Non-tolerance of Violence

•••

I was just reading a news article regarding the conviction of four members of the Animal Liberation Front getting a maximum of 14 years in prison for a six-year campaign of blackmail against an animal research laboratory in the UK. Although, we condemn extremist activities, no matter for what cause or issue; we think that this sentence is too harsh.

On the other hand, I just cannot understand how some people upon witnessing an animal being abused - say, a dog being beaten by its owner - will do something instantly to stop the owner from continuing his violent act, even to the extent of calling the police phone number, 911, which, by the way, should only be called during emergency – but, will not do anything to stop their government from going to war and killing hundreds of thousands of innocents.

War is the worst kind of violence that could be inflicted on innocent people of the world -- no matter where they are, whoever they may be.

Here is a good example of what we said in an earlier post, that tolerance of violence is violence.

We will add something to this. If tolerance of violence is violence, therefore, non-tolerance of violence is nonviolence.

Working for cessation of wars is active nonviolence.

Wouldn't it be just great if people have the same abhorrence and repugnance to wars and to violence inflicted on their fellow human beings as they have to animal abuse?

•••