Kuro5hin.org: technology and culture, from the trenches
create account | help/FAQ | contact | links | search | IRC | site news
[ Everything | Diaries | Technology | Science | Culture | Politics | Media | News | Internet | Op-Ed | Fiction | Meta | MLP ]
We need your support: buy an ad | premium membership

[P]
How Christians React to Death and Murder

By A Bore in Op-Ed
Thu Oct 12, 2006 at 01:48:38 AM EST
Tags: war, death, murder, the usual (all tags)

On Monday the 2nd of October, 2006, Charles Carl Roberts lined up 11 Amish girls and shot them at point blank range before committing suicide. He was reportedly angry at God for taking his daughter, who had died at just 20 minutes old. 5 of the Amish girls have died so far. 2 of the girls are reported to have asked to be shot first, to buy the others some time. How did the Amish react to this atrocity?

That evening they gathered together and organised a horse and buggy to visit the family of Charles Carl Roberts with food and sympathy. They invited the killer's widow to the family funerals. They bought a lock for their schoolroom door. Now they aim to establish two funds, one for the families of the dead girls, one to provide for the killers family.

Out of a horrific incident, the Amish showed what faith in God really was, turning even that horror into a demonstration of the highest principles of their faith. I must confess, I find their actions deeply moving.


(The British Observer did not agree. Cristina Odone decided "The families' tragedies is unbearably moving, yet the way this community is dealing with a gunman killing five young schoolgirls (and then himself) is disturbing." I've got to say, this is one of the most shameful pieces of journalism I've ever had the misfortune to read)

On September the 11th, 2001, two airliners crashed into the twin towers, leading to 2,997 deaths. The hijackers were apparently motivated by a desire to punish America for its support of Israel; its military bases in the Middle East; and its sanctions against the Iraqi people. How did America, with its ostensibly Christian leadership, react to this atrocity?

They curtailed basic domestic liberties with the foundation of the Department of Homeland Security, and the passing of the P.A.T.R.I.O.T. act. They invaded Afghanistan leading to the further 3,700-5,000 civilian deaths directly (uncounted are those dead from lack of suitable water, medical treatment, or food). They invaded Iraq, leading to an excess mortality rate of something to the tune of (now well over) 100,000 civilian deaths. They tortured people. They imprisoned them without legal recourse. They flew them to countries to be tortured. They never did get their man.

Out of a horrific incident, the Americans showed to what depth their faith in God resonated, turning that horror into a demonstration of the principles of their nation. Those principles are clear to see. And that demonstration, too, resonates today.

The Amish padlocked their door and forgave their murderer. Might I suggest that the lesson, after all this death and misery, and with no evidence that anything America has done has diminished the threat, but rather heightened it; might I suggest that the Amish response is the more Christian, the more practical, and the more successful one?

Sponsors

Voxel dot net
o Managed Hosting
o VoxCAST Content Delivery
o Raw Infrastructure

Login

Related Links
o establish two funds
o British Observer
o 3,700-5,00 0 civilian deaths
o 100,000 civilian deaths
o Also by A Bore


Display: Sort:
How Christians React to Death and Murder | 148 comments (133 topical, 15 editorial, 0 hidden)
Christine Odone (2.00 / 3) (#1)
by nebbish on Tue Oct 10, 2006 at 06:37:37 AM EST

Doesn't really represent the views of the Observer. She's an old school Catholic with pretty conservative views; the paper is liberal and left of centre. She's an in-house troll, basically.

---------
Kicking someone in the head is like punching them in the foot - Bruce Lee

Editorial responsibility (none / 0) (#4)
by A Bore on Tue Oct 10, 2006 at 09:11:53 AM EST

It may not be the opinion of the Observer itself; but the fact it published it means it must take some of the opprobrium.

[ Parent ]
Oh yeah (none / 0) (#6)
by nebbish on Tue Oct 10, 2006 at 09:22:27 AM EST

Like I say though, she's employed to get people's backs up and stimulate the letters page. Her opinions don't reflect the paper's editorial policy.

---------
Kicking someone in the head is like punching them in the foot - Bruce Lee
[ Parent ]

Yet they printed it (none / 0) (#7)
by A Bore on Tue Oct 10, 2006 at 09:24:12 AM EST



[ Parent ]
Like I say... (none / 0) (#8)
by nebbish on Tue Oct 10, 2006 at 09:24:41 AM EST

No, I'm not going to say it a third time

---------
Kicking someone in the head is like punching them in the foot - Bruce Lee
[ Parent ]

Pretty please /nt (3.00 / 4) (#9)
by MotorMachineMercenary on Tue Oct 10, 2006 at 09:41:25 AM EST


--
"My mental image of you is Wyatt's brother Chet in Weird Science."
- Parent ]

IAWTP (none / 1) (#22)
by The Diary Section on Tue Oct 10, 2006 at 11:58:42 AM EST

Indeed, I post-empted it :)
Spend 10 minutes in the company of an American and you end up feeling like a Keats or a Shelley: Thin, brilliant, suave, and desperate for industrial-scale quantities of opium.
[ Parent ]
One basic flaw (2.85 / 7) (#2)
by stupidpuppy on Tue Oct 10, 2006 at 06:55:38 AM EST

The Amish are Christian Pacifists, and believe violence even in self-defense is unacceptable.

No state could possibly behave in the same way, since it takes violence to maintain a state (you must arrest criminals and would-be usurpers).  

Indeed, Christian Pacifists not only stay out of the military, but out of law enforcement and the government in general.


"No state could possibly behave (3.00 / 6) (#13)
by A Bore on Tue Oct 10, 2006 at 10:05:21 AM EST

...in the same way"
Is this an unassailable truism? Can it be debated?

[ Parent ]
Yes. No. HTH. $ (none / 0) (#41)
by Hung Three on Tue Oct 10, 2006 at 02:11:57 PM EST



--
Behead those who insult Marx.
[ Parent ]
yes (none / 1) (#128)
by shokk on Sun Oct 15, 2006 at 11:38:58 AM EST

The discussion has been running since the dawn of man.  Grab a rifle and chime in.
"Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart, he dreams himself your master."
[ Parent ]
then why do they vote, and vote for gw bush (none / 1) (#62)
by circletimessquare on Wed Oct 11, 2006 at 12:32:33 AM EST

in overwhelming fashion in 2000 and 2004?

if they were true to their pacificism, they would stop voting

otherwise, they stand as a dependable voting bloc for a guy who you couldn't exactly call pacifist

strange isn't it?

according to their voting patterns, the amish are all for the invasion of iraq


The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

[ Parent ]

the left is a clear threat to their way of life (2.66 / 6) (#70)
by dongs on Wed Oct 11, 2006 at 05:40:23 AM EST

the gop prevents would-be amish-raping faggots like you from running wild

[ Parent ]
dude (none / 1) (#87)
by circletimessquare on Wed Oct 11, 2006 at 07:00:38 AM EST

i'm a faggot-raping amish, not an amish-raping faggot

get it right, please


The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

[ Parent ]

rewrite (1.00 / 4) (#3)
by GhostOfTiber on Tue Oct 10, 2006 at 08:18:12 AM EST

If you're going to do a Shades of Faith piece, which is what you're trying to do here, you need to include the religious affiliation of everyone in the piece.  I see Amish Christian here, but I don't see the Christian faiths of everyone involved in the PATRIOT act or the "Christian Leadership" you named.  Sadly, that omission makes this piece incomplete and I'm going to have to give you a -1.

[Nimey's] wife's ass is my cocksheath. - undermyne

Not really trying to do a shades of faith piece (none / 0) (#12)
by A Bore on Tue Oct 10, 2006 at 09:57:25 AM EST

I'm going by the rather cruder method of taking George Bush's religious claims at face value. God speaks to him, so he says - I wonder what God has to say to him. (STOP THAT, YOU FUCKING IDIOT!)

[ Parent ]
George Bush is not the entirety of the US Govt (none / 0) (#17)
by GhostOfTiber on Tue Oct 10, 2006 at 10:12:07 AM EST

Which is why you're Failing It on a group comparison.

I would venture that "God speaks to me" is the basis for anyone's faith.  Mohommad speaks to me, God speaks to me, Flying Spaghetti Monster speaks to me.

Your problem is that George Bush still has to pass laws like anyone else, which involves the House, Senate, and Congress.  Focusing on George Bush shows a serious lack of understanding when it comes to Gov't Process.

