Things some teenagers do that annoys me...

[LoganW]

No, I don't.

There's a difference between hitting and beating. You're classifying spanking as beating, and that's simply not what it is.

Also, that study showed that it was detrimental to spank 1-year-olds, not spanking in general.

You're basically twisting everything out of proportion. There's a difference between hitting and beating, and there's a difference between hitting being acceptable at some times and being the best thing to do.



I'd say that's irrelevant, since it's entirely possible that you needed to be disciplined less and it's also possible that you responded to other punishments well.

Everyone has different learning styles in a classroom setting, and I'd say that's true in all settings.

Honestly, here's the thing; DISCIPLINE YOUR KIDS IN SOME WAY. It doesn't matter how, just discipline them. I cannot stand the parents that let their kids get away with hitting them. In public. Get through to them some way so they aren't arrogant little brats that grow up to be arrogant big brats.

no saviors said he was whipped. The article also said that spankers were spanked themselves and they continue a violent cycle that could be avoided with something as simple as talking to them. I agree kids gotta be disciplined in some way but spanking is not the way

http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2009/09/does_spanking_make_kids_dumber.html
lol

 

[Melomaniacal]

I'd say that's irrelevant, since it's entirely possible that you needed to be disciplined less and it's also possible that you responded to other punishments well.

Everyone has different learning styles in a classroom setting, and I'd say that's true in all settings.

Honestly, here's the thing; DISCIPLINE YOUR KIDS IN SOME WAY. It doesn't matter how, just discipline them. I cannot stand the parents that let their kids get away with hitting them. In public. Get through to them some way so they aren't arrogant little brats that grow up to be arrogant big brats.

My point is that I think everyone can raise their children in a way where physical discipline is not necessary.

And yes, I agree. Without some form of discipline, everyone would grow to become spoiled, selfish *******es. Clearly some form of discipline is necessary. I just feel that spankings are the wrong way to go about disciplining your child.

As someone who was spanked occasionally as a child, I don't use violence to solve anything.

I think that "IT TEACHES YOUR KIDS THAT YOU SHOULD HIT PEOPLE" mentality is just as much crap as the argument for video games. At worst, it exposes kids to violence of some sort and triggers the thoughts they would've come upon at some point.

I'm not saying that you'll grow up and start hitting everyone to prove your points. I'm saying that you're grow up to think that violence is much more acceptable. You're just being conditioned to be more tolerant towards violence. Maybe you won't grow up and beat everyone you disagree with, but maybe you will grow up, become president, and declare war on other countries without ever considering talks to be a viable option. Get what I mean?

Also, don't let that comment turn this into a political debate.

 

[Firus]

no saviors said he was whipped.

You're classifying EVERYTHING as beating, not just what he said.

The article also said that spankers were spanked themselves and they continue a violent cycle that could be avoided with something as simple as talking to them.

The article only said the first part, the second part is your opinion. (You may not have meant it that way, but it was worded that way.)

I've seen brats that don't respond to talking. Violence surely isn't the solution to everything, but talking is not as magical as everyone seems to think it is either.
I'd be willing to bet you think that countries preparing to nuke us can be calmed down with talks, too.
(That's not an analogy, but I can tell from your opinion of "Talking solves everything" that that's likely how you feel in all aspects of the world.)

Let me just clarify now; it's not all or nothing. You can spank your kids only in extreme situations and use other methods every other time. It's not "LOL YOU SPANK KIDS ALL DA TIME".

Of course, my opinion is likely irrelevant given that I don't plan to have kids.

 

[saviorslegacy]

Saviorslegacy, you're an idiot.

"Getting slapped by the palm to the cheek isn't bad either."
It's on their ****in' FACE. FACE. You don't hit their head or face. The butt is enough.

What you believe is that kids will be better people due to listening to you, in fear of getting whipped.... But do you think that kids from 40 years ago were any better than us right now? No, they just BEHAVED as they had to. You're an idiot, I'm not joking.

