*************
The following message is relayed to you by trom@lists.newciv.org
************
Hi David,
you wrote:
My first question to them would be:
What if someone broke into your house, killed your husband and
children, stole all your money, then raped you, and broke your
arms, then dragged you outside and tied you up to the street light
post and burned your house down.
Would you consider that bad or good?
My answer to your question would be:
In the opinion of that victim(s) the deed would be considered as bad.
The perpetrator(s) will hold the conflicting opinion that it was good.
(If otherwise they certainly would not have done that.)
You see it's a matter of consideration or opinion.
Do not forget: Opinions can be manipulated (in ways that are beneficial
and ways that are not. There is a fundamental right to have an opinion.
I would give preference to a society where the members have learned to
act according to their opinions with their own volition and responsibility
toward deeply felt inner convictions. I would give such a society
preference
in comparison to a society which has to be held in check by a bunch of
rules
which require the threat of force-application in order to get compliance
from the subjects.
Opinions and considerations are subject to change over time.
(A criminal may repent later.)
No law, moral code, code of ethics, creed, constitution, what so ever
would have saved that family.
Your example is very interesting and well chosen.
Because it describes one of those rare occasions where you deal
with mad-man (e.g. sadists. There game could be to inflict a maximum of
pain.)
In such a case it would not have saved that family from being wiped out
(physically) even if they had put up the complementary postulate.
The only options which I'm aware of in such a case are:
a) Occupying the viewpoint of masochists (leads to their physical demise
but they may still enjoy it).
b) Overwhelming the attackers in the course of self-defense (often not
possible).
c) Bringing a barrier between them and the attackers (can be distance,
time, a wall, ...)
[Remark: From a higher viewpoint you have to assign at least a part
of the responsibility to the victims. Doing otherwise is to invalidate
the spiritual being in a most aberrative way.]
Axiom 31 b.t.w. does not contradict the core believe:
"That Man is basically good."
It is perfectly in line with Axiom 31. Please note: they _believe_
(It is their conviction).
Sooner or later you may come to a similar conclusion.
Regards
Robin
_______________________________________________
TROM mailing list
TROM@lists.newciv.org
http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom
