Posted on 09/18/2014 6:42:59 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Beguiled once again from her purpose — to apply to Tom Sawyer’s jam-stealing rump the well-deserved business end of her switch — Aunt Polly falls to ruminating: “Every time I let him off, my conscience does hurt me so, and every time I hit him my old heart most breaks.”
Mark Twain is careful to end The Adventures of Tom Sawyer while Tom is still a boy — “the story could not go much further without becoming the history of a man,” he warns — but with Tom encouraging his pal Huck Finn to quit his ragamuffin ways and return to the care of the Widow Douglas, we might reasonably conclude that Aunt Polly’s mission civilisatrice has succeeded.
In modern-day Missouri, Aunt Polly would likely be in prison for child abuse. That observation is not intended to be a defense of Adrian Peterson, the Minnesota Vikings running back facing two years in prison for overzealously disciplining his four-year-old son, also with a switch. But the fact that Peterson’s parenting is a subject of national comment is a thoroughly 21st-century development.
The media has been uniformly delighted to flaunt its righteousness. Rolling Stone’s Kenneth Arthur wrote that, if NFL commissioner Roger Goodell would not act, the Vikings franchise would not suspend Peterson, and coach Mike Zimmer would not bench Peterson, then Peterson should “do what’s right” and bench himself (the Vikings have since suspended him). At the Boston Globe’s website, Jordan Lebeau calls the new generation aux armes, writing, apropos the many childhood thrashings of yesteryear, “Maybe enough is enough. Maybe we are smarter than our grandmothers. Maybe we can be.” And at the Daily Beast, Amanda Marcotte contributes a representative piece entitled, “The Adrian Peterson Beating and the Christian Right’s Love of Corporal Punishment.”
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
AP is NFL’s Winston Smith
I wouldn’t use corporal punishment but I would not criticize a parent who as a last resort occasionally spanks a child. However, Adrian Peterson beat his child (one of many that he does not have custody of) with an object that broke the skin in multiple places - including the genitals - and the wounds were still evident a week later. Child abuse, plain and simple. Throw him in prison.
Someone should explain to the author it is better to remain silent and allow others to speculate about the stupidity of the author, then to talk and confirm everybody’s suspicions.
Apparently Ian didn’t see the pics in which the stripes on that boy’s legs look like results of a slave whipping.
Inclined to agree. What could a four-year-old have done to deserve such a beating?
Last year, Peterson was showered with sympathy after one of his children, a 2-year-old boy, was killed, allegedly at the hands of the mother's boyfriend. Peterson visited the child, who was on life support.
"I'm going to miss him," he told ESPN. "I kept telling him, 'I'm sorry.' "
We then discovered that Peterson only learned of the child's existence a few weeks earlier. And what was too insensitive to say then should be said now: How much could you miss him? And how might that tragedy not have happened if you'd been in the child's life the way a father should be?
Probably refused to call him “daddy”.
The narrow issue: Adrian Peterson did go over the top and use WAY too much force on a four-year old IMO.
The broader issue: The usual suspects have glommed onto this to push their long-coveted goal of Swedish-style anti-spanking legislation.
Particularly since “spare the rod and spoil the child” thinking comes out of that unenlightened, backwards Bible and all.
Just my humble opinions here. Adrienne Peterson appears to have injured a child who was too young to learn any lesson from such punishment. Probably severely enough that he should have been charged.
But he also appears to have believed it was the right thing to do. Was it malice or just ignorance? I think the latter.
As for the NFL I think it’s barely their business, and it’s really upsetting that people think it’s appropriate to destroy these people’s incomes so their families (the victims) will suffer.
Where did this idea come from that it is in any way good to stop a domestic abuser from having a job?
Thanks! You saved me some time!!!!
Surely you jest. Of course it is the NFL's and the owner's business. Peterson is an employee whose conduct reflects poorly on the enterprise. No doubt his contract has a moral's clause. When you violate the conditions of employment, the employer has the right to discipline or fire you.
Where did this idea come from that it is in any way good to stop a domestic abuser from having a job?
Peterson can apply for any job he wants. His present employer can deem him a liability and fire him. Why should the employer tolerate someone who tarnishes their product?
When Anheuser-Busch talks, the NFL listens.
And well they should. He who pays the piper calls the tune.
When A-B fires every employee accused of domestics violence, child abuse, and DWI I might listen, but until then they are hypocrites.
Damned if you do or don’t:
You handle it and the kid calls the cops-you go to jail.
You call the cops and a family member gets shot or tased.
FWIW,what AP did was child abuse.
So how would you handle DUIs? People who lose the ability to drive often lose their jobs,too.
The NFL’s product is its players. If any other company’s product maimed and disfigured 4 year-old children, they’d stop producing it.
A person with a DUI potentially will kill someone by driving. If they can get to work they will not be fired.
An NFL player cannot abuse his wife or kids while on the job.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.