US Christian Missionary endanger the lives of inhabitants on isolated Indian island

mace1229 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

mace1229 said:

PJ_Soul said:

mace1229 said:

PJ_Soul said:

mace1229 said:

PJ_Soul said:

mace1229 said:

PJ_Soul said:

If this guy didn't deserve to die then NOBODY does.

So someone trying to spread his religion deserves to die more than the dozens of people on death row for multiple intentional homicides? 

Nope, lol. SMH. I find it ridiculous that everyone's mind went to the DP when I said that. Silliness.

Also, did everyone suddenly lose their full grasp of the English language, when they thought my sentence means that this guy deserves death more than anyone else on earth? Wtf?

Well, you compared him to a rapist-burglar who gets shot in the head. I don't think its that big of a leap when you compare an unarmed missionary trying to share the Bible religion to a rapist. I'm not going to scroll up, but I'm pretty sure you said "no one deserves to die as much as him" or something very close to that.
SO with that being said, comparing him to a rapist, yeah, I can see why several on here are thinking that.

Well I made that comment before I mentioned a rapist, but I do stand by the comparison in any case, and am surprised that so few think it's apt. It tells me that most aren't really thinking about the perspective of the tribes people at all.

I've said I think the missionary was wrong and the tribe should be left alone.
But I consider a rapist one of the lowest people on earth. This guy was much better than that. He made a bad decision, but that decision had good intentions whether you agree with him or not.
I think saying he deserved this and comparing him to anyone bad, especially a rapist, is not accurate and overreaching. 

Okay then, murderer, just to avoid the subjective ideas about the seriousness of rape and the comparisons of it to the concepts driving colonization I suppose? So a MURDERER breaking into a family's home is comparable. Is that better for you? I'm not AT ALL talking about what this guy was like as a person. I'm talking only of the threat he posed to the tribe, in their minds. And I do still think that rapist is as good a comparison in that context as anything. 

I'm sure some slave traders had good intentions too btw. That doesn't seem like something that would have been very relevant to the slaves though, does it?

I don't like it because of the intent.
You talk about a murderer breaking into someone's home it implies he meant to hurt them.
Although he very well could have carried disease and viruses to kill these people, that is definitely no this intent. So  Ijust don't see the comparison between rapist or murderer.

I can't think of a single good intent a slave trader could have towards the slaves. Not ones that didn't involve freeing them.
And I think intent does matter. If a man sees a homeless guy and helps him build a fire to get through a freezing night, and that fire goes out of control and burns down a house with a family in it, would you treat him the same as an arson who intentionally burns down a house with a family inside?
The first guy definitely made a mistake, but I wouldn't compare him to the second. 
This guy made a mistake (and was very stupid) and paid a big price for it. And its a sad story. He doesn't deserve it though, not like someone going to the island to intentionally kill off these people.

his intent is irrelevant to the act of the tribespeople killing him. they don't know his intent. they don't care. if they care they may die. 

I think where this spiralled out of control is where she said the vague comment"nobody does". people got confused by that (and I still don't know who the "nobody" is in this context). and she doubled down on it. and here we are. 

I agree.
But I think it matters in terms of if he deserved it or not, and if he should be compared to a murderer/rapist or not. I saw several say he deserved it. I just can't understand why anyone would say he deserves this. Say its his own fault, he was stupid or careless. But he didn't deserve to get killed.

PJ_Soul said:

mace1229 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

mace1229 said:

PJ_Soul said:

mace1229 said:

PJ_Soul said:

mace1229 said:

PJ_Soul said:

mace1229 said:

PJ_Soul said:

If this guy didn't deserve to die then NOBODY does.

So someone trying to spread his religion deserves to die more than the dozens of people on death row for multiple intentional homicides? 

Nope, lol. SMH. I find it ridiculous that everyone's mind went to the DP when I said that. Silliness.

Also, did everyone suddenly lose their full grasp of the English language, when they thought my sentence means that this guy deserves death more than anyone else on earth? Wtf?

Well, you compared him to a rapist-burglar who gets shot in the head. I don't think its that big of a leap when you compare an unarmed missionary trying to share the Bible religion to a rapist. I'm not going to scroll up, but I'm pretty sure you said "no one deserves to die as much as him" or something very close to that.
SO with that being said, comparing him to a rapist, yeah, I can see why several on here are thinking that.

Well I made that comment before I mentioned a rapist, but I do stand by the comparison in any case, and am surprised that so few think it's apt. It tells me that most aren't really thinking about the perspective of the tribes people at all.

I've said I think the missionary was wrong and the tribe should be left alone.
But I consider a rapist one of the lowest people on earth. This guy was much better than that. He made a bad decision, but that decision had good intentions whether you agree with him or not.
I think saying he deserved this and comparing him to anyone bad, especially a rapist, is not accurate and overreaching. 

