Yes, how we do like to justify the way in which the unresolved "sins" of the fathers and mothers are quite literally beaten into the flesh of the children, generation after generation - even justifying it all by appeals to the genocidal sado-masochistic tribalistic "god" and the archaic "holy" book associated with the same "god".
This USA reference describes the cultural and political consequences of this toxic paradigm.
http://zakherys.tripod.com/greven.htm
As does this reference too - in a more comprehensive way
http://www.ratical.org/many_worlds/JCP98.html

It is of course no accident that this vile sado-masochistic film was very popular with "conservative" and/or right wing Christians.
http://spiritlessons.com/passionofchristpictures.htm

When this subject arises we always get the cry ‘my parents used to give me a damn good hiding and I turned out ok!’ Just who are these people trying to convince – us or themselves? How do you know you are ok? Perhaps you could be a whole lot better than you are now if you had not been given a hiding. Perhaps you are in denial about your ‘ok-ness’ and you are just trying to avoid the reality that you are not ok by trying to present yourself as evidence for the value of smacking. If you were really convinced that smacking was acceptable then you would present arguments that were not dependent on personal testimony. The argument for smacking should stand or fall on its own merits without you needing to tell us how well you have turned out.

People who come to accept they are not ok – and that should be all of us – know that it is generally because of the traumas they suffered as children. Nothing can be more traumatic than to feel that your well being is in danger at the hands of the very people who have the responsibility to care for your well-being. There is no more powerful relationship than the power of a parent over a child. If a parent cannot discipline a child without resorting to physical assault then they should not be a parent. There a hundreds of ways parents can use that power to control the behaviour of their children. This power is most evident when it is abused. There are parents who exercise crippling control every facet of their child’s life without ever laying a finger on them. Smacking is just an excuse for bad parenting.

Thanks for the information on how the NZ 'smack ban' is going and for a 'voice of reason'. I lived in NZ for 6 months and most parents I talked to didn't agree with banning smacking and ignored the law in the interests of responsible parenting.

Sure there is a huge child abuse among some sectors of society in NZ, as in Aus. But banning all smacking is no the way to stop child abuse, which has no relation to the odd disciplinary smack when all other options fail. Banning smacking can have the opposite effect - kids who grow into young adults who act like 'spoilt brats' with exaggerated sense of rights and little responsibility.

Let's see an emphasis on education and peer pressure - making heavy handed aggressive overly dominant parenting 'uncool'. This can be done by TV ads showing where parent help can be obtained, and increasing the availability of parent help groups.

Mothers who feel they are not coping with their kids' behaviors benefit from help provided by these groups as my wife did at a difficult stage in my daughter' infancy. Many parent are so isolated these days with no help from extended family so they to able to access community group help. Incidentally both my girls have turned out to be very well adjusted, loving parents, choosing to absolutely minimize smacking or even physical restraint. I doubt if one daughter has ever smacked her boys but instead goes through long and exhausting verbal sessions which I think are worse for all concerned than a light smack. Usually the threat of 'time out' is enough. Also distracting them works well with a 2-3 year old having a tantrum because they cant get what they want.

How the blind belief in punishment is passed from generation to
generation is dramatically illustrated in Willard Motley's
book, "Knock on Any Door." Upon hearing that his son Nick
was sentenced to death for murder, his father said,
"I can't understand it... I always whipped him when he did
wrong." Nick himself, in his death cell, has no better advice
for the upbringing of his newborn nephew than, "Don't let
what happened to me happen to him. Beat the hell out of him.
See that he does right."

Parents often ask, "Don't children have to be taught
responsibility and respect, if not by persuasion, then by
punishment?"

Ethical concepts such as responsibility, respect, loyalty,
honesty, charity, mercy can't be taught directly. They can
only be learned in concrete life situations from people
one respects. One grows into virtue, one can't be forced
by punishment.

Few parents believe in the efficacy of threats and punishment,
yet they resort to them daily. Out of desperation they blame
and shame, reproach and rebuke, threaten and punish. These
methods not only fail to correct; they provide the
troubled child with justification for past misbehaviour and
with an excuse for future offense.

Misbehaviour and punishment aren't opposites that cancel
each other; on the contrary, they breed and re-inforce each
other. Punishment doesn't deter misconduct. It merely makes
the offender more cautious in commiting his crime, more
adroit in concealing his traces, more skillful in escaping
detection. When a child is punished he resolves to be
more careful, not more honest and responsible.

I remember in high school one teacher gave a long sermon
on integrity to a pupil in our class. We listened and
were somewhat amused. The teacher was teaching us dishonesty
and didn't know it. One of the students was late to school
once because they overslept. The teacher said, "That's not
a good excuse." And she punished the student. We all got
the message. The next time any of us were late, we would
make up a convincing story.

"Just think you can train a dog without the need to smack it at any point,a human child has far more reasoning power the a dog."

Well actually not so Kenny. I've owned and trained dogs all my life - being reared on the land and now back on it - working dogs and pets.

Never seen a pup yet that hasn't needed restraining, a good jerk of the collar, shake, slap with the rolled up newspaper, cuff about the head, flick of a stockwhip at it's rear on occasion to indicate unacceptable behaviour. Adult dogs - trained well, rarely need such censure.

At the same time praise is lavished for compliance which teaches the dog RIGHT from WRONG. Ever seen a bitch discipline her pups Kenny? She will growl then roll them if they persist. Likewise adult dogs with silly juveniles plus more force. Even dogs KNOW what's needed to rear healthy balanced kids who know the boundaries and mind their elders.

Just occurred to me though, difference between a highly trained, highly disciplined working dog and a much more indulged and cosseted house pet. (The type often seen on animal shows with the undesirable behaviours!)

One is talented and very productive. The other, apart from their entertainment and companion value, is pretty useless. It may be worse than useless if raised without discipline and allowed to destroy, bark incessantly, disobey commands ect.

Not sure if you meant it this way Kenny but yeah - a young child and a young dog have a lot in common.

As for those who question those of us who say "We're OK and we've had corporal punishment" with "How do we know we're OK?" I'd say having lived as productive members of society, lived honestly and lawfully, maintained satisfying lifelong relationships with our parents, extended family and close friends, stayed married almost 36 years so far, reared children of whose character we are proud and now enjoy the pleasure of grandchildren ... That's a pretty good start - much of it due to the start we got as kids ...

Because of the danger of false and malicious accusations, among other things, I would want to see hard evidence of a reduction in real child abuse in jurisdictions that have criminalised smacking before bringing in any such ban here.

It is tempting for people to be judgmental when they don't have children or have only had easy children. If children are not easy and don't respond to approved forms of discipline, parents who are deterred from smacking may well turn to other forms of discipline that are even more harmful, such as emotional abuse, that are likely to fly below the radar of nosy third parties.

Other parents may simply give up on attempts to socialise their children and let society wear the costs.