I was called naive for not wanting a violent reaction to terrorism, as I believe violence begets more violence. So tell me, which would be that better path, naivety or violence?
2006-08-15 02:20:07 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Hello Sinyckel.. :)
You are correct..violence does begat violence..
One is not naive to want to Love all and wish No harm to anyone..
It is a gift to be able to look beyond others faults and see the need they have in their lives.. :)
I lift up All in my prayers..I do not see a terroist..but someone who is in need of my Love and prayers.. :)
For Whom the Son hath set Free..Is Free Indeed..Amen!!
In Jesus Most Precious Name..
With Love..your sister..In Christ.. :)
2006-08-15 02:51:45 · answer #1 · answered by EyeLovesJesus 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Aside from the two choices you have put forth, it is most important to be true to and not compromise yourself. If some think that makes you look naive so be it at least your conscience is clear. I have been called many things being I am more of a pacifist as far as war and conflict is concerned; I believe hate only serves to breed more hate, however I know that those decisions, those that put me against the majority, are right for me so I am good with it. The only person one can really change is themselves.
2006-08-15 09:30:05 · answer #2 · answered by genaddt 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Hell is the ultimate violent settlement with men.
The Flood was violence used by God to settle issues with humans. The God ordered genocide in Joshua was violence.God killing the firstborn babies of the Egyptians settled the issue of freeing the Jews.
2006-08-16 17:17:43 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It depends on your morals. If you can't live with someones death on your conscience then being naive is better. If you can't stand the thought of not knowing being violent is better. However if you are naive you are a target. If you are violent it will kill you in the end. Each way it's a personal decision.
2006-08-15 09:30:59 · answer #4 · answered by Roseland 1 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Both can get you killed, with violence at least you have a chance.
Do you feel we should have done nothing after 9/11? As I mentioned in your previous question sometimes violence is necessary when you are dealing with extremists. Sad but true
2006-08-15 09:45:00 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
i don't watch news or read much in the way of newspapers .. its not that i don't want to know whats going on or am turning a blind eye to it ..
but i don't want to live with all this negativity that is going on in this world .. i feel it only feeds it more , the more we give to it
i am happy living in my naivety and wearing my rose spectacles :o)
2006-08-15 09:24:48 · answer #6 · answered by Peace 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
if its not one insane group of ppl trying to take over the world then its something else. Violence is in our nature, but it is not our destiny.
2006-08-15 09:29:03 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Violence by far. At least you wont be stupid!
2006-08-15 09:24:08 · answer #8 · answered by Judas Iscariot 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Well you have to look at it this way....would more pepole die if you killed terrorists, (and their supporters) or if, say, they managed to release smallpox or got their hands on a nuke....?
Think about it....
Josh
2006-08-15 09:27:12 · answer #9 · answered by J 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
you must walk your path.don't let others choose it for you
2006-08-15 09:24:38 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