In another thread, RK and I were going back and forth about a bully in my hometown picking on a middle school girl until she decided to escape that by killing herself. The bully then went on to tell people he wasn't sorry for picking on her and that he was glad she was dead. Having been bullied myself as a kid, well, until I kicked one in his junk really hard, I've a strong distaste for bullies. I wished something "horrible" would happen to the bully for his cruel behavior. I admitted in the thread that, intellectually, I knew what I wished for was wrong, though I didn't quite feel bad about what I wished for. Anyway, I asked what I should do. RK suggested, quite correctly, that I should pray for God to work in the life of the bully for his good. I conceded that was fine but I also retorted that part of that working in the bully's life should include bringing the bully to the point of remorse for how he treated the girl and her family. RK never did reply back to that. What say you folks? Should the bully feel bad for picking on the girl to the point that she killed herself or should his conscience be clear because, well, HE didn't put the noose around her neck and make her hang herself?
He should be held to account in court for his role in this girl's suicide (possibly to the point of being charged with manslaughter, or murder), but it's no one's job to make him feel remorse. Maybe he does and won't admit it, maybe he doesn't but will in the future, or maybe he never will. There's a lot we don't know, particularly regarding this boys life (which is no excuse, by the way), and showing up to hang, draw, and quarter the kid isn't a good first reaction. But such a reaction hopefully shows that you care, and if we were talking about a rapist or a pedophile then I'd have a difficult time not reacting the same way.
I don't know that, legally, he can be held accountable for bullying her to the point that she killed herself. He physically did nothing to her. He didn't kill her. She killed herself. Sure, he drove her to that point, but, at the end of the day, she put the noose around her neck and jumped off a ladder. You say it's no one's job to make this boy feel remorse, but, if God works in this boy's life wouldn't it be GOD'S job to make this boy feel remorse for what he did?
I don't know what the law is so I couldn't comment, but I would imagine there is some sort of provision for subjecting another person to such psychological torment that they harm (or kill) themself. Obviously I wasn't talking about God when I made my comment.
*Should* a person feel remorse when a wrong they've committed harms another? Absolutely. But its clear enough not everyone does. The other interesting question is if they can be made to? And if not, what then?
Godly sorrow leads to repentance that leads to salvation. 2 Corinthians 7:8-13 is extremely instructive on the issue of "remorse" or "sorrow."
Conscience has to do with knowing, not feeling. (con = with; scire = know) It doesn't matter if you "feel" remorse or not, because ultimately the proof of repentance isn't shed tears and/or feels of regret (or lack thereof), but changed behavior based on acknowledging what you already know, and letting that overrule any internal self-justifying, and agreeing with God's standards until all lies have been exposed and discarded and truth fully embraced. Sometimes that's a highly emotional process, other times not so much. I've seen people weep at the altar, supposedly "sorry" for their sin ... and then turn around and go right back to sinning. I've seen people show little to no feeling at all ... and then turn around and bear fruit of righteousness because they made the decision to live differently, and then followed through on it. Repentance is simply this: “cease to do evil, and learn to do good” (Isaiah 1:16). I think trying to expect feels from people that they simply do not have, and then labeling them "sociopaths" if they're simply less emotional than others and aren't controlled by their feels, is extremely misleading if not outright damaging. Let them go by what they know. A non-emotional person's conscience can work just as well as a highly emotional person's conscience. Nowhere in the Bible does God judge anyone by our feels. We're only judged by how we act, which is a result of choice, driven by our will, based on either acknowledging what we know, or by ignoring it.
I don't entirely agree. If the bully knows he was wrong by bullying a girl to the point that she KILLED HERSELF, but he merely says, with no emotional twinges at all, "Gee, I guess that WAS wrong of me. I guess I won't bully anybody anymore," even if he never goes on to bully anybody ever again, there is still something not right about him. Seriously, if you feel NOTHING at the thought that your cruel actions towards another person resulted in their DEATH...there is something SERIOUSLY wrong with you. Period.
Not sure that feelings have anything to do with it. The fact that most humans would have some or perhaps a significant emotional expression related to remorse does not mean that repentance requires any emotional impact or expression whatsoever. Repentance is not about emotion; as Dani said, it's about changed behavior. Conscience has nothing to do with emotion.
Sure, but that's a different question entirely. Such a person could be perfectly aware that something is wrong with them, possess an intellectual understanding that shouldn't have acted that way and therefore won't, even while they lack particular feelings, or at least don't feel as we or they would expect.
Right. And those people have a term for their condition: sociopath. If you know you "helped" somebody decide to off themselves because of how you treated them, and you don't feel like crap for it, you are not a mentally well individual. I don't care if you do intellectually grasp that what you did is wrong and you decide not to repeat the behavior. Sorry if that's offensive or not PC to say, but that's just how I kinda see things.
Right. And those people have a term for their condition: sociopath. If you know you "helped" somebody decide to off themselves because of how you treated them, and you don't feel like crap for it, you are not a mentally well individual. I don't care if you do intellectually grasp that what you did is wrong and you decide not to repeat the behavior. Sorry if that's offensive or not PC to say, but that's just how I kinda see things. [/quote] No one is saying sociopaths are healthy, or that people who don't feel remorse are healthy.
I'm not saying that every single instance of repentance requires deep, heartbreaking, agonizing remorse for the wrong that was done by the person repenting. But, come on, if you know you helped somebody end up 6 feet in the ground you should feel like crap about it. Maybe not forever, but definitely at least initially. Death is some serious stuff. I don't know if you see all wrongs as being the same, but I believe that somebody pushing another person to suicide isn't the same moral lapse as, say, somebody leaving up the toilet seat or forgetting to put the toothpaste cap back on...
I'm such a believer in free will that I think the notion that someone can be "pushed" to commit suicide is a false presupposition.
So, the bully making this girl's life a living hell had absolutely NOTHING to do with her killing herself? You genuinely believe this girl just randomly for fun and giggles decided to snap her neck with a noose? Really?
Am I reading your reasoning correctly that in your thinking, unless someone pushes you into something and basically forces you to do it, every decision you make is random for fun and giggles because hey, nothing much better to do today?
I won't go as far as to say the bully "forced" the girl to kill herself. At the end of the day, the fact is SHE killed herself. However, I also won't go as far as to say the bully is completely innocent in all of this. The girl left a suicide note for why she did it. I'm left thinking if the douche bag kid hadn't been such a, well, douche bag to this girl she would still be around. So, to me, he is, shall we say, "less than innocent" in all of this. Yes, the decision to kill herself or not was hers to make. However, the bully obviously did all he could (wasn't that nice of him?) to help ensure that decision was easier for her to make. I think people want to gloss over that fact for some reason. What that reason is I'm not sure of.
In highly stressful situations, like being bullied, a person is often looking for options to get out of the situation (and this is partly physiologically driven). Killing oneself is one option. It's a really lousy one, but it is an option. Having someone reinforce that option is certainly abetting the process and increasing the likelihood of carrying it out.
I believe that the will of man is a free will. People make bad choices for all sorts of reasons. None of those reasons are ever the fault of someone else. Unless we wish to be slaves to others.