There is more truth in this statement than you might think. Heir to the empire, August Busch IV, is a real nasty piece of work.
giving him the benefit of the doubt. caning leaves welt marks. skin and such injuries can look different on photos than what's seen through the naked eye.
He says nothing about ok or not, nothing of the like. It's just two opposing viewpoints based on income, time, energy, ability to cope, etc ...., to use that bit (esp. just part of it) as some argument against corporal punishment is opportunistic at best and very disingenuous.
The only defense people seem to have of hitting a child is that they were hit when they were a kid so it's ok. There is nothing that shows hitting a kid does any good and there are many studies that show it can do long term damage. Violence should never be used with people/childen you are mentoring. The logic behind spanking and hitting to teach someone how to act is just so ridiculous. Yes, I was spanked as a kid until I started fighting back from the spankings. What do you do then to get your point across pro-hitting people? Tie the kid down and beat them into submission?
Blaming a beer company for domestic violence is like blaming Ford for drunk drivers or vehicular homicides.
Um, he spends the entire first part of the bit saying it isn't ok. He spends the second half explaining why people do it and relating to them on that level, and that he isn't some saint, but rather he just has more resources at his disposal to make his parenting life easier. Anyway, silly argument in the first place.
When you make billions cranking out a poison that is indisputably linked to violent and wreckless behavior, then yeah, it's a little difficult for people take you seriously sitting up on a high horse. That being said, I love me some beer. (not Budweiser mind you)
There's nothing inherently debilitating about driving. Alcohol, not so much. It's okay to think Peterson was wrong... it appears he was. No need to suggest bad examples to continue your stance.
This isn't true. There are many forms of discipline, and corporal punishment works better on some kids. There actually are studies that show corporal punishment, NOT ABUSE, can work as a method of discipline in situations where other methods were not successful. This is a minority opinion though. Either way, data is hard to obtain to properly study this area because it's not like you can randomly assign kids to parents to experiment on. Anyone who has studied the area will tell you that as well. No it's not. Some kids don't respond well to the other methods of discipline. They don't work on everyone. I'm one of the kids that those methods did not work on. Well, if you were fighting back then that method of discipline was not the right one for you. The key is knowing your kid with any type of discipline you administer.
Show me the studies because I can't find them. I can only find the studies that show the negative consequences of hitting kids to discipline them. All hitting does is create fear and it is archaic. There are many other much more effective non-violent tool for a parent. Spanking is simply not good parenting and it is a vestige of when violence at home was more acceptable.
Here is one, and the researcher also speaks about the flaws that I previously mentioned (for all of these studies). Most reports are negative. But again, it's not as if this is an area where it's easy to obtain data. Sometimes fear is necessary. Some kids, hell some adults, won't act right unless they fear the negative consequences. And for some, the only thing they really fear is physical punishment. Sure, if your kid responds to those methods. All kids don't.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p><a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Vikings?src=hash">#Vikings</a> issue statement saying Adrian Peterson placed on "Exempt/Commissioner's Permission list,” which means he must stay away from team.</p>— Sean Jensen (@seankjensen) <a href="https://twitter.com/seankjensen/status/512115844160032769">September 17, 2014</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Here is the Vikings statement: "This has been an ongoing and deliberate process since last Friday's news. In conversations with the NFL over the last two days, the Vikings advised the League of the team's decision to revisit the situation regarding Adrian Peterson. In response, the League informed the team of the option to place Adrian on the Exempt/Commissioner's Permission list, which will require that Adrian remain away from all team activities while allowing him to take care of his personal situation until the legal proceedings are resolved. After giving the situation additional thought, we have decided this is the appropriate course of action for the organization and for Adrian. "We are always focused on trying to make the right decision as an organization. We embrace our role -- and the responsibilities that go with it -- as a leader in the community, as a business partner and as an organization that can build bridges with our fans and positively impact this great region. We appreciate and value the input we have received from our fans, our partners and the community. "While we were trying to make a balanced decision yesterday, after further reflection we have concluded that this resolution is best for the Vikings and for Adrian. We want to be clear: we have a strong stance regarding the protection and welfare of children, and we want to be sure we get this right. At the same time we want to express our support for Adrian and acknowledge his seven-plus years of outstanding commitment to this organization and this community. Adrian emphasized his desire to avoid further distraction to his teammates and coaches while focusing on his current situation; this resolution accomplishes these objectives as well. "We will support Adrian during this legal and personal process, but we firmly believe and realize this is the right decision. We hope that all of our fans can respect the process that we have gone through to reach this final decision." - Zygi Wilf and Mark Wilf.
