Posts by Drew Morgan

Sean Cruz said:I simply can't put those two in the same category. Not even close.

Personally, I don't think I could ever adore anyone in the way I've seen, because that kind of devotion often involves significantly restricting the freedom of the object of one's affection.

So, what about your rabbit? Do you actually believe he has any freedom?

Now, project that onto romantic love—do you truly love someone if you are limiting their freedom? Personally, I have a hard time with that concept.

I don't believe in restricting freedom in love either, though there are certain boundaries regarding how you respect a partner.

I have to mention the book awakening by Anthony de Melo again. I feel he provided a very accurate perspective on this issue.

I haven't read that book.

You don't need to take my word for it; just look around. You'll see the pattern everywhere. Every individual is different.

Sean Cruz said:I simply can't put those two in the same category. Not even close.

Personally, I don't think I could ever adore anyone in the way I've seen, because that kind of devotion often involves significantly restricting the freedom of the object of one's affection.

So, what about your rabbit? Do you actually believe he has any freedom?

Now, project that onto romantic love—do you truly love someone if you are limiting their freedom? Personally, I have a hard time with that concept.

I don't believe in restricting freedom in love either, though there are certain boundaries regarding how you respect a partner.

I have to mention the book awakening by Anthony de Melo again. I feel he provided a very accurate perspective on this issue.

I haven't read that book.

He does. He isn't stuck in a cage; he runs the show, and we even take him out to roam through the meadows. Honestly, his life is pretty much what he wanted when he was desperately trying to claw his way out of a box at Petco. I spotted him there and bought him on impulse. He was unique—you could see his drive for independence. Then again, how much can anyone truly claim to be free within the constraints of physical existence? In a sense, he’s freer than I am because he doesn't have to worry about survival. Of course, the trade-off is that we manhandle him sometimes, which he hates. We need some kind of payoff too; we aren't just here to be servants.😍

When I compare that to my friend who keeps her cats locked indoors "for their own safety" (she's not the only one)... well, that's selfish love. It's all about her ego, not them.

Sean Cruz said:I simply can't put those two in the same category. Not even close.

Personally, I don't think I could ever adore anyone in the way I've seen, because that kind of devotion often involves significantly restricting the freedom of the object of one's affection.

So, what about your rabbit? Do you actually believe he has any freedom?

Now, project that onto romantic love—do you truly love someone if you are limiting their freedom? Personally, I have a hard time with that concept.

I don't believe in restricting freedom in love either, though there are certain boundaries regarding how you respect a partner.

I have to mention the book awakening by Anthony de Melo again. I feel he provided a very accurate perspective on this issue.

I haven't read that book.

That sounds more like setting boundaries to protect your own autonomy, whereas breathing down someone's neck is a total disaster. Psychologists teach us that sacrificing your own freedom just to soothe someone else's excessive psychological needs leads to absolute chaos.

Sean Cruz said:I simply can't put those two in the same category. Not even close.

Personally, I don't think I could ever adore anyone in the way I've seen, because that kind of devotion often involves significantly restricting the freedom of the object of one's affection.

So, what about your rabbit? Do you actually believe he has any freedom?

Now, project that onto romantic love—do you truly love someone if you are limiting their freedom? Personally, I have a hard time with that concept.

I don't believe in restricting freedom in love either, though there are certain boundaries regarding how you respect a partner.

I have to mention the book awakening by Anthony de Melo again. I feel he provided a very accurate perspective on this issue.

I haven't read that book.

It's an excellent book—witty and brutal. It's only 60 pages and you can download it online. A great guy from the Philosophy forum recommended it to me.

lonegardener said:Are you seriously suggesting that in an emergency—say, a building fire—you’d actually hesitate between saving a child or a rabbit? Let me push that scenario a bit further: imagine you have to choose between a neighbor's kid who just moved in next door and your own pet rabbit.

In a crisis, instinct takes the wheel. It's impossible to debate a "what if" scenario when adrenaline is pumping. I might not even be able to save anyone. Purely logically, I would prioritize whoever offers the highest probability of survival.

If your argument is that a child simply by being human somehow "deserves" salvation more—well, that logic is fundamentally flawed.

Sean Cruz said:Vess, I don't like all kids either. I love my own child and a few others, but generally speaking, I'm not a fan. Animals, however, are almost all dear to me. 🙂 That said, I still eat meat and don't carry around a massive weight of guilt over it. By the way, you and I have veered completely off-topic here. 😳

It's off-topic, sure, but maybe not. When it comes to love—I see people who worship their kids, and then there are those who adore their cats in the exact same way.

Personally, I don't think I could ever love anyone like that, because that kind of devotion always ends up stripping away the freedom of the object being loved.

Apply that to romantic love—do you truly love someone if you're busy limiting their freedom? I personally can't get behind that concept.

I should mention the book Awakening by Anthony de Melo. He hits the nail on the head regarding this issue.

Look, we already established this isn't some trivial matter. Just look at the ongoing mess involving poor Mid. He’s far from stupid—his enrollment numbers prove it, and you don't major in physics without a serious brain. This isn't an intelligence issue; it's purely psychological, and he let himself get dragged into this chaos by a girl who is a walking disaster zone. Mid sees the situation for exactly what it is, but there’s nothing he can actually do to fix it. Though, I suppose he's fallen into that classic "savior complex" trap.

The bottom line? Despite everything, he still feels like he loves her. It defies all logic, but that's just how it goes.

Sean Cruz said:😁
That old saying holds true: You are who you associate with. I actually held back from mentioning roasted rabbits just so I wouldn't upset Vess.

What seems odd to you? Is it that I missed the intersection, or that I don't struggle with math? 🤣
It's a metaphor, obviously. 😉

They say the first ten years are the hardest 😁 while you're struggling to find an intersection, completely unaware that you actually have a union. Some realize it early, some late, and some never at all. 😛🙂

As an anti-speciesist, I’m constantly exposed to this stuff, and frankly, it’s a daily drain.

Anti-speciesists view the world through a different lens—species isn't the deciding factor. We aren't anthropocentrists.

For people like me, there isn't much distinction between children and pets, except for one simple matter of preference: kids tend to get under my skin, whereas animals are a constant source of joy and entertainment.

It boils down to this: I find humans as a species rather unappealing, while animals are generally fine. Plus, they are the ones being oppressed in this world, which naturally drives deeper empathy toward them.

cosmictinker21 said:it was all a dream, a whirlwind, a storm passing through...

But honestly, those are still masterpieces compared to the nonsense our mothers, friends, glossy magazines, social media, the local clique, and poorly written romance novels feed us to create these completely warped expectations of how love should actually work...

We spend our lives learning about Picasso, Gothic cathedrals, corporate management, nanotechnology, quasars, or the latest breakthrough in cancer treatment or antidepressants, but we never actually learn anything about love.🤷😢

So this thread is about self-awareness, complacency, and consciousness...

And we didn't even get astronomy in our school curriculum! That always baffled me. Just an off-topic thought, but it hit me just now.

silentpilot6 said:And you have seemingly dedicated yours to attacking me whenever the opportunity arises.😵

I am not undermining anyone; I am simply expressing my bewilderment at their actions...

Legion, I’m sorry if you feel targeted—I despise personal attacks. I am simply offering a critique of your crude and primitive arguments!

PS. If you're feeling baffled, maybe ask yourself why everyone else isn't acting like you.

Unfortunately, I rarely witness anything resembling true love. It usually devolves into something repulsive quite quickly. We’ve all been brainwashed by this myth of romantic love—a myth that fuels a multi-billion dollar industry, much like how Soprano talks to his degenerate son.

