jump to last post 1-5 of 5 discussions (34 posts)

In the Name of Compassion

  1. Kathryn L Hill profile image87
    Kathryn L Hillposted 3 months ago

    "compassion noun
    pity, sympathy, empathy, fellow feeling, care, concern, solicitude, sensitivity, warmth, love, tenderness, mercy, leniency, tolerance, kindness, humanity, charity. ANTONYMS indifference, cruelty."
    OnlineThesaurus

    Democrats have ...
    "pity, sympathy, empathy, fellow feeling, care, concern, solicitude, sensitivity, warmth, love, tenderness, mercy, leniency, tolerance, kindness, humanity, charity."

    Republicans have ...
    "indifference, cruelty."

    Furthermore, Democrats are generous and giving, while republicans are money grabbing/stashing.

    And thats the bottom line.
    Right?

    1. The0NatureBoy profile image74
      The0NatureBoyposted 3 months ago in reply to this

      That would be the "bottom line" if your definitions for Democrats and Republicans were correct, unfortunately they are not, at least not any more. If they were correct the 535 congressman would not all except 5 be millionaires. Doesn't that suggests they are the same and their supposed titles' definitions are a deception? There is a pretension of those definitions presented to the people with the intention to deceive us but there is no difference, they b both are defined as you did Republican.

    2. Live to Learn profile image81
      Live to Learnposted 3 months ago in reply to this

      And people wonder why compromise is so difficult.

      1. The0NatureBoy profile image74
        The0NatureBoyposted 3 months ago in reply to this

        Yes, they have to keep pretending.

        1. Live to Learn profile image81
          Live to Learnposted 3 months ago in reply to this

          Pretending what? That we couldn't find a solution if we worked together and didn't have to have everything our way?

          1. The0NatureBoy profile image74
            The0NatureBoyposted 3 months ago in reply to this

            Pretending to be seeking a solution while not intending to find one. The solution is to follow the wording of the Constitution rather than England's stablished order this nation's founders put in place in beginning it. Perfecting this union of states and people does not allow for parties, gender nor ethnic differences and no other divisions, as the election process written therein shows.

  2. Kathryn L Hill profile image87
    Kathryn L Hillposted 3 months ago

    So, the democrats are only using the ideal of compassion while actually they are $$$$ grabbing.
    ?

    1. The0NatureBoy profile image74
      The0NatureBoyposted 3 months ago in reply to this

      Yes, without a doubt.

  3. Kathryn L Hill profile image87
    Kathryn L Hillposted 3 months ago

    There is nothing wrong with compassion of course, but logic needs to be considered as well.
    Logic is based on facts. Those with too much compassion may not have all the facts.

    Logic is based on Reason:
    reason, judgment, logical thought, rationality, wisdom, sense, good sense, common sense, sanity;

    Reason reason noun
    1 cause, ground(s), basis, rationale; motive, motivation, purpose, point, aim, intention, objective, goal; explanation, justification, argument, defense, vindication, excuse, pretext.

    1. Live to Learn profile image81
      Live to Learnposted 3 months ago in reply to this

      I'd have to disagree with you. Compassion is not applied simply because one lacks facts. You don't let a guy lie bleeding on the side of the road because you know he purposely stepped into traffic.

      I would say compassion comes into play primarily because you have the facts. I think compassion is hard to achieve if you lack the ability to empathize. You don't have to walk in another person's shoes to understand that many more factors than one's own actions lead you down the path in life you walk. 'There but by the grace of God go I." That's the fact which eludes many.

      1. Will Apse profile image87
        Will Apseposted 3 months ago in reply to this

        Dehumanising others is the trick to exploiting them.

        Failing that, you can demonise them (easier to jail, shoot or deport)

        Or just fail to notice that they exist.

        On that last point, an interesting story during the recent election in the US was Stephen Moore's pivot to a measure of  decency (or so he claimed) after decades promoting ideologically pure, supply-side economic theory. That is the theory that driving down wages and cutting taxes is good for the economy.

        He visited the rust belt with Trump, as an economic adviser, and, after meeting a few people that he probably never guessed could exist, he was persuaded that the suffering of ordinary people mattered. He then concluded that protectionism would help in some way and that he needed to stop being so ideologically pure.

        http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/30 … gans-party

        One of the more bizarre stories of the election, lol.

        1. The0NatureBoy profile image74
          The0NatureBoyposted 3 months ago in reply to this

          Very interesting and makes more sense than Reganomics but Trump will not put it in play, the "Son of Man" will be the one and remove money out of the equation.

          1. ahorseback profile image47
            ahorsebackposted 3 months ago in reply to this

            In spite of Senate and house leaderships sabotage to Reaganomics at the time , AND the bias of media at this moment ,Reaganomics  worked and  would have worked well if continued , Check out the house and senate then ,   The eighties were growth years , the only issue - I knew then that Reagan's plan for deregulation SHOULD have been  Adjusted - regulation .

            The culprit ?   Banking and Wall Street as usual .

            1. colorfulone profile image88
              colorfuloneposted 3 months ago in reply to this

              The old Federal Reserve system needs to fall so that a new system can emerge.  We are evolving and change is inevitable.  I see Trump getting things in place now in preparation for us to rise out of the ashes.

              1. The0NatureBoy profile image74
                The0NatureBoyposted 3 months ago in reply to this

                Congress has been bought by the Fed Res since the early 19teens, it is all a shows to give the Rothschilds control of the world using the U.S.military to do it with.

                1. colorfulone profile image88
                  colorfuloneposted 3 months ago in reply to this

                  All the more reason the system needs to collapse.  Can you imagine the vast wealth Rothschilds would lose.  Striped of wealth and of the power to buy loyalty.  The best way to drain the swamp and end the worship of people and things. 
                  The Son of Man just might be in this (I have no doubt).

                  1. The0NatureBoy profile image74
                    The0NatureBoyposted 3 months ago in reply to this

                    Yes I can, Isaiah 14:12 "How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!" that is what I'm betting on the "Son of Man" doing. It's also why I wrote https://hubpages.com/politics/The-U-S-C … ons-Spirit showing how he will be able to do it and https://hubpages.com/politics/Why-And-H … Overthrown showing how it can be done.

            2. The0NatureBoy profile image74
              The0NatureBoyposted 3 months ago in reply to this

              I agree the  culprit is B bankers and Wall Street but all of that will be gone once the "Son of Man" take over when Trump is Impeached.

        2. Live to Learn profile image81
          Live to Learnposted 3 months ago in reply to this

          I might agree with most but your comment about demonizing by jailing, shooting or deporting them is (in my opinion) off base. Except for the shooting part, of course.

          We do also have an obligation to protect members of our society. I can empathize, sympathize and otherwise commiserate the plight of any individual human being but I also have to determine what is in the best interest of the security of our society. Each individual deserves the same amount of consideration.

          I can feel empathy for the drug addict who was, by my estimation, somehow let down by society as a whole. However, that doesn't mean that I believe they should be allowed stay free if their circumstances are such that, in order to get the drugs they feel they need, they rob others within society. It could easily be argued that incarceration is in the best interest of their security. Allowing them to remain free puts them at jeopardy of harm being done to them when they attempt to steal.

          The refugee dilemma is another place where one is torn by the hope to protect the innocent on each side. If there is evidence that those who mean to do us harm would use our compassion against us, if they would come here in an attempt to create carnage; do we risk the lives of innocents in order to attempt to help innocents? I would have no problem opening my own home to others but to support allowing high risk groups in is to open the doors of other homes. The chance of me being anywhere which might be the site of a terrorist attack is slim. That is not true of others.

          So, the truth of the matter is, any attempt to be compassionate toward one individual runs the risk of not showing compassion toward others. There has to be a balance. I think many who appear to be cold and cruel honestly believe they are being compassionate and they probably are. It is just that they aren't showing compassion toward those you (or I) think they should.

          1. The0NatureBoy profile image74
            The0NatureBoyposted 3 months ago in reply to this

            True that!

            That is why someone who walks Buddha's "middle path" has to be the one to implement the constitution as it reads and why George Washington said "let us raise a standard only the wise and honest can repair, the event is in the hands of God," he realize man-en-mass are neither or both honest nor wise enough to implement the constitution.

            1. Live to Learn profile image81
              Live to Learnposted 3 months ago in reply to this

              The problem I have with this response is the same I have with anyone who declares they know the way and any who don't follow are dishonest, unwise, unintelligent....etc. Man, en masse, includes those making such statements.

              1. The0NatureBoy profile image74
                The0NatureBoyposted 3 months ago in reply to this

                So be it.

    2. The0NatureBoy profile image74
      The0NatureBoyposted 3 months ago in reply to this

      There is nothing wrong with compassion, however, it derives from emotions which is based on "not having all off the facts" concerning matters and not as you say "because you have the facts."

      Your 'There but by the grace of God go I" is missing some facts. With all facts in place it would read "by the grace of God there 'will I go' or 'there have I been'" because our incarnatings are for our life-forces to experience every characteristic of every specie on earth is one fact rejected by many.

      1. Live to Learn profile image81
        Live to Learnposted 3 months ago in reply to this

        I'm afraid I am one of the many who would reject your 'incaranatings' theory. Not as a whole, but as a standard. Maybe some do follow that path through eternity.

        1. The0NatureBoy profile image74
          The0NatureBoyposted 3 months ago in reply to this

          Rene acting the truth doesn't mean one doesn't follow, in this case. reincarnation.

  4. Kathryn L Hill profile image87
    Kathryn L Hillposted 3 months ago

    So, ideally Democrats and Republicans can benefit each other by balancing compassion with logic/reason and vice-versa.


    Maybe it will happen in the (distant?) future when we all know how to avoid all the drama we are currently, apparently hooked on.  neutral

    1. The0NatureBoy profile image74
      The0NatureBoyposted 3 months ago in reply to this

      If my interpretation of the facts, many of which often denied by most people, are correct "it will happen within the next 4 years without any divisions.

  5. Kathryn L Hill profile image87
    Kathryn L Hillposted 3 months ago

    "Fake News" does not provide those very valuable Facts. The News today is skewed. How can any of us make informed opinions? Especially the youth who are just learning about the world!!!! Its not fair to the young adults who are being led astray by the media and even their university professors. Why are the Federalist's Papers treated like worthless trash! This collection of essays which explain and reveal the basis/REASON for the The Constitution should be introduced in every Highschool American history class across the nation.

    And, Yes, we need a nation of people with the facts regarding The Ten Commandments and The Golden Rule as stipulated in The Bible. These same precepts are found in all religions of the world.

    Now, the Koran is plagiarized from the Bible, but some things were added or lost in the translation. This is why we see very skewed compassion coming from the terrorists, who DO believe in God, but don't have all the facts.!

    skewed
    distorted, misrepresented, perverted, twisted, falsified, biased, altered, changed; doctored, put a spin on.

    1. The0NatureBoy profile image74
      The0NatureBoyposted 3 months ago in reply to this

      They don't have the revelation I have written on http://hubpages.com/@the0natureboy so how can they reveal such facts?

    2. Kathryn L Hill profile image87
      Kathryn L Hillposted 3 months ago in reply to this

      Fake News is Spun News. Why do they call it "fake." Fake sounds too cute/funny, and downplays the seriousness of the matter.

      Spun = slanted, angled, twisted, biased.

    3. The0NatureBoy profile image74
      The0NatureBoyposted 3 months ago in reply to this

      Almost all sources of news use that term about other nose sources so which one is real fake and which one isn't? Aren't most news sources spun and not objective? Seldom do I find one that appears objective.

      1. Kathryn L Hill profile image87
        Kathryn L Hillposted 3 months ago in reply to this

        Objectivity used to be a standard for good journalism. Journalism today is the opposite of good. We are loosin' it!

        1. The0NatureBoy profile image74
          The0NatureBoyposted 3 months ago in reply to this

          I agree.

        2. colorfulone profile image88
          colorfuloneposted 3 months ago in reply to this

          So true! Its become sensationalism. That's not journalism.

 
working