Should people feel shame for the deeds of their ancestors?

[jamil]

Should Muslims, not in ISIS, be ashamed of their actions?

I can't put it any simpler. Shame implies some admission of responsibility. Muslims should feel shame proportionate with their responsibility. If they have no responsibility for it. I see no reason to feel shame.

 

[Kutnupe14]

I can't put it any simpler. Shame implies some admission of responsibility. Muslims should feel shame proportionate with their responsibility. If they have no responsibility for it. I see no reason to feel shame.

So you aren't in the "why aren't they speaking out against ISIS" category? I mean if they have no responsibility to them, they could just as easily ask Catholics why they aren't doing so as well.

 

[SSGSAD]

I feel no shame for being born into something that I had no control over and I will not allow being held to task for the actions of my ancestors.

^^^^^THIS^^^^^

 

[jamil]

So you aren't in the "why aren't they speaking out against ISIS" category? I mean if they have no responsibility to them, they could just as easily ask Catholics why they aren't doing so as well.

I've already stated that I don't believe silence is tacit support.

 

[jamil]

Meh, I've got Scots Irish ancestors that beat up other Irish to get land, ones that both stole from and married Cherokee Indians, ones that fought on both sides of the Civil war. How do I sort all that out to decide what I have to feel guilty for?

I'm sure someone fighting for social justice will be along eventually to tell you what you must feel guilty for. Probably all of it would be my guess.

 

[rhino]

I'm sure someone fighting for social justice will be along eventually to tell you what you must feel guilty for. Probably all of it would be my guess.

Whilst I wrestle with the immense shame and guilt I feel for one of my peeps whacking Magellan with a pointy stick a while back, I'm going to need to see some reparations from the Japanese and the Spanish. Cash will suffice to assuage their guilt.

 

[IndyDave1776]

Whilst I wrestle with the immense shame and guilt I feel for one of my peeps whacking Magellan with a pointy stick a while back, I'm going to need to see some reparations from the Japanese and the Spanish. Cash will suffice to assuage their guilt.

You understand how the game works!

 

[Kutnupe14]

You understand how the game works!

Is somebody asking for reparations? Meh, what's the point when everybody already is already doing all they can to please you?

 

[oldpink]

Is somebody asking for reparations? Meh, what's the point when everybody already is already doing all they can to please you?

Just because no one on INGO is demanding them doesn't mean that it hasn't been floated elsewhere.
It will eventually become a reality if the sensible people don't grow a spine.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Just because no one on INGO is demanding them doesn't mean that it hasn't been floated elsewhere.
It will eventually become a reality if the sensible people don't grow a spine.

I have yet to see any type of concerted effort to obtain reparations gain widespread traction amongst the persons most likely to benefit from them. "Reparations," is a scare word used to reinvigorate the more "traditional" members of the right wing.

 

[churchmouse]

I have a good friend of many years who is a man of color. Hard working and good at his trade. We have went on many an adventure with 2 wheels under us.
One of his favorite comebacks to certain ribbing was how much he longed for his 40 and a mule. Surprised how many were not aware of what he spoke.

 

[Bill of Rights]

I skimmed through this thread, didn't read every word. With that caveat, I'll offer a thought in four lines:

I can be proud of my country and those who created it without taking credit for their actions.
I can be saddened by the actions of some who preceded me without accepting blame for their misdeeds.
I am not due a plug nickle for the good deeds that created this country, and
I owe not one red cent for the fact that some men, long dead, owned slaves, even if they mistreated them.

The same thinking applies when some numbnuts decides to take a handgun or a rifle or a shotgun and commit an unconscionable crime: I own guns, but I didn't commit that crime, and I will NOT be held accountable for the actions of another.... unless of course, Obama and every other Democrat will accept being held accountable for the actions of the KKK, who arose from none other than the Democratic (sic) Party.

BTW, the man who assassinated Lincoln was a Democrat. So was the guy who tried to kill Reagan. I could choose other examples, but either of those is enough, because by accepting that accountability/responsibility, they have aligned themselves with a presidential assassin. That could constitute conspiracy, and attempting to take that person's life is a capital crime.

Still wanna try to blame me for what other people did?

Didn't think so.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[IndyDave1776]

I have yet to see any type of concerted effort to obtain reparations gain widespread traction amongst the persons most likely to benefit from them. "Reparations," is a scare word used to reinvigorate the more "traditional" members of the right wing.

There have been a lot of ideas that have been floated and didn't get traction, floated again, didn't get traction again, until the time that they did and everyone was shocked.

I skimmed through this thread, didn't read every word. With that caveat, I'll offer a thought in four lines:

I can be proud of my country and those who created it without taking credit for their actions.
I can be saddened by the actions of some who preceded me without accepting blame for their misdeeds.
I am not due a plug nickle for the good deeds that created this country, and
I owe not one red cent for the fact that some men, long dead, owned slaves, even if they mistreated them.

The same thinking applies when some numbnuts decides to take a handgun or a rifle or a shotgun and commit an unconscionable crime: I own guns, but I didn't commit that crime, and I will NOT be held accountable for the actions of another.... unless of course, Obama and every other Democrat will accept being held accountable for the actions of the KKK, who arose from none other than the Democratic (sic) Party.

BTW, the man who assassinated Lincoln was a Democrat. So was the guy who tried to kill Reagan. I could choose other examples, but either of those is enough, because by accepting that accountability/responsibility, they have aligned themselves with a presidential assassin. That could constitute conspiracy, and attempting to take that person's life is a capital crime.

Still wanna try to blame me for what other people did?

Didn't think so.

Blessings,
Bill

Very well said!

 

[Kutnupe14]

There have been a lot of ideas that have been floated and didn't get traction, floated again, didn't get traction again, until the time that they did and everyone was shocked.

So essentially you're saying it's a crazy idea that's never had widespread support. And despite that, it is in the best interests of those who opposes the idea, rather than letting it fade from memory, to periodically bring it up, just to remind people of "a crazy idea that's never had widespread support."?

Yet, makes sense to me.

Kut (wonders how often they'll keep blowing......































.....on that dog whistle)

 

[Kaardomos]

Many generations ago, one of my ancestors stole a banana from someone. I feel no shame.

One of my 7th Great Grandfathers was arrest for counterfeiting in the colonies. Inflation is his fault.

 

[oldpink]

I have yet to see any type of concerted effort to obtain reparations gain widespread traction amongst the persons most likely to benefit from them. "Reparations," is a scare word used to reinvigorate the more "traditional" members of the right wing.

You can go on about "scare words used to reinvigorate the right wing" as soon as you criticize your Democrat party for their constant agitprop campaigns, namely the "War Against Women," and how "Republicans/Conservatives hate (insert victim group here)."
You may think it's crazy, and I may think it's crazy, but there most definitely are others who want reparations.
They trial balloon it, they get ridiculed the first go round, they bide their time and repackage their approach, then reintroduce it.
Fewer people ridicule it this time, so they regroup and enlist political support, then bring it up again, this time buttressed with phony polls, intimidation campaigns, and twist the debate into "if you you are against this, you are a bigot," then do their best to see to it that their opponents are not just defeated, but ostracized, lose their jobs, and otherwise suffer very real harm.
Go on and scoff.
I wasn't born yesterday, and I've seen the agitprop machine ratcheted up to propel all manner of bad ideas too many times not to know the routine chapter and verse by now.

So essentially you're saying it's a crazy idea that's never had widespread support. And despite that, it is in the best interests of those who opposes the idea, rather than letting it fade from memory, to periodically bring it up, just to remind people of "a crazy idea that's never had widespread support."?

Yet, makes sense to me.

Kut (wonders how often they'll keep blowing......

.....on that dog whistle)

"...State laws against bigamy, same-sex marriage, adult incest, prostitution, masturbation, adultery, fornication, bestiality, and obscenity are likewise sustainable only in light of Bowers’ validation of laws based on moral choices. Every single one of these laws is called into question by today’s decision; the Court makes no effort to cabin the scope of its decision to exclude them from its holding. See ante, at 11 (noting “an emerging awareness that liberty gives substantial protection to adult persons in deciding how to conduct their private lives in matters pertaining to sex."
-Antonin Scalia -=- key excerpt of his dissent to the Lawrence vs. Texas case 2003 (take careful note of that year)

Whether you are in favor of the homosexual marriage ruling last week, I would remind those who either weren't alive at the time of the Lawrence ruling, weren't paying attention, or have forgotten, that Scalia was ridiculed and scorned throughout both mainstream and liberal media for pointing out that homosexual marriage would henceforth have the door opened wide in the wake of said ruling.
The media and the left (one and the same) said he was being ridiculous, and that no one would ever push for such a ludicrous proposition.
But please, go on about how slippery slopes are mere fictions, and ask yourself why the only one in the room who seems to be hearing "dog whistles" is the person who accuses others of blowing those dog whistles.

btw...while we're on the subject of "dog whistles," it's interesting how prominent homosexual activist and former Star Trek star George "Mr Sulu" Takei took over a week to finally apologize for the following, said of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas:

“He is a clown in blackface sitting on the Supreme Court,” said Takei. “He gets me that angry. He doesn’t belong there.”

Hell, that wasn't even a dog whistle, but a plain old referee's whistle right there.
But then, Takei is a man of the left, and a homosexual to boot, so he gets far more leeway than a conservative or Republican ever would for even the tiniest hint -- whether real or imagined, intentional or unintentional -- of bigotry in a comment.
Takei even doubled down several times in the week between his initial comment and finally apologizing.
It barely made a ripple,and he'll be right back at it once again, doing the Democrat party's bidding.
A Republican/conservative would be run out of town and unemployable overnight for having said something 1/10 as ugly as that.

 

[Kutnupe14]

You can go on about "scare words used to reinvigorate the right wing" as soon as you criticize your Democrat party for their constant agitprop campaigns, namely the "War Against Women," and how "Republicans/Conservatives hate (insert victim group here)."
You may think it's crazy, and I may think it's crazy, but there most definitely are others who want reparations.
They trial balloon it, they get ridiculed the first go round, they bide their time and repackage their approach, then reintroduce it.
Fewer people ridicule it this time, so they regroup and enlist political support, then bring it up again, this time buttressed with phony polls, intimidation campaigns, and twist the debate into "if you you are against this, you are a bigot," then do their best to see to it that their opponents are not just defeated, but ostracized, lose their jobs, and otherwise suffer very real harm.
Go on and scoff.
I wasn't born yesterday, and I've seen the agitprop machine ratcheted up to propel all manner of bad ideas too many times not to know the routine chapter and verse by now.



"...State laws against bigamy, same-sex marriage, adult incest, prostitution, masturbation, adultery, fornication, bestiality, and obscenity are likewise sustainable only in light of Bowers’ validation of laws based on moral choices. Every single one of these laws is called into question by today’s decision; the Court makes no effort to cabin the scope of its decision to exclude them from its holding. See ante, at 11 (noting “an emerging awareness that liberty gives substantial protection to adult persons in deciding how to conduct their private lives in matters pertaining to sex."
-Antonin Scalia -=- key excerpt of his dissent to the Lawrence vs. Texas case 2003 (take careful note of that year)

Whether you are in favor of the homosexual marriage ruling last week, I would remind those who either weren't alive at the time of the Lawrence ruling, weren't paying attention, or have forgotten, that Scalia was ridiculed and scorned throughout both mainstream and liberal media for pointing out that homosexual marriage would henceforth have the door opened wide in the wake of said ruling.
The media and the left (one and the same) said he was being ridiculous, and that no one would ever push for such a ludicrous proposition.
But please, go on about how slippery slopes are mere fictions, and ask yourself why the only one in the room who seems to be hearing "dog whistles" is the person who accuses others of blowing those dog whistles.

btw...while we're on the subject of "dog whistles," it's interesting how prominent homosexual activist and former Star Trek star George "Mr Sulu" Takei took over a week to finally apologize for the following, said of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas:

“He is a clown in blackface sitting on the Supreme Court,” said Takei. “He gets me that angry. He doesn’t belong there.”

Hell, that wasn't even a dog whistle, but a plain old referee's whistle right there.
But then, Takei is a man of the left, and a homosexual to boot, so he gets far more leeway than a conservative or Republican ever would for even the tiniest hint -- whether real or imagined, intentional or unintentional -- of bigotry in a comment.
Takei even doubled down several times in the week between his initial comment and finally apologizing.
It barely made a ripple,and he'll be right back at it once again, doing the Democrat party's bidding.
A Republican/conservative would be run out of town and unemployable overnight for having said something 1/10 as ugly as that.

I'll keep it simple:

-Your post doesn't address why reparations continues to be a common theme despite no serious effort to enact it
-Yes, there are simpletons that want reparation. But there are also simpletons that want to deport all Muslims from the nation. Both don't have a chance of ever happening, and no one, not even those who would be affected gives it much thought.
-Yes, the left uses scare terms almost a regularly (probably more often) than the right. That still does not make it right. I am equally inclined to roll my eyes over such comments from the left, as I am from the right.
-Sulu, made an #$% of himself, and obviously is solely concerned about the rights of those in his particular group(s). He's words are worthy of an bigot.
-Scalia, I think is reaching a bit with his "door opening" comment

 

[oldpink]

I'll keep it simple:

[...]
-Scalia, I think is reaching a bit with his "door opening" comment

He specifically mentioned same-sex marriage in his comments.
I wager that most, if not all, of the others mentioned in those comments will steadily jam their way into the fabric of society, and there will be plenty of folks out there who will claim that none of it was foreseeable.

 

[Trigger Time]

I'll keep it simple:

-Your post doesn't address why reparations continues to be a common theme despite no serious effort to enact it
-Yes, there are simpletons that want reparation. But there are also simpletons that want to deport all Muslims from the nation. Both don't have a chance of ever happening, and no one, not even those who would be affected gives it much thought.
-Yes, the left uses scare terms almost a regularly (probably more often) than the right. That still does not make it right. I am equally inclined to roll my eyes over such comments from the left, as I am from the right.
-Sulu, made an #$% of himself, and obviously is solely concerned about the rights of those in his particular group(s). He's words are worthy of an bigot.
-Scalia, I think is reaching a bit with his "door opening" comment

Wonder if a mass deportation like that could happen legally from a national security standpoint?

 

[Kutnupe14]

Wonder if a mass deportation like that could happen legally from a national security standpoint?