The Conservative Cave
Current Events => General Discussion => Topic started by: Ptarmigan on May 03, 2011, 02:34:30 PM
-
Believers and non-believers: Different sides to Osama bin Laden’s death
http://blog.chron.com/believeitornot/2011/05/believers-and-non-believers-different-sides-to-osama-bin-laden’s-death/
“Christians, regardless of what they feel, are called to love Mr. bin Laden and that means we pray for him, we pray for his family and we pray for the people he has deeply hurt,†said Robert Kruschwitz, director of Baylor University’s Center for Christian Ethics.
“True Christian life, to live it out, it’s not easy. In the Beatitudes, Jesus said, ‘You have heard it said, an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth, but I say turn the other cheek….’ He upped the ante,†said the Rev. Mike Buentello, at the University of St. Thomas in Houston.
The Bible also said to hate your enemies. Bit naive right there. This turn the other cheek is what is causing Christianity to fall in America. No offense to any Christian here. Also, the Bible is translated in many languages, so it gets lost in translation.
-
"Turn the other cheek"...it's what liberals do best when confronted with danger...they turn their ass to it....and run.
-
Yes, but I'm not a Christian so...
...**** 'im.
-
As my dad always said. After you're first struck, turn the other cheek. After that, Jesus left no further instructions.
-
“Regardless of what our foe deserved, our revelry in such base things harms ourselves – harms our own humanity and empathy, and that will have wider effects on ourselves and our community than intended,†wrote Houston Humanist minister D.T. Strain in his blog. “This is why we no longer drag murderers through the streets or hang them in public exhibitions – because of the kind of people that makes us.â€
I actually agree with this. We're evolutionarily wired to feel pleasure when retribution is inflicted upon evil doers... but they are dumb wires. Our internal punishment/reward architecture isn't sophisticated enough to get it right, all of the time. We'll often feel that same intoxication when retribution is doled out on insufficient evidence, or in disproportion to the crime.
And if we let it, that architecture can drive us right down the path towards a justice system that is little more than an enterprise of drunken pleasure-seeking, by way of retribution. In our zeal to get our fix, we'll hurt lots of innocent people - and ultimately ourselves.
I definitely share and understand the intoxication of victory here. I can't help but think about how bad ass it would have been to be on the team that killed him, and to go through life knowing that it was you who got him. I can only imagine what it must feel like to be a New Yorker right now, or a person who lost someone in the attacks. And I don't necessarily think any of it is wrong - we just have to be careful with those feelings.
That’s right, love the murder-espousing, America-hating, disgusting, horrible terrorist that was responsible for the deaths of thousands.
Love him. Want the best for him. I doubt many humanists/agnostics/atheists would go that far. (And why would they? Outside of Christianity, it doesn’t make sense.)
And here's where I disagree, partly. I do agree in that there's not much of a reason to love your enemy on atheism. I do agree that there's not much reason to love everyone, as you love yourself, as Jesus commands - even those you havent met. I'm not really sure what love entails in that sort of context - if it means showing enemies and strangers compassion, then I can get on board. If it means showing no preference for your own kin or friends over strangers, then no, I cannot.
But in any case, is there reason on atheism, to hate the sin and not the sinner, so to speak? Even when its somebody like Osama? Absolutely. In fact, there's every reason to. I really think that evil (actions that harm the well-being of oneself, and others), is ultimately the result of ignorance. If one truly understood what sort of lasting, and fulfilling feelings of well-being they were missing as a result of certain choices, they would really have no rational reason to choose them. If one believes that truly evil actions are the result of such misunderstanding, then one can't help but feel the stirrings of pity, sadness, and I daresay compassion for the evil doers, rather than hate... because they ultimately harm themselves.
-
Our internal punishment/reward architecture isn't sophisticated enough to get it right
Compared to what?
Do you have some morally superior invisible friend we aren't aware of?
-
Compared to what?
Do you have some morally superior invisible friend we aren't aware of?
Heh - no. "...to get it right all of the time", expands to something like "... to ensure our well-being, all of the time". In other words, that architecture can cause us to forgo some greater state of well-being for a rather short-term transient, and ultimately unfulfilling pleasure.
-
Heh - no. "...to get it right all of the time", expands to something like "... to ensure our well-being, all of the time". In other words, that architecture can cause us to forgo some greater state of well-being for a rather short-term transient, and ultimately unfulfilling pleasure.
