Faith schools lose smacking battle

Guardian

Press Association
Thursday February 24, 2005

An attempt to bring back corporal punishment by teachers and parents of children at four independent Christian schools was rejected by the House of Lords today.

The teachers and parents claimed at a hearing before five law lords in December that the ban on corporal punishment infringed their human rights.

They said their schools were set up specifically to provide a Christian education based on Biblical observance and this meant the use of corporal punishment on a limited basis as part of their beliefs.

Giving the lead ruling today, Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead said their beliefs "involve inflicting physical violence on children in an institutional setting".

http://education.guardian.co.uk/schools/story/0,5500,1424320,00.html

children? What a messed-up world we live in.

would likely face a judge for assault charges. If they smack hard enough and repeatedly, they could do time for assault.

stringent bans on all religious humbuggery such as faith-based radio broadcasting and tight curbs on terrestrial/cable/satellite tv access.

The British debate on this is also helped by the fact that the UK has a national press which has a long tradition of focusing the debate on a relatively progressive liberal agenda.

to have a tradition of focusing the debate on a relatively progressive liberal agenda at one time, too, here in the states.

Maybe I just spend too much time here on DU, but these days I have a feeling that the world is hurtling toward religious disaster. That it's a trend too powerful to stop.

arguments do not get broad exposure on a national level.

The fine American tradition that peaked during the Democrats' dominance of politics in the 20th century is long due for a comeback.

If I ever doubted that I think I would crack up.

Hey, we have USA TODAY! It has a long tradition of quality news about TV shows and sports. And short sentences, so Murikans don't get confused.

It works great as a liner for a cat box, too.

Green grass- Red butt.

180

Spare the rod and spoil the child, so the child can grow up and smack around his or her child.

The Bible. The gift that just never stops giving :eyes:

They couch it in religious terms, and say they're doing God's will. But they're really just indulging their own desire to dominate the child.

...corporal punishment has not been, is not, and will not be used in our school. We tend to read other parts of the Bible, such as:

Mark 10:14

Suffer the little children to come unto me and forbid them not, for of such is the kingdom of God. Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, he shall not enter therein. And took them up in his arms, put his hands upon them, and blessed them.

Matthew 18:6

But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.

Colossians 3:21

Fathers, provoke not your children to anger, lest they be discouraged."

If people (such as those referred to in this article) need to take their cues from the Bible on how to handle children, perhaps they shouldn't be in the business to begin with. It should start from the heart, engage the mind, and have the best interests of the child as its goal.

What guidelines were used for disciplining children before the Bible? Were people totally clueless? I don't think so.

...and so is the school. I like my religion because it is, in my opinion, a historic church that has come to grips with the Enlightenment. (No small wonder since many of its clergy and members were leading thinkers in that movement.) We say that our practice is based on the "three-legged stool" of scripture, tradition, and reason. If one of these three is not considered in the light of the other two, things get badly out of balance.

The problem with the Biblical literalists is that they get an idea in their head, then go and find a "proof text" to support it. Lacking (for the most part) the understanding of the long tradition of Biblical interpretation over the past few thousand years and dumping realistic thinking in favor of the "God said it, I believe it, that settles it" approach, these "Bible-believing Christians" get it wrong nearly every time. They worship a book, not a living God, but even do injustice to the book they claim to love so.

As someone pointed out elsewhere in this thread, "the rod" in the original cultural and linguist context of the Bible would be understood by the writers and readers of that day to be like a shepherd's crook. It's a metaphor for guidance, protection, and, yes, sometimes punishment. But it's not a command to whack kids at every opportunity.

Sorry to rant on so long, but these ignorant nutjobs just piss me off, frankly.

Have you ever seen an adult smack a child calmly? Ever seen an adult reason out his or her options for how to deal with the child, only to conclude that hitting is the most prudent tactic? Ever seen an adult NOT frustrated when they hit a kid?


Me either.

great delight in the whole ritual of hitting kids on an appointment basis, often counting to five between blows just to make the whole disgusting thing even more abusive.

my point. Aside from preying nuns, corporal punishment is rarely carried out with a cool head.

