventually fully instructed in the use of). For both these offences, my dad used his belt – and I *never* considered repeating the infractions. For fear of the belt as a 5 year old, and because I understood the danger when older.
The modern liberal does not discipline, and instead expects parents to monitor their child 24×7 lest they ride in the street, play with gasoline, or otherwise destroy themselves and others. Children raised the liberal way are the menace to society. (To be fair, there is some attempt to use logical consequences, but that is not always possible.)
My only complaint against the Pearls is that not everyone can live in the country, and much of their advice is geared to that environment. (E.g. getting rid of the TV didn’t help us much when every neighbor has one.)
P.S. Do you believe in angels? While playing with the matches, I remember to this day being very frustrated because the matches kept blowing out before they got close to the gasoline – despite there being no breeze in the garage.
The CNN narrative described here is rightfully condemned. The narrative is part of a broader push by progressives to absolve indivduals from responsibility of their behaviors and their lives in general. But if unchallenged, the narrative could easily lead to justifications to limits on 1st Admendment rights in various forms: from court decisions that intimidate fiction writers to out and out bans on subjective “hate speech”. Considering the ramifications to their industry and profession, CNN producers and Anderson Cooper should be ashamed for not making such logical connections.
@Hillbilly Geek – I’ve read it and I agree. They go into detail about the difference between spanking and beating. They are in no way teaching anyone to beat a kid, or strike them in anger.
In fact, they teach clearly against such behaviour!
CNN and the other leftist news outlets, are willing accomplices, knowingly or otherwise, of the left’s attempt to demonize and destroy every facet of our society. This, as a means to collapse society and replace it with their Socialist “utopia”, replete with re-education camps and killing fields.
Look to history for proof of where they are going.
The American Society have produced many things, CNN being one of them. And I know, it’s a shame—but just what do you suggest we do at this point? Should we declare a yearly week of sackcloth and ashes, and during which, we eat bitter herbs and, . . . beat, . . . our breasts, . . . vowing never again, . . . or what?
I’ll wager you can find the Yellow Pages in their home, too.
Wanna bet it had just as much influence on the murderers as any other book?
How could you defend TTUAC? it has been wide subject matter on a homeschool blog frequented by christainis who detest it. that isn’t “just” a defense of corporal punishment, it ADVOCATES hitting four month old babies with plumbing tubing! parents are also told to “not leave marks”. (so no one will know the child is being physically abused.) Christains should be comdeming it!
Have you read the book?
If you have, you might want to re-read it. I clearly defines the difference between spanking and beating.
It says not to leave a mark because if you do, you’re doing it wrong, not to cover up abuse. That’s an asinine statement.
It does not advocate beating children.
But four months old, really? That’s sickening.
From the book:
“One of our girls, Shalom, who developed mobility early, had a fascination with crawling up stairs. At five months, she was too unknowing to be punished for disobedience. But for her own good (and our peace of mind), we attempted to train her not to climb the stairs by coordinating the command of “No” with little spats on her bare legs. The switch was a twelve inch long, one-eighth inch diameter sprig from a willow tree.
Such was her fascination with climbing, that she continued to climb, ignoring the spankings. Spanking was supposed to work, but it seems that, at her young age, her little brain couldn’t maintain the association. So, out of desperation, I laid the switch on the bottom step. We later observed her crawl to the stairs and start the ascent, only to halt at the first stop and stare at the switch. She backed off and never again attempted to climb the stairs, even after the switch was removed.”
Also from the book:
“The spanking is not punishment and is not very painful. It merely gives weight to your words.”
And finally:
“A spanking is made effective, not but its severity, but by its certainty. Spankings don’t have to be as hard when they are consistently applied. Your calm dignity will set the stage to make it more effective.”
That doesn’t sound like a person advocating the brutal beating of four month old children.
Anyone who believes there is merit to striking a baby isn’t playing with a full deck.
I don’t think it’s appropriate to strike a child at any age as a form of punishment. All it does is set forth the example that violence is justified. It’s only justified as an act of self defense. JMO.
A closed mind opens no doors.
Ah, the usual leftist line, regurgitated.
It has never made any sense, but that doesn’t matter to leftists.
The baby boomers were brought up being disciplined; frequently the paddle was used. From homes to schools. Funny, those of that generation did not / do not frequently go around participating in mindless idiotic violence. The younger generations who were brought up without discipline and were never paddled, are the ones who frequently engage in violence, quite often with very little, if any, provacation. Abusing children is never acceptable, but paddling their butts when needed IS acceptable.
