And I respectfully disagree. I was raised in a house that followed the "spare the rod and spoil the child" mindset. I know that me, myself am better off for having strong parental influences to lay a firm groundwork of what is expected of me. I grew up in a very down ridden community, that had it not been for both of my parents and their firm but loving guidance, would've been very easy for me to fall in with the wrong crowd or do things that would endanger my future. Had it not been for their love AND firm discipline I know for me personally, that I would have not ended up where I am today. I hold no resentment for the spankings I received and I am thankful that I had parents that had a sense of value and discipline. I know that this may not apply to everyone, and I am speaking on my own personal experiences. Not knowing the full story behind AP's situation I know I cannot comment on his mindset or his method of punishment. My parents (in my mind) never went overboard with their punishment and was never excessive. I can only speak from my personal experiences and how I feel it helped shaped me as an individual.
Sounds about right for Florida and other US backwaters, along with the Islamic States of .... and much of the developing world.
With due respect to you, I don't think anyone really knows how they would've turned out had the circumstances of their upbringing been different. It's entirely possible that your parents could've spared the rod, disciplined you just as firmly and consistently in other ways, and you would've turned out just the same. You would need some sort of crystal ball to determine that with any certainty. The mistake people make in thinking about these sorts of things is that they overvalue the "lesson" involved in the discipline. They say something like, "yeah, well I'll bet his son never does THAT again!" Sure, and while that may be true, he may also never fully trust his father again. He may also never feel entirely comfortable in his own household. He may never again fully believe he's a good person. So sure, while he may never do "that" again, is it really worth it if he also never does those other things, as well? And could you have gotten him to never do "that" again some other way, that didn't involve never doing those other things, too?
You dont know those things either which has been my point all along. None of us know and we should all mind our own business
I'm not sure we should mind our own business. It's in the public interest to make sure children aren't being abused, is it not?
Where's the line then? When is it ok for the government to intervene and protect children from abuse?
He was making noise so I beat him within an inch of his life. Didn't hear a peep after that. Violence is the best way to express yourself and also correct others. I am a good parent. Sent from my LG-MS770 using Tapatalk
Exactly. And when a family friend comes over and playfully says, "hey little buddy -- how are you doing?," you don't get a peep then, either.
I think the issue is tough because you want parents to raise their own children. You also want to protect those children as well. I think AP went overboard but I don't think he meant to endanger or hurt his child. Where is tge line in this scenario and when do you cross it and intervene into the child's life?
Well, it really doesn't matter what anybody "means" to do. If you abuse your child, you have to suffer the consequences. If he truly didn't mean to, well then hopefully he can learn from this instance and put that learning into practice in the subsequent raising of his child. In other words, the "line" is where the child is being abused, whether anybody means to or not.
This is not ambiguous. He repeatedly whipped the child hard enough to leave bleeding marks that were severe enough he had to go the doctor and on top of that, they were severe enough the doctor, BY LAW, had to report it. I think we can stop pretending there was a breakdown by the system or someone over stepped their bounds.
. I wasn't saying that. I was making a broader point about what exactly constitutes abuse and at what point action should be taken.
There isn't a single line. There's an investigation, then there's the judicial system complete with a jury of one's peers. Regardless, if you willingly hit your child and the result of that hitting is injuries severe enough for a doctor to be involved and that doctor feels those injuries are severe enough to call the state, then its abuse, IMO.
Yeah...Ive been on a jury. Let me tell you that I lost all faith in our system. I don't believe in leaving peoples fate in the hands of complete idiots.
I think Minnesota wins regardless, McKinnon and Asiata are two very good running backs. If the Patriots think they're off the hook, they need to not underestimate McKinnon.
Haha. I actually didn't want to get out of it. I did the second time by saying I was sexist against men, and the prosecutor was a female. I have to say that the jury I served on had nice people, and a few were fairly bright. However a few weren't and it made me question whether I'd want my fate in the hands of a jury even if I were innocent.
They aren't. They are actually hurting the child by taking away his fathers paycheck. Same way I feel the NFL is punishing the wife of Ray Rice by threatening her husbands career.
The NFL is protecting its interests, which involve public perception. Child abuse is in the public interest, and the NFL depends on the public for revenue.
I think it's important to remember that Peterson wasn't charged with child abuse. He was charged on reckless or negligent injury to a child Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk
There is no difference lol and everything I'm reading from Vikings' fans, they want him out of the team, they're done with this diva, and they'll take anything from Jerry Jones.
Half their stadium is wearing AP jerseys so Im not sure that is how they feel. Not doubting youve read it, just saying maybe that is the minority.
Well, that's a top selling jersey and has been the jersey to get if you're a Vikings' fan ever since he was drafted and probably the only jersey they have other than some dusted Moss or Culpepper jersey. If the Vikings part ways, they will still be wearing those Jerseys until they can buy a Cordarrelle Patterson jersey. There was women wearing Rice jersey's in Baltimore's game last week.
Maybe but if I felt strongly enough about a guy that I thought he shouldn't be on my team anymore, my morals wouldn't allow me to wear his jersey to a game. On another note, Boomer just said Peterson should never be allowed to play again. Barkley says Boomer thinks that because he's white
The Pats still on the mind of Fins fans. They should be. We're going to reclaim our rightful spot atop the AFCE in a few weeks.
The NFL hasn't suspended AP (yet). The Vikings deactivated him. He's collecting a paycheck while sitting at home. Poor thing
What the NFL really needs to do here is beat AP with a rubber hose until he cant sit or lay on his back for a week or two. Then maybe hell learn his lesson and not do that again
The Vikings' owner (who belongs in prison, FWIW) said that Peterson will play this week. Whatever you think of the case, the Pats got lucky with their timing. Regardless of how the Dolphins do this year, I can take heart in the fact that the team from up north will get bounced from the playoffs by a tougher, better team again this year, and it will be fun to watch. It's always fun to watch.