Received infraction on Christianity

Tim Robbins

Hi,
There's an emotive thread on the Christian forum about Christians being the victims of the human rights abuses in China. I have an opinion that action which may exasperate these abuses (or any human rights abuse for whatever reason) is very dangerous and to the point of being sociopathological.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055543972&page=5

I received an infraction for this. I contacted the mod who upheld the infraction.

Note:

I have had a few problems in the forum before and I would be a bit worried about wasting people's time here again.

So please don't feel obliged to spend your time on this. That forum regularly gets quite heated and in fairness the mods usually do a good job.

I think my point was reasonable, and was human rights based. But in the grand scheme of things and infraction in a forum is nothing to worry about compared to what the victims of these abuses are enduring.

Regards.

Tim Robbins.

Jonathan

Link to the post itself incase you don't use the standard posts per page.

[Edit, Asia] This post
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=59973610&postcount=74

PDN

That thread began with a report on how Christians are suffering and being persecuted in China. The OP asked the Christians that post in or visit the Christianity forum to pray for the Church in China. There was no attempt in the OP to debate with non-Christians or argue with anyone. It was clearly an inhouse thing that would be of much concern to other Christians.

I would have thought that anyone with even a modicum of good taste or respect would have treated the thread for what it was. Unfortunately, however, there are certain atheists who see every thread in the Christianity forum as an invitation to attack Christianity. Soon they were posting that some of the poor folk being tortured and maimed in China were almost as bad as the Communist guards who torture them.

Then you, Tim, proclaim that anyone who does anything that increases someone's chances of getting a beating is a 'sociopath'. That was deeply insulting and unwarranted.

Helping almost anyone who is oppressed will risk the chances of a beating. That would apply to:
a) A German citizen giving a crust of bread to a starving Jewish child through a gap in the fence at Dachau.
b) Those in Europe who gave solidarity or support to the anti-apartheid movement in South Africa.
c) Those whites who encouraged Dr Martin Luther King Jr to continue with his campaign against segregation in the US.

The Chinese Christians have specifically requested that Western Christians do not forget them in their plight and their hour of need. When asked how we can best do this they detailed their four biggest needs:
a) Bibles - which are in short supply in China. Even websites such as biblegateway.com are blocked by the Great Firewall of China.
b) Encouragement.
c) Financial support.
d) Visiting teachers who can share with them Christian resources and education that are forbidden in China.

Your only suggestion as to how we should help them has been not to watch the Olympics on TV - a sacrifice that, for some reason, the persecuted believers in China find to be less than impressive.

A number of us in the West sacrifice money and spend our holiday time in visiting China, taking them Bibles and gifts, and helping them in the ways that they themselves have suggested as the most helpful. You are free to disagree with us for doing so - but I don't think that particular thread was the right time or place to express such disagreement. But labelling us as sociopaths was over the top.

Atheists in China are torturing and killing Christians because they refuse to embrace atheism. You, as an atheist yourself, may think that they should give in to the bullies' demands. But you are out of line coming into the Christianity forum and labelling those as 'sociopaths' who see another course of action other than capitulation to such brutality.

I believe the infraction was well merited.

Tim Robbins

PDN wrote: »

But you are out of line coming into the Christianity forum and labelling those as 'sociopaths' who see another course of action other than capitulation to such brutality.

As I clarified several times in the thread, by all means the Christians should help the supressed people, everyone should.

But it's important that help doesn't increase the probability of the poor victims getting more beatings. Otherwise it's not help. There are usually safer ways to help people.

PDN

Tim Robbins wrote: »

As I clarified several times in the thread, by all means the Christians should help the supressed people, everyone should.

But it's important that help doesn't increase the probability of the poor victims getting more beatings. Otherwise it's not help. There are usually safer ways to help people.

Like not watching the Olympics on TV?

Don't you think the 'poor victims' themselves are better placed than you to judge how they could be helped?

Some of us prefer to actually listen to the victims rather than presuming that we know best what they need. That does not make us sociopaths - and you were out of order to say that it does.

Tim Robbins

PDN wrote: »

Like not watching the Olympics on TV?

There are other ways than boycotting the olympics.

Don't you think the 'poor victims' themselves are better placed than you to judge how they could be helped?

Some of us prefer to actually listen to the victims rather than presuming that we know best what they need. That does not make us sociopaths - and you were out of order to say that it does.

Of course it does not make you sociopaths. Who is saying it does?

If it's clear that any action is worsening human rights rather than helping it, and the person committing that action isn't concerned if they are increasing the probability of someone else getting a beating, that is what is sociopathological.

PDN

Tim Robbins wrote: »

There are other ways than boycotting the olympics.

Then name one. What way can any of us really help those who are being tortured without running the risk of them receiving an extra beating?

Of course it does not make you sociopaths. Who is saying it does?

You said it. That is why you were infracted and hence this thread, which is following a rather predictable pattern.

By listening to the victims of torture, and responding in accordance with their wishes, we run the risk of them getting an extra beating. You claimed that makes us sociopaths. That was insulting and your infraction was merited.

And don't accuse us of worsening human rights. Human rights worsen because people sit on their hands, do nothing, and then attack those who are actually working to combat abuse.

Tim Robbins

PDN wrote: »

Then name one. What way can any of us really help those who are being tortured without running the risk of them receiving an extra beating?

You could work through political channels, work with international human rights groups or ecunemical movements.

You said it. That is why you were infracted and hence this thread, which is following a rather predictable pattern.

I said it a very specific context. You changed that and accused me of using it in a different context.

By listening to the victims of torture, and responding in accordance with their wishes, we run the risk of them getting an extra beating. You claimed that makes us sociopaths. That was insulting and your infraction was merited.

Well if you are admitting that what you are doing is increasing the probability of someone getting a beating you deserved to have your actions challenged.

And don't accuse us of worsening human rights.

You are now contradicting yourself. You admit that you are worsening the chances of them being beaten so you are worsening human rights. It's scary that you refuse to deal with criticism on such a serious issue.

PDN

Tim Robbins wrote: »

You could work through political channels, work with international human rights groups or ecunemical movements.

Yeah, they've done a whole load of good for the Christians in China so far, haven't they?

Well if you are admitting that what you are doing is increasing the probability of someone getting a beating you deserved to have your actions challenged.

And, in a another thread in another place, you would be free to challenge it. What you are not free to do is to come into the Christianity forum and call me a sociopath.

You are now contradicting yourself. You admit that you are worsening the chances of them being beaten so you are worsening human rights. It's scary that you refuse to deal with criticism on such a serious issue.

No, I'm not contradicting myself - and it's these kinds of silly arguments that cause you to get everbody's backs up and render sensible debate impossible.

So Martin Luther King worsened human rights by his non-violent campaign? Same for Gandhi? Same for every anti-apartheid protestor in South Africa? Sometimes you need to take the bullies on, even risking beatings and worse, in order to bring a lasting and genuine improvement in human rights. The Chinese Christians understand that and have asked for others to join them in solidarity and support. I and others have answered that call, and you are free to disagree with me - but you are not free to label me a sociopath for doing so.

You can try to argue off-topic as much as you want - but you have said nothing to convince me in that your infraction was in any way undeserved. I see little point in continuing this thread anymore since you are just trying to rehash the original thread instead of addressing the reasons for your infraction. If you have anything else to say regarding your infraction then you can PM me, but I have no intention of indulging you by continuing reading or posting in this thread that is clearly off-topic.

Asiaprod

This tread is drifting way off topic.

Tim, you request a hearing on why you were infracted. The Mod in question has both answered that for you, and gone on to further debate one-on-one other issues from that thread that you have raised and that do not belong here in the Help Desk.

As I see it, you received the infraction for the statement

"Anyone who does anything that increases someone's chances of getting a beating is a 'sociopath".

As is always the case, there is the written word, and there is the way the written word is perceived. What you wrote was perceived by the poster as deeply insulting and unwarranted. (It could equally be perceived as an attack on both the poster and their integrity, neither of which would be acceptable in any forum here.) Wither or not you meant it to be perceived that way is beside the point here, unfortunately, that is the way it was perceived. Normally this would result in a ban. You only received an infraction that is really little more than a slap on the wrist.

I have no intention of reversing this infraction. I would recommend you chalk it down to experience, and going forward re-read your posts from the perspective of the recipient before hitting the submit button.

This thread has a very limited shelf-life.

Tim Robbins

Asiaprod wrote: »

As is always the case, there is the written word, and there is the way the written word is perceived. What you wrote was perceived by the poster as deeply insulting and unwarranted. (It could equally be perceived as an attack on both the poster and their integrity, neither of which would be acceptable in any forum here.) Wither or not you meant it to be perceived that way is beside the point here, unfortunately, that is the way it was perceived.

Well if the Mod wasn't the OP and effectively banned from going to China to do what he was doing perhaps it may have been read more objectively.

I thought my subsequent posts would have clarified any mis-perception.

In the grand scheme of things, an infraction in the christianity forum is trivial compared to be beaten up for what you believe in or being effectively banned to what you belief your vocation in life is. So I feel petty carring this further even though I belief my point had validity.

I would like to thank you and PDN (even though we disagree) to attending to this issue.

Thank you for your feedback.

Asiaprod

Tim Robbins wrote: »

I would like to thank you and PDN (even though we disagree) to attending to this issue.
Thank you for your feedback.

You are most welcome:)