Theos-Talk Archives (February 1997 Message tl00007)

Jerry, this is just a general response to your response before I move on. In
using the examples I did, I didn't mean to imply that I support the dictum of
"an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth." This is the old Judaic law.
However, you yourself have said that there has to be rule of law. In my
opinion, this rule of law has to be based on objective reality. A case is
presented to a judge and/or jury in a court of law. Objective facts are
presented to him. Manipulation of facts or the presentation of "factoids" by
clever lawyers don't alter the objective realities involved in the case. He
or the jury determine a sentence. He or they may adjust that sentence and/or
impose none at all based on extenuating circumstances. In other words, it's
Justice tempered by Mercy. We see this happening all the time. Some say we
have too much of it. Some say we have too little. In either case, this does
not abrogate objective reality and neither do shifting cultural values.

Our concept of right and wrong have to be held to the highest standards. The
Soviet Union and Nazi Germany had their courts of law but they were a sham.
That may have suited the ruling powers in those countries but it certainly
didn't help their citizenry. More often than not, victims of their so-called
justice were sent off to the gulag or the concentration camp. If we didn't
have universal standards regarding  law and justice we wouldn't be able to
discern the abuse of human rights.

You say that every plane is both objective and subjective. I fully agree. The
minute the universe comes into manifestation, there's a duality even if only
a subtle one on the highest planes. However, I'm under the impression you are
overemphasizing the objective at the expense of the subjective. Subjectivism
leads to anarchy and chaos. We have seen examples of this in Somalia,
Lebanon, Bosnia and, as you have mentioned, in Ireland.

LunarPitri

------------------------------