That lovely, peaceful religion of peace...
POSTED BY: AURaptor
UPDATED: Tuesday, March 3, 2026 16:15
VIEWED: 15565
PAGE 8 of 21
Quote:
Originally posted by CaveTroll:Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:Quote:
He wasn't a victim. He attempted to defend himself and failed, but that of itself does not make him a victim.
...I understand that you have created some kind of personal definition of victim, laced with personal feelings about standing up for yourself, but please understand that your personal definition has no relation to standard language or logic.
I am a proponent of gun freedoms, and of self-defense. But when you say things like, (I paraphrase) "You can't be a victim if you try to defend yourself" it promotes a distorted view of reality. A righteous stance and a gun may give you a chance to survive, but it does not guarantee that you won't be a victim. You can try your hardest and still be a victim...
It is about accepting responsibility for your own safety and preparing before the moment of crisis. Bad things can happen even if you are prepared, but that does not make you a victim. Even if you don't survive. If you can't grasp that concept, then we might as well agree to disagree.
Hello,
We must indeed agree to disagree, as my language resources state something different from your personal philosophy.
--Anthony
_______________________________________________
"In every war, the state enacts a tax of freedom upon the citizenry. The unspoken promise is that the tax shall be revoked at war's end. Endless war holds no such promise. Hence, Eternal War is Eternal Slavery." --Admiral Robert J. Henner
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I find it ironic when I posted that incident with a responsable deconstruction and called for rational discussion thereof it was as usual completely ignored, and yet twice now it's been thrown as take-that propaganda by folks who clearly have no other purpose in mind.
Which says all I need to know.
-F
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Excuse me. CaveTroll's definition of victim may not agree with the Dictionary.
But it agrees with the Transactional Analysis definition which says that Victims (a role) choose to be victimized.
See Games People Play by Dr. Eric Byrne, 1964.
Furthermore, a study of Transactional Analysis can guide one to the better choice. Self-honesty required.
Personal responsibility is the Truth.
Self determination triumphs over reaction.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Furthermore, a study of Transactional Analysis can guide one to the better choice. Self-honesty required.
Hello,
I personally choose not to remove victimhood by equating it to a lack of resistance. Such would remove victimization, or transform it to some other act.
I do not believe you can make adjustments on one side of the scale without making adjustments to the other. What you perceive as a victim is someone who has surrendered. But the victimization of people is not something I believe requires surrender on the part of the target.
The heinous act is heinous, the harm is harm, regardless of the actions of the victim. I do not believe the situation is transformed by the resistance of the victim. The victim themselves may take comfort in their resistance, and they may gain hope of a better outcome, but the act of victimization is not transformed in my eyes, nor is the target any less a victim of the crime.
--Anthony
_______________________________________________
"In every war, the state enacts a tax of freedom upon the citizenry. The unspoken promise is that the tax shall be revoked at war's end. Endless war holds no such promise. Hence, Eternal War is Eternal Slavery." --Admiral Robert J. Henner
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Anthony, we can and should be using social pressure to encourage change, just like with other practices that are bad that people do to each other in other parts of the world.
Niki, so it sounds like you're saying there's no point in posting world news on this forum because it doesn't affect us personally. That is rediculous and you know it. Stuff that happens in other parts of the world does affect us, just like stuff we do affects them, people are connected and linked in this life.
Signe, I don't see the US as a "Christian nation" anymore. If you do a survey of people's beliefs a good chunk of respondants will say they believe in other things, or nothing at all, or they will say they don't know what they believe, it isn't important to them. Such surveys are poorly constructed currently but if people could just write in their religeon or lack there of we would see this. Some of our laws are still in place from earlier times when "Christian nation" was more accurate. What I'm saying is that America may be warring with Iraq etc. but it isn't about religeon, its about values, which aren't the same thing, they can relate but they aren't always exactly a match.
"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Oonjerah:
Excuse me. CaveTroll's definition of victim may not agree with the Dictionary.
But it agrees with the Transactional Analysis definition which says that Victims (a role) choose to be victimized.
See Games People Play by Dr. Eric Byrne, 1964.
Furthermore, a study of Transactional Analysis can guide one to the better choice. Self-honesty required.
