Main Kangaroo Court Discussion

Collapse/Expand Topics

03:41:14 AM Apr 3rd 2017
Not questioning the biblical account

Regarding the example of Jesus' trial, I made an edit to the effect that many theologians question the veracity of the biblical account (simply put, the Bible gives the Sanhedrin more power than it had according to very close to all other sources, but that's not the only problem - the Pontius Pilatus of the Bible is a person at odds with the historical record of him being too cruel even for Roman tastes)

However, this edit was reverted.

As I do not want an edit war, I ask what we should do? Make it clear that it's the biblical account and no other sources that say it that way? Reintroduce my edit? Formulate my edit a different way? Remove the example entirely?

I am open to suggestions.
03:48:56 AM Apr 3rd 2017
Mention this is totally irrelevant to the example.
06:23:11 AM Apr 3rd 2017
No it is not.

We are claiming that Jesus got a totally unfair trial from the Sanhedrin. And while there is some evidence that that Jesus guy did exist, there is very little to make us believe the biblical account of his crucifixion is anywhere near accurate.

Jesus likely did not get a fair trial, but that is because - as far as all sources not tainted by Christian attempts to blame Jesus' death on factions within Judaism - he ran into one of the more bloodthirsty Roman governors maybe even on a bad day.

And that's not even getting into the question of whether he was "guilty" of what he was accused of.

Of course some of the examples on this list are actually guilty of what the Kangaroo Court accuses them of (although quite often the question is whether that thing should be considered a crime in the first place)
10:58:21 AM Apr 3rd 2017
This is a Religion and Mythology example, not a real life example. And include a bit mentioning that this not actually ocurred in real life is natter.
12:38:18 PM Apr 3rd 2017
You just know that most of our readers lack the history and theology background to make heads or tails of the bible stories.

So either they will take them as gospel truth (snicker) or they'll question the wrong aspects of them. (Like those idiots that think inventing a Jewish itinerant preacher of humble origins makes any sense)

I think we should at the very least point out that there are very good reasons to question that particular account (not least of all because the gospels themselves disagree on the exact details)

But please, let's get a third opinion. Where do we get one?
07:27:31 AM Jan 24th 2017
Can you disappear someone?

Yes, it's commonly associated with Latin American dictatorships and their "desaparecidos" (disappeareds) - people that just "vanished" from one day to another mostly killed by the government or its goons in a way that Never Found the Body was not just likely but the norm. It was deliberately done instead of "run of the mill" executions because Nothing Is Scarier...
08:07:26 AM Jan 24th 2017
edited by Larkmarn
Huh? How is this relevant?
08:54:45 AM Jan 24th 2017
Look at the edit history.

Someone was questioning whether you can "disappear someone". I answered that question.
10:09:19 AM Jan 24th 2017
Ah. I see. You may want to make that a bit clearer next time. But anyway yes, you're entirely right. "Disappearing someone" is a fairly common verb for (almost always governments) quietly disposing of people (usually their own). I've noticed a few times on this site people being confused by it.
10:12:34 AM Jan 24th 2017
Yeah, sorry about that. How do you link to an individual edit? I know how to do that on Wikipedia, but here the software is a bit different, right?
10:15:56 AM Jan 24th 2017
edited by Larkmarn
I don't think you can. Where it me, I probably would have just said "In response to [whoever asked the question]'s edit reason: Can you disappear someone?

Yes, it's..."

But without being able to link to an edit there's no precise system in place so it's up to you.

... unless he was asking for someone to disappear a person for him! PLOT TWIST.
04:35:23 PM May 15th 2014
Quick question, how would a court of literal kangaroos who give a fair trial be described in trope terms?
07:00:51 PM May 15th 2014
A parody.
01:34:13 AM May 16th 2014
edited by
It depends on the context and how it's used. It could be nothing if that's a show like Around the World with Willy Fog with furry animals to represent people. Or it could be just a Visual Pun.
10:01:46 PM Jul 18th 2013
Does real life really need spoilers?
10:09:13 PM May 15th 2014
No, definitely not.
11:29:03 PM May 15th 2014
You've just replied a 10-month old post, XFilo. =P

And since then no spoiler tags have been seen in that folder.
01:32:46 AM May 16th 2014
Haha, sorry about that. I was really tired, that's my only excuse. ;-)
Collapse/Expand Topics