7 ms·

The son shall not suffer for the iniquity of the father, nor the father suffer for the iniquity of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him

The son shall not suffer for the iniquity of the father, nor the father suffer for the iniquity of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself. -- Ezekiel 18:20 That was aspirational around 590 BC when written, and still is. To isolate children from the iniquity of the parent would require the dissolution of the family.

deleted 4mo ago
[deleted]
boothby 4mo ago
My favorite (dys|u)topian setting; universal child removal to robo-nurseries, gets closer to implementable every day.
- Etheryte 4mo ago
  They more or less did that during the bombing of London, children were evacuated to foster families in the countryside en masse. Luckily they came to terms with the fact that this was an insanely traumatic experience pretty quickly and reverted. It's literally less traumatic for a child to be in an active war zone than to be separated from their parents.
  - kortilla 4mo ago
    Does this apply to babies separated at birth though?
    - moralestapia 4mo ago
      The trauma shifts forward in time, like debt.
  - CamouflagedKiwi 4mo ago
    Unless the child is killed in said active war zone, which was the maximally traumatic outcome they were trying to avoid. Some evacuation was reverted, but there were also later waves; I don't think it was clear that it was overall the wrong thing given the very possible outcomes of heavier bombing or even invasion.
    - nandomrumber 4mo ago
      Well obviously dead child suffer no trauma.
  - trelane 4mo ago
    > It's literally less traumatic for a child to be in an active war zone than to be separated from their parents. Unless they happen to go to war themselves, vanquishing an evil queen with the help of a lion and becoming kings and queens, and reigning for a long while themselves. Those kids seem to mostly turn out alright. Small sample size though.
    - wizzwizz4 4mo ago
      I'm not so sure you're interpreting the data correctly: 1 in 4 such children become "silly, conceited" adults, forgetting all the lessons they learned on their adventure; and 3 in 4 develop vivid visions that result in them getting killed by a train.
      - defrost 4mo ago
        And far far worse outcomes for those children orphaned: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-04-27/child-abuse-royal-commission-perth/5413842 https://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-04-27/child-abuse-royal-com...
    - jhbadger 4mo ago
      One of them (Susan) gets really into nylons and lipstick and is basically damned to hell for it, though.
      - wizzwizz4 4mo ago
        I think the part where she abandoned people, including one prisoner, to a murderous gang of con artists / burgeoning cultists is more relevant than precisely what she abandoned them for. I'm reasonably sure that my interpretation is not how the author (C. S. Lewis) interpreted this part of the story, though. Also, she wasn't damned by the end of the last Narnia book (rather, she's expected to be damned, but it is not yet certain).
  - em-bee 4mo ago
    it seems that at least according to the german wikipedia page about the topic in germany they came to the opposite observation. children who were sent away apparently suffered less than those that stayed in the war zones.
- marginalia_nu 4mo ago
  Amusing how many read excerpts of The Republic and come away thinking it's a utopian project, and not a thought experiment to investigate the nature of justice.
lazyasciiart 4mo ago
And as many adoptive parents know, that doesn’t go so easily.
password4321 4mo ago
You can't quote that without also quoting: Keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear the guilty; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children's children, unto the third and to the fourth generation. -- Exodus 34:7
- incr_me 4mo ago
  Why not?
  - nkrisc 4mo ago
    Probably to show you can pick any choose any bible verse to make whatever point you want. There’s a verse for A and NOT A.
    - Kaliboy 4mo ago
      That's weird. I don't have this with the Bible. But maybe I haven't read those passages. Do you have some examples?
      - jibal 4mo ago
        How is it possible to not be familiar with this common criticism? e.g., Leviticus prohibits wearing clothes woven of two different types of fabric and calls for killing adulterers, anyone who curses their parents, etc. etc. which millions of cherry pickers ignore while constantly referring to the bit about laying with a man as with a woman.
        kulahan 4mo ago
        I think it's extremely possible to be familiar with the criticism without ever having seen specific examples. I certainly haven't. I guess I assumed it was something to do with people misunderstanding the difference between new and old testament, or something to that effect. Your comment also does not seem to present any examples of this. You start talking about it, but then you move on to complaining about cherry-pickers instead of showing some other part of the old testament which happens to encourage wearing clothes woven of two different types or not killing adulterers or something.

deleted 4mo ago

[deleted]

boothby 4mo ago

My favorite (dys|u)topian setting; universal child removal to robo-nurseries, gets closer to implementable every day.

