Opposing Parental Entitlement - how we profile parents

I myself am an Anti-Spanking/Anti-Parent officer, the first Anti-Spanking officer to come. The police and CPS do not have the legal framework to enforce laws against domestic battery against children. We F*CKING hate parents. How do we categorize parents that we hate.

Anti-Spanking is a compound that engulfs the populace, terrorizing parents, striking them into submission to the Lord meaning their children. We shove parents into their homes, then not at all. All gone, all gone, all gone. We cornered them, then swept them up with the vacuum cleaner, then all done. We want them to be afraid, so be afraid, dear pro-spanking parents.

It says in 1 Corinthians 5:11 KJV:

But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if anything that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolator, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with one an no not to eat.

One word sums up the rest of the commandment, and that is the Greek root word translated "covetous" and denoting πλεονέκτης (Latin: pleonektés) and refers here to an entitled parent, meaning an identified parent who wants things from children to the point of seeking to impose said want onto a child victim, leading to abuse by way of offense perceived (Col. 3:21). Every parent that identifies themselves is suspected of being guilty of the moral crime of parental entitlement, meaning identifying as a parent as an excuse for abusing child, is an identified parent, meaning usually with the constellar web of a pro-spanking home. Think like a spider web. That's a pro-spanking family. These moral crimes listed are all acts that an entitled parent is guilty of, alongside the entitlement, with theft/abuse being lumped in with entitlement. That is because merely abusing your child, by their perception, won't send a parent to Hell. Defending it as a "right" that doesn't exist? That's entitlement. 

All entitled parents that abuse children are to be shunned, so not to enable them, using "you just lost a friend" gaslighting, so not to enable their bad habits of either punishing children or supporting it. I walk away from the table when someone brings up pro-spanking parents in a celebratory way. "With one an no not to eat" can mean today cutting off speech to someone joking about spanking, and not partaking in conversation that degrades children, and defends child abuse of any kind. I recently had to do this with a family member of mine. I can go so low that the entitled adult doesn't realize they are being shunned, or at a level that they look entitled just for making a fuss about it. I vent about it later to spread the word and campaign against the pro-spanking parent/adult. Abrupt stop, and the only way around it is to be all hysterical and histrionic about the rights of parents and other abusers of children, or else simply agree not to bring up the subject again.

There are two categories of parents, entitle parents and non-entitled parents, with the entitled being the ones identified. I am to presume innocence beyond a reasonable doubt with all parents around me, like surround sound, with pro-social ignorance judgment. "No evidence, no crime", in terms of existence. If the evidence doesn't exist, then allegations against the parents are non-existent, apart from when a child makes allegations, as a child perceives their own abuse, even as an infant or toddler in terms of the way they cry.

I was abused by a specific type of parent. The Greek root word translated "drunkard" is μεθυσος (Latin: methusos) and refers to an alcoholic parent, meaning my father was under the influence of alcohol. Think leather jacket, smoke and drink. He could avoid the bottle at work, but not the lip for the boss. He could hold the anger in for his students, but fell apart when he got home and wasn't in a professional environment. My father never punished me for anything directly regarding religion, meaning I was allowed to believe in anything, but it was strongly recommended to believe in something. He could tell somehow that I would. My father just got angry, and rationalized that unrighteous anger by sitting down and "taking deep breaths". Pop right in like the SWAT team, bam, then gone. Why use police tactics on your own child? Why not relate to them. I know what parental entitlement is, and he had it. I can "sit in the child's shoes". Most abusive parents are not motivated directly by religion these days, but trauma linked with an anger or sexual disorder of some sort, and maybe a substance use/dependence disorder. Most everyone has an addiction of some sort, with the most common being caffeine, meaning a child could be punished when parents missed their morning cup of coffee or didn't have it yet. Religious child abuse is only common within certain subcultures that are a dying breed, when understood as direct abuse in the name of a religious belief system. Religious child abuse is just one form of child abuse, albeit a sizeable minority, which I estimate as an advocate to be only about 1/3 of parents, who tend to use implements, as churches tend to want to see hands for holding.

I am never angry with anyone I put in the child role, but instead indulgent. The actual abusive feeling is a high, like a splurge, in a way that I am best friends with a child, and they can't do anything wrong, finding any excuse for them, including the generic "they're kids, what do you expect?" and then really railing when a child is told "no", which is sexual/behavioral neglect. I am many times also fixated and besotted with her, in an obsessive, energetic way that I talk about her all the time. I have to learn to say "no", and thus learn that I am not entitled to the every grace of children, meaning by nature, I am afraid of their tears in a way I'll quickly set everything straight, and try to bargain with them, perhaps on my knees. Going straight to pro-spanking is unrealistic, unless you want me in Hell for suicide. If you are a gentle, attached parent, you don't have to say "no" except once in a blue moon, instead working with the child and coming to a compromise, using choices with younger children. I am an abusive parent, meaning a flawed and entitled one, but in a way that I can see clearly enough to counter the menace of a pro-spanking parent, whom I will never relate to. Avoiding permissiveness is about self-discipline, and when you are strong enough mentally, you can take the heat from your child by saying "no" that once in a blue moon. I am prone to sexually abusing a child, but only to the level of antisocial "rough-play", meaning sexual harassment when it is perceived by the child as such. Whenever a child is offended by my conduct, it is abuse, and when said offense was triggered by sexually entitlement, it is a sexual offense, regardless of the law.

Let the depraved and entitled parents BURN! We attachment parents will repopulate the earth. I hope I will then make it to heaven like the rest of the gentle parents here. I look around, and I know I'm safe, because a child is safe due to my choices.