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
LakerLanny
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 24 Oct 2001
Posts: 41832

PostPosted: Fri Nov 30, 2018 7:18 am    Post subject:

LarryCoon wrote:


Of course not. Arrogance comes from WHY you're doing it. When you presume that you know what's better for someone than they do, and your judgement trumps their judgement about their own needs as well as their autonomy, that's arrogance.


Bingo.

It is also extremely rude.

They let him get away twice and made it clear he wasn't wanted. The guy was obtuse and had to learn a tough lesson the hard way.
_________________
Love, Laker Lanny
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 23054

PostPosted: Fri Nov 30, 2018 8:11 am    Post subject:

LongBeachPoly wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
LarryCoon wrote:
When you presume that you know what's better for someone than they do, and your judgement trumps their judgement about their own needs as well as their autonomy, that's arrogance.


Well, you just described pretty much everyone on the internet there.

Look, all I'm trying to get at is -- why do people say he deserved what he got? Like WHY say that? What's the purpose there and why the anger towards him?

Is it because he did something where he knew there could be consequences and did it anyway?

Or did he deserve it because he was a religious man and tried to convert people to his religion?


Yup, we all deserve our fate that we have total control over.

If I’m going to go mess with a cobra and I get bit and die, I deserve that fate.

If I don’t study for a test and go take it, I’m probably going to fail that test.

There are fates that we control and we accept the consequences. That’s just life.


Here's the thing. I don't believe that the comments such as "he deserved to die or deserved his fate" are rooted in pure logic. I think there is some other motivating factor at play here whether it be his religious beliefs or his nationality, but that the folks making those comments are trying to make it seem it is based in logic.

If it is based in logic, then, all scenarios which qualify within that logic must apply. As you said...

If you mess with a cobra, and you get bit, you deserve your fate.

If the law says that the speed limit is 65mph and you drive 100mph and get a ticket, you deserve your fate.

With that then, would we ALL agree that the following is true?

If the law says you cannot enter a particular and clearly marked facility or zone, and you do it anyway and get caught, you deserve your fate?

(FWIW, I'm not a missionary lol, and am disinterested in organized religion -- it's more that for me, whether a person deserves their fate depends entirely on whether the combination of the action and motivation for the action was egregious enough to warrant the outcome). Is this a wrong way to look at it?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
splashmtn
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 30 Aug 2016
Posts: 3295

PostPosted: Fri Nov 30, 2018 8:36 am    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
LongBeachPoly wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
LarryCoon wrote:
When you presume that you know what's better for someone than they do, and your judgement trumps their judgement about their own needs as well as their autonomy, that's arrogance.


Well, you just described pretty much everyone on the internet there.

Look, all I'm trying to get at is -- why do people say he deserved what he got? Like WHY say that? What's the purpose there and why the anger towards him?

Is it because he did something where he knew there could be consequences and did it anyway?

Or did he deserve it because he was a religious man and tried to convert people to his religion?


Yup, we all deserve our fate that we have total control over.

If I’m going to go mess with a cobra and I get bit and die, I deserve that fate.

If I don’t study for a test and go take it, I’m probably going to fail that test.

There are fates that we control and we accept the consequences. That’s just life.


Here's the thing. I don't believe that the comments such as "he deserved to die or deserved his fate" are rooted in pure logic. I think there is some other motivating factor at play here whether it be his religious beliefs or his nationality, but that the folks making those comments are trying to make it seem it is based in logic.

If it is based in logic, then, all scenarios which qualify within that logic must apply. As you said...

If you mess with a cobra, and you get bit, you deserve your fate.

If the law says that the speed limit is 65mph and you drive 100mph and get a ticket, you deserve your fate.

With that then, would we ALL agree that the following is true?

If the law says you cannot enter a particular and clearly marked facility or zone, and you do it anyway and get caught, you deserve your fate?

