[114] A Wee Bit Of A Problem

Thursday, July 31, 2008 at 2:43am

Hookay, here's the thing.

Like a dumb ass I'm currently entrenched in another "debate" or haphazard discussion about the christian god. What bothers me more than anything is hearing the same tired arguments and faulty logic that tries to leach from so many misunderstood areas of science and rules of logic. What I want to do is download every last video I've ever watched about evolution or Christianity and put them in a nice packet called No More Excuses. Unfortunately, this endeavor would take a the better part of my week and and space on my hard drives. Also, since the stuff is streamed online, It almost feels too redundant to have my personal copies for independent distribution. Even further, I simply don't find the people willing enough to go through and actually watch and learn from that much information. Finally, I could beat someone over the head with this information, and they would still ask me "how do I know I can trust that's a real bat your hitting me with?"

On the other hand, it would save so much time to just say, "here's a chuck of what you need to look at before we begin talking, get back to me later." It would not allow people to use the, shockingly frequent excuse, of slow internet connections. Anyone who knows the art of arguing online, apart from it being incredibly ridiculous, is that he who has the last word is felt to be the "winner" despite whether the conversation was understood by those reading it or not. To avoid feeling like I've "lost" in that sense I can just dump this on them and perhaps gear the conversation from theoretical speculation about where Zeus flew off too (actually brought up by someone) and to the actual science and most importantly, rules of logical argument that allow me to call people desperately and patently wrong. Do I go for it, and what will it really change?

3 comments

David M.L. Jaffe wroteat 9:32am on July 31st, 2008 I don't see it changing much. You know those religious ones, they'll just say everything that doesn't agree with the bible is wrong. Report - Delete

Nick P. wroteat 10:08am on July 31st, 2008 I don't see it changing much either so that's why I took the middle ground and am just making my profile a compilation of links. Delete

Cara Zimmerman (Chicago, IL) wroteat 10:59pm on August 1st, 2008 Hey now, it's not my fault I have a slow internet connection.

[113] Save Me Joel!

Sunday, July 27, 2008 at 8:17am

Joel Osteen is a character, I'll tell you what. I what to do a study about the number of passages and stories in the bible that seem to teach people non-sequitur metaphors and complacency. Osteen came up with this metaphor about God being like rainclouds. You have to constantly give God praise, like the growing condensation in a raincloud, and it will eventually rain down into your life with supernatural opportunities and new horizons. He goes back to money issues and relationship issues frequently. I can't argue with him about switching out of a defeat mode, but to take that energy towards praise instead of work I believer is superbly wrong. It kills me to think that the religious speeches are so close to getting things right, but immediately take the wind out of their sales when they tell you to focus on a god. This kind of thinking would be perfect before the days of logic and established rules in science, but unfortunately for these people once they get out of church, they go back to playing by the same rules as the rest of us. One example he uses was to imagine that your in traffic and instead of being upset at the traffic, be happy that you have a job. Now, okay great, be happy about what's going right in your life. I don't think I could depict a better example of looking for and taking the good, and completely ignoring the bad. The fact remains, traffic is a bitch, if you really want to avoid it, leave for work earlier. It does not help you deal with your anger when you ignore what it's directed towards. Osteen says it himself that change isn't going to happen within our own minds, or hearts, or intellect, it will happen in God's breath and rain. In other words, your stupidity can go ignored if you focus on how awesome it was to walk to today.

Instead of learning the proper strategies to make concrete changes in their lives, believers are allowed every opportunity to push their problems farther and farther away. How can you explain to someone that your problem with them isn't that they happen to get happy with a particular sky daddy, but their happiness is at the expense of, and almost in spite of, the hard fought knowledge of those whose contributions go towards making everyone's lives better, not just their own. The whole of Osteen's talk was about giving it to God so he can trickle it back down on you. Why wait for God? Why do you need to call that lucky parking space a message that you should respect and help your fellow man? Also, exalting that space, or working hands, or meager job etc. as the result of your praise, does not teach you how to get out of your debt or find a date. Yet another way to say how religion is one of, if not the most, destructive institution we've managed to concoct. I find myself just thinking “wow” that right after the sermon with everyone in their Sunday's best, the commercial about all the poor African families comes on. Some Christian group has managed to get Mewquay his first sippy cup and pair of shoes. All I can think about is Dubai where a recently learned a new fountain will be put in, greater and grander than the one in Vegas. I can't help but that think if the Christian groups really wanted to help, I mean give their all, for Jesus, they'd learn how to make the money of the billionaires building fountains and use it make suburbs for Africans. O wait, is religion already an industry worth billions of dollars, tax exempt dollars no less? One doesn't have to think that hard to realize where their real focus is.

10 comments

MikeAnthony BluAssasin Pirtle wroteat 8:46am on July 27th, 2008 dude... u're just sooooo confused righ now Report - Delete

Byron R. Turner II (McKendree) wroteat 9:47am on July 27th, 2008 I'm pretty sure he's alot more clear minded than anyone who believes in the sky-daddy or god (I didn't capatilze it on purpose) as some whould like to cal it. You bring up a great point, we all know religion is a billion dollar tax free corporation. In my exploration of relgious houses of worship I've seen more than one church gross over a million and a half alone, yet they still ask for more. Maybe they should stop filling the pockets or better yet stop brainwashing people into thinking you have to believe in the almighty sky-daddy ( I love that term) to be a good, giving person. Instead of building another mega church that can seat up to 50,000 people in the US, how about they take that money and build house, supply water, or simply food to destitude Africans. But if they did that then they'd have 50,000 less people that were brain washed and that much money out of their pockets. Report - Delete

David M.L. Jaffe wroteat 12:19pm on July 27th, 2008 Religion becoming an industry. Hmm.. Now, if you're talking about businesses using religion as a way to get those tax exemptions through donations, while using it for advertisement and marketing, then I completely agree. In Iowa, I helped Winter and her mom's church fix up this recently widowed lady's (shes like 27, three kids) mobile home. They completely redid the place. Furnature, bathroom, kitchen, appliances, carpet, beds, everything. All donated, all tax exempt. Now don't get me wrong, I think it was awesome the church and those businesses could do it for her, but I agree with you, the donation aspect of religion is getting a bit "business-like", not that it's a bad thing. They used money and donations to actually HELP someone. Using money to create more worthless fountains, or mega church, as Mr. Turner said, is completely unnecessary, and to me, wrong in terms of religion. I like how he said churches can gross 1 million+, and still ask for more. It's true, and is indeed showing religion turning into an industry. Religion itself becoming an industry? No. How we're using religion? Damn right it is. Report - Delete

