Kate, even if he is saying it's God's retribution, that doesn't mean he's saying it was deserved retribution. He could just be saying that God is a huge asshole! If someone slams someone's face into a wall in retribution for having a bean thrown at them, does that mean the bean-thrower deserved to have their face smashed? Of course not! It is a disproportionate response. You know, sort of like killing everyone in the world because many of them were corrupt.
There does seem to be a bit of an internal disconnect in their message, though, doesn't there? "Our God is a loving and compassionate God. He sent Jesus to die for us! Look how awesomely nice he is! Oh, but if you ever do anything he doesn't like he will RAPE you in the fucking FACE! Take that, homos and witchy people!"
These types of people are the worst kind of stupid, and they are extremely gullible. The big problem is when they take that shit and start spreading it to the other gullible, stupid people. Unfortunately, the internet exists, so even keeping them off TV wouldn't work to prevent that.
He is saying this is a result of their pact with the devil, yes? Thus, they chose to make the pact and this is the given result.
Almost...he is saying that is is a result. I don't think he said that it was the only possible result, or that it was guaranteed to happen. Either way, that doesn't mean it was a deserved result. Something being a possible result does not equal something being deserved.
For instance, what if you chose to drive down the highway at night and a drunk driver drove across the median, slammed into your car, and killed you? Your death is a result of your choice and your action, but that doesn't mean you deserved to die. Hitler, on the other hand, orchestrated horrible crimes against craploads of people. As a result of those crimes, he was killed pretty horribly. Most people would argue that that was a deserved result. Sometimes people deserve the results of their actions, and sometimes they don't.
There is a difference between saying "we know why this happened" and saying "they deserved for this to happen." I think this douchebag is saying "we know why this happened," not that it was deserved.
Within the context, it is fairly clear that he thinks the Devil is an "evil" entity and that the Haitian people participated in "evil" and that this was a result of that evil. This fairly strongly implies that he thinks this a fate chosen/coming-to the Haitians. The entire point is that this is from his perspective. Also, in light of his statements regarding Katrina and 9/11, the assumption is minor (at the largest) and leaves just enough wiggle room that he is screaming "I want to spew my hatred, but I don't want to get into too much trouble."
EDIT: When the "I know why this happened" is a result of a made up story and personal belief, it is a choice and fancy and not an objective look at cause and effect.
I think this douchebag is saying "we know why this happened," not that it was deserved.
In Pat Robertson's mind, God is always right. God punished the people of Haiti because they deserved it for making a pact with the devil. Therefore, Pat Robertson thinks the people of Haiti deserved it.
You can think whatever you want about his intentions. I personally also think he's a bigoted ass who looks down on everything he considers "other." However, I think what George and I are saying is simply that he didn't come out and say that this was deserved, so if you are going to attribute that sentiment to him, you should explain that it is implied and that it's not what he actually said. Otherwise you are no better than a Fox News opinion show quoting the health care bill on death panels. If it doesn't actually say it, you should present extrinsic evidence that supports the inference (which you have done...or at least referred to evidence we've already seen).
In your case, there is ample extrinsic evidence to support his sentiment. However, that sentiment is not obvious just from watching that clip about Haiti. Someone who only watches that clip and has no exposure to the other evidence has no grounds for the claim that he thinks the Haitians deserved this.
However, that sentiment is not obvious just from watching that clip about Haiti. Someone who only watches that clip and has no exposure to the other evidence has no grounds for the claim that he thinks the Haitians deserved this.
See now, I disagree. You're giving these guys too much credit.
If I've never seen him before, I'm looking at the video and thinking, okay, this is a Christian Network, with one of the hosts speaking about Haiti's pact with the devil, and it's apparent disaster because of it. Now, what can I infer?
Well, for one, I know that most people who believe in God, especially people who are hosts of Christian Networks, probably think he can do no wrong. It seems to be a fundamental belief. Two, they are saying that god is the one causing the disasters due the Haiti's ties with the Devil.
I believe that we can come to the logical conclusion that, if you think something/someone is infallible, and it/they do something, you think that what it/they did was correct, no matter what it was. This is the definition of infallible.
I think you're approaching this wrong. Most Christians throw morals out of the window when it comes to God's punishment. They think it's morally correct because their morals are based around God.
