Do you do unto people before they do unto you, or after, and if you do it before they do anything to you do you try to do good to them and not bad, and if you do it after, then why?
2007-05-10
01:53:51
·
15 answers
·
asked by
Friend
6
in
Arts & Humanities
➔ Philosophy
"some people think its ok to hit a child, aka spank,,, if the child does something they have been told not to do,,,,, yet they wouldnt find it acceptable for the policeman to hit them, they expect a non-physical punishment, a ticket, "
get into reality do you realize why police have guns and tazers and cars that go fast? do you undestand that jails take precious time so do courts away from more positive things?
my 30 year old son loves and respects me and I guess I actually should have spanked him a little more, but I was scared to do that, the world has spanked him a little over time, he matured though and grew out of the childish stuff,
my 13 year old is taller then me, heavier, and stronger already and he would not lift a hand to me or his teachers at school they call him a pleasure to have in their classroom, I don't let him get in my face and disrespect me or overtake me that is not right, our world is wrong when we molly coddle children, they grow up to be disabled.
2007-05-10
03:10:17 ·
update #1
There is a difference in beating a child and correcting a child, and teaching them self discipline! It is in discretion and love, certainly what one does out of love is going to be different then what one does out of oh this is my job.
I have known of foster parents that spanked kids after the kid was taken because it was spanked at home.
It is knowing that some things are just plain wrong, and they are, I felt helpless knowing I was only a few doors down from a baby that was actually beaten to death, I seen the pictures of him. That was really wrong and yet the workers were too busy to be able to do anything about that, and oh yeah the funds weren't there so they could do a good job. That is bull
Letting a child get away with just anything they want to do is just plain wrong, it is a trap. The world teaches us what our parents forget to teach us.
I have seen kids that were never spanked committ suicide and use drugs, there is a balance in life, there has to be!
2007-05-10
03:25:00 ·
update #2
When you take parental rights away or have them so scared that they are crippled in raising their kids then you might as well not have no parents, but then who is going to have all the babies that one fights to keep from being aborted or all the kids that the foster parents don't have to be perfect parents too? Our system is a crime in and of itself!
2007-05-10
03:39:15 ·
update #3
It's a bully it is one of the biggest baddest bullies that anyone could ever find and all with great immunity for how mess our world up and destroy our peoples lives. It is a bully!
2007-05-10
03:48:48 ·
update #4
for how they mess our world up
2007-05-10
03:50:06 ·
update #5
Interesting question. I've always taken a "passive" approach to this rule... but your question has me thinking maybe that's the lazy approach?
I suppose the ideal is to do good to people before they do anything to you (remember the movie "Pay It Forward"?).
My application has always been to basically "do whatever I want, as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else", only because it's easy.
2007-05-10 01:58:38
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
The dilemma of this problem is who makes the first move.
I think if an individual approaches another individual then
the approaching individual should be the one who
presents the initiating karma of the interaction.
If multiple individuals simultaneously approach each
other then the initiating karma should come from
each and every one of the individuals. If a spokesman
has been designated then the spokesman speaks
for the entire group corresponding to the spokesman.
A somewhat separate topic arises from the isolation
of self and other without regard for other others.
It is possible to observe vicariously the behaviors
of an individual and to deem whether the behaviors
are good or bad. However, this is risky business because
vicarious observation isn't a good indicator of contingency.
An observer might see an individual screaming at another
individual, but to assume whether the screaming individual
is good or bad is to know what transpired prior to the
screaming in determining rationality.
2007-05-10 09:37:56
·
answer #2
·
answered by active open programming 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
You treat people like you want to be treated all the time, before , after and right now. Why, because you attract like actions to yourself. What you give out in thoughts and action comes back to you many times over. Think about it.
2007-05-10 09:29:20
·
answer #3
·
answered by flower wanda 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
I believe this "golden rule" is an attempt to generate empathy for others that is to say you would not want someone to hit you therefore you should not hit others but if you really think about it probably wishes you to think not how you would like to be treated but how you think others would like you to treat them, 'cause ya know some folks like to get hit. I think therefore the true philosophy behind the rule is dependant on various social and cultural accepted norms, or tailored by common sense if you will. interesting question though.
2007-05-10 09:07:49
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
To set your own values on some one, it's important to express your "goodness" upon them first. Something like giving a present for giving sake rather than looking for one in return. If the "goodness" doesn't come back as you would have liked then so be it and avoid that person in future if you didn't like it. Don't look for revenge because then you just tag yourself as bad as them.
2007-05-10 09:02:08
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
The real meaning is to avoid 'double standards'........ I haven't as yet come across anyone, including of course myself, who is capable of sticking to this golden rule all the time..... we violate this more often when it concerns our own parents or children or beloved people. I hope, you get what I mean.
2007-05-10 09:21:14
·
answer #6
·
answered by small 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
i think it means treat others in a way you would wish to be treated,,,,,, for instance
some people think its ok to hit a child, aka spank,,, if the child does something they have been told not to do,,,,, yet they wouldnt find it acceptable for the policeman to hit them, if they are pulled over for speeding,,,,,,, they expect a non-physical punishment, such as a ticket, even though they have been told not to speed, and have reminders such as signs up,,,,,,
in this case, these people are treating others, the child, in a way they would not find acceptable for themselves
it means treating others with respect,,,, until you have a reason to not respect them,,,,,
2007-05-10 09:16:18
·
answer #7
·
answered by dlin333 7
·
1⤊
2⤋
The purpose of this is to act preampting the reaction . If you know the reaction to your action , your action would be suitably modified to be positively received .Now ,on to post good or bad , let me tell you reciprocity is the name of game . God always wanted us to be compassionate but not oppressed.
2007-05-10 09:08:00
·
answer #8
·
answered by Prince Prem 4
·
2⤊
0⤋
The Golden Rule is very simple.
Treat people the way YOU wish to be treated.
Don't try to extrapolate any "revenge" crap into the Golden Rule.
2007-05-10 09:05:20
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
It basically means to treat others the way you would like to be treated. It doesn't matter who goes first.
2007-05-10 08:56:58
·
answer #10
·
answered by pamomof4 5
·
4⤊
0⤋