Violence
#1
Violence is on people’s minds these days, perhaps more so than usual. I’ve even seen it on this forum. I do not like violence. This does not mean I think it is always unnecessary, but I do not like it. It is a tool of last resort. It should never be used against the innocent. My husband insists it is “more impressive to save a life than take one.” He also thinks it’s easy for people who will never be put in life or death situations to talk a big game. I agree with him.

The catalyst was listening to a friend describe raising children who are prepared to kill, to put it mildly. My response: any ape can kill. What makes us superior as humans is our ability to restrain ourselves. How about raising kids who are virtuous? Or disciplined? Trust me, the capacity for killing will always be there. It’s not the thing that needs to be taught (just read the Old Testament). This isn’t to say my own child won’t learn how to fight or how to use firearms, but for goodness sake, it’s not the first thing I’m going to advertise about him! It’s not the thing I am prioritizing. I want him to pray. On his knees. I want him to give glory to God through music. To love Tolkien with as much enthusiasm as his grandfather and great-uncles do (which is to say, with cult-level enthusiasm). I want Curdie (from the Princess and the Goblin), not Biff (from Back to the Future).

Furthermore, being capable of violence isn’t the same as being tough. Goodness, how many saints turned away from a life of violence to take up a real challenge? To pick a fight with an enemy completely out of man’s weight class to defeat, but for the grace of God? This love of violence, this desire to be “bad**s” is wrong, maybe even upside-down (and it is everywhere in the USA). It is good to want to protect. To be brave. But this isn’t what I keep witnessing. What is more evident is a desire to simply do harm.

I wonder what people’s thoughts here are about violence? About its current use? About its proper role?
[-] The following 1 user Likes Elle19's post:
  • LionHippo
Reply
#2
I agree with you that there is often a presumption to violence here in the US. Our entertainment media is very violent, and while we have a healthy respect for our military, that sometimes translates into a "war solves all" mentality.

However, even despite the recent riots and street violence, the US is an extremely peaceful country. We don't have the unfortunate affects of being in a completely war-torn country or an impoverished quasi-anarchist state to see the daily effects of actual violence. We had 9/11, but to be honest, that attack affected only a very small percent of the population. Whereas Europe still has people with living memory of being caught up in an actual World War, we do not. Thus, for a lot of these reasons, violence is very often fetishized here.

On the other hand, while Christ said "Blessed are the peacemakers," he did not say "Blessed are the war-avoiders." Sometimes, peace must come through war or the just application of violence. There is another extreme of Catholicism that violence must be avoided at all costs; this certainly is not true. It just should not be the default. The need for war or violence should be understood, but the times in which to apply it should be rare.
[-] The following 3 users Like LionHippo's post:
  • austenbosten, Elle19, Mourning Dove
Reply
#3
"It is good to want to protect. To be brave. But this isn’t what I keep witnessing. What is more evident is a desire to simply do harm."

Gobs like E. Michael Jones dont help - in fact they play directly into the enemy's plan. War. The biggest money-maker out there. ST*U Gene (though I do admire your scholarship:)

https://www.bitchute.com/video/YPQqfpOGDugd/


P.S. the comments are always the same with EMJ, some ignorant guy trying to be clever like Dr. Jones. Very disheartening.
Oh, where are the snows of yesteryear!
Reply
#4
I think violence is detestable but what we have seen in the last century is a failure to retard and reverse the progress of evil, corruption, and perversion in our society and now we are going down the path were all that is left is the last resort to violence.

When face with a people who has no qualms or hesitation to murder their unborn, or murder the born (no matter how young) because of their "race" or "religion" it is clear that the only answer to such demonic barbarism is the same horrific violence we see in the Old Testament.  I think it is a point of importance to remind people that the world between the New Testament and the Old are vastly different.  And while the New Testament had immorality and corruption, the wide-spread demonic evils of the Phoenician and Carthaginian empires had long since been destroyed by the Roman and Greeks.  As evil and corrupt Diocletian and Nero were, they had nothing on Carthage.

Children should be raised to be virtuous, but they should also be prepared for a difficult life ahead.  The world is doing everything it can to corrupt the youngest and destroy them.  Pedophilic erotica is now being shown in theaters and movies today are more hardcore than pornography was 50 years ago.  It will only be a matter of time that even more violence is going to come as the demonically-possessed fight to serve their fallen lord and preserve the unnatural and evil order.

While your friend may be a little loose with his choice of words and overly-simplistic, I cannot but share his feelings.  Fifty years have passed since Roe V Wade.  A death toll has amassed that makes Stalin, Hitler, and Mao look like chumps...but what's more horrific is it's still happening right now.  We have an Auschwitz in every city in America and nobody gives a crap.  I struggle to think how Sodom and Gomorrah could be more perverse than our society is now.  So while I think it's good to be peaceful, you have to remember Christ is the same God of the Old Testament and during the New Testament he whipped the money-changers out of the Temple.  Imagine what Christ's reaction would be if he saw that kiddie smut film on Netflix?

Karl Marx said religion is the opium of the masses (he was wrong as he was moronic, drunk, and pathetic).  However, complacency is the opium for the virtuous.
[-] The following 4 users Like austenbosten's post:
  • Blind Horus, HailGilbert, Melkite, Mourning Dove
Reply
#5
(10-04-2020, 11:03 AM)Blind Horus Wrote: "It is good to want to protect. To be brave. But this isn’t what I keep witnessing. What is more evident is a desire to simply do harm."

Gobs like E. Michael Jones dont help - in fact they play directly into the enemy's plan. War. The biggest money-maker out there. ST*U Gene (though I do admire your scholarship:)

https://www.bitchute.com/video/YPQqfpOGDugd/


P.S. the comments are always the same with EMJ, some ignorant guy trying to be clever like Dr. Jones. Very disheartening.

How is EMJ being a gob when he points out those four letter one mustn't say when speaking critically?

I agree EMJ is off-the-mark when he denies a "White" race. While I agree that there are differences between the English and Spanish, or German and Russian...thus effectively no "white" race...it doesn't change the reality that all POC label anyone of some Caucasian origin as being part of this made-up "White" race.

Also he's off on attributing Ayatollah Khomeini and JPII as being the sole defeaters of Communism. Reagan, Gorbachev, and Yeltsin had a lot more to do with the collapse of Communism. Iranian revolution and the Solidarity movement in Poland were mostly isolated incidents.
Reply
#6
In the last year, violence would have been thoroughly justified when Anarchist mobs vandalized and desecrated Churches in Chile, and when the same type of people torched buildings, hit police with bricks, bats, Molotov cocktails, etc or when they ransacked stores and assaulted anyone who tried to stop them in places like Portland, Seattle, Chicago, Minneapolis, Kenosha, etc.  A little violence from the right people would go along way to keep it contained and under control.
Reply
#7
(10-04-2020, 02:49 PM)Eric F Wrote: In the last year, violence would have been thoroughly justified when Anarchist mobs vandalized and desecrated Churches in Chile, and when the same type of people torched buildings, hit police with bricks, bats, Molotov cocktails, etc or when they ransacked stores and assaulted anyone who tried to stop them in places like Portland, Seattle, Chicago, Minneapolis, Kenosha, etc.  A little violence from the right people would go along way to keep it contained and under control.

Well according to the new "encyclical" by Bergolio...no violence is ever justified because we are all brothers.
Reply
#8
(10-04-2020, 02:58 PM)austenbosten Wrote:
(10-04-2020, 02:49 PM)Eric F Wrote: In the last year, violence would have been thoroughly justified when Anarchist mobs vandalized and desecrated Churches in Chile, and when the same type of people torched buildings, hit police with bricks, bats, Molotov cocktails, etc or when they ransacked stores and assaulted anyone who tried to stop them in places like Portland, Seattle, Chicago, Minneapolis, Kenosha, etc.  A little violence from the right people would go along way to keep it contained and under control.

Well according to the new "encyclical" by Bergolio...no violence is ever justified because we are all brothers.

                                                Not even against rigid Catholics and Climate Change deniers ?
[-] The following 1 user Likes Eric F's post:
  • antiquarian
Reply
#9
(10-04-2020, 07:02 AM)LionHippo Wrote: I agree with you that there is often a presumption to violence here in the US.

Maybe among some parts of the population in places like Chicago, where the usual response to being 'disrespected' is shooting, and if children get shot as a result, too bad. Of course, since the killers don't fit the narrative, the media don't care, and the dead children aren't buried in gold coffins.

Yes, there's a culture of firearm ownership, but it's a willingness and preparedness to use violence to defend one's own life and the lives of a wife and children, which is a husband's duty. And while there are men that are abusive, and that's a problem, rather than a presumption to violence, men have been told for decades now that 'violence is bad'. It wasn't that long ago that the response to a boy being bullied was to tell your son to fight back if the bully won't stop, and usually that put an end to it. Now the school's too scared to do anything to stop it, will punish the boy for standing up for himself, and even goes so far as to punish kids who have BB guns in their rooms at home on video.

