So you are saying that you have noticed that the divorce rates are
less now than say 20 years ago?

As to violence I am most assuredly a man, and as has already been
discussed I abhour violence, yet it is a handy tool to use, and I have
not been slow in using it when I must.  Like any tool though, I am of
the opinion that the right tool for the right job makes life soooo
much easyer.

On 23 July, 18:43, "Lorraine Belge" <[email protected]> wrote:
> I disagree, having been a marriage counselor for multiple years, I have seen 
> people attempt (successfully) to pull together and be forced, yes forced 
> because they don't have the numerous choices made possible by money, to see 
> other alternatives.  As a result you have the old fashioned marriage where 
> people realize that they need to make the best of what they think is a bad 
> situation and all of a sudden it gets better.  Violence is the result of 
> inherent tendencies to solve difficulties by physical means, frequently a 
> man's first choice, altho sometimes a women will do it also, But men are 
> physical in their formulations of situations and respond in like kind.  they 
> are by nature the hunter and women the gatherer.  But civilization has 
> brought with it numerous choices, including counselors, pastors, books, self 
> help, internet, etc.  even friends and blogs, etc.  hope this does not sound 
> negative, only my point of view from experience.   Many good wishes and 
> kindness go your way.  Namaste
>
>
>
>   ----- Original Message -----
>   From: deripsni<mailto:[email protected]>
>   To: "Minds Eye"<mailto:[email protected]>
>   Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2009 9:42 AM
>   Subject: [Mind's Eye] Re: killers
>
>   I guess staying in bad marriages is even more likely to cause violence
>   than divorces. Occurances of violence dominate the news unfortunately.
>   Its a bad bad world out there it seems. I live in a place where there
>   is not much violence, no gang problems, no racial problems to speak
>   of. I guess I am just blessed not to live in an area of high crime but
>   I cringe when I watch CNN.
>
>   On Jul 23, 8:49 am, Don Johnson <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> 
> wrote:
>   > I heard divorces were happening less often. People are staying in bad
>   > relationships so they won't be alone during the recession.
>
>   > dj
>
>   > On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 7:03 AM, 
> deripsni<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>
>   > > Yes, I presume one has to be alive to commit an act of violence ;-]
>   > > But there must be more instigating factors these days with kids
>   > > growing up watching carnage on TV, masses of people stuck in traffic
>   > > jams, workers losing their jobs, higher divorce rates, etc. Denser
>   > > poplulation areas have to increase the likelihood of violence.
>
>   > > By the way, your cat did not commit an act of violence, it was only
>   > > reacting to an instinctive urge.
>
>   > > On Jul 23, 7:36 am, 
> "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" 
> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
>   > > wrote:
>   > >> I'm pretty sure that it is simply life that 'breeds' violence. I mean
>   > >> I have never seem anything dead attack anything else. Fictional
>   > >> zombies not-withstanding.
>
>   > >> On a personal note, my 13 year old had his first taste of death the
>   > >> other day. That'st right a cat(the female one) got a hold of one of
>   > >> his hamsters. Hamster is no more, and the cat has subsequently been
>   > >> renamed 'murderer' by my young boy child.
>
>   > >> On 20 July, 13:10, deripsni 
> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>
>   > >> > Maybe knowledge breeds violence? In the unlikely case that a man has
>   > >> > not been introduced to religion or politics, would he still have the
>   > >> > same propensity to kill as the modern man? Maybe, but the reasons
>   > >> > would be fewer, say for perceived territorial infringement, or
>   > >> > protection of family and food.
>
>   > >> > I am sure that early man, before being saturated with media, 
> politics,
>   > >> > religious dogma, and over-population, was a much more peaceful 
> animal.
>   > >> > A person's conscience seems to dictate activity ranges, and today's
>   > >> > man has had his conscience mezmerized by over-information, over-
>   > >> > breeding, over-indulgence, etc. Unfortuately I cannot forsee a
>   > >> > reversal in this trend short of some global catastrophe that wipes 
> out
>   > >> > a large number of the human animals that inhabit this rock.
>
>   > >> > Many can speculate as to what breeds violence but, in my opinion, a
>   > >> > healthy conscience precludes any unsolicited violent activity. I 
> think
>   > >> > a good question to ask is 'what causes the deterioration of a healthy
>   > >> > conscience?'. Unfortunately, I think there are too many answers to
>   > >> > that question.
>
>   > >> > On Jul 18, 6:42 pm, Alan Wostenberg 
> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>
>   > >> > > A common belief today is that religion breeds violence. Isn't this
>   > >> > > like saying politics is violent? I read the below today, and it 
> gave
>   > >> > > me food for thought, particularly that last sentence:
>
>   > >> > > "Some kill because their faiths specifically command them to do so;
>   > >> > > some kill though their faiths explicitly forbid them to do so; and
>   > >> > > some kill because they have no faith and hence believe all things 
> are
>   > >> > > permitted to them. Polytheists, monotheists, and atheists kill. Men
>   > >> > > kill for their gods, or for their God, or because there is no God 
> and
>   > >> > > human destiny must be shaped by gigantic exertions of human will. 
> They
>   > >> > > kill out of pursuit of universal truths, and out of fidelity to 
> tribal
>   > >> > > allegiances; for faith, blood and soil, empire, national greatness,
>   > >> > > "socialist utopia", capitalism, and "democratization". Men always 
> seek
>   > >> > > gods in who's name they may perform great deeds or commit 
> unspeakable
>   > >> > > atrocity, even if those gods are not gods but "tribal honor", or
>   > >> > > "genetic imperatives" or "social ideals" or "human destiny" or
>   > >> > > "liberal democracy". Then again men also kill on account of money,
>   > >> > > land, love, pride, hatred, envy or ambition. ... The truth is that
>   > >> > > religion and irreligion are cultural variables, but killing is a 
> human
>   > >> > > constant"(*)
>
>   > >> > > (*) David Bently Hart, _atheist delusion_ pg 
> 12http://www.librarything.com/work/book/47946437-Hidequotedtext -
>
>   > >> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
>   > >> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
>   > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
""Minds Eye"" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to