Some advice please

[Purple]

For the love of god, Purple, can you stop it with the holier-than-thou bullshit? Not to mention the delicious irony of you pounding your chest about your own selflessness when in another thread recently you so proudly crowed about how you would never do anything to inconvenience yourself for the sake of others, but it's not a surprise that the self-aggrandizing pseudo-intellectual puppet show you like to put on for all of us is logically inconsistent.

On the contrary, what I constantly support is the notion that one should be selfless toward ones family and selfish toward the rest of the world. I would die for my parents any day but would also not give a dam if a thousand random strangers were executed. Blood is everything.

That by the way is what makes this situation so complicated morally. The fact that both the victim and criminal are of his blood makes this a moral knot that is impossible to untangle.

"Selflessness" is the fucking OPPOSITE of what you are proposing, because there is nothing "selfless" about ignoring crimes just because you feel too uncomfortable to call the authorities or take action. That's not being selfless, that's being SELFISH, and covering it up under the guise of a birthday party to pretend that you aren't just taking the easiest possible way route, the one that requires you to do nothing.

Putting ones own peace of mind and emotion before the happiness of others is selfish. Thus the selfish thing to do here is clearly to report them and get him self happy and feeling good even if it means ruining the party. And the selfless thing is feeling like shit for the entirety of the party for the sake of making his father happy and than reporting it later when it no longer jeopardizes the event.

The number one priority in this situation, believe it or not, isn't a fucking birthday party. It's holding guilty parties responsible for their crimes. If the latter isn't feasible for some reason, then he can worry about putting on the party. But there's nothing fucking special about a 60th birthday party that takes precedence over the fact that there are god-damned pedophiles involved.

That's where we disagree. The way I see it those crimes aren't going anywhere. They have been waiting for years to be reported they can wait for a couple of weeks longer. You are just being overly emotional. Thing with your brain and not your outrage.

[Simon_Jester]

Talked to Child Services and they handed it off to the State Police to investigate, so out of my court now and hopfully my limited information will be enough.

Have you considered changing up the plans for the birthday into something smaller and more manageable, preferably including only the relatives you're NOT tempted to beat the tar out of?

[Zwinmar]

Unfortunately I only have one vote out of five in that department and I have tried to exclude him from the party and was over ruled.

As for him being blood, well for his transgressions I am quickly coming to the point were I consider him excluded, if I haven't already.

[Simon_Jester]

Well, it's simple.

Assuming he doesn't get arrested for child abuse in the next month, you have four choices:

1) Grit your teeth and host the party, as planned, with Uncle Pedo present.
2) Somehow manage to exclude Uncle Pedo from the party without explaining why.
3) Put your cards on the table with whoever you need to, saying "look, I love my father and I love my family but I cannot stand to attend, much less host, a party with Uncle Pedo present, it's him or me."
4) Unilaterally call off the party without explaining why, contact your father (who, it seems, you're really doing this for), explain to him your reasons, and try to find another way of celebrating the birthday.

I may have missed an option but I can't think of any others.

[Ziggy Stardust]

On the contrary, what I constantly support is the notion that one should be selfless toward ones family and selfish toward the rest of the world. I would die for my parents any day but would also not give a dam if a thousand random strangers were executed. Blood is everything.

That by the way is what makes this situation so complicated morally. The fact that both the victim and criminal are of his blood makes this a moral knot that is impossible to untangle.

It isn't complicated morally. The morality of the situation is very simple, because blood is an arbitrary connection. If you have abusive parents, you have absolutely zero obligation under any moral system to continue connecting with them.

You are confusing emotions with morality. This situation is complicated EMOTIONALLY. Because family ties carry with them all sorts of emotional baggage and history. But this is not a moral conundrum.

Putting ones own peace of mind and emotion before the happiness of others is selfish.

WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT YOU ARE PROPOSING, you moron. You are proposing ignoring the volatile and criminal situation in this family, just to avoid an awkward dinner conversation.

Thus the selfish thing to do here is clearly to report them and get him self happy and feeling good even if it means ruining the party.

Do you really think that reporting them is going to make them happy? The entire reason this situation is fucking complicated is because reporting them ISN'T AN EASY THING TO DO. Reporting them isn't going to make him happy, but it's the RIGHT thing to do.

And the selfless thing is feeling like shit for the entirety of the party for the sake of making his father happy and than reporting it later when it no longer jeopardizes the event.

Burying your head in the sand, ignoring criminal behavior, and IGNORING THE FEELINGS OF THE OTHER PEOPLE IN YOUR FAMILY WHO HAVE BEEN VICTIMIZED, all for the sake of avoiding an awkward dinner conversation, is inherently and viciously selfish. Your attempts to make that course of action seem heroic are borderline pathetic.

That's where we disagree. The way I see it those crimes aren't going anywhere. They have been waiting for years to be reported they can wait for a couple of weeks longer. You are just being overly emotional. Thing with your brain and not your outrage.

I'm not being emotional at all, because I have zero connection to this situation. You are the one that seems to think that avoiding awkward dinner conversations is somehow a moral imperative, which is about as emotional as it gets. You honestly think that this is "thinking with your brain"?

[Purple]

It isn't complicated morally. The morality of the situation is very simple, because blood is an arbitrary connection. If you have abusive parents, you have absolutely zero obligation under any moral system to continue connecting with them.

You are confusing emotions with morality. This situation is complicated EMOTIONALLY. Because family ties carry with them all sorts of emotional baggage and history. But this is not a moral conundrum.

And this is where you've lost me. So much so that it's not worth trying to argue with you any more. As far as I am concerned the obligation that comes with family ties is the strongest one that can exist. And if you do not believe in the bond of blood and obligation of blood there really is nothing I can say to change your mind.

But I will say one thing. That must be a cold and lonely world you live in.

[Zeropoint]

But I will say one thing. That must be a cold and lonely world you live in.

This attempted insult would be much more effective coming from someone who hadn't consistently displayed a lack of empathy and concern for their fellow humans. Ziggy Stardust is looking better than you are here, Purple.

[Purple]

But I will say one thing. That must be a cold and lonely world you live in.

This attempted insult would be much more effective coming from someone who hadn't consistently displayed a lack of empathy and concern for their fellow humans. Ziggy Stardust is looking better than you are here, Purple.

That's because a lot of you labor under the mistaken idea that one should have equal levels of emotional empathy toward all human beings as opposed to valuing those close to you more than those you have newer met. And this skews your view of me.

[Zeropoint]

Well, it's not so much that as it is the whole "birthday parties are more important than preventing child abuse" thing.

[Purple]

Well, it's not so much that as it is the whole "birthday parties are more important than preventing child abuse" thing.

It's not about the party it self. It is about the family. Or rather the good part of it. Simply put I gathered from the whole situation that he is somewhat estranged from his family (after all he could not manage to gather them all together in as long as a decade ). And he was in the army implying a potential for long stays away from his family. And that thus this party is, or at least was up until this unfortunate discovery a way for him to reconnect and reforge the bonds with his father and extended family, most of whom are not in fact the two pedophiles and their enablers. So it is a special event not just for him or the father but for the entire sacred bond of family unity.

Thus it is by far preferable from my point of view that he goes there and reforges those bonds and than lays off the issue for a short while until the impressions set. And than a month or two later when there is no event and everything seems peaceful enough the police can suddenly receive an anonymous tip about a pedophile they need to follow up on.

[Zwinmar]

Update: Just got off phone, he was arrested yesterday.Here

[Iroscato]

Update: Just got off phone, he was arrested yesterday.Here

You did the right thing man. Let's hope justice of some kind is done.

[Simon_Jester]

[applause]

That simplifies matters tremendously, I would think- you can have a birthday party without Uncle Pedo now, right?

[LaCroix]

I'm glad you did it. I think you are, as well.

Enjoy the party.

[His Divine Shadow]

My advice to that guy would be to avoid the visit if at all possible. If not possible avoid the subject and just try and not get into an argument at all. It does not matter if you believe the stories or not. A small town in the middle of nowhere where pedophile rapists are tolerated sounds like the kind of place that would also tolerate you going missing. Just have a pretend fun family time, smile, laugh and sleep with one eye open. And than get out of there quickly and newer ever think about this whole thing ever again in your life.

Are you sure people know? Seems a bit prejudiced to say because it's a small town they tolerate pedos, as if rural people are degenerates.

Not that relevant to the thread, but the sentiment and what it implies bugs me, for a place that should be liberal and enlightened.

[Lord Revan]

While I wouldn't say rural people are degenerates or pedophile apologist most rural (or from rural backround) I know (which isn't that many I'll admit) would not tolerate such things, that said rural people do tend to be more conservative then people in larger communities, though that might just be due to lack of alternative opinions.

In this particular case I suspect it was more a case of not wanting to belive said person could be a "bad guy" (who was if what is told was true rather connected within the community), again returning to the conservative nature of such communities.

That's assuming people were aware of the issue in the first place.

[Purple]

Are you sure people know? Seems a bit prejudiced to say because it's a small town they tolerate pedos, as if rural people are degenerates.

Not that relevant to the thread, but the sentiment and what it implies bugs me, for a place that should be liberal and enlightened.

It's not really about urban vs rural but about the size of the community. Relatively small groups in general, be they separated out by space (like a small rural town) or some other division (like say an ethnic ghetto or religious congregation or sports team) tend to, at least where I am from produce relatively tight knit communities where most people hang out together and where people know a lot about each other, even if they aren't telling. Gossip after all is the only thing that moves faster than light. And this usually brings with it an unspoken sense of "don't ask, don't tell" because if you start talking about me I also have quite a few things to say about you and suddenly everyone's skeletons are out in the open. And a combination of that and general friendliness implied by the fact you expect these people to be your neighbors for the rest of your life means that people in small communities tend to turn a blind eye to a lot of things for the sake of not aggravating the community and muddying the water so to speak.

[His Divine Shadow]

Well it went about as I expected.

[Tiriol]

Well, it's not so much that as it is the whole "birthday parties are more important than preventing child abuse" thing.

It's not about the party it self. It is about the family. Or rather the good part of it. Simply put I gathered from the whole situation that he is somewhat estranged from his family (after all he could not manage to gather them all together in as long as a decade ). And he was in the army implying a potential for long stays away from his family. And that thus this party is, or at least was up until this unfortunate discovery a way for him to reconnect and reforge the bonds with his father and extended family, most of whom are not in fact the two pedophiles and their enablers. So it is a special event not just for him or the father but for the entire sacred bond of family unity.

Thus it is by far preferable from my point of view that he goes there and reforges those bonds and than lays off the issue for a short while until the impressions set. And than a month or two later when there is no event and everything seems peaceful enough the police can suddenly receive an anonymous tip about a pedophile they need to follow up on.

Yes, because the people under discussion here wouldn't see it as a massive betrayal. "First you weaseled your way back into our fold and then you made these accusations against one of us?!"

Your moral system is based on some archaic notion that ties of blood, which you cannot choose, trump law and society and person's own moral code. There's a huge difference between suffering a prick of a relative yet still giving him or her the benefit of doubt when push comes to shove and treating him or her with courtesy; and suffering a prick of relative whom you suspect to be a criminal and someone who routinely engage in abuse of others. First one can be seen as basic decency; the second one is simply being willfully blind and letting a possible monster continue his practices (it's up to the court of law to decide whether he's guilty or not, of course, but we are not talking about that).

Only under system where familial relations are all that matters are people expected to put their (extended) family's happiness before all else. Such tribal attitude is disgusting.

[LaCroix]

Also, since the victims are also family members in this case, the tribal argument falls even more apart.
Protecting one tribe member that actively harms multiple others?

[Simon_Jester]

It is also interesting to note that the 'moral system' Purple describes led him to give certain advice. Meanwhile, Zwinmar basically did the exact opposite of Purple's advice, and got one of the best results he could have desired: an opportunity to hold the birthday party, with Uncle Pedo out of the picture and about to be punished for his crimes.

[Adam Reynolds]

Only under system where familial relations are all that matters are people expected to put their (extended) family's happiness before all else. Such tribal attitude is disgusting.

Not to mention that an extension of that tribal attitude is why wars are fought, based on the idea that an outside group has so much less value than yours that they deserve to die for the crime of being outsiders. If people weren't locked into such tribal attitudes, the world would be a much better place.

[Purple]

A man who says that he does not put him self first, those close to him second and everyone else third is lying. That's just fact. The only question is if he is lying to us or to him self as well. The later being a real possibility in the completely likely case that he was newer placed in any situation of any significant actual problem beyond silly 1st world nonsense.

[Simon_Jester]

Purple, virtually every civilized person is capable of deciding that a criminal relative no longer deserves their protection and support.

You are utterly unqualified to say that people who behave this way are "fooling themselves," because you have literally no notion of how humans think.

[Zeropoint]

A man who says that he does not put him self first, those close to him second and everyone else third is lying. That's just fact.

And we know this is a fact by the way that no human being has EVER, under any circumstances, engaged in any kind of self-sacrifice for the sake of those around them. There are, for example, no people who have devoted their lives to helping others or bettering mankind. There are no people who put their own lives at risk to save the lives of others, and there has certainly never, ever, been even a single human being who gave up their own live to save someone else's life.

</sarcasm>