Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
User Journal

Journal TechnoLust's Journal: Where's TechnoLust? 21

Journal by TechnoLust
Many of you may have noticed that I've not been posting to my journal as often as I used to. For one thing I've been over at marotti.com a lot lately. I kind of got out of the habit of being here during the Not So Great /. Blackout. Plus, there's a lot going on right now. Work is eating up a lot of my time, since they keep firing people and dumping their work on me, and then they are making us take a week off without pay. (That's OK, I'll be on the lake that week with my Sea Doo.) I've been trying to lose weight and get more exercise, so I'm walking and exercising more instead of sitting in front of the PC browsing /. But I've been having some other problems too.

If you remember from a previous journal, the girl I've been seeing has a daughter. April 10th was her (my girl, not the daughter) birthday, and I cooked her dinner and she and her daughter came over and ate and I started to give her the present I bought her. It was a 14k gold Sea Turtle (her favorite animal) pendant on a 14k gold, diamond cut necklace. It was in a hinged box, like rings come in, only bigger. When I started to open it to show her what it was, her daughter hugged my legs and shouted out, "You're going to ask her to marry you." I showed her that it was not a ring and I said, "No, I'm not. Not tonight." She loved the necklace and I put it on her, but I didn't get the reaction I had hoped for (a passionate kiss.) I didn't really think anything was wrong, I just thought she was tired. I went to her daughter's ball game the next day and she wore the necklace and we had a great time. Then I didn't hear from her for a few days, so I called from work one day. I asked if everything was OK, and that seemed to upset her. She was working on school work and said she had just been busy and she would call me tomorrow. When she didn't I knew something was wrong. I called a mutal friend and talked to her. She said my girl was scared. Her daughter bringing up marriage had started a chain reaction of thoughts. She had called our friend and told her that she wasn't good enough for me and that I couldn't love her because of her past (having a child out of wedlock.) I thought I had made it perfectly clear that it wasn't a problem, in fact, I love her daughter and I enjoy having her around. She still won't talk to me about it, so I've kind of let it drop until she's done with finals. I just don't understand where I went wrong. I've tried to take it slow and not rush her. All I can think about is being with her, but this is rough on me. I always saw her as strong an having a very strong self esteem, but I guess she's vulnerable just like the rest of us.

At Bible study the other night, we read Genesis chapter 11. It's about how Abram's father, Terah, was supposed to go to Canaan, but he stopped along the way at Herra, a little town that wasn't all that, but was better than walking through the desert. So he just stopped there and didn't go any further. Terah died there and never saw Canaan. I related it to my situation. Where my girl and I were was good (Herra), but it wasn't as good as it could be (Canaan), so we have to go through this (more desert) to get to where we need to be. It's rough and sometimes I fear we will die in the desert, so to speak, but I have that hope of where we will be in future that keeps me going.

Normally I save personal stuff for my personal, off-line, dead-tree format journal, but I'm wondering if there are any readers who have been through this. I have talked to several of my friends and a surprising number of them went through something similar, where one of them felt inferior or unworthy because of past decisions. If you have a story I'd love to hear it. Post AC if you need to.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Where's TechnoLust? More

Where's TechnoLust?

Comments Filter:
  • First of all, you didn't go wrong anywhere, your girl just overthought the situation.

    Might I suggest you invite her to do something for her daughter (take her out to chucky-cheeses, or invite the daughter to go out on the jetskis, or, if you have money, invite them to DisneyWorld or something). The idea is for your girl to see how you want to be part of her daughters life, not just "accept" her daughter. Try and get her daughter gifts and stuff. If she notices that you are interested in her daughter as much as her, she'll be more willing to accept the fact that her past makes no difference to you...

  • I say... (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward
    ...leave her. The child out of wedlock is a sin, and since you've clearly heard the word of God, going any further in this relationship is a ticket to hell.

    Don't take my word for it though, talk to someone you can trust from your church. If they tell you to go on with the relationship, it'll only be because they aren't a real christian, or because the grasp of satan has overtaken their poor soul.

    God Bless.
    • I know a lot of people probably think this way, so I thought I should take the opportunity to witness, in case someone DOES take this AC's post seriously.

      The word Christian means Christ-like. Christ is first and foremost forgiving. He forgave her for it, can I do any less? Also to not forgive her would make me a hypocrit, because I myself am not without sin. If God did not forgive us and sent us all to hell if we sinned, there would be no one in heaven. The Bible says, "All have sinned and come short of the glory of God."

      I know you are just trolling, and the tone of your post suggests you don't believe in God, or at least you are indifferent. You may have even been hurt by a Christian and so think all of us think like that. We don't. I try not to judge anyone for any reason. For race, sex, religion or nationality. If you believe that God should punish everyone who has a child outside of marriage, that's your right. But please don't insinuate that all "real" Christians believe this. That is not true.

      • "Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God" (1 Corinthians 6:9-10).

        also:

        "A bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord: even to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the Lord" (Deuteronomy 23:2).

        You're playing with fire here, TechnoLust!

        I'll take credit for that tongue-in-cheek "ticket-to-hell" AC post. I'm actually an athiest myself; I just happen to enjoy teasing others for being "cafeteria christians".

        In all honesty, I don't know what advice to give you about your ladyfriend, but you certainly shouldn't let her past child out of wedlock slow you down. Unless you believe any of that silly stuff in the bible.

        Good luck! =)
        • I do believe you are quoting twice from the old testament. Many of the tenants in their have been supplanted in the new testament.

          I also don't think God is a rules-lawyer jerk.

          Yeah. Don't worry about the kid. Will have better reply at top layer (after obligatory 2 minute warning.)

        • I'm not familiar with the term.

          As for your last comment, I'm not letting her past slow me down, she's the one that is having trouble letting it go. But it is not because I don't believe in the Bible. (That wasn't a manipulation attempt was it? Trying to make me choose between love and God?) :-) The Bible also says, "So when they continued asking Him, He raised Himself up and said to them, 'He who is without sin among you, let him throw a stone at her first.'" John 8:7 and "Judge not, that you be not judged." Matthew 7:1. I try to focus on the forgivness and grace parts, because Jesus is our example of how to live, and he never said, I'm sorry, I can't be around you because you used to be this, or you've done this in the past. I don't know what in your life has caused you to believe the way you do, but I hope it wasn't a Christian who didn't know anything about God or the Bible. I've seen many of them, who try to beat everyone over the head with the Bible until they believe exactly the same as them. It's not the way to go. God is love (that's in there, too) but a lot of Christians don't understand that. I don't have a problem with anybody or their beliefs. If somebody wants to know what I believe or if they are looking for answers, I will talk to them, but I don't go around saying everyone who doesn't think like I do it wrong. I think everyone has the right to believe whatever they want, as long as it doesn't affect me or my rights. So, you can't believe that stealing my car is OK, because that affects my rights. But other than that, I really don't mind. I'd rather you believe in God, because it's a great feeling and the best decision I ever made, but I can't FORCE you to make that decision, all I can do it try to and piss you off, or I can pray for you and let God handle it. Then if you decide you want to make that decision, I can guide you and help you pray, but that's as far as I can go. Ultimately it is your choice. Many Christians have trouble with that. But please don't judge all Christians by the few bad apples. There are a lot of us that are trying to do it the way Jesus did it.

          • I think everyone has the right to believe whatever they want, as long as it doesn't affect me or my rights.

            Well, I agree with you wholeheartedly on that one. I do fully respect your right to believe whatever you want. I also respect my right to discuss it on the internet. This being your journal, though, I'll drop the subject if you ask me to leave. I'm not trying to harrass anybody. :)

            A Cafeteria Christian is one who picks and chooses the parts of the bible they agree with, and then calls themself a christian. There are verses in the bible that specifically forbid this kind of picking and choosing (i'm too lazy to look it up right now, but will if need be), but that doesn't seem to stop anyone. For instance, I've met a surprising number of gay people who call themselves christians. They just pick around the parts of the book that say they're going to hell, and should be publicly stoned to death, etc etc, and focus on the happy loving parts that they can agree with. Thats being a cafeteria christian.

            In my opinion, if a book is so very right that your're going to live your life by it, and make important decisions based on what it advises, then you ought to respect the whole damn thing. Of course, there are so many silly outdated verses and obvious contradictions that actually living by it would be impossible.
            I try to focus on the forgivness and grace parts...
            ...God is love...
            ...because Jesus is our example of how to live...
            While the christian God may be a loving god, he is also quite clearly a vengefull, muderous, hatefull God. Theres no denying it; it's right there in the good book for everyone to see. I tend to like the MSB [misanthropic-bitch.com]'s take [misanthropic-bitch.com] on the bible, reproduced here without any permission at all. Funny, yes, but also so true:
            Jonesboro. Paducah. Littleton. The names of those towns are seared into our collective memory. Since 1996, 30 students have died in school shootings, with dozens of others injured.


            After the April 21st shooting at Columbine High School in Colorado, legislators finally took notice. Knee-jerk legislation abounded because never before in America's history had so many middle-class, God-fearing, porcelain children met a brutal demise in one fell swoop.

            Something has to be done to protect the children, no matter how reactionary. Heading the pack is Henry Hyde.

            Hyde, the chairman of the House Committee on the Judiciary, recently announced a bill titled the "Children's Defense Act of 1999." At first, I thought this bill would protect children from their incompetent, irresponsible parents, but the bill would actually prohibit any establishment - from libraries to video stores to bookstores - from selling, renting, or loaning violent and sexual material to minors.

            The no-no's on Hyde's list include: acts of masturbation, homosexuality, and sexual intercourse; physical contact with a person's clothed or unclothed genitals, buttocks, or breasts; rape; acts of mutilation upon the human body; and, sadistic or masochistic activity.

            Many view this legislation as an affront to the First Amendment. Some school districts, at the behest of parents, have already banned such book as The Diary of Anne Frank, To Kill A Mockingbird, The Color Purple, and Huckleberry Finn.

            Even though Hyde's proposal makes allowances for violent and sexually explicit that has "socially redeeming value" for minors, who decides what is socially redeeming? This legislation could still aid in the quest to ban "offensive" books, right?

            Well, to hell with the naysayers. I applaud Hyde's effort. We need to protect America's children, regardless of the cost to the freedom we hold so dear. I view this as the perfect time to take this legislation to its natural extreme and rid this fine, moral nation of a book that has polluted the minds of American children for generations.

            No book, be it American Psycho or Lady Chatterly's Lover, has depicted such extreme acts of violence and sexual relations as this book has. But, this book is widely accepted and cherished.

            While it costs $7 to rent a pornographic movie in a motel, this book is available in every room - in an unlocked drawer, where innocent children can easily find it, and have their impressionable minds corrupted and their fragile lives ruined.

            From an early age, most Americans are exposed to this book in their homes, schools, and place of worship. Special diluted versions of this book have been created specifically for children and lazy adults because the unadulterated version is grotesque and perverse. If any person claiming that this book belongs in the bedroom of every child and on the desk of every teacher took the time to read the content, his opinion might change.

            This book is dark, dreary, and morbid. This book encourages people to hang pictures of a nearly nude, bloodied man engaged in a masochistic activity - an obvious sexual fetish - and to wear his broken body around their necks. This book discusses, and sometimes, glorifies: adultery, incest, rape, mutilation, cannibalism, and murder.

            (Genesis 19:4-8 ) "And Lot went up to Zoar," reads a passage, "and stayed in the mountains, and his two daughters with him.... Then the firstborn said to the younger, 'Our father is old, and there is not a man on earth to come in to us after the manner of the earth. Come, let us make our father drink wine, and let us lie with him, that we may preserve our family through our father.' Thus both the daughters of Lot were with child by their father."

