Which trumps which?
...whereas Justice = a principle, in which real fairness and equity are enshrined in their purest iterations... and wherein the innocent are protected from the predatory among us...
...must trump Love always.
Love forgives, and this is good; but some things cannot be forgiven, as an injustice forgiven (even ignored / tolerated) is often an injustice repeated.
Injustice destroys Love.
(Great post, btw! Important stuff.)
What would the Founders do?
Jesus came to make a new covenant which supersedes the laws of man because He loves us. So, definitely love. However, Jesus said to obey the laws and ordinances of man as long as they did not go against Him. Render unto Cesar what is Cesar's and unto God what is God's.
And he shall judge among the nations, and shall rebuke many people: and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.
God is love and God is principle also. The Bible says that if we love God we will obey His commandments. So yes they do seem coequal from that perspective.
I have said it few times on DP, but I want to repeat it again. Everybody should read the greatest work on love: Plato's "Symposium".
And by the way so called Platonic Love is not Plato's concept of Love as for Plato, or Socrates, Love/Eros begins from the the bodily love.
And after reading "Symposium" read Plato's "Phaedrus" which is his second greatest work on Love/Eros. It is about the positive madness of love.
The only thing that Socrates says to know about something is love. This means that the principle (the beginning/the first truth) of the philosopher is love. The philosopher is of course in the original sense a Lover of Wisdom. And there is Wisdom to be found in many places: there is the Wisdom of the Senses, the Wisdom of the Body, the Wisdom of the Invisible.
Then there is a great French philosopher Emmanuel Levinas who even changes the normal concept of philosophy as the love of wisdom to mean actually "the wisdom of love".
Levinas is another philosopher who anybody interested of love should read. It could be argued that Levinas is the greatest ethical thinker of the 20th century, but I have never seen anybody mention his name in DP.
His main work is called "Totality and Infinity":
Easier introduction to Levinas' thinking is "Ethics and Infinity: Conversations with Philippe Nemo":
"Air is the very substance of our freedom, the substance of superhuman joy....aerial joy is freedom."--Gaston Bachelard--
Thank you for sharing that.
I would like to hear you elaborate more on this.
I was reading on here that people want an issue to unite behind. I thought about that for a while, but I didn't really like the idea. How do you get everyone to unite behind an "issue?"
Then the more I thought about it, the more I thought about Love as the issue. How could anyone be against love? Even the Bible tells people to love their neighbors. And here you are quoting philosophers saying that philosophy is the wisdom of love. Who could be against love?
- - - -
Telepathic, I remember when I changed the tag line - from Peace Gold Liberty, to Peace Gold Love, that you argued pretty strenuously against it, and for "Liberty" instead of Love.
I'm not educated (much) in the depths of philosophy, but I knew that Love preceded Liberty. So I figured, let's just get to the root of the matter.
If I have time I could try to write more about the subject of love. What can I say for now very briefly is that in my view love is in an important manner connected to the question of breathing as breath is the ultimate caring of human life and life of living beings in general. For example, I read the masters of love, that is, Jesus and Buddha as in the first place masters of breathing and out of this mastery of breathing grows their universal love or compassion. And in my thinking the question of breath is even more universal than love and liberty as these two are fundamental dimensions of it. And if you are thinking of how to unite everyone behind an "issue" there is not an issue more universal that breath, but this breath-issue is not at all easy in a sense that not much has been written about. But this topic of connection between love and breath is something that I need to write about when I have more time.
What comes to the Bible on 'loving thy neighbors' it is important to notice that master of love, Jesus, of course, goes even further than the rest of the Bible as he says: “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous." (Matthew 5:43-45)
Well, Michael it is quite negotiable if I "argued pretty STRENUOUSLY against it" as I also said "that the second best choice for 'L' is definitely Love" and as I emphasized that our life "should always breathe Lovelution." My argument was more from the standpoint of Ron Paul website as for him Liberty is what he emphasizes.
This is what I wrote in the comment that you referred to:
"PEACE GOLD LIBERTY would still have a strong connection to this Ron Paul inspiration as Paul stated famously in Ames 2007: 'Our campaign is all about freedom, prosperity, and peace.' Freedom=Liberty, Prosperity=Gold and Peace=Peace....
Without Liberty Peace, Prosperity and Love are not possible. Please do not drop Liberty out of your New Banner even if I think that the second best choice for "L" is definitely Love.
With or Without Ron Paul our campaign should always be all about freedom, prosperity, and peace whatever we do in life or however we CHOOSE to live our life.
And of course synonymously we could say that whatever we do in life it should always breathe Lovelution."
I did not see the rest of it, so thank you for sharing that.
I was down on the canvass, body swollen from all the blows I had received, head bruised and bleeding, arrows in my back, saliva dripping from my open mouth... for having done the unthinkable - removed the picture of Ron Paul, and changed the tag line.