Among the many reasons to question the virtue of spanking is obesity. According to the Center for Disease Control, the state with the most obese people in 2008 was Mississippi, followed by Alabama, West Virginia, Tennessee, Oklahoma, and South Carolina. The most religious states are the ones with the fattest people. Religious parents are strict. They force their children to finish what is on their plates. By doing so, they inflict a curse upon their children that will follow them the rest of their lives: they will eat what is in front of them even when they are not hungry and even if they know they are overweight.
You have got to be joking.
Google page featuring hits on the subject of “correlation between religiosity & obesity”: https://www.google.com/search?q=correlation+between+religiosity+%26+obesity&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a
Several theories are entertained in those articles. I am left to wonder another factor: Many fundie types don’t get into drinking & other vices. Could the love of eating take their place? Maybe.
Research 101: Correlation does not equate to causation.
You might want to read about “Correlation Does Not Imply Causation.” It’s a core statistical concept that many people fail to grasp.
Here’s one link: http://www.infoworks.ride.uri.edu/1999/techbrief/techbrief_8.htm
Even if two variables are legitimately related or correlated, there is not necessarily any causal relationship between them. In other words, changes in the one variable may not be directly caused by the independent operation of the other variable. The one may fluctuate in relation to the other due solely to chance (coincidence) or, as is often the case, each is strongly affected by one or more other (confounding) variables that were not considered by the researcher. Other possible reasons include both variables changing over time, one (response) variable causing a change in the other (explanatory) variable or one being the direct cause of the other, and one being a contributor but not the sole cause of the other. In the well-known expression “correlation does not imply causation,” statisticians summarize this understanding of the legitimate use of statistical relationships. In the absence of any other evidence, data from an observational study cannot be used to establish causation.
However, a causal connection probably does exist if we can establish that: 1) there is a reasonable explanation of cause and effect, 2) the connection happens under varying conditions, and 3) potential confounding variables are ruled out. The best way to determine these factors is through a designed experiment in which groups which are strongly similar to one another in terms of certain important variables are exposed to different approaches (treatments) and analyzed to see whether the variable of interest performs differently among the treated groups. One or more groups is also held constant and not subjected to treatment(s) as a “control” group(s).
Or maybe– since we know religious people are more likely to be generous in their aid to those in need– folks who go hungry in less-religious areas are generously provided for in religious areas.
Since religion is also associated with strong family ties, and family gatherings are associated with food, maybe they actually LIKE their families and spend time with them, enjoying life.
Since obesity is currently generally measured by BMI, which is known to be inaccurate in accounting for muscle mass, maybe religious people have higher muscle mass. Seeing as how BMI does not account for racial variances, maybe there are racial factors involved.
You make another bad assumption– that higher obesity rates mean that the people there are more fat. “Obesity” is a BMI over thirty; having 20% of your area at 30+ means only that, not that they are individually fatter than an area where 10% are over 30 BMI.
Huh? Spanking causes obesity? What if the punishment for not finishing everything on your plate is not spanking?
The problem is that too much of the wrong kind of food goes onto those plates or gets used as snacks. If the only behavior you changed in those families was to stop spanking, but you made no change to how much food was served, what kind of food was served or whether the child was required to clean their plate, you would not stop anyone from becoming obese.
God in His wisdom gave us the garbage can. A human being is not a garbage can. Eating food you neither need nor want is wasting it.
When parents teach their children to finish what’s on their plates, they are inflicting a curse on their children that will follow them the rest of their lives. Even when they are not hungry and know they are overweight, they will finish what’s in front of them.
If I had not learned to eat what was on my plate, maybe I wouldn’t have had to undergo quadruple bypass surgery.
http://www.jochnowitz.net/Essays/Eat.html
So, it’s not your fault that you eat more than you should, it’s your parents’ fault.
Sorry, I’m not able to swallow that.
Sorry Duanne you are wrong on this one. Parents who drum it into their children that they MUST eat it all, instill a NEED to eat. It becomes a burning need so strong that you cannot think of anything but food until you eat, then you can do other things. It really isn’t the fault of someone who has a mental illness that causes them to do unreasonable things.
I am shocked that some actually believe this. I’m sorry you’ve had medical problems, but when it comes to health issues, do not pass the buck. If every parent in the US relented and did not force their children to eat what they prepared for them, we would raise an entire generation who did not eat their vegetables.
If correlation is what you want, maybe you should consider that most obese people come from families of heavy peoples. It’s not how much you eat, but what you eat.
Err:
“It’s not *always* how much you eat, but what you eat.”
There are many variables leading to obesity. One of them is the habit of finishing what’s on your plate. If this problem were corrected, obesity wouldn’t disappear, but it would become less common.
One step at a time. As we say in Chinese, “Don’t fear slow progress; just fear no progress” (Bu pa man; jiu pa zhan).
To be fair, there is an Overeater’s Anonymous. One thing they teach is learning to be able to listen to your own hunger signals. Anne Lamott writes about it, from the perspective of a long-term bulimic struggling towards health.
We live in the only nation in the world which has never had a famine. We’re learning about circumstances that have faced literally no one in history. Mass affluence- fat poor people- abundant oils- abundant meats- large houses-widespread mechanical transportation. It sounds peculiar, b/c it is peculiar.
Mr Jochnowitz probably felt pretty awkward talking about his weight and his bypass and his struggles with both. That he’s survived, and is trying to educate people as best he sees it is pretty terrific.
But George, it’s because they made you clean your plate, not because they spanked you.
Yes, children should not be compelled to finish everything on their plates, because parents may well be overestimating how much the child needs to eat. That said, it is reasonable to say, “No desert or snacks unless you finish what’s on your plate, because if you aren’t hungry enough to eat your meal, you don’t need a desert or snack.” Also, leftovers go in the refrigerator, not the garbage can. As you said, you shouldn’t waste food.
You will probably find that those states also have the largest black populations as well. There are connections between body shape and race.
That’s just silly. Religious people do not force their children to finish what is on their plates, and there is no correlation between religious beliefs and weight.
Not to complicate the issue, but this gets into more than the blame game. The modern state of liberalism does not, and will not, accept any concept of God-given morality or individual autonomy that contradicts their own beliefs. In this case they refuse to acknowledge that the murderer is at fault for his own actions. It is that kind of thought-process that motivates so many to oppose the death penalty (and has removed cheaper methods of execution as being cruel and unusual). Read Dan T. Carter (required college reading) who maintains that conservatives vote purely out of subconscious racism. Heck, in a debate on gun control, I was told that shooting someone who breaks into your home is murder because the intruder is not likely intending to murder you. Remove the actual facts from the case and introduce psychology – for liberals there are no bad seeds. (See what I mean by lack of God-given morality? Liberals argue that people are inherently good/Conservatives argue that people are inherently sinful. ‘How can a murderer commit such an act if, deep down, he is a good guy? We shouldn’t hold him responsible, blame whatever influenced him!’)
I always wonder when socialists say that the problem with capitalism is that people are greedy why they that think socialism, which assumes people will stop being greedy, would ever work?
I will start with the fact that I have read the book long before all this. I believe it is not the best book and do not recommend it to people. However, it doesn’t deserve to be demonized. I have spanked my kids as my father spanked me and his father him and so on. My children are all very healthy mentally and socially adjusted. Anyone who knows our children will testify to this. Is there a wrong way to spank? YES. And probably many who do spank do it wrong. However, there is another wrong and that is not raising a child properly. I have often seen families who do not allow children to have play guns in their family so as not to promote violence. But when brother and sister are beating the crap out of each other they do nothing. The parents would not want to promote violence by spanking. But in effect they are saying that violence is acceptable.
In actuality, often through spanking a parent is letting the child know that violence is unacceptable. For those of you who think that it is a mixed signal, do not understand. In all the many spankings at home and the four paddlings at school, I was never confused. Beating is unacceptable. And an out of control child is likewise unacceptable and is a danger to themselves and those around them.
I’ve never read the book in question here, but what I want to know is: Did CNN do a special report when Al Gore’s “Earth in the Balance” was found in the Unabomber’s shack?
Where were you when I was writing this article? I should have included that bit.
The Pearls have gotten a pass as baby- raising experts b/c they claim to be religious. The authors of Babywise were also given wide berths by the medical establishment until enough infants died, or were diagnosed as failure to thrive, based on their methods. The doctors were unsophisticated enough to not know how inquire about religious validity, I guess is the way to put it. The Babywise authors had been read out of their church for any number of misbehaviors- of which the book was the most egregious. They were not Christians in good standing with their community.
I don’t know about the Pearls. I do know that Anderson Cooper is, likewise, uninformed about the state of Christian parenting, and acceptable Christian practice. First off, there are different churches. It’s hard to smear the whole thing. Second off, I can tell you a majority of Christian parenting books strongly emphasize communication, kindness, love and self- control. I’m the librarian at a church. When people donate books, I’m supposed to flip through them and see if they are okay. If they advocate spanking, I’m supposed to send the book to recycling, not donate it.
Also, if you ask managers at Half- Price: the lead manager will say they sell all books, b/c otherwise they’d be supporting censorship. If you ask the person in charge of the infant and childcare sections, usually (not always) they will intentionally damage books advocating spanking, so that they get recycled, rather than sold.
It’s about like buying Nazi memorabilia- it’s harder than it looks, to do.
