American missionary tries to convert indigenous island people; receives the Magellan treatment
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
 
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> Off Topic Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
ringfinger
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418

PostPosted: Mon Nov 26, 2018 9:10 am    Post subject:

That is a very strict immigration policy.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Omar Little
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 90299
Location: Formerly Known As 24

PostPosted: Mon Nov 26, 2018 10:25 am    Post subject:

adkindo wrote:
Omar Little wrote:
adkindo wrote:
DaMuleRules wrote:
That's a completely failed analogy.


It is a failed analogy because you are refusing to examine your perspective....in my opinion. I think there are a lot of interesting debates and points of discussion from this situation, that probably should result in mixed opinions.

First, is it ok or should it be an option for a population to totally segregate from the rest of society? We definitely do not allow that in the United States. We would never allow the people of Key West to blow up the US-1 bridge, refuse to pay taxes or adhere to federal laws (trust me, if we would allow it, they would have already done it ) . How many times have we sent in armed agencies when a religious sect appeared to be "off the grid"? Honestly, I do not want to go down that path and debate each one on the merits, but the point is what is taking place there is not an option. We use lack of education, proper nutrition, child endangerment, etc. as excuses to roll in tanks and blackhawks if we get a hint of a population secluding itself in America.....and all of those arguments could be made about that population. Are those children better off secluded on the island? Are they given proper care or are they being abused per common human standards? Do they have access to proper healthcare when needed....or are they simply dying from simple viruses?


The reason they are segregated is simple: the benefit of integrating them to our society is outweighed by the risks. They would not only pose a risk to those trying to force them into our society, but they have no immunity to any of our pathogens, along with the violence that would be necessary to subdue them. They are not analogous to Kentucky, because they would not be blowing up a bridge and leaving a society, they have never been part of society, they don’t even know what exists beyond their island.


I get everything you are claiming....but how long does the nation devote resources to protect them? 100 more years? 1000 more years? What if we learned they are sacrificing 1 child a year as a ritual? What if we learned they sacrifice every female with blue eyes when they turn 16? What if we learned over 100 children died last month from something a simple antibiotic would resolve? Do we have an obligation to step in to preserve life? I just see a lot of room for different opinions on different aspects of the situation. I am not suggesting anything should change today or tomorrow....nor am I suggesting it should not change at some point. This is by far not the only such population around the globe, and I find them fascinating in different contexts.


I have no problem with the fact that yes, there are moral quandries in such an endeavor, and, setting aside hypotheticals, of which we could design any we wish, I suspect that not every ethics expert would agree where the boundary lies (although I suspect there is a consensus that as they currently are, letting them discover us is the null position).

Be that as it may, an individual taking it upon himself to go there and risk himself and them for no purpose other than the gratification of his own superstitions, is nowhere along that reasonable continuum of thought.
_________________
“We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
jodeke
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Posts: 67317
Location: In a world where admitting to not knowing something is considered a great way to learn.

PostPosted: Mon Nov 26, 2018 10:29 am    Post subject:

The Sentinelese people have survived for 60,000 years. They're able to reproduce without modern medicine. Are self sustaining. They don't interfere with the outer world or cause harm to it unless intruded upon. I'm in agreement with some of DMR'S contentions. I harbor "If it ain't broke, why try to fix it?" Did John Allen Chau deserve to die? I say NO? Was he responsible for his death? I say YES.

LINK

Quote:
How old are the Sentinelese?

They are designated as a Scheduled Tribe. An uncontacted people, the group, estimated to comprise between 40 and 500 individuals, is believed to have lived on North Sentinel Island for as long as 60,000 years and speaks the Sentinelese language, a language isolate unrelated to the languages of the surrounding islands.

_________________
Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.

America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.


Last edited by jodeke on Mon Nov 26, 2018 10:36 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Omar Little
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 90299
Location: Formerly Known As 24

PostPosted: Mon Nov 26, 2018 10:32 am    Post subject:

Aeneas Hunter wrote:
Steve007 wrote:
adkindo wrote:
Not sure anyone is suggesting someone should....but claiming a a human "deserves" death based on the guys actions is repulsive in my opinion.


Agreed.


Yep. I also find it disturbing that some people are so pleased that a Christian missionary got killed. It's kind of creepy, really. I'm not religious, and I find the missionary types to be annoying, but I don't celebrate when one of them does something stupid and dies.


That sounds more like implicit bias toward the religious on your part. What if he was a rich kid on a passing yacht and did it as a dare from his frat buddies? There would still be jokes. Because the reason is the stupidity and arrogance of the action, not any specific justification for it.
_________________
“We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
governator
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 28 Jan 2006
Posts: 24996

PostPosted: Mon Nov 26, 2018 10:36 am    Post subject:

Does the sentinelese have a right to determine their own life or modern civilization countries have greater right to impose their way of life to the sentinelese?

What is the track record of indegenous people being taken over in their way of life by more modern civilizations look like? The American continent? The Pacific Islanders? The Melanesians? The Taiwan aborigines? The Australian aborigines? The Papuans?

I say the Sentinelese have the right to their own determination of their way of life without being interfere or even being claimed property (whether the people or the land) by others
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
jodeke
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Posts: 67317
Location: In a world where admitting to not knowing something is considered a great way to learn.

PostPosted: Mon Nov 26, 2018 10:48 am    Post subject:

Omar Little wrote:
Aeneas Hunter wrote:
Steve007 wrote:
adkindo wrote:
Not sure anyone is suggesting someone should....but claiming a a human "deserves" death based on the guys actions is repulsive in my opinion.


Agreed.


Yep. I also find it disturbing that some people are so pleased that a Christian missionary got killed. It's kind of creepy, really. I'm not religious, and I find the missionary types to be annoying, but I don't celebrate when one of them does something stupid and dies.


That sounds more like implicit bias toward the religious on your part. What if he was a rich kid on a passing yacht and did it as a dare from his frat buddies? There would still be jokes. Because the reason is the stupidity and arrogance of the action, not any specific justification for it.


But he wasn't. I understand your position but don't think the analogy is a good one. A dare is taking a risk by choice. I don't think Chau truly fathomed the danger he self imposed.
_________________
Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.

America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
governator
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 28 Jan 2006
Posts: 24996

PostPosted: Mon Nov 26, 2018 10:52 am    Post subject:

jodeke wrote:
Omar Little wrote:
Aeneas Hunter wrote:
Steve007 wrote:
adkindo wrote:
Not sure anyone is suggesting someone should....but claiming a a human "deserves" death based on the guys actions is repulsive in my opinion.


Agreed.


Yep. I also find it disturbing that some people are so pleased that a Christian missionary got killed. It's kind of creepy, really. I'm not religious, and I find the missionary types to be annoying, but I don't celebrate when one of them does something stupid and dies.


That sounds more like implicit bias toward the religious on your part. What if he was a rich kid on a passing yacht and did it as a dare from his frat buddies? There would still be jokes. Because the reason is the stupidity and arrogance of the action, not any specific justification for it.


But he wasn't. I understand your position but don't think the analogy is a good one. A dare is taking a risk by choice. I don't think Chau truly fathomed the danger he self imposed.


How is the arrogance any difference? Unless you’re stipulating that the missionary somehow had zero idea about the previous outsider encounters whom trespassed the sentinelese’s land
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763

PostPosted: Mon Nov 26, 2018 11:19 am    Post subject:

Omar Little wrote:
That sounds more like implicit bias toward the religious on your part. What if he was a rich kid on a passing yacht and did it as a dare from his frat buddies? There would still be jokes. Because the reason is the stupidity and arrogance of the action, not any specific justification for it.


Who said anything about jokes?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
DaMuleRules
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 10 Dec 2006
Posts: 52624
Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.

PostPosted: Mon Nov 26, 2018 11:25 am    Post subject:

Aeneas Hunter wrote:
Omar Little wrote:
Aeneas Hunter wrote:
Steve007 wrote:
adkindo wrote:
Not sure anyone is suggesting someone should....but claiming a a human "deserves" death based on the guys actions is repulsive in my opinion.


Agreed.


Yep. I also find it disturbing that some people are so pleased that a Christian missionary got killed. It's kind of creepy, really. I'm not religious, and I find the missionary types to be annoying, but I don't celebrate when one of them does something stupid and dies.