I agree that we should educate our kids and physical punishments can be a way to go. But a slap to the cheek is simply stupid, that's more than just a lack of respect. Stupid kids do deserve such things, but really... If I were dad, I'd slap you on the cheek, with my palm, to teach you how to be a good father.

I deserved a slap across the face when I back talked my mother.

People years ago look at us as unruly punks. Might be because they are older and look at our youthful rebellious but I have seen some kids grow from age 3 to 9 and I compare it to other kids. It checks that he is truly spares the rod spoils the child.

saviors, you were beaten correct?
that's why your so wrong, it warped your view on reality, I feel sorry for you bro
EDIT: **** you were WHIPPED? ok that's fvcked up
I feel sorry for your kids and I hope they recover after the way you'll treat them

Beaten, no
whipped, yes

There is a difference.

I find it funny that some people are so weak-minded to think that the only and best way to effectively teach your children what is right and wrong is to beat them.

K, I want you to argue with a 6 year old about what they are doing is wrong.
They'll just say "k" and totally disregard what you say.

^do you think it's ok to beat your kids?

he was beaten and he says he deserved it. Kids can be bad but violence is never the right thing. He grew up to think that beating your kids is the best thing to do.

I am very old fashioned.
I Believe in whipping, gun ownership, the right to CARRY a weapon (in which I do), the right to teach God in schools (this country was founded on Christianity and it should stay that way) and that the elders should be respected (actions speak louder than words...... I have seen to many old people diss'd it's not even funny).

I will raise my family Christian. I will spank them when they deserve it.
I will teach them self defense, fishing, hunting, Smash bros., target shooting, carving, paint ball, how to skip stones, how to drive a motor bike and good morals of women through my actions/words.

I don't see the problem with hitting your kids, as long as it isn't something that causes any significant damage. I mean, we've been doing it since forever, perhaps out of instinct.

I mean, my parents got their fair share of smacks I'm sure, and I've had a few. They love their parents, I love my parents. There's nothing wrong with a smack.

It basically is. Humans aren't the only ones that spank.
Dogs bite, apes punch/slap, birds peck ect.

I adore my mother and father. W/o them I would be nothing.
They have taught me more than any school would and gave me love.
I would die for them.

You guys aren't getting it, you spank out of love.....

I just think it's strange how one can be so strongly for physical discipline. Hell, it seems to me like savior isn't just planning on hitting his kids, he's looking forward to it.

I don't really want to start using my experiences as evidence, but I was never hit as a child, and I have very strong morals. I clearly know the difference between right and wrong, and I'd honestly say that I have very good judgment. Not to sound arrogant.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/09/16/spanking.children.parenting/index.html
check it

Notice the ages that they are talking about.
I wasn't whipped until about 3 and after that I was rarely ever whipped because I was still really young.
I was however whipped quite often from like age 5 to 12 (I was a... little rascal... I mean I tried to catch the cat on fire... what's worse than that!?)

 

[Firus]

http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2009/09/does_spanking_make_kids_dumber.html
lol

I can't tell if that's supposed to be some sort of implication towards me, but if it is...I don't even know what to say to you. Especially since that's not true.

(Who the hell cares about IQ anyways, though? >_>)

I'm not saying that you'll grow up and start hitting everyone to prove your points. I'm saying that you're grow up to think that violence is much more acceptable. You're just being conditioned to be more tolerant towards violence. Maybe you won't grow up and beat everyone you disagree with, but maybe you will grow up, become president, and declare war on other countries without ever considering talks to be a viable option. Get what I mean?

So you're saying it wouldn't cause me to use small violence, it would cause me to use big violence, like starting wars?

That makes sense.

If anything conditions people to violence, it's the media.

 

[Melomaniacal]

Savior, I would just hope that you would develop a relationship with your children to where beating them isn't necessary. If your children don't trust your judgment and guidance, I think you're doing something wrong, and CLEARLY hitting them isn't helping establish that bond.