I’m still stuck at choosing violence towards an infant, rather than buying and installing a baby-gate, just like everyone else. What sort of person does this? Choosing violence over effort and empathy….
We have up on PJM an article by a Christian in Egypt saying that Egyptians have no inner sense of control- that they need the police to function. One of the thoughts from empathetic parenting is that you meet the child at their developmental level, and keep them safe. They develop inner control, bit by bit, the same way they develop bodily control. I notice that by elementary school, children who are gently parented tend to play together- they are more peaceful, more able to negotiate amongst each other- than children of parents who spank.
All three of my kids asked that one little girl not come back- she said ” My mommy’s not here. This isn’t my house. I can do what I want.” This profoundly shocked all three of my kids as one of the naughtiest things they’d ever heard. The little girl was acting out, too. It was one of my daughter’s best friends at school. Even she was shocked, and asked that I never invite her back. The little girl was messing up my stuff- not hers. So it wasn’t even selfishness, it really was horror.
I was raised by several family groups. One spanked. Two were out-of-control abusive. I still speak to the abusive ones, b/c I do think it was similar to alcoholism- they were out of control, and they were, and are, ashamed of their behavior. I think my kids volunteering at a breakfast for the homeless has more warmth and respect, than what I feel towards them. I don’t speak to the one who resorted to spanking, b/c I think I don’t want to talk to someone who, with a clear mind, clear head, rational, reasonable, in control of their emotions, chose pain and humiliation as an acceptable way to approach another human being. It isn’t.
And, I do have three children. I don’t spank, but I do know I wish I could. I’d like to have an instantly obedient child. It would make my life simpler, being the biggest bully on the block. But I also know that I’d have a frightened, angry, slightly twisted child. Which means I fight with my impulses on a regular basis. I have to reach into a fairly meagrely stocked drawer of parenting skills- it has spankings, grounding, shamings, and me. I have to be enough- I spend an awful lot of time on my knees, b/c I do have to confess my struggles. I do envy how easy the ones who chose violence had. But- that’s all they had—childhood. I want to still talk to my grown children. I don’t let any of them, in control or out of control, ever near my children, unsupervised. One gets to visit, and is watched like a hawk. The others have seen the children once. They don’t get the warm, fuzzy, Hallmark greeting card time they all wanted.
For that poor family, and that poor child, I think people discount the ego advantages of a child: they are this mix of yourself, and your favorite person. That’s a pretty pleasing combination. Any other child is not going to gratify one’s self in quite the same way. They think- I am a good parent, and I can reach for a higher goal- loving a child, just for that individual child’s sake. It’s tragic that they didn’t know they weren’t capable of that higher reach. It’s doubly tragic they chose to listen to the song of violence, rather than a song of compassion.
May that little girl’s soul rest in peace, cradled in an angel’s arms, in safety.
With that reasoning just stay away from my kids.
To CJK, ….Your kids would be threatened by someone who doesn’t physically punish his kids?
Not threatened, but perverted by twisted logic that excuses beatings per some leftist dribble and condemns spanking as on par with violence.
Also, what kind of twisted leftist thinking equates a parent spanking his children because he wants the best for them with his “being the biggest bully on the block”??????
WTF!
Purely technically: I am bigger than them. I have enforcement powers- I choose their bedtime. I wake them up. I send them to bed. I choose their food, by what I buy. I call them by their first name;they call me by my title- Mom. I am the power in the house 12 to 18 hours a day.
I can be a policeman like in a well-run town, or not. Britain’s police- force does not carry guns. They are still policemen. American police sometimes carry, sometimes don’t.
You are choosing to use a certain level of violence with your child. Make no mistake- if you did this to a grownup- you’d be in a fetish dungeon, or in jail for assaulting another person. Common practice for little kids is that we think that they are on the level of animals, in some ways- they get swatted a way a racehorse can get swatted. The first child abuse case was tried by the ASPCA, btw.
Plato said ” The hardest animal to tame is the little boy.” It’s hard raising kids. It just is. We all have different approaches. The American approach is considered lax to the entire rest of the world. It always has been. British nobles touring the colonies commented on how disrespectful and unruly young Americans were. Davy Crockett, himself, endured a beating at the hands of a British general. It made him hate the British, with an unquenchable passion. The colonies drained off the more enterprising and energetic ( read, ADD) people from Europe. ADD parents- our forebearers- began trying different approaches to raising children. We were different even before the Revolution. We still are. We still talk about raising good citizens, in a way familiar to people who prosecuted the Revolution. This discussion is a familiar, constant talk in America.
Like I said, keep away from my children with that type of schlock.
With your reasoning, stay away from my kids. I’d rather have ari raising mine than you. His or her values and logic are impeccable.
