- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: If you choose to expose yourself to risk, don't you deserve the consequence?
Posted on 5/9/16 at 9:36 am to NYNolaguy1
Posted on 5/9/16 at 9:36 am to NYNolaguy1
quote:
If you choose to expose yourself to risk shouldnt you take ownership of the outcome and acknowledge the other potential outcomes?
1
Posted on 5/9/16 at 9:41 am to Kujo
quote:i can get on board with this idea
no speed limit either
Posted on 5/9/16 at 9:48 am to Kujo
quote:
No, seeing the thumb marks on their arms makes me chuckle, what did/do you see in him?
You think domestic abuse is funny????
WTF is wrong with you?
Posted on 5/9/16 at 9:49 am to Theboot32
quote:
My wife thinks that saying what we are saying is blaming the victim, which isnt cool. I'm not blaming the victim, i just think the victim is a poor decision maker.
It's a fine line to say the least. At the end of the day, if a person is murdered because he walks through a bad part of town in 2016 America, I don't want to say or do anything that deflects blame from that part of town.
In other words, I think you can argue that some of these problems get swept under the rug when we say the victim should have been more diligent or made better choices. How about we do something about the fact that there are places in major American cities where you can reasonably expect to be murdered just for entering.
Posted on 5/9/16 at 10:00 am to Kujo
I have a different take on this. I don't like to use the term "deserve". It sounds too much like a participation award. I prefer "earned". Notwithstanding the issues of murder and domestic abuse which nobody should suffer, if you are engaging in risky ventures, whether personal or financial, you have earned the consequences. Whether or not these are good or bad, you earned these.
Posted on 5/9/16 at 10:51 am to lsunurse
quote:
ou think domestic abuse is funny????
WTF is wrong with you?
Yes, I think it's hilarious if the dude has a New Iberia/Cesar haircut.
Really, he was your choice? You earned the shite out of that beatin!
Think if some engineer courts a tramp stamp, thigh tatoo, type girl.....when she gets half....I'm laughing my arse off!
This post was edited on 5/9/16 at 10:53 am
Posted on 5/9/16 at 11:12 am to Kujo
quote:
If you choose to expose yourself to risk, don't you deserve the consequence?
I don't know what you personally deserve, but this post deserves a reply.
Your question is poorly worded and vague, and the implication-- that people should not take risks because of potentially bad consequences (that you think they deserve?!)-- makes you sound like a judgmental little pussy.
As others have said, the opposite of many of your examples could be equally true. For example, if you prefer... say, a BMW convertible to a Toyota Camry... the enjoyment you get from that car might far outweigh the small chance that you're more likely to have a maintenance problem... someday... maybe.
Even Jesus is in disagreement with you. In the parable of the talents, the guy who puts the talents to work (takes risks) and profits is commended; the man who risks nothing and hides his in the ground is condemned. To make anything of yourself in this life, you have to risk something and take a stand. Be hot or cold.
As KG6 said in his post on page 1: "Just take care of your responsibility, no matter how stupid a decision it was to take it on." That's the key. Risk is necessary; just take responsibility and be accountable however things shake out... But there's another part to it. Don't be self-righteous and rush to judge others. How much better would the world be if everyone just took care of their own business and didn't rush to judge the mistakes of others. I don't know if you're an SJW or not... but your post sounds like you think you know what's best for others and you want them to suffer for things you don't have (per your examples, that would be a nice car, sex and recreational enjoyment of various things). This reeks of the passive aggressive, judgmental douche-baggery that fuels most, if not all, SJW causes; hateful weakness parading as fairness, seeking not to build anything but to tear it all down and impose its own tyranny.
fwiw, I think your opinion is stupid and I'm telling you why, but I have no desire to see you suffer (this is where we seem to differ). I'd prefer you grow up to enjoy your own life a little more and become a better neighbor to others. To randomly judge others and wish ill upon them directly suggests you are not happy.
Posted on 5/9/16 at 11:30 am to epbart
quote:
Even Jesus is in disagreement with you.
Jesus agrees about the law being applied to anyone who violates it though. Jesus was executed for violating the law. It was a just and righteous execution and no one should pretend that Jesus didn't deserve to die. Jesus should've worked to change the law if he disagreed with it instead of violating it.
Same thing with, say, Spartacus, Thomas More, William Tyndale, or Jan Hus. I've always said George Washington and all the founding fathers should've been hanged for treason. No respect for the law.
Posted on 5/9/16 at 11:56 am to Kujo
quote:
don't you deserve
So much in politics and current political thought is based on the idea of "enforcing Karma." It seems that there is a need in certain risk averse people to see people who take risks suffer the bad consequences of taking the risk. They just never to see themselves suffer any such consequences.
After all, if you choose to drive your family to Florida instead of flying, don't you "deserve" to get in a wreck, lose them all, survive and suffer a spinal injury, remaining a quadraplegic for the remainder of your life?
If you choose to not graduate high school, get a low paying job that doesn't offer health insurance, don't you deserve to die if you get a condition that you can't afford to be treated for?
quote:This is sort of a false dichotomy. It's really neither. It's just people being self-righteous and wanting bad things to happen to others who make different choices so that the self-righteous can feel validated.
It's not schadenfreude, it's the concept that they were not responsible for the bad that happened and are not "shamed", thus creating a platform for recidivism.
Posted on 5/9/16 at 12:05 pm to biglego
quote:
Jesus agrees about the law being applied to anyone who violates it though. Jesus was executed for violating the law.
Both true and ironic since he also says:
"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them."
He broke the letter of the law in order to fulfill the letter of the law (and the spirit of it) as described by the prophets who preceded him. A paradox in a way, but not when seen as a parable (of which he was fond). Jesus followed the recipe book to be messiah down to every last known detail; if it was foretold, he did it.