Sandra Parker3 said:Ehm, yeah, since we're talking about being blinded by infatuation and bringing up rabbits, 😲hang in there, Drew Morgan, you're dear to me, just make sure yours doesn't end up like this one, though I'd say obsession really crushed him

Wow, you guys have covered a lot of ground here. I don't think love is blind, actually; I agree with you there
you just occasionally squint with one eye, or maybe both
Sure, you're squinting, but you still catch a glimpse through the gaps, and that’s what love is, you know... it's allowing the other person to be themselves, completely unfiltered, because that's exactly who they were when you first fell for them after all those long walks and winding roads (ugh, so dramatic, I could go on but I won't 🙄)

See, that's the difference between infatuation and love... the first one avoids obstacles, while the second one refuses to look past a double standard

Well, since you were all reminiscing about those sweet, infatuated days, it's nice to wake up the next morning and still appreciate that feeling and that person, even if it hasn't turned into a lifelong
choice... it's just a moment in time, and time eventually brings everything together so the pieces fit

Not "fit together,"
but rather "align" (like solving a puzzle, not lying)

Horrible, what even is this?!? I saw that movie ages ago, but I don't remember any rabbit. She killed their rabbit?!? Disgusting... It’s a tired trope—when you want to inflict the ultimate cruelty, you kill someone's pet 😢

cosmictinker21 said:Good luck to anyone who was only a pushover in one specific relationship. Unfortunately, a lot of people have that tendency. Maybe it isn't strictly about masochism, but more about accepting whatever passes for "love" just to avoid being alone, staying relevant in the dating scene, or feeling like they actually matter to someone. So they just endure it, and endure it, hoping things will eventually turn around. Because, hey, it’s "true love," right? And for the tiny scraps of affection they receive—which they mistake for actual love—they just keep taking it...

It's pure fear and emptiness. You take that void and pile even heavier burdens on top of it, but those wounds don't just heal themselves.

lonegardener said:I'm not so sure that counts as much of a 'start.' Once I cross off everything I refuse to deal with, I feel like there's nothing left on the list. 😬 🤣

Get a pet! 😍

Sean Cruz said:To me, comparing love for people to love for animals is absurd. You bought a rabbit; he’s your property. For me, that’s where the whole idea of unconditional love ends. If you had bought any other rabbit, it would be the exact same thing. The only version of unconditional love that exists is between a mother and her child, and even then, it isn't entirely absolute. What Maherica mentioned regarding caring for a spouse is, in most cases, due to the responsibility you take on through marriage, and that spouse has also "earned" that care in some way. You certainly aren't going to care for an abuser who mistreated you, unless you've lost your mind or are pitying them after the fact—and in that case, there's no question that it isn't love.

Love is love, regardless of the recipient. I am simply arguing my point that the only kind of love capable of forgiving everything and nourishing the soul is found with animals. I won't weigh in on maternal love—I know it can cause immense damage to children—but what a mother feels as a mother? I don't know. It likely varies from one mother to the next.

We had this debate over at my good friend (Philosophy). The fact that I bought a rabbit isn't the core issue here. I bought him because he won me over instantly and I didn't want him trapped. We started living together, and a relationship grew from that. My point is simple: we tolerate things from an animal that we would never tolerate from a human being. We endure it specifically because we love them and accept them as they are, without expecting anything in return.

Regarding what Maherica said about nursing a sick husband—that would primarily be driven by solidarity, which is the purest motivation. Beyond that, it could be anything, and not always something noble. You don't necessarily have to love someone to care for them, though if you do love them, you probably will.

Quote:

Jerry Martinez5 says: Since you're a moderator, I can't issue a strike. Please go back and actually read the rules.

silentpilot6 is a moderator?!?! 😲😲😲
The guy spends his entire existence looking for ways to suck up to the elite!

Precisely. Transformation only happens through relentless self-improvement.

So, how do you justify claiming someone was a pushover in just one relationship? Everything you listed isn't a permanent part of his character. Take masochism, for example—it isn't an inherent trait, so you can't just label him a masochist by default.

