We will interrupt our Bible V. Science series to look at a couple of posts or comments that unbelievers have posted on their website.
#1. Quote of the Day: Beating Children in School: Good or Bad?
A quick public service announcement from Science-Based Medicine, or at least from me: hitting children is fundamentally wrong. It’s also not effective when done in an attempt to improve their behavior.
This is categorically not true. While BG is quoting from someone else, his lack of commentary shows he is in favor of what Dr. Clay Jones says. But we know from experience that his opinion is wrong.
We know that when corporal punishment was removed from schools in Gyeonggi-do, violence by students against teachers rose. When the province reinstituted corporal punishment, those violent acts were reduced.
While people claim that the death penalty is not a deterrent, it is. But then, corporal punishment and the death penalty were not designed to be deterrents. They were designed to be punishments for serious violations of the rules or laws of the land.
As long as these two punishments are administered fairly and justly, the Bible has not outlawed their use. It is understandable that some people misunderstand the Bible verse ‘spare the rod, spoil the child’. Their sense of punishment is neither fair nor just.
But the use of the term spanking is problematic in that how caregivers interpret it varies widely, and there is frequent overlap with what pediatricians consider to be abuse.
No one cares what pediatricians consider to be abuse as that is a subjective application and definition. Pediatricians are supposed to be doctors not definers of legal terms or actions. We know of one mother who said her child fell yet her pediatrician accused her of child abuse.
The injuries were the result of the former action, not the latter accusation. You cannot trust pediatricians for a definition of abuse or if spanking should be administered or not because they are filled with their own biases and cannot make an honest determination of the situation.
Plus, they are not the ones in the classrooms or the homes who have to deal with students or children when the children realize they are not going to be punished for their violations. The pediatricians can say whatever they want because they do not have to deal with the aftermath of removing a viable and just punishment.
Despite a great deal of evidence showing that spanking is ineffective, is a risk factor for greater forms of physical abuse, and can negatively impact the behavioral and cognitive development of children in a variety of ways, it remains a controversial issue in the United States.
Only the last 9 words are true. There are people on both sides of the issue and the one who hates spankings are the worst of the lot as they try to force their ways on others. They cannot let other parents determine the right punishment for their children and have a need to interfere with parental rights.
This is not saying that all who apply the roid or spankings, will be just or do not cross the boundary between abuse and punishment. But that is for the courts to decide not pediatricians or other parents.
There are still no federal laws banning spanking, either in the home or in schools, which is what today’s post will focus on. Pediatricians, though not all of us, unfortunately, are generally united in their stance that this is a problem. The American Academy of Pediatrics is naturally opposed to the practice of physical violence against children in all forms and recently issued a policy statement to specifically address when it is used as a form of discipline in schools.
That is good as there should not be any laws against spanking a child. Not only is it NOT violence against children, but properly applied spankings at home and at schools is a behavioral adjustment tool.
Why is beating children in schools allowed?
This statement or question clearly distorts the issue and places a label on an action meant to influence parental thinking about school discipline. Spanking or corporal punishment is allowed in schools because it is not violence but a punishment and it works.
We have seen it work first hand. Pediatricians need to learn to stick to treating illnesses and injuries and keep their noses out of other people’s affairs.
They left it up to the states, many of which are seemingly incapable of thinking about the (born) children in any meaningful capacity.
Pediatricians lose all credibility in the corporal punishment issue when they do not unite against abortion but recommend it in the wrong circumstances. Because of their failure to oppose abortion, they have no business interfering with spankings.
AAP supports the right of an adolescent to access an abortion to terminate an unintended pregnancy.
Unintended or not, every unborn child deserves the right to be born and not have their life ended because some pediatrician thinks it should be aborted.
When a school allows faculty to hit students, which students tend to get hit?
The ones that have broken the rules that are worthy of using spanking as a punishment. But ask a loaded question…There is nothing wrong with either spankings or corporal punishment when applied biblically. Only the unbelievers and those who listen to unbelievers have a problem with this mode of punishment.
Oh, and that quoted pediatrician reminds us of a Native English teacher in Korea who had no problems telling Koreans how to raise their children but reacted in violent and angry defiance at the suggestion that he would not like it if Koreans told him how to raise his children.
Parents do not tell the pediatrician how to raise or discipline their children thus the pediatrician should not do it to them. Discipline is a parental decision, not a pediatrician’s decision.
#2. Writing Prompts: Pavlovian
Organised religion conditions us to believe certain things, and behave in certain ways
People just cannot resist the temptation to get their shots in at those who believe in God. They have to distort and misrepresent what churches are all about. Organized or unorganized religion actually presents what is right or wrong and then leaves the choice up to the people it comes in contact with.
Unfortunately, there are more false religions than the one true one which tend to enforce not the Biblical instructions but their own. Those are not the Church but false religions and cults. But unbelievers like to attack the church and read into the church’s actions what they think those actions and words may be.
Like those against spankings, they are too lazy to honestly investigate issues and see the truth from the error. or the just from the unjust or fairness from unfairness. They like to lump everything into one category and then judge everyone by whatever criterion they have chosen for that category.
Society conditions us to live around a 9-5 working day
This is not true either but serves the author’s purpose of misleading his readers with false information. A lot of times these types of complaints or observations come forth because the author of such observations does not want to participate in Church or society in the proper manner.
They want to do things their own way even though their own way leads them to unhealthy behaviors. Then they will apply just about anything to their distorted theories:
In schools, a bell will ring to signify the start and end of a lesson,
A bell is not Pavlovian in nature. You need something to indicate the start of a class and its ending. If you did not have these notifications, then schools would be in confusion and very disorganized.
God is not the author of confusion or chaos. Without organization, nothing would be done. It is dangerous to apply scientific experiments like Pavlov’s to society in general as you distort everything and mislead people. You falsely label someone else’s actions and can harm innocent people by reading into what you are thinking into their behavior.
The author of that writing prompt calls these actions manipulations but he does not know the proper definition of manipulations and where the boundary between that and free choice is. He is presumptuous to say the best as he ignores the many influential factors involved in human life to get to his desired label of how people act.
#3. Writing Prompts: Stardust
Whilst the samples may not amount to much more than the weight of a hamster (yes, that’s what the article says), the information they hold has got scientists excited. You see, asteroids like Bennu are thought to be debris left over from the formation of the solar system, and they may contain clues as to the formation of the planets, and how life began.
They won’t and they don’t. This blog post ties in with our Bible Vs. Science series and that author should spend some time reading it. Observation of different elements in an already formed entity does not provide any clues to the formation of planets or how life began.
To prove that the scientists have to go back to square one and use those same elements and create a planet or life to get their answer. Observation just opens the door to speculation without physical evidence to support those speculative ideas.
It is the same with evolutionary thought. Evolutionary scientists are cheating when they combine already formed specimans and then declare evolution true simply because those already formed specimens produced a result the scientists were expecting.
Such experiments and observations do not prove evolution true. These experiments just prove what happens when you place two already-formed specimens together and mix them up.
To prove evolution and the Big Bang true, scientists have to go back to the beginning and use their claimed initial ingredients to create life and another universe. Other than that, they are lying to the people by cheating and misrepresenting what is taking place.
To think, this probe has zipped across the solar system, and back again, and survived to deliver us a story in the form of the building blocks of our solar system. This is an astonishing display of technical brilliance from NASA. There is the potential to learn so much from this, and who knows what these asteroid fragments will reveal?
No, it is just a waste of money, not technical brilliance as those samples do not provide any evidence whatsoever for the formation of the universe and its contents. This is just another exercise in futility as scientists try to find an alternative to the truth.
theologyarchaeology 