That sounds more like implicit bias toward the religious on your part. What if he was a rich kid on a passing yacht and did it as a dare from his frat buddies? There would still be jokes. Because the reason is the stupidity and arrogance of the action, not any specific justification for it.


Who said anything about jokes?


More to the point, who "celebrated"?
_________________
You thought God was an architect, now you know
He’s something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built that’s all for show
goes up in flames
In 24 frames


Jason Isbell

Man, do those lyrics resonate right now
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Omar Little
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 90299
Location: Formerly Known As 24

PostPosted: Mon Nov 26, 2018 11:31 am    Post subject:

Aeneas Hunter wrote:
Omar Little wrote:
That sounds more like implicit bias toward the religious on your part. What if he was a rich kid on a passing yacht and did it as a dare from his frat buddies? There would still be jokes. Because the reason is the stupidity and arrogance of the action, not any specific justification for it.


Who said anything about jokes?


Well, my fault then. I assumed you meant that people were pleased because they made jokes about his death. But the point still stands. I think people would be fairly unsympathetic to a secular reason for this foolishness too.
_________________
“We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
DaMuleRules
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 10 Dec 2006
Posts: 52624
Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.

PostPosted: Mon Nov 26, 2018 11:32 am    Post subject:

jodeke wrote:
I don't think Chau truly fathomed the danger he self imposed.


Well, you're wrong. He bribed people to take him to a place he knew he was forbidden to go and why it was forbidden. He knew of the risks he was taking because he wrote about them. He detailed his first contact with the islanders and being shot with an arrow that was blocked by his bible. Despite being attacked during his first contact, he decided to return and try again.

To say he didn't understand the dangers in actions is absolutely incorrect.
_________________
You thought God was an architect, now you know
He’s something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built that’s all for show
goes up in flames
In 24 frames


Jason Isbell

Man, do those lyrics resonate right now
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Omar Little
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 90299
Location: Formerly Known As 24

PostPosted: Mon Nov 26, 2018 11:33 am    Post subject:

jodeke wrote:
Omar Little wrote:
Aeneas Hunter wrote:
Steve007 wrote:
adkindo wrote:
Not sure anyone is suggesting someone should....but claiming a a human "deserves" death based on the guys actions is repulsive in my opinion.


Agreed.


Yep. I also find it disturbing that some people are so pleased that a Christian missionary got killed. It's kind of creepy, really. I'm not religious, and I find the missionary types to be annoying, but I don't celebrate when one of them does something stupid and dies.


That sounds more like implicit bias toward the religious on your part. What if he was a rich kid on a passing yacht and did it as a dare from his frat buddies? There would still be jokes. Because the reason is the stupidity and arrogance of the action, not any specific justification for it.


But he wasn't. I understand your position but don't think the analogy is a good one. A dare is taking a risk by choice. I don't think Chau truly fathomed the danger he self imposed.


Of course he did, which is why he told people not to blame him or god if he died. Now if you want to say his religion rendered him incapable of rational choice, that's a different line of argument...
_________________
“We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
jodeke
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Posts: 67317
Location: In a world where admitting to not knowing something is considered a great way to learn.

PostPosted: Mon Nov 26, 2018 11:33 am    Post subject:

governator wrote:
jodeke wrote:
Omar Little wrote:
Aeneas Hunter wrote:
Steve007 wrote:
adkindo wrote:
Not sure anyone is suggesting someone should....but claiming a a human "deserves" death based on the guys actions is repulsive in my opinion.


Agreed.


Yep. I also find it disturbing that some people are so pleased that a Christian missionary got killed. It's kind of creepy, really. I'm not religious, and I find the missionary types to be annoying, but I don't celebrate when one of them does something stupid and dies.


That sounds more like implicit bias toward the religious on your part. What if he was a rich kid on a passing yacht and did it as a dare from his frat buddies? There would still be jokes. Because the reason is the stupidity and arrogance of the action, not any specific justification for it.


But he wasn't. I understand your position but don't think the analogy is a good one. A dare is taking a risk by choice. I don't think Chau truly fathomed the danger he self imposed.


