Turkey Day 2012!

[Shin'Ar]

But, to them, their work is more important than being liked.

And if we are able to understand that each side will say the same thing, then there is where we find the dilemma. Especially when their work/belief becomes so important that each side is willing to die and kill.

The dynamic factors involved cannot be simply dismissed for the sake of acting out anyway, that is to say, IF one really wants to acquire some sort of success or benefit.

Success and worthiness is not measured in the mere action simply because that is what someone believes with all their heart; it is measured in the balance between the results and consequences.

For example,

You have two choices which have been offered to you.

You can save one cow by following Action A, or you can save a million cows by following Action B.

Which you you choose?

Of course most will say let us save a million cows.

But, then a factor is added into the dynamic which reveals that in order to save one cow then one cockroach will die, or to save a million cows one man's two young children will starve to death until social assistance is able to resupply his community with another source of food.

Now, when the dynamic factors are considered, we must ask ourselves some very consequential questions.

Most will choose to sacrifice a cockroach.

But there are both fundamental extremists, and manipulative elites, who would quickly sacrifice two humans for a million cows.

And if you choose to dismiss this logic by suggesting it is absurdity, i suggest that you are unaware of the sanctity of the cow in the Hindu religion.

Try going to a Hindu city and kicking a cow out of your way.

The absurdity is not in the degree of emotional attachment one has to their 'work'.

The absurdity is in the inability, deliberate or not, to make a correlation between the dynamic factors of one fundamental belief with another.

It is NOT a matter of which is right, or which has the right.

It is a matter of balancing the consequential severity, by understanding the full scope of the dynamics involved.

Another example-

It is one thing for the Arab to say that God has given them the Land of Jerusalem to be their Holy Land, or for the Jews to say that God has promised them the land of Milk and Honey.

This is one 'work' in direct argument with another and both have claim by their own emotional attachment, IF each deliberately ignores the full context of all of the dynamic factoring involved.

Why do I say this?

Because it is another factor altogether to say that no one individual has the right to lay claim to any position on a planet that does not belong to them alone.

But you will not hear either side ever allude to such thought process because it would instantly render their own claims absurd.

And even though such truth is absolute and obvious, if one were to attempt a peace process with such clear and unambiguous discipline of reasoning, extreme aspects of each claim would deliberate to silence your obvious truth quickly, which would be quickly welcomed by all those who really do not want truth invading their efforts.

And so we have the dilemma of one cow or a million, and the many who would much rather win their cause/perform their 'work', at the expense of the discernment of dynamic factors/balance.

Mercy, compassion, and even justice, cannot be separated from the overall dynamics of a situation in order to appease one view or belief/work over another. And the consequences of one side winning over the other cannot be separated from the sacrifices which may be necessary for such a victory.

Far too often the victor is the one with the biggest gun/loudest voice/most opportunity, and far too often these are not the ones who actually suffer the greatest consequences to achieve their goal.

So do you want to save a million chickens, or will one alone satisfy your 'work'/belief?

If you can answer that question, without concern or regard for the dynamics involved in achieving either, then you are an extreme fundamentalist, regardless of the consequences of your 'work' or fundamental view.

If you refuse to answer that question without considering the full context of all involved, then you are realizing all that I have tried to explain in the posts above.

By the way, I am using Monica's quotes here for their pertinence, not in expectation of response from her, or as though addressing her in particular. I do not want her to think I am trying to provoke response.

I am simply showing interest in the topic, and adding my thought processes to the discussion.

The scales of balance are distorted by the degree of individual/personal/emotional interest involved.

The Peacemakers hands are bound by the actions of the fundamentalists who do not want peace, but desire only that their 'work' does not have to suffer compensation to any degree.