corporeal punishment is amoral

[Advocate]

"Do as i say, or i'll whup your ass!" has a legitimate place in parenting. Such a statement in and of itself, even if carried out, is not harmful. Perfectly stable citizens have been raised that way for many generations. When forbidding very dangerous things, very hard consequences are appropriate, and physical punishment is not inherently better or worse than any other kind. Whether, when, and how punishment is effective is a different set of questions, but spanking, etc. should be included in the available options, which parents have too few of.

Also parents should be licensed.

[Skip]

corporal punishment

"Do as i say, or i'll whup your ass!" has a legitimate place in parenting.

Legitimacy is a legal concept, not a moral, ideological or psychological or sociological one.

Such a statement in and of itself, even if carried out, is not harmful.

That's not a statement; that's a threat. Whether it is harmful depends on the context in which it is uttered - by whom, to whom, in what circumstances and in the light of what previous events. If the mother has said this a hundred times and never hurt the child, no matter what it did, they both know it's merely a venting of displeasure on her part. If she has a history of throwing a child to the floor and beating it with a broomstick for spilling its milk, the threat itself does immense psychological harm even before she raises a hand.

Perfectly stable citizens have been raised that way for many generations.

Also serial killers, obsessive compulsives, life-long bedwetters, frigid women, impotent men, sadistic prison guards, strutting dictators, pedophiles, hermits and suicides. Thing is, you don't know how the particular kid you're whupping will turn out.

When forbidding very dangerous things, very hard consequences are appropriate,

That's what Jehovah figured - and look how well that turned out!

and physical punishment is not inherently better or worse than any other kind.

What other kinds is it being compared to?
Why is "punishment" considered a necessary aspect of raising children?

Whether, when, and how punishment is effective is a different set of questions, but spanking, etc. should be included in the available options, which parents have too few of.

That different set of questions could be significant. Does etc. include garroting a daughter who engaged in premarital sex?

Also parents should be licensed.

That's an even bigger question. By whom? The HEW? FDA? APA? The archbishop or grand imam? State government?
What criteria do they use? How is restriction enforced and by whom?
Etc.

The other thing is: a healthy society raises healthy young, who then become healthy adults.
A dysfunctional society squabbles and argues and makes far too many rules, breaks most of them, fights over them and tries to make more rules to compensate for its lack of co-operation. Parents have very little control over the influences that shape their own lives and the development of their children. Beating the children doesn't add to the net happiness of society - but does instill in those children the conviction that hitting is a good and proper way of convincing, converting and correcting people weaker than themselves.

[Impenitent]

corporal punishment is only good if you're a sergeant...

-Imp

[Immanuel Can]

corporal punishment is only good if you're a sergeant...

-Imp

I'm worried about incorporeal punishment...which I presume means "being beaten up by a ghost."

[Skip]

No, that's what a god does to people who have sinned in his eyes.