Capt. Sir Mick Preston
Capitán of the Zouaves
Posts: 6,511
Talossan Since: 9-21-2006
Knight Since: 10-12-2010
Motto: Cuimhnichibh air na daoine bho'n d'thainig sibh
|
Post by Capt. Sir Mick Preston on Mar 24, 2008 18:41:44 GMT -6
Capt. T' -
I think...
I think that everyone has a certain view of past events that they personally feel are tragic. I personally feel the Irish Diaspora was rather tragic.
I don't think giving up your life for a cause you believe in is tragic. I believe it is the final statement of your beliefs, your thoughts and your ideals. You don't have to be a soldier to express those thoughts. I do think it's a bit different sitting in your office on the 94th floor of a building and standing in front of a tank in Tiananmen Square.
But when it comes down to it... we all die. Sooner or later, we all stop breathing. Some think it's best if you stop breathing surrounded by friends, family and loved ones. Some think it's better to stop breathing arm raised, fist clenched, screaming " FREEDOM". Some think it's best to step off the mortal coil doing something you really, really want to do. Some do that with a 6-pack in hand.
But ...we all die.
I don't want to celebrate death. I don't want to say that this person's death was nobler than that persons. I don't want to decide that that person's death was more honorable than this one's. I don't want a parade recognizing any one's death.
I do want to celebrate life. I want to celebrate fighting for what is important to someone - even if that is Man U beating Chelsea for the Cup. I want to celebrate the little things that make life happy.
I want to celebrate - not memorialize.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 24, 2008 18:55:58 GMT -6
Mick,
You brought up some very good points. And on many of them I agree with you. I think we are on the same page with regards to not perpetually mourning, but we express these similar views in different ways.
My intention is not to elevate one death over another. Nor is it to have a parade to commemorate one death as being more honorable than another. My intent is simple.
We should be spending every day celebrating life. But we don't always. It is hard to celebrate life sometimes, even if we know we should. It is hard because we see senseless killing, we see starvation and people dying from diseases in other countries that we completely forgot exist. Our daily lives get weighed down with all of these things and, as a result, we feel compelled to pass many resolutions saying "The Nazis were bad" or "The British were bad" or "JFK was good!" We draft these types of bills, I would imagine, because we know we should speak out against injustice, and maybe if we just yell loudly enough, it will all end.
It is enough to drive a person crazy. Or, you do what I do. You celebrate. Every morning when you wake up you celebrate the day, even if it is the grayest day you've ever seen and it is dreary as all heck. You celebrate. But, for one day a year. Would it be so bad if we at least contemplated the individual stories? If on 9/11 we sat back and reflected upon these (or any events that strike to your core) and say to oneself "How have I done my part to avert these tragedies this past year and what will I do differently the next, for me and for everyone around me."
That's all. Just a day of reflection. If the most tragic event in history is the death of your hamster, so be it. Reflect on it and make yourself a better person for it. That is my intention.
You guys know I do not often propose legislation. When I do, it is because I feel it may be of value. With this full explanation in mind, I open it up to opinions. If it seems like this is something we as a people will benefit from, great. If not, no biggie, I'll withdraw the bill rather than waste the Ziu's time with it. I propose this with the hopes it will make things better, not because I want to attach my name to as many bills as possible.
|
|
Capt. Sir Mick Preston
Capitán of the Zouaves
Posts: 6,511
Talossan Since: 9-21-2006
Knight Since: 10-12-2010
Motto: Cuimhnichibh air na daoine bho'n d'thainig sibh
|
Post by Capt. Sir Mick Preston on Mar 24, 2008 19:25:59 GMT -6
"Just a day of reflection... Reflect on it and make yourself a better person for it. That is my intention."
Count on my vote.
|
|
|
Post by Dréu Gavárþic'h on Mar 24, 2008 19:27:48 GMT -6
Wow. That was an incredibly articulate speech there. Bravo.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 24, 2008 19:47:49 GMT -6
Thank you Mick and Dreu.
With recent clarifications made, I adjusted the wording of the bill. I invite everybody's feedback.
|
|
|
Post by Owen Edwards on Mar 26, 2008 16:28:12 GMT -6
I'm not really sure it's appropriate to list specific incidences - inasmuch as some of those people will have different views on. What if one considered Bhuto a corrupt Western pawn rather than an effective leader interested in real democracy? I believe the latter, but mileage may vary.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 26, 2008 17:01:52 GMT -6
What if you believe the Jews are an insidious race that needs to be destroyed?
What if you feel that African Americans are best used for picking cotton?
A person's personal view does not make these events less significant. If you feel that Bhutto (of Blessed Memory) was a corrupt Western pawn, then when you reflect upon that incident, you will view it as a victory within your ethical system.
The objective is self-reflection while keeping in mind these events so that you can learn life lessons to improve yourself. So, personal views on the above situations are going to vary. Part of what makes this bill unique is that they are supposed to vary. We are not issuing a declaration stating the Bhutto's assassination was the worst thing that happened ever, we are simply setting it out there as a significant event one may or may not wish to keep in mind during this day of reflection.
|
|
|
Post by Owen Edwards on Mar 26, 2008 17:05:44 GMT -6
Emotive examples do not an argument make. Hard cases make bad law.
And I don't think "it's about self-reflection, natch" answers the core concern, because we are plainly citing those as examples of hideous crimes and tragedies. Add Hitler's suicide in the bunker to the list of things to remember. Then we can all consider what we think about it.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 26, 2008 17:21:30 GMT -6
Ok, fine. I was giving you my tactful answer. I suppose the real answer is that if you think that the Spanish Flu Pandemic was one of the greatest things to happen in history or are glad that Bhutto (of Blessed Memory) was killed or think that the Shoah was "neat" then I imagine you'll be made quite uncomfortable by this Act.
However, I did my very best to only list situations which are generally regarded as "horrific." As I said, I did not mention the bombing of the King David Hotel, I did not bring up the assassination of Yitzhak Rabin, there is no instance where I discuss the death of Yasser Arafat or the Assassination of Anwar Sadat.
So I suppose this is my answer. Does anything on the list offend you? If not, then I am not willing to strike all of these events from the list, or even just the one regarding the Bhutto Assassination because we foresee a situation in which a person may become offended (unless the offense is completely reasonable).
If you think that 9/11 was a joke, then tough, go ahead and be offended, let that be your reflection for the day.
|
|
|
Post by Owen Edwards on Mar 26, 2008 17:31:17 GMT -6
I actually think THAT was your tactful answer, given that it actually responded seriously and honestly rather than emotively.
You know what? I don't disagree with the fact all of those are tragedies (though hey, I find the mass deception/delusion and self-induced slaughter of the Japanese, German and Italian peoples in WW2 as tragic, if not more tragic, than the casualties amongst the ranks of the liberating armies - and I think that's a problem - what's your litmus for your list of test cases?). I just think having a specific list, with some edgy examples as well as many widely-accepted ones, is an unnecessary addition, at least where the implication is that these are the PARTICULAR tragedies and crimes to reflect on.
It speaks of didacticism.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 26, 2008 18:39:56 GMT -6
I actually think THAT was your tactful answer, given that it actually responded seriously and honestly rather than emotively. You know what? I don't disagree with the fact all of those are tragedies (though hey, I find the mass deception/delusion and self-induced slaughter of the Japanese, German and Italian peoples in WW2 as tragic, if not more tragic, than the casualties amongst the ranks of the liberating armies - and I think that's a problem - what's your litmus for your list of test cases?). I just think having a specific list, with some edgy examples as well as many widely-accepted ones, is an unnecessary addition, at least where the implication is that these are the PARTICULAR tragedies and crimes to reflect on. It speaks of didacticism. I will say again. Everyone wants to pass legislation condemning certain acts. We cannot spend every Clark sifting through the "Drugs are Bad" genre of legislation. And so I included some of the events that were condemned in failed legislation. Would you feel better if I included ONLY those actions? I have to say, a bill that commemorates past tragedies but only cites three events, among them being the Assassination of Bhutto, the Armenian Genocide and the plight of the Burmese would pretty much evoke a call to include more significant events, like the Holocaust. The alternative is to mention no incidents at all. But then what is this a memorial of? Then it is just reflection day. While reflection day is good, it is also insanely vague. As I have said elsewhere, the purpose of this day is to reflect upon these events and see how we can use them to improve ourselves. I'm sorry as it seems you don't like that response, but that IS the purpose of the bill. Without providing a list of events that one may or may not reflect upon, it sort of loses its intensity. So, alternatively, we can scrap the entire concept and not memorialize anything. As I said, I always remain open to this option.
|
|
|
Post by Owen Edwards on Mar 27, 2008 5:48:52 GMT -6
I don't think it does lose its point when not accompanied with a list, for one.
And for two, one point about individual (if time consuming) pieces of legislation on similar topics is that they may be individually debated etc.
I support the purpose of this Bill - to establish a day of memorial - but consider the appended list an un-necessary piece of didacticism.
|
|
|
Post by Dréu Gavárþic'h on Mar 27, 2008 5:59:04 GMT -6
Think about it like this:
This is basically Talossa's Tish B'av.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 27, 2008 10:29:59 GMT -6
That's kind of what I was going for.
Folks, there is a difference between trying to prevent legitimate problems in the future and thinking up obscure problems that may occur if very specific conditions then trying to correct it.
|
|
Hooligan
Squirrel King of Arms; Cunstaval to Maricopa
Posts: 7,325
Talossan Since: 7-12-2005
Motto: PRIMA CAPIAM POCULA
Baron Since: 11-20-2005
Count Since: 9-8-2012
|
Post by Hooligan on Mar 27, 2008 11:35:16 GMT -6
I see both sides of the argument here, I guess. My gut instinct is to leave the list off (as being necessarily incomplete, especially as -- and may God forbid, but I sadly doubt He will -- future tragedies worthy of reflection occur). The point of this bill, as I understand it, is to put an end (and I welcome it) to the natural desire to memorialise every tragedy with legislation, which always leads to the same discussion, that "if we memorialise this, why didn't we memorialise that? That was much worse than this!" "Oh no it wasn't; this was worse," etc., etc. So in this sense, including a list (despite inclusion of the very obvious and necessary "and all other..." clause) kind of defeats the purpose of the bill to be all-inclusive and avoid the silly "which was worse" debates.
The argument for the list is that without it, we may as well pass a law saying that "On this day, Talossans think thoughts." I guess, though, that with proper wording about the type of thoughts and reflection and the nature of the events being memorialised (using generalisations such as "loss of life, political assassination, terrorism, genocide and mass murder", the list could be omitted.
Hooligan
|
|