|
 Shroomalicious
You may say I'ma dreamer...
Registered: 06/20/02
Posts: 319
Loc: The Shire
Last seen: 21 years, 3 months
|
 Non-Violence explained (by my all time hero!)... 
#1005237 - 10/30/02 03:41 AM (21 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy. Instead of diminishing evil, it multiplies it.Through violence you may murder the liar, but you cannot murder the lie, nor establish the truth. Through violence you may murder the hater, but you do not murder hate. In fact, violence merely increases hate. So it goes. Returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness: only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate: only love can do that.
Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
Like I could imporve on that, but I would like to clear up a few points that I think are vital.
People say to believers in non-violence, "Well, what are we suppose to do...just let people walk in our country and kill us?" IMO, no...Non-violence doesn't make sense to a certain number of people for two reasons (IN MY HUMBLE AND FALLABLE OPINION). One because they are thinking in the short term. They are thinking about the next 5 years where I think a person who believes in non-violence is trying to prepare for future generations.
You see, I do believe that wars create war. Look at WW2 and WW1 and the treaty of Versailles for a real clear, clear cut example. I believe that well a war may kill Saddam, it won't erase those ill feelings the less fortunate people of the war will have, and some of those people will take the resentment with them throughout their lives...breeding a new generation of hate (and terrorists). So what the goal is to make ourselves a country that doesn't get in any war, let alone a war for every generation. It is a long term solution, not a short term one.
Number Two is people are worrying what is going to happen to them, not even in a selfish way but in a protecting way. Well, to once again qoute the admirable MLK - "The question is not, 'If I stop to help this man in need, what will happen to me?' 'If I do not stop to help (those in need), what will happen to them?. That's the question." (Mr. Luther King put his money where his mouth was too, amongst other things a women came up to him in New York and stabbed him...He recalls "The only question I heard from her was, 'Are you Martin Luther King?' And I was looking down writing, and I said yes. And the next minute I felt something beating on my chest...And that blade had gone through, and the X-rays revealed that the tip of the blade was on the edge of my aorta, the main artery. And once that's punctured, you drown in your own blood, that's the end of you...if I had sneezed, I would have died" - 4/3/68)
In the long term I believe non-violence saves lives, in the short term it may be a very hard road to hoe. However, like I said it isn't about short term solutions.
Surely some will agree and others will disagree with me but what you believe is okay with me, I don't think badly of you. I love you. You are a human, you are wonderful and I love you for it. I love everyone, even those who have done horrible things to me and my family. (To those that might say, the only reason I love everyone is because nothing bad has ever happened to me...private message me if you want to know my family history! lol  I think you will find this to not be true.) It is because I am an unconditional lover, because in the end I believe I will have made the world a better place than before. However, it isn't about pride, it isn't about martyrdom...it is about love and peace. This is my method of obtaining it.
Read my signature...I DO love you.
--------------------
Shroomalicious - I love you and in doing so I love myself, because we ARE all one - "An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth leaves the whole world blind and toothless". - Mahatma Ghandi
|
Shroomalicious
You may say I'ma dreamer...
Registered: 06/20/02
Posts: 319
Loc: The Shire
Last seen: 21 years, 3 months
|
Re: Non-Violence explained (by my all time hero!)... [Re: Shroomalicious]
#1005245 - 10/30/02 03:50 AM (21 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
BTW, I felt it was important to add that...these ARE only my opinions and in no way fact and do not, in any way, discredit or disrespect anyone elses beliefs...at least that is my intension. I sincerely hope that the tone is not one of "preachy arrogance" but rather that you get the feeling that I am just a dude trying to explain his complex beliefs to anyone who listens.
I welcome all comments, no matter how critical.
--------------------
Shroomalicious - I love you and in doing so I love myself, because we ARE all one - "An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth leaves the whole world blind and toothless". - Mahatma Ghandi
|
Traveller
enthusiast
Registered: 04/13/01
Posts: 309
Last seen: 16 years, 6 months
|
 Re: Non-Violence explained (by my all time hero!)... [Re: Shroomalicious]
#1005251 - 10/30/02 04:21 AM (21 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
i likes yer attitude, shroomalicious.
|
Phred
Fred's son
Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 3 months
|
 Re: Non-Violence explained (by my all time hero!). [Re: Shroomalicious]
#1005296 - 10/30/02 05:45 AM (21 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Shroomalicious writes:
Non-violence doesn't make sense to a certain number of people for two reasons (IN MY HUMBLE AND FALLABLE OPINION). One because they are thinking in the short term. They are thinking about the next 5 years where I think a person who believes in non-violence is trying to prepare for future generations.
What about the police sniper who must think about the next 5 seconds while he has a hostage taker in his sights?
Non-violent solutions to a threat of physical force are of course always preferable if there is a realistic chance they may work. There are countless situations where they won't. In those cases the only options are to resist to the limit of your capacity (i.e. violently) or submit and be either harmed or destroyed, in which case violence, not non-violence, is the victor.
The sad truth (and it is the truth) is that there are many individuals who are not amenable to peaceful discussion. Their preferred method of human interaction is through force. This is the case not only of criminals, but also of some heads of state.
Robert Heinlein once wrote, "An armed society is a polite society". Think about it for a while.
Imagine a society in which every member had a "destruct" mechanism implanted in their cranium at birth, with a monitoring system reporting back to an impartial central computer programmed to detect acts of aggression. Whenever an individual attempts to deliberately harm another, the computer sends a signal and the "destruct" charge goes off, turning the contents of that particular cranium into mush. How long do you think it would take to put an end to violent crime and wars? About a week?
The best way to end violence is to make the consequences of its initiation so draconian that only the most incorrigible will ever even ATTEMPT a violent act, and then only once.
pinky
--------------------
|
 Evolving
Resident Cynic
Registered: 10/01/02
Posts: 5,385
Loc: Apt #6, The Village
|
Re: Non-Violence explained (by my all time hero!)... [Re: Shroomalicious]
#1005522 - 10/30/02 08:49 AM (21 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Six million dead Jews in Nazi Germany didn't put up much of a fight (sure, there were pockets of resistence). All that's necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.
--------------------
To call humans 'rational beings' does injustice to the term, 'rational.' Humans are capable of rational thought, but it is not their essence. Humans are animals, beasts with complex brains. Humans, more often than not, utilize their cerebrum to rationalize what their primal instincts, their preconceived notions, and their emotional desires have presented as goals - humans are rationalizing beings.
|
Cosmic_Monkey
PongidaeKosmikos
Registered: 08/06/02
Posts: 149
Loc: Somewhere between inner-s...
|
Re: Non-Violence explained (by my all time hero!)... [Re: Shroomalicious]
#1005750 - 10/30/02 10:10 AM (21 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
What your saying sounds good to me ,but I'm not entirely sure I know what exactly violence is concidered to be. It would certainly be a great thing for everyone to care more about each other. The problem is that it would take a major change in the way people think about things. This not being part of the agenda for making large amounts of money I don't see it happening soon.... 
We do have the power to change ourselves though, so maybe in the long run our doing so will make some sort of difference. I also like to believe that a change in conciousness is going to come on it's own eventually anyway and it will probably be because we will have to in order to survive.
|
CleverName
the cloudsshould know meby now...
Registered: 08/26/02
Posts: 1,121
Loc: red earth painted with mi...
Last seen: 18 years, 4 months
|
 Re: Non-Violence explained (by my all time hero!)... [Re: Cosmic_Monkey]
#1005809 - 10/30/02 10:26 AM (21 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
everytime you love, even if your thikning loving things, i think it causes ripples that extend throughout our universe....everything is cause and effect.....the more love you give, the more love there is around....I LOVE YOU ALL 
--------------------
if you can't find the truth right where you are, where else do you expect to find it?
this is the purpose
|
CleverName
the cloudsshould know meby now...
Registered: 08/26/02
Posts: 1,121
Loc: red earth painted with mi...
