www.CharlesRehn.com - For the Love of the World

5/3/2009

Captain & Tennille - There is Love (Wedding Song)

When I write music, I often try to capture the essence of a moment of thought or experience, especially when it comes to love. To truly get to the bottom of a feeling. You might say, I write music about my innermost thoughts and feelings to sort of define that feeling for myself. It's also why my songs are sort of embarassing to sing to people, even though they don't know that my songs expose my deepest dreams and desires.

It might be like how other people have dreams that are manifestations of their minds sorting out their experiences and emotions.

In another way, it's kind of like all the teachings in the Bible, the 10 Commandments, Mosaic Law and The Sermon on the Mount and all of the great writings that can lead us to spiritual truth. Sometimes I think, do I really need to study the Bible. I knoew the essence of it, the Golden, and I understand how it applies to everything and every one and every situation and every bit of creation, if allowed to be, and if I knew nothing else, I would want to know that. And I would want other people who feel the same way to be a part of my life, a part of God's masterpiece of living art, beauty in motion all from a source of love.

Whenever I've been troubled in life because I didn't like the way personal interactions were going, I'd always try to think back and capture the essence of a time when I thought relationships of the kind I was having trouble with always worked out well. I'd try to capture the essence of how I was being and how people were responding.

It's not that I always thought I was wrong about my conclusions about someone else's actions, these days, that would translate to "they were wrong", but I always knew, even when I was wrong or had been inappropriate according to my own standards, which is a much higher bar than most people I've ever known, that there was a way I could have done things better or been a better person or responded in another way that could have been more productive. You could say, in my own mind, I'm wrong even when I'm write. It's not about guilt or pride. It's about personal integrity, and the desire to be the kind of person I decided to be, not the person I was forced into acting like to survive or get ahead.

I've spent a lot of time during my life thinking about love, in various forms and contexts. I even wrote a song called "The Recipe For Love" once but it wasn't.

I often wondered if there was a simple way to express how I actually viewed love and kind of relationship an way of being that accurately represented the essence of how two people, me and someone else, could co-exist and flourish individually and as partners. The closest I ever came to it was to think of a good marriage as the meeting and promising of perfect companions to each other.

I'm a big fan of marriage. I believe a good marriage is a beautful thing, and that it represents a great deal more than falling in love, economics and social expectations. For me, it was something I wanted more than anything else in this world, to fall in love, be married, have a couple of kids and build an entire life sharing the rewards of good work and, in my mind the way I think, as the foundation to do some pretty big things in the world, and I really wanted that foundation to be firmly in place before I did anything in the world that might lead to public recognition, knowing that a great number of good people have fallen to the temptations of power and fame and money and more, and I didn't want the work I wanted to in the world to be harmed by giving in to those temptations. It wasn't like wanting to have a marriage so there was someone I could use to retreat to and hide, or someone to be obligated to to "keep me in line".

It was about having someone with me who I could share with, enjoying the pleasure of seeing the results of hard work, who could appreciate without becoming arrogant and conceited, doing work on a very large scale. You might say, never forgetting your roots, never forgetting the work you're doing isn't about yourself, and be content with what God provided us, even if it wasn't as much as I'd hoped for.

For me, I always believe that God gives us what we need. It's about contentment, having enough, and knowing that life is really about people and feeling blessed when you have the opportunity to have the fun of doing good things in the world, whether anyone knows it or not. Especially when you can see the results over time.

And, I like money and all, but I never wanted that to be the purpose of my work, and I hoped I could find someone who could understand that wasn't a commitment to poverty, but a knowledge that there are more important things in life, and when you have good times, great, when you don't, you scrimp and save, or just adjust the budget accordingly.

I've named several "circumstances" and contexts for ways I view realtionships that probably, most people can relate to. But I want to take this discussion deeper. To the essence of this discussion, and even, the essence to what life is all about in the first place.

Once again, like in the chapter "From the Beginning of Time", I look back to images in my mind that might exist of a relationship, maybe a scene in a movie or a daydream I had, a song, or anything that succinctly encapsulated the way I thought of someone I would have the perfect relationship with. There's even a Monet painting that sort of says it. Lots of songs that beautifully say things about facets of relationships that I treasure, from the romantic to the more "pragmatic" and philosophies and approaches to life that I hope someone could share with me...

But when I really look back to capture the essence of what I want to share with someone, I have to go back to the memories of my feelings and just a few pictures of a girl I knew when I was 3 or 4 years. I just realized this today.

I lived at 2752 Hunter Street in Palo Alto, California, an area now called East Palo Alto. We lived in the middle of the block. But on the corner of the block was a family who this little girl named Gina Applebaum. I've always wondered what happened to her.

When I think about her, and I don't remember a lot, I always think of things how I just always really loved hanging out with her. I don't ever remember arguing with her, having a disagreement or us ever getting in trouble for doing anything wrong.

I do remember it seems like we always wore blue jeans, it seemed like it was a big deal to some people that they were Jewish, and her dad was some sort of executive. Every once in a while, her parents would take us for a drive and we'd play in a walnut orchard, somewhere. After they moved away, I got to stay at their new house a couple of nights, sort of a way our parents made it easier for best friends to "say goodbye". They had this really cool place built around a sun room/garden/aviary. It was fun to watch the birds.

The point of this is: the real picture I have of her and my childhood relationship with her, the impression I have of it, is of two little, innocent kids just sort of looking around and seeing what was around them, playing with everything they saw and never even thinking of getting into mischief because there was so much they could do that they knew was okay, it didn't even occur to them. Our parents definitely made the rules clear.

Even more, it was like the whole world was like this huge, amazing playground with all kinds of things to do and see and have fun doing. And it's amazing because it keeps changing too. Everytime we got together it was like a whole new world. Eyes wide open. Amazed at all the wondrous things to see.

It may seem naive, idealistic or childish, but that's actually how I've tried to live and approach my life. The reasons that caused me to live my life this way probably aren't typical, and I find few people who fully understand or who are willing to try to understand "being" that way in life.

At the same time, that's not at all to say that I ignore or reject the responsibilities of the "real world", the material world we live in that does and has provided a great deal, materially as well as in opportunities. And I assure you, I never forgot about my deal with God and my promises, and I certainly don't take them lightly.

One time, working at a company in a position that had some oversight over some 70 people or more, I would walk around the department, just watching people work, their habits, the stress levels and more, always wondering what could make their jobs easier and empower them to do their jobs better, in the face of the challenges they didn't even know they would be faced with soon because of management decisions as the demands of the market required. Not bad things, just new challenges.

The fun part for me was like putting together a jigsaw puzzle, taking all the pieces that existed and configuring them in a new way that created a scaleable model as the business grew and expanded.

There was one man working there who came to me one day and said, "You know, I used to see you walking around the department, and I thought you looked like the most authoritarian person in the department. And now that I know you, you're also one of the funniest."

The most fun I have in the world is thinking about how get to the essence of what it would take to cause the world to unite in a way that would truly cause global peace and abundance for all. And I think I'm getting close to it.

I think even the greatest challenges are fun. They bring me great pleasure, particularly when I know and can see how they beneficially impact other people's lives. In a way, maybe my definition of fun is a little different than most people's, but...

The relevance of that is that there are times to be serious and times to be playful. A time to every purpose...

It seems that, as long as I can remember, I've always wanted to start this thing called The Family of Artists and Musicians. In one way, it was a business, and if successful, I knew I would have been a powerful person in the entertainment and publishing industries.

But the real reason I wanted to do it, to satisfy my personal desires, was to create a sort of utopia.

See, in my world, just like I view what a government's role is in society, in my world, when I go home and step onto my property, my rules apply. I didn't know until very recently that the goals of this organization I always envisioned, the rules and things it taught and provided to people was a clear application of the paradigm of the Kingdom of God, and the Kingdom of Heaven.

