Any Black Lives Matter Catholics here?

[Rubee]

I thought about this many years ago: a freedom fighter is someone who attacks the military of an opposing nation or militarily valuable targets while minimizing civilian harm and who follows the Geneva Conventions for doing so.

A terrorist is one who usually attacks civilians and does not follow the Geneva Conventions.

The Geneva Conventions require protecting civilians, including wearing some identifying article of clothing and not hiding among civilians, etc.

Both terrorists and freedom fighters fight for some political type of goal, criminals just act for themselves.

Yes, that’s supposed to be the difference but in practice it appears not so straightforward. There are groups whose terrorist designation no one would dispute. For example, ISIS, Al-Qaeeda, Al-Shabaab, Boko Haram, etc. They’re never the problem. It’s the greyer categories that are not so easy. For example, many Americans categorize Hezbollah as terrorists but not all countries in the world do, even Western countries. They wear uniforms and operate a lot like a standard army. A few months ago, Americans made it a purity test to call a general in the Iranian Army a terrorist. It just seems like a very political decision, at the end of the day, who is a terrorist and who is simply an enemy.

 

[Annie]

. It just seems like a very political decision, at the end of the day, who is a terrorist and who is simply an enemy.

The definition has a lot of parts, which means that some people don’t look like 100% terrorists or freedom fighters.

And people misuse terms for various reasons, sometimes because we lack a needed term.

 

[StudentMI]

It’s the greyer categories that are not so easy. For example, many Americans categorize Hezbollah as terrorists but not all countries in the world do, even Western countries. They wear uniforms and operate a lot like a standard army. A few months ago, Americans made it a purity test to call a general in the Iranian Army a terrorist. It just seems like a very political decision, at the end of the day, who is a terrorist and who is simply an enemy.

Yes! Exactly.

 

[marybobo]

I don’t think anyone is calling the protestors “thugs”. They have a constitutional right to protest, but they do not have a right to riot and destroy property and assault other people. Those are the ones I call thugs.

 

[Nepperhan]

It’s not just the looters. It’s the wanton bringing of chaos. And the Catholics here excusing the violence and chaos have no understanding of the common good. They don’t care anymore.

Who here excused chaos and violence? You exaggerate.

 

[RidgeSprinter]

I don’t really understand statements like this. Someone points out blatant racism by majority group X against minority group Y then someone else chimes in with “what about racism by group Y against group X?”

Can you seriously point to a single instance in American history where whites were discrimated against by a black government? Or where whites were forced to use different facilities than blacks? Or where whites were enslaved and considered subhuman?

Is there been an answer yet to this yet?

 

[Nepperhan]

Sincere question not necessarily directed at you: What is the difference between a criminal and a terrorist? Between an act of crime and an act of terrorism?

Terrorists are operatives who act to inflame emotions and destroy. That’s different than looters.

 

[josie_L]

Some posters here were excusing/condoning it, so yes!

And please don’t ask me who, I’m not Joseph McCarthy.

 

[SouthCatholic1]

I’ve been watching this unfold since it started. What I see is a whole lot of white people out their looting. I have seen several instances of black protesters stopping white instigators from looting and starting fires. In Louisville a group of white people formed a human chain to protect black protesters from police aggression. The next night, also in Louisville, a group of black male protesters formed a human chain to protect a white police officer who had gotten separated from the other police officers. But of course, some people are unwilling to acknowledge these instances.

 

[SouthCatholic1]

We really need a lol button!

 

[josie_L]

White people aren’t losing their sons and daughters to police abuse.

Number of people shot to death by the police in the United States from 2017 to 2020, by race:

People shot to death by U.S. police, by race 2024 | Statista

 

[petra22]

I’m just throwing my comments in here… something about from womb to the tomb… When Jesus walked on Earth he tried to get us to love one another. Since every person has a free will he did not try to force them to love one another… Since God gave us our free will HE will not force us to love one another. I don’t even have to love my brother who is taking my part of the inheritance… Jesus tells me to put my treasure in heaven where it won’t be destroyed instead of in earthly things. But he doesn’t force me to love, he strongly suggests that it its heaven’s way. People cannot be forced to love one another by any law written by man. That’s what I’m trying to say. I’m sorry for all people who don’t feel loved 100% of the time, often by members or their own family. Some people just aren’t lovable to everyone… we are human. Is this fight that people are fighting kind of the impossible dream?