These owners sound like a couple of puds. They revisited the situation after their fans and sponsors threw a fit. Now the Commissioner is bailing them out with this exemption. How convenient.
Thanks for providing a source. I can't really say his arguments are that convincing, and one can find someone in the minority that disagrees with anything. The vast majority of research shows that hitting is not effective and only has downside. The article you linked lays out the argument against corporal punishment pretty well and it gives some good ways to punish without hitting. I was asking my mom about how it was growing up for her in East Texas....**** it sounded like hell and it was accepted and commonplace. Going to pick you own switch or getting popped over the head with a wooden spoon out of nowhere. Granted, my grandfather was an abusive drunk, but they even had corporal punishment in school with the paddles with holes in them. It was everywhere and widely accepted as proper discipline. The times in my life when I was faced with fear of getting hit nothing positive came of it. And geez if I had to go what she went thru going up I'd be totally ****ed up. Anyhow, let's get down to why corporal punishment of kids is even possible. It's because they are smaller and weaker and can't fight back or resist. And I can't think of any 2 year old that needed to be hit for punishment. You say some kids need to get hit to learn, but that's a bunch of crap. The only kids that are that bad off are the ones that have horrible parents. Human children simply aren't born needing physical abuse in order for them to learn. I simply can't think of anyone I know who has benefited from getting hit as a kid or as an adult. Some what of a tangent, but it used to be accepted to hit your wife. Has an woman ever benefited from being hit? Did it teach them how to act properly? The most recent story in my life of someone being subject to corporal punishment is my ex's nephew. His father is a piece of trash who only shows up in the kid's life every weekend or 2 and does just enough damage to really screw up the kid (sounds kind of like Peterson who was able to hit a 4 year old so much that he stopped crying from the abuse). The kid was having trouble with potty training so the father decided the mom wasn't disciplining the kid properly and the father decides the child needs to be hit when he has a potty accident. And I know this will come as surprise but the father was also punished by his father in that same abusive way as a young child...kind of like AP. Spanking/Hitting as a form of punishing a child negative cycle that needs to stop. There is no benefit to it.
what about the nflpa when they try to appeal whatever suspension the commissar gives ? or the actual courts when they let it pass? here is my thinking, the commissar panicked. He was ready for the weed and over training symptoms but completely forgot that like in the real world there are some violent people with anger issues in the NFL. carruth, hernandez and leonard little killed a person while under the influence and came back to play, that was under commissar tagliablue
The vast majority of research is also hard to obtain and the results are typically correlational for the reasons he cited. Even those that conclude spanking is bad will tell you that, so his argument from that front is very convincing and makes sense. Before providing the study I noted it was a minority opinion. Spanking is the norm, it kind of makes sense that most research surrounding it would be to prove that it is bad. Yup. I never said there weren't valid arguments to not spank. But there is also valid research to support spanking, NOT ABUSE. You asked for it so I gave you an example. If you were just going to say someone can disagree with anything then why ask for an example? It sounds like she experienced abuse, since you say your grandfather was an abusive drunk. Not all corporal punishment is abusive. The times in my life where I got spanked it stopped my negative behavior, when other methods failed to do so. Different strokes for different folks. People respond to different types of discipine. They key is to know your child and what can work on them, but to not be abusive in any type of discipline. I really won't go into the rest of your post because your mind seems to be made up on the topic and I'm not trying to convince you otherwise (I only wanted to highlight that corporal punishment can be effective, that there is research saying it can be, and how hard it is to obtain research in this area). I don't see the point of debating it if you will just blow off the support that I provide, after you asked for it. Kinda pointless, especially since I agree that there are valid arguments not to spank.
