I went to a Quaker meeting...

[otherlander]

When I got there this nice lady gave me a couple of pamphlets about Quakers. Then I went into the main room where they had all these benches in circles, so instead of facing a speaker in front you were just facing each other. For the first half hour or so, nobody said anything and everyone just kind of sat there and meditated. Then about 5 people talked. Then everyone got up and shook hands. From what I heard from the people talking, they're into environmentalism and women's rights. Awesome.

After sitting there for an hour and then shaking hands, everyone went into this other room where there was food and they just walked around the room and talked to each other. I started talking with this one guy who said that this meeting was "pretty unitarian" and they had people from a lot of different religions and some not-so-religious people to. Apparently the Quakers in the middle of the country are more Christianity-centered and more conservative, but still pacifists. The ones here in Pennsylvania, or at least this part of Pennsylvania, are more progressive.

I don't think I could really be one of them, though. My basic philosophy is that there is no one right way of living, and that if we can accept that and agree that nobody knows what is "best for" anyone else, it frees us to help each other without being paternalistic. And I also think that both love and rage can be used as tools for shaping a more free and more human world. I don't think they would agree with me on that one.

Another thing is, I'm not a pacifist. I used to be, but then I realized that I, living comfortably in the suburbs, had no right to say that *no one* was *ever* justified in using violence to fight oppression. What I think is that when bad circumstances cause rage and fury, these emotions are appropriate and useful. And sometimes the ugliness that surrounds a person is so great and so blinding that when they try to fight it they wind up creating more of it, becoming what they rage against. Riots, dictators replaced with dictators, paranoia, random executions, etc. But I don't think that people should therefore stop trying to use their anger to change things and only try to change things through love. I think that people who find non-destructive ways to use anger as a tool should be applauded. Rage doesn't have to mean violence. But there are a few things that I think justify violence. Overthrowing dictators, self-defense, freeing hostages whose lives are in danger, etc. It's not exactly a Quaker philosophy that I have.

But I think I'll go back, though. They sell fair trade coffee. Next time I think I'll bring money to buy some. Maybe bring up my ideas about psychology if I get into another philosophical discussion with somebody.

Edit: previous thread about this:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=105&topic_id=7651219