How is the arrogance any difference? Unless you’re stipulating that the missionary somehow had zero idea about the previous outsider encounters whom trespassed the sentinelese’s land

I don't think Chau was being arrogant, I believe he thought he was doing the work of his lord. Zero idea, NO Thought he would be protected, YES.
_________________
Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.

America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
DaMuleRules
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 10 Dec 2006
Posts: 52624
Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.

PostPosted: Mon Nov 26, 2018 11:36 am    Post subject:

Omar Little wrote:
Aeneas Hunter wrote:
Omar Little wrote:
That sounds more like implicit bias toward the religious on your part. What if he was a rich kid on a passing yacht and did it as a dare from his frat buddies? There would still be jokes. Because the reason is the stupidity and arrogance of the action, not any specific justification for it.


Who said anything about jokes?


Well, my fault then. I assumed you meant that people were pleased because they made jokes about his death. But the point still stands. I think people would be fairly unsympathetic to a secular reason for this foolishness too.


Absolutely. The fact that he was a missionary has nothing to do with why people are condemning his actions and pointing out that he brought it on himself, and it's BS to pretend otherwise. Whether he was a missionary, a frat boy going to the island on a dare or an explorer/journalist looking to profit from being the first to make significant contact and document the islanders, the contempt would be the same.
_________________
You thought God was an architect, now you know
He’s something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built that’s all for show
goes up in flames
In 24 frames


Jason Isbell

Man, do those lyrics resonate right now
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
jodeke
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Posts: 67317
Location: In a world where admitting to not knowing something is considered a great way to learn.

PostPosted: Mon Nov 26, 2018 11:38 am    Post subject:

Omar Little wrote:
jodeke wrote:
Omar Little wrote:
Aeneas Hunter wrote:
Steve007 wrote:
adkindo wrote:
Not sure anyone is suggesting someone should....but claiming a a human "deserves" death based on the guys actions is repulsive in my opinion.


Agreed.


Yep. I also find it disturbing that some people are so pleased that a Christian missionary got killed. It's kind of creepy, really. I'm not religious, and I find the missionary types to be annoying, but I don't celebrate when one of them does something stupid and dies.


That sounds more like implicit bias toward the religious on your part. What if he was a rich kid on a passing yacht and did it as a dare from his frat buddies? There would still be jokes. Because the reason is the stupidity and arrogance of the action, not any specific justification for it.


But he wasn't. I understand your position but don't think the analogy is a good one. A dare is taking a risk by choice. I don't think Chau truly fathomed the danger he self imposed.


Of course he did, which is why he told people not to blame him or god if he died. Now if you want to say his religion rendered him incapable of rational choice, that's a different line of argument...

Incapable of rational choice is subjective. It was probably rational to him. To others, ??
_________________
Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.

America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Omar Little
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 90299
Location: Formerly Known As 24

PostPosted: Mon Nov 26, 2018 11:39 am    Post subject:

jodeke wrote:
governator wrote:
jodeke wrote:
Omar Little wrote:
Aeneas Hunter wrote:
Steve007 wrote:
adkindo wrote:
Not sure anyone is suggesting someone should....but claiming a a human "deserves" death based on the guys actions is repulsive in my opinion.


Agreed.


Yep. I also find it disturbing that some people are so pleased that a Christian missionary got killed. It's kind of creepy, really. I'm not religious, and I find the missionary types to be annoying, but I don't celebrate when one of them does something stupid and dies.


That sounds more like implicit bias toward the religious on your part. What if he was a rich kid on a passing yacht and did it as a dare from his frat buddies? There would still be jokes. Because the reason is the stupidity and arrogance of the action, not any specific justification for it.


But he wasn't. I understand your position but don't think the analogy is a good one. A dare is taking a risk by choice. I don't think Chau truly fathomed the danger he self imposed.


How is the arrogance any difference? Unless you’re stipulating that the missionary somehow had zero idea about the previous outsider encounters whom trespassed the sentinelese’s land

I don't think Chau was being arrogant, I believe he thought he was doing the work of his lord. Zero idea, NO Thought he would be protected, YES.


Wouldn't that kind of be the height of arrogance? And why did he talk about him dying if he thought it wasn't going to happen? While we are at it, why is there a bias on behalf of religious thought that we wouldn't extend to any other?
_________________
“We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
jodeke
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Posts: 67317
Location: In a world where admitting to not knowing something is considered a great way to learn.