(FWIW, I'm not a missionary lol, and am disinterested in organized religion -- it's more that for me, whether a person deserves their fate depends entirely on whether the combination of the action and motivation for the action was egregious enough to warrant the outcome). Is this a wrong way to look at it?
no its not the wrong way to look at it. naive people do silly/dangerous things all the time. but they dont all do them in malice. do they also deserve their fate with this group? some would agree yes and others would say no.
the truth is, if this same group on lg that keeps saying he deserved it. had a different scenario where their son or daughter or husband or wife was involved. all bets are off.

what if you son or daughter contracted HIV from their first sexual encounter. raise your hand if you would be telling your son or daughter "well...you had sex or you had unprotected sex so......"

what about when your kid goes off to college. one of them drinks to much one time. and they end up dying of alcohol poisoning.

the "he/she" deserved it would not be on the table. because when it hits home things get different.



Truth is, bottom line biblical logic or non biblical logic. he did get what he deserved under the circumstances. and thats me saying that without feeling/emotion. based on a computer type of logic. no feelings involved. he got what he deserved. but once you go down this road just remember you have done quite a few things where you deserved to be hurt harmed or dead yet you are still here. same with your family/friends. Are you still hanging on to the "he/she got what they deserved" when it hits home? if the answer is no. then dont be so quick to say it in this instance.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Hector the Pup
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 25 Jul 2002
Posts: 34471
Location: L.A.

PostPosted: Fri Nov 30, 2018 8:58 am    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
LongBeachPoly wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
LarryCoon wrote:
When you presume that you know what's better for someone than they do, and your judgement trumps their judgement about their own needs as well as their autonomy, that's arrogance.


Well, you just described pretty much everyone on the internet there.

Look, all I'm trying to get at is -- why do people say he deserved what he got? Like WHY say that? What's the purpose there and why the anger towards him?

Is it because he did something where he knew there could be consequences and did it anyway?

Or did he deserve it because he was a religious man and tried to convert people to his religion?


Yup, we all deserve our fate that we have total control over.

If I’m going to go mess with a cobra and I get bit and die, I deserve that fate.

If I don’t study for a test and go take it, I’m probably going to fail that test.

There are fates that we control and we accept the consequences. That’s just life.


Here's the thing. I don't believe that the comments such as "he deserved to die or deserved his fate" are rooted in pure logic. I think there is some other motivating factor at play here whether it be his religious beliefs or his nationality, but that the folks making those comments are trying to make it seem it is based in logic.

If it is based in logic, then, all scenarios which qualify within that logic must apply. As you said...

If you mess with a cobra, and you get bit, you deserve your fate.

If the law says that the speed limit is 65mph and you drive 100mph and get a ticket, you deserve your fate.

With that then, would we ALL agree that the following is true?

If the law says you cannot enter a particular and clearly marked facility or zone, and you do it anyway and get caught, you deserve your fate?

(FWIW, I'm not a missionary lol, and am disinterested in organized religion -- it's more that for me, whether a person deserves their fate depends entirely on whether the combination of the action and motivation for the action was egregious enough to warrant the outcome). Is this a wrong way to look at it?


Short answer? Yes. You're completely lacking in any recognition of nuance or situation and trying to analogize with things that are so far from being comparable that it's laughable. You're essentially trying to put running with scissors on the same level as jumping into an active volcano.

Honestly, if you weren't such a long time poster, I'd go so far as to say you were trolling.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 23054

PostPosted: Fri Nov 30, 2018 8:58 am    Post subject:

splashmtn wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
LongBeachPoly wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
LarryCoon wrote:
When you presume that you know what's better for someone than they do, and your judgement trumps their judgement about their own needs as well as their autonomy, that's arrogance.


Well, you just described pretty much everyone on the internet there.

Look, all I'm trying to get at is -- why do people say he deserved what he got? Like WHY say that? What's the purpose there and why the anger towards him?

Is it because he did something where he knew there could be consequences and did it anyway?

Or did he deserve it because he was a religious man and tried to convert people to his religion?


Yup, we all deserve our fate that we have total control over.

If I’m going to go mess with a cobra and I get bit and die, I deserve that fate.

If I don’t study for a test and go take it, I’m probably going to fail that test.

There are fates that we control and we accept the consequences. That’s just life.


Here's the thing. I don't believe that the comments such as "he deserved to die or deserved his fate" are rooted in pure logic. I think there is some other motivating factor at play here whether it be his religious beliefs or his nationality, but that the folks making those comments are trying to make it seem it is based in logic.

If it is based in logic, then, all scenarios which qualify within that logic must apply. As you said...

If you mess with a cobra, and you get bit, you deserve your fate.

If the law says that the speed limit is 65mph and you drive 100mph and get a ticket, you deserve your fate.

With that then, would we ALL agree that the following is true?

If the law says you cannot enter a particular and clearly marked facility or zone, and you do it anyway and get caught, you deserve your fate?

(FWIW, I'm not a missionary lol, and am disinterested in organized religion -- it's more that for me, whether a person deserves their fate depends entirely on whether the combination of the action and motivation for the action was egregious enough to warrant the outcome). Is this a wrong way to look at it?
no its not the wrong way to look at it. naive people do silly/dangerous things all the time. but they dont all do them in malice. do they also deserve their fate with this group? some would agree yes and others would say no.
the truth is, if this same group on lg that keeps saying he deserved it. had a different scenario where their son or daughter or husband or wife was involved. all bets are off.

what if you son or daughter contracted HIV from their first sexual encounter. raise your hand if you would be telling your son or daughter "well...you had sex or you had unprotected sex so......"

what about when your kid goes off to college. one of them drinks to much one time. and they end up dying of alcohol poisoning.

the "he/she" deserved it would not be on the table. because when it hits home things get different.



Truth is, bottom line biblical logic or non biblical logic. he did get what he deserved under the circumstances. and thats me saying that without feeling/emotion. based on a computer type of logic. no feelings involved. he got what he deserved. but once you go down this road just remember you have done quite a few things where you deserved to be hurt harmed or dead yet you are still here. same with your family/friends. Are you still hanging on to the "he/she got what they deserved" when it hits home? if the answer is no. then dont be so quick to say it in this instance.


Well, you pretty much nailed it on the head. That's what I'm getting at. Once we go down this road... if we're speaking purely in logical terms, as you said, anyone who does something they know they should not do, deserves their fate. But that must apply to ALL people who do things they know they should not do.

So, for example, if you enter an area that is clearly marked as prohibited (let's say a border of some kind like in this story) and the people there find you and take you and put you right back outside of that area or border, would we all agree they got what they deserved?

This conclusion being drawn by many, that the deserved to die, seems more rooted in a bigotry against Christian-based faiths in my view at least, more so than logic.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 23054

PostPosted: Fri Nov 30, 2018 9:05 am    Post subject:

Hector the Pup wrote:
Short answer? Yes. You're completely lacking in any recognition of nuance or situation and trying to analogize with things that are so far from being comparable that it's laughable. You're essentially trying to put running with scissors on the same level as jumping into an active volcano.

Honestly, if you weren't such a long time poster, I'd go so far as to say you were trolling.


I would be the one trolling because I'm the one saying I don't think a missionary who went to an area he wasn't supposed to deserved death?

I'm the one pushing for nuance and context here. I think we all agree he shouldn't have done this. We all agree he should have known what the consequence could be. But what act was so egregious that a civilized group of people would say, oh yeah, he deserved to die?

I mean, if the islanders ended up welcoming him with open arms, would he still deserve to die? If not, why not?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
DaMuleRules
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 10 Dec 2006
Posts: 41595
Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.

PostPosted: Fri Nov 30, 2018 9:11 am    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:

This conclusion being drawn by many, that the deserved to die, seems more rooted in a bigotry against Christian-based faiths in my view at least, more so than logic.


No. Not even close. You can bend over backward trying to sell that crap, but that is exactly what it is . . . crap.

The judgment of this guy's actions aren't based on the fact that he was a missionary. The judgment is based on the fact that he knowingly violated the sanctity of these people and what the repercussions would be for doing so. The same judgment would apply regardless of his intentions and whether he was religious or not.
_________________
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
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 23054

PostPosted: Fri Nov 30, 2018 9:14 am    Post subject:

DaMuleRules wrote:
ringfinger wrote:

This conclusion being drawn by many, that the deserved to die, seems more rooted in a bigotry against Christian-based faiths in my view at least, more so than logic.


No. Not even close. You can bend over backward trying to sell that crap, but that is exactly what it is . . . crap.

The judgment of this guy's actions aren't based on the fact that he was a missionary. The judgment is based on the fact that he knowingly violated the sanctity of these people and what the repercussions would be for doing so. The same judgment would apply regardless of his intentions and whether he was religious or not.


Your reason would apply to basically anyone that is guilty of trespassing. That, whatever the known repercussions are for the trespassing, are deserved.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
DaMuleRules
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 10 Dec 2006
Posts: 41595
Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.

PostPosted: Fri Nov 30, 2018 9:19 am    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:

I would be the one trolling because I'm the one saying I don't think a missionary who went to an area he wasn't supposed to deserved death?


You're trolling because you are intentionally changing the argument to something that isn't be said in order to spark disagreement - the very essence of trolling.

The issue of whether his death was warranted or not isn't just that he wan't supposed to go there. It's based on the fact that he knew that death was the most likely outcome of his attempt to visit.

You know that, but you continue to knowingly argue otherwise . . . that's trolling.
_________________
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
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 23054

PostPosted: Fri Nov 30, 2018 9:32 am    Post subject:

DaMuleRules wrote:
ringfinger wrote:

I would be the one trolling because I'm the one saying I don't think a missionary who went to an area he wasn't supposed to deserved death?


You're trolling because you are intentionally changing the argument to something that isn't be said in order to spark disagreement - the very essence of trolling.

The issue of whether his death was warranted or not isn't just that he wan't supposed to go there. It's based on the fact that he knew that death was the most likely outcome of his attempt to visit.

You know that, but you continue to knowingly argue otherwise . . . that's trolling.


So how does this not apply to any and all trespassers then? That, any trespasser, that is removed and placed back outside of the restricted area, deserve that displacement?

Or should it?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Hector the Pup
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 25 Jul 2002
Posts: 34471
Location: L.A.

PostPosted: Fri Nov 30, 2018 9:39 am    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
DaMuleRules wrote:
ringfinger wrote:

I would be the one trolling because I'm the one saying I don't think a missionary who went to an area he wasn't supposed to deserved death?


You're trolling because you are intentionally changing the argument to something that isn't be said in order to spark disagreement - the very essence of trolling.

The issue of whether his death was warranted or not isn't just that he wan't supposed to go there. It's based on the fact that he knew that death was the most likely outcome of his attempt to visit.

You know that, but you continue to knowingly argue otherwise . . . that's trolling.


So how does this not apply to any and all trespassers then? That, any trespasser, that is removed and placed back outside of the restricted area, deserve that displacement?

Or should it?


So you don't recognize any semblance of nuance or situation?

Gotcha.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 23054

PostPosted: Fri Nov 30, 2018 9:42 am    Post subject:

Hector the Pup wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
DaMuleRules wrote:
ringfinger wrote:

I would be the one trolling because I'm the one saying I don't think a missionary who went to an area he wasn't supposed to deserved death?


You're trolling because you are intentionally changing the argument to something that isn't be said in order to spark disagreement - the very essence of trolling.

The issue of whether his death was warranted or not isn't just that he wan't supposed to go there. It's based on the fact that he knew that death was the most likely outcome of his attempt to visit.

You know that, but you continue to knowingly argue otherwise . . . that's trolling.


So how does this not apply to any and all trespassers then? That, any trespasser, that is removed and placed back outside of the restricted area, deserve that displacement?

Or should it?


So you don't recognize any semblance of nuance or situation?

Gotcha.


What is the nuance, that warrants death?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
lakersken80
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 12 Aug 2009
Posts: 30982

PostPosted: Fri Nov 30, 2018 9:49 am    Post subject:

This guy thought these guys were heathens, devil worshippers, etc, whatever thats why he went to this remote island to convert them. He even said in his writings that it was the last place on Earth untouched by Christianity. He did not think much of them, their culture or lifestyle. He was warned once that he wasn't welcome, and he went back. He basically went to that island to destroy their society and he got what he deserved. Its been known since the days of Marco Polo what type of people the natives were yet he ignored the warning signs.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Omar Little
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 83021
Location: Formerly Known As 24

PostPosted: Fri Nov 30, 2018 11:34 am    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
Hector the Pup wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
DaMuleRules wrote:
ringfinger wrote:

I would be the one trolling because I'm the one saying I don't think a missionary who went to an area he wasn't supposed to deserved death?


