Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
January 18, 2016 at 9:57 am (This post was last modified: January 18, 2016 at 10:05 am by popsthebuilder.)
(January 17, 2016 at 11:18 pm)Thena323 Wrote:
(January 17, 2016 at 6:00 pm)Thena323 Wrote:
What a horrible, stupid analogy. I guess a cretin like you sees nothing wrong with comparing a living, breathing, human being with a heart, feelings, and a family that loves her, to a piece of meat on a toothpick. Is there any circumstance in which you'd be okay with someone to relegating your wife, daughter, or your mother to being a nice, juicy hunk of cuntsteak?
Having a deeply flawed pathology and a penchant for violence is what causes people to rape; that's why it happens to women who are fully clothed, men, and young children alike. Seeing a bra strap or pantyline will not incite a normal man to commit such a violent and criminal act, so there's no need to suck the majority of decent men into your shitty narrative.
I took the liberty of bolding your most ridiculous comment as an example of the flawed thinking and delusions sexually aggressive men use to rationalize their behavior. I pity any woman in your life, as well as any living within a 30-mile radius or so of you.
Before you accuse me of drawing an unfair conclusion about you, consider the fact that you're perfectly fine with concluding that any woman dressed in whatyou consider to be inappropriate, fantasizes about being a whore.
So, judging by your statements, I feel comfortable concluding that you're probably a fucking monster.
(January 17, 2016 at 11:01 pm)popsthebuilder Wrote: Never did.
Faith in selfless Unity for Good.
Like hell you didn't, you lying sack...it's all in the Show Content box, in black and white.
So saying that a person is less likely to be a victim if they minimize the stimuli for being a victim doesn't make since to you.
I'm just defending rapist huh?
Let me give you an example;
One night at approx. 2am my significant other and I went out to celebrate her birthday against my better judgement in New Orleans.
I being a native of sorts kinda knew better, but went anyway.
Upon arrival a predatory criminal noticed us. Long story short I was robbed, my woman was nearly dragged off and raped and I was shot at.
Now, if I had used the little judgement, instead of letting greed and pride cloud my judgement I could have averted the crime by easily not putting myself in that situation in the first place.
I guess to you, I'm defending the dog that robbed, attempted to rape, and shot at me though, right?
(January 17, 2016 at 11:44 pm)Losty Wrote: The thing I hate about humility is it means "a modest or low view of ones own importance". All too often pushing that humility is a great virtue is a disguise for belittling someone's self worth to unhealthy levels. My parents raised me to have so much humility that even after over a year I think that I haven't associated with them or anyone else toxic from my past, if someone is hurting me I struggle asking them to stop or even having the "audacity" to complain about it. Humility is not always a good thing. Having a low view of your own importance can be extremely harmful. Pride means "a feeling of deep pleasure or satisfaction derived from ones own achievements". Pride is not always a bad thing being satisfied with yourself, your achievements, and your life can be very healthy.
So no, humility isn't always good. It's all about balance. People should think highly enough of their own worth that they love themselves and never let others use them as a doormat, and they shouldn't think so highly of themselves that they allow themselves to impede someone else's path to happiness.
Pride leads to privilege, prejudice, and entitlement, none of which are positive.
Humility allows for learning and sincerity, both of which are needed for learning and peaceful advancement of civilization.
It really just depends on how we use the word "pride" and "humility." IMHO.
When you accomplished a goal and you feel good about yourself, that is not the bad type of "pride" I think of. Nor is it the bad type of pride to hold a high standard to yourself and do things well. When I think of the sinful, harmful type of pride, I think of when someone is too proud to admit that they are mistaken when they know they are. Or when they are too proud to forgive someone who is apologizing, or too proud to apologize when they know they have unjustly wronged someone else. Or just plain being an arrogant butt hole who looks down on everyone else and thinks they are above everyone else.
^That's how the sin of pride was explained to me. And the opposite of that "bad pride" is the virtue of humility - being willing to forgive and ask for forgiveness, being willing to admit you're wrong when you know you are, not looking down your noses at others and feeling like you are above everyone else. The virtue of humility is NOT feeling ashamed of yourself constantly, it is not feeling like you're worthless, it is not being too weak to stand up for yourself when you need to.
...This is how it was all explained to me. Basically, the "sin of pride" is *not* simply pride across the board. As the "virtue of humility" is *not* simply humility across the board. Just figured we needed to distinguish the difference here so we are all on the same page.
"Of course, everyone will claim they respect someone who tries to speak the truth, but in reality, this is a rare quality. Most respect those who speak truths they agree with, and their respect for the speaking only extends as far as their realm of personal agreement. It is less common, almost to the point of becoming a saintly virtue, that someone truly respects and loves the truth seeker, even when their conclusions differ wildly."
January 18, 2016 at 10:49 am (This post was last modified: January 18, 2016 at 10:59 am by MTL.)
(January 18, 2016 at 10:02 am)popsthebuilder Wrote:
(January 17, 2016 at 11:44 pm)Losty Wrote: The thing I hate about humility is it means "a modest or low view of ones own importance". All too often pushing that humility is a great virtue is a disguise for belittling someone's self worth to unhealthy levels. My parents raised me to have so much humility that even after over a year I think that I haven't associated with them or anyone else toxic from my past, if someone is hurting me I struggle asking them to stop or even having the "audacity" to complain about it. Humility is not always a good thing. Having a low view of your own importance can be extremely harmful. Pride means "a feeling of deep pleasure or satisfaction derived from ones own achievements". Pride is not always a bad thing being satisfied with yourself, your achievements, and your life can be very healthy.
So no, humility isn't always good. It's all about balance. People should think highly enough of their own worth that they love themselves and never let others use them as a doormat, and they shouldn't think so highly of themselves that they allow themselves to impede someone else's path to happiness.
Pride leads to privilege, prejudice, and entitlement, none of which are positive.
Humility allows for learning and sincerity, both of which are needed for learning and peaceful advancement of civilization.
Peace
Faith in selfless Unity for Good.
More hamfisted thinking.
It's always got to be black or white, doesn't it?
Pride = BAD
Humility = GOOD.
again, I call bullshit.
I already said that there is legitimate Pride, and toxic Pride,
but I guess I'll spell it out:
Legitimate Pride:
Holding your head up, having self-respect, being proud of your kids,
your accomplishments, your country, your heritage.
Toxic Pride:
Being too proud to ask-for, or to accept help, when you need it,
and suffering as a result,
and perhaps making those you love, suffer with you;
or, being too proud to admit your mistakes or apologize.
Well, the same applies to Humility:
Toxic Humility:
(As with 'modesty') anytime Humility gets confused with SHAME, it becomes toxic.
When Humility becomes Humiliation. When it becomes Fear or Self-Doubt.
"Healthy" Humility:
The opposite of Egotism, Entitlement, and Elitism.
Being able to laugh at yourself.
Taking accountability for your mistakes.
Getting your hands dirty to help someone else.
Knowing that you will have to work hard for what it is you want, in life.
You know, this reminds me of a comment I once made on the "Seven Deadly Sins" in the Catholic Church.
In no particular order:
Greed
Gluttony
Slothfulness
Lust
Pride
Envy
Wrath
Four things I would point out about the flaws of this list:
1.In many cases, these "sins" are not sins at all.
Rather, they are symptoms of something deeper that is wrong with the person.
For example, when someone "commits the sin" of "Gluttony", like a 600 lb man who eats 12 cheeseburgers a day,
it is usually motivated by deeper cause,
like a fear or loneliness or inadequacy.
The "gluttony" didn't just occur in a vacuum. It is a symptom.
And it shouldn't be shamed or punished.
It should be addressed and treated.
Same applies to Slothfulness: An extremely slothful person might be depressed, or driven by a fear of something.
You get the idea.
2. It is mostly filled with redundancies.
These "sins" are not even reduced to their lowest common denominators.
Greed, Gluttony, Sloth, Pride...usually have a deeper root cause.
Most human behaviors are ultimately driven by either LUST or FEAR.
LUST: The appetites that drives us forward...not just lust for sex, but lust for life, for food, for prosperity, for fun.
FEAR: That which acts as a check for Lust....Fear pulls us back, keeps us safe, makes us think twice.
Which brings me to #3...
3. FEAR is not on the list, and it should be (IF you are a God-fearing individual):
Why isn't FEAR on the list of Deadly Sins?
In the Bible, nothing is underscored more than the importance of FAITH.
Yet, if you truly have Faith in God...then you have nothing to FEAR.
FEAR indicates lack of FAITH.
So why didn't it make the list of Deadly Sins?
It should be #1 on the list.
(Of course, we know perfectly well why...it's because the Church uses FEAR, themselves,
to control the flock. Fear of hell. Fear of shaming. Fear of being ostracized.
For the Church to fail to put FEAR on the list of Deadly Sins
is hypocritical, transparently corrupt and self-serving of the Church...IMO).
4. By having a list of fundamental "sins"
...that are actually just human nature...
the Church misleads people:
Having eliminated most of that list as redundancies,
(and having added FEAR to a list that is missing it)
I am left with only two "sins":
LUST and FEAR.
And, IMO, these are NOT "sins", in and of themselves, AT ALL.
Rather, I see them as gifts. They are part of the balance of nature, as I already described:
LUST is the array of appetites that drives us forward.
