My sister, bless her heart, wrote to me the other day describing how she’s finally had a long-term relationship with a boy. They dated for seven weeks. She said that she’d have dated him a lot longer, but he was moving, and they mutually decided that a long-distance relationship wasn’t appealing. That, and she wasn’t sure that he’d be the kind of spiritual leader she needs in a husband.

There has been a lot made of the needless pain and suffering directly attributed to religion, and to other dogmatic systems of belief (i.e., Hitler, Stalin, etc.); it’s a favorite approach of secularists like myself, and others who consider themselves humanists, freethinkers, atheistic, etc. But I think that it misses the point to discuss all the horrendous things that Faith and Dogma have caused, and do cause in the lives of millions. This is because we–as individuals living our quaint little first-world lives–don’t have any context for truly understanding and empathizing with those that have been, are, and will be harmed by the dogged belief in ancient barbaric religious ideals.

But the personal suffering caused by religious dogmatic belief in the lives that surround our own is much more relevant, profound, and obvious.

The myth of the existence of any worthy “spiritual leaders” is one which perpetuates suffering in the lives of women who’ve been raised to believe they need such a thing in order for their salvation, and that of their family, to be secured. This isn’t a teaching that is limited to Mormonism, or Christianity. In Islam the women simply have no choice. But perhaps that’s a more desirable situation than the one Christian women find themselves in: of having to qualify men spiritually. It isn’t good enough for any man to be highly compatible with them, to share many of their same motivations, to love them in the unique ways they need to be loved; nor is it good enough for a man to have the looks, education, outlook, success, or what-have-you, that women desire. No, they find themselves meeting and rejecting man after man. They find one that seems virtually perfect for them–a soulmate, if you will–and then discover that he doesn’t have the hazy list of qualities a “spiritual leader” should have. Nevermind that this may be a man who they could happily live the entirety of their lives with; a man who would father happy, secure, healthy children.

For women raised to desire the “spiritual leader” ideal, the challenge of finding the right “match” is many orders of magnitude harder. Impossible? Perhaps not, but nearly. I speak from experience. Not my own–I’m a male–but from observing my sisters efforts to find the “right” guy. They’ve dated far more men than I can imagine. Many of these men are rejected outright, after a date or two, because they weren’t compatible (were shallow, dull, not good looking enough, lacking direction, etc.). Those that passed those preliminary tests were then subjected to, and have all failed, the “spiritual leader” test. Most women, my sisters included, don’t even know what they’re looking for in that regard. This is because religion teaches that one is necessary–to ensure the strength, stability, and salvation of the union–but not how to find one, what one is, what one looks like. This is because even those teaching such an ideal don’t know; because they too are imperfect, and fall short of the “spiritual leader” ideal.

Let me suggest this simple solution for all those in the throes of needless suffering of the “want a spiritual leader” type: look only for a man whose intention and desire is to be a spiritual leader. Asking for anything more is essentially demanding to have your own personal Jesus, or Prophet, in your own home. Even Jesus, or Prophets, are made. They didn’t exit the womb fully realized in all their spirituality. Remember that.

Still, my sisters feel that this is a “trial of [their] faith.” Once their faith has been tried enough, they will find their spiritual leader and their story will conclude with “and they lived happily ever after.” But finding someone you feel confident will be the “spiritual leader” you desire will not protect your marriage from hell on earth. No, in fact, it my assure it. The role of spiritual leader is one which causes tension, pain, and conflict in a relationship. Women want one, but don’t realize what having one means. A good spiritual leader requires that you’re in church EVERY week, that you participate in all church social activities, that your fellowship enthusiastically, that you volunteer your energies in every conceivable way, that you–and your children, of course–read your scriptures nightly, have nightly and morning prayers, and generally, walk the straight’n'narrow. Basically the position is one of taskmaster (oh, but lest we forget, one with love and tenderness) in the home.

There are at least two sources of conflict here. One is that the woman can’t quite identify what it should look like when the man is being a good “spiritual leader,” but feels confident that she’s able to tell when he’s not. This subjectivity causes problems. The man is informed that he’s not being the spiritual leader that the woman needs. He asks what he’s doing that isn’t measuring up. She can’t tell him. A rift occurs and grows over time as the woman continues to feel like there must be something the man isn’t doing because she isn’t feeling any closer to the Lord, to the Spirit, strengthened in the Gospel, etc. The man, for his part, feels both embattled and embittered because he’s expected to fill a role without being provided with a specific, relevant, job description.

I’ve heard of more than one divorce–among people I actually KNOW–which was rooted in the fact that the woman felt that the man had deserted or unsatisfactorily filled the role of spiritual leader. Consider this: in a nation filled with believers, like ours is, a high percentage of those getting divorced are believers; at least half. This means that at least half of all those women who did their best to marry qualified “spiritual leaders” (because they thought it would help ensure the longevity of their marriage–among other things) were faced with the harsh reality of divorce and the vicious damage it caused their families.

Women like my sisters would do well to forget about finding a “spiritual leader” and concentrate on looking for a highly compatible man; look for a man as close to a “soul mate” as you can find. Look for a man who brings far more happiness into your life than heartache. Look for a man “fits” with You more than 99% of the rest of men that you’ve known. These are the elements that will ensure that you and your husband will have a happy, fulfilling, meaningful marriage; and many, many anniversaries in excess of fifty.

The myth of the spiritual leader, and the need of the spiritual leader in order to have a happy, secure, and salvation oriented marriage is just that: a myth. A myth that causes inordinate, unnecessary pain and anguish in the lives of those that believe in it.

Buying into the spiritual leader myth only results in anguish before, during, and after marriage.

More news by category Topic -: Buy phentermine saturday delivery ohio Tramadol hydrochloride tablets Picture of xanax pills Free shipping cheap phentermine Buying phentermine without prescription Safety of phentermine Pyridium Generic viagra cialis Cialis generic india Pink oval pill 17 xanax identification Buy free phentermine shipping Best price for generic viagra Information about street drugs or xanax bars Ordering viagra Snorting phentermine Hydrocodone overdose Lithium Amiodarone Get online viagra Order viagra prescription Order xanax paying cod Cheap phentermine free shipping Imiquimod Tramadol next day Linkdomain buy online viagra info domain buy onlin Pfizer viagra sperm Vidarabine Cheapest viagra price Prevacid Viagra cialis levitra comparison Dutasteride Lisinopril Thiotepa Female spray viagra Black market phentermine Betamethasone Cialis forums What does xanax look like Loss phentermine story success weight Order xanax overnight Viagra alternative uk Diet online phentermine pill Order xanax cod Mecamylamine Eulexin Cheap hydrocodone Buy cheapest viagra Viagra xenical Phentermine with no prior prescription Xanax in urine Macrodantin Cheap phentermine with online consultation Epivir Buy phentermine epharmacist Ditropan Woman use viagra Cialis erectile dysfunction Xanax withdrawl message boards Viagra online store Atorvastatin Generic ambien Is phentermine addictive Next day delivery on phentermine Buy online viagra Ethanol Natural phentermine Avandamet Xanax long term use Diet page phentermine pill yellow 5 cheap Cheapest secure delivery cialis uk Information medical phentermine Cialis experience Phentermine no perscription Compare ionamin phentermine Viagra cialis levivia dose comparison Noroxin Effects of viagra on women Buy cheap cialis Viagra shelf life Hydroxyurea Phentermine discount no prescription Buy cheap online viagra Dog xanax Online cialis Viagra class action Viagra price Phentermine without prescription and energy pill Hydrocodone cod only Nicoumalone Cheapest viagra Cheap ambien Vicodin without prescription Phentermine prescription online Phentermine snorting Mirtazapine Quazepam Isradipine Buy generic viagra online Xanax look alike Moxifloxacin Viagra experiences Piroxicam Nicorette Free try viagra Sotalol Cash on delivery shipping of phentermine How do i stop taking phentermine Xanax prescriptions Cheapest phentermine 90 day order Niacinamide Phentermine weight loss Phentermine

The music of the spheres (or musica universalis) is an ancient philosophical concept that hypothesized that the relationships and movements of the cosmos are harmonic in nature. Simply put, music is math, and math music; or, more broadly, all of life is math, which includes music.

Still, tonight I was thinking about how everything in life has sound. I suppose deaf people don’t experience sound, but nevertheless, sound is still there. It’s an odd twist on the question, “if a tree falls in the forest and nobody is around to hear it fall, does it make a sound?” In this case, if the tree is unable to hear the sound of its fall, does it still make sound when it falls? Anyone with hearing would argue that it does.

However, that’s beside the point. What I’m fascinated with is that everything makes sound: the various workings of our bodies, animals, the contact of one material with another… if something is so prevalent among everything in existence, it must have much greater importance than we tend to give it. We think of sound as simply a function of hearing, but we only hear because their is something to hear–vibrations in the air, of one object interacting with another.

Sometimes the interaction is contrived, as in the case of speech, other times it’s incidental, as in the case of the rustling of grass as a wind blows through it. The difference is that in one case, we choose to make the sound–or respond to it, and in the other, the grass has no control over the sound it issues.

So, with the prevalence of vibrations in life, don’t you suppose they mean more than simply talk, music, or the experience of life (through hearing)? Might they have a more profound meaning?

If sound is the result of vibrations caused by one object interacting with another, it’s roots occur at an atomic level. How does sound/vibrations effect an atom; or, are vibrations themselves comprised of atoms? Hmmm…

In other words, I think the ancients were onto something with their theory of the music of the spheres. I think the music/sound/vibrations have far more implications in the sciences than we yet know.

The Bible

This was posted on a forum I (and several of my friends) am part of earlier today and I found it greatly entertaining.  Enjoy.

TO:
Lee Scott
President and CEO
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
Bentonville, AR 72716-8611

Dear Sir,

We, the undersigned, respectfully request that Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. cease distribution of the book known as the Holy Bible.
We make this request after careful consideration, having examined
numerous passages in the Holy Bible that are repulsive, stridently
offensive and/or illegal. The following five examples reveal the
obscene nature of this book and help you to understand why we are
making this request.

1) The Holy Bible demands that readers murder hundreds of thousands of Wal-Mart employees.

In Exodus 31:15 the Holy Bible demands: “For six days, work is
to be done, but the seventh day is a Sabbath of rest, holy to the LORD.
Whoever does any work on the Sabbath day must be put to death.”
This demand is repeated in Exodus 35:2: “For six days, work is to be
done, but the seventh day shall be your holy day, a Sabbath of rest to
the LORD. Whoever does any work on it must be put to death.” To put these demands in context, please see Isaiah 40:8, 1 Peter 1:24-25, Psalm 19:7 and Matthew 5:18-20.

Mr. Scott, you are in a unique position to understand how
dangerous these statements are. Hundreds of thousands of Wal-Mart’s
employees work on the Sabbath. The Holy Bible demands their murder.
This threat to employee autonomy and safety should be both repugnant
and highly offensive to Wal-Mart’s senior management team as well as
Wal-Mart’s employees.

2) The Holy Bible demands that readers discriminate against
women. This type of sexual discrimination directly affects female
employees working for Wal-Mart.

In 1 Timothy 2:11-12 the Bible says: “Let a woman learn in
silence with all submissiveness. I permit no woman to teach or to have
authority over men; she is to keep silent.” See also statements like 1
Cor 14:34-35 and Numbers 31:14-18. These statements should be repugnant
to every member of the Wal-Mart management team, since a large
percentage of Wal-Mart’s employees and managers are women.

3) The Holy Bible fully endorses slavery, which is today
strictly illegal in the United States. The Bible also endorses such
egregious behaviors as the beating of slaves.

In Leviticus 25:44 the Bible says: “Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves.
You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and
members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your
property. You can will them to your children as inherited property and
can make them slaves for life.” In Exodus 21:20 the Bible says: “If a man beats his male or female slave with a rod
and the slave dies as a direct result, he must be punished, but he is
not to be punished if the slave gets up after a day or two, since the
slave is his property.” Statements like Col. 3:22 and Titus 2:9 in the
“New Testament” fully endorse slavery. Slavery is illegal in the United
States, as is assault and battery, and the Holy Bible flagrantly
disregards these statutes. Slavery is barbaric. A book that condones
slavery is highly offensive.

4) The Holy Bible demands that readers murder homosexual
men. The Holy Bible incites readers to commit hate crimes against
innocent citizens.

In Leviticus 20:13 the Holy Bible commands: “If a man lies with
a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is
detestable. They must be put to death.” The Holy Bible clearly
incites its readers to commit murder. The Bible provokes hatred
against, and threatens the lives of, innocent citizens in Wal-Mart
communities across the nation.

5) The Holy Bible demands that readers murder those who do not believe in the “god” of the Bible.

In Leviticus 24:16 the Bible demands: “Anyone who blasphemes the name of the LORD must be put to death.
The entire assembly must stone him.” See also 2 Chron 15:12-13 and Deut
13:12-16. In the “New Testament” of the Bible, the man known as Jesus
also condemns all unbelievers. Since the majority of Earth’s citizens,
and a sizeable percentage of the citizens of the United States, do not
believe in the “god” of the Bible, these statements are both highly
offensive and dangerous.

We, the undersigned, recognize that any book which demands the
death of innocent Wal-Mart employees, which commands sexual
discrimination against women, which endorses slavery and the beating of
slaves, which incites hate crimes against innocent citizens of the
United States, and which demands the murder of people of other faiths,
is so obscene that Wal-Mart should cease distribution of the book. The
dictionary defines the word obscene in this way:

1. offensive to morality or decency; indecent; depraved.
2. causing uncontrolled sexual desire.
3. abominable; disgusting; repulsive.

The Bible fits this definition. Any book that incites murder, hate
crimes and discrimination is offensive to morality and decency. It is
apparent from the five examples listed above that the Bible is
depraved, abominable, disgusting and repulsive.

Two years ago, according to this article in USA Today - Stewart finds controversy -
Wal-Mart refused to distribute the #1 best-selling book “America”, by
Jon Stewart. The reason cited was a nude photograph of the members of
the Supreme Court. Wal-Mart felt that this photograph was obscene, so
Wal-Mart chose not to distribute the book in its stores.

In Jon Stewart’s book, it is obvious that the intent is
comedy. The Bible, on the other hand, is deadly serious and is
frequently cited as an authoritative justification for discrimination
and hatred. For example, the Bible was cited as an authoritative
justification for slavery during the American Civil War. Readers of the
Holy Bible act
on its discriminatory statements every day. A book that openly demands
the murder of millions of innocent Americans, that directly
discriminates against women and that fully condones slavery and the
beating of slaves is outrageously obscene. By Wal-Mart’s own obscenity
standards, as well as by the standards of civilized society, a book
such as the Holy Bible has no place on the shelves of any Wal-Mart
store.

Some Wal-Mart customers may argue such attributes as “wide
readership” and “historical precedence” in order to maintain the Bible
in Wal-Mart’s inventory. They may also argue that removal of the Bible
from Wal-Mart’s shelves represents censorship or an attempt to “ban the
Bible.” It is important to note that we, the undersigned, do not
advocate censorship. Nor is Wal-Mart “banning the Bible.” The removal
of the Bible from Wal-Mart’s distribution network simply acknowledges
the reality of the situation: many parts of the Bible are transparently
obscene, and Wal-Mart (like most retailers) has a longstanding policy
on obscene material. No book, regardless of popularity, has the right
to endanger lives by directly and undeniably inciting its readers to
commit murder and hate crimes.

We, the undersigned, trust that you, Mr. Scott, will look at
the five examples listed above and recognize the deep and systemic
problems found in the Holy Bible, along with the highly offensive,
obscene and illegal nature of its content. We request that you work
within your organization to expediently remove this book from
Wal-Mart’s distribution chain.

From The Atlantic, in an article explaining why religion might be a bio-reaction of our brains. As the purest source of what humans really are, under the gunk of adulthood, the author quotes numerous examples of children’s ways of thinking about life/existence, etc. The following sums it up:

It’s not surprising, then, that nascent
creationist views are found in young children. Four-year-olds insist
that everything has a purpose, including lions (”to go in the zoo”) and
clouds (”for raining”). When asked to explain why a bunch of rocks are
pointy, adults prefer a physical explanation, while children choose a
functional one, such as “so that animals could scratch on them when
they get itchy.” And when asked about the origin of animals and people,
children tend to prefer explanations that involve an intentional
creator, even if the adults raising them do not. Creationism—and belief
in God—is bred in the bone.

This may, or may not, mean that God exists. Some argue that because we’re designed to believe in God, God must exist. The logic of such a statement is weak; though, I may have made such a claim in the past, myself. It may be that the propensity for such thoughts (that lead to the creation and belief in religion) is a byproduct of the way we need to think in order to survive and/or flourish as a species.

Another quote from Bertrand Russel, regarding the question: Does some part of us live after death? He astutely points out that in order for something of us to live on after death, that part would have to be separate from the physical reality of our brains, and, that, since we know that in certain brain injuries a person can be drastically altered (from nice to mean, from pure and chaste to coarse and corrupt, from smart to dumb, etc.), it becomes obvious that who we are is entirely dependent on our brain, our physical brain. So, sadly, it becomes clear that when we do die, the essence of who we are evaporates like so much morning dew.

The quote (in full):

Before we can profitably discuss whether we
shall continue to exist after death, it is well to be clear as to the
sense in which a man is the same person as he was yesterday.
Philosophers used to think that there were definite substances, the
soul and the body, that each lasted on from day to day, that a soul,
once created, continued to exist throughout all future time, whereas a
body ceased temporarily from death till the resurrection of the body.

The part of this doctrine which concerns the present life is pretty
certainly false. The matter of the body is continually changing by
processes of nutriment and wastage. Even if it were not, atoms in
physics are no longer supposed to have continuous existence; there is
no sense in saying: this is the same atom as the one that existed a few
minutes ago. The continuity of a human body is a matter of appearance
and behavior, not of substance.
The same thing applies to the mind.
We think and feel and act, but there is not, in addition to thoughts
and feelings and actions, a bare entity, the mind or soul, which does
or suffers these occurrences. The mental continuity of a person is a
continuity of habit and memory: there was yesterday one person whose
feelings I can remember, and that person I regard as myself of
yesterday; but, in fact, which are now remembered and are regarded as
part of the person who now recollects them. All that constitutes a
person is a series of experiences connected by memory and by certain
similarities of the sort we call habit.
If, therefore, we are to
believe that a person survives death, we must believe that the memories
and habits which constitute the person will continue to be exhibited in
a new set of occurrences.
No one can prove that this will not
happen. But it is easy to see that it is very unlikely. Our memories
and habits are bound up with the structure of the brain, in much the
same way in which a river is connected with the riverbed. The water in
the river is always changing, but it keeps to the same course because
previous rains have worn a channel. In like manner, previous events
have worn a channel in the brain, and our thoughts flow along this
channel. This is the cause of memories and mental habits. But the
brain, as a structure, is dissolved at death, and memory therefore may
be expected to be also dissolved. There is no more reason to think
otherwise than to expect a river to persist in its old course after an
earthquake has raised a mountain where a valley used to be.
All
memory, and therefore (one may say) all minds, depend upon a property
which is very noticeable in certain kinds of material structures but
exists little, if at all in other kinds. …We all know that memory can
be obliterated by an injury to the brain, that a virtuous person may be
rendered vicious by encephalitis lethargic, and that a clever child can
be turned into an idiot by lack of iodine. In view of such familiar
facts, it seems scarcely probable that the mind survives the total
destruction of brain structure which occurs at death.

Christianity (and most/all of the world’s religions) is built on at
least one massive reverse burden of proof fallacy. They hold that
Jesus/God exists because it cannot be proven otherwise.

To suggest that God/Jesus exists and lived is the same as asserting
that carrying a rabbit’s foot improves luck, on the grounds that it
cannot be proven that it does not. Or, further, since I cannot prove
that Santa Clause doesn’t exist, he does.