And because I knew the power this organization would garner over the years, I wanted to make sure of one provision, that I was always in charge so that no one else had the opportunity to corrupt the process or the intent of the organization. Because I knew that if someone greedy or controlling took it over, it would very quickly turn into another corporate giant taking advantage of talented people, people I was trying to create a whole community with, and frankly, to partner with in causing a renaissance in the arts and music in the world to bring about a transformation of the ways we express ourselves and more importantly, the way we resolve conflict, and always strive to make sure everyone has what they need on a fair and equal basis.

To prove my sincerity in my intent, it was always that I would own the land and build the campus, and then give it to the organization with the provision that if the board of this non-profit organization decided to vote me out of leadership, that I'd just have a small piece of the land on the campus to live on until I died.

Because the truth was, to be able to have lived in such a community doing all those fun things, and sure, requiring a lot of hard work and commitment, and having a huge number of people depending on you, I just couldn't imagine how I could possibly want more or have more fun.

Except for being President of the United States.

And, except for this partner to share it with, who could treat it like the fun, awesome journey of discovery it is, and laugh about it at the end of the day, knowing you were the same person, that innocent child inside, with the laughter actually being the giggling you do when you have the joy of empowering people. In my mind, that means being adult and pragmatic enough to be a true leader, who honestly serves the citizens in one way or another, and a child enough to always be willing to understand and to enjoy it all as part of the living art, and the art of living.

And then, as if it sounds like this "partner" or companion in life would have to be part of this organization, well, maybe they would, maybe they wouldn't. But if they were, whatever they wanted to do would be fine. Because I want them to have fun, too, so long as they understand the rules and know how to apply them and empower people with them.

All that said, I have to tell you that there are a couple of other things I noticed about my image of what it would be like to have the perfect marriage

First, I giggle at how that image of me and Gina so resembles children in the Garden of Eden. I just couldn't help but notice.

Second, as I review the "images" I have of my life, and think about the mistakes I may have made along the way in terms of relationships, as well as the good things I've done or recall, and then think about what I remember enjoying about the innocence of my relationship with Gina, really good friends, I realized that the biggest mistake I may have made in my relationships was becoming too involved without knowing the people I was becoming involved with.

Even more, I would view people in relationships based on what they'd tell me about themselves, and give them the space to be that person, and somewhere along the line determine that despite their visions of themselves, they actually didn't understand how to be that way, and I'm not faulting them for that.

What I realized was that in these relationships, I would be someone's coach and empower them in some way, neither one of us understanding that dynamic was going on, and they would no longer "need" me for fulfilling the part of them that in the time of our relationship or their lives was unfulfilled or holding them back from going beyond themselves. I was like a psychologist, more than a friend, and when I realized that was happening, I started looking at relationships to see what the relationship was based upon.

That's really what I'm trying to get at. What causes us to decide how to choose a relationship. Or what comprises a good or bad relationship.

It always, one way or another, goes back to those old memories of the values, mores and heritage of our families and religions and schools. Memories of things that caused us to decide what was important to us, normal, moral and ethical. The influences that shape our world in our minds, that we end up calling reality or culture.

It's about knowing what you're looking for. Having a sense of what you believe love is and how it's expressed, far beyond the generally accepted ways of buying gifts, remembering birthdays, being responsible by being employed and presenting a public image of being a good person who isn't poor or lazy.

It's about having a sense of the dynamic that occurs when two people meet and for some reason, they relate to each other in a way that causes them to want the other to be proud of them, the best they can be, and at the same time, know that whatever that is, if it makes them truly happy, then it's okay and accepted. As well as an ease in relating and communicating.

And that it changes. Knowing that people change and learn and grow and that the worst thing you can do is anything that would hold someone back from seeking to do or be whoever they are.

I'm not talking about fighting windmills. I'm talking about empowering someone to be who they are at any given moment, and that they know that they will never be sterotypically confined to being a certain way... and in my mind, that includes the necessity of the willingness and some facility at applying the Golden Rule to everything and that if nothing else, that can be counted on.

What that's about is far beyond allowing for someone else's likenesses and differences. It's about freedom, that inherent sense within every one of us that demands to be free, to have true liberty and be allowed to live our lives the way we choose and see fit. And freedom in this context is not about being willing to give up on someone or something or have the ability to walk away from a relationship because of personal changes or, to say, seek employment thousands of miles away.

It's about being in relationship with another being in such a way that change and success of one or the other is not an occasion for competitiveness or dominance or measurement of worth, but for a joyful celebration of discovery and maybe even accomplishing something they didn't believe they could do or be done.

There's one song that, for me, captures the essence of that thought, the song "If You Love Somebody Set Them Free" by Sting. If you love somebody, set them free. Set their spirits free, provide them unconditional love and a foundation of life they can depend on, in good times and bad, in confidence and indecision.

Of course, that foundation must be based upon an even more important foundation of values and beliefs that allow for the merging of the "cogs of the wheel" they are part of. Their own lives meshing together with the ways of life in the world. Symbiosis. Synergy.

For me, what I'd have to say I've failed to recognize before is that the foundation I was looking for, that I even found a couple of times and didn't realize because of my inexperience, the foundation was friendship.

The kind of friendship that was so good I didn't think of it as more than friendship. I even remember one relationship with someone where I didn't even realize she was in love with me, and if I had even thought for a moment that was a possibility, I'd have been all for it, though I wouldn't have known what to do. The truth is, she and I were such good friends, I didn't want to risk losing her friendship because of the romantic thoughts of a boy who was far too young for such commitments.

It was the kind of friendship where two things were true: we were always there in support of everything each other wanted to do, and we had the kind of relationship I talk about, the proof of a true friendship as I define it.

A friend is someone who won't take advantage of you, even if they have the opportunity.

And as much as that appears to be a defensive statement, the truth is, anyone who could live up to that 100% of the time would be rare and unlikely to find, but anyone who could intend to live up to that all the time would be a rare treasure because it would take a great deal of understanding and respect for the rippling effects of one person's actions on others to fully come to grips with the power of that statement.

Which is just another way of expressing a facet of the Golden Rule.

I didn't say all of this as any sort of advertisement for a date or relationship. Because of the containment of my "bubble life" and a number of facts I'd like to know in order to fully appreciate who I am and the heritage and wisdom that has preceded me, as well as the fact that I am still contained and frankly, believe I am more of a prisoner thanks to the United States Government, I don't really have much of a life to offer anyone to be involved with. Further, as I've reviewed my life, I've realized that a number of relationships I was involved in, to one degree or another, were either arranged or manipulated into existence or ending by psyops people. And, unless I can get these psychotronic and directed energy attacks to stop, I don't see that I have much of a future to offer either. As many other people have reason to complain as well.

I should also point out, if you believe that the feelings I describe here and the considerations I'm writing about are in any way complete or thorough, they're not. Some would say that the bar I set for my true companion in life is unreachable. That may be true. I don't believe that. Nor do I want someone who is the same as me. Just, someone who shares the same basic values and a true appreciation for all things and beings as unique and beautiful creations just as they are.

I told you all of this in hopes it would cause you to reconsider what you value in life in regard to your marital relationships, and your romantic relationships. To cause you to consider your own visions of things, to look at the picture of what the perfect relationship would look like in your mind, and then examine whether you have that relationship, and whether you live like that relationship exists or can exist.

If not, you'll probably go with the flow, and settle for what a friend of mine calls "mister or miss right now."

It's that kind of thinking, the influences that cause us to conform to a paradigm in what may be an unnatural way of relating to one another, looking for things in people that are not expression of their spirits or our spirits, that leads to the acceptance of serial monogamy.

I don't mean that in terms of thinking that if things don't work out, you should continue to live in a bad relationship or that if you divorce, you should never marry again.

I'm talking about the idea that it's supposedly it's so hard to meet the right person, and that there is a level of loneliness in the world, that causes us to settle for relationships because we want to have a relationship.

Who could blame anyone for wanting that?

It's worth noting, without trying to imply guilt on anyone, that despite the teachings of Jesus, divorce has become universally and generally accepted as part of the marriage paradigm.

But, these days, that makes for a mindset of disposable relationships, and relies on the hope or fatalism that things will work out instead of a commitment to cause it to, always being able to draw upon the knowledge of the spirit of the other to rekindle the flame of romance and energy that we think only truly exists in the early years of a relationship that, like dreams, are supposed to mellow and dwindle as we grow older and wiser.

Much of that is based upon the replacement of the magic and mystery of love with the thrill of sex. And our natural instincts of mating and nesting, food gathering and protecting our families, the fabric of our families and the fabric of our cultures - has been replaced with the measurement of economic wealth. To survive, it's not like you stand a fair chance if you don't work with the paradigm of money that's handed to you.

The Bible says that the day will come that if you don't go along with the ways of the anti-Christ, you will be denied the opportunity to buy and to sell. We're in those days. I'm a witness and victim of it, as are literally thousands I network with via the internet.

You may think that what these people want Christians and other moral people to conform to is Globalization, originally called the New World Order, you're right.

It relies on economic coercion as its core weapon against those who will not "bow down" to its authority. In these ways, they can make your life uncomforatble, to the point that under diress, you will give up your moral values, the 10 Commandments, the Golden Rule and even your belief and faith in God to avoid suffering. Just like the techniques of torture, which is what it is, more commonly referred to as Satanic Ritual Abuse.

That's why the Bible says those who are able to resist betraying their beliefs will be saved.

The Bible says, and it's easy to prove, that none of us are without sin.

You may not relate anything of marriage to anything related to sin, however, I'd suggest to you that our choices in relationships and marriage are very much affected by the impressions we are given, through the media a variety of role models, which are models of accpetance of sin on the premise of a culture that is maturing and more tolerant. I'd also like to suggest that when examining your relationships, that you keep in mind that it could upsets, and not to let your inquiry at any moment dictate your actions.

It could well be that finding out that the reasons you were attracted to a certain person were not the reasons you would wanted if you believed it was a conscious choice founded in spirituality. You may also find that understanding these things, and getting back in touch with these spiritual issues, will cause you to realize you ended up with the right person after all.

I have an ulterior motive for telling you that, and it's not just to hopefully empower you to strengthen your current relationships.

It's because if I'm successful at all, whatever that means, whatever God chooses for me to accomplish or endeavor next, part of what I know the job will entail is reducing or doing away with many of these opporuntistic images and impressions we're exposed to that lead us and encourage us to make bad decisions or conduct ourselves in immoral ways. Understand, I'm no prude nor do I believe in government control or censorship of the media.

Further, psychotronics is in use on a much wider scale than I could ever likely cause you to believe. And one day, when we get it turned off, you might find yourself wondering all of a sudden why you're living your life the way you do, why you live in the relationships the way you do, and it will be useful for you to really understand yourself in these and many other areas of your life. When the time comes, you'll understand, without any doubts, what I'm talking about.

There is a reason the Bible describes someone as "The Comforter". And in this area of psychology, being and spirituality, as well as in many other areas, people will go through some shock as the revelations of what's going on in the world and in the spiritual world become revealed. And that's when you'll need to listen to a leader you can really trust, as a servant of God, as a servant of citizens, as someone who will understand the anguish of the realization of the depths of the deception that are going on. And the strains it will put on relationships. God promises that the friend you'll need then will be there for you.

One last thought I want to leave you with on these aspects of my insights regarding marriage is that when I reveiwed what I wrote about some of the fundamental things about what makes for a good marriage at least in my eyes and in relation to what is going on in the world - and the way we're all influenced regarding relationships, I couldn't help but notice that the description I provided could also describe some aspects of a good government, free of the divisive politics and power mongering. And how, in the holographic nature of the paradigms of God's ways, that such ideas of what makes a good relationship - in personal life or in government - makes for a good relationship, to one degree or another, appropriately applied in respective contexts.

I actually have a great deal more to say in these areas, about relationships, how they are, what they could be, God's intent, the intent of Jesus and evolution of the consciousness of the cosmos. But I believe those issues are important and distinct enough, particularly in shaping a future we would choose, that I want to discuss them in another chapter called:

Men, Women, Freedom, Equality & Leadership ...with liberty and justice for all....What it means in God's world

There is something that will be in that chapter that is actually quite important to me. Is has to do with what I consider the study of dominance and submission, how it occurs and evolves, takes on meaning and form as well as an example of instruction and punity, as well as how a paradigm of checks and balances and the respect of an order of co-leadership and equality can be used to enforce submission as well as suppression, and negatively impact the consciousness of the cosmos.

I will repeat this story sometimes because I think it's an important thing to consider. Actually, it contains a great number of things worth considering. And I have to admit, it brings up a number of painful, as well as amusing thoughts and memories for me.

One night, not long after beginning to watch Pastor Melissa Scott on TV, I'd be sitting there giggling and laughing while watching her, and I don't say that out of disrespect or criticism. I was being hit with some pretty intense psychotronics attacks that were making me pretty silly, and I was so excited to come across someone talking about the text and vernacular of the Bible that when I'd listen to her talk, it would cause me to free-associate about all sorts of things that weren't about what she was talking about, or that caused me to see an entirely different interpretation of the scriptures, not her interpretation, but other literal or analogous interpretations that for me, at least, made the Bible make a great deal more sense and provided a more consistent view of the paradigms of human history and the ways of God.

I don't know this for a fact, but ways that I don't think other people would or have considered that don't disprove or invalidate previous interpretations. I think it's like God saying to me, see how most people view this. Try thinking about it this way, and see what a difference it makes.

I've always been a proponent of women's rights. There is a difference between men and women, and I think it should be respected as having value, not as a component of diversity. There's a reason for the differences between men and women, having to do with animal instincts inherent to all animals, as well as providing what I'd call spiritual checks and balances.

The women's liberation movement can include people who are angry about their suppression and expressing their hatred for their suppression and their suppressors, and those who seek relief through justice. They may be the same people. And either way, they are correct for what motivates their actions and desires for freedom and equality.

It's important to notice that when any person or group or government suppresses any group or persons or government or ethnicity or gender or religion, it does not result in pacification and an inevitable acceptance of the masses of the policies and methods of the oppressors, it causes violence: physical violence, emotional and psychological violence, emotional and physical abuse and all sorts of things, none of which lead to peace, none of which are sourced in or create more love, and none of which seem to reflect a world of the kingdom of God that is adamant about equality and freedom and liberty.

How could suppression of a human being or spirit be considered freedom?

So, the thing that gets me going on this topic has to do with this particular free-association, and others I got when listening to other things she said that confused me in the context she was presenting that for Aesopian reasons made no sense to me.

She seemed to have a thing about this word called emnity. And kept referring to Genesis. Initially, after reading Genesis and seeing that word in the context it was used, I had to wonder if she was trying to tell me she believed I was a false Christ. In the part of a dialectic that was being run that she was particpating in, I can only assume it was desired to make it appear that I became somewhat irrational toward her, with the appearance it was because she rejected me personally, and that in a Biblical context, if she was used to claim to the public that I was a false Christ or the anti-Christ, that she could claim my supposed irrationality caused me to pick on the poor female minister and try to defame her, to discredit her as someone who could discredit me but inevitably cause me to look like an evil, mentally ill person who couldn't possibly be Christ, and. more importantly in the way religion fornicates with the whore of politics, to cover the crimes of Barack Obama, many other politicians and some media corporations that stood to gain billions in profits by suppressing me and then using her supposed expertise to deliver an implied threat to intimidate me into silence - the threat being to embarass me publicly, or, even to make me subject to institutionalization or criminalization for fraud. This dialectic has an incredible number of possible ways they can play it, all of which will fail because their paranoia caused overkill which created patterns and evidence.

This is the way psyop dialectics work. Unfortunately for all these people, I'm not intimidated, and I won't back down, and they're going to have to eventually do the right things and put an end to the criminality or deal with the consequences without expectation of understanding or mercy from me, the public or God, because their crimes egregiously affect millions and billions of people, not just me. She'll have to explain, some day, if she really knew what she was particpating in, although it's hard for me to believe she wouldn't.

I set that aside for a while. But it's important in the context I'm going to speak about. Conforming to paradigms that are inconsistent with the spirit and intent within us, sinning for "good reasons", justifying even crimes, in a struggle to find a way to succeed within the parameters of the pardigms in which we live that end up being corrupt efforts of applying the idea of the ends justify the means for what we believe will result in positive results.

And what sets this discussion off for me is something she said one night about a woman should reflect the man.

It seemed out of context for me, but it made sense in thinking about the relationship of a man and a woman, particularly in a marriage or committed relationship or marriage in the eyes of God (whether modern relationships are viewed that way or not).

I remember hearing her say that, and immediately got the mental image of the sun and the moon, casting light on the earth.

It made sense to me that the woman would reflect the man, given the paradigmsof the world and the Bible and how women were to remain silent in churches, and if they had questions they should ask the man, and a great number of other things that were adopted that could have led to a shaping of culture in other ways than establishing male domination.

Just as how the jealousies and coveting that resulted in Abraham and Sarah sending her handmaiden and Ishmael off into exile has, all these years later, created a need for the reconciliation and re-uniting of the children of God of the Muslim faiths and the Christian faiths.

When Adam and Eve committed sin, God told them that as a result, all sorts of things would happen. In one of my Bibles, it calls the expulsion of Adam and Eve from the Garden of Eden the downfall of humanity, cursing us all with the evil in the world, of temptation.

People don't understand that often times when God "gets angry" and says this or that or the other thing will happen because of the actionsof people, particularly Christs, he's speaking out loud about His knowledge of what the results will be of their actions because of the influences and rippling effects on other people, and the future of humanity. Not because He causes that harm out of wrath or vengeance.

I have to admit, I wish Adam and Eve had never come to know sin, and that we all haven't had to endure what we have to endure, the crosses we all bear in the material world but I have to admit, even with my strange life, I really appreciate the lessons I've learned and know in my heart regardless of any tears I've cried or inconvenience I've experienced, I know that the person I am now is capable of being trusted, because I understand the issues of humanity, old and young, impoverished and wealthy and privileged. And I understand what's at stake in the way the future is being formed under the laws of mankind, the importance of justice - God's true justice.

And I honestly believe, in terms of the balance of creation and equal and opposite forces, as well as the fact that God would not have created us with differences simply to satisfy a need for pro-creation, that what's missing most in the world is the influence of women. I say that because of the nurturing and more forgiving ways of women, forced to deal with the brutality of the world we live in. And I mean it in a way to empower women, not force them into a role. I mean it in a way that means I believe that women can and should be leaders, not to be our mothers in leaders, anymore than I think a president who is a minister should preach to citizens on government time.

What's most imporant in this, and the discussion of how much better life would be if we were all allowed to "be", with liberty, who we really are inside in our spirits, is the idea that men ARE men and women ARE women and we have diffferences that are neither better or worse but compliment each other if we allow them to. Differences we can learn from, not to become unisexual or to all end up thinking exactly the same thing like robots, but to broaden a discussion that is not limited to the ages old male dominated paradigm that has us living in a world of military and domestic violence.

I always said, if you want to solve a problem and annoy a man, just get a woman involved. They'll make you try to resolve things even if they force the territorial and protective men to declare peace. It's horrible for men sometimes. Part of the breeding of men to protect their offspring is violence. Not to say all men are violent, but we do have a world that seems to thrive on conflict and victory, as defined by a world relying on force, not love, and governments and media that honor and promote violence.

Now, if you think I'm relying on or believe in certain stereotypes about men and women, I'll admit it. I like the differences between men and women. They're real. For a purpose. In terms of pleasure and rationale, just like I think a healthy government would include discussions of various points of view and like a real Democracy, has built-in checks and balances to make sure the right choices are actually made. And, I think it's very oppressive for women to have to prove they will go along with the male dominated paradigm of government and leadership in order to be allowed to participate in it at all.

Understand, I'm not against men anymore than I'm against white people because I want to fully empower black people or other ethnicities. There are differences between the races and cultures of nations because of their experiences, whether inherent tendencies or not, that we all can and need to learn from in order to reconcile the injustices of the world by making sure that all equal and opposite reactions are transformed into flowing currents of human progress to ensure that fundamental, foundational values are fulfilled in order to cause the ultimate true equality and liberty of the beings and spirits of this world as promised to us by God.

As someone who considers themselves something of a strong personality and leader type, even though most people think I"m quiet on the outside, and being human, in one way it's an attractive thought to think that a woman should reflect the man and is half of the wisdom that we all need to see. Leaders like followers. Once I get over that fantasy or intellectual train of thought, I realize that to be that way toward women (and I'm not that way) would be to oppress them. And doing that to anyone diminshes my spirit, to believe that I've done anything to diminish another spirit. It's not the Golden Rule. It's sin. And God's rules are not arbitrary.

I also believe in a good marriage and in all aspects of life, a man should reflect the woman. It's not that we're incomplete separately or or as individuals. It's that God actually intended us, for the most part, all of us to have partners and companions in life to not only bring us love and contentment, but also to be an ever present reminder and inspiration to the spirit of love inside us all, and to restore and revive that part of us that makes us feel alive.

It's the true intimacy that gives us the ability to have someone who accepts and supports us in every way, the unconditional love that we say we understand. When you think about it, if someone is dominated and suppressed, which is different than leadership or wisdom, how can there be true intimacy, let alone truth, if peace is to be obtained and sustained.

Peace, however you define it.

If you apply that paradigm to government, I believe it's unlikely that women not being forced to conform to the current paradgims would vote to send their own children to war for the sake of corporate profits.

You may think that effect is because of the warm fuzzy side of women, if you want to diminish their nature by saying that.

Men, on the other hand, have been trained for ages to believe it was their job to suck it up, deal with the harsh realities and obey their commanders and go to war without question. It's their training, otherwise, they would not be speaking of the glory of war and sending their children to die for corporate profits either. Instead, as trained, they puff their chests and speak from macho pride to benefit the corporations who will disallow them fame and glory if they don't go along.

I am not criticizing soldiers, I respect them for their courage, discipline and commitment and willingness to serve.

But, it's a never ending, destructive cycle that must end. I'm not saying women are the answer. I do believe they are necessary in supplying part of the solution. And their perspectives, similar or dissimilar, are important. The way they can make a difference isn't by going along with things you don't really believe in in order to be granted respect as in a political system that restricts the ideas allowed to be presented to the public.

It isn't actually that for anyone, man or woman, except in the corrupt governemental paradigms the world currently contends with, and the way we train people to conduct themselves based on comfortable, manipulative stereotypes that do not provide freedom or opportunity to them or those who feel pressure to conform to them.

I don't know about you, but if I had a "play mate" to live in the garden with my whole life, I'd want them to feel equal and want to share without embarassment with me on every level, just because it's more fun, keeps me thinking and discovering, and from falling into a boring and unproductive rut that seems more like existence than living.

What I am presenting may seem idealistic and warm and fuzzy, but if the co-existence of men and women and their influences upon one another weren't important, God would have made everyone of one sex with the ability to reproduce, and that would have been the end of that.

And then, we'd all just associate on a more public social level, without special intimacies that satisfy and provide a richness to our lives. Please understand, when I'm talking about intimacies rght now, this discussion has nothing to do with sex. It has to do with minds and ideas and contemplating the universe and having the fun of sharing it with someone you respect as much as yourself - with spirits feeling free and having it feel alright to feel like a child at times, not silly and childish, but innocent and free, without shame or guilt, or feeling the need to .present yourself with a certain image or behavior in order to have someone's approval.

I can't help wonder if you see in what God is having me write, the paradigms and designs of love and liberty that run through nearly every paradigm designed to influence humanity, and to cause the Kingdom of God.

Liberty, equality, checks and balances, creation instead of destruction, peace instead of force, communication instead of enforcement and dominance, appreciation and empowerment instead of critical and divisive thinking and demeanor.

