Let's fire some gays! — Page 5

I don't know. I'm sure there are some non-violents who are very religious. I, however, don't have a problem with religious or non-religious thoughts...both serve a particular purpose, and I try to balance myself with both thoughts.

---

While the articles you linked were informative, they do create a rather bleak image of the use of nonviolent demonstrations. Only Buglaria was an actual peaceful victor against Hitler. Denmark was lucky that they were leaked information in advance. David McReynolds speaks quite a bit about the fact that "sometimes nothing works", when he could just as easily have said "sometimes pacifism doesn't work", yet he makes it sound like if pacifism doesn't work, then nothing will, which is obviously not true.

Gandhi said, "The doctrine of Satyagraha works on the principle that you make the so called enemy see and realize the injustice he is engaged in."

But there are some enemies, like Hitler, who never see it, which is why he could only be defeated through violence. It was the only language he understood.

Gandhi also said, "Non-violence does not mean making peace."

Which proves that peace does not breed peace. Non-violence is about faith that someone else will change their minds and do something good. But what if that doesn't work? For decades? Do you simply keep trying until your group is extinguished or rely on others for violence to save you? Sometimes violence works and sometimes it is necessary. It's not pretty, but then, truth is not always a pretty thing.

---

'but if we're doing it for the good of all people now and in the future'

Except, of course, for European Jews.

Non-violence may have taken longer?? Then the Final Solution would have been completely successful.

---

down Matt_G! LOL.