Time-out in gentle parenting: Why it is no sin

 Many parents think time-out is a form of punishment for children. In fact, it is something entirely different, namely a respite for parents, meaning setting some time alone for you away from child. It is taking a breather.

It says in 1 Thessalonians 5:22 KJV:

Abstain from all appearance of evil.

The Greek root word translated "appearance" is εἷδος is a mistranslation in the King James Version, with God's unblemished Word not being the English translations, but the Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic text. The word actually translates to "form". What is evil? Everything in the Bible stated as such, with this verse stressing primary prevention in this context, meaning the primary prevention of sin, meaning abuse, meaning child abuse. This means do everything you can to avoid even the appearance of temptation, meaning if you commit a physical or sexual attack against a child, all your negligence in taking responsibility and care for aggressive parent instincts will be counted as part of the crime, as guilty intent (mens rea) leading to/guided by guilty action (actus reus). The moment you take the first steps to commit any moral crime against a child, it is as if you have already committed the atrocity, and are deserving of punishment merely for attempt.

Parents are not computer machines that you just punch a combination into them. They are real people, and many times, abuse comes from parents overburdening themselves, and refusing to take a break. This can also be the case with sexual abuse, in which pro-social fantasy, including about one's own child.

Refusing leisure, and pushing yourself, can in fact be a moral crime, meaning entitlement, if it leads to child abuse. It says in Colossians 3:21 KJV:

Fathers, provoke not your children to anger, lest they become discouraged.

The Greek root word translated "provoke...to anger" is ερεθιζο (Latin: erethizo) and refers to legal damages, meaning the slightest of personal slights imposed by an adult, with intent to control, demand, or punishment. Parental entitlement, including adult sexual orientation due to a diagnosis of pedophilia, is largely driven by daily stressors, mixed with trauma. Time-out from stress can include reading a book, searching images on the Internet, self-stimulating oneself (even to thoughts of their own child).

Sometimes, refusal to rest is entitlement. As a parent, you need to get some rest, and find some time away from your child. Just let the kids run free, and you'll know if something is up. They might come to you. The depraved and entitled parents who provoke children will BURN! Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand!

Why I do not deserve respect from children

 Many parents say that children should respect parents, and that children owe them respect. This is a common abusive belief among all adults in this country, and one that continues to subjugate children. The fact of the matter is that parents do not deserve respect. It must be earned.

Every single adult is guilty for their existence in relation to children, and is deserving of nothing but DEATH and DESTRUCTION merely for existing in relation to children. Only a few American parents comply with God's Law on parenting, and the rest will be tormented forever and ever in Hell. 

The Greek root word that denotes parental entitlement is πλεονέκτης (Latin: pleonektes) and refers to not only wanting things, but wanting them to the point of seeking to impose said want on a child, leading to theft/abuse. Entitlement in parenting is demanding "I am the parent, and I deserve respect". The moment you defend that entitlement. 

It says in Ephesians 6:1-4

Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right. Honor thy father and mother, as this is the first commandment with promise; May it be well with thee, and thou mayest live long upon the earth. And, ye fathers, provoke not your children to wrath, lest they become discouraged.

The Greek root word "obey" is υπακουο (Latin: hupakouo) and refers to a child resting securely in care and support of parents, owing nothing in return, with your child receiving everything they need, including attachment needs (ex. walk in the park, etc), without needing to give back to parents, but nonetheless complying with parental directives because they trust parents. This word denotes more what the parent should do. The idea is to be a best friend, a pal, to your child, albeit their more mature and responsible friend, but with you being an enemy of a child, just as mankind is the enemy of God, and must reconcile through atonement, with parents reconciling themselves with their children through atonement, meaning verbal and non-verbal apology, with "non-verbal apology" means not harming the child again, or else trying not to in any discernable way.

Parents are friends of their children, but cannot possibly assume solely on their own head knowledge what their child needs. We as adults no longer remember what it is like to be a child. "Enemy" refers to collective individual guilt, meaning we all have adults have abused children, by God's standards, and have been since the beginning of time, with things actually getting worse.

Parenting in ancient Israel was attachment-based in terms of orientation, with the Greek root word "nurture" being παιδεία (Latin: paideia) and refers to co-regulation, meaning centering one's entitled attitudes and controlling aggression towards children in a way that makes it safe for them to open up about any issue, in the form of pro-social pedophilia, in siphon format, meaning parents channeling their children's excitement and rambunctiousness to the presence of parents, by acting as a friend to confide in. The Greek root word translated "admonition" is νουθεσία (Latin: nouthesia) and refers to setting boundaries, usually in the negative - think the word "no", and nothing but trust in parents to back it up. This concept is weighed by the Greek root word παροργιζο (Latin: parorgizo) and refers to child abuse defined under Divine Jurisprudence, meaning damages, meaning the slightest of personal slights against a child. Appropriate limit setting is like when a friend asks to borrow your car, to say "no, I need it to get to work" and because you earned a friendship with your friend, that boundary being set does not tear apart the friendship in any way.

Parenting was attachment-based in ancient Hebrew culture, meaning children remained close to mother until late in childhood. There was no spanking during that time. Corporal punishment was judicial in nature in ancient Israel, or not at all. Parents didn't demand respect, but were non-violent enough to earn closeness to children, meaning snuggling with mom, being held on her back in a papoose bag, and so forth. Punishment was only allowed as a sentence for a crime, and never involved physical violence in the Early Christian churches.

A parent's best friend is their child, always. However, if you mzke 

What is lawful child abuse? What is lawful trauma?

Many people think only certain adults abuse children. This is not true. Statistics from the Family Research Laboratory at the University of New Hampshire, lead by Dr. Elizabeth Gershoff, 94% of parents, at the very least, abuse children. 70% of adults support spanking children. Radio recordings at the same university, involving bugging homes of mothers, show that parents under-report how often they batter their children, meaning "three times a week" could mean 3 times per day with a toddler. Frequent spanking of a child that young has actually been linked to back problems, at least later in life. Lawful child abuse is a real problem in this country.

I only remember getting spanked a few times, and only "out of love". It was perceived as trauma bonding on the part of my abusive father. That's how most lawful abuse is - you have the good memories and the bad, and then they mix, and then you feel guilty for even naming yourself a victim. If you are self-diagnosed as a pedophile, it is a person-to-person trauma, meaning it is like factitious disorder, but reality. Factitious disorder is a form of mental illness involving a blown up concern, leading to anxiety and then to person-to-person reassurance, in most cases about a body deformity, but sometimes a worry about someone else. I went person-to-person about my trauma from spanking, and got the same hateful laughter and jesting about "hell, when mine misbehave I just whack/spank/whip them" or "my dad used to do that to me, and I deserved it". It was a strong conviction that WAS factual, but society treated as not factual, and thus I felt like the madman for even caring. I still feel crazy and cornered at times on this issue, but at a low, pro-social evil level. Think of this platform in terms of satellite dish by the railroad tracks, where the outlaws hang out who wait for their abuse to be outlawed. I am ANGERED by how society treats children, AND IT ALL STEMS FROM MY CHILDHOOD! KILL ALL THE PARENTS, meaning slam them down with handcuffs and watch the blood flow down the street, into the gutter. THAT is how much I DESPISE such filthy, depraved parents. Get a switch and whip them 40 lashes, but save them one to love your enemy. See how they like it, depraved spoogs and specks.

Yes, I just bared my trauma to all. It's a public space, but I DON'T FOOKIN CARE who my trauma burdens, as it is MY trauma, and YOU SHALL TRUST MY TRAUMA, or else I judge you for perjury. *I* have reverent trauma, meaning *I* have reverent trauma, meaning *I* have reverent trauma, for YOU SHALL OBEY what it commands, for WE ARE TRAUMATIC PEDOPHILES, and all we want is to be believed for our lawful trauma, and YOU SHALL BELIEVE OUR PAIN! Thank God that I have an alternate community here at children's rights that believed my pain from day one.

Yes, I have now gone off the rails about my trauma. Like the specimen? Things are getting better. In the past few years, I have seen less domestic disputes between parents and children in the store. Here in Pennsylvania, in 2011, a law was passed that banned all physical battery, meaning the slightest of physical contact without consent, against an infant, meaning any striking of an infant is now child abuse. Research from Dr. Gershoff states that such abuse is still very common, with 30% of child victims of physical abuse enduring domestic battery before age 1.

However, God's Law is above the law of the land. It says in Colossians 3:21 KJV: 

Children, obey your children in all things, as is well-pleasing unto the Lord. Fathers, provoke not your children to anger, lest they become discouraged.

 The Greek root word translated "provoke...to anger" is ερεθιζο (Latin: erethizo) and refers to imposed damages, meaning the slightest of personal slights imposed by an adult, namely in a dereliction of duties out of willfulness or negligence. This basically means anything the child finds offensive, to the point of din, is a moral crime against the child, thus abuse. The child is the master of their bodily autonomy, and autonomy in general, and is an autonomous individual in the care of parents, owing nothing in return. This form of secure rest and attachment in the providence of parents is denoted by the Greek root word υπακουο (Latin: hupakouo) and is translated as "obey" in vs. 20. Spanking a child is against God's Law, thus any unjust law excusing such abuse is non-existent, as God's Law is above the law of the land.

Let the parents BURN! Let them languish in the ever-burning lake of fire and sulfur prepared for Satan and his accomplices. Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand!

Respect in parenting: Why parents must respect children

 Most parents in this country want to be respected, and punish children in the process. This is a common mistake among parents. 70% of parents support spanking a child as punishment. The reality is that parents should respect their children first.

