Comments on Welcome to Blogit

Go to Religion in the Modern World - Add a comment - Go to Welcome to Blogit

Pat_B - someone interpreting something other than what was implied is a

given in a public forum.

I tend to look at it in a light of determining if I am clearly expressing what I am trying to say.

posted by gomedome on October 22, 2007 at 6:51 AM | link to this | reply

Re: Pat_B - that sentence doesn't mean anything close to what you infer

Thanks for clearing that up. I knew I was nit-picking, and hoped I'd misread you even as I commented. Keep writing!

posted by Pat_B on October 22, 2007 at 6:40 AM | link to this | reply

Pat_B - that sentence doesn't mean anything close to what you infer

I am not saying, nor do I particularly believe that we are all part of one single human entity. What I was saying is that as individuals we are only capable of so much with our primary responsibility being to moniter our own behaviour and to be realistic about how we can influence the world around us.

The large font is a little trick that the Blogit interface sometimes plays.

posted by gomedome on October 20, 2007 at 11:47 AM | link to this | reply

sorry about the shouting in my prev. comment. it was Blogit's doing.

posted by Pat_B on October 20, 2007 at 7:06 AM | link to this | reply

I cut a line you wrote in this blog and will paste it here...

We are all just one person, we can only accomplish so much in one lifetime. Interesting idea -- we are all one. In some subatomic ways this is a true statement.

However, I don't think I am "all one" with some. For instance, I don't feel part of the fundamentalist Christian shadow army doing battle in Iraq with fundamentalist Muslim warriors. I'm scared their devotion to an idea of what god wants is going to bring a premature end to what I hope to accomplish in my lifetime.

posted by Pat_B on October 20, 2007 at 7:05 AM | link to this | reply

Antonionioni - that would be the educate part of the equation

The ancient cultures still working on the "have many sons and you will prosper" philosophy must come into the 21st century. It doesn't help when one of the largest outside influences of the third world in catholic charities denounces birth control however. Maybe we should bomb the Vatican?

posted by gomedome on October 18, 2007 at 1:12 PM | link to this | reply

We have to reduce the world's population - but not thru bombing!!

And not just in some places, but in all places.

posted by Antonionioni on October 18, 2007 at 12:27 PM | link to this | reply

Sheilah - your comment encapsulates the point I am attempting to get

across in this blog quite nicely.

With any worthy ideal such as world peace, the fact that it may be impossible in absolute terms does not change the fact that any success in partially achieving this goal is success in of itself. But as I feel you are implying in your comment; the road to world peace will never be achieved through words. We have to feed, educate and provide hope to a billion or so human beings first.

posted by gomedome on October 18, 2007 at 11:01 AM | link to this | reply

hahahahhahaha

I don't think I've read you before, but I'm starting to like you already (I just loved your short-to-the-point, witty response to spamming! got me ROFL).

Now, about your post, I agree that it is impossible to turn this world into a peaceful place, but still I think we should "practice" (not preach) the good...it may not change the world but at least it won't make it worse. We shouldn't fool/illude ourselves, but we shouldn't lose hope, either. Reality should be aknowledged (although sometimes ignorance is bliss).

About blogit... it's nice to hear nice words...but sometimes it's better to get a proverbial slap and wake up to reality. Either way, it's always best to do it in a "respectful" way.

I wonder if my comment had anything to do with your post...I sort of got lost after laughing at your reaction to spam! LOL sorry

posted by Sheilah on October 18, 2007 at 10:03 AM | link to this | reply

OTA. - I see where you got that now - I am going to edit that portion of

this blog simply because if it gave you that impression, it doesn't quite make the point.

I am speaking about the difference between talking about things we would like to change and doing something about them. Hence my suggestion that a $2 donation to Unicef has a far greater impact than people living in a wealthy society preaching to other members of that same society about peace and love in a blog read only amongst themselves. And yes, peace is impossible amongst human beings, we can only strive for as little conflict amongst our species as we can possibly attain. To suggest otherwise is unrealistic.

posted by gomedome on October 18, 2007 at 9:59 AM | link to this | reply

Gomedome, The following portion of your post is how I arrived at my thought

"The world would be a wonderful place if we all just got along and loved one another but we may never see anything that resembles this in our lifetimes. Especially considering that it has never taken place in any meaningful form at any time in history. So why do people perpetuate this call for the impossible? Ultimately it is what others want to hear. It is the right thing to say regardless of how untrue or impractical a suggestion it is."

You suggest in your words that it is impractical to speak for peace. You suggest that peace is impossible.

I for one want peace in my life. It is not something that I say just for others to hear. Peace is as real as war. If we stop suggesting peace as an alternative to war simply because it is as you say "impractical", where will be on this planet?~Peace, OTA

posted by Blue_feathers on October 18, 2007 at 9:35 AM | link to this | reply

ROFL (sorry, gomey, your one comment made me laugh)

posted by Ariala on October 18, 2007 at 9:23 AM | link to this | reply

Kayzzaman - happy spamming - read my blog!

posted by gomedome on October 18, 2007 at 9:07 AM | link to this | reply

OTA. - of course we should not abandon all efforts to have peace

I'm at a bit of a loss as to how you derived your final question from this post. Bloggers manifesting their religious and social conditioning by posting feel good messages of love for all has precious little to do with world or regional peace. Where as individuals we admittedly have little impact on the agressive ambitions of nations, all proactive efforts towards shaping prevailing sentiment in favor of world peace are desirable. But the desire for peace is also a given amongst all rational human beings and is not affected in the least by naive messages outlining how the world can fix itself if only all members of our species would adopt a specific philosophy. Donating $2 to UNICEF has an exponentially greater impact in real terms than someone pretending they are John Lennon.

posted by gomedome on October 18, 2007 at 9:06 AM | link to this | reply

Gomedome

You have some valid points here about the greed of the west and the blind preaching of love and peace. However, as you say there has never been a moment in recorded history without at least one war in progress.. there has also never been a moment in recorded history without at least some areas of peace. If it where not so how would we define war? Should we just throw our hands up and stop trying to have peace in our lives because war exists? ~Peace, OTA