More twisted leftists coming out of the woodwork.
Keep away from my kids.
?
Exactly.
To Ari,… I found what you wrote very moving. You are a good dad.
Thank you. It’s really kind of awkward writing what I really think. I dread that I’ll call out a sneering or threatening response, esp on hot-button topics. I usually try to find a pacific response, or a blank response. Being so definite is hard, and kind of frightening.
So, if the author agrees with God, the book doesn’t get put in your library?
Interesting church, in a twisted sort of way.
Interestingly you’ll find that many of those anti-spanking ‘churches’ have no problem when it comes to infanticide.
And, I suppose I ought to apologize. There is a range from ” a glass of wine at dinner” to ” alcoholic”. I get offended when my MIL goes off on a fantasia of memory about alcohol- addled father, when I have a drink at the table. I’d be more Christian to simply hide any liquor from her. She does have a point- it is all alcohol, and it did ruin her childhood.
Likewise, you think a swat is the same sort of thing, distinct from full- on beating. I take my MIL’s defense: it ruined my childhood. It’s all violence to me.
I don’t think anyone who does smack their child wants to be compared to an alcoholic in the throes of DTs, or considered a criminal. They want to be recognized as good parents enforcing decent social norms. that I have offended you in this way- I am sorry. It was wrong of me to cast aspersions on your parenting skills.
So I’m right then in guessing that your type of church people don’t have any problems with a person deciding to end an unborn child’s life?
If indeed it is all violence to you, then you need to think about reality for a while. Comparing spanking with violence is the height of liberal idiocy, a perversion of the difference between right and wrong.
Keep away from my children.
Yes, refrain from giving scandal to anyone. If she has not come to peace of accepting that Jesus drank wine and the Bible encourages moderate alcohol consumption, do not provoke her by serving alcohol in front of her.
There is considerable exegesis that says “the rod” of correction is figurative language for the rods that hold the scrolls of God’s word, sort of like “..those that wait upon the Lord will rise up on wings of eagles…” I don’t pull my kids inside when there’s a big bird of prey about, after they’ve been to church, and waited around for God. Same thing.
The Pearls are distinct from most readings of how to raise a devout Christian child. It’s why we can identify the book by the name of the authors, rather than the title, the authors, the subject, the details. They are a distinctly different voice. Dr Sears has written books for religious parents, as well. He is most famous for his Baby Book, so we don’t call his religious works “Sears” books. The religious books advocating kindness, empathy, working at your child’s level of development are the books in the mainstream.
I think there is some misconception: a lack of spanking is not the same thing as a lack of discipline, focussed parenting, and parental involvement. I don’t doubt that most parents dearly love their children, and that they wish the best of all futures for their children. They try to get there in different ways.
Sparta and Athens are two different ways of life. I grew up in Sparta, and moved to Athens. My husband did, likewise. It’s something we prayerfully considered together, searching our hearts, reading books ( 100+ books on infant and child development, thank you very much) considering our histories, and our reactions to how we were raised, interviewing people we admired about their lives- and their parents….this is not an absence of parenting thought, okay? I trust that you, likewise, searched your heart, and came to the conclusions that you decided were best. It’s how America works so well- there’s freedom to choose what you think is best.
I’ve written both my conclusions, and how I got there, and how it applies right now, not to be entirely right, but so that someone else can read, and decide, with as much information as comfortably possible. It’s why this essay is a little bit long. I can’t force compliance on this, or any issue. Someone might find my life and conclusions nonsense on toast. We all run that risk, when we say what we think.
As for the church: I don’t know about all churches, but this one has a baby boom like you wouldn’t believe. It’s a grow your own congregation thing. I delivered my child on a weekend that two other mothers had theirs. We aren’t anomalous, either. And, second, there are mothers who did turn to adoption. They are honored and loved for being genuinely loving, caring, self-sacrificing people, and we are lucky to have them in the congregation, b/c it’s how they approach everyone and every dilemma, every day. And the church substantially supports a home for troubled children, a school for troubled children, and charities- a list I don’t even keep track of, it’s so long.
As for the library. Christian publications are a big, big, big market. We don’t have to have every book. We do have to deal with each other, for our whole lives, and pretty apparently, the lives of our children and grandchildren. There are three generations worshipping together here. Not many churches can say that. There is a huge investment in the mother’s groups- speakers, tours, educational programs, books, study groups, prayer groups, play groups…if you know that someone is raising the parent of your probable grandchildren- wouldn’t you want that person to do a good job? These people expect to be talking to each other forever. There is a unifying effect, joining isn’t rushed, there are lots of meetings, interactions, groups….you can tell when a kid is new, and when they’ve been here a while. They start to watch each other, and interact with each other, and not just the Sunday School teacher, or the craft leader, or so on.
This is a long way of saying, I didn’t just decide on my own to trash certain books. There are enough Christian life-style books that we don’t need to include every little flavor. These are well-educated people with home libraries. They can go buy what their heart desires. For the church library, however, there are gatekeeping functions. We threw out a book advocating suicide from a religious values perspective. We throw out, on a regular basis, books advocating population control, couched in religious terms. We throw out any book denigrating wives. We throw out any book advocating divorce as a means of following your bliss and higher calling.
Likewise, there are books that I think are silly, or boring, that are in there. There are books where my entire reaction is “pull up your socks and quit whining” and those stay. There are dusty old books. There are books with underlining ( that’ll get you kicked out of a public library) There are books in Greek and Latin. There are books by authors violently disagreeing with other authors on the shelves. By Name.
I’m sorry, but no sort of hitting children is acceptable. Hitting children even for punishment teaches that it’s acceptable to hit. Anyone condoning hitting children (even with a switch) is seriously off their rocker.
How is hitting a child a Christian act? The God I believe in doesn’t condone violence. I get tired of this whole religious excuse for everything. Live your life right as Jesus would do; not as you have molded Christianity to fit your deluded ideas of moralism.
I don’t agree with this book and I agree with the church librarian above. Violence has no part in religion. Anyone saying it is, is twisting and distorting Christianity for their own agenda.
The Pearls are responsible for writing a horrible book on raising a child, but the ultimate responsibility for that child’s death was her adoptive parents. No one made them hit that child, they did it on their own. It was a choice; whether we agree with the Pearls or not, the parents are responsible.
There is a difficult age range where children are capable of understanding that they are doing something wrong or potentially dangerous to themselves, but they are not capable of reasoned discussion. Spanking (defined as the use of the palm of your hand with enough force to cause temporary pain) is the only effective method for many children.
If it takes more than three or four swats, there is probably something a lot more serious going on. Any spanking that is so hard that it hurts you is WAY too hard. You should never spank a child when you are angry or upset, because you are likely to overreact. Some parents should probably not use spanking, because they lack the self-control to use it appropriately.
Children vary: our daughter was very strong-willed, and required spanking to stop her from doing dangerous things. I doubt that my wife and I spanked our son more than a couple of times. Most of the time, raising my voice was enough.
Or with the one that Jesus wrote!
At 7 months old my son developed a fascination with electrical outlets. Although our house was “baby-proofed”, he figured out how to pry the plastic covers out of the outlets. You better believe his little hands got smacked. Spanking in this sense was to teach him a less painful lesson than getting a 120V jolt of reality–and to keep him alive. Try explaining electromotive force to a baby. Even at 7 months, he eventually looked at an outlet and equated it with an undesirable outcome. It is by the grace of God and butt-swatting, hand-smacking, and the occassional pinching in church that he’s survived to the ripe-old age of 6 and is a likeable little guy.
Just like the parent whose only response to undesirable behavior is the leather strop and beatings, the parent that refuses to ever spank is neglecting some valuable tools and hobbling their own children. Love, compassion, and communication are certainly the backbone of any good parenting regimen, but will only stand alone in the most angelic of children. For the rest, there’s time-out, the corner, grounding, extra chores, and–when necessary–corporal punishment to reinforce what love and compassion would have us communicate. That’s my humble opinion (and the apparent opinion of every generation of my kin back to the time of Adam).
Read the Book of Proverbs from beginning to end, then get back to us.
It is the height of politically correct idiocy to equate spanking with violence. Where do you even start to have a reasoned discussion with someone who thinks on that order, or should I say doesn’t think?
I grew up in Queens in the 1950s. Many of the kids I knew had immigrant parents who often spanked them. I never felt that these spankings adversely affected any of the kids in my neighborhood. There is a big difference between a spanking and a beating.
And Megan, I haven’t read the book. Have you?
We don’t spank, but I’ve never understood why appropriate spanking seems to cause some to throw their hands to their foreheads and shriek for the vapors as their legs buckle underneath them.
Making the case that corporal punishment can not be separated from beating a child is like saying that taking an aspirin for a headache can’t be separated from heroin use.
But that is the left’s whole thing these days – anarcho-tyranny. Getting hysterical and demanding prison time for slights committed by well meaning law abiding citizens in one breath and in another excusing other far more destructive behaviors as being justified for the cause.
heh heh, I should probably clarify – my first paragraph was referring to opponents of corporal punishment, not those being spanked.
I am in general agreement with the philosophy of this writer–and the psychologist, as discussed.
Throughout the ages, religious cults have gathered CERTAIN individuals into their philosophy–no matter how abnormal most people find their behaviors.
Humanity is imperfect; ergo we shall always have to fight evil with good on this earth.
Lastly, I do intuit that the author’s six children are very fortunate to have their father as their teacher!
The media, academia and some “intellectuals” in Hollywood cannot abide any criticism of the atrocities committed, almost daily around the world, by Muslims and have totally bought the lie, by prominent Muslim advocacy groups like CAIR, MSA, MAS, ISNA, etc., that all such criticism emanates from Islamophobes who ignore the “equivalent” or “even worse atrocities” committed by other religions, primarily Judaism and Christianity. This outrage expressed by the media regarding this tragedy is red meat that results in a feeding frenzy. They will adamantly deny it but they’re incapable of ignoring or reporting this just as a human tragedy with no connection at all to any religion. But let a Muslim man murder his daughter or sister because, in full accordance with Islamic tenets, she “dishonors” the family and the silence from these noble knights standing at the ramparts of journalistic integrity are strangely silent; because it simply doesn’t fit their preferred narrative and real agenda.
Is speaking what can easily determined to be factually true about the Islamic menace “Islamophobia” or is it more likely true that ignoring the fanatical denials and threats made by the aforementioned advocacy groups at every perceived insult and the openly obvious connection of Muslims to the thousands of so called terrorist actions around the world, a dereliction of journalistic integrity?
These media reports regarding the connection of the brutal slaying of a child to a book written by Christian authors is much ado about nothing. The death of the child is tragic and the perpetrators need to be punished but the media needs to stop using this tragedy as a whipping post for its favorite villain. I’m an Atheist, so no advocate for Christianity or any other religion but I’m damned tired and disgusted with what is supposed to pass for responsible, impartial journalism.
The same argument applies to violent pornographer on the internet.There is no case for banning it . It does not cause sex crimes. In Northern Europe and in Australia a very high proportion of crimes against women and indeed underage girls are committed by Muslims. Dont blame commercial porn blame the Koran. Why is there a difference? Because porn is not integrated into a set of social approved moral imperatives whereas the Koran is. Porn is trivial fantasy but Islam backs up grossly antisocial acts with social permission.
“The book is an unapologetic defense of corporal punishment, advising the reader to “switch your kids” in order to train them to be obedient.”
You do realize that sentence contradicts itself, don’t you?
The book is clear that it is absolutely against “punishment”, and instead advocates aversion training as a method to create the perfect little soldier, all neatly dressed up with Biblical quotes with the expresss purpose of justifying “whipping” children with instruments rather than simply “hitting” them with a bare hand.
It should further be noted that these aversion training whippings are explicitly declared to be performed until a state of absolute and complete submission to a “higher authority” is achieved.
In such a context it is quite easy to see how that could easily become lethal, particularly when the book also explicitly states that failing to properly “train” the child in that manner does not merely turn the child into a “Nazi” instead.
Now a reasonable case could be made that the media is unfairly attacking Christians because the author claims a Christian ministry.
The thing is, said author makes it clear that the above training failure also constitutes a religious failing on the part of the parents, who in addition to creating a budding National Socialist are also ensuring the absolute damnation of the child. As such the author of the book must bear the responsibility for portraying Christianity in such a manner, just as anyone claiming some other religious basis for similar acts must bear the responsibility when people take them at their word that they represent the general beliefs of that faith.
Anderson Cooper and Transgender Awareness Week
No one really knows who first said, “Those whom the gods wish to destroy they first make mad” but, if there’s any validity to the sentiment, there are clear signs of madness in society today. One proof is this week, “Transgender Awareness Week.”
For a change I’m not referring to the Occupy Wall Street loonies or sex-addled Penn State coaches or Nancy Pelosi but to people who decide they don’t like their penises or vaginas and either have their male members lopped off or female parts supplemented with male organs.
They’re called “transgenders.” They can also be called disturbed. When their enablers are parents of young children, they should be prosecuted for child abuse as surely as PSU’s Jerry Sandusky.
Transgendering seems to be all the rage in some, fortunately limited, quarters but perhaps the worst feature of the anomaly is the support and encouragement granted them by the mainstream media and Democrat politicians.
Forty-two year old Chaz, (formerly Chastity), Bono is only the most recent instance of MSM lionizing transgenders. However, Chaz/Chastity was an adult when he transformed himself from female to male and even if he can’t dance very well he was entitled to enjoy his self-mutilation to his heart’s content.
Sarah and Bill Tyler were adults as well though they didn’t act that way when they succumbed to the pressures exerted on them by their four year old, Danaan, born Dana.
