Jump to content

Is love altruistic?


myata

Recommended Posts

Opened another book read the line "to love one is to love the Universe". Actually the question is not is, rather why?

Why do we insist that it could be? Like what is not obvious about it, where? Or does it illustrate the length and depth of self-deception we are willing to go to voluntarily to preserve our illusions and beliefs?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 7 months later...
  • 2 months later...

We might like to think so, but in the end it is always transactional when it comes to our spouses.  Love at first sight is a delusion sadly too many young men fall into, as I did when I was young.  We yearn to have those feelings we had when we first met, but that utopian feeling we once had does not last long and doesn't generally repeat.  Instead we love our spouse based on a list of who they are and what they do for us.  

The closest thing to altruistic love would be the love we have for our children.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I had a rich uncle who used to say, "Son...Love is an abscess of the heart, that grows to a head at the crotch."

I always found that shallow. Today I have a 30+ year marriage and mostly-baked spawn, and I have come to this conclusion;

Love encompasses a wide array of feelings and causes. My wife is a tiny little Czech woman who grew up under communist Czechoslovakia. She's a very strong-willed woman who can make paint peel with her scream. She's also incredibly healthy. The woman had breast cancer and would go for chemo and go straight to work afterwards. Never up-chucked or had any side affects aside from the hair thing. I figure The Rona catches her scent, and runs away. I never seem to get sick. When I do...I sneeze, eat a box of oranges, sleep and done. Our kids are all in shape, strong and healthy.

My love for her WAS lust. Then it WAS the adoration of a man who'd been given 3 amazing kids and a new reason for living. Now...its thankfulness for driving me to be my best at all times. In the future, when we retire, she'll be the doll who makes me peanutbutter and honey sandwiches for my golf rounds... ;)

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

John 15:13 — "Greater love has no one than this, that someone lay down his life for his friends."

 

Homosexual love is disordered love, not real love, therefore their appeal to love is moot.

Edited by Great American
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/8/2022 at 10:41 AM, Great American said:

John 15:13 — "Greater love has no one than this, that someone lay down his life for his friends."

 

Homosexual love is disordered love, not real love, therefore their appeal to love is moot.

I hope you're wrong about this. I have a gay son...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/10/2022 at 9:10 AM, Nationalist said:

I hope you're wrong about this. I have a gay son...

Thats okay. We are ALL disordered due to Original Sin. Some are overeaters, drunkards, gluttons, anger issues . . . whatever. Many folks have a variety of sexual disorders too.

Your son only has to do something that is very simple, but very unpopular: He must admit to himself that he has a problem, and practice abstinence.

Much like the alcoholic who is in denial for years, then finally admits to himself that he has a problem and seeks support to stay clean, the homosexual also must finally admit to himself that he has a problem and seek support to stay clean. Its really no different.

We are all sinners who need a savior. Your sons only real problem is that the world is telling him that his sin is not a sin, and he might be believing them.

 

 

Edited by Great American
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Great American said:

Thats okay. We are ALL disordered due to Original Sin. Some are overeaters, drunkards, gluttons, anger issues . . . whatever. Many folks have a variety of sexual disorders too.

Your son only has to do something that is very simple, but very unpopular: He must admit to himself that he has a problem, and practice abstinence.

Much like the alcoholic who is in denial for years, then finally admits to himself that he has a problem and seeks support to stay clean, the homosexual also must finally admit to himself that he has a problem and seek support to stay clean. Its really no different.

We are all sinners who need a savior. Your sons only real problem is that the world is telling him that his sin is not a sin, and he might be believing them.

 

 

I don't think the lad feels any remorse. Or that he needs any help.

When he told me I asked how long he'd known he's gay? He said all his life. Homosexuals are born homosexuals. It's nothing like being a lush.

You can't "cure" nature. Trying to is begging for bad outcomes. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Nationalist said:

I don't think the lad feels any remorse. Or that he needs any help

Well, I won't argue with you about your son. Such an argument would be bear no fruit.

All I can say as a Christian is that we are all fallen, and we all have our particular weaknesses to different sins, and we are called to not give in to those weaknesses and to not sin. As Jesus said to the woman caught in adultery, Go and sin no more.

And if you are a Christian, know that sodomy is indeed a sin, a grievous sin. Sin can always be forgiven, but only if one repents.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/12/2022 at 5:42 PM, Great American said:
On 5/10/2022 at 7:10 AM, Nationalist said:

I hope you're wrong about this. I have a gay son...

Thats okay. We are ALL disordered due to Original Sin. Some are overeaters, drunkards, gluttons, anger issues . . . whatever. Many folks have a variety of sexual disorders too.

Your son only has to do something that is very simple, but very unpopular: He must admit to himself that he has a problem, and practice abstinence.

Much like the alcoholic who is in denial for years, then finally admits to himself that he has a problem and seeks support to stay clean, the homosexual also must finally admit to himself that he has a problem and seek support to stay clean. Its really no different.

We are all sinners who need a savior. Your sons only real problem is that the world is telling him that his sin is not a sin, and he might be believing them.

The original 'sin' is a precursor to the meaning of 'sin' as some evil refers to the 'shun'-ing of the Tree of Wisdom. It did not connote something necessarily bad but a promise that they will not like to learn what the gods knew. The tree symbolizes the secrets of Nature (or for the religious, God), which came from meaning the part of nature that is DEFINES  'good'). The word, Eve, means "All that follows" and so evil means "that which 'fell' " ["fell" describes the sun as it falls in every evening and how it 'follows' each day.] So....

'sin' is what defines 'evil (that which fell) from paradise. That this happens to be interpreted as something bad is only about how no one could interpret God (the 'good' source of Nature) as defined the 'bad' reality of our inevitable DEATH. Jesus, 'salvation' was about permitting deserving people an eternal life in Heaven ("heaven" is originally from what 'follows' above Adam, the word for that which is below.)  [And where the Greeks "atom" also comes from as meaning the most elemental earch.]

Now you no doubt think that the above is 'crap', right? But when you get more mature and curious to grow up, try to take time to notice that it demonstrates what the ORIGINAL authors of Genesis were using the story to explain: that when young, we are naive and unable to handle discovering the actual truths regarding God, Nature, or ideal 'goodness' because it is an illusion for children being cared for by those matured loving adults not wanting to scare them but who are themselves cursed as adults to KNOW that Nature is actually more 'cruel' than good and that we are all going to die necessarily. And, ....that there is no fairygodfathers anymore than there is a God! 

So, 

You only have to do something that is very simple, but very unpopular: YOU must admit to yourself that you have a problem, and practice abstaining from religious beliefs.

Much like the junky who needs to first admit he even has an addiction,the religious extremist must first recognize their religious immature beliefs are extreme before they have a reason to want to stop being extreme. This goes witout saying. 

Then you can take a bite of that fruit ....learn the actual truth about what is or is not real, and the irrational child may then BECOME a rational adult.  Its really no different.

We all shun hearing that we are all going to suffer and die and so we need some myths to make children not become too fearful from having to grow up. Your very real problem is that you are no longer a 'child' but still believe that playng pretend and shunning intelligence IS a sound and appropriate decision. The 'we all sin' point is moot if you think that you are the wiser for shunning wisdom and leave the cradle of your childhood playpen (Eden.) Its' time to learn to wipe your own ass. 

 

Note that if you want to argue againt homosexuality, you can't use your selfish religious authoritarianism to dictate how others should behave. I ALSO happen to disagree to those assuming gender is something one is born while still believing people should not be shunned for their choice to be in a consenting relationship. But you are not seeking rational arguments but proselytizing like a cult recruiter serving his leader in absolute blind faith.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Scott Mayers said:

The original 'sin' is a precursor to the meaning of 'sin' as some evil refers to the 'shun'-ing of the Tree of Wisdom. It did not connote something necessarily bad but a promise that they will not like to learn what the gods knew. The tree symbolizes the secrets of Nature (or for the religious, God), which came from meaning the part of nature that is DEFINES  'good'). The word, Eve, means "All that follows" and so evil means "that which 'fell' " ["fell" describes the sun as it falls in every evening and how it 'follows' each day.] So....

'sin' is what defines 'evil (that which fell) from paradise. That this happens to be interpreted as something bad is only about how no one could interpret God (the 'good' source of Nature) as defined the 'bad' reality of our inevitable DEATH. Jesus, 'salvation' was about permitting deserving people an eternal life in Heaven ("heaven" is originally from what 'follows' above Adam, the word for that which is below.)  [And where the Greeks "atom" also comes from as meaning the most elemental earch.]

Now you no doubt think that the above is 'crap', right? But when you get more mature and curious to grow up, try to take time to notice that it demonstrates what the ORIGINAL authors of Genesis were using the story to explain: that when young, we are naive and unable to handle discovering the actual truths regarding God, Nature, or ideal 'goodness' because it is an illusion for children being cared for by those matured loving adults not wanting to scare them but who are themselves cursed as adults to KNOW that Nature is actually more 'cruel' than good and that we are all going to die necessarily. And, ....that there is no fairygodfathers anymore than there is a God! 

So, 

You only have to do something that is very simple, but very unpopular: YOU must admit to yourself that you have a problem, and practice abstaining from religious beliefs.

Much like the junky who needs to first admit he even has an addiction,the religious extremist must first recognize their religious immature beliefs are extreme before they have a reason to want to stop being extreme. This goes witout saying. 

Then you can take a bite of that fruit ....learn the actual truth about what is or is not real, and the irrational child may then BECOME a rational adult.  Its really no different.

We all shun hearing that we are all going to suffer and die and so we need some myths to make children not become too fearful from having to grow up. Your very real problem is that you are no longer a 'child' but still believe that playng pretend and shunning intelligence IS a sound and appropriate decision. The 'we all sin' point is moot if you think that you are the wiser for shunning wisdom and leave the cradle of your childhood playpen (Eden.) Its' time to learn to wipe your own ass. 

 

Note that if you want to argue againt homosexuality, you can't use your selfish religious authoritarianism to dictate how others should behave. I ALSO happen to disagree to those assuming gender is something one is born while still believing people should not be shunned for their choice to be in a consenting relationship. But you are not seeking rational arguments but proselytizing like a cult recruiter serving his leader in absolute blind faith.

Nice soliloquy.  I think you responded to the wrong person though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
On 5/15/2022 at 3:09 PM, Scott Mayers said:

The original 'sin' is a precursor to the meaning of 'sin' as some evil refers to the 'shun'-ing of the Tree of Wisdom. It did not connote something necessarily bad but a promise that they will not like to learn what the gods knew. The tree symbolizes the secrets of Nature (or for the religious, God), which came from meaning the part of nature that is DEFINES  'good'). The word, Eve, means "All that follows" and so evil means "that which 'fell' " ["fell" describes the sun as it falls in every evening and how it 'follows' each day.] So....

'sin' is what defines 'evil (that which fell) from paradise. That this happens to be interpreted as something bad is only about how no one could interpret God (the 'good' source of Nature) as defined the 'bad' reality of our inevitable DEATH. Jesus, 'salvation' was about permitting deserving people an eternal life in Heaven ("heaven" is originally from what 'follows' above Adam, the word for that which is below.)  [And where the Greeks "atom" also comes from as meaning the most elemental earch.]

Now you no doubt think that the above is 'crap', right? But when you get more mature and curious to grow up, try to take time to notice that it demonstrates what the ORIGINAL authors of Genesis were using the story to explain: that when young, we are naive and unable to handle discovering the actual truths regarding God, Nature, or ideal 'goodness' because it is an illusion for children being cared for by those matured loving adults not wanting to scare them but who are themselves cursed as adults to KNOW that Nature is actually more 'cruel' than good and that we are all going to die necessarily. And, ....that there is no fairygodfathers anymore than there is a God! 

So, 

You only have to do something that is very simple, but very unpopular: YOU must admit to yourself that you have a problem, and practice abstaining from religious beliefs.

Much like the junky who needs to first admit he even has an addiction,the religious extremist must first recognize their religious immature beliefs are extreme before they have a reason to want to stop being extreme. This goes witout saying. 

Then you can take a bite of that fruit ....learn the actual truth about what is or is not real, and the irrational child may then BECOME a rational adult.  Its really no different.

We all shun hearing that we are all going to suffer and die and so we need some myths to make children not become too fearful from having to grow up. Your very real problem is that you are no longer a 'child' but still believe that playng pretend and shunning intelligence IS a sound and appropriate decision. The 'we all sin' point is moot if you think that you are the wiser for shunning wisdom and leave the cradle of your childhood playpen (Eden.) Its' time to learn to wipe your own ass. 

 

Note that if you want to argue againt homosexuality, you can't use your selfish religious authoritarianism to dictate how others should behave. I ALSO happen to disagree to those assuming gender is something one is born while still believing people should not be shunned for their choice to be in a consenting relationship. But you are not seeking rational arguments but proselytizing like a cult recruiter serving his leader in absolute blind faith.

 I'm not a very religious guy but i do happen to think there is a higher power, like a god. This country was built on religion, the good and bad, most of our morals and values are taken from the bible, including our laws. Do we throw those out as well, knowing they are based on the bible and the belief of God? What are the new morals and values going to look like? 

The charter of rights includes religion, why is that? The majority of the world still believes in a higher power such as God, why is that. Religion is not gone just yet... Here in Canada, we are moving away from religion, in large numbers, why I don't know.

I think everyone on this planet should be treated equally, gay, straight, creed, race whatever...What you do in your home is no one else business. We as a race tend to take everything to the extreme like religion, gender identity, and critical race theory to name a few.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Army Guy said:

 I'm not a very religious guy but i do happen to think there is a higher power, like a god. This country was built on religion, the good and bad, most of our morals and values are taken from the bible, including our laws. Do we throw those out as well, knowing they are based on the bible and the belief of God? What are the new morals and values going to look like? 

The charter of rights includes religion, why is that? The majority of the world still believes in a higher power such as God, why is that. Religion is not gone just yet... Here in Canada, we are moving away from religion, in large numbers, why I don't know.

I think everyone on this planet should be treated equally, gay, straight, creed, race whatever...What you do in your home is no one else business. We as a race tend to take everything to the extreme like religion, gender identity, and critical race theory to name a few.

I interpret government as our means to DEFINE morality. In nature, there is none other than the INDIVIDUAL'S interpretation. The concept of 'good' (to which "God" is a different spelling of the original meaning) only originates as a kind of early childlhood program that begins with a blank slate. This 'program' when it intially runs will DEFINE anything it receives during specific events as 'good', in the same way God, in the Judea-Christian Genesis begs God as merely defining what is 'good' by what it is.

Religion only evolved FROM 'politics' (a poll among people's different opinions). So religion does not 'own' morality because it is merely begging some kind of supernatural authority along with some mythical made up history to justify the belief that SPECIFIC actions are somehow 'good' or 'evil'. Nature is 'nihilistic' and does not care what we think. Each animal also has this 'program' mentioned above because it is necessary to define what to SEEK in the environment. 

My problem is that governments that are permitted to use religion within it, are bringing in anti-rational, anti-scientific beliefs that lack actual universal agreement nor 'fit' to the reality of nature. ALL our political problems initally stem from governments USING 'religious' assertions to rationalize those in power to do ANYTHING! You cannot think that 'religion' is ONE belief. And if it is some possible fact that a God exists, it should be irrelevant to a system that PEOPLE create that is both BY them as it is FOR them. Thus, the reasoning for the American's First Amendement. We lack this. And in actualilty, that preamble dictating that 'we' respect this country as 'founded' upon God, it intentionally UNDOES any 'universal' statements that directly follow  because it is an intentional 'condition'! It permits governments to create things like 'hate' laws. It might help to think of what its direct opposite could be: 'love' laws'. Obviously, the only such emotionally laden terms is justified ONLY through the auspices of those privileged people who think they have unique personal access to some God! So we need to keep religion OUT of the political realm altogether. It can justify ANY government's behaviors ARBITRARILY when permitted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Scott Mayers said:

 

Governments don't need religion to bring in policies or laws that are woke in nature, or unscientific,  like the unlimited amount of genders, where is the science behind all of that, critical race theory, just means to keep us divided. I think for the most part religion has been removed as the prime motivator for our morals and values. and we have moved on to something else, You don't have to be religious to have the same moral values as the rest of us...

Without religion what do those morals and values look like? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, Army Guy said:

Governments don't need religion to bring in policies or laws that are woke in nature, or unscientific,  like the unlimited amount of genders, where is the science behind all of that, critical race theory, just means to keep us divided. I think for the most part religion has been removed as the prime motivator for our morals and values. and we have moved on to something else, You don't have to be religious to have the same moral values as the rest of us...