 

[Sarcelle]

My uncle is a retired police officer.

Back when he was working, the police would have a community day where the community and the police would get together and know each other as people.

This goes a long way towards the regrettable tendency for both sides to view each other as “other”. The community feels a sense of hostility towards police as petty tyrants while the police view all members of the public as potential criminals.

 

[Magnanimity]

Police officers don’t face justice more often for a variety of reasons — from powerful police unions to the blue wall of silence to cowardly prosecutors to reluctant juries. But it is the Supreme Court that has enabled a culture of violence and abuse by eviscerating a vital civil rights law to provide police officers what, in practice, is nearly limitless immunity from prosecution for actions taken while on the job. The badge has become a get-out-of-jail-free card in far too many instances.

This is overstated. As in so many instances, the reality of the situation is much more complicated and nuanced than such extreme statements would allow.

The US Supreme Court has indeed typically erred on the side of deferring you the extremely difficult nature of law enforcement arrests. As in, split-second decisions are made under heightened pressure with adrenaline flowing freely. Tunnel-vision, rapid heartbeats, shortness of breath—all in addition to whatever the suspect is bringing to the encounter to further accelerate all of the reactivity of the officer. It’s true to say that the Court has taken all of this into consideration and had erred on the side of officers in several landmark cases in the past. However, it’s also erred on the side of the 4th amendment plenty as well. Tennessee vs Garner is one such historic case where the officer shot in the back a person that he thought to be a “fleeing felon.” Under existing TN law at the time, he was within his rights to shoot. However, the Court ruled to overturn the TN law on the rationale that exerting deadly force toward someone who is not an immediate threat (of committing death or bodily harm) to anyone around is illegitimate.

All of these issues are vastly complex, but stating that LEO’s have a get out of jail free card is grossly oversimplified and not helpful. If things need to change in this country regarding LEO’s “legitimate use of force,” we need to consider the actual state of affairs, not made-up hyperbole.

 

[qui_est_ce]

I’ve been watching this unfold since it started. What I see is a whole lot of white people out their looting. I have seen several instances of black protesters stopping white instigators from looting and starting fires. In Louisville a group of white people formed a human chain to protect black protesters from police aggression. The next night, also in Louisville, a group of black male protesters formed a human chain to protect a white police officer who had gotten separated from the other police officers. But of course, some people are unwilling to acknowledge these instances.

So, so true. I blame the media for roiling things up.

 

[qui_est_ce]

You’re white, aren’t you? This is part of the problem.

Wow.

Unless and until you feel that pain, you really have no right to tell me how to respond or organize!

Actually, community standards and the law ought to do that.

I lost my father to a violent crime. That doesn’t mean other people can’t weigh in on whether the death penalty is appropriate or not…

 

[pnewton]

Why is there more talk and/or concern over the protesting, rioting, and looting? I 100% disagree with the rioting and looting. But what on earth is wrong with protesting against the injustices within the black community.

I would not make this into a false dichotomy, where if we oppose one we cannot oppose another, nor would I assume to assign others tiers over which most concern them

And the Catholics here excusing the violence and chaos have no understanding of the common good.

In all fairness, I think only two or three have gone that far. Remember that understanding is not excusing.

‘He said he may invoke the 1807 Insurrection Act, which permits a president to deploy military inside the U.S. to deal with civil disorder.’

Regretfully, once citizenry take up arms and turn to violence against the government, then they become revolutionaries and potential enemy combatants. I to not think this will happen, but then the furor is not yet ebbed in some cities.

You’re white, aren’t you?

Ad hominem much? No need to be racist about it.

 

[qui_est_ce]

I wish we would have these kind of protests every time an innocent child gets killed.

The 818 years of life lost by children killed in St Louis gun violence

13 children have been killed by gun violence since April 2019 in the Missouri city, where average adult life expectancy is 74.1 years

www.theguardian.com

 

[gracepoole]

SouthCatholic1:

You’re white, aren’t you?

Ad hominem much? No need to be racist about it.

I don’t think it’s racist to point out that we have different experiences in society and some of these differences are based on our races.

 

[pnewton]

Me either. However, assuming color based on reading a few lines involves a pretty narrow set of stereotypes about what black people are like, or white people. It is the same problem police have when they base assumptions of people on such little information like skin color.