Last seen: 18 years, 4 months
|
Re: Non-Violence explained (by my all time hero!)... [Re: CleverName]
#1005942 - 10/30/02 10:54 AM (21 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
the bible talks about god having unonditional love, but then he throws most of our asses in hell, im not buying that. plus my god isnt a vengful god, if im above vengence, my god had better be...
-kna mean?
--------------------
if you can't find the truth right where you are, where else do you expect to find it?
this is the purpose
|
Swami
Eggshell Walker
Registered: 01/18/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
|
Re: Non-Violence explained (by my all time hero!)... [Re: CleverName]
#1006433 - 10/30/02 12:49 PM (21 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
I lived the non-violence philosophy and literally put my life on the line to get out of the U.S. Navy as a conscientious objector. (Several hardcore seadogs, including the ship's doctor threatened my life saying I might find myself thrown overboard some night!) I was a fire control technician: (read as missile technician not fireman).
As part of the evaluation process, I distinctly remember the captain asking me what would happen if everyone took my non-violent stance. I said that the world would be an amazing place! (What he meant was, what would happen if every AMERICAN took my stance and we were defenseless.)
My take on it is that it is nearly impossible to start a fight with someone who does not also have violence inside of them. That being said, I am far from a pussy and would defend my family, friends and self if necessary, but I have a different defintion of "necessary" than most Americans.
--------------------
The proof is in the pudding.
|
Shroomalicious
You may say I'ma dreamer...
Registered: 06/20/02
Posts: 319
Loc: The Shire
Last seen: 21 years, 3 months
|
Re: Non-Violence explained (by my all time hero!)... [Re: Evolving]
#1007728 - 10/30/02 08:01 PM (21 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Six million dead Jews in Nazi Germany didn't put up much of a fight (sure, there were pockets of resistence). All that's necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.
My point is, it never would have happened if there hadn't have been war before WW2, so it would have been avoided.
In my opinion, we have start non-violence now in order to avoid an escalating effect. In the long term my belief is it will save the entire human race.
--------------------
Shroomalicious - I love you and in doing so I love myself, because we ARE all one - "An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth leaves the whole world blind and toothless". - Mahatma Ghandi
|
Shroomalicious
You may say I'ma dreamer...
Registered: 06/20/02
Posts: 319
Loc: The Shire
Last seen: 21 years, 3 months
|
Re: Non-Violence explained (by my all time hero!). [Re: Phred]
#1007798 - 10/30/02 08:23 PM (21 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
What about the police sniper who must think about the next 5 seconds while he has a hostage taker in his sights?
I am not going to second guess somebody put in that situation. I have my philosophy's as to how I would handle a hostage situation, but like I said for me to second guess someone who was in that position would kind of disrespect the person, I think.
Non-violent solutions to a threat of physical force are of course always preferable if there is a realistic chance they may work. There are countless situations where they won't. In those cases the only options are to resist to the limit of your capacity (i.e. violently) or submit and be either harmed or destroyed, in which case violence, not non-violence, is the victor.
Like I said, in immediate situations non-violence could get you hurt, however I honestly believe that ultimately it would save lives. Without creating a situation of hate and violence, hate and violence cannot bread. Love will be the end of violence, IMO.
Robert Heinlein once wrote, "An armed society is a polite society". Think about it for a while.
I disagree with this qoute entirely. It is a common NRA belief that if everyone had guns than nobody would want to bother anyone. What kinda of Utopia is fear? Creating a society of fear, is not one of love and trust. In my opinion arming everyone is only building on the problem. Creating people in fear will only teach them fear and make them feel powerless, IMO...which can make them desire power and that is all Hitler was anyway...a guy mad with power.
Imagine a society in which every member had a "destruct" mechanism implanted in their cranium at birth, with a monitoring system reporting back to an impartial central computer programmed to detect acts of aggression. Whenever an individual attempts to deliberately harm another, the computer sends a signal and the "destruct" charge goes off, turning the contents of that particular cranium into mush. How long do you think it would take to put an end to violent crime and wars? About a week?
Who pushes the button to kill people? What is perceived as a violent act? Who has the power to decide one man's actions are to violent, so they will be killed?
