• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

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

If you can change the definitions of words like marriage to give everyone equality then surely bachelors can call themselves 'married'.
And bats can be called birds.
And atheism can be called a religion.
And Pluto can be called a planet.
Pluto is clearly a dog!
 
The definition of words change all the time.
 
If you can change the definitions of words like marriage to give everyone equality then surely bachelors can call themselves 'married'.
And bats can be called birds.
And atheism can be called a religion.
And Pluto can be called a planet.

It is not possible, or at least practical, to "give everyone equality." At some point, we have to draw lines, set boundaries, make laws and enforce laws, punish violators, etc. We just disagree with fundies about where to set those lines. It should not be based on whichever gender you are attracted to.

Besides, there is nothing inherently wrong with making changes to definitions, or making changes to anything. That is how we make improvement and increase our prosperity, by being willing to change what we are currently doing to something else that is better.

Brian
 
So, how do *you* define "justice"? In the example above, what do you think justice would look like?

Assume you were driving and drove over a mail box - some property - Vengeance would be that guy taking his car and driving over your mail box - your property.
Justice would be for you to pay for a new mail box
Hollywood loves Vengeance - kill Bill movies and the like were built on Vengeance

The ideas are not that complicated
But when it comes to religions we blindly repeat primitive ideas born when life was much different - lots more violent, when justice was unheard of, when things were settled with fists and violence
When it comes to religion, we have no evolved at all!

So, justice is the replacement of something lost, a return to the state before a harm was done?
 
If you can change the definitions of words like marriage to give everyone equality then surely bachelors can call themselves 'married'.
And bats can be called birds.
And atheism can be called a religion.
And Pluto can be called a planet.

Yes, but the question is: is that a *useful* thing to do? What is gained by calling bats birds? Or the other suggestions you give.
 
So, justice is the replacement of something lost, a return to the state before a harm was done?
Is it still justice if someone else replaces the lost item? If the driver is a teen and his day personally digs the hole for the new mailbox, is that justice?
Or if the driver's insurance pays for the new mailbox, is that justice?
Or if the post office regularly replaces and upgrades mail boxes, and installs a new one, is that still justice?

Because if justice is just the replacement/restoration, that's one thing. If the person who did the damage MUST be the one to do the replacement, that's more vengeance, not justice.

I think you're right, Shadow, we would need an actual definition of 'justice' and 'vengeance,' not just examples.
 
Vengeance: Whatever makes the victim of a bad deed feel better about it.
Justice: Whatever makes society at large feel better about the resolution of a bad deed.

Yore welcome!
</facetious>
 
Justice: Whatever makes society at large feel better about the resolution of a bad deed.
And if society wants the perp to suffer, then we can have both.
I'm thinking of Ford pardoning Nixon before the nation got their pound of flesh... We got neither.
 
Reincarnation appears to require a Cosmic accountant weighing up each act ever performed in terms of ethical value, then orchestrating the event of the World in order bring about balance between wrongs that were done and, presumably, lessons to be taught. Except the players cannot know what these associations are because there is no immediate or obvious connection to be made.

Not really - there is no accountant sitting in the sky and adding up debits and credits - bad things don't happen to you because you did bad things in the previous life - that is a wrong view. Take a look at my post on 9/1 - my answer to steve jobs coming back as a chinese worker - that should give you an idea
 
Vengeance: Whatever makes the victim of a bad deed feel better about it.
Justice: Whatever makes society at large feel better about the resolution of a bad deed.

Yore welcome!
</facetious>

Vengeance is quick, violent and accompanied by hate and anger
Justice is slow, non-violent and there is absence of hate and anger

Justice is about the victim and the dominant religions like Christianity and Islam do not even mention that person. God and the Criminal have a confab and decide the criminal gets to go enjoy heaven - the victim is twice-raped

If your kid breaks his friends toy in a fit of anger - asking that other kid to come and break your kid's fav toy is vengeance
Buying a new toy for the friend coming out of your kids allowance is justice - notice the lack of violence

This is where Gandhiji's brilliance shone thru - he asked for Justice and MLK and Mandela followed in his footsteps - they too asked for Justice not Vengeance
 
Vengeance is quick, violent and accompanied by hate and anger
Justice is slow, non-violent and there is absence of hate and anger
Then 'Kill Bill' was not vengeance. It took the Bride quite a bit of time to track down her targets. It wasn't quick.
Justice is about the victim and the dominant religions like Christianity and Islam do not even mention that person.
That's not true. If a girl is raped, the Bible tells us that her father must be paid the virgin price, despite the fact that the rapist took the virginity and decreased the girl's value. That's all about the victim, the girl's father.
If your kid breaks his friends toy in a fit of anger - asking that other kid to come and break your kid's fav toy is vengeance
Buying a new toy for the friend coming out of your kids allowance is justice - notice the lack of violence
Ah. But does it HAVE to come out of the kid's allowance? Does the kid who perpetrated the crime HAVE to suffer in order for there to be justice?
This is where Gandhiji's brilliance shone thru - he asked for Justice and MLK and Mandela followed in his footsteps - they too asked for Justice not Vengeance
Still waiting for an actual definition of either term, not just qualities associated with them, or illustrative anecdotes.
 
