[Parker]

Originally Posted by SemiMike

Here's a perspective on these issues from an Eastern viewpoint, as the so-called Fifth Remembrance of the Buddha: "My actions are my only true belongings. I cannot escape the consequences of my actions. My actions are the ground upon which I stand."

Wow. Love that.

[billethkid]

and what is wrong with being judgemental?

One cannot make it trough a day without being judgemetal?

It is presented, in my opinion, as if it were perhaps not a good thing to do....perhaps!

btk

[senior citizen]

Originally Posted by SemiMike

Here's a perspective on these issues from an Eastern viewpoint, as the so-called Fifth Remembrance of the Buddha: "My actions are my only true belongings. I cannot escape the consequences of my actions. My actions are the ground upon which I stand."

Ditto. I'm a big fan of the present Dalai Lama. Happy to see your post.

Case in point......Jodi Arias slaughtering Travis Alexander.
Overkill, to say the least. She could have just walked out the door.

I do tend to believe he went into a rage when she dropped his new camera in the shower. Irregardless of all of her lies to cover up her evil deed (after the fact), I do believe she was a victim of verbal abuse and perhaps physical abuse. That in and of itself does not condone murder. I do not believe in murder.

She could have simply left his home..........or, never gone back there in the first place.

Whether or not she "snapped", probably about something vile he said to her.......it is no excuse to take a life. That action of hers has now ruined her own life. Life without parole in an Arizona prison system will not be a picnic. Death Row will go on for years and years with all the appeals.
That route also will not be a day in the park.

Jodi Arias cannot escape the consequences of her actions the day she killed Travis Alexander.

I do also believe that she never told anyone of the "domestic abuse" to preserve his reputation; it was a dysfunctional relationship to say the least. I also never thought it was premeditated. The jury should have been sequestered as when they returned home, how could they avoid the news and late night shows bashing Jodi Arias?

I feel deeply for Travis' family who will have to sit through another round of gory photos, lurid testimony, etc.

Jennifer Wilmott, the female defense lawyer, did a remakable job of humanizing Jodi when she put her hands on Jodi's shoulders prior to giving her final closing argument.......

Again, Jodi has no one to blame but herself for her own actions......however, the jury was conflicted as far as showing mercy vs. killing her. As Wilmott said, "Two wrongs don't make a right".

Not to bash dead person, but Travis was not a saint....although he passed himself off as a virgin "Bishop" of his church. No one deserves to die for that, however, it was a tricky case all around..........

Forevermore, Jodi Arias' actions will be the ground upon which she stands.

[quirky3]

Originally Posted by SemiMike

Here's a perspective on these issues from an Eastern viewpoint, as the so-called Fifth Remembrance of the Buddha: "My actions are my only true belongings. I cannot escape the consequences of my actions. My actions are the ground upon which I stand."

Welcome, SemiMike! I find the eastern perspective refreshing!

[Taltarzac725]

Originally Posted by Villages PL

WARNING: If you like dull unemotional threads, this thread may not be for you. You might think I'm "stirring the pot" but I'm just asking questions that I think are interesting.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
1) If I drive my car above the speed limit and I get a speeding ticket, do I deserve to get a ticket?

2) If I slack-off in school and get failing grades, do I deserve to fail?

3) If I go to jail for robbing a bank, do I deserve to be in jail?

4) If I live an unhealthy livestyle, knowing that it will likely lead to poor health, do I deserve poor health?

5) If I jump off the Golden Gate Bridge, knowing that I will most likely not survive the fall, do I deserve to die?

6) If you say something that you know is judgemental, do you deserve to be judged?

If you answered "no" to all of the above, do you think there's ever a situation when people deserve the results of their actions? If you answered "yes" to some of the above, are you being judgemental?

Okay, fire away!

Some of these questions are a bit simplistic.

There are many extremely successful people who received bad grades at some point in their lives and went on to great achievements. Einstein. Many celebrities in music, acting, etc. have such backgrounds.

Suicides can be done for any variety of reasons. It depends a lot on the circumstances/culture/time period, etc. Think Masada. Marilyn Monroe.

There are various speed traps in Florida where you might be going two miles over the limit and get a ticket because that is the way that community's funds are boosted.

It is hard to know the whole story about many people so I find it had to be judgmental especially considering how fallible our knowledge of the facts can be. All those defendants cleared by DNA testing often because of the game like nature of our legal system and the egos involved.

[looneycat]

yes to all. We are responsible for what we do, we are, however, free to bitch and moan afterwards

[Russ_Boston]

I think deserve is wrong verb for many of these questions. Like it or not we don't live in a true 'wrong or right' society. And I'm thankful for that. If you don't think there are gray areas on any of these questions then maybe there is such a thing as being TOO judgmental. Judges themselves, whose job it is to be judgmental, have guidelines to go by when sentencing or determining guilt. Even to a judge there is no easy answer sometimes and they have to weigh all the factors.

[Villages PL]

Originally Posted by Dr Winston O Boogie jr

I think that people misunderstand the term judgemental. There is nothing wrong with judging actions. If someone stabs someone, it's not judgemental to say that was a bad thing to do. It would be judgemental to say that the person was a bad person or had no redeeming qualities.

Judging acts is different from judging people. Only God gets to judge people.

If people deserve the results to their good decisions, why would it be wrong to feel that the deserve the results of their bad decisions.

In the case of suicide, it may be, and in most cases it probably is, that the person is suffering from some kind of mental illness. A person in that state may not be responsible for his or her actions.

We should look at cases where a person is suffering from a terminal illness and doesn't want to suffer anymore differently. In those cases it could be argued that there is no hope, no way to turn things around and the person is only going to suffer needlessly for a period of time. That may be a sound and cogent decision on their part.

Good post....lots of good points.

[Villages PL]

Originally Posted by billethkid

and what is wrong with being judgemental?

One cannot make it trough a day without being judgemetal?

It is presented, in my opinion, as if it were perhaps not a good thing to do....perhaps!

btk

No, I wasn't judging whether "being judgemental" is good or not, I purposely wanted it to be vague.

I like your answer and feel inspired to add something: What takes place when singles seek a mate to marry? Don't they do a lot of dating? And how would they be able to decide which one is right for them without judging the other person's actions? (It's been said that "being judgemental" is not the right thing for us to do, so I changed it to "judging actions".)

[skyc6]

Originally Posted by Villages PL

No, I wasn't judging whether "being judgemental" is good or not, I purposely wanted it to be vague.

I like your answer and feel inspired to add something: What takes place when singles seek a mate to marry? Don't they do a lot of dating? And how would they be able to decide without being judgemental? Or are they just judging the other person's actions?

Rather than being judgmental, which has a negative context, I think it is being able to form an opinion about something, whether it is right or wrong.

[Gerald]

If you live on a golf course do people have the right to be rude to you and annoy you after hours because no one is there to check what is going on after hours on the courses. The people seem to think if you live on a golf course you are entitled to no privacy any time even at nine at night...sorry just sounding off I guess

[Topspinmo]

"after hours because no one is there to check what is going on after hours on the courses." Why are there people on Golf course after hours?? I thought that was against the Village Law? aren't there somebody you can call and report this?

Hear some more hypothetical questions:

IF I do something illegal am I breaking the law and if so am I considered criminal? if I'm illegal (ops pardon me Undocumented) do I have the right to vote in country that I am not citizen of? If I stay more than 30 days in another state am I now an illegal resident of that state or am I now a legal resident? If I vote more than once is that illegal? Law is written so you can't tell who's innocent or who's guilty and can be twisted many different ways depending on how good (or evil, slick) your lawyer's are. Only in USA criminal or illegal has more rights that citizen and gets free medical... Makes you wonder why more aren't on the freebee list? is that right or wrong.... I guess I am judgmental when it comes to law and lawyers......

If police officer gives males tickets 99% and only gives Female tickets 40% of the time is he judgmental or Soft for the skirts?? I wonder this cause I have never gotten out of minor traffic ticket (maybe I don't wine, just face the music) but hear about woman getting of scott free or just warning??

Law is rarely fair or impartial IMO of course, others may disagree???????

Why do they let cold blooded killers live? why do governors step in and let cool blooded killers live when they was convicted and sentenced to death in court of law.

[Quixote]

Originally Posted by Villages PL

No, I wasn't judging whether "being judgemental" is good or not, I purposely wanted it to be vague.

I like your answer and feel inspired to add something: What takes place when singles seek a mate to marry? Don't they do a lot of dating? And how would they be able to decide which one is right for them without judging the other person's actions? (It's been said that "being judgemental" is not the right thing for us to do, so I changed it to "judging actions".)

Sensible change, IMHO; judging actions is a far cry from judging others! However, even judging actions is (obviously!) from our individual perspective, not a universal thing.

Originally Posted by skyc6

Rather than being judgmental, which has a negative context, I think it is being able to form an opinion about something, whether it is right or wrong.

Very well put! We must remember, though, that while there are societal standards for some "right or wrong" issues, there are others, as I just wrote above, that are (obviously") from our individual perspective and not universal (if I may quote myself...).

[blueash]

The danger occurs when you slip without even noticing from judging to pre-judging a situation or an individual. Being judicial is a positive, being prejudicial is a negative. The former requires information which hopefully is in itself accurate and free from bias. The latter requires satisfaction with one's own unchallenged world view, or ignorance.

Language is important. How is a sex worker different from a call girl from a slut? The job is the same but the word you choose calls up differing mental pictures. Is a person who speeds an illegal driver? I think the word deserves is a loaded word. It suggests to me that punishment is merited after having considered all the mitigating circumstances. Too many of your examples have intentionally been left vague thus I don't have enough information to decide whether the person "deserves" the consequence.

So in the spirit of the challenge I will answer NO most and give an example of how it could be that the punishment isn't merited by the offense

1. Speeding ticket.. as above, friend is having a heart attack and you are getting him to the hospital. Mitigating circumstance, driver needs help not a ticket
2. Failing student... Student has a treatable learning disability which school is not addressing. He seems to be daydreaming and never gets his work done, slacking. Repeating the grade will not help, diagnosis and therapy are what is needed and this student may shine. Or to make it even simpler, the kid needs glasses.
3. I can even stretch this one. Episode of Bones. Bank robber was forced to do it because he had been kidnapped and had remote control explosive devise strapped to his body. So he robbed the bank but did not deserve to go to jail.
4. Unhealthy lifestyle.. Who is defining unhealthy and how certain is your data? If a person fails to exercise due to arthritis do they deserve more trouble? Do smokers deserve lung cancer and COPD? If a person gets high from running they are considered to have a good addiction. If a person gets high from eating, a bad one.
5. Suicidal moment. If you jump you should expect to die which is very different from deserve to die.

6. This is actually the most difficult. If a person is judgmental do they deserve to be judged? If I encounter a bigot do I have an obligation to point out their bigotry? Does my sense of just walk away and avoid confrontation constitute me being judgmental but civil or judgmental and cowardly? Is the offense I experience at hearing the expression of prejudice my problem or should I be judging the speaker harshly? Does the speaker even know that his words are offensive? The seller "gypped" me. The buyer jewed me down. He was an Indian giver. All words that are fortunately becoming less commonly heard as all are highly offensive if you know the history of the words. But if a speaker is unaware of the derivation... Do I correct her, do I judge her, do I walk away? See it is never easy.

[golf4me]

Originally Posted by blueash

The danger occurs when you slip without even noticing from judging to pre-judging a situation or an individual. Being judicial is a positive, being prejudicial is a negative. The former requires information which hopefully is in itself accurate and free from bias. The latter requires satisfaction with one's own unchallenged world view, or ignorance.

Language is important. How is a sex worker different from a call girl from a slut? The job is the same but the word you choose calls up differing mental pictures. Is a person who speeds an illegal driver? I think the word deserves is a loaded word. It suggests to me that punishment is merited after having considered all the mitigating circumstances. Too many of your examples have intentionally been left vague thus I don't have enough information to decide whether the person "deserves" the consequence.

So in the spirit of the challenge I will answer NO most and give an example of how it could be that the punishment isn't merited by the offense

1. Speeding ticket.. as above, friend is having a heart attack and you are getting him to the hospital. Mitigating circumstance, driver needs help not a ticket
2. Failing student... Student has a treatable learning disability which school is not addressing. He seems to be daydreaming and never gets his work done, slacking. Repeating the grade will not help, diagnosis and therapy are what is needed and this student may shine. Or to make it even simpler, the kid needs glasses.
3. I can even stretch this one. Episode of Bones. Bank robber was forced to do it because he had been kidnapped and had remote control explosive devise strapped to his body. So he robbed the bank but did not deserve to go to jail.
4. Unhealthy lifestyle.. Who is defining unhealthy and how certain is your data? If a person fails to exercise due to arthritis do they deserve more trouble? Do smokers deserve lung cancer and COPD? If a person gets high from running they are considered to have a good addiction. If a person gets high from eating, a bad one.
5. Suicidal moment. If you jump you should expect to die which is very different from deserve to die.

6. This is actually the most difficult. If a person is judgmental do they deserve to be judged? If I encounter a bigot do I have an obligation to point out their bigotry? Does my sense of just walk away and avoid confrontation constitute me being judgmental but civil or judgmental and cowardly? Is the offense I experience at hearing the expression of prejudice my problem or should I be judging the speaker harshly? Does the speaker even know that his words are offensive? The seller "gypped" me. The buyer jewed me down. He was an Indian giver. All words that are fortunately becoming less commonly heard as all are highly offensive if you know the history of the words. But if a speaker is unaware of the derivation... Do I correct her, do I judge her, do I walk away? See it is never easy.

A very deep and thoughtful post and very well presented as to give us pause and reason to think...and not judgmental. (The American spelling, Brits spell it ..judgemental.

It is VERY hard not to pre-judge at our age sometimes. If we get on an airplane, we feel safer if everyone looks like the guys and girls in OUR town, the one we grew up in. If not we begin thinking about shoes with stuff in them and underwear under folks clothes who look well, you know...different.
It is human to jump to conclusions. Human. Even the kindest among us do it .