Is abortion on-topic? (was Re: On abortion and moral intuition)

[Angela Harms]

It's topics like this one, that 1) come up naturally in discussion and 2) raise strong feelings, that give us the opportunity to find the errors in NVC, and correct them. For me, it's providing the kind of challenges that evolution thrives on.

I have been especially delighted in working with responses that have been "outside the model." I'm finding the practice very enriching.

Angela

[Conal Elliott]

that give us the opportunity to find the errors in NVC, and correct them

Now *that* would be on topic!

[Angela Harms]

Maybe I was too concise. :)

What I mean is perhaps whether something's on-topic isn't so much about the subjects we discuss, as about showing interest, while discussing them, in developing NVC consciousness around them?

Here's what I've noticed about this discussion:

• First, Craig said "I know it is not in the model to interject myself so early in the process of empathy... But I share your unease." And then it was all about him.
  
  
• Then, my dear Tracy tried to comfort me by explaining that the thing I was sad around wasn't real. (He and I covered that one at home.)
  
  
• And now Susan offers lists of facts that she thinks imply a moral conclusion, and I can't tell whether she's enjoying her jackal show, and working toward the place of non-judgement, or whether she thinks this is a debate.

It's true that these things would be more fun if I could be sure all the players are actually interested in and motivated by the desire to co-create a real NVC consciousness that fits with all of life. But even if I can't, it's been *really* enriching for me to work with these reactions.

Doesn't mean it's good for the list, but it might be. It's good for me! :)

Angela

[Craig Sones Cornell]

On Oct 1, 10:56 am, "Angela Harms" <angela.ha...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Maybe I was too concise. :)
>
> What I mean is perhaps whether something's on-topic isn't so much about the
> subjects we discuss, as about showing interest, while discussing them, in
> developing NVC consciousness around them?
>
> Here's what I've noticed about this discussion:
>

>    - First, Craig said "I know it is not in the model to interject myself so

>    early in the process of empathy... But I share your unease." And then it was
>    all about him.

This is frustrating and difficult for me. I am hearing that I am too
abstract, philosophical, and wordy (giraffe guilty of the last
one)from some quarters. That I am at my best when I share myself. Then
that I am interjecting too much of myself. Hmm. More information and
details might add to my clarity. If you are willing, give it a shot.

>    - Then, my dear Tracy tried to comfort me by explaining that the thing I

>    was sad around wasn't real. (He and I covered that one at home.)

I am glad you found some comfort. That meets my needs for mutuality
and compassion.
>
>    - And now Susan offers lists of facts that she thinks imply a moral

>    conclusion, and I can't tell whether she's enjoying her jackal show, and
>    working toward the place of non-judgement, or whether she thinks this is a
>    debate.
>
> It's true that these things would be more fun if I could be sure all the
> players are actually interested in and motivated by the desire to co-create

> a real NVC consciousness that fits with all of life. But even if I can't, *it's
> been *really* enriching* for me to work with these reactions.

My goal with my too long focus on abortion advocacy by Marshall as you
presented it was to scream for empathy and inclusion of anti-choice
people in the NVC model. I guess I was too far outside of the model
and/or lacked clarity as Conal suggests in another thread. I regret my
effect, but stand by my intention. Noting would please me more than to
co-create an NVC consciousness that is a co-creation of us all. I am
glad that working with your reactions has been enriching. That is
really a huge relief for me.

> Doesn't mean it's good for the list, but it might be. It's good for me! :)

I hope we decide what is "good" for the list, whatever that means, by
consensus and empathy and honesty as giraffe's experience and practice
it. Your view of something being precious to you is precious to me.

All the best and a little teary with relief, Craig.

> Angela

[Susan L]

- And now Susan offers lists of facts that she thinks imply a moral

conclusion, and I can't tell whether she's enjoying her jackal
show, and
working toward the place of non-judgement, or whether she thinks
this is a
debate.

I was shocked when I read this response to my post, and I am mourning
an unmet need for understanding.

Would you be willing to explain to me the difference between a fact,
which you seem not to value, and an observation, which I'm guessing
you do value as an NVC practitioner? And would you be willing to
refrain from drawing conclusions about what I think my observations
imply before you offer a reflection? because I was trying to take the
discussion out of the realm of moral judgments, not make one myself!

I didn't enjoy your labeling of my post as a jackal show, and I could
use some help in transforming that statement into something other than
a judgment. However, even if you are "right" and it WAS a jackal
show, would you be willing to offer my jackal some acceptance? My
jackal is, after all, my favorite pet because it calls my attention to
concerns where my deepest NVC skills are needed to restore my inner
peace.

Are you asking if I think this a debate? If so, the answer is YES it
looked like a debate to me with people trying to make right-wrong
generalizations about abortion. I was calling for an END to the
debate by NOT participating in it but rather expressing my deepest
values that are connected to the decision of a mother to end a life
that began in her body, namely:

1. That all children know that they are precious.
2. That women who terminate the life of a child be treated with
compassion.