Corporal punishment should be implimented in a school setting.
Side Score: 10
Side Score: 12
You bet it should and i have no problem with that. Problem we have today is Democrats who disapprove of one getting that ass busted for being out of line. Democrats need a PC world but Democrats of today could have never made through the years when swaps is what you got for being out of line.
That isn't an argument for corporal punishment. You didn't even say anything about the advantages or disadvantages about corporal punishment. You're not even talking about corporal punishment, your entire message is complaining about Democrats.
This is an exact paraphrase of your argument.
"Corporal punishment is good because Democrats do not want to be spanked and they would not have survived if they were spanked."
You're not even debating, you're just trash talking about Democrats.
1.physical punishment, such as caning or flogging.
1.put (a decision, plan, agreement, etc.) into effect.
School corporal punishment refers to causing deliberate pain or discomfort in response to undesired behavior by students in schools. It often involves striking the student either across the buttocks or on the hands, with an implement such as a cane, wooden paddle, slipper, leather strap or wooden yardstick. Less commonly, it could also include spanking or smacking the student with the open hand, especially at the elementary school level.
As of 2015, 31 states and the District of Columbia have banned corporal punishment in public schools, though in some of these there is no explicit prohibition. Corporal punishment is also unlawful in private schools in Iowa and New Jersey. In 19 U.S. states, corporal punishment is lawful in both public and private schools.
Years ago, it was acceptable for a husband in the United States to beat his wife in order to get her to do what he wanted or to punish her. His asserting his authority through corporal punishment was accepted as a social norm. Should we be teaching school children that in this day in age it is appropriate for them to be hit when someone disagrees with them and their behavior.
Physical punishment can easily escalate and cross the line to abuse and serious injury, particularly when an instrument is used and public schools are required to use a paddle or ruler to implement corporal punishment.
An estimated 1 to 2 percent of physically punished students in the United States are seriously injured, to the point of needing medical attention. According to the AAP and the Society for Adolescent Medicine, these injuries have included bruises, abrasions, broken bones, whiplash injury, muscle damage,brain injury, and in a few cases death.
I am aware that this data is out of date but we should not ignore the fact that through the ages the number of children being smacked by their superiors is large
during the 2005-2006 school year, 223,190 children had corporal punishment implemented in schools.
It is because of these reasons I do not believe it moral to implement corporal punishment in schools.
Society for Adolescent Medicine
This is not an issue of Republicans vs. Democrats. This is an issue of science versus people who are wrong about things.
Corporal punishment does not work and is directly correlated with increased aggression, lower IQ, weakened mental health, and weakened moral internalization. People who are punished this way are more likely to bully, fight, and victimize others. We should not implement it in schools because we should not make more use of something that doesn't work.
If you corporeally punish your children and/or were corporeally punished as a child and become defensive when somebody challenges your view, and the above statement angers you, please feel free to completely disregard the below evidence and/or claim that science is biased, claim that I am a weak-willed democrat or afraid of pain, and/or claim that corporal punishment works because of anecdotes.
Childhood corporal punishment is linked to lower IQ's internationally.
It leads to increased aggression, and children who fight, bully, and victimize, exhibit much higher incidences of corporal punishment by their parents.
It is correlated with lower overall mental health and lower moral internalization.
Yes, I am being judgemental. I am definitely saying that you are wrong about corporal punishment. I am judging you as incorrect, as wrong about something. That is why this is called a debate.
Let me know when you're ready to dispute the facts I presented instead of the fact that I presented them.
Having to administer corporal punishment is a sign of failure on the part of the parent or teacher to gain the respect of the child.
If, by example the guardian can illustrate the necessity to conform to the accepted values and principles of the society in which they live and by showing extreme disappointment when those in their charge step out of line is usually sufficient to achieve the desired conduct.
If the teacher/parent has gained the respect of, and shows respect to, the children in their care then the children will return that respect by behaving to the standards they know is expected of them.
The other danger is that those who administer corporal punishment can become sadistic and begin to enjoy the experience of causing pain.
This can lead to gratuitous and excessive sessions of corporal punishment.
Society already vilifies teachers and school administration simply for trying to teach. We're constantly cutting their funding, blaming tenure, picking on what they teach and don't teach, and suing if any physical contact of any kind occurs. How do you expect them to apply a corporal punishment program you're comfortable with when you aren't even comfortable that the majority are competent in the fields they teach?