Religions do not teach Justice & yet no one points it out

[Keith&Co.]

Hell, I could have been a Mormon Separatist who died in 1959 in a shootout with the Feds, losing my three wives and fourteen children. I could be BEHIND the curve in this life, in comparison to my previous one.

All in all, reincarnation seems just like Heaven, apocalypse insurance, campaign promises, and the inflatable life-raft issued to each submarine. People feel better for the idea of it, but it's not really going to be terribly useful in the end.

aaaah! run for the hills!
You just get a new life! That's all! Stop thinking you are owed something in the past life! You are not getting a better life in this life because of something that has happened in the previous life - that's not what is happening.

Dude, YOU'RE the one claiming this is justice and that has, at various points, included replacement of what was lost, the satisfaction of the victim, and the punishment of the criminal.
If i don't remember the loss, then the replacement isn't going to make me happy and your attempt to describe 'justice' is meaningless noise.

There is no magic accountant sitting in the sky and adding up your debits and credits! God is not an accountant - you are not owed anything from the previous life, nor are you punished in this life - again if you are punished or rewarded because of something bad or good that you did in the past life, that would be Vengeance, not justice

Then there's no justice in getting a new life. You just get a new life.

Over and over, if you did something bad and got punished for it, that is vengeance, not justice

But as part of previous descriptions of justice, you HAVE included punishment.
Can we please, please, please get your definition of justice? You're not making a lot of sense, here. Or at least, there's not a lot of consistent continuity.

This kid's life got cut short - if she chooses she gets a do-over, that's all!

Then what makes that 'justice?'

She doesn't get to be a princess in this life!
In fact, she may get a worse life - she had a loving family in this life - in her next life maybe not so loving family - it's just luck of the draw

Random chance is justice, in your view? What makes meaningless reincarnation attractive, to you?

 

[Shadowy Man]

You answered my question about a specific scenario by relating a different, uncomparable scenario. Can you address the question I had directly, please?

Come on, this is not rocket science - one has to understand the concept

If you ran over a picket fence, would you have 1) the big owner come out and give you a beating?
or 2) pay for fixing the fence?
One is uncivilized and the other is Civilized - that's the difference between Vengeance and Justice

Justice is about the victim - if your dog is run over - not only have you lost a loving friend, you have lost the opportunity to shower your love on a friend
The criminal who did that getting a beating or jailed does not help you
Getting a new Dog is justice - it won't bring back your loving friend but at least you get the opportunity to shower your love on your new friend and that is what a lot of people recommend doing for those owners who have lost their pet

There are only so many examples that i can give - i keep drawing a picture and keep being amazed that this concept is that hard to understand

Ok. So you are saying that getting a new dog is justice for having your old dog run over.

 

[Keith&Co.]

posts like this make me question the adult in you - i am telling what a parent might do to teach his kid a lesson

You weren't presenting it clearly as 'an option.' WHen you were trying to offer an anecdote to describe 'justice,' you included, more than once, the punishment aspect.
It would have been more consistent if you had completely avoided the question of who pays for the new fence or fixes the mailbox or buys the puppy.
But you had to bring that in AND you defended that.

- some may choose not to take the new toy's cost out of their kids allowance, but the most important thing is that the other kid gets his toy back - he is made happy - he is made whole again - that is what Justice is all about

But you WERE insisting that justice required this punishment. At least, it certainly appeared to be part of your discussion.

If you were to run over a fence - would you have 1)the big burly owner come out and give you a beating which lands you in the hospital
or
2)get taken to court and pay for a new fence?

How about you DEFINE justice rather than ask for my subjective assessment of a whatif scenario? Still trying to figure out what YOU MEAN by the term 'justice.'

One is Uncivilized and the other is Civilized

By your subjective assessment. Fine, whatever. Is that actually the best you can offer, here? Just keep throwing out analogies and repeating yourself?

The fact that you think that in both cases you suffer equally is horrible.

I think your descriptions of 'justice' keep foundering on the details. That's kind of horrible. Worse is that you just keep repeating the same mistakes over and over, as if you're advancing the argument.

There is a difference between the two - one does nothing for the victim - he didn't get his fence back, in the other no one gets hurt and he got his fence back - that is justice

Well, then stop asking me which choice i might make, since the world is not binary.

- - - Updated - - -

Ok. So you are saying that getting a new dog is justice for having your old dog run over.

Wait, that means you're the victim.
Isn't the dog the victim, too?

If the girl dies early, she's a victim. but so are her parents. How does her reincarnating provide justice for the victimized parents?

 

[Shadowy Man]

Ok. So you are saying that getting a new dog is justice for having your old dog run over.

Wait, that means you're the victim.
Isn't the dog the victim, too?

Ramaraksha said, and I quote: "Getting a new Dog is justice".

 

[Keith&Co.]

