I'm a total pacifist.
Physical violence actually offends me because it is the most savage display of the ego.
Whether it is a street-fight or boxing on the television, it all comes from the same proliferation of caveman-like mentality that both sickens and saddens me.

This attitude also extends toward the military.

I do not have any patriotic frenzy that accompanies any mention of 'supporting the troops'.
In my estimation ANYthing that war can accomplish, peace can do better.
Killing someone is the worst possible thing i can think of doing,
and no amount of war propaganda can convince me otherwise.
Given the choice of 'defending my country' or going to Jail,...
i would gladly live behind bars.

During a conversation with a war enthusiast,
they asked me what i would do hypothetically if armed forces from an invading country broke in to my home to attack my loved ones,...  if i had a weapon would i use it?

My immediate answer was no,
there is no excuse for taking a life,
EVEN under threat of death of myself or the people i love.

This made no sense whatsoever to the war enthusiast.

I felt confident in my answer because it directly reflected my beliefs.

However, after a while i became aware that this was within the parameters of a hypothetical question. - I had the luxury of being unaffected by the feelings and the reality of an imminent demise.
I then became suddenly aware that my principles are nothing more than untested approximations of my assumptions.
I get to uphold a belief on an idea without having to prove myself.
In the actual MOMENT my principles would have to contend with and then overpower
ego, fear, adrenaline, panic and impulse.
And even tho i would dearly LOVE to hold that opinion and view of myself as someone who values ALL life equally, i cant honestly say that i could predict my actions in a situation so far removed from my own reality.
I had to therefore concede that there 'could' be a situation whereby i could be foreseeably murder another human being, and as horrific as that was to admit,....
without being tested how can i ever truly know?

I started to scrutinize other people with firmly held beliefs and noticed the same level of solace they derive from an unwarranted title.

The next day i bumped into a christian
Today you can call yourself a christian without ever having read the bible,
let alone upholding any of its tenets.
Yet in the old days people used to get thrown to the lions for their faith in christianity & would actually die praying while being ripped apart and eaten.

I found myself wondering if i tied this guy to a stake and threatened to set him on fire,
how long it would take before denouncing his religion?

How far would his religious conviction carry him when it suddenly became inconvenient for once,... and in this case the catalyst for a supremely negative consequence?


Not long after that i saw a transgendered person.
It was quite clearly a grizzly faced man, wearing a dress and a wig.
He had not yet had any surgery as was evident by his gravelly voice.
He firmly insisted on being called a female.
Yet ALL of my senses promoted the idea that he was still just a guy in a wig.
While i respected his preference in being identified as female.

I saw no difference in that,
than me holding a bunch of sticks and insisting everyone now refer to me as a tree.


What i'm basically getting to,
is that who you think you are has little to no basis in reality.
they are all merely your own interpretations of yourself.

By identifying with any social or psychological designation,
you get to adopt the title and impose it on others to help guide them in perceiving you in a way you can control.
But if your beliefs are never tested, should you still get to enjoy the perks of that title?







(P.s - It only took 5 minutes, being tied up and the sudden appearance of a gas can for that christian guy to renounce ALL of christianity.)