Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

Why do Americans suffer Puritan guilt?

Page 2 of 2 [ 30 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

Previous topic | Next topic

auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 115,219
Location: the island of defective toy santas

03 Aug 2018, 9:39 pm

if only those puritanical types understood, that fun exists for a reason under god.



Hollywood_Guy
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 11 Nov 2017
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,283
Location: US

04 Aug 2018, 11:11 am

No. The point in this thread isn't that I agree with Puritanism. It's about this thing of guilt-by-association played by others.



Spooky_Mulder
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 May 2018
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,041
Location: NY

04 Aug 2018, 11:37 am

Well, seeing that many countries see the United States as an empire (Star Wars reference) type force that continues its aims of colonization on a country-wide scale...

I don't see a huge difference between the past and today. A difference? Yeah, but not an all-encompassing one.

Now, if Germany as a country still pledged to Nazism rather than those who try to wave the Nazi flag and are immediately arrested for doing so (the U.S. should do that with Nazis and Confederates) - it's impossible to lay that on Germany itself due to its harsh rules against any signs of Nazism.

If this is "all of you discredit and attack Thanksgiving! Who cares what the colonizers did?!" Well... I don't see Germany celebrating Nazism, whereas the United States still celebrates its colonizing roots on a yearly basis and in sometimes a hero worshipping way.

That is to say, America has responded differently to colonization than Germany has to Nazism. Germany has outlawed its past, the United States still celebrates theirs.



naturalplastic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 71
Gender: Male
Posts: 35,189
Location: temperate zone

04 Aug 2018, 1:40 pm

Hollywood_Guy wrote:
No. The point in this thread isn't that I agree with Puritanism. It's about this thing of guilt-by-association played by others.


There is NO "guilt by association". for you to be railing against.

Saying that Americans have cultural attitudes that can be traced to America's colonial founding centuries ago is just a neutral observation. Not a condemnation of either modern America, or the colonial puritans of the 1600's.

Its like saying "Americans speak English" because of our roots as colonies of Britain.



Hollywood_Guy
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 11 Nov 2017
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,283
Location: US

04 Aug 2018, 4:45 pm

naturalplastic wrote:
Hollywood_Guy wrote:
No. The point in this thread isn't that I agree with Puritanism. It's about this thing of guilt-by-association played by others.


There is NO "guilt by association". for you to be railing against.

Saying that Americans have cultural attitudes that can be traced to America's colonial founding centuries ago is just a neutral observation. Not a condemnation of either modern America, or the colonial puritans of the 1600's.

Its like saying "Americans speak English" because of our roots as colonies of Britain.


Well, that's neutral then. But a lot of comments about it come off as snobby. The views of many Americans today aren't as much puritan as they were when it was founded.



Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 35,278
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

04 Aug 2018, 5:16 pm

auntblabby wrote:
further proof of our continuing nambypambyness regarding things such as cursing, we are the only western nation to bleep people speaking their minds. we're the only nation where you still get bleeped mentioning body parts or bodily functions. not only bleeped but having one's speaking mouth digitally pixilated or fuzzed out, so the hard-of-hearing can avoid offensive real life as well. watching Canadian tv [for example] one hardly ever sees such nonsense.


I do find that stuff to be very distracting, If they want to say f*ck, sh*t, f*ck you ect...I'd rather just hear that instead of BEEEEP. But see even just there I censored those vulgar words, because of it being in the back of my mind that its inappropriate to type it all the way out.

And really whats the big deal of seeing a nipple or even a penis in a scene where someone is taking a shower for instance. American movies don't show nudity even in a non-sexual context without the movie being 'R-rated' I've seen more non sexual nudity in movies from Europe than I do in the american movies.

Also, if the Monty Python movies were made in the U.S they would be R rated, and I really see no reason a kid shouldn't be able to watch them.

I mean it is a little silly so I can't get that mad about people from Europe and the U.K having a laugh at it.


_________________
Tis the time to melt the Ice.


Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 35,278
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

04 Aug 2018, 5:36 pm

Hollywood_Guy wrote:
naturalplastic wrote:
Hollywood_Guy wrote:
No. The point in this thread isn't that I agree with Puritanism. It's about this thing of guilt-by-association played by others.


There is NO "guilt by association". for you to be railing against.

Saying that Americans have cultural attitudes that can be traced to America's colonial founding centuries ago is just a neutral observation. Not a condemnation of either modern America, or the colonial puritans of the 1600's.

Its like saying "Americans speak English" because of our roots as colonies of Britain.


Well, that's neutral then. But a lot of comments about it come off as snobby. The views of many Americans today aren't as much puritan as they were when it was founded.


Yes but those attitudes did influence a lot of current thinking and culture here. Also there certainly are still a lot of people who follow those kind of puritan type religious beliefs, some of them are quite vocal about it.


_________________
Tis the time to melt the Ice.


Campin_Cat
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2014
Age: 64
Gender: Female
Posts: 25,953
Location: Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A.

04 Aug 2018, 6:40 pm

Hollywood_Guy wrote:
Why do Americans suffer Puritan guilt?

Well, if you mean "Puritan", as in "strict moral code", I don't think anyone who has such a code, suffers guilt from having it (I know *I* don't); but, I think there are people who think we SHOULD.

If you mean "Puritan" as in the protestants of the 1600s, and people feeling guilty because they are descended from them, I don't think people who believe as they did, would feel guilty about it.

If I'm interpreting what you're saying, correctly, I'm thinking you have allowed yourself to feel guilty about being descended from Puritans, because of something some person(s) said? Why would you allow them to make you feel guilty----especially, if you don't believe as the Puritans did? Like you said, that's like blacks continuing to put down whites for slavery. Just chalk-up whatever person(s), as idiots, and move-on.




_________________
White female; age 59; diagnosed Aspie.
I use caps for emphasis----I'm NOT angry or shouting. I use caps like others use italics, underline, or bold.
"What we know is a drop; what we don't know, is an ocean." (Sir Isaac Newton)


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

05 Aug 2018, 2:11 am

Meistersinger wrote:
Fnord wrote:
No such thing as "Puritan Guilt", unless it's the pervasive feeling that having fun is somehow a sin...

Puritan (n): 1. a member of a group of Protestants that arose in the 16th century within the Church of England, demanding the simplification of doctrine and worship, and greater strictness in religious discipline: during part of the 17th century the Puritans became a powerful political party.
2. (lowercase) a person who is strict in moral or religious matters, often excessively so.
3. a person possessed by the haunting fear that someone, somewhere, may be happy.



Fnord, you never lived in PA Dutch Country. I have the same attitude as the old-order Amish and Mennonites. They are extremely strict and eschew anything but hard work. They, like the Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod (especially those congregations close to St. Louis (Missouri, Illinois, Wisconsin, Iowa, primarily), as well as WELS (Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod) and ELS (Evangelical Lutheran Synod) tend to be quite hard-nosed about entertainment and doing nothing but work.) Then, again, growing up in a dysfunctional household (and both parents came from dysfunctional
Families themselves), the only thing I, as well as my brothers (to a lesser extent) were always subject to “spare the rod and spoil the child,” for even the slightest infraction.


As you know, I'm a Missouri Synod guy myself, but I've also a Pacific Northwesterner, born and bred. And I've noticed how many members of my congregation who are transplants from the midwest tend to be way more conservative when compared to the rest of us born here. Even within a particular denomination, regional differences can make all the difference.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 115,219
Location: the island of defective toy santas

05 Aug 2018, 6:08 am

Kraichgauer wrote:
I've noticed how many members of my congregation who are transplants from the midwest tend to be way more conservative when compared to the rest of us born here. Even within a particular denomination, regional differences can make all the difference.

would you say these more conservative members acted puritanical [opposed to dancing in public, for example, or for enforced segregation of menstruating women as "unclean"]?



Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 60,951
Location:      

05 Aug 2018, 10:42 am

Meistersinger wrote:
Fnord wrote:
No such thing as "Puritan Guilt", unless it's the pervasive feeling that having fun is somehow a sin...

Puritan (n): 1. a member of a group of Protestants that arose in the 16th century within the Church of England, demanding the simplification of doctrine and worship, and greater strictness in religious discipline: during part of the 17th century the Puritans became a powerful political party.
2. (lowercase) a person who is strict in moral or religious matters, often excessively so.
3. a person possessed by the haunting fear that someone, somewhere, may be happy.
Fnord, you never lived in PA Dutch Country. I have the same attitude as the old-order Amish and Mennonites. They are extremely strict and eschew anything but hard work. They, like the Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod (especially those congregations close to St. Louis (Missouri, Illinois, Wisconsin, Iowa, primarily), as well as WELS (Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod) and ELS (Evangelical Lutheran Synod) tend to be quite hard-nosed about entertainment and doing nothing but work.) Then, again, growing up in a dysfunctional household (and both parents came from dysfunctional
Families themselves), the only thing I, as well as my brothers (to a lesser extent) were always subject to “spare the rod and spoil the child,” for even the slightest infraction.
I grew up in Michigan Amish country, under the yoke of a very strict alcoholic father, who was brought up by very strict teetotalling Methodists. I know all about that ”... extremely strict and eschew anything but hard work” philosophy, the “growing up in a dysfunctional household” situation, and the “spare the rod and spoil the child for even the slightest infraction” practice.

Puritan guilt? No such thing. There is only meanness that is “justified” by distortions and mis-interpretations of the Bible.


_________________
The mere fact that science may not yet adequately explain an object, event, or experience does not mean the immediate explanation should automatically default to a conspiratorial, extraterrestrial, paranormal, or supernatural cause.


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

05 Aug 2018, 1:10 pm

auntblabby wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
I've noticed how many members of my congregation who are transplants from the midwest tend to be way more conservative when compared to the rest of us born here. Even within a particular denomination, regional differences can make all the difference.

would you say these more conservative members acted puritanical [opposed to dancing in public, for example, or for enforced segregation of menstruating women as "unclean"]?


Oh, no, these people are more likely to anti-LGBT, anti-evolution, overly probusiness, hated Obama, etc.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 115,219
Location: the island of defective toy santas

05 Aug 2018, 1:13 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
auntblabby wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
I've noticed how many members of my congregation who are transplants from the midwest tend to be way more conservative when compared to the rest of us born here. Even within a particular denomination, regional differences can make all the difference.

would you say these more conservative members acted puritanical [opposed to dancing in public, for example, or for enforced segregation of menstruating women as "unclean"]?


Oh, no, these people are more likely to anti-LGBT, anti-evolution, overly probusiness, hated Obama, etc.

i'd read of some ultra-righties who did the anti-dancing/anti-menstruating women thing, some of them in the northwest [Idaho] in fact.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

05 Aug 2018, 1:32 pm

auntblabby wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
auntblabby wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
I've noticed how many members of my congregation who are transplants from the midwest tend to be way more conservative when compared to the rest of us born here. Even within a particular denomination, regional differences can make all the difference.

would you say these more conservative members acted puritanical [opposed to dancing in public, for example, or for enforced segregation of menstruating women as "unclean"]?


Oh, no, these people are more likely to anti-LGBT, anti-evolution, overly probusiness, hated Obama, etc.

i'd read of some ultra-righties who did the anti-dancing/anti-menstruating women thing, some of them in the northwest [Idaho] in fact.


That's a real possibility.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer