It's been a slow-news Friday afternoon, so please accept my apologies for continuing this protracted discussion with noone noone:
The world according to noone noone: > If I invented a billion dollar technology and someone copied > it without my permission, I would not accept a trillion > dollars from a lawsuit. > > The only thing I would accept is for the other company to be > forced to re-call all their products. Then I would make money > by selling the products from my own company. > > When it comes to sticking to my principles, it does not > matter what people think of me. It's been my experience that when I hear people boast that they don't care "...what other people think about [them]." they are essentially trying to convince themselves that they have found a magic bullet that allows themselves to become immune to what other people think about them. It matters, noone. It always matters. It's learning how to DEAL with how others think about you... that is a lesson in life we all must face. Its learning to find one's personal center. It's learning how to discover one's sense of personal integrity so that one can subsequently withstand the onslaught of external pressures demanding that we conform to specific social taboos. Quite frankly, it looks to me as if you are trying to remove yourself from having to deal with the anticipation of personal pain you fear you will feel based on what you fear others might say about you or think about you. You think you can avoid this lesson? Think again. Avoiding that lesson only means it will come back in another scenario again, and again, until you have the courage to pass through that fire. > I'm the kind of person who goes into church and asks > Christians, "who would Jesus bomb." At that point I'm > automatically considered an evil liberal. I have no idea how making such a statement about whom "...Jesus would bomb" could possibly cause ANYONE to assume that you must therefore be an "evil liberal." Are you sure you are reading their responses accurately, or is it possible that you hope you will be labeled as an "evil liberal" so that it gives you additional justification to dismiss how others will perceive you. From what you have told me so far, what all this seems to boil down to is the fact that you seem to be fishing around for convenient ways in which to avoid having to deal with how you fear others will perceive you. > In this life you can usually take two roads when it > comes to most decisions. The first road is the one that > is a compromise of your principles, and branches out to > many different roads. This road is often easier to ride > on, has fewer bumps, and makes a commute easy. The second > road is the one where you refuse to budge one inch on your > principles. It is full of bumps, and can easily get you a > flat tire. For example, a woman divorcing her husband after > being cheated on (THE FIRST TIME) despite having ten kids > and no way to financially support them, and her husband > apologizing. Divorce is the only appropriate answer, even > if it could mean the kids end up being sent to orphanages > and never seeing each other again. Some may say she should > have not divorced her husband, but I believe her principles > are more important than anything else. I get the sense that certain elements pertaining to this hypothetical "divorce" scenario you have brought up may have touched on something that actually happened to you. In what capacity, I don't know. Nevertheless, you have my sympathies. Seeking counsel from individuals one has learned to trust is recommended. It can help. Now, in regards to the infidelity issue you cite here... quite frankly, noone, you are NOT dealing with "principle" here, even though you claim you are. The actions you cite have NOTHING to do with sticking to one's "principles". To be perfectly blunt, you just don't want to deal with the complexities of what a dynamic relationship sometimes brings forth between two individuals. Sticking to the principals you cite here means you don't want to deal with WHY a spouse might have in the first place temporarily wandered from the sacred bonds and emotional security of marriage. You are using the excuse of sticking to your principles so that you can avoid some potential unpleasant soul-searching on your own part. What are you really afraid of? That maybe you'll discover the fact that you're just as imperfect as your spouse? After entering into discussion maybe a couple WILL discover the sad fact that they actually SHOULD separate, but then maybe such a drastic decision is unwarranted. Your "principals" would allow for no opportunity to explore all the choices - except for your "principal" of avoiding the whole matter altogether. > If I were Andrea Rossi and if my technology had been copied > without permission (I'm not saying it has) I would let the > world consider me the most evil man in history. I would > sleep just fine at night knowing that I did the right > thing, by standing up for not only my rights, and the > property rights of all other inventors. > > A world without absolute rights is not worth living in. Sadly, > the way the world is going, individuals are having their > rights violated more and more each day. You seem to be battling some interesting windmills in your life. You might want to listen to Sancho on occasion. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