I can prove that a light bulb issues light. I can prove gravity–not
the word, but the force and its effects. I can prove that my parents
are my parents. I can prove many things in my life but I cannot prove
God. Neither can I disprove him–for the same reasons that his
existence cannot be proven. It would be equally fallacious of me to
suggest that because I cannot prove he exists, he doesn’t.

Proof is not mythology, or books, or movies, or feelings, or any such things.

 Feelings aren’t proof (Christians refer to this as feeling the Holy
Spirit)–for the same reason that just because we feel fear or anxiety,
or hope, or anger, or any other emotion, that the emotion is
appropriate to the situation. I may feel happy today simply because my
brain is well fed, well rested, and under no particular stress. Feeling
happy doesn’t mean that my life, objectively, is any different than it
was the day before.

Books aren’t proof, because, as we all know, plenty of obviously
non-true books have been written (it’s what we call fiction). Just
because a book is old, doesn’t mean it’s any more true than any other
or nothing at all. If age made something true than the myths/books that
proceed the Bible should be considered even more true than it.

Lastly, proof isn’t in numbers. Millions of kids believing in Santa
Clause doesn’t make him any more real. And just because millions, or
billions of people believe in an erroneous idea, doesn’t make the idea
true, or real. There are plenty of urban myths that prevail over time
and amongst massive groups of people–not because they’re true, but
because they appeal to the core of our psyche. For example: a news
article today reported that the Six Degrees of Separation concept has
been thoroughly refuted. Yet, millions of people still believe it to be
true. Numbers of believers don’t truth/reality make.

So, while I cannot say that God does not exist, you, for the same reason, cannot say that he does.

I saw Little Miss Sunshine tonight with my buddy Josh Miller. Great guy, excellent movie. Although nearly impossible to shoehorn, the movie was essentially about the nature of life and family. It was about how much of life is pure, undiminished crap…just when you think things are hard, the doors REALLY come off. Yet, how amazing the journey is, if we can just See it for how wonderfully eccentric it is.

The movie got me thinking. We never really know when we’re gonna die; this is one reason why the question “what would you do if you knew you only had a week to live” is ultimately empty–because we don’t know. Knowing would ruin the odyssey. An, or perhaps the, essential ingredient in life is that we don’t know what’s coming. Hell, I could be killed tomorrow by brain aneurism, or in a car accident. It’s hard to say. Most of us forget about that essential reality: that each tomorrow could be our last one. And if it were, what does that mean? For most of us it means that we’ll be taken out of life far before we can ever make much of that life–at least in terms of traditional accomplishments, wealth, power, status, and such. So then we’re left with how we lived. Were we fighters or lovers, thinkers or doers, happy or sad?

What it comes down to is that all we have is today, or even more specifically, this moment.

With that in mind we’d do well to literally forget about tomorrow as much as possible, and simply let today be. Do what we enjoy in today, be who we want to be, live in a way that pleases us; tomorrow may never come. Harder said than done, I know. It’s hard to do because we become so convinced that there will always be a tomorrow. But someday, out of the blue, almost certainly completely unexpected, there won’t be.

If I can live this way, I imagine I’ll gain a certain degree of peace and serenity from it. I’ll call upon myself to forgive myself the past, and not fear the future. I’ll accept whatever the moment I’m in brings. The Now will absorb my pains, sorrows, joys, and happiness. Indeed, what better cure for depression or melancholy than reminding yourself that you may not see tomorrow. At least realizing such things will motivate me to shed melancholy and disquiet as readily as I’m able.

So, if we cut ourselves free of the entrapments of past and future, what’re we left with? What place does planning, saving, investing in learning, and everything else that doesn’t pay off in most todays, have? Well, there’s a balance to be achieved. One would be wise to save, but not everything. Save in a way that works for you. After all, the savings will contribute to tomorrows you may have; and if nothing else, if you die with money in savings then someone you care about will certainly enjoy the fruits of your labor unexpectedly.

That same attitude applies to almost everything we do which doesn’t pay off today. Learning to play a musical instrument? Since it won’t pay off Now, today, or even in a long time, only learn to play something you enjoy learning to play. Don’t work jobs which make life miserable, or which drag your spirits down. Demand of your jobs at least satisfaction. Don’t expect all fun and games, but don’t tolerate pure misery either. Seek a life rife with thought, with experience, with challenge, with variety. If religion appeals to you and you’re convinced of the existence of heaven, and furthermore want to go there, I’d advise against paving the road there (this life) with hell. Wouldn’t it be terrible to get to where you thought heaven would be and realize 1)you went through hell getting there, and 2)you missed heaven.

Make plans, set goals, but enjoy every step in-between lest life doesn’t grant the opportunity to reach those goals or see your plans to fruition.

Also, as Little Miss Sunshine expresses with great clarity, life is full of pain. And each of us feels it in our own unique way. We’re not all vulnerable to the same trauma, in other words. But hidden in the pain and trauma is often a wealth of laughter and, oddly, joy.