When God said He would put emnity between Eve, woman, and Satan, it wasn't as punishment or restriction or even to cause those "impetuous, emotional women" from causing men to do things they weren't supposed to do without the final permission or decision to be that of the man.

It allowed for woman to become more sensitive toward temptation and injustice and suffering, and the evil caused by the temptations that surround us and distract us from our principles, and in that context, a woman unto a man became the guardian - like the person on the watch tower of their family, at least - of those principles in a family, not as the enforcer, but as the conscience of a family unit in a world that also required a man's inherent territorial and protective instincts to ensure the mortal safety of the family from physical harm.

Checks and balances, equality and sharing of rewards and responsibilities. Being able to teach each other how to view things differenetly to make up for a blind side, or just sharing interesting points of views and perspectives. However you want to look at it, if the woman reflects the man, and the man reflects the woman, then the result is equality, balance, caused by and sustained by intimate communications uninhibited by fear or domination.

God didn't say Eve and women should be dominated, He said they would be dominatd by man, a foretelling of how that mistake in the garden would be used to justify a world of male domination, or in this case, female suppression.

That may be a new interpretation to people. I say, it's simply one more that might add depth to the full scope and context of things stated in the Bible that - over time and in certain time periods - are like something that's only relevant now because its context also fits the pardigm of the context of cirmcumstances in the current world and cultures, like a prophecy that provides key understanding to a scripture in the Living Word today, made possible by the learning and knowledge and wisdom gathered and passed down over time that causes a circumstance to appear as or emulate a "story" from a book or a movie you saw. Almost like a script.

Just like political leaders use our supposed lack of understanding of world affairs and our lack of knowledge of the deceptions and ploys they use as an excuse to tell us we should trust them without knowing the details we would supposedly never understand because they won't tell us the truth of world affairs in order to understand.

It's not that we're incapable. But, if we're not told the truth, how could we possibly understand? Thus we are diminished and blamed for a lack of knowledge purposely kept from us to enable the powerful to rationalize why they should be leaders, and we should not. Like, we're regular and ordinary, and they're special.

It also becomes a good example of how interpretations are created and foisted upon us, in every area of life, not to fully nform us or teach us, but to cause us to believe what other people want us to believe for their benefit. And then, once a tradition or a heritage sets into a culture, it's hard to reverse it. Once a precedent is established, it becomes a baseline for future decisions and judgments, even if the precedent is errant. And it's easier to go along with that perversion than to go against the grain and correct it. So the precedent, the heritage and mores of our past are passed on to other generations without question.

When God reduced the number of years people lived, our bodies, it was done to give us enough time to be taught, to learn and grow and experience, God knowing the temptations and evils of the world that could tempt even Adam and Eve despite the fact that they had everything they needed and wanted, understanding the suffering and hardships these temptations would cause people.

So He reduced our years so that the values of right and wrong could be learned, experienced, and that our beings and spirits could incorporate the lessons without our spirits experiencing so much suffering and hardship because of the evils brought about by temptations, causing us to give in and abandon the principles that we know are God's ways because it's easier to go along with evil than to resist it.

With fewer years, the evil would have less time to become a natural part of us, and we would not be as likely to pass down a heritage that condoned evil. This is also very much a part of the reason why we do not consciously remember the experiences and wisdom our spirits garner from previous incarnations. I use that word as an noun, and not the description of a specific spiritual or religious belief in this context.

However, in a perfect world where the influences of evil do not exist, there would be no reason to forget anything, ever. Thus, originally, God intended and provided everlasting life, and did not alter that way to punish us, but to spare us suffering, despite lessons that we needed to learn to be perfected in His love, and not molded by people who do not actually believe in liberty, or the inherent goodness of people.

And by perfected in His love, in this context, meaning, perfected by the experience and teachings of the ways of God and His love, without being negatively impacted by the ways of evil and Satan. Think of "His love" as something you learn about in a college course, and perfected means truly understanding it both in terms of receiving it and "implementing" and/or experiencing it. Then you'll understand how faith in God - and His ways of love - cause Grace in your being.

And why a woman should reflect the man, and the man should reflect the woman, and in this paradigm, realize that a world of love is about giving and sharing, not taking and seeking advantage. The more liberty and freedom people, beings, spirits experience, the happier they are.

God wants women to be equally as happy in marriage and life as men. And even though some of the things that make us happy are different, in most ways they are the same. Frankly, a simple rule of thumb would be to simply say, when considering equality, if you do anything to or for someone else, if it's not something you like, chances are, the person you're doing it to might not like it either.

And there you go again, The Golden Rule. It applies to everyone universally and in every way.

In marraige, it cannot be ignored with the expectation that the relationship and the individuals will both flourish. Just as in life, we are married to the world. Without the Golden Rule, the absolute quintessential verbiage expressing equality, the marriage just won't work. Neither will the world.

I think I've made my point about marriage and love, equality and the necessity to give women equal voice in our world. Otherwise, it's an endless cycle of oppression.

And I'll end this part by pointing out my offense on behalf of women when reading in Proverbs "Having a quarrelsome wife is like having the roof fall in during a rainstorm".

The question it causes for me is, why is she being so quarrelsome in the first place that she would complain and be such a burden or annoyance?

If the choice to marry someone is based upon love and all the nuances and facets love involves and affects, and not like a right or the acquisition of a possession, or someone subject to the absolute judgment and control of another, or the fulfillment of a social or familial heritage, the only reason left for someone being so unhappy with their companion would be the influences we have had that would cause us to choose the wrong people for the wrong reasons, or conduct ourselves toward them in ways we would never allow anyone else to treat us.

And once again, the endless cycle begins again, and always will, until it is stopped. Or the endless cycle of the Golden Rule prevails.

As far as I'm concerned, God provided us with one of His greatest gifts in the material world when He decided we should have such fine companions in our lives. Such good friends. People to rely on and who can rely on you. Our companions should be treated like precious gifts to be cherished, because they are precious. And the last thing you'd ever want to do is to suppress the real love someone wants to give. To suppress that is to teach them to withhold love. And without that real love, the sharing of the essence of a being and spirit and life of another, the light of the spirit can fade, even if only just a litte.

The only question we need to ask ourselves now is, what is real love, as opposed to what we've been told to believe it is for unheavenly purposes. When that question is answered and truly understood, the cycle will be broken, because no one will want the suffering of evil over the joy of love. Part of that will be to realize that certain things we have been trained to believe, buy and do are nothing more than facades created by focusing on things that cause us to suffer.

When a TV ad tells a woman that to look younger and more attractive, and to spark up an old marriage, that you should dye your hair, and then you dye your hair, do you do it because you decided to do it for the fun of it for your own amusement, or did you do it because you were concerned that your own hair or current hair do maybe wasn't as good as something else that would cause you appear sexier or more professional?

Understand, I don't have anything about people coloring their hair, except for the implications of being exposed to chemicals. But really think about that, not like there's a right or wrong answer, but what really motivated you?

If you say "It's fashionable", that may be true, but who decided that was the fashion, and if you're going along with the crowd or a fashion, then it's simply true that someone else talked you into believing that something else was better, more popular, makes you a better, a more valuable and desireable person, all relying on making you think of yourself as not perfectly normal and beautiful the way you are. You could rationalize and justify this all many ways, but still, when you get to the bottom line, it's true.

And that is, in one way or another, causing you to suffer just enough that you believe that you have to make up for some sort of inadequacy which can be compensated for by doing or being or buying something else, that will make you better than you are. To yourself. And especially, based on your image of yourself, your self-esteem, something that will make you seem better to other people.

We think about love in the ways same sometimes.

We look at the market and package ourselves to be competitive and protective of our "sales territiories", and then put fences around our "purchases and assets" to prevent them from falling into someone else's hands. I hope you'll think about that a while. Because after the initial falling in love is over, and all the special little things are a little too much trouble or not quite so cute, and that's a normal process that happens in one degree or another, what's left is the essence of a spirit and a feeling and a being you've made some very serious promises to.

