When is MURDER justified?

If a police officer kills a criminal because of a threat on his life or others, is it right for him to pull the trigger, and let the hammer slam down the irreversible death of the criminal? If a thief breaks into your house and holds a knife on a family member, are you right to blast his life into history? There is no reason, to not be able to answer these questions as a christian, with the book of life right in front of us. “Yeah, it’s simple ... Exodus 20:13, thou shall not kill, that simple” ... WRONG. The KJV might say “kill”, but translated from Hebrew, the scripture actually uses the word “murder.” The definition of killing is to cause death. The definition of murder is to kill in a way that breaks the law, or is unjust. Well, what is “unjust”?

Killing is justified in warfare. Why would God send out nations to fight other nations, if killing was a sin? That is, because it’s not. God wouldn’t contradict himself. God even commanded certain people to go kill their enemy (Gen. 10-12). When these wars were set, they were just, because they were through means of protection. IF they weren’t to fight, their nation would be taken advantage of, or even wiped out.

“Well, I’m not a soldier and don’t plan on ever being one... is it ever just for me to kill?” First of all, we all are soldiers of the LORD’s army, we are mighty warriors always at constant battle. Killing is justified in self-defense. Similar to the situation in warfare, God does not want people to just stand there and be killed, but stand up and defend their lives. This is how the police vs criminal, and family vs thief situations are justified. IF YOU’RE LIFE IS BEING THREATENED, DON’T JUST STAND THERE...DEFEND YOURSELF!!! “Well, why is it justified, when the thief holds a family member? I am not the one at threat, they are.” You didn’t expect the thief to break into your house, did you? You didn’t know he was going to grab your family member, did you? Then, do you know what his other plans are? NO. What if he will kill you after killing your family member? In addition, if your love isn’t strong enough to even attempt saving their life, are you really a christian? “Greater love has no one than this, that he lay down his life for his friends.”

Now this last one, I will leave for your interpretation.

Capital Punishment is justified. God himself beliefs in it’s concept. Genesis 9:5-6, "And for your lifeblood I will surely demand an accounting. I will demand an accounting from every animal. And from each man, too, I will demand an accounting for the life of his fellow man. Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed; for in the image of God has God made man." Why would the word “demand” be used? Does God command himself of an action? The definition of a command, is to direct with authoritatively, or overlook and dominate. These definitions make it seem to point at a command given to man. This would justify criminal punishment. I want to remind you guys, this is not necessarily what i believe, but its food for thought, rather than just always side with what we are told. we are to be challenged in our thinking, so think about it.

NATURAL.IS.My.fate

The style McCarthy uses fancied my interests, so i decided to research his literary style. This interest initially was birthed, because I found it very interesting that McCarthy constantly refers to the two protagonist as father and boy. He never mentions they’re names. When others are met along the way, they also get title’s, but not names. McCarthy created characters, we would recall not as Frank, Bob, or Joe ... more like Lightning-Man, Shot-guy, Slaves, and the mysterious bearded men. Since McCarthy never really had an interview, but he short Oprah session, we are left to interpret the story without restriction. 

First, I looked up online the nameless style he used. This style was birthed from Naturalism. Naturalism toke place from the 1880’s to 1940’s, using details to show the characters having been formed by it’s inescapable physical, mental, and hereditary areas. The time frame of this style, seems to be possibly lined up with the literature McCarthy might have read in his younger years. He might have been influenced to write in this style, form his favorite literature piece, or author. Naturalism is often criticized for being to bland/blunt. I tend to disagree, at least considering The Road. The blunt and straightforwardness offered, makes the book seem more like a recalling, conversation, or a personal narrative. With personal narrative, I mean as in the narrator reading next to you, as you look down and watch the scene ... sort of a God type thought. 

Naturalism has many definite characteristics, such as pessimistic connotations. Often these would be emphasizing the inevitability of death, which in this case is fitting. “Father” and “Boy” often talk about dying, they see others in the process of death, and the world is constantly revealing more death. 

Another type of naturalistic strategy, is that of creating a tone of detachment. Detachment in naturalist works, as well as The Road, include creating nameless characters. This is done in order to draw more attention to the plot that is challenging the characters. The missing of the names, as a reader also creates a sensation, that something is missing. It is important that McCarthy made us feel like something is missing, because it creates a lost and confused mind. The readers mind is now the same as the characters; we are a part of the story.

Naturalism is also know to make the reader feel that the characters have a predetermined fate and can do little about it. The father and boy’s fat in the apocalyptic world, is obvious that of doomed death. This determinism device is often followed by a shocking/surprising ending. Which to me means, that quite possibly McCarthy might keep the novel, basically death to the very last pages. Within the last few pages, he will save the father and son ... or will he?

Meerschaum imagination annotation ?

     I would like to tackle the word "meerschaum" from Peace Like a River. This word comes up during the time of court dealings, right before Mr. DeCuellar enlightens Swede with a new game ... War at Sea. This is the exact passage it is found in, "He looked at her, brought out his meerschaum, and squatted comfortably."(82)    
    The reasons why this stuck out to me, was that it was a German word, and it's literal meaning would seem awkward and unfitting. I am German, and therefore reading this passage the first time automatically read it as it's original German meaning. Meerschaum translates into Sea foam. He brought out his sea foam? This imagery of waves crashing and as a result creating calm foam drawing towards the beach, made me view Mr.DeCuellar as described nice. First, he is like waves crashing (maybe symbolizing his job in protecting and turning people over) then later, he is the calm sea foam (talking and playing with Swede, comforting). My mind just accepted it as a great imagery device to use meerschaum as Dr. DeCuellars choice of speech. It just fit so well, with the War at Sea game reference, just a sentence later.(82)
    Once I researched the word in the dictionary, the revelation of a completely different meaning splashed me in the face.

[meer-shuhm, -shawm] –noun
1. a mineral, hydrous magnesium silicate, H 4 Mg 2 Si 3 O 1 0 , occurring in white, clay like masses, used for ornamental carvings, for pipe bowls, etc.; sepiolite.
2. a tobacco pipe with a bowl made of this substance.

    Realizing now, that meerschaum did not represent DeCuellars way of speaking, but his tobacco pipe, I felt a mix between "duh, that makes sense" and disappointment. I liked my initial way of thinking far better. Meerschaum symbolism seemed to be a secret, since I could not find any results...I must have been the first one to think deeply into meerschaum. Smoking Pipes, in general were compared to a man's hat, or clothing. They both reflect the style, personality, and taste of a person. Meerschaum pipes were white, hard (yet soft enough to be able to be scratch-carved into designs), quality, and artworks. Could this describe Mr. DeCuellar? ... white for pureness, righteousness? ... hard, yet has a soft side? ...quality?...artist? I think the symbolism could relate very well here. In order to do his job right, he must be righteous and hard, with slight softness. He must manipulate the word choice and tone he uses, as an art form to succeed at his lawyer profession with quality.
    As a summery, my own interpretation of meerschaum was great to be engaged in. The true meaning used in the story might have not been as greatly effective as mine, but it's what the author meant. Considering I am reading his work, I want to keep it to his meanings. The lawyer in the end is portrayed as a professional mannered man, by simple adding an artistic pipe to the story line.

Citations

Chisholm, Hugh, ed (1911). Encyclopædia Britannica (Eleventh ed.). Cambridge University Press.

"Meerschaum." Dictionary.com Unabridged. Random House, Inc. 31 Mar. 2011.
    <Dictionary.com http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Meerschaum>.

 

Enger, Lief. Peace Like a River. New York : Grove Press, 2001.

 

Love this "LOVE POEM"

This is my reflection on a love poem ... it’s titled “Love Poem”. =P Here is the poem for you to read, and then my reflection to follow. 

Love Poem

I want to write you
a love poem as headlong
as our creek
after thaw
when we stand
on its dangerous
banks and watch it carry
with it every twig
every dry leaf and branch
in its path
every scruple
when we see it
so swollen
with runoff
that even as we watch
we must grab
each other
and step back
we must grab each
other or
get our shoes
soaked we must
grab each other

First, I realized that the title is straight forward with what the writing will be about. This sets a mindset of a comfortable and personal feeling to the poem, instead of being disclosed in a strict literature style writing. The author sets the poem by describing it as headlong. David Hand figured out that, Headlong is defined as rushing in a manor which is reckless. This could be describing their “creek”, or love. The love between the lovers was so intimate a that they went with a constant speed, a flow, ignoring the fact that not much thought was being considered. This imagery and symbolism of flow, turns out to flow through the rest of the poem as a strong motif. 

To stick to this motif and also add more details, the author added more exaggerated and visual terms. First, she mentions the creek, then about how it’s so dangerous. A creek is like a peaceful miniature river, known to create calm and satisfying feelings ... yet she portrays it as an adventure (this was an interesting thought we had come up with in my poem group). This shows how every moment the author spent with her lover, was more than it seemed. It is also mentioned that this creek is thawing, which represents a season of change (as Jasmin had put it) . Spring brings about new life, new starts, and is all together a refreshing time. With this sense of freshness, she goes into how all their hesitations, thoughts, flaws, and other negatives are washed away/past. Scruple means hesitation caused from doubt with moral flaws. The creek, or their love, washes these away. 

Towards the end, the author does a great job tying the poem altogether. The “step back” and “grab each other” pieces go together, to signify their need for each other. They also describe their belief to let the old pass and embrace the new, as they still stay in check not to slip back into the past. At least that is my interpretation of the ending, with some influences by my peers in the poem group.

Reflective Post on New Face (alice walker)

New Face

I have learned not to worry about love;

but to honor its coming

with all my heart.

To examine the dark mysteries

of the blood

with headless heed and

swirl,

to know the rush of feelings

swift and flowing

as water.

The source appears to be

some inexhaustible

spring

within our twin and triple

selves;

the new face I turn up

to you

no one else on earth

has ever

seen.

This is one of my favorite love poems, for several reasons. It speaks to me, as if I am reading my own thoughts. I ,myself, had to deal with the process of not worrying about love. Rather than being worried about love, I am patient and welcoming to it. I, also want to learn about love’s secrets ... selflessly. I want to enjoy the flowing emotions that it brings. To me the source of love is originated from God, and therefore had no end, since he has no end. We have multiple personalities, we take on depending on who we are with. The most precious or special character comes out when we are loved. So, I indeed feel like the author shares my same feelings on this topic.

Within class discussion, my blog group came across details that I will share with you (I’m only saying this, to let you know, this isn’t all my thought work). The first two lines, reminded me of the Bible’s “love is patient”, and how we should appreciate love, rather than be obsessed to an unhealthy extent. Jasmin thought that the blood in the fifth line could symbolize deep passion, since it’s color is deep red. David brought forth that the word “swirl” helped bring about a flowing sense of the love emotions being portrayed. The inexhaustible spring, as I said before, I believe is/or could be God, while also reusing the flowing theme. David added that the flowing now became a motif. Another comment he used was that a new person has come out of the experience of love (lines 13-15). The ending 4 lines, I personally think are beautiful, with the comparison to spring. Spring can be an out flowing, but also a season. This spring, brings about new life, and new “faces” as leaves fall and flowers bloom. Much like spring the lover opened the others heart to a renewed life/face. 

The author is a christian, and therefore knows what true love is. She captures it’s definition quite well within the poem. The poem in my eyes, is written with Christian views. The inexhaustible spring and flowing uses create a feel of spirit.

This piece and the knowledge I gained from reading and discussing it, is mainly that of viewing writting in many different angles. This way it is appreciated more and also adds to the feel of it. I could even say, “I learned to love this poem.”

Creative post

Dear Government,

I just thought, you might want to know your hideous scheme is going to fall through.  You are probably laughing right now, thinking this is not a big deal. This is not a letter to be taken lightly. Well actually, I don’t care what you think or do, because either way we are breaking free.

If you don’t remember me, I was one of the technicians that were forced to reapply their handicaps. Well, when me and the other workers left, we decided to have a little talk. As an outcome of this little talk, none of us are wearing our handicaps. We are revealing the truth to many others. Soon, we will make up the whole population.

Our motifs are that of freedom. How can you say, you are helping us achieve and keep equality? We are wearing handicaps, and you are over lords?!?! No more! An older man among our group, spoke of this man his great grandfather would speak of. This man was know as Malcolm X. He had true ideas of equality and freedom. He once said, “It is criminal to teach man not to defend himself when he is the constant victim of brutal attacks.” Your ways of holding down “equality” is brutal, in mind and even the physical sense, as we saw recently. You blew the man’s life away with bullets, yet you didn’t realize that he wasn’t just flesh. He had an idea, he shared that idea, and it will be know forever. Once an idea is set in a mind, it won’t just disappear. Yes you killed the man, but his ideas are bullet proof. 

By the time you get this letter, majority of the society will have your secrets revealed. No one will be oppressed by your over lord ways any more. They will be enraged. We have already realized, there is no turning back now. We accept the fact that you may take our lives, but haven’t you already done so??? We will live the few moments of our lives with our own decisions, our own thoughts, our own feelings. 

HARISSON BERGERON was willing to die for ... freedom?

        Kurt Vonnegut’s Harrison Bergeron is very attached to the time at which it was written. Considering he wrote from the 60’s where the government were seen as superiorly strong, and the people as hope, we can conclude that he had his views on society versus government(compared to our present day views). I find it challenging to think about in current times, and the future. The questioning reason he uses in the setting is something very vivd and true in today’s society. Majority claim they want true equality, but this short story goes against our very desire. I love the way he convinced me that true equality has its negatives. Going by the story, we understand that with each step to further equality, we are taking a step back form freedom. So, from that point the main point of the story isn’t how bad the government is, but actually which we find more important, freedom, equality, or an in between.

       As a christian, I strongly believe in both equality and freedom. Jesus gave us the freedom from the ways of this world, and God intends us to live under a mind set of equality. Yet, even with God equality has its boundaries. There can be no situation were everyone is perfectly equal and still in some way striving and living for a purpose, or is there? I think there is not, yet there is no concrete proof to take either stand. My decision is for the reasons that even in heaven there is inequality. Yes, it’s true. Think about how God rules over all, then consider how angels and humans aren’t on the same level. We can also bring in the evils. In God we are given the authority to over come all evil. 

      We should all give people of all backgrounds the same chances and the same treatment we give to others. Ultimately, going back to Kurt’s idea of society giving into suppression and even growing used to it, I agree that society has been following that idea. So, for some food for thought...Are you really free, or equal? Are you living by your own decisions, or formed by someone else's?