And if you were trying to set cats on fire at the age of 12, it's pretty clear to me that "whipping" you didn't help.

So you're saying it wouldn't cause me to use small violence, it would cause me to use big violence, like starting wars?

That makes sense.

If anything conditions people to violence, it's the media.

No, I'm saying that you'll find violence as a more acceptable solution to problems. I don't like saying that you would grow up and beat people up to solve your problems, because there are so many other factors going into that. For instance, even if I did find violence to be the answer, I wouldn't beat people up because I'm scrawny and I know that I would get my *** kicked.

 

[saviorslegacy]

http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2009/09/does_spanking_make_kids_dumber.html
lol

Don't believe everything you hear and only half of what you read.

At least we have billions of cases through out the ages that spanking your kids makes them obey, not be as unruly, be more respectful and to not get in as much trouble.

Savior, I would just hope that you would develop a relationship with your children to where beating them isn't necessary. If your children don't trust your judgment and guidance, I think you're doing something wrong, and CLEARLY hitting them isn't helping establish that bond.

And if you were trying to set cats on fire at the age of 12, it's pretty clear to me that "whipping" you didn't help.

I would hope that I wouldn't have to whip them either. If they need it though they're getting it.

BTW... I done that at 6.
AT 12 I was attempting to make dynamite (giving someone like me a chemistry book and a book called How Things Work is actually pretty dangerous because I tried to build such things and experiment....).

If anyone is interested in knowing I did make the dynamite. It didn't explode because I didn't know what the measurements were. However it did burn quickly in my paper tube....
(Don't ask how I got the salt peter....)

 

[LoganW]

I
I am very old fashioned.
I Believe in whipping, gun ownership, the right to CARRY a weapon (in which I do), the right to teach God in schools (this country was founded on Christianity and it should stay that way) and that the elders should be respected (actions speak louder than words...... I have seen to many old people diss'd it's not even funny).

christianity is so wrong, just a more popular version of scientology but equal in the way that they're both ridiculous

 

[GreenKirby]

And the country wasn't even founded on Christianity. Most of the founding fathers were just deists.

And then let's consider the slaughter of Native Americans and slavery.

The U.S. is about as Christian as I am a woman. >_>

 

[saviorslegacy]

christianity is so wrong, just a more popular version of scientology but equal in the way that they're both ridiculous

AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


SCIENTOLOGY IS BULL **** HOW DARE YOU COMPARE MY RELIGION TO SUCH AN ALIEN FREAK SHOW!
NOW I'M BURNING BRING IT ON BUDDY! POINT OUT FALSE FACTS!!!!!
GAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[LoganW]

And the country wasn't even founded on Christianity. Most of the founding fathers were just deists.

And then let's consider the slaughter of Native Americans and slavery.

The U.S. is about as Christian as I am a woman. >_>

yup yup yup savior's wth

 

[Melomaniacal]

And the country wasn't even founded on Christianity. Most of the founding fathers were just deists.

And then let's consider the slaughter of Native Americans and slavery.

The U.S. is about as Christian as I am a woman. >_>

Just adding to this:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press...

As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion,-as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Musselmen...

I'm not even going to bother quoting from the plethora of anti-religious statements made by our founding fathers. To say that we were founded on Christianity is blatantly and hilariously wrong.

 

[Firus]

No, I'm saying that you'll find violence as a more acceptable solution to problems. I don't like saying that you would grow up and beat people up to solve your problems, because there are so many other factors going into that. For instance, even if I did find violence to be the answer, I wouldn't beat people up because I'm scrawny and I know that I would get my *** kicked.

When I said I don't use violence to solve anything, I mean I don't even consider it as a possibility. I resent the implication that I'm going to somehow consider beating people up as a solution just because I was spanked as a child, that's just bogus, I'm sorry.

 

[LoganW]

AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


SCIENTOLOGY IS BULL **** HOW DARE YOU COMPARE MY RELIGION TO SUCH AN ALIEN FREAK SHOW!
NOW I'M BURNING BRING IT ON BUDDY! POINT OUT FALSE FACTS!!!!!
GAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

LOL their both absurd it's just one has more followers
I'm a pastafarianist lol

 

[Melomaniacal]

When I said I don't use violence to solve anything, I mean I don't even consider it as a possibility. I resent the implication that I'm going to somehow consider beating people up as a solution just because I was spanked as a child, that's just bogus, I'm sorry.

You're not understanding what I'm saying.

I said that you may be more tolerant towards using violence as a solution. Maybe not to your own problems, but just in general. Either way, when I say "you," I'm trying to refer to everyone who was hit as a child (sorry, that wasn't clear). Maybe you're different, I don't know. I'm generalizing.

 

[saviorslegacy]

And the country wasn't even founded on Christianity. Most of the founding fathers were just deists.

And then let's consider the slaughter of Native Americans and slavery.

The U.S. is about as Christian as I am a woman. >_>

Actually it was founded on Freemason ideals. Mainly composed of Newtons manuscripts.
However, the founding father were Christian, and they taught Christian.

And don't go saying that because a Christian done something stupid the religion is stupid.
I have meant plenty douche bag atheists. Then again some of the nicest people are atheist.

 

[saviorslegacy]

LOL their both absurd it's just one has more followers
I'm a pastafarianist lol

I hate that stupid noodle creature. -_- I find it very insulting.

How can you even compare the two?!
Tell me what is so absurd about about Christianity.

:EDIT:
****it I double posted.
I thought someone would have posted by the time I finished with this. Owell... my bad Teran.

 

[Firus]

LOL their both absurd it's just one has more followers
I'm a pastafarianist lol

Despite his Phoenix-Wright-worthy freak-out...

Calling someone's beliefs "absurd" is rather obnoxious and elitist, and I wouldn't suggest doing it again.

I'm not a Christian, but I still find your attitude annoying.

You're not understanding what I'm saying.

I said that you may be more tolerant towards using violence as a solution. Maybe not to your own problems, but just in general. Either way, when I say "you," I'm trying to refer to everyone who was hit as a child (sorry, that wasn't clear). Maybe you're different, I don't know. I'm generalizing.

No, I understand exactly what you're saying. I think the idea that I'm going to be open to violence as a solution, consider it as a solution, whatever, to anything, just because my parents spanked me a few times, is absolutely ridiculous.

 

[GreenKirby]

No the founding fathers really weren't.

http://www.sullivan-county.com/news/ffnc/

Washington never called himself one
Paine pretty much disowned all religions
Ethan Allen said that Jesus was not the son of God
Etc


And who said I thought religion is stupid? I'm of the Christian Left.

 

[Melomaniacal]

No, I understand exactly what you're saying. I think the idea that I'm going to be open to violence as a solution, consider it as a solution, whatever, to anything, just because my parents spanked me a few times, is absolutely ridiculous.

Clearly you don't understand what I'm saying, because I'm using the word tolerant (key word), and you're not understanding that. I also stated that you could be different, that I am generalizing, and that I am not referring to just you.

Actually it was founded on Freemason ideals. Mainly composed of Newtons manuscripts.
However, the founding father were Christian, and they taught Christian.

And don't go saying that because a Christian done something stupid the religion is stupid.
I have meant plenty douche bag atheists. Then again some of the nicest people are atheist.

Okay, now I need to get quotes...

Have you considered that system of holy lies and pious frauds that has raged and triumphed for 1500 years.

I do not find in orthodox Christianity one redeeming feature.

Religions are all alike - founded upon fables and mythologies.

Millions of innocent men, women, and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burned, tortured, fined, and imprisoned, yet we have not advanced one inch toward uniformity. What has been the effect of coercion? To make one half of the world fools and the other half hypocrites.

