I’d have to think about that. For me to be embarrassed, I think I would have to have some control over how the group behaved and saw my control or persuasion as having failed.
Embarrassed because some white guy was racist? Why? How do I own his actions because of an accident of melanin in my skin? I certainly do not hold blacks to any guilt by association when a person of that birth (or cultural background) does something evil or foolish. Do I have to be embarrassed that Charles Whitman was white? Does every black person, (or even every black person in the U.S.) have to be embarrassed that John Allen Muhammad is black?
In thinking it over, I guess I might have been embarrassed if some kid at my 300 student high school had trashed some other school’s property in an excessive display of “school spirit” or I would have probably been embarrassed when I worked at a small consulting firm if one of my co-workers had really hacked a project, because my name would have been intimately associated with their actions through our (relatively small) community. But had I gone to school at some university of 35,000 students, I cannot see how I would have been embarrassed if some kid from a distant department was caught cheating. (Have you ever been embarrassed to live in a large city because there were rapists, murderers, or child abusers in that city?)
My parish has over two thousand families (giving nearly 10,000 people). How am I supposed to be responsible for all of their actions?
My denomination has nearly a billion adherents.
Christianity makes up around one third of the world’s population.
(Even atheism has a few wing-nuts; do SDMB atheists have to be embarrassed when one of them acts dumb?)
I find it difficult to see how anyone would choose to be embarrassed by some other person having some limited number of beliefs in common simply because at some level of human sorting, lumping, and splitting each of us has been thrown into a column with the same heading.
Dude, the stupid is burning my hands when I try to open the links. I’m not saying the links are broken (I can’t get close enough to click one them), only that they’re very, very dangerous.
Without remotely endorsing Kirk Cameron’s intellectual reasoning or debate chops, I would like to represent to you now that I, a believing and practicing Roman Catholic, have read the entire Bible. In fact, I’ve read all of the New American edition, and all of the King James Version.
Now, I certainly agree you don’t know me, but perhaps it can be said that you know of me, and perhaps this knowledge could interest you in changing your statement if ever you feel compelled to make it again, down the line.
My apologies if I offended, Bricker (and see my later qualification of that statement). Certainly there are some Christians who have read the entire Bible, and it would probably be better if more of them (like yourself) had done so. I’ll admit that I’ve tried, but I got bogged down somewhere in Numbers. My intention by that statement was to refute the ludicrous claim that one could not read the Bible without becomming Christian, and to ridicule the minority of self-identified Christians who make similar claims, not to in any way slight Christians as a whole.
I tried the third of those links. One of the tract covers right below their list looks rather salacious at first glance. I also have a craving for one of those God biscuits, somehow. With lots of butter! I hope they don’t mean biscuit as in cookie.
we don’t even control our own actions much less the actions of others, so if you believed that, your criteria would have you pretty much disavowing any responsibility not only for other people’s actions but yours as well. Of course, that’s using the word control on one end of the spectrum where you have the actual power to change things conclusively, but by using control on the other end of the spectrum where your persuasive power is possibly just a voice in the darkness, that kind of control could be considered to have a much larger range, I would think.
I don’t know that anyone “should” feel embarrassment over these events, but I do know that they sometimes do. I know that the I saw some comments from Korean-Americans after the Virginia Tech. incident that they hoped that there wouldn’t be any stigma attached to the incident. Stigma is a sense of embarrassment.
Another interesting theory. You seem to be advocating the monkey sphere theory of control/embarrassment. The monkey sphere theory of caring works because we can only care about what we know about. But it doesn’t seem to extend to what we have control over since as I noted above, we don’t have a great deal of control over other people’s actions even if they’re standing right next to us or live in the same house that we do. Of course, that depends on how you defined control.
I don’t think this analogy works. If a serial murderer got on national television and said that he was responsible for several murders and will be committing more and is proud to be from X city, that person would probably be arrested or hunted down pretty quickly. In this instance, it’s not that we’re proud to be associated with them–it’s that we don’t know who and where they are.
In this case, Kirk Cameron got on national TV saying that he represents Christians and that he can prove that God exists without using faith.
Do you feel any responsibility or call to action to bring awareness or try to stop those people who pollute the earth? As a group, those people represent the whole human population.
I don’t think they “have to”, but I think they often do. In each of those Pittings of you that you spoke of earlier, in each one that I read, there was at least one atheist who came in and said that the Pitting didn’t have to do with the OP author being an atheist, it had to do with the OP author being an idiot. Whether it was true or not, at least some people felt compelled to say it.
Another example is the controversy over Richard Dawkins’ material. I see a lot of discussion over whether this form of “atheism” is justified.
As you noted, you do sometimes feel embarrassment in groups where you feel you have a high degree of control. Do you choose this?
I don’t think that anyone chooses to be embarrassed. I think it’s the flip-side of the function of being proud to be associated with a group. If you’re proud to be a graduate of a prestigious school, then the actions of those that you disagree with might cause you embarrassment. Of course, you can actively choose to dissociate yourself from their actions, but that might also cause one to speak out against them.
I still find it odd that so few Christians feel the need to speak out against the actions of people like Kirk Cameron supposedly representing their views.
While you’re praying, could you put in a good word for the rest of us, please.
Perhaps something like:
And please Please PLEASE protect everyone else from your fan club also.
