Are people to blame for what their ancestors did?

#23
What if the people in question agree with what their ancestors did? Even if they dont do what they did themselves?
What if lets say some one stole a coin worth alot from someone, He dies 3 or 4 generations back, The descended of said person ask for the coin back or compensations from the original thief descended , Said descended refuse say its not their problem and that it happened many generations ago and they shouldnt be blamed for something that happened long ago? Even if they still have the coin? Even if they still benefiting from it by selling it or using the money that their ancestor got for selling that coins generations back? What if people dont condemn an evil or bad act their ancestors did? There are more severe examples i just gave some simplified examples for the sake of just telling a story.

What i am saying that, Its not black or white. Some things are just too complicated to give a definitive answer.
That's very black and white to me, there will be inevitable conflict in that situation.
Post automatically merged:

How ironic that this is a subject within OP, Roger and Ace. The WG/Marines went around killing babies etc... because of Roger and his would be "blood".
I think the marines had the right idea. Ace turned out to be the same as Roger pretty much.
 
#24
Nobody bears the sin of another human, everyone is responsible for his own doings. You don’t bear the sins of your ancestors, you only bear them if you go the same way the did. There’s just one problem , as a society our doings intertwine with each other, a bad doing of a father can influence the behaviour of the child. That doesn’t mean that this child bears the sins of his father but this could lead to other bad doings where the child creates his owns sins. I live in Germany and I see how Germans are still effected by the doings of the nazis. Today’s Germans have no fault and most of them learned from the past and that’s something where they can be proud of ! So nobody bears the sins of his ancestors but there’s still an impact that they leave. I believe in God and in his books there’s mentioned something great , nether the objects you have or your bloodline will help you, the only thing that will help you are the good things you did.
 
Last edited:
#25
That's very black and white to me, there will be inevitable conflict in that situation.
Post automatically merged:

I think the marines had the right idea. Ace turned out to be the same as Roger pretty much.
Hows it black and white, Its a very specific situation in a very specific manner, Say someone got a stolen gift from an ancestor he know its stolen, he keeps it use it and not give it back. Its not really his its someone elses. Doesnt matter that he didnt steal it him self. Him knowing and using it makes him share the blame.

It depends on the situation. Some people hate what evil deeds the ancestors did and try and fix them to the extent that they can. Some endorse them and even take pride or benefit from it many generations after willingly. So why cant you blame them. IMO in some cases you just can.

Not always and like i said it depends on the person himself. But sometimes you can.

Edit:
And yes there sometimes conflict but some times you cant avoid it, People who owns the item rightfully deserve to get whats their back. Then its even worse because the person who inherited the stolen item is making a conflict out of a situation that should because its not rightfully his item. And this conflict should be blamed on him solely not on the person who got his item stolen.
 
Last edited:
#28
Hows it black and white, Its a very specific situation in a very specific manner, Say someone got a stolen gift from an ancestor he know its stolen, he keeps it use it and not give it back. Its not really his its someone elses. Doesnt matter that he didnt steal it him self. Him knowing and using it makes him share the blame.

It depends on the situation. Some people hate what evil deeds the ancestors did and try and fix them to the extent that they can. Some endorse them and even take pride or benefit from it many generations after willingly. So why cant you blame them. IMO in some cases you just can.

Not always and like i said it depends on the person himself. But sometimes you can.

Edit:
And yes there sometimes conflict but some times you cant avoid it, People who owns the item rightfully deserve to get whats their back. Then its even worse because the person who inherited the stolen item is making a conflict out of a situation that should because its not rightfully his item. And this conflict should be blamed on him solely not on the person who got his item stolen.
That item is not rightfully the descendants either who had their ancestor stolen from them.

Something your ancestor had isn't necessarily yours so you have no right to claim right to that thing.
 
#29
That item is not rightfully the descendants either who had their ancestor stolen from them.

Something your ancestor had isn't necessarily
Then there is nothing wrong with holding a grudge against these descendants even though they didnt steal it them selves. And this could apply to anything, wealth land items or even peoples lives. But thats just my opinion.
 
#30
Then there is nothing wrong with holding a grudge against these descendants even though they didnt steal it them selves. And this could apply to anything, wealth land items or even peoples lives. But thats just my opinion.
It reminds me of the whole Israel/Palestine situation where one side claims the land because their ancestors were once there but the other side claims the land because said people left so it didn't belong to them anymore.
 
#37
Only justice will bring peace.
You don't exact justice by punishing and blaming a descendant that has nothing to do with the problem.
You are not going to Kill every child of someone who committed a murder because that's your idea of justice, are you?
Post automatically merged:

This is wrong. Mr X is not to blame, he can't be held responsible for the acts of his grandfather.
Sure you can hate the guy (if you want to) and fight back for that piece of land but the grandchildren isn't guilty of anything in this scenario.
 
#39
It reminds me of the whole Israel/Palestine situation where one side claims the land because their ancestors were once there but the other side claims the land because said people left so it didn't belong to them anymore.
Afaik The Palestinians ancestors were Jews, but over time the Palestinians culture, Religion and all changed. After the WW1 when the Ottoman turks defeated, Brits take the land and bring all the Jews from all over the Europe and give them an own homeland there which is what called Israel without the approval of the Palestinians. So technically The land belong to Palestinians.
 
#40
This is wrong. Mr X is not to blame, he can't be held responsible for the acts of his grandfather.
Sure you can hate the guy (if you want to) and fight back for that piece of land but the grandchildren isn't guilty of anything in this scenario.
They are guilty of being in possession of a land that is not rightfully theirs.

Imagine a relative/friend giving you a gift which he stole from someone else, shouldnt you be accountable for keeping it under your possession? Can you tell the police, "I will keep the gift because I am not responsible for the actions of someone else"?
 
Top