Actually, Murph didn't write the comments below -- I did -- his wife,
Bev.  Just wanted to clairify.

On Sat, 18 Sep 1999 00:49:06 -0400 joan carol urquhart
<[log in to unmask]> writes:
> ON Sept  17 Murph adamantly wrote:
>
>
> >I am very sad, however, that so many on this list seem to believe
> that
> >morality is relative and that, as Joan Carol Urquhart states:
> "Anyone
> >with a heart would agree that to alleviate human suffering, at any
> moral
> >sacrifice, is good and right."  Joan, you have just justified
> Columbine
> >-- after all, those young men were suffering and they chose the
> killing
> >of their classmates and themselves to alleviate their suffering.
>
>
> How could any single human being  justify murder?...If you re-read
> my words,
> you will note that I say that "to alleviate human suffering at any
> MORAL
> sacrifice is good and right."  When I say a  'moral sacrifice'... I
> do not
> mean to suggest that one should sacrifice one's morals.  Instead I
> mean that
> if we can help someone  through moral means or   if,  through moral
> means,
> we can help to alleviate another's  suffering, lets not waste time,
> lets do
> it.  If medical science can craft a cure for Parkinson's Disease
> without
> harming anyone  in the process, do it.  I am not advocating that we
> hurt or
> kill or work without morality to do so...   How have I justified
> Columbine?
> The only people who try to justify violence are the people who
> commit
> violence or profit from it.  The boys who did the Columbine killings
>  may
> have, as you say,  "suffered",  but their suffering is diminshed by
> the
> violence they perpetrated on others.  We all have a right to our
> feelings.
> But none of us has a right to harm another person.
>
> What happened in WWW11 Germany under Hitler's regime, including the
> medical
> experiments was autrocious. Unfathomable.
> We are in agreement.  But once again, words get in the way of our
> understanding each other. They tie us up in Knots of
> misunderstanding.
>
>
>
> "All in all
> Each man in all men
> all men in each man
>
> All being in each being
> Each being in all being
>
> All in each
> Each in all
>
> All distinctions are mind, by mind, in mind, of mind
> No  distinctions no mind to distinguish"
>
> R. D. Laing
>
>
>
>
> Be at peace
> Joan U.