history lesson

[wildsweetone]

a) there is nothing disgusting about a woman wearing a burka. surely it is the present connotation of why they had to wear them that's disgusting.

b) female circumcision - does it make you feel better if it's a male domination thing? if it's a women domination thing, is that any better?

c) india - does the lowest caste member have any choice in not following the caste system? how do they go about fending for themselves when they are chucked out of their environment? who is there to support them? and, what have you done about letting the indian government or whoever know that you disagree with their system?

what do you personally do with those things which you discover are wrong or bad? anything at all?

i am interested in this thread as a discussion.

 

[Quint]

I ask myself the same thing, more often than I'd like recently. I'm so bloody tired of war. If you ask what I do when I discover evil on a worldwide level, the short answer is "nothing." So frustrating.

My sophomore year in high school, I was involved with a project called Jubilee 2000, which was intended to relieve national debt in most of the world's most impoverished countries. I did the whole shpiel, petitions, letters to the senators, reports to the church I belonged to at the time.

That's it.

I can't stop thinking about other places' misery, but I have stopped doing anything about it. I am concentrating on becoming the best person I can, benefitting myself and therefore other people. It's enough for me.

 

[its Leslie]

I have to point out that I personally don't accept anything that is sexually repressive of women.

I object to it being eves fault mankind fell from grace (ok I think the story is stupid in the first place actually).

I object to covering women as if the sight of them was somehow bad. Why is it ok if am not covered, surely women have to endure looking at our cute buns eh.

Caste system, no I am definitely into all humans are equal.

All my comments though were merely illustrative of the world we actually do live in.

As for me. Hmmm yes I hate war. I am also an expert in military history and I have worn a uniform.

I am not even remotely concerned about taking a life in defense of my way of life. If tomorrow someone tried to destroy my way of life, I would have no trouble stopping them with lethal force.

Like the expression "talk is cheap".

I dont listen to rap music primarily because talk is cheap. It's to angry to hostile and talk is cheap. If I feel emotional about something I do something about it. Singing about it doesn't do it for me. Talk is cheap.

I have sent many a letter into Macleans magazine expressing my views on this that or the other matter. But I haven't had one see print unfortunately (I respond in some way to almost every issue too). I might be to extreme in my views even for Macleans magazine.

But one thing I won't write about is wife beating. I can assure you if anyone hits a woman in my presence, I will disregard the woman's protests and beat the man to a pulp.

No one stomps on my flowers. And you gals are all flowers to me, and the world is my garden. No one hurts my flowers.

 

[wildsweetone]

yeah man! lets get out there and shoot the lot of em!

here's a radical thought...

what if all those guys who disagreed with killing actually didn't put the uniform on and refused to hold the gun?

what if ?

 

[karmadog]

What if?

Sweet One, there is no reason to ask the question. Like communism it is an ideal that cannot work in the real world. Your theory fails to take into account basic human nature. A nation of pacifists will be a nation of slaves.

Of course, a nation that tries to solve every problem with force will eventually be destroyed by force.

 

[Lisa CJ]

Phasers on Stun

Well, that's usually the way it works in STAR TREK...

 

[wildsweetone]

it only can not work because of the closed mindedness of humans who don't believe in it.

are you also fence sitting karmadog?

 

[VeraGem]

I watched a program on BBC America last weekend; I can't remember the title. The story was set in Ireland and dealt in large part with the character's feelings about violence. What I got out of it was this:

The Catholics and Protestants involved in the violence saw each other as so different that their differences had no possible resolution.

The rest of the world simply saw Irish killing Irish over something the English started hundreds of years ago.

**********

Forgiveness? I don't know - depends on the transgressor. I've heard certain criteria for forgiveness; Ray began to touch upon one of them. The person has to first admit they have done wrong, second show remorse for their actions, and finally show some effort to change.

Turning the other cheek is fine - so long as that turning away doesn't mean standing around doing nothing while evil flourishes. The guy who started the whole cheek-turning thing didn't stand around and watch a stoning did he? He stepped in to stop it. He turned his own cheek, not everyone else's. Big difference.

Not ours to judge? I beg to differ; we make judgments every day. We watch the news and see a mother kill her children and say to ourselves: "That was wrong." How can we remain civilized if all we sit do is sit back and watch? I'll even venture to say that freedom has never been achieved by a society that sat back and did nothing but try to understand the motivations of violence.

I don't believe in killing for revenge, the dead want nothing. They are simply dead. More killing won't bring anyone back - it just spins the wheel of hate to a faster RPM. On the other hand, at what point to we defend ourselves, and to what degree? I think that question is best answered by a mind free of hatred.

That's my own personal prayer; it's something I asked for the same hour the towers fell - the strength to be free of hatred.

I'm still working on it.

 

[its Leslie]

Just want to say I don't hate Pacifists.

Ghandi was a man to respect. He was able to force his issue in his own way. While he wasn't violent he was still doing something.

But I am no fan of the anarchy loving, civil disobedient, I want freedom but you get to pay for it, Utopian whacko peacefreak sort. Most of them live here or were born here in the land of plenty and the free hand out where life is wonderful all the time.

And they have not earned the right, or suffered to get the right.

Ghandi did not get his freedom for free he had to suffer a good bit before it happened.

Over here I can carry a sign, march in the street, and know that I can disrupt, destroy, and generally do what I want, because I can always retreat behind the law when I want to.

The difference between a communist in Russia and a communist in Canada, is the Russian knows its a crock, and the Canadian has not had to learn the hard way.
Canadian commies are just spoiled brats, that don't like the fact that rules are for everybody.
They turfed communism in Russia when the internet made hiding the lies no longer possible. People generally don't take well to being lied to. They are only having trouble with our way of government because they have not had our way of government before (we take commerce a bit for granted here).

Our worst off street bum can still take his pan handled change into any store they want and buy virtually whatever they feel like. And that is because we actually have goods on the shelf. Even the rich can't purchase bread if it isnt there.

When I said I am capable of defending my way of life with lethal force, don't assume I have any specific desire to kill. You won't find much in the way of real soldiers that ever want to see real combat. War is a very ugly activity.
The saying those who have forgotten the past are doomed to repeat is brutally accurate.

I am a fan of the notion, you don't get your citizenship until AFTER you serve 3 years in uniform. Society should be based on the views of people willing to protect it. Not based on the views of petulant people who are merely protected by those they don't appreciate.

 

[wildsweetone]

just imagine

world peace




now, isn't that meant to be the ultimate goal of humanity? to live in peace with our fellow man. what do we do to achieve this goal? how do we get it? which pathway do we follow to get there?

we could eliminate everyone who disagrees with our own opinion i guess.

nuke them out, threaten them, cudgel them into obedience. most of that's being done every day right now. trouble is it'll take a hell of a long time to reach the goal that way. most likely we'll all continue to loose family and friends to violent deaths too.

stick our head in the sand and let it all flow over us? ignorance is bliss aint it?

surely everybody who is human has the right to living peacefully? our children shouldn't have to earn that right, the right is a gift which birth gave them.

in no way am i suggesting we should forget the past. the only way to grow is to remember our history. but do we have to sling it constantly in each others face in a manner which is derogatory to those who lived it?

i do disagree with you Leslie on the last part of your posting. basing society on who has more power to rule over another is complete crap. that's merely using stand over tactics, threating with nuclear weapons.

how can i explain what i am trying to say...

respect the right to have differences and respect each other.

 

[its Leslie]

Hello again.

No I dont advocate might is right (it isn't).

I do advocate freedom isn't free though.

It's not my way or the highway, but admittedly it's easy to come to that conclusion.

As for Nukes, no I have way to much cold war stress to ever enjoy nukes. Nukes are the weapon of choice of people that don't wish to survive. I do want to survive.

I am fortunate to live in a free country. And I am wise enough to know that that freedom isn't automatic. I am also able to see that along with being free I have to accept that there will be those that will abuse that same freedom.

It's the reason that we have pediphiles and nazis living in Canada (as opposed to fertilizing Canada).

But that same freedom allows me to spit on those people if I don't like them fortunately.

A world free of hate sure would be nice. I would love to see one of those worlds myself.

But turning the other cheek got Christ nailed to a cross. I am just not up for that personally.

 

[wildsweetone]

to those who have children...

when you witness two children fighting, what do you do?

 

[Whispersecret]

Not ours to judge? I beg to differ; we make judgments every day. We watch the news and see a mother kill her children and say to ourselves: "That was wrong." How can we remain civilized if all we sit do is sit back and watch? I'll even venture to say that freedom has never been achieved by a society that sat back and did nothing but try to understand the motivations of violence.

EXACTLY. Well said, VeraGem!

surely everybody who is human has the right to living peacefully? our children shouldn't have to earn that right, the right is a gift which birth gave them.

I disagree. Peace is not a birthright; it is a goal, and sometimes it has to be defended. I respect differences. I do not respect people who are evil. Yes, I make mistakes, and people WILL judge me because of them. That is life. I accept that.