Sean Cruz said:But here’s the thing: accepting a rabbit, or a person, 😁 exactly as they are isn't actually unconditional love. Maybe you and I just define "unconditional" differently.
To me, being truly unconditional would mean expecting absolutely nothing from the other party—literally zero. I don't think any living creature is capable of that. Even in your case, that rabbit makes you happy because he plays with you and provides companionship, but there's still an element of ownership involved. That's not unconditional love. It's the same with people. Even when we claim to love someone unconditionally or say we'd die for them, we’re always subconsciously expecting something in return. In my view, unconditional love is little more than self-delusion.

By that logic, it looks like I love only my rabbit. I expect nothing from him. In fact, I expect him to be a jerk, just like he’s always been. But if that changed, I’d still love him. We want him to give us a treat, but instead, he bites our nose. We know that's a possibility—we're happy if he gives the treat, and if he bites? Well, that's just him—stubborn, fearless, and bold.

I don't even expect him to stay good-looking, even though he is (and smells great). He could go bald, get mange, or start stinking—we would still love him. There is something special about him, and since he's an animal and not a human, you just forgive him for everything.

Kenneth Peterson5 said:Look, you can't go mixing up being "in love" with actual love—that’s a huge mistake. Being in love? That's just a massive hormonal glitch in your brain. Real love is more like this steady, balanced state where we somehow choose to see way less than what's right in front of us, even though our eyes are wide open.
That’s why everyone says love is blind.

👍 A hormonal imbalance, sure! 😍

silentpilot6: The logic is flawed. It’s like trying to fix a broken engine by polishing the hood.

silentpilot6 said:Alright, let me repeat the question... why hasn't anyone in this thread protested against a similar campaign involving billboards or massive posters? It’s the exact same point... being emaciated isn't beautiful or desirable. 🤷
If I had come up with this scheme myself, I'd be accused of "sneaking it through," wouldn't I? 🤷

Regarding this current madness... you say there's no cure. Fine... but for some, this "temporary" insanity lasts for years... sometimes even thirteen years. 😲 I wouldn't call that "temporary."
And you know what actually helps? Prevention. 😁 (For those who still have a bit of sense left.) For some, it might even serve as a wake-up call. And I don't mean my posting on this thread, but the subject itself... though, of course, it doesn't hurt to provide a framework for people to discuss what they observe.
As they say: fools learn from their own mistakes, while the wise... the wise read the forums. 🤣 😂
Say whatever you want, but I still maintain that a large portion of these fanatics simply aren't themselves. There must be underlying roots or causes. A "normal" person (I don't mean they are clinically insane, just that they aren't all quite right 😁), no matter how much they love someone, won't allow these things to happen. Ultimately, they won't fall for someone who treats them like a doormat—which is exactly what these fanatics do.

Look, we’re talking about a preventative campaign here, not a cure.

silentpilot6 said:Alright, let me repeat the question... why hasn't anyone in this thread protested against a similar campaign involving billboards or massive posters? It’s the exact same point... being emaciated isn't beautiful or desirable. 🤷
If I had come up with this scheme myself, I'd be accused of "sneaking it through," wouldn't I? 🤷

Regarding this current madness... you say there's no cure. Fine... but for some, this "temporary" insanity lasts for years... sometimes even thirteen years. 😲 I wouldn't call that "temporary."
And you know what actually helps? Prevention. 😁 (For those who still have a bit of sense left.) For some, it might even serve as a wake-up call. And I don't mean my posting on this thread, but the subject itself... though, of course, it doesn't hurt to provide a framework for people to discuss what they observe.
As they say: fools learn from their own mistakes, while the wise... the wise read the forums. 🤣 😂
Say whatever you want, but I still maintain that a large portion of these fanatics simply aren't themselves. There must be underlying roots or causes. A "normal" person (I don't mean they are clinically insane, just that they aren't all quite right 😁), no matter how much they love someone, won't allow these things to happen. Ultimately, they won't fall for someone who treats them like a doormat—which is exactly what these fanatics do.

That’s the thing about illness—it's unpredictable. With the flu, you can usually count on five days. These cases are far more complicated than that.

silentpilot6 said:Alright, let me repeat the question... why hasn't anyone in this thread protested against a similar campaign involving billboards or massive posters? It’s the exact same point... being emaciated isn't beautiful or desirable. 🤷
If I had come up with this scheme myself, I'd be accused of "sneaking it through," wouldn't I? 🤷

Regarding this current madness... you say there's no cure. Fine... but for some, this "temporary" insanity lasts for years... sometimes even thirteen years. 😲 I wouldn't call that "temporary."
And you know what actually helps? Prevention. 😁 (For those who still have a bit of sense left.) For some, it might even serve as a wake-up call. And I don't mean my posting on this thread, but the subject itself... though, of course, it doesn't hurt to provide a framework for people to discuss what they observe.
As they say: fools learn from their own mistakes, while the wise... the wise read the forums. 🤣 😂
Say whatever you want, but I still maintain that a large portion of these fanatics simply aren't themselves. There must be underlying roots or causes. A "normal" person (I don't mean they are clinically insane, just that they aren't all quite right 😁), no matter how much they love someone, won't allow these things to happen. Ultimately, they won't fall for someone who treats them like a doormat—which is exactly what these fanatics do.

It’s easy to throw stones when you aren't the one standing in the line of fire.🙂 You’ve probably never heard the old saying that people can't learn from someone else's mistakes. They only learn from their own—because you need the sting of your own failure to finally get the lesson through your thick skull.

silentpilot6 said:Alright, let me repeat the question... why hasn't anyone in this thread protested against a similar campaign involving billboards or massive posters? It’s the exact same point... being emaciated isn't beautiful or desirable. 🤷
If I had come up with this scheme myself, I'd be accused of "sneaking it through," wouldn't I? 🤷

Regarding this current madness... you say there's no cure. Fine... but for some, this "temporary" insanity lasts for years... sometimes even thirteen years. 😲 I wouldn't call that "temporary."
And you know what actually helps? Prevention. 😁 (For those who still have a bit of sense left.) For some, it might even serve as a wake-up call. And I don't mean my posting on this thread, but the subject itself... though, of course, it doesn't hurt to provide a framework for people to discuss what they observe.
As they say: fools learn from their own mistakes, while the wise... the wise read the forums. 🤣 😂
Say whatever you want, but I still maintain that a large portion of these fanatics simply aren't themselves. There must be underlying roots or causes. A "normal" person (I don't mean they are clinically insane, just that they aren't all quite right 😁), no matter how much they love someone, won't allow these things to happen. Ultimately, they won't fall for someone who treats them like a doormat—which is exactly what these fanatics do.

Sure, it's possible. But everyone has issues (except you, apparently), and those problems manifest in different ways. Labeling pushovers as merely "stupid" is lazy. That is a massive oversimplification of a complex, multi-layered issue.

Alternatively, if we buy into the theory that love means unconditional acceptance and expecting absolutely nothing in return, then fine. In that case, pushovers are the only ones who truly LOVE. 😍

cosmictinker21 said:Seriously though, I kept my cat too, didn't give him to my ex😍
but I did dump the guy who spent the whole relationship being jealous and suffocating, ha, ha🤣

That’s that. We expect a certain level of consciousness from a human being, not just a mindless slave to primal impulses. You don't excuse jealousy in a person—I'll forgive my dog for being jealous, but he’s a dog. This is a man. If he's suffocating me with it, he clearly doesn't love me.

That kind of logic is completely foreign to those fools at the front office; they’re delusional. Legion just doesn't get it.

Jamie Reyes73 said:He managed to chew through every single piece of my clothing from 😠 😍

A giant moth! You can't keep one in the house, and you certainly won't be able to catch it once it's out in the wild.