Wait, that means you're the victim.
Isn't the dog the victim, too?

Ramaraksha said, and I quote: "Getting a new Dog is justice".

Ramaraksha really sucks at analogies.
Every example he offers in his attempts to explain Justice, someone loses something, they get it back or they get it replaced, and that's justice.

But in his reincarnation model, justice is different.

A better analogy would be that i drive over someone's dog.
THen i go home and forget about it.
That's justice.
Because there's no one watching or keeping track, no one's 'owed' a dog, justice has nothing to do with any sort of replacement plan.

Justice is that now the person who owned the dog has a chance to get a new dog. Or maybe a cat. Or they can get a goldfish. Or they can decide to avoid pets and take up a hobby that they couldn't afford before, because of the cost of dogfood and veterinarians. Or they can get hit by a car on a different street. Or any damn thing might happen. That's justice, reincarnation style.

 

[Ramaraksha]

Then there's no justice in getting a new life. You just get a new life.

Over and over, if you did something bad and got punished for it, that is vengeance, not justice

But as part of previous descriptions of justice, you HAVE included punishment.

As a kid someone breaks your toy, and then your father gives you a new one, do you actually care that you remembered or forgot the loss? The main thing is that you got your toy back - that is what makes it justice
Punishment can happen - the other kid might lose some pocket money - but the main idea is to make the victim whole - as opposed to vengeance which is basically limited to punishment

Over and over there is no magic man, there is no accountant in the sky sitting and making sure you are properly compensated! I am sorry to tell you this is how real life works!

"What makes meaningless reincarnation attractive, to you?" dude, over and over, there is no magic man in the sky to take you in and give you the easy good life. Heaven is a fantasy - it is not real - people want the easy good life and religions are happy to exploit it, that's all. Only one faith has refused to do so.
It's either life here or death - non-existence. Yes Life does sound attractive to me

- - - Updated - - -

You weren't presenting it clearly as 'an option.' WHen you were trying to offer an anecdote to describe 'justice,' you included, more than once, the punishment aspect.
It would have been more consistent if you had completely avoided the question of who pays for the new fence or fixes the mailbox or buys the puppy.
But you had to bring that in AND you defended that.

- some may choose not to take the new toy's cost out of their kids allowance, but the most important thing is that the other kid gets his toy back - he is made happy - he is made whole again - that is what Justice is all about

But you WERE insisting that justice required this punishment. At least, it certainly appeared to be part of your discussion.

If you were to run over a fence - would you have 1)the big burly owner come out and give you a beating which lands you in the hospital
or
2)get taken to court and pay for a new fence?

How about you DEFINE justice rather than ask for my subjective assessment of a whatif scenario? Still trying to figure out what YOU MEAN by the term 'justice.'

One is Uncivilized and the other is Civilized

By your subjective assessment. Fine, whatever. Is that actually the best you can offer, here? Just keep throwing out analogies and repeating yourself?

The fact that you think that in both cases you suffer equally is horrible.

I think your descriptions of 'justice' keep foundering on the details. That's kind of horrible. Worse is that you just keep repeating the same mistakes over and over, as if you're advancing the argument.

There is a difference between the two - one does nothing for the victim - he didn't get his fence back, in the other no one gets hurt and he got his fence back - that is justice

Well, then stop asking me which choice i might make, since the world is not binary.

- - - Updated - - -

Ok. So you are saying that getting a new dog is justice for having your old dog run over.

Wait, that means you're the victim.
Isn't the dog the victim, too?

If the girl dies early, she's a victim. but so are her parents. How does her reincarnating provide justice for the victimized parents?

They are reincarnated as well - i told you this is not that hard - what makes it hard is someone who refuses to understand

 

[Ramaraksha]

Ramaraksha said, and I quote: "Getting a new Dog is justice".

Ramaraksha really sucks at analogies.
Every example he offers in his attempts to explain Justice, someone loses something, they get it back or they get it replaced, and that's justice.

But in his reincarnation model, justice is different.

A better analogy would be that i drive over someone's dog.
THen i go home and forget about it.
That's justice.
Because there's no one watching or keeping track, no one's 'owed' a dog, justice has nothing to do with any sort of replacement plan.

Justice is that now the person who owned the dog has a chance to get a new dog. Or maybe a cat. Or they can get a goldfish. Or they can decide to avoid pets and take up a hobby that they couldn't afford before, because of the cost of dogfood and veterinarians. Or they can get hit by a car on a different street. Or any damn thing might happen. That's justice, reincarnation style.

Yes you can go home and forget about it - lots of people have done exactly that - justice would be for the victim to get a new dog or a new fence or have the fender of his car repaired. It would be better if it came from you, you would become a better person

At some point i have to give up - there is only so many examples that i can give - sorry but i need to move on

- - - Updated - - -

Ramaraksha said, and I quote: "Getting a new Dog is justice".

Ramaraksha really sucks at analogies.
Every example he offers in his attempts to explain Justice, someone loses something, they get it back or they get it replaced, and that's justice.

But in his reincarnation model, justice is different.

A better analogy would be that i drive over someone's dog.
THen i go home and forget about it.
That's justice.
Because there's no one watching or keeping track, no one's 'owed' a dog, justice has nothing to do with any sort of replacement plan.

Justice is that now the person who owned the dog has a chance to get a new dog. Or maybe a cat. Or they can get a goldfish. Or they can decide to avoid pets and take up a hobby that they couldn't afford before, because of the cost of dogfood and veterinarians. Or they can get hit by a car on a different street. Or any damn thing might happen. That's justice, reincarnation style.

Yes you can go home and forget about it - lots of people have done exactly that - justice would be for the victim to get a new dog or a new fence or have the fender of his car repaired. It would be better if it came from you, you would become a better person

At some point i have to give up - there is only so many examples that i can give - sorry but i need to move on

 

[sharon45]

A better analogy would be that i drive over someone's dog.

Where you are potentially teaching an irresponsible dog owner one lesson to not have pets wandering in the streets... and sadly, absolutely nobody points this out.

 

[Keith&Co.]

Yes you can go home and forget about it - lots of people have done exactly that - justice would be for the victim to get a new dog or a new fence or have the fender of his car repaired. It would be better if it came from you, you would become a better person

Okay, see, you CAN NOT describe justice without at least an element of the punishment, the suffering.
And once more, with feeling, your example of justice involves the loss being restored.
But this is not how you describe reincarnation.

So you're presenting a conflicting, incoherent story.

At some point i have to give up - there is only so many examples that i can give - sorry but i need to move on

Actually, all you do is give the same example, over and over. There's loss, someone restores it, that's justice.
But in reincarnation, according to you, there's loss, and then there's just a random follow-on story. Absolutely nothing like your examples.

No wonder you can't give a definition of Justice.






You don't have one.

 

[DBT]

''You are that'' still doesn't establish a connection between seemingly disconnected events, the initial act and the karmic balance that comes around in response. If there is no connection, it is not karma.

sigh! not reading the post & repeating the same thing over. There is nothing coming around in response

You appeared to miss the point the first time and now you appear to be avoiding it altogether. Your response did not address the issue I pointed out then, nor does it now. If you can't deal with it, fine, I won't press you again.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

sigh! not reading the post & repeating the same thing over. There is nothing coming around in response

You appeared to miss the point the first time and now you appear to be avoiding it altogether. Your response did not address the issue I pointed out then, nor does it now. If you can't deal with it, fine, I won't press you again.

So, to sum up, you'll both just move and forget about it with no consequence, so that will be Justice. It's what the word means.

 

[DBT]

You appeared to miss the point the first time and now you appear to be avoiding it altogether. Your response did not address the issue I pointed out then, nor does it now. If you can't deal with it, fine, I won't press you again.

So, to sum up, you'll both just move and forget about it with no consequence, so that will be Justice. It's what the word means.

Forget about.....what?

 

[Ramaraksha]

You appeared to miss the point the first time and now you appear to be avoiding it altogether. Your response did not address the issue I pointed out then, nor does it now. If you can't deal with it, fine, I won't press you again.

So, to sum up, you'll both just move and forget about it with no consequence, so that will be Justice. It's what the word means.

Over and over Justice is when the victim becomes whole - someone runs over a fence, it is repaired. A kid loses his toy, he gets a new one. A father is robbed off his savings that he had been saving for his kids, he gets the money back - that is justice

The brilliance of Gandhiji shone thru when he asked for Justice for his people, not vengeance. MLK and Nelson Mandela followed in his footsteps - justice is slow, non-violent, there is an absence of hatred

Vengeance is beating the guy who ran over your fence, give the kid who broke the toy a beating, killing or beating the guy who stole the money from the father. Vengeance is fast, very violent and is full of hatred. Hollywood of course loves the latter

Honestly, i can't believe this is this hard to understand

 

[Ramaraksha]

Okay, see, you CAN NOT describe justice without at least an element of the punishment, the suffering.
And once more, with feeling, your example of justice involves the loss being restored.
But this is not how you describe reincarnation.

So you're presenting a conflicting, incoherent story.

At some point i have to give up - there is only so many examples that i can give - sorry but i need to move on

Actually, all you do is give the same example, over and over. There's loss, someone restores it, that's justice.
But in reincarnation, according to you, there's loss, and then there's just a random follow-on story. Absolutely nothing like your examples.

No wonder you can't give a definition of Justice.
You don't have one.

As the old saying goes, one can take a horse to water but can't make it drink.

You can come up with a million different situations and then expect me to magically come up with explanations that satisfy you - who is making zero effort to understand any of it - can't do that. Only so much anyone will explain but they can't do the homework for you

 

[Ramaraksha]

sigh! not reading the post & repeating the same thing over. There is nothing coming around in response

You appeared to miss the point the first time and now you appear to be avoiding it altogether. Your response did not address the issue I pointed out then, nor does it now. If you can't deal with it, fine, I won't press you again.

My answer is the same as with Keith - i am not explaining E=Mc2 - these are simple ideas - it should not be that difficult
As they say one can take a horse to water, but cannot make it drink
I can't make you drink the water

Justice is when the victim is made whole, Vengeance is violence against the criminal - these words should be enough for anyone to understand. Hell is violence, not justice. Forgiveness does nothing for the victim, that is not justice either & i think that might be a problem here - going against established religious ideas

 

[Ramaraksha]

A better analogy would be that i drive over someone's dog.

Where you are potentially teaching an irresponsible dog owner one lesson to not have pets wandering in the streets... and sadly, absolutely nobody points this out.

It's just an example of the difference between vengeance and justice - vengeance is when the owner reacts violently and attacks the driver of the car. Justice is when the owner is compensated for the loss of the dog - but the dog is not a piece of furniture, so this is a bit more difficult

My original cartoon says that religions like christianity with their concept of heaven and hell do not address justice - all God can provide is Vengeance - which shows that these religions are man-made

 

[sharon45]

So, to sum up, you'll both just move and forget about it with no consequence, so that will be Justice. It's what the word means.

Over and over Justice is when the victim becomes whole - someone runs over a fence, it is repaired. A kid loses his toy, he gets a new one. A father is robbed off his savings that he had been saving for his kids, he gets the money back - that is justice

Except this is your idea of justice, which can also be other people's definition as well, but you need to undertstand that it is not for everyone. Much that you may see as vengeance is considered justice to many.

The brilliance of Gandhiji shone thru when he asked for Justice for his people, not vengeance. MLK and Nelson Mandela followed in his footsteps - justice is slow, non-violent, there is an absence of hatred

To me, none of these are examples of achieving justice, yet they are not illustrations of vengeance either, although they still reveal a form of punishment.

 

[sharon45]

Justice is when the owner is compensated for the loss of the dog - but the dog is not a piece of furniture, so this is a bit more difficult

Exactly, and all have an opinion of justice.

My original cartoon says that religions like christianity with their concept of heaven and hell do not address justice - all God can provide is Vengeance - which shows that these religions are man-made

Yet to believers, everything their god does is totally justified, and if it really is vengeance, that is also completely righteous.

 

[J842P]

You appeared to miss the point the first time and now you appear to be avoiding it altogether. Your response did not address the issue I pointed out then, nor does it now. If you can't deal with it, fine, I won't press you again.

My answer is the same as with Keith - i am not explaining E=Mc2 - these are simple ideas - it should not be that difficult
As they say one can take a horse to water, but cannot make it drink
I can't make you drink the water

Justice is when the victim is made whole, Vengeance is violence against the criminal - these words should be enough for anyone to understand. Hell is violence, not justice. Forgiveness does nothing for the victim, that is not justice either & i think that might be a problem here - going against established religious ideas

As far as I can tell, the only one with established religious ideas is you...

 

[Ramaraksha]

Exactly, and all have an opinion of justice.

My original cartoon says that religions like christianity with their concept of heaven and hell do not address justice - all God can provide is Vengeance - which shows that these religions are man-made

Yet to believers, everything their god does is totally justified, and if it really is vengeance, that is also completely righteous.

Basically Justice is when the victim is made whole - if someone drives over your fence, they pay to get you a new fence. Instead lets suppose they get hit by another car - the latter is vengeance - it is violent, uncivilized - Hollywood loves it - it satisfies our blood lust and we think Justice is done - no, Justice is not done, vengeance is done

Is Hitler burning in Hell? How does it help his victims? It doesn't.
That is what Gandhiji was saying and MLk and Mandela saw that - hating the white man achieves nothing - what was needed was Justice for the oppressed

Justice lifts up the oppressed, whereas Vengeance brings down the oppressor to a lower level

- - - Updated - - -

My answer is the same as with Keith - i am not explaining E=Mc2 - these are simple ideas - it should not be that difficult
As they say one can take a horse to water, but cannot make it drink
I can't make you drink the water

Justice is when the victim is made whole, Vengeance is violence against the criminal - these words should be enough for anyone to understand. Hell is violence, not justice. Forgiveness does nothing for the victim, that is not justice either & i think that might be a problem here - going against established religious ideas

As far as I can tell, the only one with established religious ideas is you...

Faith, not Religion, and i didn't realize it was a crime. What did your post achieve except for letting off steam? And oh i forgot, snap, this forum is titled - General Religion