Most Read
    Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

    Won’t have any what?

    Won’t have any what?


    Spotted by reader Scott in Asheville, NC, on July 4th:


    Donations tax deductible
    to the full extent allowed by law.


    BP non-oil corp American | July 7, 2011 at 10:03 am

    Love is a good thing, in addition to quoting a song from the distance past, “…happiness is a warm gun…”

    Ipso Facto | July 7, 2011 at 11:33 am

    I am a Cafeteria Christian. This means I went down the line and I took some of the tenets of Christianity and others I left there. I have always wondered about the supposed wisdom of loving one’s enemies. By the way, I didn’t take that tenet. It doesn’t make any sense to me. I would finish the bumper sticker by saying, Love your enemies and you won’t have any peace.

    jakee308 | July 7, 2011 at 12:15 pm

    That’s right. If you love your enemies you’ll be kissing their a$$ and serving up whatever they want to them and the main thing they want is to see you destroyed/ruined.

    If you’re dead or begging in the street, you don’t have
    (m)any enemies.

    Platitudes inspired by estrogen.

    Owego | July 7, 2011 at 3:52 pm

    A bumper sticker for the other side and a matching set – “If we could get rid of all the police, there’d be no more crime.” (Not original)

    David R. Graham | July 7, 2011 at 7:38 pm

    “Love your enemies.” and “Turn the other cheek.” are counsels to eschew revenge. They are NOT counsels to abjure self-defense.

    In addition, the counsels contain NO, repeat NO, implication that loving the enemy will produce a specific outcome, such as making the enemy not an enemy. The counsels do NOT address what a loved enemy will do in response. How could they?

    In addition, the counsels do NOT mean that self-defense against an enemy is unloving. Loving the enemy may include any number of context-driven responses to them, up to and including killing them. Love and discipline, including lethal discipline, are integral components of life. (And by “discipline” I mean punishment/rebuke to train to a standard of behavior, not sado-masochism.)

    In addition, there are four types of love and they are operationally integral: love for an inferior (libido), love for an equal (philia), love for a superior (eros), unconditional love (agape). The occasion, use and consequence matrices for those types of love differ and integrate, so, the requirement of clarity demands careful articulation when discussing and doing love.

    Finally, it is against revenge that these counsels point. They align with a fundamental rule of soldiering: never pursue an enemy who has left the field of battle, on the contrary, protect them as one does one’s own. If they are on the field of battle, or if they only feign leaving it, the right of self-defense legitimates (but, importantly, does not demand) fighting them to a decision. But an enemy who leaves the field must not be pursued, meaning, revenge must not taken on them for coming upon the field in the first place.

    The long-term personal, familial and social benefits of eschewing revenge are well-known and real. To those benefits the counsels look. They are realistic, practical and confirmed by the experience of the race. They do NOT commend much less demand baring the neck or cheek to an enemy. They do not address the subject of self-defense, much less the subject of an enemy’s response.

    Hollywood, bars and locker rooms commend revenge. The sign is irrational.

      No. What the bumper sticker means is just what it says. It presupposes that your enemy will love you back rather than stick a dagger in your heart or back. It is no different than the “war is not the answer” or the “coexist” bumper stickers. And revenge may or may not be wrong, but it feels really, really good.

    Leave a Comment

    Leave a Reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.

    Notify me of followup comments via e-mail (or subscribe without commenting.)

    Font Resize
    Contrast Mode
    Send this to a friend