Mitch

[size=1][color=red] I might just scrap this, but then again, I might just go along with it as well. I hate how stereotypical Dena is, and her marriage with Daw is as well. I did polish this piece up a bit last night, so it's in better condition. I plan on writing more of it. I want to make it a weird story. We'll see how it works. Yeah...just read.[/color][/size] [b][center]"Al"[Tentative][/b][/center] 1 Albert Munie wasn't Albert Einstein. He would admit to this without the single flicker in his eyes. Not a genius, always a bloke. That was his pet phrase which, like any pet, he petted?even fondled?even groped all the time. It was funny. The girls seemed to get a kick out of that one. Even if it was subtle. Known affectionately as Al to his good friends, no, he certainly wasn't anything more than normal. Normal is about what anyone really is and can be?Al included. But all the same, normal people sure can do some amazing things once in a while. Even become heroes. Heroes?hah, heroes. The knights in shining armor that aren't even knights, and don't even have shining armor. Heroes. Those guys are just normal people too, they've just done an amazing thing. Or maybe a good thing. No one can really say. Al sure can't. When you see Al, he'd like to see himself with your eyes. But eyes only look out from themselves and don't turn inward, letting you see yourself. They sure don't let you look through other's eyes either. Funny how as much as you think you know yourself, others can often tell you more. It's the same with Al, same with anyone. Heroes aren't heroes, you know. They're only heroes when someone says they are?they aren't perpetually heroes. They aren't them their whole life. Heroes aren't born, they're made. And Al was born, he was made. He'd tell you with the biggest grin on his face that he wasn't created by anything but circumstances. He'd say he was born when his mother and father engaged in a certain circumstancial exchange; and that also, things went just right that a certain little guy that had a tail and a head found a certain microscopic egg and a certain combination happened that made a certain man. Some people call it a miracle. Al just calls it circumstance. It happened because this led to that, and that led to another this, and this and that slopped together and wam! you had yourself there born and made and conceived right then. And since heroes aren't born, they're made, Al thinks, maybe, since he was born, he can't be a hero. Who would want to be a hero anyway? Albert would rather be the coldhearted, cruel-intentioned villain. That man whose main goal in life is to say a how-do-you-do "fuck you" to everything, and a how-do-you-do "there is an I in this, but no you in this. And the "I" spells Al, and Al says, kindly, 'fuck you.'" Fuck. The word sounded German to him. Sounded something like American cheese. How the hell can cheese be American, let alone fuck be German? Just because. No reason otherwise, really, thank you very much, carry on now babe. Here he was, holding still there. Little muddy brown eyes, sandy brown hair, atrociously bold eyebrows?also brown as the word fuck sounded German. He was so goddamned brown. Even was wearing a brown sweatshirt that looked like itchy sandpaper. He looked at the picture. Is that him? How the hell does he look so goddamned brown? Brown, it was official color of dirty seems. Mud was brown, pretty much, and the ugliest muck you could ever look at; dirt, that stuff was brown too, messy as well, dusted all over you and made you feel all sandy; and Al, he was brown as brown could get, he was the most dirty. It sounded so sexy. Dirty sounded so sexy. Or maybe it didn't. He held that picture of him all brown, and looked at it closer, thinking young Al would move on it, maybe. Maybe he'd give some wink, the one that said, "fuck you" in the entire meaning of the phrase?all animal, deprived, and feral. Al looked closer and closer, to the point where he was just looking at a colossal brown blur. Nope, nothing, no movement. Not even from the colossal brown blur. He held it away, seeing it all finally, not just looking at himself. He looked past the smart grin on young Mr. Albert Munie's face, and his brownness, his dirtiness. In the background. What was there? A large sunset bruised the sky. And that's what it looked like?a bruise from the sunset. Away from the sunset's rays, the sky was its darkening blue; but once the dark sky was touched by the sun's rays, it was a purpleish red, one that seemed warming somehow, bruised but serene. Al remembered that day. Remembered it quite well, in fact. Al wasn't any Albert Einstein, but he remembered that day. The one this picture was showing. It wasn't an eventful day, but it was a day nonetheless. He put the picture down, put his horniness aside like a thrown dumbbell that weighed an insurmountable weight, and lay down on his bed. Soon he slept. 2 Albert Munie was an Albert Einstein. He would admit to this without a single flicker in his face. Not a single spasm in his eyes, hidden by atrociously bold, furry animal's brown eyebrows would you get from him when he would say it or think it. He was Albert Munie to you, but an Albert Einstein he was to all. Albert Munie hiked up the side of a hill, his parents up in front of him, his friend beside him, his brother and sister up with his parents. His friend's name was also Al?more specifically, Albertis Colesce. The name was quite a mouthful, but so was Albertis. Albert Colesce had atrociously large eyebrows, as if they were an injustice to all other eyebrows. His hair was gray, was died that way. He did not appear old; but, instead, he appeared the age of his friend, Al Munie. His hair gave him a quirky, semi-solemn appearance. The two looked quite closely like one another. And it was right to think that. Sweat was coming down both their faces in a small start as their feet moved up and down, scraping the dirt in that little noise that just screams, "You're stepping on dirt! This is the noise I make!" Albert smiled at the thought, a small little smile that only he knew he was doing. He wished dirt [i]could[/i] speak, that would really be the day. But then again, Albert Munie, he was dirt in the flesh. He was a dirty man-thing, a teenager, but a man-thing all the same. So it seemed dirt could speak, and it could scream that noise that says, "You're stepping on dirt! This is the noise I make!" Al was dirt personified, baby. [i]Personified[/i], meaning he was dirt in the flesh. He was breathing living lugging [i]personified[/i] dirt. Albert wiped the sweat permeating on his forehead off, wiping the sweat now on his hand to the shorts he wore. The dirt still gritted under their feet, and the two friends still said nothing to one another, as if hell bent on getting done with the hike. Once there, they'd have a picnic. Albert's parents, brother, and sister were still up ahead. His mother was a brown-haired woman, medium-sized; a still beautiful, but fading woman of thirty-nine. His father was built of steel, rock, and sadly, flesh. The man was a walking careening big bad meaning toting machine. He wore no shirt; his abs, well-defined, stood out starkly on his bare, shaved chest; his back was lively and moving muscles; and his face was chiseled, hardened, and always seemed graced in an ever-endearing look of stern, unprecedented strength as his hair, in a buzz cut, stood in brown stumbles on his head, further accentuating the sternness of his face. He did labor work, and had since the dinosaurs roamed the earth, even after they had died of extinction. Or, as long as Albert and known him, anyway. Same difference. His mom, Dena, and dad Daw had also been married since the dinosaurs did their little dance on the earth as far as Al knew. Married twenty years, when Dena was just the ripe, plucking, luscious age of nineteen, and Daw twenty-five, they had been together ever since. Being married a reptile, scaly, twenty years, it took something reptile to survive something like that. To survive in something as-yet-unextinct. Their marriage was constantly changing, adapting, catalysting and moving; just like the dinosaurs, in one form or another, adapted and grew and flourished. It wasn't something meant to last forever. In fact, it was starting to fall apart; it was starting to die and become gone and extinct. Like the dinosaurs, like the dodo bird, it was starting to go. When around Albert and their other children?Doyle and Angelica, respectively?they acted like all was fine. It was the best thing to do, the only thing to do. But things had been falling apart, and the pieces weren't coming back together. It was a lot like being caught on the edge of a cliff, Dena thought: it got harder and harder to hold on, and eventually, some day when you're just out of it, and your mind's off and away in la la land, you'd just let go. And down you would fall, too late, too gone, too lost, too out of it; down you'd fall, and then [i]splat[/i] you'd go as you landed on the hard, cold ground that was reality. She was morbidly attracted to Daw's muscular body. She couldn't kid herself there. The way his body moved, the way he moved, fascinated her. It made her feel soft and seamless and flowing and, most of all, it made her infatuatedly aroused and amazed at Daw. Dena wondered often if she'd just married Daw for his body? She thought she had. She also now thought she married too young, and that maybe it wasn't even love she felt. Was there even anything such as true love? Lately, she didn't think so. She thought maybe it was just some fantasized fairy tale. Or even a ploy to make life have meaning. She wondered how long the marriage would last. When would it fall apart? When would it die? When would it go? Only the dinosaurs knew, it seemed?only the people that'd gone through this all knew. And about now, they were fossils. She made a little smile in spite of herself. It spread on her cheeks like light spreads about a room; it was there one second, gone the next, was there just to be there. "We're almost there," she said to herself more than anyone, wiping off the sweat from her hairline that was slowly streaming down.