I did take a lot of abuse for that, but in the end, even though it was kind of about Ron Paul, I needed to move forward. In retrospect, I realize it wasn't really about Ron Paul. These days I have only a passing interest in what he is up to. In truth, the whole thing was about finding a solution. Ron Paul, for a period of time, appeared to be that solution.
Many people now believe Rand is that solution.
I think we need to think bigger.
And I very much welcome, and look forward to your writings on love.
We could use a love renaissance in this world!
Love is history's most discussed topic and issue through the ages. It is the least understood human passion. It has spawned more written work and music than any other issue. I think you were just in your decision Sir. Thank you.
If I disappear from a discussion please forgive me. My 24-7 business requires me to split mid-sentence to serve them. I am not ducking out, I will be back later to catch up.
Love is the basis for good principles. So, love.
PEOPLE OPPOSING TYRANNY - Real Grass Roots!
Are you a POT or a PET - Person Embracing Tyranny?
There are two parts to this question:
True or false:
1) Love is a principle.
2) Love is the primary principle of the Universe.
2. you could look at that way I suppose.
But I think principle comes from love.
Principles never change
Love, is a principle. Therefore, love cannot exist devoid of principle.
Turn off the TV Propaganda.
Find out what's really going on!
"Your portal to reality!"
Every principle by which we must live is founded on a word, a command, of God. This is what gives principles their primacy and makes them axiomatic.
The following portion of scripture speaks to the question in the OP very precisely and addresses I believe the underlying meaning of the question.
"But if you fulfill the royal law as expressed in this scripture, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself,” you are doing well. But if you show prejudice, you are committing sin and are convicted by the law as violators. For the one who obeys the whole law but fails in one point has become guilty of all of it. For he who said, “Do not commit adultery,” also said, “Do not murder.” Now if you do not commit adultery but do commit murder, you have become a violator of the law.
Speak and act as those who will be judged by the law of liberty. For judgment is merciless for the one who has shown no mercy. But mercy triumphs over judgment." (James 2:8-11)
If one reads and ruminates on these words it will become clear that love takes precedence when there has been a breaking of a principle, a sin. Since God has forgiven us we should forgive each other. The act of love manifested in this situation we call mercy and it is the right of every victim to show mercy even when the law itself calls for a specific punishment. This truth is taught throughout scripture. The Lord Jesus Christ in his teaching to His disciples instructs us specifically that "Blessed are the merciful for they shall be shown mercy". (Matthew 5:7)
The Law of Liberty mentioned by the apostle is the Law of God that is fully revealed by the Lord Jesus Christ in His life, death, resurrection and ascension and in the light of which all scripture is seen to reveal the heart of God which is Love. The revelation of saving Grace liberates us from the condemnation and death that is the consequence of breaking the Law. This sets us free to be merciful to those who offend us, who steal from us, who insult us, who injure us, who persecute us and even to those who murder someone near and dear to us.
"Jesus answered them: 'Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is a slave to sin. The slave does not remain in the house forever; the son remains forever. So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed.'" (John 8:34-36)
Thanks for The Word
Not only are they not mutually exclusive,
they are never mutually exclusive.
They are two dimensions of the same enchilada.
One is the recipe, the other its manifestation.
Of course I'm tempted to say love trumps principle, but love is the essential principle. I digress. Which came first? The chicken or the egg, the oak tree or the acorn. The egg is a chicken. The acorn and oak tree are one and the same. Principle is like static electricity, the act of love its discharge. A capacitor is thought to be measured in capacity, but in reality its capacity is measured in discharge. A recipe or blueprint is inherently [and continuously] sprung from previous manifestation and flows into new manifestation. We seem to be purveyors of replication. Though they are one, we perceive both form and function. Neither is never nonexistent. You know you hold one coin yet heads and tails are not simultaneously perceivable unless you hold it before a mirror...
...reflect what you are...♥...reflect what you are...♥...reflect...♥...
I don't think it is an either/or type of question. I think that love drives the principles.
Love is the greatest principle
but a both/ and . If your principles are in line, love will be the highest one. The two greatest commandments, according to Jesus were: Love the Lord your God with all your heart, mind, soul and strength, and Love your neighbor as yourself. If you love your neighbor, you will not harm him by taking away his freedoms for 'his own good' because you realize that it would be giving you power over him that you would not want another to have over you.
"Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern." ~~C.S. Lewis
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15
I suppose you could call this my athiestic angle approach to the issue, but to me it all starts with love. From love, morality is born, from morality, principals are made possible.
Human morality is born from our ability to love and bond with other humans. That which we consider "moral" is that which affects (directly or indirectly) our loved ones in a positive way. That which we consider "evil" is that which causes them harm or suffering.
