It occurs to me that a confounding factor here is that powerful men abusing less powerful women is a crime that has historically been overlooked or easily explained away or played down, and the victims blamed more than the perpetrators. Therefore in this case there are good reasons to be censorious.
But in general being censorious and self-righteous about other people is a bad thing. Saying that people like me wouldn't do something horrible is a solid first step towards both generalising that all the people like them would and towards tolerating people like me doing horrible things (because we wouldn't do something horrible, therefore if we did it it's not horrible).
One also needs to be wary of the scapegoating process, where the conflicts of the group are blamed on one member.
But this is clearly a hard case given that people like Epstein and his circle generally have too much moral impunity not too little, and are generally beneficiaries of the thought that 'people like me don't do horrible things'.
Sigh…you people need to be careful what you post. It is mostly supposition.
All this moral indignation gets a bit tedious and helps nobody.
Do you honestly expect Andrew to denounce Epstein or spoken up for “victims”? Has it occurred to you that he may not see them as “ victims@ or see any reason to denounce his reported “best friend”?
And before you respond: I hold no brief for either Andrew or any of his tribe going back several generations.
No I don't honestly expect Andrew to denounce the convicted sex traffickers, the man charged but died in prison nor do I expect him to say anything to acknowledge the victims.
I am perfectly aware what he thinks of the victims and by his actions we know what he thought of his friends.
Someone raised the question of the age of consent. In the US, the unrestricted age of consent ranges by state from 16 to 21 (19, 20 and 21 are rare). The federal age of consent, is, I believe, 18, relevant if people cross state lines. The whole issue is confused by matters such as "Romeo and Juliet" exceptions, parental consent, court consent, whether one party is in a position of authority over the other, and so on.
@Nick Tamen@Dafyd fron my perspective, someone like Epstein who sexually exploited many people would have some kind of inclination towards that. I don't think it's too controversial to suggest that particular crimes do involve a person being inclined towards particular activity, rather than a crime you might get involved in for eg financial gain. I think it's reasonable for people to state that they genuinely don't have any inclination towards crimes which would involve such inclinations.
I feel extremely confident in saying that I have zero inclination towards sexually exploiting anyone, and I don't understand why owning that ostensibly good trait is apparently a bad thing. Sorry, I think I am a better person than Jeffrey Epstein and I would strongly resist any religious framework that would suggest that we (me and Epstein) are both equally bad sinful people. Sorry but the stories of our respective lives just makes it very clear that that's not true.
...for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God...
My italics.
Yeah, but that isn't saying that everyone is equally as sinful - nor does it say that all sins are equal in badness. Being rude to someone isn't equally as bad as sexual exploitation, or do you think that it is?
How do you think survivors of sexual exploitation feel about their abusers being equated in terms of sin to those who haven't sexually abused anyone?
Sorry, I think I am a better person than Jeffrey Epstein and I would strongly resist any religious framework that would suggest that we (me and Epstein) are both equally bad sinful people.
I have tried to avoid saying anyone is “equally bad” here. (Without going to back to look, I’ll apologize if I didn’t successfully do that.) Rather, I have tried to frame it as “equally deserving of God’s condemnation.” That is not, I do not think, the same as “equally bad,” but instead is a reorientation of what is being compared. I think anytime I find myself thinking “well, at least I’m not as bad as that person,” I’m at danger of letting myself think I don’t need God’s grace just as much as the person I’m considering myself better than.
I’ve never killed anyone. But I have known and even worked with people who have. Those experience have taught me not to think I’m “better” than they are.
I haven’t directly exploited anyone either. But I have participated in and benefited from political and economic systems that are built upon the exploitation of people and of natural resources, and for much of my life done so without giving it much if any thought.
Jesus’s admonition about pointing at the speck in someone else’s eye while ignoring the log in our own seems relevant here to me.
We're probably better off (Christian or not!) to avoid doing comparisons between ourselves and other people regarding who is the "better" person. I mean, we can't see most of their lives, let alone see into their hearts; we haven't got most of the info we'd need to judge.
FWIW, those Bible verses are also meant for a different purpose than setting us up to judge people, even ourselves. The "all have sinned" verses are generally there, not to tell us that all sins are equally horrible or equally whatever in the eyes of God (which frankly makes him look like a lunatic to a lot of people), but rather to say that if you've got even a little bit of sin, you need God's help--just as a person with a single bubo is in the same boat as the person who's utterly covered with the marks of bubonic plague. So God's not saying "Shoplifting is in all ways equal to rape and murder," but rather "Stop wasting your time comparing your symptoms to somebody else's, and comforting yourself because you look better--you're still at risk of death. Rather, get yourself to the healer right away."
Comments
But in general being censorious and self-righteous about other people is a bad thing. Saying that people like me wouldn't do something horrible is a solid first step towards both generalising that all the people like them would and towards tolerating people like me doing horrible things (because we wouldn't do something horrible, therefore if we did it it's not horrible).
One also needs to be wary of the scapegoating process, where the conflicts of the group are blamed on one member.
But this is clearly a hard case given that people like Epstein and his circle generally have too much moral impunity not too little, and are generally beneficiaries of the thought that 'people like me don't do horrible things'.
https://inews.co.uk/opinion/andrew-lose-privilege-taking-falklands-medal-too-much-4018480
Nothing like being “ perfectly aware” , is there?
Yep, paywall there but one gets the drift….
I feel extremely confident in saying that I have zero inclination towards sexually exploiting anyone, and I don't understand why owning that ostensibly good trait is apparently a bad thing. Sorry, I think I am a better person than Jeffrey Epstein and I would strongly resist any religious framework that would suggest that we (me and Epstein) are both equally bad sinful people. Sorry but the stories of our respective lives just makes it very clear that that's not true.
...for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God...
My italics.
Yeah, but that isn't saying that everyone is equally as sinful - nor does it say that all sins are equal in badness. Being rude to someone isn't equally as bad as sexual exploitation, or do you think that it is?
How do you think survivors of sexual exploitation feel about their abusers being equated in terms of sin to those who haven't sexually abused anyone?
I’ve never killed anyone. But I have known and even worked with people who have. Those experience have taught me not to think I’m “better” than they are.
I haven’t directly exploited anyone either. But I have participated in and benefited from political and economic systems that are built upon the exploitation of people and of natural resources, and for much of my life done so without giving it much if any thought.
Jesus’s admonition about pointing at the speck in someone else’s eye while ignoring the log in our own seems relevant here to me.
Flippancy and insults are not ISTM pertinent here.
The Bible FWIW does remind us in more than one place (IIRC) that none of us is perfect.
FWIW, those Bible verses are also meant for a different purpose than setting us up to judge people, even ourselves. The "all have sinned" verses are generally there, not to tell us that all sins are equally horrible or equally whatever in the eyes of God (which frankly makes him look like a lunatic to a lot of people), but rather to say that if you've got even a little bit of sin, you need God's help--just as a person with a single bubo is in the same boat as the person who's utterly covered with the marks of bubonic plague. So God's not saying "Shoplifting is in all ways equal to rape and murder," but rather "Stop wasting your time comparing your symptoms to somebody else's, and comforting yourself because you look better--you're still at risk of death. Rather, get yourself to the healer right away."