The thing I don't understand about this whole "Pact with the Devil" business is that, if I were in Haiti and I made a pact with the devil, it would probably involve somehow leaving Haiti. If it didn't, it would surely include some infrastructure improvements - maybe even a "no earthquakes" clause. I kind of think that, if they made a pact with the devil, they were shafted; because from what I understand, Haiti wasn't a very nice place even before the earthquake.
Hitler, on the other hand, orchestrated horrible crimes against craploads of people. As a result of those crimes, he was killed pretty horribly.
Actually, he committed suicide, and ordered his own body burned after the event so it couldn't be dragged through the streets and hung up like Mussolini's.
if they made a pact with the devil, they were shafted; because from what I understand
That's kinda how it goes when you deal with the devil. The devil always wins.
Shouldn't you get at least some benefit from a pact with the devil? Usually, someone gets musical talent, wealth, power, or some such thing. It seems to me like all the Haitians got was a crappy third world hellhole with unstable politics.
That's what gets me. If they made a pact with the devil, what exactly did they get in return?
My fail is that there's a Facebook group going around claiming that Mercury is no longer considered a planet by astronomers, and everyone is believing it.
I'm alright, just unable to bend my left index finger because of the bandaid I put on it. I was cleaned the metal from the knife and thinking to myself, "I think this knife is starting to cut through the paperOWWWW!!!" No biggie, it'll be healed in the morning.
I assure you, I knew instantly what I'd done. However, now that I know these are ludicrously sharp I'm looking forward to cooking tomorrow. ^_^
Oh, I assumed as much. I'm just talking about the sharpest knives I've ever seen, which were these crazy micro-fine scalpels for facial reconstruction and laparoscopic surgery.
Comments
There does seem to be a bit of an internal disconnect in their message, though, doesn't there? "Our God is a loving and compassionate God. He sent Jesus to die for us! Look how awesomely nice he is! Oh, but if you ever do anything he doesn't like he will RAPE you in the fucking FACE! Take that, homos and witchy people!"
These types of people are the worst kind of stupid, and they are extremely gullible. The big problem is when they take that shit and start spreading it to the other gullible, stupid people. Unfortunately, the internet exists, so even keeping them off TV wouldn't work to prevent that.
Thus, they chose to make the pact and this is the given result.
For instance, what if you chose to drive down the highway at night and a drunk driver drove across the median, slammed into your car, and killed you? Your death is a result of your choice and your action, but that doesn't mean you deserved to die. Hitler, on the other hand, orchestrated horrible crimes against craploads of people. As a result of those crimes, he was killed pretty horribly. Most people would argue that that was a deserved result. Sometimes people deserve the results of their actions, and sometimes they don't.
There is a difference between saying "we know why this happened" and saying "they deserved for this to happen." I think this douchebag is saying "we know why this happened," not that it was deserved.
EDIT: When the "I know why this happened" is a result of a made up story and personal belief, it is a choice and fancy and not an objective look at cause and effect.
God punished the people of Haiti because they deserved it for making a pact with the devil.
Therefore, Pat Robertson thinks the people of Haiti deserved it.
In your case, there is ample extrinsic evidence to support his sentiment. However, that sentiment is not obvious just from watching that clip about Haiti. Someone who only watches that clip and has no exposure to the other evidence has no grounds for the claim that he thinks the Haitians deserved this.
If I've never seen him before, I'm looking at the video and thinking, okay, this is a Christian Network, with one of the hosts speaking about Haiti's pact with the devil, and it's apparent disaster because of it. Now, what can I infer?
Well, for one, I know that most people who believe in God, especially people who are hosts of Christian Networks, probably think he can do no wrong. It seems to be a fundamental belief. Two, they are saying that god is the one causing the disasters due the Haiti's ties with the Devil.
I believe that we can come to the logical conclusion that, if you think something/someone is infallible, and it/they do something, you think that what it/they did was correct, no matter what it was. This is the definition of infallible.
I think you're approaching this wrong. Most Christians throw morals out of the window when it comes to God's punishment. They think it's morally correct because their morals are based around God.
That's what gets me. If they made a pact with the devil, what exactly did they get in return?
EDIT: Let me clarify... Why is that a fail?
Also, didn't your Mama warn you about fast women and sharp knives?