I do not like vigilantism. But.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
02-10-2012, 08:48 AM
RE: I do not like vigilantism. But.
(01-10-2012 04:33 PM)DLJ Wrote:  
(01-10-2012 02:47 PM)Greatest I am Wrote:  I would not mind a link if you have one.

Was he a pedophile who had escaped justice?

As requested...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2000/aug/30...on.society

btw... interesting that your thought was that it was a "he".

Thanks for this.

I don't know why. The issue was pedophile priests and that a male would be targeted would be the normal assumption.

Regards
DL
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-10-2012, 08:56 AM
RE: I do not like vigilantism. But.
(01-10-2012 05:51 PM)Starcrash Wrote:  The problem with taking the law into your own hands is that you excuse everyone who wishes to do so. And what if Christians saw us in the same light that you see the Pope and Muslims? I think they do.

So, unless you want to erect a double-standard, you're suggesting that Christians should have the freedom to "enact justice" against atheists. "Great idea," he said sarcastically.

"But justice isn't being done!" you cry. Of course it is. Muslims aren't breaking the laws of their own countries, which is why they aren't being arrested for crimes. The Muslims in the US aren't committing the crimes done in Islamic states, because if they did they'd end up in Guantanamo Bay. The pope is the ruler of a city-state, and I imagine he's not breaking the "laws" of Vatican City. I think we all hate dictators that do whatever they like, but they're not law-breakers because they make their own laws. Other Catholics that commit these crimes are being arrested/sued, and I don't see why we'd need to compound their punishment for the sake of their leader's "crimes".

Who asked for compounding the punishment because of the church leadership?
Not me.

Are you suggesting that atheists are breaking the law of the land?
For your analogy to be close, they would have to be.

That is the law at issue here. Nothing else.

Regards
DL
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-10-2012, 09:02 AM
RE: I do not like vigilantism. But.
(01-10-2012 11:02 PM)morondog Wrote:  
(01-10-2012 02:50 PM)Greatest I am Wrote:  As they should when dealing with a mob not interested in justice and enforcing the law of the land.

What of when they are interested in justice and enforcing the law?

There is no such thing as mob justice. That's why the term is used sarcastically.

Hmm. The peace marchers would disagree as they were called mobs many a time even when they were peaceful marches.

Regards
DL
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-10-2012, 10:43 AM
RE: I do not like vigilantism. But.
(02-10-2012 09:02 AM)Greatest I am Wrote:  
(01-10-2012 11:02 PM)morondog Wrote:  There is no such thing as mob justice. That's why the term is used sarcastically.

Hmm. The peace marchers would disagree as they were called mobs many a time even when they were peaceful marches.

Regards
DL

You are advocating that they *not* be peaceful marchers. How do you feel about lynchings?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-10-2012, 10:43 AM
RE: I do not like vigilantism. But.
(02-10-2012 08:30 AM)Greatest I am Wrote:  I have not tracked the number of beatings that Rodney King and that situation prevented but if the police needed a reminder that they were there to serve and protect, not be the bullies for their white masters.

Simple answer: Zero. None. Nada.

Do you think those policemen who beat Rodney King were "thinking" about what they were doing at the time? No. Not at all. They were their own little 5-man mob. Their own little mob mentality took over and they lost control. No thinking.

Do you think that, the next time some policemen forgot to protect and serve but instead started to beat some innocent man, that the Rodney King riots gave them a "reminder" to behave in a more policeman-like fashion? No. Not at all.

Those kinds of mindless, racist beatings are not a matter of forgetting to behave properly, and no reminder is going to prevent the beating.

The only "reminder" anyone got from the Rodney King riots was that the next trial will have a different outcome: the policemen will be guilty until proven innocent and will not be acquitted unless there is a mountain of exonerating evidence that can be broadcast on every known media source to show the potential rioters that the policemen really and truly are not guilty. Not how justice should be done, but how it will be done - to prevent the kind of justifiable mob that only wants truth and justice that you seem to be advocating.

"Whores perform the same function as priests, but far more thoroughly." - Robert A. Heinlein
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-10-2012, 11:01 AM
RE: I do not like vigilantism. But.
(02-10-2012 08:45 AM)Greatest I am Wrote:  
(01-10-2012 03:45 PM)Impulse Wrote:  I assume you mean the US government?

They already are moving.
Regarding pedophilia in the Catholic church:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_sex_abuse_cases

The Muslim extremist issue is more complicated, but don't think for a minute the US government isn't working on far more than you know.

No argument that some progress has been made but if you read some of the apologies that the Pope has publicly made, they are quite shallow and the problem has not gone away and probably will not till the rules on marriage for priests change.

I hope I am wrong but doubt it.

Some abuse will always be with us in what some wold say is acceptable numbers that does not take care of the institutionalized protection of pedophile priests.

Regards
DL
Well first, killing the existing Pope won't get rid of pedophilia in the church either. They'll just appoint another Pope who will make the same shallow apologies.

