Racism & Sexual Scandal - A Statute of Limitations?

[evensaul]

Blackface racism. Sexual acts. Youthful indiscretions. Apologies and more apologies. Current events in Virginia are pretty representative of happenings nationwide.

I'm going to agree for the purpose of this debate, that any use of blackface, by anyone, at any time, is inherently racist, and that any unwanted sexual advance or act is immoral and should be denounced.

Should we citizens and voters never forgive any such acts that an elected official or candidate for office may have committed? Or should we have some unofficial statute of limitations, not because of a lack of witnesses or failed memories, but because people and culture change over time?

To me, what the three accused Virginia officials did, even if true, happened a long time ago. What is considered acceptable behavior has changed over time, and the three of them have no doubt changed also. I don't believe they should be disqualified for public service based on the distant past, any more than I though Judge Kavanaugh should have been rejected for the Supreme Court based on what might have happened when he was a teenager.

Sure, there is a need to look at each case individually, and take into account the seriousness of the prior conduct, and some actions might not be forgiven. But on the whole, I think a zero tolerance policy by the public (and political parties) is not warranted, just, or good for the country.

For further reading: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/08/u...r-scandal.html

[Dionysus]

This is an interesting topic. I agree that there should be room for redemption for some people for some things under some circumstances. The idea that a person should be ruined forever for a momentary lapse of reason, irrespective of any circumstances, is not only unwarranted, unjust, and generally bad for the country, but it is also plainly absurd, fringe behavior.

[MindTrap028]

Case in point?
Senator Robert Byrd
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Byrd

In 1946, Byrd wrote a letter to a Grand Wizard stating, "The Klan is needed today as never before, and I am anxious to see its rebirth here in West Virginia and in every state in the nation."[19] However, when running for the United States House of Representatives in 1952, he announced "After about a year, I became disinterested, quit paying my dues, and dropped my membership in the organization. During the nine years that have followed, I have never been interested in the Klan." He said he had joined the Klan because he felt it offered excitement and was anti-communist.[11]

I think we have become a less tolerant nation. Byrd would have been strung up today, Lynched if you will. Where as he had a pretty long an as far as I can tell successful career. Which would have never been allowed to happen today.

I don't think we need a statue of limitations, as much as we need some tolerance for other peoples life story. After all, what is the difference between Ben Carson and just another murdering black man in the prison system? Apparently a belt buckle and a realization that living your life angry at the world is destructive behavior for anyone. The former is a tragedy that we should all be appalled at. The latter is a success story that if the intolerance of today were applied to it equally, would just write Ben off as a murderer.

[evensaul]

This is an interesting topic. I agree that there should be room for redemption for some people for some things under some circumstances. The idea that a person should be ruined forever for a momentary lapse of reason, irrespective of any circumstances, is not only unwarranted, unjust, and generally bad for the country, but it is also plainly absurd, fringe behavior.

Dio, why is it that the Left generally believes convicted criminals should get third and fourth chances, that people breaking immigration and drug laws should go largely unpunished, that convicted felons should be allowed to vote, etc. etc, but also call for apparently decent hard working men and women to resign from their jobs over accusations of donning some black face makeup some years ago? Or even that a liberal lieutenant governor of Virginia should be forced to resign based on an unproven, uninvestigated allegation of rape fifteen years ago? It all really seems upside down to me.

[Dionysus]

Dio, why is it that the Left generally believes convicted criminals should get third and fourth chances, that people breaking immigration and drug laws should go largely unpunished, that convicted felons should be allowed to vote, etc. etc, but also call for apparently decent hard working men and women to resign from their jobs over accusations of donning some black face makeup some years ago? Or even that a liberal lieutenant governor of Virginia should be forced to resign based on an unproven, uninvestigated allegation of rape fifteen years ago? It all really seems upside down to me.

I'm no sociologist, and I have no idea what I'm talking about, so my opinion here has exactly that much value.

I think a lot of it is this weird impulse so many people have these days to engage in public virtue-signaling. People are so keen to show everyone how "woke" they are that they'll abandon any sense of reason they have in order to draw attention to it. It's this crazy, Instagram/Facebook/Twitter, look-at-me culture of relentless click-seeking, attention whoring combined with a bunch of causes that people can easily throw themselves behind and create the fantasy that they alone are changing the world. People are also unbelievably fixated on 'gettin dat money', and doing it by the most banal and superficial means possible; attention-seeking, click-baiting bull$#!t.

When's the last time you went more than a week without seeing some staged video of somebody helping out a homeless person, followed by a smarmy, pious speech about how we should all be a little more kind? How generous would this kid have been without all that YouTube click-money sponsoring his goodwill?

It seems like there are more people in this world - or at least in this country - consumed with the desire to be important/famous than there are people who want to useful. I don't think it's just a phenomenon with the Left, either. I think most people who blather on about their causes on social media don't actually care about those causes - they just care that people see them care about those causes; it helps shape their own, personal brand into whatever they want it to be.

LOOKATMELOOKATMELOOKATMEEEEEEE.

For example: I don't think most people that prattle on about the horrors of abortion actually care about abortion. If they did, you wouldn't see orphanages full of kids waiting to be adopted. If people are so ate up with the crime of abortion, they should put their money where their mouths are and open up their doors to all those kids they're so worried are being denied their shot. Same thing with people wanting to just let people into the country with no kind of vetting process at all - why don't you clear out that spare bedroom and fill up that pantry, with all that love and tolerance in your heart?

A person making some pretentious "bold" statement on social media about they much you care about this thing or that - and reminding people how they're a piece of sh!t if they don't care about THE VERY SAME THING JUST AS MUCH AND IN THE VERY SAME WAY - doesn't do a damn thing except let people know that they, by virtue of these things, are the best person a person can be.

GTFO here with that BS.

But again, I'm no sociologist.

[eye4magic]

But on the whole, I think a zero tolerance policy by the public (and political parties) is not warranted, just, or good for the country.

I'm not sure the average hard-working American who loves their country and what it represents has a zero tolerance. I think most people in the country would agree with you. I could be wrong, but that's what I think. I also think these sort of events are driven by political motives and the media verses what is the right thing to do. I think most Americans are quite forgiving of what we might today regard as negative events that happened decades ago to their family, friends and leaders in their community. With that said, I think rape is a serious charge and needs to be looked at carefully.

The Vigrinia fallout and the fact that the states top three political leaders are involved in some type of past "sin" reminds me of a passage in the Bible where the people are about to stone a women to death who commited adultry -- which was considered very taboo back then and in some countries still is. And Jesus comes along and does a reality check with the crowd: "So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her." (John 8:7)

[Sigfried]

Case by case.

I will say that high office comes with high expectations, so the bar for the character we want in an elected official can and should be more sensitive than that of many other jobs and situations.

I'll also say that wearing blackface is not as great an offense as rape or sexual harassment. Its more along the lines of being an asshole rather than a criminal so I'd give it more leeway. When it comes to redemption or forgiveness, it really is all about what have you done since and how do you respond to the revelation. We should care about who you are now, not who you were then. The challenge is that many people don't change all that much so who you were could be who you are unless we see evidence otherwise.

So I would not call for resignation for highschool yearbook pictures of blackface. Its lame and jerky behavior but it was a while back and they seem to repudiate such things now.

Rape is a different ball game. If you raped someone I don't want you in public office. It needs to be pretty well supported and credible, but its the kind of moral failing that will definatley get me not to vote for someone.