I DO agree with you but I JUST got back from the laundromat where I actually witnessed "corporal punishement" meted out by a cool-headed woman. The kids headed out the door when she was transferring clothes. She herded them back in. They tried again, she cut 'em off at the pass, never once raised her voice. The little one (mebbe 3) tried ONE LAST TIME and this time she herded her in while patting her on the butt. Didn't even rise to the level of a swat. No stress in her voice whatsoever.

Little Girlfriend threw herself on the floor in an award winning performance. Mom noticed HOW HARD I was trying not to laugh and winked.
LG picked up on our non-verbal exchange, jumped to her feet (completely dry-eyed, btw) and it was onto the next shiny object...

When I was acting up when I was little, I used to get spanked. (This happened probably 3 or 4 times total, so it's not like I was getting beaten all the time.) My parents were always very clear on the fact that they weren't spanking me because they were angry. It'd be a couple of quick smacks on the butt and then I'd be sent to my room for a while. But I turned out fine, and I don't have any lingering issues over it.

I'm not advocating beating your children, and these people from the OP sound like lunatics. I'm just saying that in my experience, every once in a while a quick spanking's not the worst thing in the world. Now donning my asbestos suit... :)

As do other people who bring up examples like this one. I certainly wouldn't want to tell your parents they can't behave in the way that you describe.

Let me withdraw the "every/all" intonation of my post, and just leave it at "often." Because, your example notwithstanding, most of the hitting I've seen is done because the parent is at wits end, and frustration has won the day.


edit: typos

My parents were a lot better at their job than many. I'm sure that in the vast majority of cases of parents hitting their kids, they're just frustrated or, in some cases, enjoy taking their anger out on someone who can't hit back. Sometimes a quick pop is what's needed to help a kid snap out of hysterics, as kids tend to do, but I definitely don't think it's a good idea in general. I would say you could use "almost all" instead of "often." :hi:

experiences being sent away to boarding school at the age of seven. This was not a fundamentalist school, but evidently, the teachers always seemed to find excuses to beat the students.

I commented that it sounded as if the school was run by sadists, and he said, "Exactly."

If you read older English novels about boarding schools, it seems that "caning" was a tradition. Judging from the Guardian article, the practice must have been banned some time after this (middle-aged) acquaintance had gone through school.

and as such should be taken figuratively, not literally. As I understand it, "rod" is simply a euphemism for discipline.

...to refer to some form of whacking with a stick.

On the contrary, in a pastoralist society, "the rod" meant something very different. A shepherd carried a long rod to extend as a 'railing,' as it were, so that when sheep were travelling in a bunch along a narrow path, they couldn't leave it, and fall over the edge or wander off.

In other words "spare the rod and spoil the child" meant "fail to give proper guidance and protection, and the child will stray and possibly get hurt."

And the proper guidance and protection referred to had nothing to do with whacking, and everything to do with pointing out the right way and guiding gently away from the wrong way.

There may or may not be instances when some form of physical contact would be appropriate in maintaining discipline. I don't think being spanked as a child warped me for life, but neither do I think it's a good idea. But there is NO, repeat NO Judeo-Christian religious justification for whacking kids. None.

Repeat, NONE.

The Bible is problematic enough without yet more half-baked interpretation being used to justify someone's need to control others.

wearily,
Bright

Well...except for Leviticus 19:19, pretty much all of Leviticus 11 (they do obey the commandment against eating buzzards, though), Exodus 20:4, Exodus 20:14-15, and the absolutely fantastic Exodus 20:23.

...and then search around for a "proof text" to support it. Most of them are ignorant of the cultural, linguistic, and interpretive traditions behind any given text and read it in its most literal (in English!) form.

The Bible is a book of books written over hundreds and hundreds of years. Cherry-picking a particular text to support an idee fixe is just plain bad scholarship and worse public policy.

until he has been to a good school.
-- H.H. Munro (Saki) (1870-1916)

school, on the street, at the store, at the playground, in their nightmares... basically everywhere.