Second, I don't think the marriage issue is the primary one influencing the pedophilia. By and large, it seems to be boys who are the victims of male clergy. (Not exclusively, but largely.) I think the issue is more about why some people choose to become a priest in the first place. Some probably go there just to be a pedophile figuring "who would suspect a priest?" or at least that it would be far more difficult for them to be caught. Others probably become a priest for all the wrong reasons (the "right" ones being a true desire to follow and serve their god) such as feeling they have no other place where they fit in. They may have such a low self image that they believe they will never get married, for example, and this becomes a way to save face with their family. Or, maybe some are homosexuals who don't want to "come out of the closet" and again the priesthood is a way to hide it, not get married, and save face. With the wrong reasons, they may be less attentive to the priesthood and more easily tempted into something like pedophilia. Allowing marriage may help a few to behave better, but I think the church needs to focus on who is being allowed to serve in the clergy in the first place. They spend years in the Seminary; I would think there are plenty of exercises that can be done to examine in considerable depth why each person wants to join the clergy. They may not find the "wrong reasons", but they could probably notice an absence of the right ones and send those people off to find other careers.

I do agree with the unacceptability of the institutionalized protection, but I think the church will eventually be pressured into doing better even by its own members alone, but also by the general public.

"Religion has caused more misery to all of mankind in every stage of human history than any other single idea." --Madalyn Murray O'Hair
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-10-2012, 11:07 AM
RE: I do not like vigilantism. But.
(02-10-2012 11:01 AM)Impulse Wrote:  ...I think the church will eventually be pressured into doing better even by its own members alone, but also by the general public.

Maybe.

Let's not forget that, after WWII, thee was a huge outcry from Catholics to have Adolf Hitler excommunicated for being such an evil bastard. The faithful were picketing for it in Vatican Square for weeks.

Nothing was done. Not to be too big a cynic, but my take is that it would have gone differently if Hitler had sent six million Catholics to the gas chambers. But he didn't, and ultimately he wasn't excommunicated despite the church being pressured by its own members.

So, I'm not going to put too much faith in the church doing the right thing because of member pressure.

Member pressure - that sounds like it would violate the celibacy rules or something...

"Whores perform the same function as priests, but far more thoroughly." - Robert A. Heinlein
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Aseptic Skeptic's post
02-10-2012, 11:12 AM
RE: I do not like vigilantism. But.
I don't think for a second that this kind of abuse stuff should be allowed to be covered up by the church or that the church should be allowed to handle it as an internal matter - it's a matter for courts and the law, just as any sexual assault case. But vigilante justice is not an acceptable solution either. We worked hard for civilization. Vigilantism is a significant step backwards that would take a long time to recover from, because we are saying 'it is acceptable to take the law into your own hands'...
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes morondog's post
02-10-2012, 11:49 AM
RE: I do not like vigilantism. But.
(02-10-2012 11:07 AM)Aseptic Skeptic Wrote:  
(02-10-2012 11:01 AM)Impulse Wrote:  ...I think the church will eventually be pressured into doing better even by its own members alone, but also by the general public.

Maybe.

Let's not forget that, after WWII, thee was a huge outcry from Catholics to have Adolf Hitler excommunicated for being such an evil bastard. The faithful were picketing for it in Vatican Square for weeks.

Nothing was done. Not to be too big a cynic, but my take is that it would have gone differently if Hitler had sent six million Catholics to the gas chambers. But he didn't, and ultimately he wasn't excommunicated despite the church being pressured by its own members.

So, I'm not going to put too much faith in the church doing the right thing because of member pressure.
Good point. Maybe it's naive, but I think there is a difference between the clergy sinning and a member sinning. Also it's many clergy members, not just one. Many Catholics are quite embarrassed by all the pedophilia and the churches mismanagement of it and the whole matter speaks to them personally as they continue to belong to the church. It's the leadership of the church itself that is sinning which is far more disturbing than one of the church's members sinning.

But the public outrage and the court trials should also have an impact too, fortunately.

(02-10-2012 11:07 AM)Aseptic Skeptic Wrote:  Member pressure - that sounds like it would violate the celibacy rules or something...
LOL!

"Religion has caused more misery to all of mankind in every stage of human history than any other single idea." --Madalyn Murray O'Hair
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Impulse's post
02-10-2012, 11:50 AM
RE: I do not like vigilantism. But.
(02-10-2012 11:12 AM)morondog Wrote:  I don't think for a second that this kind of abuse stuff should be allowed to be covered up by the church or that the church should be allowed to handle it as an internal matter - it's a matter for courts and the law, just as any sexual assault case. But vigilante justice is not an acceptable solution either. We worked hard for civilization. Vigilantism is a significant step backwards that would take a long time to recover from, because we are saying 'it is acceptable to take the law into your own hands'...
If you're replying to me, I didn't mean to imply that the church should handle it exclusively. I was just saying that I believe it's membership will pressure them into doing more than they have up to now. But the public and trials will have an impact as well and I agree that they should.

"Religion has caused more misery to all of mankind in every stage of human history than any other single idea." --Madalyn Murray O'Hair
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Impulse's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: