Love conquers violence

Human nature is unique, as our ability for love and
compassion goes hand-in-hand with the darker instincts to be cruel, rude and
hurtful, just in the same way we are can adapt ourselves from a state of
happiness to a state of sorrow. To get a real understanding of how love can
conquer violence, do visit the blog at

I am of two minds about removing this. On the one hand, it is an ad. He is trying to drum up business for his blog and has no intention to interact with any of us. (I'd love for him to prove me wrong but I really doubt he will even return to read this.) It's self serving, and using our free site for his own purposes, not the ones we intended. On the other hand, it isn't selling something and who knows? Someone here might be interested.

He has also brought up an interesting subject. I think an awful lot of violence has been done in the name of love so I don't think that love does conquer violence. What do you think?

Actually, I'd quibble with the contention that humans are unique in these aspects. Studies of our fellow primates have demonstrated that they have somewhat similar abilities to behave lovingly or cruelly to others...even mates, children and other relatives.

So, unique? I'm not so sure we are except perhaps in complexity.

I think the real issue is the mental state of the person committing the acts. Not all acts that might be considered "violent" are done so out of cruelty, and not all acts of caring are done out of love.

We live in a culture that equates pacifism with compassion, but that is an over simplistic way of looking at it.

Love does not conquer violence. You always kill the one you love.

all

I almost removed it, myself. But, I think if we disable/remove the link that will serve our purpose...1. Leaves an interesting topic and 2. Stop a spammer.

Good idea.

I'll bite, haven't been on in awhile. About compassion, I can be compassionate and NOT love. As humans we are so very self serving aren't we?

I don't see love conquering violence. I have seen learning compassion aid people in controlling their own aggression and curbing their violence. Of course when people enjoy violence they are only curbed by those of us who are simply so much better at it, and desire a society ruled by law, not impulse.

If I had to love people not to be violent towards them, then billions on this planet might not live through the day. I love many people, but they are the smallest percentage of the teeming masses that I interact with.

Could we not simply have self discipline, collective commitment to a community of peaceful interaction and respect for commonly agreed laws of conduct? It doesn't end in group hugs, but it lets us walk about in a world where we can not like someone and still not kill them for the cool hoodie they are wearing.

John T Mainer wrote:I don't see love conquering violence. I have seen learning compassion aid people in controlling their own aggression and curbing their violence. Of course when people enjoy violence they are only curbed by those of us who are simply so much better at it, and desire a society ruled by law, not impulse.

If I had to love people not to be violent towards them, then billions on this planet might not live through the day. I love many people, but they are the smallest percentage of the teeming masses that I interact with.

Could we not simply have self discipline, collective commitment to a community of peaceful interaction and respect for commonly agreed laws of conduct? It doesn't end in group hugs, but it lets us walk about in a world where we can not like someone and still not kill them for the cool hoodie they are wearing.

Given the choice between a society ruled by law, and one ruled by impulse, I'll take the one ruled by law.

The reality is this is the way it has to be. Just keep the constrictions of behavior to a minimum, K?

Agreed. Restrictions should be shown to be necessary before they should be tolerated.

John T Mainer wrote:Agreed. Restrictions should be shown to be necessary before they should be tolerated.

Not only should the restrictions be shown to be necessary, but the reasons used to justify the restrictions should be shown to be necessary in general.

A lot of restrictions today are under the blanket idea of "keeping us safe". To keep us safe is not the governments job. The government doesn't need to dictate that fast food places put calorie counts on the menu's, or that tobacco companies need to put warnings on the packs.

all

I'd quibble with one of your examples, all. I don't regard calorie information as falling under the guise of keeping people safe but rather giving them information that isn't always evident so that they can make a better decision.

Astonishingly, some fast food sandwiches that I'd think are fairly low in calories and fat content are appallingly high probably due to flavor enhancers and other additives. Without the nutritional information charts, it'd be more difficult for me to choose the healthier options on the few occasions when I do eat fast food.

Since I'm gluten intolerant, I rely quite a bit upon the now-required allergen information on food packaging. Not that it's life threatening for me to eat something containing gluten, but I'd rather be able to choose to feel rotten for a few days instead of unknowingly eating something I shouldn't. Honestly, who'd think that currant preserves would contain wheat? Yet, a brand I'd rashly bought without examining the label as thoroughly as usual turned out to.

On a humorous note, this morning I was about to put the lid on the thermal travel mug I sometimes use when working in various areas of the house. I was holding the lid upside down in one hand ready to pop it onto the mug when I saw what appeared to be writing on the underside of the lid. Yep, sure was. "CAUTION Contents may be very hot." Gee, I'm sure that McDonalds coffee lawsuit warning on the underside of the lid does a lot of good for anyone but the manufacturer's needing to comply with the warning regulation. What idiotic positioning!

DotNotInOz wrote:I'd quibble with one of your examples, all. I don't regard calorie information as falling under the guise of keeping people safe but rather giving them information that isn't always evident so that they can make a better decision.

I just gave examples. There are a few topics that I'm intentionally trying to avoid, so the example that immediately came to my mind I avoided to not sound like a one trick pony.

If you choose to look for the information, it is out there. It was put on the menu in an effort to change the choices that people made about it. My prediction, that won't have the desired effect, so we will see a "fat" tax, as well as a "salt" tax.

DotNotInOz wrote:
Astonishingly, some fast food sandwiches that I'd think are fairly low in calories and fat content are appallingly high probably due to flavor enhancers and other additives. Without the nutritional information charts, it'd be more difficult for me to choose the healthier options on the few occasions when I do eat fast food.

So? If you want the information, look it up. Nobody is stopping you.

DotNotInOz wrote:
On a humorous note, this morning I was about to put the lid on the thermal travel mug I sometimes use when working in various areas of the house. I was holding the lid upside down in one hand ready to pop it onto the mug when I saw what appeared to be writing on the underside of the lid. Yep, sure was. "CAUTION Contents may be very hot." Gee, I'm sure that McDonalds coffee lawsuit warning on the underside of the lid does a lot of good for anyone but the manufacturer's needing to comply with the warning regulation. What idiotic positioning!

Well, yes, I can look up such information online with my iPhone at the restaurant. I suppose a person concerned about nutrition for whatever reason ought to do their research and have some choices in mind before heading out to eat.

I don't mind the calorie info, because it's convenient and often amusing when I find out, for instance, as I did in a restaurant recently that a meal which otherwise is pretty healthy becomes laden with calories, fat and sugar by the addition of the muffin accompanying it when it's a regular menu item. That and a slightly larger portion were the only differences between the "Fresh & Fit" item and the regular menu one, the waiter advised me.

But yeah, overall I think we've become nutcases about nutrition info regulations.

It's as idiotic as people who carry disinfecting wetwipes so that they can sanitize the safety bar on the car of the amusement park ride before their little darlings touch that germ-laden surface. Sheesh!

DotNotInOz wrote:
But yeah, overall I think we've become nutcases about nutrition info regulations.

I think we've become nutcases about a lot of stuff.

I'm thinking lately about how much the world has changed, gotten more populated and busier. I just received word that a patient of mine was involved in an accident. He was in a truck in a construction zone, and hit 4 guys on motorcycles. It killed the 4 who were on motorcycles. There suspecting that alcohol was a factor.

Now, my dad tells the story about how when he was in his 20's he went to a party, got drunk, and drove home. The cops pulled him over, saw that he was drunk, and made sure they followed him home to ensure that he got there safely.

He told me this story in the 90's, when I was in my 20's, to illustrate how much the legal system had changed, and that I could expect stricter penalties. If I would have got pulled over and was intoxicated, I could expect to not be treated this way.

Now it is 20 years later. This young man had a momentary lapse of judgment, and killed 4 people. IF alcohol was a factor, he can probably expect to get the stiffest penalty for 4 counts of motor vehicle homicide that the law allows.

I'm a cold hearted SOB, and I'm not saying it should be any other way, but I bet if we are all honest with ourselves we can think of things that we have done, and gotten away with in the past. I myself can think of numerous ways that I should have died before 25, and after 25 too. It just makes ya think.

DotNotInOz wrote:
It's as idiotic as people who carry disinfecting wetwipes so that they can sanitize the safety bar on the car of the amusement park ride before their little darlings touch that germ-laden surface. Sheesh!

Not to mention that most of them are made of a plastic that has anti-biotics impregnated in them as well. I'm of the opinion that you need some exposure to germs.

all

I really have to restrain myself on one Disney World forum I read. There have been whole threads recommending what all people really must have to keep their kids from coming in contact with germs on various WDW surfaces.

I agree with you, All, that we need some exposure to germs.

It scares me to think that we're likely encouraging the evolution of some future invincible micro-organism by being so fanatically clean.

Geez, half the fun of childhood is playing in dirt and staying grubby for as long as you can get away with it.

The immune system need to be stimulated in order to develop properly, and if it doesn't get stimulation from germs, it'll get it from whatever it can in the environment. Just tell them that they are fostering allergies.

DotNotInOz wrote:

I agree with you, All, that we need some exposure to germs.

It scares me to think that we're likely encouraging the evolution of some future invincible micro-organism by being so fanatically clean.

^ This.

From Violence & Compassion all the way to? G erms?

Willowcreek70633 wrote: From Violence & Compassion all the way to? G erms?

And this surprises you, considering that it's us, in just what way? < giggle >

My darling, Dot.... So it IS true, you can't teach an ol dog new tricks?
Especially when we're still up to our ol antics!

With the germs: I am a firm believer (yes part of my path) that one should get dirty & play or labor within the fruits of mother earth!

Hey, playing in the dirt is still one of my favorite things to do, although adults typically refer to it as gardening.

Sure wish we'd get a break in the weather soon. My poor plant-babies are looking about as "hotted out" as I feel.

Ooopsie! I'd better get my lazy butt out and water them before the sun really gets up there.

:::::: dashes off to do just that ::::::::