Turn the Other Cheek

Discussion Open Forum
21

[quote=“coach”]as for forgiveness, is that mine to give? i must have missed the memo that put me so far up the moral ladder that judgement was now included in my job description. is there a pay raise that goes with this awesome responsibility? i don’t think i can handle it.

i quit.[/quote]
Forgiveness is yours to give to the extent that you were wronged.

Individuals in the public were wronged slightly by extension of the comedian’s fame and the fact he was giving a performance.

So, yes, the public has a right to be somewhat offended, and have the capacity to forgive.

On the other hand, the fact that Richards to this point does not seem to have made a personal apology to those he directly attacks does mean something. But my point is that we as a society have become so conscious of insult that we may have become unforgiving in nature (speaking collectively, not individually).

The guy is even suing Richards at law for an apology.
I don’t think the law should have that power and I don’t think it would set a good precedent for society if we can get money from others over insults. But more telling, I don’t think we should go after other people and force them to apologize. They should come to us, and should be given the time and space to do it on what terms they are comfortable with.

22

[quote=“R. Daneel Olivaw”]On another thread here there’s a discussion of a comedian who used terrible words towards a member of his audience. Regardless of whether the guy intended the insults or not, he’s offered an apology and asked people’s forgiveness.

What is the response? No. You are not forgiven.

A Reverend concerned with civil rights publicly refuses to accept the apology. The audience members refuse to accept the apology and plan to file a law suit. People on video forums discussing the incident refuse to accept the apology.

There was no murder. There was no violence. Nobody lost property. Yet, this is being deemed “unforgivable” by many people.

There was a man a couple thousand years ago who said some pretty profound things about forgiveness. He said love your enemies, bless those that intentionally harm you, and to forgive others who wrong you.

Some people call this man Lord. They say he is their Master.

Most others acknowledge these particular teachings as some of the wisest and most profound ever spoken. These are virtues to be emulated.

Are we so far removed from these virtues?[/quote]

Yeah, but in reality this doesn’t work because the Greeks came up with morality. Then the Austrians gave us the ego. So when you factor in morals, and how much these things crush people’s ego’s, calling someone a ‘Ngger’ is bound to hurt. 'Ngger’ is now a description of all the negative scummy lowlife behaviour that some people aspire to and glorify. White people who are like this in the UK are similarly called Gypo’s, Chav’s, Asbo queens.
But black people don’t mind when Chris Rock talks about Nggers. Do they? Its funny then, isn’t it? But a cracker can’t use the word 'Ngger.’ I’d say thats a stupid standard. I can’t even bring myself to write the word in full. Why? Social conditioning. Gimme a copy of OldDirty’s ‘Ngga please’ though and I’ll use the word freely, and without guilt! Weird!
Whats my point? The word has a stigma around it. The stigma must be based partially in truth. Americans are so damn keen on re-dressing the balance, that words like 'Ngga’ still hold a sway. Label a man and you hold him back. You allow the boundaries to continue. If words like ‘n*gga’ are to lose their power to insult then it can only be achieved by less labelling, and more general tolerance to the wishes of the person stood next to you.
Call a chav a chav and they dont care. ( I think.) Call a middle class man a chav and he will get upset.
Richards expressed a sentiment held by many people and HE gets demonized, not the label, not morality, not ego. Chris Rock is to blame for defining ‘N&ggas’ and then making the term a label. People are to blame for agreeing with this.
Society breeds more society. Social conditions are bred from social conditions. Change is made in the heart. That and America seems obsessed with re-dressing the balance. (Reverse apartheid.) Which clearly doesn’t work. And with blaming things on 1 man (thats a western trait.) Afghanistan = Osama. Iraq = Sadam. Well at least one of those guys is in prison, and the country is still a mess of murder and uprising. 1 man? Highly laughable. Tomy Lee Jones made the point in ‘Blown away,’ which was years before either conflict started. You need to blame one man, it makes the issue easier to deal with!

23

[quote=“R. Daneel Olivaw”]

The guy is even suing Richards at law for an apology.[/quote]

That is plain ridiculous. “He upset me way more than I upset him.” The bully doesn’t like the consequence of his actions so he calls for his mummy! What a dick. Talk about low self esteem issues.
Even more stupid than compensation for soldiers who get shot in Iraq. What part of ARMY did you not understand when you joined?

24

Definitely on to something here. His words were obviously nasty, hateful, vitriolic etc. But were they based on prejudice against the group (race) or were they using the language of racial hatred to bash individuals within that group.

25

[quote=“TomHill”]
.
Even more stupid than compensation for soldiers who get shot in Iraq. What part of ARMY did you not understand when you joined?[/quote]

Umm, bad anology. Soldiers should be compensated for their pain and suffering. It’s right up there with workman’s compensation, that a construction worker would apply for. The Army is a job.

Now if you want to say it’s stupid to complain about the risks of being killed while on the job in the Army, then you have an point :wink:

26

[quote=“Namahottie”][quote=“TomHill”]
.
Even more stupid than compensation for soldiers who get shot in Iraq. What part of ARMY did you not understand when you joined?[/quote]

Umm, bad anology. Soldiers should be compensated for their pain and suffering. It’s right up there with workman’s compensation, that a construction worker would apply for. The Army is a job.

Now if you want to say it’s stupid to complain about the risks of being killed while on the job in the Army, then you have an point :wink:[/quote]

I 100 % disagree. Join the army, expect bullets to be fired at you. Expect them to hurt.

27

[quote=“TomHill”][quote=“Namahottie”][quote=“TomHill”]
.
Even more stupid than compensation for soldiers who get shot in Iraq. What part of ARMY did you not understand when you joined?[/quote]

Umm, bad anology. Soldiers should be compensated for their pain and suffering. It’s right up there with workman’s compensation, that a construction worker would apply for. The Army is a job.

Now if you want to say it’s stupid to complain about the risks of being killed while on the job in the Army, then you have an point :wink:[/quote]

I 100 % disagree. Join the army, expect bullets to be fired at you. Expect them to hurt.[/quote]

:laughing: What?!?!? I think that most people grasp that concept, but that doesn’t mean that they shouldn’t be compensated for their work. It is a job. One I guess you dont’ care for.

Now, if you’re a gang banger and want compensation from the police force because you were shot at then I would go :raspberry:

28

I’m with Tom on that one. I would start to question round about here: ‘Now, this “gun” piece of equipment. Will the other team have one of these then? Yes, they will. Right. I see.’

Gang banging is its own reward.

29

[quote=“Namahottie”][quote=“TomHill”][quote=“Namahottie”][quote=“TomHill”]
.
Even more stupid than compensation for soldiers who get shot in Iraq. What part of ARMY did you not understand when you joined?[/quote]

Umm, bad anology. Soldiers should be compensated for their pain and suffering. It’s right up there with workman’s compensation, that a construction worker would apply for. The Army is a job.

Now if you want to say it’s stupid to complain about the risks of being killed while on the job in the Army, then you have an point :wink:[/quote]

I 100 % disagree. Join the army, expect bullets to be fired at you. Expect them to hurt.[/quote]

:laughing: What?!?!? I think that most people grasp that concept, but that doesn’t mean that they shouldn’t be compensated for their work. It is a job. One I guess you dont’ care for.

Now, if you’re a gang banger and want compensation from the police force because you were shot at then I would go :raspberry:[/quote]

Please define the army for me then. I was under the impression that it was a group of trained soldiers who enter into armed combat with another group of trained soldiers. If I joined the army it would be because I wanted to enter into armed combat. Not because I wanted a paid job. If I wanted a paid job that didn’t involve being shot at, I would work as a driving instructor. Or a teacher. If I got shot whilst teaching, I would expect to get compensation.
Can porn stars get compensation if they get aids?
Can my window cleaner get compensation if he gets frostbite?
Can a bodyguard get compensation for taking a punch?
Join the army and expect a bit of fighting. That’s fair to say isn’t it?

Compensation for soldiers is the world gone mad. Pay them more. Explain the bit about bullets more clearly.

30

You’s are all off topic now. :slight_smile:

If I fall off a ladder at work, there’s work comps for that. (Maybe not in Taiwan, I don’t know)

If the milkman slips or drops a case of milk on his foot, he will be compensated for his loss of income.

If the factory worker shreds his hand in a machine, he too will be compensated.

If a cop gets shot, he will be compensated, and so will his family if he dies.

Looking at other dangerous jobs, if an underwater welder suffers injuries, he will be compensated. If an oil driller loses an arm, he will be compensated. If a fireman gets disfigured, he will be compensated.(maybe not enough…)

It seems to me that Nama is thinking about compensation as in working compensation, where you get paid for the amount of hours you’re unable to work. In other words, compensation for loss of revenue due to injuries that occurred on the workplace. On the other hand, you are thinking about high amounts of money/compensation due to being injured while serving as a soldier. Something like you lose one leg, you get so much money. You lose two legs, you get twice more money, etc.

I agree with Nama that lost revenue should be compensated for, just like any other dangerous job out there. I also agree that compensation beyond that, maybe out of line for those who enroll on their own will…

But what if you were drafted, and you lost both legs? Should you be compensated by your country?

To be on topic, I sure hope the hecklers do not get money for this. That would be a sad day for the western legal system.

31

I agree with working compensation for soldiers.

I thank the right honourable bobepine for seeing through my mess of thoughts and straightening this whole thing out.

32

[quote=“TomHill”]I agree with working compensation for soldiers.

I thank the right honourable bobepine for seeing through my mess of thoughts and straightening this whole thing out.[/quote]

The military calls it “disability pay.”

33

On military compensation for being wounded (or for combat duty, or for being disabled), I’m astonished that anybody should be against this. If soldier A suffers / sacrifices more than soldier B, doesn’t he deserve more money?

On turning the other cheek, as your lord and savior I have to point out that on reflection, many of the things I said way back in the Sermon on the Mount turn out to be really not all that practical. (“Give to all who ask?” What WAS I thinking?) I’m now with the socio-biologists on this one.

But going with Jesus version 1.0 (Version 2.0 is gonna kick ya’lls asses on judgment day), shouldn’t we be trying to empathize with Kramer and try to understand his perspective before going all smarmy and critical on him? (Or am I confusing Jesus with Gandhi?) How would YOU feel if you were a comedian, and some gentlemen of color began heckling you, in a manner which called attention to your racial differences? Especially if your background and experience had led you to certain expectations about the behavior of black men…?

I think I would have told them “Begone, ye generation of vipers! Ye are the sons of your father the devil!” or however it goes.

34

[quote=“TomHill”]Can porn stars get compensation if they get aids?[/quote] Yes, although it would be under a private health insurance program and possibly supplemented by a state workers compensation program or state catastrophic illness program as the disease progressed.

[quote=“TomHill”]Can my window cleaner get compensation if he gets frostbite?[/quote] - State Workmans Compensation may indeed kick-in on this one. After a lengthy investigation as to why the workman was stupid enough to go about his/her duties in a climate in which frostbite was not only possible but actualized. Unfortunately, stupidity can pay.

[quote=“TomHill”]Can a bodyguard get compensation for taking a punch?[/quote] Yes, and/or a bullet also if the situation warrants. It is provided by a private insurer or in many cases by the insurance group advising the principal to make use of the protection afforded by private security team.

[quote=“TomHill”]Join the army and expect a bit of fighting. That’s fair to say isn’t it?[/quote] Yes, one would think. There do seem to be a number of individuals who are unable to figure this one out.

[quote=“TomHill”]Compensation for soldiers is the world gone mad. Pay them more. Explain the bit about bullets more clearly.[/quote] I quite often do think the world has indeed gone mad. As for the pay bumps for the military - I’m al for that one. No explanation needed about the bullet things - quite well understood.
As JDSmith has pointed out; If a Soldiers injuries are severe enough that they follow him/her after discharge from duties, then a “Disability” payment schedule comes into effect. A monthly check is sent in the mail. This is determined by a panel of Military Physicians at time of discharge from the service. They tend to be quite liberal in their decisions in favor of the Soldier. Disability payments usually start at 20% of base pay up to 100% of pay depending on the severity of the injuries. Also, all needed medical treatments and/or rehabilitation is provided, as well as any needed meds, at no cost. And I have to say that in my experience, the rehab & medical care is 1st rate. From my experience.
I speak from the USA point of things. Other countries procedures may vary.

35

Or direct deposited. :smiley:

36

[quote=“Screaming Jesus”]

But going with Jesus version 1.0 (Version 2.0 is gonna kick ya’lls asses on judgment day), shouldn’t we be trying to empathize with Kramer and try to understand his perspective before going all smarmy and critical on him? (Or am I confusing Jesus with Gandhi?) How would YOU feel if you were a comedian, and some gentlemen of color began heckling you, in a manner which called attention to your racial differences? Especially if your background and experience had led you to certain expectations about the behavior of black men…?[/quote]

And I guess this is where I respond and the given responce is met with :unamused: here we go again with Nama. :wink:

Yea, Kramer should get the social beatdown. It’s comedy club for Christ’s sake. Everyone gets heckled. In life you get heckled. How YOU respond to the sitation says more and means more than the place or the heckler. It’s not like black comedians haven’t been heckled by other blacks either.

Bernie Mac has a great story for how he dealt with hecklers. Long story short- rough audience, and the act he followed was eaten alive by the audience. He came out and shouted


I ain’t scared of you

Not only was that his breakthru in comedy (he was struggling for a looong time) but became his sig line as well as that night he recalls that it was the best routine he ever gave.

37

[quote=“TomHill”]I agree with working compensation for soldiers.

I thank the right honourable bobepine for seeing through my mess of thoughts and straightening this whole thing out.[/quote]

I thought that was the only compensation you were talking about.

But what about compensation from companies that produce shoddy equipment for the Army? Should soldiers not be allowed to file for that?

I see how everyone has explained it, but I still don’t understand how someone could be against giving compensation to a soldier. It’s a job, albeit a nasty one, but you do get paid to execute your duties.

38

[quote=“TomHill”][quote=“R. Daneel Olivaw”]On another thread here there’s a discussion of a comedian who used terrible words towards a member of his audience. Regardless of whether the guy intended the insults or not, he’s offered an apology and asked people’s forgiveness.

What is the response? No. You are not forgiven.

A Reverend concerned with civil rights publicly refuses to accept the apology. The audience members refuse to accept the apology and plan to file a law suit. People on video forums discussing the incident refuse to accept the apology.

There was no murder. There was no violence. Nobody lost property. Yet, this is being deemed “unforgivable” by many people.

There was a man a couple thousand years ago who said some pretty profound things about forgiveness. He said love your enemies, bless those that intentionally harm you, and to forgive others who wrong you.

Some people call this man Lord. They say he is their Master.

Most others acknowledge these particular teachings as some of the wisest and most profound ever spoken. These are virtues to be emulated.

Are we so far removed from these virtues?[/quote]

Yeah, but in reality this doesn’t work because the Greeks came up with morality. Then the Austrians gave us the ego. So when you factor in morals, and how much these things crush people’s ego’s, calling someone a ‘Ngger’ is bound to hurt. 'Ngger’ is now a description of all the negative scummy lowlife behaviour that some people aspire to and glorify. White people who are like this in the UK are similarly called Gypo’s, Chav’s, Asbo queens.
But black people don’t mind when Chris Rock talks about Nggers. Do they? Its funny then, isn’t it? But a cracker can’t use the word 'Ngger.’ I’d say thats a stupid standard. I can’t even bring myself to write the word in full. Why? Social conditioning. Gimme a copy of OldDirty’s ‘Ngga please’ though and I’ll use the word freely, and without guilt! Weird!
Whats my point? The word has a stigma around it. The stigma must be based partially in truth. Americans are so damn keen on re-dressing the balance, that words like 'Ngga’ still hold a sway. Label a man and you hold him back. You allow the boundaries to continue. If words like ‘n*gga’ are to lose their power to insult then it can only be achieved by less labelling, and more general tolerance to the wishes of the person stood next to you.
Call a chav a chav and they dont care. ( I think.) Call a middle class man a chav and he will get upset.
Richards expressed a sentiment held by many people and HE gets demonized, not the label, not morality, not ego. Chris Rock is to blame for defining ‘N&ggas’ and then making the term a label. People are to blame for agreeing with this.
Society breeds more society. Social conditions are bred from social conditions. Change is made in the heart. That and America seems obsessed with re-dressing the balance. (Reverse apartheid.) Which clearly doesn’t work. And with blaming things on 1 man (thats a western trait.) Afghanistan = Osama. Iraq = Sadam. Well at least one of those guys is in prison, and the country is still a mess of murder and uprising. 1 man? Highly laughable. Tomy Lee Jones made the point in ‘Blown away,’ which was years before either conflict started. You need to blame one man, it makes the issue easier to deal with![/quote]

I had assumed that THIS above would have raised more discussion, than my comment about compensation for paid killers. Life is varied.

39

Well yes, Nama’, it doesn’t speak too well of his mojo when the stand-up comedy guy gets flustered. But anybody might lose his cool under provocation, run afoul of a bunch of self-righteous minority spokespeople, and come under pressure to humiliate himself for the sake of those oh-so-sensitive souls.

40

Seems to me that Richards was the sensitive soul, or a pompous soul, who created his own mess because he was too sensitive a soul himself to use slaps forehead HUMOR to diffuse the situation. :unamused: I don’t think those guys were going out there with the intention to get called the n word.

Besides, do you think that people are responsible for or have that much control over what comes out of other people’s mouths?