[Windmills]

I always felt that trials by fire would determine whether or not your beliefs run deep and strong. For example, if you believe you're honest, place yourself in a situation where your honesty will result in the deaths of people you love. Do you lie and kill them, or speak the truth and take some comfort with the empty pride in your virtuosity when you visit their graves? After learning about Peak Oil, it seems some of my more treasured ideals have slipped away.

I used to be a pacifist, anti-death penalty, pondering vegetarianism, and openly anti-gun. I used to think the Second Amendment should be stripped from the constitution.

Carrie, my girlfriend, and I have lately had a few discussions about which firearms to buy, how many, and how much ammunition to store.

It makes me feel weak and craven to have my own survival become so paramount, that I now find myself pondering barbaric measures in the face of some types of survival situations.

My father, recently a convert to PO, has also done an about face. He and I used to be on opposite ends of the political spectrum and have blistering political arguments. Now, I could hardly care less about the words "liberal" and "conservative." Our relationship has grown much closer when not long ago we were adversarial with my mother having to come between us to keep him from socking me in the face.

Perhaps virtue is a luxury, affordable only in civilized times. It's a shame to have to choose between death and morality.

[rogerhb]

It's just a staircase to climb down.

[Pops]

Don’t give it another thought.

The basis of liberalism is the willingness to question the status quo, not the various and sundry bumper sticker bites used to gain votes and power.

Virtue is a luxury given those wealthy enough to buy their way above the fray.

There is none weaker nor more craven than the one that sends someone else to protect the things they wouldn’t stand up for themselves.


Copyright 2005, Pops

[killJOY]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'N')ow, I could hardly care less about the words "liberal" and "conservative."

[gego]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Windmills', ' ')

Perhaps virtue is a luxury, affordable only in civilized times. It's a shame to have to choose between death and morality.

[rogerhb]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('gego', 'I') can't see how you equate your own survival with immorality and uncivilized behavior. If someone else commits an act of agression against you, and you are forced to kill them to defend your own life or the lives of your loved ones, then where is the immorality in the killing? Wouldn't it be more immoral to let someone else kill your children than to stop them from doing so?

[NordicThora]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Windmills', 'A')fter learning about Peak Oil, it seems some of my more treasured ideals have slipped away.

I used to be a pacifist, anti-death penalty, pondering vegetarianism, and openly anti-gun. I used to think the Second Amendment should be stripped from the constitution.

Carrie, my girlfriend, and I have lately had a few discussions about which firearms to buy, how many, and how much ammunition to store.

Perhaps virtue is a luxury, affordable only in civilized times. It's a shame to have to choose between death and morality.

[Auntie_Cipation]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('gego', '
')I can't see how you equate your own survival with immorality and uncivilized behavior. If someone else commits an act of agression against you, and you are forced to kill them to defend your own life or the lives of your loved ones, then where is the immorality in the killing? Wouldn't it be more immoral to let someone else kill your children than to stop them from doing so?

[gego]

I think this is really a question of survival of the fittest.

It is immoral to initiate acts of agression against others, such as theft, rape, murder and the like. If these acts of agression are directed at you and you refuse to defend yourself or your family, then you are an evolutionary dead end and deservedly so.

It is interesting that we do have a build in adversion to killing one of our own species and that works well in normal times, but it will not work well in a dieoff where others are so desperate that they will commit unprevoked acts of agression to further their own survival. The basis for "thou shalt not kill" and "do unto others as you would have them do unto you" is species survival. It works, but when others violate those rules, it is insane (out of touch with reality) not to defend yourself.

If you garner self worth by veiwing yourself as compassionate, and that view keeps you from justifiably defending your own life, then too bad for you.

[rogerhb]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('gego', 'T')he basis for "thou shalt not kill" and "do unto others as you would have them do unto you" is species survival. It works, but when others violate those rules, it is insane (out of touch with reality) not to defend yourself.

[SurvivalAcres]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'W')e, as humans, have a built in reluctance to killing other people (the gun-nuts may be suprised to hear about this).

[rogerhb]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('SurvivalAcres', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'W')e, as humans, have a built in reluctance to killing other people (the gun-nuts may be suprised to hear about this).

[gg3]

Those who have little use for virtue will always find an excuse to discard it. And logical double-binds can always be constructed to cause someone's ethical system to appear to break (lie or die, etc.).

Meanwhile in the real world:

Remember the virtues of the warrior ethic: honor, duty, courage, integrity, and so on. Hang out with anyone who's committed to a career in the military and ask about this stuff. And even in the midst of warfare, where it's kill or die, there are rules, the laws of war, and respect for innocent life: among soldiers, if not necessarily among their civilian leadership.

The idea that "fluffy" and "hard" are mutually exclusive, is an artifact of the Western tendency to think in dichotomies. "Either/or" is intellectual laziness; "and/both" takes courage and discipline. You have to be lucid -aware of your state of consciousness- and mindful, in order to recognize whether a situation calls for being fluffy or being hard, or some combination thereof, or something else. This does not come easily, and it does require regular practice to maintain.

These are times that demand more effort and penalize the lack thereof.

And as for firearms, the knowledge and training and willingness to defend oneself and one's family/community/nation with the use of force, is not mutually exclusive with compassion and charity.

Those who rail against compassion or dismiss it as weakness, only expose their underlying fearfulness; which is to say, lack of real courage and lack of warrior skills. The more capable you are as a warrior, the more capable you are of exercising compassion.

[MrBill]

If you are trained as a first aid responder and you come across a medical emergency your training will take over and you will know instinctively what to do. You don't have to go looking for accidents.

If you are a hunter and have been around guns all your life, you will instinctively know when and how to use them when you have to. You may not even hunt anymore because you don't need the meat or would prefer not to have to kill anything for sport, but you don't forget how to use a gun.

If you have emotional intelligence you will mitigate the chance of a violent encounter, but confronted with one you will know how to react.

Having lived in places where there were no police you could rely on or the police were corrupt we lived behind steel doors. Calls at all hours to find out if anyone was home. Knocks on the door in the middle of the night. My wife and I had a handgun. My instructions to her were simple enough, if anyone comes through the locked metal door they do not mean you well. Just point and start pulling the trigger. Don't think just act. Now, that we no longer live there it is not an issue.

However, having been on the wrong end of a gun three times and being threatened by the Russian mafia, I know that the threat of the gun is an acute threat. Once it is by you return to normal. However, the threat of retalliation or violence is chronic. It lives with you until you can safely remove yourself from the threat. I don't know if anyone who has not lived with these different levels of threats can truly appreciate them? My life is not more important than anyone's and I accept mortality. However, I do not willingly give it up for a criminal.

And, I would willingly kill to protect my family or innocents around me. Protect life, but not property that is. However, are you always given a choice?