BS: On Not Hating One's Enemies

Subject: RE: BS: On Not Hating One's Enemies
From: robomatic
Date: 21 Jan 05 - 03:34 PM

Donuel -
I'm touched, you define the meaning of that word anyway you want! Have a great weekend, artistic one.
Robo

Subject: RE: BS: On Not Hating One's Enemies
From: Donuel
Date: 21 Jan 05 - 03:22 PM

politics is not always divisive.

For example the robomatic post about Wellstone was the first time I could agree with anything I have seen him write.

Meanwhile- some great contributions were found here in general

Subject: RE: BS: On Not Hating One's Enemies
From: GUEST,Art Thieme
Date: 21 Jan 05 - 01:32 PM

What about disliking, disrespecting, and then deciding to avoid the person for the rest of my life.   They were morons, cretins and all around heinous individuals for ever thinking up and then carrying out the behavior in question.

(But they don't belong at Guantanamo.)

Art Thieme

Subject: RE: BS: On Not Hating One's Enemies
From: freda underhill
Date: 21 Jan 05 - 07:56 AM

yep, Bobert, you got it in a nutshell.

Subject: RE: BS: On Not Hating One's Enemies
From: Little Hawk
Date: 20 Jan 05 - 10:27 PM

That's it, Bobert. In a nutshell. Jesus' teachings were not lost on you, ol' pal!

People commit harmful, even terrible acts out of fear and ignorance (and a variety of misplaced assumptions which = ignorance). That is why Jesus said, "Forgive them, for they know not what they do."

Subject: RE: BS: On Not Hating One's Enemies
From: Bobert
Date: 20 Jan 05 - 10:23 PM

If we are all collectively God's creations then to hate one another is to hate oneself...

Hate the behaviors... Not the man...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: On Not Hating One's Enemies
From: Tannywheeler
Date: 20 Jan 05 - 10:19 PM

So, nobody remembers Brother Dave G, hunh?       Tw

Subject: RE: BS: On Not Hating One's Enemies
From: Once Famous
Date: 20 Jan 05 - 03:51 PM

i don't really hate anyone here.

but then again, I don't think anyone here is a part of Hamas, are you?

Subject: RE: BS: On Not Hating One's Enemies
From: GUEST,Art Thieme
Date: 20 Jan 05 - 03:44 PM

I can honestly say I hate no one.

All the bastards I hated are dead.

Art

Subject: RE: BS: On Not Hating One's Enemies
From: Greg F.
Date: 20 Jan 05 - 10:54 AM

Forgiveness, like compassion, could be extended only so far. For many former slaves, the teachings of Christianity and their recollections of bondage would never be easily reconciled. Harry Jarvis remembered working for "de meanest man on all de Easte'n sho', and dat's a heap to say." Early in the war, he fled the plantation, eventually joined the Union Army, and lost a leg in the Battle of Folly Island. Some years later, two white schoolteachers questioned him about slavery days, his escape and army service, and his intense religious conversion immediately after the war. "As you have experienced religion," one of the teachers asked him, "I suppose you have forgiven your old master, haven't you?" The question came unexpectedly, the glow immediately left the man's face, and he dropped his head. Upon recovering his composure, he straightened himself and gave his reply. "Yes, sah! I'se forgub him; de Lord knows I'se forgub him; but" - and now his eyes suddenly blazed - "but I'd gib my oder leg to meet him in battle!" The schoolteachers thought it best at this moment to terminate the conversation.

(Armstrong & Ludlow: Hampton and its Students, 109-114

Subject: RE: BS: On Not Hating One's Enemies
From: Little Hawk
Date: 20 Jan 05 - 09:12 AM

The thought occurred to me cos I just can't resist bugging you now and then, 42. :-)

Subject: RE: BS: On Not Hating One's Enemies
From: robomatic
Date: 20 Jan 05 - 07:45 AM

GUEST:

I have a problem with your initiating post. First of all, no handle. You can preserve your anonymity while establishing a reference, and you should, particularly when you start a thread.

There is a certain amount, a LARGE amount, of self-serving in presenting yourself as a victim (by association) of hate while presenting your opponents as hateful. Need I remind anyone this is one of the common attributes of the White Power movement, but a common enough technique of extremists through the ages.

I was a fan of Sen. Wellstone, without knowing him or his activites that well. He was one of those people one is glad is 'out there', raising the quality of the debate. I remember the tragedy of the accidental deaths of Sen. Wellstone and members of his entourage and family, not to mention aircraft crew, as they were landing. I remember a somewhat confusing memorial function which was critiqued as to whether it was a true memorial for Wellstone and the spirit of his work, or a political gambit. It seemed to be not quite a dignified ceremonial commemmorance, not quite a rally. This confusion was represented in the press, and I shared it.

I am not a regular listener to Rush Limbaugh and I do not consider him a neocon; the term seems to be relative to the person who uses it. I have no idea what 'savagery' is being referred to in the wake of Sen. Wellstone's passing.

There have been some intriguing and interesting posts to this thread and I would have more to say, but the confusion introduced at the very inception by Guest has contributed to 'thread muddle'.

Subject: RE: BS: On Not Hating One's Enemies
From: 42
Date: 20 Jan 05 - 06:57 AM

never crossed my mind LH. I'm surprised and offended the thought occurred to you. just a question of semantics and perception.
j

Subject: RE: BS: On Not Hating One's Enemies
From: Little Hawk
Date: 19 Jan 05 - 03:10 PM

Yes, Wolfgang. :-) Hunger is a useful message from the nervous system, signalling a lack of nutrients. I did not say that there are so such things as messages, useful or otherwise. You can compose a message about anything, even something completely unreal.

Example: Wolfgang, there is a large eggplant devouring your house! And your Russian Campaign game just spontaneously combusted, preventing you once again from achieving victory for either side in 1945!

(completely untrue in both cases, but it IS nevertheless, a message...)

Subject: RE: BS: On Not Hating One's Enemies
From: Amos
Date: 19 Jan 05 - 03:04 PM

Hold on there. Hunger is CAUSED by a lack of nutrients, but it is a distinct transmission by the nerves and the brain, isn't it? Don't they send signasl they wouldn't otherwise? This is going over into the silly business of saying that pain isn't real because all physical reality is merely an illusion. This profound discovery fails to notice that the body is PART of the damnedillusion!!

There was a faith healer named Neil
Who declared, "Although pain is not real
If I sit on a pin,
And it punctures my skin,
I dislike what I fancy I feel!

Don't ask a thermometer not to believe in temperature!!:D


A

Subject: RE: BS: On Not Hating One's Enemies
From: Wolfgang
Date: 19 Jan 05 - 02:27 PM

It's easy: there is no such thing as hunger..it's simply a lack of nutrients in your body system. A lack is not something in itself....If you think it is, then find me something which makes a body filled with nutrients hungry.

Actually, I could beam some darkness into a lighted room with a switch. We perceive dark and light only relative to the surroundings. So if I switched on a much stronger light outside of the room, the room would immediately look darker than before to us.

Wolfgang (feeling academic)

Subject: RE: BS: On Not Hating One's Enemies
From: Little Hawk
Date: 19 Jan 05 - 12:00 PM

It's academic, 42. There is no such thing as dark...it's simply a lack of light. A lack is not something in itself. Nothing is not something. If you think it is, then find me a darklight that you can press a switch on and beam some darkness into a lighted room with. :-)

And if you think this has ANYTHING to do with racial issues, you're dumber than I think you are!

Subject: RE: BS: On Not Hating One's Enemies
From: Dewey
Date: 19 Jan 05 - 07:44 AM

So true Brother Little Hawk! So True Brother Amos! So True Sister Guest!

I'm gonna go get a job today, instead of writing 'til 6:30 a.m. I'm Getting tired of Surviving on Little Debbie's Snacks and 99 cent double cheeseburgers from McDonald's.

The New Bush Economy! (LOL) Just kidding (sort of :-)

Actually, in truth things are going to be O.K.: I have found myself another silent invisible partner, and we are going to be a roaring success someday, despite the fact that I have not re-cognized him and the power of his position initially since our meeting.

Since he is so, so good to me at making everything else work, I'm just gonna leave the business end to him (LOL) He is a tough partner though: found out he expects me to work every day feverishly for what it is I am called to do for him, though he is very nice in sharing the rewards with me of that work he is demanding of me. I better not disappoint this very important guy though, he is not big on disappointments, he is much more of a progress kind of guy by nature, as I'm sure all the rest of you here know that have ever met, heard, or saw him at any time yourself and at any turning point in your life.

Dewey

If it's gonna be its up to me (or I should say US!)



My two year spiritual retreat to find myself is about over. Thank God!

Sorry can't resist the following quote:

"What is behind us and what is in front of us, pales in comparison to what lies WITHIN us"

Ralph Waldo Emerson

Subject: RE: BS: On Not Hating One's Enemies
From: 42
Date: 19 Jan 05 - 06:55 AM

LH

why do you think the process isn't dark, less dark, even less dark, light. ?
j

are you comparing dark to evil? shame on you.

Subject: RE: BS: On Not Hating One's Enemies
From: Little Hawk
Date: 18 Jan 05 - 01:39 PM

Yeah. I think the key problem in human perception, actually, is the belief in diametrical opposites. It spawns opposition and misunderstanding.

Subject: RE: BS: On Not Hating One's Enemies
From: Amos
Date: 18 Jan 05 - 01:37 PM

"Opposites" are -- as you say -- only semantic constructs. In this universe, anyway, all qualities are infinitely gradual. Bi-polarism is a defect in the eye of the beholder. That's why artificial intelligence is such an oxymoron. Analog systems are infinitely gradual; binary systems are bipolar. Even though the transistors used in computers have a whole range of gradient values as outputs, we reduce them all to two for the sake of logic in its primitive two-valued form. (Well, three: true, false, and don't-give-a-shit). Genuine intelligence integrates huge numbers of variables flying through infinite gradations.

A

Subject: RE: BS: On Not Hating One's Enemies
From: Little Hawk
Date: 18 Jan 05 - 01:07 PM

Beautifully stated, Amos. You know your words very well indeed. By your standards I was using words sloppily. But isn't this like arguing about whether an art deco print is from the 1932 edition or the 1935 one? The point I was making was...that Love has no opposite, and neither do heat or light...except in the conventions of language.

They are phenomena that happen along a scale of perception from most to least...

LIGHT...less light...still less light....still less light...no light.

We call "no light" "darkness". Darkness is not something in itself, it's just "no light". There is no opposite to light. There is no opposite to Love.

Subject: RE: BS: On Not Hating One's Enemies
From: Amos
Date: 18 Jan 05 - 12:49 PM

Thermal energy is defined as a molecular motion. It is measured by the metric we call temperature.

Obviously energy is involved -- but there is a difference between energy in wave forms and energy manifesting in molecular motion which may be in any pattern or no apparent pattern. Just because energy is involved does not mean that "heat is an energy wave". That concept went out when we outgrew phlogiston theory.

When you play energy over molecules they get excited, and move around, so obviously energy in wave form can induce heat--anyone who uses a microwave knows that. But to say they are the same thing is sloppy. Words fall short to the degree they are used sloppily. They can be quite good at paralleling experience, although no-one would ever claim they WERE experience.

A

Subject: RE: BS: On Not Hating One's Enemies
From: Little Hawk
Date: 18 Jan 05 - 12:42 PM

What causes the molecular motion, Amos? Energy? Science is an attempt to describe reality with words (definitions), but words will always fall short of fully describing any reality. Reality can be experienced, but no series of words will ever serve to completely explain what is experienced. Words are mere conventions, agreed upon within a closed loop by those who already know those words. To someone else outside that particular loop, it doesn't matter. But...heat is perceivable, and will always be perceivable, regardless of what words you use to describe it. The same goes for Love and for Light. Without a knowledge of molecular vibration, you still have heat and you still experience it.

Dewey, you are so right. Politics is the Great Divider. It sets people against each other who would otherwise be the best of friends. It has caused the unneeded deaths of billions.

Subject: RE: BS: On Not Hating One's Enemies
From: Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull
Date: 18 Jan 05 - 12:31 PM

I need some new glasses, I thought it said=
On Not Eating Your Enemies.

Subject: RE: BS: On Not Hating One's Enemies
From: TheBigPinkLad
Date: 18 Jan 05 - 12:28 PM

>That's why hell hath no fury like a woman scorned, as they say.

I suspect the word 'scorned' is redundant ... ;o)

Subject: RE: BS: On Not Hating One's Enemies
From: GUEST,Amos
Date: 18 Jan 05 - 09:56 AM

LH, just to keep the record straight, heat is not an energy wave. It is a measurement of molecular motion.

As to love and hate, it is a truism that the magnitude of the break is directly proportional to the prior affection or connectedness experienced. That's why hell hath no fury like a woman scorned, as they say.

A

Subject: RE: BS: On Not Hating One's Enemies
From: Dewey
Date: 18 Jan 05 - 03:33 AM

If you go through you life thinking that everyone that disagrees with your position politically is an ENEMY, you weaken yourself. Whatever divides us weakens us. Politics is very divisive because people have closeds mind on the subjects before they even get started.

The subject of poltics for example isn't quite that serious for me (LOL) though I have voiced my opinion before here and had to shut up by those that thought themselves tolerant, that SAY they want to love their enemies, but in reality can't stand their gutts for daring to disagree.

Good Grief its bad enough that many see those that dis-agree with them as enemies, not alone the fact that they are having a difficult time loving their "enemies",

And they say WE conservatives are the ones that are intolerant, Those that take Politics it too serious, only weaken themselves. President Clinton understood this which was why he was such a Giant of a politician and genius. You have to admit this is true reguardless of your political persuasion.

As for the Wellstone family, their wonderful legacy of caring for the community is going to be overlooked by their partisanly making fools out of themselve by villifying everyone politically that they thought was different from their own liking.

The way the Wellstone memorial service turned into a political rally just went to show the Wellstone's were more "enemy oriented" than thir so called "enemies"

Booing Trent Lott, who was decent enough to take some time out of his day to honor Mr. Wellstone's memory and service to the country was unfair; as was talking about Political races during the memorial service itself.

This was not only, a dishonor to Mr. Wellstone, but to the State that elected him. It didn't even give the Rest of the Conservative Minnesotans a chance to honor his memory.

I am conservative myself, and though I would probably not have voted for Mr. Wellstone even if I had lived in Minnesota. I would have definitely liked to have had an un-biased oppportunity to pay homage to this wonderful human being without the divisive backlash of those who think one has to be a liberal (not just an American) to appreciate this representative who by the way represented us ALL reguardless of political persuasion.

Like Governor Vertura said at the time, We were "Shamed and Duked" (the citizenry that is, by the intolerance of those who claim to have so much of it).

I face this condescending, non-inclusive, non-open-mindedness rubbish on mudcat all the time. The other person (usually Conservative) is always wrong and the enemy. Having strong beliefs in politics is one thing, but ALWAYS being right is ALSO WRONG, and so is having so called "enemies" merely because one disagrees and is working in opposition to your un-inclusive plans.

Optimistic people find common ground and learn from others and very often if they do not change their opinions poltical or otherwise, they can accept the other person's opinion or at least work around it somewhat for the beneficial good of all involved.

I wish this tribal mentality of "enemies" on Mudcat was desolved, it does so little good and diverts us from the common good of what is beneficial, that is each other. Politics is mass histeria just like Religion can be and effects clarity of mind, decision and purpose, which is why the politicians love and use it so much.

I have no hard time admitting this myself and I know of some liberal issues and causes that have changed my conservative opinion on various issues, but I can't hardly, or seldom do, learn anything.... if I think the other person is always the one in the wrong and. "Dangerous" based on my pre-concieved notions of the world.

Sure Limbaugh says some dumb things that can un-knowingly spur hateful acts. But then again so does/did Malcolm X, Louis Farakan etc. And, I don't judge the whole movement of a politcal party based on a few rabble-rousers in one persusion of another, Such persons are not inclusive of any one party whether the Repulican party or not, there are rabble rousers in Libertarians, Conservatives, Socialists, Democrats etc..

THE ONLY ENEMY I HATE IS RELIGIOUS AND POLITCAL INTOLERANCE. (possibly I think the guest may have a little bit of this :-)

I don't hate anybody, I get annoyed however by the vast amount of intolerance on the mudcat over things that really don't matter. People and their progress as citizens is more important than individual ways in which we all see the world.

Whether through organized religion or politics. Anything that divides us is not of a spritual, creative, everlasting, benefit to the progress of mankind.

Not to hurt your feelings Guest...but, this would indeed include the Wellstone rally.

Wellstone was far ahead in the polls, even after his death when Mondale took over. However, it is my opinion (and it still it JUST my opinion) that his divisive rally didn't win him any swing votes, i.e. open-minded conservative that otherwise might have voted for him. He (Mondale after much cockiness and bragging) in fact lost voters that he once most likely had (prior to the Wellstone family speech) and went on to LOSE the election in droves.

When Jesus said. "Love you enemies" he meant to look beyond them and and their current state of affair and faults and see the Good that is within them from outside of your own self-imposed ego.

When Jesus walked into a room his very presents would light up the room, he radiated with energy and love, and he certainly could not have had some love towards others in this manner if he viewed himeself as seperate, different and an ENEMY of them. You can't give away something that you don't already posess yourself.

So let's stop hating people over their politics and religion, this is far worse of US than it is of the particular religion/politics in which they practice! After all politcs and religion doesn't really effect us and our world as much as we THINK it does, and if it does it is becasue of our tribal mentality. Who we are as INDIVIDUALS is far more important than the so-called, leadership that represents us.

Great moments that effected human civilization since the beginning of time always came from the bottom up, not from the so called leadership that was supposed to allegedly represent us and and was supposed to solve our so-called "problems" that resulted. Actually most problems we make are though ourselves and through our attitudes and beliefs toward other people and/or their beliefs towards us (i.e. tribal mentality)

Let's be careful in making enemies (myself included) as it is more easier and rewarding to make friends, and you grow and learn more spiritual and intellectually from having done so in this capacity, than to worry about the sacredness of your politics, religion and/or ego.

Dewey

Subject: RE: BS: On Not Hating One's Enemies
From: Little Hawk
Date: 18 Jan 05 - 02:02 AM

There is no opposite to love.

People make up opposites to explain something they think is lacking.

There is no opposite to heat, but people think there is, and they call it "cold". Cold is not a thing in itself, it's simply a perceived lack of heat. It's a no-thing. Heat is an energy wave. Cold is not.

Love is like heat. Love is real, it's an energy, and it's a powerful thing. When people sense a lack of it they make up words and claim that there is the "opposite to love". Not so.

There is no opposite to light either, but people think there is, and they call it darkness. Darkness is not a thing. You can't beam darkness into a lighted room. It doesn't exist. It's just a word to label a lack of light. A shadow is not a thing either. It is again, simply a noticeable blocking of some available light.

Hate is not the opposite of love. Neither is indifference. Love is totally encompassing, totally vital, and it HAS no opposite.

Hate is a fearful emotional reaction to a perceived lack or threat. Indifference is a complete lack of emotional reaction to something. Love is a power much greater than forms of emotional reaction...though it certainly can stir emotions in a useful direction.

Subject: RE: BS: On Not Hating One's Enemies
From: dianavan
Date: 18 Jan 05 - 01:46 AM

Know your enemy but do not hate him. It does more damage to yourself and gives him too much power.

Subject: RE: BS: On Not Hating One's Enemies
From: GUEST
Date: 18 Jan 05 - 01:39 AM

I was told by a reader of many self-help books that the opposite of love is not hate, but indifference.

Subject: RE: BS: On Not Hating One's Enemies
From: Little Hawk
Date: 18 Jan 05 - 01:26 AM

That's an interesting notion, Michelle, and there may be a great deal of truth in it. Hatred is often a reaction to the sense that love has been denied. In other words, people hate it when their dearest expectations are not met. The path of enlightenment involves, among other things, doing away with the whole concept of expectations and learning acceptance of what IS rather than longing for what only MAY be. That seems impossible to most people, and is a very, very hard thing to do, for sure.

I think 2 things can cause hatred. 1. the sense that love has been denied or betrayed...and/or 2. extreme fear. But that which knows it cannot die (or even be damaged), does not fear.

Subject: RE: BS: On Not Hating One's Enemies
From: Auggie
Date: 17 Jan 05 - 08:25 PM

I find I'm also the unnamed 5:01 guest on the Martin Guitars Again thread. Once= a mistake. Twice= just plain stupid.
It's OK to hate me after all.

Subject: RE: BS: On Not Hating One's Enemies
From: Auggie
Date: 17 Jan 05 - 08:18 PM

Apologies to McGrath. I am the anonymous guest of 5:08. One computer, five users, well, you know the story.
I knew the cookie was gone and just forgot to fill in the box.
I'm not the Enemy. Please dont hate me :)

Subject: RE: BS: On Not Hating One's Enemies
From: LilyFestre
Date: 17 Jan 05 - 07:45 PM

I'm kinda of the mind that you can't hate someone if you haven't loved them.

Michelle

Subject: RE: BS: On Not Hating One's Enemies
From: *Laura*
Date: 17 Jan 05 - 07:10 PM

"Never hate anyone - it's too close to love and makes it hard to kill them if you have to" -
Hugh Laurie.

xLx

Subject: RE: BS: On Not Hating One's Enemies
From: wysiwyg
Date: 17 Jan 05 - 05:51 PM

(And I also think that we should avoid doing things which we know are seen as unfriendly and discourteous, such as posting as unnamed GUESTs.)

Or such as continuing to post things like that, knowing full well it re-ignites the Guest controversy, each and every time.

~S~

Subject: RE: BS: On Not Hating One's Enemies
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 17 Jan 05 - 05:47 PM

Most of us do in fact generally avoid the personal invectives and flaming. What is harder to do is to resist falling into the tricks of debating - for example, when we ignoring the weak points in our own positions, and the strong points in those of the people we are arguing with.

The aim of arguing here ought to be to try to get closer to the truth, and to get a clearer understanding of the views of those who disagree with, together with a clearer undewrstanding of what we ourselves actually think.

(And I also think that we should avoid doing things which we know are seen as unfriendly and discourteous, such as posting as unnamed GUESTs.)

Subject: RE: BS: On Not Hating One's Enemies
From: GUEST
Date: 17 Jan 05 - 05:08 PM

might not hurt to expand that thought to include opposing and defeating one's idealogical opponents here on the Cat without resorting to personal invectives or flaming.

Subject: RE: BS: On Not Hating One's Enemies
From: PoppaGator
Date: 17 Jan 05 - 04:56 PM

On this day when we commemorate the birth of Dr. Martin Luther King, let's give a moment's thought to his example, demontrating how to oppose and defeat one's enemies with love and non-violence.

Subject: RE: BS: On Not Hating One's Enemies
From: GUEST,Frank
Date: 17 Jan 05 - 04:31 PM

Guest, Paul Wellstone is a hero of mine. His book, The Conscience of a Liberal should be required reading for every political science and civics class in the country. It was a brilliant answer to Barry Goldwater's Conscience of a Conservative. Wellstone outlined a powerful agenda for liberals everywhere and his legacy is with us in these times.

Anger has to be channelled. Hatred becomes an incapacitating response but there can be no illusions about what the Neo-cons are about. They want to have a single Party system in this country (very fascist) and destroy the liberal view. This will be impossible since most of the country agrees with much of the liberal viewpoint although some have been brainwashed to demonize what they think of as liberals. Liberals don't generally drive fancy cars as Paul Wellstone showed us. He traveled in a beat-up bus to talk to the people. He was about love and meeting the needs of the American people through public service. He was a man of conviction and carried this into his campaign. In short, he gave politics a good name.

Nowadays we have a conciliatory and cowardly DLC that threatens the demise of the Democratic Party. Wellstone and Dean represent the true Democrats. Also Micheal Moore and Move On.

We intend to turn our anger into action. It's the anger at injustice by a cold, heartless Administration and I for one want Bush to be alive and well enough to stand trial for his misdeeds. We can indict him at the polling booth once we reform the electoral system that is being co-opted by fraud and cheating through black boxes and state voting irregularities which disenfranchise
Black Americans. If Martin Luther King were alive, he would have marched in Ohio and Florida to protect our voting rights.

Paul Wellstone did not leave us a legacy of hate, but was a beacon and model for what we must do next, reclaim America through our moral values.
Care for our children providing them with health insurance and a good public education regardless of whether they're rich or poor. Care for our elderly by not allowing their Social Security to be stolen. Care for our land keeping it secure from the rape of corporate polluters. Care for our young men and women in the service by bringing them home and keeping them out of harms way. Care for our Democracy by returning the political power to the people from the hands of wealthy corporate fat cats. Care for our working class by instituting unions that protect them. Care for our legal protectors who keep our citizens safe from irresponsible pharmaceutical payoffs to the FDA and those who jeapardize the health of employees.

Take back our Democracy. Channel that anger and use it for justice and fairness. That's what Paul Wellstone was about.

Frank

Subject: RE: BS: On Not Hating One's Enemies
From: Little Hawk
Date: 17 Jan 05 - 04:05 PM

Very good answer, Mr Haig! :-)

When Pierre Trudeau was questioned by the press as to how he felt about being called an "asshole" by Nixon on the Watergate tapes, he smiled and said, "I've been called worse things by worse men."

Subject: RE: BS: On Not Hating One's Enemies
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 17 Jan 05 - 03:28 PM

Romans 12, 20-21:
If your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink. In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head. Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.

-----------

When Alexander Haig was seen smoking Cuban cigars in Moscow, and questioned, he said "I like to think of it as burning their crops."

Subject: RE: BS: On Not Hating One's Enemies
From: LilyFestre
Date: 17 Jan 05 - 03:06 PM

For given situations, I think hatred and rage certainly go hand in hand. Given time, I think rage subsides and depending on your nature and wants for yourself, hate can either grow or that can subside as well.

Michelle

Subject: RE: BS: On Not Hating One's Enemies
From: Tannywheeler
Date: 17 Jan 05 - 01:48 PM

Somewhere in the first 4 books of the New Testament Jesus is (reputed to be) talking about loving friends and hating enemies. He says (approximately): ...Pray for those who despitefully use you, for by so doing, you heap coals of fire on their heads.

Brother Dave Gardner (anyone remember Bro. Dave? Where is he now?) was blunter: "Love yo' enemy -- drives 'em nuts!!!"
(Bro. Dave: "Ah smoke tuhbakuh 'cuz it's a suhthun produk -- Ah'd smoke chains, if Ah could laht 'em.")          Tw

Subject: RE: BS: On Not Hating One's Enemies
From: wysiwyg
Date: 17 Jan 05 - 11:45 AM

I think we sometimes confuse rage-- a momentary emotional reaction-- with hatred, a long-term, settled-in, chosen attitude and mindset.

~S~

Subject: RE: BS: On Not Hating One's Enemies
From: Little Hawk
Date: 17 Jan 05 - 10:43 AM

I'm glad it had that effect on you, Lilyfestre.

A wise person does not look for enemies. He looks for opportunities to do positive things in the World. It may be that someone decides he is their enemy, because of his positive activities. That happens, specially when those activities have a big effect. It happened in the case of Jesus, Gandhi, Martin Luther King, and many others. It seems that great good is annoying to certain people. :-) (Mainly because it threatens established power structures.)

Well, there's no use hating those kind of enemies, because if you subscribe to the consciousness termed "hate", you start becoming just like them. It's a toxic emotion.

What you have to do is continue to love the good in this World, and not waste your energy hating the evil. Those who love the good are quite good at defending it.

Joan of Arc loved France dearly. Accordingly, she proved to be an excellent battle commander and defeated the English time and again when no other French commander had been able to do so for 75 years prior to her campaigns. Yet...it was noted time and again that she had great compassion for the English who fell in battle. She gave them far more generous terms in defeat than was customary, allowing them to leave surrendered fortresses with their horses and their weapons, as long as they would leave peacefully. Others at the time would have simply killed them all without mercy. She wept over slain enemy soldiers, pitying their families who would not see them again. These were powerful demonstrations of a person wise enough to fight for what she loved, yet not to hate her enemies.

That is the wisdom given to saints, and it's a shining example to the rest of us.

Subject: RE: BS: On Not Hating One's Enemies
From: Peace
Date: 17 Jan 05 - 10:26 AM

There is a big difference between hating one's enemies and dealing with one's enemies. The assumption being made (I think) is that dealing with an enemy requires hatred. That is not so. Sometimes it's just 'takin' care of business'.

Subject: RE: BS: On Not Hating One's Enemies
From: LilyFestre
Date: 17 Jan 05 - 09:22 AM

Little Hawk,

You wrote: "To "love" people, in spiritual terms means: to wish them no ill, but rather wish them well at the deepest, most profound level. This does not mean you have to love their outward personality, their outward behaviour, or anything else they are projecting onto the world around them...nor does it mean you have to PUT UP WITH IT! I don't.

Wrongdoers don't learn a thing if people put up with them, so the most loving thing you can do for them is not to put up with them."

~It's a message I needed to read today on so many different levels. Thanks for posting it. :)

Michelle

Subject: RE: BS: On Not Hating One's Enemies
From: freda underhill
Date: 17 Jan 05 - 06:08 AM

.. hating one's enemies can lead to peculiar pastimes..

Rattling her chains - in jail
January 17, 2005 sydney morning herald

A woman who harboured a grudge against her husband's employer, has been sentenced to four months' imprisonment for terrorising the boss by making ghostly sounds at his castle-like estate.

The 42-year-old woman, whose name was not released, was convicted on nuisance charges after she allegedly spent weeks masquerading as a ghost and making mysterious noises, Austrian television reported.

Police captured the woman on videotape after the jittery owner, who employed the suspect's husband, begged authorities in the alpine province of South Tyrol to solve the mystery.

The haunted owner had complained of hearing footsteps in the hallways and slamming doors late at night at the estate near Austria's southern border with Italy.

It was unclear why the woman had become angry.

AP