Okay then, murderer, just to avoid the subjective ideas about the seriousness of rape and the comparisons of it to the concepts driving colonization I suppose? So a MURDERER breaking into a family's home is comparable. Is that better for you? I'm not AT ALL talking about what this guy was like as a person. I'm talking only of the threat he posed to the tribe, in their minds. And I do still think that rapist is as good a comparison in that context as anything. 

I'm sure some slave traders had good intentions too btw. That doesn't seem like something that would have been very relevant to the slaves though, does it?

I don't like it because of the intent.
You talk about a murderer breaking into someone's home it implies he meant to hurt them.
Although he very well could have carried disease and viruses to kill these people, that is definitely no this intent. So  Ijust don't see the comparison between rapist or murderer.

I can't think of a single good intent a slave trader could have towards the slaves. Not ones that didn't involve freeing them.
And I think intent does matter. If a man sees a homeless guy and helps him build a fire to get through a freezing night, and that fire goes out of control and burns down a house with a family in it, would you treat him the same as an arson who intentionally burns down a house with a family inside?
The first guy definitely made a mistake, but I wouldn't compare him to the second. 
This guy made a mistake (and was very stupid) and paid a big price for it. And its a sad story. He doesn't deserve it though, not like someone going to the island to intentionally kill off these people.

his intent is irrelevant to the act of the tribespeople killing him. they don't know his intent. they don't care. if they care they may die. 

I think where this spiralled out of control is where she said the vague comment"nobody does". people got confused by that (and I still don't know who the "nobody" is in this context). and she doubled down on it. and here we are. 

I agree.
But I think it matters in terms of if he deserved it or not, and if he should be compared to a murderer/rapist or not. I saw several say he deserved it. I just can't understand why anyone would say he deserves this. Say its his own fault, he was stupid or careless. But he didn't deserve to get killed.

I guess you're interpreting the word different than I am then... You're using some kind of emotional interpretation of it. I'm using the word more objectively. He literally deserved it. He did something illegal that is known to be likely to get him killed, and, most importantly, that threatened the lives of a bunch of other people who are well known to defend themselves in that manner, which is half the reason approaching them is illegal in the first place. Therefore, he deserved the consequences of his actions. Kind of like someone who deliberately walks into the cage occupied by a starving wild tiger deserves to get mauled and eaten. Actions = consequence.

PJ_Soul said:

mace1229 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

mace1229 said:

PJ_Soul said:

mace1229 said:

PJ_Soul said:

mace1229 said:

PJ_Soul said:

mace1229 said:

PJ_Soul said:

If this guy didn't deserve to die then NOBODY does.

So someone trying to spread his religion deserves to die more than the dozens of people on death row for multiple intentional homicides? 

Nope, lol. SMH. I find it ridiculous that everyone's mind went to the DP when I said that. Silliness.

Also, did everyone suddenly lose their full grasp of the English language, when they thought my sentence means that this guy deserves death more than anyone else on earth? Wtf?

Well, you compared him to a rapist-burglar who gets shot in the head. I don't think its that big of a leap when you compare an unarmed missionary trying to share the Bible religion to a rapist. I'm not going to scroll up, but I'm pretty sure you said "no one deserves to die as much as him" or something very close to that.
SO with that being said, comparing him to a rapist, yeah, I can see why several on here are thinking that.

Well I made that comment before I mentioned a rapist, but I do stand by the comparison in any case, and am surprised that so few think it's apt. It tells me that most aren't really thinking about the perspective of the tribes people at all.

I've said I think the missionary was wrong and the tribe should be left alone.
But I consider a rapist one of the lowest people on earth. This guy was much better than that. He made a bad decision, but that decision had good intentions whether you agree with him or not.
I think saying he deserved this and comparing him to anyone bad, especially a rapist, is not accurate and overreaching. 

Okay then, murderer, just to avoid the subjective ideas about the seriousness of rape and the comparisons of it to the concepts driving colonization I suppose? So a MURDERER breaking into a family's home is comparable. Is that better for you? I'm not AT ALL talking about what this guy was like as a person. I'm talking only of the threat he posed to the tribe, in their minds. And I do still think that rapist is as good a comparison in that context as anything. 

I'm sure some slave traders had good intentions too btw. That doesn't seem like something that would have been very relevant to the slaves though, does it?

I don't like it because of the intent.
You talk about a murderer breaking into someone's home it implies he meant to hurt them.
Although he very well could have carried disease and viruses to kill these people, that is definitely no this intent. So  Ijust don't see the comparison between rapist or murderer.

