Bednar on taking offense--true or not?

[BYU71]

To simplistic for me. I could agree or disagree. I think the real choice is how you react to being offended.

I can see myself in a situation where someone is throwing out the F bomb around my grandkids. I can see myself asking someone to knock it off. I am not going to sit there and determine whether I want the person to stop because I am offended, annoyed, angry, hurt or just don't want my grandkids hearing that language and thinking it is acceptable.

I looked up the definition of the word and one place provided 12 synonyms. I think as Elder Bednar defined it, I could pretty much agree.

What he says provides something to think about, but isn't an absolute.

[smokymountainrain]

Bednar's comments seem eerily familiar to a little discussion we were having on here yesterday.

FTR, I agree with Bednar.

Waters posed the following question to Indy and I think it's a great question...

Indy, if you sitting in church, and the Bishop got up and said "All you niggers and wetbacks sitting here, get up, and get out now and don't come back!"

In that situation, I would choose to be offended on behalf of the those people the Bishop is referring to. I said in the thread yesterday in which we were discussing this, that I don't ever remember allowing myself to be offended by the words of another person, but that if I had chosen that route, I regret that decision and am not proud of myself.

In the scenario described by Waters, like I said, I would choose to be offended on behalf of those being described by the Bishop and I would not regret it.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by PaloAltoCougar

Introduce the element of time, and I agree with Elder Bednar. It’s nearly impossible not to react instantly to an egregious offense; that’s the fault of the offender. But over time, how I react is more a function of my self-control, ethos and desires than anything the offender did.

Forgiveness is far more important for the person that is offended than the offender. Often, the offender doesn’t even know, much less care, if he has been forgiven. But the person who stews over an offense allows the hurt to become a festering sore that does far more damage than the original slight.

That’s why I rarely post within a day or two after a BYU loss. I learned this principle more from Elder Crowton than from Elder Bednar.

I would agree with this. I see his talk as good common sense advice along the lines of Viktor Frakl philosophy, ala Man's Search for Meaning. But I have noticed that some folks in the church have hijacked the talk as a means for excusing boorish behavior and/or as an excuse to judge people who have been offended.

[RockyBalboa]

Originally Posted by Jeff Lebowski

I would agree with this. I see his talk as good common sense advice along the lines of Viktor Frakl philosophy, ala Man's Search for Meaning. But I have noticed that some folks in the church have hijacked the talk as a means for excusing boorish behavior and/or as an excuse to judge people who have been offended.

On the other side people have also used the talk as a means for finding yet another reason to be offended or to justify their grudge. This can and does go both ways.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by RockyBalboa

On the other side people have also used the talk as a means for finding yet another reason to be offended or to justify their grudge. This can and does go both ways.

Help me out here. How would someone use this take as a means for justifying a grudge? Or a reason to be offended?

[RockyBalboa]

Originally Posted by Jeff Lebowski

Help me out here. How would someone use this take as a means for justifying a grudge? Or a reason to be offended?

For someone who is already offended or seeking offense they're going to take this "how dare they tell me to not be offended so easily." Thus cementing their anger and making them feel even more justified.

For someone who has other underlying issues and motives, they're not gonna like that their real intentions are being exposed.

One only need look at a large portion of the religion threads here to see that.

Since you and I rarely agree on anything, I know you're gonna read this and completely disagree with me and that's fine (what else is new?). A lot of times it's the messenger, not the message though.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by RockyBalboa

For someone who is already offended or seeking offense they're going to take this "how dare they tell me to not be offended so easily." Thus cementing their anger and making them feel even more justified.

For someone who has other underlying issues and motives, they're not gonna like that their real intentions are being exposed.

One only need look at a large portion of the religion threads here to see that.

Since you and I rarely agree on anything, I know you're gonna read this and completely disagree with me and that's fine (what else is new?). A lot of times it's the messenger, not the message though.

"real intentions are being exposed"?

Thanks. You have provided a concrete example of my second point about people using the talk as a vehicle to judge others.

[scottie]

Originally Posted by RockyBalboa

For someone who is already offended or seeking offense they're going to take this "how dare they tell me to not be offended so easily." Thus cementing their anger and making them feel even more justified.

Who is ever "seeking offense"? It sounds like maybe you know people who like to be offended; you need to find new friends.

Originally Posted by RockyBalboa

For someone who has other underlying issues and motives, they're not gonna like that their real intentions are being exposed.

What could these "other underlying issues and motives" possibly be?

[RockyBalboa]

Originally Posted by Jeff Lebowski

"real intentions are being exposed"?

Thanks. You have provided a concrete example of my second point about people using the talk as a vehicle to judge others.

As have you.

[DrumNFeather]

Ever since Bednar's talk, (and probably long before) becoming offended by someone at church has become quite passe. As a result, people are still offended, but they spin it a different way so it doesn't look like one is taking offense. Just look at the uproar Sister Beck's talk caused last year...a lot of people were probably "offended," but rather than admit it, they spun it in a way that made it look like she was saying these really stupid, misguided things...which is what the ultimate goal of the offendee is...but you just can't be successful doing it under the lable of "offended one." It's much much easier to just point to faults in others instead of taking offense.