David M.L. Jaffe wroteat 12:21pm on July 27th, 2008 I like your first paragraph as well. Using religion to distract you from your problems is just stupid, and one of the reasons I don't really like religion. If traffic sucks and you're late for work, don't ignore it and ask God to make traffic speed up, or tell you how awesome your life is. Fucking do something about it. Take a new route. Leave earlier. Be productive. /end rant. Report - Delete

Nick P. wroteat 9:37pm on July 27th, 2008 Mr. Pirtle if you'd like to explain to me how I'm so confused I'm eager to hear it. Delete

Cara Zimmerman (Chicago, IL) wroteat 11:49pm on July 27th, 2008 Hey, um, just giving my input as a "religious" person. I realize that I'm only 19 and I don't have a steady income, but no, I do not give any money to my church. I mean, yeah we take an offering every week, but there is never any pressure or awkwardness if you don't give money. And the fact that my church is so freaking huge and keeps adding on new things to it actually has bothered me before, especially when there's people in need of money. You're right, we should be using the money on people who actually need it.

[112] It's All About Me (Happy Birthday To Me)

Saturday, July 26, 2008 at 2:29am

I don't fit in. This is something I am repeatedly reminded of in any given social situation. This is not to say I can't get along well enough in tighter circles, but essentially, I'm different. For as long as I can remember I've been fully aware of this difference. Whatever brainwave a mass of people might be on, it always manages to pass right by me. I think this comes from me incessantly thinking about people instead of acting like them. At some level this “capacity,” or whatever you want to call it, is one of the best things I could hope to do to myself, but in another way it opens up so many paths and things to think about you start to wonder what's really motivating these thoughts. I'm so adamant about seeing people's actions and judging them by their work because I don't trust the origins of my own thoughts, let alone their own misunderstood and often misguided ways of looking at things. And here we find the break. Who am I to levy the charge of others being misunderstood and misguided? Did I not just admit to questioning my own thoughts? I would never require that someone take something I said on faith, but to instead perhaps trust the practical sense in me that would forgo the frivolity of making things up. It isn't exactly hard to recognize the habits of others which objectively and directly lead to some problem or another. I know everything that is, and that could ever be, wrong with me. Here, a chance for the learned reader to point out the ignorance of the word everything, but nonetheless. At the same time, I know that all the things right with me can be manipulated to reach any means I put an effort towards. Ready for the head spin? The “right” things I could abuse beyond all reason to further some chosen agenda would automatically fall into the area of things wrong with me, in that the pedestal I've put them on would turn me into a figure I'm all too familiar with. Although, referring to things as wrong or bad is entirely subjective. We're talking character traits. So how do I decided what to start with, let alone when it has gone too far? Is this where one is to fall back on instinct? This would have to be the sort of instinct that did not openly contradict objectivity, alas, hasn't philosophy taught us the nature of our scornful instincts? Who says there isn't a point where the two can live in harmony?

I'm obsessed with empiricism. The thought of just being the playing out of known and independent forces helps to relax my egocentric mind. It constantly feels like everything I do is simply because I can. The almighty words, because I can. Once this starts to sink in, I begin to drain of any passion that started me on a path to begin with. Especially when I succeed, the will to care any further is all but extinguished. I find that I throw myself into challenges, or sometimes “pissing matches” as Aaron so eloquently put it one day, even though I really do not care what the outcome will be, the prospect of doing something because I can just takes over. It is my unrestrained, dramatic, and sometimes scary mode of thought that prompts me to want to act as if my body has the same freedom. These actions, stemming from some long overly calculated position, paint the target the reads “what the fucks up with that guy?” I'm never sure of what I'll do at any given moment, yet I feel totally in control once I engage in whatever it is. Almost as if I was setting myself to do it, but never letting myself know until the last second that it was really going down. If you find this hard to understand, imagine what I'm going through trying to explain it. If you do understand, any pointers? I just got done reading Beyond Good and Evil and although Nietzsche has paragraph long sentences and it's all been translated from German, I can't help but feel like I connect with some of the hardest, and frequently re-read, passages. I can literally feel different parts of my brain activating, kind of like little waves and pulses, after some line about philosophers or deep thinkers, and their beleaguered thoughts, is noted. As hard as some of his stuff is to read, the imprints that lines like those leave on my mind and mannerisms tend to subtly steer me in directions I don't fully appreciate until I reflect back on them.

It really bothers me that no matter how much I talk and act like there is only the current moment, the past gone and future not here, I constantly find myself trying to, in a sense, “stomach” the past. In truth, I don't feel like I let the misgivings or awkwardness of the past dominate or really influence what I do now, but those ever present thoughts come back as if there is something I could possibly to to change them. Every weird phone conversation, some past encounter with a fling, that answer I gave to an innocuous question, the things I'm not lying about, but will never choose to tell. I am too adept at remembering all the bad, weird, or particularly “awkward” interactions I've had with people. Then I think to myself in one sense here's the sum of all that comprises what I am today, yet I'm still fully capable of being anything, even the direct antithesis, to my past. And in all honesty, it is every bit my past, I own it. The stupid little things I'd like to put there like my tendency to mumble and inability to find a “normal” volume I can always trust people will hear always come back in some memory involving a secretary or check out lane. Something about those times, I'm figuring, is still confusing me and by me endlessly reminding myself of them I'm seeking to learn and apply some lesson now? Buggah, what have I gone and asked now....?

I find myself intrigued by the first four principals of Buddhism, in particular the one about the cause and nature of suffering. What I can't get around is that I barely find the will to want or pine over things, let alone enough to find myself suffering. All I find myself suffering from is boredom. The monks don't get bored in their awesome meditation sessions? The only reason I'd rather be a millionaire than humble musician is because I could set myself up on Kierkegaard's rotation method of entertainment going from one indulgence to the next. Here's the paradox. I'm almost certain that while I know I'll be able to have fun learning how to snowboard and ride motocross, I am fully aware that the people who are truly and most abundantly happy are the ones who've found meaning and purpose to their lives. This of course does not mean I don't have, nor plan to improve upon, my current purpose, but in light of my last blog I'm just reintroducing the theme. One thing that does in fact take me from naught to a hundred is the opportunity to inform and make you think. I didn't exactly memorize all the books and videos I've watched on evolution or Christianity, and even need to go back and refresh on perhaps a fact I've heard several times, yet the prospect of giving other people “I've never thought of things that way” moments is like a drug for me. Unfortunately this tends to conflict with another idea I am pretty well sold on. I really truly believe that people are responsible for themselves, need to save themselves, and no amount of (my) wondrous knowledge can make them choose to understand or pursue things for themselves. The one thing to get me off, they need to shoot in their own face, so to speak. This I find depressing because I don't see enough people who even hint at giving a damn.

I can sit and work out my whirlwind of a mind, while others sit eager to nod at and swallow the preaching of people like Kent Hovind. I can literally scare myself with “How the fuck can you think that” ideas that are somehow, yet eventually, filed away in a manner I can barely make sense of, while the masses carry on as if the entity Individual is a mere concept to be played with like a chess piece. Before I have officially reached the age of twenty, I've learned how to empathize with any idea. I can be bored and demoralized as shit, but still be fascinated with and revere our world and our ability to think at these levels. I don't feel like I'm chasing the same kind of peace and security that most people are looking for in their lives. I'm not even convinced there's a manifest “thing” to chase. I'm already the most chill and still angriest person you'll ever meet. I realize I'm a contradiction of terms, and I'm not sure if being comfortable with that means I'm “doing it right” as it were, currently, or am unequivocally mentally fucked. Assuredly, the later would seek to undermine any sort of understanding I sought by writing this in the first place, so I'm just gonna chalk this up to an ill-conceived analogy.

I'm probably going to be asleep most of the day after this gets posted. Is that a “proper” way to spend a birthday? I remember birthday's being the be-all end-all of my life. I could still get my dad to spend all sorts of money celebrating, but for what? Manipulate my dad because I can? This is obviously not what I want to do, but isn't that a horrible thought? To think that I could play on my dad's love and formal ideas about birthdays to get what I want. What bothers me, isn't so much discussing the (innocent) thought as much as the knowledge that people like my brother do that almost on a day to day basis. I'm fully aware that all kinds of people abuse the feelings of others and even I have pulled dick moves, to a lesser extent and not with people I consider family, in that area. It always reduces to the “why?” My brother is just a stuck up prick who probably acts from a learned subconscious, but for me it is just the curiosity of seeing what happens, because I can. It is for this reason alone that I don't think of myself as an evil person who's reached the proverbial point of no return when it comes to thoughts or potential actions. I also feel like this is a wobbly foundation from which to base anything. I don't have some sort of pent up malice or motive. I'm just confused, confusing, and curious.

8 comments

Michele Elizabeth Zerbe wroteat 10:29am on July 27th, 2008

interesting. :)


Report - Delete

Cara Zimmerman (Chicago, IL) wroteat 6:21pm on July 27th, 2008

ya know, nicko, the fact that you see things differently is good.


Report - Delete

Michele Elizabeth Zerbe wroteat 6:23pm on July 27th, 2008

yea it makes u capable of showing some closed-minded people out there other windows of thought. the world needs people like you.


Report - Delete

Cara Zimmerman (Chicago, IL) wroteat 6:24pm on July 27th, 2008

well michele, i wouldn't go that far...jk :)


Report - Delete

Michele Elizabeth Zerbe wroteat 6:26pm on July 27th, 2008

jeez cara. lol. cmon imagine never running into anybody like nick. nobody to challenge anything or be unique.


Report - Delete

Cara Zimmerman (Chicago, IL) wroteat 6:28pm on July 27th, 2008

well i guess you have a point there...but it's not like he's some weird species or the only one of his kind or something.


Report - Delete


Michele Elizabeth Zerbe wroteat 6:32pm on July 27th, 2008

oh for sure hes just the one i know lol

Report - Delete

Nick P. wroteat 9:31pm on July 27th, 2008

trust me ladies, I am the only one of my kind.

[111 (159)] Eureka Moments Like These Don't Come Often Enough

Wednesday, July 23, 2008 at 8:56am

Shame on me for neglecting TED talks for so long. I've just finished watching Dr. Martin Seligman's talk about the three kinds of happy lives, and the bads and goods of psychology over the last 60 years. I won't pretend to be as capable of explaining the details so look at His talk and His site. I strongly urge you to check these out for yourself. What I would like to go into are the little eureka moments that hit me when I was listening to him.

What are people after in life, and will their drives actually manifest into happiness? The number one kind of happy life, according to Seligman's research, is the one that adds (1) meaning. ::HUGE COUGH:: I know right, exactly what religion has been touting since its conception. The "lesser" of the two lives involves (2) recognizing ones strengths and likes and engaging in them as often as they can, thus producing more "flow." The last characteristic is (3) being super social, usually feeling love, and being able to make a habit of positivity. Well, show me the talented activist(2) who actively engages hoards of people(3), all while believing he is devoted to the infinite brilliance and love that is God(1), and I'll show you someone who is 100% supported by science to be predisposed to proselytize on behalf of the truth and meaning in religion.

Think about any tough subject you've had to master or at least learn about. I'll choose playing the guitar in hopes of remaining clear. Before I started, my mental "flow" consisted of dreams about shredding or being the campfire entertainment. Anyone who's started to learn an instrument can easily understand how quickly cogs get thrown into your dreams. Some overcome it, many more give up or stay mediocre. So transpose this into a religious framework and compare it to scientific understanding. In truth, there are many people who treat bible study and ancient languages to the scrutiny they require, but I'm talking more general. Any scientist with the prerequisites to publish in Scientific American or Nature has done years of research and work to get where they are. What does it take to become a born again Christian? A dunk in a kiddie pool and meager church attendance. After reading over this and thinking the gap may still lead to an unfair analogy, I'll make it more personal. What did it take for me to coherently engage in discussions about the origin of life, the universe, evolution, the bible, etc? Three years of reading, watching videos, and too many frustrating discussions, and it isn't like I've reached some sort of end in my understanding. What does it take for the guy on Facebook to ask me "knock-out" questions that ten independent fields of science are devoted to refining answers for? Ya...

Those scientists and those Christians are both in pursuit of the same thing, but frankly, the Christians are after the meat of the happiness without stumbling over the cogs we all have to live with when we actively try to understand something. They will readily and openly admit this to you as their “faith.” Someone particularly apt in biology, who's flow of life has led them to understand evolution, should not have to debase their work and time engaging in debates and legal battles. I think with the flow idea in mind, it is quite obvious something about many religious people isn't flushing. You can be a desperate loner, yet still abuse your faith in a god. You can know absolutely nothing about the world and universe you live in, and still claim that golden nugget of meaning, albeit second-handedly, through the eyes of a god. For me, the pieces of the puzzle might as well be labeled in numerical order at this point. You want the same kind of fulfillment and meaning that religion claims by the throat? Here's the work of Dr. Martin Seligman who can tell you more about your potential for positive psychology than you'll ever find in your death-cult's book.

I remember a conversation with Mr. Bowman talking about how great it would be to have the power to just shoot all the stupid people. These mostly consisted of Showplace customers and library patrons, but in truth, I think we should point the guns at the lazy people. I think it is the laziness of thought that entices people to ponder and engage in the myriad of stupid facilitators. That would be me nipping it in the bud.

Religion is sometimes called our first attempt at science; for the obvious reasons above. It is just the recognizing of the fundamental truths about what makes us happy. Congregations of ten people don't last long, bad preachers are directly ignored, and if it wasn't all going back to God, then we would be all too quick to ask "What's the point?" Do you still wonder why I instantly bat away all the magical analogies that depict the portrait God has painted on your soul? Yet again, the power of our reason and hard fought intelligence has shined and shown us the way to happiness. Shucks, you don't have to take it on faith, wallow in sin, nor fear eternal hellfire to benefit from (and you will) what it's offering.

[110] The Dragon In My Garage

Monday, July 21, 2008 at 7:50am

by
Carl Sagan

"A fire-breathing dragon lives in my garage"
Suppose (I'm following a group therapy approach by the psychologist Richard Franklin) I seriously make such an assertion to you. Surely you'd want to check it out, see for yourself. There have been innumerable stories of dragons over the centuries, but no real evidence. What an opportunity!

"Show me," you say. I lead you to my garage. You look inside and see a ladder, empty paint cans, an old tricycle--but no dragon.

"Where's the dragon?" you ask.

"Oh, she's right here," I reply, waving vaguely. "I neglected to mention that she's an invisible dragon."

You propose spreading flour on the floor of the garage to capture the dragon's footprints.

"Good idea," I say, "but this dragon floates in the air."

Then you'll use an infrared sensor to detect the invisible fire.

"Good idea, but the invisible fire is also heatless."

You'll spray-paint the dragon and make her visible.

"Good idea, but she's an incorporeal dragon and the paint won't stick."

And so on. I counter every physical test you propose with a special explanation of why it won't work.

Now, what's the difference between an invisible, incorporeal, floating dragon who spits heatless fire and no dragon at all? If there's no way to disprove my contention, no conceivable experiment that would count against it, what does it mean to say that my dragon exists? Your inability to invalidate my hypothesis is not at all the same thing as proving it true. Claims that cannot be tested, assertions immune to disproof are veridically worthless, whatever value they may have in inspiring us or in exciting our sense of wonder. What I'm asking you to do comes down to believing, in the absence of evidence, on my say-so.

The only thing you've really learned from my insistence that there's a dragon in my garage is that something funny is going on inside my head. You'd wonder, if no physical tests apply, what convinced me. The possibility that it was a dream or a hallucination would certainly enter your mind. But then, why am I taking it so seriously? Maybe I need help. At the least, maybe I've seriously underestimated human fallibility.

Imagine that, despite none of the tests being successful, you wish to be scrupulously open-minded. So you don't outright reject the notion that there's a fire-breathing dragon in my garage. You merely put it on hold. Present evidence is strongly against it, but if a new body of data emerge you're prepared to examine it and see if it convinces you. Surely it's unfair of me to be offended at not being believed; or to criticize you for being stodgy and unimaginative-- merely because you rendered the Scottish verdict of "not proved."

Imagine that things had gone otherwise. The dragon is invisible, all right, but footprints are being made in the flour as you watch. Your infrared detector reads off-scale. The spray paint reveals a jagged crest bobbing in the air before you. No matter how skeptical you might have been about the existence of dragons--to say nothing about invisible ones--you must now acknowledge that there's something here, and that in a preliminary way it's consistent with an invisible, fire-breathing dragon.

Now another scenario: Suppose it's not just me. Suppose that several people of your acquaintance, including people who you're pretty sure don't know each other, all tell you that they have dragons in their garages--but in every case the evidence is maddeningly elusive. All of us admit we're disturbed at being gripped by so odd a conviction so ill-supported by the physical evidence. None of us is a lunatic. We speculate about what it would mean if invisible dragons were really hiding out in garages all over the world, with us humans just catching on. I'd rather it not be true, I tell you. But maybe all those ancient European and Chinese myths about dragons weren't myths at all.

Gratifyingly, some dragon-size footprints in the flour are now reported. But they're never made when a skeptic is looking. An alternative explanation presents itself. On close examination it seems clear that the footprints could have been faked. Another dragon enthusiast shows up with a burnt finger and attributes it to a rare physical manifestation of the dragon's fiery breath. But again, other possibilities exist. We understand that there are other ways to burn fingers besides the breath of invisible dragons. Such "evidence"--no matter how important the dragon advocates consider it--is far from compelling. Once again, the only sensible approach is tentatively to reject the dragon hypothesis, to be open to future physical data, and to wonder what the cause might be that so many apparently sane and sober people share the same strange delusion.

[109] The Problem Of Dr. Eeeeeviiiiiiil

Saturday, July 19, 2008 at 8:31am

I wish I had every news story, documentary, debate, and youtube video about religion, faith, the bible, the quoran, Jesus, Greek mythology, and science, just so I could splice together every staggeringly important instant that is diminished when reduced to mere words. What instances am I referring to? The question I
have to ask for you (usually) is in reference to the many "this will seal the deal" one-liners and one-paragraphers that the faithful believe put a nice finishing bow on whatever they are trying to sell. These are the times when shoddy low-blow remarks are made against the rabid atheists they are debating. These are
the times when the expert "accidentally" makes a side argument and seemingly random statement that has literally nothing to do with the argument at hand. I want to compile all the clips of people saying, "I believe the bible, Quaran, meaning of jihad, Jesus, faith, and God stand for peace and love." Every earnest and heartfelt witness's account paralleled by the Imam preaching almost word for word about his holy book.

It never fails when I watch someone as articulate and specific as Sam Harris "debating" some Christian theologian or Rabbi, how often the conversation goes from a deliberate digression about faith and rules of conversation, to book critiques and character attacks, and no, not from Sam. Wouldn't you know that right
after I watch this I go into a documentary about the Quaran where its followers and leaders are saying THE EXACT SAME THING about their book and their god. There isn't much to be said here that can't be seen in the documentary and mini "debate" so if you want the links just ask.

I don't know if it's just the newest trend of those defending faith and the bible, but I feel that am too often hearing about "The Problem of Evil." As most of you know, we are evil because we are separated from God, and only by either assimilating or alienating our neighbors will things be okay. Now that fact
aside I simply have to talk myself empty until I can wrap my head around how bloodied their psyches have become.First, the basic and obvious logistics. The idea of being separated from the being that is everywhere at all times and created everything from his will, is just, wow. Second, the idea that evil somehow comes from a lack of belief or connection to the admittedly unseen, not fully understandable, and dare I
mention evil as fuck god of the old testament, is again just, wow. As with their definition of god, these people have as many varying ideas and thoughts about what 'evil' in fact is. They don't want to get specific, because the second they think being gay is as evil and murder, they are only speaking to a selective audience. When there are specific orders from the bible or Quaran to commit, what are obviously evil tasks, the last thing
the believer should say is "The bible/quaran talks about love and peace and Jesus." This selective reading only speaks to the laziness and dishonesty of people who reference their holy books for ANY "spiritual" viewpoint, not just the peaceful one. Alas, there is a difference from quoting the bible to back up your
beliefs about the bible, and quoting to illustrate the types of passages that incite hatred or will influence a followers. This is a fact very few seem to understand. Random thought, I'd like to take a poll to see if people even know Jesus appears in the Quaran.

I'm gonna take a stab at where I think "evil"(as they define it) comes from, and you tell me what you think. I think we should get the obvious fact out of the way; some people simply aren't mentally sound and do all sorts of weird and negative shit because of kangaroos. I think people are, in general, absolutely dominated by their emotions. Anger and happiness (dare I mention love and the rest) are not thought to be things which are controlled, they are just "part of life" as most cliches that misunderstand people go. I think that some people murder because they are instantly filled with some emotion, maybe jealousy over a cheating wife, and as the courts sometimes word it, are "temporarily insane" and unaware of their actions. I find those definitions hard to swallow, but the fact that they even exist, and are successfully used to get people off the hook, show how universally serious the idea "emotions just happen," and are somehow independent of us, is taken. I think people steal, well I know people steal for practical reasons like selling what they get to pay for school. They steal because of the rush that interrupts an otherwise tedious life and simply to have things they want. I think people hate because its necessary. Many many things people do and say need to be hated and fought against. This idea that we're all stemming from the perfect branch of eternal love naively denies the utility of our "sinful and evil" actions.

Naturally, we need to have sex to perpetuate our species, but sex before marriage is a sin, so obviously it's time to draw your own conclusion. Naturally, we observe many animal species to engage in homosexual behavior, in fact, I have gay incestual dogs that hump each either every day, but obviously the abomination of humans stands to reason. What else do these people find evil.... um,... actually I can't really think of any other main issue aside from perhaps believing in a different sky daddy or being an atheist.

Care to hear what I think evil is? I think it is evil to subscribe to any belief that tells you to deny your worth as a human being. I think it is evil to act as if logical argument and deductive reasoning should be debased in light of your faith. I think it is evil to oppress women, which to both lesser and obvious greater extents, both Islam and Christianity do. I think it is evil to not show people how brilliant and exciting science and history are. I think it is evil to feel as if controlling and exploiting anybody but yourself becomes your drive in life. I still feel up in the air about the circumstances under which to kill people, because in my view on life, where there would be one person killed, there would be confusion and shock, although admittedly I feel prepared to decapitate people like Dinesh D'Souza when such a glaring ludicrousy is touted. I don't outright denounce "stealing," and I'm already prepared for when this will get taken out of context, because in my view exists a, potentially, free society, and I understand the motivations and circumstances.(These last two sentences could fuel a blog of their own, but they're here anyway.)

In truth, I like George Carlin's take on things, "Don't kill me, and don't take my shit." There is a simple direction we could all consciously and actively pursue in life. We are so quick to point to the "facts of life" and meager understanding as humans to excuse our seemingly never ending problems. People don't feel like they have control because their focus is on controlling things, ::ehem:: like gods, which are indefinitely beyond their control. Change your focus, and change your life. When those who keep asking god to change the evil and the lives of the believers finally understand they are at the wheel, they will find themselves finally putting an end to their grand Problem.

[108] The Myth Of Progress

Thursday, July 17, 2008 at 12:30am

I want to make the case that as hard as we work to push into the future and unlock all sorts of new secrets and truths with our knowledge, this should not be viewed as progress. I want to illustrate this idea with just basic examples from what many people engage in on their paths to "grow" as human beings.

First, lets take basic society. Society is not focused on progress, it is focused on sustainability. You can sustain almost anything by frequently insufficient means. The crime rate in Chicago is resulting in a dead kid a day since June. The question isn't, "what progressive line can we travel to maybe make the crime rate so low that 1 murder a year would be a shock." The only thing people seem to care about is immediately putting in the National Guard to quell the fighting enough to look good in the eyes of the the 2016 Olympic committee. The truth is, Chicago will still survive as a city if 1 or 10 kids are shot every day. The fact that it has skyscrapers and tech savvy inhabitants does not mean its made any progress at the level that matters. The individual human level.

We have the basic human life. You are (hopefully) born into a family where your parents remain together and you get your basic education. You go to college and meet the girl who you'll marry and have kids with. You'll work your job and be the model provider. You'll learn from all the years of raising your kids. You may or may not be apart of some job or activity that opens your eyes and mind to what matters in life. Then if your lucky, when your're old your kids liked you enough to refrain from putting you in a home. To me, I don't feel that being born on to a "model track" of our day means that once you reach a certain age or mustered up the courage to pop a question, you've somehow achieved the title of progress. It's no secret we're all "doomed" at some time or another, but that fact isn't what impedes what I'm talking about.

I'll start with the area I think the least amount of progress can be made. Take the person above and imagine they've taken on the religious agenda. Their progressive act is to save as many people as they can, or at the very least put the name Jesus into everyone's head. For over two thousand years these people have done the same thing their predecessors felt as their moral charge, and what is the result? Whenever I watch some early morning pastor or news report it's the pastor screaming something about how far the country is falling. The non-believers, but o-ho especially the believers! need to get their acts together and settle in to the loving kind of society they should be passively aggressively fighting for. Do you know how great Jesus's sacrifice was, by the way it's the greatest gift you'll ever receive, hey its also great to get gifts when you don't ask for them isn't it, o golly gee greatness praise Jesus. This mindless pummeling of the same tired words into people's heads. The breaking them down as pathetic sinners that need to be brought back up by the same agenda that just broke them down. Ever on his knees the believer waits idley by for when Jesus will come floating from the sky.

Say we move on to the philanthropist. Take the grand scheme of Dubai. What was it like 10-15 years ago there was nothing but a few scattered buildings and sand? Now you'll find all the great progress in its new architecture and happening night life. Here's of course where I have my complaint. If the happening party scene in every city or town that's ever been in existence has only served to distract people from depressing thoughts about their meager lives, or served to contribute to alcohol and violence problems, what is to be considered progressive about making another hole to this five stars of fun golf course? People need opportunities to let loose and express themselves, but should those opportunities be grounded in places that have one of the longest histories of negative results? I feel I should make note that I'm not speaking against developing areas or new feats of architecture. All that bugs me is that I know personally enough people who are struggling with finding themselves in the fog of partying and "modern thinking" and I don't see how simply introducing others to the front door, after we've barely stumbled out the back, contributes to the human agenda.

Here's my next attempt to plug my hopes for science. We're all born as scientists. We are fascinated with our hands and toes and test out what will happen when we pull the dogs hair or plunge head first into a birthday cake. To me, a broad definition of scientific practice would be anything furthering your personal knowledge and ability to speak on any given subject. Granted, I would never agree to that definition when arguing with a creationist about what science is, but for the sake of my point you can keep that one in mind. Assuming you don't have some evil intent I have yet to find the negative by-product from getting smarter or more comfortable with your understanding about the world. I've never heard one scientist speak of his work like this, "O well, this just is what it is, I guess I get by well enough, gotta pay those bills you know." There is always this exuberance and passion for the work. This is where progress can be made. When you're passionate. When you fuel yourself by the work your're doing. Some would describe the discovery of the atomic bomb as the most terrible thing we could ever unlock, and I would say those are the people who would be the first to launch them, because they understand so little about the nature of those who discovered it. I don't see the progress in getting a handful of disgruntled nations to destroy some of their bombs, because ultimately it comes down to the political pressure they are facing, not their growth as human beings who no longer see a point in initiating holocausts. The task of showing people how grand and fulfilling their lives can be without the destruction of themselves or others has always been the task of the teachers and the scientists.

Why are religious icons so fervently idolized? They were the teachers and the holders of knowledge. If you wanted to be happy, just follow their ten step program and forgo those hopeless selfish urges. I used the term in one of my last blogs, but it needs to be brought up again, second-handers.(Yes, I ripped this from The Fountainhead) I see the religious institutions as one of the most destructive ideas to ever hit our race. They've racked up enough bodies with holy wars or suicide bombing, but I fear more for the type of mind they instill in their followers. They teach you that knowledge can only be found in what they are selling. The sweet taste of understanding only exists in crackers and wine. The thing that makes a scientist proud and tireless in their pursuit, is point blank exactly what religion tells you to redirect, after they've soiled it with sin, towards Jesus or Allah or some righteous and pious task. You do not have the opportunity or right to say "This is me, and this is what I am doing." Every sentence has to be prefaced with "We are charged with the task, I am working within the confines of my belief in."

I just read a blog of a girl who felt saved form depression by drinking, which obviously didn't last long. I have no doubt that people are feeling saved by Jesus to this kind of extent. The band aid for cancer. In this context depression is easy. Pills, new friends, and a hard fought will can put you on a different track. But think about the religious context. Every time you say the devil had his role, you're reinforced. Every time you say you're going to pray and cry instead of fight and change, you're reinforced. When an edict or piece of advice is handed down to you, for all those concerned the question has been answered, you are alleviated from your duty of thinking, peace unto you. You are not taught to be an individual with rights and feelings, you are a sheep. Your motivations and deductive reasoning are not allowed in the kingdom of God. Everyone one of your friends and family tell you the same things from the same collective viewpoint. I can't imagine a worse kind of suffering.

I've watched two interviews now on A.J. Jacobs who lived for an entire year as literally by the bible as he could. what I think is interesting is, here is man who has taken the book more seriously than any fundamentalist, has read it more deeply, and literally made his life about following its tenets, and yet when you hear him talk about what he took away from the experience, it's ideas and habits that transgress many religions, customs, or mantras throughout time. Being forgiving of people and yourself, i.e. letting go of things. Prayer, in what it does to calm you down and keep you focused. The exuberance of just being alive and able to experience things. He refers to himself as a "reverent agnostic" now. What I find most striking is in his motivation. He'd never been raised in a religious household and considered himself to be Jewish to the same extent that Olive Garden is Italian food. He alone wanted to do this. He wasn't inspired by a god. His "selfish" want of knowledge and personality type that has to focus and take things seriously is what allowed him to progress as a human being. Did he piss off his wife and weird people out, sure, but where does that deter from what he's learned?

I'm asking for you to be a scientist. Growth and progress can only be obtained when you work to understand the world around you, ipso facto yourself along with it. Test yourself, observe and be honest about the results. When you can do that, I predict you'll start being the person you always knew and expected yourself to be.

8 comments

Updated about 4 months ago

Billy Bowman (Bloomington, IN) wroteat 8:17am on July 17th, 2008 You are (hopefully) born into a family where your parents remain together and you get your basic education. Like, 1 in 1000 Americans? Maybe your lucky to get a basic education, but your parents remaining together? I can't think off the top of my head of 1 family i know like that. Report - Delete

Nick P. wroteat 8:23am on July 17th, 2008 Meh, just an overall hypothetical. Not like mine are together either. Delete

Billy Bowman (Bloomington, IN) wroteat 8:27am on July 17th, 2008 "You are not taught to be an individual with rights and feelings, you are a sheep." I'm fairly certain parts of the bible actually say this out right. Jesus is the Shepard, etc. etc.. Report - Delete

Billy Bowman (Bloomington, IN) wroteat 8:28am on July 17th, 2008 I completely agree with you here, and find that "reverent agnostic" quite interesting.. Report - Delete

David M.L. Jaffe wroteat 1:32pm on July 17th, 2008 I love the picture. As humorous as it is, its unfortunately true. Luckily my dad finally started a business that is making some good money, so I fall under the privilaged I suppose. Anyways, the way I see it is society today is too worried about economics. Progress today means expanding, building, researching, profiting, etc. Religion can't help you make money. Now sure, religion can make you more happy or hopeful and give you faith, but today, people would rather have money. We can't really make religious progress right? I mean sure, in a historical aspect we can by trying to find proof it happened, but this goes back to science, research, expanding (our knowledge), for most likely profit. Your example of Chicago is perfect. Will losing some kids from the ghetto kill the city? As inhumane as that may seem, no, it won't. People will still live and work there. My entire W131 summer english class was writing about sustainability, and it's right. If something will sustain, nothing will be changed. Humans are too distracted by dangling money (haha, jew gold) to make "progress." IMO, I believe a majority of society's problems are related to profit. Thats just how I see it. You should seriously like, compile your short essays into a book, or work on getting them published in a paper or something. Report - Delete

Billy Bowman (Bloomington, IN) wroteat 4:21pm on July 17th, 2008 "You should seriously like, compile your short essays into a book, or work on getting them published in a paper or something." And sell it, there by proving his point.. haha Report - Delete

David M.L. Jaffe wroteat 4:27pm on July 17th, 2008 Bowman has proven the cycle at work!! Brilliant! Report - Delete

Nick P. wroteat 7:05pm on July 17th, 2008 Lol as much of an ego boost that would be I generally just report on things where people have already said it or said it better. I blog to stay sane. If I wanted to make money, there would be a lot more sources and exciting information.