Part of Justice is seeing it served. Feeling it served. Reincarnation does not do this. It doesn't rescue justice, it just kicks the can down the road, as all religions do.
 
Assume you were driving and drove over a mail box - some property - Vengeance would be that guy taking his car and driving over your mail box - your property.
Justice would be for you to pay for a new mail box
Hollywood loves Vengeance - kill Bill movies and the like were built on Vengeance

The ideas are not that complicated
But when it comes to religions we blindly repeat primitive ideas born when life was much different - lots more violent, when justice was unheard of, when things were settled with fists and violence
When it comes to religion, we have no evolved at all!

So, justice is the replacement of something lost, a return to the state before a harm was done?

Vengeance = Uncivilized; Justice = Civilized

Basically instead of settling things with fists(Hell) you settle it civilly. Justice is when the victim is made whole - some cases like murder or pedophilia that is hard to do but something like a broken gate can be repaired. Saying the criminal is being tortured in Hell does nothing for the victim, of course what they don't mention is that God will nicely forgive you if you just repent. And what are the choices? Like saying, "we will give you a million dollars(Heaven) if you repent, but if you don't we will shoot you in the leg(Hell)" - amazing that no one points out these cheap tactics

- - - Updated - - -

Part of Justice is seeing it served. Feeling it served. Reincarnation does not do this. It doesn't rescue justice, it just kicks the can down the road, as all religions do.

??? a bit wishy-washy there aren't you? What does that mean exactly? In the case of a little girl who was abducted, raped and killed - this actually happened in Minnesota - please explain all this talk of seeing and feeling served using her as an example
 
Then 'Kill Bill' was not vengeance. It took the Bride quite a bit of time to track down her targets. It wasn't quick.
Justice is about the victim and the dominant religions like Christianity and Islam do not even mention that person.
That's not true. If a girl is raped, the Bible tells us that her father must be paid the virgin price, despite the fact that the rapist took the virginity and decreased the girl's value. That's all about the victim, the girl's father.
If your kid breaks his friends toy in a fit of anger - asking that other kid to come and break your kid's fav toy is vengeance
Buying a new toy for the friend coming out of your kids allowance is justice - notice the lack of violence
Ah. But does it HAVE to come out of the kid's allowance? Does the kid who perpetrated the crime HAVE to suffer in order for there to be justice?
This is where Gandhiji's brilliance shone thru - he asked for Justice and MLK and Mandela followed in his footsteps - they too asked for Justice not Vengeance
Still waiting for an actual definition of either term, not just qualities associated with them, or illustrative anecdotes.

Vengeance is an eye for an eye, you killed mine i will kill yours - that is how we have so much gang violence
Vengeance is quick, violent and very uncivilized
Justice is slow, non-violent and civilized

In the Kill Bill movie did she get her life back? She was going to be married, have kids, a family - all that was robbed off her. Killing all those people does nothing. And as for being not so quick - you do realize they are making a movie, right? Killing them all in the first few minutes - what will they have for the next two hours?

Basically if you have a misfortune you have a choice - someone runs over your dog - you can either take your car and run over that other guy's dog or accept his apologies and get a new dog. Not that it will replace what has been lost but it is a better way

As for the Kid suffering - well yes, if he did not wouldn't you be pointing it out as a problem? There are consequences to every action - the point is that what needs to be done with criminals. Say someone robbed you of your money - would you rather see that person suffer(Hell, Vengeance) or get your money back with interest and an apology?(Reincarnation, Justice)
 
So, justice is the replacement of something lost, a return to the state before a harm was done?
Is it still justice if someone else replaces the lost item? If the driver is a teen and his day personally digs the hole for the new mailbox, is that justice?
Or if the driver's insurance pays for the new mailbox, is that justice?
Or if the post office regularly replaces and upgrades mail boxes, and installs a new one, is that still justice?

Because if justice is just the replacement/restoration, that's one thing. If the person who did the damage MUST be the one to do the replacement, that's more vengeance, not justice.

I think you're right, Shadow, we would need an actual definition of 'justice' and 'vengeance,' not just examples.

"If the person who did the damage MUST be the one to do the replacement, that's more vengeance, not justice" - excuse me? You made a mess, should you get to walk away or should you be the person cleaning it up
I think your opposition to this idea is based on religion - your religion teaches vengeance not justice, that's the problem

- - - Updated - - -

If you can change the definitions of words like marriage to give everyone equality then surely bachelors can call themselves 'married'.
And bats can be called birds.
And atheism can be called a religion.
And Pluto can be called a planet.

It is not possible, or at least practical, to "give everyone equality." At some point, we have to draw lines, set boundaries, make laws and enforce laws, punish violators, etc. We just disagree with fundies about where to set those lines. It should not be based on whichever gender you are attracted to.

Besides, there is nothing inherently wrong with making changes to definitions, or making changes to anything. That is how we make improvement and increase our prosperity, by being willing to change what we are currently doing to something else that is better.

Brian

Exactly! What next give blacks and women equal rights? Religious people i dare say have the lowest morals - still stuck in medieval times just like their religion

- - - Updated - - -

If you can change the definitions of words like marriage to give everyone equality then surely bachelors can call themselves 'married'.
And bats can be called birds.
And atheism can be called a religion.
And Pluto can be called a planet.

Imagine blacks and women asking for equal rights - the horror! People like you live in a primitive world made by religion
 
It's easy to win a debate when we present both sides of the argument.

There is always a little confusion about justice, forgiveness, and mercy, in this kind of discussion. As Hamlet said, " Use every man after his desert, and who should ’scape whipping?"

Justice, as presented in the OP is an Earthly quantity and all the grace in heaven can't excuse a person from justice. Some of the most pious and surely heaven bound Christians I have ever met, are serving life without parole. The idea that God metes out justice for the living, is a human conceit.
 
Originally posted by Ramaraksha:
??? a bit wishy-washy there aren't you? What does that mean exactly? In the case of a little girl who was abducted, raped and killed - this actually happened in Minnesota - please explain all this talk of seeing and feeling served using her as an example

Wishy washy? I don't see how. The little girl is obviously not going to see justice done. She's dead. What about her loved ones? How does making claims that in another life (whether that be heaven or with reincarnation) she'll receive justice. Part of justice is seeing it in action. Knowing the killer will not be able to harm others. Reincarnated justice is just another claim by another religion which is unsubstantiated. Even if reincarnation were real, you don't remember your past life, therefore there's really no way to learn from your past, your mistakes, or feel that justice has been served. You may as well be another person for all the good reincarnation does you.

Try to think about it as if you're an outsider to your own religion.
 
Reincarnation appears to require a Cosmic accountant weighing up each act ever performed in terms of ethical value, then orchestrating the event of the World in order bring about balance between wrongs that were done and, presumably, lessons to be taught. Except the players cannot know what these associations are because there is no immediate or obvious connection to be made.

Not really - there is no accountant sitting in the sky and adding up debits and credits - bad things don't happen to you because you did bad things in the previous life - that is a wrong view. Take a look at my post on 9/1 - my answer to steve jobs coming back as a chinese worker - that should give you an idea

I wasn't responding to what you said. I made a general comment. Some believe both, that karma works over multiple lifetimes and during one's current lifetime. Either way, assuming karma is true, there has to be a connection and means of balance between seemingly disconnected events, hence my comment about a cosmic accountant.....which is not meant to suggest a literal little balding guy with a stack of ledgers on his desk.
 
Vengeance is an eye for an eye, you killed mine i will kill yours - that is how we have so much gang violence
Nicely oversimplified.
Vengeance is quick, violent and very uncivilized
Again with the 'quick.'

And, again, not a definition. Just a subjective assessment.
In the Kill Bill movie did she get her life back?
You didn't say anything about 'getting your life back' in your descriptions of vengeance. is that a part of it?

Can we, at any point, get an actual definition of what you mean by vengeance other than a sense of superiority?
And as for being not so quick - you do realize they are making a movie, right?
Hey, YOU are the one offering a movie as an illustration of your point, it's not my fault if your illustration does not illustrate your point. It's actually your problem if the illustration FAILS to get your point across.

How about instead of an analogy, look up what a definition is?
Basically if you have a misfortune you have a choice - someone runs over your dog - you can either take your car and run over that other guy's dog or accept his apologies and get a new dog. Not that it will replace what has been lost but it is a better way
Wait. _I_ get a new dog? Is that justice if _I_ replace the dog or does he have to be the one to get me a new dog?
As for the Kid suffering - well yes, if he did not wouldn't you be pointing it out as a problem?
I'm just trying to understand your effort to describe vengeance and justice with incomplete anecdotes and assumptions.
You haven't said whether suffering was key. You were JUST saying that restoring shit is what makes it justice. NOW you want the criminal to suffer in order to restore shit.
How is that different? Seems to me that if justice is 'getting your shit back' (New mailbox, new dog, or now 'getting your life back' when you're Uma Thurman), then why is it crucial that the person who took it suffers? Because that desire does seem, to me, to be vengeance, not justice.
There are consequences to every action - the point is that what needs to be done with criminals.
So, 'punishment' is part of your definition of justice? Then why can't 'Hell' be part of justice?
Say someone robbed you of your money - would you rather
Never mind what I would rather. Let's establish what you're trying to say, first. You're not painting a very clear picture.
 
Back
Top Bottom