Random Politics & Religion #01

I don't know of anyone (myself included) why would tell somebody to preventing a child from physically injuring themselves by smacking their hand away from a dangerous object is abuse. Except for maybe the crowd who would prefer them to learn to not do it by letting them do it.

That being said, backhanding and spanking are not preventative measures.

Incidentally, at Easter, I was at a large gathering at my neighbors' house, with like 50 people there. There must've been at least 15 little kids from 2 to 10 running around (hiding nips for the big nip hunt), and yet there was a ceramic wood stove outside that some of us were hanging out by. A two year old kid walked by it, got relatively close, and then backed away, and nobody had to intervene.

Side thought, I can't wait to get a vasectomy.

It's unfortunately a very common problem, especially for those who are repressed.

I'd argue it's a common problem on these forums (even beyond P&R).

Eh. I think I got one spanking per parent growing up. And the latter may have only happened b/c that parent didn't realize it had already happened at the other house.

I don't remember what the one from my dad was for, but the one from my mom was for wandering blindly into a parking lot where there was a car driving right toward me and I was oblivious as a deer on the interstate.

That said, I think not being allowed to watch cartoons or go out to play afterward made the point much better than the spanking.

If you constantly use it for the only means of punishment, sure.

If you use it rarely and only for extreme punishments, not really.

That's how I was raised. I turned out....err....mostly ok. Maybe not whole, I am missing some parts, emotionally and some body parts, but still mostly ok.

I don't know. Then again, I don't see any statistics on this either. It's not like something that people record.

There isn't a consensus amongst the professionals who have done studies on subject as to whether it is effective or not. However, there is consensus amongst all camps that utilizing it out of exasperation or desperation is ineffective. That's also why there seems to be a notion that professionals in the area are against it when there is still a split opinion regarding physical discipline.

Oh, this isn't RT?! *deletes* lool

Question for Cruz supporters... We all used to hear a lot of talk about how Obama didn't have any experience to sit in the Oval Office as he was only a "community planner" and the like... What kind of experience does Cruz bring that would actually make him a good president? I mean it looks like he's been a senator since 2013 so what differentiates him from Obama in the lack of experience area that you argued disqualified him for the presidency?

I'm not a Cruz supporter, even though he is a Texas Senator.

But what qualifies him over Obama? He isn't Obama.

Osama Krayem, 23, has been arrested for his involvement in the Brussels bombings. He is a Swedish citizen from Malmö who left for Syria to fight for ISIS in early 2015. Later that year he returned to Europe through Leros, with a fake passport. He then went to Ulm in Germany where he was picked up in a car rented by Salah Abdeslam.

Magnus Ranstorp, Research Director of the Centre for Asymmetric Threat Studies at the Swedish National Defence College, believes he used Leros to get into Europe because ISIS took his passport or to stay hidden from intelligence agencies.

RTBF reports that he was the one who bought the suitcases the terrorists used to hide the bombs in. He was also seen with Khalid El Bakroui, one of the brothers.

His fingerprints were found in the apartment the others used, where they also found 15 kg explosives, iron balls and an ISIS flag.

He is in the database Aftonbladet (A Swedish evening newspaper) created of Swedish jihadists

http://svenskajihadister.story.aftonbladet.se/chapter/databasen/

I didn't ask what qualifies him over Obama... I said that people have criticized Obama for a lack of experience saying that he was nothing more than a community planner and that should make unqualified to be president. It was an argument that was made against Obama that applies to Cruz... He has little to no real experience that would prepare him for the job so why wouldn't the same people make the same argument against him?

1) It was a joke.

2) There really isn't any qualifications to be the president of the US, except being voted into office legally. What more do you want me to say? That the democrats are a bunch of hypocrites?

That's a pretty terrible joke if it was one...

Considering you said you weren't a Cruz supporter I would have expected you to say nothing at all...

Well, I can't believe you asked a question that had an obvious answer.

I thought you were being rhetorical.

Which is why I said legally.

You know, being a national born citizen or a child born to natural born citizens, over 35, not stuffing ballot boxes, that type of thing.

Not...exactly.

Again, it depends on the parent's nationality and their laws. But the US would not grant the child citizenship unless the child was born on US lands.

Do you ever contribute anything to P&R other than slap-fighting and drunk, incoherent rambling?

Or you can be VP, minimum age 30, and inherit.