PostPosted: Mon Nov 26, 2018 11:49 am    Post subject:

Omar Little wrote:
jodeke wrote:
governator wrote:
jodeke wrote:
Omar Little wrote:
Aeneas Hunter wrote:
Steve007 wrote:
adkindo wrote:
Not sure anyone is suggesting someone should....but claiming a a human "deserves" death based on the guys actions is repulsive in my opinion.


Agreed.


Yep. I also find it disturbing that some people are so pleased that a Christian missionary got killed. It's kind of creepy, really. I'm not religious, and I find the missionary types to be annoying, but I don't celebrate when one of them does something stupid and dies.


That sounds more like implicit bias toward the religious on your part. What if he was a rich kid on a passing yacht and did it as a dare from his frat buddies? There would still be jokes. Because the reason is the stupidity and arrogance of the action, not any specific justification for it.


But he wasn't. I understand your position but don't think the analogy is a good one. A dare is taking a risk by choice. I don't think Chau truly fathomed the danger he self imposed.


How is the arrogance any difference? Unless you’re stipulating that the missionary somehow had zero idea about the previous outsider encounters whom trespassed the sentinelese’s land

I don't think Chau was being arrogant, I believe he thought he was doing the work of his lord. Zero idea, NO Thought he would be protected, YES.


Wouldn't that kind of be the height of arrogance?

And why did he talk about him dying if he thought it wasn't going to happen?

While we are at it, why is there a bias on behalf of religious thought that we wouldn't extend to any other?

If you're not a religious person, or a atheist, I see how you would label arrogance. To a person who believes, it's the height of belief not arrogance.

Because he didn't think it would happen. He thought his savior would protect him.

I don't have a bias. I give equal space to both religious and non.
_________________
Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.

America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Omar Little
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 90299
Location: Formerly Known As 24

PostPosted: Mon Nov 26, 2018 11:59 am    Post subject:

jodeke wrote:
Omar Little wrote:
jodeke wrote:
governator wrote:
jodeke wrote:
Omar Little wrote:
Aeneas Hunter wrote:
Steve007 wrote:
adkindo wrote:
Not sure anyone is suggesting someone should....but claiming a a human "deserves" death based on the guys actions is repulsive in my opinion.


Agreed.


Yep. I also find it disturbing that some people are so pleased that a Christian missionary got killed. It's kind of creepy, really. I'm not religious, and I find the missionary types to be annoying, but I don't celebrate when one of them does something stupid and dies.


That sounds more like implicit bias toward the religious on your part. What if he was a rich kid on a passing yacht and did it as a dare from his frat buddies? There would still be jokes. Because the reason is the stupidity and arrogance of the action, not any specific justification for it.


But he wasn't. I understand your position but don't think the analogy is a good one. A dare is taking a risk by choice. I don't think Chau truly fathomed the danger he self imposed.


How is the arrogance any difference? Unless you’re stipulating that the missionary somehow had zero idea about the previous outsider encounters whom trespassed the sentinelese’s land

I don't think Chau was being arrogant, I believe he thought he was doing the work of his lord. Zero idea, NO Thought he would be protected, YES.


Wouldn't that kind of be the height of arrogance?

And why did he talk about him dying if he thought it wasn't going to happen?

While we are at it, why is there a bias on behalf of religious thought that we wouldn't extend to any other?

If you're not a religious person, or a atheist, I see how you would label arrogance. To a person who believes, it's the height of belief not arrogance.

Because he didn't think it would happen. He thought his savior would protect him.

I don't have a bias. I give equal space to both religious and non.


Again, he actually was expecting to possibly die, not to be saved. And my take has nothing to do with being an atheist. Belief of any kind that leads you to take inappropriate risks, and to risk others as well, where you determine your belief trumps all evidence and the wellbeing of others, is very arrogant.
_________________
“We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
governator
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 28 Jan 2006
Posts: 24996

PostPosted: Mon Nov 26, 2018 12:15 pm    Post subject:

Jodeke, Me and u have a difference in seeing the arrogance of believing in a religion trumps everything else
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
jodeke
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Posts: 67317
Location: In a world where admitting to not knowing something is considered a great way to learn.

