What exactly is love

OK Mark, have it your way. Your little allegory about a fictitious carpenter reminds me of the similarities between the bible and ta chucks, both are the figments of the imaginations of varied writers all adding their own little bit to the story line. Let's have a full-scale debate on whether there is any factual basis for believing the bible was actually written by real and reliable witnesses to everything that is purported to have happened. Perhaps if I could ask a few questions you might be prepared to supply sensible, believable answers. Firstly, viz a viz apes or Adam's 'seed'. How come archaeologists have discovered countless fossils of skeletons of apes, dinosaurs, crocodiles and every other lifeform on the planet dating back millions of years but none of men as we now exist, when I thought it said in the bible, the earth and all it's contents were made in a week? (Well almost a week, I believe in those days even gods got time off at the weekend.) Why is it that to my knowledge no modern scientist or anthropologist gives any creedence whatsoever to the notion of mankind being invented by anybody overnight? How come every artifact ever discovered and being declared of biblical import when exposed to modern scientific examination has proven to be either a hoax or at best of too recent origin to be confirmed as being relevant to biblical events? If you manage to supply convincing answers to these questions perhaps other contributors may like to pose their own queries! Who knows you may yet enter history as being the salvation of christian belief. Personally I doubt it!

Hi, I don't know how to define the word love, all I know is I sure don't want to live without IT. Albeit, dirty socks, nappies (my grandson's) snoring, bad habits, (the loo seat left up) etc etc etc.!!!!!!!!!!! That's what LOVE IS:........ putting up with things from some people, that you wouldn't with anyone else. AJ :>) PS Course I don't have any habits like the above!!!!!

*sighs*

Dear Mississippi, and for those who are getting frustrated with this thread because it's about religion or that some people are being slightly vitriolic, well none of us have to continue, and if we do then we should be able to take the consequences, which includes Mississippi. Personally, people getting upset aside, I love to debate it. When Mississippi comes out with his stunning comments like `ficticious` or the non-authenticity of the bible I wonder if it has ever occurred to him that all Christians are not completely brainless or purposely ignorant. You see there's this thing called faith, usually brought on by revelation that makes one decide that after all there is or maybe a God and then one attempts to look into it. There is a scripture that explains "Draw near to God and He will draw near to you" If you are not walking the path of searching for God then why should you find Him, why should you believe if the only time you think about, talk about Him is to refute those who have a faith, that's just talking about God, not actually facing `Him`or whatever you think he maybe. Any realisation that there is a spiritual realm, whatever you think it is , for me is the first signs of waking up,LOL they're gonna love that one, (thinks to himself). IFB is right let's be tough on ideas and kind to eachother. AJ, I use the user name Genghis because he's a great hero of mine and was misunderstood. Or alternatively it's a nick name my brother gave me ironically cause I'm so not like Genghis Khan, apart from being very Genghis like in my strident opinions. Finally, I believe God does answer prayer, He has answered mine, not usually the way I expected. Sometimes I'm glad He hasn't, especially when an affirmative would have proved disasterous. I don't know why he did not answer yours AJ and I wouldn't be trite enough to pretend I do but as I do believe in Him please extend me the grace of having my belief, and that means I believe he does love you, did love you and will always love you, despite your very real trauma.

Of course you don't Jackie. I once knew a girl who told me she never owned a hanky because she never had a dirty nose! And more recently a woman who insisted she'd never farted! I'm now expecting the one who never tossed a tantrum! (I'm not a chauvinist, I love all ladies. I just don't understand 'em!)

Sorry but "There's more" as a famous philosopher once said. Mississippi, I'm afraid you are factually inaccurate. There have been an incredible amount of proof for the actual authenticity of the bible as much as there have been very real hoaxes. Do I believe in the garden of eden explanation of man's beginnings, sometimes depends what mood I'm in, strangley it does not affect my faith as that is real vibrant and living. Do I believe Darwin got it complely right ? some bits certainly not all of it. Read some C.S.Lewis on the ideas of the survival of the fittest, again my faith isn't destroyed by Darwin, I appreciate any true explanation of God's wonderful creation. Mississippi, have you heard of the big-bang it's the theory that the universe was created, sort of, all at once, great, but by who? We look at creation, we wonder at it, we even worship bits of it, i.e the sun, moon etc. What about the creator. It astonishes me that we think we just appeared beautifully, like some lucky dice throw. I think that takes more faith!

hehehehehe "i'm not a chauvinist, i love all ladies" is one of the best phrases i've seen for ages...

Mark, it may suit you to have me put my tail between my legs and run but that is not my style, it wasn't my intention to be dismissive of your beliefs and I assure you I am quite capable of withstanding any consequences of my views, but as usual with religious discussion facts are confused with faith. You may well find the use of the word 'fictitious' stunning but as far as I can see it is the only accurate word to describe the bible. I stress that I am not remotely trying to be vitriolic or derisory but you are putting up a smoke screen with all this talk of 'faith'. I hasten to add that I am not faithless, my faith in man's ultimate arrogance, conceit, ignorance and undeniable ability to destroy the planet we live on is pretty much set in stone, however I don't completely preclude that I may be wrong. Just give me unchallengeable evidence and you got yourself a man! As commendable as it may be, faith is only a personal internal feeling, not based on any scientific proven fact, not based on empirical study. You try to dismiss the argument by challenging whether or not it has occurred to me that not all christians are ignorant or brainless. The inference here is that I am not capable of clear even-handed thought. I find this mildly insulting and can assure you that I would happily pit my intellectual abilities against yours in any discussion. I am sure the people who persecuted Galileo for his reasoning on the universe, along with the persecutors in comparatively modern America, of the teacher of Darwinism, were intelligent men and women. They persecuted these people out of fear that their nice cosy explanantion for all things earthly and heavenly might just be wrong, and like you, they couldn't begin to contemplate that dearly held beliefs might be built on quicksand. You say variously that I am 'factually inaccurate', that there is 'an incredible amount of proof' of the authenticity of the bibe and you then suggest that maybe your conviction about the Adam and Eve story isn't quite as unshakeable as you implied earlier. Nowhere do you give any of this proof you waffle on about, you just hide behind your faith. You didn't answer any of the questions I put to you simply because you can't! You try to ridicule me by questioning my reasoning ability in a most patronising way by suggesting that you may possess some higher insight into the workings of the human condition, and yes, believe it or not, I have read about the big bang theory. I can see that the origins of the universe has presented mind-wrecking problems for mere mortals but an equally acceptable point of view is, does it matter! Perhaps we should be more concerned with preserving it than worrying about where it came from. It's easier on the brain, if nothing else. The contention in the bible that the earth was created for man, and that everything on it was put there for our benefit is the most insufferable, presumptuos piece of arrogance it has ever been my misfortune to hear. Do you suppose that trees, termites, sea-slugs or any other life form on earth feel exactly the same way about their existence? Finally, to borrow from another thread and reproduce a favourite poem I give you Joseph S. Newman's insight regarding religion. (Newman, was interestingly or not, the uncle of Paul Newman the actor). Black Cross Hezekiah Jones of Hogback County Lived on a hill in a weather beaten hovel And all that he owned was a two-acre plot And a bed and some books and a hoe and a shovel Hezekiah, black as the soil he was hoeing Worked pretty hard to make ends meet; Raised what he ate, with a few cents over To buy corn-likker that he drank down neat And a few cents more that he put in the cupboard Against what he called 'de rainy season' But he never got to save more'n two or three dollars 'Til he gave it away for this reason or that The white folks around knew old Hezekiah and said 'Well he's harmless enough but the way I figger He better put down them goddamn books! Cause reading ain't no good for an ignorant nigger' Reverand Green of the white man's church Finally got around to 'comin' ovah, To talk with y'all about the Pearly Kingdom An' to save yo' soul fer the Lawd Jehovah' 'D'ya b'lieve in the Lawd?' asked the white man's preacher Old Hezekiah puckered his frosty brow 'Well I can't say yes, so I aint gonna say it Caze I ain't SEEN de lawd, nowhere, no how!' 'D'ya believe in heaven?' asked the whiteman's preacher 'Where you go if'n you're good, fer yer last rewahd?' 'Ah'm good' said Hezekiah, 'good as ah'm able But ah don't expect nothin' from heaven OR the Lawd' 'D'ya b'lieve in the church?' asked the white man's preacher Hezekiah replied, 'Well de church is divided, Ef they cain't agree then ah cain't neither Ah'm just just like them, ah ain't decided' 'You don't b'lieve in nothin', roared the white man's preacher 'Oh yes ah does', said old Hezekiah 'Ah believe that a man's beholden to his neighbahs Widout de hope of heaven or de fear o' hells fiah' 'Well there's a lot of good ways to be wicked',screamed the white man's preacher And they hung Hezekiah as high as a pigeon And the NICE folks around said, 'Well he had it comin!' 'Cause the sonofabitch didn't have no religion!' 'Nuff said!

