Meaning of life...

Life isnt about keeping score. It's not about how many people call you and it's not about who you've dated, are dating or haven't dated at all. It isn't about who you've kissed, what sport you play, or which guy or girl likes you. It's not about your shoes or your hair or the color of your skin or where you live or go to school. In fact, it's not about grades, money, clothes, or colleges that accept you or not. Life isn't about if you have a lot of friends, or if you are alone, and it's not about how accepted or unaccepted you are. Life just isn't about that. But life is about who you love and who you hurt. It's about how you feel about yourself. It's about trust, happiness, and compassion. It's about sticking up for your friends and replacing inner hate with love. Life is about avoiding jealousy, overcoming ignorance and building confidence. It's about what you say and what you mean. It's about seeing people for who they are and not for what they have. Most of all, it is about choosing to use your life to touch someone else's in a way that could never have been achieved otherwise. These choices are what life is about.

Pro-Abortion vs Pro-Choice and the Double Effect

I hear lots of folks in the pro-life side of the abortion debate insist on characterizing those on the other side of the debate as "pro-abortion."  They insist that being "pro-abortion" and "pro-choice" are really just two different labels for the same thing.  Of course, if these really are just two different labels for same thing, then why insist on using "pro-abortion" instead of "pro-choice" since either would be an equally good way of describing the position?  It's more than a little curious why a person that really believes these are just two different labels for the same thing would insist on using one phrase over the other.  So, perhaps something more is going on here.  I'm tempted to say that characterization of the "pro-choice" side as "pro-abortion" is a convenient and self-serving attempt to frame the issue in a way that's disadvantageous for the opposition because it seems to define them as having less than noble intentions. 

At any rate, I find this aspect of the pro-life community rather confusing because most people in the pro-life community - the pro-life label not withstanding - are willing to accept that abortion is permissible in some cases, e.g. if the mother's life is in danger, entropic pregnancy, etc.  In order to defend abortion under these circumstances the pro-lifers often appeal to what's called the doctrine of the double effect.  According to this doctrine, there's a distinction between "killing", i.e. intending to do harm, and "letting die", i.e. permitting a negative side or double effect of the means used to achieve well intended ends.  So, if a mother's life is in danger it is permissible to let or allow the termination of the unborn baby's life in order to fulfill the intention to save the mother's life.  The idea is that there's a difference between directly and explicitly intending to kill someone and letting or allowing them to die as an unintended and indirect side or double effect.  It's a distinction that is central to debates over the permissiblity of "active" vs. "passive" euthanasia as well.

Now, here's my question: can the pro-lifer both appeal to the doctrine of the double effect and insist that there is no difference between being pro-abortion (i.e. intending to kill, abort, etc.) and being pro-choice (i.e. intending to protect autonomy, reproductive freedom, etc.) without contradiction?  Here, I'm not interested in the issue of whether or not we should accept or reject the doctrine of the double effect, which is a related but distinct issue.  I'm just interested in whether or not a person that does accept the doctrine of the double effect can coherently appeal to that doctrine to defend their view that abortion is permissible in some cases and deny that there is a distinction between being "pro-abortion" and "pro-choice."  Alternatively, can someone that denies there is a distinction between killing and letting die coherently deny that there's a difference between being "pro-abortion" and "pro-choice"?

John Schmidt Piano/ Cello piece...

This is AWESOME!!!!!

Check it out and his webpage as well:

www.johnschmidt.com

This arrangement is dedicated to Sarah, my 7 year old daughter who loves the song Love Story by Taylor Swift. Because of a common rhythm element between the tunes, I decided I could mish/mash the two. My great friend Steven Sharp Nelson (cello percussion) really makes this tune. 

If you want to make God laugh... tell Him your plans

I love country music...I am sorry...don't hate me now. But there is a song that has a great line in it. It says, "if you want to make God laugh tell Him your plans." Obviously this is not a Christian song, but that one line really got me thinking. 

God's ways are so infinitely beyond ours, we can't even begin to comprehend His ways. So when life is confusing, or my circumstances don't seem to make sense, I have to remind myself that God's plan is out of the scope of my understanding. I just have to trust Him and know that the outcome is from the hand of holy, righteous, loving, good, God. And I have to be thankful for ALL of the circumstances He's put me in.

It seems nothing ever works out the way we want it to or expect it to, but God is creating a beautiful portrait with my life and right now I can only see one color, but as time goes by and I look back, more and more of the picture will be revealed and the handiwork of God will be evident in my life for all to see and how thankful I will be for the way God is shaping me right now.

Twouble with Twitters...

Does anyone know of someone who twitters and acts like this?

LIVE OUT LOUD!!!!!!!

Live you lives out loud. It is all about creating the life you have always wanted to live instead of just dreaming one day it will happen or keep putting it off until later.

We all assume we have a future but unfortunately, that is not the case. There is no guarantee what will happen past today. All we really know is that we have the present to live our lives and make them the best that we can.

Of course, I want us all to believe there is a future and be responsible in planning for it but we can not live our whole life based on the future. We have to base our life on the here and now. How many times have you wished you would have taken that opportunity? How many times have you wished you had said something different? How many times have you wished you could get back some of the time you have wasted?

You can make a change today! You can decide to start living your life! How do you do that? Dream Big, Stop the drama, Hold yourself accountable, Learn to say no, LAUGHT TOO MUCH, Stop waiting to be perfect, Be honest, Simplify your life, Achieve goals, and most importantly HAVE FUN!!!!

Life...

Our society places great emphasis on individuality. We are encouraged to express our unique selves, and to pursue our personal aspirations and beliefs.

 

I believe that in most friendships or relationships each person desires this individuality for the other as well as for him or herself. They want to be true to who they are, and for the other person to recognize and accept them for those very qualities. Likewise, they want to know who the other person is, not a character they are good at portraying.

 

There is, however, a catch to being unique, to being open with another. In my experience there are times where being yourself is inconvenient. In certain situations it seems as though being who you are may hinder you from progressing with another person. This is especially true, but not limited to, relationships.

If you start off being someone else, how will they ever know you?

I, unfortunately, came to this realization after the chance to make any changes had passed. On the one hand you helplessly wish to go back in time and stop yourself from pretending. You are able to replay moments and ask yourself, "What was I thinking?" But there is also the part of you that wracks your brain trying to think if even for one instance, you were yourself with that person. And, if so, was it enough? Would circumstances have been different had you remained true to your character?

 

I, personally, would love to say no. It would be comforting to tell myself that nothing could have changed the outcome. But I cannot answer with certainty, because how could I know?

 

Compromising your identity is degrading to yourself as well as the other person. By not being yourself you are assuming you know already that he or she would not accept you for who you are. There are two details very wrong with this logic. One, you should not surround yourself with people who do not care about you because of who you are. You should never feel uncomfortable being yourself around someone. Also, since you are not in fact the other person, you really have no means of determining who they would and would not like, nor should you be the judge of it.