PostPosted: Mon Nov 26, 2018 12:15 pm    Post subject:

Omar Little wrote:
jodeke wrote:
Omar Little wrote:
jodeke wrote:
governator wrote:
jodeke wrote:
Omar Little wrote:
Aeneas Hunter wrote:
Steve007 wrote:
adkindo wrote:
Not sure anyone is suggesting someone should....but claiming a a human "deserves" death based on the guys actions is repulsive in my opinion.


Agreed.


Yep. I also find it disturbing that some people are so pleased that a Christian missionary got killed. It's kind of creepy, really. I'm not religious, and I find the missionary types to be annoying, but I don't celebrate when one of them does something stupid and dies.


That sounds more like implicit bias toward the religious on your part. What if he was a rich kid on a passing yacht and did it as a dare from his frat buddies? There would still be jokes. Because the reason is the stupidity and arrogance of the action, not any specific justification for it.


But he wasn't. I understand your position but don't think the analogy is a good one. A dare is taking a risk by choice. I don't think Chau truly fathomed the danger he self imposed.


How is the arrogance any difference? Unless you’re stipulating that the missionary somehow had zero idea about the previous outsider encounters whom trespassed the sentinelese’s land

I don't think Chau was being arrogant, I believe he thought he was doing the work of his lord. Zero idea, NO Thought he would be protected, YES.


Wouldn't that kind of be the height of arrogance?

And why did he talk about him dying if he thought it wasn't going to happen?

While we are at it, why is there a bias on behalf of religious thought that we wouldn't extend to any other?

If you're not a religious person, or a atheist, I see how you would label arrogance. To a person who believes, it's the height of belief not arrogance.

Because he didn't think it would happen. He thought his savior would protect him.

I don't have a bias. I give equal space to both religious and non.


Again, he actually was expecting to possibly die, not to be saved.

And my take has nothing to do with being an atheist. Belief of any kind that leads you to take inappropriate risks, and to risk others as well, where you determine your belief trumps all evidence and the wellbeing of others, is very arrogant.

How can you do anything except speculate on his thinking? You're saying a man expected to die. I say I think he was expecting his lord to save him. Who's right? Both are speculations.

You're saying being of religious belief is arrogant. I give space to those who are religious. Belief trumps evidence. Belief is all powerful to some. I give them their space as I give you yours. I'm not a judge.
_________________
Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.

America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Omar Little
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 90299
Location: Formerly Known As 24

PostPosted: Mon Nov 26, 2018 12:23 pm    Post subject:

jodeke wrote:
Omar Little wrote:
jodeke wrote:
Omar Little wrote:
jodeke wrote:
governator wrote:
jodeke wrote:
Omar Little wrote:
Aeneas Hunter wrote:
Steve007 wrote:
adkindo wrote:
Not sure anyone is suggesting someone should....but claiming a a human "deserves" death based on the guys actions is repulsive in my opinion.


Agreed.


Yep. I also find it disturbing that some people are so pleased that a Christian missionary got killed. It's kind of creepy, really. I'm not religious, and I find the missionary types to be annoying, but I don't celebrate when one of them does something stupid and dies.


That sounds more like implicit bias toward the religious on your part. What if he was a rich kid on a passing yacht and did it as a dare from his frat buddies? There would still be jokes. Because the reason is the stupidity and arrogance of the action, not any specific justification for it.


But he wasn't. I understand your position but don't think the analogy is a good one. A dare is taking a risk by choice. I don't think Chau truly fathomed the danger he self imposed.


How is the arrogance any difference? Unless you’re stipulating that the missionary somehow had zero idea about the previous outsider encounters whom trespassed the sentinelese’s land

I don't think Chau was being arrogant, I believe he thought he was doing the work of his lord. Zero idea, NO Thought he would be protected, YES.


Wouldn't that kind of be the height of arrogance?

And why did he talk about him dying if he thought it wasn't going to happen?

While we are at it, why is there a bias on behalf of religious thought that we wouldn't extend to any other?

If you're not a religious person, or a atheist, I see how you would label arrogance. To a person who believes, it's the height of belief not arrogance.

Because he didn't think it would happen. He thought his savior would protect him.

