Protestantism

» pink101 - everybody's right?

In response to everybody's right? posted by redback:

.
Do you think justice means everybody should get what they deserve?
.
Do you think it means everyone should get an equal shot at life?
.
Do you have an opinion on justice?

-- posted by pink101

» Brian Tubbs - to redback

In response to everybody's right? posted by redback:

No offense, but you've solved nothing here. You've just added another word to debate: "minor." Who decides what injustices are "minor"?

I'm sorry. As difficult as it may be to understand "justice" and as unlikely it is we're going to get universal agreement on it, you can't have peace without it.

» Brian Tubbs - Question of Justice

In response to Question of Justice posted by pink101:

It is one of the most difficult quandaries in the history of civilization, and we aren't going to come up with a fully agreed-upon definition here in these threads. But, that doesn't mean we can just toss the term aside and/or dismiss the need for it.

Think about it. You love to take shots at the South, so let me step into your South-bashing mindset and ask you this. Should Abraham Lincoln have let the South secede and maintain their institution of slavery? Had he done so, there would have been no Civil War. No 620,000 soldiers dead. No tens of thousands maimed and disfigured. And on and on.

Should Lincoln have let the Deep South go?

What say you, Mr. Yankee?????

» pink101 - Question of Justice

In response to Question of Justice posted by BrianTubbs:
.
We have come a long way since Plato. Justice is leveling the playing field so that everyone has an equal chance.
.
Should Lincoln have let the Deep South go?
.
Being concerned with the right,. wrong, good, or bad of the past isn't going to, in and of itself, get us to anyplace good. It is what got us to where we find ourselves now. We need to understand it in the light of what we want for ourselves int he future. Remember, the people die where there is no vision.
.
What we must do is to come up with a vision of what we would like for the future.
.
Once we have that firmly in mind, we can develop a strategy for attaining it.
.
The strategy of trying to pull the future back to us won't work--it's a loser. That's like the man in the row boat who has lost his oars. Instead he uses his anchor by throwing it toward the shore and pulling the rope up and throwing the anchor toward the shore again and again until he is able to step out on dry land. It's like prayer, isn't it? Is the man pulling the shore to his boat or is he pulling his boat toward the shore? Do we bring God down by prayer or do we bring ourselves up closer to him? Do we pull our dream of the future back to us or do we make changes in our actions so we can achieve the goal of our dream?
.
The thing to do is for us to move into the future moment by moment and to reach back and pull ourself into it. With direction--toward our goals and objectives. And, we must always keep our sights on our goals and objectives. That way we can make sure we are pulling ourselves in the right direction. And, we can measure our success as we progress toward our goals--whatever they are.
.
That's the way to get out of the mess we have allowed ourselves to be put in.
.
Ideology is never a good way of looking at reality.
.
You asked. That's what an old Yankee has to say.
.
What do you have to offer?
.

-- posted by pink101

» Migisi - Question of Justice

In response to Question of Justice posted by pink101:

.
Very good post, Pink. Especially:
.
What we must do is to come up with a vision of what we would like for the future.
.
Once we have that firmly in mind, we can develop a strategy for attaining it.

-- posted by Migisi

» redback - to redback

In response to to redback posted by BrianTubbs:

As you usually don't respond to my posts, here's my opening comments for context:

"I am sure there are elements of being right in what all are saying and doing, including political leaders...if we search deep enough. But who was it who said: "You can be right or you can be happy."

Brian's reference to no peace without justice also suggests to me that some who believe they are right, may not like the justice they need. And that a happy peace is too big an ask."

"No offense, but you've solved nothing here."

You both seem to agree about the quandary and difficulty with definition - I agree - yet you add a "minor" jibe. I really don't want you guys isolating one word within my post out of context, but if you insist, nothing tells me I have to play.

In our striving for peace, we go to our enemy. We offer...justice. They accept. Brian...fill in the blanks as your posts may be too hard for me to understand.

-- posted by redback

» redback - Jeff's test

In response to everybody's right? posted by pink101:

I plan to fail this test until Brian and Pink provide actual solutions.

"Do you think justice means everybody should get what they deserve?"

Deserve means what??? Justice is only something to hand out to those who must receive consistent, equal punishment...or those who need 'reward'??? Justice is a single hand-out??? But global justice is not necessarily something the USA believes is justice...is likely compromise-ridden...and is likely unachievable. And likely to be called something else.

Everybody won't receive 'justice' for a myriad of reasons. What it means and what everybody gets are two different ideas.

"Do you think it means everyone should get an equal shot at life?"

I can't comment on God's relative 'justice' but in an ideal world where we can eg eat all the fairy floss we want or be able to refuse it, everyone should get not just a shot, but if it's going to be different or "equal", at least a full life. Life SHOULD be like a bowl of cherries is FAR too theoretical a philosophy for me to wallow in. Nor do I believe it examples a delivery of something solely contained within 'justice'.

"Do you have an opinion on justice?"

Yes. Have you read my related posts incl above? Did you wonder why I actually agreed with you here on the difficulties or did you think I was being disingenuous, lazy or superficial? Do you remember why I endorse a fair dinkum approach and still disbelieve me? Your 3 questions.

-- posted by redback

» pink101 - Jeff's test

In response to Jeff's test posted by redback:
.
My take on these discussion threads is that they are open group discussions. We're all sitting around in a circle and, unless, a post directly addresses another person such as, "Well, Pink, what do you think about such and such?", then questions are open to every one. And, anyone can chime in with their responses.
.
Thanks for your comeback, redback. My thoughts were that we don't have a unified understanding of what it means when we use the word, justice. My idea of justice is not payback; but, someone else probably believes that is exactly the meaning of the word, i.e., tit for tat.
.
So, I am seen as a social liberal because I believe people born into the sub-culture of impoverished ignorance deserve to be lifted up by the those who are born into privilege. THAT is society's responsibility. And, harsh conservatism does not buy into that. I think that is one of the main problems that has America by the throat and in a death grip at this time--so to speak.
.
This is the area where progressives have been thrown off balance by unbridled and galloping conservative interests that have over taken American politics at this time. We must turn around or we're going to end up where we were when we rebelled against that rotten bas**rd of a king that ruled over our fore fathers in 1776. A person has to be intellectually vacuous and or amoral not to understand that. Such people must hold their greedy self righteous interests above the greater good--personified vulgarism..
.
It is a worthy passion to support the lifting up of the underclasses.

-- posted by pink101

» Brian Tubbs - Hey Redback

In response to to redback posted by redback:

Jeff, I agree with Pink. I can't respond to all the posts. This Suite101 thing isn't a full-time job for me. But, if you direct something at me...I will try to respond.

Now, Migisi, I know I owe you a respone on the Trinity. I haven't forgotten. I'm planning an article on that subject soon.

» Brian Tubbs - Nice dodge

In response to Question of Justice posted by pink101:

Being concerned with the right,. wrong, good, or bad of the past isn't going to, in and of itself, get us to anyplace good.

Nice dodge - and there goes the study of history.