[Pigeon Lady]

..I'm not sure if this will be of interest to anyone but I noticed it because I recalled the name and remember there being a thread a while ago because his ex wife's boyfriend at the time, physically abused another son of his which resulted in the child's death..which is why I was stunned that he would do something like this..I just can't understand how any parent could think this is in any way 'the right way' or an acceptable way or that it 'teaches' anything..and the fact that it was something he himself experienced as a form of 'discipline' as a child and is doing it to his children just really to me proves that 'violence only breeds more violence' and nothing more than that/it teaches no lessons other than that...anyway, the story.....





Minnesota Vikings star running back Adrian Peterson has been indicted for reckless or negligent injury to a child for allegedly beating one of his sons as punishment, and a warrant was issued for his arrest.



The 2012 NFL MVP reportedly admitted to police that he did give his son a 'whooping' last May with a switch - a term he used to describe a leafless tree branch - while the boy was visiting him in Houston.

Peterson, 29, who was in Minnesota training with his team ahead of a game this Sunday, was deactivated from the roster after his indictment by a Texas grand jury went public, ESPN reported

During the incident, Peterson’s son had pushed another one of his children off of a motorbike video game, according to new details from CBS Houston. As punishment, Peterson grabbed the branch, removed the leaves and struck the child repeatedly.

According to doctors, the beating resulted in numerous injuries to the boy, including cuts and bruises on his back, buttocks, legs and scrotum.

Peterson then allegedly texted the boy's mother about the incident, saying that one wound in particular would make her 'mad at me about his leg. I got kinda good wit the tail end of the switch,' according to CBS.

In further text messages, the football star said he 'felt bad after the fact when I notice the switch was wrapping around hitting i (sic) thigh' and that he “got him in nuts once I noticed. But I felt so bad, n I’m all tearing that butt up when needed! I start putting them in timeout. N save the whooping for needed memories!'

He also texted the boy's mother: 'Never do I go overboard! But all my kids will know, hey daddy has the biggie heart but don’t play no games when it comes to acting right.'

The child offered police a different version of events, telling them Peterson hit him on the face and that he feared further punishment for talking to the authorities about what happened


He said that he had been hit by a belt and that 'there are a lot of belts in Daddy’s closet.'

The boy also said that Peterson put leaves in his mouth when he was being hit with the switch while his pants were down and told his mother that his dad 'likes belts and switches' and 'has a whooping room.'

Peterson's lawyer, Rusty Hardin, confirmed the indictment to Fox 26 in Houston, which originally broke the story.

Hardin said Peterson is cooperating fully with investigators.The Montgomery County Sheriff's Department also confirmed the indictment and said it issued a warrant for Peterson's arrest on Friday.

'Adrian is a loving father who used his judgment as a parent to discipline his son,' according to Hardin's statement.

'He used the same kind of discipline with his child that he experienced as a child growing up in east Texas. Adrian has never hidden from what happened. He has cooperated fully with authorities and voluntarily testified before the grand jury for several hours.'

The statement adds that Peterson 'deeply regrets the unintentional injury'.

In fact, Peterson didn't think there was anything wrong with his actions when he was interviewed by police, telling them he only used 'whoopings' or spankings as a last result.

When asked if some of the marks on the boy's body were from an extension cord, he said 'Oh, no, I’d never hit my child with an extension cord. I remember how it feels to get whooped with an extension cord. I’d never do that', CBS reported.

After Peterson's four-year-old boy returned home to Minnesota, his mother took him to a doctor, who found a number of lacerations on this thighs, bruise-like marks on his lower back and buttocks and cuts on his hand

A police report obtained by a radio affiliate of CBS said the boy told the doctor that Peterson had hit him with a branch from a tree.

A doctor describes some of the marks as open wounds and called it 'child abuse'. Another agreed and called the cuts 'extensive'.

Peterson told investigators when they questioned him that he regarded the incident as a normal spanking and not excessive

A grand jury held in the summer had declined to charge him. A new one was impaneled in Montgomery County, Texas, and decided to pursue the indictment.

In a statement, the Vikings said it was deactivating Peterson for this Sunday's home game against the New England Patriots.

Peterson had plenty of fans and detractors on Twitter.

Some thought what he did was nothing out of the ordinary.






http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...boyfriend.html

[Toy Soldier]

Some thought that what he did - beating a 4 year old until he was covered in blood and bruises - was "nothing out of the ordinary". And we wonder why the world is full of such messed up adults.

[Kizzy]

It's child abuse, any attempt to dress it up as 'discipline' is pathetic and wrong.

[Urwreatha]

that's horrific. I know a few kids who need a slap on the wrist, but this is something else completely.

[Alf]

Beating a kid Black and Blue is not right and should definitely be a criminal offence.

However I do believe a smacked arse or a clip round the lug (if needed) is acceptable.

[Toy Soldier]

My daughter only has one friend who is regularly smacked / spanked, and that friend is the only one who regularly hits / deliberately hurts my daughter and her other friends when they don't do what she wants.

Violence breeds violence, full stop. If you don't have the smarts to negotiate with a child and get them to understand verbally without getting physical, then don't bother having them in the first place.

"In My Opinion"

[Pigeon Lady]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

My daughter only has one friend who is regularly smacked / spanked, and that friend is the only one who regularly hits / deliberately hurts my daughter and her other friends when they don't do what she wants.

Violence breeds violence, full stop. If you don't have the smarts to negotiate with a child and get them to understand verbally without getting physical, then don't bother having them in the first place.

"In My Opinion"

..what is so staggering about this as well is that another child of his was killed by an abusive boyfriend of his ex wife, which is also one of the things that drew me to this story because I remember the discussion on here at the time...

[ChristmasNeeve]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

My daughter only has one friend who is regularly smacked / spanked, and that friend is the only one who regularly hits / deliberately hurts my daughter and her other friends when they don't do what she wants.

Violence breeds violence, full stop. If you don't have the smarts to negotiate with a child and get them to understand verbally without getting physical, then don't bother having them in the first place.

"In My Opinion"

Exactly. Kids learn by example so you're basically teaching your child that hitting other people is ok and it's not.

[MTVN]

Looks like his career for the Vikings is probably over, he was looking like playing on Sunday but since the sponsors started talking the Vikes have barred him from all team activities until the outcome of this case. Massive fall from grace for him, not sure he will ever play in the league again depending on the outcome and whether any team takes a punt on him, there's people still playing who have done worse but he is already getting on a bit for a running back..

Not been a good couple of weeks for the NFL

[lostalex]

Violence never works. If violence is an effective tool to make people learn then why shouldn't employers be allowed to beat their employees?

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

My daughter only has one friend who is regularly smacked / spanked, and that friend is the only one who regularly hits / deliberately hurts my daughter and her other friends when they don't do what she wants.

Violence breeds violence, full stop. If you don't have the smarts to negotiate with a child and get them to understand verbally without getting physical, then don't bother having them in the first place.

"In My Opinion"

Pretty much this.

[lostalex]

There are also numerous studies that show children who have been hit as a form of discipline have lower IQs and more behavioral problems.

I'm not saying being hit makes you dumber, i'm saying children with disabilities experience more violence, and it's not right. You can't beat someone into being a better person, especially if they have a disability.

but even hitting smart kids is damaging, because it teaches them that violence is the solution to problems. Children learn how to be adults by their experiences with adults as children.

Just like Also men who beat women come from families where they had a father that beat their mother, and girls who are in abusive relationships grew up in households where they watched their mother being abused. Because it affects the subconscious, subconsciously they learn that it is normal.

We learn how to be adults from the adults we watched when we were children.

The older i get, the more i recognize how much like my dad i really am. I would never admit it when i was teenager.

[Livia]

Disgraceful.

[lostalex]

maybe we should follow the old testament's advice (both the torah and bible), and all disobedient children should be killed.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by lostalex

maybe we should follow the old testament's advice (both the torah and bible), and all disobedient children should be killed.

Maybe we shouldn't take it literally or they've got us all, one way or another.

[lostalex]

Originally Posted by Livia

Maybe we shouldn't take it literally or they've got us all, one way or another.

If we don't take it literally then how can we hold them accountable? It's a cop out to just let them get away with their violent beliefs if we just say "well maybe they don't believe all of the horrible hate filled violent things in their religion". It's important to hold people accountable for their beliefs.

Most KKK members don't go lynching black people, that doesn't mean that the KKK isn't racist.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by lostalex

If we don't take it literally then how can we hold them accountable? It's a cop out to just let them get away with their violent beliefs if we just say "well maybe they don't believe all of the horrible hate filled violent things in their religion". It's important to hold people accountable for their beliefs.

