logo - 刷刷题
下载APP
【单选题】

There has been a lot of hand-wringing over the death of Elizabeth Steinberg. Without blaming anyone in particular, neighbors, friends, social workers, the police and newspaper editors have struggled to define the community’s responsibility to Elizabeth and to other battered children. As the collective soul-searching continues, there is a pervading sense that the system failed her.
The fact is, in New York State the system couldn’t have saved her. It is almost impossible to protect a child from violent parents, especially if they are white, middle-class, well-educated and represented by counsel.
Why does the state permit violence against Children There are a number of reasons. First, parental privilege is a rationalization. In the past, the law was giving its approval to the biblical injunction against sparing the rod.
Second, while everyone agrees that the state must act to remove children from their homes when there is er of serious physical or emotional harm, many child advocates believe that state intervention in the absence of serious injury is more harmful than helpful. Third, courts and legislatures tread carefully when their actions intrude or threaten to intrude on a relationship protected by the Constitution. In 1923, the Supreme Court recognized the "liberty of parent and guardian to direct the upbringing and education of children under their control." More recently, in 1977, it upheld the teacher’s privilege to use corporal punishment against schoolchildren. Read together, these decisions give the constitutional imprimatur to parental use of physical force.
Under the best conditions, small children depend utterly on their parents for survival. Under the worst, their dependency dooms them. While it is questionable whether anyone or anything could have saved Elizabeth Steinberg, it is plain that the law provided no protection.
To the contrary, by justifying the use of physical force against children as an acceptable method of education and control, the law lent a measure of plausibility and legitimacy to her parents’ conduct. More than 80 years ago, in the teeth of parental resistance and Supreme Court doctrine, the New York State Legislature acted to eliminate child labor law. Now, the state must act to eliminate child abuse by banning corporal punishment. To break the vicious cycle of violence, nothing less will answer. If there is a lesson to be drawn from the death of Elizabeth Steinberg, it is this: spare the rod and spare the child. "Sparing the rod" (黑体部分) means ______.

A.
spoiling children
B.
punishing children
C.
not caring about children
D.
not beating children
举报
题目标签:黑体
参考答案:
参考解析:
.
刷刷题刷刷变学霸
举一反三

【单选题】下列哪个CSS样式可以将整个网页中的默认字体调整为“黑体”?

A.
p{font-family: "黑体";}
B.
h1{font-family: "黑体";}
C.
*{font-family: "黑体";}
D.
h2{font-family: "黑体";}

【单选题】下列各物体哪个是绝对黑体:()

A.
不辐射任何光线的物体
B.
不能反射任何光线的物体
C.
不能反射可见光的物体
D.
不辐射可见光的物体

【单选题】黑体辐射公式计算出的是黑体的()。

A.
光谱辐射出射度
B.
辐射出射度
C.
辐射亮度
D.
辐射通量

【单选题】黑体是指( )

A.
反射为1
B.
吸收为1
C.
黑色的物质
D.
不发射电磁波

【单选题】反映黑体的积分辐出度和温度的关系的辐射定律是()。

A.
基尔霍夫定律
B.
普朗克定律
C.
斯蒂芬—玻尔兹曼定律
D.
维恩定律