            Two daughters conspire to have sex with their father. Here we have rape, deceit, incest, and illegitimate pregnancy. Do we want our children exposed to this debauchery? According to the organization Prevent Child Abuse America, at least 20% of American women experienced some form of sexual abuse as children. What kind of message is this book sending to girls? That sexual abuse is okay? That incest is acceptable?

            And, yet, it is held up as a moral guide.

            What of the passage that reads, "(II Kings 6:28,29) And the king said unto her, What aileth thee? And she answered, This woman said unto me, Give thy son, that we may eat him to day, and we will eat my son to morrow. So we boiled my son, and did eat him: and I said unto her on the next day, Give thy son,that we may eat him: and she hath hid her son."

            What kind of sick imagery does that put into the minds of children? The consumption of one's young? Why, even in Hansel and Gretel, the two children get away before the witch can eat them. Here, cannibalism and child murder are not depicted in a negative light.

            In a 1993 national survey conducted by Metropolitan Life, 55 percent of teachers and 60 percent of law enforcement officials believed that violence in the mass media is a "major" factor contributing to violence in the schools.

            But, still, this book remains an integral part of America's culture and history.

            America's children are suffering. Our children are crying out for help. They are in danger. If we are to save them, if we are to rescue them from this moral turpitude, there is only one thing we can do: ban this book; ban the Bible. Don't you care enough about the children to do that?
            </msb-quote>
            But seriously, how do you sleep at night knowing that if the bible is to be taken literally, you will certainly be going to hell? Most likely, by not taking it literally, I'd imagine. But if it's up to the reader to pick and choose and interpert the bible, how can you be sure you've interperted it correctly? Certainly, it has lead many many people down the wrong path. Throughout modern history, the bible has lead people to do stupid things. If we are to believe these instances are all due to misinterpertation of the bible's wholesome message, how can you be so sure your interpertation is so right?

            And how can you even know the Bible is the right book to be interperting at all? If any one religion turned out to be the true religion, the billions of people (majority of the human population) who had placed their faith in a different religion would clearly be wrong. By aligning yourself with any exclusive belief system, you are automatically making the arrogant statement "I'm more right than the majority of the human population". I'd need some pretty strong evidence to make an arrogant statement like that, which is why I generally go with science. You know, that belief system with proof, backed up by the scientific method, and all that other good stuff, that doesn't ask you to make a "leap of faith" or tell you "thats just because god works in mysterious ways" and so on. It may not have all the answers (yet), but the answers it does have are backed up with some pretty good evidence.

            I'm going to stop now, because it's late, and I'm ready to smoke a bowl and go to sleep.

            Say a prayer for my lost soul, kind christian ;}
            • So by saying that there is not God at all, aren't you making an even more arrogant statement? I'm saying I believe there is a being more powerful than me, and this is who I think He is. Many others belive also in a supreme being, but have a different idea of who he is. So by saying their is no God, aren't you saying everyone who believes in Jehovah, or Buddah, or Allah is wrong? It seems to me that you are making a larger statement. ;-)

              As for the quote, just because it is in the Bible doesn't mean it is an instruction, unless it is a direct command (like the 10 commandments). By putting in there the story of David having multiple (500 I believe) wives, God isn't saying polygomy is okay. If one reads the rest of that story, one finds that his wives were his downfall. The Bible CAN be taken literally, if ALSO taken in context. But you can't just read it, you have to study it and pray about it and rip it apart and put it back together. In my Bible study class, my teacher also reads and translates the original Greek in some places. This also depends on your definition of literal. Some of Jesus stories are parables, they represent something else. Matthew 13: 10-11 says, "10. And the disciples came and said to Him, "Why do You speak to them in parables?'' 11. He answered and said to them, "Because it has been given to you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been given. "

              which is why I generally go with science. You know, that belief system with proof, backed up by the scientific method
              Yes, I know science, and I believe in science to a degree. (Actually, I have a BS in Chemistry.) But I have seen many things that science can not explain. One very specific example was when I was a very young child. I had a very bad case of bacterial Spinal Meninjitis [musa.org]. It is fatal in 1 out of 10 cases. I had all the symptoms; seizure, high fever, vomiting, etc. The doctor told my mother I would almost definitely die. He also said my complications were so bad and my fever had been so high for so long, that if I did by some miracle survive (And it was a miracle) I would have brain damage, be blind, and I would lose most of my hearing.

              I am 24 years old now. I graduate 4th in my class with honors from High school, earned my BS in Chemistry in 4 years on a full tuition scholarship, and have 20/20 vision and perfect hearing. The doctor could not explain it, when my parents tried to thank him, he actually said, "Don't think me, I didn't do this. Thank God and the people who were praying for him." I have seen my grandmother cured of cancer, I have seen things that science simply can not explain. To me saying, "Science can explain it, we just haven't discovered the how or why yet," is no worse than saying, "God works in mysterious ways." Science doesn't have all the answers, and neither does religion (don't confuse religion with God.)

              Yes, God is vengeful and jealous, He has to be. But He gave us a way out of that, a very simple way. Let's use your "smoke a bowl" example. (I assume you were referring to pot.) Pot is illegal, you may not agree with that, actually I don't really agree with that. I don't smoke the stuff, but it is less dangerous than some of the other stuff that is legal, but I digress... The fact remains that it is illegal. Now lets move into parable mode and say the police is all knowing, so as soon as you spark that bowl, Officer Smith knocks down your door and arrests you. Let's also assume the penalty for possession is death. Now Officer Smith gives you a choice: Pay your dues and be put to death, or admit that almost 2000 years ago Officer Smith knew you were going to smoke that bud and he sent his perfect son and let some people kill him, and that he saved your life by doing that. Which option would you choose? OK, so it isn't a perfect parable (I'm not perfect after all) but I think you see where I'm going. Imagine that love. You didn't deserve a get out of jail free card, neither did I, and God knows everything you and I ever did, and everything you and I ever will do. And He STILL let His Son be crucified (which is a horrible way to die, you should read up on it just for the historical signifigance, if nothing else.) for us. That to me is amazing.

              I also respect my right to discuss it on the internet. This being your journal, though, I'll drop the subject if you ask me to leave. I'm not trying to harrass anybody.
              No, please, stay. I love to engage in an intellectual exchange of ideas. Just because your ideas are not mine doesn't mean they aren't valid. Who knows, you might even change my mind! (I am very open minded, I just have never found a set of belives that fit the data better than the ones I currently have. My current beliefs are not the ones I have always held, although I have always believed in God, I have modified how I view God and my perception of how He fits into my life.) I'm enjoying this banter, as I hope you are. I'm in this for the intellectual stimulation. If I learn something, or you learn something, that's all the better. I hope, if anything, I have improved you view of Christians. I hope now you realize that not all people who believe in God are closed minded.

              I'm going to stop now, because I am having a cook out with my Bible study group, and we have some souls to pray for. ;-)

              • So by saying that there is not God at all, aren't you making an even more arrogant statement?
                Yes! That was my point. By aligning oneself with an exclusive belief system (really, 'being' anything besides Agnostic, I suppose) you must make such a statement. Which is why I followed with "I'd need some pretty strong evidence to make an arrogant statement like that, which is why I generally go with science. You know, that belief system with proof, backed up by the scientific method, and all that other good stuff, that doesn't ask you to make a "leap of faith" or tell you "thats just because god works in mysterious ways" and so on. It may not have all the answers (yet), but the answers it does have are backed up with some pretty good evidence." (sorry to repeat myself like that) I'm fully aware of the arrogance. :)
                The Bible CAN be taken literally, if ALSO taken in context
                Please, put the following into context for me, so that I may take it literally:
                Num 31 [cforc.com]:15: And Moses said unto them, Have ye saved all the women alive?
                Num 31:16 Behold, these caused the children of Israel, through the counsel of Balaam, to commit trespass against the LORD in the matter of Peor, and there was a plague among the congregation of the LORD.
                31:17 Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him.
                31:18 But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.
                See, to me, a nonbeliever, it sounds a lot like Moses is telling his people to kill the little boys and nonvirgin women, and keep the virgins alive for themselves. And Moses is only doing what God commanded, as we hear a few lines later: 31:21 And Eleazar the priest said unto the men of war which went to the battle, This is the ordinance of the law which the LORD commanded Moses.
                And were these savage killers punished, so that the genocide they committed could serve as some sort of lesson in the Good Book? No, they 'purified' themselves, and that made everything alright. (They purified their captives too.) Seriously:
                31:19 And do ye abide without the camp seven days: whosoever hath killed any person, and whosoever hath touched any slain, purify both yourselves and your captives on the third day, and on the seventh day.
                31:20 And purify all your raiment, and all that is made of skins, and all work of goats' hair, and all things made of wood.
                This book is to be used as a moral guide? You'd let your kids read this? My god man! Please, put Numbers 31 [cforc.com]:15-21 in a context that makes it even slightly OK.

                I'm sure I'll hear the retort about how this is all in the Old testament, as if that somehow it excusable. But if God is so all knowing, why would he have given Moses these orders, even then? Was killing women and children (and taking virgins for yourselves) somehow not wrong then? If the bible is true, and these things happened at God's command, he sure doesn't seem like the forgiving loving happy God I keep hearing about. In fact, if God came to earth in human form again, I think we'd probably have a pretty solid case against Him for war crimes. That is, if He existed, and wasn't a mere fictional creation of man.
                Yes, God is vengeful and jealous, He has to be.
                Why does he have to be? Matthew 19:26 tells us that "with God all things are possible.". Is it not possible for him to overcome his petty jealousy? I guess maybe that should read with God all things are possible, except dealing with childish jealousy, because gods a baby like that sometimes.

                Moving on:
                Now lets move into parable mode and say the police is all knowing, so as soon as you spark that bowl, Officer Smith knocks down your door and arrests you. Let's also assume the penalty for possession is death. Now Officer Smith gives you a choice: Pay your dues and be put to death, or admit that almost 2000 years ago Officer Smith knew you were going to smoke that bud and he sent his perfect son and let some people kill him, and that he saved your life by doing that. Which option would you choose? OK, so it isn't a perfect parable (I'm not perfect after all) but I think you see where I'm going. Imagine that love.
                Interesting parable. No just officer (or authority figure, or god) would give me such a choice, however. My options are both quite unreasonable, and neither would serve justice. On the one hand, I've got death (cruel, unusual, no chance for me to reform my wicked ways, etc etc) and on the other I've got "admitting that almost 2000 years ago Officer Smith knew you were going to smoke that bud and he sent his perfect son and let some people kill him". Now the first option is clearly no good for me, but the second is just preposterous. How does the death of Officer smith's son 2000 years ago have any relevance at all to my crimes today? (how did jesus' death 'absolve' anyone of sin?) And if Officer smith knew I was planning to smoke the bowl 2000 years ago, it's clearly out of my hands, so I really shouldn't be held responsible! And furthermore, how is my simple acknowledgement of these events going to change anything?! I'm not challenging your parable, I'm challenging the biblical logic you've based it on. Seriously, did Christ's death prevent sin in the following 2000 years? No, of course not. It just laid a massive guilt trip on sinners, and gave them an easy way (repentance) that they could feel a little better about themselves after the fact.