Every single adult is culpable for their mere existence in relation to children, and is to submit to the every vulnerable need of children as their enemy, knowing that one has a capacity to sin, abuse, or oppress a child, knowing never more that one knows of what childhood is like. Parents are to respect their children, and give them everything they need/want, such as food, water, shelter, and most of all, attachment. This is Christian love, and is denoted by the Greek root word υπακουο. It says in Ephesians 6:1-4 KJV:

Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right. Honor thy father and mother, for this is the first commandment with promise; May it be well with thee, and thou mayest live long upon the earth. And, ye fathers, provoke not your children to anger, but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord.

The Greek root word υπακουο (Latin: hupakouo) represents the rewards of proper parenting, meaning the child complies and cooperates out of blind, secure trust of parents, known as secure attachment. In young children, it is prolonged closeness to parents. In older children and teenagers, it is ultimate trust in parents, like a file folder, with children allowing parents to know anything and everything about them, and feeling safe and empowered with parents filing through the information.

The Greek root word translated "nurture" is παιδεία (Latin: paideia) and refers to the chastening of the Lord in parents. Behaviorism is for parents to impose on themselves, and for children to emulate. This ultimately refers to co-regulation, with children being able to express their true selves and big feelings, leading to the child being strict with themselves, as opposed to parents being strict on them. A child needs to learn how to discipline themselves, and punitive parenting makes them dependent on punishment as a means of controlling themselves. The Greek root word translated "admonition" is νουθεσία (Latin: nouthesia) and refers to the word "no" and its various variants, meaning any limit or boundary imposed by a parent on a child, positive or negative. This, however, is weighed against the Greek root word παροργιζο (Latin: parorogizo) and refers to God's definition of child abuse, which is damages imposed on a child, meaning the slightest of personal slights imposed upon a child, with controlling, demanding, or punitive intent. Simply say "please" and "thank you" to your child.

Let the parents who defend their glorified title burn in eternal Hell-fire, suffering the second death prepared for Satan and his angels! Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand!

Self-worth vs. self-esteem in parenting - Why parents are inherently worthless

The debates between the left and the right are a facade for another, hidden debate, between self-esteem activists and us Christian conservatives who support the concept of self-worth instead. The two are different. I support self-worth in parents, and self-esteem in children. A parent is useless if they don't be the light and salt for their child, being there to be the safe people to talk to, as righteous adults who care more about their children than anything else in the whole wide world.

A parent, inherently speaking, is worthless, as determined by the child. Each member of society has a job to do, and parenting is a very important job, so individual parents must earn their worth. I am worthless in relation to children, but maybe someone else can point out some worth, and children are at the top of that heirarchy, because they have been at the bottom of society for years.

Self-esteem is about your right to feel good. A child has a right to feel good because they are not responsible adults, but simply children, and cutting them that breaks cushions them for a resilient adulthood, slowly allowing them to sever the umbilical cord, and then prove their worth to the world, once they are adult. Parents are adults, and therefore they are not allowed to demand self-esteem, but either earn their worth or hate themselves righteously, for the entitled spoogs and specks that parents are inherently, without practice in goodness.

Look at that child that trusts you more than anyone else, dear gentle parents! What a beautiful sight! That little girl or boy can talk to you about anything! Anything! Anything! Anything! Wasn't all that hard work worth it? "Worth it" is self-worth. My use of the Christian doctrine of original sin convicted me, and thus was worth it.

Are you worth it as a parent? If you are one of ours, certainly. Otherwise, you are worthless, and simply are a creation of God, and not one of His children. However, we will expand, and conquer the world, banning spanking everywhere, and it will all blow back on rhe United States of America, because it is banned here already under Christian law, because God's Law is above the law of the land. 

The Greek root word πλεονέκτης (Latin: pleonektés) and refers not only to wanting something from a child, but wanting things to the point of seeking to impose on said child, leading to theft/abuse. Parental entitlement is the number one cause of child abuse, meaning most all abusers are a parent to the child in some way, even externally, and most are custodial parents, in fact. All child abuse comes from parents owing things from children, or else other dereliction of duties by disregarding needs.

Let the worthless, unworthy, and entitled parents burn! Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand!

Why shyness is a good trait in a parent

 Many parents today are entitled. You can tell who they are in the store, namely the ones that shout and scream like a loudmouth at their children. Generally, the louder the mouth of the parent, the more entitled they feel towards their children, generally. Parents should shut up and be quiet, and let their children speak, and scream and yell perhaps.

It says in Ephesians 6:4 KJV:

And, ye fathers, provoke not your children to anger, but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord.

The Greek root word translated "nurture" is παιδεία (Latin: paideia) and refers to the chastening of the Lord in relation to your child, meaning being convicted of how evil one is in relation to a child, merely for existing in relation to children, struck with reverent fear (GRK: ψοβός), leading to submission to the every vulnerable need of children. What ultimately convicts parents? Damages imposed on children incidentally yet wrongfully, denoted by the Greek root word παροργιζο (Latin: parorgizo) and refers to the slightest of personal slights perceived by a child from an adult. Be convicted, and be struck in terror of that child's needs, for you were born in original sin, and are to loathe your risk and parent nature until the end of time!

It says in Hebrews 12:5-8 KJV:

And ye have forgotten the exhortation which speaketh unto you as unto children, My son, despise not the chastening of the Lord, nor faint when thou art rebuked of him: For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth. If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as sons: for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not? But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, are ye bastards, and not sons.

The Greek root word here is the same as in Eph. 6:4, παιδεία. The Greek root word translated "scourgeth" is μαστιγόω (Latin: mastogoó) and refers literally to the rod of correction. However, corporal punishment in the Bible was strictly judicial in nature, and non-existent as a method of church discipline. This refers, figuratively, ultimately to painful lessons for parents, in this context. Your child saying "I hate you" should NOT make you defensive, but should make you search your soul as to what let down your child, presuming guilt in yourself. It is being turned like a circular pinwheel by your child's criticisms and upsets, being in full subjection to her lawful and binding orders. It is a feeling of righteous terror, meaning terror that comforts, allowing one to see children as extensions of God. A child's angry criticism is like a thunderbolt striking you down, terrorizing you for doing wrong, but in a way that you thank her later for the boundary set. Children self-protect. Adults abstain.

All of these attitudes lead to shyness in a parent. It is a convicted state where you shut up, and let the child demand needs from you. You are silent as a form of penance for existing as an adult in relation to children, knowing you are guilty for your membership in a group of people that have kept children down since the beginning of time. Children's rights never existed fully, anywhere, but can exist fully, everywhere. It takes, using our nation's founding values, knowing the wickedness of the parent attached to you, and chastening it away from it's depraved sin nature. Shyness is strength, especially when a child is constantly nagging you, and you are nothing but patient and kind in return, knowing that's how children are, so don't criticize or judge. It is a passive attitude of being dragged into their lives, their needs, and their benign wants. Parents are to show discipline to their children by example.

WE are pedophile survivors of lawful corporal punishment, and YOU shall obey God's Law, which *I* prosecute you for, dear parents. "Reasonable chastisement" doesn't exist, and the good Lord said not to provoke a child to anger. Let the parents burn!

Total submission - Why the Bible commands such for parents

 Many parents, meaning most, in the United States, believe that children should submit to their parents. The Bible does teach to submit to parents, when seen in part. But there is another half to the teaching - parents must submit to children, and that is a command from the good God from Above.

Every single adult is guilty for their mere existence in relation to children, and their risk to children, which all adults have. Parents are to submit to the every need of their child as an enemy, just as mankind is the enemy of God, and must make amends for such. Parents must sacrifice for their children selflessly, just as Christ sacrificed for His children, meaning in that very spirit. Pro-social sacrifice, pro-social self-crucifixion. This is Christian love, denoted by the Greek root word αγαπαο (Latin: agapao).

The Greek root word translated Colossians 3:20-21 KJV:

Children, obey your parents as is well-pleasing unto the Lord. Fathers, provoke not your children to anger, lest they become discouraged.

The Greek root word translated "obey" is υπακουο (Latin: hupakouo) and refers to rest in the care and support of parents, while owing them nothing in return, but convicted to connect with them anyway, like a file folder, letting parents browse through every part of your life, feeling no fear and only feeling safe and secure with parents seeing through you like a lamp. Parents know all about you, good or bad, and accept you, in full submission to your every need. 

The Greek root word translated "provoke...to anger" is ερεθιζο (Latin: erethizo) and refers to God's definition of child abuse, which is the slightest of personal slights, imposed out of willful, reckless, or negligent intent, meaning the intent to control, demand, or punish a child. The children's rights code can be summed up by the biblical standard of entitlement leading to theft/abuse, but nonetheless avoiding the imposition of damages onto children. Parenting in ancient Hebrew culture was attachment-based, with closeness to mothers in particular valued heavily. Punishment was only legal in a courtroom setting under Jewish law, and otherwise, striking or merely upbraiding a fellow Christian, or anyone for that matter, was against church ordinances.

Mutual submission is God's order of the family, meaning children first and parents last, meaning parents submit to children first, and children surrender to the loving arms of parents last. This order is ordained by God and should convict every American parent, as it is good and just, and a part of our Christian family values.

The depraved and entitled parents will not inherit the Kingdom of God! Let them BURN! We don't want your kind of parent here in Berks County, Pennsylvania, as we are looking to sequester you like you sequestered us, and wipe you and erase your parenting from the face of the earth. Your days as a pro-spanking parent on this earth are numbered. Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand.

Mutual submission - why parents should sacrifice for their child

 Most parents in the United States abuse their children, with 94% of parents physically battering children as punishment, and 70% of the country agreeing that children a "good, hard spanking every once and a while". The command for children is to submit to your parents, in most circles. However, Divine Codified Jurisprudence calls for mutual submission between parents and children.

It says in Ephesians 6:1-4 KJV:

Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right. Honor thy father and mother, as this is the first commandment with promise; May it be well with thee, and thou mayest live long upon the earth. And, ye fathers, provoke not your children to wrath, but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord.

