To train up a child
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 2 Votes - 3 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
20-11-2013, 01:35 PM
RE: To train up a child
(20-11-2013 12:34 PM)guitar_nut Wrote:  The martyr act is getting old.

PJ, here's a quick lesson in communication:
"Hi everyone. I actually used this book's methods on my children. I know they're controversial; before you jump to conclusions (which is understandable considering the subject matter), here's what I didn't do... and here's what I did do, methods I found to be successful."

You ain't dumb. You knew that if you said you used this controversial book's methods and didn't specify which methods you used, you'd get backlash... after which you could cry out about how you've been picked on. Sadcryface2

Clearly you didn't read most of the thread. There were about 20 "we don't want to hear it... here are eight sentences from the book that if you do them you should go to jail". I will reiterate, we do/did most of what the Pearls did. Disclaimers were required naturally.

Um, do I need to cry out about being picked on as a fundamentalist who frequents an atheist forum? I do not. I am continuing to point out that by behaving exactly as the Bible predicts you would behave, you are affirming Bible truth. DESPITE THIS FACT, y'all behave the same way over and again rather than taking away the Christians' credence.

When Jesus was on the Earth, I don't know if I would have worshiped Him or mocked Him if I was present. But I do know I'm sensitive to when people behave vilely to others who try to show them compassion or knowledge. I'm not saying that's what you're doing here, rather I'm challenging you to read my recent lengthy post and judge the content--rather than the presentation.

Thanks.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-11-2013, 01:40 PM
RE: To train up a child
I can't believe that I am joining the fray. I've learned to stay away from the insane lately but.....

Two things (beyond the obvious advocating of child abuse) that also stand out for me against the "Pearl Method" are:

(1) the call for obedience as if this was the penultimate virtue. Where in the world would we be if everyone was obedient? There always needs to be some challenge to the rules, to the prevailing beliefs, to authority. Without some degree of challenge society stagnates into lets say "Dark Ages"? OFC anarchy is not what I am advocating but you need a little rebellion. There wouldn't be a USA without rebellion, equal rights, voting rights, all things (and I'm not even mentioning the entire body of scientific knowledge) that wouldn't have changed if everyone toed the line.

(2) One system for all children. That is complete and utter garbage. Before I had kids, I would have perhaps been a proponent of strict rules and equity (its how I was brought up so why shouldn't it work?). Now with two kids I can't believe how wrong I started out being and how much I've had to change. My youngest is absolutely brilliant, scary smart but he has ADHD. A strict regimented discipline system does not work with him. A normal reward and consequence system doesn't work with him. If I was uber strict with him he would end up hating me his entire life and I would lose one of the greatest opportunities we have in our time all for the sake of obedience. I've had to adapt (still a work in process as I still need to step back once in a while) to him. My daughter on the other hand just a normal kid but she has her quirks too. Mealtimes are a real challenge as she doesn't like any food outside a small list of items. She requires a different set of rewards and consequences.

I hope some DA finally gets a set and goes after the Pearls.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like devilsadvoc8's post
20-11-2013, 01:46 PM
RE: To train up a child
(20-11-2013 01:40 PM)devilsadvoc8 Wrote:  I can't believe that I am joining the fray. I've learned to stay away from the insane lately but.....

Two things (beyond the obvious advocating of child abuse) that also stand out for me against the "Pearl Method" are:

(1) the call for obedience as if this was the penultimate virtue. Where in the world would we be if everyone was obedient? There always needs to be some challenge to the rules, to the prevailing beliefs, to authority. Without some degree of challenge society stagnates into lets say "Dark Ages"? OFC anarchy is not what I am advocating but you need a little rebellion. There wouldn't be a USA without rebellion, equal rights, voting rights, all things (and I'm not even mentioning the entire body of scientific knowledge) that wouldn't have changed if everyone toed the line.

(2) One system for all children. That is complete and utter garbage. Before I had kids, I would have perhaps been a proponent of strict rules and equity (its how I was brought up so why shouldn't it work?). Now with two kids I can't believe how wrong I started out being and how much I've had to change. My youngest is absolutely brilliant, scary smart but he has ADHD. A strict regimented discipline system does not work with him. A normal reward and consequence system doesn't work with him. If I was uber strict with him he would end up hating me his entire life and I would lose one of the greatest opportunities we have in our time all for the sake of obedience. I've had to adapt (still a work in process as I still need to step back once in a while) to him. My daughter on the other hand just a normal kid but she has her quirks too. Mealtimes are a real challenge as she doesn't like any food outside a small list of items. She requires a different set of rewards and consequences.

I hope some DA finally gets a set and goes after the Pearls.

Training is useful but not just for pure obedience or submission. Read my post again about child training in action. First, there's a reason that is life-saving for certain obedience actions.

Second, training is not a one-size-fits-all program. There is NO book, even the Bible, that can tell you everything about raising children. The Bible indicates there is struggle and joy both involved...

Anyone who says one training fits all children has 1 or fewer children!

But general principles apply to training, knowledge and education.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-11-2013, 01:49 PM
RE: To train up a child
(19-11-2013 02:43 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  I do pretty much everything the Pearls do and did, and my children are not abused.

(20-11-2013 12:33 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  I apply many of their techniques but not to the degree to which they do--they are WAY beyond what many or most Christians do.
Which one is it? You're so full of crap!

(20-11-2013 12:33 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  First again, do take personal stock, folks. I'm most surprised that some of you react so strongly to this concept of withholding food. Really? None of you had atheist parents who when you refused to eat the hot dog mom made for dinner, said, "Sit there and eat it and learn some respect--people are starving in Africa" or even "This goes in the fridge now and in the microwave for you in an hour when you're really hungry, our home is not a restaurant and we're all eating hot dogs tonight…"?
How is this withholding food?

(20-11-2013 12:33 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  So, let's start with very young child "training". TRAINING, not discipline or punishment. I think the Pearls say six months, but again...
Training is for animals. Love and education are for kids.

(20-11-2013 12:33 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  My son is eleven months old. He can't communicate much verbally but he can crawl and walk some. Back in the day, we have a VCR underneath the living room TV on the carpeted floor. He likes the flashing lights, the noises, the warmth. He crawls toward it. Our ideal moment to begin training! We can move the electrical equipment higher or use an opportunity or both?

Mom and I say, "No touch" with a bright, pleasant voice. Think Barbara Woodhouse saying "walkies!" No touch! No touch, son! Happy, soft, bright, not angry or abusive.

My boy regards us for a moment as we are near him and he is near the VCR. Wheels turn in his head. He reaches out to touch the VCR then hesitates. "No touch!" we say with a smile. He touches. We kill him! No...! Just foolin’ round with you people.

Here's what we did back then...

We take his tiny 11-year old precious hand gently in one of our hands. With the other we flick the soft skin that webs between his thumb and forefinger. Like the way you flick an "okay" sign made with a thumb and one finger on your hand, like you're propelling a marble--only far gentler.

He shouts in pain!  No, it wasn't nearly enough to cause discomfort. It's merely a stimulus.

We say no touch, he reaches for the VCR again and we flick again. No touch! Walkies!
Just move the VCR up out of reach. Rolleyes When he is old enough to understand the danger, then you can take the opportunity for education and move it back down. No flicking necessary. The flicking isn't the worst thing in the world, but it's also a completely unnecessary infliction of some pain. So why do it when there are other ways?

(20-11-2013 12:33 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  Just as important--and I apologize for jumping ahead in my story--we could say "Stop" to our children while they walked and they--stopped. Several times they were saved from stepping in front of cars and other vehicles when we were carrying groceries or whatever.

Training a child isn't for everyone at every level--but it can be a matter of life or death.
Teaching them to obey "stop" is useful, but when it comes to traffic or other dangers, I would never leave the matter up to obedience when they are that small. I would hold their hands. If I couldn't carry groceries and do that to protect them, then the groceries could wait.

"Religion has caused more misery to all of mankind in every stage of human history than any other single idea." --Madalyn Murray O'Hair
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Impulse's post
20-11-2013, 01:52 PM
RE: To train up a child
(20-11-2013 12:54 PM)Cathym112 Wrote:  http://homeschoolersanonymous.wordpress....-disaster/

Interesting view from a child who grew up with this discipline

I read that entire blog. Mistakes were made. The "break their will when they're two years old" is not meant for withholding food, nor does it take overnight. It takes about 10 minutes for a typical child. We have to see all the Bible in context. It says, "Fathers, do not exasperate your children" in Paul's epistles. Several day food punishment for a two-year-old does sound bizarre and excessive.

I'm not sure I want to go further with this point until people actually respond to my training-an-11-month-old post.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-11-2013, 02:02 PM
RE: To train up a child
(20-11-2013 02:14 AM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  My two cents worth on this very important topic…

Power in Families

In the bible, people are ordered to obey God, and punished if they don’t. In Ephesians 6:1, Paul states that children should obey their parents, as if it were a universal and infallible truth. It’s no surprise that parents feel justified in lording it over their own children, and that the abuse of power is a serious issue in many fundamentalist families.

Smart parents know that good parenting requires thought and effort. Interactions with children need to be perceptive, individualized, and developmentally appropriate. Fundamentalist parents often avoid the effort and complexity of this responsibility. Rather, doctrinal rules are applied, and fear of punishment used for control. The family is deprived of the constructive process of developing rules, values, and mores. Children can fail to learn how to take on the personal responsibility of making choices about life issues later in life.

Physical and Sexual Abuse

Physical punishment is sanctioned in the bible:
“ He that spareth his rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes.” (Proverbs 13:24, KJV.)

Some parents take this to extremes, believing it’s necessary to break the will of their children to gain their respect and obedience. This dictatorial attitude is typically patriarchal, and reliance is often placed upon Paul’s mantras on women and children for justification.

Some fundamentalist wives have difficulty stopping the cycle of physical abuse in their marital relationships because of biblical beliefs about marriage and sex-role stereotypes.

Sexual abuse occurs in many strictly religious families, for a number of complex reasons. In my opinion fundamentalist beliefs can inhibit true emotional development and compromise communication skills. An inability to communicate in a mature fashion impairs normal adult-to-adult sexual intimacy; which may be why some adults turn to children for sexual gratification. This fits with the fact that pedophiles are often emotionally immature.

The fundamentalist mother, often taught to treat her husband like a little god, is less likely to question or interfere with the father’s behavior, or report him to the appropriate authorities.

Children are told to be obedient and to revere their parents, especially their fathers, so they’re more vulnerable and less likely to seek help.

Religion Replacing Love

There’s nothing more crucial to a child’s emotional development than natural love and affection from parents and family. Some parents use religion to compensate for what’s lacking in their own repertoire of parenting skills. Not good at expressing love or even affection, they use prayer as a substitute, presuming their children will benefit from a “personal relationship with Jesus,” and in doing so push them away. Children feel rejected, as they assume they aren’t good enough for their parents. The faith is at fault, because it over emphasizes the relationship with God, and too often downplays the importance of interpersonal love.

As a consequence, fundamentalist families can be unaffectionate, lacking fun, spontaneity and laughter. There isn't enough “realness” and self-confidence to freely give the hugs, compliments, and unconditional love that children so desperately crave and need. Individuals become burdened with self-esteem issues and difficulty expressing their own affection for others.

“Un-Christian” Emotions

In many fundamentalist families, troubling “un-Christian” emotions such as anger or frustration are denied. People are told to pray, rather than discuss issues. The emphasis is on being “right with God” and “good” according to the bible, rather than allowing individuals to express what they intuitively feel. “Emotionality” is suspect, and there are always “higher” concerns than personal feelings. As a consequence, people struggle to reconcile their need for love and recognition with an acute feeling of shame whenever they, rather than God, are the focus of attention. They avoid dealing with real issues until the point is reached when emotions boil over. Then there are explosions of anger, followed by intense feelings of guilt, but a refusal to talk about what happened. The cycle is often repeated, producing a family of deeply emotionally scarred, angry, poorly self-expressed people.

Mark, I have to play the context card here again, especially since some of what you wrote was fairly dismissive and even patronizing on this important subject. There are PhD's who spank their children and otherwise discipline them, not in anger, but with corrective training in mind--and their better good.

Note this quote of yours:

"Smart parents know that good parenting requires thought and effort. Interactions with children need to be perceptive, individualized, and developmentally appropriate. Fundamentalist parents often avoid the effort and complexity of this responsibility. Rather, doctrinal rules are applied, and fear of punishment used for control. The family is deprived of the constructive process of developing rules, values, and mores. Children can fail to learn how to take on the personal responsibility of making choices about life issues later in life."

I can almost buy it all if the child is four or five years old. Now, however, I'm imagining a two-year-old Napolean screaming their head off at the mall while the parents are absolutely mortified. And then you say, "Let's discuss this, my child. We need to set a stage for later life decisions."

Yes, the weak-willed and uncaring parent threatens their child with physical force or implied threat of same. So how about it? How did you handle your two-year-olds at the mall? "Sit down and be quiet. Don't make me lose my temper. I'm going to count to three, don't let me get past two..."

We never brought tyrants to the mall. We brought respectful, thoughtful, playful, mostly obedient children. Once they were past a year old, we never had to leave a theatre or mall because of a tantrum. We could bring the children to church without sending them to Sunday School. They'd sit and listen and we could ask them their perceptions of the sermon after and hear their input and questions.

Because they were trained and instructed, I could have adult conversations on a wide variety of topics with my kids when they were five--and hear thoughtful, intelligent responses after.

The Pearls and families (somewhat) like them don't have black sheep children. They don't have "terrible twos" like everyone else or willful teens who abuse themselves, their parents and others.

I'm being serious--I'm not baiting you or mocking you. I know all kinds of loving, thoughtful parents who do "time out" and etc. when the kids are older. How did you handle the two-year-olds at the mall. We didn't really need to, nor did they try to handle us!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-11-2013, 02:12 PM
RE: To train up a child
(20-11-2013 01:49 PM)Impulse Wrote:  
(19-11-2013 02:43 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  I do pretty much everything the Pearls do and did, and my children are not abused.

(20-11-2013 12:33 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  I apply many of their techniques but not to the degree to which they do--they are WAY beyond what many or most Christians do.
Which one is it? You're so full of crap!

(20-11-2013 12:33 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  First again, do take personal stock, folks. I'm most surprised that some of you react so strongly to this concept of withholding food. Really? None of you had atheist parents who when you refused to eat the hot dog mom made for dinner, said, "Sit there and eat it and learn some respect--people are starving in Africa" or even "This goes in the fridge now and in the microwave for you in an hour when you're really hungry, our home is not a restaurant and we're all eating hot dogs tonight…"?
How is this withholding food?

(20-11-2013 12:33 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  So, let's start with very young child "training". TRAINING, not discipline or punishment. I think the Pearls say six months, but again...
Training is for animals. Love and education are for kids.

(20-11-2013 12:33 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  My son is eleven months old. He can't communicate much verbally but he can crawl and walk some. Back in the day, we have a VCR underneath the living room TV on the carpeted floor. He likes the flashing lights, the noises, the warmth. He crawls toward it. Our ideal moment to begin training! We can move the electrical equipment higher or use an opportunity or both?

Mom and I say, "No touch" with a bright, pleasant voice. Think Barbara Woodhouse saying "walkies!" No touch! No touch, son! Happy, soft, bright, not angry or abusive.

My boy regards us for a moment as we are near him and he is near the VCR. Wheels turn in his head. He reaches out to touch the VCR then hesitates. "No touch!" we say with a smile. He touches. We kill him! No...! Just foolin’ round with you people.

Here's what we did back then...

We take his tiny 11-year old precious hand gently in one of our hands. With the other we flick the soft skin that webs between his thumb and forefinger. Like the way you flick an "okay" sign made with a thumb and one finger on your hand, like you're propelling a marble--only far gentler.

He shouts in pain!  No, it wasn't nearly enough to cause discomfort. It's merely a stimulus.

We say no touch, he reaches for the VCR again and we flick again. No touch! Walkies!
Just move the VCR up out of reach. Rolleyes When he is old enough to understand the danger, then you can take the opportunity for education and move it back down. No flicking necessary. The flicking isn't the worst thing in the world, but it's also a completely unnecessary infliction of some pain. So why do it when there are other ways?

(20-11-2013 12:33 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  Just as important--and I apologize for jumping ahead in my story--we could say "Stop" to our children while they walked and they--stopped. Several times they were saved from stepping in front of cars and other vehicles when we were carrying groceries or whatever.

Training a child isn't for everyone at every level--but it can be a matter of life or death.
Teaching them to obey "stop" is useful, but when it comes to traffic or other dangers, I would never leave the matter up to obedience when they are that small. I would hold their hands. If I couldn't carry groceries and do that to protect them, then the groceries could wait.

1. There was no pain. The child was not hurt. There was a stimulus. We do not cause children 11 months old to feel pain. No.

2. Yes, you have me moving the VCR. Do I move the entire contents of my childless friends' homes when I visit? We never had to childproof our home because we home proofed our children, other, again, then the obvious and necessary like medicines and household chemicals.

3. I KNEW someone would tell me how virtuous they were in that the groceries weren't as important as the children. Exactly what I thought as I typed it.

In real life, hands slip and kids--Christian kids--aren't on leashes, like the disgusting, dog-like leashes parents who don't train feel compelled to bring to public places. My kids are everything to me. When younger, they spent most of their time in public in my arms or perched between my shoulders. But I'm telling you the couple of times there was risk the risk was ended instantly with a verbal--wait for it--wait for it--here it comes--a verbal command.

Obedience has to do with obeying commands. My children were told the necessity of obeying "stop" had to do with life and death situations in different cases. Unlike other children, they stopped.

At the mall, the children who cling tightly to their parents crave attention. My kids always felt secure and loved, so they could be steps ahead. Christian children who are trained are often far ahead. You could say "Stop when you get to X" or "Yes, you can go on ahead and wait for me at the corner of this block" once they understood and had been trained in appropriate responses to strangers and outside threats from kidnappers and etc.

Children who are trained, including versions of the Pearl methods, are comfortable obeying commands. There were benefits obeying syllabi and instructions in school. There were benefits in being respectful to authority instead of filled with bitterness and anger. And there was plain old goodness. My son just got his driver's license and I feel so very secure in his passenger seat because he is a defensive, courteous, calm, careful vehicle operator. But insurance is high for teens because they "naturally" take risks. To some extent, like neurology and brain chemistry, they do.

But we did not raise "natural animals". We raised young adults.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-11-2013, 02:17 PM
RE: To train up a child
(20-11-2013 01:35 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  Clearly you didn't read most of the thread. There were about 20 "we don't want to hear it... here are eight sentences from the book that if you do them you should go to jail". I will reiterate, we do/did most of what the Pearls did. Disclaimers were required naturally.

Here are some of the questions you ignored:

Does it say to beat them with a plastic tube, or not? Does it say to do what the blogger quoted, or not? Is the blogger misquoting the book?
What do define abuse as then? I would like to hear your definition.
What of their techniques did you use?
What is your definition of abuse?
So you beat them with a plastic hose? You withheld food?


(20-11-2013 01:35 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  Um, do I need to cry out about being picked on as a fundamentalist who frequents an atheist forum? I do not.

You merely want to hurl invective at me on a rhetorical basis.
There is so much I'd like to share but it continues to sound like a show trial here from 1930's Russia


(20-11-2013 01:35 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  I am continuing to point out that by behaving exactly as the Bible predicts you would behave, you are affirming Bible truth.

Did people behave that way before the bible? Do you think people lashed out at beliefs they did not share, argued and taunted their opposition, and criticized others before biblical times? If so, that's not much of a prediction.

Second post coming regarding the book...

If Jesus died for our sins, why is there still sin? If man was created from dust, why is there still dust? If Americans came from Europe, why are there still Europeans?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-11-2013, 02:25 PM
RE: To train up a child
(20-11-2013 02:17 PM)guitar_nut Wrote:  
(20-11-2013 01:35 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  Clearly you didn't read most of the thread. There were about 20 "we don't want to hear it... here are eight sentences from the book that if you do them you should go to jail". I will reiterate, we do/did most of what the Pearls did. Disclaimers were required naturally.

Here are some of the questions you ignored:

Does it say to beat them with a plastic tube, or not? Does it say to do what the blogger quoted, or not? Is the blogger misquoting the book?
What do define abuse as then? I would like to hear your definition.
What of their techniques did you use?
What is your definition of abuse?
So you beat them with a plastic hose? You withheld food?


(20-11-2013 01:35 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  Um, do I need to cry out about being picked on as a fundamentalist who frequents an atheist forum? I do not.

You merely want to hurl invective at me on a rhetorical basis.
There is so much I'd like to share but it continues to sound like a show trial here from 1930's Russia


(20-11-2013 01:35 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  I am continuing to point out that by behaving exactly as the Bible predicts you would behave, you are affirming Bible truth.

Did people behave that way before the bible? Do you think people lashed out at beliefs they did not share, argued and taunted their opposition, and criticized others before biblical times? If so, that's not much of a prediction.

Second post coming regarding the book...

I neither ignored the questions nor do I back down regarding the incensed paraoxyms atheists went into when I suggested I both followed the Pearl's more biblical methods and saw good fruit with my kids.

And the biblical prediction is that people would lash out in anger against goodness, moral uprightness, biblical precepts, etc. You are being disingenuous. There's no reason--none--for me to say to someone in a non passive agressive manner, "God loves you" and get back the "f God concept, f you pj, f your mother, I hate you, you're a jerk" - no reason at all.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-11-2013, 02:34 PM
RE: To train up a child
Here's what I have a problem with in the book. These are direct citations:

When the baby bit, she pulled hair (an alternative has to be sought for baldheaded babies). Understand, the baby is not being punished, just conditioned.
Conditioned. Punished. It's semantics. It's an infant, and you are causing it deliberate pain. I wonder what the 'alternative' is for bald headed babies... Unsure

Remember, Pearl does not advocate striking with the hand (so PJ's finger flick is not following the rules). Hands are for love and kindness, thus his instructions to use a rod to inflict pain. Yes, pain is the actual word.

At four months she was too unknowing to be punished for disobedience. But for her own good, we attempted to train her not to climb the stairs by coordinating the voice command of "No" with little spats on the bare legs. The switch was a twelve-inch long, one-eighth-inch diameter sprig from a willow tree.
Again, using pain as a training stimulus on a 4 month old. Is this necessary? How useful is this, really?

She then administers about ten slow, patient licks on his bare legs. He cries in pain. If he continues to show defiance by jerking around and defending himself, or by expressing anger, then she will wait a moment and again lecture him and again spank him. When it is obvious he is totally broken, she will hand him the rag and very calmly say, "Johnny, clean up your mess."
Inflict pain until 'totally broken.'

After about ten acts of stubborn defiance, followed by ten switchings, he surrendered his will to one higher than himself.
Dominance through pain.

Show them examples. Expose them to death--the death of a pet, or an accident victim. This must be done with calm, confident reverence, not with fear. Don't be excessive. One or two examples to a three-year-old is enough.
Show a three-year-old an accident victim. Did you do this?

If he is roughed-up by his peers, rejoice; he is learning early about the real world. Don't make a sissy out of him. If you jump to his defense every time another child takes away a toy, pushes your child down, or even pops him in the nose, you will rear a social crybaby.
I can name several kids I went to high school with who were mercilessly picked on and harmed by bigger kids. Two committed suicide. What did they learn? That a pack of 200 pound meat heads will always dominate a small skinny kid. There are some battles kids cannot win and should not have to fight alone.

And finally, Mr. Pearl has no formal degree or training in child development. PJ, I bet you didn't show your toddler an accident victim or hit them with a switch 100 times (ten sets of ten, people) to 'break' them. I bet if your kid got beat up every week for years (happened at my school), you wouldn't tell him to 'toughen up.'

Come on... this book has some serious flaws, the least of which is the fact that Pearl has no formal training in child psychology. Don't be so obtuse.

If Jesus died for our sins, why is there still sin? If man was created from dust, why is there still dust? If Americans came from Europe, why are there still Europeans?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like guitar_nut's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: