Marriage and Family

[vegetariantaxidermy]

Define 'happy'.

I'm happy to leave it there.

How surprising. Btw, do you have a basement with hooks and torture devices? Because that's how you come across

[Dontaskme]

...marriage between two people, is nothing more than legalised slavery...

What a lovely life you must have.

Why wouldn't she?

I'm neither happy nor unhappy, I quickly learnt very early on in my life not to impose such fleeting conditions upon myself. Imagine the burden of having to maintain a man-made condition. I'm much too smart to fall for that trick, it's a stupid game that humans love to play. I'm just so over their dumb mind games.

What I am though, is awake.. I am aware of what's really happening here, directly knowing from a first person self-evident perspective.

Any person who claims to know God, ( which is just a hominid brain function, nothing more than a subjective benign belief) has no argument with anyone else. The very idea that there is a 'Knower of God' ...will, once seeded and firmly planted within the brains archive of believed thoughts, will aready know that their beliefs whatever form or shape they happen to take on, cannot be forced onto another person.

The claimer of knowing God, assuming they believe they are right, will WILL their knowledge of a God with so much believable absolute certainty, that it should and most certainly would be enough and complete for them. They would have no argument with anyone else.
So I have absolutely no idea what IC thinks he is doing here on this forum, unless he is trying to persue the very thing he already knows can't be forced...even a gentle pursuasion is pointless, and he's too far up his God's A hole to see how stupid he is being by bluffing his way through life.

As for intelligent people, they would not bluff their way through life. The facts would be staring them straight in the face.


IC is just a sandwich short of a picnic, he'll grow up one day, probably not until he is lying on his death bed though..

.

[Gary Childress]

Define 'happy'.

I'm happy to leave it there.

How surprising. Btw, do you have a basement with hooks and torture devices? Because that's how you come across

I don't think that's a fair assessment of IC. He's a good guy. He believes in Christianity, you believe in whatever you believe in. None of us know for %100 certain the metaphysical underpinnings of this world (if there even are any.)

[Gary Childress]

I'm sorry for bringing up this topic. It's really my fault. I realize now that I probably just fueled flames that weren't necessary to fuel or otherwise best left alone.

[Dontaskme]

My two cents...marriage between two people, is nothing more than legalised slavery... a force, self-imposed and authorised by humanity itself, disguised as a nomenclature pagan culture.

I see the view you are pointing out. That is definitely one way of looking at it. But I'm sure there are more views and realities. Clearly, there is a compelling and rewarding societal convenience thing that's part of the game/package. And, I wonder, do we need to be resistant to the game while we're here, or can we find benefit in playing along? I'm not a big fan of marriage, either (I did it once, long ago) -- it definitely isn't necessary for (nor a symbol of) love and sharing life. But I think I've become more accepting of the conditions of the game we're in... and playing along in the best ways I can. Awareness and love can get stronger from their own foundation of clarity, regardless of any games.

I don't believe that we can get love, or give love to and from other humans. Love is just another man-made concept like the word God. It only exists as an idea.

I'm not really playing the human mind game, I can only pretend to play the game, for what other game is there for humans to play? the game has been forced upon us, and we have no other choice but to play it. We consent to the game, because what's the alternate, we're already here now, so we have no other choice, but to consent to living our life.

We could kill ourself, but what's the point in that? when you know there are many others who will be still left here, being forced into playing the game that people obviously enjoy else they would stop imposing it on themselves in the form of intentional human procreation..

As for my opinion about life for sentience feeling beings, if one person is alive, then everyone is alive. What difference would my disappearance to the game make on the game... But that's just the way I personally see it, through the lens of my personal perception.

.

[Gary Childress]

My two cents...marriage between two people, is nothing more than legalised slavery... a force, self-imposed and authorised by humanity itself, disguised as a nomenclature pagan culture.

I see the view you are pointing out. That is definitely one way of looking at it. But I'm sure there are more views and realities. Clearly, there is a compelling and rewarding societal convenience thing that's part of the game/package. And, I wonder, do we need to be resistant to the game while we're here, or can we find benefit in playing along? I'm not a big fan of marriage, either (I did it once, long ago) -- it definitely isn't necessary for (nor a symbol of) love and sharing life. But I think I've become more accepting of the conditions of the game we're in... and playing along in the best ways I can. Awareness and love can get stronger from their own foundation of clarity, regardless of any games.

I don't believe that we can get love, or give love to and from other humans. Love is just another man-made concept like the word God. It only exists as an idea.

I think love is an attitude we have toward someone else. The same goes for hate. If we behave violently toward someone (for example), then we have "hate" in our hearts. If we help someone overcome something that is difficult for them (for example), then we have "love" in our hearts. Some of us sometimes have hate in our hearts. It could be for justifiable reasons or it could be for unjustifiable reasons. Some of us sometimes have love in our hearts. And it could be general love toward everyone or specific love of a few particular people. I don't think having love in our hearts at a particular time necessarily makes a person "better" than someone who doesn't. As soon as we try to establish a hierarchy of people, then we no longer have love in our hearts. Sometimes, we establish a hierarchy because we want something that is not universally available to all and we want to think that we deserve that something that not everyone can have. I'm guilty of that sometimes and don't realize what I'm doing is not right.

[Gary Childress]

Or in contemporary parlance, we have love in our MINDS or hate in our MINDS. "Heart" is an archaic word for me to use, I realize.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

I'm happy to leave it there.

How surprising. Btw, do you have a basement with hooks and torture devices? Because that's how you come across

I don't think that's a fair assessment of IC. He's a good guy. He believes in Christianity, you believe in whatever you believe in. None of us know for %100 certain the metaphysical underpinnings of this world (if there even are any.)

I don't care what he believes in. My assessment has nothing to do with that. And you are so annoying!

[vegetariantaxidermy]

I'm sorry for bringing up this topic. It's really my fault. I realize now that I probably just fueled flames that weren't necessary to fuel or otherwise best left alone.

Would you stop apologising all the time!

[Gary Childress]

How surprising. Btw, do you have a basement with hooks and torture devices? Because that's how you come across

I don't think that's a fair assessment of IC. He's a good guy. He believes in Christianity, you believe in whatever you believe in. None of us know for %100 certain the metaphysical underpinnings of this world (if there even are any.)

I don't care what he believes in. My assessment has nothing to do with that. And you are so annoying!

I understand why I am annoying to you. I'm sorry for starting this thread. It's my fault. (It really is.)

[Gary Childress]

Perhaps "love" and "hate" are archaic terms as well. I guess instead of "love" I should use whatever neurotransmitter (or combination there of) creates violent behavior and instead of "hate" I should use the term for whatever neurotransmitter creates supportive behavior in someone. The only problem I have with contemporary terminology is that intellectuals like to use fancier words like "serotonin," "dopamine" etc, instead of words that everyone is familiar with. But perhaps that is necessary sometimes when paradigms change.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

I don't think that's a fair assessment of IC. He's a good guy. He believes in Christianity, you believe in whatever you believe in. None of us know for %100 certain the metaphysical underpinnings of this world (if there even are any.)

I don't care what he believes in. My assessment has nothing to do with that. And you are so annoying!

I understand why I am annoying to you. I'm sorry for starting this thread. It's my fault. (It really is.)

Are you serious? Just stop fucking apologising and butting in. Can's a big boy. I'm sure he can handle himself. I mean, you have to actually type the words 'I'm sorry'. It's not as if you have no control over that.

[Gary Childress]

I don't care what he believes in. My assessment has nothing to do with that. And you are so annoying!

I understand why I am annoying to you. I'm sorry for starting this thread. It's my fault. (It really is.)

Are you serious? Just stop fucking apologising and butting in. Can's a big boy. I'm sure he can handle himself. I mean, you have to actually type the words 'I'm sorry'. It's not as if you have no control over that.

I type those words when I feel responsible for something bad. I don't know of any other way to atone with people for my mistakes.

[henry quirk]

I'm sorry for bringing up this topic. It's really my fault. I realize now that I probably just fueled flames that weren't necessary to fuel or otherwise best left alone.

I was gonna say encouragin' things, but after that cheap, unwarranted, shot in another thread: pffftt! You're on your own, guy.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

I understand why I am annoying to you. I'm sorry for starting this thread. It's my fault. (It really is.)

Are you serious? Just stop fucking apologising and butting in. Can's a big boy. I'm sure he can handle himself. I mean, you have to actually type the words 'I'm sorry'. It's not as if you have no control over that.

I type those words when I feel responsible for something bad. I don't know of any other way to atone with people for my mistakes.

Actually you attack me quite often, usually under the 'guise' of being someone else's knight in shining armour. Apologies should only be used under extreme circumstances. The world has gone 'faux apology' mad