IndigoChild
Member
My love is more powerful than my lust, and I do not love for shallow reasons. I can be "crushing" on someone for their looks, but if I find that their personality is distasteful, I lose all interest. The same goes with my friendships... if I still make an effort to be your friend, it's because I genuinely like you. If I didn't, I wouldn't waste my time.
Similarly, if I truly love someone for who they are, I can overlook any physical abnormality. I find beauty in the flaws anyway, "crushing" on people most other people would not find attractive at all, but I am thousands of times more understanding and patient with people I truly like than with those I don't.
I think I may have grown slightly egotistical over the years, though I try to offset that. But what I mean is, I especially get egotistical about my time. People have to be interesting to me to be worth my time, though I don't automatically prejudge strangers. I always give people the benefit of the doubt... even after I've decided they're not worth my time. Yes, if someone says they've changed, I will open up my interest in them enough to determine if their claims are legitimate. Even if someone continually pretends to have changed when they haven't, I never come to a point where I refuse to look at them objectively.
Sometimes, I admit, my emotions get in the way of being truly objective, but I always try to at least put forth an effort... in fact, I think this is why I keep maintaining arguments with certain people online. I always want to think the best of people, I always hope they'll become aware of themselves and become decent people.
*Sighs* I don't care if other people's opinions differ from mine. What bothers me is people who think that their opinions HAVE to be believed. Self-righteous people in other words. Because the way I see things, beliefs like whether Jesus is God or not is an opinion like whether chocolate ice cream or vanilla is better... ultimately, since you can't convert everyone, why bother trying? Just enjoy your ice cream and shut up.
Of course, I also dislike people who consistently refuse to acknowledge when the world is not working, when certain behaviors don't work to achieve what we say we want to achieve. People who think their religion is infallable, for example, really bother me. People who think law, or morality, or anything is infallable and should be set in stone, they bother me. Because life isn't like that at all. The only constant is change. People should be able to look around anywhere and see - as plain as day - that the world is not working the way we want it to.
Thus, we should objectively look at what is not working for us and seek to change it... not get rid of it, especially if it is religion, but to improve it. And one way to do that is to merge our new knowledge into our religion.
What I mean is this: why must it be a choice between either creationism or evolution? Why can't it be both? I sure believe in both. The world was created, yes, but it was done over time, and God is still creating. How could God be the Creator if S/He was not still creating?
Well, that's all for now.
Kat
Similarly, if I truly love someone for who they are, I can overlook any physical abnormality. I find beauty in the flaws anyway, "crushing" on people most other people would not find attractive at all, but I am thousands of times more understanding and patient with people I truly like than with those I don't.
I think I may have grown slightly egotistical over the years, though I try to offset that. But what I mean is, I especially get egotistical about my time. People have to be interesting to me to be worth my time, though I don't automatically prejudge strangers. I always give people the benefit of the doubt... even after I've decided they're not worth my time. Yes, if someone says they've changed, I will open up my interest in them enough to determine if their claims are legitimate. Even if someone continually pretends to have changed when they haven't, I never come to a point where I refuse to look at them objectively.
Sometimes, I admit, my emotions get in the way of being truly objective, but I always try to at least put forth an effort... in fact, I think this is why I keep maintaining arguments with certain people online. I always want to think the best of people, I always hope they'll become aware of themselves and become decent people.
*Sighs* I don't care if other people's opinions differ from mine. What bothers me is people who think that their opinions HAVE to be believed. Self-righteous people in other words. Because the way I see things, beliefs like whether Jesus is God or not is an opinion like whether chocolate ice cream or vanilla is better... ultimately, since you can't convert everyone, why bother trying? Just enjoy your ice cream and shut up.
Of course, I also dislike people who consistently refuse to acknowledge when the world is not working, when certain behaviors don't work to achieve what we say we want to achieve. People who think their religion is infallable, for example, really bother me. People who think law, or morality, or anything is infallable and should be set in stone, they bother me. Because life isn't like that at all. The only constant is change. People should be able to look around anywhere and see - as plain as day - that the world is not working the way we want it to.
Thus, we should objectively look at what is not working for us and seek to change it... not get rid of it, especially if it is religion, but to improve it. And one way to do that is to merge our new knowledge into our religion.
What I mean is this: why must it be a choice between either creationism or evolution? Why can't it be both? I sure believe in both. The world was created, yes, but it was done over time, and God is still creating. How could God be the Creator if S/He was not still creating?
Well, that's all for now.
Kat
I'd just like to say that my love and lust are equal. I've got a lot of each. Boy did I miss the point of the post... I know, I know.