Just about then, you really begin to inquire, and to figure out as a truth to yourself, what is real love? Now that I know what I know now, would I really have made the same choice, not discounting time and experience and forgiveness, but understanding that real love goes far beyond sharing a few hobbies and sports when dating, the desire for children, a home, and the American Dream? Whatever someone told you that is.

And then we'll have to figure out how every part of our lives, everything we commit to is like a marriage.

And that begins another cyclical discussion for another time, about a world where possessions and borders and territory, in general become less and less important, as every kind of fear diminshes into nothingness, and love is what is left.

Because after a while, when a marriage is working, you don't have to work on the marriage so much anymore. You can "be" in a real marriage, and play in the garden of creation, while the marriage empowers you and everyone included in it.

Then for the fun of it, consider how that could relate to the "bride and the bridegroom" of the Second Coming. But don't spend too much time jumping ahead on this one, because we'd have to discuss a purported discussion in 1954 with certain leaders about the old phrase "prepare ye the way", which they didn't, the result of which is that you're reading this book right now instead of living in the New World God promised, because of something of a marriage in which people didn't keep their promises of fidelity and their vows to each other and God.

When you look around the world, you can see how that failure worked out. And maybe, the reason why we should take marriage more seriously.

Being more direct and specific about marriage and love in the paradigm of the present world.

First, on second thought, I want to say that I actually have no complaint with the concept of "legal marriage", except that I don't see it as something a government has a right to voice an opinion about if it is to be considered a sacramental or holy act of a religious nature.

In truth, every time anyone gets "legally married", they are in fact being contractually and legally bound together in a civl union premised on economic and social measurements, standards and social engineering goals. The same thing could be achieved through a pre-nuptial agreement.

Still, whether religious or not, a true marriage is spiritual. And that surrendering of one spirit to another has nothing to do with the material world. Call it an intangible or whatever you want, there is no true languageable description of what love is between spirits. It can not be programmed or defined. It simply is.

But for the moment, I'm speaking of the current social paradigms from a person viewing it all objectively, dispassionately in order to evaluate what it is and has become, and not what we would necessarily envision perfection to be.

And, because of the current social paradigms in the U.S. and the world, when you compare the two, it becomes obvious that even marriage has become a politicial issue for the purpose of hijacking a religion by enraging those who honor the previously agreed upon and religiously defined definition of the word marriage for the purpose of providing or depriving certain groups of people their civil and human rights, as well as equality as already guaranteed in the Constitution, and causing them to use political means to be allowed something we call an inalienable right granted by God.

All people are created equal. No matter what your preferences, beliefs, religion or heritage, in the kingdom of God, all people are created equal. All spirits and beings are created equal.

The question is, will we allow the use and definition of a word to divide us as people because of the politicization of what has been diminsihed, by the law of man, into a contractual arrangement, like the Universal Commercial Code for businesses?

Or will we be able to preserve the sanctity of the union itself as we individually believe in its significance or view it as a symbol of political equality? And by so doing, re-establish the reverence due to such a truly holy and sacred union.

Part of what I've always disliked about "legal marriage" is the idea that it is somehow sinful or shameful to commit yourself to a relationship with someone without a piece of paper that says you have permission, as if not having that legal sanction means someone else has the right to tell you or shame you into accepting someone else's ritual for such a promise. Frankly, as if those promises have much meaning anymore. I thought, intellectually, it was a stronger statement to be able to say that I am with someone as a choice, everyday, than to make promises that some people keep, but that no one seems to take as serious as they are.

The Bible tells us never to make promises we can't guarantee we'll keep. The same thing comes up with vows and oaths.

What really comprises a marriage, two people unto each other, in the eyes of God, is the sincerity and intent and commitment to the promises and agreements of that marriage.

For example, before getting married, would you discuss with your future partner what their philosophy about infidelity is, or do you just assume that it's an automatic agreement that people won't and don't, despite a high rate of infidelity by both genders? And if you don't talk about it, why don't you? I never did, but I think it's a good question.

And if it's too embarrassing for you to talk about with your future lifelong partner, or if its too uncomfortable, you should be honest with yourelf and your partner about why. It's not about "locking someone in". There is an element of being able to hold someone accountable.

But mostly, it's about actually knowing, not assuming, about that part of that person so that you can know what to expect, what kind of person they really are - not meaning good or bad - and what the promises are that you're really making to each other. It's about knowing that you're going to be with someone who's thoughtful about the "institution" they are engaging in - not thoughtful as in nice or sensitive - but thoughtful in terms of having given thought to what is really being created and how two people in such a relationship surrender to and are responsible to each other for each other's physical, spiritual and mental well being in every way. Not as a burden or obligation, but as an act of love and trust to one another.

When I say love, I'm not talking about the romantic "falling in love", I'm talking about the love and appreciation for another individual that is so natural and desireable that years down the road, as ups and downs and ebbs and tides happen, even in the heat of an argument, you can always reach back into your heart and soul and remember and be inspired by the those things that inspired you from the beginning, partly because the essenceof that person remains constant not just because they have have established who they are and "be" by habit and repetition or assumed roles in the relationship, but because you have empowered and challenged them to be and blossom that essence in the face of changes and growth in every part of their existence, which to some may seem threatening because of something more akin to co-dependency and competition than sharing life, existence, spiritually and physically, with another unique individual - equally separate and yet a part of another person.

Carly Simon has a great song called "The Stuff That Dreams Are Made Of" that I really like.

It's got one line that says, it's the stuff that dreams are made of, it's the slow and steady grind... and except for the "grind" part, I agree, but it would make me ask, what part of your life don't you love, why, and what would make it seem more like a joy? Just a question. What expectations did you have that were never fulfilled? And, what resentments have been built up that have never been resolved? And they do add up, no matter how good of a relationship you have in most other ways.

I don't know if you'll find this funny or ironic at all, but I do, as I laugh at myself frequently, and as some might think I necessarily see myself as being better at such things, which I really don't, but here I am, thinking about the same things I'm asking you to think about, being a human being with the same kinds of insecurities and fears of failure and living up to expectations and sincerely wanting to be an excellent partner for someone, truly wanting that person to be Christian, maybe a minister in their own way, and part of that is to share the love of God and to share a foundation that includes the Grace of God.. being a human being with a spiritual identity that I'm clear is Christ, worried that if I met and fell in love and married such a person, I would always feel somewhat suppressed because I'd be afraid I'd never possibly live up to their expectations of what a good Christian man would be like.

Someone told me to imagine what it would be like to live up to the expectations of someone who's supposed to be Christ.

I don't mind the idea that I could improve my habits or better myself or knoweldge, quit smoking to make an environment more pleasant or whatever. What I fear is the requirement of those changes, the conditionality of those requirements to be qualified to be loved. And I'm not even saying that compromising or improving myself or not wouldn't be good reason for someone to make a choice regarding a relationship with me. But I have this thing about friends and relationships that I really want them to know and understand the essence of me and to value me based upon who I am as a person to them and other people, and after that, anything else is possible.

If you're in a relationship where one person gets pleasure out of the idea of improving the other, then you either don't really know and or love that other person, you'll always be finding something about them to be critical about which will diminish them and their spirits and inspiration, or you're settling for someone who may be very nice but isn't really the one for you, but you're settling for the "image" of a marriage that's perfectly normal and right to want, and thinking that you can cause the other person to become that "image", which will not happen. They don't stand a chance, because they're not an image, they're a human being.

I find it amusing, in a way, to think about how two women told me that being in a relationship with them caused them to seek psychological therapy, apparently spending a good deal of their time "trying to figure me out". I don't claim to be easy to figure out. I don't try to be hard. I just be. And what I don't understand is why it was so important for them to figure me out and what that would accomplish, and why they just didn't discuss whatever was going on for them with me directly. To me, that would be an adult relationship.

I don't say this to criticize them or make light of their desire to know me in some way they apparently didn't. But they both told me their therapists advised them that the issues they had with me were actually issues they had with themselves, seeking to resolve their internal inquiries and struggles by changing me to satisfy the incomplete or unfulfilled part of themselves that neither I nor anyone could ever fulfill for them.

