From: hyder@cs.utexas.edu (Syed Irfan Hyder)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.pakistan
Subject: Re: Contradictions of (so called) upholders of rights
Date: 20 Aug 1992 12:22:07 -0500
Organization: U Texas Dept of Computer Sciences, Austin TX
NNTP-Posting-Host: pageboy.cs.utexas.edu

In article <1992Aug19.234503.2531@sol.cs.wmich.edu> sherwani@sol.cs.wmich.edu (Naveed Sherwani) writes:
>
> I am a peaceful fellow, who would prefer to live and let live in peace.
>We cannot allow people to EXERCISE their religion on others due to
>following example.

This reminds me of two more peaceful people: Dr. Zhivago in Boris 
Pasternak's novel and the nephew (forgotten his name) of 
Monseigneur, the Marquise (sp?) in Dicken's "A Tale of Two Cities".
Both of them belonged to the privileged classes of France and
Russia before their respective revolutions. Both understood
the exploitation of poor people by their classes and abhored it.
 Both of them knew it was wrong, felt it was wrong.
So, both had the opportunity and therefore the responsiblity 
to make some difference. However, one escaped to England from the
 responsiblity, while the other took refuge in poetry. In turn,
history was ruthless in punishing them for "escaping their
 responsiblity". I have thought and wondered for so long, why?
what was their fault? why them? why the poor cobbler? why the
poor women?

Then there is light. I am reminded of Jean Valgean in "Les Miserable".
I know Jean Valgean had the opportunity of being indifferent after
his escape. But he didn't. "Life is to give and not to take",
the kind priest reminded Valgean. [When the police bring him in for
stealing the silver candlestands, and the  priest tells the police
in order to let him go that he had actually presented the 
candlestands to Valgean.] Jean Valgean, then becomes the active
supporter of fight against injustices.

Moral of the three novels:

If one is bestowed with knowledge, intelligence, and opportunity,
and if he doesn't use them to obliterate injustice in this world,
then his indifference is construed by history as escape. For such
escapes into indifference, neutrality and apathy, history never
forgives. The missed opportunities always come back to haunt.
Such people are then made an example for those who come later.
They are an example and a warning for us to shape up and act. If not,
then shortly we will be made yet another example!!!!!!!!!!
>
>In other words, your ultimate truth stops, where my nose starts,
>whatever your ultimate truth is, could be total trash for me.
>In a world, where everyone is looking for ultimate truth and acting
>upon and naking others follow it, would be a terrible world.
>As a result, we propose a differnt model, which allows you to
>find you ultimate truth but you cannot not impose it on others,
>until they want it without pressure.
>If you feel that ultimate truth is unique, then your message should
>be so powerful, that poeple will folk to you, you dont have use force.

I agree will all the above. But the question remains that all the
above logic "should not" make us "indifferent", apathetic and
listless for injustices happenings around us. There are times when
there is no doubt about an "injustice" being done __ for instance
today in Bosnia. However, in such times, rationalizing like
"national security etc" should not make us indifferent, which
in turns appears as aiding the tyrant and the cruels. A situation
so clearly apparent to us today vis-a-vis bosnia and serbia.