MaxedOutMama
Tuesday, July 05, 2005
Looking For Advice
Michele Agnew has a friend who is considering buying a house in a not-so-great neighborhood. She is seeking advice.
Also, Sigmund Carl and Alfred posted on the problem with not hating enough:
Yet if we had succumbed to hate, where would Germany and Japan be today? What about all the good people who have been born and raised in those countries since then, because we overcame our hate and acted wisely instead of passionately?
Instead of hate, we should feel love and compassion for the victims of these atrocities all over the world - enough love and compassion to move us to act in whatever way we can. That's the only answer I know. Hate is destructive; true love is constructive. We must not let evil take root in our own hearts.
Also, Sigmund Carl and Alfred posted on the problem with not hating enough:
God does not instruct us to love Osama bin Laden or Saddam Hussein. Nor did he instruct us to love Stalin, Pol Pot or Adolph Hitler. To imply otherwise is patently absurd. There may come a time when we can forgive many sins- but that forgiveness must be earned. There has to be real contrition and real remorse before real forgiveness can earned. Bestowing unearned forgiveness is an illusion. Ask any parent.I have trouble with his formulation. Outrage, yes, but hate for the perpetrators seems to me to be the wrong path. After all, I can't imagine evil worse than we have seen in the last century. Yes, I do mean evil. The Nazis were evil. Reading about some of the abuses in Stalinist Russia is enough to make you puke. The Japanese vivisected some of their American POW's, did you know that?
The fact is, we need more hatred of evil. We need to be outraged at Darfur and the other places like it. We must be so outraged that we must be ready to inflict a pain so great and a punishment so profound, that the evil doers will take note and cease their brutality. There is nothing to discuss about Darfur. There is nothing to discuss about terrorism perpetrated against civilians. If that is a hard concept to accept, close your eyes and imagine it was your wife or daughter in Darfur. Imagine it was your son or husband riding a bus or eating lunch in a restaurant that was to be blown up. There is nothing to discuss about the case for the insurgency in Iraq. That argument was lost when the insurgents started blowing civilians and other innocents, on the streets or at prayer.
Yet if we had succumbed to hate, where would Germany and Japan be today? What about all the good people who have been born and raised in those countries since then, because we overcame our hate and acted wisely instead of passionately?
Instead of hate, we should feel love and compassion for the victims of these atrocities all over the world - enough love and compassion to move us to act in whatever way we can. That's the only answer I know. Hate is destructive; true love is constructive. We must not let evil take root in our own hearts.
Comments:
<< Home
Your point is well takenm MOM, but I nelieved I addressed that issue.
Darfur, Nazi Germany and Japan were the result of governments gone awry. They used their positions to poison the minds of their citizens- not unlike what the Arab world engages in today.
That said, the actions of those governments could have brought the evil to an end.
They chose not to do that.
I am not implying that we inculcate ourselves with hate- I am saying we need to inculcate ourselves with hatred of evil. It was that very hatred of evil that motivated this nation to defeat Hitler and the Japanese.
Thankfully, we hated evil that much.
Darfur, Nazi Germany and Japan were the result of governments gone awry. They used their positions to poison the minds of their citizens- not unlike what the Arab world engages in today.
That said, the actions of those governments could have brought the evil to an end.
They chose not to do that.
I am not implying that we inculcate ourselves with hate- I am saying we need to inculcate ourselves with hatred of evil. It was that very hatred of evil that motivated this nation to defeat Hitler and the Japanese.
Thankfully, we hated evil that much.
Yes, we should reject evil. We should fight it.
What's very frightening is that some just don't want to admit that we are seeing some of the same thing today.
I don't hate government per se, but it is extremely hard to look at even the last 100 years of history and not see that governments have a way of falling into domination by evil men.
What's very frightening is that some just don't want to admit that we are seeing some of the same thing today.
I don't hate government per se, but it is extremely hard to look at even the last 100 years of history and not see that governments have a way of falling into domination by evil men.
MOM, I think that is the most important thing to take from SC&A's comment and post. It's so easy to believe that any given person is not evil enough to do something. It's simply such a foreign concept to most of us.
Then once it's revealed it always seems easier to just find a way to cope instead of confronting it. Once that government establishes that foothold, then it's almost always impossible to talk openly and freely with others and it's easy to be convinced that everyone else must think it's OK and that there is nothing I can do.
That is why evil must be called out early, plainly spoken for what it is. And dealt with.
The semantic choice of words (hate, lack of acceptance, refusal to tolerate) is irrelevant. What matters is the action of confronting and dealing with it.
That is the lesson that should be taken from the last 100 years. Unfortunately it seems we are still prone to finding a way to not have to deal with it. If nothing else one would think we should have learned that by now.
Then once it's revealed it always seems easier to just find a way to cope instead of confronting it. Once that government establishes that foothold, then it's almost always impossible to talk openly and freely with others and it's easy to be convinced that everyone else must think it's OK and that there is nothing I can do.
That is why evil must be called out early, plainly spoken for what it is. And dealt with.
The semantic choice of words (hate, lack of acceptance, refusal to tolerate) is irrelevant. What matters is the action of confronting and dealing with it.
That is the lesson that should be taken from the last 100 years. Unfortunately it seems we are still prone to finding a way to not have to deal with it. If nothing else one would think we should have learned that by now.
# posted by 
: 7:28 PM
: 7:28 PM
I'm glad you posted this, I prefer discussing it in this venue. What you intuit is right, and if we don't get it right, what do we become? The very thing we hated.
We know real love by viewing Christ. We know He was a tough outspoken critic of evil, but we know He did not take things into His own hands, even though by rights He could have.
We will have to go through the avenues of established law to punish evil. That honors and trusts God and in no way lets evil persons off the hook.
If you want the theology on it, the doctrine of Depravity explains the complete spectrum of evil acts. It also says that we all are as capable of it as the next guy, and reminds us to be vigilant for that.
This is one reason it is dangerous to advocate hatred and rationalize our own evil acts. We have need to submit ourselves to the neutrality of the law, and use that to prosecute against evil and evildoers.
I believe we are doing just that in Iraq in spite of the protest otherwise. The wheels of justice grind slow but they grind exceedingly fine ( a favortie maxim).
We know real love by viewing Christ. We know He was a tough outspoken critic of evil, but we know He did not take things into His own hands, even though by rights He could have.
We will have to go through the avenues of established law to punish evil. That honors and trusts God and in no way lets evil persons off the hook.
If you want the theology on it, the doctrine of Depravity explains the complete spectrum of evil acts. It also says that we all are as capable of it as the next guy, and reminds us to be vigilant for that.
This is one reason it is dangerous to advocate hatred and rationalize our own evil acts. We have need to submit ourselves to the neutrality of the law, and use that to prosecute against evil and evildoers.
I believe we are doing just that in Iraq in spite of the protest otherwise. The wheels of justice grind slow but they grind exceedingly fine ( a favortie maxim).
# posted by : 7:44 PM
: 7:44 PM
There are inverse relationships at play. Heightened hatred of evil means that we are defending all that is right with equal. We do nothing about Darfur, for example, because we don;t hate the evil enough. Oh, we love the victims, of course- we love all victims, everywhere.
We just don't hate the evil enough to do anything about it.
We cannot defend all that is good if we do not prosecute all that is evil.
That is the bottom line.
Hmm. I need to post this.
We just don't hate the evil enough to do anything about it.
We cannot defend all that is good if we do not prosecute all that is evil.
That is the bottom line.
Hmm. I need to post this.
SC&A - yes, we can't defend good without moving against evil, and it cannot always be a defensive move. Sometimes it does have to be aggressive.
There are such things as just wars. Logically then there must be times when peace is unjust.
Also, I believe your entire post is wrapped up in attacking the moral decadence of our own society. If we refuse to see evil for what it is and what it does we are foolish and weak against it. To the extent that our society has accepted that idea we have become foolish and weak.
I totally support the point you are trying to make and the choice you are trying to set forth to people. It's just that so many will not understand you, but will take the "hate" and stop there. Hate is an emotion. It is not a moral principle.
But foolishness and weakness in the face of evil is not a moral principle either.
When you asked people to imagine that it was their wife or daughter son or husband being attacked in these ways by these people, you asked people to love the victims and act accordingly. And you are right - if we weren't shutting our eyes and refusing to see this evil, we would be doing more to act against it.
Tommy, you wrote:
"That is why evil must be called out early, plainly spoken for what it is. And dealt with."
That's an excellent formulation of the dilemma. It's easy for those who have good aims to fall into passivity. But you are right, the time to act is early, and the way to act is by direct confrontation.
Ilona - yes, I too believe that attempting to free Iraq was the least bad of all alternatives, not least because it was the alternative that allowed the most constructive paths for Iraqis.
Hate is an emotion and destruction is an action. However hate causes the instinctive need to destroy what is hated. I think we should not fear evil but love creation and defend creation and life. I have not ever run into the doctrine of depravity but I think it must be related to our own mixed natures.
I think of Ireland, and I see that to hate destruction and those who destroy can't be enough. There must be some greater principle or it is all too easy to be led astray.
Post a Comment
There are such things as just wars. Logically then there must be times when peace is unjust.
Also, I believe your entire post is wrapped up in attacking the moral decadence of our own society. If we refuse to see evil for what it is and what it does we are foolish and weak against it. To the extent that our society has accepted that idea we have become foolish and weak.
I totally support the point you are trying to make and the choice you are trying to set forth to people. It's just that so many will not understand you, but will take the "hate" and stop there. Hate is an emotion. It is not a moral principle.
But foolishness and weakness in the face of evil is not a moral principle either.
When you asked people to imagine that it was their wife or daughter son or husband being attacked in these ways by these people, you asked people to love the victims and act accordingly. And you are right - if we weren't shutting our eyes and refusing to see this evil, we would be doing more to act against it.
Tommy, you wrote:
"That is why evil must be called out early, plainly spoken for what it is. And dealt with."
That's an excellent formulation of the dilemma. It's easy for those who have good aims to fall into passivity. But you are right, the time to act is early, and the way to act is by direct confrontation.
Ilona - yes, I too believe that attempting to free Iraq was the least bad of all alternatives, not least because it was the alternative that allowed the most constructive paths for Iraqis.
Hate is an emotion and destruction is an action. However hate causes the instinctive need to destroy what is hated. I think we should not fear evil but love creation and defend creation and life. I have not ever run into the doctrine of depravity but I think it must be related to our own mixed natures.
I think of Ireland, and I see that to hate destruction and those who destroy can't be enough. There must be some greater principle or it is all too easy to be led astray.
<< Home
