| 
 A real discussion. Finally. I would like to tell you that I am willing to go about this conversation in a way that I could totally except that I had some sort of stupid regression. But know that as of now I do disagree with your analysis on me, and am only defending myself so that you can attempt to prove me wrong.
I'm gonna go about this the long way, just to make sure I don't miss anything, I apologize in advance for the potential lengthiness of this.
"Well, have you read up about this guy? What do you know about him? Do you even know the context under which I am saying he is a bad father, because there are obviously gradients of bad parenting?
"
No, I have no idea. I did assume that they were bad parents though. I know a lot of people with bad parents, and though mine were only bad at a few things in life, I know people that have terrible parents and have turned out just fine. Not that I am saying that your standpoint is irrelevant because of a few good cases, but in my opinion, from what I have seen, even people that have been abused have the ability to be happy. So, assuming that this was the case, I came to the conclusion that even if he was an abusive parent, or neglectful parent, that it would not warrant punishment so severe as death, and that it seemed to me, at first, that you were commenting in a way that made it sound like you were saying that there was a chance that his bad parenting did warrant death. Something that I disagree with. And instead of directly assuming that of you, I asked you, humbly.
"What is the comparison between giving birth to a child, making them completely unprepared for the world, and therefore in 99% of the cases cursing them to a confused, angry, fucked up existence of addiction, and killing someone?"
First I would like to say that this statement seems more emotional than logical to me. Not that it isn't a good question, and one that should be discussed, I am only telling you how it affects me emotionally. And that is that it seems that you are steering somewhat away from a pure and objective logic, and more towards frustration and embellishing. I say this because any time i have thrown a random percentage out there in an argument I was usually talking out of my ass. Like I said, and don't think that's what your doing, but, to me, you are definitely getting closer to that, and I find it somewhat..... un-professional? This is just a conversation, no need to get emotional.
Secondly, I would say that choice and strength and will are the difference. The opportunity to fail as at least greater than no opportunity at all. You would have to agree that 99% is not a factual number, you did not get it from any book or website, and that it is something you just made up off the top of your head. i would say that the undeniable truth that killing someone ruins there life, and that bad parenting MAY ruin someones life is a definite distinction. One that draws a clear line of evil and unfortunate family situations. Personally in my life I have had to deal with the fact that my parents did not ruin my life, and that even though they may have made it unnecessarily difficult, even though I may have to deal with psychological problems now, that they did not do me an injustice that could be compared to killing me.
"Yes, you're wrong, because you are confused as to what you think merits the death penalty and what doesn't."
I am not confused, only un-informed. From the way you worded your original statement, or at least how i took it, it sounded like neglect or something. It did not sound like sexual abuse or any real serious shit. Now, lets say that the guy left his 2 and 3 year old all alone by themselves in an apartment and didnt plan on coming back. I would say that this is a serious crime and deserves serious punishment.. But I would also say that if the guy was so fucked up in the head that he thought that he would "Usher in world peace with his ditty." then he was obviously not fit to be a parent in the first place, do to a mental condition, not because he is evil. That is why I thought that the connection between the death penalty and his crime towards his children was a little off base.
"And no, I was not saying he was deserving of the death penalty."
I never said that you did say that. I said that at first it sounded like that but after I thought about it for a day or two that I decided that you were just saying that he wasn't harmless and your were just putting a little info out there. I did give you the benefit of the doubt, which was the first thing I said.
"I was pointing out that this guy wasn't an absolute good guy. "
My exact conclusion. I was just telling you about the initial doubt that I had.
"And I don't think my bias is influencing me in that regard... moreso my knowledge of the effects bad parenting has on a person and society as a result."
Thank you for answering an innocent question, there is no need to get upset over an innocent question.
"I realize that you try to act smart, and your main method of doing so is in criticizing others by demeaning them, but don't use the idea that you read my articles as a glimpse into some realm where you are in a position to criticize me with stupidity. You can't disclaim aggression by saying "don't take this the wrong way"... I'll still see it.
"
Fair enough, I have left a lasting negative impression on you and it is my responsibility to prove to you otherwise, but give me a fair chance.
I can assure you that my question of your motives in why you said that was out of curiosity, because of how little information I do have on your child hood or past experiences. I truly do feel that the more I know about you, as an individual, the more I can understand. And, while there was a possibility that your parents were affecting you in this discussion, was on some level probably from the few things I have read from you, that I really had no idea. The only way that I could know is if I directly asked you, again out of innocence and curiosity. Not in a way to demean you. Through out this post I have littered it with unnecessary politeness and cautiousness, as to show you that I am in complete respect of you, not to shield my disrespect. I know no other way to show respect than to tell you. And I can say that it was your misconception of me, through legitimate preconceived notions of negativity that I caused, that caused you to think I was being disrespectful. Like I said, I expect responsibility for that, and hope that you now understand that I am no longer that way.
"1) You didn't do any research about the guy to understand why i may or may not have said what I said. "
Something that you do not know about me is that I am extremely lazy. Very very lazy, and I did, knowingly, put the responsibility on you to educate me, because it just seemed easier. It was not out of aggression that I said these things. And, out of a knowingly negative impression I put on you, I chose to not post these thoughts that I had yesterday, because I thought that I was just being too harsh, and that I should let the idea sit awhile before I find it necessary to ask you. That is my evidence to you that I was not being aggressive.
"2) You "act" confused but as was pointed out by #1 you didn't make any effort to rectify the situation. "
Again, not aggressive, lazy.
"3) As a result of the above two, you place your confusion in my hands as my responsibility"
100 percent true, but again, our of laziness, not aggression.
"4) You repeatedly try to make it seem like others will share in your confusion to assert that it is indeed my responsibility. "
I disagree. I am openly confused, and not ashamed of it. I need no comfort in this, and I am possessing a sense of humility.
My attempt to rectify it was to tell you how I felt, and then have you tell me if I was right or wrong. And I would then totally exepct what you told me as the truth, because there is nothing else that I can do about the situation.
Like I said, I don't think you are entirely off base with calling me out here. There is a chance that what I said was out of aggression, but my honest feelings right now, are that you are misinterpreting my laziness for aggression. It is not a semantic, but a misunderstanding.
If you can prove to me, logically, that it was not laziness, I will concede.
If you have a problem with me being lazy, I will no longer speak to you in that tone.
Do you still feel that I was aggressive or lazy?
"Why cry for those that often cry? Instead, help them smile, and smile for those that smile."
|
