(November 28, 2016 at 11:20 pm)johan Wrote: Well then maybe I'm splitting hairs but what you suggested earlier was being angry at the person and what you're suggesting now is being angry at the act. One is not nearly the same as the other. And BTW, I'm not suggesting loving your enemies. I'm just suggesting taking the time to understand them before writing them off. Again, one is not the same as the other.
I mean case in point, look at the title of this thread. If we had taken the time to understand what was actually happening before reacting, this thread would not have the words active shooter in the title.
My bold.
To clarify then, I feel they are both one and the same. I did not mean to come off as I was differentiating between the 2. I don't see how it makes sense to be angry about something someone did without being angry at the person for doing it. Unless the person was somehow completely unconscious when they did it and had 0 control, but I take it going into this type of trance and killing people without knowing you're dong it is probably extremely rare and does not apply to this case.
I agree we should try to understand people and to still see them as human beings and treat them as human beings at all costs (this is what I consider loving your enemies), but this does not mean we can't be angry at them for a horrible thing they did, imho. I think the anger is justified.
"Of course, everyone will claim they respect someone who tries to speak the truth, but in reality, this is a rare quality. Most respect those who speak truths they agree with, and their respect for the speaking only extends as far as their realm of personal agreement. It is less common, almost to the point of becoming a saintly virtue, that someone truly respects and loves the truth seeker, even when their conclusions differ wildly."
-walsh
-walsh