[b]Of Spiders and Flies[/b] "The best laid plans of mice and men often go awry," said the spider to the fly. She brushed her eyes with one of her eight legs. "But we're not mice or men?we're a spider and a fly I'd say we don't have to worry a bit." She was large and hairy and black, and was a widow. "You know, my husband died just recently," she said, pausing in rememberance. She counted her legs, held them up as she did. "Been dead five days to be exact." She sat them down. Going to the ground. She was pitiful, sad, shuddered around. Then she gathered herself back together, back onto her feet. The widow looked as if she were about to cry? But she could not force a tear from her eyes. She was a spider, and spiders can't cry. In spite of this, her despair went all about her web. And as she spoke the fly only struggled in his cell of thread. His spider's cell he'd had the luck to come into. "Please let me free," said the fly to the spider, and added? "I'm very sorry about buzz buzz your husband, madam, very buzz buzz sorry indeed but I must be go- go- going, I have things to buzz buzz see. Would you please let me free?" She thought it over, looked at him through her eyes. Looked about her white web, looked all over to the back and the front and the sides. Let out a large sigh. "No," she said. "I don't think I can." The fly buzzed and tried even harder now, his cell shacking and bending as he buzzed and spoke. "Why buzz buzz can't you let me free? I must be go- go- going, I have things to see! Please let me free! buzz buzz, what will it be? Where will I go? Buzz buzz what will I see! Buzz buzz, don't do this to me! Let me go, buzz buzz, let me free! " She thought about the poor fly?thought wide but her thoughts kept returning to her husband. She wondered how he died. Vaguely she asked, "How did he die?" more to herself than to the fly. "How did he die." The fly stopped buzzing, stared her in the eye thought and thought till he felt he was himself going to die. Silence came to the room as the spider sat and thought. And the fly continued to glare from his white cell of thread. The silence was too much for the fly and soon he feared he would be eaten. "Buzz buzz, madam, maybe I know! I'm a housefly around here buzz buzz as I go. Maybe I know! And if I know, I can say, and if I say buzz buzz then you can let me go away, let me get go- go- going buzz buzz on my way!" She looked at him amused, would have laughed half in humor and half in hope if she weren't a spider. Could this housefly know? It was doubtful, but worth a go. She supposed she would describe him to the fly see if he knew how he died. "My husband," she said just as vaguely as before, speaking more to herself than the fly. "My husband was as large as me, black and more hairy, with big bulbous cute eyes, and his legs were muscular and most fine." She paused, thought of something that might distinguish her husband. Then she had it. She knew something that only her husband would have! "Oh, I've got it?on his back, he had this scar. It was in the shape of a semi-circle, had been quite a nasty wound. He had said he'd gotten it from a large man, and he'd escaped barely alive. Wait?maybe this man killed him?" she thought, then turned to the fly. "Well, do you know anything?" Her voice was quavering, demanding. "Do you know anything?" she said in a whisper this time. The fly looked at the spider, in her deep eyes. He was thinking deeper than a fly should think. Thinking much too hard, and nothing was coming. The fly started to fear? his thoughts kept going to the spider eating him. His wings fluttering, gaping, his body breaking, cracking in half. The fly didn't know spiders actually suck out their victims' insides. He couldn't think of ever seeing this husband of hers. He didn't think he knew. He cowered, didn't know what to say. Bought for time. "Well?" said the spider to fly. "Do you know, or are you just playing with me?" "Answer! answer or I'll eat you now!" She was so loud. The fly squirmed in fear. Cowered. Felt death near? Then a paw reached out. A paw. The fly could not believe it He felt his fear turn to amazement. Was he seeing this with his eyes? The paw was large, but the fly soon found out it wasn't a paw at all. It was a man's hand. A man that was colossal in size. The fly stared at him?looked at him with his eyes. The man looked so big, so strong. Soon the fly was carried off in the man's paw. Soon he was with the spider again. "Where are we?" said the spider to the fly. The fly was still wrapped in his white cell of thread. His eyes were wide, peering, as he looked about. There was little light. But what little he could tell they were in some kind of a container? it seemed made of fabric of some kind. But that's all he could find. "Buzz buzz I don't know!" said the fly. "Oh dear buzz buzz madam, I do not know where we are! Buzz buzz but where I think we are is someplace far!" "Someplace far, hm," said the spider. She seemed calm and reserved. But underneath her she was panicking. She was scared and everything was on her nerves. "I must try to esc?" She was cut off as a loud hum came. It surrounded them, held them and boomed. All about the shook and moved. It was likely the man that had taken them. They both knew. And he was talking to himself it seemed. It was something about rabbits. Something about a George. Something about George not leaving. It was something this, something that. The spider didn't care. And the fly was glad? glad it was buying more time. It finally stopped, and there was a bump? most likely the man sitting down. "What was that?" said the spider. The fly buzzed a shrug. "Buzz buzz was probably the man that grabbed us! Sounded like him buzz buzz. He sounded sad! Did he do something bad buzz buzz?" "Don't know," said the spider to the fly. "I don't know. All I know is that I need to get out of here." She began walking around, searching for a way out. "Now, how to get out of here?that's the wonder." The fly didn't want her to leave him where he was. He was still in his prison, still locked in thread. "Buzz buzz, madam, do you think you could let me go? I have to be go- go- going, I have places buzz buzz I must see! I must leave! buzz buzz I have things to see! Can you please let me free?" She stared at him annoyed. "No," she said. "I said no, and the answer's still, 'no.' If I can't get out of here, I'll need some food? and that food will be you." She said it with no emotion but deep inside her she was sad for the fly. But it was just the way of things, she thought? one thing was killed and eaten to keep another alive. And that was true. The fly was quiet as the spider searched around some more. She climbed up the side of wherever it was they were. The fabric was kind of easy for her to climb. She fell down many times, but refused to give up. About the tenth time that voice boomed again shook them all over, and made her fall where she was climbing. She fell on her back, struggled back to her feet, and waited for the man's loud voice to quiet down. First he was saying he didn't mean to do it. Do what? the spider and the fly thought. And there was a new man, and he comforted him. Said it was all right. Then he was saying, "George, tell me about the farm." And the new man's voice mumbled? something about having him turn over and look out. Look out in the distance. The new man was talking about the farm now. He said what he was saying in a flat way, in a way that, underneath, held pain. And he kept going all the same. There was talk of bunnies, talk of having their own place, having it to themselves. And the spider and the fly could almost picture the man smiling. Smiling as he looked out in the distance. Then there was a pause? then there was the loudest sound. It was short but harsh and resounded and boomed. And gnarled and toothed. They felt that bullet? felt it as it probably went into that man. Went into the man who had captured them. Was there blood? was he dead? They didn't know. They didn't know if they cared. Said the spider to the fly, "I'm getting out of here. This is it. I'm going to get out of here once and for all?this is it." She enunciated the last "this is it" slowly and with much emphasis. She was sick of it?she was getting out. The fly was alerted?was scared?was most afraid, terrified, sad? "Buzzbuzzz youcan'tleave me here! Buzzbuzz whatwill I do? WhatwillIdo?" Wherewill I go? Will I dietoo?! Whycan't you let me goandlet me free? Whycouldn't you have let me be?!" The fly was going insane with fear?with stiffening, harsh, rocking fear. He spoke fast, spoke with all the temerity that was in his heart?all the power he had left. He wasn't going to die. He wouldn't let himself die here, slowly, from starvation, in this white cell of thread. He wouldn't?he wasn't?going to die here. It wasn't meant to be this way. But she just turned to him, she was already halfway done climbing. She turned with one last look, and looking back up and climbing: "I'm sorry," said the spider to the fly. And that was all. She climbed and climbed? and climbed and climbed? and then she was gone. She had made it. And here was the fly. He fought and fought to get free? moved, jittered, jutted, grimaced, pulled. But he wasn't strong enough. He was going to die. He buzzed and buzzed himself to a lullaby. Outside, she skittered out of the man's pocket and into the outside air. Inside the pocket, she could hear the fly. Deep within he was buzzing in his pain. She felt sad for him?but all the same, she had to go on. She needed to find her way back to her web?back to the house. Either that, or make a web out here. There were voices now, but she didn't pay attention. She needed to get away from them. They might grab her, and she might end up back in captivity. She might die. Be back where she was. She was onto the ground now, moving with all the speed she could. She was tired?she had climbed all the way out of the pocket after many tries. As she walked, she gazed in the distance with her kaleidoscope eyes. She thought she saw another spider a little ways away. Something in her sent a shiver. She walked up towards the other spider? and the closer she got, the more it looked like her husband. She started going faster and faster?was amazed that it might be him? and then? and then. A spider was crawling quite fast. And a man's foot and that spider crossed paths? his shoe fell on that spider right and direct? and the spider was squashed under its sole. Was killed on hit. And in the distance, with her last dying sight, she realized she was just hallucinating. Her husband she thought she had saw wasn't real? as she had approached, he had faded. And then there was only blackness as she died. A brief moment of pain. And all her suffering?everything that spider felt? it was gone. When the shoe lifted up, her guts stuck to it. And the man continued to walk on with the other men. And in the dead man's pocket the fly buzzed?and buzzed?and buzzed? and got weaker, and weaker till in delirium he was lulled to death. Let it stand? let it stand that the "best laid plans of mice and men often go awry." But let it also stand that the best laid plans of flies and spiders, too, often go awry. And let it be remembered that a large man with large paws, and who was not so smart, died. That his friend shot him to ease his suffering? to do what was best to do. And let it also be remembered that a fly and a spider died too.

[size=1][color=red] I'm a big supporter of recreational drugs. My friend Bibby smokes, and I find it highly entertaining to watch him smoke away and kill himself, as well as see the stone-eyed look he gets from smoking. I think recreational drugs are the best thing to ever come to America, save the terrorists. /thatwasthetruthandyoubetterbelieveit [/color][/size]

[size=1][color=red] If I could be anyone, I'd be Nothing. Nothing's really a nice guy. No really, no kidding. He's really really nice--so nice that he makes me wonder why he's so nice and why he can't be so evil. Because when you're Nothing, you don't feel any pain, don't feel any emotion, and you can't give a damn because you don't have to and needn't do that anyway. Non-existentialness-ishesh baby, or something.[/size][/color]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Sara [/i] [B][SIZE=1]Not [i]necessarily.[/i] I knew that, and I haven't taken Latin. Which isn't to say I don't sometimes look up roots of words in my free time... But, yeah. You're right about German, by the way. English is a Germanic language, and some words are just too close [i]not[/i] to recognize. It's cool like that. [/SIZE] [/B][/QUOTE] [size=1][color=red] You're right. That's not necessarily right. But I'd like to think they took Latin and were then that smart heh. And I don't think the average person would know that, though. I mean, you're Sara, you're quirky, you're a language nut. A regular person isn't heh. It was a valid point.[/size][/color]

[size=1][color=red] Actually, Chibi, about 60% of English words are derived from Latin. German is like this in a sense, with a lot of German words looking closely to English ones. So it isn't a waste of time, even if it's a dead language. If you're planning on pursuing a career in the writing field, then it's beneficial that you have a concrete grasp of language, as well as a varied vocabulary of English. Knowing some Latin, you can look at a word, and guess its meaning. Also, there's the use of it in scientific terms. The entire human anatomy is made up of Latin words; the entire way we name a species and such is used by two Latin words which describe it (I believe, if memory serves. If it isn't right, it's somewhere in line with that). The shortened forms of Elements is often taken from Latin (but there's about one that's taken from German). An example is the shortened form of Potassium is actually K. Sodium Na. So knowing some Latin has very good uses if you plan on going into sciences, or plan on having a writing career. Also, words such as etc, eg, and so on, are taken from Latin themselves. Etc is a shortened form of the latin phrase [i]et cetra[/i], vaguely meaning "and so on." You know the company Megnavox? Vox (pronounced "w-oh-x" in latin) is the word for voice in Latin. Whoever came up with that name, which is higly easy to remember, took Latin in school and was smart enough to implement it in a cool way. Latin and knowing other languages has many, many uses than you seem to say, Chibi. Anything you learn in school isn't totally useless, you know. It can be applied in a lot of ways. It's just that some people don't have the sense to do it, and thus aren't as intelligent because of it.[/size][/color]

[size=1][color=red] It is bad to drop Latin II, yes Boba Fett, it is. Thinking I am you should keep this class, I am. I'm in Latin I right now. Yes, it is challenging, but it's like that with any foreign language. I took Spanish last year (waste of time, should've taken Latin right away) and it's just as hard as Latin. Or any language class. I've always wanted to learn German too. Hey, Sara, say, can we switch lives during Latin and German class, and mutually share brains? ;p Heh. German seems like an awesome language, must learn it some day. I know that Latin is hard. I hate all these declensions and crap, and how you have to memorize all these cases: accusative, ablative, dative, nominative. It's the same thing with any language, though, I'd say. Just gotta suck it in, learn the stuff, and become smarter. Plus, if you want to go to a good college (which I'm assuming you're a senior in High School) you need two years of language, mebelieves. And whoever drops an English class should be shot. English rocks, and if it doesn't, then make it that way! I mean, writing's not for class, it's for you to do on your own if you like writing enough, silly. Now Geometry. That's a class worth dropping, I think. Too bad it's required. *winces in pain*[/size][/color]

[size=1][color=red] I pretty much go with what Tony said. And you're totally right, Tony, about it feeling unhealthy for online friends to take presedence over your life. I'd have to say though, online I can be a lot more personal than I usually am in real life. In real life, I've very rarely told someone how I feel, or ranted at them. It's different here though. I've ranted to many online friends of mine, as I'm sure many of you know that have had me do it. So basically, I do look forward to speaking to my online friends, but not to some immense extent. At times it is some immense extent, but lately, I've been seeing the reality of things: that I need to get a job, that I need to get some actual friends other than the ones I have. In real life. I only have two people I call friends. It's been like that most of my life, really. I'm a quiet person around a stranger. Plus my family's moved multiple times in my life. Plus I used to be a really ignorant kid. But now, it's much the same. I mean, sure, there's flattering them, or humoring them, but I just don't show who I really am in some amazing way. I just can't communicate as well as I can through just writing things down. I'm sure I could grow as an orator (and I will), but at this point, most of the things I say are either sarcastic, or just talking to myself (which is another thing I do lol. It's fun, everyone should do it). That's the basis of what I say every day, other than replying to some question in school, or whatnot. This has sort of changed in a small way, though, since my writing of columns in the newspaper. Some of you may recall my one article, "Pristine Nazerene." That article was deceptively dark, and many people at my school didn't understand it, but those who did, I think they got more of an understanding of who I can be at times. But people still don't know me, nor understand me. I mean, if I don't even understand myself, how can someone else understand me more? Exactly. I think, at this point, the internet does take a decently large presence over my life. I mean, it's not like it's killing me or anything, but I'm usually on once a day at least, for an hour or more. I've been trying to stay off more lately, though. But this week, hopefully, I plan to force myself to get a job. Anyway, I'm going off topic. I actually value a lot of my friendships online. Even moreso than some people I know in real life. Which I think is a sad fact, but it's a fact nonetheless. I do have my two friends though, and I do value them. But one of them, his name's Adam, we don't really hang out much anymore heh. It's no big deal. The other one, Ryan, he's a computer nerd. He's a really cool friend though, I really value our friendship. Yeah. I have no clue where I'm going with this post. Basically, I'm just reinforcing what Tony said on some level. The internet has its pros and cons for friendships. I think they allow someone to be themselves more, I mean, there's not the appearance factor really, not whatnot else. You can just be yourself ultimately. Which is something, often, I hide in real life, for reasons even I can't define. It's just how I am, I guess. I mean, I do show myself; just not every facet of myself. My mood changes often, and I think you can tell here on OB when that happens (anyone remember me bashing education? Yeah. That was when I wasn't in too good of a mood lol. Right now, I actually love education. See how it changes so fast?) and on My O as well. I've been in a good mood lately, though, so yay. But when I'm in some moods, I just keep it to myself, listen to music, whatever else. I'm pretty sure a lot of people my age are like this, though. Who knows. What I can't stand is girlfriend/boyfriend relationships online though. I doubt they often work. I mean, once you meet the person in real life, what's going to happen then? Then everything's factoring in. As much as people deny it, physical implications are quite more important than anything when you first meet someone. I know when I first meet someone physically that I can't just be myself. I'm not like that. I have to become comfortable with that person first, have some understanding, have something on some level that goes on to become what the internet allows--just being yourself, then, now, and raw. What can I say. I'm a loser. :p Well, I'd rather be a loser than win all the time. When you win all the time, you get arrogant and hubrant. And I guess I feel the stereotypical role of a writer as well, all to myself most of the time and all.[/size][/color]

[size=1][color=red] I thought it shows good potential, and is good on its own as well. Other than this stanza, which needs a quick work to it:[/size][/color] [quote]My state of being, [i]a pile of crumpled of hope[/i], Residue of happiness torn away,[/quote] [size=1][color=red] See the two "ofs"? One of those can go. Sure it was just a simple error, but it's worth fixing. So, fixed, it'd read like this:[/size][/color] [quote][i]crumpled pile of hope[/quote][/i] [size=1][color=red] Other than that, this poem shows good heart--the emotions are there, you're not using words that aren't you, it's Annie. And that's the way to go with poetry--make it your own. It took me a while to find this out, but I've finally learned it. Speak with your own voice; be obtuse when you want to be, but not to the ambiguous extent I used to. And you're definitely doing this. Just keep writing and keep at it, trying to write a poem a day (it's what I try to do, hasn't been going on much lately) and it should all work out I mean, honestly, everyone has the potential to be a good writer. You just have to apply yourself. Yes, for me it does come easy, but that's because I've applied myself to it a lot in the past, as well as now. And it's just something I'm interested in. Interest is a big part, but if you keep at something long enough, interest's bound to grow. The main thing for me is I need encouragment. And that's why I'm here--encouragement to other people. Heh. [/size][/color]

[size=1][color=red] I thought it was simply, quizzically, introspectively profound in its own way. It's all just questions, which is interesting. The flow is good; isn't marred by much. Doesn't rhyme--which isn't a bad thing at all. I thought it was good. Good in a simple, easy way. Keep writing, keep writing, keep writing--and then on the side, eat oatmeal cream pies, because those things rule. O.o'; So yeah..it says what it says clearly. Clarity. That's what I've been finding in my writing lately. Finding my voice, finding my own way to write. An implementation of the various authors I've absorbed. Clarity's a good thing. Yay for clarity.[/size][/color]

[size=1][color=red] Well, first off, put some more effort into your poem. From what I can tell, you probably wrote this right on the spot (which itself isn't too bad) and I can tell you didn't put much effort at all. I mean, you aren't even using the most fundamental thing in poetry, which is universally used: stanzas, and spaced lines. This isn't prose, you know. Not that you can't write poetry like that, but generally, if a poem is prose, it's not going to be this simple, either. So, basically, use stanzas. Stanzas are things like this: Down and up and up and down there we go round and round And I'm spinning all the time. See those two spaced blocks of text? The first one is stanza one, the second one is stanza two. And they're also spaced in lines; they aren't straight-flowing blocks of sentences that context into paragraphs. So yeah. I don't see reason to keep this open--there's not going to be much discussion other than what I said here. Try and take some time on a poem, make it have stanzas, give it heart. Then I'll give you the bad with the good. But I'm not going to critcize this poem--I mean, it's so scant and lacking effort, I can't. Thread closed. Try posting a new poem, and making it better, by doing what I said. Then I'll give you some opinions on it.[/size]

[size=1][color=red] This fan fic looks very decent, but I don't have the time to read it. From what I vaguely skimmed, the only thing I'd try to improve on is trying to stray away from always using, "And then [i]blah blah[/i] said, 'Chicken tastes good.'" Mix it up a bit. Do it like this: Bob and I, we were great friends. Walking up to him, I put my hand round his back. "What's up, Bobby-boy?" "Oh, not too damn much. You?" "Just checking out the chicks," I said. "Just checkin' 'em out." I looked in the direction of one passing in the hall, and pointed. "What?" Bob said. "That was a prime one. Didn't you see it?" "No, Nick, I didn't." I stared at Bob and hit him upside the head playfully. "Silly Bob. You missed out on some prime chick there." "Did I?" Bob asked. "Did I really?" "Yeah, you sure did." See, the way I see it (from just scanning it briefly), you use a lot of: [i]Blah blah[/i] said, "Woo! I got the ticket; I got the ticket to hell! Ha ha!" When, actually, that gets sort of repetitive. Not that it's terrible, but it's just a thing that makes it flow better. I mean, wouldn't you agree, by my example, that it flows pretty seamlessly and well? Little things like that do help. We'll see. I'll try to read this whole thing. Don't count on it though, I'm busy with homework, and probably will be every day heh. Also, remember that double posting isn't allowed, unless you fill up an entire post, and have to post another one (which is what I think happened here, I'll check it out in a second and edit my post if it isn't so). And that's about all I have to say unless I get to reading this whole thing.[/size][/color]

[size=1] [color=red] Be sure to tell [i]why[/i] you like this character as well, otherwise there's not going to be much to this thread, and it will thus be considered spam, thus having me to close it. As for what characters I like. I actually haven't read [i]too[/i] much things (reading has been slow for me as of late) but I can try to give some charactes that'll contribute to this discussion. I've always liked Atticus Finch from Harper Lee's widely known [i]To Kill a Mockingbird.[/i] He's a man that has dignity, which is something I highly value. He also said that courage is, "when you're down and out" and you still try at something, even if you're going to fail for sure. Also, there's his mentality of "putting someone else's skin on" and wearing it--walking around in it a bit. All those things are things I believe in highly. Atticus in general is a very likeable character, I think. Let's see. I liked Sam too, from the also (*cough*) widely known epic [i]Lord of the Rings.[/i] He's just a good character. I especially liked his speech, to Frodo, as they were approaching Mount Doom. The one about how there's some things in this world worth fighting--and living--for, and so on. In the movie adaptation of the books, Sam says that speech pretty much word-for-word, if I recall. It's a good speech. That's about all I can think of at this moment, sadly. I need to go to the library, read what books I have, blah blah blah. Stupid lazy unreading Mitch.[/size][/color]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Transtic Nerve [/i] [B]Ahh just think... when you get into college, you CAN drop all the classes you want. [/B][/QUOTE] [color=red] Yes. That's because college costs money. And when you buy something yourself, you can stop paying it and not do it all the same. There's also those stupid people that pay for their classes they never attend to, and thus waste their time at college. And money, not to mention.[/color]

[size=1] I supposed I'll post this one piece here. I find it to be a song more than anything. [/size] I There once was a boy, and he showered the world with love. He'd twist and twirl on his hands and face, land all over the place. He'd tell his mother he loved her, and they'd hug each other in their arms. The boy is dead. The boy is dead. He's dead He's dead. Like a mirror you can't always see it right. Like a kiss you can't always feel its might. Like a boy you can't ever be so small. Now's a time to be so small in a time so big. The boy's dead, took him in a hearse. Hearses can't hear, and I think the boy was alive. And I think the embalmer didn't know. Baby it's so long to go. And the boy's dead. He's dead. He's not here to stay. Bury him solemn dismay. Solemn dismay. Bury him. They killed him. He's dead. Now's a time to be so small in a time so big. II Where's the feeling gone where's the touch I've always known. Dead. Dead on the surface but alive and moving. The boy turned to a man. And the man buried the boy. And the boy was still alive. I heard footsteps upstairs, it was his mother. The boy's mother and she was walking. And I wonder if she's going to come. Is she going to yell? Why doesn't she sleep? Why does she care? The boy's dead. The boy's bare. He doesn't kiss his mommy anymore, and he needs to go on when he feels so sore. His mommy thinks he hates her, he doesn't know anymore. "Love you," she says so often. And all the same she smokes away. Killing herself where the love fades. Selfish dead going away. She's killing herself with her own ways. The boy doesn't know what to say. "Love you," she says so often. And he loves her too. But how he doesn't know. Is it even true? The man says nothing and the boy wants to cry, and kiss and hug her. But the man's killed him. You can't say much when you've died. Best to just shut those eyes. There is no answer to the love. And so the boy gets more dead and done. Wishing for something I've never had. Wishing for faith that isn't from the sky. When it comes it'll fall. When it comes it'll probably break us both. Wishing's for the boy. He's got to die. He's already dead. Shot him right in the head. But it wasn't anything he said. Dreams are wishes and they are there. And the boy wanted to be scientist. Then a geneticist. Where has it gone? Where is it still alive? Don't know. It died. Can you bury something that's always alive? Can you feel something you want to bide? Can you reach with your hands and feel? I can't. I've killed. Dreams are fading wishing for them back. But can't have something that isn't there. Want to snub this all like mommy does with her cigarettes. Want to smoke in the ashes like mommy does with her cigs. Want to feel the smoke as it burns and feel my heart beating, thudding blurred. Want to feel alive not held back in this hell. Want to even things out want to know all ends well. Want someone there that knows me more that feels closer and can feel these sores. Might as well not wish anymore. Might as well just be so sore. She smokes the cigarettes and I wish my thoughts. Contemplating what it's like to have lived while she's sucking it dry as she inhales. Told her once told her twice told her many times too many to suffice. And she still smokes every day. And the smoke fills the room and smell it in dismay. Never gonna end it's never gonna stay. She'll kill herself while the boy rots in his grave. I guess it's an equal exchange. A life for a death. It's never going to change. I guess it's an equal exchange. Can I tell her I love her? She can tell me the same. Guess I just don't want to matter. Guess I just feel me change. Guess I'm going to have to watch her die. Nothing more to do I'll be fine. Nothing more to do I'll be fine. She'll fall over it just takes time. I'll even out it just takes time. Nothing more to do I'll be fine. [size=1] By the way, I can tell what it's about, and whatnot, if someone wants that. I think it speaks for itself--to me, at least.[/size]

I There once was a boy, and he showered the world with love. He'd twist and twirl on his hands and face, land all over the place. He'd tell his mother he loved her, and they'd hug each other in their arms. The boy is dead. The boy is dead. He's dead He's dead. Like a mirror you can't always see it right. Like a kiss you can't always feel its might. Like a boy you can't ever be so small. Now's a time to be so small in a time so big. The boy's dead, took him in a hearse. Hearses can't hear, and I think the boy was alive. And I think the embalmer didn't know. Baby it's so long to go. And the boy's dead. He's dead. He's not here to stay. Bury him solemn dismay. Solemn dismay. Bury him. They killed him. He's dead. Now's a time to be so small in a time so big. II Where's the feeling gone where's the touch I've always known. Dead. Dead on the surface but alive and moving. The boy turned to a man. And the man buried the boy. And the boy was still alive. I heard footsteps upstairs, it was his mother. The boy's mother and she was walking. And I wonder if she's going to come. Is she going to yell? Why doesn't she sleep? Why does she care? The boy's dead. The boy's bare. He doesn't kiss his mommy anymore, and he needs to go on when he feels so sore. His mommy thinks he hates her, he doesn't know anymore. "Love you," she says so often. And all the same she smokes away. Killing herself where the love fades. Selfish dead going away. She's killing herself with her own ways. The boy doesn't know what to say. "Love you," she says so often. And he loves her too. But how he doesn't know. Is it even true? The man says nothing and the boy wants to cry, and kiss and hug her. But the man's killed him. You can't say much when you've died. Best to just shut those eyes. There is no answer to the love. And so the boy gets more dead and done. Wishing for something I've never had. Wishing for faith that isn't from the sky. When it comes it'll fall. When it comes it'll probably break us both. Wishing's for the boy. He's got to die. He's already dead. Shot him right in the head. But it wasn't anything he said. Dreams are wishes and they are there. And the boy wanted to be scientist. Then a geneticist. Where has it gone? Where is it still alive? Don't know. It died. Can you bury something that's always alive? Can you feel something you want to bide? Can you reach with your hands and feel? I can't. I've killed. Dreams are fading wishing for them back. But can't have something that isn't there. Want to snub this all like mommy does with her cigarettes. Want to smoke in the ashes like mommy does with her cigs. Want to feel the smoke as it burns and feel my heart beating, thudding blurred. Want to feel alive not held back in this hell. Want to even things out want to know all ends well. Want someone there that knows me more that feels closer and can feel these sores. Might as well not wish anymore. Might as well just be so sore. She smokes the cigarettes and I wish my thoughts. Contemplating what it's like to have lived while she's sucking it dry as she inhales. Told her once told her twice told her many times too many to suffice. And she still smokes every day. And the smoke fills the room and smell it in dismay. Never gonna end it's never gonna stay. She'll kill herself while the boy rots in his grave. I guess it's an equal exchange. A life for a death. It's never going to change. I guess it's an equal exchange. Can I tell her I love her? She can tell me the same. Guess I just don't want to matter. Guess I just feel me change. Guess I'm going to have to watch her die. Nothing more to do I'll be fine. Nothing more to do I'll be fine. She'll fall over it just takes time. I'll even out it just takes time. Nothing more to do I'll be fine.

[color=red] I'd drop Geometry. I had a D in that class second quarter. Luckily, the first quarter of the class was easier, got a B there. So for a semester grade it all evens out as a C. Now I'm just worried about doing bad this semester. Bleh. I'd keep most else of my classes. Nothing too bad. I'd drop Chemistry if I could too. Today is the first day of second semester for me. I'm going to hate Chemistry. I'd rather just take some creative writing class, and all writing classes. We don't even [i]have[/i] creative writing classes here at my school. Pff. I hate you people that have creative writing class! [/color]

[color=red] This singer totally sounds like Thom Yorke. Right now I'm listening to "Sunburn," and I've listened to about two other songs. All of them have been amazing. The first song I listened to was "Muscle Museum." I listened to it over and over again. I already love this band. They actually do sound a lot like Radiohead if you've heard [i]The Bends[/i]. Back then, Radiohead a more rock-ish sound, like Muse does from what I've heard so far. I love this kind of stuff--the singer's voice is so frail, and the instrurmentals are highly loud and blearing. I think it's a good combination. So yeah. They are a lot more like Radiohead than you think, I think, Tony. Listening to "Time Is Running Out" now. It's from [i]Absolution[/i], it says on the tag heh. I really think they sound like Radiohead lol, but more heavy rock-wise. Especially when you talk about Radiohead's newer stuff. Damn, now I want to buy all this band's CDs lol. Money money money. Yeah. This band is exactly the stuff I love. I think I could maybe even like them more than Radiohead, if not the same.[/color]

[size=1] Exactly. You got my Mitchcasm in that post. Good work lol. You're as right as anyone. I'm just here giving my opinions and making you think about them. I'm sure you learned something from this long, extended excursion.[/size]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by wrist cutter [/i] [B]I don't want to get really involved in this post but this caught my eye anyway... Let's say Jesus Christ is walking through your neighborhood and decides to stop by your house. He knocks on your door, states who He is, performs a few miracles to prove it, tips His hat, then walks out. I think we can agree you would be fairly convinced of His existance, correct? Now, I know you're saying, "but perhaps I'm delusional", or "perhaps it was just a dream." And that's a good point, because you're the only one to have seen Him. Assuming you don't have video cameras running in your house, you can't really prove to anyone else that Jesus indeed came to visit you. But what if Jesus, instead of ascending back into Heaven, walked over to your neighbors' house and visited them? He does the same thing for them: states who He is, proves it with some miracles, etc. etc. Now your neighbor has seen Jesus and fully believes in His existance. If we assume that both you and your neighbor are generally rational people, and not likely to be carted off to an asylum anytime soon, then I think both of you would both believe that what you saw was indeed the real thing. You would be sure of your sanity and that you really did encounter Jesus Christ. So maybe after He's done with your neighbor He leaves the Earth. Nobody ever sees Him again. He cannot be "seen and known and felt and touched and known by all" (two knowns?) because He's gone. But wouldn't you still be very sure of His existance? Your neighbor described the exact same situation, so you can be sure that it wasn't just your mind playing tricks on you. If this were to ever occur, would you proclaim God as truth then? Granted, many would think it was just you and your neighbor trying to fool everyone with wild stories, but it would still be truth would it not? [/B][/QUOTE] [size=1] I just want to clarify why God is a perception at this time. No one has really seen him, right? As far as we know no one has. And so people make him like they want him to be. There's Christianity. There's the Muslims. There's the Jewish religion. There's the Mormon religion. There's many religions all with a different perception of God. And just like that, that's what I meant. People perceive God when they haven't even seen him. If I were to see God, then he wouldn't be a perception, he'd be a truth. But no one can admit to this with proof, now can they? I see what you're saying wrist cutter. But at this point in time God is perception to me. As for you, Deathbug, you can have your opinions. I'm done with you. I've said well enough my opinions, I don't see any reason to continue just bickering over nothing. Just know that from the replies to this thread, my perception of what evil is has been said over and over again. More people stand by me. Most people accept what I've said. They see it absolutely the way I've said it. They totally agree. That must mean that mine makes more sense, now, doesn't it? If the general consensus says my opinion more over yours. Indeed. But you can have your opinion, whilst all others have theirs. *tips hat* Fare thee well, Sir Deathbug. [/size]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by DeathBug [/i] The only person I have decryed as [b]evil[/b] is Adolf Hitler. If saying that Adolf Hitler was an [b]evil[/b] man, (emphasis on [b]man[/b]; I don't recall raising his status to some demonic anti-Christ) makes me close-minded, then I'll happily be close-minded. You know why? [i]Because it's Hitler.[/i][/quote] [size=1] And I've agreed with you that he's evil, but I've also said you need to see Hitler and understand what he saw he was doing. As I said, Hitler wasn't the only person that killed all these people. So just "because" it's Hitler doesn't really give you a reason to just say, "I'm not going to think like Hilter." That's no way to think by my ways. But then again, this is your perception. As for making him some demonic anti-christ. It's called Mitchcasm. Get used to it. [/size] [quote]I never once passed personal judgement on suicide, or even mureder (although I did decry the murder of children). I simply disagreed on two points; the Hitler thing, and [b]evil[/b] as only a perception. There are some things that, no matter what lense of perception you view them through, are [b]evil[/b]. I classify the systematic slaughter of six million people simply because you don't think they deserve to live as an absolute wrong, no matter what your society is.[/quote] [size=1] Well, Hitler ties in with suicide and murder. It's hard to stay off of something like that when that's what this man did. Actually, you must realize, I was just using those things to further illustrate my point. My point being that everything's about perceptions. And get it right, Hitler had motives for killing those people as bad as it sounds. Hitler was a genius in a bad way--he was intelligent to a point. Someone like that just doesn't decide one day as he's sitting down, "Hell, I want to kill millions of people sysyematically. That'll be great fun I think." He had his motives. And Hitler wasn't even the one that did most of the killing, you have to understand. He just organized most of it. Again, you're not being open-minded and just writing off what I said. If you were born in a society which said what Hitler did was right, you'd be right there with it. You wouldn't have what you have here. You'd be just as brainwashed that killing was right as you say it's wrong here. And so would I. There are some things that are evil by society; there are some things that are evil by what people see. Your argument is still soley based on that there's absolute things in this world that are good and bad, when that right there is a perception. I don't even know why I'm wasting my words. I've said this all in my post already, as well as the one just before this lol.[/size] [quote]To say that [b]evil[/b] is a perception is to say that there is no absolute; please correct me if I am wrong for making that extrapolation. [/quote] [size=1] Obviously so. But you must realize that someone can perceive that a set group of things are right, thus making them absolute in a perceived manner. So in essence, in a sense, you can have absolution without set rights and wrongs--you just have to choose to make your own sets of right and wrong and choose to follow them. It's what religion does. What society does. It's what we as humans do.[/size] [quote]If [b]evil[/b] is solely perception, then no one can be held accountable for their actions. Rape, murder and violence can run rampant if it's not wrong, can't it? At some point the line has to be drawn; at some point one have to say: "These actions are [b]evil[/b], and you are an [b]evil[/b] person if you continue to do them." Otherwise, you have chaos.[/quote] [size=1] That's why there's society: an organized thing that gives you perceptions. That's why there's government. I agree that by the things I've been taught in this society that people should be responsible for what they do. I'm sure this is contradicting, but what can I say, humans are contradicting creatures, aren't they? Even though this person may be responsible for their actions, they themselves also would never feel they were. Have to say that as well. So in fact, punishing them would be pointless. It would only make them more bitter--but it would, in turn, make the people who held him responsible for his actions feel better, wouldn't it, since they perceive what they are doing is right. [/size] [quote]Where that line is and what actions those are is what I thought discussion could divine. (It won't, because people have been trying to devine it for centuries.) I would hope that slaughtering six million people would be placed in the [b]evil[/b] catagory.[/quote] [size=1] If people can't find absolute lines, it's obvious there isn't. Things aren't that black and white. Yes, by what I've been taught, and what society says, slaughtering people is wrong. But I'm just thinking outside my own box here. I'm thinking farther than just what I could think. I'm seeing all ends of the equation.[/size] [quote]Regarding slavery, you persist in using the pronoun "we", which is wrong; even if you consider "we" the United States, no one alive in the US today had slaves. There is no "we" to refer to in that sense. I take offense at being labled with those who would consider a human being property.[/quote] [size=1] Well, as I said in my other post (*ahem*), if you were born in that age and time, you would've probably seen that slaves were a right thing to have and use and abuse. You'd perceive what you were doing was right, and you'd be shown that slavery was right. I'm not saying you think that; I'm just saying that "we" during this time say like that.[/size] [quote]You act as though the entire country was in favor of slavery, which simply was not true. Slavery had been a devise institution in the US since its beginning. You don't have to tell me how horrible slavery was. I will say that it was an [b]evil[/b] act, and I would hope that no one would argue that fact. However, even when slavery was legal, may people saw it for what it was.[/QUOTE] [size=1] I'm speaking generally. Generally people thought slavery was right. Of course there were people that thought it was wrong--the slaves themselves being a grand example. Telling me that some people didn't think slavery was right really has no call to this argument. I think it's obvious if you think about it that most people in the US did think slavery was right. It's called generalizations. People use them all the time. The reason why I brought up slavery in the first place was to orchestrate that we are just like Hitler. We have the potentials to do things like that and perceive them as right. Because during that time, the general consensus was that slavery was right. And now that's changed. We see at as wrong. It further proves my point that nothing is so clear-cut as right and wrong or evil. And that there probably never will be while people can perceive for themselves. And I find it funny, we're arguing a word here. It's enunciations and letters that spell out a certain notion: the notion that there's something set in stone that says something is bad. Arguing someting so small is to argue something too big to ever be so clear-lined. It's just a word. And so people are going to apply it to what they think the word applies to. Another point which further points out what I'm saying. Deathbug, admit it. You're beat here. I have a much better argument than you do. But you can choose to have what you want. That's fine.[/size]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Ben [/i] [B]Clarify this for me Mitch, please. You're saying that the slaughter of millions of innocent people [I]could[/I] be viewed as a [B]good[/B] thing to do? Based on a different perspective, I mean. Just because Hitler saw it as right, it was an okay thing to do? Granted, people went along with it; people believed it. But the intended end (the "purification"), whatever the perception, does not justify the means. Think about it Mitch. [I]Millions of [B]innocent[/B] people.[/I] Just because a few people view it as right doesn't make it a good thing. Granted, I'm willing to admit that just because the majority of people view it as a bad thing, that it is not [B]evil[/B] based solely on their perception. Tell me this too, if I murdered your family because I thought it was right, I should get off scott free while you sit at home crying in a puddle of your parent's blood and I am free to kill again? That just makes no sense to me. [/B][/QUOTE] [size=1] Did I say it was a good thing? No, I didn't. So why are you telling me what I think? Again, I already said this all in my post. You obviously didn't hear what I said. I said that in this society today there are values interred and bestowed on as as a people which we are grown to follow. And because of this, we think killing is wrong, rape is wrong, murder is wrong, on and on and on. I'm not saying I don't agree with this. I didn't say that at all. I'm just trying to get you people to think--to understand that, were you born in a certain way and taught a certain way, your perceptions on what's good and bad would be different. So by this, yes, what Hitler did--[i]by his eyes, and those cronies with him[/i]--could be right in what they think they're doing. All you have to do is think. I mean, imagine you're born in a society where it's okay to kill my parents, that it's okay to murder, plunder, kill, destroy. Now imagine you were brought up in this society--that your parents told you these things were right. Imagine all you think is bad is actually good in this society, and all you think is good is actually bad. Say Hitler is the ruler of this society, since people just can't get past what I'm saying. In Hitler's mind it was perfectly fine to kill millions of people. He thought the Jews were inferior--he sought to purify. And so, in turn, what Hitler thinks himself he perceives as what is right and wrong. Do I sound like some broken record in this post? It's because I've already said everything you're asking in the above post. I'm not supporting Hitler. People seem to just jump when they hear someone say something about him, that's what I think you're doing. Read the above post more closely. All the answers you are asking are there--you just have to see them. I'm not saying it was a right thing to do--I'm saying it could be a right thing to do. But my upbringing brought in, it's wrong. I'm just trying to understand the implications of hows whys, not just the hard cold facts: that Hitler killed so many people. Again, it's all perception. You just need to put yourself in Hitler's skin--put aside every little shred of what you think is right aside--and put in what Hitler thought. If you were Hitler you would have done the same things had you been brought up the exact same way he was, it's likely. I don't say it's certain, because there's always uncertainly. I do realize that killing that many people is a big deal, but it's not like the US hasn't done things like this. It's not like we didn't bomb the Japanese to end World War 2. That killed at least thousands of people--not millions--but still, we killed innocent people. And what about war? If you think killing is wrong, then what's war? It's hypocritical to be all, "Killing is bad. Murdering is bad," when you might be coming back and saying, "War is good." War is the killing of people without much reason than the leader who tells all his soldiers what to do and why. Basically, what I'm trying to say is that just because Hitler was so bad, it's not like we could be this bad too and think it was good. Again, I'm not supporting Hitler. People seem to not understand this--I said directly in my past post that what Hitler did was bad, no doubt. But if you were to look in his skin--as ugly as you might think it is--there's probably reason for his killing. There's probably ideals. There's probably morals he's made himself. Hitler's just a man. Don't make him more than he is. He's a man that came to power under opportunity and took advantage of the people suffering in Germany by the Great Depression. It's funny when you think about it actually. World War 1's end brought about the Depression (with a little bit of things going the wrong way by chance) and the Depression brought about Hitler's rise to power, thus World War II happened, and thus all the events that happened, happened. If there hadn't been a Great Depression, and the economies of the world had been doing great and fine, Hitler would have never rose to power. He's just a man, as I've said. A man with an ideal that some of the German people bought into and thus went along with and thus killed all those people. Hitler alone didn't kill all these people. I'm saying what I've said again, aren't I? There's not much else to say in this post. I've said all that needs to be said in the above post. If I really wanted to be pessimistic, I could say this of the death of those 3 million people: they were going to die anyways. But that's just a perception, right? Those 3 million people didn't deserve to die by my perceptions, but by Hitler's, they did. There is no fine-line of what's right and wrong but where you make it. And where there's right there's bound to be wrong. Right and wrong go together: what's foul is far what's good is bad. There's sides to everything; a way it can all be looked at. You just have to be open-minded and not write things off so easily. I'm looking past that Hitler killed so many people. I want to know Hitler the man, not Hitler the man that killed so many people just to kill them. Because there is a reason he killed them. There's more to everything than just cold facts. Hitler was also a person, he was born with the same potential as any regular human being. Things shaped him into what he was--his childhood, his life in general. Anyway, that's enough of that. The entire rants contained in my posts could be summed up in a few sentences: Evil is just a word. Right and wrong are perceptions as to how you see them. What's right to another could be wrong to someone else. What's wrong to another could be right to someone else. And it could all be summed up in one word, if you wanted: Perception. That's what this is all about. Look past your own ideals and see others' ways of thinking. Even Hitler's, as ugly as it sounds. Try to understand something and be able to say why before you just say it's wrong. Try to look in their head and know why they did what they did. It's as simple as that: perceive past your own perceptions instead of being so closed-minded. And if you can't do that, and see what I'm saying, then I don't know what to say. [/size] [quote]Wow, I'm getting a friggin' tan off of this one...this has gotten far too personal. Though, I don't see why it's so amusing that's it's gone religious. Why shouldn't it? After all, if there were no God, anything I believed to be "right" or "wrong" would be bogus. That's why subjective truths cannot exist along side an omniscent God. Evil is simply the lack of good. Satan lacks goodness, so he is evil. Simple enough? Because I'm a human, I was born into a curse of sin. Because I am human, I was born evil. The one, singular thing that makes me not evil now is God's undeserved grace and love. By myself, I am nothing. By myself, I am the biggest hypocrite you'll ever meet. By myself, I am filthy, angry, lustful, greedy, arrogant, and perverse. But by Jesus, who lives in me, all that is washed away. By Jesus, who lives in me, my sinful nature and personal slavery to my sinful nature no longer exist; in others words, I am free to be what I was designed to be. By Jesus, who lives in me, I am seperated from this world and all that characterizes it and placed beneath His cover. And by Jesus, who lives inside of me, I am becoming more and more like Him. That is the ultimate goal of Christianity. Not what is acceptable based on my own reasoning; but what is proven righteous by His sacrifice. If Jesus had ever sinned, His life, death, and resurrection accomplished nothing; but, people, I can tell you, those events accomplished something. You're reading the words of an accomplishment made by Jesus Christ. Give me that Wildfire, baby. The righteous will burn again. -Justin[/quote] [size=1] This is just what you think. Let me tell you, I have morals. I just choose to think past them. Let me tell you as well: God is just a perception. He's something you see, not what everyone else sees. And for something to be a truth, everyone must see it: it must logically, entirely be true and seen and known and felt and touched and known by all. And God isn't. And what's your reply going to be to that? That I'm just not feeling God. To believe in God is to be too assuming. There couldn't be a God as much as there could be. The ideals that you live to die so you can become a better person and be cleansed of all you've done wrong is the talk of someone that's lost all hope but what God can give--but what a perception can give. Justin, when speaking of death, it's best to remain cryptic. Let's keep Heaven and Hell and all that nonsenscial garbage out of it. You don't know if there's a Heaven. You don't know if there's a Hell. I don't know if there's a Heaven, nor Hell. you don't know what happens after death. You don't know if Jesus even ever lived, you just choose to. Jesus could've been some fantatical dude just like Hitler was. Only he didn't kill people--he bought them in on his beliefs. And he even died for them. He could've thought he saw God, but he didn't. As for Humans, they're both good and evil. Get that through your head: get it through your head that what's foul is fair, what's good is bad. As for sins, I don't want my "sins" to be cleansed. Again, what are sins? They're the words of your so-called God. A so-called God that only exists to those who perceptionize him. Just look at all I've said. Look past what this so-called God says. And also look at what he says as well while seeing the rest of it. Just read my other post. It says everything I'm saying here. It's just as fundamentally uncertain as our rights and wrongs. It's just like society--things are set and viewed as right and wrong just because you're told so. That's no way to live--just blindly believing to believe. You have to think for yourself. You can fancify God and Jesus as much as you want. They're just as unset in what is right and wrong and evil as you are. Saying that you can't have your own sets of wrong and rights but by some god is entirely preposterous. But it's your perception, and you can have it. What's funny is your God isn't anything greater than anything else unless you make him. And so you perceive that he is, and perceive that what he says is completely right. Nothing is ever completely right. There's always something bad in something good, always something wrong in something right. Just assuming that some God has all your answers to your life is preposterous. It's preposterous to think in the first that such a being exists. It's selfish and self-wanting. You want there to be a God, don't you? Not just say, you want. You want there to be Heaven, you want to die and go to someplace better. Well, let me tell you, as good as Heaven sounds, I'd rather just die and no longer exist. Anyway, don't worry Justin. I don't mean to be harsh. It's mainly the first part you said that really makes you seem selfish to your God. God isn't about chruch, you know. It's about knowing him yourself. And as far as I see, knowing something yourself when you can't even see that it's there, you can't do that. Not me anyway. It's when things are organized that they begin to force you to believe and muddle away your ways of thinking deeply and outside of just what this organized thing says. Really, Justin, by your post, you sound like some religous zealot, even a fool. You know, I'd rather cry with the sinners than smile with the saints. I'm just as much of a fool as you too though. So I'm not any better than you or anyone else. Again, what you see is your perception. What's your good and bad is your perception. Just don't force it on others in a way that you seem to be saying. What you think isn't absolute, Justin, just like what I think isn't either. There could be a God as much as there couldn't. You could see things one way as much as you could see them another. If you want to be omniscent like your God, you have to see every way too. Because to create you have to see everything and weigh everything; and to believe something that creates, you have to look at everything too. Just because the Christian God is said to be who he is doesn't even mean at all that that's what God is if there is one. I guess you can't see that your God probably isn't even God if there is one. It's obvious you haven't done that. You just choose to believe blindly what your God says because it makes you feel more whole and gives your life reason where there'd probably be none. Well, I'd rather see it all than see one thing. I'd rather not be whole if it meant seeing as much of a truth as I could. Justin, you're a stronger person for believing in your God. It's just the same as I said to Dan. And I'm weaker for not. But I'm weaker in a way that will make me stronger--because seeing as much of the truth is stronger than any God can say or any follower of God can say. I don't mean to be mean with this post, but I guess it's like that. I'm not even pointing the mean things I've said at you, I'm just saying them generally. May you be stonger with your God, then. I'll be stronger with as much of the truth as I can have.[/size]

[size=1] I've been trying to get their stuff off of Kazaa for a while now. Somehow it never gets to getting done. Dad always kicks me offline or something. From the comparison to Radiohead, no matter how meaningless, I'm all over wanting to hear this band. Tony, I want to fall in love. Let's hope I can. I'll get back to this thread once I hear them. Till then we have this stupidly lame post of damnable exploitiation and spammopolis.[/size]

[size=1] I write poems. Not sure if you'd call them songs...but I could really see them as songs. Eventually I'm going to learn to play guitar and make personal music for myself, and maybe for others that it matters to. If you want to see some of my stuff, check out the poetry forum. Should be plenty of stuff there. Too lazy to post something.[/size]

[quote]No offense, but that's a bunch of crap. I'm sorry, but some things are evil, and I don't care who you are or what your perceptions are. [/quote] [size=1] You've just proved my point. Some things [i]are[/i] evil--that is if you choose to perceive them as so.[/size] [quote]So, when asked the question, "What is evil?", the answer is "Whatever you think it is"? That's a cop out. I might be open to debate on the exact meaning or nature of evil, but to say it doesn't exist screams of ignorance. some actions are evil no matter who you are or how you percieve them.[/quote] [size=1] In society today, there are things which are deemed certainly wrong and right. I do agree there. But again, what society says is yet again a perception. A perception in being that it's something that's seen one way when it could be many others. I'm not saying evil doesn't exist--don't get me wrong, don't put words in my mouth. I'm just saying that it exists where one sees it--not on some immense level. The values which you believe are the ones you've lived with your whole life, right? Yes, they are. These values: the ones that say killing is wrong, rape is wrong, being rude is wrong, on and on and on. And I believe these things as well: I believe it is wrong to kill someone without reason. Do you want more examples of how evil is how you see it? Must I give more? Let's bring in suicide; in this day and age it's seen as a terrible act. And since you're so adamant about Hitler--I'll also say Hitler killed himself because he was so [b]evil[/b] that he couldn't go on. Think back to feudal Japan. The Samurai. They lived for war. And if they were ashamed--they would kill themselves. If they were shamed in battle they would kill themselves. Committing suicide was seen as a noble death. It's seen as the same thing for the Romans. Have you read Shakespeare's [i]Julius Caesar[/i]? If you have, you'll remember that Brutus had someone help him kill himself on the field. It was seen as a noble act. And look at today--with time comes change. Now suicide is seen as wrong. I'm not supporting suicide. I'm just showing you--perceptions change with time. It's not always been a straight-up "suicide is wrong" type of mentality. So were the Samurai "screaming of ignorance" for killing themselves because they were ashamed of losing battle, or were they killing themselves because they saw it as right? Was Hitler "screaming of ignorance" for killing himself, or was he killing himself because he didn't want to face his consequences (since you like to bring Hitler up so much in this argument)? Here's what you need to do: you need to put yourself in Hitler's skin. You need to put yourself in a Samurai's skin. Image, for a second, Deathbug, that you are Hitler. Your mind is a strange thing, working in its ways. By what you see, you see that the people of Germany are weakened by the Great Depression happening about ten years after World War 1. Imagine, for a second, that you want to purify. Imagine for a second that from your eyes you think the Jews deserve to systematically die. Try to put yourself in Hitler's shoes. Hitler wasn't some big bad evil man. He was just one man. And any man is weaker than can be said. Hitler only took an opportunity and used it to his advantage--this opportunity being that his country, as well as the US, as well as the entire world, was under a Great Depression. Because of this Great Depression, the US didn't pay attention to Hitler's rise to power. Because of World War 1 the Great Depression, in an indirect way, arose. Because of the Great Depression, Hitler rose to power. Because Hitler rose to power, he started Germany's military to work (even though they had signed a treaty not to after World War 1). Because of this money circulated around Germany. Because of Hitler World War 2 began. But not because of Hitler, but because of opportunity. Now, Hitler was just a man with a certain view on things--as bad as it may be--yes, I'll use the word, as [b]evil[/b] as it may be. He was just a man. He wasn't some demonical demon from the deepest bowels of hell--he was just a man. A man alone cannot systematically kill so many people, can he? Other people have to cooperate with this man. And that's what happened with Hitler's rule. People did what he said because there wasn't much else they could do--and also, because, I'm sure, some of them felt the same way Hitler did. Hitler wasn't the only man that killed those millions upon millions of people. It was also his minions, those "demonical demons from the deepest bowels of hell that were so evil." They also killed all those people in those camps. They gased and maimed and killed and abused all those people. Yes, what Hitler did was bad--I think that goes without saying. This isn't my point. My point is that even though I, and you, see that what Hitler did was bad by our own perceptions--that by his perceptions it wasn't. That if I were Hitler and raised in the exact ways he was, I'd probably be that man too. I'd probably think that what I was doing wasn't evil, and it was wonderful and grand and great. Put yourself in his skin. His "demonical demoned skin that is so evil." Put it on for a second--look at the opposite end of what you're thinking. Yes, Hitler was mentally ill. Yes, Hitler was a bad man. But he's only bad because we see that he is--not because he sees that he is. And it's not like "we" (meaning the United States) haven't done things that are in some character the same. Hitler thought Jews were inferior. We thought blacks were inferior, we thought immigrants were inferior, we thought, as in the court case I mentioned, the feebleminded were inferior and needed to be cleansed and purified out of society. Hitler only took it many steps further. He killed millions of innocent people because he thought they were inferior and he wasn't. He sought to exinct this branch of inferior people as he so saw. And what did we do? What did the United States do? We had slaves. have you ever seen the movie Amistad, Deathbug? It's a very good movie, directed by Steven Spielberg. See it sometime, won't you? Then you can see how bad slaves had it. Slaves were many steps back from what Hitler did, but they do compare in a sense: that sense being we saw African Americans as inferior, and so we made them in our servitude. Now, slaves were often beaten: beaten till they had large welts on their backs, till they bled all about. They were often starved, given little food, forced to work day-by-day and sometimes night-by-night slaving away in sometimes heavy physical work. The US wasn't the only country having slaves--but for the purposes of this, I'll focus on the US, since it's where I think you live, I'd say. You know what's funny about slaves? They were considered property. And why were they considered property? [i]Because they were perceived as so.[/i] The people of that era thought what they were doing was just as right as you think that killing, raping, and so on is wrong. If you were born in that time, it's likely to say you'd be just like the people then. It's likely to say that if you were Hitler, you would've done what he did. Just put yourself back at those times and eras--try to understand why this person did this, why they did that. Now slaves were treated like they were nothing. We beat them, overworked them. There were some that got lucky, though. Some that didn't have to do this daunting physical labor. But generally, this is how slaves were treated. And people thought it was right back then. You know how they justified, at least some, what they did? Religion. That's how. Religion. And how are you justifying evil right here? Society. That's how. Society. Society and what it's taught you. So just because you never did any of these things--you're missing the point. Try to understand why people did these things--put yourself in their shoes. Don't just write things off as black and white and say, "Hitler was evil. Why was he evil? Because he killed millions of people." Don't just say, "Enslaving blacks was wrong. But I never did it." Put yourself in these peoples' shoes. Understand their motives. Read between the lines. See what they saw. Perception. This is what this post comes back to. I'm not saying your perceptions are wrong. I'm not saying that Hitler was a bad man (which seems to be your biggest gripe). I'm just saying that before you write something off as one thing or another, you should think about it. Even if your beliefs lie elsewhere, still try to understand what would drive someone to beat and punish blacks. Ask yourself why Hitler did what he did. Because I can certainly tell you it wasn't just because he wanted to kill a whole bunch of people--that is somewhat of it, but still, you're not understanding. Deathbug, imagine something. Imagine you live in a different world. Imagine that in this world's society it's right to kill and rape and rob and plunder and kill and destroy. Imagine this. Put yourself in this society's shoes. Now imagine you were born in this society. Imagine it was what taught you what you know--imagine that it's what your parents taught you to believe. Would you still be saying that Hitler was an evil man? For all purposes, let's say Hitler's the "leader" of this society. What if you were born here in that society, and were shown that all you think is bad is right. Would you, having been shaped by this world (and not at all by what you know of this world) still think Hitler was a bad man? No, you wouldn't. For you would be born in a society where it's seen as right to do what Hitler's doing. And all those things would be interred in you. Just as all the things you are interred with now are in you. It's just as I said: it's all how things are perceived. You've just been brought up in a way that makes you perceive things strongly your way. You need to learn to understand fully why people do what they do. I mean, just saying Hitler killed millions of people isn't enough to me. I want to know why he did it. I want to know the man behind it. And I know that Hitler wasn't the only man behind it. Hitler was just the head of it. He had all his cronies that also thought his ways. So he's not alone to blame, but generally is seen as so. Anyway, I think I've said things in a direct enough way. As I said, everything goes both ways for me. I can see how killing might be right, but from what I've been taught, it's wrong. What's good is bad and what's foul is fair. That's what it comes down to for me.[/size]