So you agree that if I were to beat you with a stick just because I could, I would not need to apologize as the act of stopping would be enough of an admission of wrongdoing?
I only pre-judge those who eat Peeps. Peeps are pretty to look at, but they're really gross to eat. :mrgreen:
These grants are not what was orginially put together. Originally, these grants were to assist folks where insurance is not doing what it was intended to do. The grants were to be monitored by and disbursed in cooperation with the lenders who held mortgages on the homes. Now they have turned into just another "freebie", with no strings attached. Before: House is 40% damaged. Grant is provided to cover the $60,000 in damage not covered by insurance. Lender holds funds and makes disbursements to accredited contractors as work is done. Home gets repaired properly, collateral for mortgage is brought back to original value, borrower has a nice home to live in and they continue to pay their mortgage. Now: House is 40% damaged. Grant is provided as a lump-sum, no-strings-attached hand-out. Borrower takes the $60,000 and abandons the house and their mortgage debt, leaves town and starts new somewhere else with their $60,000.00 windfall. The lender is left holding the bag, and the areas devestated by the hurricane become ghost towns of decimated houses and crime. Yep...that's the way to build a city back up. Those who had a mortgage were required by law to have flood insurance if they lived in a flood zone. Their lenders made sure they had it, because by law the lenders are required to do so. A significant number of homes in the flood zones of New Orleans whose owners did not have a mortgage, made a conscious decision not to have flood insurance - despite knowing the absolute dangers.
But...is your son going to use that apology against you later and sue you for billions of dollars for allowing your toddler to hit him in the head? Is he going to stand up in court and claim that your apology is tantamount to a confession of your responsibility for him getting in the head, and thus you are responsible and must pay? I'd dare to say "no"...and thus your analogy doesn't fit the proportions of the situation we have with the govt apologizing. Because the govt represents us, and our taxpayer dollars are their pocketbook...then yes...they are apologizing on our behalf, without our say-so.
It shows the way to the cash cow. Which is good. But unfortunately, you won't get a say in whether or not money is needed.
There is a difference between apology and empathy. Empathy is defined as: "the intellectual identification with or vicarious experiencing of the feelings, thoughts, or attitudes of another." Empathy is appropriate and helpful in addressing that which cannot be fixed, but which should be acknowledged. I believe that empathy has been given for some time over slavery, but the capacity for empathy is not an abyss. Apology is defined as: "a written or spoken expression of one's regret, remorse, or sorrow for having insulted, failed, injured, or wronged another". Apology entails a confession of responsibility, and in this instance is a very slippery slope. There are those who have been carefully watching and planning their moves based on the various "apologies" being given by both corporations and governmental entities regarding slavery. And their legal complaints are pre-written and ready to go. Some, in fact, have already been filed. Don't think these groups don't also understand the "responsibility" and "ownership" implied by an apology.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/05/AR2007040501976.html?hpid=features1 Be sure to look at the photo gallery, my favorite was Reservoir Peeps! :lol:
Because they still suffer from the effects of slavery, just as the Native Americans still suffer from the effects of the treatment of their ancestors.
If our government had anything to do with it, it would be her son's descendants that would be "entitled" to do that.
And by apologizing you are now offending descendent's of slave owners. I second Magnolia's thoughts between empathy and apology. If the United States government starts apologizing for what someone deems wrong then we will never do anything. It will always offend somebody. You can not rewrite history, but only learn from it. Slavery was wrong and we admitted that when we ended it. Their is no apology needed and anybody still suffering from slavery should pull themselves up by the boot straps and press on. That is why people continue to immigrate to this country. You can start with nothing and become a whole lot, but only if you focus on the future.
Government of the people, by the people and for the people. When the government speaks, it speaks for me (and you and everyone else). So, if the government apologizes, then they are apologizing on my, and your, behalf.
I truly believe any lawsuits of descendants of slavery coming/may come to fruition is going to be a hard one to win. If still living I can see it but otherwise I can't. There are people being enslaved in our country right now, they would win. http://www.iabolish.com/slavery_today/usa/states.html That IS scary. lol
OK, I took this comment: to mean that we do not need to apologize because some other party also did wrong. The analogy about children was simply intended to say that someone else doing wrong does not make the first party less culpable, did you not understand that? I think you did understand that, and chose to address a peripheral issue instead. Which is what I mean by "keeping score" - you seem to be always in "debate team" mode, and unwilling to consider whether anyone else has a valid point. I do not think it is a sign of weakness to consider other people's arguments. Specifically addressing your question above, I do not know if or when the tribal leaders will apologize, but it doesn't effect what I think my leaders should do. I don't have a vote in Africa. Peace & Love, Pat
Exactly why we do not owe anyone an apology. Anybody that thinks it will only be an apology and not lawsuits does not understand the meaning of "Ambulance Chaser". If you were going to start apologizing start with the Indians as we forced them out of their native homes, introduced diseases, blatantly destroyed their lands, ignored their religious beliefs, and basically enslaved them.
I agree, my point is there is still enslavement today. Not because the gov't said it was legal. Thank you for clarifying.