Way too many from Jefferson to quote them all, but that will do.

During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What has been its fruits? More or less, in all places, pride and indolence in the clergy; ignorance and servility in the laity; in both, superstition, bigotry, and persecution.

Religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind and unfits it for every noble enterprise.

The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason

Way too many from Franklin to quote, but that will do.

Sir, Washington was a Deist

No, America was not founded on Christianity. It was founded on freedom of religion. It separated Church and State, the way it should be.

 

[Firus]

Clearly you don't understand what I'm saying, because I'm using the word tolerant (key word), and you're not understanding that. I also stated that you could be different, that I am generalizing, and that I am not referring to just you.

What do you mean I'm not understanding that? I saw the word tolerant, I know what it means.

If you want me to phrase it using the exact same wording, fine:

I find it ridiculous that I'm going to be more tolerant to violence just because I was spanked as a child.

And just as you are generalizing when you say "you", I am generalizing when I say "I".

 

[saviorslegacy]

The freak out= bad temper........
Anyways.. sorry for going ballistic on you. At least you didn't say it to me IRL.

@Greenkirby
I never called you unchristian. I argue evolution a lot.
I usually get people pissed at me. lol Then we end up in debates.


Hmmmm... why did my History book always teach it as they were stanch Christians?
Stupid false information!
Now Ima spend time googling some other things in that book series.

 

[Melomaniacal]

What do you mean I'm not understanding that? I saw the word tolerant, I know what it means.

If you want me to phrase it using the exact same wording, fine:

I find it ridiculous that I'm going to be more tolerant to violence just because I was spanked as a child.

And just as you are generalizing when you say "you", I am generalizing when I say "I".

Well, you never seemed to be making the connection. I don't know enough about you to tell you if you are more tolerant to violence, which is why I'm not directing all of this at you. For the third time now, you may be different. In my experiences, those who were beaten as children are all the people who say "the atomic bomb was the only solution," "we need to bomb Iraq/starting the war in Iraq was the right decision," etc. Obviously there's more to it than that, but you get my point (right?).

I'll say it for the fourth time, you may be different. I don't know enough about you to know.
And because I like the number five: you may be different.

Don't take it as a personal attack, because it's not.

 

[Firus]

Hmmmm... why did my History book always teach it as they were stanch Christians?

Because the schools like to teach propaganda, not teach you what really happened.

 

[john!]

We went 6 whole pages without discussing religion. That might be a record.

 

[Firus]

Well, you never seemed to be making the connection. I don't know enough about you to tell you if you are more tolerant to violence, which is why I'm not directing all of this at you. For the third time now, you may be different. In my experiences, those who were beaten as children are all the people who say "the atomic bomb was the only solution," "we need to bomb Iraq/starting the war in Iraq was the right decision," etc. Obviously there's more to it than that, but you get my point (right?).

I'll say it for the fourth time, you may be different. I don't know enough about you to know.
And because I like the number five: you may be different.

Don't take it as a personal attack, because it's not.

...Okay, for the second time then, when I said "I", I was generalizing too...I didn't take it as a personal attack. I find the idea that one is more likely to form a certain belief just because their parents spanked them ridiculous.

I understand your point, I just disagree.

 

[GreenKirby]

Hmmmm... why did my History book always teach it as they were stanch Christians?
Stupid false information!
Now Ima spend time googling some other things in that book series.

The same reason the history books:

Doesn't mention anything other than Europe during World History (I mean seriously, I can find few people who can name any African or Asia or pre-colonial American empires)

Doesn't mention that most of the founding fathers were blatant hypocrites.

Doesn't mention anything about the Middle East other than the 30 years of Jesus' life

Doesn't mention anything about the accomplishments women contributed to history as well


Seriously, you would flip your wig if you found what Martin Luther King REALLY thought of white America.

Edit: Teran unlock the Education blog again, plz!

 

[Darkshadow7827]

I read the first page and all of the last page. Such a big digression from general annoyances to corporal punishment and religion. I'd leave an opinion, but it'd probably be irrelevant within the next 20 posts.

 

[Melomaniacal]

The same reason the history books:

Doesn't mention anything other than Europe during World History (I mean seriously, I can find few people who can name any African or Asia or pre-colonial American empires)

Doesn't mention that most of the founding fathers were blatant hypocrites.

Doesn't mention anything about the Middle East other than the 30 years of Jesus' life

Doesn't mention anything about the accomplishments women contributed to history as well


Seriously, you would flip your wig if you found what Martin Luther King REALLY thought of white America.

I must have a weird text book, because there are sections on all of those things (minus the founding fathers being hypocrites).

...Okay, for the second time then, when I said "I", I was generalizing too...I didn't take it as a personal attack. I find the idea that one is more likely to form a certain belief just because their parents spanked them ridiculous.

I understand your point, I just disagree.

It serves as conditioning. If I am spanked for every wrong thing I do, I'm being conditioned into thinking that causing pain to others (violence) is the only/best way to teach them right from wrong.
Do you think there's no such thing as conditioning?

Yes, I know not everyone spanks their children for every wrong thing, but some do.

 

[saviorslegacy]

I'm with Melo.
The only thing that it did was make the founding father look like Christians.

I mean, I had 200 some pages devoted to American Indians for crying out loud!

 

[Melomaniacal]

I'm with Melo.
The only thing that it did was make the founding father look like Christians.

I mean, I had 200 some pages devoted to American Indians for crying out loud!

Yeah, but the quotes from the founding fathers themselves make them seem very... not-Christian. That may mean something.

 

[Firus]

It serves as conditioning. If I am spanked for every wrong thing I do, I'm being conditioned into thinking that causing pain to others (violence) is the only/best way to teach them right from wrong.
Do you think there's no such thing as conditioning?

Yes, I know not everyone spanks their children for every wrong thing, but some do.

Which is why I don't think it's right to hit someone for every wrong thing they do, especially since different punishments are proper for different transgressions.

You don't just send your kid to bed early for purposefully smashing a TV, and you don't ground your kid for a year if they just take an extra cookie.

In other words, in that sense, I agree with you.

EDIT:

Does it really matter if the founding fathers were Christian or not? That's not relevant to this topic at all...someone should create a new thread for that discussion.

As it is, this whole corporal punishment topic is only loosely related to the topic. In fact, I feel like we should probably stop hijacking the thread now.

/hijacking

 

[Darkshadow7827]

I would love to give my opinion on corporal punishment, but I'm not gonna digress.

Link to original post: Things some teenagers do that annoys me...
This is basically a rant blog about some of the things I've seen people my age do that I think is stupid/annoying.

- Girls who think that starving themselves so they look like skeletons makes them attractive.

- Guys who pretend to be gay by licking each others shirts and trousers. Yeah, because gay people blatantly like licking people's clothes....

- The held belief that anyone above the age of 16 who's a virgin is a freak.

- People who hit you for no reason whatsoever.

- Sarcastic thumbs ups.


There are more, but if I listed them all I'd be here for hours. Basically, I hate how a small minority of teenagers give the rest of us a bad name.



Rant over.

I know/ see very few anorexics in my area and age group. Reading about "thinspiration" gets my blood going. Urg, so unhealthy.

I don't usually see guys pretending to be gay... or lick clothes... If anything, I see imitators use flamboyant gestures and talk with a lisp/accent.

As for 16+ virgins, people always say get laid. I hate that statement cause I always see the guidos/frat meatheads say that.

The last time someone hit me for no reason was when I was in 7/8th grade. A slap to the back of the head made him stop.

 

[Teran]

We are heading into touchy territory, I think I'll just nip this one in the bud.