Because if no one judges, if everyone refrains from judging because of a fear of being judged themselves, then there is no right or wrong. There is only that which people refuse to see as wrong. Society morally handcuffs itself and people feel free to do wrong whenever they please because no one is courageous enough to point to them and say in one way or another, "Shame on you."

 

[wildsweetone]

why sit there pontificating and judging. where is the support or help for the mother who got to the stage where she had to kill her kids?

we are doomed to disagree (and that's ok with me)... peace, innocence and life are all birthrights.

we aren't born with the skills of a killer, we learn them.

we aren't born with hatred, we learn it.

we aren't born with judgment, we are judged and learn how to judge in return.

the courageous act comes in loving and caring enough to make a useful difference.

 

[its Leslie]

When I see children fighting I stop them. I don't seek permission I am not "interested" in permission.

 

[wildsweetone]

how do you stop them?

 

[Ray Dario]

Re: just imagine

World Peace ... now, isn't that meant to be the ultimate goal of humanity? to live in peace with our fellow man.

Actually I though having sex with two women at the same time was the ultimate goal of humanity Or at least men.

we could eliminate everyone who disagrees with our own opinion i guess.

If we did this, there would only be one person left. Maybe not that many, because I often disagree with myself.

nuke them out, threaten them, cudgel them into obedience. most of that's being done every day right now.

And exactly when was the last "Nuke" used against a non-agressor? Doesn't exactly qualify as an everyday occurance. But truth seems to not be what you are going for in your posts.

surely everybody who is human has the right to living peacefully? our children shouldn't have to earn that right, the right is a gift which birth gave them.

Sorry this is just plain crap! Freedom, peace, happiness can only be fought for and won. I wish it weren't so, but it is. 'Cause if you stand around being peaceful long enough someone with a big stick will sneak up behind you and whack you with it. Again I wish it weren't so, but it is.

i do disagree with you Leslie on the last part of your posting. basing society on who has more power to rule over another is complete crap. that's merely using stand over tactics, threating with nuclear weapons.

While I don't agree with very much that Leslie said, that ain't what he said at all. He said that those who have paid the highest price for freedom should be the ones to shape society. I'm here to say that old soldiers are not the people with the most power, but they are sometimes the wisest. They are also sometimes not the wisest.

Anyway, WildSweetOne, once again you have forsaken truth to shovel drivel. You do fancy up your nonsense with lots of pretty sounding words, but once you get down to the meaning, it's all just crap.

Just my take, worth a little less than what you paid for it.

Ray

 

[wildsweetone]

Dear Ray

i'll try to reply to your posting with respect Ray. i'm not quite sure i can get the same feeling of wit, sarcasm, youthfulness and rudeness as you, but i do know that i wont try.



Ray: Actually I though having sex with two women at the same time was the ultimate goal of humanity Or at least men.

WSO: only a person with limited use of their brain would insinuate that men believe sex is the ultimate. there are several men around here who actually have brains, Ray. some of them even use them. possibly a novel thought though... i suggest you give it a day or so to sink in.



Ray: If we did this, there would only be one person left. Maybe not that many, because I often disagree with myself.

WSO: odd how you didn't manage to pick up the sarcasm in that quote of mine. quite a gem really, which obviously went right over the top of the head. as for disagreeing with yourself... what can i say?



Ray: And exactly when was the last "Nuke" used against a non-agressor? Doesn't exactly qualify as an everyday occurance. But truth seems to not be what you are going for in your posts.

WSO: did you miss the word 'most' Ray? i am as truthful as i can be. i am tempering my words with thoughtful respectful answers. maybe that's above some people too.



Ray: Sorry this is just plain crap! Freedom, peace, happiness can only be fought for and won. I wish it weren't so, but it is. 'Cause if you stand around being peaceful long enough someone with a big stick will sneak up behind you and whack you with it. Again I wish it weren't so, but it is.

WSO: of course it can be fought for. doesn't it depend on the 'weapon' used though? if violent death is what you're meaning and that's the way you want to live then keep believing that fighting for freedom etc should be with guns.
i'm ok that you have a different perspective to me. i respect that. likewise, i don't have to agree with it. and guess what? life is much better when it's simplified and peaceful. shall we live forever with the knowledge that someone is going to smack us down when we least expect it. makes it sound like the terrorists have won eh?



Ray: I'm here to say that old soldiers are not the people with the most power, but they are sometimes the wisest. They are also sometimes not the wisest.

WSO: fence sitting?


Ray: Anyway, WildSweetOne, once again you have forsaken truth to shovel drivel. You do fancy up your nonsense with lots of pretty sounding words, but once you get down to the meaning, it's all just crap.

WSO: one day it will all have a better meaning for you Ray. until then, at least show a little respect that others may not mirror your image.


by the way Ray, what is your ideal world? have you thought about it? please feel free to share it. i am still interested.

 

[its Leslie]

Now children stop fighting.

 

[its Leslie]

Now granted sex is not the be all and end all of life, but its 7:50 in the morning and it's the only thing on my mind.

Likely will be the only thing, until I either pump a load of sperm into my wife, or she offers to pump it out herself (she sometimes isn't up to a quick fuck but she does a hand job that is incredible). Or as is often enough the case she asks me to amuse myself on my own (gal has no objection to me sitting here jacking off).

After I unload my balls I might be able to think clearer.

As for world peace. Thats like expecting rational thought from a room full of 5 year old boys. I am a Beaver Scout leader with Scouts Canada. I happen to know that you can't get 20 5-7 year old boys to think rationally. At best you can only attempt to amuse them and try to keep them from getting hurt while you do it. And we usually do a good job. But it requires we stop physical confronations the moment they start. Or someone gets hurt.

As for nukes. The only problem with nukes, is only one country has ever used them. They were dropped on people, and they were dropped on people that had engaged in open warfare. The people that used the bomb are the same people that espouse such lofty goals for humanity. So its hard to say they won't use the bomb. Which is perhaps the one reason no one else has called their bluff all these years.

But back to sex. Sex has a bad reputation. Its undeserved. It isn't a sin.
Now if sweetone met me some day san panties and bent over innocently to pick something up. And her skirt and or dress revealled she was clearly not wearing panties. Well I know what would happen. My cock would stiffen (as it just did thinking of this), and I would have no hesitation placing my cock in sweetone. And if she didn't object I would begin to fuck her most agreeably. And if uninterrupted I would eventually pump whatever sperm I had available into her (sans condom, I havent had need of one in my life, so not accustomed to using them).
The only down side here. Is while sweetone was dealing with the sperm dripping down her inner leg. I would be dealing with how I had made a great error in loyalty.

Where sex is concerned. My only current limitation is in an agreement i made. I promised not to fuck other women. A person's word is only as good as they make it. I would not be thinking about christian hells, only that I had soiled my good word (while soiling sweetone's thigh).

Am I irresponsible? Don't know. To date no woman has ever been inclined to make me take that test. I am not overly sure what I would do. But I am sure of one thing, I am not afraid to be openly sexual. I lost my need to feel guilty about being human a long time back.

I will say this much though sweeetone. You have to refrain from making vague statements.

Asking "what I would do" for instance, and not including specific parameters is merely "baiting". If one of those chldren has a gun for instance, that sure makes a difference eh.

 

[Ray Dario]

Re: Dear Ray

i'll try to reply to your posting with respect Ray. i'm not quite sure i can get the same feeling of wit, sarcasm, youthfulness and rudeness as you, but i do know that i wont try.

Well you failed miserably on the first part but succeeded marvelously at the part you said you wouldn't try

WSO: only a person with limited use of their brain would insinuate that men believe sex is the ultimate. there are several men around here who actually have brains, Ray. some of them even use them. possibly a novel thought though... i suggest you give it a day or so to sink in.

Damn woman lighten up. It was humor. Sorry you don't have a sense of it.

WSO: odd how you didn't manage to pick up the sarcasm in that quote of mine. quite a gem really, which obviously went right over the top of the head. as for disagreeing with yourself... what can i say?

Nope, caught it, didn't think it terribly witty

WSO: did you miss the word 'most' Ray? i am as truthful as i can be. i am tempering my words with thoughtful respectful answers. maybe that's above some people too.

Ahh, the vauge accusation, giving the loophole of "well gee I didn't mean that." If you didn't mean Nukes were being used every day then you shouldn't have included it in the list. It's like saying

"Rape, Murder, theft, cannibalism, honesty: That man is guilty of some of those things. The inference is that the man is a Murdering rapist theif who is an honest cannibal. When what you really mean is that man is honest. The statement is designed to mislead. Ergo it is a lie.

WSO: of course it can be fought for. doesn't it depend on the 'weapon' used though? if violent death is what you're meaning and that's the way you want to live then keep believing that fighting for freedom etc should be with guns.
i'm ok that you have a different perspective to me. i respect that. likewise, i don't have to agree with it. and guess what? life is much better when it's simplified and peaceful. shall we live forever with the knowledge that someone is going to smack us down when we least expect it. makes it sound like the terrorists have won eh?

I would think the weapon used would depend on the weapon used first. My grandfather, someone I consider very wise, tells me "If someone hits you in the nose, kick him in the balls." The point is that if you perscribe to the "eye for an eye and tooth for a tooth" philosophy all you get is a lot of blind toothless people, but if you respond with more violence than the aggressor used then they learn that it's a bad idea to attack you. As far as the terrorists winning, why does being vigilent mean they won? I can go about my life just fine with the knowledge that at some time I may have to defend my freedom.

Ray: I'm here to say that old soldiers are not the people with the most power, but they are sometimes the wisest. They are also sometimes not the wisest.

WSO: fence sitting?

I see why you might think that, but no. I meant that I disagree with the philosophy of making soldiers the ruling class. They may or may not be the best ones to lead a country and that is why America's system of open election, while not perfect, is the best around.

WSO: one day it will all have a better meaning for you Ray. until then, at least show a little respect that others may not mirror your image.

Ah the old, "I'm so much wiser than you that you cannot even comprehend my wisdom" Sorry, not buying fertilizer today. You ain't wiser than me, I'm not wiser than you. We disagree that's fine. What I object to is twisting the truth and other peoples words around. You do have talent in that. If you live in America you should go into politics. Your talent for deception would serve you well in that career.

by the way Ray, what is your ideal world? have you thought about it? please feel free to share it. i am still interested.

I have thought about it. There is no "Ideal World" Each person has their own likes and dislikes, their own preferences, their own passions and desires. What I want today, may not be what I want tomorrow. Trying to build an "Ideal World" is usually at the root of our problems. Osama's ideal world includes the destruction of America, Hitlers's ideal world included the genocide of the Jews. During the crusades the knights ideal world was one without the infidels.

When you try to pursue ideals you usually end up killing lots of innocent people. To me that isn't ideal.


Ray

 

[wildsweetone]

Dear Ray

ok i reckon we could easily go on quoting, copying and pasting till we've all been dead for a year. so i'm calling it quits.

i have begun to understand where you're coming from Ray. i'm sorry that i couldn't make my own thoughts a little clearer so you could see my angle.

perhaps you and i can set an example to those in power above us and call a real truce, a lasting one.

i apologise for being unable to putting my thoughts into better words and i apologise for offending you.

wso

 

[wildsweetone]

thanks so much for that visual leslie

 

[Ray Dario]

WildSweetOne

Truce gratefully accepted. BTW I wasn't offended, just being defensive. Probably responded with more vigor than was appropriate.

I appologize as well. But it was a fun debate, wasn't it

Ray

 

[VeraGem]

World peace; a wonderful notion - but how does one live in peace with those who have no respect for any way of life but their own? How does one deal with the rabid dogs of fundamentalism when they come knocking at the door with a mantra of "believe it or die?"

My point is that sticking one's head in the sand applies to both sides of the argument here. Doing nothing has never secured peace for any society in recorded history.

Personally I really don't care what anyone does or believes, so long as they don't expect me to be and act just like them. I'm a firm adherer to the adage: "If it harm none, do what you will." The problem is that there always seems to be someone, or a group of someones, hell-bent on inflicting their way of life on their neighbors. This applies to Muslims and Christians alike, even the radical right and left wings right here in the USA

Would I compare Bin-Laden to some of the American Christian leaders? Absolutely. When I surf the net and see pages like "godhatesfags.com" and read shit about how our religious fanatics are better than Muslim fanatics or hear idiots stating that America deserved the attacks because we've turned away from God it gives me the creeps - big time. Do we sit passively while the fanatics make decisions for us or do we speak out and tear away the sheepskin that covers the wolf?

Speaking of pacifists - I take issue with labeling Mohandas K. Gandhi a pacifist. A pacifist does nothing but talk - Gandhi risked his life and well-being many times over for the cause he believed in - equality for all. He believed that nonviolent noncooperation could achieve peace and liberty. He states in his autobiography, 'The Story Of My Experiments With Truth,' his reasons for taking part in Red Cross rescue operations during W.W.II - and I paraphrase: "It would be wrong to live under the protection of the British and take no part in their defense or our country (India)."

My point? Simply that even Gandhi recognized that there is evil in the world - but the first response to injustice is not violence - nor is it turning the other cheek.

Sticky, ain't it?