I didn't get that from Transactional Analysis. I got that behaviour is often unconscious, and we can remain 'the child' in our interactions with others. Being aware of our behaviour and responses, means we can start to choose how we respond. TA encourages us to act 'the Adult' in our interactions with other. The truth is we unconsciously move in and out of roles, often in the same interaction. But it has its uses, TA.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:Quote:
Furthermore, a study of Transactional Analysis can guide one to the better choice. Self-honesty required.
Hello,
I personally choose not to remove victimhood by equating it to a lack of resistance. Such would remove victimization, or transform it to some other act.
I do not believe you can make adjustments on one side of the scale without making adjustments to the other. What you perceive as a victim is someone who has surrendered. But the victimization of people is not something I believe requires surrender on the part of the target.
The heinous act is heinous, the harm is harm, regardless of the actions of the victim. I do not believe the situation is transformed by the resistance of the victim. The victim themselves may take comfort in their resistance, and they may gain hope of a better outcome, but the act of victimization is not transformed in my eyes, nor is the target any less a victim of the crime.
--Anthony
yes, big thumbs up, Anthony, you nailed it.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:
I personally choose not to remove victimhood by equating it to a lack of resistance. Such would remove victimization, or transform it to some other act...
It doesn't involve resistance, it involves preparation. In order to prepare you have to clearly appraise risk of an incident. Be it Mother Nature, random chance or ill intent. Most people I know stop at buying insurance. A handful make some modest provision (Life hammer in their car, fire extinguisher in their kitchen, etc.). A very few make an unflinching appraisal of the risk in their lives and do what they can to prepare for tragic events.
You can be prepared and have a tornado hit your house at 3am. Sound asleep you can be killed by nature. But that still doesn't make you a victim. (Going up against Mother Nature is a sucker bet, usually.) Does this mean a gun in your pocket and one concealed in every room of your house? No. Alertness is the best defense. Don't be there when bad things happen.
If you only want things that work 100% of the time then don't put locks on your doors and windows. They can be defeated and aren't 100% effective.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by CaveTroll:
Here you go Pizmo, spin this one.
http://www.wnd.com/2012/02/atheist-choked-by-muslim-and-then/
Muslim judge, muslim defendant, US court, case thrown out.
Yessir, if you don't like what someone is saying, just go over and hit 'em. And not get charged with assault. Any comments on this? Or is this going to be one of those posts where there is an inexplicable silence?
I don't think I've ever failed to reply to your direct posts - if you hit reply below a Kwicko post (as it looks like in this case) then he gets the notice, not me.
Anyway - this one is easy. I agree with the judge in all of this. First "muslim judge?" Where is that distinction made in the court system? Is it because he had some knowledge of muslim culture that the reports are trying to *tarnish* him with that?
That was a total doofus move too, pretty much by both. I think the judge wanted to minimize the fall out of this - Muslim V. non-Muslim is pretty sensitive area, you can get into a lot of deep doo-doo - so he basically wagged his finger at told the defendant to grow up and get the hell out of my courtroom, we have bigger matters to decide.
Judge's comments: "Here in our society, we have a Constitution that gives us many rights, specifically First Amendment rights. It’s unfortunate that some people use the First Amendment to deliberately provoke others. I don’t think that’s what our forefathers intended. I think our forefathers intended to use the First Amendment so we can speak with our mind, not to p— off other people and cultures – which is what you did."
Totally agree.
And come on, Atheists dressed as zombie Pope and zombie Mohammed?? Gee, they're not trying to provoke anything are they? I guess he got what he was looking for.
Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Hello Pizmo,
I am shocked at your position and disagree with you.
Only offensive speech needs to be protected, obviously. No one objects to the other kind.
Just as we can not assault Westboro Baptists, we can not assault zombie Mohammads.
Freedom of speech must absolutely apply to the most offensive speech around, else it's pointless.
--Anthony
_______________________________________________
"In every war, the state enacts a tax of freedom upon the citizenry. The unspoken promise is that the tax shall be revoked at war's end. Endless war holds no such promise. Hence, Eternal War is Eternal Slavery." --Admiral Robert J. Henner
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME