dimreepr

Indeed one action leads to another when revenge is involved, which just adds further weight to my post #125.

One persons terrorist is another persons freedom fighter.

Maybe ‘only’ wasn’t really the right word to use especially with such emphasis, given the complex nature of politics; however given the topic and the cyclical nature of the violence, I stand by my opinion in this case. Having cogitated further on this I think maybe Hamas were correct to provoke Israel with violence. But having done so, and brought focus on the fact that they are being persecuted and imprisoned within their own country. Now would be the time to switch to a peaceful protest, with the world looking on I think Israel would be forced into a corner. Edit/ Just to be clear by now, I meant, just after Israel invaded.

If Hamas put as much effort into peaceful protest, of their predicament, as they do into firing rockets and fighting Israel, then enough people of the world, let alone, peace loving Israelis would soon bring enough pressure on Israel for them to be forced into an amicable settlement. If nothing else, surely, history teaches us that they only have to follow the example set by India and South Africa, in our recent past to see the truth of that. Edit/ conflict is never unique, different maybe, but ultimately the same.

As long as mistrust and revenge informs the thinking of either side then war is the inevitable consequence; trusting and forgiveness is the ONLY way to break the cycle.

All that's needed is a little more of this...

Like most things in life, religions exist on a spectrum that ranges from the non practising agnostic all the way to the radical extremist; most are somewhere in between and often takes comfort in their belief. They may not need a god to be good but if that’s what it takes, why not?

Whilst I do agree that neither side has the higher moral ground by default, I do have to conclude that tolerance is more often correct than a strict adherence to the traditional intolerant stance of the natural conservative; both views have merit and are necessary in a balanced society but a little more tolerance does go a long way in keeping the peace and lessoning extremes of attitude.

Yet you ask and find fault in others questions? Ok here’s one: It would seem that in some religions entry into heaven requires, not only, adherence to that particular doctrine, but also belief in the deity; so why is hell so much easier to enter even when adherence is maintained but belief is not?

Given that this is a science forum, I really don’t see why navigating what is really only a side issue needs further clarification; as always in internet fora, if in doubt, just ask.

Why is that important? If we played constantly for a billion years it would be entirely possible, almost certain, that no hand would be replicated.

You have it backwards. Edit/ The RPM would be the same but speed would be slower.

So what question would you ask?

Why?

A couple of quotes to illustrate “If there weren't luck involved, I would win every time.” - Phil Hellmuth “I must complain the cards are ill shuffled till I have a good hand.” - Jonathan Swift

Cogito ergo sum

Your anger is only hurting you and those closest to you; forgive and tolerate and it will abate, better for all, I think.

OK then, thank you, BTW I've heard of another method of doing that (the up arrow) but keep it under your hat.

War leads to death; forgiveness and tolerance leads to peace.

I’m not entirely sure what you’re trying to argue? Given you accept “a medical indication” is a right reason.

You’re more than welcome to forgive however you wish, the results will be the same, but why would you deny the emotional satisfaction? Why are your two sides conflicting? Your emotions are ‘yours’ regardless of how much you don’t want them, accepting you have emotions doesn’t mean you have no choice but to act on them. Revenge in films is more of a balm to society’s frustrations; it has no suitable place in reality.

A world wide blanket ban would just mean, in areas such as described by Endy0816, people would suffer as a result; I’d much rather the parents do it for the right reasons, rather than being told to dogmatically. BTW I agree in terms of females.

This thread are my thoughts on what you're saying.

A good judicial system isn’t be about revenge, it’s about learning; society learns how to avoid future problems through rehabilitation and limiting the wrongdoer’s ability to commit more of the same until they’ve learned why they shouldn’t. We may be swayed by the particular chemical mix in our system at any one time but that doesn’t make us automatons, we make decisions not reactions; a bully is still a bully even though he’s been made that way via abuse, one feels sorry for them but one should still stop them bullying.

That’s what I’m seeing although, “This is borderline trolling now, although post 48 was a blatant troll”, is equally ridiculous either way.