Pacificism

[beachbum7]

I've been thinking about this subject ever since since people comment on the death penalty (I'm actually disappointed that there's more support for the death penalty than I thought would be, but those are other people's opinions, and I can't do anything about them).

Since I think most of the people on this site generally dislike war, I'd like to get your thoughts on pacifism. What do you consider pacifism? And do you consider yourself a pacifist? Is being called a pacifist an insult?

I'm not totally sure what's my definition of pacifism. I'm against the death penalty, war, and the use of violence to solve problems. But I do have to admit that (on occasion) I do enjoy watching boxing and some sports that could be considered violent.

[Ocean Byrd]

The death penalty isn't violence used to solve a problem; in fact, there's not much carnage involved usually. The only reason I think the death sentance should exist is it just saps further taxes by keeping another prisoner that's sentanced to life around.

[beachbum7]

The death penalty isn't violence used to solve a problem; in fact, there's not much carnage involved usually. The only reason I think the death sentance should exist is it just saps further taxes by keeping another prisoner that's sentanced to life around.Actually, life in prison is cheaper than a death sentence. Before an excution takes place, there are numerous appeals, and those appeals cost a lot of money.


Check out this link: http://www.ncadp.org/fact_sheet3.html

Actually, I've always thought of the death penalty as violence.

[TelimTor]

x

[soulrebel51]

I consider the intentionall killing of another person to be violent. And the death penalty is violent because of that


I was going to write that exact same thing earlier today, but my computer froze. But yes, even if all that is happening to the person getting killed is getting a lethal injection of some poison, its still violent. And just what if that person were innocent? Even if he is found guilty in courts he should be allowed to live no matter if he is guilty or not.

[Kitaro]

Death penality is not violence, it is unhuman. end of subject.

[Willy_Wonka_27]

Death penality is not violence, it is unhuman. end of subject. Violence - vi·o·lence - (vhttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/AHD4/GIF/imacr.gifhttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/AHD4/GIF/prime.gifhttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/AHD4/GIF/schwa.gif-lhttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/AHD4/GIF/schwa.gifns)

1. Physical force exerted for the purpose of violating, damaging, or abusing
2. Abusive or unjust exercise of power.

look at # 2 it proves that the death penitaly is infact violence

back to the question i do concider my self a pacifist because i never get mad...ever

[soulrebel51]

back to the question i do concider my self a pacifist because i never get mad...ever
thats pacifism? well then I would have to say that i am a pacifist too

[Ocean Byrd]

back to the question i do concider my self a pacifist because i never get mad...ever

Pacifism doesn't exactly mean you don't get mad, it means that you don't act on feelings of frustration or anger; which is what I do. I tend to call it anger retention though... I appear to be angry sometimes, but I don't do anything; but I wouldn't call myself pacifist as I sometimes lose my control, but that's a good thing to release every now and then.

[beachbum7]

Pacifism doesn't exactly mean you don't get mad, it means that you don't act on feelings of frustration or anger; which is what I do. I tend to call it anger retention though... I appear to be angry sometimes, but I don't do anything; but I wouldn't call myself pacifist as I sometimes lose my control, but that's a good thing to release every now and then.
I've never thought pacifism means not getting any. I think anger is a natural part of life. It's just that some people hanger their anger differently.

[cerridwen]

i'm too pascifist to give my opinion on this....

just kidding. I have no idea.

[kiddo]

even if all that is happening to the person getting killed is getting a lethal injection of some poison, its still violent. And just what if that person were innocent? Even if he is found guilty in courts he should be allowed to live no matter if he is guilty or not.

don't forget that a lethal injection is just a "nicer" way of execution...
in the past they would have chopped someone's head with an axe & make a big 'show' out of it.
The methods have changed, the act itself hasn't. I don't see much of a difference between killing someone in some town square & killing someone tied to a chair with media coverage. it's stlll violence at its worse.

[spooner]

i'd call pacifism refusing to kill or coerce

however there is a pretty distinct line between pacifist and pussy - if you see something wrong happening you still gotta do something (ie guy hitting a girl, etc)

[greenpeople]

it´s being against any kind of war and violence and to help prevent it

[Nathan11]

I am deffinatley a pacifist.
I do not act on my anger.
I understand it is human to become angery, but I will not ever support violence and cruelty.

[jailmate]

Pass duh dumb shitt in2 duh shitter, an start eatin uhr vegiez.
Yuhzez fine young cannibalz should, yet are 2 far removed
from duh karma neccesary, 2 get real wit this hip trip.

[soulrebel51]

thats pacifism? well then I would have to say that i am a pacifist too
Haha, everybody gets angry :p



I consider myself a pacifist; I will never use violence to "solve" a problem (because violence never solves anything), but I do enjoy the martial arts and I will defend myself or someone else if I/they are being attacked.

I'm also against war and the death penalty.

