Over the last few weeks, we've heard about a lot of alleged atrocities. The trouble is that many of them are treated as if they occurred without any independent corroboration. Having some personal experience with this, I do not expect them to actually be treated as innocent until proven guilty. Most of the time, when police arrest someone, they have evidence that they have the right person. However, we're all humans, and consequently it is extreme hubris on our part to assume that any among us, be it judge, politician, protestor, or spectator, actually has all the truth on which to base the perfect decision.
A former student of mine was absolutely (and literally) atwitter today about the old lady pepper sprayed in Seattle. The trouble is that he wasn't there and that even though the woman was even she doesn't have all the facts or share them with us. When I was child, my parents used to ask me what I had done to provoke a response from my brother. They did not assume that there was no cause. Perhaps the escalation was the problem, and perhaps it was in perception. I have never been a cop, and neither has this student or this woman. We have no idea what it's like to stand in front of a crowd that is chanting hateful things in your direction, even if it's not directed at you. If he felt threatened, what is justified?
The irony is, this has happened before. John Adams rose to national prominence when, in the 1770s, he defended a column of British soldiers. The soldiers opened fire into a crowd in Boston after being set upon, killing several people. Adams was able to prove the soldiers fired with some cause.
We listen to the accusers because we like to think we're civilized enough to wipe out such behavior. However, punishing behavior does nothing to change human nature. The law, the legislature, and the government are absolutely ineffective in changing human nature. Ask all the reformed criminals- they did not reform because of the punishment. They reformed because they turned to God.
Equally ironic, just as in the Boston Massacre, the Occupy protestors have an allegedly established modus opporendi. It is well known that Samuel Adams, one of the Sons of Liberty, fomented discord at every turn and played a major role in the Boston Tea Party. Occupy movements have been associated with rape, robbery, littering, insobriety, drug use, and disease. It seems to have attracted miscreants. Contrast that to the TEA Party protests were the police were rarely, if ever, set upon, and where few, if any, arrests were made, and where the protests were by and large clean and orderly and peaceful.
People attack people and ideas they fear. During their ministry, the Apostles came across lots of persecution for their activities. Gamaliel I believe stood up and warned the leaders of the people to let it alone. If the movement was of men, and consequently of no consequence, it would fall apart under the weight of the egos at its head. If it were of God, the people who opposed it faced personal consequences at judgment day. You can tell from the reporting who the media, the intelligentsia, and the GOBNet fear the most. Notice we hear very little about Mitt Romney because they don't feel he is a threat but we do hear about things the media hopes to prevent from metriculating into the world of truth.
Judgment without condemnation is a natural part of our mortal experience. We make judgments all the time- in what we eat, where we go, our type of employ, etc. When we condemn others because of their imperfections, we in essence declare ourselves to be better. However, are we not all beggars? Do we not depend on the same things for our sustenance, our raiment, and the very inflation of our lungs? We think we're so important, but on a universal scale, humans, and even our governments, armies, and organizations, are absolutely irrelevant. What truly gives us value is that our Creator actually loves us.
You tend to find the things for which you look. If you look for the bad in mankind expecting to find it, Abraham Lincoln said, you surely will. If you listen to only part of the story without the rest to back it up, you run the risk of being wrong. Emotional outcries are common but frequently flawed. Some of these people went out there looking to be roughed up so they could be a story, tactically reworded and regurgitated to create an engineered response. They control the words and use words to convey a meaning they wish to create.
An old high school friend of mine said this of the story previously cited:
Dorli went out there totally intending to get roughed up by the cops so she could go to the media about it later, just as the pregnant girl did and dozens of others involved. These are not blind, unprovoked attacks as they imply. They're looking for a fight and doing what they can to bait the cops and pick a fight, because anything they do in response is fodder for the media and the poliblogs.
It is poor judgment to theorize without a plurality of the facts. Otherwise, you start bending the interpretation of and search for facts to fit your theories. Scientists do this all the time. They begin with what they hope is true and try to find data tha corroborates their theories. Most people are not looking for truth, and as a consequence they do not find any if much.
Eventually, no matter what you believe, the truth remains. It eventually exonerates the wrongly accused and catches up to the clever who manage to get off on technicalities. Question everything. Do your own homework. Study harder. That's always good advice. Rather than let other people guide you to truth, seek it yourself, for whosoever seeketh shall find, and to them that knock, it shall be opened.
No comments:
Post a Comment