With morality established, we develop "principal" as a sort of "Social Compact" which will allow us to live in a society where our loved ones can be safe and prosperous. I.e. Reason tells us that if we don't protect others' loved ones with whatever principal we develop, no one will protect ours, and no one will be safe or prosperous.
Principals vary from human to human, society to society. The desired end is always the same (safe, prosperous society for our loved ones) however the methodology for getting their differs because of the various mythologies, philosophys and educations involved in coming up with a particular society's guiding "principals." Largley they have been failures due to insufficient application of human reason and a healthy dose of corruption.
The inevitable conclusion of reason: The highest (yet) achievment of Human Reason in the realm of civilization. Through thousands of years of trial and error, through a dangerous addiction to collectivism, the Human race finally draws near the only known logical conclusion of the persuite of the perfect "principal." The perfect social compact by which we as a society choose to live by in order to bring about the most freedom and prosperity for our loved ones: The Philosophy of Liberty and the Non-Agression Principal.
To be honest though, this is nothing new. "Do unto others as you'd have done unto you." pretty much summed it up thousands of years ago. Its only a matter of tilting the scales so that humans as a whole are willing to start waking the hell up. Thank you to Ron Paul, our modern Promethieus who brings illumination whilst managing to piss off all the gods.
Conclusion: Love is vastly superior to "principal" because not only do many people follow eronious and dangerous "principals" but principals built on "morality" are impossible without Love. Therfore if you allow an organization to develop "principal" such as a government, you will find a set of principals which do not come from love, but rather from a desire to enslave and control, and their "principal" or social compact will be bad for the human race in the end.
Much like "money"... "principal" will arrise naturally among humans who are capable of love.. and that isnt going to stop without some serious genetic tinkering by the banking empire.
Without it, what's the point of principles?
I mean, in order to get the nomination, he starts shuckin' & jivin' on all of his positions. Compromising here & there.
It just happens. It happened to Obama. My lefty friends can bend my ear all the way down to the ground on that.
So let's just say that happens to Rand. "The Romnification of Rand."
And when everyone asks Ron Paul: Ron! Who do you support in 2016?
What does he choose?
Principle, or love?
(Purely hypothetical question, of course)
I expect he would be supportive of his son because you support your kids in whatever they choose to be (within some limits). However, if Rand was too off-base I expect Ron would do his "I won't tell people how to vote" thing...and voting is private, etc..
Love is involved either way :-)
From my view/ committee perspective: Ron never had the seats he needed on committees. Hillary had seats and gave the election to Obama. Obama never had the seats.. that's why Obama is doing what Hillary/Kerry seats are proposing.. Obama doesn't have HIS people seated.
Unlike Ron and Obama, Rand, because of Ron, and because of his own merits (the neotea party), has committee seats. I've got an entire committee that didn't go to Tampa and has no problem going to Vegas for 2016 for Rand.
I think Rand is going to stay in the Senate..
Meanwhile, it's interesting to me that the federal government is shut down presently as my committee is dealing with an audit as far back as 1994, the chair resigned, speaking of chairs, Preibus made the CA GOP hire a director, young man out of college, worked on one campaign in his life and lost huge.. and just like that the CA GOP is out of 1/2 million debt.. I hope to find out more about what's going on and let DP know from the convention in Anaheim. 24 hours or so from now. Disneyland is across the street, for what that's worth.. and the tea party is very corporate looking from the ads.
I just logged in to see how you were doing. I haven't been around for a while and now I'm trying to figure out whats been going on with you. Glad to see a comment I can reply to finally... I'm sorry for the recent trouble you have had on here being pro that country. You know what God says in His word about it. I have started to realized lately how anti christian and semitic libertarianism is. However, it is still the best political option out there. Jesus calls us not to be part of this world's system (our citizenship is in Heaven), but sometimes to make a difference you have to. Also, if you are interested, I urge you to check out theater.goodfight.org. Watch the video about aleister crowley (far right bottom) and you will realize how close his common beliefs are to libertarianism. "Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law." etc.
I hope this isn't taken wrong by anyone on here, but if so what's the point in free speech right? Anyhow, love and prayers to you. May God bless you in all your endeavors.
((((((V1G1L4NT))))) Thank you. I am well and hope you are too.
What's been going on with me is that I found, "the spark" in that other country.. It has enriched me on many levels.. I didn't know I had found it, or really what it was, so I shared it here, which brought on the brouhaha, confirmed that I found it. And I have made some very sincere enemies. I'm happy to know who they are. It's one thing when you have enemies but don't know why or who.. it's wonderful to know who and why.
If I said I was a citizen of Israel, Biblically, you would know what I mean? There it is.
and I support you.
Want DP delivered to your inbox daily? Subscribe here: