For example an army of pacifists would not be able to stop a single Islamic terrorist.
2007-04-24 04:43:58 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
A true pacifists would just stand there and watch people suffer. That to be is the definition of true evil since he is unwilling to do anything. Since the pacifists knows better but does NOTHING>
2007-04-24 04:51:22 · update #1
huffyb..... that is absolute not the point I am trying to make. My point is that standing in the side lines is equivalent to loosing.
2007-04-24 04:56:20 · update #2
Yes Ross I agree. Gandhi would be unable to stop a murderer like Hitler. The British were not ruthless like the Nazis.
2007-04-24 04:59:33 · update #3
†Hayden†…um i dont know.
2007-04-24 05:16:59 · update #4
People have a moral obligation to defend themselves, and defend those who cannot defend themselves. So if pacifists want to not take every reasonable measure to stop injustice, then they are perpetuating it, and that is evil.
2007-04-24 04:53:29 · answer #1 · answered by kess 1 · 1⤊ 1⤋
how is that "evil"?
I assume there might be a better adjective.
p.s. - I do not know many people who consider themselves pacifists who would allow themselves to be purposely hurt by another. They also would not ignore a person drowning.
So, being a pacifist to me means that aggression is not the first and only option.
Seems to me that the opposite of pacifism is being proven distructive right now.
Cheers!
2007-04-24 04:49:05 · answer #2 · answered by countbehavior 5 · 3⤊ 1⤋
No, I wouldn't agree completely. And by the way, in what alternate universe would pacifists create an ARMY? Pacifist army... isn't that an oxymoron, like "jumbo shrimp"?
2007-04-24 04:49:03 · answer #3 · answered by ZER0 C00L ••AM••VT•• 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
I can respect someone who is willing to die themselves rather that raise a hand to harm another human being. To me, that is the ideal expression of will over reflex.
So no.
Ghandi liberated India without so much as touching a Brit. He united the country while he was alive, and even his death at the hands of a fanatic was not in vain.
Can you say the same?
2007-04-24 04:50:07 · answer #4 · answered by Scott M 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
I can see it now, an Army of Pacifists, what might that look like?
Oh, I know, the UN!
2007-04-24 04:50:10 · answer #5 · answered by Wolfgang92 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
No pacifism is not evil. Reacting to fear may in fact be as it is lack of Faith that if we do the right thing and leave it to God, that He will intervene and cause change.
My God admonishes me to remember Our war is not with flesh and blood but powers and principalities perhaps the cult of fear and hate is what He is referring to as well as the terrorist mentality.
2007-04-24 04:57:13 · answer #6 · answered by bess 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
how do you get your avatar to display two different pics at once? on the main page it's always the anime and on your questions it's the astronaut
2007-04-24 05:03:38 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
How is altruism and understanding why non-virtuous behavior arises, "evil"? Nothing is inherently anything, and so I disagree with you.
_()_
2007-04-24 04:50:15 · answer #8 · answered by vinslave 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
So---your suggesting we spend all our lives in a state of hate & revenge???---doesn't sound too healthy to me!
2007-04-24 04:49:40 · answer #9 · answered by huffyb 6 · 3⤊ 1⤋