You're trolling because you are intentionally changing the argument to something that isn't be said in order to spark disagreement - the very essence of trolling.

The issue of whether his death was warranted or not isn't just that he wan't supposed to go there. It's based on the fact that he knew that death was the most likely outcome of his attempt to visit.

You know that, but you continue to knowingly argue otherwise . . . that's trolling.


So how does this not apply to any and all trespassers then? That, any trespasser, that is removed and placed back outside of the restricted area, deserve that displacement?

Or should it?


So you don't recognize any semblance of nuance or situation?

Gotcha.


What is the nuance, that warrants death?


The nuance is that you are really good at being deliberately obtuse in order to yank people's chains, and you need to knock it off.
_________________
I guess I just miss my friend.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 23054

PostPosted: Fri Nov 30, 2018 11:46 am    Post subject:

Omar Little wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
Hector the Pup wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
DaMuleRules wrote:
ringfinger wrote:

I would be the one trolling because I'm the one saying I don't think a missionary who went to an area he wasn't supposed to deserved death?


You're trolling because you are intentionally changing the argument to something that isn't be said in order to spark disagreement - the very essence of trolling.

The issue of whether his death was warranted or not isn't just that he wan't supposed to go there. It's based on the fact that he knew that death was the most likely outcome of his attempt to visit.

You know that, but you continue to knowingly argue otherwise . . . that's trolling.


So how does this not apply to any and all trespassers then? That, any trespasser, that is removed and placed back outside of the restricted area, deserve that displacement?

Or should it?


So you don't recognize any semblance of nuance or situation?

Gotcha.


What is the nuance, that warrants death?


The nuance is that you are really good at being deliberately obtuse in order to yank people's chains, and you need to knock it off.


So I have to believe that this man deserved to die?

That is all I'm arguing with man. Nothing else. I'm in total agreement with everyone on literally everything including the fact that this missionary was an idiot. I just think we should above saying that he deserved the punishment of death.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aeneas Hunter
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 21398

PostPosted: Fri Nov 30, 2018 11:49 am    Post subject:

LongBeachPoly wrote:
Or someone going to Thailand to have unprotected sex with a bunch of prostitutes. You're going to get HIV. That seems inevitable.


It wasn't for me. Wait, what I mean is, er, never mind. Move along. Nothing to see here.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aeneas Hunter
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 21398

PostPosted: Fri Nov 30, 2018 11:53 am    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
This conclusion being drawn by many, that the deserved to die, seems more rooted in a bigotry against Christian-based faiths in my view at least, more so than logic.


Is there an undercurrent of that in this thread and in the larger internet reaction? Yes. I pointed this out on the second page of this thread. Then I moved on, because arguing about religious bigotry is just as futile as arguing about religion. You should move on, too.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
JerryMagicKobe
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 28 Jul 2005
Posts: 14422

PostPosted: Fri Nov 30, 2018 12:06 pm    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
Omar Little wrote:
The nuance is that you are really good at being deliberately obtuse in order to yank people's chains, and you need to knock it off.


So I have to believe that this man deserved to die?

That is all I'm arguing with man. Nothing else. I'm in total agreement with everyone on literally everything including the fact that this missionary was an idiot. I just think we should above saying that he deserved the punishment of death.
You do not have to believe he deserved to die. All done now?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LarryCoon
Site Staff
Site Staff


Joined: 11 Aug 2002
Posts: 10186

PostPosted: Fri Nov 30, 2018 12:16 pm    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
This conclusion being drawn by many, that the deserved to die, seems more rooted in a bigotry against Christian-based faiths in my view at least, more so than logic.


You made a leap there (in your defense, probably without realizing it) in order to justify your conclusion.

"Deserved their fate" is not the same thing as "deserved to die." It was YOU who said the latter.

To try to explain it by way of example, if I jump into a bear cage, then whatever negative consequences I experience are deserved (result directly from my poor decision), which in this case may be up to and including death (because this is what could happen when you jump into a bear cage). This is not the same thing as saying I deserve death. If you don't understand the distinction, we can talk about it further.

You're trying to argue a strawman in order to justify a conclusion, and that strawman is needed in order to back-fill a rationalization so that you can get to that specific conclusion. I wish you wouldn't do that.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
LarryCoon
Site Staff
Site Staff


Joined: 11 Aug 2002
Posts: 10186

PostPosted: Fri Nov 30, 2018 12:19 pm    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
Your reason would apply to basically anyone that is guilty of trespassing. That, whatever the known repercussions are for the trespassing, are deserved.


Yeah, so your adding this slippery slope fallacy to the previous strawman and post-hoc rationalization fallacies is what leads to this conclusion.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
LarryCoon
Site Staff
Site Staff


Joined: 11 Aug 2002
Posts: 10186

PostPosted: Fri Nov 30, 2018 12:21 pm    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
What is the nuance, that warrants death?


Substituting "warrants" for "deserved" doesn't change the substance.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
splashmtn
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 30 Aug 2016
Posts: 3295

PostPosted: Fri Nov 30, 2018 12:23 pm    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
splashmtn wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
LongBeachPoly wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
LarryCoon wrote:
When you presume that you know what's better for someone than they do, and your judgement trumps their judgement about their own needs as well as their autonomy, that's arrogance.


Well, you just described pretty much everyone on the internet there.

Look, all I'm trying to get at is -- why do people say he deserved what he got? Like WHY say that? What's the purpose there and why the anger towards him?

Is it because he did something where he knew there could be consequences and did it anyway?

Or did he deserve it because he was a religious man and tried to convert people to his religion?


Yup, we all deserve our fate that we have total control over.

If I’m going to go mess with a cobra and I get bit and die, I deserve that fate.

If I don’t study for a test and go take it, I’m probably going to fail that test.

There are fates that we control and we accept the consequences. That’s just life.


Here's the thing. I don't believe that the comments such as "he deserved to die or deserved his fate" are rooted in pure logic. I think there is some other motivating factor at play here whether it be his religious beliefs or his nationality, but that the folks making those comments are trying to make it seem it is based in logic.

If it is based in logic, then, all scenarios which qualify within that logic must apply. As you said...

If you mess with a cobra, and you get bit, you deserve your fate.

If the law says that the speed limit is 65mph and you drive 100mph and get a ticket, you deserve your fate.

With that then, would we ALL agree that the following is true?

If the law says you cannot enter a particular and clearly marked facility or zone, and you do it anyway and get caught, you deserve your fate?

(FWIW, I'm not a missionary lol, and am disinterested in organized religion -- it's more that for me, whether a person deserves their fate depends entirely on whether the combination of the action and motivation for the action was egregious enough to warrant the outcome). Is this a wrong way to look at it?
no its not the wrong way to look at it. naive people do silly/dangerous things all the time. but they dont all do them in malice. do they also deserve their fate with this group? some would agree yes and others would say no.
the truth is, if this same group on lg that keeps saying he deserved it. had a different scenario where their son or daughter or husband or wife was involved. all bets are off.

what if you son or daughter contracted HIV from their first sexual encounter. raise your hand if you would be telling your son or daughter "well...you had sex or you had unprotected sex so......"

what about when your kid goes off to college. one of them drinks to much one time. and they end up dying of alcohol poisoning.

the "he/she" deserved it would not be on the table. because when it hits home things get different.



Truth is, bottom line biblical logic or non biblical logic. he did get what he deserved under the circumstances. and thats me saying that without feeling/emotion. based on a computer type of logic. no feelings involved. he got what he deserved. but once you go down this road just remember you have done quite a few things where you deserved to be hurt harmed or dead yet you are still here. same with your family/friends. Are you still hanging on to the "he/she got what they deserved" when it hits home? if the answer is no. then dont be so quick to say it in this instance.


Well, you pretty much nailed it on the head. That's what I'm getting at. Once we go down this road... if we're speaking purely in logical terms, as you said, anyone who does something they know they should not do, deserves their fate. But that must apply to ALL people who do things they know they should not do.

So, for example, if you enter an area that is clearly marked as prohibited (let's say a border of some kind like in this story) and the people there find you and take you and put you right back outside of that area or border, would we all agree they got what they deserved?

This conclusion being drawn by many, that the deserved to die, seems more rooted in a bigotry against Christian-based faiths in my view at least, more so than logic.
its not just christian based faith. its faiths period especially when its a first world citizen trying to bring their faith to this tribe.

YOu will of course have push back from those who dont believe in anything.
or those that dont believe in America or any other first world country shouldnt be running around trying to convert people. because that brings up a tough past where a lot of these countries were FORCING their religion on people.

So there are a number of biases at hand here as well.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 23054

PostPosted: Fri Nov 30, 2018 12:31 pm    Post subject:

LarryCoon wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
This conclusion being drawn by many, that the deserved to die, seems more rooted in a bigotry against Christian-based faiths in my view at least, more so than logic.


You made a leap there (in your defense, probably without realizing it) in order to justify your conclusion.

"Deserved their fate" is not the same thing as "deserved to die." It was YOU who said the latter.

To try to explain it by way of example, if I jump into a bear cage, then whatever negative consequences I experience are deserved (result directly from my poor decision), which in this case may be up to and including death (because this is what could happen when you jump into a bear cage). This is not the same thing as saying I deserve death. If you don't understand the distinction, we can talk about it further.

You're trying to argue a strawman in order to justify a conclusion, and that strawman is needed in order to back-fill a rationalization so that you can get to that specific conclusion. I wish you wouldn't do that.


I won't belabor the point. But I need to clarify one thing in your post. I did not say that he deserves to die nor did I put those words in anyone's proverbial mouth.

Check your facts. Scroll back to the beginning and look and see who it was that said this man deserved to die a "cold, hard, and violent death."

I WAS arguing against that exact position.

If you support it, fine, but I think it's disturbing and felt the need to challenge it. But I will relent going forward.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Omar Little
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 83021
Location: Formerly Known As 24

PostPosted: Fri Nov 30, 2018 1:03 pm    Post subject:

Aeneas Hunter wrote:
LongBeachPoly wrote:
Or someone going to Thailand to have unprotected sex with a bunch of prostitutes. You're going to get HIV. That seems inevitable.


It wasn't for me. Wait, what I mean is, er, never mind. Move along. Nothing to see here.

_________________
I guess I just miss my friend.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Omar Little
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 83021
Location: Formerly Known As 24

PostPosted: Fri Nov 30, 2018 2:22 pm    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
Omar Little wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
Hector the Pup wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
DaMuleRules wrote:
ringfinger wrote:

I would be the one trolling because I'm the one saying I don't think a missionary who went to an area he wasn't supposed to deserved death?


You're trolling because you are intentionally changing the argument to something that isn't be said in order to spark disagreement - the very essence of trolling.

The issue of whether his death was warranted or not isn't just that he wan't supposed to go there. It's based on the fact that he knew that death was the most likely outcome of his attempt to visit.

You know that, but you continue to knowingly argue otherwise . . . that's trolling.


So how does this not apply to any and all trespassers then? That, any trespasser, that is removed and placed back outside of the restricted area, deserve that displacement?

Or should it?


So you don't recognize any semblance of nuance or situation?

Gotcha.


What is the nuance, that warrants death?


The nuance is that you are really good at being deliberately obtuse in order to yank people's chains, and you need to knock it off.


So I have to believe that this man deserved to die?

That is all I'm arguing with man. Nothing else. I'm in total agreement with everyone on literally everything including the fact that this missionary was an idiot. I just think we should above saying that he deserved the punishment of death.


I'm not getting into your daisy chain, where you are making silly semantic arguments, getting your butt handed to you, and you just keep making more deliberately obtuse and evasive nonsense arguments (and I'm not doing that about the fact that you do it either). This is what you do time and again all over the board. You know what they mean and you're just pretending not to, so just stop.
_________________
I guess I just miss my friend.
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 8 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