Page 72 of 83 FirstFirst ... 2262707172737482 ... LastLast
Results 711 to 720 of 825

Thread: Aboriginal Civil Disobedience

  1. Top | #711
    Tricksy Leftits Angry Floof's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Lancre
    Posts
    13,126
    Archived
    14,435
    Total Posts
    27,561
    Rep Power
    76
    By the way, Angra, I didn't see your response to my earlier question for you. Given what we do know about the schools searched so far, how many of the remaining 100+ schools would you guess will be found to have children buried under them once searched?

  2. Top | #712
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Buenos Aires
    Posts
    3,595
    Archived
    7,588
    Total Posts
    11,183
    Rep Power
    61
    Quote Originally Posted by Angry Floof
    The RCC is alive and well, and still abusing children as we speak, and likely murdering children somewhere as well because Catholic churches are so often trusted with orphans, kids who don't have families to keep track of them.
    Who is the RCC?
    Some priests are definitely abusing children. Some might be murdering them, though I'm less certain of that.
    For that matter, some police officers are abusing children. Some might be murdering them, though I'm less certain of that. And that's because the police are often trusted in many circumstances.
    For that matter, some foster parents are abusing children. Some might be murdering them, though I'm less...the point should be clear by now.

    Quote Originally Posted by Angry Floof
    If the RCC, which operates under a world view, beliefs, and practices that give rise to abuse, has not yet been held accountable to the point where it can be relied on to behave itself without external forces keeping it in line.
    "Held accountable"? What do you mean by that? Consider the RCC guilty (to go by laughing dog's "Holding the driver accountable (i.e. guilty)"?
    But who is the RCC?
    That is, which mind do you intend to punish or consider guilty for the decisions of kidnapping children, abusing them, etc., in the schools in Canada we are talking about?

    Quote Originally Posted by Angry Floof
    For the RCC to be reliable to behave itself without external powers forcing it to, it would have to undergo drastic reform, and it has barely undergone small reform over centuries.
    But that is an argument to say that the pope or whoever has power should try to reform the church, not that others should blame them for what other people did.



    Quote Originally Posted by Angry Floof
    Not having the will or wherewithal to hold powerful organizations accountable for the abuses their structure and culture allow, encourage, and cover up ensures that abuse of vulnerable people will continue.
    They are only 'their' abuses in the sense that they are the abuses of some human individuals. And no, one can argue that the present leaders or whoever has power should try to reform them to protect the public in the present and the future, without engaging in blaming of the innocent.


    Quote Originally Posted by Angry Floof
    The Pope, arguably the world's most powerful person, can absolutely put a stop to the abuse quite easily, but he won't, and no Pope ever will of their own accord.
    He is not remotely the world's most powerful person. And he cannot stop all of the abuse. But he could defintely do a lot better than what he is doing. And he should. And he is guilty of failure to do that. But he is not guilty of what happened in the schools in Canada. And he should not apologize for it. Because he did not do it.



    Quote Originally Posted by Angry Floof
    What the rest of us can do to hold the RCC accountable is to legislate what its authority figures can and can't do and impose strict, impinging secular oversight measures. Religion, particularly the RCC (because of its vast influence), holds a special, undeserved, and dangerous place of protection from criticism and accountability. We could easily change that if not for so many people like you making sure none of that ever happens.
    I'm not sure what you are accusing me of opposing. Just to be clear, what measures do you have in mind?

  3. Top | #713
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Buenos Aires
    Posts
    3,595
    Archived
    7,588
    Total Posts
    11,183
    Rep Power
    61
    Quote Originally Posted by Angry Floof View Post
    By the way, Angra, I didn't see your response to my earlier question for you. Given what we do know about the schools searched so far, how many of the remaining 100+ schools would you guess will be found to have children buried under them once searched?
    I have no idea. I would need more information about the remaining ones. Do you have a link?

    With no further information, my guess would be whatever number gives you the same average as it is now, rounded to the nearest integer.

  4. Top | #714
    Tricksy Leftits Angry Floof's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Lancre
    Posts
    13,126
    Archived
    14,435
    Total Posts
    27,561
    Rep Power
    76
    Quote Originally Posted by Angra Mainyu View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Angry Floof View Post
    By the way, Angra, I didn't see your response to my earlier question for you. Given what we do know about the schools searched so far, how many of the remaining 100+ schools would you guess will be found to have children buried under them once searched?
    I have no idea. I would need more information about the remaining ones. Do you have a link?

