Is it necessary to celebrate everything we agree with and condemn those things we don't ? I read where the Congress has asked the President to condemn Nazi's and white supremacists. Does that really require a document ? I mean it kinda goes without saying doesn't it ? And even if I sign a document, make a formal declaration, what does that accomplish. I guess it is a reward of sorts, I got my way and made him say it. It all sounds rather childish to me. Now, Kim Jong Un, that dictator needs to be told in no uncertain terms what will be the result if he continues in his actions. A formal declaration is in order for that, a warning. We don't need to send him a formal letter saying I don't like you or " unfriending " him on Facebook ! He already knows that.
I believe in God. My belief in God does not require you to believe in him. My faith is not dependent upon your acceptance. I have noticed if I don't go around hitting people over the head with my Bible, they generally leave me alone. Fact is, many don't know a thing about what I believe.
Yes I know the Bible tells me to go forth and spread the word. It has been my experience whispers are heard before shouts. Shouting tends to make people defensive. The first act of defense is to put up a wall. Offerings are accepted but demands are met, usually with force.
I will offer to share my belief with those in need. I offer that as a gift. You can either accept or reject that gift. I expect nothing in return.
It is unreasonable to expect the majority to accept the opinion of the minority. I agree it is equally unreasonable for the majority to condemn the minority for beliefs or practices that do no harm. Each and every one of us have some aspect of our personality that others don't like. Each and every one of us have secrets that we keep from others. Personal likes and dislikes. It isn't wise to impose those likes or dislikes upon others. What is the benefit in that ? The benefit is to you, and you alone. You receive satisfaction, affirmation for your belief. My feeling is if you require that in order to believe, you are not convinced. Belief can be proven or disproven. Faith requires no proof !
But, you say, nothing changes without protest. It takes revolution to create new realities. Okay I can see that logic, history is full of examples. What was created however was a new society, a new form of government or a return to the old.
"Democracy will soon degenerate into an anarchy; such an anarchy that every man will do what is right in his own eyes and no man's life or property or reputation or liberty will be secure, and every one of these will soon mould itself into a system of subordination of all the moral virtues and intellectual abilities, all the powers of wealth, beauty, wit, and science, to the wanton pleasures, the capricious will, and the execrable cruelty of one or a very few."
-- John Adams, An Essay on Man's Lust for Power (1763)
John Adams was aware of all this and certainly expressed it so much better than I ever could. I believe he is correct in his assessment. I am troubled that I may indeed be witness to this degradation of Democracy, every man doing what is right " in his own eyes. " Moral virtues are on the decline and wanton pleasure is definitely on the increase. If we continue in this revolution just what will be created ? If you agree with Adams, it must be anarchy.
I believe in God. My belief in God does not require you to believe in him. My faith is not dependent upon your acceptance. I have noticed if I don't go around hitting people over the head with my Bible, they generally leave me alone. Fact is, many don't know a thing about what I believe.
Yes I know the Bible tells me to go forth and spread the word. It has been my experience whispers are heard before shouts. Shouting tends to make people defensive. The first act of defense is to put up a wall. Offerings are accepted but demands are met, usually with force.
I will offer to share my belief with those in need. I offer that as a gift. You can either accept or reject that gift. I expect nothing in return.
It is unreasonable to expect the majority to accept the opinion of the minority. I agree it is equally unreasonable for the majority to condemn the minority for beliefs or practices that do no harm. Each and every one of us have some aspect of our personality that others don't like. Each and every one of us have secrets that we keep from others. Personal likes and dislikes. It isn't wise to impose those likes or dislikes upon others. What is the benefit in that ? The benefit is to you, and you alone. You receive satisfaction, affirmation for your belief. My feeling is if you require that in order to believe, you are not convinced. Belief can be proven or disproven. Faith requires no proof !
But, you say, nothing changes without protest. It takes revolution to create new realities. Okay I can see that logic, history is full of examples. What was created however was a new society, a new form of government or a return to the old.
"Democracy will soon degenerate into an anarchy; such an anarchy that every man will do what is right in his own eyes and no man's life or property or reputation or liberty will be secure, and every one of these will soon mould itself into a system of subordination of all the moral virtues and intellectual abilities, all the powers of wealth, beauty, wit, and science, to the wanton pleasures, the capricious will, and the execrable cruelty of one or a very few."
-- John Adams, An Essay on Man's Lust for Power (1763)
John Adams was aware of all this and certainly expressed it so much better than I ever could. I believe he is correct in his assessment. I am troubled that I may indeed be witness to this degradation of Democracy, every man doing what is right " in his own eyes. " Moral virtues are on the decline and wanton pleasure is definitely on the increase. If we continue in this revolution just what will be created ? If you agree with Adams, it must be anarchy.
No comments:
Post a Comment