According to this news article, the state of California is considering a bill to outlaw spanking (and all physical forms of punishment) for children up to 3 years of age.
Assemblywoman Sally Lieber, D-Mountain View, wants to outlaw spanking children up to 3 years old. If she succeeds, California would become the first state in the nation to explicitly ban parents from smacking their kids.
Making a swat on the behind a misdemeanor might seem a bit much for some — and the chances of the idea becoming law appear slim, at best — but Lieber begs to differ.
“I think it’s pretty hard to argue you need to beat a child 3 years old or younger,” Lieber said. “Is it OK to whip a 1-year-old or a 6-month-old or a newborn?”
The bill, which is still being drafted, will be written broadly, she added, prohibiting “any striking of a child, any corporal punishment, smacking, hitting, punching, any of that.” Lieber said it would be a misdemeanor, punishable by up to a year in jail or a fine up to $1,000, although a legal expert advising her on the proposal said first-time offenders would probably only have to attend parenting classes.
If this law passed and you lived in California, what would you do? Does the biblical support for corporal disciplining of children rise to the level of breaking the law to do it?
Aside from the well known axioms found in Proverbs, I am not aware of any verses that actually command corporal punishment. The Bible makes clear the benefits of corporal punishment and I agree; however, I don’t think those references call us to civil disobedience. While I would disagree strongly with this law, I would obey it (much like how I feel with many other laws of this land)!!!!
PS-I like how Assemblywoman Sally Lieber equates those of us who carry out corporal punishment with those who beat their children. Nice!
I agree with Pat. While I would strongly argue against this legislation and pray that it would be overturned, I would adhere to it.
If I lived in California and this passed, it might prompt me to move!!!!
I am curious as to what makes you guys feel that a proverb is not a “command?” What principle are you following that helps you make such distinctions? Is it simply a “recommendation” from the Lord (which is inspired and therefore absolute truth). When do I know if I am reading an “axiom” and when I am reading a “command?” It seems that if I follow your principle to its logical conclusion, then I should be able to throw out a great portion of the Old Testament (Wisdom Literature) as not binding on my conscience.
That being said, I agree that “spare the rod” does not equate with our modern definition of spanking, per se, but our modern definition of spanking could be a logical and reasonalbe applicaton of that verse.
As a parent, it facinates me how the modern evangelical culture has adopted a popular definition of discipline and neglected to ask what the Bible actually says about it.
To me the debate is this: What does the Bible say about discipline? Given that definition, does this new law contradict that? If not, it must be obeyed (Rom. 13). If so, then it must be rejected.
Jason,
You bring out an excellent point. Thank you for making me think about this in more depth.
I completely agree that spanking is a logical and reasonable application of Proverbs 13:24. However, I am not certain that discipline there is limited to only spanking. The debate is whether both Proverbs 13:24 and Romans 13 can be obeyed at the same time. My conclusion is that, while not optimal, both could be. You have definitely encouraged me to challenge that idea and research discipline in greater depth though.
This does lead to another great question. When is a Christian justified in breaking the law / Romans 13? An obvious example would be during early church persecution where the government demanded that believers deny Christ. That is, of course, a justified reason. Maybe this is a GraceTalk question….
Jason-
Pro 13:24 Whoever spares the rod hates his son, but he who loves him is diligent to discipline him.
I don’t see in this verse where I am commanded to spank my child. It is implied, but what is more clearly stated is that he who doesn’t discipline his child hates him. Discipline may take many forms, one of which may be corporal punishment. However, if the government forbade me from doing that, while strongly disagreeing, I would comply. Nonetheless, I would still discipline my child in other ways; thereby complying with the Scripture.
Perhaps you can help me grasp some of the nuances in the wisdom literature. I don’t mean to say that one has the ability to just pick what one wants to beleive. That is not correct. But, clearly, the wisdom literature is different from the other forms. For example, Pro 23:14 says, “If you strike him with the rod, you will save his soul from Sheol.” Does that mean if you carry out corporal punishment he will be saved? I would think most would say no. So, there must be some nuance associated with this type of literature. That was what I meant in the first sentence of my original post.
I agree with both of you from the outset that Proverbs 13:24 does not necessarily command us to spank our children. I stated that already. My post was not meant as a defense of the need for spanking. Yet I also do not disagree with anyone who would make that application because it seems to be implied by the verse.
Pat-
It seems from your post that we are in agreement on how Wisdom Literature should be interpreted. I agree that it is different in the sense that poetic language should not be interpreted in a woodenly literalistic way. It seems to me that you are saying that we should obey the principle. I agree whole heartedly.
The question seems to be: “Does the principle of discipline, which is clearly commanded in scripture, necessarily include corporal punishment?” (I am simply restating the question I posed in my previous post) If it does, then we as Christians would have to break the law in California because we must obey scripture.
David-
Because of the question raised immediately above, I am not sure that the California law and Prov. 13 are compatible. Further study is needed. I do know that the state law cannot supercede the law of God. When the state contradicts God’s law, we must disobey.
Come on, P. Diddy!! You do believe in the authority of Scripture, don’t you???!!!
Bulldawgy-
I trust that you aren’t implying that interpereting and understanding Scriptures based upon their literary style implies that one picks and chooses what one believes, right?!?
Yeah, one could argue that only Pat and David are properly recognizing the authority of Romans 13.
I haven’t quite decided where I come down on this.
I still don’t see where anyone has shown that corporal punishment is a command. Thus, I don’t see how Romans 13 bears on this situation. Anyone……??????????
Pat, I agree that no one has yet shown that corporal punishment is a command. But, doesn’t Romans 13 support your position (that if such a law were passed we would be obligated to obey it, even if we think it’s stupid)?
I don’t think anyone will show that corporal punishment is a command because it is not. As far as Romans 13 goes, in this case, we must obey it. But, hypothetically, if corporal punishment was commanded, then we would have to disobey the law and this would not be inconsistent with Romans 13. Romans 13 does not teach us to sin against the law of God in favor of obeying government.
Absolutely!