[Nimey's] wife's ass is my cocksheath. - undermyne
[ Parent ]

I would suggest it is your misunderstanding (none / 1) (#34)
by A Bore on Tue Oct 10, 2006 at 12:46:23 PM EST

A huge amount of power is currently, and has been in the past, concentrated in George Bush's hands. That the senate has to rubber stamp (SOME) decisions he makes or some of the people he appoints is hardly more than a figleaf over his pulsating agenda.

[ Parent ]
can you prove that? (none / 0) (#51)
by GhostOfTiber on Tue Oct 10, 2006 at 06:07:38 PM EST

Unless you can justify in your article singling him out, no one is going to vote it up.

[Nimey's] wife's ass is my cocksheath. - undermyne
[ Parent ]

The Amish (1.90 / 11) (#5)
by BerntB on Tue Oct 10, 2006 at 09:16:00 AM EST

The Amish doesn't allow agressions and conflicts. It is a tabu not to forgive. You get ostracised.

I remember a tv program about an Amish girl whose brothers had sex abused her for years -- she was so angry when told she had to forgive them and she wasn't allowed to be angry! This for a type of crime that often gives mental problems for life.

She said her mother told her, "You don't fight hard enough and you don't pray hard enough." Mary said her mother made her feel as if the assaults were her fault. "Every time I would talk about this she would say that they have already confessed in church and you're just being unforgiving," she said.

Indeed, Mary's brothers had confessed in church. In this closed society problems are handled internally, the church elders are both judge and jury.

And the punishment might be surprising to outsiders.

"The Amish emphasize the simplicity of life, plainness of life. They accentuate several themes, such as pacifism, the importance of community," said Donald Kraybill, professor of sociology at Elizabethtown college and author of "The Riddle of Amish Culture."

"They feel that the use of force, even legal force, even filing a lawsuit is outside the spirit of Christ, and outside the spirit of Christian faith," according to Kraybill.

Kraybill said individuals who confess to offenses -- regardless of the seriousness -- are banned from church activities for six weeks and only restored to full membership in their community if they are truly penitent.

In a clan society, i.e. one without a working police force, the Amish would be like the civilians in west/south Sudan without UN protection... dead or slaves.

And, as others have written, it is damn difference between what countries do -- and what a group of people protected by a police force do. There is no police between countries.

For some reason, I am not surprised that A Bore thinks those are ideals to be followed... the rest of the world thinks of them as dysfunctional and sad.

A Bore, please learn to think or to troll better.

I don't think the rest of the world (none / 0) (#11)
by A Bore on Tue Oct 10, 2006 at 09:54:23 AM EST

thinks the Amish ideals are 'dysfunctional and sad'. I think for most people the 'themes, such as pacifism, the importance of community' and forgiveness are things to aspire to. I don't doubt there are problems with the way the Amish live - your child abuse citation is interesting. But then there are problems with the way everyone lives, if you look hard enough.

[ Parent ]
Read basic game theory, e.g. read Selfish Gene n/t (1.25 / 4) (#15)
by BerntB on Tue Oct 10, 2006 at 10:09:47 AM EST



[ Parent ]
I have read the Selfish Gene (3.00 / 3) (#30)
by A Bore on Tue Oct 10, 2006 at 12:37:17 PM EST

And The Blind Watchmaker, and Climbing Mount Improbable, and just about every other book that Dawkins has wrote since the 70's.

You are committing the classical fallacy of over extending Dawkins chapters on evolutionary stable strategies. The Prisoner's dilemma and Hawk / Dove calculations may be all very well with concrete, deterministic rules, but extending them willy-nilly to more complicated, fuzzy situations is pushing them too far, or at least pushing them further without providing evidence that shows they can be pushed.

[ Parent ]
Almost coherent, but (none / 0) (#53)
by BerntB on Tue Oct 10, 2006 at 07:09:13 PM EST

You are committing the classical fallacy of over extending Dawkins chapters on evolutionary stable strategies.
I wrote "Read basic game theory, e.g. [Dawkins]".

I.e. much more trivial -- helpless entities either is very insulated or tend to be eaten by neighboring entities. Pacifism only works with insulation, implemented e.g. with a policing force.

I already wrote that as a point in the first post ("In a clan society, i.e. one without a working police force, the Amish would be like the civilians in west/south Sudan without UN protection... dead or slaves.") -- but you ignored it.

[ Parent ]

It worked for Gandhi (none / 0) (#65)
by brain in a jar on Wed Oct 11, 2006 at 03:15:00 AM EST

In the absence of any policing force, aside from public opinion and the consciences of those that he campaigned against.

The only enemy against whom pacifism will fail totally, is the enemy which is prepared to commit genocide.


Life is too important, to be taken entirely seriously.
[ Parent ]

It worked INSIDE a society (none / 0) (#66)
by BerntB on Wed Oct 11, 2006 at 03:56:30 AM EST

with working police force.

The point was that pacifism has to have some people protecting them, because of trivial game theory.

We can't generalize our experiences from inside a state with violence monopoly that implement laws to a place where there is no such monopoly. Historically, it hasn't worked like that.

[ Parent ]

a police force that was AGAINST ghandi!! (none / 0) (#81)
by A Bore on Wed Oct 11, 2006 at 06:27:55 AM EST



[ Parent ]
But upheld the laws n/t (none / 0) (#90)
by BerntB on Wed Oct 11, 2006 at 07:15:39 AM EST



[ Parent ]
again, AGAINST Ghandi! (none / 0) (#95)
by A Bore on Wed Oct 11, 2006 at 09:06:01 AM EST

Ghandi's non violent struggle took place within a set of laws that was opposed to his nonviolent resistence! The peace movement had no protection, no outside force threatening violence against the apparatus of a state that committed and threatened to commit violence upon the movement! Ghandi himself was imprisoned under laws he found quite reasonable, and did not fight against.

It's very difficult to argue that his movement needed a cadre of violent soldiers to perserve its existence. Because all the facts suggest it didn't!

[ Parent ]
So publish that you'll never call police whatever (none / 0) (#97)
by BerntB on Wed Oct 11, 2006 at 09:26:13 AM EST

happens to you or your posessions. Make sure everyone sees it, on the net -- and the city you live in.

[ Parent ]
Also, think of the Hindi/Muslim right after... (none / 0) (#73)
by BerntB on Wed Oct 11, 2006 at 05:59:44 AM EST

Would a pacifist attitude have worked re the Hindu/Muslim separated into two states?

Without atrocities, you wouldn't have that kind of exodus from land people had owned for a long time.

The historically "normal" human state is to be ready to do atrocities and genocide. We have forgotten that in civilized societies, with a working police force.

(And for the next comment -- it is not contradicting that relatively modern states can commit atrocities, too.)

[ Parent ]

Actually no. (none / 1) (#120)
by For Whom The Bells Troll on Thu Oct 12, 2006 at 06:54:07 AM EST

Without atrocities, you wouldn't have that kind of exodus from land people had owned for a long time.
You're mixing two issues completely here.

The north-western side of undivided British India, Punjab, Sindh and others, saw large-scale rioting, genocide, fatricide and the largest forced migration in human history. The eastern side, Bengal, on the other hand, had comparitively negligible violence. One side had 500,000 (or so) troops. The other had Mahatma Gandhi.

(Rather, Bengal's forced migrations happened long after Partition and Gandhiji's assissination, not during.)

---
The Big F Word.
[ Parent ]

You still haven't explained (none / 0) (#82)
by A Bore on Wed Oct 11, 2006 at 06:32:14 AM EST

..how game theory is shown to have a real world equivalent. That's quite a chasm you're stepping out over.

But let's say it does apply, for arguments sake. I could equally make the argument that the 'Hawk' strategy is doomed as, in a background of all 'Hawk', everyone loses. When two 'Hawks' come up against each other, they both lose ie. cold war, nuclear escalation. We were one Russian submarine commandment away from all losing.

So aggressive entities tend to create a world in which everyone loses.

Do you now see why this application of Game Theory is a pseudoscientific facade? I can pick any example I want from it to prove whatever I want.

[ Parent ]
That was not relevant to what you commented (none / 0) (#89)
by BerntB on Wed Oct 11, 2006 at 07:15:02 AM EST

You still haven't explained ..how game theory is shown to have a real world equivalent
Outside of isolated islands/areas, historically there has never been a pacifist culture -- except where the pacifists have been protected/enslaved by non-pacifists.

Also, your comment was not relevant to what you answered (I never needed Dawkins/Hamiltons neat work for my argument, but you know that).

[ Parent ]

Yes, but... (2.50 / 2) (#18)
by thefirelane on Tue Oct 10, 2006 at 10:20:39 AM EST

themes, such as pacifism, the importance of community' and forgiveness are things to aspire

Aspire to, yes. But the point that I got from this was that the Amish were only able to practice these noble traits because someone else decided they wouldn't.

In other words, the Amish world could only exist with a very nice military protecting them from outside forces.

-
Prube.com: Like K5, but with less point.
[ Parent ]
He isn't interested in any stupid points (1.50 / 4) (#21)
by BerntB on Tue Oct 10, 2006 at 11:55:07 AM EST

A Bore is trolling. A bit too obviously.

It is a pity, since a better troller could have made this into a really red flag. A Bore had a good idea.

(I don't think I could do it better; I generally am either serious or joking, seldom trolling. But I can appreciate a good troll -- and see potential here.)

[ Parent ]

I'm sorry I upset you, Bernt (none / 1) (#27)
by A Bore on Tue Oct 10, 2006 at 12:27:11 PM EST

But really, to repeatedly call me a troll in retaliation is bit severe. What have I trolled? Where have I stated opinions I don't hold?

I really wish you would drop this passive aggressive bullshit, and stop calling me a troll after every post I make because you are really only hurting yourself.

With regrets,
A Bore.

[ Parent ]
That was better! (1.00 / 7) (#28)
by BerntB on Tue Oct 10, 2006 at 12:30:25 PM EST

I loved that insult with passive-agressive in such a passive-agressive way.

I just wish you could get some more variation.

(And yes, I think you went over the top in this story. But note that I said it was a very neat idea and that I couldn't have done it better myself.)

[ Parent ]

I can't say anything to change your mind (none / 0) (#33)
by A Bore on Tue Oct 10, 2006 at 12:43:31 PM EST

Everything I say is interpreted as some sort of bizarre troll. I can only reinforce your opinion, it is incapable of changing. So carry on. But only bigots never doubt, remember that.

[ Parent ]
But you are a bad troll (none / 0) (#54)
by BerntB on Tue Oct 10, 2006 at 07:12:54 PM EST

You write conspiracy theories based on one extremist journalist's web site that HRW, NY Times etc are totally wrong re Hezbollah's unaimed rocket attacks on civilians. (And if you again want to claim the majority of rockets weren't unaimed, note that this contradict HRW and all the mainstream press.)

[ Parent ]
This is why I am a 'troll' (none / 0) (#80)
by A Bore on Wed Oct 11, 2006 at 06:26:55 AM EST

because you disagree with me politically. Pretty shabby tactics, bernt.

[ Parent ]
INCREDIBLE non sequitur! (none / 0) (#88)
by BerntB on Wed Oct 11, 2006 at 07:09:27 AM EST

[You call me troll] because you disagree with me politically. Pretty shabby tactics, bernt.
As answer to:
You write conspiracy theories based on one extremist journalist's web site that HRW, NY Times etc are totally wrong re Hezbollah's unaimed rocket attacks on civilians. (And if you again want to claim the majority of rockets weren't unaimed, note that this contradict HRW and all the mainstream press.)


[ Parent ]
What's the crime rate in the Amish community? (none / 0) (#26)
by A Bore on Tue Oct 10, 2006 at 12:25:00 PM EST

Do people prey on them as easy game? Police called out every night?

[ Parent ]
false (none / 1) (#48)
by thefirelane on Tue Oct 10, 2006 at 05:36:06 PM EST

Do people prey on them as easy game?

IHBT... This is a false argument, because criminals don't really want anything from them. However, they are allowed to practice their religion because we have a military that protects them from people who would forcibly convert them.

Drop an amish community in the middle of Iraq and see how long their ways are preserved.

-
Prube.com: Like K5, but with less point.
[ Parent ]
I already told you so. n/t (none / 0) (#55)
by BerntB on Tue Oct 10, 2006 at 07:14:49 PM EST



[ Parent ]
You're trying to have it both ways (none / 0) (#79)
by A Bore on Wed Oct 11, 2006 at 06:25:59 AM EST

The Amish need this protection, yet they never use it? If they have nothing anyone would want, then who is going to bother them to get their nothing?

Hell, drop anyone into the middle of Iraq and see how long they would last. It's hardly a valid point of debate.

[ Parent ]
Also WAT Buddhists?/nt (none / 0) (#32)
by A Bore on Tue Oct 10, 2006 at 12:41:31 PM EST



[ Parent ]
Buddhists eh? (none / 1) (#46)
by Delirium on Tue Oct 10, 2006 at 05:20:12 PM EST

Didn't work out too well for 'em in Tibet. Now they're being involuntarily "protected" from outside forces by the non-pacifist Chinese military!

[ Parent ]
And yet! (none / 0) (#64)
by A Bore on Wed Oct 11, 2006 at 02:03:42 AM EST

There are around 350 million Buddhists worldwide, and as far as I know there is no requirement or need for an enormous army to protect them. To say pacificistic creeds can only flourish where armed men create enclaves for them is demonstrably wrong.

[ Parent ]
Are you claiming that buddhists aren't soldiers? $ (none / 0) (#67)
by BerntB on Wed Oct 11, 2006 at 03:59:41 AM EST



[ Parent ]
I'm claiming buddhism is a pacifistic creed (none / 0) (#78)
by A Bore on Wed Oct 11, 2006 at 06:19:33 AM EST

Yet a successful one. No doubt you asked that because, somehow, there is a tiny enclave of aggressive Buddhist monks, probably in a monastery somewhere, who flip out ALL THE TIME and once uppercut some guy you knew because he opened a window.

Stop trying to score points.

[ Parent ]
You're full of it (1.33 / 3) (#84)
by BerntB on Wed Oct 11, 2006 at 06:54:05 AM EST

See e.g. this. Self defence is OK.
Stop trying to score points.
Stop lying, then. Or at least learn to troll entertainingly.

As usual when you make a claim and I bother to check on your idiocy, it took less than a minute to find that you are full of shit.

[ Parent ]

Sensible words (none / 0) (#91)
by A Bore on Wed Oct 11, 2006 at 07:16:51 AM EST

The Buddha replied, 'He who deserves punishment must be punished. And he who is worthy of favor must be favored. Do not do injury to any living being but be just, filled with love and kindness.'

[...]

However, if he moderates himself and extinguishes all hatred in his heart, if he lifts his down-trodden adversary up and says to him, 'Come now and make peace and let us be brothers,' then he will gain a victory that is not a transient success; for the fruits of that victory will remain forever.
A soldier who does not kill? A soldier who, upon winning, lifts his adversary and makes peace? Sounds almost... pacifistic.

[ Parent ]
Sure, but still contradicts your claim (1.33 / 3) (#92)
by BerntB on Wed Oct 11, 2006 at 07:24:47 AM EST

Violence to protect yourself/others are accepted in Buddhism, which trivially contradicts your original claim.

There are around 350 million Buddhists worldwide, and as far as I know there is no requirement or need for an enormous army to protect them. To say pacificistic creeds can only flourish where armed men create enclaves for them is demonstrably wrong.


[ Parent ]
So, to sum your argument up (none / 0) (#94)
by A Bore on Wed Oct 11, 2006 at 08:53:21 AM EST

Because some Buddhists can be soldiers, albeit soldiers committed to not injuring any living being, this means that Buddhism is a)not a pacifist creed and b)requires soldiers to sustain its existence. Do you see that your position does not make sense?

[ Parent ]
Please troll better, this garbage is boring (none / 0) (#96)
by BerntB on Wed Oct 11, 2006 at 09:24:10 AM EST

Because some Buddhists can be soldiers, albeit soldiers committed to not injuring any living being
Are you claiming that Buddhist soldiers will never shoot enemies? References, please.

[ Parent ]
Are you claiming they always will? (none / 1) (#101)
by fn0rd on Wed Oct 11, 2006 at 11:33:43 AM EST

References, please.

This fatwa brought to you by the Agnostic Jihad
[ Parent ]

You claimed NOT to troll in another place... :-) $ (none / 1) (#103)
by BerntB on Wed Oct 11, 2006 at 12:17:44 PM EST



[ Parent ]
Sorry, you weren't A Bore (or?) (none / 1) (#104)
by BerntB on Wed Oct 11, 2006 at 12:19:11 PM EST

Not that your "argument" was coherent either. :-)

[ Parent ]
Neither is yours. (none / 0) (#105)
by fn0rd on Wed Oct 11, 2006 at 12:29:55 PM EST

That was the point.

This fatwa brought to you by the Agnostic Jihad
[ Parent ]

Read my comment as part of the one (none / 0) (#108)
by BerntB on Wed Oct 11, 2006 at 01:19:36 PM EST

Read my comment as part of the one I wrote before that.

Then tell me what is wrong with the argument. A Bore is just making a really non-serious troll because he can't defend his position.

If you have a serious comment to make, I am of course interested.

[ Parent ]

If the only violence perpetrated... (none / 0) (#110)
by fn0rd on Wed Oct 11, 2006 at 01:25:35 PM EST

were for self-defence, there'd be none. That said, sure, Buddhists accept violence for self protection. Shaolin is a real Buddhist sect devoted to the principle.

This fatwa brought to you by the Agnostic Jihad
[ Parent ]

Yes, and A Bore contradicted that in his troll (none / 0) (#112)
by BerntB on Wed Oct 11, 2006 at 02:00:53 PM EST

That said, sure, Buddhists accept violence for self protection. Shaolin is a real Buddhist sect devoted to the principle.
If you read what I referenced, A Bore's stupid defence of his trolling was that totally pacifistic societies like the Amish were viable because Buddhists are pacifist.

I really wish that "A Bore" could either argue or troll better.

[ Parent ]

Buddhism plainly isn't a pacifistic creed (none / 1) (#126)
by cr8dle2grave on Thu Oct 12, 2006 at 05:40:05 PM EST

While Theravada monks are supposed to be committed pacifists, that fact has obviously had little real effect on the behavior of lay practicioners, as can be easily observed in the histories of those regions where Theraveda buddhism is dominant and which are as violent as everywhere else. Vajrayana and Mahayana buddhism often don't even bother to pay any lip service to the idea of pacifism.

No buddhist soldiers? Are you serious? Or just ignorant? Kublai Khan was Mahayana buddhist, which he made the state religion of China, and a great admirer of Tibetian Lamaism. Was Kublai Khan or the horde he commanded pacifistic?

Ever hear of the Samurai? Or The Book of Five Rings?

---
Unity of mankind means: No escape for anyone anywhere. - Milan Kundera


[ Parent ]
I do think they're dysfunctional and sad (none / 1) (#69)
by vadim on Wed Oct 11, 2006 at 05:37:52 AM EST

I think for most people the 'themes, such as pacifism, the importance of community' and forgiveness are things to aspire to.

But there's no aspiring here. What the religion says is "Be nice, OR ELSE!". Say, there's this story that Vlad the Impaler was able to leave a golden cup in a public place for drinking from a fountain, and nobody stole it. Does that mean it was a great society to live in? Or that they were so deathly afraid of getting staked on red hot iron that they probably didn't even dare to breath on it?

The Amish girl demonstrates it nicely, IMO. She's being forced to forgive, against her will, OR ELSE. That's nothing to aspire to.


--
<@chani> I *cannot* remember names. but I did memorize 214 digits of pi once.
[ Parent ]
I'm thinking more of contemporary society (none / 1) (#75)
by A Bore on Wed Oct 11, 2006 at 06:07:08 AM EST

than Vlad the Impaler. Some pramface on a council estate would aspire to a sense of community, if only to combat the antisocial problems that spring up in its absence. Most people do admire forgiveness, and think it is a desirable trait. Revenge and jealousy are generally seen as BAD THINGS.

You seem to think I'm arguing that people yearn for the selective interpretation of forgiveness seen in that particular case. It is obviously wrong for the community to ostracise someone who is the victim of sexual abuse. They should forgive her lack of forgiveness.

Rather, forgiveness generally is an aspired or admired trait.

[ Parent ]
What I'm saying is (none / 1) (#83)
by vadim on Wed Oct 11, 2006 at 06:34:26 AM EST

These things are only something to aspire to when it's voluntary. Hence the Vlad example.

A society without theft is indeed something to aspire to. A society where the lack of theft is ensured by impaling people is NOT something to aspire to, because the price at which it comes is far greater than the benefit it brings.

Which is why I think the Amish are messed up. Peace is ensured not by having a community that actually lives in harmony, it's by supressing signs of unhappiness, sweeping problems under the rug, and threatening people not to complain, or else.
--
<@chani> I *cannot* remember names. but I did memorize 214 digits of pi once.
[ Parent ]

Spend some time with the amish (none / 1) (#121)
by lukme on Thu Oct 12, 2006 at 09:43:27 AM EST

Please walk onto their property - I am sure you will be welcomed with open arms.




-----------------------------------
It's awfully hard to fly with eagles when you're a turkey.
[ Parent ]
Another interesting thing about the Amish (1.00 / 4) (#10)
by A Bore on Tue Oct 10, 2006 at 09:49:45 AM EST

is that they must be about the closest thing, contemporarily, to the original pilgrims that came across on the Mayflower to colonise America.

So the difference between the two responses are almost a natural experiment in the changes that have taken place in American society from the original founders. Downhill.

Not a fair comparison (3.00 / 2) (#19)
by iGrrrl on Tue Oct 10, 2006 at 10:21:13 AM EST

My understanding of the colonization of the US is a bit different. It was driven as much by commercial interests as by members of the Puritan sect.  The commercial side of things would welcome advances in technology that enhance comfort and improved manufacturing and trade, and I don't think the Puritans turned down the Franklin stove when it was invented.

There was a deep division very early on between the religious and commercial sides, and civic government in the late 1600s was more on the side of commerce.  For example, a religious minister could not solemmnize a marriage; that right was reserved for the civil government.

I don't buy the cartoon romanticism.  It doesn't jibe with the historical record.  The Puritans horsewhipped one of my (great x 12) grandfathers for being a Quaker, so I don't know that one can credit them with tolerance and non-violence.

--
You cannot have a reasonable conversation with someone who regards other people as toys to be played with. localroger
remove apostrophe for email.
[ Parent ]

wow (none / 0) (#50)
by aphrael on Tue Oct 10, 2006 at 05:52:00 PM EST

i find it amazing that that story has come down the line.

[ Parent ]
historical record (none / 0) (#52)
by iGrrrl on Tue Oct 10, 2006 at 06:48:11 PM EST

He went on to become the first mayor of Philadelphia.

--
You cannot have a reasonable conversation with someone who regards other people as toys to be played with. localroger
remove apostrophe for email.
[ Parent ]

He also invented Philadelphia Cheese. $ (none / 0) (#136)
by skyknight on Wed Oct 18, 2006 at 05:50:05 AM EST



It's not much fun at the top. I envy the common people, their hearty meals and Bruce Springsteen and voting. --SIGNOR SPAGHETTI
[ Parent ]
How the fuck do you come up with that? (nt) (none / 0) (#42)
by kurobots are funny on Tue Oct 10, 2006 at 02:51:14 PM EST




[ Parent ]
I doubt it. (none / 0) (#56)
by xC0000005 on Tue Oct 10, 2006 at 08:14:56 PM EST

The amish are much more accepting.

Voice of the Hive - Beekeeping and Bees for those who don't
[ Parent ]
I'd certainly call it uphill (none / 0) (#140)
by Delirium on Tue Oct 24, 2006 at 11:12:04 PM EST

The Puritans gave us the Salem witch trials, made blasphemy illegal, and would've killed anyone who was openly homosexual. I think we've come a good way from that nonsense.

[ Parent ]
Eh? (none / 1) (#16)
by Gruntathon on Tue Oct 10, 2006 at 10:11:57 AM EST

I really don't see those shootings and the September 11th terrorist attacks having particularly much in common, apart from violence, death and cowardice. The scale is completely different.

Perhaps comparing them to some more similair violent act would make more sense, and deliver a more thought provoking piece, especially in these post-fifth-year-anniversary of September 11th times.
__________
If they hadn't been such quality beasts (despite being so young) it would have been a nightmare - good self-starting, capable hands are your finest friend. -- Anonymous CEO
9/-11 (1.54 / 11) (#20)
by debacle on Tue Oct 10, 2006 at 11:25:20 AM EST

Seriously, five fucking years ago. Way to trivialize the Amish loss and thier way of life.

I'd say 'kill yourself' but I guess it's hard to do that when you've got one hand on your dick and two fingers up your asshole.

You deserve to be cast out of society and left to rot.

It tastes sweet.

Trivialise the Amish loss? (2.33 / 3) (#31)
by A Bore on Tue Oct 10, 2006 at 12:39:32 PM EST

Fucks sake man! Ignore the 105,000 dead dark skinned people, it's the Amish loss I'm trivialising. Are you a fucking sociopath or what?

[ Parent ]
Hell yes (2.00 / 2) (#47)
by debacle on Tue Oct 10, 2006 at 05:25:28 PM EST

I skin cats and wear them as underwear while I perform mammectomies on fat internet nerds.

It tastes sweet.
[ Parent ]
I didn't pick you for the Bme type. n (none / 0) (#58)
by livus on Tue Oct 10, 2006 at 11:15:49 PM EST



---
HIREZ substitute.
be concrete asshole, or shut up. - CTS
I guess I skipped school or something to drink on the internet? - lonelyhobo
I'd like to hope that any impression you got about us from internet forums was incorrect. - debillitatus
I consider myself trolled more or less just by visiting the site. HollyHopDrive

[ Parent ]
No (2.00 / 2) (#74)
by A Bore on Wed Oct 11, 2006 at 06:00:31 AM EST

Your first response is to bemoan the trivialisation of 5 dead american girls, over 105,000 dead men, women and children overseas. I think that is intensely revealing.

[ Parent ]
the amish (3.00 / 3) (#23)
by circletimessquare on Tue Oct 10, 2006 at 12:07:55 PM EST

overwhelmingly voted for gw bush in 2000 and 2004

what does that tell you?

The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

That they voted for a percieved (3.00 / 2) (#24)
by A Bore on Tue Oct 10, 2006 at 12:21:22 PM EST

Christian candidate? What does it tell you?

[ Parent ]
I've actually talked to some voters (2.85 / 7) (#29)
by army of phred on Tue Oct 10, 2006 at 12:32:18 PM EST

about why they voted Bush and it seemed to be overwhelmingly on morality issues, ie., homosexuality and abortion issues. The issues of Iraq and other foreign policy concerns were generally considered a republican failure.

Lets face it, abortion and gays are ugly to most christian folks, and that by default will get the republicans a core constituency as long as democrats are the party of aborted fetuses and dick suckers. Most folk do not vote for what they perceive to be gross stuff.

"Republicans are evil." lildebbie
"I have no fucking clue what I'm talking about." motormachinemercenary
"my wife is getting a blowjob" ghostoft1ber
[ Parent ]

aborted fetal dick suckers? (3.00 / 2) (#36)
by LilDebbie on Tue Oct 10, 2006 at 12:56:54 PM EST

lol what

My name is LilDebbie and I have a garden.
- hugin -

[ Parent ]
I, MichaelCrawfish, voted for Bush (none / 0) (#43)
by MichaelCrawfish on Tue Oct 10, 2006 at 03:02:56 PM EST

And I, Michael Crawfish, am not a religious person and do not stand with him on (most) moral issues.  Really, I, Michael Crawfish, just support his "We'll do whatever benefits us, damn the rest of the planet" attitude.
Well, that and the fact that I, Michael Crawfish, would rather have Michael Crawfish's tax money go to entertainment (Iraq, Bush, etc) than the poor. Sorry.

[ Parent ]
THANK YOU! (none / 0) (#139)
by The Real Lord Kano on Sun Oct 22, 2006 at 10:21:02 PM EST

You actually get it. Very few of us who voted for Bush did so because we actually think that the Iraq war is a good thing. Personally, I think that it's a huge mistake.


I voted for Bush because of social issues, namely abortion and gun rights.


Lets face it, abortion and gays are ugly to most christian folks, and that by default will get the republicans a core constituency as long as democrats are the party of aborted fetuses and dick suckers.


Right again sir. I don't much care about what homosexuals do. I like chicks, he likes dicks, that's fine. Do whatever makes you happy.


LK


[ Parent ]
That they're also idiots? (none / 1) (#35)
by shm on Tue Oct 10, 2006 at 12:51:05 PM EST

Is that what we're supposed to think?

[ Parent ]
Being an idiot is a successful survival strategy (3.00 / 2) (#44)
by rpresser on Tue Oct 10, 2006 at 03:25:11 PM EST

Just look at the results. There are more idiots now than there ever were, and they're not going away.
------------
"In terms of both hyperbolic overreaching and eventual wrongness, the Permanent [Republican] Majority has set a new, and truly difficult to beat, standard." --rusty
[ Parent ]
Why do you always spell Philipino woring? (1.00 / 6) (#38)
by Egil Skallagrimson on Tue Oct 10, 2006 at 01:00:19 PM EST

Get it right, like your White over-lords taught you to spell it.

----------------

Enterobacteria phage T2 is a virulent bacteriophage of the T4-like viruses genus, in the family Myoviridae. It infects E. coli and is the best known of the T-even phages. Its virion contains linear double-stranded DNA, terminally redundant and circularly permuted.
[ Parent ]

That they have the luxury (2.85 / 7) (#39)
by BottleRocket on Tue Oct 10, 2006 at 01:03:59 PM EST

Of limited understanding of the broader world.

$ . . . . . $ . . . . . $ . . . . . $
. ₩ . . . . . ¥ . . . . . € . . . . . § . . . . . £
. . . . * . . . . . * . . . . . * . . . . . * . . . . . *
$ . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Yes I do download [child pornography], but I don't keep it any longer than I need to, so it can yield insight as to how to find more. --MDC
$ . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
. . . . * . . . . . * . . . . . * . . . . . * . . . . . *
. ₩ . . . . . ¥ . . . . . € . . . . . § . . . . . £
$ . . . . . $ . . . . . $ . . . . . $
$B R Σ III$

[ Parent ]

That they didn't have to use voting machines $ (3.00 / 3) (#99)
by nebbish on Wed Oct 11, 2006 at 10:15:56 AM EST


---------
Kicking someone in the head is like punching them in the foot - Bruce Lee
[ Parent ]

Post proof or retract (none / 0) (#133)
by rigorist on Mon Oct 16, 2006 at 02:05:43 PM EST

Bullshit.

The Amish don't vote, you moron.

You don't know shit about Anabaptists, do you?

[ Parent ]

-1 plagarized from my neice's jr high school paper (2.25 / 4) (#49)
by thankyougustad on Tue Oct 10, 2006 at 05:49:19 PM EST



No no thanks no
Je n'aime que le bourbon
no no thanks no
c'est une affaire de goût.

It's OK (none / 0) (#76)
by A Bore on Wed Oct 11, 2006 at 06:07:51 AM EST

Your niece voted +1

[ Parent ]
interesting (3.00 / 8) (#68)
by binford2k on Wed Oct 11, 2006 at 04:14:03 AM EST

Why do people seem to have a problem with expressing sympathy towards the family of the murderer?  What did they have to do with it?  Do you think that his wife told him to go murder a bunch of schoolgirls and kill himself?  The poor lady must be hurting just as much as the families of the dead girls, if not more.  Not only did she lose a loved one, but she has to face the fact that her husband committed an atrocity.

I think their response is a hell of a lot more normal than most of the responses I've read here.

I'm pretty saddened (2.00 / 5) (#72)
by A Bore on Wed Oct 11, 2006 at 05:58:27 AM EST

By the people asserting that my intentions when writing this weren't honourable. To believe that, you would have to believe that the forgiveness shown by the Amish would never have worked as a policy after 11-9. Is it so utterly implausible to suggest that it was a viable strategy, given that 'winning the hearts and minds' of the average Iraqi, and indeed potential enemies worldwide, was judged, even by people in the Pentagon, to be of the upmost importance?

To say I am troll for arguing a more Christian response to 11-9 would perhaps have been more successful, noting the more viscerally pleasing revenges have backfired, is to completely rule out as ridiculous non aggressive responses to aggressive acts. Has the kuro5hin proletariat really become so bitter and cynical of human nature?

Then publish that you will never call the police (2.00 / 3) (#86)
by BerntB on Wed Oct 11, 2006 at 06:58:25 AM EST

whatever is done to you or your posessions.

Please publish it so most people in your local city will find it. With your picture and home address.

Put your money, teeth and life where your fingers are on the keyboard.

[ Parent ]

That isn't the same thing at all (2.00 / 2) (#106)
by A Bore on Wed Oct 11, 2006 at 12:33:03 PM EST

Rather I promise that, should someone kill my love ones, I would do the best I am humanely capable of to forgive them their sins, and try to think about the suffering of the family of the killer as much as about my own suffering.

[ Parent ]
It is wrong to stop murderers, not e.g. thieves? (2.00 / 3) (#109)
by BerntB on Wed Oct 11, 2006 at 01:23:14 PM EST

At least, you argued not to go after people murdering thousands of people in your story.

[ Parent ]
They voted it up didn't they? (none / 0) (#127)
by harrystottle on Fri Oct 13, 2006 at 10:02:27 AM EST

"Has the kuro5hin proletariat really become so bitter and cynical of human nature?"

So they can't be all bad! It's just an unfortunate fact of life. The noisiest tend to be the nastiest

Mostly harmless
[ Parent ]

I think you've missed the point. (2.66 / 3) (#93)
by onealone on Wed Oct 11, 2006 at 08:25:50 AM EST

The US would have invaded Iraq anyway. 11th September just helped them sell the idea to the population.

I think the appropriate response would be (2.12 / 8) (#100)
by Egil Skallagrimson on Wed Oct 11, 2006 at 11:17:41 AM EST

for the Amish to go and kill the family of the shooter in a very violent and public way. That would really serve to put off other would-be shooters by seeing just how out of hand religious people can be. All this wimpy Christian sympathy and turning-of-the-other-cheek stuff is strictly for the weak.

----------------

Enterobacteria phage T2 is a virulent bacteriophage of the T4-like viruses genus, in the family Myoviridae. It infects E. coli and is the best known of the T-even phages. Its virion contains linear double-stranded DNA, terminally redundant and circularly permuted.

That ISN'T very funny OR practical /nt (none / 0) (#107)
by A Bore on Wed Oct 11, 2006 at 12:42:07 PM EST

Why don't you go back to talking to yourself?

[ Parent ]
Well, it IS funny. (none / 0) (#113)
by Egil Skallagrimson on Wed Oct 11, 2006 at 02:53:51 PM EST

Though not very practical.

----------------

Enterobacteria phage T2 is a virulent bacteriophage of the T4-like viruses genus, in the family Myoviridae. It infects E. coli and is the best known of the T-even phages. Its virion contains linear double-stranded DNA, terminally redundant and circularly permuted.
[ Parent ]

Hang them upside down in their sinews (none / 1) (#111)
by tetsuwan on Wed Oct 11, 2006 at 01:30:12 PM EST

That would teach 'em.

Njal's Saga: Just like Romeo & Juliet without the romance
[ Parent ]

Yes, and sodomy. (none / 0) (#114)
by Egil Skallagrimson on Wed Oct 11, 2006 at 02:54:20 PM EST


----------------

Enterobacteria phage T2 is a virulent bacteriophage of the T4-like viruses genus, in the family Myoviridae. It infects E. coli and is the best known of the T-even phages. Its virion contains linear double-stranded DNA, terminally redundant and circularly permuted.
[ Parent ]

Blood honor was not about sodomy (none / 0) (#115)
by tetsuwan on Wed Oct 11, 2006 at 05:05:06 PM EST

You totally fail it as a viking, sir.

Njal's Saga: Just like Romeo & Juliet without the romance
[ Parent ]

As did the Greenland Norse. (none / 0) (#117)
by ghjm on Wed Oct 11, 2006 at 09:52:43 PM EST

Picked off by Inuit skraelings. How could a true Viking survive the shame. NNNOOOEEEESSSS!!!

[ Parent ]
Huh? (none / 0) (#118)
by tetsuwan on Thu Oct 12, 2006 at 04:31:54 AM EST

What has this to do with anything?

Njal's Saga: Just like Romeo & Juliet without the romance
[ Parent ]

Climate changes (none / 0) (#119)
by BerntB on Thu Oct 12, 2006 at 05:41:08 AM EST

All research I've seen was that climate changes made farming impossible on Greenland.

Also re sodomy, note that that the Vikings were sailors -- and we know how those are! :-)

[ Parent ]

nothign like calling a horse a dog... (none / 1) (#116)
by CAIMLAS on Wed Oct 11, 2006 at 08:57:07 PM EST

If you want to talk about irresponsible, I'll show you irresponsible: it's comparisions like this. You make several ideological comparisions (implying that they should all be "equal") which simply don't hold water when held to the light.

Republican politicians aren't so much Christians - they're just politicians. I really don't need to expouse on this one more; you know they're crooked as fuck and will do anything to get elected.

Furthermore, the Amish have a fairly divergent view from mainstream Christianity, or at least one which is much, much more aligned in it's beliefs and practices. It is, indeed, to be commendable, if a bit extreme. (It's also not possible outside of the confines of a large civilized society, else they'd all be quite dead - as evidenced by this atrocity.)

Mainstream Christian views are somewhere in between. The more seriously they take the finer dogmatic points, the closer their philosophy aligns itself with what the Amish believe.

(No, that's not a category in which I easily fit. Quite the contrary, in most regards. I just don't like it when someone is intellectually dishonest to try and "make a point" particularly when that point is inaccurate and smears a people group.)
--

Socialism and communism better explained by a psychologist than a political theorist.

-1 Troll (1.18 / 11) (#122)
by bhearsum on Thu Oct 12, 2006 at 12:08:31 PM EST

How the hell did this make section?

troll voters? (none / 0) (#137)
by cDiss on Wed Oct 18, 2006 at 11:34:28 PM EST



[ Parent ]
I agree (2.00 / 2) (#123)
by greatred on Thu Oct 12, 2006 at 03:20:34 PM EST

I'm not interested in the debate which has followed from this article. I merely want to say that the response from the Amish community following this has earnt my greatest respect.

Although an atheist, I agree (1.66 / 3) (#124)
by eMb on Thu Oct 12, 2006 at 03:33:03 PM EST



did you see his checklist? (none / 1) (#125)
by actmodern on Thu Oct 12, 2006 at 05:18:15 PM EST

he had ky lubricating jelly on him along with other instruments.

--
LilDebbie challenge: produce the water sports scene from bable or stfu. It does not exist.
The Amish...dysfunctional or not? (2.50 / 2) (#129)
by stalker on Mon Oct 16, 2006 at 09:44:12 AM EST

A lot the comments to this article strive to undermine the validity of the comparison between Amish reaction and non-Amish (specifically americans as a political and social entity). Some cite events such as rape victim stigmatization and socio-anthropological flim-flammery such as positing that a pacifist society could not be viable. From what I read of the happening the most of the Amish reaction was not in forgiving the killer, but in expressing common grief and extending their means of relief to the others victims, i.e. the family of killers. Pray tell, what is exactly dysfunctional: recognizing that the widow of the killer is grieving too? Just imagine to be in the same spot of the widow and think: "I lost my child" "I lost my husband" "I lost my husband in a horribly shameful way" "I'll be marked as the wife of that psycho who killed all those girls" "I'm alone" Now, fast forward some time in the future, *without* these people who happen to be Amish, try to imagine bearing the burden of whispers, half stares and whatnot. I'd choose having some people like those Amish each day and twice on Sunday and I'm not even religious. Last but not least, ask yourself: in that situation, would *I* be capable of sharing my grief as a parent with the killer's widow grief? These people, who happen to be Amish, are commendable. Trying to superimpose on this socio-religious quabbles like i'm-better-than-you--you-wouldn't-be-there-without-me is childish at best.

Strange amount of new accounts I've seen? (none / 0) (#130)
by BerntB on Mon Oct 16, 2006 at 10:00:22 AM EST

socio-anthropological flim-flammery such as positing that a pacifist society could not be viable.
If you claim it is possible, answer this trivial game theory situation:
Consider a prisoners dilemma, where one prisoner never could chose an option that would hurt the other prisoner! Some obvious points:
  1. To mourn with a killer's family isn't that strange, since they are also innocent victims to his insanity.
  2. To not let someone be angry at people that have given her mental scarring for life is ... well, words fail me.
  3. To let people know that they will never take revenge and harm attackers also work well -- IF there is a good police force or equivalent. Otherwise, I can't mention any stable society in history that has worked over centuries.

(Please don't drag up Buddhists as example of pacifists, since they have armies. Go watch some Thai boxing...)

[ Parent ]

My comment was scarcely readable...my fault (none / 1) (#131)
by stalker on Mon Oct 16, 2006 at 12:05:42 PM EST

I'll bite, first...then I'll try to explain myself better.

Asserting, tout court, that a pacifist society is not viable amounts to flim-flammery: the words "trivial" and "theory" in your response are strong indicators of flim-flammery.
Saying that a pacifist society, where pacifist is simplicistically defined as totally averse and alien to any form of violence, has never been observed in the wild for long periods of time is correct and inoppugnable.
To fully appreciate the question of pacifism we should start with an operative definition of pacifism and the framework in which it could exist. Then we would come nonetheless to the realisation that we are still speaking of a model, which can't possibly capture the complexity we looking at.

What I wanted to stress with my comment is that, mutatis mutandis, the behaviour of that group of people (the Amish) in that situation (the killing) was less unsatisfactory that the behaviour of the other group (the "Western" establishment) in the other situation (the Middle East-centered crisis).

That does not mean that the Amish Way Of Life is inherently superior than the American Way Of Life: try to uphold such a view from a single example of commendable behaviour is foolish at best. On the other hand, contrasting the two situations rhetorically underlines the dissatisfaction of the current state of affairs in world politics. Or, at least, this is how I read the article.

Nit-picking on your obvious points:
1) If "shared mourning" between killer's family and victim's family were common, it wouldn't be such a news item.
I mean, for me, it's a fine display of maturity, emotional and rational, from the parents of the victim, which I rarely see in other, similar, situations.

2) To not let... et cetera: I assume you're referring to the raped girl which is being forced by peer pressure into forgiving the rapists: no question is a ghastly and cruel situation for her and that, undoubtedly, is a grave fault of the closed society in which the girl lives.
But...I understood that the article was justaxposing the "Amish" (or, better, this particular group, who has behaved so sensibly to a tragedy) to the "Westerners" to underline the fallacy and inadequacy of our society in handling confrontation.
Pointing fingers and waving hands socio-anthropologically smells of trying to avoid the issue...

3) I must confess I'm having some difficult in reading this paragraph, but I'm not a native speaker in English and I do have some grammar troubles.
Anyway, the Italian Constitution refuses war as a viable option: doesn't this qualify as a form of pacifism?
Sadly, it mostly remains an intention, rather than a practice...

[ Parent ]

No comment re the Prisoner's Dilemma argument? (none / 1) (#132)
by BerntB on Mon Oct 16, 2006 at 12:44:06 PM EST

I argued that pacifism can be seen as a Prisoner's Dilemma situation where one prisoner isn't allowed to chose an alternative that harms the other prisoner in any way! (If you don't know about Prisoner's Dilemma, it is a "simple" game theoretical concept. Best introduction to it I've seen is in Hofstadter's Scientific American columns, collected in Metamagical Themas.)

In reality, that kind of situation would work, if the choices for everybody are limited to those alternatives! Which is what a police force does. Before there was a police force, we had a clan society. (This was my explanation of point 3, too.)

(You are Italian? Your country has been civilized for quite a while more than mine -- before a police force, all of society is like a bunch of mafie clans and nothing else. Think modern Afghanistan.)

Anyway, the Italian Constitution refuses war as a viable option: doesn't this qualify as a form of pacifism?
It doesn't disallow self defence, right? Then it isn't "real" pacifism.

If pacifism allowed "self defence", we can do interesting definition games. It is arguably self defence to attack someone first which will certainly attack you later, when the situation is better from their viewpoint. Most any country might apply when we discuss insane dictators/theocracies with nuclear weapon programs... (-: Even USA! :-)

My point is an analogy between a society without police, hence a brutal clan society, and the situation between countries. There is no real world police force for misbehaving countries. So pacifism and forgiveness is by definition not a viable strategy.

[ Parent ]

Five Amish kids shot to death becuase ... (1.20 / 5) (#134)
by k24anson on Mon Oct 16, 2006 at 10:00:21 PM EST

the guy is sick and tired of the thoughts from these hallucinogenic chemicals. He couldn't think to feel proud being a practicing faggot. So ... one day it is time to see God, and then to ask It what the fuck is going on ...
'Tis life.

And five, ten years from now there will be another kid, or kids done in, and then another, and than others. Cop types know: there are no answers, there are just a few sick people in the world ... every now and then.

But certain types in law enforcement are aware of the cause. No cop who has any balls though cares about someone with a faggot minded mentality, and then to address it correctly by employing the word hallucinogenic in conversation. Hey, most social services in local government are staffed with goofball (Godless) Democratic sissies, so expecting that crowd for serious conversation is not going to happen. For years, decades, both Oprah and Katie Couric types have oh? more titilating politically insightful comments, about Republicans like George W., basically about how incompetent he and his administration are ..., and always are, ... and so it goes. For various reasons, those of prominence and in a position to say and do something, do not. Religous leaders today are clueless, totally irrelevant to rectify anything detrimental in society.

Anyway, law enforcement knows what to do ... after the body is cold. Don't ever forget this: they are heroes ...!

Think about it happening every year, for the rest of your life: the loss of five or ten kids every few months is probably better than having public discussion where the word hallucinogenic is bantered about in conversation, and the psychtropic qualities of certain drugs, chemicals are discussed. Expecially if this type of conversation is taking place around the likes of a crowd with the low IQ mentality of regular Kuro5hin.org forum members. Talking about drugs in a public platform such as Kuro5hin.org only encourages tempting this crowd towards illicit drug use, and then the felonies follow. So if you don't want your tires slashed, or any type of criminal act perpetrated on you by the people who protect your community, keep your mouth shut about anything to do with drug affects. If you don't understand shut up, you will soon. Keep in mind our law enforcement agencies know what is best.

(I gotta laugh here for a moment as I write this ...)

Instead, help keep current the politically correct: keep saying to any male faggot you may know and love that no one knows for sure why they act like a girl sexually, and just be happy putting things in your mouth and butt, and be "proud" when you allow others to do this to you too. Uhm ...? everybody likes watching lesbos right? Ok, so there's no problem with that side of the human ...

Land of the free: so many hapless types; many, many more are the spineless, gutless types.

Those faggot thoughts that are the basis of those wicked acts are because of a natural psychotropic chemical, a drug. And the future villians who should know this fact (probably) never will. Thank the government administrator, the judicial and legislative intellectual bums that this is so.
KLH
NYC

Stay focused. Go slow. Keep it simple.

Let me clarify myself (1.25 / 4) (#135)
by k24anson on Mon Oct 16, 2006 at 10:12:37 PM EST

Think of the names of the chemicals that starts trickling into the bloodstream of the young human female at puberty. For the next ten, twenty years the hallucinogenic quality of these trickling chemicals builds the sexual identity of this female by developing the idea for this person to like and enjoy the idea of something being put into, and then have this "thing" squirt some stuff into her body. This is the way many little girls grow up to actually like the idea of making babies ..., the reader of this is asked to try to realize the powerful influence an hallucinogenic chemical has to practically force, coerce the female to like and want to act as she does ... to be sexual ... to think it's normal to want to become pregnant as she grows to adulthood.

These same molecules of puberic chemicals that force and coerce the minds of little girls to have thoughts to want to make babies also is found trickling in the bloodstream of many human males. If the guy doesn't understand the hallucinogenic quality of these trickling chemicals at puberty, if this said guy starts playing around in his mind with the attributes of these hallucinogenic chemicals as he goes through his daily walk in life, it shouldn't surprise anyone to hear that this guy now sometimes thinks his anus is a vagina; to sometimes hear the person talk like he thinks he has a woman trapped inside his body. Duh.

Don't anyone reading this think to start talking too loud and in public about any type of hallucinogenic qualities of drugs though. Or if you do think to talk like this expect big time problems from the people who protect our communities. The proliferation of homosexuality in society today is much better than any person's quest for understanding and some meaning of life. I'm trying to say here the average person really doesn't understand in these regards the implications and effects of a drug that's called hallucinogenic. Think about it though. These trickling chemicals ( excuse me here for a second) WERE DESIGNED for the female to "make" them want to do the things, and they now WANT and encourage the things done to them by guys (to propogate the species.) These same chemicals in a guy though, over time ...? some guys do wicked things because of these trickling hallucinogenic chemicals. I mean, ten years from now there will be another report of a little girl sexually mutilated on the side of the road, found strangled in a ditch. Some people already know why these things happen, the vast majority of the populace do not. And why not? Becuase of that word hallucinogenic. The powers that be are mucho scared of what the populace will do should the word hallucinogenic be bantered about. Damned if they do, damned if they don't type of thing.

These last three paragraphs I wrote for a past post on gay marraige at Kuro5hin.org.

I gotta go do something else now, I can't talk on this anymore.
KLH
NYC

Stay focused. Go slow. Keep it simple.

I just can't buy it... (3.00 / 2) (#138)
by tinkertux on Sat Oct 21, 2006 at 05:44:32 PM EST

First: Forgiveness can be admirable, however, the Amish automatic blanket forgivness keeps them from fixing their problems. They have the usual Christian fucked up problems but they don't do anything about it because they just forgive the offender rather than address the problem. Shunning somebody for a couple months for rape helps nobody. They have serious social problems that they do not address. This is not admirable.

Second: Afghanistan was a legitimate operation as their government knowingly supported the criminals that perpertrated 9-11.

