Tragedy in a homeschooling family

A daughter killed by her own parents. Can anyone imagine a more heart-wrenching story? A California couple have been charged in the death of their 7 year old daughter.

Children are precious blessings from God. To beat them until their will breaks is a monstrous offense against God. I understand that for some children, a swat on the backside might be an appropriate punishment from time to time. Perhaps several swats.

In my judgment it is a mistake to ever use anything other than an open hand on the backside. And it is a mistake to ever initiate an open-ended, physical punishment with the idea that you will not stop until the child submits or repents. A spanking is a specific, limited punishment. 3, or 5, or perhaps 10 swats for something really serious. And then it is over. Regardless of the child’s reaction. Children will react in unique and different ways. At least one of our children would burst into tears at a frown or a sharp rebuke. At least one of them once responded to a spanking with a defiant, “that didn’t hurt!” Youthful bravado. I suspect the spanking had exactly its intended purpose, regardless of their comment.

But to hold a child down for an hour? And beat the child with a flexible plastic pipe? Because she mispronounced a word? Monstrous.

The parents must answer for what they have done. And those who taught them that this was an acceptable manner of discipline must answer for what they have taught.

I will not condemn those who never spank. I have known parents who were quite successful without ever using a spanking. I also will not condemn those who, on infrequent occasions, administer a swat to the behind with a hand. I know many warm, loving, compassionate parents who believe that at times, it is necessary. And they have lovely, loving, affectionate children.

But I do call on those who use physical punishment as their first, or most frequent discipline tool to stop. And I condemn any parent who would use a plastic pipe to beat a child. Ever. I condemn anyone who would instruct others to do so.

Read Ephesians. Read it again. Husbands and fathers – focus on what Paul calls husbands and fathers to do. Love your wives. Love your children. Deny yourselves and lay down your life for your wife. Be patient and kind. Do not exasperate your children.

Every child is a precious gift from God and dear to His heart. Even when they stomp their feet and disobey – it is a misguided sense of pride to think that this in any way impugns our position, dignity, or competence as parents.

Focus on love – not on creating an image of obedience and perfection.

Put away wrath. Put away the idol of perfection. Put away the damn plastic pipe!

Please, as a father and a teacher – as an encourager of fathers, I appeal to you. Make your spankings rare and short. And your beatings never.

Other bloggers have written posts on this tragedy which are worth reading:

Virginia Knowles, Katie Kind, and Timberdoodle are good places to start.

There is a remarkably even-handed article in Salon by Lynn Harris, which was published today. It literally drove me to my knees in anguish. A word of caution! The comments are almost uniformly hostile to Christianity in general and spanking in particular. This would NOT be the place or the time to defend corporal punishment. Read the comments if you dare, but set aside your anger. The death of Lydia is a tragedy, for the loss of her precious life. It is also a scandal to the whole body of Christ. We must acknowledge this.

A thoughtful critique from Tulipgirl, written in 2006 but still quite relevant, and with links to useful resources. Her reaction to the latest tragedy is here.

Update: SpunkyHomeSchool blog (Karen Braun) has a thoughtful post up that is also worth reading.

Warm Air carries more water?

With 40+ inches of global warming on the ground in the Washington DC area, defenders of global warming have been scrambling to deflect or rebut the taunting of the skeptics. Contessa Brewer of CNN, attempting to swim in waters way over her head, made the assertion online that the large snowfalls on the East Coast don’t refute global warming, because warm air carries more moisture. The heavier snowfalls, according to the dear Contessa, are actually BECAUSE of global warming – because warm air carries more moisture.

While technically this assertion is true, it doesn’t help the defenders of global warming one inch! If the syllogism “global warming -> more moisture -> more snowfall” were true, then we ought to see more total inches of precipitation in the DC area, right?

Let’s go to the numbers, Johnny.

Over the past 30 years, the average precipitation for the month of January at Washington Reagan Airport has been 2.72 inches.

Total precipitation for January of 2010? 1.37 inches.

Average precipitation for the month of February? 2.71 inches

Precip so far for February of 2010? 1.79 inches.

Yep, from these stats its clear to see that the warmer air caused by global warming has been carrying more moisture and that this has been causing the large snowfall amounts in DC.

Wait.. No, that’s not right… Something…

Never mind.

Perhaps Contessa Brewer should get out an elementary science book and remind herself of this simple science fact. When it’s warm the moisture in the air comes down as RAIN. When it’s cold, the moisture in the air comes down as SNOW.

Is there any difference in the amount of moisture / precipitation in DC this year vs the past 30 years. NO!

There. Is. No. Increase. In. The. Amount. of. Moisture!.

The only difference is that it’s COLDER.

Which leads me to a prediction. It’s only a matter of time before Contessa informs us that Gobal Warming is causing it to be COLDER.

Contempt for the American People

Andrew Breitbart at the Tea Party Convention in Nashville (referring to the outrageously biased mainstream media coverage of the Tea Party movement):

That my friends is not media bias. That is contempt for the American people”

Then, he looked into the cameras and addressed the mainstream media:

Your days of doing this are over. It’s not your business model that sucks, it’s you that sucks.

watch the video (3 minutes)

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wcbhf0iJcL8&feature=player_embedded

Preliminary analysis – Scott Brown win in MA

I quickly downloaded the AP results by city for Massachusetts. Now Massachusetts is unique in the US, in that the entire state is divided in townships. Counties exist in name only and all local government functions are carried out by the township governments. Another way of putting this: There are no unincorporated parts of Massachusetts.

But, of course, the townships vary quite a bit in their size – both in area and in population. It was quickly clear from the AP table that Coakley had carried most of the largest cities in the state. She carried 10 of the 15 largest with 59% of the vote. She won Boston, Worcester, Newton, Springfield, Brockton, Brookline, Arlington, Medford, New Bedford, & Framingham. Brown won Quincy, Weymouth, Lowell, Barnstable, and Peabody. In those 15 towns/cities she collected 278,620 votes to Brown’s 193,063.

But Brown won 183 of the next 235 towns/cities and racked up an impressive total of 862,627 votes to Croakley’s 657,560.

Brown’s margin of 205,000 votes from the 2nd tier of 235 cities easily overcame Coakley’s margin of 85,000 from the top 15 cities.

In the 3rd and final tier of 75 towns/cities, Coakley won 54 and Brown only 21, with Coakley again winning 57.5% of the vote. But there just aren’t that many people in the small cities. In the 3rd tier she won 26,657 votes to Browns 19,695.

Conclusions: I think what the pattern shows is simply confirmation of the conventional wisdom. Coakley won the urban areas (and some significant liberal suburbs). Brown won the suburbs. And he won them with big enough margins that he won the state. It’s also a confirmation that you don’t have to win over every constituency in order to win an election. You have to win big on your turf and not lose too badly in areas outside your strengths.

Oh no! He DIDN’T just say that, did he?!?!

yes he did.

Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee said THIS about Ted Kennedy’s Senate seat…“Why would you hand the keys to the car back to the same guys whose policies drove the economy into the ditch and then walked away from the scene of the accident?” “For the Republicans to say vote for us and bring back the guys who got us into this mess in the first place, I don’t think it’s a winner.”

http://www.thefoxnation.com/massachusett-senate-race/2010/01/18/dems-make-unfortunate-kennedy-analogy

I mean, it is Ted Kennedy’s Senate seat, but this is unseemly!

The DSCC thinks “Tea Party” is a bad thing

Does this strike anybody else as weird?

The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (which is run jointly by all of the current Democrats in the US Senate) thinks that all they have to do to persuade folks to vote against Scott Brown is to link him to the Tea Party movement.

Maybe it’s just me. But national polling has shown that the Tea Party movement has higher favorability ratings that either the Republican or the Democratic Party.

While the choir might respond well to this attack, I think the majority of independent voters greet news of Brown’s affilation with the Tea Party movement as a positive, not a negative.

Apparently, it’s not just the Coakley campaign in MA that’s out of touch. From inside the beltway it appears to be axiomatic that Tea Party = Evil.

I don’t think most voters agree. We’re going to find out tomorrow.

The Director's Blog – Rob Shearer, Francis Schaeffer Study Center, Mt. Juliet, TN