You are a large part of the reason people like the man who killed the Abortion doctor do it! If you ever wondered how the Germans stood by and let 6,000,000 Jews be murdered by Hitler you are the answer!

OUT OF SIGHT OUT OF MIND! Simple minded people who don’t think things through! What would happen to anyone who did that to Dogs, Cats, Seals, Polar Bears? Be honest with yourself if you can!
They’d be in prison wouldn’t they? No B.S. it’s not a person yet because because it’s not aware of what is happening, or it doesn’t have a concept of Tomorrow! Does A Dog, Cat, Seal? Has it told you so?
HYPOCRISY ISN’T LIMITED TO CHURCH GOERS IS IT?

The man who killed the Abortion doctor did so to stop the murder of innocent babies and most likely did save a few for a while! Should we all go kill an abortion doctor? It’s not or responsibility as an individual it’s our responsibility as a society! Are both of these men equal in their corruption injustice? Get real!
One killed babies for money, one killed another man to stop the madness because He lost faith in society and couldn’t stand by and do nothing any longer!
So don’t gripe when you see people stand by and do nothing when people are being robbed, killed, raped or beaten in the street! (UNLESS IT’S A WOMEN OF COURSE THEN SOMEBODIES GOT TO DO SOMETHING)
Is He a monster, or foolish? He sacrificed his freedom for what? Who will learn anything from His actions? Shallow people will only see the fact that both men killed! I can’t judge Him I will leave it to God to do so!
IT IS THE GOVERNMENT WHOM GOD HAS ORDAINED TO EXECUTE HIS JUSTICE! We are the government but we elect others to enforce the laws we establish! We as a people are and will be held accountable for our Injustice! To kill one doctor will not solve the problem because we are the problem! We have become a fast food culture in every way demanding immediate gratification at any cost!
How are we different than those who threw their first born into the fire to Moloch to show their devotion so life would be good for the rest of them?
We sacrifice our children at the alter of freedom to party, or convenience, or what ever we want more don’t we?
We who are so enlightened who forgot our social security system was designed for an ever expanding population to spread the cost of the retired over an expanding work force!
The 60,000,000 babies we’ve aborted and their kids (tax payers) would be handy about now wouldn’t it?

We are to self centered and short sighted to foresee the end result of our selfishness and sin!
Maybe that’s why the the bible says the fear (respect) for God is the beginning of wisdom! Because He presses us to look at everything from an ETERNAL perspective IF WE WILL LISTEN TO HIM!

SO should I stand their and watch someone murder and rape my daughter and wife and tell them how much I love them but I don’t want to be like the perpetrator and kill Him? Then I would be as bad as Him right?
I’m sure they would be so proud that their father didn’t stoop to His level right?

Only silly imbalanced people equate all killing as murder or equal!
The secret to truth is balance or as Meogyson says the secret to life is balance!

Just as the bible says
Ecclesiastes 3
1. To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven:
2. A time to be born , and a time to die ; a time to plant , and a time to pluck up that which is planted ;
3. A time to kill , and a time to heal ; a time to break down , and a time to build up ;
4. A time to weep , and a time to laugh ; a time to mourn , and a time to dance ;
5. A time to cast away stones, and a time to gather stones together ; a time to embrace , and a time to refrain from embracing ;
6. A time to get , and a time to lose ; a time to keep , and a time to cast away ;
7. A time to rend , and a time to sew ; a time to keep silence , and a time to speak ;
8. A time to love , and a time to hate ; a time of war, and a time of peace.

Those who Love will be forced to hate when everything they love is threatened by evil!
Those who are peaceful by nature will be forced to fight when evil men are determined to destroy the peace of the meek!
Those who value life will be forced to kill when evil men are determined to destroy the lives of everyone else or take away their ability to follow their conscience in obeying God!

Or do you Believe our founding fathers were nothing more than murders?

I’m asking you this specific question because in your post, you seem to think or assume that all humans are equally gifted or equally not gifted….that is what I get from reading your post, perhaps wrongly, maybe not.

http://www.abanet.org/domviol/statistics.html#prevalence
http://vaw.umn.edu/documents/inbriefs/domesticviolence/domesticviolence-color.pdf
http://www.rileycenter.org/domestic-violence-statistics.html
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/intimate/victims.htm

Someone raised the question of defense, which is a good one. We typically are taught the “eye for an eye” ( O.T. ) scriptural response in this case which is often interpreted to mean ‘use any force necessary’. This is the ‘Wild West’ response that always ends with the ‘good guy’ winning promising us that the most force is the best choice.

There are other cultures that teach different ways of defense that protect by deflecting aggression as in Akido for physical action. These can be very effective at disarming and discouraging further invasion when learned well, which means good teachers, study and practice. Obviously, this is not a priority for most in our culture. Winning means not just defeat of the other, but destruction of the other for many in our culture.

Even Gandhi believed one should be willing to defend him or herself. How one does it is the key. Using the “eye for an eye” or deciding on one’s own that killing the attacker is the only possible answer is primitive and decidedly one sided. There’s the story of a husband whose wife became mentally unstable and he had to learn to deal with that if she got off her medicine for one reason or another. She was not a bad person, but she did become difficult to control or direct when off her meds. At one point the husband found her with a kitchen knife going for one of the children’s bedrooms while they slept. He knew her and the situation so he carefully and cautiously restrained her until he could get help. Had someone who did not know her been attacked by her with that knife, they might have had a very different reaction than her husband and hurt or even killed her.

We do not know the stories of all ‘criminals’ or those who break the law and norms, so it is important for us to tread cautiously with our reactions. Not to say we don’t defend ourselves, but to do so in ways that minimize danger to any or all involved. We are not taught these methods and techniques as a part of growing up. Rather we are taught to fight back, meaning hurt the other kid worse than s/he hurt you.

There are self defense methods like Akido that are taught in cultures we do not fully recognize as equal to ours. They in fact, are miles ahead of us in some survival techniques. It is up to us to become more fluent in these methods in order to make them accessible to our children as they grown and learn to live successfully. That is, without taking advantage of others in order to gain more for one’s self.

Thanks again. I would like to hear your thoughts.

There will always be a radical fringe to every cause. The trick is learning how to deal with it.

I used to be a religious fanatic myself and know that it’s possible to transcend it. Such religious fervor is a necessary step on the road to the kind of mystical faith that Sarah had and that I advocate.

Romans 11:33 says this about God’s marvelous, wonderful judgments:

“Oh, the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgments and unfathomable His ways.”

He will judge your heart, and your heart will determine the way in which you fight your battle, and who you choose to fight it for.

Sadly, your blog seems to attract all sorts of religious fanatics looking to beat their drums louder than the last. (Or perhaps they all do… re: my previous remarks). How can you stand it?

When I wrote of individuals taking responsibility for their own actions, it seemed pretty clear to me that I was referring to those who use God as their excuse for individually taking another life or for using the power over others ( be it military, a church, or whatever ) to order others to take lives away from others. From this statement, “According to you, the good guys, that would be the U.S. Military, are responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths for no other reason than they are blood thirsty automatons looking for the next kill.” you obviously feel all military are “the good guys”. If we want “a confused farrago of an argument”, we need look no further.

There is no way you will convince any rational being that all persons in the military or in any group are all “the good guys”. THAT is the kind of illogical generality that loses your audience immediately. To state that I was making that kind of jump in logic shows some very shallow reading and less than genuine motives on your part.

I doubt too that you would have to “remind” any student of history, politics or the last fifty years of U.S. international relations that Saddam was a dictator and did some horrendous things to many – with the support of our government – Republican and Democrat. But since you seem to be in a dictatorial ‘teacher’ mode – meaning, whatever you say is right and “So don’t you dare” contradict me. THAT’S REALLY looking a both sides of an issue – as if there were only two sides to ANY issue !

My apologies for appearing to be “a confused lefty” or not being clear enough, but I was not “arguing the sanctity of some life but not all life “. I was saying if one believes in the sanctity of all life, then one cannot use God as an excuse to eliminate one life or thousands on any basis.

Someone raised the question of defense, which is a good one. We typically are taught the “eye for an eye” ( O.T. ) scriptural response in this case which is often interpreted to mean ‘use any force necessary’. This is the ‘Wild West’ response that always ends with the ‘good guy’ winning promising us that the most force is the best choice.

There are other cultures that teach different ways of defense that protect by deflecting aggression as in Akido for physical action. These can be very effective at disarming and discouraging further invasion when learned well, which means good teachers, study and practice. Obviously, this is not a priority for most in our culture. Winning means not just defeat of the other, but destruction of the other for many in our culture.

I would like you to make yourself perfectly clear and describe the second response to “great evil or injustice”. As you say, “Christianity allows for two responses … and only one of them is to turn the other cheek.” Christianity is one thing. However, the teachings of Christ are quite another. I assume you know the history of ‘the church’ on that score. I do not recall in my four years of theological study a teaching of his that allowed for taking another life as one’s choice to make.

“What really bothers me about the pacifist views you espouse, jjay, is that they are formed in a protected environment whose protections you do not acknowledge even in passing.” This is bothersome to me as well, because you have made an assumption you have no right to make. You have no concept of how my “pacifist views” were formed, in what environment, and that I also have some obligation to “acknowledge” them “even in passing” to you.

I have to disagree with you also on “The first line of protection in this environment”. Our first line of protection in this society is the individual. Most of us can and do live together peacefully. We work out disagreements. “the military” does not need to be called in to keep the peace. Neither does your “the second … police power”. They all certainly do an enormous job which most of us do not and will not take on. That is a huge statement of how valuable their pledge to our safety is or should be to those who do not recognize their sacrifice. I would say that your “third … the law” is actually the second line of protection, for without the law, the police cannot do their job, because they would not know what they could or could not do. We disagree on this and I do not expect to convince you, but that’s okay. It’s semantics for the most part.

I agree, “You and I live in an armed society,” but it is not the weapons and military that makes the peace. They can only create chaos in order to get the people out of the streets and into hiding. That is not peace. That is acquiescence. It is the willingness of you and I to live together with our differences that creates peace.

One thing you can perhaps explain is how you can generalize so innocently by stating “When I read pacifists arguments they always run along lines of personal peace. The assumption being that if everyone were at peace there would be no need for drastic measures.” How you can make this an introduction to solipsism is a leap perhaps only you know, but I’d like to hear more on that one. No, really, I would. I plead ignorance.

The other conspicuous generality you slip in with all too much ease and comfort of self assurance is “Do you not see that your personal peace is only an excuse for inaction? With the possible exception of lighting up your bong, what have you done to make peace more universal? My guess is not much.”

YOU ARE RIGHT about at least one thing. You ARE guessing and that’s the nail in the coffin of your ‘argument’, if one can even call it that. You have slipped into the ease of condemning one with whom you disagree on the basis of guesses, generalities based on who knows what and bias instead of a genuine interest in dialogue.

You would know nothing of my “temerity” and I would challenge you to check out the numbers the U.S. government has killed, poisoned, maimed, displaced, or imprisoned and convinced that we are their enemies because we have done one of those things to one or more of their family members, their neighbors, their friends or their patriots. We have done this through not only our young and able military, but through our corporations, banks and policies that put only the U.S. first regardless of the damage done to others, simply because they are in our way of “progress” and what we want. Measure that against those you say we have “freed” and you will begin to see that we have much to learn about what it means to “win” in this world. That there are many other choices before those mentioned above that we have just begun to explore and accept that they do work more often than not. They do take time, but in the long run, make less enemies and create less conflict.

I know and you hopefully know there will always be some who cannot be pleased by the actions of the majority. There will be terrorists. They have to be dealt with in a much different way than attacking and destroying a whole culture or system of governing, simply because we do not like a short term leader. We have much to do to get to that understanding and way of dealing with each other.

Thanks again and I hope you find your peace.

My Methodist pastor drove from that congregation in 1994 when he was shocked to find that my two children came from a loving home with two parents and the SAME FATHER (Wow!!). I took them to his church every Sunday while my husband took his two older kids to the Catholic church… every Sunday. Apparently my two Irish twin girls had caused a scandal! When I returned after the transfer of that gossipy biddy, the next guy in line wore bows of every color on his lapels each Sunday to harangue a mostly retired congregation for not contributing enough to his favorite liberal causes. I haven’t been to another Methodist Church, and won’t, although I’ll listen to a nice well written sermon in other churches.

Since I, like David Horowitz, came from lefty origins (a family of teachers), I started out with leftist and feminist leanings. I saw early on that the Pro-Life Movement was being run by the Lesbian fringe. The Gay rights Movement (at least back then) was run by angry promiscuous men with no values whatsoever… (at least that group seems to have found it’s bearings), the Women’s Rights Movement was run by angry middle aged (and older) strident monsters. It seemed then, and now that all radical groups, in the end, are taken over by… who else? the most radical! Sarah must have had wisdom beyond her years, and I look forward to reading more about her.