FEAR is the brakes on the car, as it were. Chastises us, keeps us prudent.
So,
I posit that instead of regarding "LUST" as "BAD", full stop,
We begin to see that it is only when these two get OUT OF BALANCE that there is a problem;
when LUST is out of control, you are an addict or a compulsive, taking absurd degrees of risk;
When FEAR is out of control, you are a phobic, held back from living to some degree,
by your unhealthy degree of fear.
And, most ironically,
it is ONLY THEN that the other "sins" on the list make an appearance:
Greed, Gluttony, Slothfulness, etc etc.
My point:
In Christianity (and most religious dogma),
many human characteristics are wrongly designated as "sinful",
and being simply "bad" or "good".
Rather, we should see that EACH of those characteristics has the POTENTIAL to be either bad, or good.
(January 18, 2016 at 10:45 am)LostLocke Wrote: ^
Minus the word 'sin' of course...
... I have to agree with CL.
I think it's entirely possible to be a humble person, but still be capable of "kicking ass" if the need, a legitimate need, arises.
Yes, substitute the word sin for immoral or harmful or however you see it.
"Of course, everyone will claim they respect someone who tries to speak the truth, but in reality, this is a rare quality. Most respect those who speak truths they agree with, and their respect for the speaking only extends as far as their realm of personal agreement. It is less common, almost to the point of becoming a saintly virtue, that someone truly respects and loves the truth seeker, even when their conclusions differ wildly."
January 18, 2016 at 11:18 am (This post was last modified: January 18, 2016 at 11:21 am by MTL.)
(January 18, 2016 at 9:57 am)popsthebuilder Wrote:
(January 17, 2016 at 11:18 pm)Thena323 Wrote: [/hide]
Like hell you didn't, you lying sack...it's all in the Show Content box, in black and white.
So saying that a person is less likely to be a victim if they minimize the stimuli for being a victim doesn't make since to you.
I'm just defending rapist huh?
Let me give you an example;
One night at approx. 2am my significant other and I went out to celebrate her birthday against my better judgement in New Orleans.
I being a native of sorts kinda knew better, but went anyway.
Upon arrival a predatory criminal noticed us. Long story short I was robbed, my woman was nearly dragged off and raped and I was shot at.
Now, if I had used the little judgement, instead of letting greed and pride cloud my judgement I could have averted the crime by easily not putting myself in that situation in the first place.
I guess to you, I'm defending the dog that robbed, attempted to rape, and shot at me though, right?
Get your head out of your Ass.
Faith in selfless Unity for Good.
Hey, I'm really sorry to hear that you had such a horrendous, traumatic experience.
But I'm sorry, it doesn't change the point.
It has already been repeatedly acknowledged in this thread,
that while rape is never the fault of anyone but the rapist, that doesn't mean that people shouldn't exercise prudence,
and not put themselves into high-risk situations.
But what was more recently being argued, was whether or not a woman's dress had anything to do with the risk, ....and I didn't see anywhere in your post that mentioned your wife's style of dress.
What was risky was the location and the timing...as far as I'm able to tell from your story.
So you may have just proved our point:
Even a demurely-dressed woman, in the company of her husband,
is at risk, depending on factors other than how she is dressed.
(January 18, 2016 at 11:04 am)MTL Wrote: CL post #453
You wrote this at the same time I was writing mine (post #455)
...so I didn't see it until after i posted, myself.
We basically make the same observation.
I do take issue with the concept of "sin", of course.
But it's interesting that an Agnostic and a Catholic agree on this point.
And, of course, yours had more brevity than mine
Yep! I agree also with the very last thing you said on that post. Many of the more sheltered/uber conservative Christians can't distinguish between the "sin of pride" (or whatever word you want to use), and just pride across the board. Same thing with the virtue of humility, and many other sins/virtues.
"Of course, everyone will claim they respect someone who tries to speak the truth, but in reality, this is a rare quality. Most respect those who speak truths they agree with, and their respect for the speaking only extends as far as their realm of personal agreement. It is less common, almost to the point of becoming a saintly virtue, that someone truly respects and loves the truth seeker, even when their conclusions differ wildly."
(January 18, 2016 at 10:02 am)popsthebuilder Wrote: Pride leads to privilege, prejudice, and entitlement, none of which are positive.
Humility allows for learning and sincerity, both of which are needed for learning and peaceful advancement of civilization.
Peace
Faith in selfless Unity for Good.
More hamfisted thinking.
It's always got to be black or white, doesn't it?
Pride = BAD
Humility = GOOD.
again, I call bullshit.
I already said that there is legitimate Pride, and toxic Pride,
but I guess I'll spell it out:
Legitimate Pride:
Holding your head up, having self-respect, being proud of your kids,
your accomplishments, your country, your heritage.
Toxic Pride:
Being too proud to ask-for, or to accept help, when you need it,
and suffering as a result,
and perhaps making those you love, suffer with you;
or, being too proud to admit your mistakes or apologize.
Well, the same applies to Humility:
Toxic Humility:
(As with 'modesty') anytime Humility gets confused with SHAME, it becomes toxic.
When Humility becomes Humiliation. When it becomes Fear or Self-Doubt.
"Healthy" Humility:
The opposite of Egotism, Entitlement, and Elitism.
Being able to laugh at yourself.
Taking accountability for your mistakes.
Getting your hands dirty to help someone else.
Knowing that you will have to work hard for what it is you want, in life.
You know, this reminds me of a comment I once made on the "Seven Deadly Sins" in the Catholic Church.
In no particular order:
Greed
Gluttony
Slothfulness
Lust
Pride
Envy
Wrath
Four things I would point out about the flaws of this list:
1.In many cases, these "sins" are not sins at all.
Rather, they are symptoms of something deeper that is wrong with the person.
For example, when someone "commits the sin" of "Gluttony", like a 600 lb man who eats 12 cheeseburgers a day,
it is usually motivated by deeper cause,
like a fear or loneliness or inadequacy.
The "gluttony" didn't just occur in a vacuum. It is a symptom.
And it shouldn't be shamed or punished.
It should be addressed and treated.
Same applies to Slothfulness: An extremely slothful person might be depressed, or driven by a fear of something.
You get the idea.
2. It is mostly filled with redundancies.
These "sins" are not even reduced to their lowest common denominators.
Greed, Gluttony, Sloth, Pride...usually have a deeper root cause.
Most human behaviors are ultimately driven by either LUST or FEAR.
LUST: The appetites that drives us forward...not just lust for sex, but lust for life, for food, for prosperity, for fun.
FEAR: That which acts as a check for Lust....Fear pulls us back, keeps us safe, makes us think twice.
Which brings me to #3...
3. FEAR is not on the list, and it should be (IF you are a God-fearing individual):
Why isn't FEAR on the list of Deadly Sins?
In the Bible, nothing is underscored more than the importance of FAITH.
Yet, if you truly have Faith in God...then you have nothing to FEAR.
FEAR indicates lack of FAITH.
So why didn't it make the list of Deadly Sins?
It should be #1 on the list.
(Of course, we know perfectly well why...it's because the Church uses FEAR, themselves,
to control the flock. Fear of hell. Fear of shaming. Fear of being ostracized.
For the Church to fail to put FEAR on the list of Deadly Sins
is hypocritical, transparently corrupt and self-serving of the Church...IMO).
4. By having a list of fundamental "sins"
...that are actually just human nature...
the Church misleads people:
Having eliminated most of that list as redundancies,
(and having added FEAR to a list that is missing it)
I am left with only two "sins":
LUST and FEAR.
And, IMO, these are NOT "sins", in and of themselves, AT ALL.
Rather, I see them as gifts. They are part of the balance of nature, as I already described:
LUST is the array of appetites that drives us forward.
FEAR is the brakes on the car, as it were. Chastises us, keeps us prudent.
So,
I posit that instead of regarding "LUST" as "BAD", full stop,
We begin to see that it is only when these two get OUT OF BALANCE that there is a problem;
when LUST is out of control, you are an addict or a compulsive, taking absurd degrees of risk;
When FEAR is out of control, you are a phobic, held back from living to some degree,
by your unhealthy degree of fear.
And, most ironically,
it is ONLY THEN that the other "sins" on the list make an appearance:
Greed, Gluttony, Slothfulness, etc etc.
My point:
In Christianity (and most religious dogma),
many human characteristics are wrongly designated as "sinful",
and being simply "bad" or "good".
Rather, we should see that EACH of those characteristics has the POTENTIAL to be either bad, or good.
I like the distinctions you make, and we're almost on the same page.
Pride towards self is can always lead to bias and negativity.
Pride in things one helps to make or achieve are not as destructive, but still have negative potential.
One can be proud of their child to the point of defending or hiding them from the consequences of their actions, effectively stopping anything good from being learned from the mistake the child made.
Hold your head level isn't the same as looking down at others. Self respect isn't synonymous with pride.
Humility and fear aren't synonymous either. One can be respectful and still stand up for what they think is right.
If one is humble and the other is greedy, who is negative?
Being proud, haughty, demanding, and condescending are of pride.
Can you learn from someone like that? I have trouble with it for sure.
It doesn't have to black and white. Words and the meanings of them generally aren't. You just explain it differently.
