Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Past sins
#1
On two recent occasions, men have been punished quite severely, for unacceptable  comments made to women years back. I do not dispute that people have no right to make such comments and that doing so should have consequences, but I do have questions about those consequences happening five or ten or even more years down the track.

People make insulting hurtful remarks to each other all the time. It is not acceptable, ever, no matter who they are. But justice delayed is justice denied and should also be unacceptable in our society. Restrospective punishment, whether it is a sportsman, or a politician, or some ordinary person, is simply an excuse to cover some agenda no one is talking about.

There should be a time limit on payback to prevent it being more a case of skeletons unearthed in order to pursue a vendetta than genuine restitution to an insulted victim. Fairness does not apply only to the one damaged by someone else's stupidity, but to the perpetrator as well.
Reply
#2
(25-11-2021, 07:24 AM)Oh_hunnihunni Wrote: There should be a time limit on payback to prevent it being more a case of skeletons unearthed
Hmmm could you tell that to my Wife please ?

Just kidding lol.
Reply
#3
Tell that to the woman who was raped 30 years ago, who until now, couldn't bring herself to face, not only a jury, but her perpetrator, and even more importantly, her emotional state, that would still exist, even after so many years.

Tell that to the children who were brought up in a convent, where there was abuse going on, and they were too afraid to speak up, even well into their adulthood, because they were so traumatised.

Tell that to the family, who's child was murdered back in the '80's, and finally, there might be a breakthrough, and the murdered will finally get what they deserve, and imprisoned.

Why should the time after a crime has been committed, be 'forgiven', simply because it happened 2 decades ago, or whenever.
Reply
#4
Not forgiven. Forgiveness is the purview of the injured, no one else. But not rehashed when the original incident was dealt with at the time. Of course past crimes that were never solved should be examined given the opportunity, but I am talking about things that were addressed at the time. Should there not be a 'statute of limitations' applied to those, or are they fair game for later exhumation? Particularly when there is obviously a malicious motivation in the revisiting?
Reply
#5
(25-11-2021, 09:13 AM)Me+Me Wrote:
(25-11-2021, 07:24 AM)Oh_hunnihunni Wrote: There should be a time limit on payback to prevent it being more a case of skeletons unearthed
Hmmm could you tell that to my Wife please ?

Just kidding lol.
lol totally relate...
The world would be a perfect place, if it wasn't for the humans.

VPN | Dropbox | Cloud Backup
Reply
#6
(25-11-2021, 12:59 PM)crafters_corner Wrote: Tell that to the woman who was raped 30 years ago, who until now, couldn't bring herself to face, not only a jury, but her perpetrator, and even more importantly, her emotional state, that would still exist, even after so many years.

Tell that to the children who were brought up in a convent, where there was abuse going on, and they were too afraid to speak up, even well into their adulthood, because they were so traumatised.

Tell that to the family, who's child was murdered back in the '80's, and finally, there might be a breakthrough, and the murdered will finally get what they deserve, and imprisoned.

Why should the time after a crime has been committed, be 'forgiven', simply because it happened 2 decades ago, or whenever.
those are unforgivable crimes and i'm not sure it's being suggested there should be a time limit on prosecution of crimes. 

I think the time limit suggested is moreso for dumb things people say and do, not necessarily a crime, but potentially career ending...

If it's a criminal offence that has been investigated at the time and no outcome - i'm on the fence, probably if it's misdemeanour level then it should be left in the past...
The world would be a perfect place, if it wasn't for the humans.

VPN | Dropbox | Cloud Backup
Reply
#7
sounds a bit like double jeopardy
having to pay multiple times for the same sin.

i felt the same when that staircase pusher got his job back and everyone went all karen on him.
he had already lost his job, hundreds of thousands of dollars, publicly vilified, humiliated and pilloried.
then when he got his job back 6 years later he got punished again in the media and losing the job again.

at what point has one 'paid' for ones sins?

i have done a few things that required forgiveness.
im better for it and try to pay forward in kind
Reply
#8
We cannot have a time limit, because there was Auschwitz & the other death camps.
And we can't have a time limit for sexual abuse crimes.

This though is another level & if what Simon Bridges says is right, something he'd already realised he shouldn't have said & apologised for, & the matter was ended at that point.

Until it became something which Judith Collins could use to get Simon Bridges out of her way; which ironically had something of a boomerang effect & which has led to her downfall. imo, she brought this upon herself.
in order to be old & wise, you must first be young & stupid. (I'm still working on that.)
Reply
#9
i heard that mp who bitched (the word seems apropos) on the news last night.
karen killjoy. thin lipped, nit picking, pernicious grandstanding, a mean streak and a sneer to boot.
cannot interact with the other adults, has to put the beak in.
shes the one should lose her portfolios. a politically driven hit job on a colleague is not how you bind a party.
Reply
#10
Magoo, you'n me agree on rather a lot of things it seems...
Reply
#11
(26-11-2021, 11:58 AM)Magoo Wrote: i heard that mp who bitched (the word seems apropos) on the news last night.
karen killjoy. thin lipped, nit picking, pernicious grandstanding, a mean streak and a sneer to boot.
cannot interact with the other adults, has to put the beak in.
shes the one should lose her portfolios. a politically driven hit job on a colleague is not how you bind a party.
Nailed it!
Reply
#12
It depends on the motivation? If someone looks set to rise to a position of influence (e.g a politician) it might be better the voters know the true character of the person. Look there's a lot of things people said in the distant past that can so easily be taken out of context, it probably shouldn't be brought up.
Reply
#13
I think you are right, and this latest debacle might just prove the point. It has revealed the true character of a couple of politicians who found resurrecting past sins can have a nasty habit of backfiring.

Sadly, it may have also resulted in the old frying pan into fire scenario - but we'll have to wait and see about that!
Reply
#14
Tall poppy syndrome. Trying to bring someone down. Trying to make ourselves look better.

Really, all that does, is reflect on those that are trying to do the bringing down.

I do rather like people 'showing' themselves up for who they really are.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)