One intent of law is to protect the individual from abuse of all kinds. Libel and slander are spiritually abusive behaviors for they seek to destroy the integrity and honesty of individuals in the awareness of the rest of society. They are a form of adult temper tantrum that takes the form of "You didn't give me what I wanted, so I'll make you sorry!" Others have expressed it also as: "I think you did something wrong to me, so I will do something worse against you!"

Feelings of accusation may be legitimate and witnessed, or, they may be entirely the fantasy of someone who projects into reality their own feelings of insecurity and low self-esteem to provide a fantasy of negativity to cover over exaggerated feelings of shame, anger, abandonment. The latter results in vengefulness against the innocent: abuse.

If the felt wrong is real, that is, it did happen in the manner and for the intent which the accusing victim believes, the vengeful "Eye for an eye" response is a straightforward infantile response of the emotionally distressed 2-year-old who is finding that the world was not made solely for his or her benefit. Like rage, vengefulness goes beyond anger, and, to do that, the one expressing it must obsess on their feelings and their memory of the experience. This obsession is the result of a constant anxiety.

The anxiety of the victim could be resolved by the aggressive interaction of expressing one's anger and hurt to the one considered responsible. This could lead to a possible assertive conclusion if the perpetrator acknowledged their negative behavior, learned from the feedback, requested forgiveness, and, chose to and make an effort to modify their future behavior.

Constructive problem resolution seldom happens with an individual who projects their own feelings and assumptions onto reality. Often proud and hard-of-hearing, their reactions usually accelerate conflict situations into compliance or violence from the victim. Compliance reinforces the person's trait of projection. Violence reassures them by allowing them to blame their adversary, or partner, for being weak, or abusive. The projective person cannot understand the reality of assertiveness. For them, all is just "my way", or, wrong!

The vengeful person chooses to be a victim.
They choose to avoid the interaction and confrontation which could lead to an exchange of feedback, enable clarification, and reach a possible resolution. That would make them, and their initial adversary both winners in personal growth through expanded awareness and empathy. Instead, the vengeful person, in affirming their lack of self-confidence, chooses to prevent their supposed attacker from taking responsibility for their errors. They assume prejudgement, convict, and, sentence the accused, without the freedom of a hearing, or a defense, to a penalty arrived at with the extreme prejudice of exaggerated emotions.

The result of vengefulness is ALWAYS unjustfulness for an unfair and/or exaggerated penalty rationally justifies a compensatory action by the original perpetrator --- who has now been victimized. This is the basis of feuds, tit-for-tat exchanges, much violence, most wars. In the end, everyone loses. Everyone chooses to play god and be proud in their intolerant assumptions. Truth is never sought or clarified. Wrongs are never acknowledged, only justified by the wrongs of others.

A just retribution or penalty is never determined for such is only possible with a full knowledge of the details of the original incident and with feedback from the perpetrator which acknowledges what would be a relevant penalty. I may penalize you by not allowing you to drink coffee for a week, but, if you don't like coffee and don't drink it, the penalty is meaningless and provides neither deterrent for the future nor sacrifice in the present. By my assuming your guilt and your penalty, I lose TWICE, and you lose ONCE, for perhaps being innocent. This is immaturity and foolishness for if I have chosen this direction, I have forced us both to be losers and to be victims.

Why insist on being a loser?
Energy blocks, imprinting, lack of coping skills, extremes of one's Basic Personality --- all are possible contributors to such a dynamic. Each of these factors are discussed in more detail elsewhere on the Earthtym.net site or in the Health Balance Package. From the standpoint of Spirituality and Justice, a loser makes losers of us all. They win at nothing other than confirming to themselves and demonstrating to the world around them that they are losers ... and committed to remaining so.

If one's legal system is just it must limit instances of abuse. To do that it must have statements and procedures which define, limit, and prosecute instances of abuse. The attached political system must allocate sufficient resources to enable anyone so abused to find justice through an enactment of penalty, or, a refutation of lies, slander, innuendo --- spiritual abuse. The results must be made public to provide positive reinforcement for persons to reflect, and attempt to resolve BEFORE rushing to judgement with lynch-mentality or vigilante short-sightedness. The results, with adequate publicity, become educational resources for the encouragement of citizens to grow into a maturity of consensual understanding and respect based on an openness and honesty of communication. But, is this the reality?

The following is a Province of Ontario (2001), Canada, reality.
From the news stories I read and the reports which are sent to me, it appears that this reality is replicated through much of the political world which likes to think of itself and promote itself as "civilized." If someone in Ontario chooses to use their influence to discredit you, there is little that the culture will do to protect you. It will actually work against your maintaining and re-establishing your good image.

In the early 2000s super-competitive and job shrinking economy, government budgets have been slashed with an attempt to decrease bureaucratic waste and tax levels. If it were not super-competitive, there would not be almost daily reports in the newspapers of another 10,000 to 40,000 persons being laid off from their jobs and mergers and acquisitions being made between former rivals. The need to decrease taxes, in addition to getting re-elected, is to assist taxpayers in retaining their standard of living in spite of pay and benefit cuts. More and more of the populace is statistically becoming poor while almost all are reported maxed out to their credit limit.

Those who are poor require government legal assistance in order to allow them legal representation to defend themselves. Ontario Legal Aid Assistance Plan (OLAP) is the government agency charged with this purpose, but, cases involving libel or defamation are NOT covered. In other words, you can be a hard working, honest, professional of high integrity and lose your job, career, friends, spouse, and perhaps your freedom --- because you cannot AFFORD justice. Such trials are necessarily expensive as many witnesses are likely to be called.

Lawyers have also confided to me, that if I wanted to win a legal case, my best assurance would be to hire a lawyer of high prestige, power, and cost. Every lawyer knows they will someday likely face their opposition lawyer again. If they have trounced their professional brother this time, their "brother" may do his best to bury him or her next time. So, out of respect, my lawyer may proceed slowly and win, if they are allowed. If the more powerful lawyer is feeling insecure or feels threatened by the communication of the lesser lawyer during the pre-trial and trial proceedings, someone is going to lose --- and, it won't be them. So, your freedom and integrity are played out on the "Justice" boardgame by players with unequal resources. For you, it is win or lose. For them, they win (money, acceptance) regardless of the verdict. Everyone goes home happy, except the innocent person.

Injustice encourages evil persons who have been allowed to get away with injustice to commit more injustices. Every failure in policing and prosecution creates confidence in the criminal for whom it means a win. It also encourages civility to breakdown with the likely unjust outcomes of tit-tit-for tat, social disturbance, political apathy, chronic illness, vengeance, violence, increased criminality through egotistical disrespect for the law. Persons who might defend the innocent are encouraged to back off and abandon the innocent in an attempt to avoid becoming drawn into the mess. If evil against one person is going to be allowed, why bring it against yourself also? Check the biographies of every tyrant, including Mussolini, Hitler, Stalin, Hussein .... The pattern is clear.

What of our two EXAMPLES?

While the examples are from a Canadian Province, the legal complexity, detail, structure, formality, and injustice ... is common to most legal systems.

• Tenancy Rights (Ontario);
• Defamation and LIBEL (Ontario).

TENANCY RIGHTS:
The would-be tyrant landlord and her spiritual slaves lost.
Her intent, by her actions, was to make my life difficult and hurt me as much as she could. Instead, she, and they, freed me from a great amount of negative influence experienced by my continual close association with one or other of them. I cannot work with persons who choose to be failures ... who choose to keep their energy blocks and complain about their old lives as if with a badge of victimhood. It was their choice to pin those badges on themselves at this stage. It is never my choice to give up on anyone or to abandon them so making the break would have been a difficult endeavor for me, and impossible without being Guided to. They made the break easy, fast, and relatively painless.

The landlord revealed the depth of her evil for all to see.
How kind and loving is a person who does their best to destroy the income of another person and force them into the street through misrepresentation of the person's integrity and manipulation and deception of the support of those co-dependent upon her? There are now documents on file in the bureaucracy setting out my legal complaints even if they were not resolved. An adjudicator, mediator, and many others who are associated with me in a positive way --- now associate her name with her actions. I lost 2 weeks worth of residency. Isn't that a PLUS in order to get away from such negativity and destructiveness?

The landlord failed completely in her intent.
I can say that since moving, I have been happier and more content in my new location than I was for much of the last 2 or 3 months as a tenant at her place. I did manage to get a place to store my things and to live in addition to a formal office. In the agreement I had with her, much of my references were in storage at a distance; now they are within a few minutes walk.

Before, I had to see clients in the basement area I rented, or in a small boardroom. Now I see them in a formal office, always. Since 48 hours after the move, I have had more work than I can do and have had to NOT contact prospects as I cannot yet afford time for them. Before, I was at a distance from grocery and other stores, business services, a laundromat, coffee shops. Now, I am surrounded by them. I thank her for her coercive encouragement that drove me into a better life.

What of our second EXAMPLE?

While the examples are from a Canadian Province, the legal complexity, detail, structure, formality, and injustice ... is common to most legal systems.

• Tenancy Rights (Ontario);
• Defamation and Libel (Ontario).

DEFAMATION and LIBEL:
By allowing others to be spiritually abused, we sanction malicious gossip, lies, and defamation. If you so encourage the act, do not complain when it becomes used against you.

I have won by NOT reacting to the negativity of my protagonists and becoming more like them. I did not support their projections and fantasies by returning their abuse. I was assertive in being open and honest with them and telling them of my concerns and inviting feedback and dialogue. I have followed Guidance with the strengths of my Basic Personality to detail, analyse, and provide an understanding of and a strategy for coping with such a difficulty constructively.

The normal non-spiritual REACTION to their assault would have been to strike back. That could have meant public and private displays of anger and physical violence, further reacted to by the perpetrator with behaviors of abandonment, lack of acknowledgement, denial, and, greater projection. Articles might have been smashed, or destroyed, or burned. Threats of physical injury would likely have been made. Murder or suicide may have been attempted or made successful.

In Marshall Houtt's excellent volume "They Asked for Death", his forensic analysis of individual examples of couple interaction leading to murder indicate a high incidence of a pattern involving two persons who BOTH share low self-esteem, a lack of assertiveness, a lack of trustfulness, co-dependency, projection. There is little justice for the survivor and none for the perpetrator. Each has been locked into reactive failure patterns established by childhood imprinting, energy block generating traumatic experiences, and, lack of self-direction.