Some still don't understand this.

[RandomThoughts]

For instance, what if the only way you can disagree with a comment is to do the very thing said in the comment.

But anyways.

There are some that like to 'flaunt' luxuries in life, or use some form of lack of luxury in a form of deriding someone.

The idea of saying to someone that their choices, or choices of others have different life effects then use those life effects to make the decisions of what they think is right.

Or if you see a big plate of gold coins in front of you, then you must be doing right, by them being there.



I have tried to explain this, I understand that thought process, and I am capable of thinking that way, and could walk out tomorrow, or could have many years ago, chosen to strive for that plate of coins.

I chose differently, not becuase I know, but becuase I know that I don't know, from there I make a choice.

I took the red pill, sure I eat goop everyday, and am due beer and travel money, and watch and hear many people make snide remarks about that as if it somehow judges me as less by not 'having'

What they don't understand is in the unknown of possibilities everyone must choose. I choose to do what I think is right, and stand for what I believe is better. I know many doctrines that insult that, proud, self righteous, whatever, but I don't think that way.

I know I am due beer and travel money.

And if it be that there is no 'after' or if I had a bad after, that would not change my decision, becuase as far as anyone knows, I might have made the right choice, and things will work out. Furthermore, even if there was a bad after from my choice, I would still choose it, becuase it makes sense, and has not been shown wrong, while trying to learn of better thoughts.

You don't know.

Your only bet is that people die at the end of life without an after. That is all you got, becuase if there is an after, you don't know either, and you gambled on luxury in life, maybe that is the path people are suppose to take, or you were suppose to take, but if you hurt many people to do it, or use power from something like money to oppress.

It might be different in the after, you don't know.

So you can't use 'having as an argument' you can say you choose to have at all costs, but you can't say it is the having that is your argument, only that was your choice.


And to those that tote 'work' what use will you be to anyone in the after? What 'work' will you be able to do, and for who and why?