open discussion about personal conviction's

I have some personal conviction's i would like to start this thread off with shareing, one thing that really bother's me and i wish i could change in this world is the blind hatred i've seen toword's people to wich is justifyed by name of god & in the name of religion and evan in the name of love.. people are murdered everyday around this world & in this country just because a guy like's another guy or because somebody's skin is a different color, how dose this hatred get sown into our heart's to make us want to kill another human being?? it's awfull. Another thing that bother's me is name-calling & lableing people, evan lableing myself or namecalling myself for a mistake i made could hurt another person who make's the same mistake and find's out what i said.. my conviction's are real and they don't go away, i really want us all to openly discuss our personal conviction's starting with me.. thank you in advance.

There some good personal convictions Jason, I share them also.
One thing that ticks me of in particular is the mistreatment, neglect or abuse of child.

I completly agree with you, Jason. We have developed many areas (technology, science...) but at the end our primary instincts arise. Possession, sex, afraid of being alone and the fight for the land. I think that we bought the ticket for the extintion.
Another thing that bothers me a lot is our egocentrism. Anyway, I think each human beign has all this instintcs. We can´t deny them. The difference to show them in a lower or higher degree is in some factors such as, education, necessity to cover our primary needs, genetic, social and political circumstances...

lastnight me, my brother, my mother.. were all discussing this sort of thing we see on the new's and in the church's around us & yes we all three have these quality's of realizeing the fact's over delusion's to an extent of fear of the unknown - some of us more open to idea's than others, most around the world could think clearly if these delusion's werent reinforced by (religion turned cult) brainwashing by "surrendering" oneself the a single idea of what is "right" & the guilt reinforced "wrong" these congragation's teach. the crusader's would murder peacefull tribe's in the name of "god" to wich i believe is "you know not what spirit you are of " when an aposal told jesus to call fire from heavan to murder people. please forgive if i'm sounding anti-religion in this reply but this is a great concern to me for other's wellbeing..

General convictions that some people have: prejudice, namely against homosexuals, women, personality disorders, and mentally illness. Not surprising as I fit at least half of those things, I probably do have a personality disorder ot two also.

I dislike this idea: a person is not taking advice and/or trying just because the person isn't progressing as someone else thinks they should. Or the idea that some people can't be helped and they don't deserve it.
I do know personality disorders, mood disorders, and mental illness are generally for life, but I don't think it means no help should be given, or that it gets to the point that it is only considered help if they don't express themselves, rather that they just do it to please. It's also a common thing to want empathy more than advice.
There are two sides to that though, how much can a person help without breaking themselves?

My own convictions change. I've hated myself for some things, and in turn hated or looked down on others for it, or they could have hated themselves for the same mistakes/characteristics.
I've dealt with stigma. It would seem appropriate for me not to have stigma with the knowledge that I'm not what some think, but I have sometimes avoided others with the same illness because of prejudice.

you brought a whole new perspective shutin, you know my conviction's change also - i'm not soo great, i'm problematic and vulnerable and my mind just go's shallow at time's and i feel really bad for it. all of your reply's are great and i would be tickled pink to find more reply's to read and think about ...

Not sure if this would be a conviction, but its somthing i'd change in the world if i could.

I dislike how we defy the natural laws of things, and keep the sickly and weak alive from a young age. The natural way of things is the survival of the fittest. If we followed this, the weak, and sickly that end up milking our governments of billions of dollars would die, and thus save us an abundance of money as a country, that we could then invest somewhere else. I am aware this goes against the common morals that people deserve to live if the means are there, but i still don't see how someone who is sick and weak from the day they're born to the day they die that contributes zero to society deserves to be kept alive using our money.
Anyone on life support should die, as they are supposed to. People with cronic illnesses, mental retardation, and other such illnesses that make them incapable of working and providing for themselves should be killed. If you cannot provide for yourself, you're supposed to die, this whole keeping the sickly alive for the peace of mind of their familys is just absurd, and is the reason our world econemy is failing, atleast i think so. Yes i'm aware of the whole bank thing and such, but think of how much extra money we would have if we took even half the people on life support right now off of it.. millions and millions of dollars. I suppose if you're family can provide for you, or a spouce or somthing, enough to cover what you would be putting in if you were working you'd get to live, but i highly doubt anyone would be willing to pay for someone else to live.. they'd rather just use everyone elses money to provide for it, and that right there is a fine example of how messed up that system is. Most people on life support and such are being paid for by the government, or some insurance agency or somthing.. not by the people directly, and if it ever came down to the people having to pay directly, i gaurentee, a lot of people would die.

There would have to be some sort of rule, that you get as much as you put it. Meaning, as a child, you're parents pay a tax for you that covers your health. When you turn 18, or 21, and start earning your own money, its kept track of, so that when you retire, you get that amount of money back for your health. It would be difficult to keep track of and such, but it would save so much money that we waste on people who would be dead if we had not interveined.

I'm aware this probably has many wholes in it, and such.. as i am terrible at relaying my thoughts in a complicated manner, but i think i got the general point across.

the insurance industry doesn't give money away. People pay for it, the people who eventually use it. No one's forcing you to donate to cancer funds. A family member gave lots of money to that. She has cancer now. She isn't getting the money back, but what if she needed to? My father paid ss for years, then died and that money would have gone to you if i wasn't disabled. Why do you deserve my family's money more than me? What about schools? I mean if you don't have kids why do it. Where should this money go to is not society? everyone is practicaly forced to be a member of society. Maybe we'd have more money to build more bombs and jets, and kill off that are wounded or let all who survive die. We could also close the libraries. ###$ it, if you can't buy it you shouldn't learn. Then there would be more money for the wealthy and lucky to give each of their children a large screen LCD tv. Of course their sick could survive cause they'd pay for them. Maybe only the wealthy should have kids because if a poor person's kid gets sick society pays. We could have a nice African government here if we really tried, where there actually is $#%^ to pass around, but some just aren't entitled to any of it. And, while the poor families have dying relatives, they can continue working in the medial $#%^ for the wealth to make a profit.
I kinda agree on life support if there is no chance for a change.
A middle ground would be legalizing euthanasia for people who choose to be euthanized. That isn't going to be legal though because some assume it would lead to forced euthanization, which isn't an impossible thought.

What makes me mad is when people are quick to judge without any form of empathy and act as if they are beyond ALL reproach. But then again, we are all judgemental aren't we? I guess that's the root of all injustice, discrimination and the like. The minute we feel as people that we are superior then what's to stop us from judging right? Any judge should be beyond reproach.

Eric_Lee wrote:Not sure if this would be a conviction, but its somthing i'd change in the world if i could.

I dislike how we defy the natural laws of things, and keep the sickly and weak alive from a young age. The natural way of things is the survival of the fittest. If we followed this, the weak, and sickly that end up milking our governments of billions of dollars would die, and thus save us an abundance of money as a country, that we could then invest somewhere else. I am aware this goes against the common morals that people deserve to live if the means are there, but i still don't see how someone who is sick and weak from the day they're born to the day they die that contributes zero to society deserves to be kept alive using our money.
Anyone on life support should die, as they are supposed to. People with cronic illnesses, mental retardation, and other such illnesses that make them incapable of working and providing for themselves should be killed. If you cannot provide for yourself, you're supposed to die, this whole keeping the sickly alive for the peace of mind of their familys is just absurd, and is the reason our world econemy is failing, atleast i think so. Yes i'm aware of the whole bank thing and such, but think of how much extra money we would have if we took even half the people on life support right now off of it.. millions and millions of dollars. I suppose if you're family can provide for you, or a spouce or somthing, enough to cover what you would be putting in if you were working you'd get to live, but i highly doubt anyone would be willing to pay for someone else to live.. they'd rather just use everyone elses money to provide for it, and that right there is a fine example of how messed up that system is. Most people on life support and such are being paid for by the government, or some insurance agency or somthing.. not by the people directly, and if it ever came down to the people having to pay directly, i gaurentee, a lot of people would die.

There would have to be some sort of rule, that you get as much as you put it. Meaning, as a child, you're parents pay a tax for you that covers your health. When you turn 18, or 21, and start earning your own money, its kept track of, so that when you retire, you get that amount of money back for your health. It would be difficult to keep track of and such, but it would save so much money that we waste on people who would be dead if we had not interveined.

I'm aware this probably has many wholes in it, and such.. as i am terrible at relaying my thoughts in a complicated manner, but i think i got the general point across.

YOU GOT TO BE KIDDING ME!!!