Clean Language Again--Interesting Site

[kempermentor]

> > bdclark wrote:
> > So when I speak of the Golden Rule, I am only taking the context of 
> > what is written in Leviticus 19.   Which, by the way is originally 
> > written in Hebrew.  Instead of trying to translate word for what has 
> > been written, I choose to use the reference of `The Golden Rule' 
> > since most people understand what this really means.  This `rule' is 
> > present in all cultures and all languages, so I'm not considering 
> > the beauty of the individual here but of the world the same as you.  

Kemper now:
I agree with all of this.


> > bdclark:
> > I fear you have now put words into my mouth.  I'm actually referring 
> > to the concepts that are apparent in not only Leviticus 19, but in 
> > the many texts of so many religions:  ...snip referrences most of
> > which can be found here:
http://www.schools.utah.gov/curr/fineart/core_curriculum/general/Golden_Rule.pdf

Kemper now:
Yes.  And none of your referrences that I found truly considered the
other, they revolbe around the you (or in practice, the I).  As I said
earlier, The Golden Rule has a good intention, but the implemenatation
of the Golden Rule is misguided.
>From the above link, if you scroll down to Sufism, they seem to have
it right... though it's not a quote from ancient text.


> > bdclark:
> > Basically, I think we're arguing the same point, it's just that it 
> > seems we're dicing golden delicious apples that are going to be put 
> > together with granny smith apples in a pie that just ends up being 
> > delicious.

Kemper now:
I think we're on the same side with regards to wanting compassion in
the world, what we differ from is the best way to bring the compassion.
But I'll take a slice of the pie if you're offering.


> Carol responds to bdclark:
> Essentially, I agree with you. I'd like to add that it's much easier
> to base your conduct on the way you wish to be treated than it is to
> know or assume or guess how the other person wishes to be treated. 

Kemper now:
It takes work to understand another, but if one's intent is to truly
show compassion toward another rather than feel good about helping,
then the work is benefitial.

> Carol:
> For example, if I wish to be treated with respect, I treat others with
> respect. If I don't wish to be hit or shouted at or sworn at, then I
> don't hit or shout or swear at others. (Okay, I occasionally fail with
> those last two, but, nevertheless, they serve as an excellent
guideline.)
> 
> Most people want others to be kind and courteous and respectful to
> them, and they can safely assume that the other person, regardless of
> who the other person is, want the same thing. And it doesn't matter
> whether that person is your own child or the President of the United
> States. Nor do age, sex, physical condition, race, or sexual
> preference have any bearing on the matter.

Kemper now:
Bringing up sexual preference reminds me of an incident.
A decade ago I was working with a group of youth involved in the
juvenile justice system in a very conservative (never blue) state. 
One of the youth came out that he was gay. A staff that frequently
followed this group attempted to 'save his soul'.  This staff never
used language that was hateful.  Rather, the staff was genuinely
concerned and encouraged the youth to read passages from the bible. 
This staff,  though obviously exhibiting poor boundaries, liked the
youth and wanted so bad for this youth to have an exalted afterlife.
But the youth was uncomfortable and came to me with concerns (I was
the group's leader).  S/He liked the staff but felt increased guilt
for his/her feelings.
The staff was putting the Golden Rule into effect.  It was very nice
but extremely unkind and inconsiderate.

I obviously agree with you and bdclark that people want kindness and
courtesy, but in order to do that effectively we have to consider what
that means and looks like for the person.


> Carol:
> Civility, courtesy, concern for the needs of others. That's what the
> golden Rule means. 

Kemper now:
That's what it may suppose to mean, but to help it actually mean that,
it could use a good editor! :)


> Carol:
> And there's nothing wrong with using the person we
> know best, our individual self, as a guide to determine what others
> want. And if we're not sure, we can always ask.

Kemper now:
I agree.


> Carol, who thinks that as a general guideline and a reminder to use
> not-so-common courtesy, the Golden Rule is both memorable and
> practical, not to mention that it's a time-honored tradition
> frequently encountered in literature

Kemper, who thinks tradition sometimes needs to be challenged