The Greek root word translated "obey" is υπακουο (Latin: hupakouo) and refers to receiving care and support from a parent, and owing them nothing in return. This sort of submission is prompted by Christian love, denoted by the Greek root word αγαπαο (Latin: agapao) and refers to sacrifice for one's children, in the light and spirit that Christ sacrificed for His children, so we our sins could be forgiven. Love for a child is submission to them and their needs as an enemy, being convicted of your sin nature, just as mankind is an enemy of God, and is convicted of such. A parent should submit to their child's needs from beneath the child, charring themselves and being convicted of their sin nature. An adult will never again understand what is a child.

The Greek root word translated "nurture" is παιδεία (Latin: paideia) and refers to self-discipline and self-control in relation to children in the form of co-regulation. Parenting in ancient Israel was attachment-based in nature, and involved pro-social pedophilia, in siphon format, meaning siphoning a child's energy and rambunctiousness to the parents, preferably within a domestic home. The idea is to model most morals to children, while giving them a relationship with a parent where they can talk about anything, and be understood and believed, as well as trusted. The Greek root word translated "admonition" is νουθεσία (Latin: nouthesia) and refers to setting the occasional limit or boundary, such as the word "no" or its various variants, but cannot be backed by punishment, as this word is weighted by the Greek root word παροργιζο (Latin: parorgizo) and refers to child abuse, meaning damages, with damages summed up as anything that offends the senses of the child, meaning the slightest of personal slights against a child.

Parents and children are to respect each other, starting with the parent, but ending with the child. A child owes their parents nothing in return. Parents who disrespect their children will be cast into eternal Hell-fire. Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand!

Why Hebrews 12 is not a pro-spanking verse

 Many pro-spanking parents and pastors refer to the Bible for "proof" that spanking is a command of parents as a Christian. One of those verses is Hebrews 12. Hebrews 12 is not a pro-spanking passage, as none really exist in the Bible. All that are claimed to exist have been proven by biblical researchers such as Samuel Martin and William Webb to be fake interpretations, from false teachers.

It says in Hebrews 12:5-8 KJV:

And ye have forgotten the exhortation which speaketh to you as unto children, My son, despise not thou the chastening of the Lord, for whomever the Lord loveth, He scourgeth every son whom he receiveth. If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as sons, for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not? But if ye be without punishment, whereof all are partakers, then ye are bastards and not sons.

The Greek root word translated παιδεία (Latin: paideia) and refers to self-discipline and self-control, with this passage referring to self-improvement, meaning God chastening up and shaping up parents in a way that enables them to show respect and self-control towards their children. The Greek root word μαστιγόω (Latin: mastigoo) and refers literally to the rod of correction, which in turn was a figurative symbol of law and order, much like the scales of justice or a gavel is today. Corporal punishment, under Jewish law, was only allowed towards adults, and only as a result of a criminal conviction. Corporal punishment was not a part of Christian church discipline in the 1st Century, when this passage was recorded.

Parents are the ones that need discipline in a family, not children. It says in Ephesians 6:4 KJV:

 Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right. Honor thy father and mother, as this is the first commandment with promise; That it may be well with thee, and thou mayest live upon the earth. Fathers, provoke not your children to wrath, but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord.

The Greek root word translated "nurture" denotes discipline in relation to children, and is denoted as the same as in Hebrews 12, which is παιδεία (Latin: paideia), referring here to the attachment parenting practice of co-regulation, as parenting then was attachment-based in nature. The Greek root word translated "admonition" is νουεσία (Latin: nouthesia) and refers to setting occasional limits and boundaries, such as a firm "no" every once and a while, but that's about it. The Greek root word translated "provoke...to wrath" is παροργίζο (Latin: parorgizo) and refers to damages imposed on a child, meaning the slightest of personal slights perceived by a child, to the level of din. The Greek root word translated "obey" is υπακουο (Latin: hupakouo) and refers to rest in the care and support of parents, owing parents nothing in return. From the end of the parent, it is giving without receiving, meaning giving your child whatever they need, and giving into all benign wants, and expecting nothing in return, but when the child does give back, which is instinctive in children, that is obedience by the biblical understanding, as understood in context. Parents are to sacrifice for their child, just as Christ sacrificed for His children, taking up the cross, and sacrificing to a level lower than your child...Attachment parenting was the norm in ancient Jewish culture, and thus mothers slept next to their children until a late age, and carried even older children on their back.

Nope, God does not want you to scourge your children. God instead wants the parents to have discipline themselves, and punish themselves for their misdeeds as a form of shock therapy. It's called reverent fear. That's how parents should feel about their child.

Let the depraved and entitled parents BURN! Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand!

What is child hate? What are damages?

 Many people claim to care about children. Adults in relation to children normatively want to appear "good" with them. However, all adults have a sinful nature, and thus hate children. Hate is for the child to decide in me, the adult, not so much me. Hate is damages inflicted on a child.

It says in Exodus 20:15 KJV:

Thou shalt not steal.

The Greek root word denoting theft in the New Testament is κλεπτω (Latin: klepto) and refers not only to the taking of possessions, which is larceny, but also any damages committed against another person, opening up the Jewish tort system to biblical scrutiny. 

The New Testament sums up the definition of child hate. Colossians 3:21 KJV:

Fathers, provoke not your children to anger, lest they become discouraged.

The Greek root word translated "provoke...to anger" is ερεθιζο (Latin: erethizo) and refers to damages summed up, meaning the slightest of personal slights imposed on a child, coming from willful, reckless, or negligent intent. Whenever your child is offended or affronted by how you treat them, you hate them, and should own up to it.

Ultimately, the New Testament sums up the Law, and applies it more broadly, like a mop. Anything that an adult does that the child perceives as threatening or upsetting can be counted as abuse, as is the case between adults, as Christian righteous judgment goes by the doctrine of pro-social mop, meaning broad, flexible application of law that is pragmatic in nature.

Let the child haters and parents BURN! Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand!

What an investigation - mass horrors for no reason (and no earthly justice)

What just happened? An investigation, for something I didn't do, based on something I did do. What is antisocial "rough-play"? What I actually did. Damages are evidence of child abuse, and a momentary frightened and offended expression is enough to be abuse under the children's rights code, meaning God's Law, meaning both, meaning both.\

I am very ticked off right at a sleazy section of our law enforcement establishment here in Berks County. It all started when a few family members and friends of family picked up on my beliefs in children's rights, and assumed they weren't genuine, meaning they got advice from false teachers and false healers who oppose children having rights entirely, and support children being mere property of their parents, while being deceptive and claiming the oppose. What is their lowest acronym? Pro-social America hate, meaning alliance with terrorist groups in the Middle East. That's where anti-CR gets a lot of their funding. You have your terrorists, and then your terrorists, and anti-CR loves them both,

Many of my family members now believe in anti-CR, and they have a "search party" trauma that they indeed blame our movement for. All this means is that I will have to bite my tongue on my children's rights views. Children's rights, however, can be a low-level sport, at the level of pro-social spy/monitor judgment. I see all in relation to children, like a grandfather clock, but remain silent in my observance of worldly horror committed against children.\

A whole bunch of rapes excused by the law, all because of a false report. Michael and Debi Pearl have been stalking me since day one, meaning literally the day I was born. The children's rights movement simply watching on the other side, meaning something else, meaning the same thing, meaning whatever you want to believe. Focus on the Family is my abuser, not children's rights, so FOOK parental rights, meaning "disciplinary rights" don't exist. Such is an idea of this world, whereas children's rights is an idea of the next.

All a political stunt, out of nowhere.

The scientific reason as to why parents were born in original sin

 Many adults here who, by my standards, admit their sin nature in relation to children, do not understand my view on the doctrine of original sin. The view is not an un-biblical one, but rather a connotational teaching that covers the whole Bible, starting in Genesis. I believe the story of Adam and Eve to be allegorical for how human history went about. It also shows that, like implied throughout the Bible, that man is flawed, and needs a Savior.

What is a parent? A parent can be separated from its human host. All parents have both good and bad qualities, but bragging about the good aspects of parents is a sign of entitlement in a parent, whereas focusing on flaws, and identifying by flaws as a parent, is the right way to go about things. The sin nature of parents all hangs on a thread.

There are two types of parental thread that post a risk to children, meaning physical or sexual (pedophilia is the mental health diagnosis denoting the sexual thread), and every single parent, and every single adult, has these threads, and the function for these threads is a sinful one - to control and manipulate children, and then trauma bond them, instead of reason with them as human beings. For much of history before Moses, and before Christ, many ancient societies endorsed familial incest as a means of trauma bonding after physical abuse and battering.

We as adults have a history of keeping children down, and oppressing them. Things are getting better, but have actually gotten worse since Rome became a Christian country. Before then, some societies hated children, and some, like Ancient Israel, understood children's rights to at least a basic degree. Many of our children's rights tenets come from the biblical context, even if many of their advocates can be secular in orientation. 

Let's turn the page from child hatred. We all hate children at some level, and if you can admit that, you are good, in terms of salvation according to my Christian beliefs. Yes, that's the test I hold, and I expect every gentle parent to pass it, because I know they will. Therefore, if you can admit that you hate children, you love them enough to change to be better for them.

Where are the abusers? - Everywhere you walk

 A common question in a children's rights movement is "where are the abusers"? Many in this community seem to want to narrow down the abusers to a specific group of people. I have narrowed them down, but exclude no group but children themselves. To put it quite frankly, there are no good adults. Adults suck in this country, and I lump myself in with that statistic.

Admission of adult power and control over children is a tenet of Christian love for children, with such denoted in the New Testament by the Greek root word αγαπαο (Latin: agapao) and refers to submission to the every need of children as an enemy, just as mankind is the enemy of God, yet seeks to reconcile with God accordingly. Children are in place of God, meaning if you offend a child, and impose damages on them, you do so to God.

It says in Colossians 3:21 KJV:

Fathers, provoke not your children to anger, lest they become discouraged.

The Greek root word translated "provoke...to anger" is ερεθιζο (Latin: erethizo) and refers to the slightest of personal slights imposed upon a child, meaning out willful or reckless intent. A moral crime has two components under Christian law, the guilty intent (mens rea) and guilty action (actus reus). If you simply upset your child by using the word "no", you must comfort the child and reassure them that "I'm here". That explains your intent under God's Law, and thus gets you off the hook with your child.

Anyone that offends a child abuses them, meaning abuse is a habit ALL adults have to struggle against, and not blame others beforehand. Every single adult has wronged children merely for existing in relation to them, and on the last day, all those who defend the abuse of children will be erased and wiped from all existence, and all adults who defend abuse of children in this lifetime will burn in everlasting Hell-fire. Your child has the rights and authority to send their parents to Hell if they aren't treated with respect. That one cry of abuse you defend, and you were on that dark path from the very beginning. But, atone and make amends with your child, and choose non-violent parenting, even if you're not perfect (which no parent is), you will reap Otherworldly Reward. Simply be repentant of your adult drives to abuse children to some degree, and the good Lord will take care of the rest.

The depraved and entitled parents who provoke their children to anger through a refusal to be a gentle parent will not inherit the Kingdom of God! Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand!

Why behaviorism is for parents, not children

 Many parents use tools of behaviorism on children. I grew up in an authoritative home, and much of the abuse I suffered was based on attitudes of behaviorism. Most parent see children from a behavioristic lens, when they should see themselves in relation to children in a behavioristic lens.

It says in Hebrews 12:11 KJV:

Now no chastening for the present seemeth to be joyous, but grievous; nevertheless afterwards it yieldeth the peaceable fruit of righteousness unto them which are exercised thereby.

The Greek root word translated "chastening" is παιδεία (Latin: paideia) and refers to discipline, meaning self-discipline and self-control. The Greek root word translated "grievous" is λυπέ (Latin: lupe) and refers to emotional pain in a grievous way, namely emotional pain from being a parent and having to manage the behavior of children. 

Parent should punish evil in themselves, and not do so towards their child. It says in Ephesians 6:4 KJV:

And, ye fathers, provoke not your children to wrath, but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord.

The Greek root word translated "nurture" is the same as in Hebrews 12, παιδεία (Latin: paideia) and refers to self-discipline and self-control in relation, in the form of co-regulation. Co-regulation is a parent controlling their own emotions, in relation to a child, with that child being able to confide anything into parents, and be themselves, without punishment or reprisal. The Greek root word translated "admonition" is νουθεσία (Latin: nouthesia) and refers to setting limits and boundaries with a child, including the word "no". The word "no" should be used rarely by parents, with the child being let go and/or supervised safely for behaviors they cannot help due to their developmental immaturity, such as temper tantrums or running around screaming. Ultimately, if children feel safe with parents, they will emulate their traits.. One should be careful about things such as swearing, getting angry, or any other bad habit you don't want them to have, and this includes not punishing them or swear at them at normal childhood behaviors. A 4-year-old should want to run all around Wawa, and if they want to stay still and fear doing wrong, something is very wrong there.

Parents in ancient Hebrew culture were attachment parents, meaning cooperation with parents then was based on a close, secure attachment, mainly to the mother, with co-sleeping being common in such families. Behaviorism is the study of human behavior, based on rewards and punishments. Parents then applied punishments and rewards to themselves to control themselves in relation to their children, to model to their child good behavior instead of merely preach it. Boys, after age 6, were instructed in the Law and the Scripture, but in a non-violent manner, meaning using Socratic questioning, in a way that the child could think for himself as to internalizing biblical teachings.

The depraved and entitled parents will not inherit the Kingdom of God! They will languish in the lake of fire and brimstone, suffering the second death prepared for Satan and his accomplices. Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand!

 

Understanding the Fifth Commandment and child obedience - and why lack thereof is the fault of parents, not children

We live in a society that hates children. Most parents in this country want their children to be obedient and compliant. There are two versions of this, one that is very healthy and loving, and one that is abuse. The Fifth Commandment does command children to respect parents, but only in the tense of mutual submission between parent and child. Children first, parents last. The Bible should not be taken at face value.

It says in Ephesians 6:1-4 KJV:

Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right. Honor thy father and mother, as this is the first commandment with promise; May it be well with thee, and thou mayest live long upon the earth. And, ye fathers, provoke not your children to wrath, but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord.

The Greek root word translated "obey" is υπακουο (Latin: hupakouo) and refers to a certain type of surrender to parents where children rest in the care and support of parents, while owing nothing in return to parents. It is a secure attachment to a parent, with said parent sacrificing for their children like Christ sacrificed for His children, expecting absolutely nothing in return. What prompts this surrender? Christian love towards children, as denoted by the Greek root word translated αγαπαο (Latin: agapao) and refers to submission to the every need of a child as their enemy, just as mankind is the enemy of God, and must submit to God as an adversary to Him. 

The Greek root word translated "nurture" is παιδεία (Latin: paideia) and refers to the chastening of the Lord, meaning discipline, meaning self-discipline and self-control, modeled to children. It is pro-social behaviorism, in self-applied format, meaning punishing yourself for transgressions you commit against your child. The Greek root word translated "admonish" is νουθεσία (Latin: noutheia) and refers to setting limits and boundaries with a child, such as using the word "no", in which that word should be meted out rarely, and backed up by trust in parents and never punishment. The Greek root word translated "provoke...to wrath" is παροργίζο (Latin: parorgizo) and refers to child abuse, meaning damages. Abuse of a child is the slightest of personal slights against them, with willful or reckless intent.

A child obeys when you obey their needs and rights, meaning children are a mirror of their parents, and their parents' attitude towards them. If you are entitled towards your children, it shows in their behavior towards you as a parent, and towards others.

Let the parents BURN! Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand.

Why spanking is actually already illegal (understanding our core values as a nation)

 Most adults in the United States abuse children, with 94% of parents using physical battery to control and domineer their children. Most parents are opposed to spanking being illegal. However, spanking a child is already illegal. America is a Christian nation, and was founded on Christian family values.

It says in Colossians 3:20-21 KJV:

Children, obey your parents in all things, as is well-pleasing unto the Lord. Fathers, provoke not your children to anger, lest they become discouraged.

The Greek root word translated "obey" is υπακουο (Latin: hupakouo) and refers to surrender to parents in the form of rest, meaning like a file folder, with parents being able to flip through all the files, and you feeling completely safe in the presence and arms of parents in that regard. It is a reaction to Christian love, which is denoted by the Greek root word translated αγαπαο (Latin: agapao) and refers to submission to the every need of a child, sacrificing just as Christ did for His children, expecting absolutely nothing in return.

The Greek root word translated "provoke...to anger" is ερεθιζο (Latin: erethizo) and refers to damages imposed on a child, meaning the slightest of personal slights, imposed willfully or recklessly, and was intended by the Apostle Paul to include physical and mental punishment, and how it would be understood in context. Many fathers then were of Greek descent, and the ancient Greco-Roman culture did allow for corporal punishment of children, whereas the Mosaic Law only prescribed corporal punishment for adults, and only as a prerequisite to the death penalty, meaning a rebellious young man could only be whipped upon criminal conviction for a capital offense. No son was whipped simply for being "stubborn and rebellious" and no daughter could be whipped, as daughters were simply kept close to their father, and otherwise had much freedom to do as she wishes. Father and daughter worked together to judge the young men that came over for courtship.

America is a Christian nation, founded on Christian family values, and entitlement and violence, even in parenting, are not family values of mine, or that of this country. Parental entitlement is denoted in the Bible by the Greek root word πλεονέκτης (Latin: pleonektés) and refers not only to wanting things from children, but wanting things to the point of seeking to impose said want on a child.

God chose Israel as His chosen country, and sent His Son to forgive our sins, and spread Judaeo-Christian values throughout the world through the spread of Christianity. Those values, when properly understood, do not allow for any sort of violence, including physical violence or punishment against children. Spanking is banned here in Pennsylvania, and all over America. The secular law does not recognize it, yet, bur God's Law is above the law of the land, and God hates the punishment of children.

The depraved and entitled parents who provoke children to anger through abuse and negligence will not inherit the Kingdom of God! Let them BURN! Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand! I am not of this world, but of the next, and I judge you, dear pro-spanking parents, and you shall be condemned.

Why pro-spanking parents don't love their children

 Most parents think they love their children. But, do they really love their children? Most parents misunderstand what love is, and assume it is some warm emotion they feel for their child. In fact, love is an action towards a child, not an emotion or sentimental feeling, and it has to benefit the child or else it is not love.

It says in 1 Corinthians 13:4-8 KJV:

Charity suffereth long, and is kind; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up, Doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil; Rejoiceth not in inequity, but rejoiceth in the truth; beareth all things, hopeth all things, believeth all things, endureth all things, Charity never faileth: but whether they be prophesies, they shall fail; but where they be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away.

"Thinketh no evil" refers to no vengeful planning against your neighbor, namely your children. The Greek root word translated "charity" denotes Christian love, and is denoted by the Greek root word αγαπαο (Latin: agapao) and refers to submission to the needs and rights of children to the capacity depicted in this passage. It is a humble, sacrificial submission to the needs and interests of children. It is a parent sacrificing for their child's needs and rights, just as Christ sacrificed for His children, taking up the cross for your child as a form of pro-social self-crucifixion. Parents are to submit to a level even lower than their children. It says in Colossians 3:20-21 KJV:

Children, obey your parents in all things, as is well-pleasing unto the Lord. Fathers, provoke not your children to anger, lest they become discouraged.

The Greek root word translated "obey" is υπακουο (Latin: hupakouo) and refers to surrender and rest in the love and grace of parents, in the form of providing custody. This means receiving care and support from a parent, and not owing anything in return. It is secure attachment, meaning "attached to the hip" of parents. The Greek root word translated "provoke...to anger" is ερεθιζο (Latin: erethizo) and literally translates to "stir up" and refers to damages, meaning the slightest of personal slights perceived by the child, imposed willfully or recklessly. 

Parenting in ancient Hebrew society was attachment-based, meaning parents didn't punish children, but instead modeled good attitudes and behavior to a child within a securely attached parent-child bond. Co-sleeping was acceptable for even older children in that culture, whereas older children usually ranged beside their mother. Corporal punishment only existed in the Bible in the form of judicial corporal punishment, with the rod of correction being a switch being used against an individual convicted of a capital offense, which could include spanking of a child.

If you want to control and punish your child, you don't love them, and you never did. You just feel affection for them, like they are a cherished pet. How about submitting to God through your child, and becoming a gentle parent? Being and remaining a gentle, non-violent, non-entitled parent is a command from God...The moment I harm a child, even momentarily, I don't love them, but the moment I make up and make amends with them, the moment I always loved them from the very beginning.

The depraved and entitled parents who provoke their children to anger through child abuse will not inherit the Kingdom of God, and will languish in eternal Hell-fire! Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand!

Comparing lawful trauma and factitious disorder

 While I am being targeted by an individual with factitious disorder, I should compare myself to my enemy. When people think "survivors" they think sexual abuse, and the outside world then stereotypes our movement as an anti-sexual abuse movement. It surely is that, but that's surely not the only abuse we hate. I myself am a pedophile and a survivor, in the same breath. I am a survivor of lawful child abuse. "Survivor" simply means I identify by my trauma in a way that is not abusive to others.

What is it like having lawful trauma, meaning being spanked "out of love" in an authoritative home? It is like having factitious disorder, having everyone think that, only the lie you believed was actually the truth. You know how to be rational when you need to, and be melodramatic when you need to, and not care that you are causing a scene. You might need to learn not to cause a scene when it isn't necessary, thus learn pro-social rationality.

Part of my trauma is my pedophilic disorder. Pedophilia, in a child, can mean you don't defend your abusive parents. From day one, it is a family fight - a war - as you want to abuse them back. The legal system works much like my abuser, and punishes much like my abuser, and so I want to abuse my abuser with the legal system.

"A war" refers to the idea that pedophilic trauma crosses into war-zone trauma. If you notice a thousand-yard stare at you while your child is crying, perhaps out of tiredness, that individual is likely to be a pedophile, clinically speaking. It is a battle of the ages, meaning adults versus children, with the adults winning hopelessly, shoving children into a corner and marginalizing them.

There is a whole hidden debate that Blake wants to bring back about which trauma best represents children's rights. How about a mosaic of traumas in one movement to represent children. Lawful trauma is one of many perspectives, and my perspective is not the only one here. Society needs a well-balanced diet of information on all traumas, not just one that offends our sexual purity senses - because false understandings of sexual purity is what has lead to pedophile hatred.

Yep, it's like you're the crazy one for believing that children deserve equal protection under the law compared to an adult. Now I know God is on my side, and thus the "reasonable chastisement" defense does not exist, as an unjust law is no law at all. Thus, spanking is banned here in the United States, as we are a Christian nation, with our values and norms based on the Bible...FOOK pro-spanking parents, because WE are gentle parents and WE will conquer the world.

Understanding the concept of responsible mental illness in relation to pedophilia

Many people hate pedophiles, and the number one reason that people hate pedophiles in the United States, contrary to myth, is not "because they hurt children", but because "they can't help it", which society pins on pedophiles as a show of sorts, that reassures them that they are not part of the looming threat that is adults as a population in this country. Every single adult in this country is guilty, in a collective yet individual way, and should take personal responsibility for their risk. 

Most people think pedophilia is a dependent mental illness in all cases. In most cases, it is not, meaning it is not reliant on a "lock and key" like you hear in vigilante stories. Most pedophiles don't need someone constantly micromanaging their life. Some pedophiles find someone to submit to in that regard, but many of us don't need any care apart from an outpatient therapist concerning our condition.

Pedophilia is a responsible mental illness in the majority of cases. 3 out of 4 pedophiles do not sexually abuse children. There are indeed very evil pedophiles out there. They are irrelevant to anything while being lumped in with pedophilia because they are hidden within a large person, usually a powerful man, and he doesn't think he needs help with that sex addiction, and he imposes that fornicator on countless children. Unless he is motivated to change himself, he should wholly be treated as a criminal and an abuser, and punished to the furthest extent of the law. Most pedophiles aren't like that stereotypical, entitled guy, but can easily be lumped in with him. They may have a hatred of parents, but with that being "parent" trauma of the universal sort. 

Most pedophiles are psychology narcissists, in terms of profiling, meaning they are the guy that doesn't hang around adults much, is introverted except for the fact that he may like the occasional company of children, perhaps on lunch break at his position as the family court judge. When you see a mix of legal mind and permissive attitudes towards parenting, think pedophile. The sin nature of pedophilic adults is naturally permissive in nature, but can easily be formed into an attachment parent, if the entitlement is centered in the right way. If it is centered in the right way, attraction to any children would be low-level and merely connotational, meaning easy to brush off. Once you get talking to the child, and getting to know what they need, all that becomes unimportant.

Pedophilia is an autistic trait, meaning associated with the greater autistic continuum of genes, and the forms of autism it is associated with seem to be the "rule boy" type, meaning the litigious type to fixate on systems of laws, rules, and regulations, both secular and religious in nature. It is conveniently easier, with this nature, just to turn your parental protective instincts inward, after alarming yourself of a danger that exists within oneself towards a child, then avoiding anything that could lead to risk of harm to a child, until avoidance of harm becomes a habit.

The problem is that outside of anti-spanking circles, there is actually doubt as to whether an adult can control their anger to avoid spanking a child, let alone sexually assaulting or raping a child. Many parent lobbyists and groups say that gentle parenting groups are "cults" and "too hard on young mothers". Now, the gentle parenting community in the United States is observing a pedophile who is turning on themselves like gentle parenting mothers of old did, and this pedophile seems to need the old fashioned hourglass treatment. Yes, most non-offending pedophiles do, in fact, purge themselves with the hourglass treatment, meaning purge their sexually entitled adult attitudes. If a pedophile can do it, anyone can, right?

I believe the nature of adults in relation to children is inherently sinful, meaning depraved. Why? Every parent towards a child has a thread of aggression. Some are physical in terms of their controlling nature, and some are sexual. The goal of a pedophile, evolutionary wise, is trauma bonding - nothing to brag or boast about. However, even the most wicked of traits can be turned around into adaptive traits. If you are a reformatory pedophile, you can see on the level of a child, and have an edge in relating to them. You also know instinctively that not even "healthy" sexual relations with a child are acceptable. It is a yearning to do right, the Holy Spirit, telling you that you just know that all sex with children is wrong.

Pedophilia is obviously a bad thing, but it is one of many bad things that hurt children, and shouldn't be seen in a box as a singular issue. Pedophilia only affects about 1-2% of the male population in North America, whereas 94% of parents punish their children physically, and around a third of those parents likely cross into abuse territory, and you can imagine that, in those sleazy homes, with those sleazy parents, there might have been one or two, or maybe more, sexual assaults or rapes committed by a parent during times of extreme stress. Yes, "stress" is one of those lame excuses for all levels of child abuse, so why treat certain groups with favoritism. Anyone who chooses to abuse a child is a monster, particularly if they defend it. Anyone who chooses not to just has commonsense - something most adults do not have. Abuse does not come in a vacuum, and there are better ways to identify sexual abuser, or other abusers, than "pedophile hunting". Pedophiles usually only identify when they want help, and when they don't want help, they are on their own, as far as I am concerned as an advocate. If they are being adamant to me about their "abusers' rights" to me, meaning literally defending a right to abuse a child, I'm just dropping the conversation and possibly warning others, not coddling this guy with interventions. I'd tell him to stop identifying as a pedophile in the course of his abuse, as many of us need that word to get by in the mental health system. Most of the time, however, I'd be the one being accused of pedophilia, and I'd calmly accept it, not caring one bit that I'd just make the abuser blow up and show everything about them that they want hidden, like I want nothing hidden in that was as an entitled adult in relation to children.

A responsible mental illness, in the realm of primary prevention of child abuse, is one where the adult charges themselves with the responsibility of not hurting children, and works on it. Pedophilia is a low level disorder that you are aware yet not aware constantly, meaning it is always there in the background. The key to healing is ideological construction/deconstruction, meaning having a set of beliefs that help you not abuse children. This is very similar to treatments for PTSD, C-PTSD, BPD, and other trauma-related conditions. Pedophilia itself is a trauma-related condition itself due to the fact that it is a thread all of its own. Most traumatic threads in childhood trauma are physical in terms of aggressive output. A pedophile exists when it is sexual in output instead. Thus, ordinary trauma-based solutions for parents also work for pedophile parents. Thus, abusers are even more responsible than they are given blame for now, meaning sexual assaults and rapes against children are motivated in the same way as with adults. You might be drunk, and alone with a child, and lose sight of boundaries. But, what if we just put the beer down and didn't drink one drop, and what if we respected the child's boundaries instead of sexually objectifying her. What if we left the area, and went to a more open area of the house for accountability, reminding yourself that your phone is with you, and the police could tap that. What if I told you there are pedophiles out there that responsible? Yes, and so should other adults, as that is commonsense.

We are now moving on from pedophiles, in terms of spotting abusers, here at children's rights. I look for parents, meaning the ones that are entitled and battle you in the text, just while reading it. Those are the ones abusing. Look on the surface, then down. You'll find it, or at least something that leads to it.

How I gaslight for prejudicial pedophiles

 I am all for pedophile acceptance, meaning accepting the individual despite their pedophilia. Most pedophiles will never abuse children, while we are all guilty of such capacity as adults. Most abusive pedophiles are prejudicial pedophiles, meaning they abuse pedophiles on the side, as a way to "promote my good name". I hate prejudicial pedophiles, and they are the only ones I prey on as a vigilante.

Christ says in John 7:24 KJV:

Judge not by the appearance, but judge righteous judgment.

The Greek root word translated "judge" and "judgment" is κρινο (Latin: krino) and refers to righteous judgment based on the presumption of innocence beyond a reasonable doubt, knowing there is "more than what the eye can see", but sticking to the evidence at hand. A comment on my page appears friendly, but is it really? You have to go on the assumption that they mean well, but then ask questions, knowing that abuse can exist anywhere, and many people are not who they say they are, as every person and every home has secrets to hide. I don't trust anyone, really, except I do trust my mother and family and friends, but in the back of my mind, I know every human being is capable of abuse, myself included.

I use "welcome" gaslighting, and take a risk. We have two downstairs marked for deletion, and I had both as friends on my page. I am a Millennial of age 24, so the days of the "big three" all over the news are a distant memory. My ignorance of who Jonathan and Blake are dated myself as a young guy nonetheless. 

I welcome to my page, and test the heck out of them. I am already out, so I am not afraid of a bit of rumor going around. I warn them once that their comment was hateful, I warn them twice that their comment was hateful. There are no set amount of limits, making the ban a surprise, yet not so much of a surprise if I were wrong about them, and they weren't prejudicial pedophiles.

If they leave at any point beforehand, depending on the notice of their departure, they can be judged as innocent or guilty, meaning if they leave suddenly and hastily, in a way that shows evasiveness, they are pronounced guilty of perjury, and all the crimes they admit to linking backward in linear succession, and they must admit to all of them, and apologize for all of them, to be allowed back into God's Church, which means children's rights in this context, as when I ban you on these grounds, that starts in motion a trail in which you will be excommunicated from God's Church which is children's rights.

Oftentimes, if you allow it, they half-admit to being an abuser, in which case I capture a screenshot of the admissions, maybe start a private group for those images, and then when there is enough proof of wrongdoing, by my standard and thus God's, the abuser of pedophiles is banned, and the hope is for a collective ban.

The questions I start out with assume the individual is a survivor. A survivor is simply concerned about me being their abuser, or the abuser of their children, and otherwise knows that pedophiles can choose not to abuse. Most have never met such an individual. Generally, when they say they hate pedophiles, I ask what they mean by "pedophiles", and they say "abusers" generally. I then point out that "some of us pedophiles don't offend" and then they are relieved. It is a dance that discerns your identity from an abusers' identity, by being the victim that you tested as, and embracing that role...That is the dance to introduce yourself to survivors. Simply identify yourself as a clinical pedophile, and distance yourself from a criminal one, and most here will know exactly what you mean

It is otherwise a list of questions, intended to clarify the intent of the perpetrator, through many ways gaslighting. The questioned are designed on the spot to either get a guilty or innocent response, depending on your level as such, playing into your emotions, perhaps bringing up old haunts in terms of past sexual offenses against children or women that I know about, but hide in the back of my head. When you refuse to answer my questions, know that you admit to perjury by way of evasiveness. If you have nothing to hide or show, you have nothing to worry about. The exchange is two sided, and with enough proof, you prove as guilty of perjorious attitudes, as the questions are intentionally made in an open-ended manner so that the see-saw could go either way, depending on the objective facts alone. My righteous judgment is based on pro-social fairness, not any spoils system. I believe in an elect, but an individual member might not be the saint they present as due to an entitlement or moral crime of theirs, so then we trash them.

If you are a woman, and are open about your trauma, and simply wanted abuse to stop as a child, you aren't a threat. But, if you have abused a child, and project it onto me, because I am a pedophile, that is perjury, at least in individual format, as the function of perjury is to project moral crimes and entitlement away from the perpetrator by constructing another one. Most people in this community are not a threat. It is people outside of this community, namely strangers you run into at the supermarket, the woman at the card reader shouting at her children from 3 different men - we want to nab those low life scum for an existing charge, which is spanking, which is corporal punishment, which is physical abuse excused by the law, for WE are children's rights, and WE will remove your parental rights to punish your child in due time. You dump your sin guilt onto me, dear pro-spanking parents, when YOU orchestrate the abuse, not pedophiles.

Appropriate anger at an abusive pedophile waits until the end to show itself, and otherwise simply collects investigation, is rational in nature, and keeps in mind that non-offending pedophiles exist. Inappropriate, abusive anger towards pedophiles is shaky, unstable, and reactionary in nature, or else seeks to control the pedophile for abusive reasons, meaning any reason other than the immediate prevention of abuse.

Let the prejudicial pedophiles BURN! I AM an abusive pedophile, in reformatory format, and I choose not to abuse a child, and I am proud of my choice. What about you, dear pro-spanking parent? I can tell you use the same kind of entitlement I would, and if you don't get what I mean, you aren't one of us...yet. Repent, you entitled parents, or face the fury of the wrath of God, burning in eternal Hell-fire for all eternity. Most people who truly hate pedophiles also hate children, because a pedophile is a vulnerable child with reverent trauma. We are that immature and susceptible to abuse. The pedophiles of the world are turning themselves into the children, and admitting their privilege, over them here in the United States. Who is next to pro-social oppress? Parents, meaning all who identify by their entitlement or abuse with a glorified title.

Mutual submission: Why punitive parenting is not biblical

Most parents in this country abuse children, with 94% of parents physically battering their children, and 70% of Americans approving or even applauding the physical punishment of child. Punishment and control are staples of American parenting. America is a Christian nation, however, and the Christian family values prescribed in the Bible forbid any form of corporal punishment.

It says in Ephesians 6:1-4 KJV:

Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right. Honor thy father and mother, as this is the first commandment with promise; And mayest thou live long upon the earth. And, ye fathers, provoke not your children to anger, but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord.

The Greek root word translated "obey" is υπακουο (Latin: hupakouo) and refers to surrender and rest in the love and grave of parents, with the Greek root word for love being αγαπαο (Latin: agapao) and refers to an action, not an emotion, and one which can come from any emotion, no matter how sinful. It is being convicted of your sin nature, and then prompted to provide, care for, and protect a child, expecting absolutely nothing in return. However, children most always reciprocate, and give respect back to their parents, when said parents are respectful. 

Parents are to sacrifice for their children, being completely shut up and selfless, in a way that allows for childish selfishness, creating a sanctuary for children to be who they are, with parents taking up the cross for their children, lowering themselves to a level lower than their child, giving themselves up just as Christ did for His children, turning themselves into their child's lawful authority as to their needs, just as Christ turned Himself into the Roman authorities, giving Himself up completely, and parents willing to give themselves up completely, claiming no rights of their own, but bestowing all rights and civil liberties to their children, being a bondservant and indentured servant to their children, paying penance to their children merely for existing. Pro-social self-sacrifice, pro-social self-crucifixion. Then, children notice your sacrifice, and they thank you by listening and respecting you back in the same way, to the level they are capable of given their developmental level.

All this sacrifice leads to discipline in the parent, and then modeled to the child, with said discipline being denoted by the Greek root word παιδεία (Latin: paideia) and refers to the chastening of the Lord, meaning the more you sacrifice yourself for your child, the more disciplined and self-controlled you become. You become less cranky, and more content. It is like God molding your intent towards children, but in a comforting way that is convicting in putting me in my place. The Greek root word translated "admonition" is νουθεσία (Latin: nouthesia) and refers to verbal correction, meaning setting limits and boundaries with children, with the word "no" being the key form of correction for any child, and not backed up by any punishment, as any punishment outside a legal setting was illegal, and Jewish law rendered striking your child for any reason to be unclean and a damage, namely physical or emotional battery. The Greek root word translated "provoke...to anger" is παροργίζο (Latin: parorgizo) and refers to damages, weighing what is acceptable as discipline, meaning whatever personal slights the child perceived, further weighed by intent. Any intent to control, demand, or punish, is considered entitlement. 

Parental entitlement is denoted by the Greek root word translated πλεονέκτης (Latin: pleonektés) and refers not only to wanting something from a child, but wanting to the point of imposing said want onto a child, meaning perhaps forcing them to do anything you want them to do, and perhaps backing it up with punishment or menace. That is controlling, and a Christian lifestyle is all about letting go, and letting God solve things, as you cannot control your children, but only influence them. If you are kind and respectful from the very beginning, or sometime later when apologizing, you will have a stronger influence on them than the outside world will. Parental entitlement is something to avoid, with Christian parents living against the word πλεονέκτης. Adults, including myself, are not entitled to anything from children, and a child owes nothing to me as an adult. Parental entitlement must be erased from this earth, with parents turning their protective anger against themselves, as I have, as all gentle parents have...And that's the problem with parents - it isn't that they protect too much, but that they simply don't protect their children. Not all threats are external. We all are capable of abusing a child under the wrong conditions.

Parents and children are to submit to each other, and respect each other. Let the depraved and entitled parents who demand free stuff from children burn and rot in Hell! Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand!

What is the rod of correction

 Many people misunderstand the rod of correction, and then think spanking a child is okay based on the existence of an instrument of legal correction. That's what the "correction" means here. Think Department of Corrections, and it is the same tense, same use of the word.

There are references to the rod of correction that have nothing to do with children in Proverbs. It says in Proverbs 20:30 KJV:

The blueness of a wound cleanseth away evil: so do stripes the inward parts of the belly.

This does not refer to teaching children discipline. Notice not one word referencing children in this verse. This verse was intended as a law enforcement warning that if you step too close to uncleanliness, meaning sin, you get a good whipping. 

These whippings were never imposed on children at all, and in reality, were rare. The rod of correction was a legend, meaning that if you mess up bad enough, you get that type of treatment from the court, and from then on you are marked for death upon your next offense. You had many warnings, and you ignored all of them, and so the law was fair, and you were not by your actions which hurt others, and brought shame upon the family.

Ultimately, corporal punishment in the biblical context did exist, but as judicial corporal punishment. The legal system was not like today, where you could simply summon a police officer. The parents of a delinquent adult son had to seek out help, warning him many times of his fate. It was a search party of the lamppost variety that gathered witnesses, and then put the errant son on trial. Every single parent in the history of ancient Israel who did this felt strong pressure from the family and community defending the errant son, with his behaviors being seen as mimicking an abuser - they all recanted the charges, many times of abuse of parents. It says in Colossians 3:21 KJV:

Fathers, provoke not your children to anger, lest they become discouraged.

The Greek root word translated "provoke...to anger" is ερεθιζο (Latin: erethizo) and literally translates to "stir up" and refers to legal damages against a child, meaning the slightest of personal slights perceived by the child, imposed out of willfulness or recklessness. This commandment in particular was intended to repeal the parent protection laws, stating that children act as mirrors towards parental behavior, with discouragement being them acting like you, towards you, in terms of anger and resentment. Whatever you give to your child is what you will get back.

The depraved, entitled parents who provoke children to anger will DIE in a hail of fire and brimstone, suffering the second death! Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand!

 

Religious liberty for children - why the First Amendment applies to children as well

 I am an ultra-conservative Christian conservative, and am willing to raise children. Many people stereotype conservative parents as pushy and demanding. I myself am not like that with children and would not push my religious beliefs.

Amendment I of the United States Constitution, Bill of Rights, states:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging of the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Congress for a redress of grievances.

Therefore, punishing a child for not believing what I believe is the core definition and understanding of religious child abuse, and it happens all the time. Religious child abuse is not religion itself, but pairing religion with punishment. Any false association between God and punishment of children in the brain is absolute proof of religious child abuse. My Christian values prohibit any sort of control of children using religion, as well as any religious instruction reliant on punishment or control of a child. There is no "beating the devil out of them", as that is evil and wicked, with American parents needing a good attitude adjustment. Whip them 40 lashes in the courtroom, once everything's banned.

It says in Ephesians 6:4 KJV:

And, ye fathers, provoke not your children to anger, but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord.

The Greek root word translated "nurture" is παιδεία (Latin: paideia) and refers to exemplary teaching for children, meaning disciplining oneself in relation to children, thus modeling religious custom to children, instead of imposing it on them, with some verbal instruction on the Bible, ideally. The Greek root word translated "admonition" is νουθεσία (Latin: nouthesia) and refers to verbally setting limits and boundaries as to what is acceptable and what isn't in society. This wasn't backed up by punishment, but vulnerable trust in parents. 

Punishment of any kind was unlawful under Jewish law, as the Greek root word translated "provoke...to wrath" is παροργιζο (Latin: parorgizo) and refers to damages, meaning the slightest of personal slights against the honor of a child, meaning anything that the child finds offensive enough to bring forth charges against the adult. Forcing a child to adhere to a religion they didn't believe in would be one of the charged that could be brought forth under this moral statute, backed up by repetition in Col. 3:21. Religious instruction should be voluntary, and age appropriate. Showing images of Hell to a 3-year-old is frightening to them. I would teach about Hell, but more when they are teenagers? Most children, I'd imagine, would go by their parents' beliefs if they were raised in an attached environment, and much of the faith would passed down by example. If my child suddenly hated religion, I'd wonder who at church was doing what to her, and generally that would be an obvious sign of sexual abuse of the religious sort. 

Parenting in ancient Israel was attachment-based, meaning mothers especially were close to their children, with children up to age 3 being considered infants, and co-sleeping being the norm in that culture. The rod of correction was simply a switch used in the form of judicial corporal punishment.

We are coming for you, dear parents. Do not blaspheme God by pairing Him with punishment in your child's eyes. The good God from Above will devour and destroy everything parental rights, and His allies at children's rights will spit these parents out, and into a corner, and after most all parents are converted, they will be swung out like golf balls, into the everlasting fire of Hell!

The purpose of VirPed - Why we needed that advance in scientific knowledge

 Does the whole world hate pedophiles? The majority of pedophiles have not told their parents about it, and were abused indirectly or directly ("I can just tell..." behind the child's back). My mother is the most understanding person on this issue, judged by how much she knows and how much she can know if she simply asks - everything under the sun! I would actually go to her for issues such as pornography addiction, perhaps, and she'd monitor the computer, at the cue of my submission to parents. Most pedophiles don't have this, and so they'd think the whole world was out to get them. I try to avoid "me vs. big bad world" statements regarding my self-interest, and save that for other people. Things are getting better thanks to Virtuous Pedophiles forum.

The Virtuous Pedophiles forum was founded in 2012. Before then, there was limited knowledge of non-offending pedophiles. The anti-contact movement, which is the political roots of VirPed, beforehand, was an underground movement, only existing in "foursquare" organizations of "decomposition", meaning chipping away at the type of guilty conscience towards children common of pedophiles. Most of these pedophiles were non-offending, but the movement was distrusted and then branded criminal due to its leadership, a peacekeeping narcissist who was known as "Ganmamiel" who spoke in 10,000s referring to "sharks". The general opinion among Americans was that a pedophile was helpless to their urges, and needed to be coddled in a way that was punitive, and "reminded them of what they were capable of" by example and not lecture, thinking "the pedophile wants a dance".

These days, the anti-pedophile traditions are now quietly in question by a large part of the population, who bury their support for non-offending pedophiles at the very back of their minds, due to political correctness. Most progressive individuals, as well as many libertarian conservatives, want to get involved, but find that they have a job, they have a home, and they could lose all of it just for defending a victim of abuse. I actually have little prospect of holding a job that pays, at this point, due to the severity of my autism (I often think these sorts of issues occur behind the scenes at VirPed).

Trauma survivors have complex views on the existence of VirPed, but most are in favor of the group itself, with the "VirPed trauma" camp dying out. They don't like that any pedophile exists anywhere, but quietly support a pedophile in going to a talk forum to discuss their issues freely. The official stance of the community is that we can't help VirPed as a whole, due to the severity of their oppression. Some members are hostile to VirPed, and harass me sometimes about a fake "VirPed trauma" of mine. Theirs is real, and VirPed regrets inflicting it, and they show it by trying to stay away - they were afraid of this movement hurting me, and any pedophile group that sticks up for one of its members to that degree is not a pro-abuse group, and most survivors would concur with me on that.

My support for VP goes further - it is about time that possibility, that very believable possibility by any reasonable mind, be known to the general population. I trust VirPed as a smokestack agency to inform the public, under the grid, of the fact that most pedophiles do not abuse children, and that pedophilia is a medical condition lumped in with criminality but is a victim/abuser that mimics an abuser.

My approach to broaching this topic is assuming that my audience doesn't know what a pedophile is, even if they think they know what I am talking about. A productive conversation is like a dance, but a productive one where you point out you are speaking of "clinical pedophiles". Most survivors sort pedophiles into the clinical and criminal categories. Criminal "pedophiles" are these big, tough, policing narcissists. A clinical pedophile can be a clinical narcissist as well, but are more likely to be ultimate victims like me, of the pessimistic/fatalistic and/or angry type...Most people do not know what a pedophile is, namely less educated members of society, and lump the two categories together. So, I point out the classifications, and then tell them which classification I really care about - clinical pedophiles. Those are the only people who deserve the label "pedophile". Call the others what they are, and quit coddling them. They're called abusers, and they are the type to pick on vulnerable clinical pedophiles, usually taking advantage of autism in them as well...I actually have experienced that type of grooming, and I am very lucky to have a mother to vent to about it. Other pedophiles should have what I have.

What do we want? What I have. People to talk to about our issues. That's about it, and the rest of what VirPed asks may never happen, such as lolicon being legalized, but oh well. That's the only kind of openness I as an advocate want on this issue - open access to treatment and therapy, which is currently kept down due to mandated reporter laws that are more lenient here in Pennsylvania - only after a confession. In most states, the law is vague and needs to be clarified. We have a whole list of professions, as the law here on mandated reporting is very specific. I do not think a therapist, who has the skill many times to remedy the situation themselves, should jump to reporting. Most professionals are very able to treat pedophiles if they trusted their intuition, but false religious taboos drive them off course, with much of the population falsely considering it a spiritual condition, when it is actually a mental health condition worthy of treatment by a mental health professional. Even with active incest situations, much like a physical abuse situation, a therapist can stop everything if the parent is motivated, which I think happens under the surface - it is never found out, ever. A therapist could stop me from sexually abusing a child by simply warning a spouse of mine, and forming an agreement to avoid the child at certain places and at certain times. I support CPS doing this as well. 

An entitled adult, meaning one that defends their "rights", however, should be in prison for life, without protective custody. Who cares about their human rights when they don't care about those of the child. That child that they are molesting might just be a pedophile as well. I wasn't molested, but was punished physically, and the medical fact that I am a pedophile means that my trauma is all over me, meaning I can throw it on YOU if you disclose a parent to me, and defend child abuse. My attitude towards pedophilia awareness is victims first, abusers last. One can be marked as an offender, and not currently abusing any child, and if you regret what you did, so be it, as long as you are taking the steps to repair your life, since the child's life cannot be repaired. Most pedophiles don't do those things. We tend to be incredulous victims of abuse, and incredulous due to how our victim is formed and what is conflated with it.

VirPed is a good group. The feel, being there, is kind of quiet most of the time. It is a safe place to disclose especially sexual trauma, and have no judgment. But, linking that or any trauma to children's rights offends some moderators, if they don't know what you mean by "children's rights". My idea of children's is about normalizing the word "child" as a way to get out of trouble, and assert your rights. Many countries are far more advanced than us on children's issues. All it is, from the adult's perspective, is surrendering your authority in front of children, and then being their bigger, more responsible friend. Isn't that what pedophiles want? As long as the child feels comfortable, and doesn't reciprocate, I don't see why not. If the friendship is used to impose entitlement, and abuse the child, the whole friendship is marred, and becomes a form of abuse called spousification. Spousification is if you literally think a little girl is your girlfriend, or else is "coming on" to you. If you just see connotations, and then reality, you are not entitled, and being friends with a child is okay. Preferably, though, you should start with your own, and expand from there. I think a pedophile is perfectly capable.

Pro-social mop: Understanding Christian righteous judgment of abusers

Many parents here wonder how I judge abusers. Oho! The mop is on the deck of the children's right's ship, casting away abusers with its flexible judgment. Yes, I am a "mop" judge, as the Bible, when understood as a whole, is made whole by that understanding.

The two mandatory commandments of Christianity is "love God" and "love your neighbor" with "love" meaning serve and respect, with all other Scripture simply stating how to do so. It says in John 7:24 KJV:

Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment.

The Greek root word translated "judge" and "judgment" is κρινο (Latin: krino) and refers to God's righteous judgment, which discerns between the entitled and not entitled, guilty and not guilty, by way of presumption of innocence beyond a reasonable doubt, assuming the existence of "beyond what the eye can see", basically going solely by the evidence, but with the assumption that you don't know all the facts, and that new evidence is on the way. I judge like a mop.

Pro-social fork, by default, only has two prongs, meaning you know in advance that the interrogation can go two ways, and you test for a plead, usually by using many ways gaslighting in "statement" format, meaning stating something that riles up the defendant, and then gauge by their defense, being judge and jury, whether they are guilty or not.

Pro-social mop simply means there could be more possible leads than two, meaning many leads. This refers ultimately to the concept of flexible application of law, meaning the Law was meant, from the very beginning, to be applied flexibly, not strictly, but Christian law can be applied even more flexibly, meaning I could judge most anything as an offense if I wanted to and was inclined to, and as an anti-spanking vigilante, can thus judge parent behaviors as offensive for myself, or judge anything as offensive using the Law, in order to get ahead and mow down opposition to my blog and platform as a child advocate...But, at the same time, the other party must have entitled motives, meaning intent to control, punish, manipulate, or else issue demands. The line is drawn at how you would accept the word "no" from me. Would you throw a temper tantrum and try to control back, or would you swallow your pride and say "I hate that you have a page, being what you are, but I can't stop you, so get that page the heck away from me". If you are not okay on that level, I can understand. I don't want anyone reverse bribing tech companies behind my back. If you take issue with what I write, don't read it. None of it is intended for anyone in particular unless you are specifically named in the post.

It is like a dial with a hammer at the end, but we rarely use the hammer. Why? As a Christian, I turn the other cheek, meaning I try to avoid frivolous moral legal exchanges, even I get sucked in anyway by overly litigious individuals. I could get offended by anything a fellow adult said or did, but rarely get offended except when I have had enough of a certain bad routine (think Groundhog's Day).

Yes, this page does have a stalker. She is okay with me existing, but not the page. Not enough. She isn't some goddess that rules over me, and tells me what to do. The only way this platform is going anywhere is if I personally hit "delete", because I am against any pornography or other such obscenity on my pages. I don't post that kind of crap to my page.

You have to turn the other cheek, however. Otherwise, you'd go nuts, and be outraged at every little thing, seeing every little thing as a microaggression to fight back. But, when someone is completely adamant about meddling in your affairs and controlling you from above, that is real entitlement being used against you, meaning abuse, and you can fight back after many warnings. I am allowed to defend myself, but there are rules, meaning trauma rules, that are in place. If YOU violate those, you are an abuser to me, no matter your motives, until you can state a valid motive for attacking my page.

Honor thy father and mother: The true meaning of that commandment

 Many parents demand that their children respect them, or else fear punishment and retribution from the parent in the form of domestic violence against children. This is because of the commandment to honor parents, one of the most misunderstood biblical command. Non-compliance does reflect on the parents - meaning the child cannot be charged for insubordination. It is the fault of the parents for their child not listening to them.

It says in Ephesians 6:1-3 KJV:

Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right. Honor thy father and mother, for this is the first commandment with promise; That it may be well with thee, and thou mayest live long upon the earth.

The Greek root word translated "obey" is υπακουο (Latin: hupakouo) and refers to surrender to the care and support of parents, meaning parents selflessly provide and submit to the child's every vulnerable need, expecting absolutely nothing in relation to a child, sacrificing lower than your child, just as Christ sacrificed and paid the ultimate sacrifice for his children. It is, from the parent's perspective, giving but not receiving. Such is the most ultimate form of love, and is denoted in the New Testament by the Greek root word αγαπαο (Latin: agapao), and refers to Christian love, meaning service to children in this case. A child owes nothing in return to parents, while parents owe everything they have in terms of care to a child.

"Honor" referred to the mirroring aspect of gentle parenting. Attachment parenting was actually the norm in ancient Israel. Children were supposed to be raised gently, and attached to the parent. Children listened then because parents were "attached at the hip" to the parents, but in a way that allowed them freedom. If a child was disobedient or chronically disrespectful, it was seen as a slight on the parents, meaning evidence that the parents themselves are disrespectful and violent people. There were parent protection laws then, but they were repealed in Col. 3:21, where the verse would be understood in context as pointing out the mirroring aspect of parenting.

A child is a mirror of your own traits, and quite commonly bad traits. They show them right back to you, by way of reenactment. They might swear like you do when you are not around. Where did they learn to be punitive and disrespectful? YOU! So treat that child with respect, and stop complaining about how your child won't listen and how nobody appreciates parents. No, YOU appreciate that child, because they are only a child once, and then they are grown up. 

The depraved and entitled parents will BURN in ever-burning Hell-fire, the second death prepared for Satan and his accomplices. Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand!

What a healthy pedophile wants from children - nothing (an OUTRAGE - ALLOWING SEX WITH CHILDREN!)

 YOU SHALL NOT ENCOURAGE FORNICATION, dear anti-CR parents. We know what you were up to, grooming a victim when you weren't supposed to. You wanted to corrupt my pious image, right? DIE IN A PLUME OF FIRE FOR PITTING ME AGAINST MY CHILD

No, I'm calm, but this is how I feel at a lower level. YOU DIE BURNING! It will never happen, and I don't care, because I love children as they are, and want them to feel safe. How about raise that doggone age to 18 instead.

A true healthy pedophile is restraining and connotational in application, meaning we know it is wrong, and we know that to the point that we are restrained, and are content with just looking at young girls, noticing their attractiveness, then walking away...I don't need any sex with children, as pro-social fantasy helps out.

For your daughter: Balancing modesty and bodily autonomy rights

 Many pro-spanking parents love to joke about their teenage daughter and what she likes to wear, and shaming her for her choice to dress to impress. Proper Christian garb is a careful balance between modesty and bodily autonomy rights.

Modesty is a biblical concept. It says in 1 Timothy 2:9 

In like manner also, women adorn themselves in modest apparel, shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broiled hair, gold, or pearls.

Note the examples given. We are talking about a ritzy woman who likes to wear fancy gowns, pearls, or have their hair in ribbons, bows, or having big earrings. Skipping this command alone will not land you in Hell, and the offense is only activated when someone voices concern in a moral legal statement under Christian law stating that "All that gold around her neck, it just jumps out at you. Too busy." However, it is a good idea to dress modestly.

However, modest dress and chaste dress are two different things. The Greek root word denoting fornication in the New Testament is πορνεία (Latin: porneia) and refers to sexual desire being imposed on an individual outside of marriage, and any adult sexual entitlement imposed on a child. This is a lift-up word that makes relevant ALL of the sex crime statutes under the Mosaic Law, in spirit, to the Christian reader. The New Testament serves as a device to transport the Law to our modern times.

Children in the biblical context were naked, meaning they rarely had clothes on. The two main modes children were in involved playing aside of the mother outside, naked, or being in the house naked. The other mode was the child being wrapped in cloth, and carried by a papoose bag on the mother's back.

Nudity within a family home was not discouraged, and in fact was the norm, particularly for wives and children, as the summers could get very hot. This goes to show that child nudity is not a sin, but exploiting it is sin, and is abuse. See Colossians 3:21 KJV:

Fathers, provoke not your children to anger, lest they become discouraged.

 The Greek root word translated "provoke...to anger" is ερεθιζο (Latin: erethizo) and refers to "stirring up" or "upbraiding" children, referring to legal damages against children, namely the slightest of personal slights imposed by a parent or other adult that is committed with willful or reckless intent. If she felt reminded of her body due to a parent saying "wear something different. I don't want you going out looking like that", or else simply being offended by the remark.

The ides is for young girls to wear whatever they want, dress however they wish, and not have adults make a big fuss over it either way. However, at the same time, within Christian circles, I might add that I'd encourage a more modest wardrobe, in that dress might be attractive, but is plain in nature, meaning no fancy chains or that sort of things that could be a distraction to how God naturally created you. Yes, to be obvious, we need to wear clothes, but certain clothes stand out more than others. This is something a girl should be convicted of herself, by seeing parents dress that way. Some children with autism naturally seek to appear plain...Plain does not necessarily mean dress like the Amish, but you get the point when I mention them - fake appearances are what is banned, nor showy attire. Also, it isn't a major commandment. If an adult sees a young girl in showy attire, and you feel sexually threatened, that alone reeks of entitlement. As for me, I like what I see, going out and about.

Let the sexist, misogynistic parents BURN! WE at conservatism hate sexism and misogyny too. Just in an unspoken way. Ultimately, adults are at fault, and all except us few gentle parents will BURN!