Saturday, June 24, 2006

Liberal Lies on raising children

In another post on our continuing trend of disproving Liberal Lies on social norms, we now turn our attention to raising children.

Lie number one, we must never spank children, it teaches them nothing positive. This theory is an extention of the "Pain doesn't teach" theory of raising children. This theory is that pain is bad, and we should never do anything bad to the children, as it only causes resentment.

Friends, this line of theories is easily disproven, and obviously flawed. These theories lead to serious juvenile crime problems, and tragic situations where young adults are sentenced to death for crimes.

First, to disprove the "pain doesn't teach" theory of the Liberals. If pain teaches a child nothing, explain why the child doesn't touch the hot stove more than once? The child learns that the stove is hot, and if the child willingly touches the stove repeatedly, we may have a child in need of special help. Pain teaches, it is the most effective teaching tool of Nature. In History's long documentation, nothing has taught a child faster than pain. We all know Cactus have sharp needles, why do we know this? We know because we touched that thing sooner or later in life, and got poked. After that, we respected that plant, because it taught us that it can hurt if we touch it.

Before you suggest I am a lunatic and advocate daily beatings, burnings, and needle torture for children, nuts. I am saying that Pain can teach, not that it should be a daily part of anyone's life.

By spanking the child, after scolding the child to insure that the child knows what they did wrong, the lesson is seared into the minds of the child. If I climb up on the counter to get at the cookies, I get spanked if I am caught. After a while, the "if I am caught" is dropped when the child learns that Mom and Dad always are around, and always know.

We all have heard stories of children who run away from home, and walk around the block continuously, because they aren't allowed to cross the street. These children, while adorable, have been taught to obey, and even when in frank disobedience, obey the rules that have been pounded home by good parents.

What you are in the process of teaching the child, is that rules mean something, and breaking those rules means suffering the consequences. Only when the consequences are worth the gain from breaking the rules, will the child do the bad thing. As the child grows, minor infractions will continue, and the parent will continue to dole out punishments, the parent must dole out punishments, to insure that the lesson takes hold, violations of rules, laws, has consequences.

Take our juvenile crime situation above. A youth of 11 steals some candy from the store. He is caught, scolded, and released. Same youth then commits other crimes, theft, robbery, and nothing happens to punish the child. Instead, people make excuses, quote long studies about how it's society that is really at fault, and the child's criminal activity keeps getting worse and worse. Then after his, or her, 18th Birthday, we find the child had killed someone while robbing them. We then decide the man is truly bad, and sentence the man to death. The current Justice System has decided that children should be treated as adults if the crime is bad enough. This again is a serious issue, certainly the child shouldn't be forgiven for murder, rape, or other violent crimes. However isn't there something wrong with a system that allows a juvenile to become such a violent criminal without clear warning signs?

The Man grew up knowing that any punishment for his wrong action would be slight at the worst. We set that boy up for failure, by not punishing him in a far more severe manner, so that he would understand that rules are not made to be ignored, or broken, but obeyed unless you are willing to risk the punishment. St. Augustine proposed that an unjust law is no law, is an unjust system which does nothing to correct the problem also problematic?

The term Juvenile Delinquent is a lie. Juvenile means child, or youth, but not adult. Delinquent means failure to meet the requirements of duty. A youth can have no duty, since Duty is inherently an adult responsibility to begin with. It is a social term created to diminish the problem. Where there is a Juvenile criminal, there is a delinquent adult somewhere.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home


Hit Counter