Could you forgive a killer?

Property & Home EDF and Utilities
121

Hi Kent, some interesting points you raise, and at the risk of Brian's ire I will continue with the opera as I see it.

You last points are the main ones I refer to as the 'isn't that one of the main things we are here for?' to me is unanswerable, simply as I have no idea 'why' we are here in any spiritual sense. That we have the ability to think is a gift (often underrated) so on that basis it is probably for each individual to answer the question, and therein lies the problem?

Brian once made the most pertinent response to a much earlier post, and it was one of his shortest (:-) which was 'we are all creatures of our experiences' or words to that affect. I deem this not simply of own own physical experiences, but those acquired often second-hand. The books we read, the newspapers and media, our form, type and qualityof education are all parts of this I think. As such it is hardly surprising we are all so different.

However and except in one major area I do feel there are more things that really join us as human beings - we all eat, drink, defecate and even (sometimes, or so I am told) fornicate. We do seem capable of emotional responses between us - but not always amiable ones.

So, where do we get the guidelines? Within ourselves? Partially, but I believe that collectively society has laid down certain 'rules of engagement' and these vary from religion to religion, value systems and much more They are not all the same, which is the root of most conflicts in my view.

Ascending spiritually I think is another way of expressing the desire for 'self-fulfilment' or even just trying to make sense out of everything. By definition we will never know 'everything' let alone understand it.

On this basis - We're doomed I tell thee - we're all doomed!!!

122

I share your same ignorance Norman but I assume the vernacular in the deep south is different to the north or wherever and I suppose that's indicative of the social and cultural differences built up over the centuries.

123

Peter,

I would rather think he would have regarded it as demeaning and insulting to be offered the words from someone he almost certainly regarded is his 'inferior'. I don't think it would have affected any conscience in any way at all.

I have to admit to not having followed the case in any real detail but I suppose others must have seen the images on the France 24 debate last night which surely must have suggested to someone this man was vehemently racist? House, Confederate flag all over the place, gun in hand etc.,etc. Or was it as Brian has suggested, that this was just regarded as the 'norm' in the region or even the USA as a whole?

I still find it stunning that the KKK are still able to parade their particular form of fancy dress lunacy openly (apparently), so can only assume this too is regarded as totally normal?

Having said all that aren't we all just a bit racist? I include black people in this incidentally. Our roots all tend to be tribal, and the thought or even images of us being over-run or overwhelmed by those of another culture bothers us to some degree or other? Colour of a persons skin or visual differences are very convenient in identification. THis is why we tend to stay in our own comfort zones of familiarity and where we mostly have shared values. Politely we call these 'neighbourhoods' when we live in them, or 'ghettoes' when others do.

We are now watching an invasion of illegal immigrants from Africa, can we really deny that their culture (or perceived lack of one) and their colour doesn't affect us at all?

We might overtly wish for a better world, but how many would willingly go and live in a black or Arab neighborhood? Plus how many would even be welcomed? The reverse is of course also true. The Banlieus of Paris are now supreme examples of how this works (or doesn't work according to your point of view).

At best I think we must ensure that whatever else the artificial elements of inequality MUST be removed. I remember on a vist to Cape Town en route to Australia at being truly appalled at the 'Whites Only' 'Blacks only' signs everywhere - plus the slightly amusing extensions of this in the Railway Station highlighting how crazy this was with the Porters signs of 'White Porters carrying White Passengers baggage' to 'Black porters carrying White passengers baggage' to Black Porters carrying Black Passengers baggage' etc. Of course the moment the mixed race 'Coloreds' came into play the whole thing became bizarre in the extreme.

I am not a believer in so-called positive discrimination in jobs or anything else as I feel this simply feeds resentments even from the so-called 'beneficiaries'. Everyone should have equal rights (including salaraies, wages etc) as a matter of course to enable them to live at the levels they are best able to achieve or want, and it really is that simple.

Living with differences is easier when everybody is in the same boat with the same rights and opportunities. We are not all endowed with the same skills or mindsets, but this has zero to do with skin colour.

Yeah, I know - dream on?

124

Peter,

this language business is always odd. I have noted on many American films that it seems totally normal between black people to use the so-called 'n' word (isn't that coy when we all know what it means as we do with the 'f' word and the 'c' word?) about each other.

Not being any sort of expert in American vernacular, and it may sound strange in the light of my own background, I have never visited or even wanted to visit the USA, but I also noted, in films at least, that blacks use the word 'Honky' as an insulting descriptive of White people, but we (they, as in Americans) never refer to that as the 'h' word.

Odd or not odd?

125

Once upon a time, the idea was to keep the peasants in line, obedient, docile, respectful of authority, telling them that they'd get their reward in the next life, since the current life was such misery. I don't know what people are told today. I pity the preacher in Charleston who has to face a crowd of mourning families and tell them that God works in mysterious ways. Hopefully he has the grace not to come up with platitudes such as that.

126

So what's the point of God then ? What's his job ?

127

Churches have done a fabulous job convincing people that there is a benevolent dictator in the sky, observing them 24 hours a day, who will either a) protect them from bad people and events, b) mete out punishment when and where he sees fit, or c) just be a voyeur and watch what all the little humans on the blue planet are capable of doing on their own, keeping a score card of course for judgment day. But I suppose most religious people have found a more palatable and useful concept of god since then.

128

Gary, do you really believe that people are basically good? Or is it something you wish was true? I envy the happy bubble you must live in. It's a postcode not found on any map I've ever seen :-)

129

Are you implying Gary might be making a show of being morally superior to other people by using the word sanctimonious? I think he might be asking indirectly whether you are sanctimonious. Calling people human garbage could very easily imply that!

130

Touché Doreen. It was a bit of very contrived whataboutery on my part to make a point and I would have to further invent somebody picked on at random to it. I used it as a far fetched example, but where I wanted to go was how conditional things are and how minds can be changed almost randomly by external influences rather than actual knowledge.

131

Peter and Doreen, God is not punishing anyone.

We are all part of humanity and if another part of that humanity takes it upon themselves to do terrible things to another part, that is not of God's doing.

I do not expect God to protect me from the vicissitudes of life and I cannot understand why others should expect it either.

God is not an umbrella shielding us from the actions of others.

132

I think Christianity has moved on from an eye for an eye Norman.

If you want. to blame someone for this attitude to Christianity have a go at Constatine and his male political/religious cronies at the time.

133

Yes Norman, a certain percentage of the population do really object to gays. It only takes one deranged person to walk into a gay club and gun them down just like the racist walked into the church and murdered 9 people. That's the prroblem, whether we are talking about a minority of Jihadists who want to kill or a minority of anti-gay or a minority of racists et al. These 'oddballs' as the majority probably sees them have always been with us and always will be.

134

Food for thought.

135

Thanks for that Gary, most enlightening or is that sanctimonious? - jury's out.

136

Brian,

be completely honest and not the professional 'impartial'. If your daughter was killed by someone like this, and this is completely in the context of the question at the outset, could YOU genuinely forgive that person?

137

Brian

from my distant past and having gone to a 'faith school' (which turned me into a total agnostic even at the time), I recall something in the Bible, which I assume has something to do with the Judao-Christian ethic (?) 'An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth'?

Of course then there was the 'Vengeance is mine sayeth the Lord' which seems contradictory? Then of course the universal religious cop-out of 'The Lord moves in Mysterious Ways his Wonders (sic) to perform'.

Good chunk of moral leadership there don't you think?

Do people really care any more if someone is Gay? Hasn't it become a complete irrelevance? I know you were only using it to demonstrate a point, but interesting just the same.

Oops, back to the opera- sorry about the intrusive nature of the contribution.

138

That is contradictory. The people who forgave gave compassion, Roof did not ask for it. It was there right to give it. We do not know whether or not he feels forgiven. Yet again it goes back to Peter's question 'Could you forgive a person who had killed a loved one ?'. Those people gave forgiveness irrespective of what he was entitled to or not because that is what they believe. Whatever you say, he has been forgiven. That cannot be taken away, for right or wrong. What some people here are saying in effect is that on the one hand those people have forgiven and that is fine but that is not the way it should be because you think the opposite. That completely defies the logic of the Judao-Christian ethic which shapes the way we live irrespective of whether we are believers or not. Plus you are assuming what was in his mind before anybody knows. Thus far there has been no such statement anywhere.

Would it change if you suddenly found out he had been drugged and then hypnotised/brainwashed into doing it for the KKK or something like that. I know that is most certainly pure fantasy on my part, but just imagine if that came out. Would he still not be entitled to compassion?

It all gets a bit like reading the Sun (oxymoron in there) and finding out that Beyoncé has just announced she is gay, biasesd fans would stop liking her. Next day her lawyers are suing News International for printing an untrue story about her. Do the ex-fans start liking her again? Being reactive does not help anything, opinions can only be formed by knowing not assuming one knows because something has happened.

139

Jane, what happens when God is a part of your life but then lets you down ? It makes ex believers like me think twice about putting my faith in such charlatans. Or is it meant to be like that ? Are we being 'tested' ? If so, why does he punish the people who love(d) him ?

140

I look at this way: if you cross the line, cruelly and intentionally killing innocent people and destroying their loved ones' lives, you forfeit your right to sympathy and compassion. In my first post in this discussion, I did not dismiss the forgiveness that any of those people involved in this tragedy might express. I speculated on their reactions and motives and I acknowledged that it brings some people a measure of comfort. Whatever gets you through the night. I don't judge them for that. But seeing as we are far removed from that tragic situation, it feels not only inappropriate, but also revolting to me, to have people outside that situation rationalize anything the killer might have done that is intended to arouse empathy, sympathy or understanding. I have compassion for people who have compassion, who try to do their best in this cruel world, who know that life is unfair and short, but they carry on stoically, take care of their loved ones and the vulnerable around them, and try to spread a little happiness. For this killer, I have only a sense of horror and disgust, and it makes me feel better to deride him and to look at him as something I would scrape off the bottom of my shoe. Call it a primitive human emotion if you like. I can live with it. I don't have to have any compassion for him. He lost his right to that.