                The "Jesus died for your sins" thing never made any sense at all. If god is all powerful, and nothing is beyond his ability, why did he choose the brutal death of his son as 'payment' for man's sins? Why did he even need payment in the first place? It makes no sense. Think about it.
              • Hey, by the way, hows it going with your girl?

                Is she dealing with her fears? I wish you luck with that, man.

                Your journal fans await further news! :)

              • hey (Score:1)

                by phyxeld ( 558628 )
                you know, slashcode will soon archive this journal, forever sealing this discussion.

                Should I take your silence as a sign you'd rather not continue our conversation?
                • I haven't had time to think, let alone post on /. If slashcode gets it I'll just start a new journal topic, but I didn't think it archived journals. I really do want to continue this conversation, but time is against me. I will be off next week for MULA [slashdot.org]. That isn't some bizaar holiday, it is our corporate Mandatory Unpaid Leave of Absence. Oh, joy! So, I'll be at the lake during the day, and I'll have some time to continue our conversation during the night. As I said I enjoy intelligent conversation, and religious conversation always either makes me fine tune my beliefs or strengthens my current beliefs. Which is good either way.

            • I'm a Christian. I take the Bible for what it is: accounts of a) the history of Israel (though it's somewhat biased in that regard) b) people's experiences of God (most of the prophetic and apostolic type parts) and c) protest literature (Jonah, Ruth, and Job come to mind). These were all written by people, not a deity. They cannot be infallible (to raise them to infallibility is, imho, to be idolatrous.

              I'd suggest reading the works of John Shelby Spong for an enlightening and contrarian view of the Bible.

              • I take the bible for what it is also: A book of hate, often used as a tool to control people, dressed up as some kind of innocent religious moral guidebook, and presented to children as the root of all good.

                I'd gladly explain why in great depth, but I already have elsewhere [slashdot.org] in this very journal discussion, and I need to get some sleep right now.
      • I would first of all like to say that any attempt to discuss God to someone who does not have any common ground to start with is fruitless and counter-productive. There has to be *at least* the desire to know* at best a search for truth.

        *Anyone* who *studies* the old and new testament can see discrepancies with the way God handled the Israel before Jesus and after Jesus. You don't often know the reasons. Anyone who wants to know the short answer only has to know that Jesus was there to supplant the lesser law (law of Moses) with the higher law (God's way of living). In other words, no more eye for eye or tooth for tooth. I am biased obviously, being a Mormon, but if you are interested in knowing the reasons why God seems to change, read the Book of Mormon. . If you have any serious questions, the Book of Mormon tries to address it in a simple and direct way. There needs to be no suspension of belief, only the desire to find out the truth. The Book of Mormon speaks for itself. [mormon.org]

  • This is a classic problem, well documented in the literature [cars.com].

    -- MarkusQ

  • No AC post for me. It's all well documented on various public Delphi.com forums (back in the day when you had to pay and dial in. None of this web stuff).

    I dumped my wife (then girlfriend) not once, not twice, but three times. Guess who felt unworthy? Of course, with her disabilities, she felt unworthy going into it. So we've both got issues.

    What helped (finally) was talking. Lots of it. I suggest the same. Talk. And act. Be yourself. God, fate, or whatever has brought you this far. If it's meant to be, it will happen. But don't try to play a game. Don't try to 'prove' that you accept and enjoy her daughter. Just be yourself. Either those actions will be suitable to GF as father/husband/boyfriend/whatever, or they will not be enough. In which case... Too bad.

    Have you talked about marriage? Is it one of those cases where it is all done except the ring and the walk down the aisle? Is that jumping ahead?

    All I can say (from the wizened old age of 29 and just under 3 years of marriage) is to open up, don't change who you are, and let it take its course. Things are tough now. Things will be tough later. Life is a walk through the proverbial desert (perhaps the lesson to be gleaned from Exodus?)

    Another incoherent stream of conciousness babble brought to you by Dr. Pepper.

Slashdot Top Deals

Don't sweat it -- it's only ones and zeros. -- P. Skelly

Close