> >RickR@net-effect.com (Rick Rossi) wrote:
> >
> >...7 yr. old boy kicks cat in head... Boy gets 10 smacks on bottom
> >with belt from father... father gets arrested for child abuse...
> "Mark D. Fulwiler" <mfulwiler@earthlink.net> wrote (if I've got this right):
> >
> >Being a cat lover and having W.C. Field's attitude towards most kids,
> >I'm on the father's side....Child abuse, my butt (pun intended).
> While the boy did something wrong, something about the
> BELT makes me wonder whether the father had taught the boy to act that way.
> (Besides, on whose word do we have it that it was the boy who hurt the cat?)
>
> I believe the state *should not have taken sides.* Mark, why do you think
> it's right or necessary for you to take a side, here?
> --Steve
Steve, I'm just expressing my opinion. Surely, there is no issue of
right or wrong in the mere expression of an opinion. As for it being
necessary, it certainly isn't. Is this board "necessary?" No, but it's
kinda fun.
Also, there is a big difference between me taking sides and the state
taking sides. The state has the legal use of force at its disposal and I
don't except in a few limited circumstances. The state can send people
to jail and take their money and property and I can't.
Actually, I am basing my opinion on a news story. It may be totally
wrong. In such case, I may revise my opinion. However, we can only go on
the information we have, and infomation is always imperfect.
Perhaps the boy's father is a violent person who also kicks animals
everyday and is really vile. That could be true. Or maybe, like my
father, he just gives his kids I few whacks when they are really bad.
(However, I never did anything as bad as kick a cat's head!) Based on
the information I had, I think the later is the case. But I may be
wrong.
Mark D. Fulwiler