Nawrocki's Morality

ireneuszlara.blogspot.com 1 week ago

Only now can I share my thoughts on the presidential elections in Poland.

He won the Nawrocks. Recalculation of votes would make no sense. Dr. Account's calculations on the deviations, my late prof. of statistics, Krystyn Lyback, would throw out the door. But I'm not gonna do a math lecture here.

He won the Nawrocks.
As with almost all election, the structure of the PiS electorate looks similar: Nawrocki obtained the majority only in the country – 64.2%. As many as 73% of those with primary education voted for it. Interestingly, among women, Trzaskowski won.

Again, 1 can be outraged: "the village parishioner has won", "the mentally manipulated quilt", a nationalist... So what?
Do we want democracy or not? Why don't we take distant the voting rights of the villagers, those without a higher education? How about men?

Or should we go back to the Polish People's Republic – to elections in which the National Unity Front had 99% of support? Oh, no.
We can follow Frost to say, "Most people are stupid. The larger the majority, the dumber," but even if so? No substance how we divide people into fools and wise, it's inactive 1 nation.

We're all Polish. Those who starved for Nawrocki are besides Poland. What's more – they're the ones that will come to share this country, this reality.

The electorate that prevailed is frequently called conservative. I would alternatively call him fearsome—and that's not offensive. all society needs forces to advance, but besides forces to brake. Fearers chose Trump, Orban, Fico, AfD grows stronger in Germany, and Le Pen in France.
Without brakes, advancement can shatter – an example? The free love of the Children of Flowers has barely begun, and it is over, for luck. Marks besides proposed progress. How it ended – you know.

He won the Nawrocks due to the fact that his run pushed all possible fears.

This "rural, uneducated" voter is fearful – but fear is not the domain of 1 group. We're all afraid, only at different levels and for different reasons.

Nawrocki's electorate fears refugees, Jews, Germans, LGBT, trembles at what is unknown, incomprehensible. He fears the European Union, failure of sovereignty, progress, the euro, freedom of speech, knowledge, education. They're afraid the churches will fall apart.
Ridiculous? Yes!!
But it's not their fault. The guilt of those who could not dispel these fears. First of all, the Church's fault.

According to the data, they voted for the Nawrock voters powerfully associated with the Church.
And that saddens me. It saddens me due to the fact that how can religion in the Gospel be reconciled with support for a man whose past is marked by violence, deceit and contempt for the weak?
Even though I am an agnostic, I have accepted Christian values as a moral compass.
How can a Christian vote for individual who extorted an old man's apartment, worked with the mob, was a sutener, took part in violent “laws” organized by criminal groups dealing with drug trafficking and prostitution?
On the man who forged papers with the notary, he abandoned the sick ward despite a written commitment, he vouched for the Nazi with Hitler and the Swastika tattooed?
A man addicted to a psychoactive substance?

Heads in the background. Just no morality.

How can the Gospel be reconciled with contempt? A cross with cynicism? Community with banditism?
Is it truly adequate that individual goes to church and says the word “God” to give him full authority—even if his life is simply a denial of Christian values?
What are the values of his constituents? due to the fact that not Christian.
If morality allows to support a man with specified a story, then something is profoundly incorrect with this morality.

This is not an attack on faith. This is simply a question of work – whether religion is more than a decoration on an election campaign.

Why, then, did Christians vote for Nawrocki—a man with specified serious moral charges?

1. Enslaved Minds and Propaganda of Fear
A large part of the electorate is inactive subject to long-term propaganda of fear – both the 1 generated by Jarosław Kaczyński and by the Church with media related to Rydzyk at the head. Many people absorb messages without reflection, not curious in facts or evidence. They believe what they hear from 'authorities' that they recognise, and treat any another origin as 'fejk' or 'liar'.

2. Intellectual laziness and rooted schemes
There are besides those who have no desire or strength to face facts. They're not checking information on Nawrock, they're not curious in his past. There is simply a long-standing propaganda of "Tusk's fault" in them, so the vote against Trzaskowski becomes the only right option for them – regardless of the morality of the candidate they support.

3. A Mistaken knowing of Ethics: We Make Evil to Make Good Out of It
Some know about Nawrocki's past, but justify his choice in the name of “greater good”. That's incorrect thinking. In Christian ethics, bad measures cannot be justified by a good goal. The Bible says:
Romans 3:8: “Should we do evil, that good may come out of it? The condemnation of them is right.”
Christianity rejects the thesis that the end justifies means. all moral action must be good both for the intent and how it is achieved.

When I asked, nobody wanted to answer.
I've asked my loved ones, my friends, my friends a fewer circumstantial and factual questions. I offered evidence, documents, recordings. Nobody wanted to see them. I have only heard repeated phrases about the fact that “Trzaskowski will demolish churches” or “give Poland to Germany”. And that the charges against Nawrocki are lies, lies, Facebook.
The conversation effort ended in screaming, aggression. 2 examples:

My simple school teacher – a great, smart and good individual – did not want to answer my questions. After a series of repetitions of PiS propaganda she yet shouted that it was all lies and then removed our discussion. No questions asked, no problem – conscience calmed.

On Facebook, I met a wonderful, intelligent female – a catechist. I thought we'd been friends for years and that we respected each other. We knew we had different views, but that wasn't an obstacle. erstwhile she became active in Nawrocki's election campaign, I kindly drew attention to any of the facts related to it. She treated me like garbage – she removed my entry, along with comments that supported it and then blocked me. It was a shock. To spit on individual is completely different than to argue with them. And 1 more thing – the individual who spit has no desire to connect.

My questions that stay unanswered:
1. Forgery of documents – Did Nawrocki not sign a commitment to pay PLN 120 1000 to Mr.Jerzemu and then confess that he did not pay. It's a lie and a fraud. Doesn't that disqualify morally?

2. Breaking a life conviction – Nawrocki signed that he would supply Mr.Jerzem with care – to supply him with food, clothing, housing, light and fire, to supply him with adequate aid and care in the illness and to give him a ceremony corresponding to local customs /Art. 908 [Life contract]/ – and he did not know that he was dealt with by MOPS for 3 years and stayed in a nursing home for a year?
I'm taking care of my friend, and if he hadn't answered the telephone twice, I'd be driving 100 km consecutive away, and if he hadn't opened the door, I'd have called the police.
And how did Nawrocki defend himself? As if the president of Gdańsk Dulkiewicz hid Mr. George. There's no more absurd explanation. All you had to do was call the police about the missing person.
Doesn't that show his complete indifference to another man? Isn't that disgusting? Unworthy Christian?

3. Participation in ‘Acts’ – Nawrocki himself admitted to participating in violent fights organized by criminal halfworlds. This is simply a crime under Article 158 §1 of the Criminal Code. The morality of a bandit may be. Is this man worthy of the highest authority?

4. Addiction to a psychoactive substance – There are recordings that may indicate an addiction to psychoactive drugs. Can a individual with specified a problem make liable decisions as head of state?

5. warrant for a neo-Nazi – Is the warrant for a individual - Grzegorz Horodko nicknamed "The Judge" with tattoos of swastika and Hitler acceptable to the Pole? Well, Braun supported a million...

6. Allegations of complicity in trafficking in human beings, prostitution – Isn’t a red light lit erstwhile we read public accounts of witnesses talking about Nawrocki’s engagement in the transportation of prostitutes? Nawrocki was able to check the witness credibility in court within 24 hours. In the event of an adverse judgment, he would appeal to a higher court and would have a conviction in the next 24 hours.
He doesn't? Why? I leave the answer in a vacuum. But he promised to file a announcement with the D.A.'s office and the civilian court. Trials would take years, but they won't. I bet peanuts against dollars Nawrocki won't file these cases in the D.A.'s office and court. due to the fact that the fact would see the light of day.

A Sad Conclusion
People can deny the truth. make morality “for your own use”. They can view sin as virtue if it is convenient for them. They can ignore the Gospel if it contradicts their own self, with their political choice.

I'm sad, God.

== sync, corrected by elderman ===================================================================================================================================================================================================

Read Entire Article