    With no further information, my guess would be whatever number gives you the same average as it is now, rounded to the nearest integer.
    Yes, I'm just asking for your guess based on the ones we know about so far. I'm assuming you mean average per school. So you would expect all the schools to have some number of bodies under each of them.

    So I'm wondering how you would expect that and still think that only the individuals involved in all those schools would be complicit in the deaths of those children.

    What kind of organization could contain that many people in that many different places being involved in that many children's bodies being secretly buried under the organization's buildings? You can't possibly say "any organization," and you know that it was not just random evil people coincidentally all working at the same schools under the same religion.

    Having a hard time understanding what you think you're defending here. It's not truth or justice, that's for sure.

  5. Top | #715
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    seattle
    Posts
    7,355
    Rep Power
    23
    The RCC considers itself above civil law answering to a 'higher power'.

    The RCC lost its civil power of enforcement with the rise of the Italian state in the late 19th century. . In the mid 1800s there was an international story when an RCC priest essentially seized a Jewish boy from his family with the intention of raiing him Catholic. The family lost in the courts of the day.

    It is the 1000 year old Vatican presumption of superiority and immunity on civil affairs.

    I rad a bio of Jefferson, he did not like the papcy at all. On the question of spreading our new system abroad he was not supportive, he likened it to the RCC sending an 'army of Jesuits' over here to convert us.

    Starting in the 90s the RCC has pressured Catholic politicians to vote as the RCC wants, or be punished with denial of sacraments. It was in the news recently regarding Biden and RCC threats.

    Open admition of moral failure undermines the premise of the RCC, the one and only moral authority on Earth derived from a god.

  6. Top | #716
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2020
    Location
    Midwestern USA
    Posts
    2,373
    Rep Power
    7
    Open admition of moral failure undermines the premise of the RCC, the one and only moral authority on Earth derived from a god.
    Well, that is Scriptural. Derived from God.

    Jesus founded His church on Peter, the first Pope. He was very clear. If you believe the Christian Testament. I don't, but I can read the plain teachings of the New Testament and that's what it says.
    Tom

  7. Top | #717
    Elder Contributor
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    19,524
    Archived
    41,943
    Total Posts
    61,467
    Rep Power
    88
    Quote Originally Posted by Angra Mainyu View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by laughing dog View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Angra Mainyu View Post
    your logic is simply mistaken.
    If you are trying to save face with your unreasoned responses, it is not working like you think.

    Fortunately for society, your inhumane and irrational viewpoints do not prevail.
    It's not about saving face. Your logic is just wrong. Sure, you will not realize that, so I will not 'save face' in your eyes. And the same goes for those who agree with you. But that doesn't change logic. You are still wrong.
    You are mistaken about my logic. Your posting history leads me yo believe you will never see nor admit your obvious errors in “reasoning”.

    Fortunately, your views on this matter ate not even close to representing existing social arrangements or rational social arrangements.

  8. Top | #718
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Buenos Aires
    Posts
    3,595
    Archived
    7,588
    Total Posts
    11,183
    Rep Power
    61
    Quote Originally Posted by Angry Floof
    Yes, I'm just asking for your guess based on the ones we know about so far. I'm assuming you mean average per school. So you would expect all the schools to have some number of bodies under each of them.
    No, that does not follow (though it is irrelevant, since my expecting that would not have the consequences you think).

    And by the way, just in case, also I would not expect the number to be what I said. In fact, I think that for any given number x, the probability that the total number will be x is extremely low.
    I just made a guess as the closest, given essentially no info.


    Quote Originally Posted by Angry Floof
    So I'm wondering how you would expect that and still think that only the individuals involved in all those schools would be complicit in the deaths of those children.
    I do not expect that. Again, I have no idea which schools were search, what the choice criteria was, how many schools had bodies under them, etc. But in any event, I never said that only the people involved in the deaths of the children already found are guilty of choosing to abuse, kidnap, etc., children. There may well be more to be found.


    Quote Originally Posted by Angry Floof
    What kind of organization could contain that many people in that many different places being involved in that many children's bodies being secretly buried under the organization's buildings? You can't possibly say "any organization," and you know that it was not just random evil people coincidentally all working at the same schools under the same religion.
    Again, 'contain'. Many organizations would have people like that. The government of a country perhaps. A large church like the RCC. Some other churches perhaps. But the organization 'contains' them only in the same that some individual members engage in that behavior, in the context of their organization-related activities. That is irrelevant to my points against blaming the innocent.