A sane society would have put a stop to these riots when they started. It's called law enforcement for a reason. But as one of the rules in modern society is how evil violence is, the left forces it to play by its rules, and won't allow the police to stop this. If you know you have a very real risk of being shot and killed, you're probably not going to riot.


(10-04-2020, 07:02 AM)LionHippo Wrote: Our entertainment media is very violent, and while we have a healthy respect for our military, that sometimes translates into a "war solves all" mentality.

I don't watch much TV, so maybe there's more violence than I'm aware of, but I think sex is a far bigger problem, and far worse for society in promoting immorality. Sure, there's a certain fascination with criminals or the mafia, and shows like The Sopranos or Breaking Bad were very popular, but that's nothing new, the latest version of pirates and Wild West outlaws and even as far back as Robin Hood - there's an appeal to standing up to authority and living life as you want - but people don't actually do it. They know it's fictional, and that even the most realistic violence is really fake. (The sex isn't - even if there's no actual intercourse, the nudity and kissing and touching are real acts of fornication and/or adultery by the actors.)

I don't entirely disagree that there's too much of a military mentality sometimes, but I think it's less 'war solves all' than 'war makes some people really, really rich'. All those tanks and planes and bombs cost money, and someone has to manufacture them. I don't think the US needs troops all over the world - the Cold War's over; let Europe pay for its own defence. And policing the world often creates far more problems than it solves.

On the other hand, peace doesn't solve all, either. Obviously countries can't just let any group that disagrees with its government revolt and leave, or you'd never have any order in society, but most people want to live with others of the same ethnicity and language and culture and religion and values, and a 'peace at all costs' attitude may just lead to more unrest and drag things out. The situation in Armenia's a good example.


(10-04-2020, 07:02 AM)LionHippo Wrote: Whereas Europe still has people with living memory of being caught up in an actual World War, we do not. Thus, for a lot of these reasons, violence is very often fetishized here.


That exists, but I see it more as a willingness to, well, be a man. Society's been so feminised that any sort of violence, even parents or teachers disciplining their children, is frowned upon. Boys who want to roughhouse during recess are called hyperactive, and put on drugs. And now we expect police to just talk down knife- and gun-wielding criminals, or send in social workers. Even the military has become all about diversity and safety-first, rather than getting the job done. We can't even bring ourselves to execute people who have murdered innocents, even children, and often in horrible ways. Is it really 'progress', or is it cowardice, refusing to use violence when that's what's needed? The state gets its authority from God, and God gave it the power of the sword. It's no virtue to be pacifist when it allows evil to continue harming innocents, particularly innocents that the state has a duty to protect.
[-] The following 4 users Like Paul's post:
  • antiquarian, austenbosten, HailGilbert, Mourning Dove
Reply
#10
(10-04-2020, 12:32 PM)austenbosten Wrote:
(10-04-2020, 11:03 AM)Blind Horus Wrote: "It is good to want to protect. To be brave. But this isn’t what I keep witnessing. What is more evident is a desire to simply do harm."

Gobs like E. Michael Jones dont help - in fact they play directly into the enemy's plan. War. The biggest money-maker out there. ST*U Gene (though I do admire your scholarship:)

https://www.bitchute.com/video/YPQqfpOGDugd/


P.S. the comments are always the same with EMJ, some ignorant guy trying to be clever like Dr. Jones. Very disheartening.

How is EMJ being a gob when he points out those four letter one mustn't say when speaking critically?

I agree EMJ is off-the-mark when he denies a "White" race.  While I agree that there are differences between the English and Spanish, or German and Russian...thus effectively no "white" race...it doesn't change the reality that all POC label anyone of some Caucasian origin as being part of this made-up "White" race.

Also he's off on attributing Ayatollah Khomeini and JPII as being the sole defeaters of Communism.  Reagan, Gorbachev, and Yeltsin had a lot more to do with the collapse of Communism.  Iranian revolution and the Solidarity movement in Poland were mostly isolated incidents.
austenbosten, he's a rabble-rouser.
His polished rhetoric appeals to two groups: old fools and the young.

Here's the YouTube (starts at about the 4 minute mark) for those who wish...



PS he's been harping on this for years and years and he knows his lines better then Yul Brynner (R.I.P.) doing The King and I for the 4,000th time.
Oh, where are the snows of yesteryear!
[-] The following 1 user Likes Blind Horus's post:
  • Fionnchu
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)