Originally Posted by Steve
According to the subjective model, when you forgive, accept, and love all parts of yourself, you will forgive, accept, and love all other human beings as they are.
Long time reader of Steve's site here. Normally I find Steve's article resonate very strongly but i'm a little stuck on this one.
The essence of my problem is that Steve seems to be saying: unconditional love = unconditional forgiveness & acceptance. Unconditional acceptance is a very difficult concept to swallow. It implies a complete lack of desire to instigate change in the world around us and in our relationships with the people in it.
I can think of plenty of examples where unconditional acceptance would have been wrong course of action.
WW2. What if Britain has unconditionally accepted Germany's annoying habit of invading its neighbours? Or what if Nelson Mandella has unconditionally accepted the treatment of Blacks in South Africa under the Apartheid regime? Both times people acted on an unacceptable situation for what I would call the greater good (this may or may not be an appropriate term for Erin's filing habits hehe). Is it possible to have unconditional love for someone and yet adamantly refuse to accept them as they as? I think so. Why does having love for someone mean you let them treat you like a doormat? Not everybody is so enlightened as to be able to follow a superior example of how to act without some coercion, or even to recognise superior behaviour when it presents itself. In the article by Steve he uses his tidyness is an example. It is implied this is a superior behavioural condition to being messy. Why? This is a viewpoint that may or may not be shared by everybody and depends largely on their personal frame of reference, upbringing, cultural standards etc. This same concept can be applied to all manner of behaviour.