    Quote Originally Posted by Angry Floof
    Having a hard time understanding what you think you're defending here. It's not truth or justice, that's for sure.
    It is both truth and justice. In particular, I am opposed collective blame, and then blaming the innocent. But it is true you are not understanding what I am defending. If you intend to understand my view, I suggest you read this post carefully.

  9. Top | #719
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    California
    Posts
    5,243
    Archived
    4,797
    Total Posts
    10,040
    Rep Power
    69
    Quote Originally Posted by laughing dog View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Bomb#20 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by laughing dog View Post
    So you do believe in collective guilt.
    Why do you regard this as an example of collective guilt? The getaway driver is individually guilty of the felony of helping others commit a felony that he knows, or should know, has a significant risk of causing injury or death.
    This is a group. LP and the law consider the getaway driver guilty of the actions of the robbers even though the driver did not participate in the actual robbery. Whether the driver knows or should know about the risks is irrelevant to the issue that the driver did not engage in actual violence. Neither LP nor the law (nor apparently you) consider whether the driver protested against the use of violence or was assured of no violence as relevant.

    Holding the driver accountable (i.e. guilty) for the actions of others is a form of collective guilt. Why anyone would think this is controversial is certainly fascinating.
    That is a bizarre way of looking at it.

    What people are held accountable for is the foreseeable consequences of their own individual actions. If their own individual actions are criminal then they're criminally accountable for the consequences; if their own actions are non-criminal and merely irresponsible then they're held civilly accountable; if there's nothing wrong with their actions and the harmful consequences are an unforeseeable random fluke then they aren't accountable at all. For example, if you announce on the radio that you've hidden five $100 bills in five random books in your local Barnes & Noble, then when the store is predictably trashed by a ravenous mob of treasure hunters, the store owners will sue you for the damage, and they'll deserve to win. That's individual responsibility, not collective responsibility, even though the actual damage was committed by people other than you. You ought not to have hidden those bills and made that radio announcement.

    In the event that people are held accountable, the reason is they did something wrong and predictable results came to pass. Whether the mechanism by which those results come to pass happens to pass through the decision making apparatus of some other human is an immaterial detail. Human minds are not supernatural causality interrupters; they're a part of the cause and effect structure of the universe. The people who trashed the store might as well have been robots programmed to search out Benjamins for all the legal and moral difference it makes. So it's no more reasonable to call holding a getaway driver accountable "collective guilt" than it would be to call holding a mob boss accountable "collective guilt" because he ordered a hit and the underling he told to commit the murder delegated it to some under-underling. In both cases the death is a foreseeable consequence of the individual's decision to break the law.

    Whether the driver knows or should know about the risks is irrelevant to the issue that the driver did not engage in actual violence.
    Why? Because you say so? If that were irrelevant then the only relevant point with the mob boss would be that he didn't pull the trigger himself. It's not as though ordering a hit creates a 100% chance the intended victim will die; it merely raises the probability.

    Neither LP nor the law (nor apparently you) consider whether the driver protested against the use of violence or was assured of no violence as relevant.
    Well, duh! The people the driver was protesting to and receiving assurances from were robbers. The driver knew they were robbers. The court will take due judicial notice of the fact that it is not reasonable to rely on the assurances or on the good will and virtue of people you know are robbers. That a criminal who cares so little about his fellow man that he'd rob him might well not be above going back on his given word when he finds keeping his promises would put him at risk of going to jail is a fact the getaway driver knew, or should have known. That somebody will get hurt is a foreseeable consequence of agreeing to help a person escape after the robbery, even if he says "Nobody's going to get hurt" before heading off to stick a gun in someone's face. This is not rocket science.
    Last edited by Bomb#20; 08-01-2021 at 11:45 PM.

  10. Top | #720
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    seattle
    Posts
    7,355
    Rep Power
    23
    Quote Originally Posted by TomC View Post
    Open admition of moral failure undermines the premise of the RCC, the one and only moral authority on Earth derived from a god.
    Well, that is Scriptural. Derived from God.

    Jesus founded His church on Peter, the first Pope. He was very clear. If you believe the Christian Testament. I don't, but I can read the plain teachings of the New Testament and that's what it says.
    Tom
    I doubt the real Jusus if he existed founded a churchm he was Jewish rabbi preaching to Jews.

    That Peter was anointed by Jesus as the head of a new church is an RCC narrative to justify power.

    Why on Earth take a few lines in an ancient document of unknown authorship as literal factual reporting?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •