Delaware becomes 1st state to officially outlaw spanking

[Feeding the Abscess]

Lol you don't have to quote Non-Aggression Principal like I just pulled it out of my ass. The Non-Aggression Principal IS Libertarianism, it's the foundational philosophy for all things Libertarian. If you don't subscribe to it, then you're not a Libertarian. If that's the case, I wasn't talking to you in my previous post.

Here's the wiki on it, so you can catch up.

How many kids do I have? Are you implying that if I have no kids then I'm not qualified to discuss this? That's an Ad Hominem. Here's an Ad Hominem example: Perhaps you spank because you lack communication skills (e.g Ad Hominem attacks).
-----------------

To Feeding the Abscess. I believe the Non-Aggression Principal SHOULD be law.

Our differences are semantic. Under our current monopoly law system, there's no way I'd support legislation restricting spanking. Under a free market law system, I'd probably be okay with it.

 

[tod evans]

Geeze, defensive much?

I'm not a libertarian either so any attempt to pigeon-hole me isn't going to work..

I don't need to "catch-up" as you put it, I've actually lived life for over 50 years, often in ways you can't imagine.

I'm guessing, (because you didn't actually answer) that you don't have kids?

It's really a shame that you would advocate for any more laws. You've been a member here for quite a while, hasn't it registered that politicians passing new legislation is a really large part of the mess our country is in?

Have a nice day.

Lol you don't have to quote Non-Aggression Principal like I just pulled it out of my ass. The Non-Aggression Principal IS Libertarianism, it's the foundational philosophy for all things Libertarian. If you don't subscribe to it, then you're not a Libertarian. If that's the case, I wasn't talking to you in my previous post.

Here's the wiki on it, so you can catch up.

How many kids do I have? Are you implying that if I have no kids then I'm not qualified to discuss this? That's an Ad Hominem. Here's an Ad Hominem example: Perhaps you spank because you lack communication skills (e.g Ad Hominem attacks).
-----------------

To Feeding the Abscess. I believe the Non-Aggression Principal SHOULD be law.

 

[Smart3]

Delaware Becomes First State in Nation to Outlaw Child Spanking

Last month, Gov. Jack Markell signed Senate Bill 234 into law, making Delaware the first state in the nation to effectively make it illegal for parents to use corporal discipline on their children.

The bill was opposed by several organizations, including the Home School Legal Defense Association (HSLDA), which worked with the Delaware Home Education Association and the Delaware Family Policy Council in a failed bid to defeat the legislation earlier this year.

The legislation - sponsored by state Senate Majority Leader Patricia M. Blevins, a Senator representing Delaware’s 7th District -- alters the state’s current child abuse and neglect laws by changing the definition of “physical injury” on Delaware’s existing statutes.

Under the legislation, a “physical injury” is described as the intentional infliction of “pain or impairment of physical condition” on a child. Under the new law, child abuse is categorized as a separate crime in Delaware, whereas child abuse cases before the law was enacted were prosecuted using the same statutes that pertain to adult victims.

The new legislation creates three new categories of child abuse. Parents that intentionally inflict “a physical injury” on a young person under the age of 18 are now guilty of class A misdemeanors, which may subject offenders to a one-year prison sentence. Those that are found guilty of intentionally or recklessly injuring a child who is under the age of 4 or has “significant” developmental disabilities -- considered class G felonies within the state -- may find themselves imprisoned for two years.

“The statute also expands the state of mind necessary for certain offenses against children allowing for more effective prosecution of parents who subject their children to abuse by others and fail to protect their children,” the law reads.

“These new statutes combine current statues and redefine physical injury and serious physical injury to reflect the medical realities of pain and impairment suffered by children,” the law reads.

 

[low preference guy]

fun thread ahead

 

[zach]

Spanking actually does curb behaviors that are inappropriate.

 

[tod evans]

Many here might want to move just for this law.

I'm not one of 'em.

 

[angelatc]

Spanking actually does curb behaviors that are inappropriate.

And it does it pdq.

 

[Jumbo Shrimp]

Ridiculous.

 

[angelatc]

While I usually snicker at the whole concept of the non-aggression principle, I find it especially hilarious to apply it to dealing with toddlers. Those little demons will eat you alive.

There are only two ways to persuade people. Logic and force. 2 year olds don't comprehend logic.

 

[low preference guy]

While I usually snicker at the whole concept of the non-aggression principle, I find it especially hilarious to apply it to dealing with toddlers. Those little demons will eat you alive.

There are only two ways to persuade people. Logic and force. 2 year olds don't comprehend logic.

dang. too bad ron paul didn't know that.

 

[Origanalist]

My inner child needs good spanking.

 

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

USA's future is screwed. More and more kids feel self-entitled and are empowered by the liberals... Taking power out of "grown-ups".

Spanking exists for thousands of years and humans turned out fine.

God forbid they don't have their persons violated. Seems like parents are the self-entitled to lay their hands on another human being. /Shrug

As far as the OP...they didn't need a new law. Battery is all ready law, no? If you don't think spanking is battery, then...I don't know what to say - just because you gave birth to a new life doesn't 'entitle' you to violate their rights and yes, that means being secure in their person.

 

[Shane Harris]

I bet the founding fathers were spanked and spanked their children. Not that I condone spanking personally, but passing a law restricting spanking is asking quite literally for a nanny-state to raise children for us.

For those here who support this, how would you propose to enforce such a law?

 

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

I bet the founding fathers were spanked and spanked their children. Not that I condone spanking personally, but passing a law restricting spanking is asking quite literally for a nanny-state to raise children for us.

How is making spanking fall under battery (which for instance wouldn't necessitate a new 'law'), asking for a Nanny-State? Is making murder illegal, creating a totalitarian state?

In the United States, criminal battery, or simply battery, is the use of force against another, resulting in harmful or offensive contact.[1] It is a specific common law misdemeanor, although the term is used more generally to refer to any unlawful offensive physical contact with another person, and may be a misdemeanor or a felony, depending on the circumstances. Battery was defined at common law as "any unlawful touching of the person of another by the aggressor himself, or by a substance put in motion by him."[2] In most cases, battery is now governed by statute, and its severity is determined by the law of the specific jurisdiction.

That sounds like spanking to me. I can appeal to authority too - Ron Paul never spanked his children in fact, he's openly talked about how he doesn't like it (corporal punishment..), because he understands liberty - you have no right to lay your hands on another human being to inflict violence and punishment.

 

[Shane Harris]

How is making spanking fall under battery (which for instance wouldn't necessitate a new 'law'), asking for a Nanny-State? Is making murder illegal, creating a totalitarian state?

In the United States, criminal battery, or simply battery, is the use of force against another, resulting in harmful or offensive contact.[1] It is a specific common law misdemeanor, although the term is used more generally to refer to any unlawful offensive physical contact with another person, and may be a misdemeanor or a felony, depending on the circumstances. Battery was defined at common law as "any unlawful touching of the person of another by the aggressor himself, or by a substance put in motion by him."[2] In most cases, battery is now governed by statute, and its severity is determined by the law of the specific jurisdiction.

That sounds like spanking to me. I can appeal to authority too - Ron Paul never spanked his children in fact, he's openly talked about how he doesn't like it (corporal punishment..), because he understands liberty - you have no right to lay your hands on another human being to inflict violence and punishment.

so you think Ron Paul is celebrating the passage of this law? Spanking is far from murder, and far from actual battery. In my opinion a woman slapping a man across the face shouldn't put her in prison. How would you enforce this?

 

[RonPaulFanInGA]

 

[tod evans]

Ron Paul never spanked his children in fact, he's openly talked about how he doesn't like it

Ron Paul chose to battle in congress for years too.......He's a far more patient man than I.

Me, I'll let you do as you choose with your kids and I'll raise mine as I see fit.

Do not interfere if I need to spank my child because I don't subscribe to this "non-aggressive" mind-set.

 

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

so you think Ron Paul is celebrating the passage of this law? Spanking is far from murder, and far from actual battery. In my opinion a woman slapping a man across the face shouldn't put her in prison. How would you enforce this?

No one should be put in prison - our 'justice' system is no justice at all. It punishes you twice - once for the infliction or injury violating your liberty by the initial aggressor and secondly for paying for his incarceration. You get drilled twice. I don't know what Ron Paul is doing, do you? Also, I'm quite aware that battery and murder are far apart and I don't believe I ever made any other statement contrary.

How would you enforce this? Like any other - someone reports it and then the monopoly police investigate the claim. Unless you seem to think a child is not a person and has no liberties. I bet you're just fine viewing children as property of the parent. Unlike you, I don't selectively apply my morality.

 

[JK/SEA]

is there a common sense Amendment somewhere in the Constitution?...

yeah...thought so....geezus...wtf...

 

[Shane Harris]

something tells me a lot of the proponents of this law would have had no objection to that child being aborted.