Love is memory of emotion, Entertained indulgently. shameless plug from my poem "achilles'feel"

Nuff Said? Nah! Mississippi what is exactly going on here, and why are you so agressive? You always seem to deny what your always doing, being agressive. A potter makes a pot, designs it, imagines it,forms it, finally creates it. The pot decides that he doesn't believe in the potter? That's what someone denying an ultimate creator for me means. But you know what it's only what I believe. Of course facts are different from faith, you can no more prove to me that there is a God than I could prove to you there is. There reason for this `debate`is that we don't agree with eachother's arguement, which is fair enough. Faith is something as real if not more than so called facts, that ultimately can be used for and against the `idea` of God, I believe I'm in touch with the heart of God. I believe, through Jesus, that I can commune with the creator, it's very simple Christian doctrine, not really that contreversial, it's what this country based it's laws and morality on for centuries, do you think things are better now, you obviously don't. Can I ask you a favour Mississippi, if you can be bothered to answer this can you stop the vitriol

I posted too soon then, back to the `facts` debate. I don't need to show you proof about the facts of the authenticity of the bible, I have seen them, read them. I've been reading and studying the bible for ten years. How does that prove the truth of God to you. Your reason for not believing in God I truly believe is for personal resons, ultimately I find it usually is if people examine themselves. In the beginning we all believe in something, then life crushes and we decide, well there can't be a God, look at life, or my life, where's God. The sad thing is, as a real reason for not believing it doesn't truly add up. If you never face God, seek God with an open unprejudiced heart, or even more startling approach Him as a created being to the creator with awe and a bit of respect, then why should you ever meet Him. The great thing is even despite our incredible arrogance and undoubted fallen nature, he still loves us, still reaches out to us and still extends grace. As I said to AJ, with my belief system Mississippi I believe God is always waiting for you to admit the smallness of your humanity and your need of something I believe we were created for, a relationship with God. Over to you my big River friend!

To hear you laugh Robert does more for me than a cherry or a star! Not everyone sees me as funny.

I'm obviously getting something seriously wrong here! Mark I am NOT being aggressive. I am merely asking you to supply lucid, logical, arguments backed up with REAL evidence to support your views! You are the one who insists on bringing your faith into every thread that you can. If you don't want to be challenged on religious grounds don't bring them into the discussion! It's as simple as that! I don't have a problem with anybody's religious beliefs until they try to impose them on others, and I resent your accusations of 'aggression' and 'vitriol' which you are again using to throw a smoke screen over the issue at hand. I state categorically that there is NO aggressive or hate filled motive in any of my postings on this subject. If you believe there is, you have made a grave error of judgement. Will you please answer the questions I put to you in a reasonable way? I have no wish to undermine your beliefs or challenge your right to hold them, in fact believe it or not, I would be the first to defend your right to hold them. If your only answer to my posting is further accusations of nastiness in any form, do ME a favour and don't bother! I have no wish to make any more enemies than I already have, but if the price of popularity is silence, then go ahead and denigrate me.

I didn't see your last post before my last one, so to comment further..... I don't have or need a reason for not believing in god Mark, I don't have a reason TO believe in him. You make the assumption of believing that to be religious is the 'norm' and everybody else is lacking in some way. You say you have 'seen' the facts but you are deluding yourself Mark, they are not PROVABLE facts, just things you have read in a book you choose to believe in. I have no quarrel with that but you have no scientific, logical grounds for insisting they are FACTS. You further insinuate that by not being a believer that I am missing something that is imperative to a proper life. And a the risk of being boring, please exclude me from the 'royal we' used to assert that everybody starts out believing in something. I started out with an open mind and it has steadily been turned against religion of any kind by the endless wars started in it's name. And before you go off about not blaming religion for what it's followers do, I put it to you that for all practical purposes religions are, to a great degree what it's followers ARE.

Gosh I'm sorry to get your goat that much. I don't consider you an enemy, in fact I'm incredibly grateful for the chance to debate. Anyway I don't know you, how crass would it be to consider you an enemy! and how unChristian! Is there anything to argue now? I truly believe your arguements are lame and you certainly believe mine are. I have a faith, you don't want one, truly, "Nuff Said!" However, If your ever in a tight spot please don.t not call on God for help just because you've denied him in the past, that's cutting off your nose to spite your face! ( surely your being just plain provocative now...ed) I confess to you Mississippi you do get my goat, but that's great, gives me a buzz, BUT I do not want to be unloving, or crappy towards you, I have no right to be that. So, if that's how I've come across, forgive me, that's my crappy human nature and my lack of control and love.

I missed your last post as well, so I'll answer that one, thanks Mississippi, this is great stuff! What `facts` are you talking about, has science disproved God? News to me! Those facts are allout there. Proof of the authenticity of the gospels, supposedly written hundreds of years after the death of that `ficticious character`Jesus. Actually it's now been `proved` that the last gospel was written about AD90, and the first one about AD45, 12 or 15 years after his death. As for being a ficticious character I'm afraid your `facts` are not really facts. Josephus a Jewish historian wrote about him, he was not a Christian. Other Roman historians and all written around the same time as thegospels. I am afraid no historian denies that Jesus actually lived, that's a `fact`! But heh! the point is that isn't going to convince you of the truth of God, is it. That's why I keep coming back to faith, faith is action, it is seeking an answer from the one we think might have them, the originator, you know GOD!

Feeling's mutual, MissusHippy. I don't understand men, either. Different species. What's the female equivalent of 'chauvinist'? And I have some appalling habits...

OK Mark enough's enough. Your perception of facts and mine are blatantly different, I'm sorry for taking possession of your goat, you are welcome to reclaim it. May we just beg to differ on this one? Re: tight spots, I've been in many, and you know who helped me? Just like Jackie, no one! One last thing, I can't guarantee not to take the bait if you put it under my nose another time.

Germaine Greer? or perhaps Magaret Thatcher!

Always having trouble with my ar's.

Didn't you miss an 'e' out there somewhere, Miss? (And put the appo in the wrong place? Eric would be shocked and distraught!) Always had a not-so-sneaky fondness for Germaine Greer - perhaps that explains it. As for M. Thatcher, I don't think so - pass me 'andbag, luv... ps. What HAS happened to Eric, come to think of it?

Mississippi, your smashing! That's all I've got to say!

It was all part of my new inoffensive strategy Andrea! As for Eric, he can kiss my arse!

Well, it's working, that's for sure...don't know whether I like you better that way or this way, Hippy. Oh, I'm so indecisive sometimes... Not too sure about Eric kissing your nether regions tho'

I wouldn't go using words such as 'like' in the same sentance as my name Andrea, you might be making enemies! I retract the offer associated with my botty!

As I recall, the equivalent of Chauvinist when applied to men is still chauvinist. The term means discriminatory (historically more xenophobic than sexist), and is named after some French general.

haha don't think either of you could've been any more apologetic while arguing with each other. Not that i'm gonna bother saying anything to take sides..

Ta, Andrew. Nicholas Chauvin, to be exact. One of Napoleon's veterans, to be even more precise. And a thoroughly nasty piece of work he must have been, too. Probably not unlike Mrs. T. Sans handbag and, possibly, Dennis.

Love IS: The utter desolation that I am feeling right this minute. My stomach and heart is wrenched to form one organ. The pain of losing my father, whom I hasten to add was 'the proverbial pain in the a..e', but he was MY pain in the buttocks, goes on and on and on. Boy do I miss him. If you think that I'm opstreporous then you should have met my dad. After all, they modelled Alf Garnet and Victor Meldrew on him!! Says it all, don't it. So you all know what love IS, well take it from me, I KNOW and LOVE HURTS. AJ :>(

Andrea, I think the female version of chauvenist is misandrist (well, misandrist is the opposite of mysoginist which is sort of close although I wouldn't say chauvenists necessarily *hate* women) Favourite love line: 'It grows like a flower Or it grows like a tumour. Love proves that God Has a sense of humour.' Joe Jackson, Stranger than Fiction (I think)

I love the lyric Emily but next time you see that Joe Jackson crooner-type bloke tell him you don't need it to prove God has a sense of humour. If God hasn't got a sense of humour then nothing at all makes any sense. By way of contrast, if God has got a sense of humour, nothing at all makes any sense. By the way, re the 'CAN YOU BE A CHAUVINIST AND STILL LOVE WOMEN?' question. The answer is yes. I am (a chauvinist) and I do (love women) who make about as much sense to me as God and his goddamn unfathomable sense of humour. To be fair, he did warn us that he moves in mysterious ways. Just like that horse-type piece in chess then. That moves in a mysterious way - I mean 'one forward and two to the side'. Just like the horses I back at Dunstall Park (Wolverhampton, to you) race track. All in all, I like AJ's Buddhist-type answer 'Love IS.' 'Aah, the "suchness" of LOVE' as Homer Simpson might say - except for LOVE substitute BEER. Come to think of it, that could almost be a life-rule, couldn't it: FOR 'LOVE' SUSTITUTE 'BEER'. By the way, Mississippi - I think you're funny as well. In the words of that big bloke who sang cheesey love songs in a very deep voice 'Don't go changing to try to please 'em.' Just BE, Mississippi. Aah, the 'suchness' of Mississippi.' Must go now because I've just come downstairs and found wayward son sprawled out on sofa with remains of spliff between thumb and forefinger plus weird bong-type devise on breakfast bar. Will give him fireman's lift upstairs and place gently in bed without waking, then remove incriminating evidence from kitchen. If that isn't love, I don't know what is.

Hi all, I, like Mississippi agree to disagree. But I would like to say one more thing: My original point still stands. If all of the peoples in the world kept their beliefs to themselves, then without the cloak of religion we could hope to get on. However, just in the last twenty four hours I have read of the Telebans (islamic) enforcing their religious beliefs on the poor populace of their people. More atrocities in Isreal, etc etc etc. I have many friends of twenty or more years and I don't know what their religious leanings are, why, 'cos I love them for who they are and not because of their beliefs. I know that my argument is probably naive, but there you go that's me. Finally, I do not wish to denegrade anyone's belief in anything, you see I don't need that crutch. Mississippi: You are a very learned man and I concur with everything that you so eloquently argued. Fecky: Seems that I owe you an apology, I apologise. IFB: MYB nor Fecky needed your intervention. PS Should there be any more replies to this most interesting 'heated debate' not mailicious nor vitriolic argument, I must apologise if in my absence I miss anything. You see tomorrow I am off to Edinburgh to put my father's ashes in the family grave. Love IS: Peace, humility and above all respecting EVERYONE ELSES beliefs. Good or bad.........

You're undoubtedly right, Emily - they're probably too busy 'loving' themselves... Ooops, sorry John, typed that before I read your post - a serious error. Sod it, what the hell, I'll bung it up anyway and await the inevitable consequences...

Meremortal have you thought about the condition of your soul? HA HA HA.....(trails off maliciously!)

Here's a thought... I've just decided that love is traipsing through a metre of snow, in the middle of a freezing winter, to visit a nick in the middle of nowhere, where yet another wayward son (mine, in this case) was banged up for 3 months for posession of a seriously large amount of a certain (soft) illegal substance. What long-suffering creatures we mothers are...

Sorry AJ posting at the same time. Good luck in Edinburgh, and look forward to your return, I think....can I handle it?

OK, Andrea - that's love. Wayward sons, hey. What would you do with 'em. I hate to admit it, Andrea, but I do love myself more than somewhat. Does this make me a bad person? Even if the answer is 'YES' I'm still gonna love myself. After all, O love plenty of other 'bad people.'

Think maybe we've got our wires crossed somewhat. There's nothing wrong, as I see it, with loving (or, rather, genuinly liking)yourself, provided vanity and false pride pay as little part as possible in the equation. In fact, I'd go so far as to say it's a good and necessary thing, because if YOU don't like/love yourself, how can you expect anyone else to? For me, though, chauvinism (exaggerated patriotism of an aggressive kind) just don't make it on the nice front and doesn't, I think, have an awful lot to do with love...

nice thread ... yes love is def. a DOING rather than a word ... it is terribly easy to say "i love you" and damn hard to actually love someone ... we are mistaken if we believe love is sweet and easy ... "It is also good to love: because love is difficult. For one human being to love another human being: that is perhaps the most difficult task that has been entrusted to us, the ultimate task, the final test and proof, the work for which all other work is merely preparation. ..." or so Rilke says ...

Love is simply compassion for oneself and other beings ... Compassion is active identification and caring ... It's so simple :-)))

If you think loving one human being is difficult, Ivory, how about trying to love the whole goddam human race? You quite often hear, don't you, the modern mantra 'to love someone else, first you must love yourself.' I reckon there's every chance the self-help gurus have got this exactly the wrong way round. How about 'To love yourself, first you must love everyone else.' I think it was Mother Theresa who said 'The more love I give, the more love I get.' Or was that the Beatles? Anyway, to put it in other words 'Cast your bread on the water and it shall return a thousand times.' Or something like that. I agree Michael. All so simple in theory yet somehow so difficult in practice. By the way, Michael I'm in Dublin this weekend. Any good pubs? And is the Bad Ass Cafe worth a visit? Chauvinism, hey? Whilst I freely and openly admit to being a kind of woolly, blurred at the edges, third-rate male chauvinist porker (it's my age you know), as for that 'exaggerated, aggressive patriotism', never. In fact, I don't even believe in the concept of countries, preffering the concept of one big happy family. I think borders should be strictly limited to the bits around the edge of your garden. Still, I guess it's hard to argue with all those lines on the Atlas and all the bad news on the TV, ain't it. When John Arlott (cricket commentator, now sadly commentating on that Great Cricket Match in The Sky) went to South Africa many years ago he was required to fill in a visa which included the question 'RACE?' to which he simply replied 'HUMAN.' That'll do for me. As far as I'm concerned, the sooner we remove all artificial barriers, the better. Roll on, the United States of Europe. After that, the World. Then all we'll have to fight about is whether Nick Hornby is better than Tony Parsons.

I'm after a United States of Europe too John. Unfortunately we are heading closer and closer, at an alarming rate, in fact, to becoming "Pocket America" I feel we are losing our European ties, and that makes me so sad....Nothing against America, despite how it sounds, but..well, you know. Capitalism, materialism...it is dreadful, and we all seem to be accepting it as part of the way that the world is naturally developing. Well I don't like it much. Ok, I type that, sat in front of a state of the art PC, in my own house - I'm probably hypocritical, but I'm still of the mind that you only need one watch, one TV etc...and they sure as hell don't need to be designer ones. Rushed off at a tangent there, but what I really wanted to say, was how much I agree with what you said about loving others in order to love yourself. I've never really understood the "love yourself first" school of thought. Seems indicative of the whole bloody mess we're all getting into really.....

i agree too ... so much so that i am going to go and live in a field and grow carrots ...

On another note, and off at a tangent (AGAIN) I recently started a fundraising thread on ABC to ask for ideas to help raise money for a new day centre for the deafblind....I got tons of help, and put quite a few ideas into practise. One of the things that I did, was to write letters to local businesses, pubs, bars etc - in total over 70 letters, asking for any help that they could give at all - even dangled the carrot of local media coverage for those that could oblige. Yesterday, I received, finally, a response. Boots, sent me a £10 gift voucher for a raffle that we're doing. (Good old Boots) Not one other business has even acknowledged us. Now, that - is what love isn't. *sigh*

i think a 1% response is usual in these matters liana ... so you did statistically well ... but yes it is poor ... i will happily donate carrots when they are grown ...

Liana, OK, so you rushed off at a tangent but what a brilliant tangent. In my humble (?) opinion not only do you need only one watch etc. you don't even need that. Whenever I feel a dose of materialism coming on (it still happens despite all my best intentions) I make a list of all the things I need. I mean, really need as in 'can't survive without.' Believe me, this is not a very long list and usually doesn't extend beyond 'next pint of Guinness, library ticket, pair of underpants (don't particularly want to get arrested). Just try it and see. Socrates said 'When I walk through the market place and see all the things I do not need , I realise how rich I am.' How cool is that, if I can type like my 20 year-old daughter for a few seconds. Glad you agree about loving others first. This was a neat trick I learned from my friends the Buddhists and as far as possible I try to live by it. Needless to say, it ain't easy and, being a frail and feeble human (and, worse yet, a bloke) I fail all the time. The Buddhists also helped me understand why possessions are so bad, even though I kind of instintively knew it before. According to them (and I'm a believer) it's because everything you own becomes, in a weird way, part of 'you' and thereby reinforces your sense of self, your ego if you like. In turn this divides and separates you from all your brothers and sisters in the big bad world, which is the only one we've got. Or as my daughter Ellie says 'What you own ends up owning you.' It's pretty difficult not to 'own stuff, of course. I think the problem comes when 'stuff' becomes too important and starts to replace 'life.' Should properly attribute this thought to 'American Beauty.' You know, the scene where Lester Burnham is trying to make love to his wife on the sofa but she refuses because the sofa is '$4,000 worth of Italian silk.' to which Lester replies 'the sofa ain't life, it's only stuff.' Sorry for the sermon, by the way. It's just that I love Buddhism so much I can't help sharing it at every opportunity. Whoops, caught myself out there - even loving Buddhism is not Buddhist 'cos that itself can grow your ego. How difficult is all this or is it just me? Aldous Huxley was always warning about the Americanisation of the World and, boy, was he right. Shall we all boycott McDonalds and stop drinking Coke by way of a small protest? Just so we're absolutely clear I only want a United States of Europe as a stepping-stone to a United States of the World. Think big, that's what I say. Never mind the Euro, what about the Cosmo as a unit of currency. Then I can die a happy man with zillions of Cosmos in me big fat Swiss bank account. Except I don't want loads of Cosmos in the first place and anyway there won't be a Switzerland for me to have an account in. So that's my idea of an ideal World. Borders - None, Religion - Buddhism (optional, of course), Currency - the Cosmo, Politics - you must be joking, Race - Human. how about yours. Or is this a thread all of its own? By the way, the leader of this World would have to be someone cool enough too know loads of dodgy song lyrics like 'A mulatto, an albino etc., etc. It would be a goddamn law. Know anybody who fits the bill?

I'm never going to live that one down am I John? :o)

Doesn't seem to be much agreement on the definition of love does there? If you want to know what it ain't, go look at www.soyouvebeendumped.com , it's enough to make most people feel worshipped by the entire population of ABCtales!

Love is like projectile vomiting; it leaves you empty when it's all over.

Love, love is a verb Love is a doing word © Del naja, Marshall, Vowles, Fraser (Massive Attack, with Liz Fraser) Doesnt sound so good without the music though.. and l hate to admit it John, but I cant solve the lyric you challenged me on, from the other thread ..grr!!