Re: [Unschooling-dotcom] to each his own
[email protected]
In a message dated 11/27/00 8:45:45 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[email protected] writes:
<< There's an auto-faulting mechanism in protesting.
A public, vocal protester cannot in good faith say "to each his own."
"To each his own" starts at home, and doesn't make placards.
Sandra
cath
[email protected] writes:
<< There's an auto-faulting mechanism in protesting.
A public, vocal protester cannot in good faith say "to each his own."
"To each his own" starts at home, and doesn't make placards.
Sandra
>>Sandra, sorry, you could say a little more about what you mean here? thanks.
cath
[email protected]
In a message dated 00-11-27 16:23:35 EST, you write:
<< << There's an auto-faulting mechanism in protesting.
A public, vocal protester cannot in good faith say "to each his own."
"To each his own" starts at home, and doesn't make placards.
<<Sandra>>
<<Sandra, sorry, you could say a little more about what you mean here?>>
When people are strident and inflexible they can't then say "to each his
own." A person can't really (for example) be a serious fundamentalist
Christian and then say "Oh, I don't fault you for your religious beliefs"
unless that other person is a born again Christian. For someone to say
abortion is absolutely and always wrong and should be criminalized, they
cannot in good faith tell someone, "Oh, I didn't mean You and YOUR
abortion... I certainly understand where you were coming from and I don't
judge you."
It's a hypocricy which either dissolves the power of their first position, or
which shows them to be cowardly in the face of their real
originally-proclaimed target.
If a person really truly believes that each person should make his or her own
decisions about religion, politics and educational options, then there's no
sense, really, in dedicating much time or energy to one or the other of those
options. A to-each-his-own believer should, it seems, spend time making sure
people HAVE options.
There are few to no political positions which can match this, though. One
person's extreme beliefs stomp the life out of another's. You can't save the
rainforest without putting some people and companies out of livlihood and
possibly in jail. You can't be pro-choice and then tell your brother in law
you love him just the same even though he burned down the Planned Parenthood
building around the corner from his house (unless you never liked him and you
still don't).
There will always be people who will say "sorry; whatever" though and not
hold their positions strongly. I think it's worth pointing it out to them
sometimes. If I read the original tirade and then have to witness the
waffling, I get to say "waffle."
But I'll try not to so much.
Sandra
<< << There's an auto-faulting mechanism in protesting.
A public, vocal protester cannot in good faith say "to each his own."
"To each his own" starts at home, and doesn't make placards.
<<Sandra>>
<<Sandra, sorry, you could say a little more about what you mean here?>>
When people are strident and inflexible they can't then say "to each his
own." A person can't really (for example) be a serious fundamentalist
Christian and then say "Oh, I don't fault you for your religious beliefs"
unless that other person is a born again Christian. For someone to say
abortion is absolutely and always wrong and should be criminalized, they
cannot in good faith tell someone, "Oh, I didn't mean You and YOUR
abortion... I certainly understand where you were coming from and I don't
judge you."
It's a hypocricy which either dissolves the power of their first position, or
which shows them to be cowardly in the face of their real
originally-proclaimed target.
If a person really truly believes that each person should make his or her own
decisions about religion, politics and educational options, then there's no
sense, really, in dedicating much time or energy to one or the other of those
options. A to-each-his-own believer should, it seems, spend time making sure
people HAVE options.
There are few to no political positions which can match this, though. One
person's extreme beliefs stomp the life out of another's. You can't save the
rainforest without putting some people and companies out of livlihood and
possibly in jail. You can't be pro-choice and then tell your brother in law
you love him just the same even though he burned down the Planned Parenthood
building around the corner from his house (unless you never liked him and you
still don't).
There will always be people who will say "sorry; whatever" though and not
hold their positions strongly. I think it's worth pointing it out to them
sometimes. If I read the original tirade and then have to witness the
waffling, I get to say "waffle."
But I'll try not to so much.
Sandra
Mac and Carol Brown
Sandra,
See - you've done it again!
Or maybe we should, as I suggested half in jest on the message board, start a
crones thread. Or perhaps a 'grumpy old women's' list <beg>
Carol
See - you've done it again!
> If I read the original tirade and then have to witness thePlease keep it up - there's others out here that appreciate it!
> waffling, I get to say "waffle."
>
> But I'll try not to so much.
Or maybe we should, as I suggested half in jest on the message board, start a
crones thread. Or perhaps a 'grumpy old women's' list <beg>
Carol
uebinger robyn
Hi and thanks to everyone for the great posts. I wanted to expand on them a
little. We all choose a path in our life and when someone thinks they have
found a small spark of truth it is very hard not to let everyone know about
it. The hard part is to do it in a respectful, loving, caring way. We all
put our foot in our mouths to many times. I have personally tried to choose
a life path of love, compassion, and nonviolence to all. I believe their are
definite universal rights and wrongs. I try to live a life abiding by those
truths. I don't feel exceptions can be made for these universal truths. Does
this mean I cannot treat people in a caring, empathetic way? Does this mean
I feel I am above everyone else? No Way! For example, if I feel
homosexuality is wrong does that mean I cannot speak to homosexuals and have
to shun them? Does that mean if I do talk to them I am not being truthful to
my own beliefs? The answer once again is a big fat no! "All men are created
equal." So if I were to met a homosexual it would be wrong of me to treat
him with any less dignity, empathy or compassion than I would the Pope. We
are all one in the same on different life paths. We are created by one
creator, connecting us all together. On the same note, it would also be my
responsibility when a mutual opportunity became available to express my
feelings respectfully and with love on homosexuality. If I did not I would
not be living and abiding by my own truth. This is the only way to make
change in such a chaotic world. Everyone knows the story of the "Good
Samaritan", it is possible to be a caring neighbor to all without giving up
any of your own beliefs. Arguing and preaching will never accomplish
anything. It is only love, compassion, and truth that will break down these
walls.
Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com
little. We all choose a path in our life and when someone thinks they have
found a small spark of truth it is very hard not to let everyone know about
it. The hard part is to do it in a respectful, loving, caring way. We all
put our foot in our mouths to many times. I have personally tried to choose
a life path of love, compassion, and nonviolence to all. I believe their are
definite universal rights and wrongs. I try to live a life abiding by those
truths. I don't feel exceptions can be made for these universal truths. Does
this mean I cannot treat people in a caring, empathetic way? Does this mean
I feel I am above everyone else? No Way! For example, if I feel
homosexuality is wrong does that mean I cannot speak to homosexuals and have
to shun them? Does that mean if I do talk to them I am not being truthful to
my own beliefs? The answer once again is a big fat no! "All men are created
equal." So if I were to met a homosexual it would be wrong of me to treat
him with any less dignity, empathy or compassion than I would the Pope. We
are all one in the same on different life paths. We are created by one
creator, connecting us all together. On the same note, it would also be my
responsibility when a mutual opportunity became available to express my
feelings respectfully and with love on homosexuality. If I did not I would
not be living and abiding by my own truth. This is the only way to make
change in such a chaotic world. Everyone knows the story of the "Good
Samaritan", it is possible to be a caring neighbor to all without giving up
any of your own beliefs. Arguing and preaching will never accomplish
anything. It is only love, compassion, and truth that will break down these
walls.
>From: SandraDodd@..._____________________________________________________________________________________
>Reply-To: [email protected]
>To: [email protected]
>Subject: Re: [Unschooling-dotcom] to each his own
>Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 12:14:37 EST
>
>In a message dated 00-11-27 16:23:35 EST, you write:
>
><< << There's an auto-faulting mechanism in protesting.
> A public, vocal protester cannot in good faith say "to each his own."
> "To each his own" starts at home, and doesn't make placards.
>
><<Sandra>>
>
> <<Sandra, sorry, you could say a little more about what you mean here?>>
>
>When people are strident and inflexible they can't then say "to each his
>own." A person can't really (for example) be a serious fundamentalist
>Christian and then say "Oh, I don't fault you for your religious beliefs"
>unless that other person is a born again Christian. For someone to say
>abortion is absolutely and always wrong and should be criminalized, they
>cannot in good faith tell someone, "Oh, I didn't mean You and YOUR
>abortion... I certainly understand where you were coming from and I don't
>judge you."
>
>It's a hypocricy which either dissolves the power of their first position,
>or
>which shows them to be cowardly in the face of their real
>originally-proclaimed target.
>
>If a person really truly believes that each person should make his or her
>own
>decisions about religion, politics and educational options, then there's no
>sense, really, in dedicating much time or energy to one or the other of
>those
>options. A to-each-his-own believer should, it seems, spend time making
>sure
>people HAVE options.
>
>There are few to no political positions which can match this, though. One
>person's extreme beliefs stomp the life out of another's. You can't save
>the
>rainforest without putting some people and companies out of livlihood and
>possibly in jail. You can't be pro-choice and then tell your brother in
>law
>you love him just the same even though he burned down the Planned
>Parenthood
>building around the corner from his house (unless you never liked him and
>you
>still don't).
>
>There will always be people who will say "sorry; whatever" though and not
>hold their positions strongly. I think it's worth pointing it out to them
>sometimes. If I read the original tirade and then have to witness the
>waffling, I get to say "waffle."
>
>But I'll try not to so much.
>
>Sandra
>
>
>
Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com