Or we can do it this way:
If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone. (Romans 12:18.)
I’m for the Roman way. Those who disdain peace have never been through a war.
Interesting – and powerful – way to put it. Is there a particular person that is attributed to?
I think that’s an original, Tim.
Well done, then, Jim.
We really ought to be calling it anti-social media. Anonymity plus a lack of personal contact seems to add up to behavior that would never be tolerated if we met each other on the street.
The same phrase was running through my head this morning, Steve.
P.S. Here’s something I wrote along that vein: How to make sure your blog is more social media than anti-social media.
I know what you mean. It becomes very clear, very quickly, that there are defined “sides” to issues, and it’s hard for people to cross the line and relate to someone on the other side as if they’re a real person. The issue and the stance get in the way. I think the more intensely we feel about an issue, the more we need to be sure we’re not dehumanizing others who take a different or opposing view. I appreciate those who make the effort to do that, including yourself, Doug Bursch (@fairlyspiritual), and others.
Good points, Jeannie. Scorched earth tactics have no place in our relationships with other people.
P.S. I’d put you on the same list with Doug, you know.
Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:
You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Twitter account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Facebook account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Google+ account. ( Log Out / Change )
Connecting to %s
Notify me of new comments via email.
Notify me of new posts via email.
Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.
Join 4,952 other followers