Also consider, Pilate found him not guilty of breaking Roman law and wanted to set him free before capitulating to the pharisaical mob (who remember, were said to be bearing false witness against him) and washing his hands of the matter. And further, if I'm not mistaken, about the only charge that stuck was that he presented himself as 'son of God'-- a blasphemy if he wasn't. But if he was, what was he guilty of?
Lastly, it was the same hateful, hard-heartedness which I'm calling Kujo out on, that drove those biblical events.
Posted on 5/9/16 at 12:05 pm to BiggerBear
quote:
So much in politics and current political thought is based on the idea of "enforcing Karma." It seems that there is a need in certain risk averse people to see people who take risks suffer the bad consequences of taking the risk. They just never to see themselves suffer any such consequences.
After all, if you choose to drive your family to Florida instead of flying, don't you "deserve" to get in a wreck, lose them all, survive and suffer a spinal injury, remaining a quadraplegic for the remainder of your life?
Well put. Similarly, do you deserve to die if you join the military?
The bottom line is that people should be sympathetic within reason - there is no black and white answer. You cannot equate having all your investments in penny stocks to walking down the sidewalk in a bad part of town. In one situation you are taking on a risk/reward decision that should compensate you accordingly over the long run, but you can get burned as well. That is an acceptable trade off. In the other, there are no acceptable outcomes that end with murder, assault, or being mugged. No one who is innocently walking down an American street deserves that, ever.
If you heard the story about the Tulane student and thought "play stupid games, win stupid prizes", then you should probably see a psychologist.
Posted on 5/9/16 at 12:11 pm to BiggerBear
quote:
It's just people being self-righteous and wanting bad things to happen to others who make different choices so that the self-righteous can feel validated.
Is that how you see it?
What I'm saying is that if the "bad choices" aren't emphasized then they are more likely to repeat themselves.
Everyone else is making excuses for them and saying that the "event" was just a one off.
Sorry Honey, he was just a bad felon, not all felons are bad. And the only reason he was bad is because judgmental pricks discriminate against people with face tattoos. If they gave him a good job, then he wouldn't have had to steal all those ipads.
Posted on 5/9/16 at 12:12 pm to slackster
I just think you are a sociopath if you think other people's true suffering (violence, disease, debilitating conditions, etc) is a source of comedy to you. You clearly lack the capacity to feel compassion and empathy towards others.
I mean I get that many on here act "hard" cause it's a message board and they want to elicit approval and attention from others. But I really hope many of them don't ACTUALLY feel that way.
I mean I get that many on here act "hard" cause it's a message board and they want to elicit approval and attention from others. But I really hope many of them don't ACTUALLY feel that way.
Posted on 5/9/16 at 12:17 pm to lsunurse
quote:
I just think you are a sociopath if you think other people's true suffering (violence, disease, debilitating conditions, etc) is a source of comedy to you.
Medical workers have the most morbid senses of humor
Posted on 5/9/16 at 12:21 pm to Topwater Trout
Many times that is a coping mechanism to deal with all the fricked up stuff they see at work. When you deal with death and dying, and the unfairness that disease and injuries bring to others on a regular basis....you have to find a way to deal with it so you can do your job. Otherwise you will breakdown and become incapable of helping others.
However, it's not like Kujo saying he laughs when he sees a woman with bruises on her arm.
However, it's not like Kujo saying he laughs when he sees a woman with bruises on her arm.
Posted on 5/9/16 at 12:25 pm to slackster
quote:
That is an acceptable trade off
and what's the industry standard for acceptability?
I only use this as an example:
Say only 30% of a certain demographic is actively involved in first 10 years of their child's life and another demographic is at 75%....if you were to choose a demographic to have a child with, which logically would you choose?
If you become a single parent and you chose someone from the lower probability demographic should I have more/less/equal sympathy for you if you were to have chosen someone from the higher probability union?
Was there an acceptable trade-off...or just the assumption of an unnecessary risk?
Also, if demand for the lower probability investment decreased...wouldn't that investment need to yield a higher rate of return to have logical people re-invest in them?
Posted on 5/9/16 at 12:26 pm to Kujo
When I think of "deserve" as an adjective to describe someone I tend to think of someone that worked hard to achieve a goal as being deserving of an honors they then receive. In a negative way, I think people are deserving of consequences when they have a pattern of misbehaving.
Simply making a poor choice does not mean that someone deserves the worst possible outcome. My reasoning is that we all have different abilities to not only perceive risk but to tolerate it. Therefore it's hard to criticize someone's decision when you don't know all of the variables it took for that person to make it.
Simply making a poor choice does not mean that someone deserves the worst possible outcome. My reasoning is that we all have different abilities to not only perceive risk but to tolerate it. Therefore it's hard to criticize someone's decision when you don't know all of the variables it took for that person to make it.
Posted on 5/9/16 at 12:28 pm to Kujo
I agree that one should be deemed to have accepted the risks and potential consequences and those same consequences shouldn't be whitewashed. But the word "deserve" doesn't quite sit right, although I understand the intent and still agree with the spirit of the message.
Posted on 5/9/16 at 12:34 pm to lsunurse
quote:
it's not like Kujo saying he laughs when he sees a woman with bruises on her arm.
agreed
Posted on 5/9/16 at 12:36 pm to lsunurse
quote:
However, it's not like Kujo saying he laughs when he sees a woman with bruises on her arm.
you see them as innocent flowers?
Watch more COPS
question: If Hitler beat Eva Braun...did she deserve it for living the life of luxury by going out with a dude who was responsible for the deaths of millions? Of she was just an innocent flower who knew nothing?
This post was edited on 5/9/16 at 12:41 pm
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News