Without religion what do those morals and values look like? 

Your argument to an atheist might be comparable to me challenging you, "What would horses be like if unicorns didn't exist?"

The present paradigm of the politics on the Left that derives 'woke' identity politics are themselve RELIGIOUS to me. You seem to not care to notice that many of the atheists tend to favor the Left still.. But this is an unfortunate choice in a world that excludes the non-religious as valid regardless of which political side you opt for. Even the atheists on the Right would tend NOT to favor the religious interpretations but have no choice. So you cannot argue that just BECAUSE naive or deceptive people ruled the polical power throughout most of human history, that religion would somehow NOT exist otherwise! If stupid people have always ruled, does it make stupidity the 'correct' type of thinking that should always rule regardless? 

Edited by Scott Mayers
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Scott Mayers said:

Your argument to an atheist might be comparable to me challenging you, "What would horses be like if unicorns didn't exist?"

The present paradigm of the politics on the Left that derives 'woke' identity politics are themselve RELIGIOUS to me. You seem to not care to notice that many of the atheists tend to favor the Left still.. But this is an unfortunate choice in a world that excludes the non-religious as valid regardless of which political side you opt for. Even the atheists on the Right would tend NOT to favor the religious interpretations but have no choice. So you cannot argue that just BECAUSE naive or deceptive people ruled the polical power throughout most of human history, that religion would somehow NOT exist otherwise! If stupid people have always ruled, does it make stupidity the 'correct' type of thinking that should always rule regardless? 

In what way do you think the woke are religious? 

And your right I don't care if atheists favor the left, or right it's a personal choice and does not affect me one way or another. Nor do I judge a person that's an atheist, or value their opinion any less, If I did would I still be posted to you on this topic.  

And I think you have the whole idea of religion did not exist because of politics is back words, i think it is the other way around, religion has had a huge influence on building our nation, it has shaped our present-day morals and values,

We as a nation have been slowly drifting away from religion, to the point most Christians are not churchgoers as they were in the past. And religion will slowly fade into the dark over time.

My question was if religion pretty much touched everything we did in the past, what do you think it would look like if we had no religion at all to guide us. Even if you do not believe in God, Someone wrote the bible and those thoughts and messages are still guiding us here today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/6/2022 at 9:16 PM, Army Guy said:

In what way do you think the woke are religious? 

And your right I don't care if atheists favor the left, or right it's a personal choice and does not affect me one way or another. Nor do I judge a person that's an atheist, or value their opinion any less, If I did would I still be posted to you on this topic.  

And I think you have the whole idea of religion did not exist because of politics is back words, i think it is the other way around, religion has had a huge influence on building our nation, it has shaped our present-day morals and values,

We as a nation have been slowly drifting away from religion, to the point most Christians are not churchgoers as they were in the past. And religion will slowly fade into the dark over time.

My question was if religion pretty much touched everything we did in the past, what do you think it would look like if we had no religion at all to guide us. Even if you do not believe in God, Someone wrote the bible and those thoughts and messages are still guiding us here today.

If your PARTICULAR religion you think should be promoted, you are demanding people believe that there is ONLY ONE religion and that IT was necessary to define the non-religious concept of a free (liberal) democracy! The problem with religion as defined neutrally is that they are beliefs that LACK univeral CAPACITY to know WHICH belief is correct. The problem with religion then also means that no ONE religious set of ideals exist. Religion IS 'culture' and what those on the Left supporting 'Multiculturalism' ARE promoting RELIGIOUS beliefs like you except they recognize that there is differences. 

The concept of 'government' is about society seeking to find COMMON grounds of their different beliefs. ONLY those who demand STRICT religious power to make laws (presuming they have some special unique connection to what is 'true' about nature through their 'god'), goes against any system that permits NEGOTIATION among people but prefer a COMMAND style set of FIXED NON-NEGOTIABLE BELIEFS. Thus, you might believe, for instance, that the Bible suffices as a 'government' that has its 'commandments' that need no new legislation. Such arrogant dictatorial beliefs are Non-democratic and make such 'governments' merely tools for the rich to POLICE the rest as though they are slaves who are thought to be INTRINSICALLY 'evil'. 

The con is that the powerful on the Right are NOT 'religious' themselves because they CREATE the very 'religions' FOR those they want to OBEY. They want BLIND BELIEVERS IN THEIR OWN "SUPERIORITY" but cannot without some particular KIND of 'religion' that irrationally defends why they themselves have a 'right' to BE so powerful regardless of their arbitrary worth. The fact that wealth gets passed on by the choices ONLY of the wealthy, for those on the Right, they do not want any 'government' that promotes doubt in their VIRTUE. 

The 'woke' are those who believe they recognize that the very powers on the Right are pretending that they are not responsible for how whole classes of people based upon arbitrary racial lines are not racial. The fact that the 'right' defends "FAMILY" means that they believe in 'racial' superiority, given it is default that having a system that ONLY favors the self-interest of one's OWN, implies any extension of what 'family' can mean.

Race is just an extension of 'families' and so IF you begin with a majority of some particular race dominating the economic pie, whatever the genetic makeup of those families ARE, the wealthy ONLY get to dictate which race gets to STAY dominant. 

The Leftwing religious who ALSO value 'family' only want distribution of power that enables them to be ABLE to compete. As such, they cannot collectively agree to other economically powerless cults UNLESS they find some means to point out that the 'family' is identical to one's race or other genetic factor. These are the 'woke' that are religious but not YOUR particular religion. 

To me, the fault is that no one WANTS to give up their independent power to selectively FAVOR their own through inheritance choices, especially the religious extremes who believe in isolated conservation and want their own children only to marry within their own extended 'family' (race/ethnicity). They also want the same power to IMPOSE debt upon the general society as an 'inheritance'. Since the rich can choose to pass on any debt to the whole (choose NOT to pass on debt to their own), then this hypocrisy is what 'awoke' those realizing why their own empoverished societies are not able to get ahead. 

The delusion is that the Right wing cannot notice that their power to favor their own while negligently being able to be 'indifferent' to the rest is harmless. The Left wingers who support the 'woke' concept are asserting that IF 'inheritance' is a 'right' as the Right believe regarding economics, they so is their families beliefs ....their culture. Thus, when you pass on wealth through your own privilege, you also pass on the culture. 

You, arguing for some 'right' to religion is demanding the right to pass on some 'heritage' given you THINK that we had some prior virtue based upon it. You ALSO only want your culture's POSITIVE values being pointed out while passing on the NEGATIVE factors as owned by the rest of society in the same way. Thus, you prove, by supporting a belief that your 'family' has in virtue is your OWN kind (being eligible to pass on economic wealth) but that any vices belong to the rest, as though the reason for other people's failures economically are due to flaws in their inherent 'culture' (their 'heritage'.

Note how 'heritage' is the root of 'inheritance', if you haven't. above. This is key because the only difference between them differs in that the dominant cults believe they 'earned' their economic virtue due to their cultural virtue BUT that one's cultural virtue is actually due to their accidental coinciding economic virtue. The non-dominant cults are 'woke' to this fact and want the SAME. The rest of us who lack 'family' cohesiveness AND economic power are being forced by you religious supremacists to take sides BASED upon the religious belief that we inherit our culture in our genes. 

It is 'religious' to believe that we inherit something cultural by our genes. I don't 'inherit' a likeness to play guitar, for instance because some ancestor passed it on. It is equally religious to think that it is appropriate to then pass on environmental wealth for the same reason. Your children don't deserve any form of 'good' inheritance unless they deserve 'bad' inheritance equally. When you think so, you excuse the failures of others as INTRINSIC to their literal genetic nature,....making it 'racist'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...
On 6/9/2021 at 7:24 PM, myata said:

Opened another book read the line "to love one is to love the Universe". Actually the question is not is, rather why?

Why do we insist that it could be? Like what is not obvious about it, where? Or does it illustrate the length and depth of self-deception we are willing to go to voluntarily to preserve our illusions and beliefs?

Ayn Rand certainly would have a problem with that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,752
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    Dorai
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • paradox34 went up a rank
      Explorer
    • Venandi earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • CrazyCanuck89 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • CDN1 went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • DUI_Offender went up a rank
      Proficient
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...