And now we know for sure that the way you post on FFL is an exception to your theories on compassion.
No surprise there. I just wanted you to demonstrate that for us, and you've done so very effectively. (P.S.: What's the difference, in your mind, between "silly" and "dumb"? My dictionary defines "dumb" as "lacking intelligence" and "silly" as "weak in intellect." I'm just not sure which to call the inclusion of children in your "hate the wrongdoing, have compassion for the wrongdoer" formula, since children aren't generally considered to have a clear idea of right and wrong. One would *think*, with regard to that formula, that "at some point in our lives" would mean at some point after we've developed a sense of right and wrong.) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long <sharelong60@...> wrote: > > No Judy, I wouldn't expect you to be at all interested in any post that was > about universal compassion. Your compassion seems limited to one person in > particular and maybe 2 or 3 others. And I wouldn't say it was silly of you to > think I was talking about adults. I'd say it was dumb, since my sentence > read: My guess is we've all done wrong and or stupid stuff at some point in > our lives. At some point in our lives would include childhood and teen years, > now wouldn't it? > > > > ________________________________ > From: authfriend <authfriend@...> > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Sunday, June 30, 2013 5:46 PM > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: compassion > > > > Â > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long <sharelong60@> wrote: > > > > Jeez, what a saint you've been Judy. You mean to tell me > > that you and your sister never got into any hair pulling > > fights?! > > Oh, I thought you were talking about adults. Silly me. > > > Anyway, I simply meant that if A is being hurt by B, then > > it's A's responsibility to remove himself or herself from > > B's presence. > > So that's what you meant by "Don't allow [the wrongdoer] > to continue wrong doing"? I see. > > > Otherwise it's society's responsibility to > > put wrong doers in circumstances where they can't harm > > those weaker than them. > > So you *aren't* talking about FFL, just as I thought. > This was all an idea you had, completely unrelated to > anything going on here, that you thought we would find > of interest. > > Right. > > > ________________________________ > > From: authfriend <authfriend@> > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > > Sent: Sunday, June 30, 2013 2:40 PM > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: compassion > > > > > > > > ÃÂ > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long <sharelong60@> wrote: > > > > > > My guess is we've all done wrong and or stupid stuff at some point > > > in our lives including lying and physically hurting others even > > > those we love. So I vote for pragmatic and universal compassion. > > > Just to be clear, by pragmatic compassion I don't mean the allowing > > > of abuse. I mean something along the lines of hate the wrong doing, > > > have compassion for the wrong doer but don't allow them to continue > > > wrong doing. > > > > I guess you're not talking about FFL, then, huh? Unless > > you have some magical formula that prevents wrongdoers > > from continuing their wrongdoing. > > > > As to "physically hurting others," I suggest you speak for > > yourself. My own guess is that most of us have managed to > > avoid physical violence, to those we love as well as to > > those we don't. > > > > > For yourself, steer clear of abusive behavior and do what's > > > necessary to protect those who aren't able to protect themselves. > > >
