|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 66 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,473 Year: 3,730/9,624 Month: 601/974 Week: 214/276 Day: 54/34 Hour: 0/2 |
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 357 days) Posts: 438 From: Tempe, Az. Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: A measured look at a difficult situation | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1466 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
The question was whether you would consider it legitimate, not whether you'd be forced to comply with it. But the question was rhetorical, of course you wouldn't think it legitimate. But there are different meanings to the word "legitimate." If they've conquered the US and are running things, then their law is legitimate in the sense that it's the law of the land. Which is what I meant when I said I might have to, accept it as legitimate, I mean. In the other sense of whether I consider it a just law, no, and if it conflicts with God's Law I'd have to disobey it. That doesn't stop it from being the law of the land. The context here is Ireland's being run by England. The Irish didn't and don't like it but if the English have the power and are running things then they are the legitimate authority. Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9143 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.3 |
It truly is amazing how you condemn any catholic violence, but justify all protestant violence. You have a total unwillingness to look at the actual facts behind the history of Ireland.
Did you not support James interpretation of the divine right of kings on another thread? Why are you not supportive of that right by other kings? Your blanket dismissal of English violence against the men, women and children of Ireland is truly abhorrent. But not surprising considering the amorality you have expressed in the past.Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts "God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1466 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Obviously you know a lot about the history of Ireland, and as I said there are always going to be complexities in such a situation, even the alliance of Protestants with Catholics for certain purposes. Not all the problems are religious.
I can't believe Cromwell could have invaded if he hadn't been sent by some legitimate authority, that doesn't make sense. From the Irish point of view things are going to look different than from the English point of view and I'd rather just leave it at that.' But it's the religious problems that I've had in mind from the beginning, not the political problems, and where those dominate my impression is that it's Catholic aggression against Protestant victims and not the other way around, and this is because of the RCC's sense of its right to rule the world. This can get buried under local political issues but wherever it's dominant that's what I'd expect to see.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1466 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
It truly is amazing how you condemn any catholic violence, but justify all protestant violence. You have a total unwillingness to look at the actual facts behind the history of Ireland. What ARE you talking about? Blanket accusations really don't communicate anything, please be specific, I have NO idea what you mean.
Did you not support James interpretation of the divine right of kings on another thread? Why are you not supportive of that right by other kings? Huh? I did not "support" the idea of the divine right of kings, let alone support it for one king and not another. What ARE you talking about? Please go back and read what I actually said. I gave a reason why James 1 insisted on it that is a tad different from what is normally thought: that it was necessary to counter the Pope's claims to dominate kings. That doesn't make it right in itself and I didn't say it did. And besides, what does this concept in the abstract have to do with what we are talking about? Where have I justified any actual aggression against anybody on the basis of the divine right of kings? You seem to delight in making up stuff out of thin air to accuse me of.
Your blanket dismissal of English violence against the men, women and children of Ireland is truly abhorrent. But not surprising considering the amorality you have expressed in the past. "Dismissal of English violence?" I'm sorry, I thought I was making a distinction between a legitimate military action to put a stop to a rebellion as against a foul (Irish Catholic) rebellion that outright murdered defenseless Protestants. As I've often pointed out there seems to be a tendency here to refuse to distinguish between murder and necessary force. The "amorality" is on your side, your confusion of good for evil and evil for good,. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9504 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 4.8 |
Faith writes: In the other sense of whether I consider it a just law, no, and if it conflicts with God's Law I'd have to disobey it. Exactly, you would see it as unfair and you would feel you couldn't comply with it.Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android "Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved." - Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1466 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
In the other sense of whether I consider it a just law, no, and if it conflicts with God's Law I'd have to disobey it.
Exactly, you would see it as unfair and you would feel you couldn't comply with it. Sorry, I think I confused you. My not considering it a just law would not be reason to disobey it. If it's the law of the land, whether I consider it just or not, I'd expect to have to obey it. It's only if it conflicts with God's law as spelled out in the Bible that I'd be obliged to disobey it, such as if it required me to bow down to Allah. In that case I'd expect to be punished. A law's being unfair doesn't make it illegitimate. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Heathen Member (Idle past 1305 days) Posts: 1067 From: Brizzle Joined: |
and where those dominate my impression is that it's Catholic aggression against Protestant victims and not the other way around
And in this you've demonstrated your complete ignorance on this subject.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1466 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Reading through some Wikipedia articles I see that the history is way more complex than I want to try to take in. The irish Rebellion in which Protestants were murdered was in 1641, and the English reponse to it was not led by Cromwell. He led another military action in 1649 against some other incident. This is way beyond the context I started out with. It's the Irish Rebellion itself that simply outright murdered unarmed Protestants that I was saying was specifically a Catholic action, and whatever military action came in to put it down I'd have to consider just.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1466 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Complete ignorance of the political situation, yes, but if you keep confusing English military action with Protestantism you are the one confusing things. The Irish Rebellion as I've seen it described was the stripping naked of defenseless Protestants and driving them into the snow to die. That's not a military action and it's specifically Catholic against Protestant.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9143 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.3 |
That is correct sorry. You have a very odd view of this. That it wasn't a divine right of kings, but that kings needed to get back authority that the pope some how had taken from them.
It all boils down to1. Catholics bad Protestants good 2. Conqueror goodTrying to throw off conqueror bad 3. American Revolution GoodIrish revolution bad See 1 4. If Protestant vs Protestant violence than one side(decided by Faith) is obviously not true Protestant. 5. Winner is always good. Unless of course they are not Protestants, then the Jesuits were behind it. Anything else we need to add to Faith's rules of history? BTW, have you even tried reading anything about Irish history to learn the reasons for the Irish rebellions?Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts "God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Larni Member Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined:
|
Their authority was legitimate because they WERE in power. So if Sharia law was forced upon America through armed conflict after a declaration of war and subsequent occupation Sharia law would be legitimate from your perspective? All the best.The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer. -Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53 The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286 Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Heathen Member (Idle past 1305 days) Posts: 1067 From: Brizzle Joined: |
nonsense, and even the most cursory of investigations makes that clear
Irish Rebellion of 1798 - Wikipedia The prospect of reform inspired a small group of Protestant liberals in Belfast to found the Society of United Irishmen in 1791
So the rebels were founded by protestant liberals.(note: Daniel O connell the leader of catholic emancipation was a protestant) The Establishment ... used tactics including house burnings, torture of captives, pitchcapping and murder, particularly in Ulster as it was the one area of Ireland where large numbers of Catholics and Protestants (mainly Presbyterians) had effected common cause. the notion of sectarianism was used by the government as a divide and conquer strategy:
The British establishment recognised sectarianism as a divisive tool to employ against the Protestant United Irishmen in Ulster and the divide and conquer method of colonial dominion was officially encouraged by the Government. The Catholic Church OPPOSED the rebellion:
The Government's founding of Maynooth College in the same year, and the French conquest of Rome earlier in 1798 both helped secure the opposition of the Roman Catholic Church to rebellion The aftermath of almost every British victory in the rising was marked by the massacre of captured and wounded rebels with some on a large scale such as at Carlow, New Ross, Ballinamuck and Killala.[11] The British were responsible for particularly gruesome massacres at Gibbet Rath, New Ross and Enniscorthy, burning rebels alive in the latter two.[12] For those rebels who were taken alive in the aftermath of battle, being regarded as traitors to the Crown, they were not treated as prisoners of war but were executed, usually by hanging. In addition non-combatant civilians were murdered by the military, who also carried out many instances of rape, particularly in County Wexford.[13][14] Many individual instances of murder were also unofficially carried out by local Yeomanry units before, during and after the rebellion as their local knowledge led them to attack suspected rebels. "Pardoned" rebels were a particular target.[15] Yes, there were massacres of loyalists by the rebels also:
Massacres of loyalist prisoners took place at the Vinegar Hill camp and on Wexford bridge. After the defeat of a rebel attack at New Ross, the Scullabogue Barn Massacre occurred where between 100[16] and 200[17] mostly Protestant men, women, and children were imprisoned in a barn which was then set alight.[18] In Wexford town, on 20 June some 70 loyalist prisoners were marched to the bridge (according to an unsourced claim by historian James Lydon, first stripped naked[17]) and piked to death.[19] But your one-sided view is beyond ridiculous. Edited by Heathen, : No reason given. Edited by Heathen, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1466 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Murder bad, military action to quell murderous rebellion legitimate. That's all I've claimed.
But I've certainly had the impression that historically it's Catholics who initiate the conflicts and do the murdering. But thanks for reviewing what I said about the divine right of kings. I'm not interested in getting into the complexities of irish history. Too much.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1466 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Their authority was legitimate because they WERE in power.
So if Sharia law was forced upon America through armed conflict after a declaration of war and subsequent occupation Sharia law would be legitimate from your perspective? Yes. This has already been discussed, please read through previous posts on this subject.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9504 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 4.8 |
Faith writes: A law's being unfair doesn't make it illegitimate. We can abandon the circularity of a law being legitimate because it's a law - that's rather silly. For a law to have legitimacy it must be moral and supported by its population; law imposed on populations by dictatorships are neither moral, nor legitimate. Or perhaps you consider the law of imprisoning jews simply for being a jew was legitimate?Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android "Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved." - Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024