Peace

Thanks!

WAR MUST BE OVER . between people, nations, cats, dogs etc

:)

Peace is the best thing in the world… especially because we have so little of it nowadays….

Reading the daily papers,watchin' the evening news – We seriously need so much of it!

Peace!

It seems the media goes to great lengths to find negative news, I know there is good news to report. We need something to be able to feel good about. If the news gets to be too much, I just turn it off, I am not denying that bad stuff doesn't exist, but I resent being reminded about it day in and day out. All we are saying is give peace a chance.

Mother Teresa once said:
 <font>If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other.</font>

Peace can be acheived... world peace, not so sure. not eveyone agrees on every subject and this leads to controversy. controversy leads to anger sometimes and so on.

i would love world peace... although i do enjpy controversy occasionally. XD

If i could bring peace in just one area it would be prejudices.

Mother Theresa made clear the difference between Pro-Peace and Anti-War.

Mother Teresa also said that if they had an anti-war rally, she would not attend, however, if there was a peace rally, she would attend. She was right; focus on what you what, not what you don't want.

Put it as you like... but still, if you attend a rally 'for peace' and there is a war going on, that is also an 'anti-war' rally!!

To be honest, at least in my country, I never saw peace rallies. I mean, anti-war rallies in general. There has always been one single event, or a particular threat of war or whatever, which triggers a rally. The biggest anti-war rally I ever saw here was in 2003, it was actually a peace rally but people had gathered because they opposed war in Iraq.

Anti-war rallies are fueled by anger. Peace rallies are fueled by love. That isn't a matter of this name or that, but a matter of completely different emotions. If you look at past rallies that have made news, you'll see what I mean. THere is also a major difference in how the general public perceives the rally. Do you want them on your side or do you want them to fear your motives?

Vano: I have looked at many pictures of the 2003 'anti-war' rally – or demonstration – I wrote about. I was there, actually, so I can tell you. Rome was overwhelmed with peace, love, and three million people of all types, hugging each other and smiling to everyone. I never felt so 'at home' and welcome in such a big city, which is normally chaotic and just full of indifference. Believe me, I think I saw a demonstration fuelled by love on that occasion, although everyone was clearly opposing to the imminent war.

Yeah, Clara is absolutely right. Rome, March 2003 was an anti-war rally which was full of peace!!!

Last night I saw the film Gandhi onTV for the  first time since many years. Gandhi opposed every form of violence. In the Indian conext especially the violence against women and the parias (or as Gandhi called them the Harijan). Beeing against wars is o.k.; is the least our reason should impose us. Bur achieving peace means a big deal more. As I already remarked on this forum justice, equal opportunity and a fair distribution of food, water and other resources are the fundament for a real peace. Then everybody will  also be able to find his/hers interior peace.

Yeah, that's for sure… but I think Gandhi would have been against wars too…;)

might i question the significance of the difference between "anti-war" and "pro-peace"?  i'd say they're pretty synonymous, only anti-war is a more specific application of the exact same philosophy

Yes Silthilar!! Totally agree.

That’s interesting because Gandhi used to slap his wife around.

Anti anything is fueled by anger. There is a huge difference.

When i went to church the priest used to say how terrible the peace sign was, he said that the hippies created it to be anti-christs or something and that the peace sign stands for evil because it is an "upside-down, broken cross inside of the circle."

I’m glad I don’t go to church. I also never understood the use of the cross. To represent what is regarded by the Christian religion as the savior, they carry the very thing he was killed on. It’s sort of a remember his death sort of thing, but if someone I love dies, I would want to remember their life. We know what crosses were used for, so why does that in itself become something sacred? It really doesn’t matter, it’s just that that is such an ignorant thing to say.

Yes i am glad i do not go to church any longer because i feel very uncomfortable in them... i could barely stand being at my freind's funeral because the dumb ass priest spoke nothing of my friend but god. I couldn't agree with anything he was saying.

Silthilar and i had a conversation about why they "worship" the cross and he said that it had something to do with remembering how he sacrificed himself for mortals... it is ironic though... How can you remember the life of someone who most likely didn't even exist?

Come to think of it, I’ve never been to a funeral that hasn’t been like what you described. Are there alternatives to the traditional Christian sendoff?

The Christian funerals i went to mostly talked about the person that is supposedly passing by it is the Catholic that really bother me. I don't know i think you can just take the person to the graveyard and just have a few speaches.

I was very mad at that funeral... not only because of the retarded priest but because of his mother and his ex-girlfriend... much anger was building during that time but i felt that i had to stick it through for him.

Usually, the priests don't know anything about the person, so they can't really talk about him. Generally at a Catholic funeral, their supposed to have a friend or family member speak about the person. Of course they'll talk about God, it's a religious ceremony. I was raised Catholic, however I'm not Catholic, or even religious. (no offense or anything, I hope this doesn't sound harsh)

Not at all.  Of course, I'm not religious either, so it really isn't up to me to say...

The only alternatives I can think of involve fire...there's the funeral pyre, the flaming Viking ship...but apart from those (which I guess are only alternate forms of interrment, not the actual funeral), I've got nothing.

Then of course, the classic send your body out into outer space.

There is that.  Or you could be sacrificed.  Or tossed into a feeding frenzy of things with teeth.  Or you could be nailed up on a dead tree, but only weirdos end up like that.

Or you could go see an orthodox doctor for anything.

I think Vano understands this whole anti- and pro- thing. When you are anti- something you are focusing your intentions on something you don't want, doesn't make much sense to me. However if you focus on things that you do want, love, peace, happiness; these things will come into your life by being pro-. Oh, and if you are pro- something that does not mean that you are anti- something. Just thought I'd throw that in to the mix.

good point.

Well, I don't know about that. Sometimes you have to be anti- something in order to make the pro- somethings stronger. I am anti-violence because I am pro- peace. How can you be pro- something and not be anti- the opposite of that thing? I mean, if you really care for something, you have to be able to sacrifice having the perfect life. Focusing on anti- might mean that I won't find peace, love, and happiness, but someone has to do it. Examples, anti-abuse, anti-animal cruelty, anti-drugs, anti- kids (jk). But anyways, sometimes you have to have the bad in order to have the good.

Thank you Silthilar. gb bows deeply

Well M_eanwhile, I think what they mean is just what you should focus on. Obviously, to be pro something you would technically have to be anti the opposite. But, focusing solely on the negative will only cause a bunch of negativity. Even Mother Theresa had a quote on this; I don't remember it exactly but it said something like "I would rather go to a pro-peace rally than an anti-war rally."

Oh, I know that. I wasn't saying you have to focus on the negative only. I'm saying you have to focus on both. I don't think it makes your life negative, if I were to focus on stopping abuse, which would make it anti-abuse, I would say that's a pretty positive thing and a pretty positive feeling. I don't believe that focusing on the anti will make your life negative automatically. And anti-war rally is basically the same thing as a pro-peace rally. One just sounds nicer. To always try and say you're pro this and pro that, you're just sugar coating the reality.

I don't think you have to focus on both.  Gandhi didn't really stop any violence, but he sure as hell advocated peace.  It certainly takes an iron will to focus purely on the pro-whatever, but it can be done.

I never once said that you DO negative things, whatsoever. You're confusing what I said. If you're focusing on being pro-peace, you're automatically focusing on anti-violence. Pro-peace = anti-violence. They are one and the same. You can just say pro-peace to make it seem positive, but there is nothing negative about being against violence. Just because something has an anti- at the beginning of it does NOT make it a negative thing in your life. anti-drug = positive, anti-war = positive, anti-violence = positive. The words you choose to use do not make pro-peace and anti-violence any less of the same thing.

And, what you said doesn't make sense. By adovcating peace, he is trying to stop violence.  