Most KKK members don't go lynching black people, that doesn't mean that the KKK isn't racist.

I don't personally know anyone, including devout people, who would advocate killing children - or anyone else for that matter. Religious people don't have the monopoly on killing... or on beating children.

[lostalex]

Originally Posted by Livia

I don't personally know anyone, including devout people, who would advocate killing children - or anyone else for that matter. Religious people don't have the monopoly on killing... or on beating children.

but they do have the monopoly on advocating it. Are there secular people who are abusive? yes. but they don't justify it with their secularism. They don't feel justified for doing it, and they were never Taught to do it in the name of secularism.

Unlike Xtians and Jews and Muslims who are taught that being abusive is okay and even required. They are taught from an early age to be submissive and that anyone who rebels deserves punishment.

[Kizzy]

I wonder who decides on which parts of holy books are to be taken literally?

[Livia]

Originally Posted by lostalex

but they do have the monopoly on advocating it. Are there secular people who are abusive? yes. but they don't justify it with their secularism. They don't feel justified for doing it, and they were never Taught to do it in the name of secularism.

Unlike Xtians and Jews and Muslims who are taught that being abusive is okay and even required. They are taught from an early age to be submissive and that anyone who rebels deserves punishment.

I was never taught that being abusive is okay - never, ever. So when you say "they", I'm not really sure who you're talking about. Certainly not me... and certainly not anyone I know.

[lostalex]

Originally Posted by Livia

I was never taught that being abusive is okay - never, ever. So when you say "they", I'm not really sure who you're talking about. Certainly not me... and certainly not anyone I know.

but you were taught that you should be submissive. and that people who don't submit deserve to be punished.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by lostalex

but you were taught that you should be submissive. and that people who don't submit deserve to be punished.

Do I seem submissive to you?

Really Alex, this is a thread about a moron who beat his child till he was bloody. It's got bugger-all to do with me or with religion. There's only one person to blame and that's the idiot who obviously doesn't know right from wrong.

[lostalex]

Originally Posted by Livia

Do I seem submissive to you?

Really Alex, this is a thread about a moron who beat his child till he was bloody. It's got bugger-all to do with me or with religion. There's only one person to blame and that's the idiot who obviously doesn't know right from wrong.

well i certainly agree with that point, that individuals should be held accountable for their own behavior. you won't hear me disagree with that point.

I was also talking about the larger issue of corporal punishment though, because others brought it up. that's how conversations work Livia, sometimes individual cases lead to larger philosophical issues. I thought we were talking in a more conversational tone, not just specifically about this one guy.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by lostalex

well i certainly agree with that point, that individuals should be held accountable for their own behavior. you won't hear me disagree with that point.

I was also talking about the larger issue of corporal punishment though, because others brought it up. that's how conversations work Livia, sometimes individual cases lead to larger philosophical issues. I thought we were talking in a more conversational tone, not just specifically about this one guy.

Well, beating a child the way he did should end up with him serving time for assault in my opinion. And the contention that people should believe that naughty children should be killed because it says so in the Torah is just ridiculous. As ridiculous as saying you should be stoned to death for planting two different crops in one field, or wearing two different cloths, or cutting your hair, or being gay are all equally ridiculous. These are ancient texts from a time when pagans were making blood sacrifices on a regular basis. It also says in the Torah that I can keep a slave so long as he is not a Jew. It might have been acceptable 5000 years ago but it's not acceptable today. Society moves on and so does religion and the interpretation of texts.

[lostalex]

Originally Posted by Livia

Well, beating a child the way he did should end up with him serving time for assault in my opinion. And the contention that people should believe that naughty children should be killed because it says so in the Torah is just ridiculous. As ridiculous as saying you should be stoned to death for planting two different crops in one field, or wearing two different cloths, or cutting your hair, or being gay are all equally ridiculous. These are ancient texts from a time when pagans were making blood sacrifices on a regular basis. It also says in the Torah that I can keep a slave so long as he is not a Jew. It might have been acceptable 5000 years ago but it's not acceptable today. Society moves on and so does religion and the interpretation of texts.

i think i agree with you, but i'm not sure.

you are discrediting ideologies, but are you also discrediting those ideologies completely/ or are you justifying those ideologies by saying that we shouldn't take them seriously? i'm confused.

It's a dangerous game saying that hate groups(religions) can get away with it because most people don't take them seriously, but some people do take them seriously.