[WharfRat]

first off beachbum is totally right...with all the appeals and everything life in prison is cheaper, some people say the death penalty is a deterrence which i dont think it is, id rather be killed than rot away in prison...back to pacifism tho, i get angry and such but id rather not resort to violence but sometimes its necessary...its in our nature if you think about it we've been killing each other since the beginning of time(mostly in the name of "god") and the animals were killing way before us(not really the same tho they did it for survival/food). also where do you draw the line with pacifism, would you let someone kill/hurt you or someone you loved? dont know how relevant that is

[PizzaProphet]

Im a pacifist. To me it is non violance, non killing. No war, and even when your very angry and pushed to fight. It is saying no. Living life in harmony. It is ok to get mad and angry at times, But it is knowing when and how to act.

As for would I allow someone to kill or hurt me? Still would have to say, many ways to try and avoid it. Even running or walking away. And if that us not a option, then I would have to say I no were I am going after death. It is a inner belief, speaks nothing if you alter it. If someone tryed hurting/killing someone I loved. Well I could try to stand in there way, take the heat why they get away. If not, well honestly cannot say. No on can tell there in that situation. Just can have faith in whatever belief you have that things will work out.

Now after saying this. Sports really have nothing to do with pacifism in my eye. The difference between a group of people tackling each other on a field, or wrestling on a mat is fine. But when it goes over the line, then it is wrong. But most (hopefully) players no this. Its why you do not see to many fights. But sports like hockey (and basketball now it seems), well that has no pacificism involved in it at all. I just wish more people would practice sportsmanship. Like when the Baseball Cardinals took on San Diego? and when San Diego lost they walked out shook hands.

These are my views and how I choose to live life. May not be what others beleive. But I live happy under them.

Peace
The Pizza Prophet

[spooner]

god i hate steve moore

[SucculentFlower]

Howdy Folks...how I've come to understand it, the death penalty and the business of "corrections" is a multi-billion dollar industry run by private-tized corperations...these corperations were the people that lobbied for the 3 strikes and your out law. Did you know that there are 7,000 ppl on death row in California, 4000 of which are there because they commited that 3rd crime, but it was a non-violent crime, such as stealing batteries. Imagine that. That is a fact. It costs $30,000 a year to house a person on death row, an education at Stamford University costs $31,000 a year. Hmmm.

Another thing folks, death by lethal injection is not as "clean" as one imagines...there have been cases where the drugs that have been injected, have been injected in the wrong sequence...providing a very grusome event,
these facts just make me sad.

the death penalty was instituted as a deterrent to murder, yet almost all murder is a committed in the heat of the moment.

crime is over reported by the media by 600%.

I think and this is just my impression, that the corperate media (owned by most of the weapons manufactorers) is trying to keep us in fear, so that we will have this knee jerk reaction of "self-defense/self-preservation."

And we must always be vigilant not to abuse our priviledges---if you are white, a man, and live in the first world---all priviledges. Also hording money and materials is a form of violence...ppl go without so that a few can have some.

[alycebgray]

To me, pacifism means that you don't see violence as a SOLUTION to any of life's problems, and that you attempt to solve problems in non-violent ways whenever possible. This does not mean that you completely rule out all uses of destructive force. Obviously, if someone attacks you in a dark alley, and you can't run away, passive resistance is not a practical response.

I think that violence is never "right," but it can be justified. An obvious example is American involvement in World War II, because Hitler had to be stopped. Of course, if the German people had been pacifists, the war wouldn't have started in the first place, but they weren't, so it had to be fought. Similarly, if someone attacked my son, I would do everything in my power to immobilize that person. My violence would not be "right," but it would be justified, because it is my duty as a mother to protect my child, just as it is our duty as human beings to protect each other from social deviants; if people were not violent in the first place, there would be no cause for a violent response.

So I think what I'm trying to say is that my brand of pacifism dictates that I never initiate violence, although I am comfortable with using force for self-defense, as well as the defense of my fellow human beings. Preemptive strikes don't count, and violence is only justified when all other options are exhausted. If someone attacks my son, and I am surrounded by friends, I would much rather he be hog-tied than punched; however, if I am alone, and someone attacks my son, I think that my only recourse would be violence, because I am rather small. I could deliver a quick blow to the solar plexus, but unless the attacker weighs less than 115 pounds (or is very weak) I don't think there's much I could do to immobilize them.

As you can probably tell, my pacifism is practical...I think that violence creates more problems than it solves, but I also realize that, sometimes, it is the ONLY solution availiable--at least in a utilitarian sense. Of course, we could have let Hitler run rampant through Europe, Asia, and maybe America, in the name of some high ideal of peace; however, to do so would have been to close our minds and our hearts to the suffering of millions of people. I think both options pose a serious moral question, and I think the only solution is this:

Don't initiate violence.

[zelia]

Hate begets hate; violence begets violence.

I am very much of a pacifist.

[greenpeople]

I think and this is just my impression, that the corperate media (owned by most of the weapons manufactorers) is trying to keep us in fear, so that we will have this knee jerk reaction of "self-defense/self-preservation."


well, it´s not just your impression, it is true!!
so many americans have guns, because they somehow think theres a constant threat. but theys cause it themselves. if i knew that any idiot could have a weapon, i´d be frightened too. luckily i live in a country where only very few people have weopons at home.