Think about that one long and hard and see if that kind of scenario or thinking may apply to how you relate to someone you love. We're all guilty of it to one degree or another.

The question that leaves is, what influenced you to develop that mental image you have of the person you decided to turn into the perfect mate that doesn't actually exist?

And what's missing that might have you always with your eyes open, comparing your relationship to others and wondering if you might have done better? What does commitment mean to you, and when you think seriously about spending years and years with someone, if you actually do, if that's what you actually are committed to, what makes you believe you and they are actually willing as well as capable of promising that?

I purposely used infidelity as an example before because I think the topic comprises a whole host of issues related to what marriage really means and can be for people. You may think it's obvious and assumed. I disagree.

Fidelity, the "agreement" to not commit adultery, to cheat or to be unfaithful, provides an opportunity to look at the rippling effects of our actions in relation to other people, as well as to exemplify what a real choice is.

The last thing I'm trying to do is convince you I'm some kind of goody-goody, because I'm not. But, I want to tell you a story that's kind of embarassing, something I'm kind of proud of, something I thought I did well on toward keeping the 10 Commandments and was until I read the Ten Commandments and realized I was still breaking them with the further understanding of a "knowledge of sin" in this area, and further, realized some things that didn't quite make sense to me that made me think I disagreed with Jesus about divorce. And, like I said, caused me to relaize a conscious choice in a way we all should in the same way toward a great number of things.

Back when I was about 13, I was really naive about relationships. I had never kissed a girl before. But I met this one girl, and I can't even remember how, but we started "hanging out" together, and I mean, I was so naive, I started going to her church on Sundays, and there was guy there I knew from school I was friends with. We'd stand around after church, and Paul would stand there with his girlfriend, and - seriously - hol dhis girlfriends hand, so I would. He'd put his arm around her, so I would. Monkey see, monkey do. He taught me a lot about appropriate ways to be around a girl. And they all knew it:}

One night after a high school play, my friends threw a cast party, and they were all drinking and at one point, almost everybody there started kissing each other. I didn't get involved in that. I was a little confused. This one girl walks up to me and tries to give this big old kiss, and says, "You don't know how. I'm going to teach you how to French kiss."

Dan Fogelberg - Nether Lands - AB03 - Give Me Some Time

So she did. I have to say, I wasn't all that impressed. But I thought, that girl must like me. All the kids around me in high school were changing girlfriends and boyfriends every week. So I broke up with the first girl, and then asked the other girl if she wanted to "hang out", and she laughed and said no, she just wanted to have fun teaching me to French kiss. She was older than me, and a lot more experienced.

Now, it wasn't like I was in love with the first girl, although she was incredibly nice, and I had no clue what love was then anyway.

So, I made up a rule for myself: never begin a relationship with someone else unless I'm certain that the relationship I'm in has not only ended, but that I gave an honest attempt to keep the first intact. That later included a commitment to not even date more than one woman at a time, because I didn't want to have a relationship with someone who I wanted to actually get to know to be put in a position of displaying "insecurities" that wouldn't be a part of a relationship I would have with them because I figured, if they knew me, they'd know they didn't have to worry about me being unfaithful. It's like, why cause suspicions where they don't exist? Why give someone you care for reason for concern? And I certainly didn't want to create any feelings of competition or jealousy.

Here's the paradoxical part. A few years later, as a junior in high school, I had a girlfriend who fortunately lived back in the hills where I lived, so we were able tro spend a lot of time with each other. I have to admit, I really loved her, and she loved me. To this day, I always laugh a little and think really nice thoughts about her whenever I think about her. She looks just like Clea Duvall. Sometimes I wonder if she is Clea Duvall.

Meanwhile, back in drama class, there was this girl I'd met before "Clea" who I met the first day at that school when I tripped over her foot, looked up, and fell in love. Of course, this girl had a boyfriend. And then I met "Clea". She and I had a good relationship for over a year I think.

Just a few months before she and I broke up, the second girl, who I'd become good friends with, was up on the stage listening to soemone playing a cassette of Cat Stevens - the day I first heard Father and Son and wondered what it meant - and she said "Chuck, I love you".

I didn't know what to do or say. The truth was, there wasn't anything else I can imagine I wouldn't wanted to hear. By then, I'd gotten a gist of what love is, and to me, she was special, in fact, she's a part of my life as a friend to this day. But I had a good relationship with "Clea". So I told the second girl something like "I really love you too, but be careful about saying that because people might get the wrong idea about the way we mean love", and of course, I was implying friendship.

To this day, probably mostly because I was a teenager then and maybe should have been less attached or committed to a relationship, or maybe be as serious as I always was around other people's feelings, I wonder a little if I made the right decision. And then, I remember how great my relationship was with the first girl, and how I still treasure my friendship with the second woman - we stay in touch - let's say I'm always willing to accept that things turn out the way they're supposed to, and I got to learn how to really love someone of the opposite sex with it having to be a romance.

Back in the late 70's, I was "working" at a radio station in Los Angeles. The woman who was my supervisor and I got along really well. We'd go to her place for lunch almost every day, I'd brown bag it, she'd make something at home. One day, she went into the bathroom and came out naked.

Basia - Time and Tide - 01 - Promises

I didn't know what to do or say. I was really embarrassed, it's not like I'd done anything to suggest this would be fun and I never got any idea of that from her, and she was really cute, but I told her I was married and flattered but just wasn't interested. This may sound weird, but I"d been approached sexually by people in Hollywood before while writing in the entertainment industry, and I wouldn't say I took it as normal, but I took it in stride, just chalking it up to some of that abstract Hollywood thinking at work. And it didn't affect our working relationship.

I think it was the third time in as many weeks that she did that, and, there I was, I didn't intend to be in the situation, it still didn't affect our working relationship, she had a boyfriend, she was really cute, nobody would ever know, apparently she has an open relationship, and I don't remember what I said but she put her clothes back on.

That night, I lay in bed next to my wife, unable to sleep, sweating, literally sweating, it was like watching pornography for the first time, and you get all worked up, and I wasn't about to have intercourse with my wife to relieve it any more than I could have faced her if I had been unfaithful. And I knew I'd be having lunch with this other woman the next day.

She invited me and my wife over to meet her boyfriend for dinner a couple of times, and the subject never came up again. I'm proud of myself for not having given in just as much as I'm embarrassed that I wasn't more forceful in stopping it in the first place.

And mind you, it wasn't even really so much the idea of having sex with someone else. I made a commitment to someone, and I made a conscious choice not to violate certain, most basic and fundamental principles upon which to base that relationship, that marriage.

See, I believe when you marry someone, you actually give yourself to that other person, and they give themselves to you. In spirit and with a commitment in being, as a partner and companion in life. And you really are responsible for being their biggest ally, fan, empowerer, coach, lover, companion, all sorts of things we assume are part of marriage and vows we take that we take seriously and believe in to one extent or another, but I don't believe we really understand them. And like a legalistic society, even when we believe divorce and adultery are sins or not accpeted in our religions, we do it anyway, because we have laws that absolve of us of the promises we made. Understand, I'm not trying to criticize anyone, I'm just asking you to think about it.

And, think about this, I don't enter into relationships without the idea that I am actually seeking to have that relationship for life. Whatever it becomes. I'm not talking about dating or someone you go out with once in a while. I'm talking about the people you spend time to get to know. Not like I'm sizing theme up for marriage, really. Like I'm giving them a safe space in which to be whoever they are, and to let the relationship be whatever it is. I wrote a song once about not knowing the rules of the game of love, and not really wanting to. I don't have a sort of policy of letting a woman be the first one to kiss me just because I'm clueless :}

I can honestly say that when I'm talking to any person, I make the same kind of commitment at any given moment to give them space to communicate and be themselves without the usual "pre-judging" that usually occurs, particularly when, say, asking questions of a subordinate employee in an emergency situation, even when they're to blame, knowing I don't know all the facts, and that what's important is communicating and resolving things. Besides, the info that might look like they were to blame might be innacurate. I think it's nice to be around people and environs where everyone knows that judgments won't be made without be certain of the truth. You know, justice.