So many questions. This system sounds like something Hitler would have loved...a computer that FORCES people to do what someone believes is the "right" thing. No offense but I don't think this would create anything but fear. Not spiritually fullfilled happy people. IMO, this would not end violent crime because people would be walking around with there heads being turned into mush...and of course those who push the button are killing people, wich is violent, so they would be blown up...and so it would go...blowing up people is violent, is it not?
Clearly this society you speak of would either have to create people who are "above the law" and without the program, therefor creating a system of Government in which a few would lead the many, not a democracy. This is a system of Government that has never worked. The other alternative in your society is that your Government would declare that killing people was okay, as long as they were violent people. In other words..."THEY STARTED IT". Which is already similar to the society we live in.
At least that is the way I see it, friend.
The best way to end violence is to make the consequences of its initiation so draconian that only the most incorrigible will ever even ATTEMPT a violent act, and then only once.
Once again...fear will lead us to Utopia? Wouldn't it be better if you just made a world were people would not want to freak out, rather than forcing them to do what you believe is the right thing?
Thanks for bringing your points up so we can discuss this though, I enjoy people who challenge my beliefs because they help me. They do so by exposing my weaknesses and allowing me to strenghten them and also by challenging them and making them stronger in my mind.
You help me. I hope I help you. Love and peace!
--------------------
Shroomalicious - I love you and in doing so I love myself, because we ARE all one - "An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth leaves the whole world blind and toothless". - Mahatma Ghandi
|
Phred
Fred's son
Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 3 months
|
Re: Non-Violence explained (by my all time hero!). [Re: Shroomalicious]
#1008087 - 10/30/02 09:41 PM (21 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
I have my philosophy's as to how I would handle a hostage situation...
I'd be interested to hear how you would handle one. Before you reply, keep in mind that standard police procedure is to bring in the most highly-trained negotiator they can find, one who knows EVERY non-violent, persuasive argument in the book. Yet there are times when the negotiator makes no progress, and the choice boils down to a) kill the hostage taker/s or b) allow the hostage/s to be killed.
Like I said, in immediate situations non-violence could get you hurt, however I honestly believe that ultimately it would save lives.
To be frank, I personally am not interested in becoming a martyr so that future generations may benefit from whatever "lesson" I may have left them. Even if non-violence may ultimately save lives, (a theory I find absurd, obviously), if I am in a situation where I cannot run from a violent thug, where I cannot reason with a violent thug, and it looks like I might get hurt, I will resist violently. I have a scar on my jaw that I'll carry to my grave because I pussied out and tried to talk two guys out of attacking me with beer bottles, rather than taking at least one of them out immediately. Never again.
Without creating a situation of hate and violence, hate and violence cannot bread.
I didn't create that situation of hate and violence that led to the attack I mentioned. I just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. Those guys hurt me bad, and guess what? My non-violent reaction to their aggression didn't change either of those dudes one little bit. They're still at it.
What kinda of Utopia is fear? Creating a society of fear, is not one of love and trust. In my opinion arming everyone is only building on the problem.
You have it backwards. WHO is it who creates fear? The thugs, NOT the peaceful citizens who are armed only for self-protection from predators. The predators aren't FEARFUL of the peaceful, they are RESPECTFUL of their ability to protect themselves.
It doesn't matter to me WHY they leave me alone -- whether their motivation for being peaceful is love for their fellow man or the fear of dying -- all that counts is they leave me alone.
Creating people in fear will only teach them fear and make them feel powerless, IMO...
Again, you have it backwards. The predators are not fearful and powerless, it is the weak and helpless who are fearful and powerless.
...which can make them desire power...
They don't desire "power", they desire safety.
Who pushes the button to kill people? What is perceived as a violent act? Who has the power to decide one man's actions are to violent, so they will be killed?
Sorry, I must have been unclear. The computer program decides. The program is set to whatever parameters the society feels is required, but once programmed, no further human intervention is required. The computer "pushes the button".
This system sounds like something Hitler would have loved...a computer that FORCES people to do what someone believes is the "right" thing.
No more so than the current legal system in countries which still have the death penalty. It's just quicker, and not subject to the perjured testimony of bought witnesses, or a jury swayed by a fancy defense lawyer. Think "OJ Simpson".
Look, if you're not happy about the computer setup, then use God instead. Every time someone tries to hurt someone else, God zaps him with a lightning bolt. Don't get hung up on the mechanism -- I'm talking fundamental principles here.
No offense but I don't think this would create anything but fear. Not spiritually fullfilled happy people.
Tough to be spiritually fulfilled when you live in fear of being mugged every time you venture out of your apartment to cash your pension check.
IMO, this would not end violent crime because people would be walking around with there heads being turned into mush....
Only those who indulge in violent crime. Peaceful individuals like you and me would have nothing to worry about. Pretty soon all those who couldn't control their violent tendencies would be dead. Problem solved, now let's move on to world hunger.
The other alternative in your society is that your Government would declare that killing people was okay, as long as they were violent people.
Correct. I fail to see the problem. Pretty simple choice, really... leave others alone and all is well. Try to fuck with someone and your life ends instantly. How can that be bad? It wouldn't take long for violence to end. YOUR way of doing things -- leading by example -- has never worked and WILL never work. Despite such beautiful and highly publicized examples as set by Jesus Christ, Buddha, Martin Luther King, Ghandi, et all, the level of violence in the world hasn't decreased an iota.
Wouldn't it be better if you just made a world were people would not want to freak out...
How? Some individuals are predators, period. They don't give a fuck about Ghandi and King; they think of them as losers. You can pour love on people like that and take them out to dinner till the cows come home and it doesn't mean squat to them. They are laughing at you and planning when is the best time to rip you off for all you own. They are not violent because some people are armed, they are violent because they are violent.
...rather than forcing them to do what you believe is the right thing?
They're not being "forced" to DO anything. They can sit on their ass all day in front of the boob tube and nothing will ever happen to them.
pinky
--------------------
|
Shroomalicious
You may say I'ma dreamer...
Registered: 06/20/02
Posts: 319
Loc: The Shire
Last seen: 21 years, 3 months
|
Re: Non-Violence explained (by my all time hero!). [Re: Phred]
#1008403 - 10/30/02 11:08 PM (21 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
I'd be interested to hear how you would handle one. Before you reply, keep in mind that standard police procedure is to bring in the most highly-trained negotiator they can find, one who knows EVERY non-violent, persuasive argument in the book. Yet there are times when the negotiator makes no progress, and the choice boils down to a) kill the hostage taker/s or b) allow the hostage/s to be killed.
That is something like how I would handle it...I know this is "standard procedure" but I don't think it is put into practice as much as, I believe, it should.
To be frank, I personally am not interested in becoming a martyr so that future generations may benefit from whatever "lesson" I may have left them.
It isn't about martyrdom or glory of any kind. There isn't even really a "lesson" that I am trying to teach. My point is, we must look at what kind of conditions create a "bad person" and how those conditions can be eliminated. In my opinion those conditions are caused by people who faught, whether or not the fighter felt they had a good reason.
I have a scar on my jaw that I'll carry to my grave because I pussied out and tried to talk two guys out of attacking me with beer bottles, rather than taking at least one of them out immediately. Never again.
I have a knife wound on my chest from someone who just couldn't be talked out of a violent situation. I don't think you or me "pussied out" because I think it takes even bigger balls to stand there and say "I will not fight because I don't believe in it" then it does to just start throwing punches. I also don't think our energies were wasted because we did not contribute to the violent environment and did our own small step for a world without violence.
Like I said, those guys who mugged you may not be changed simply because you do not want to fight. However, you are doing your part in creating a non-violent world. If everyone in the world was not violent, we would have a better world IMO. If everyone in the world waited for someone else to start the non-violence just to be safe, then it would never start. Therefor, it starts with me.
I didn't create that situation of hate and violence that led to the attack I mentioned. I just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. Those guys hurt me bad, and guess what? My non-violent reaction to their aggression didn't change either of those dudes one little bit. They're still at it.
I can't prove this but I can say that it is found to be true in general that people who are violent, grew up in violent situations. They have learned violence. No, you did not create an atmosphere of violence...someone else did before them to make them violent. That is why I see it vital to not be violent, so you never teach anyone else violence.
You have it backwards. WHO is it who creates fear? The thugs, NOT the peaceful citizens who are armed only for self-protection from predators. The predators aren't FEARFUL of the peaceful, they are RESPECTFUL of their ability to protect themselves.
Regardless of who creates the fear...it is there and it effects everyone. In the world you are 4 times as likely to accidentally hurt yourself with a gun then you are to shoot an intruder. Weapons of killing will only bring more killing, and IMO weapons of killing can never bring peace. It is like the old saying...
Fighting for peace is like screwing for virginity.
If everyone had a gun, then that would include the "thugs"...how would this not create fear? You say we would keep guns out of "thugs" hands...well, we have tried that and it has yet to work IMO. Even if you could keep guns out of the hands of criminals there is always the threat of a here-to-for harmless guy who opens fire on the general public.
And even if you could somehow keep the guns 100% out of the hands of "bad people" then you would still have to worry about the thing that kills more people per year than any other gun related death...accidents.
Again, you have it backwards. The predators are not fearful and powerless, it is the weak and helpless who are fearful and powerless.
However, the predators were born into fear and powerlessness, that is my belief and the belief of those who have done the studies at least.
Sorry, I must have been unclear. The computer program decides. The program is set to whatever parameters the society feels is required, but once programmed, no further human intervention is required. The computer "pushes the button".
Aside from any moral complaints lets just talk about, what I would call practical complaints. Machinery is fallable and there is always the inevitable risk of killing an innocent person. Also, how would this computer decide when someone is doing something violent? Would do it by examining what chemicals were released in the brain when someone is commiting a violent act, as it has been proposed in the past? Again this is quite fallable. The brain acts in times of violence the same it does when the body experiences an orgasm...so everytime someone has sex there brains would explode (in a bad way). Also, there are people with a medical condition (speaking about the legally insane) who genuinely do not know the difference between right or wrong and there are people who also have brain dysfunctions (ranging from any number of mental illnessess including the depressed) whos brains don't function normally. Any number of things could present different brain activity and thus, through off the computer...not a good thing to do with something that would control all walks of human life around the planet. And by the way...what about hunting? Is that not violent? Would hunters all be killed? Or would there be an exception for them? If so, then once again you are creating a double standard for violence that could confuse the software. Also, what about accidentally hitting someone or something with my car? Is manslaughter not violent?
Tough to be spiritually fulfilled when you live in fear of being mugged every time you venture out of your apartment to cash your pension check.
Tough, but can it not be done. Also, in my opinion it would be tough to be happy with a chip in my brain that could go off anytime I commit a violent act as seen through the eyes of a computer chip.
Not everyone thinks alike, and many people have very different definitions of violence. Once we allow something else to decide for us it is not only dangerous but we have entered a dictatorship that does not reflect the people.
How? Some individuals are predators, period. They don't give a fuck about Ghandi and King; they think of them as losers. You can pour love on people like that and take them out to dinner till the cows come home and it doesn't mean squat to them. They are laughing at you and planning when is the best time to rip you off for all you own. They are not violent because some people are armed, they are violent because they are violent.
I personally feel they are violent because of there own human fraility being exposed by certain unsensitive people. I don't believe people are born into hatred, I believe they are taught it. So, that is why I want to lead by example a way without hatred.
What your computer effectiviely does is takes people whom the computer deems worthy and kills them all. Replace the word computer with Hitler, and you have an explanation for a Nazi party. Believing in this is believing that the opinion of a computer (programmed by some guys) is worthy of being treated as fact and law that everyone else has to live by. A dictactorship by definition.
Me and you clearly think very differently...but that is okay with me. This is a democracy and you have your right to vote and I have mine, we are equals in mind, opinion and soul.
Peace and love Pinky!
--------------------
Shroomalicious - I love you and in doing so I love myself, because we ARE all one - "An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth leaves the whole world blind and toothless". - Mahatma Ghandi
Edited by Shroomalicious (10/30/02 11:10 PM)
|
Xlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/25/01
Posts: 9,134
|
Re: Non-Violence explained (by my all time hero!). [Re: Shroomalicious]
#1008596 - 10/31/02 12:04 AM (21 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
I disagree with this qoute entirely. It is a common NRA belief that if everyone had guns than nobody would want to bother anyone.
Amen Shroomalicious. And I think the 30,000-40,000 americans slaughtered every year by guns would disagree with pink too.
Maybe it's just me but getting shot isn't very polite where i come from.
--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi
|
Phred
Fred's son
Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 3 months
|
Re: Non-Violence explained (by my all time hero!). [Re: Shroomalicious]
#1009565 - 10/31/02 07:42 AM (21 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
lets just talk about, what I would call practical complaints. Machinery is fallable ...
Fine. Replace the computer with God and lightning bolts, then. Or change the "mush-maker" charge inside the cranium to an electrical charge that renders them unconscious instantly for an hour or so. We are talking fundamental PRINCIPLES here, not arguing over specific lines of code. The opposing PRINCIPLES involved can be summed up easily. The question each of us is attempting to answer is, "What is the best way to eliminate violence?"
Option 1) Allow the predators to perform violent acts at will, and offer no physical resistance to them. At the same time, those who haven't yet been killed by the predators attempt to reason with them, to coddle them, to provide them with love and compassion in the hopes that they may see the error of their ways and eventually stop harming others.
Option 2) Universally publicize the fact that those who attempt to harm others will be killed instantly, ideally before they can swing their baseball bat or pull the trigger, but at any rate before they can harm more than a single victim.
Your approach (option 1) is a cast-iron guarantee that the violent will shortly own the planet. My approach (option 2) is a cast-iron guarantee that there will shortly be no more acts of violence.
pinky
--------------------
|
Cosmic_Monkey
PongidaeKosmikos
Registered: 08/06/02
Posts: 149
Loc: Somewhere between inner-s...
|
Re: Non-Violence explained (by my all time hero!). [Re: Phred]
#1009613 - 10/31/02 08:17 AM (21 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
But then who else will be removed by our bad element removers, all those who break the law? Who will choose these laws? For that matter who will choose what a violent act is and isn't?
|
Xlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/25/01
Posts: 9,134
|
Re: Non-Violence explained (by my all time hero!). [Re: Phred]
#1009767 - 10/31/02 09:54 AM (21 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
My approach (option 2) is a cast-iron guarantee that there will shortly be no more acts of violence.
Hitler tried this. It didn't work.
--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi
|
CleverName
the cloudsshould know meby now...
Registered: 08/26/02
Posts: 1,121
Loc: red earth painted with mi...
Last seen: 18 years, 4 months
|
Re: Non-Violence explained (by my all time hero!). [Re: Xlea321]
#1009774 - 10/31/02 09:57 AM (21 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
you can lock up the hater, but you cant lock up the hate.
--------------------
if you can't find the truth right where you are, where else do you expect to find it?
this is the purpose
|
Phred
Fred's son
Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 3 months
|
Re: Non-Violence explained (by my all time hero!). [Re: Xlea321]
#1009940 - 10/31/02 11:25 AM (21 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Hitler tried this. It didn't work.
For the umpteenth time Alex demonstrates his inability to think in terms of fundamental principles. Hitler did NOT try this. Not even close.
pinky
--------------------
|
Phred
Fred's son
Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 3 months
|
Re: Non-Violence explained (by my all time hero!). [Re: CleverName]
#1009949 - 10/31/02 11:29 AM (21 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
CleverName writes:
you can lock up the hater, but you cant lock up the hate.
So what? It makes no difference to me if some predator I've never met hates me, loves me, or is indifferent to me. All that I care about is that he not harm me. His motivation for letting me go about my life without being harmed by him is a matter of supreme indifference to me.
pinky
--------------------
|
|
Threaded
Previous
Index
Next
Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order 
Red Vein Kratom
Edit 
Reply 
NiamhNyx
spewed 4th
1 2 3 all )
Droz
Adamist
Swami
Kiafi