I Love Mass Spanking

SpankingI love Mass spanking and, by that, I mean I truly love the latest ruling on spanking as a form of corporal punishment by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court somewhat less than I mean that I have any fondness for the actual act as a punishment. I have neither any fondness nor antipathy for spanking children.

I also  love how the lower courts got spanked. 😉

In 2011 Jean Dorvil was arrested in Brockton, MA on charges of assault and Battery for spanking his child. During the trial the judge made the odd remark, “If you’re in public with your kids, it’s not appropriate to discipline in this fashion.” Dorvil then lost his appeal based on the appellate court’s view that the child lacked the capacity to understand the discipline and that the father spanked her “when he was upset and angry.”

OK, so we have one judge that thinks that spanking is wrong and constitutes assault and battery if it’s done in public and another set of judges who thinks that spanking is wrong and constitutes assault and battery if the parent is angry when they spank the child. Combined, these two judicial statements imply that spanking is legally A-OK if it’s performed in private and if the parent is neither upset nor angry. Hence, by their statements, it’s perfectly fine in the privacy of your own home to spank you child if you just enjoy doing so.

No! That’s not what the courts meant…but it is what, in the language of the law, they said. They created an arguable defense with their idiocy.

Thankfully, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court overturned Dorvil’s conviction and coded that parents have the right to use corporal punishment to discipline and safeguard their children. Even better, they specifically codified that that a parent or guardian may not be subjected to criminal liability for the use of force against a minor child under the care and supervision of the parent or guardian, provided that:

  1. the force used against the minor child is reasonable;
  2. the force is reasonably related to the purpose of safeguarding or promoting the welfare of the minor, including the prevention or punishment of the minor’s misconduct; and
  3. the force used neither causes, nor creates a substantial risk of causing, physical harm (beyond fleeting pain or minor, transient marks), gross degradation, or severe mental distress.

Yeah, I love Mass spanking and, even more, I that the court now has this particular ruling on the books because legal precedence counts for more than legislative text.

Tags: | | | | | | | | |

It’s Anti-Clerisialism

jonolanTo start with, there was before this date no such word as clerisialism or its antithesis. I, in my hubris and out of specific necessity, just coined it. It is meant to denote an “ism” predicated up the noun, “clerisy” – a distinct class of learned or literary people.

What can I say, I may be arrogant, but English – especially American English – is a living language.

Alright, now that I’ve given longer than truly needed shrift to the linguists out there, let me continue on to substance of the post…

Anti-Clerisialism Not Anti-Intellectualism

There’s a once-again growing trend towards hysteria, especially amongst Leftists, that the American people are growing more and more anti-intellectual in outlook and ideology. This is a cyclical plaint from the left-wing intelligentsia that returns whenever whatever idea they’re pushing at that time is rejected by the American people. It is also as wrong as it is recurring.

No, what America is experiencing is a rise in what I have dubbed anti-clerisialism. Large swaths of the People are rejecting the Liberal and Progressive clerisy and are denying that that these Leftists have any form of valid magisterium. We are rejecting the Left’s claim of authority to teach and indoctrinate, not rejecting education or intellectual pursuits.

Tags: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |

And This Makes Sense?

In New York City, as with essentially the entire country, school nurses can’t dispense even an aspirin without direct doctor’s order but now under the auspices of Connecting Adolescents To Comprehensive Health (CATCH) they can dispense both contraceptives and the Plan B abortificant to to minor girls without any form of parental consent or notification – and this makes sense?

Indeed, does it make any sense for the city to provide doctors to the schools to give these prescriptions to girls as young as fourteen when they don’t provide such services for any other sort of medical need, most of which would be far more legitimate than contraception and abortificants?

 

Tags: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |