(on the Pennsylvania report re: sexual abuse in the Roman Catholic Church)
RE: UNCONDITIONAL LOVE, WHY I THINK IT'S A BAD IDEA
this past Wednesday, 22 August 2018, on the Freedom From Religion show, Ask An Atheist at https://www.facebook.com/4ffrf/videos/241098113260114/?comment_id=241357..., the topic was "It's Time to Quit the Catholic Church." one of the viewers left the following comment:
"The pope actually tweeted "We need to protect our family" Disgraceful"
here's my reply:
that's VERY telling. "our family" means the RCC, i suppose. which reminds me of a concept that i have no sympathy for -- unconditional love. it's one of the many reasons i chose not to have children; i did not want to love unconditionally.
there's an example i always think of, a man out in Seattle, Washington, George Keller. he's the rare exception that tends to prove the rule. back in the '90s, a serial arsonist terrorized the Seattle area, causing millions in damage and taking 3 lives. police put together a profile of the arsonist and published it. when George Keller read it, he recognized his son, Paul. he turned him in. Paul Keller is locked up for life. https://blog.seattlepi.com/seattle911/2009/11/12/how-was-serial-seattle-...
how many parents would do that to slash for their children? hardly a one. but i would. you do no one -- particularly the guilty party -- any favors by "protecting" the identity of a criminal, simply because they have your DNA. there is literally no rational sense in that. by "criminal," i mean a doer of mis- or malfeasance, such as a person, persons, or an entity or entities. i suppose nonfeasance counts, as well; the sin of omission.
same goes for the RCC. the pope's statement is a confession of unconditional love for his church and of a willingness to do anything -- literally -- to "protect" it. but you have to think about what "protect" really means: are you protecting the church from harm, or are you protecting the public from the harm of the church and thereby preventing the church from committing more harm? it's philosophically dicey, sure, but i'd always choose to protect the Commonweal from the malfeasance of the individual, my "child" or not. this pope, Francis, needs to rethink his priorities. perhaps he should have a talk with George and Paul Keller.
Subscription Note:
Choosing to subscribe to this topic will automatically register you for email notifications for comments and updates on this thread.
Email notifications will be sent out daily by default unless specified otherwise on your account which you can edit by going to your userpage here and clicking on the subscriptions tab.
I think you are confusing unconditional love with unconditional actions. You can unconditionally love someone and still do the right thing. Just because you love someone does not mean they are not accountable for their actions. You can love the RCC and still hold it accountable. In fact, If you really love it and unconditionally so, you should be the one leading the charge to clean house and restore it to its former glory. (I don't actually believe there ever was a former glory. The RCC has always been corrupt. Still, if you love it and want it to be ethical, moral, and whatever... shouldn't you work towards that?" Isn't it "Not giving a damn." that has allowed the Church to become amoral, greedy, and the bullshit organization it is today?
i agree about the difference between unconditional love v. actions. but it's not me who does that confusing. IMO, anyway, it's the parents or shepherds of those bad boys and girls that are guilty here.
it's accepted rhetoric that one would "do anything" to protect their child/ren. however, as you point out, in order to truly "protect" your progeny, it is imperative that you occasionally are required to protect them from themselves. and from the Commonweal, as well.
the "affluenza" teen was done no favors by being shielded from punishment based on a weak-assed excuse that should have been thrown out with the bathwater. and that entire family ought to have the self-respect and morality to be ashamed for their "but" argument. yet, it worked -- or so they believe. what it really did was impair the character of a young man, possibly for the rest of his life. that's not good parenting, just as the pope is not practicing good parenting when he shields the RCC from its just punishments.
Attachments
Attach Image/Video?:
I don't call that "unconditional love." I just call it being ignorant. I know what you mean. You should try teaching at a school in Korea. (There is an entire tradition in Asia that schools train children and not parents. Schools are responsible for parenting and morality.) As Korea is becoming Westernized, the teachers no longer have any control over the students. The students do not learn manners or morality at school or in the home. When teachers complain about a student's behavior they are told to "deal with it" and not complain. If they complain to the parents the parents assume the teacher is not doing their job. The result of this is teachers lying to principles and parents to be seen as good teachers and to keep their jobs. Teachers alter test scores and pass students all the time who are severely below average. No one points out the problems. No one singles out troubled individuals for special treatment less they embarrass the person or the person's parents or the school. Talk about unconditional love - Korea has unconditional love of children gone insane. Especially the first born son who is the family jewel and can do nothing wrong. The first born son is the most important family member and will be doted upon his entire life. Parents believe that they must give this child everything he wants so he will take care of them when they are old. Sometimes things get really insane.
Give a student a bad grade and the student will cry and complain to his or her parents. (I work at a university. The kids are that immature.) The parents will call the university and complain about the teacher. Obviously if the student is doing poorly, the teacher is not doing their job. The teacher will be called into the dean's office and chewed out for not doing their job. Obviously if students are failing the teacher needs to try harder. I probably fail 3 to four students a semester. The students go to their departments and complain. The departments just change the grades. Welcome to Asian Education. Much of Asia has the same system.
All students graduate every class. The classes move through the university system together. The Korean Grading Act is the only evaluation. Everyone graduates but the students are given a ranking. You graduate as number 1, 2, 3, .... 5276th. etc... Where you graduate is more important than whether or not you graduated. Korea has more university graduates than any other country in the world.
In the US, it is just a money grab. They pass everyone unless they do not show up at all, because well they are charging often times more than 1000 dollars a class (especially when you throw in what is essentially government subsidies.) Then the kids get a student loan that are, or almost predatory like. A good chunk of the degree holders holding a degree barely worth the paper it is printed on, let alone the 20k+ debt the student has accrued for it.
The baby boomer generation learned that a college education is a golden ticket to the middle class, frequently upper middle class or higher and college was actually accessible to the middle class. And they pushed hard to try and instill this no longer true idea on their kids.
Now a days the majority has at least some college education, (even if they did not last long enough to get a degree, - drop out.) Creating quite a bubble based on good intentions. Just like the real estate crash in 2008 was in large part due to the bubble created by good intentions of "everyone deserves their own home." Now we are seeing a college loan bubble where colleges can increasingly ratchet up prices, but everyone feels they should get a college education, the money is available via loans, so prices endlessly spiral upwards.
In many cities that have large colleges we are seeing a reverse, where people with bachelors, masters, degrees struggling to find jobs that pay enough to pay back their loans and attain middle class with a home, (Ever look at real estate markets in highly educated college town cities where the college educated jobs are?) But huge shortages in more "blue collar" workers like electricians, plumbers, construction and so on. In some places it got so extreme that the blue collar workers make significantly more money then the typical college educated person does. All without the large student loan debt.