[107] Blame It On The Rain

Monday, July 14, 2008 at 8:38am

I was writing a nice and to the point "initial thought" piece on the many videos and articles I've read tonight, but one click makes it all go away when you’re stupid and write online. Because I am determined to put something out and don't really care if things are disjointed at this point, here's take two.

What usually strikes me when I'm watching a documentary or interview is that one key phrase or comment that completely paints the person their true color. Some of those lines tonight have included, "We need to vote our conscience," "country's Christian foundation," "don't murder your baby," and "Jesus for president." Immediately I'm concerned with the voting from out conscience because you would hope people would vote on issues or policies that coincide with their best interests. When Bush has a "Jesus feeling" about helping the poor, but his policies are going to empower the rich, its pretty stupid to say your gonna vote because you feel you agree with his feelings.

Moving on to the country's alleged Christian foundation I can't help but feel a pain about how little people research before they make comments into microphones. I don't expect everyone to read everything about the founding fathers. I do expect them to at least check their source for where they got that comment. You didn't hear things like that until the agenda to distort facts was taken up. When your using a new cliche, take the ten seconds to google where it came from.

"Don't murder your baby," the woman activist cries in front of the abortion clinic. The people here and now who are starving and desolate don't matter. Your socio-economic and health issues don't matter. Her ignorance of the anatomy regarding fetuses doesn't matter. As long as she can remain happy as a clam with her poster and loudspeaker, all is right with the world.

Now while we all want Jesus for president, we still realize he's stuck in an everlasting battle with the devil, Zeus, and Amon-Ra and can't bother with us. These new age hippies with their drums and ranting about how much more needs to be done regardless of political party are useless. You'd think with a room full of hyped up drum bangers you might march into the world and do more than rally. Every hour that goes by filling the air with how much you love Jesus is another hour the people you want to help are dying. Good job, fuckheads.

A note on church incentives. This is an idea that really kills me. It isn't enough to come for the salvation of Jesus, obviously, because churches keep going to great lengths to entice people to come. One in particular had the grand prize of an $800 automatic weapon give-away. Who were they targeting no less? Teenagers! Nothing says I love Jesus like automatic weapons. Then you have those churches centered around some type of sporting even like rodeo or wrestling. Yaaaa, all those kids are there to see Juggernaut Judas get torn apart by the Baptist Batista, not to save their immortal souls.

This all speaks to another comment that is actually true and worthy of remembering. "Religion is big business" with some congregations pulling in as much as 700 million in like a year. Maybe you have "good"(ha) reason for going to church, but don't forget for a second that it ain't exactly the welfare checks and strong spirits that keep those pastors and priests motivated.

A recurring pattern in people who discuss what they don't like about how others are practicing their faith keeps popping up. Some old lady will start of "I fully believe in miracles....but those loonies slapping each other in the head to cure cancer are just wrong." Perhaps you'll get some moderately religious person on camera who can say "I believe in the power and mercy of the Lord.....I'm so sad my son just got hit by a train." How can people say that faith doesn't hurt anybody? This is the point when someone's beliefs about miracles or god keep them complacent about what happens in their lives. Why is it wrong to explain to the woman who believes in miracles that that kind of thinking is the same as that which drives those loonies to get smacked in the head? When grieving mothers just "give it up to god" do you think they are as well apt to learn from why it happened? Do you think they are focusing on how to change something so that it doesn't happen again? Something tells me the deceased usually just get the honor of being mentioned at prayer before family dinners.

Okay, well I'm done. If I ever get the motivation to provide all those links again or start my series, you'll be the first to know. The bulk of my comments were going to be about the first two pages from atheistmedia.blogspot.com if you cared to look around. In particular It is probably best you just watch everything and think for yourself anyway.

2 comments

Cara Zimmerman (Chicago, IL) wroteat 7:40pm on July 15th, 2008 Nick, when Christians "give it to God" and don't do anything about it, yeah that's stupid. But not everyone is like that. When we say "I'm just going to give it all to God", it's not us saying that we're not going to try to do anything about it on our own. What we're saying is, we realize that everything is ultimately in God's control. I was actually talking to one of my friends about this. He was saying something along the lines of "If God will provide, then why do I need to try to get a good paying job?" That's just stupid thinking right there. God does not CONTROL what we do. We have our own free will and our own mind to think. We don't expect God to just make a million bucks magically appear because he is "providing" for us. We have do DO something, not just sit around waiting on God. But we do know that yes, God will provide for us when we are in need. Report - Delete

Nick P. wroteat 8:21pm on July 15th, 2008 This line of thinking still doesn't make any sense. What's the point of attributing anything to to a god if you already understand it takes your own action and effort to fix things. If god helped people in need I can point to a few disasters in the last ten years. Also, again I have to ask what the point of prayer is if people aren't looking to have god take control and arrange the universe to play to their selfish desires.

[106] To Be Clear

Friday, July 11, 2008 at 8:01am

Alan I just tagged you because you were there as most if not all of this really isn't geared at you. Also, for anyone concerned I'm not speaking from "Nick and Byron's" perspective so depending on what you regard as the actual "bitch move" some of the things may not come across correctly or clearly. I'm just elaborating on how I view things.

