Deleted
Joined: May 1, 2024 21:33:27 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2014 8:10:23 GMT -5
Agree completely. The only question is who is going to teach the kids respect? Just look at this thread. Immaturity and disrespect abound. Why would we expect our children to behave any better? I've seen it written that children live what they learn. I guess that's true. i hope i have not shown any disrespect. seriously. i am mostly curious about later. i want to understand her perspective. and i already said that if she was personally offended by this and honestly felt that this kid had her and other Christians in her site, she had every right to be offended. but i am nearly certain that was not the case- that he did NOT intend to offend Christians- or at least that was not his "intended goal". I want to make the point that I have had similar discussions when the disrespect was towards the icons of faiths other than my own. Overall I feel that we need to respect each others sacred objects. That doesn't stop us from disagreeing with various teachings and debating that. But desecrating each others sacred objects does nothing except offend people at their core. The fact that so many of you don't really think it is a problem is scary. Years ago the American and Canadian women's hockey teams were playing and the Americans were doing pretty well. To brag about that they put a Canadian flag on the floor of their locker room and walked on it throughout the game. I guess it was to represent how they were walking all over our team. You have no idea how many of us still have that stuck in our craw. And then Americans wonder why they aren't that popular around the world.
I am sure this kid knew it would offend the members of that congregation and actually took pride in it. And expects lots of laughs and no repercussions.
I read that he was threatened. I don't believe in that. That goes back to the shoot out at high noon days. That is why I believe the repercussions should be legal.
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,866
|
Post by zibazinski on Sept 16, 2014 8:21:34 GMT -5
I also don't think he realized it was offensive for religious reasons. I also think he did it to be funny. I might have done bunny ears behind Jesus' s head and I was raised baptist which is Christian on steroids. But I have a sick sense of humor which has only gotten worse as I've aged. Putting his face in my crotch, well, no, that I wouldn't have done but I'm not a silly boy with hormones and no common sense. I can tell you I bet DS would have done something equally stupid given the chance with zero clue that it was offensive and he is a very good and stable person. I probably never told you all the story of the George Foreman cardboard cut out but it's enough to say that DSs fraternity was very diverse with blacks, Muslims, Jews, and all kinds of others. Somewhere in Internet heaven is a group picture with George and he is dressed in a klan outfit and posed next to all the blacks, Jews, Arabs, and even an Indian guy. The only thing they all have in common was that they were all drunker than skunks and thought this was hilarious. We are talking college age here not 14. It doesn't matter. Boys are boys regardless of age. He sent it to me and I had a cow about it. Because it was, to me, racist, and I wasn't even thinking about future where this might get out. DS felt I thought it was racist because I was old. Maybe he's right and I'm wrong.
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,492
|
Post by Tennesseer on Sept 16, 2014 8:27:07 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 1, 2024 21:33:27 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2014 8:33:41 GMT -5
i hope i have not shown any disrespect. seriously. i am mostly curious about later. i want to understand her perspective. and i already said that if she was personally offended by this and honestly felt that this kid had her and other Christians in her site, she had every right to be offended. but i am nearly certain that was not the case- that he did NOT intend to offend Christians- or at least that was not his "intended goal". I want to make the point that I have had similar discussions when the disrespect was towards the icons of faiths other than my own. Overall I feel that we need to respect each others sacred objects. That doesn't stop us from disagreeing with various teachings and debating that. But desecrating each others sacred objects does nothing except offend people at their core. The fact that so many of you don't really think it is a problem is scary. Years ago the American and Canadian women's hockey teams were playing and the Americans were doing pretty well. To brag about that they put a Canadian flag on the floor of their locker room and walked on it throughout the game. I guess it was to represent how they were walking all over our team. You have no idea how many of us still have that stuck in our craw. And then Americans wonder why they aren't that popular around the world.
I am sure this kid knew it would offend the members of that congregation and actually took pride in it. And expects lots of laughs and no repercussions.
I read that he was threatened. I don't believe in that. That goes back to the shoot out at high noon days. That is why I believe the repercussions should be legal.
What percentage of the population would need to consider an object sacred in your opinion for it to qualify for extra punishment? For example if someone had something from their deceased grandmother they consider sacred and no one else does, should it qualify for protection under this law?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 1, 2024 21:33:27 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2014 8:35:07 GMT -5
Later " Overall I feel that we need to respect each others sacred objects. "
Totally and completely agree.
BUT you can't do this by making it illegal not to.
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,866
|
Post by zibazinski on Sept 16, 2014 8:44:47 GMT -5
I'm sure this boy's parents opened a can of whoopass on him already. He sorry, I'm sure. Probably more sorry he got caught but I'm sure he wasnt thinking. It isn't like he went INTO a church and did it. It's bad, it's stupid, and its out there. Would I like the pics DF took of me to get out on the Internet? Hell, no, and if he were an ass, he could do it.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 1, 2024 21:33:27 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2014 8:51:00 GMT -5
Guys, the fact that so many of you have done things similar is not comforting. It's like saying "My parents beat me and I turned out fine" In whose opinion did you turn out fine?
@aj we already have methods of identifying religions, we could easily use the same standard. I don't have to justify every hypothetical situation to say that this one is criminal.
oped of course we use laws to indicated what our morals are as a society and what we consider worthy of respect and what we don't.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 1, 2024 21:33:27 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2014 8:56:51 GMT -5
@aj we already have methods of identifying religions, we could easily use the same standard. I don't have to justify every hypothetical situation to say that this one is criminal.
oped of course we use laws to indicated what our morals are as a society and what we consider worthy of respect and what we don't. Aj response: Sure you do... Because our government is expressly forbidden from establishment of religion. If the law suggest that only certain objects from certain religions are sacred, they are by extension establishing religion. So defining what is and is not a sacred object is paramount. To me: ... I'm against all law which might regulate morality. Law needs to concern itself with protection of property and person from harm. ... And being offended is not harm.
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,866
|
Post by zibazinski on Sept 16, 2014 8:57:32 GMT -5
I don't think it's the same. My mom beat me and I didn't turn out fine. I also didnt beat my children but I'm sure others would feel I was very harsh with them. They might even be right. I did stupid things, my kids have done and probably still do, stupid things. I know I do even now. You do learn there's a time and place for doing stupid things as you get older and a. Little common sense kicks in. I didn't do the dumb thing in front of an audience but only with DF. Go back 10 years with my girlfriends and we all would have been doing it and taking pictures of each other doing it. No one is saying what he did was okay, at least I haven't read anyone saying it. What posters are saying and I agree, it isn't criminal and some community service is sufficient. No one is saying he should get off scot free.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 1, 2024 21:33:27 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2014 9:00:14 GMT -5
You also can't change development. You can't force all 4 year olds to read, and you can't force all 14 year olds to be serious.
Nor can you expect perfection. People need to be allowed to make mistakes in order to learn.
And not all correction and molding should be done by law and the state.
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,492
|
Post by Tennesseer on Sept 16, 2014 9:15:32 GMT -5
I do not believe the courts andcthe law should even be involved in this.
If there is going to be any community service, it should be parent-ordered community service.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 1, 2024 21:33:27 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2014 10:53:57 GMT -5
@aj we already have methods of identifying religions, we could easily use the same standard. I don't have to justify every hypothetical situation to say that this one is criminal.
oped of course we use laws to indicated what our morals are as a society and what we consider worthy of respect and what we don't. 1. Aj response: Sure you do... Because our government is expressly forbidden from establishment of religion. If the law suggest that only certain objects from certain religions are sacred, they are by extension establishing religion. So defining what is and is not a sacred object is paramount. 2. To me: ... I'm against all law which might regulate morality. Law needs to concern itself with protection of property and person from harm. ... And being offended is not harm. 1. Government recognises religions, it doesn't create them. It recognises them by allowing certain tax privileges.
2. Then you are against all law. Because it ALL legislates morality.
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Sept 16, 2014 10:56:23 GMT -5
I don't see most law as legislating morality. I see most law as legislating civility. To me, there's a big difference.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 1, 2024 21:33:27 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2014 10:59:34 GMT -5
How do all laws legislate morality?
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,129
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 16, 2014 11:17:18 GMT -5
i hope i have not shown any disrespect. seriously. i am mostly curious about later. i want to understand her perspective. and i already said that if she was personally offended by this and honestly felt that this kid had her and other Christians in her site, she had every right to be offended. but i am nearly certain that was not the case- that he did NOT intend to offend Christians- or at least that was not his "intended goal". I want to make the point that I have had similar discussions when the disrespect was towards the icons of faiths other than my own. Overall I feel that we need to respect each others sacred objects. That doesn't stop us from disagreeing with various teachings and debating that. But desecrating each others sacred objects does nothing except offend people at their core. The fact that so many of you don't really think it is a problem is scary. Years ago the American and Canadian women's hockey teams were playing and the Americans were doing pretty well. To brag about that they put a Canadian flag on the floor of their locker room and walked on it throughout the game. I guess it was to represent how they were walking all over our team. You have no idea how many of us still have that stuck in our craw. And then Americans wonder why they aren't that popular around the world.
I am sure this kid knew it would offend the members of that congregation and actually took pride in it. And expects lots of laughs and no repercussions.
I read that he was threatened. I don't believe in that. That goes back to the shoot out at high noon days. That is why I believe the repercussions should be legal.
speaking for myself, i was not voting for "disrespect". i just think the heavy handed, court centered approach to gaining it is not the right one.
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Sept 16, 2014 11:19:50 GMT -5
Laws have a moral component to be sure, but they're mostly put in place to stop harm. It's immoral to cheat on your spouse, every religion recognizes this. It's not illegal though. That's why I consider the law to be directed toward the legislation of civility as opposed to morality, Shaun. Efforts at legislating morality have always proven failures.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,129
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 16, 2014 11:19:53 GMT -5
I'm sure this boy's parents opened a can of whoopass on him already. He sorry, I'm sure. Probably more sorry he got caught but I'm sure he wasnt thinking. It isn't like he went INTO a church and did it. It's bad, it's stupid, and its out there. Would I like the pics DF took of me to get out on the Internet? Hell, no, and if he were an ass, he could do it. i am also betting that if ANY adults were around, he would not have done it.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,129
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 16, 2014 11:20:40 GMT -5
Guys, the fact that so many of you have done things similar is not comforting. It's like saying "My parents beat me and I turned out fine" In whose opinion did you turn out fine? mine, of course.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,129
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 16, 2014 11:23:11 GMT -5
2. Then you are against all law. Because it ALL legislates morality.
what moral is being upheld by vagrancy laws?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 1, 2024 21:33:27 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2014 11:24:55 GMT -5
The law against murder, for instance, isn't because of 'Thou Shall not kill." ... It is a protection of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,476
|
Post by billisonboard on Sept 16, 2014 11:29:16 GMT -5
2. Then you are against all law. Because it ALL legislates morality.
what moral is being upheld by vagrancy laws ...
Both America and Great Britain owe a great debt to the Puritans ... The “Yankee work ethic” came about because of the belief that a man's work is done first for God's approval.
Read more:http://www.gotquestions.org/Puritans-Puritanism.html#ixzz3DUrrOAdH
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,129
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 16, 2014 11:30:03 GMT -5
The law against murder, for instance, isn't because of 'Thou Shall not kill." ... It is a protection of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. yes, and last time i checked, there was no law against dishonoring your parents in this country.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,129
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 16, 2014 11:31:14 GMT -5
what moral is being upheld by vagrancy laws ...
Both America and Great Britain owe a great debt to the Puritans ... The “Yankee work ethic” came about because of the belief that a man's work is done first for God's approval.
Read more:http://www.gotquestions.org/Puritans-Puritanism.html#ixzz3DUrrOAdH maybe. i have another idea, based on how these laws are actually ENFORCED.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 1, 2024 21:33:27 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2014 11:36:19 GMT -5
2. Then you are against all law. Because it ALL legislates morality.
what moral is being upheld by vagrancy laws? The Dude: Oh, Jesus, what's that smell, man? Auto Circus Cop: Yes, probably a vagrant slept in the car. Or maybe just used it as a toilet and moved on.
|
|
ՏՇԾԵԵʅՏɧ_LԹՏՏʅҼ
Community Leader
♡ ♡ BᏋՆᎥᏋᏉᏋ ♡ ♡
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 16:12:51 GMT -5
Posts: 43,130
Location: Inside POM's Head
Favorite Drink: Chilled White Zin
|
Post by ՏՇԾԵԵʅՏɧ_LԹՏՏʅҼ on Sept 16, 2014 11:36:32 GMT -5
How can you be sure that it was his intent to offend the congregtation? He probably did know it was an offensive pose.
And it was certainly a dumb-assed thing to do - and the kid was thinking like - well, a dumb-assed kid. But he most likely did it to get a few cheap laughs from whoever he was with (someone else had to have taken the pic).
It was probably one of the friends who got the pic circulating in the first place - not this kid.
I'm certainly not defending what he did - far from it - but I think assuming he purposely did it to offend the congregation is an incorrect conclusion.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 1, 2024 21:33:27 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2014 11:37:21 GMT -5
I didn't say all morals have been made into law, I said all laws legislate a morality. Protecting life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is a moral stand. As for the vagrancy laws, you might not agree with the morality behind it but there is one.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 1, 2024 21:33:27 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2014 11:39:28 GMT -5
Morality (from the Latin moralitas "manner, character, proper behavior") is the differentiation of intentions, decisions, and actions between those that are "good" (or right) and those that are "bad" (or wrong).[citation needed] Morality can be a body of standards or principles derived from a code of conduct from a particular philosophy, religion, culture, etc., or it can derive from a standard that a person believes should be universal.[1] Morality may also be specifically synonymous with "goodness" or "rightness." Immorality is the active opposition to morality (i.e. opposition to that which is good or right), while amorality is variously defined as an unawareness of, indifference toward, or disbelief in any set of moral standards or principles.[2][3][4]
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,129
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 16, 2014 12:14:55 GMT -5
I didn't say all morals have been made into law, I said all laws legislate a morality. Protecting life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is a moral stand. As for the vagrancy laws, you might not agree with the morality behind it but there is one. i think this discussion is going to become a case study in experimenter bias, so i will pass.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,129
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 16, 2014 12:15:45 GMT -5
Morality (from the Latin moralitas "manner, character, proper behavior") is the differentiation of intentions, decisions, and actions between those that are "good" (or right) and those that are "bad" (or wrong).[citation needed] Morality can be a body of standards or principles derived from a code of conduct from a particular philosophy, religion, culture, etc., or it can derive from a standard that a person believes should be universal.[1] Morality may also be specifically synonymous with "goodness" or "rightness." Immorality is the active opposition to morality (i.e. opposition to that which is good or right), while amorality is variously defined as an unawareness of, indifference toward, or disbelief in any set of moral standards or principles.[2][3][4] yeah, i am familiar with the term. i learned it in Ethics class.
|
|
toomuchreality
Senior Associate
Joined: Sept 3, 2011 10:28:25 GMT -5
Posts: 15,698
Favorite Drink: Sometimes I drink water... just to surprise my liver!
|
Post by toomuchreality on Sept 16, 2014 12:26:28 GMT -5
www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/09/11/oral-sex-jesus-statue-photo_n_5805174.htmlWill this boy get punished for coming to Jesus?A Pennsylvania teen may face up to two years behind bars for allegedly taking a photo of himself simulating oral sex with a statue of Jesus, Kron 4 reports. The photo was taken in front of Love in the Name of Christ, a Christian organization in Everett, Pennsylvania, and posted on Facebook back in July. On Tuesday, the 14-year-old — whose name has not been released by police — was charged with desecration of a venerated object, the Smoking Gun reported. If convicted, he could wind up spending two years in a juvenile jail, according to Kron 4. I would ask what this kid was thinking, but clearly, he wasn't. Talk about poor judgement. This is not about if you believe, or not. It's about having respect. But does he deserve 2 years in jail? ←That's what I'm torn about. (no previous record)
|
|