Probably too deep a thought for Message Board discussion but....
Who are we as society to find fault in Peterson's methodology? If those temporary marks on his sons skin leaves a permanent lesson in his sons mind that prevents him from becoming the next Michael Brown in 15 years, how could it be wrong? Not to say it's right. But how can it be wrong?
And I don't know Mike Browns background. Perhaps there is no correlation at all. Perhaps he was whipped too. But as a parent, I respect ADs right to parent his child as he sees fit, to a reasonable extent.
There is no right or wrong to me in this case. I'm not turning a blind eye to the matter, I just respect the intent. Or atleast the perceived intent.