Too often we miss the joy and laughter, the wealth that life packages in with pain and sorrow, in our fixation on the “bad” things that happen to us and others. I experienced this the other day. The day after I received a nasty citation/ticket for $535, the attendant at a gas station gave me a free drink with my purchase. Sure, the free drink was worth about $1, but it’s effect was positive in my life. Maybe life doesn’t do math in the same way we do. Maybe life thinks those two events equal out. Maybe they do. Regardless, we’d be wise to truly grasp, note, and appreciate those good things in life. Over time I think we can also develop the ability to see silver linings in even the darkest of clouds.

The costly ticket might appear to suck, but what good can come of it? I pollute the enviroment less, possibly? Not likely, but theoretically. I develop a stronger dislike for ridiculous laws and public policy, which potentially leads to my making (or supporting) future efforts to change things for the better? Much more likely. I discover that I am not willing to give up; that I’m more resilient than I give myself credit for?

The bad things in life are never personal: nature obviously doesn’t deal us a harsh hand maliciously; neither is the officer who cited me being vindictive; nor is murder even personal. In order for something to be personal the dealer of pain/sorrow would have to live in our shoes for a day in order to know our experience, who we really are. Otherwise they’re merely functioning based upon their own experience of who we are. Essentially, a murderer executes a portion of his own experience. When it comes to it, we’re all truly blind, except with ourselves.

So, realize that there is plenty of both “good” and “bad” in life and you’ll have your turn at both. Accept today as it is, live it in a way that is satisfying. Make plans, but never assume that tomorrow will come.  Don’t invite more trouble into Today then it will deal you itself. Let life be what it is for you, and you’ll find that upright and healthy or bedridden with disease, you’ll retain your ability to enjoy each day.

“The question ‘Who made me?’ cannot be answered, since it immdiately suggests the further question, ‘Who made God?’”
-Bertrand Russell

Frankly, the
answer would have to be that if we were made by God then God was also
created. Twists your gut doesn’t it. It just sounds blasphemous to even
say such a thing. But that’s assuming that all the patterns of
creation and existence we’re familiar with hold true in infinite and
immortal physics. God may exist in a sense that is incomprehensible to
we mortal beings–in fact, God almost certainly exists in such a sense.

Recent science has proven fairly thoroughly that our universe
specifically caters to carbon-based lifeforms. That includes plants,
animals, and everything in-between; which suggests that supporting
carbon-based lifeforms is the REASON for our universe. So Why? is a
good question. Also, How? is another relevant one. I imagine if we ever
discover and fully comprehend the answers to such questions we’ll be
completely stunned, awed, and so on.

Sometimes I think that, like the bacteria that live within us, we too
live within a larger organism (God?), and perhaps that organism too
lives within a larger organism than itself…which makes sense if you
think about it. Bacteria seem to have no recognizable signs of
intelligence to us, as we observe them under microscopes, and we would
almost certainly seem devoid of intelligence to any Greater Being too.

I received a letter from her today. It was the first time I’ve heard from her since…March, I think. In an email then she’d told me that she needed some time to get over her anger at having to pay a bill which the collectors couldn’t get any money out of me for. This was back when I was working at Hastings and making about $140 a month, after taxes. I was also trying to study medical transcription. My plan was that I’d finish the medical transcription course, start working as a medical transcriptionist, and start paying on that debt and others. However, bill collectors are rarely patient, so when they couldn’t get the money out of me or my parents they went after her. She was right to be angry, though I thought it’d probably have been more effective to write me an email every month telling me what a burden the bill was on her. Apparently she hoped that cutting off all contact to her would sufficiently punish me for the bill. It didn’t. Frankly, it made me feel better. The less contact with her, the better.

That was roughly 6-months ago. Then I get this letter. I’m thinking: oh, great, what does she have to say now? Nothing, it turns out. The invoice did the talking. She invoiced me for all the payments she’s made on the loan she co-signed for me. My thought was if I didn’t have the money to pay the bill then, how does she expect me to have it now; and even if I did have the money, how is invoicing me going to magically cause me to start paying? Invoicing me is probably the way most apt to raise my hackles and insult me. I’m apt to be very uncooperative when I’m pissed-offed. I suppose that’s pretty typical for most people. I mean, how would she feel if I invoiced her for 4.5 years of pain and suffering? I’m not that mean, otherwise I would. Her little invoice included a subtle threat that if payment isn’t forthcoming she’ll pursue judgment in divorce court. All I’ve got to say is bring it on, baby. Another judgment isn’t going to do anything. It’ll just give me that much more incentive to file for bankruptcy. Sure, I can’t discharge much of my debt, but I certainly can discharge my debt to her and another $4000-$10000.

However, when I saw that invoice I wasn’t feeling so angry. I felt devastated. I felt like the life tapped me on the shoulder and informed me that it still has it out for me. Throughout my life I’ve struggled financially. It seems like everytime I make efforts to become a responsible, solvent adult, I get the rug pulled out from under me. I decide to be responsible and get a full-time job which will pay enough for me to start being wholly independent again and I get three notices of pending court judgments (one from the State of Montana, one from the place we were renting before we separated, and now one from her). Oh, and I got a $535 ticket. Yeah, that’s just how life does me. 

ADVERSITY: Was served notice of court judgment re place I and JV were renting. Received threatening letter (of court judgment) from State of Montana. Received invoice from ex-wife for ~$11000. Received ticket for $535.

BELIEFS: I’ll never get out of this hole. I’m bound to harried at every turn financially. Everytime I make any effort to improve my situation, I’m hunted by the piranhas of the past. Why even try anymore? Why even try to become financially solvent and responsible when I get my legs kicked out from under me every time I try to get up. The very moment I try to make some money the bloodsuckers come along. Why not allow someone time to establish themselves before pestering them with old burdens which have no current value in their life. It’s like poisonous air…you can’t escape it, it’s just there, but it’ll kill you. It’s not like I’m enjoying anything I bought with all the money people are coming after me for…nope, all of it is like the rental situation. They want money from me because we (JV and I) just left the apartment without finding replacement renters or anything, thus, violating our contract. Why have any hope at all? The mere act of having hope seems to bring the hammer down on me everytime.

CONSEQUENCES: I’m tempted to quit my job and just not do anything and try to keep as low a profile as possible until this storm goes away. I feel badly about myself, helpless, and hopeless. I feel like utterly giving up. I feel like I’m being raped when I’m down, repeatedly. Rather than helping me achieve more independence, this shit makes me more apt to avoid it. I just feel overtaken by despair.

DISPUTATION: It’s not really worth giving up. Giving up would mean that I’d be bored on top of being miserable, lonely (’cause I wouldn’t have any money to do things with friends), and depressed. Giving up would mean that they’d really have won. Sure, they’re really have lost because they wouldn’t get any money out of me, but giving up would mean that I ceded to them my sovereign power over my own soul, over my own internal fires. It would mean that I’d let them get to me. Plus, the only real way of ensuring that I get out from under the storm and usher in more days of sun is to deal with all this crap. Sure, it sucks; sure, it’ll be complicated and painful, but eventually it WILL end. I don’t have as much debt as some people, though I do have more than others. Sure, I’ve made silly mistakes which continue to haunt me, and I may make more in the future, but I’m likely to make less of them having had this annoying and painful experience. Besides, what’s the worst that can happen? They all bring judgments against me and begin garnishing my wages? Even in that worst case scenario they’d only, cumulatively, be able to take 25% of my income. That would still leave me with a significant chunk. What do judgments really mean? Nothing other than that I own certain people money, which I’m already aware of. They don’t mean that I’m a bad person, or worthless. Even though I’ve handled my credit and finances in ways which I’m not proud of, I can change for the present and future and resolve never to do so again. And, just because I did make mistakes and those mistakes have been financially hurtful to individuals and companies in the past, I don’t need to continue to torture myself over those things. They’re in the past; if I have the opportunity to make them right then I will, otherwise I cannot sweat it. It just doesn’t make sense. I won’t sweat what I can do nothing about. Even now I’ll only worry about what I can do something about: making reasonable arrangements to pay my ticket, beginning to make payments to the State of Montana, pursuing bankruptcy, and working and saving. I’ll do the best I can, and that’s all I can do. People, and creditors can be pushy and want more from me, but I only have what I have to give. If it’s good enough then they’ll just have to understand or go on there way. Either way, all I can take responsibility for is myself and what I can do. Realizing my limits and capacities is a healthy and necessary thing to do. Accepting them is equally important. Really, things aren’t so bad. What’s three judgments and a ticket, really? Not too shabby. I certainly have a lot more strength and resilience than to let myself be worn down and beat by such pathetic foes. I’m still in control of my life, and that life keeps trucking along. It’s not even about being “in control” as much as it is about realizing that this is still MY LIFE…the only one I have; and others can try to make it hell, but they only succeed in that IF I LET THEM. It’s up to me just how big a deal this all is, how much I let it effect me.

ENERGIZATION: I feel more positive, more capable, less afraid. I’m not nearly as worried about what will happen.

AIDS is not caused by HIV.

Smoking will not kill you.

Global warming may, or may not be our fault.

The problem is that a certain status quo is constructed around certain flawed hypothesis’ and the construct fights viciously for survival in the face of new, better, more sound evidence to the contrary.

For example: the this article examines very succinctly how WRONG global warming alarmists are. The short version: humans (and any element of humanity: cars, factories, smokers, etc.) contribute very little CO2 to the atmosphere (a figure I read once said less than 20%). Also, “the Greenland ice sheet is growing on average,” and “glaciers have been retreating well before the 19th century…many of the glaciers have stopped retreating and some are now advancing again. And, frankly, we don’t know why.” Oh, and “the Arctic was as warm or warmer in 1940.” Keep in mind, all of those points are heavily argued in doomsday literature. The alarmists say that the Arctic is getting warmer, melting; oceans are rising, threatening cities; everything is melting, and soon so will we. However the scientist cited at the above article (just follow the link) exposes that if you really consider the WHOLE of all climate science you’ll find that there’s a lot fewer answers than popular media and junk science would suggest. People like Al Gore have the money to fund whatever pet projects, portraying whatever worldview, that they want. An Inconvenient Truth (the documentary) is no more fact than Michael Moores Fahrenheit 9/11–which Mike Moore even admitted was strictly his opinion.

This is the essential argument of this post: there’s two sides to every story and the most obvious or well known side may not be right.

Why would the climate alarmists be so defensive about global warming that they say such things as–to paraphrase Stephen Schneider–there is no legitimate opposing view to the scientific consensus that man-made carbon emissions drive global warming. To suggest or report otherwise was irresponsible.

This is the same problem I have with religion. Most religions suggest that anything contrary to their doctrine is simply unequivocally incorrect. There is no room for discussion; no actual appreciation and nurturing of truth. No, truth is only what fits. Anything else must be error. Obviously, this is incorrect. Truth must, by nature, be objective and exist without regard to who recognizes it in what context. When I realized this religion was sunk. When I realized that Truth has nothing to fear from the other side of any story, I opened up to it and discovered that there was a lot of Truth which conflicted with the errors I was being sold as “truth.”

Therefore, be the subject global warming, AIDS, or smoking, the person desiring to be fully informed MUST read and seriously consider evidence from all perspectives.

Cigarettes have also gotten a bad rap over the years. They’re blamed for everything from lung cancer to premature infant deaths on the moon. However, this site presents a plethora of evidence which suggests that smoking may not be all bad for you; in fact, in some cases it may even be GOOD for you. All of the oldest people in the world have been, without exception, smokers. A long-term study in California found that although the number of people who’ve never smoked has risen greatly, the incidence of lung cancer hasn’t fallen. If lung cancer is tied to smoking, wouldn’t we expect to see far fewer cases of lung cancer when there’s so much less smoking going on these days? Apparently we haven’t seen a reduction in lung cancer at all. The site I mentioned above points out that it may not be the smoking that’s so bad for people as much as it is the typical lifestyle of a smoker. Most smokers eat poorly, exercise little or none, and in general take poor care of themselves. If you’re interested in this topic, check out the above site for more info.

AIDS. The mere word is send a shiver of fear through anyone. Since we were kids we’ve been taught that AIDS is caused by HIV. However, it’s recently come to my attention (at this site) that HIV, according to their research, appears to be a harmless virus inside and outside the body (in vitro and in vivo, respectively). Their research indicates that AIDS may be caused by immunosuppressants among other things. The site recounts in its introduction the case of a 60-year old white male who was HIV-negative yet developed AIDS following treatment with prednisone and azathioprine. After cessation of that treatment his T-cell count returned to normal. The researchers of that site (ourcivilization.com) believe that AIDS may be caused by (among other things) glucocorticoids–which are heavily used by gay men, which is why AIDS is often thought of as a gay man’s disease.

These are just three areas where we’re being told only one side of a multi-dimensional story. We’re sold a single way of looking at certain things because we’re simple people; we just want to know what’s good, what’s bad, what will kill us, and what won’t. We don’t as a society, as yet, have an appreciation and tolerance for hard numbers, real research, and the substance of truth. I’ll admit, reading the gibberish on the AIDS IS NOT CAUSED BY HIV site was hard. But, yet, wading my way through the language of academia made me a better, more informed individual. Now I am aware of a whole other side to AIDS then I was before.

Keep your mind open. Don’t accept the first explanation–even one heavily marketed and with scientific support. Always seek alternative explanations. If someone says that one perspective is the only legitimate one then find out what the other side of that coin is ASAP because they’re probably lying to you. Truth doesn’t need to tell you to ignore all other challengers because truth simply IS. You cannot change truth, warp it, or corrupt it. If you try all you end up with is more untruth. Only non-truth is afraid of being found out.

Over here they list a wide variety of odds; many have to do with a person’s chance to die from a given cause.

The average American man has a 1 in 2 chance of developing cancer in his lifetime. (if you’re a woman your odds are slightly better at 1 in 3)

The average American has a 1 in 3 chance of dying from heart disease.

With just those highlights we can clear up any delusion of living forever. Essentially, chances are that I’ll either get cancer or die from heart disease. I could do everything in my power to try and squeeze a few more years of life into my life, but why worry too much about it? Why not live a life that satisfies me, and accept the self-imposed limitations? To me it’s better to choose how we live, rather than live so we don’t die as soon as we otherwise might. I’m not suggesting that we go crazy and get drunk every night, or smoke like chimneys, or do drugs until we O.D.; no, instead I’m just suggesting that we live in a way that pleases us. If that includes smoking, great; if it includes drinking, phenomenal…just live, and let death catch up to you whenever it does. See, you could be one of those people who exercises a ton, is in great shape, eats well, and still keels over from a heart attack. So, don’t exercise if you expect it to save your life, only exercise if you enjoy it.

Today we live much more hollow lives then people used to. We’re so much more afraid of living because we’re so much more knowledgable about how we can die from various things. I suggest that we stop worrying so much about it all. Let us intentionally embrace a more limited perspective on life. Deny the monsterous fear and anxiety of our age and simply live.