I don't have a bias. I give equal space to both religious and non.


Again, he actually was expecting to possibly die, not to be saved.

And my take has nothing to do with being an atheist. Belief of any kind that leads you to take inappropriate risks, and to risk others as well, where you determine your belief trumps all evidence and the wellbeing of others, is very arrogant.

How can you do anything except speculate on his thinking? You're saying a man expected to die. I say I think he was expecting his lord to save him. Who's right? Both are speculations.

You're saying being of religious belief is arrogant. I give space to those who are religious. Belief trumps evidence. Belief is all powerful to some. I give them their space as I give you yours. I'm not a judge.


I'm not speculating, I'm going by what he told people. If you tell me you are happy, it's not me speculating on your inner thoughts to relay that you said you were happy. I'm just taking him at his word. Are you saying he was lying? And if so, aren't you speculating on his actual thoughts?
_________________
“We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
jodeke
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Posts: 67317
Location: In a world where admitting to not knowing something is considered a great way to learn.

PostPosted: Mon Nov 26, 2018 12:30 pm    Post subject:

Don't want DMR on my case so I chopped down the quote tree. @ DMR

Omar Little wrote:

Quote:
I'm not speculating, I'm going by what he told people. If you tell me you are happy, it's not me speculating on your inner thoughts to relay that you said you were happy. I'm just taking him at his word. Are you saying he was lying? And if so, aren't you speculating on his actual thoughts?


I missed what he told people. Do you have a link? I'd like to read and analyze it.
_________________
Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.

America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
lakersken80
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 12 Aug 2009
Posts: 38751

PostPosted: Mon Nov 26, 2018 12:33 pm    Post subject:

jodeke wrote:
The Sentinelese people have survived for 60,000 years. They're able to reproduce without modern medicine. Are self sustaining. They don't interfere with the outer world or cause harm to it unless intruded upon. I'm in agreement with some of DMR'S contentions. I harbor "If it ain't broke, why try to fix it?" Did John Allen Chau deserve to die? I say NO? Was he responsible for his death? I say YES.

LINK

Quote:
How old are the Sentinelese?

They are designated as a Scheduled Tribe. An uncontacted people, the group, estimated to comprise between 40 and 500 individuals, is believed to have lived on North Sentinel Island for as long as 60,000 years and speaks the Sentinelese language, a language isolate unrelated to the languages of the surrounding islands.


I think it being a remote island protected by the Indian government has helped protect their existence. That being said this unwanted media attention won't help them in the future.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
DaMuleRules
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 10 Dec 2006
Posts: 52624
Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.

PostPosted: Mon Nov 26, 2018 12:37 pm    Post subject:

jodeke wrote:
You're saying being of religious belief is arrogant.


No. Religious belief is not arrogance, and that is not what was said. The arrogance comes when one assumes that their personal beliefs need to be imposed on others, as this missionary did.
_________________
You thought God was an architect, now you know
He’s something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built that’s all for show
goes up in flames
In 24 frames


Jason Isbell

Man, do those lyrics resonate right now
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Omar Little
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 90299
Location: Formerly Known As 24

PostPosted: Mon Nov 26, 2018 12:40 pm    Post subject:

jodeke wrote:
Don't want DMR on my case so I chopped down the quote tree. @ DMR

Omar Little wrote:

Quote:
I'm not speculating, I'm going by what he told people. If you tell me you are happy, it's not me speculating on your inner thoughts to relay that you said you were happy. I'm just taking him at his word. Are you saying he was lying? And if so, aren't you speculating on his actual thoughts?


I missed what he told people. Do you have a link? I'd like to read and analyze it.


From the original article poste:

Quote:
His notes, which were reported Thursday in Indian newspapers and confirmed by police, make clear he knew he might be killed.


I will try to dig up the other article where he was quoted telling friends not to blame the islanders or god if he died.
_________________
“We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> Off Topic All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
Page 3 of 9
Jump to:  

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum






Graphics by uberzev
© 1995-2018 LakersGround.net. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy. Terms of Use.
LakersGround is an unofficial news source serving the fan community since 1995.
We are in no way associated with the Los Angeles Lakers or the National Basketball Association.


Powered by phpBB