| Abstrakt: |
The corporal punishment of children has become a topic of heated social and political debate in recent years. In this paper, I examine one facet of this broader debate, namely, competing presuppositions about religiously legitimated corporal punishment. First, I examine social scientific critiques of conservative religious rationales for physical punishment. These scholars regard theologically legitimated corporal punishment as (1) unloving and austere, (2) abusive and indiscriminantly violent, and (3) psychosocially damaging to children. Then, I contrast this set of presuppositions with that embraced by prominent conservative Protestant parenting specialists, who (1) believe a restricted reliance on corporal punishment is an expression of parental love and concern, (2) contend that corporal punishment can be administered in a deliberate and non-abusive fashion, and (3) claim that corporal punishment need not impair a child's psychosocial development. I conclude by discussing several promising directions for future research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
