The Forum > Article Comments > Despair and social disease > Comments
Despair and social disease : Comments
By Peter Sellick, published 14/9/2015My difficulty is with the idea that we as a community can simply decide to end violence in the home.
- Pages:
-
- Page 1
- 2
- 3
-
- All
A well written and a 'Stop thrashing the wrong solution!' article. Putting band aids on the deep wounds in mainly male psyches is not going to solve the problem - deep healing with repentance and a turn around from violent behaviour can only come from change within. It is my view that only God can do this. It is a much cheaper 'solution to the problem' though it may not be seen as "politically correct" by the media . . . and the trendy spin commentators who feed on the rhetoric of some of the unenlightened politicians from all sides of the political divide. One day the 'sleepng church' will awaken and encourage believers to vote out of office those who claim to represent them but in fact are only complicit in deluding the 'masses' [not only the Roman Catholic masses either, Pentecostals are included in the unhealthy avoidance of any leadership comments to those in the pews about voting out ungodly political representatives].
Posted by ZhanPintu, Monday, 14 September 2015 8:15:47 AM
| |
ZhanPintu
you are right in what you say however your last comment is useless unless you point out who these 'godly' politicians are who should be promoted or elected. When you look at the trashing of husbands/wives by many of our pollies you would think they would shut up when it came to morality. Instead that try and make the gw religion or 'equality' a moral issue. Private philosophy certainly works it way out into public policy. In WA have had a couple of MInisters done for dui. One Labour culprit was actually in charge of roads. You got to laugh or cry. Posted by runner, Monday, 14 September 2015 11:21:16 AM
| |
It seems plain to me that ending domestic violence simply with the kind of loud urging that is going on at present can never achieve its ambition. To start with, no-one is in FAVOUR of domestic violence. There’s nothing to argue about. So in that context, more general arguments like the one put forward here are all that we have to go on. However, I would think that a return to religion won’t offer the answer either. Primarily, one would need to demonstrate that societies with the strongest religious tradition and activity have lowest violence rates. Now that would be a topic worth investigating. A researcher could look at intra-religious differences, e.g. comparing Christian countries like Ireland, Australia, New Zealand and the USA. Or at inter-religious differences, comparing say Christianity with Islam, Hinduism and atheism. Such a study (it might have been done already – not my field) might provide a few PhDs but is unlikely to solve the problem. If I had to predict the conclusions, my guess is that religious males are at least as violent as the rest and probably worse. But that’s just a guess!
Posted by Tombee, Monday, 14 September 2015 12:18:23 PM
| |
ALL of our unresolvable interpersonal problems are caused by the fact that we do not grow into fully autonomous human beings who are responsible for their emotional-sexual presence and actions in the world.
These two references describe what is required for each and every one us to "first become human". http://global.adidam.org/books/first-three-stages http://www.adidam.org/teaching/aletheon/human-maturity Furthermore we (thus) always pass the "sins of the fathers" onto the next generation - all with the misguided "best of intentions". How this occurs is described in this essay http://www.dabase.org/2armP1.htm#ch2 Sinners are of course by self-definition, and moment-to-moment dramatized action, constitutionally incapable of being fully responsible for their presence and actions in the world. Posted by Daffy Duck, Monday, 14 September 2015 1:28:06 PM
| |
Thanks Tombee for your comment however I disagree with your statement "To start with, no-one is in FAVOUR of domestic violence. There’s nothing to argue about." IF I was a perpetrator of domestic violence [which I aren't] I suggest that certainly I am in FAVOUR of it? If only they conformed to me 100% there would not be a problem of their own making!I have to use it to control my heterosexual or same sex partner to conform to my demands [whatever they are] - that's not my problem surely if I am the DV perpetrator? He/she ONLY HAS ONLY GOT THEMSELVES TO BLAME - If they just did what I WANT 24/7 I wouldn't have any issue surely! This is a 'bit tongue in cheek'but I hope that I have made a valid? point?
Posted by ZhanPintu, Monday, 14 September 2015 3:23:38 PM
| |
The obvious response to violent criminals is to end the crime at the perpetrator's expense.
Breaching a "keep awey" order: Minimum of 7 years without possibilty of parole Assaulting someone in the home: Minimum of 15 years without possibility of parole Assaulting someone anywhere else: Minimum of 15 years without possibility of parole. Repeat offence: Gaol time at least doubled. Escape from gaol: Gaol time at least doubled on recapture. Just sweep the mongrels out of the homes and off the streets instead of fiddling around looking for do-gooder sociological solutions that never happen and don't protect the victims. Cost? Defray cost by confiscating offenders' assets and abolishing privileges. Posted by EmperorJulian, Monday, 14 September 2015 6:23:27 PM
|