In Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, one topic is broached over and over again.  That topic is whipping.  Every single one of Douglass’ overseers or masters has been shown to have whipped their slaves.  It was definitely inhumane, but technically legal, because the slaves were only property.  Today, it is illegal to render another human being as your property.  However, parents are the legal guardians of their children until they reach the age of 18.  What “rights” are bestowed upon the parents of a child who misbehaves?  Certainly whipping is not an option, but there are some topics which have resulted in heated debates.

            One of those topics is spanking.  Although not as severe as whipping, spanking still induces physical pain on the target.  I know my parents are entirely against spanking, they are more into the newer “invention” of grounding (for better or for worse).  Very few parents today condone spanking as an appropriate punishment, but there are still some who do.  A lawsuit involving a man named Christopher Robinson took place this July in Kentucky.  Robinson was accused of beating his son with a belt.  He admitted to spanking his son with a belt, but claimed that there were no resulting injuries.  The son never complained of any injuries, and there were none found when he was examined.  Robinson was naturally found innocent, as there was no proof to his son being injured.  For more on this story, go to http://www.fox19.com/Global/story.asp?S=13237722.  I personally think that spanking is wrong, but it is a parent’s choice.  As long as no lines are crossed, I think spanking should not be illegal.  Naturally, there are some people who think otherwise.  Should spanking be illegal?