Retribution is fine system, especially when coupled with discrimination (in the "good" sense).
We might ask if a rapist *deserves* to be killed. The urge for killing is driven by a desire for retribution. But if we say yes and then ask, "Does the petty thief *deserve* to be treated as a rapist" people will say no becaus he doesn't *deserve* to be treated so harshly.
We might say the petty thief ought to be rehabilitated but what if the therapy that is most effective is also cruel? Once again the sense of retributive justice says, he probably doesn't *deserve* to be treated cruelly no matter how much we would prefer to see him improved.
You claim we should ignore retributive wiring for fear of harming innocents. It seems to me the problem isn't retribution so much as it is a lack of proper discrimination (in the "good" sense).
-
I think I've told my opinion of the "eye for an eye" on here before, but I'll do it again.
In the Old Testament the "eye for an eye" was directed toward the Hebrew people as a whole. It was their rule of law as a governed citizenship (I suppose are the terms I'm looking for) not as individuals.
In the New Testament Jesus is giving rules for the individual.
In other words, the Christian duty of the individual is to turn the other cheek and forgive Osama. The duty of the United States government, on the other hand, is to make Osama pay for his crimes.
In this case the United States government and the Navy SEALs who acted as their representatives properly performed their duty. I'm not so sure that I did mine.
-
Being an irreligious SOB, I find myself rather untroubled by these concerns.
-
Don't care. He's dead, so now we can all stop fighting, right?
Except we won't.
-
Being an irreligious SOB, I find myself rather untroubled by these concerns.
...and every shepard has his dogs to keep the wolves away. Thank god for the Devil Dogs and luke warm christians.
-
Give me a minute to catch my breath here--what are you guys saying ????
How often when a really bad crime comes up do fathers and brothers say they wish they had 5 minutes alone in a room with the man that killed, raped, and disemboweled their 3 year old daughter???? What they want, a quick game of checkers and then forgive them????
Take this a step further, say the sob is caught and killed, or so the police say, but you are not allowed to see his body and only have to go on their word that he is dead. They say they have proof he is dead but you are not allowed to see the proof. 2 hours after the killer was shot, the police had his body cremated.
Later on you find the police chief has been supporting the killer renting him the house next door to him having him over for a few brews on Sat. night.
Now the killer is dead you are are told so do not ask any questions as it may upset the killers family and give grief to the Chief of police that had no idea who he was renting to.
I cannot see how Christian forgiveness comes in here, Christians are not sheep to forgive the wolves that eat their family. Christians sue each other every day in court, they do not forgive others that give them cause to sue.
This idea that a Christian should not go against except gently, recognising the feelings of those that attack us is absurd. Any victory must show compassion for the feelings of the enemy.??
It is said that we want to show that we are better then the enemy, what good does that do, we will not go to the lengths the enemy does, we are better that that. Bull shit------
When war comes there is no question of not getting down in the dirt and street fighting. Anything goes, along comes the reality of war, civilians die are raped and the countryside is plundered. Spoils of war, people sold into slavery, and all belongings of a nation gathered up by the winner.
This is the warfare of the Middle East, they rape murder and plunder as a normal thing to do in war. It must amaze them when their enemy who does the same is placed in military jails for doing the same.
I am not sure what I am thinking here, I am still trying to wrap my mind around the fact that it is said the enemy of the world is dead but the government refuses to give us proof. Damn the times are driving me totally Mad to have to believe this shit.
-
Retribution is fine system, especially when coupled with discrimination (in the "good" sense).
We might ask if a rapist *deserves* to be killed. The urge for killing is driven by a desire for retribution. But if we say yes and then ask, "Does the petty thief *deserve* to be treated as a rapist" people will say no becaus he doesn't *deserve* to be treated so harshly.
We might say the petty thief ought to be rehabilitated but what if the therapy that is most effective is also cruel? Once again the sense of retributive justice says, he probably doesn't *deserve* to be treated cruelly no matter how much we would prefer to see him improved.
You claim we should ignore retributive wiring for fear of harming innocents. It seems to me the problem isn't retribution so much as it is a lack of proper discrimination (in the "good" sense).
I don't think I'm quite understanding what you mean by "discrimination".
-
...and every shepard has his dogs to keep the wolves away. Thank god for the Devil Dogs and luke warm christians.
Yeah. Some of us are just a whole lot better suited to be guard dogs than members of the flock.