JoJosMom Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 I usually stay out of these threads, but I honestly don't understand how people being glad this man was released is in any way "controversial." He's someone for whom those who are celebrating have had a personal concern because of shared affiliation. There is nothing wrong with that. Nothing. I guess I should take heart, really, because if expressing happiness in the freedom of a tortured captive is now controversial, then the world at large must be running short of real problems and issues. So good it's worth repeating. :thumbup: 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carol in Cal. Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 The controversy doesn't revolve around the release of one man, but the apparent favoritism when multiple people experienced the same horrors. You have been corrected repeatedly about this but persist in making the accusation. It's really quite an unfortunate fixation. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Susan Wise Bauer Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 1) Albeto, quit sidetracking the thread. Start a new one if you want to argue about Christianity (again). 2) The rest of you, stop attacking Albeto (again). Enough said. SWB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnMyOwn Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 (edited) Journalism has no belief system that denies or eschews an ingroup bias. Many xian beliefs do. These are mainstream, and common. I do recognize they are not universal among xians. Journalists' bias for concern does not bother me as much, because I understand this is human nature, but xianity claims to alter human nature in some way. In reality, there is no evidence for this. Nevertheless, there is an unequal access to privilege based on the assumption that a xian inspired human nature is in some way different, better, and that bothers me. That is, admittedly, beyond the scope of this thread, but this thread is a tiny illustration of that kind of thing. You must not read the Washington Post, lol. The journalists' slant bothers me because they have a professional responsibility to report the news and it struck me that the others who were released were being treated as unimportant. I can completely understand why some moms on a message board would celebrate the release of someone they had been praying for. That does seem natural to me and I don't see anything wrong with it. Edited January 20, 2016 by OnMyOwn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Word Nerd Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 Yes, this. I have a friend dying of cancer right now. My prayers are for him and his family. That does not mean I don't care about any of the many cancer sufferers in the world! But I am focused on the individual whom I know. It's really that simple. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Word Nerd Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 (edited) shouldn't their striving towards the good also then involve noting, praying for, celebrating ALL persons ? Why do you assume they are not doing that? Does what has been shared in this thread represent the entirety of who believers have noted, prayed for, and celebrated? Edited January 20, 2016 by Word Nerd 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laurie4b Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 (edited) It's the choice of tortured captives whose release we choose to celebrate that can be thought-provoking. It's natural to focus on a member of the in-group. I always notice the murders/lashing/beheading of atheists, for example. But is 'natural' the same as 'good' ? And when a religion posits its believers as the most moral, shouldn't their striving towards the good also then involve noting, praying for, celebrating ALL persons ? Or is the very narrowest definition of 'love thy neighbour' to be preferred ? I think you're looking past the simplest explanation and it has to do with information: human capacity for information and which information a particular human is exposed to. Human beings simply have limitations as to how much our brains take in and that we can focus on. I heard about the release of all 3 because I know someone who works at a Congressman's office and had raised the issue and she had written me personally about the release of all 3. I am also something of a news junkie and I read at least 2 major news outlets per day from different ends of the liberal-conservative spectrum. In addition to mainstream news, I am more likely to be get news related to the Christian community or African American community because of ties to those communities. I am guessing that many of us have some kind of additional sources of information like that. I had a lot more info on Saeed Abedini, prior to his release, than on either of the other 2 or 3 (depending on your sources) captives. I had seen photos of him with his children and his wife. Saeed Abedini had a wife who worked tirelessly and effectively for his release. She got the word out. She connected with people with power in the media and in government. It doesn't hurt in human terms that she is gorgeous and her children are adorable. And no, she doesn't look like me. She left her two kids with relatives and made that her full time job. I also knew that she had said a few months ago that there was emotional abuse in the relationship and she was stepping back. I didn't have to go seeking that info, just read the blogs I typically read, or scroll through FB. I did know there were 2-3 other captives but I probably only know that because I am a news junkie. I never saw a lot of personal info on them. Personal info makes things stick in your head better. Did I pray for all of them? Yes--because they are all connected by the Iran imprisonment. I had also previously read a book about two sisters imprisoned at the same prison before their (ETA: Their meaning this recent group's) imprisonment, so there were additional "hooks" to hang the new info on--which again, makes it stick. And I also called members of Congress to express my horror when it appeared as if we had made a deal with Iran and left them there. All 4 of them. All human beings have limitations in the amount of data we can take in and that we are privy to. We also have limits to our empathy. How many stories of suffering can a single one of us process? I am guessing, because I know based on your prior history of posting, that you are a compassionate person and so if you happened to have heard of Saeed Abedini's imprisonment, you would have cared about him and if you were doing any advocacy, would have included him. But I wouldn't fault you or say you didn't care if one of the other captives was someone whose personal info you ran into again and again and that you felt particularly happy with his release because you felt more like you knew him. That would be natural and I wouldn't see any lack of morality in that. Good on you for caring at all! Most people don't. If we cannot pray, advocate, etc. for particular people without somehow feeling guilty that we have not done the same for all people, I think the end result is less compassion and not more simply because everything becomes more vague. Humans aren't particularly motivated by abstract ideas. That's why groups choose people with an appealing narrative to represent their cause. Humans tune into that. BTW, what group posits its believers as most moral? Edited January 20, 2016 by Laurie4b 11 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cindy in FL. Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 Thanks for this post, Laurie. Very well articulated! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jyhwkmama Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 I really hope his wife is receiving the support she needs to plan a life away from him if that is what she wants. I imagine that she is under immense pressure to "make things work" now that he will be coming home. She should have a choice about how much exposure to him she receives. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Word Nerd Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 Something about this thread rubs me the wrong way. LOL! Me too. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoJosMom Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 I usually stay out of these threads, but I honestly don't understand how people being glad this man was released is in any way "controversial." He's someone for whom those who are celebrating have had a personal concern because of shared affiliation. There is nothing wrong with that. Nothing. I guess I should take heart, really, because if expressing happiness in the freedom of a tortured captive is now controversial, then the world at large must be running short of real problems and issues. Such a great post. Still. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carol in Cal. Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 It's common, and not lazy but rather faith filled, for Christians to credit God with the good in the world, and to regard those who work for that good as doing good stuff that He approves of, and to thank him for that. That's part of the basic belief system, and it doesn't take any credit away from the humans who do good stuff. When something has been prayed for for a long time, it is only natural and right to thank God when those prayers are answered affirmatively, no matter who else was involved as well. That's what is going on in this thread. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JadeOrchidSong Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 (edited) Nm Edited January 20, 2016 by JadeOrchidSong Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
albeto. Posted January 21, 2016 Share Posted January 21, 2016 (edited) nm Edited January 21, 2016 by Susan Wise Bauer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Susan Wise Bauer Posted January 21, 2016 Share Posted January 21, 2016 Really? Is it that hard to abide by my request? I suppose so. Let me try again. To respond to a post like the OP by starting a thread about how wrong it is to thank God is a violation of a long-standing board rule--you know, the one that says, "Don't leap into a thread asking for Halloween costume ideas in order to condemn the OP for celebrating Halloween." That's exactly what happened here. Want to start a new thread on the new topic? Sure, go ahead. Argue away. I've tried to encourage posters to do so. But please stop torpedoing threads begun with innocent intent by starting a religious debate. That turns this board into a hostile place. The same would be true of responding to a thread begun with a non-religious assumption by attempting to show the OP that, actually, she should believe in God. This seems very simple to me, and I'm extremely frustrated by the continuing disregard for forum rules. Please reread them. Thank you. SWB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts