|
Post by robeiae on Oct 4, 2017 7:38:16 GMT -5
It's an auto-response from many politicians, celebrities, and everyday people after any tragedy: "our thoughts and prayers are with the victims and their families," or some such thing. Another now-common auto-response from others (in all three groups) is something along the lines of "thoughts and prayers are not enough." And I would agree with the latter, insofar as offering thoughts and prayers cannot tangibly help anything, though at the same time I tend to take expressions of sympathy and compassion at face value. Anyway, opposing views: Why ‘thoughts and prayers’ is starting to sound so profanev. Thoughts And Prayers Are Not Useless After Tragedy, But A Call To ActionI think there's something to be said for social media's role in all of this, insofar as people feel compelled to say something publicly after every single tragedy, man-made or natural, in the US or in some other part of the world.
|
|
|
Post by michaelw on Oct 4, 2017 7:47:23 GMT -5
And I would agree with the latter, insofar as offering thoughts and prayers cannot tangibly help anything, though at the same time I tend to take expressions of sympathy and compassion at face value. I don't, especially not from politicians. "Thoughts and prayers" often feels to me like a standardized political trope, more than a genuine expression of sympathy. It wouldn't surprise me if Trump--for example--hasn't actually offered up prayers for anyone, despite his suggestions otherwise.
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Oct 4, 2017 7:53:42 GMT -5
The problem with that angle--for me--is you end up in a "every Congressperson is corrupt, except for mine" situation, more often than not, where sincerity is an ideological assessment.
|
|
|
Post by michaelw on Oct 4, 2017 8:18:56 GMT -5
That seems possible.
For me, when I look at someone like Trump, the perceived lack of sincerity is almost unavoidable, IMO. He claims the bible is his favorite book, but he also--at the same time--apparently doesn't read. So has he actually read the bible? I dunno. I would tend to doubt it, though of course I could be mistaken.
He fits the mold of someone who seems to care more about the virtue-signaling benefits of professing religiosity, more than the genuine thing. I dunno if that's really a matter of ideology though, from my POV. I would bet there are many politicians--both left and right--who are out there playing the same part, because it's expected of them.
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Oct 4, 2017 9:31:32 GMT -5
"Thoughts and prayers" are an entirely sufficient response to someone else's tragedy. A dear friend of my wife has been battling Stage 4 cancer for nearly two years after one clinic told her to go home and start making final preparations. She's back in the hospital and deteriorating rapidly. A long-planned vacation for November may not come off as scheduled because the thought of having fun out of the city while her friend is dying is an abhorrent nightmare for my wife. Our thoughts and prayers are appropriate and sincere to my wife's friend. Thoughts and prayers are also an admission. They are an admission there is nothing else we can do for her. Congress can do something else besides send out thoughts and prayers. They can get off their lazy butts and actually DO something about the ease in which filth can easily obtain and stockpile weapons to kill as many people as they can as fast as they can squeeze the trigger. That would require some courage and courage is a rare animal in Washington and when it comes to defying the NRA, there is none to be found amidst the Republican caucus. Every Member of Congress Who Took Money From the NRA and Tweeted 'Thoughts and Prayers' to Las Vegas Thoughts and prayers from Congress are a synonym for nothing will change. Thoughts and prayers from Congress are bullshit.
|
|
|
Post by Vince524 on Oct 4, 2017 11:50:34 GMT -5
The being against thoughts and prayers seems like a way of telling one side if you don't support this here remedy that we say will fix things then you're thoughts and prayers are an insult and you're putting the support of the NRA before the victims, and you don't care about dead kids, or what have you. It's shaming, and I'm not a fan of that.
The issue is complicated, especially when the bodies aren't even cold yet. We don't even know what happened, yet we're supposed to know what new law to enact that would have prevented it. Most people who aren't a part of using guns don't know the different terms, and a new law banning a gun that wasn't used in this attack isn't going to solve anything.
I don't have a problem with anyone offering thoughts and prayers after a tragedy like this. Is it particularly helpful? No, not unless you really believe prayers can help. Some do and their offered in earnest. But when a family member dies either from illness, a car accident or murder, the go to response is, "I'm sorry." I didn't give anyone cancer, hit anyone with my car or kill someone, so I'm not apologizing. I'm trying to convey that I'm sorry for your pain and loss. And usually, that's understood.
Do I think that there's shame to be had for the fact that we're not able to stop this? Yes, lawmakers should be ashamed. But IMHO, there's plenty to go around. It's not just the reflexive response from the pro 2nd amendment crowd to listen to NRA lobbyists that are to blame, it's the heated rhetoric from the other side that justify that, and gin up the idea that if you give an inch, they'll take a mile. Instead of an honest attempt to come together, both sides are in it to score political points. They don't care who gets hurt in the meanwhile. Politically, each side benefits from the status quo.
I actually talked today to a customer who owns gun shops. He was horrified by this, but also knew it would help sales because of the talk of gun bans. He told me that he voted for HRC, not because he liked her but because her stance was good for sales of guns. And now they're in what they call the Trump Slump. People think their 2nd amendment rights are safe, so there's no reason to buy guns right away before someone passes a law. He wasn't being cold hearted about it, but it is what it is.
|
|
|
Post by Amadan on Oct 5, 2017 16:56:30 GMT -5
Thoughts and prayers are like the yellow ribbon magnets people stick on the back of their cars - literally the very LEAST you could do.
In some cases, like a friend with cancer, it's a heartfelt expression of solidarity and acknowledgement that there really is nothing more you can do. But if you're responding to a public tragedy with "thoughts and prayers" no one cares unless you're also sending money. My FB feed is full of thoughts and prayers (and angry rants). La de da.
|
|
|
Post by Don on Oct 5, 2017 17:33:53 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 5, 2017 20:10:36 GMT -5
When it comes to people's personal tragedies, I think thoughts and/or prayers (the latter if the people in question are religious), are generally all you CAN say safely. As I know from going through some personal grief myself, more than that often ends up being worse.
National tragedies, though, when you are a public figure, are something else. You have to do better. People want to hear what you're going to do to help, and need to know you understand the full scale of the disaster and are on it with more than thoughts and prayers.
And on the prayers -- if a public figure is clearly a person of faith, fine. The prayers of the Bushes and the Obamas never rubbed me the wrong way because they felt genuine, and as long as they aren't demanding nonreligious people be religious, it's all good with me and probably comforting to many.
But Trump -- his prayers ring all wrong to me. The man NEVER talked about God or went to church until he became president. His life sure doesn't reflect deep faith. Melania may be another story (she was baptized a catholic in a Soviet country at a time it was forbidden, and she went full-scale black veil to meet the pope -- I suspect she is indeed religious).
But Trump? He sounds and looks deeply uncomfortable when he talks about God. I'm thinking maybe he should leave it to others on whom it sits more naturally.
Also, he should stop throwing fucking paper towels at hurricane survivors and congratulating them on having fewer casualties than survivors of "real disasters" like Katrina. FFS. He was hatched on Mars, I swear.
|
|
|
Post by Vince524 on Oct 5, 2017 20:17:54 GMT -5
Martians would like to object.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 5, 2017 20:21:10 GMT -5
He was incubated in an Onion article?
|
|
|
Post by Vince524 on Oct 6, 2017 11:29:36 GMT -5
The auto response on thoughts and prayers when something happens is it's a natural response and nobody, Politian or otherwise should be shamed for it. If we're talking death from a shooting, or death from a hurricane, to just death because someone over the age of 107 dies of natural causes.
I have no problem telling people in a position of power that more than that is needed when it is, re gun deaths or natural disaster. If the President (Any one of 'em) had no response to a natural disaster other than thoughts and prayers, we'd be outrages. Not because of the thoughts and prayers, but because of the lack of response beyond that.
Same with gun murders.
However, shaming people who offer thoughts and prayers that they have no right because they don't see the solution the same as you do is also wrong and not helpful at all, and that's what seems to be the current trend. And it's not just aimed at politicians but also at everyday citizens who don't vote the way some want. And that outrage seems to be held by the left. President Obama offered his and Mrs. Obama's thoughts and prayers for the victims of Los Vegas. Yet there's not much aimed his way. (Nor should there be in this regard)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 6, 2017 16:54:56 GMT -5
Who's "shaming" anyone here?