When he was all of two, Dana began insisting he wasn’t really a boy, by four he was denouncing God for burdening him with a penis and threatened to cut it off. By six, he talked about hanging himself and told his parents, ”I don’t think God is so great because God made a mistake when he made me.”
Little Dana claimed he was being bullied at school, although his parents sending him to school lugging a princess backpack and lunchbox may have been a factor in that teasing. When he insisted on wearing high-heeled slippers, they bought him high-heeled slippers.
Isn’t that what all parents do, give their children everything they demand?
To the Tylers’ rescue came none other than the biggest flamer on cable television “news,” Anderson Cooper, famously known for his lasciviously-gay remark denigrating the Tea Party movement and relating it to his own homosexual practice of “teabagging.”
Well, Cooper isn’t exactly known for that comment since CNN accepted his apology and rewarded him with his own show.
In any event, Cooper featured the Tylers on his newest show in a special edition titled, “Children & Teens Caught in the Wrong Bodies,” a subject to which Cooper could probably relate.
Diagnosed with “gender identity disorder,” a disturbance newly-concocted to explain situations shrinks can’t explain, Danann is now living her life as a girl and her mother feels, “I have a little girl that needs to be a little girl.”
It’s good that everyone’s happy. Let’s see what they think ten or twenty years from now when the Tyler’s spoiled, indulged child confronts the real world and discovers she can’t always get her own way, or that being a boy wasn’t all that bad.
In view of the facts the Tylers were distraught and confused, consulted their homosexual friends, and hailed from Orange County, California, they can almost be forgiven for permitting a very young child dictate decisions that will affect the rest of her life.
Less forgivable are the actions of Massachusetts Democrats who rammed a bill through that state’s legislature which will affect every school, workplace, accommodation, and institution in the Bay State. . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=5994.)
I come from a weird perspective here. I was spanked as a child (rarely) by my mother, who for all her faults (and they were many) didn’t abuse me in this way. However, she sent me to military school. There, we had a number of adults who punished us for various transgressions. We had one hous mother who had “Old Faithful” as she called it, a ping-pong paddle that she wielded to encourage the kids to get into the barracks and into bed at night; occasionally she inflicted a set number of swats with it, and it was more or less a serious punishment. None of the kids (to my memory anyway, it’s been about 40 years) disliked her; she was a good woman. However, there were other adults at the school who were seriously physically abusive. One morning, bleary-eyed and half-asleep, I showed up for assembly wearing an improperly shined belt buckle, and was laid out by a smack to one side of my head. And I witnessed the incident that got the school shut down: another house mother beat the cadets with a push broom handle, swinging it over her head like John Belushi doing his samurai thing. She beat a kid black and blue, and his parents sued the school; the school closed because they couldn’t defend themselves.
After all this time, I still feel pretty strongly about abusive corporal punishment, but it’s important to recognize the difference between that and a mild spanking, where the child in question knows what they did was wrong, defied authority, and essentially dared their parent to punish them. Children test boundaries, a lot. These days, when we don’t spank them, they rarely find boundaries that they shouldn’t cross. This isn’t good. Abuse is bad, yes. I speak from personal experience. Hitting children when angry is bad. Not punishing them physically, ever, is bad also. Just as an aside, until I was an adult I don’t think my mother ever asked me to “please” do anything. She ordered me, because she was the authority figure. I’ve often found it absurd to watch a mother following a 3-year-old around a store, trying to get him to behave, and yelling at him to “please” put something down. It’s just weird…
Oh, and berlet, I get that you don’t like Anderson Cooper, and apparently don’t like TG people either. That being said, being snide about someone’s sexual orientation doesn’t really earn you any points in my book; I don’t really care about his report, and the whole subject is off-topic just a bit, don’t you think?
The author of this article, in his zeal to protect the Pearls, missed the point entirely. This book was not a piece of fiction like Taxi Driver, it is a child rearing manual – one is supposed to follow the advice given in it. This book advises among other things: start beating a baby at four months old for crying. I will repeat that AT FOUR MONTHS OLD FOR CRYING! The advice gets worse from there. Offer a child something forbidden; if they take it beat them. It isn’t enough just to make them cry – beat them until they are wimpering and totally defeated. I am a Christian too and this book by any standards of Christianity, is evil. Did Jesus recommend beating, starving, locking children outside in the cold? One of the three children who have died; died , in part from hypothermia. I am not saying the parents should get off. They are responsible for allowing this evil in their homes. But the Pearls shouldn’t get a free pass either. They should be forced from under their rock and publically disgraced. PJ has done numerous articles on the Penn State scandal. What about the children who are being tortured right now by their parents in their homes because it is “Godly”. This author of this article should be ashamed.