So what violence did he stop?

(is reminded of the debate on the no smoking page)

I'm not saying he succeeded. I'm saying he adovacting peace.

Are you trying to say that by adovacting peace he was not trying to stop violence? That someone who wishes the world to be in peace, wouldn't try to stop violence? That doesn't make any sense whatsoever. I mean, it's pretty obvious one of his missions in life was to stop violence BY advocating peace. Violence against his people, the violence his people attained for simply trying to gather salt. He was adovcating peace, which is the opposite of violence. Thus, he was trying to STOP violence. His efforts did not go unnoticed either and they made a big impact on the world today. 

I wasn't trying to say that he wasn't trying to stop violence.  I was saying that he was much stronger as an advocate of peace.

It is possible actively advocate something without actively opposing its antithesis.  Also, some things have more than one 'opposite'.  For example, you could try to stop violence for some self-centered purpose, in which case you wouldn't care two cents about peace.

And you are saying he succeeded: His efforts did not go unnoticed either and they made a big impact on the world today.

There is obviously a very strong connection between anti-something and pro-said something's opposite, in this case anti-war and pro-peace.  But (if I interpret your argument correctly) they are not one and the same.

No I didn't say he suceeded, I said his efforts didn't go unnoticed, as in, he had many people who followed his wisdom and learned from his teachings, that doesn't necessarily mean he stopped violence. And, I'm not sure if you've noticed, but his impacted on the world, was pretty huge. I mean, you can impact the world without accomplishing your true goal. And, yeah, he was a strong adovcate of peace, which meant he was a strong adovcate againist violence/war/hate.. or whichever you prefer. With every action there is an EQUAL and OPPOSITE reaction.

And, yes, they can have more than one opposte, but not matter what opposte they choose to oppose, they still are anti- something just as much as they are pro- something. And, I never said that they couldn't be negative, I said that it doesn't automatically make them negative.

And explain how when someone who is pro-peace is not anti-violence (not war). Something can have more than one equal pro-peace = anti-violence, pro-peace = anti-chaos, and so on. I'm not saying it's anti-violence, I was just giving an explain. Of course, I don't see how you can be pro-peace without being anti-violence. 

You are limiting yourself by thinking too much. What?! I do not like violence, but, instead of doing non-violent things, I choose to do peaceful things with my actions. When you are worried about NOT doing something violent, there really isn't a clear path to peace. In that given scenario, one might choose to do nothing, to be on the safe side. However, if you are thinking peacefully, and kindly; you can do anything you want because you have cleared the way for your actions to show nothing but love. If you protest war what are you for, peace? Not really, all you are saying is that you do not want war, well that's nice and all, but not much gets accomplished, unless you have the power of peace behind you.

Pro-peace comes straight from the heart, it is what you feel. Anti-war says that you hate war, or are at the least, against it; while it's a noble idea to be against something, I would rather be for something I care about.

But peaceful things ARE nonviolent, are they not? They are many things, but non-violent is one of them, and there's nothing you can say or do that makes that untrue. When you are thinking peacefully and kindly, you aren't NOT thinking about doing violent things... When you protest war, you ARE for peace... this is just one of the ways you are showing it. Just because someone protests a war, does not mean they don't also protest other things that are non-peaceful. When you are at a rally to adovcate peace, you ARE protesting war, violence, chaos, and so on. And, of course not much happens unless you have the power of peace behind you, that's because they go hand in hand when it comes to apposing war and supporting peace, see?

Whe you are pro-peace, you are automatically against violence! No matter how you'd like to put it, you can not escape that. You're contradicting your self. Sure, you can say you're pro-peace... but even though you didin't state it, you are ALSO against violence. You just choose to advertise one above the other. 

Okay, how 'bout this... I am pro-vanilla ice cream. What do you make of that?

Oh come on, you know what I mean. That's different, it's not a concept and/or an action.