I think there are reasons the discussion tilts the way it does, and it has nothing to do with blaming "the victim."Bootstrap wrote: ↑Tue Aug 12, 2025 11:59 amIn practice, in the Ukraine thread, this often looks like focusing on the victim, urging surrender, and saying little about the perpetrator.R7ehr wrote: ↑Tue Aug 12, 2025 11:55 amThe church should focus on their own spiritual well being, namely forgive the perpetrators, and return good for evil. Surrender, is close to "give to him that asks" and, "if compelled to walk a mile, walk two".
Not relentlessly bark about the wicked things the enemy did, which makes forgiveness more difficult and makes hate more justified.
And that looks like blaming the victim.
#1 - We all agree that the Russians were wrong to invade (at least I think we all agree on that). What is there really to talk about? Shall we just stand around and pat each other on the back for being willing to call out Russia's wrongs?
#2 - I don't remember any posts that blame Ukraine for being the victim or saying that being the victim is wrong, with the possible exception arguably being the comments speculating that Ukraine might have suffered less if they hadn't fought back. To me, that's not any more "victim blaming" than if I talk about a co-worker of mine who jumped under a steel frame when it fell instead of jumping away from it. Instead of just a smashed toe he got a horribly broken leg.
#3 - There seems to be a sense, by at least one Mennonet poster, that when it comes to responding to Russia's aggression Ukraine can do no wrong. Any suggestion that Ukrainians ought to surrender to Jesus Christ and follow his teachings is met with hostility, which is especially intriguing coming from a professing Christian. When somebody feels the need to jump on every negative comment about Ukraine and accuse the person who made it of being soft on Russia or being morally cloudy, it will certainly amplify those comments.