The State of California is close to passing a law that bans all spanking of children under the age of three. Now, whatever you think of spanking under three --I agree, it should be rare (although a smack on a hand that refuses to obey a command not to stick the finger in the fire on the stove might be a good thing)-- why is the legislature of California telling parents when they can and cannot spank?
This is typical for liberal politicians. They claim freedom, but they love to control all aspects of life. They are oppressive in their mind set and don't even notice. They think they are helping the poor peons they govern who don't know any better, I guess.
CA lawmakers, get a clue. You will only make criminals out of good parents with such laws. People who abuse babies will do so anyway.
Oh the foolishness of California.
3 comments:
I seem to remember a proposal by the UN a couple years back similar to that. I haven't heard anything since. First thoughts were it was odd that the UN would be concerned about spanking, but then again, look at how helpful they have been in Iraq and Iran.
Also, with the nationwide bandwagon banning trans fats (isn't that the stuff that makes donuts and fries taste so good?), something as insignificant as dictating family parental rights doesn't shock me.
You're right. People who abuse kids are going to do it with or without this law. It's already NOT legal to do so! We agree with spanking and start to spank around 2. Just one swat does the trick with our 2 year old. It is rare that we have to do it, though. Anytime I have to spank my kids I have to try hard not to cry right along with the kids. What good would that do, to see mommy crying too?? I need to toughen up I guess!
Post a Comment