Of course, the house is divided on the issue. One side says "thats what their fast tails get", "he was only being a good dad", and the ever popular "if i had done that blah blah blah" aka "i got my ass beat and i turned out ok" epistles. Then you have the
I personally was a pretty good kid. Getting a whooping happened very rarely, if ever. I honestly can only think of a couple of times that i got hit, aside from random smacks (never in the face of course) for being a smartass. But i've also seen my sister and my brother get their ass handed to them for doing shit they have no business. So i'm not one of those people who's against corporal punishment because i never got it/saw it. I just don't really buy into the idea that the only way to discipline a child is to beat them senseless. People take that spare the rod and spoil the child scripture way too literally/seriously. Sure, sometimes a spanking or a swat on the arm/leg/bottom is in order. But to pick up a cable cord and beat your child til they are bruised (or worse) is just too much to me. And it certainly is no guarantee that your kid will behave. I know plenty of people who've never been sent out to pick a switch (and it better be a good switch or the beating will just be worse cuz now your parent or whomever is even more pissed) that have turned out to be perfectly respectable and upstanding citizens. Likewise, i know people who's parents bust their ass on a regular basis that ain't doin shit in life.
Discipline has always been a touchy subject. In essence most people feel "well who are you to tell me how to raise/discipline my kids". And to a certain extent, i understand where they are coming from. But come on. At some point the line has to be drawn between what constitutes discipline and what just shouldn't be acceptable. The question i pose is...where do we draw that line?