Etheryte 4mo ago
They more or less did that during the bombing of London, children were evacuated to foster families in the countryside en masse. Luckily they came to terms with the fact that this was an insanely traumatic experience pretty quickly and reverted. It's literally less traumatic for a child to be in an active war zone than to be separated from their parents.
- kortilla 4mo ago
  Does this apply to babies separated at birth though?
  - moralestapia 4mo ago
    The trauma shifts forward in time, like debt.
- CamouflagedKiwi 4mo ago
  Unless the child is killed in said active war zone, which was the maximally traumatic outcome they were trying to avoid. Some evacuation was reverted, but there were also later waves; I don't think it was clear that it was overall the wrong thing given the very possible outcomes of heavier bombing or even invasion.
  - nandomrumber 4mo ago
    Well obviously dead child suffer no trauma.
- trelane 4mo ago
  > It's literally less traumatic for a child to be in an active war zone than to be separated from their parents. Unless they happen to go to war themselves, vanquishing an evil queen with the help of a lion and becoming kings and queens, and reigning for a long while themselves. Those kids seem to mostly turn out alright. Small sample size though.
  - wizzwizz4 4mo ago
    I'm not so sure you're interpreting the data correctly: 1 in 4 such children become "silly, conceited" adults, forgetting all the lessons they learned on their adventure; and 3 in 4 develop vivid visions that result in them getting killed by a train.
    - defrost 4mo ago
      And far far worse outcomes for those children orphaned: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-04-27/child-abuse-royal-commission-perth/5413842 https://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-04-27/child-abuse-royal-com...
  - jhbadger 4mo ago
    One of them (Susan) gets really into nylons and lipstick and is basically damned to hell for it, though.
    - wizzwizz4 4mo ago
      I think the part where she abandoned people, including one prisoner, to a murderous gang of con artists / burgeoning cultists is more relevant than precisely what she abandoned them for. I'm reasonably sure that my interpretation is not how the author (C. S. Lewis) interpreted this part of the story, though. Also, she wasn't damned by the end of the last Narnia book (rather, she's expected to be damned, but it is not yet certain).
- em-bee 4mo ago
  it seems that at least according to the german wikipedia page about the topic in germany they came to the opposite observation. children who were sent away apparently suffered less than those that stayed in the war zones.
marginalia_nu 4mo ago
Amusing how many read excerpts of The Republic and come away thinking it's a utopian project, and not a thought experiment to investigate the nature of justice.

lazyasciiart 4mo ago

And as many adoptive parents know, that doesn’t go so easily.

password4321 4mo ago

You can't quote that without also quoting: Keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear the guilty; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children's children, unto the third and to the fourth generation. -- Exodus 34:7

incr_me 4mo ago
Why not?
- nkrisc 4mo ago
  Probably to show you can pick any choose any bible verse to make whatever point you want. There’s a verse for A and NOT A.
  - Kaliboy 4mo ago
    That's weird. I don't have this with the Bible. But maybe I haven't read those passages. Do you have some examples?
    - jibal 4mo ago
      How is it possible to not be familiar with this common criticism? e.g., Leviticus prohibits wearing clothes woven of two different types of fabric and calls for killing adulterers, anyone who curses their parents, etc. etc. which millions of cherry pickers ignore while constantly referring to the bit about laying with a man as with a woman.
      - kulahan 4mo ago
        I think it's extremely possible to be familiar with the criticism without ever having seen specific examples. I certainly haven't. I guess I assumed it was something to do with people misunderstanding the difference between new and old testament, or something to that effect. Your comment also does not seem to present any examples of this. You start talking about it, but then you move on to complaining about cherry-pickers instead of showing some other part of the old testament which happens to encourage wearing clothes woven of two different types or not killing adulterers or something.