Should We Shame Religious Politicians?

[Twilight Hue]

I'm not sure you can actually shame a politician about anything.

Post of the month award. *grin*

 

[Revoltingest]

Do unto others as you would have them do unto you, perhaps?

We can ask ourselves "would you like it if someone publicly shamed and humiliated you, for any reason?" I think most of us would answer that with a "no."

That sums it up well.
We shouldn't encourage shaming.
Enuf kids suffer & even die from it.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

It's difficult to shame people who have no shame of their own.

 

[Kori]

We shouldn't shame anybody. It's their right to believe whatever they want to. If you don't agree then just don't listen to them.

You do realize that they have there hands on the levers of power in this nation and they want to take equality away from people. It's not simply: They believe in something and it ends there.

I think you're a bit paranoid.

How so? Gay people are getting fired from there jobs because of a Religious "Freedom" Bill passed.

Do unto others as you would have them do unto you, perhaps?

We can ask ourselves "would you like it if someone publicly shamed and humiliated you, for any reason?" I think most of us would answer that with a "no."

We are not talking about children or people making an mistake. We are talking about oppressive Religious Extremists. Extremists that want to control other people's lives.

 

[Underhill]

If your goal is to cause shame, I call that wrong.
If your goal is to effect political change for the better, that's fine.
If both are your goals, then shaming is still wrong.

I get what your saying. Intent is what lets you sleep at night. But, in the end, I don't think intent matters to the person who feels attacked. Just ask the 23,000 politicians who have been slapped with a scandal in the name of "ethics" and informing the public good.

 

[Revoltingest]

I get what your saying. Intent is what lets you sleep at night. But, in the end, I don't think intent matters to the person who feels attacked. Just ask the 23,000 politicians who have been slapped with a scandal in the name of "ethics" and informing the public good.

We can only be responsible for that which we control.

 

[Sunstone]

Do unto others as you would have them do unto you, perhaps?

We can ask ourselves "would you like it if someone publicly shamed and humiliated you, for any reason?" I think most of us would answer that with a "no."

For any reason? Of course not.

But if you rule out shaming, what else do you rule out along with it? Sarcasm? Criticism in general? I've known plenty of people who were thin-skinned enough to call just about any criticism of them "shaming".

Then again, there are plenty of people who like to harp on the fact that everyone has a different view of things, often with the implication there is no reasonable way to decide which views are most accurate. But if that's so, then how do you draw a line between one person's shaming and another person's gentle ribbing?

When you rule out shaming, you open a can of worms.

 

[leibowde84]

If a politician is honestly religious would not religious voters hope the politician
would be bound by beliefs in a higher authority?
Thoughts?
Nelson Mandela comes to mind.
What about U.S. political leaders?

It depends. If they base their political decisions in any way on religious beliefs, they should be called out. If they can, in the spirit of JFK, put their religious convictions aside in the interest of reaskn/logic, then I don't see an issue.

 

[Quintessence]

For any reason? Of course not.

But if you rule out shaming, what else do you rule out along with it? Sarcasm? Criticism in general? I've known plenty of people who were thin-skinned enough to call just about any criticism of them "shaming".

Then again, there are plenty of people who like to harp on the fact that everyone has a different view of things, often with the implication there is no reasonable way to decide which views are most accurate. But if that's so, then how do you draw a line between one person's shaming and another person's gentle ribbing?

When you rule out shaming, you open a can of worms.

Hmm. Allowing shaming also opens up a can of worms. Just a different brand. Po-tay-to, po-tah-to, pick your poison, I guess.

 

[Revoltingest]

Hmm. Allowing shaming also opens up a can of worms. Just a different brand. Po-tay-to, po-tah-to, pick your poison, I guess.

If shaming is good, then abuse would be too....racial, gender, ethnic,
religious....it's all fair game if it advances a political agenda, eh.

 

[Sunstone]

If shaming is good, then abuse would be too....racial, gender, ethnic,
religious....it's all fair game if it advances a political agenda, eh.

What's your reasoning? In this case, I'm merely curious, rather than asking in order to engage in a debate about it. But how do you get from shaming to tossing out racial,etc slurs?

 

[jeager106]

If shaming is good, then abuse would be too....racial, gender, ethnic,
religious....it's all fair game if it advances a political agenda, eh.

No it isn't good at all.
We've come a long way in the past 50 odd years to depress name calling and
segregating people according to differences.
I appreciate an open accepting society.
Remember Governor Wallace?
What a disgusting pig of a politician!
Someone finally gut shot the hog. He lived I think.
Wallace quote upon loosing an election:
"After the election, aide Seymore Trammell recalled Wallace saying, "Seymore, you know why I lost that governor's race? ... I was out******ed by John Patterson. And I'll tell you here and now, I will never be out******ed again."
What a pig!

The filers caught these letters.
N I G * * * you get that right?
He'd use that term even on radio but not t-v.

 

[leibowde84]

If shaming is good, then abuse would be too....racial, gender, ethnic,
religious....it's all fair game if it advances a political agenda, eh.

Why do you think that allowing shaming would necessarily open the door to abuse? What kind of abuse soecifically?

 

[ak.yonathan]

I see that some people here have suggested shaming. That is what I am against, for whatever reason shaming is wrong, especially if it is because they hold religious views. Like I said before, we have to respect their rights.

 

[Sunstone]

Like I said before, we have to respect their rights.

So you're arguing we have a right not to be shamed?

 

[ak.yonathan]

So you're arguing we have a right not to be shamed?

I'm saying that there is no reason good enough to warrant shaming, especially if it is just because they hold views which are different from ours.

 

[Sunstone]

I'm saying that there is no reason good enough to warrant shaming...

Interesting. I would never have thought there was no reason good enough to warrant shaming.

 

[ak.yonathan]

Interesting. I would never have thought there was no reason good enough to warrant shaming.

Allow me to explain why. In my experience shaming is usually a tactic used by people who think that they have the moral high ground over someone else, when in fact they don't. That is why I despise shaming of any kind.

 

[Sunstone]

Allow me to explain why. In my experience shaming is usually a tactic used by people who think that they have the moral high ground over someone else, when in fact they don't. That is why I despise shaming of any kind.

Well, I'd be opposed to shaming someone if they don't deserve it. But I usually see it applied to people who do deserve it.

 

[Mister Emu]

Should We Shame Religious Politicians?

I tweeted him and included this pic.

I think if we are going to talk about shaming people, we shouldn't expose ourselves with resounding ignorance.