home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
- Path: sparky!uunet!paladin.american.edu!auvm!MHSGATE.CIT.AC.NZ!SANDY.CIT
- X-Delivery-Notice: SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
- X-Mailer: XGATE 2.00 MHS/SMTP Gateway
- Message-ID: <75D4612B81A5C1D1@mhsgate.cit.ac.nz>
- Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
- Approved: NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
- Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 01:00:28 NZT
- Sender: CHRISTIA@ASUACAD
- From: Sandy Sartorelli <sandy.cit@MHSGATE.CIT.AC.NZ>
- Subject: Re: Defending yourself (was Re: Segregated churches)
- Lines: 30
-
- > I have seen articles over the past couple of days saying that we
- should not
- > defend ourselves but that we do have a responsibility to defend other people,
- > especially our family.
- > Would the fact that a person who has attacked you is extremely likely to
- > then go on and attack someone else be a reason to defend yourself and try to
- > restrain your attacker(s) if possible in order to prevent any further
- > attacks?
-
-
- In my humble O:-) opinion Peter, Yes!
-
- Also think of the commandment (no, I 'm not getting onto that thread
- here) " Love your neighbour as yourself." This command works back
- the front as well - if you love your neighbour enough to defend him,
- surely you should love yourself enough to defend yourself as well?
- (Obviously love should be extended to the attacker if possible also -
- but I fail to see how tolerating his/her violent behavior shows love
- to the attacker in the long run). Enough already.
-
- Cheers, Sandy Sartorelli
-
-
-
-
-
-
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
- Sandy Sartorelli Internet: sandy.cit@mhsgate.cit.ac.nz
- MHS: sandy@cit via nhub
-