Can we not love our brother as ourselves?

[Owledge]

So you call murdering 16 innocent people, being "defensive"...

 

 

That depends. Do you equate my initial remark with dissing someone's sacred beliefs?

Edited January 15, 2015 by Owledge

[Aetherous]

That depends.

 

There is never a reason to murder (versus kill in self-defense) innocent people (versus people who would kill you and/or others). At least in my view...perhaps you feel differently.

[Owledge]

There is never a reason to murder (versus kill in self-defense) innocent people (versus people who would kill you and/or others). At least in my view...perhaps you feel differently.

There is a reason for everything.

 

Did you get the message from my question that you cut away in your quote? Doesn't look that way, but if you believe differently, tell me.

[Aetherous]

There is a reason for everything.

 

There really isn't. And if a terrorist has "reasons" (such as his ideology being insulted) to murder innocents, then his reasons aren't good enough.

 

There is never a good enough reason to murder an innocent person.

 

You want to keep arguing otherwise? Have at it, because that's all that needs to be said.

 

Did you get the message from my question that you cut away in your quote? Doesn't look that way, but if you believe differently, tell me.

 

I'm not interested in further discussion.

[Owledge]

Almost seven years on an excellent Taoist forum.
More than 7800 posts.
Still a righteous crusader.

Makes it easy for me to let that one go.

The journey begins with an intention.

[Aetherous]

I think one area we (you and I) differ is in identification. I do not, though I live in the UK, identify myself in any way as part of this "we" or "us" that you speak of

 

My bad. I wasn't referring to you personally, but about myself since I served and saw some of the Iraqis who were being trained by us over there.

 

But the people of Iraq, as far as I remember, were not pleading for assistance... and "we" "helped" them anyway.

 

Some actually were.

 

The people of Nigeria are dying in the thousands, and they are pleading for assistance. And "we" are ignoring them, choosing instead to whine about free speech even as we prevent others around us from actually saying whatever the fuck they want.

 

There are entire villages being wiped out in Nigeria and Sudan and South Sudan and humans being murdered all the time in many other places around the world, and there is almost nothing ordinary citizens in those areas can do about it. I feel no personal obligation to go and fight for them, but anyone who sees the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as a justified collective effort should feel an obligation to get their country going and do something.

 

Like I said, I think we should be doing something about it. What I mean by "doing something", is we should wipe that terrorist group off of the face of the earth, so that the innocent people there can live in peace.

 

(This isn't a personal attack on you, A. It got away from me a bit towards the end there...just.. apparently needed to let some feelings out..)

 

Totally didn't take it as one, friend. If you called me "meager" though, like owledge attempted to do, I might have.

[Aetherous]

Almost seven years on an excellent Taoist forum.

More than 7800 posts.

Still a righteous crusader.

Makes it easy for me to let that one go.

The journey begins with an intention.

 

Do you think this is not a personal attack or an insult? Rhetorical question! Like I said, I don't wish to continue a back and forth. It feels too hostile between us at the moment.

Edited January 15, 2015 by Aetherous

[Marblehead]

Hey, can I wish a painful death upon all those who actively supported a government's illegal war, inflicting grand scale pain and suffering for the benefit of the rich elite? I mean, if we're talking about vengeance, this seems legit, no?

No. Believe it or not those two situations are extremely different.

 

As a person living in Germany you should know that.

 

The rules of war prohibit the intentional killing of non-combatants. Terrorists seek out non-combatants because they are the least able to defend themselves. Hitler's SS did that too. Yes, they were terrorists.

 

And no, I wasn't talking about vengeance. I was talking about a person's just rewards.

[Marblehead]

Now, I don't know if "the West" has any obligation to help, but we felt like we did in Iraq and Afghanistan, didn't we?

 

Or...wait...is there a political agenda behind all of this?

You may be seeing something being done about that rather soon I think (and hope).

[Marblehead]

 

(This isn't a personal attack on you, A. It got away from me a bit towards the end there...just.. apparently needed to let some feelings out..)

Yeah, you did let it all out there, didn't you?

[manitou]

I still think the current state of Capitalism is one of the problems. If young people have nothing more to look forward to than joining a hate group, what else will they do? I think it's time that we consider that rich vs. poor or desperate enter the equation. And I don't think it's going to work merely on a regional or national level. I think it must be done on a world wide level.

 

Just as this thread has become as polarized as it has, so will the world become more polarized as the capital remains in the hands of only a few. There was a real need for the industrial template of capitalism at the time of the industrial revolution and the time of Henry Ford, etc. There was need for innovation, and the entire world has benefited from innovation in many ways. But now the capital is just stuck at the top, and anger sits at the bottom.

 

Just looking at it from a different dimension, and one that I think has to be considered. I'm not advocating any existing governmental system as a model; I think some creative thinking is in order. The west can no longer sit smugly in comfort while so many others in the world suffers.

 

I do not say this out of a bleeding heart, although my heart is one of Oneness. I say this with all pragmatism in mind. How can the current state of affairs, escalating as it is, end in peace?

[Marblehead]

And how many multi-millionaires and billionaires do you think are reading or will read your post?

 

And even if one did, do you really think they would pay any attention to it?

 

I have never been a member of a labor union but I would say that it is time for labor unions to move to the foreground again. That is the only way changes will be made. But the union members need make sure they do not elect criminals to leadership positions else all will fail.

[manitou]

The Dao will work as the Dao will work. I am not so arrogant as to think anyone will pay attention to my posts. I am only looking with very long eyes. I can see no other alternative. The current way we are going is annihilation, if we continue down the same road. The Dao lives within the millionaires and billionaires as well, only they may not know it. All things will work as they must.

 

Marbles, I live in Singularity and you live in Duality. In singularity, the Dao is within us all, waiting to be recognized. It is the intelligence underlying all, waiting within us to be recognized and acknowledged. It is in nature, in the rotation of the planets, in the seasons, in the moon and the ebb and flow of the tides. In Duality, there is no recognition of a unifying underlying intelligence that encompasses everything and everyone. So-called religious people live in Duality, in that they think there is a separate intelligence out there that acts a bit like Santa Claus. Neither one of us buys into that concept.

 

That's why it doesn't matter whether billionaires read these posts or not. I'm not, WE are not, the causative agent for change. The billionaires don't have to be the causative agent either. The Dao is doing what it is doing, and we, us humans, are the channels for the workings of the Dao. More often than not, the Dao seems to work 'to the opposite' of what we think is happening. As awful as things in the world seem, we must remember that only the ugly makes news. There is an equally beautiful force for 'good' (a seemingly dual concept, but I have to use this for my purposes here) that remains under the radar and attracts no attention. People of spirit are raising to new levels; mass communication is also raising the awareness of people all over the world, although, again, only the negative is broadcast on the news. It's in our faces all the times, unfortunately; the beauty and the wisdom must be searched out. But the Dao is in total balance, although not apparent to our eyes at this time. And the funny thing, is that it's all Awareness. Things seem to be happening at such a fast rate now because our Awareness is moving at the speed of light, as to our communications with each other across the world.

 

 

Agreed as to the labor unions. But that only works in industrialized societies.

Edited January 16, 2015 by manitou

[C T]

If you were a passerby and saw this, would you help?

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f8nsXuTigJ4

 

 

Hypothetical question: If the child's father is a terrorist and had recently harmed someone you know (or loved), what would it be, then? Help, walk away, or wish death upon the kid?

[Chang]

Moderation Message

If the temptation arises to engage in petty squabbling and needling in this thread, then please refer to the threads title and give pause before pressing the post button.

[C T]

Just read a Reuters interview with Pope Francis, asking for his views on the Paris incident.

 

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/01/15/us-france-shooting-pope-idUSKBN0KO17F20150115

[Marblehead]

The Dao will work as the Dao will work. I am not so arrogant as to think anyone will pay attention to my posts. I am only looking with very long eyes. I can see no other alternative. The current way we are going is annihilation, if we continue down the same road. The Dao lives within the millionaires and billionaires as well, only they may not know it. All things will work as they must.

Oh, I pay attention to your posts. I respect your idealism (even though I constantly argue against it as not being realistic).

 

Yep. As soon as there were Two there was Duality. As long as we are alive there will be Duality.

 

Agreed as to the labor unions. But that only works in industrialized societies.

That is historically correct but I suggest that it can be expanded to all aspects of a society. The working class, those who are the productive element of any society, should have the greatest say as to how the produce of the productive should be shared amongst the various elements of their society.

 

We in the USA thought we had that with elected government officials but we found out just how wrong we were and still are.

 

Just like in the Arab states, all that money from oil is going to only a very small portion of their societies. This is why many Muslims feel disenfranchised, not because of what the 'Western World' is doing. But we still get the blame.

[Marblehead]

If you were a passerby and saw this, would you help?

 

Hypothetical question: If the child's father is a terrorist and had recently harmed someone you know (or loved), what would it be, then? Help, walk away, or wish death upon the kid?

Based on my warrior's creed:

 

"I will help you if I can, I will kill you if I must."

 

The child must be saved, The father must be killed.

[Marblehead]

 

Moderation Message

If the temptation arises to engage in petty squabbling and needling in this thread, then please refer to the threads title and give pause before pressing the post button.

Fair warning. However,

 

The thread title: "Can we not love our brother?", it is my opinion that love must be earned. I cannot love an evil person. That is my reality. I could, however, learn to love a person who was evil but changed their ways before they were killed.

 

For a discussion like this, that is, universal love, to be honest it must be viewed from all perspectives.

 

Yes, it seems that we are needling one another but I don't really think this is true. I think it is more at, we all have our own understandings and opinions and unless we talk about the commonalities and differences there will never be a chance for understanding the others' POV.

 

Some posts may appear to be negative but if we deny the various POVs then we have gone nowhere with the discussion.

[manitou]

Fair warning. However,

 

The thread title: "Can we not love our brother?", it is my opinion that love must be earned.

 

That is a perfect description of conditional love.

[manitou]

Just read a Reuters interview with Pope Francis, asking for his views on the Paris incident.

 

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/01/15/us-france-shooting-pope-idUSKBN0KO17F20150115

My computer, for some reason, couldn't play the clip. But I did hear him this morning giving his version of 'If you hit a hornet's nest with a stupid stick, don't be surprised at what happens next."

[Owledge]

That is a perfect description of conditional love.

I wouldn't say it's pefect. It's extreme. Conditional love is usually understood as love that is felt towards a person who has a beneficial effect on you. Claiming that love has to be earned is way more creepy, because it introduces a regulatory third party to that dynamic. It implies that if someone loves me for something about me that I didn't even aim for (it being their own subjective decision), I do not deserve it, and in turn also condemning the other person's affection. I cannot remember ever having encountered a statement like "Love has to be earned." before.

[GrandmasterP]

Pope Francis' thoughtful speech was reported in today's newspaper here.

Seemed like sound and compassionate common sense.

"If Cardinal X here insults my mother then I will punch him..."

And he made to mock punch the cardinal who was standing next to him.

Justifiable anger and justifiable retaliation seemed to be the point but all tempered with forgiveness and the possibility of improvement or 'redemption'.

Not sure about 'redemption' as a concept but forgiveness has to be an essential.

There's not much point in forgiving someone who simply takes advantage and carries on offending.

Saying to someone who has no intention of stopping stealing for example...

" Oh that's wrong all this stealing you are doing but I forgive you."

That gets no one anywhere at all.

There has to be some sanctions applied and limits defined.

Edited January 16, 2015 by GrandmasterP

[Marblehead]

I wouldn't say it's pefect. It's extreme. Conditional love is usually understood as love that is felt towards a person who has a beneficial effect on you. Claiming that love has to be earned is way more creepy, because it introduces a regulatory third party to that dynamic. It implies that if someone loves me for something about me that I didn't even aim for (it being their own subjective decision), I do not deserve it, and in turn also condemning the other person's affection. I cannot remember ever having encountered a statement like "Love has to be earned." before.

Your understanding of love is way too complicated. Keep it simple. "Love has the be earned."

[Marblehead]

That is a perfect description of conditional love.

Well, you just put the finger on me, didn't you?