I just think
(1) it comes off so painfully phony when Trump does it because nothing about his life and habits indicate religion means anything to him, and better to leave God out of it if you come off looking as uncomfortable as he does (Did you see his speech? he looked as comfortable talking about God as I would.) With the Bushes and Obama, it does not look that way because it is known that their faith is important to them. They belong to a church. They attend it. They did so before they became President. Ditto, actually, on all of our former Presidents. Whereas Trump said he attended a church that the pastor confirmed he never did attend, and he seemed to have some trouble even saying what his faith was. (Later I can dig up cites for that, if you like. I know I read newpaper articles on it.)
I think talking about God is one of those things that comes off fine when you seem sincere, and jarringly fake when you don't.
(2) private people are one thing. thoughts and prayers may be enough. But politicians -- at least those with a relevant jurisdiction -- need to do more than that. When 9/11 hit, if Giuliani, Bush, Clinton et al had just said "thoughts and prayers", I would have been fucking steaming.
and
(3) As far as private people go, I personally do not mind when religious people tell me they are praying for me after a tragedy. I know what they mean, and that it is intended as a kindness. I hear it as "I'm thinking of you."
But, ya know, when they know damn well I'm NOT religious, and they go past saying they're praying for me to talking extensively about God, it really... is the opposite of comforting. Religious people? Please consider not doing this, OK?
See, I adored my dad and I miss him horribly every day. He had a terrible end and he deserved so much better. I still, two years later, well up with tears just thinking about him. It really would be wonderful if I could console myself by thinking he's in a better place, or everything happened for a reason, or that I'll see him again. But, see, I don't believe any of that. And since I don't believe any of that, every word of it grates at best, and at worst is a dagger to my heart. Don't you fucking dare tell me that God wanted my Dad to suffer like that for a "reason." Don't torture me by reminding me I'll never see him again (which is what you do when you insist that I will). And that little box where his ashes are is not a better place.
I don't know, maybe religious people like hearing that stuff. I don't. I think before you go past "I'm praying for you," consider whether you're sure the grieving person feels the same before you dish it out.
If a person DOESN'T know I'm an atheist, I cut more slack for them going on and on with religious talk at me -- though I still wonder internally "really? someone finds it comforting to hear that God made their loved one die horribly for a reason?"
|
|
|
Post by Angie on Oct 6, 2017 17:29:49 GMT -5
I have less of a problem with "thoughts and prayers" than I do with " I'll pray for you" (the latter only in certain circumstances. I get that it's a reflexive response for people who don't know what else to say in the midst of a tragedy, and I'm fine with them expressing their sympathy/sadness/horror that way. But, like Cass, I DO have a problem with it when it's done by a politician who's clearly only pandering by saying it.
|
|
|
Post by Amadan on Oct 7, 2017 8:17:53 GMT -5
The auto response on thoughts and prayers when something happens is it's a natural response and nobody, Politian or otherwise should be shamed for it. If we're talking death from a shooting, or death from a hurricane, to just death because someone over the age of 107 dies of natural causes. I have no problem telling people in a position of power that more than that is needed when it is, re gun deaths or natural disaster. If the President (Any one of 'em) had no response to a natural disaster other than thoughts and prayers, we'd be outrages. Not because of the thoughts and prayers, but because of the lack of response beyond that. Same with gun murders. However, shaming people who offer thoughts and prayers that they have no right because they don't see the solution the same as you do is also wrong and not helpful at all, and that's what seems to be the current trend. And it's not just aimed at politicians but also at everyday citizens who don't vote the way some want. And that outrage seems to be held by the left. President Obama offered his and Mrs. Obama's thoughts and prayers for the victims of Los Vegas. Yet there's not much aimed his way. (Nor should there be in this regard) You're stretching, Vince. Nobody is prayer-shaming here. It's the insincerity ("I'll offer thoughts and prayers as a transparently token gesture, but no concrete efforts to help"), not the praying, that grates.
|
|