It's amazing what we're capable of. Simply amazing. I mean to literally destroy a friend's life would be chalked up there with killing random pets. I just want the dynamic back. When someone tries to take up a position of authority that does not belong, in any sense, to them, it is hard to refrain from reacting in what is now being considered a "bitch move." Now maybe my definition of bitch is different because usually its the bitch that has to take the back seat on bikes, the bitch who gets slapped around, the bitch who has to follow orders. Sending proper messages through serious channels is not bitch. I talk so much about trying to find people who are on my level. I know that most people are at their normal, and what I consider to be useless, stasis. My initial group of friends is comprised of people I semi grew up with and I generally get along with. You can't get back what you loose with your roots so I figure it is worth trying to formulate something from your history and base, instead of poking around with every new personality you come across. In such a group, you have a hierarchy. When that is challenged, you either step down and take things like the proverbial bitch, or you come back tenfold with a blindside that overtly gets your point across. Jim is a bitch. Jim is less than a bitch because he seems to actively pursue the "art of bitch." He's fat, he smells, he can barely play and sing crappy music, and every attempt made at making him a "project" that will make him emerge able to talk to girls, be social, and just mesh better is spat at and shit on by his ego, of all things imaginable, his ego. When a person like this says anything to you, automatically you want to hit them. When they say things in a condescending and pious attitude, all bets are off. I thought it has been abundantly clear to people who even vaguely know me that I am not a nice person. I don't feel any sort of allegiance to the "don't look like a bitch club." I'm playing my own game, for my own team, under my terms. When I start to roast or say some shit about someone like that, it isn't fun and games, its "I feel bad about myself for putting up with a person who allows himself to carry on in this way." The only joke is thinking the tongue lashing will lead to any sort of change.

I am the one who pulls for people. I generally give people the benefit of the doubt and am not quick to hammer in the last nails. What kills me the most is when I do this, no matter what befalls the "friends" afterward, I will never believe they feel as angry or pained as I do when things aren't felt to be working out. When they allowed the most disgusting and degenerate waste of life to actively speak up for them, it conveyed more to me than any excuse I could have to just let things die. I ultimately blame myself for how situations play out, and this is no different. I'm not sure why I'm so surprised things went from "bullshitting" to scary serious in a moment, but they did. If people are ever going to get along with me, its going to require honesty. Unfortunately for most people faced with an opportunity to lay it all out there, they recede to their happy places and hope things will blow over within the actions of another. This kind of second-handed way of living one's life is beyond unacceptable to me. Why should I have an opinion you might ask? Where is there room for me to step in and try to guide the tides in a direction I see fit? Take ten seconds and think about religion, mob mentality, popularity, and reality tv. When someone sets a precedent, for example, letting the most meager of survivors in a group speak as if they have anything to say or any place to say it, everyone else feels entitled to speak from this position. It's not BJ's position or DJ's position. It's BJ's position in light of the freedom he now feels after what has transpired. It's DJ's position after the relief he feels not having to expound in some tangent about where he's "really" coming from. This is not honest, moreover it is unjust and disgusting. And as the self-interested person I am, if these people are going to be my "friends," I have little recourse but to do the only truly friendly thing I'm good at, making things real. Quite frankly, when you let someone speak for you like that, I'll do what I have to that makes you wake up to yourself.

Now obviously I'm not the cleanest or "best" example of anything. I try to grow everyday with all the good and bad consequences that come from my actions. I was the one that got caught after all. At the same time though, I can understand that deeper thing about me that keeps it cool and knows everything can be made alright, despite the big reveals at the end. I'm not sure how convinced am I that I will return to the kind of life I had when things were "innocent" and "experimental," because I'm sort of driven towards reckless abandon. I don't crave power, but it is a funny little feeling to think that someone would hold you responsible for literally destroying their life. I don't want to become entrenched in someone else's life, but I keep getting reminded that they are always around. What they do and say comes back to me. If I don't do something I automatically excuse and accept whatever the outcome is. So I suppose I've stated it enough times in previous blogs, but again won't hurt. I'm out to literally change the human dynamic. I want to take every old, precious, and "understood" way to live and put them in a new light. I would rather be around ten people that could "destroy me" in an instant who all understand and appreciate why they won't, than one person who will be my best friend and never care to understand why or how we're friends. Yet the answer is simple no? Your in it for the feelings you get. The mental stimulation of bouncing ideas off of someone "at your level." When are we going to choose to exist at a higher one? You don't find as many friends as you can to make charity cases out of. That is not what a "friend" means gentlemen. Referring to one as you "project" does not reinforce what you can actually provide. This is why your cause, as well as Byron and I's previous one, is/was completely futile, misguided, and wrong. People are responsible for themselves, whether they like it or not. He is trying to live through you. You are trying to either gain ego points or self-esteem tokens by trying to "help" him. When you start to live for yourself you'll convey everything you need to and "help" more people than you'll ever care to know.

I say to tell me otherwise. Explain in paragraphs or less where I'm so wrong. To me, there's always been a difference between "bullshitting" and joking around with your friends, and pointing out every single flaw, that is well known as a flaw, and ridiculing it to the point of exhaustion. How many jokes on the kid are made that just end in "Hmph, haven't heard that before....O look more Smash because the thought of laughing is a hassle not worth the effort it takes to short hop." If we really want to break it down, "saying something to his face" is not any more respectful or telling of your level of friendship than stating, "I want to throw shit in his face" and then actually going and doing it. How many more jokes can be made about fucked up hands, unopenable mouths, looking pregnant, and being gay? Well to be sure, probably hundreds, but that isn't my point. I can joke about myself just as quickly as the next guy, but when the conversation goes from "gotta catch 'em all" when I'm around to "god, I wish that asshole wouldn't show up anymore" when I'm not, does no one see a problem? When someone bitches about all the shit that's happened in the past, for literally years after it's happened, I would call this an unresolved issue. When I challenge the person to either fight out their aggression, or talk out their feelings, or do anything to come straight about who they are and what they are thinking, you'd think in light of everything holy they'd choose anything besides off-shot comments that don't have any impact, nor actually pertain to what is being brought up. This is the point of all lost respect. This is where chucking a controller should be the least of things you feel inclined to worry or comment about. You want to talk about "the most immature things you've seen" look at your own cowardice. Look at your plot with my best friend (genius plan) to fight me. Look at your lie about a kiss that you dragged on for years.

So tell me what deserves more respect. Keeping this "light hearted and cool" when everyone knows just how bullshit that state is? Do I not provide enough to our group dynamic to hope that the "understanding" can be kept on an even keel? Do we forget that I, as well as you, should look at the whole a person's actions to judge what they are worth and capable of? So it is from here that my confusion and frustration played things out int he way they went. I will fully concede to almost every charge or grievance you have against me and for the sake of myself and what I portray I will work to change them, but it will take the level of honesty I don't think we've reached in this group's relationship. It's going to take more than one person blanketing the air with what may or may not be the truth of everyone's views. When I'm not the person who gives rides, watches pets, brings over video systems, invites to trips, and repays what he owes, make me out to be the butt of every joke and scornful bitch who isn't thinking about how or why he's around and doing things. I can recognize when someone is being himself and putting who they are and what they have into friendship. That is the last thing I want to threaten. The thing I want to feel scared, and needs to be killed, is the kind of thinking that allows that effort to be tarnished by the "bad air" and formality that comes with being complacent and dishonest about who you are and what you want.