And I have a rule about my own conduct, and a requirement, frankly, of others, that if you actually care for someone, if you are aware of a weakness or a sensitivity that person has, you won't use it as a weapon against them in a fight or argument. Even more, you'll empower them so that if nothing else, they know it's safe to talk to you about it, maybe to you, even laugh about it, but at the very least, make sure they know that when they're grieving whatever hurts them, that you'll be there for them when they need to know they have unconditional love without having to suppress their spirits and beings and need to have someone who understands. To just know that. Not have to question it. That's a healing only someone who shares love can provide.

And when and if I or they fail at it, and everyone does from time to time, to know, without question, that you both respect the sincere intent to be conscientious in never purposely acting toward each other with vengeance. Never.

The simple question is, why would you want to hurt someone you love in any way?

And when you do, why do you do it? That's not a criticism. It's a genuine suggested inquiry.

When you purposely hurt someone you love, or they purposely hurt you, what are you really trying to do? Hurt them, get their attention, cause them to show you or give you love in a certain kind of way? What do you want and expect? And what if those same things were asked of you?

What strategies have you learned in dealing with people that cause you to hurt people you love and then justify it in some way, maybe because you have a preference and you're not giving it up? And I'm not saying you should give it up.

How are you being hurt in the same ways? Do you respect your partner? Do they respect you? Do you respect you?

It's hard enough when you're young to think about these kinds of things ahead of time, even harder to remember them after getting married and establishing a way of being with someone that isn't satisfying.

The last part of the story of the woman who would come out of the bathroom naked...

A few years later, my wife and I were swapping stories of strange things that have happened at work and in life. You know, just funny, quirky stuff. And, I often forget that I've witnessed some pretty odd things in my life. Sometimes I tell people odd things about what I've seen and they look at me like saying, I've never heard of that happening to anyone else before, and I realize, once again, that I really have had a lot of odd experinces.

So I proceeded to tell her the story of my boss in Los Angeles, and she got all upset and angry that I hadn't told her it was happening when it was going on and a number of other things that actually sounded reasonable. And what it caused for her was exactly what I wanted to prevent by not telling her in the first place. In the context we were talking, I figured if anything, it would re-assure her that I really was committed to being faithful to her. Instead, it caused her concerns that I was being approached and tempted by women, and that she had something to worry about.

And just to demonstrate how rippling effects work over time and surprise you at the most unexpected moments, I'll say that a few things were said that truly offended me. You might think it was because I was was offended at the idea that she would think I would be unfaithful, and I was a little. I was actually sad that I'd opened a can of worms that I think I shouldn't have opened, not to hide something from her, but to spare her something she didn't need to be hurt by.

It also made me sad because the same issue came up at a time when I was having some success when submitting my music to publishers, and she became concerned that if I was successful in music, that she would have to deal with me being tempted by groupies, which I found odd because I never wanted to take the chance of succeeding on that scene unless I had a solid personal life together specifically so I wouldn't get sidetracked by that sort of thing.

The truth was, it was the beginning of a period that led me to realize that she really didn't know know me that well, not the Chuck deep inside. And I didn't really know her, either. I only recently realized I never told her about the vision I had a as a child, about my deal with God, that I had any political ambitions or that somehow I thought I might be a minister one day. It's not that they were the most pressing issues on my mind at the time, but 9 years of marriage, and she never knew those things. I'm not sure what conclusions she came to about things, but for me, I'd have to say we have very different priorities in life.

Otherwise, I have always considered her a good person, and we even told each other we'd write each other "letters of recommendation" if either of us ever needed one :}

The point of all of this is about marriage, love, what they mean, and choices. Choices really can't be made unless you have knowledge of what currently exists or is true, what's also available to you, and what's possible. You can't really make a true commitment to anything unless you know what you're agreeing to and what is expected of you. And, you can't really know those things unless you're willing to communicate about everything.

It's much easier said than done, but if you trust one another enough and can be a friend as well as a lover, then I say anything can be discussed between two people who are always working to empower the love between them, and not ulterior motives that they might not want to admit because they may, for example, feel guilty about it for being selfish. And done in a way that is sensitive to the other persons needs, sensitivities and insecurities.

I joke about my attitude about businesses who provide poor service, and how I simply won't give them my business anymore, because "nobody asked them to go into business". Well, nobody twists anybody's arm to get married, either. You could say they do. But, it's a choice. Part of that choice is to know, understand and appreciate the vows you are exchanging, and by so understanding, never having to question your partner's intent.

An intent for unconditional love. Isn't that what it really is?

Dan Fogelberg - Longer

In view of wanting to honor the integrity of the intellectual honesty of this discussion, I have to say with equivocation that there is no excuse for infidelity. It's a choice, just as it would be a choice to commit adultery. Nobody can force you to commit adultery. And the choices you make in this area, as well as any other vow, declare that you will respect the reverence and respect people agree to as what constitutes a marriage, as well as the actual vows you take.

It's possible that these vows, and the reverence and sanctity they are given by those who partake in and exchange them make sall the difference between marriage and a civil union, at least by legal definition, the first describing a spiritual marriage, the second a legal contract conveying legal rights and responsiblities. And it's also possible to restore these definitions, symbols and the values that accompany them.

Now that I've said there's no excuse for adultery, or breaking other vows of marriage, or the 10 Commandments... I also have to lightly contradict myself in this way, by stating that I have lots of stories that could demonstrate that there are mitigating circumstances, including temptation itself. I say the mitigating factor is influences, and I'll talk about that a great deal more when I talk about sex. So, if anyone reading this is beaating themselves up any more than they might already have before, please don't.

I'm not saying it's okay. But in that chapter on sex, I'll tie together my thoughts on "influences" in a way that will help you see things in a different way that will assist you in avoiding being influenced in ways you don't imagine, whose rippling effects are enormous.

Part of the judgment I am supposed to apply and formulate is to see what has placed the "consciousness of the cosmos" - the state of world affairs, in the condition it's in, and determine what needs to be done and provide to resolve the problems.

Marriage, choices, commitment and influence are all at the root of the restoration, re-creation and creation of the future. And there's a great deal interfering with their success, and while I would not be happy with people who commit adultery or ignore other promises without concern except for getting caught, I would have little sympathy for them, but a great deal of empathy for their "victims"... still, sometimes, even God knows the best of us can become overwhelmed, particulalry when there are so many unhealthy influences. I wouldn't be writing this if He didn't know these were exceptional times.

We often say things like, families and marriage are at the heart of the fabric of our cultures. I believe that. And even though there are great changes to come in the future, it's important that we re-capture the essence of those things that mean the most to us, that we know are the best things in life that we either don't believe exist or aren't possible anymore, and to recall "the good old days", not to re-live them, but to remember what it is in your life that consistently makes you and those you love feel more alive, and to revive that in your life, in the lives of the people you love, and the community you live in.

And do it honestly, not because you think you should or have to or have an obligation to do it.

I really think marriage is a beautiful thing, and families where love shows are just a beautiful thing to see in motion.

But when it comes to marriage, ceremonially, I think big weddings are cool, and so are small ones, but what I'd like most, regardless of whatever formal ceremony there was, I'd want to have a separate ceremony of my own, not to include or exclude a smaller group of people, but to really share vows and promise in front of a group of people, friends, who understand that I rely on my community as I hope they can rely on me to empower my relationship, as well as to fully express to my partner in life what I feel and promise and dream.

To me, that would be a perfect wedding, as the beginning of a marriage, where two people understand what a marriage really is.

Carly Simon - That's The Way I've Always Heard I Should Be

� 1965-2009 Charles Rehn Jr IV and Kingdom of God Communications, Inc. ™ All Rights Reserved Fair Use Policy
	It's a Whole, New World! All you have to do is want it! With God, Everything is Possible! Creating the Future By Empowering People

	Have you been to the Brain Dump? Unclassified information of all kinds!