Nonviolence

From the standpoint of simple justice, I believe that everyone has equal right to life, as do most people. On the other hand, most people say there are exceptions to this principle. For example, if a person is considered dangerous and we suspect that they may kill someone, then we say it becomes justified to kill that person in the name of defense. This is the opposite stance of saying every person has the same right to life, because it is claiming that, in certain circumstances, we should take away someone’s life, after we have just stated that we have no right to do this. It is irrational for two reasons, first because we can never know for certain whether the act of violence we are trying to prevent is lesser or greater than the act of violence we are choosing to resort to. In other words we are willing to commit an act of violence now, based on preventing a supposed act of violence in the future which might not have happened at all. Secondly, it is irrational because of the equal right of every human to life, we have no right to assume that one person belongs in this world and not another. It seems clear enough now, yet this is a contradiction which I’ve noticed most people try to live with, or at least try not to think about.
If you wish to comment, I would appreciate any response.

I, too, believe that everyone has "a right to be here (in the physical world)"; I also believe that it is not our place to judge whether or not another should be put to death; although I realise that in the interests of one's peace of mind and the integrity of one's society it may be necessary to assess another's ability to reside within it peacefully - and if they cannot, one may by common consent regard it as unacceptable that that person remains a "thorn in the flesh" (an incompatibility) and ask them to leave.

Of course, one can take the view that such an "incompatible" person is a mirror for some similar attributes hidden within one's own nature, and strive to uncover these and change, rather than "shooting the messenger" and having them leave... but perhaps comparatively few today would take that stance. However, I believe that is the stance that is most likely to work towards peace and Unity, and spiritual growth.

Just as one has no right to judge a person as unworthy of continued life, by the same token no one has the right to make another's life miserable on a continuing basis; so they must realise that doing so will result in turmoil until they move away. And it is better to insist on them doing so than to allow them to shatter one's health and harmony of being beyond repair! In My View.

Pounamu

pounamu, thanks for the response. I particularly liked the part when you say "Of course, one can take the view that such an "incompatible" person is a mirror for some similar attributes hidden within one's own nature..."...I've never really thought of it quite that way.

But when you say, "And it is better to insist on them doing so (leaving) than to allow them to shatter one's health and harmony of being beyond repair!"...The problem with this is how forceful do you get with insisting they leave? Do you call the cops, who will resort to violence if necessary? I think your first prescription is much better, as nobody can "shatter" your health or "harmony of being" unless you let them as health and harmony are more states of mind than anything else.
Plus if we are trying to help reform this other person, it certainly does less good to send them away than to practice forgiveness and forbearance.

Originally Posted by Mark_W

For example, if a person is considered dangerous and we suspect that they may kill someone, then we say it becomes justified to kill that person in the name of defense.

Kia ora, gidday,


I don't know of such people who do that here in New Zealand. We've got a good justice system where no one gets away with killing based on suspicion. No court in the land will allow anyone, for any reason, to 'kill or be killed' without receiving Just punishhment.
A paranoid psychopath fits the description though. A Soldier in combat might get ordered to kill someone too (kill or be killed senario). I bet there's a lot of soldiers out there though, who have killed for a cause, and not gone unpunished, for they have to live their lives tortured by the images of their aatrocities. I wouldn't wish that on my worst enemy. I view soldiers (who carry out orders to kill or cause destruction), as puppets of a paranoid psychopath, some head-job with a 'kill or be killed' mentality, sad really.

[peteyzen]

Originally Posted by Mark_W

pounamu, thanks for the response. I particularly liked the part when you say "Of course, one can take the view that such an "incompatible" person is a mirror for some similar attributes hidden within one's own nature..."...I've never really thought of it quite that way.

But when you say, "And it is better to insist on them doing so (leaving) than to allow them to shatter one's health and harmony of being beyond repair!"...The problem with this is how forceful do you get with insisting they leave? Do you call the cops, who will resort to violence if necessary? I think your first prescription is much better, as nobody can "shatter" your health or "harmony of being" unless you let them as health and harmony are more states of mind than anything else.
Plus if we are trying to help reform this other person, it certainly does less good to send them away than to practice forgiveness and forbearance.

Interesting stuff Mark,my perspective is this, although I agree with much you say I disagree with some things, namely: you state that niobody can shatter your health or harmony of being unless you let them, believe me if some one mugs you and kicks the hell out of you one evening you would be naive to imagine this will not have a profound effect upon you.
We live in a material world and we need to allow for this in our dealings, my teacher once said to me that it comes down to `deserve or not deserve`, it is as simple as that. If someone is trying to hurt, abuse or violate your freedom then they do not deserve to be treated as others in your circle are. How you treat them depends on the situation, and I am not condoning the death penalty here, but they do need dealing with.

Originally Posted by Pounamu

no one has the right to make another's life miserable on a continuing basis; so they must realise that doing so will result in turmoil until they move away. And it is better to insist on them doing so than to allow them to shatter one's health and harmony of being beyond repair! In My View.

Pounamu

Nah, I'm with Jesus, I'd rather turn the other check and walk away than insist or demand someone change so that I might feel better...There is absolutely nothing in the world worth killing for, nothing. I will never, ever, ever intentionally harm my fellow man for anything in the world.

There is no good reason that justifies an act called violence.

Originally Posted by peteyzen

I disagree with some things, namely: you state that niobody can shatter your health or harmony of being unless you let them, believe me if some one mugs you and kicks the hell out of you one evening you would be naive to imagine this will not have a profound effect upon you.
We live in a material world and we need to allow for this in our dealings, my teacher once said to me that it comes down to `deserve or not deserve`, it is as simple as that. If someone is trying to hurt, abuse or violate your freedom then they do not deserve to be treated as others in your circle are. How you treat them depends on the situation, and I am not condoning the death penalty here, but they do need dealing with.

Tehehe, I don't think that's what mark was conveying (read the bottom of what you quoted, smiles).


I'm curious peteyzen, when your teacher said to you..."it comes down to deserve or not deserve," did you interpret that, to mean all this ..."If someone is trying to hurt, abuse or violate your freedom then they do not deserve to be treated as others in your circle are," or did your teacher actually say that?


Well, I'm with Jesus again, treat others as you would like to be treated, but hey, what ever floats your boat, just remember karmic law, what goes around, comes around.
It's true Peteryzen, what Mark_W said "Nobody can shatter your health or harmony of being unless you let them." This is true. I speak from experiencing domestic violence & yeah, it's not the greatest feeling getting physically & emotionally abused, and yeah, it had a profound effect on me, yet I now see the truth - I put myself in that situation, I let that happen to me. The beauty is that I got so much from the experience, it transformed my life by giving me a chance to learn about my true self, to heal & grow more and more in Spirit, and to gently and lovingly change the seed thought that made me think I deserved it. When I stopped the violence within me, I stopped the violence outside of me, and my reward for that is Spirit.

Greetings..

Persons that demonstrate an inability to peacefully coexist in society should be isolated from that society..

Acts of violence are excuseable in only the most difficult of circumstances.. the kill or be killed scenario.. the kill or watch an innocent be killed scenario.. but, in all cases, every effort should be made to find an alternative solution.. some way to neutralize the threat and isolate the offender.. i will never willingly take a life, and i do not want my government to do so on my behalf.. Once an offender has been neutralized and isolated the threat is over, to take the life of a defenseless person (death penalty) is a crime itself.. the prisoner is isolated and defenseless, at the mercy of the captors..

It is my belief that persons demonstrating the inability to fit into a peaceful society should be isolated geographically.. contained within a particular area and given the rudimentary tools for agriculture and shelter.. that they determine their own fate within that geographic area.. an old Sci-Fi movie did this with exploding collars, collars that exploded if the prisoner left the designated area.. this puts the responsibility on the offenders, they live or die by their own hand.. society doesn't bear the burden of maintaining their food and shelter.. and, in appropriate demonstrations of compassion, society provides a reasonable level of healthcare..

We are capable of evolving beyond the philosophy that pretends to give us the right to end the gift of someone's physical existence.. that is a divine gift, sacred and beyond our right to negotiate..

Be well..

Nonviolence is the only way to peace both inside and out.
Violence begets more violence.
Have faith that true justice will prevail instead of taking the law (God's & Man's laws) into your own hands.
Love thy neighbour, nothing in the world is worth killing a man for, nothing.
Choose nonviolence, be it, do it, have it.

[quote=TzuJanLi Once an offender has been neutralized and isolated the threat is over, to take the life of a defenseless person (death penalty) is a crime itself.. the prisoner is isolated and defenseless, at the mercy of the captors..

It is my belief that persons demonstrating the inability to fit into a peaceful society should be isolated geographically.. contained within a particular area and given the rudimentary tools for agriculture and shelter.. that they determine their own fate within that geographic area.. [/quote]


Ah, hahaha, what are you refering to, cattle? lol.
Oh, or robots....seek, neutralize & destroy (I was using my robot voice then), just kidding.

Mate, they did the isolation of misfits thing over 100-200 years ago and called it AUSTRALIA. History shows it was a giant Prison Colony. Look where it got them, they still have problems co-existing now.
That's not a solution, thats a write-off. And what a mistake it would be to repeat an obvious past f***-up. As for segregation??? ahh hahaha, your joking right? lol

Here's a solution, learn detachment from this material things, make the changes in yourself that will benefit mankind, then watch the world around you evolve as you evolve and live your truth, your highest good.