by working together in pink, we can get there

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJ76pS23Ky8&feature=related

On Sep 9, 7:06 am, gabbydott <[email protected]> wrote:
> I wore pink yesterday, Molly. It was a birthday present from my
> sister. And I definitely wouldn't have worn it, had it been a rainy
> day. So much for "the change comes from inside out". Unless you are
> suggesting that my wearing a pink T-shirt brought out the sun, of
> course.
>
> Me, like Lee, don't do shadow work with my family but live with them.
> This is not all pleasing to the golden god's view, but we don't
> pretend to be other(s) than we are. It is good for children to be able
> to try out things and get an honest answer rather than the safe answer
> that everything is pink and if it isn't just yet then it will surely
> be one day.
>
> On 9 Sep., 12:37, Molly Brogan <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > On Sep 9, 5:37 am, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
> > wrote
> >  "some people may see things like that Molly, lets take that for
> >  granted, but to extend this to all humans, no I belive that is
> > wrong."
>
> > I don't believe I did extend that to all humans, Lee (hence, the "or
> > not")
>
> >  "I'm with the kid, we DO hurt those we love the most,"
> > Our most intimate relationships allow our best shadow work - we
> > project our shadows onto those closest to us.  If we don't understand
> > this, pain may be involved.  This is true.  Some of us, may become so
> > addicted to anger and pain, we weave it into our relationships so that
> > we can get a regular dose of it.  This requires others in our
> > relationship to also require regular doses of it, and this often
> > develops in family dynamics.  However, people with this kind of
> > dynamic in the family likely also extends that relationship dynamic
> > into the larger community as well, and their ability to function in
> > the larger society is vastly limited.
>
> > "we CAN treat family worse than we treat strangers."  we can if our
> > family unit has fallen into deep dysfunction, however if this is the
> > case, relationships outside the family will also be dysfunctional.
> > Someone who beats her husband and children, may not physically beat
> > people outside the family, but will have extremely limited
> > relationships because of a range of other types of abusive behavior
> > that are not hard to spot.  I did not dispute any of this.  However,
> > if we can truly feel our connection to everyone, we are not in a frame
> > of mind to be abusive.
>
> > "We do not all think alike"
>
> > I don't remember stating or implying this.  I to believe in human
> > potential, however.  I surely do.
>
> > "and this relalisation of 'family' I think will make not a lot of
> > differance to the majority."
>
> > Might be more than you think.  I think, it is more and more all the
> > time.
>
> > "There are many ills in the world and I figure that the fix is really
> > not going to be this simple."
>
> > You are right, not simple, because it is up to each of us,
> > individually, the change comes from inside out.
>
> > > On 7 Sep, 16:45, Molly Brogan <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > The difference that it makes, kid, is that if we truly understand that
> > > > we are all related in a way that means what happens to you happens to
> > > > me, we see the world differently, we act differently toward each
> > > > other, we live differently.  Most of us learn this first in our
> > > > families, but if we have the misfortune of being born into a family
> > > > that does not provide a loving foundation or give us this lesson, it
> > > > is up to us to learn it from the greater community (or not.)
>
> > > > On Sep 7, 10:03 am, "pol.science kid" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > my point is.. how does it matter whether one is a relative or not... 
> > > > > where
> > > > > does this obligation of being good to our relatives come from.. it 
> > > > > was the
> > > > > accident of birth that made them our relatives... why should that 
> > > > > make them
> > > > > special... wat if they were not our relatives.. would we behave 
> > > > > differently
> > > > > towards them?
>
> > > > > On 9/7/09, Molly Brogan <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > that might be how it feels kid, but someone capable of being rude 
> > > > > > and
> > > > > > indifferent to family is also prone to this behavior in public,
> > > > > > although they might be more selective and use the behavior to 
> > > > > > promote
> > > > > > personal agenda...
>
> > > > > > On Sep 7, 9:35 am, "pol.science kid" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > > > i dont thinkit would.... we can be rude and indifferent to our
> > > > > > > relatives like we can be to neone else.
>
> > > > > > > On Sep 6, 2:50 pm, retiredjim34 <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > >      Have you ever thought about those to whom you are related? 
> > > > > > > > Of
> > > > > > > > course you have, but maybe not in this way.
> > > > > > > >      We all have four grandparents, eight great grandparents, 
> > > > > > > > etc.
> > > > > > > > This geometric progression continues as we go back from 
> > > > > > > > generation to
> > > > > > > > generation until, in about 1400 AD it equals the entire 
> > > > > > > > population of
> > > > > > > > the human species at that time. In other words, each of us is 
> > > > > > > > related
> > > > > > > > to everyone else if we look back far enough.
> > > > > > > >      Similarly, if we go forward, from children to 
> > > > > > > > grandchildren etc.,
> > > > > > > > making some reasonable assumptions and using the current 
> > > > > > > > projections
> > > > > > > > for the future human population, our direct progeny will equal
> > > > > > > > everyone living in about 2900 AD. If we include in this 
> > > > > > > > calculation
> > > > > > > > brothers, sisters, aunts, uncles and cousins, we will be 
> > > > > > > > related to
> > > > > > > > everyone living in about 2700 AD.
> > > > > > > >      So at present we seem least related to friends, neighbors, 
> > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > those in our community and country. But in fact we are all 
> > > > > > > > related. It
> > > > > > > > is just that it seems now that we’re not. Would it change 
> > > > > > > > anything if
> > > > > > > > we but acknowledged our relationship to everyone, ancestors and
> > > > > > > > descendants?  Jim- 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