Third: Iraq has nothing to do with 9-11. It was being planned before the monkey got into office. Once the PNAC boys got their chimp, it was a done deal.

I don't think you make a valid point.

Iraq had enough to do with 9/11 to warrant attack. (none / 0) (#142)
by k24anson on Fri Oct 27, 2006 at 07:31:29 AM EST

Should Saddam be rewarded for attacking coalition forces protecting no-fly zones?

Twenty-five thousand US dollars rewarded to families of suicide bombers?

Over the last five years two Islamic nations are brought down. Only three still hostile to the West remain. Republican democracy will govern people world over someday; fifty, five hundred years maybe, someday democracy rules.

Some men are born great. Some men achieve greatness. Some men have greatness thrust upon them. Today most schools of thought extol a mentality of beer, blow jobs and idiotic tv shows upon the populace. George W. et al., took a course that will make America the nation brave, strong, courageous- basically heroic to the future peoples who will read in their history books the events of these times. Past, recent Democratic Party actions will be rendered as the putrid, rancid slimeball mentalities that they are, in the minds of the authors of tomorrows history books. And Democrats are basically "weak" and flighty types, as individuals, as people.
KLH
NYC

Stay focused. Go slow. Keep it simple.
[ Parent ]

No cackling responses from the buffons ... (1.00 / 2) (#141)
by k24anson on Fri Oct 27, 2006 at 07:12:28 AM EST

supposedly, rather unfortunately protecting the communities of and across america? No intelligent conversation to the above mentioned post?

Why would I expect back stabbing law enforcement rats unfortunately employed within our government to waste their time responding to psychotic posts ...! The good guys are deep into their psychology books, their criminal justice course on "deviant behavior," they're waiting for the half-pay-after-twenty-years retirement paychecks to get all worked up about some pathetic rant on the internet. I didn't realize how busy they are, being as intelligent and rational as they are.

Just so they know, this post is to insure the next and last thirty or so years of my life contains all the verbal backhands I'll stay up nights devising to post to these back-stabbing godless losers, these kind of posts and rhetoric that were obviously missing during the first fifty years of my life, and just so the rats know I'm not dead yet.

Any of you slimeball rats have comments to this? Yeah you, you disgusting intellectual pig.
KLH
NYC

Stay focused. Go slow. Keep it simple.

(AP) - Police Sting Nab Catholic Priests ... (none / 1) (#143)
by k24anson on Fri Oct 27, 2006 at 07:49:44 PM EST

(the 1950's, the 1960's, the 1970's, the 1980's) - Nationwide, police have arrested hundreds of Catholic priests with various sexual abuse charges.

Early reports have fifteen arrests in Dallas, sixteen arrests were made in and around the New York metropolitan region, and within the Washington, D.C. diocese Bishop Blah-Blah is under investigation...

Anyone think this could've ever happened in the past? Never could anything like this have happened with the bums in law enforcement, or legislative houses, nor anyone within an administrative capacity would have done the right thing over the last thirty, forty years. Police (and brass especially) and district attorneys throughout the US are clueless uppity well-connected godless toads and lackeys and would never have thought of a way to have stopped the rampant abuse that was happening for all those decades inside the Catholic Chrurch. How many cases and reported incidents have there been? and in all that time not one stupid butt "The Man" hole brass on top, not one anal brained district attorney started an investigation even? How odd the finest are not, not really the finest.

Butt wait with these guys; I have to put things in perspective. I have to realize they're all in that group, that group like the one the gay Senator just got kicked out of. Cops can't go into mosques either, no matter what.

Maybe I should tone down the spineless, gutless rhetoric I've recently been spewing towards them. I mean, I heard Katie Couric is doing a show on all the many different kinds of mayonnaise that are on the market now, on one of her next twenty minute segments too, soon. Great.

Maybe cockeyed is a better phrase for this generation of the best and the brightest in our midst, especially if they consider themselves professionals, the cream of the crop, the best, 'ya know?

Any pigs want to comment? Probably not. What's to say? to cackle about ...?

... of course they got the World Trade Center the second time around ...! Consider the mentality of these oafs with the ability to have done something about it. I mean, people still get away with robbing banks too, right?
KLH
NYC

Stay focused. Go slow. Keep it simple.
[ Parent ]

Wow ...! Katie & Michael J. Fox (none / 0) (#145)
by k24anson on Sat Oct 28, 2006 at 08:23:10 PM EST

The same day I posted my rant I find, the next day today that Katie is interviewing Michael on YouTube:

Katie and Michael on CBS

I'm as serious as cancer saying Mergatroid and I, Katie and friends of Michael J. Fox could turn this nation into a powerhouse within a decade ..., easily. To bring a large portion of the next generation of youth to want to be as smart as whips!

This revolution I'm planning should've happpened years ago though, and too bad it'll happen later than sooner, if ever. I mean, I don't think as I walk down Fifth Avenue tonight, or one day while I'm at work in Maspeth I'll have a limousine pull up to my side, the window rolls down and there is Katie herself! waving over to me! with, You who ... oh Yoo-Hoo Kurt, over here. I want to talk to you about plannng and then maybe starting that revolution you were talking about to the good people at Kuro5hin.org ..., and-

and it'll never happen, am I right?

I seen another video ..., and I noticed Katie had some arms on those shoulders of hers. I had the impression she lifts weights to stay in shape; that she could, and does bench press five sets of fifteen reps of a hundred pound weights on a regular basis. Impressive upper body physique I noticed on Katie there that day.

Oh well ... someone of her upper class status wouldn't want to, much less be aware of someone like myself. Like the opera Beauty and the Beast, you know, Katie is the beast- I mean, I am the beast and Katie is the beauty or some type of "thing" like that. It'll never happen so I should stop thinking like this ...

Darn. Shucks.
KLH
NYC

Stay focused. Go slow. Keep it simple.
[ Parent ]

-1 FP (none / 0) (#144)
by 7h3647h32in6 on Sat Oct 28, 2006 at 07:26:29 PM EST

Bear in mind, it wasn't the American people who dealt the war, it was Congress, the President, and the leaders of the military who made those calls.

Also, we do not know what the Amish would have done to the killer if the situation had better mirrored the twin tower bombings. What would they have done if the killer was traveling through the community committing heinous crimes instead of committing suicide right after as he did?

We are reconstructing Iraq and providing aid to Afghanistan. I believe you are comparing two different stages of the situation. The Amish did not  have to deal with actual murderer but were faced with the aid stage immediately after the crime was committed, unlike the US that was forced to deal justice before providing aid and support to the victims of the tragedies.

So what would you have done? (none / 0) (#146)
by paxman on Thu Nov 09, 2006 at 07:12:48 AM EST

After 9/11, would you sing warm, loving songs ,holding hands and raising candles - then move on?

Your America would quickly cease to exist. Move to France, your attitude will go over well there.

if you are interested in christianity (none / 0) (#147)
by channel on Sun Nov 19, 2006 at 08:58:08 PM EST

please see http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc.htm catechism of the catholic church, kthxbye.

Marriage is a divine rite. It was part of God's design when He created man. - Royal Martyr Empress Alexandra Fedorovna.
Actually (none / 1) (#148)
by shiningpath on Fri Feb 23, 2007 at 11:45:26 PM EST

The Amish solution was more successful only because the murderer was already dead, and couldn't committ the act again.

Your premise is wrong here too:

"The hijackers were apparently motivated by a desire to punish America for its support of Israel; its military bases in the Middle East; and its sanctions against the Iraqi people."

No, that's what they said they were doing. Do you think they want a peaceful palestinian democracy living happily alongside a sunny Israel? They're motives and goals are far more sinister than that.

They want us out so they will be free to wipe out Israel, and establish an Islamic fundamentalist states. They seek this everywhere and have grown roots in far flung corners of the world.

Abu Sayef in the Phillipines beheads infidels to do them a favor. They're putting their victims out of their misery. This mercy buys them Allah's favor.

Be sheep and the wolves will eat you.

How Christians React to Death and Murder | 148 comments (133 topical, 15 editorial, 0 hidden)
Display: Sort:

kuro5hin.org

[XML]
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. The Rest © 2000 - Present Kuro5hin.org Inc.
See our legalese page for copyright policies. Please also read our Privacy Policy.
Kuro5hin.org is powered by Free Software, including Apache, Perl, and Linux, The Scoop Engine that runs this site is freely available, under the terms of the GPL.
Need some help? Email help@kuro5hin.org.
My heart's the long stairs.

Powered by Scoop create account | help/FAQ | mission | links | search | IRC | YOU choose the stories!