I can't think of a single good intent a slave trader could have towards the slaves. Not ones that didn't involve freeing them.
And I think intent does matter. If a man sees a homeless guy and helps him build a fire to get through a freezing night, and that fire goes out of control and burns down a house with a family in it, would you treat him the same as an arson who intentionally burns down a house with a family inside?
The first guy definitely made a mistake, but I wouldn't compare him to the second. 
This guy made a mistake (and was very stupid) and paid a big price for it. And its a sad story. He doesn't deserve it though, not like someone going to the island to intentionally kill off these people.

his intent is irrelevant to the act of the tribespeople killing him. they don't know his intent. they don't care. if they care they may die. 

I think where this spiralled out of control is where she said the vague comment"nobody does". people got confused by that (and I still don't know who the "nobody" is in this context). and she doubled down on it. and here we are. 

I agree.
But I think it matters in terms of if he deserved it or not, and if he should be compared to a murderer/rapist or not. I saw several say he deserved it. I just can't understand why anyone would say he deserves this. Say its his own fault, he was stupid or careless. But he didn't deserve to get killed.

I guess you're interpreting the word different than I am then... You're using some kind of emotional interpretation of it. I'm using the word more objectively. He literally deserved it. He did something illegal that is known to be likely to get him killed, and, most importantly, that threatened the lives of a bunch of other people who are well known to defend themselves in that manner, which is half the reason approaching them is illegal in the first place. Therefore, he deserved the consequences of his actions. Kind of like someone who knowingly walks into a cage occupied by a starving wild tiger deserves to get mauled and eaten by the tiger. Actions = consequence.

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJ_Soul said:

mace1229 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

mace1229 said:

PJ_Soul said:

mace1229 said:

PJ_Soul said:

mace1229 said:

PJ_Soul said:

mace1229 said:

PJ_Soul said:

If this guy didn't deserve to die then NOBODY does.

So someone trying to spread his religion deserves to die more than the dozens of people on death row for multiple intentional homicides? 

Nope, lol. SMH. I find it ridiculous that everyone's mind went to the DP when I said that. Silliness.

Also, did everyone suddenly lose their full grasp of the English language, when they thought my sentence means that this guy deserves death more than anyone else on earth? Wtf?

Well, you compared him to a rapist-burglar who gets shot in the head. I don't think its that big of a leap when you compare an unarmed missionary trying to share the Bible religion to a rapist. I'm not going to scroll up, but I'm pretty sure you said "no one deserves to die as much as him" or something very close to that.
SO with that being said, comparing him to a rapist, yeah, I can see why several on here are thinking that.

Well I made that comment before I mentioned a rapist, but I do stand by the comparison in any case, and am surprised that so few think it's apt. It tells me that most aren't really thinking about the perspective of the tribes people at all.

I've said I think the missionary was wrong and the tribe should be left alone.
But I consider a rapist one of the lowest people on earth. This guy was much better than that. He made a bad decision, but that decision had good intentions whether you agree with him or not.
I think saying he deserved this and comparing him to anyone bad, especially a rapist, is not accurate and overreaching. 

Okay then, murderer, just to avoid the subjective ideas about the seriousness of rape and the comparisons of it to the concepts driving colonization I suppose? So a MURDERER breaking into a family's home is comparable. Is that better for you? I'm not AT ALL talking about what this guy was like as a person. I'm talking only of the threat he posed to the tribe, in their minds. And I do still think that rapist is as good a comparison in that context as anything. 

I'm sure some slave traders had good intentions too btw. That doesn't seem like something that would have been very relevant to the slaves though, does it?

I don't like it because of the intent.
You talk about a murderer breaking into someone's home it implies he meant to hurt them.
Although he very well could have carried disease and viruses to kill these people, that is definitely no this intent. So  Ijust don't see the comparison between rapist or murderer.

I can't think of a single good intent a slave trader could have towards the slaves. Not ones that didn't involve freeing them.
And I think intent does matter. If a man sees a homeless guy and helps him build a fire to get through a freezing night, and that fire goes out of control and burns down a house with a family in it, would you treat him the same as an arson who intentionally burns down a house with a family inside?
The first guy definitely made a mistake, but I wouldn't compare him to the second. 
This guy made a mistake (and was very stupid) and paid a big price for it. And its a sad story. He doesn't deserve it though, not like someone going to the island to intentionally kill off these people.

his intent is irrelevant to the act of the tribespeople killing him. they don't know his intent. they don't care. if they care they may die. 

I think where this spiralled out of control is where she said the vague comment"nobody does". people got confused by that (and I still don't know who the "nobody" is in this context). and she doubled down on it. and here we are. 

I agree.
But I think it matters in terms of if he deserved it or not, and if he should be compared to a murderer/rapist or not. I saw several say he deserved it. I just can't understand why anyone would say he deserves this. Say its his own fault, he was stupid or careless. But he didn't deserve to get killed.

I guess you're interpreting the word different than I am then... You're using some kind of emotional interpretation of it. I'm using the word more objectively. He literally deserved it. He did something illegal that is known to be likely to get him killed, and, most importantly, that threatened the lives of a bunch of other people who are well known to defend themselves in that manner, which is half the reason approaching them is illegal in the first place. Therefore, he deserved the consequences of his actions. Kind of like someone who knowingly walks into a cage occupied by a starving wild tiger deserves to get mauled and eaten by the tiger. Actions = consequence.

no, deserve literally means "do something or have or show qualities worthy of (reward or punishment)." to me, someone doing something ignorant doesn't "deserve" to die. and no, that's not "emotional". that's using the definition literally and objectively. 

HughFreakingDillon said:

speaking as someone who despises those who try to convert others, I don't consider trying to spread the word of who he thinks saved his soul is worthy of death, but that's just me. that sounds like middle east type shit. 

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJ_Soul said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

speaking as someone who despises those who try to convert others, I don't consider trying to spread the word of who he thinks saved his soul is worthy of death, but that's just me. that sounds like middle east type shit. 

You're hinting that I've got a jihadist's mentality? It's like you're avoiding the nuance of what I'm saying on purpose or something, lol.

Obviously there is a huge difference between, "He deserved to die for purposefully doing something that predictably caused his death" and "He is worthy of death for his beliefs." I know you know that.

that's also not what I said/inferred. 

I know you know that. 

I'm saying I don't agree that what he was doing had a natural consequence of death. 

HughFreakingDillon said:

worthy is a synonym for deserve. 

that is an insane leap to make. but ok. 

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJ_Soul said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

worthy is a synonym for deserve. 

that is an insane leap to make. but ok. 

I just told you that I took it as a loaded word. You know, context? That word along with the middle east reference... yeah, there is context there IMO, if I didn't see it I wouldn't have commented. I mean, if that's not what you meant, then you meant what? Nothing at all?

Dude... discussing something with dictionary definitions and ignoring context doesn't generally lend itself to any kind of decent discussion, don't you think?

yeah, and I just told you, you took it wrong.

I'm not ignoring context. I didn't mean it that way. it wasn't "loaded" in my mind when I typed it. But I guess I'm wrong about my own intentions. 

didn't you recently bitch about this place being too sensitive lately?

you don't like dictionary definitions when there was, at your insistence, different interpretations of the word being used and claimed you were using the word more "objectively" than anyone else?

alrighty.

What? I'm not being sensitive. I'm not mad or anything like that, or taking anything personally. I'm just telling you how your comment came off, for good reason.

LongestRoad said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

LongestRoad said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

LongestRoad said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

LongestRoad said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

LongestRoad said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

LongestRoad said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

LongestRoad said:

oftenreading said:

LongestRoad said:

my2hands said:

This is a perfect example of "shit white people do"... dude paddled up with a bible & cross lol

Lol, you managed to be a bigot and make a racist statement. I’m glad we get to read everyone’s real thoughts on immigration. 

In what way do you think responses to this story reflect posters’ opinions on immigration, given that it is about a completely different issue? 

It’s not different in the least. Someone was attempting to go to a land. They weren’t welcome. The people there believed that the alien may have come to take over their way of life or to harm them or put stress on their people. They made sure it didn’t happen. You all (most) believe they were right in what they did.

Are you high? 

No, sorry I don’t partake. Maybe I should so I can block out the hypocrisy I see from all of us. I have to pass on it though. 

There is no hypocrisy on display here in this thread. Your analogy was poorly constructed.

This idiot wasn’t even looking to immigrate so the scenarios can’t even be compared for one. And if he was... well then the two situations still aren’t comparable. At all.

Oh, they are. Just like saying the Indians should have kept the Europeans out of North America. 

No.

You're being silly now.

For the record (and without a doubt), if the Indians had known what was ahead for them... they should have met the European invasion with as much force as they could muster. Saying this is not suggesting I am apologizing for my existence- I'm not.

Is that why we’re sending troops to the border? For what might be???? 

I am assuming so. You’re worried that a caravan of broken Honduran people fleeing the violence of their home country is the first step in the decimation of the US people.

No?

You all seem to be the ones against immigration. I was just pointing out hypocrisy. 

No you are not pointing out hypocrisy -- you show your own problems with connecting dots and thinking out analogys.

No, I can connect the dots that some people refuse to acknowledge. Read what’s written. 

the caravan is not an invasion. 
most here are not against legal immigration or claiming asylum
the christian was SEEN by the inhabitants of the island as an invasion, and was dealt with accordingly. and whether you wish to acknowledge it or not, his intent is irrelevant to whether he was actually an invader or not. he most likely did not intend to infect them with bacteria we are immune to. but that's what he very likely could have done. 
they didn't know he was christian. they don't fucking know what a christian even is. I would have the same non-feelings towards the guy had he been an ahtiest going there to peddle his Scientific ways. 

An invasion. Armed with a Bible.