Hi Mike,

>>Essentially my response to you has been to what I see as an incorrect use of the term anarchy. I think you're applying it a little too broadly and perhaps that's the issue..
>
>I never said anarchy, you did. I said anarchist, which does mean something different, though very related.

So... Anarchist play Pinochele then? <g> Anarchist perform acts of anarchy (here's the link for those out there who haven't figured it out yet.. <g>) which seems fairly straightforward to me anyways.. So, while you didn't use the word you certainly icluded the concept. That is, unless anarchists don't do anarchy..

>
>>Typically it goes like this; "I can use marijuana as long as I don't hurt others." Well, there's no way that an individual can live their life as an island and not hurt others.
>
>First of all, you seem to be under the impression that I'm a pot head.

Uhhh.. First of all I am under the impression that you think that the government should get out of the business of prohibiting the use of pot and think it shouldn't be illegal. I don't recall me ever suggesting that I think you are a pot-head. Are you? Not that it's any of my business but I'd think a direct question followed by a direct answer would settle this minor issue.

> Just cause I think it should be legal it doesn't mean I smoke it. Second, how does that hurt someone?

Well, look.. You've obviously let others do your thinking here for you so let's just leave it at that. We disagree.

> I know some very decent people that do things with their own time that I would not recommend everyone else shoudl do, but I in now way advocate those people being thrown in jail. And I especially wouldn't call them self centered if they live their life helping others and only take an hour or two a week to enjoy themselves. That said, lets drop it and not bring drugs into this conversation.

Well, I brought it into the conversation to illustrate my point. You seem to be the one having the large reaction so from my vantage point Mike you seem to be the one with the prickly skin right now. <g>

>
>>The 'trick' it seems to me is in your definition of what constitutes "not hurting others". I define that this way: The only way I can avoid hurting others is to have my life's priorities absolutely properly set up. The only way to do that is to love God with all my heart, mind, soul and body and secondly to love my neighbor as myself.
>
>Want to know my priorites in life? I have 3. Love, Learn, and Live. Mostly in that order.

Great.

Define love for me if you would. Do you love a ham and chees sandwich the same way you love your dog (presuming you have one) or the same way you love writing cool code (you do BTW) or the same way you love your family, wife children?

Love, in the ENglish language, is the bastard stepchild of at least four different concepts and it's important to discriminate these things... I'm not asking just to be rude..

>
>You think I'm self centered for not loving god?

No.. I think everyone is self centered to some degree or another. I am. Are you saying you aren't? <g>

However, I will say that those who do not love God are indeed self centered. They've set themselves up as the final arbiter in life and that's well, pretty self-oriented. Or do you let others think for you? I'd bet not - so you think for yourself, which is, you figure it out. The difference between us in this area is that I CHOOSE, based on some serious reading, thinking and investigations to allow my thoughts to be guided by the Bible. I have indeed found it reliable. That's all really. AM I still self centered? Sure.. I look at the blemishes on my face first thing in the morning just like almost everyone else does. <g>

What I am asserting is that in spite of this universal self-centerdness there are options for those who choose them. Choosing to not choose them is, well, a choice. I just happen to think that it is a bad choice.

We're all equally messed up attitudinally. Some of us have just decided accept God's care and help and stop fighting Him.

> Lets think about it like this, when I serve food to homeless people, I don't see a smile on God's face.

I do.

> However, when I did do that this Christmas, even though I don't celebrate the holiday, I did see smile's on the faces of real people. Thats all I care about.

That's a great thing to do. Giving of one's self is IMO the absolute best way to a full life. You have to give it away to gain it. Hmmm.. DIdn't Jesus say something like that? < bg > IOW..You prove me right yet again. Nyahh nyahh. <g>

Actually, you prove God right yet again..

>If there is a god, I don't think he cares that I don't love him as a supreme being, but he'll proabably be very thankful that I love what he has given me even if I don't understand who gave it to me.

Not so.. He cares so much He died for you Mike so He wouldn't have to judge you. He wasn't obligated to do this but He did.. You misapprehend the true nature of God here..

>If he's all knowing, than he knows that I appreciate life in the highest sense without assigning a name and face to its creator.

He knows your thoughts before you do.

>The amount of time you people spend loving him makes up for me not. Thats how I love.

Well, that's your choice but it's also your loss.


>
>Learning is something that anyone can do, at any age, at any time, from anyone. You just have to know that you are learning, and then want to learn some more.

I love learning.

>
>Finally, after I have catored to fellow humans through loving, and my mind by learning, its time to live. I feel no need to place limits on what I can and can't do like you have. Don't have sex before you're married? What sense does that make. Don't learn about other religions and ways of life because it would upset the true god? Ha, not my idea of a good time.

Like I said, the "do your own thing" philosophy. Hedonsim at its best. Live to satisfy ME!!!!! <g>

And you argue with me about the nature of man.. LOL!

>No, Doug, I think I have my priorities straight, and I strive to be far from self cenetered. After all, I'm not the one that assumes that anyone who has not had contact with supernatural beings (which is by definition impossible in the natural world, HTH) is not as "right" as I am.

I am not more 'right' than anyone else MIke. I've said this about 50 times over the last 2-3 years so I guess you're not hearing me. However, in this situation I have the advantage because I speak from personal experience. I've been where you are and now I'm here. You've only seen one side of the 'fence', so to speak. How does that make you informed about wmy 'side' of this 'fence'?

Regardless, as always I enjoy the stimulation.