Results 1 to 30 of 78

Thread: My minimal beliefs

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    A very, very Senior Member Adrian II's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    9,748

    Default My minimal beliefs

    Here's the deal.

    When I was young, I used to have high-falutin ideals like peace and justice for mankind. Why? Because!

    Then I hit my nose a couple times. I lost friends for the wrong reasons, came under a streetcar called marriage, had to learn how to fire people. Low & behold, I started thinking.

    And come to think of it: if and when those former ideals of mine would ever be realised, life on earth would be a total bore. I wouldn't want to live in peace and harmony. Yuk!

    Besides, the things I typically enjoy in this life are the fruit of war, strife and greed: from fast cars to movies and from good dentistry to chess -- with the possible exception of the printing press which seems to have been the result of selfless pioneering. Then again, old Gutenberg was sued over it within the next three years.

    So, what's left? I am still moved by ideas and desires. My life hasn't suddenly become aimless. That's not the problem. It took me some time to discover, however, what it is that still makes me tick.

    What makes me tick is aesthetic and intellectual gratification. Art, good books, theatre, film, anything that explores the human condition in an honest way. And that isn't stupid. Conflict or injustice don't bother me anymore, stupidity does.

    Does that make me smart? I don't think so. Just wiser.

    It makes me a bad journalist as well. To be honest, the outbreak of a new war in some part of the world doesn't mean crap to me these days. All wars are alike. A new book by Philip Roth or Michel Houellebecq, now that's news!

    I see life as an intellectual adventure, more than a physical adventure. The true quest is inside your head (and heart). I guess such insights come with age. I am ready for the Zimmer frame. Yes Doctor, I have taken my yellow pills this morning, thank you.
    The bloody trouble is we are only alive when we’re half dead trying to get a paragraph right. - Paul Scott

  2. #2
    boy of DESTINY Senior Member Big_John's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    OB
    Posts
    3,752

    Default Re: My minimal beliefs

    ok.
    now i'm here, and history is vindicated.

  3. #3
    Enlightened Despot Member Vladimir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    In ur nun, causing a bloody schism!
    Posts
    7,906

    Default Re: My minimal beliefs

    Thank you! Whenever some brainless minion talks about wanting world peace all I can think is: "How boring."

    But no, srsly. Peace is the dream of the wise, war is the way of man. Dream big but you have to wake up eventually.

    Conflict and competition are good things, however war is the ultimate conflict and competition.
    Last edited by Vladimir; 03-19-2008 at 19:19.


    Reinvent the British and you get a global finance center, edible food and better service. Reinvent the French and you may just get more Germans.
    Quote Originally Posted by Evil_Maniac From Mars
    How do you motivate your employees? Waterboarding, of course.
    Ik hou van ferme grieten en dikke pinten
    Down with dried flowers!
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 



  4. #4
    Oni Member Samurai Waki's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Portland, Ore.
    Posts
    3,925
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: My minimal beliefs

    What would the Universe Be like without it's Emperor Palpatines and Darth Vaders? Cause if the Story was based on C3PO and Luke having a jolly good time on the beach, I don't think it would've been hallmarked as it has.

  5. #5
    A very, very Senior Member Adrian II's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    9,748

    Default Re: My minimal beliefs

    Quote Originally Posted by Wakizashi
    What would the Universe Be like without it's Emperor Palpatines and Darth Vaders? Cause if the Story was based on C3PO and Luke having a jolly good time on the beach, I don't think it would've been hallmarked as it has.
    This is why I love Wesley - Simon says: "Bleed" - Snipes in Demolition Man. That movie is so true. "I don't need a history lesson! C'mon, where are the god damn guns?"
    Last edited by Adrian II; 03-19-2008 at 21:19.
    The bloody trouble is we are only alive when we’re half dead trying to get a paragraph right. - Paul Scott

  6. #6
    Prince of Maldonia Member Toby and Kiki Champion, Goo Slasher Champion, Frogger Champion woad&fangs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    2,884

    Default Re: My minimal beliefs

    It's 300 syndrome.

    We know we can't actually completely stop war and suffering but we want to be the ones who helped to slow down the never ending tide of war so that others in the future might have the chance to build upon our minor victories.

    I hope that made sense
    Why did the chicken cross the road?

    So that its subjects will view it with admiration, as a chicken which has the daring and courage to boldly cross the road,
    but also with fear, for whom among them has the strength to contend with such a paragon of avian virtue? In such a manner is the princely
    chicken's dominion maintained. ~Machiavelli

  7. #7
    Clan Silent Assassins Member Faust|'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    US
    Posts
    361

    Default Re: My minimal beliefs

    Any values that don't proceed ultimately from strength (which has, at least, a significant physical component) are worthless and I don't trust them.

    Also, to get a better view of things such as injustice and strife, you have to really be exposed to such things (in the most seemingly extreme way). Not really saying that I have, but I at least try hard to imagine. It doesn't seem like strife in war is very glorious now, either! I think you're talking about imaginary or pretend strife!

    The only way I would be so much for real strife (I'm not talking about personal quarrels or competition) would be if glory or honor could possibly accompany it. It's kind of funny when I see people express that they want more strife... because they're just little fish, ultimately.

    Competition, on the other hand, I'm all for. Also, on a side note, I wouldn't mind being taken back several hundred years or so, but alas, hehe...

  8. #8
    Naughty Little Hippy Senior Member Tachikaze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    San Diego, California, USA
    Posts
    3,417

    Default Re: My minimal beliefs

    And I think about all those people who suffer so life will not be boring for you.


    Screw luxury; resist convenience.

  9. #9

    Default Re: My minimal beliefs

    Quote Originally Posted by Wakizashi
    What would the Universe Be like without it's Emperor Palpatines and Darth Vaders? Cause if the Story was based on C3PO and Luke having a jolly good time on the beach, I don't think it would've been hallmarked as it has.
    Where would WWII be without Hitler and Stalin?

    Quote Originally Posted by emfm
    Also, conflict, in my opinion, is fought on a cost-reward basis. If the nation predicts it will gain more than it will lose, it will go to war, and vice versa. The only true system for world peace is a system like MAD - if you do anything, you lose everything. Unfortunately, all it takes is one idiot - which, as you agree, is what a lot of humans are.
    We end up with less wars as people place more value on human life.

    Quote Originally Posted by Adrian
    Besides, the things I typically enjoy in this life are the fruit of war, strife and greed: from fast cars to movies and from good dentistry to chess -- with the possible exception of the printing press which seems to have been the result of selfless pioneering. Then again, old Gutenberg was sued over it within the next three years.
    I think we had booze before war

    I think your missing the middle ground completely. If you're not an idealist you don't have to be a cynic.

  10. #10
    Chieftain of the Pudding Race Member Evil_Maniac From Mars's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    6,407

    Default Re: My minimal beliefs

    Quote Originally Posted by Sasaki Kojiro
    Where would WWII be without Hitler and Stalin?
    If they hadn't existed, it would've been someone else. The delicate political situations in their nations at the time opened the path to the dictators of this type.

  11. #11
    Chieftain of the Pudding Race Member Evil_Maniac From Mars's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    6,407

    Default Re: My minimal beliefs

    Quote Originally Posted by Vladimir
    But no, srsly. Peace is the dream of the wise, war is the way of man. Dream big but you have to wake up eventually.

  12. #12
    Part-Time Polemic Senior Member ICantSpellDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    U.S.
    Posts
    7,237

    Default Re: My minimal beliefs

    Check this out, Adrian

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
    David Mamet: Why I Am No Longer a ’Brain-Dead Liberal’
    An election-season essay
    by David Mamet
    March 11th, 2008 12:00 AM
    link

    John Maynard Keynes was twitted with changing his mind. He replied, "When the facts change, I change my opinion. What do you do, sir?"

    My favorite example of a change of mind was Norman Mailer at The Village Voice.

    Norman took on the role of drama critic, weighing in on the New York premiere of Waiting for Godot.

    Twentieth century’s greatest play. Without bothering to go, Mailer called it a piece of garbage.

    When he did get around to seeing it, he realized his mistake. He was no longer a Voice columnist, however, so he bought a page in the paper and wrote a retraction, praising the play as the masterpiece it is.

    Every playwright’s dream.

    I once won one of Mary Ann Madden’s "Competitions" in New York magazine. The task was to name or create a "10" of anything, and mine was the World’s Perfect Theatrical Review. It went like this: "I never understood the theater until last night. Please forgive everything I’ve ever written. When you read this I’ll be dead." That, of course, is the only review anybody in the theater ever wants to get.

    My prize, in a stunning example of irony, was a year’s subscription to New York, which rag (apart from Mary Ann’s "Competition") I considered an open running sore on the body of world literacy—this due to the presence in its pages of John Simon, whose stunning amalgam of superciliousness and savagery, over the years, was appreciated by that readership searching for an endorsement of proactive mediocrity.

    But I digress.

    I wrote a play about politics (November, Barrymore Theater, Broadway, some seats still available). And as part of the "writing process," as I believe it’s called, I started thinking about politics. This comment is not actually as jejune as it might seem. Porgy and Bess is a buncha good songs but has nothing to do with race relations, which is the flag of convenience under which it sailed.

    But my play, it turned out, was actually about politics, which is to say, about the polemic between persons of two opposing views. The argument in my play is between a president who is self-interested, corrupt, suborned, and realistic, and his leftish, lesbian, utopian-socialist speechwriter.

    The play, while being a laugh a minute, is, when it’s at home, a disputation between reason and faith, or perhaps between the conservative (or tragic) view and the liberal (or perfectionist) view. The conservative president in the piece holds that people are each out to make a living, and the best way for government to facilitate that is to stay out of the way, as the inevitable abuses and failures of this system (free-market economics) are less than those of government intervention.

    I took the liberal view for many decades, but I believe I have changed my mind.

    As a child of the ’60s, I accepted as an article of faith that government is corrupt, that business is exploitative, and that people are generally good at heart.

    These cherished precepts had, over the years, become ingrained as increasingly impracticable prejudices. Why do I say impracticable? Because although I still held these beliefs, I no longer applied them in my life. How do I know? My wife informed me. We were riding along and listening to NPR. I felt my facial muscles tightening, and the words beginning to form in my mind: Shut the fuck up. "?" she prompted. And her terse, elegant summation, as always, awakened me to a deeper truth: I had been listening to NPR and reading various organs of national opinion for years, wonder and rage contending for pride of place. Further: I found I had been—rather charmingly, I thought—referring to myself for years as "a brain-dead liberal," and to NPR as "National Palestinian Radio."

    This is, to me, the synthesis of this worldview with which I now found myself disenchanted: that everything is always wrong.

    But in my life, a brief review revealed, everything was not always wrong, and neither was nor is always wrong in the community in which I live, or in my country. Further, it was not always wrong in previous communities in which I lived, and among the various and mobile classes of which I was at various times a part.

    And, I wondered, how could I have spent decades thinking that I thought everything was always wrong at the same time that I thought I thought that people were basically good at heart? Which was it? I began to question what I actually thought and found that I do not think that people are basically good at heart; indeed, that view of human nature has both prompted and informed my writing for the last 40 years. I think that people, in circumstances of stress, can behave like swine, and that this, indeed, is not only a fit subject, but the only subject, of drama.

    I’d observed that lust, greed, envy, sloth, and their pals are giving the world a good run for its money, but that nonetheless, people in general seem to get from day to day; and that we in the United States get from day to day under rather wonderful and privileged circumstances—that we are not and never have been the villains that some of the world and some of our citizens make us out to be, but that we are a confection of normal (greedy, lustful, duplicitous, corrupt, inspired—in short, human) individuals living under a spectacularly effective compact called the Constitution, and lucky to get it.

    For the Constitution, rather than suggesting that all behave in a godlike manner, recognizes that, to the contrary, people are swine and will take any opportunity to subvert any agreement in order to pursue what they consider to be their proper interests.

    To that end, the Constitution separates the power of the state into those three branches which are for most of us (I include myself) the only thing we remember from 12 years of schooling.

    The Constitution, written by men with some experience of actual government, assumes that the chief executive will work to be king, the Parliament will scheme to sell off the silverware, and the judiciary will consider itself Olympian and do everything it can to much improve (destroy) the work of the other two branches. So the Constitution pits them against each other, in the attempt not to achieve stasis, but rather to allow for the constant corrections necessary to prevent one branch from getting too much power for too long.

    Rather brilliant. For, in the abstract, we may envision an Olympian perfection of perfect beings in Washington doing the business of their employers, the people, but any of us who has ever been at a zoning meeting with our property at stake is aware of the urge to cut through all the pernicious bullshit and go straight to firearms.

    I found not only that I didn’t trust the current government (that, to me, was no surprise), but that an impartial review revealed that the faults of this president—whom I, a good liberal, considered a monster—were little different from those of a president whom I revered.

    Bush got us into Iraq, JFK into Vietnam. Bush stole the election in Florida; Kennedy stole his in Chicago. Bush outed a CIA agent; Kennedy left hundreds of them to die in the surf at the Bay of Pigs. Bush lied about his military service; Kennedy accepted a Pulitzer Prize for a book written by Ted Sorenson. Bush was in bed with the Saudis, Kennedy with the Mafia. Oh.

    And I began to question my hatred for "the Corporations"—the hatred of which, I found, was but the flip side of my hunger for those goods and services they provide and without which we could not live.

    And I began to question my distrust of the "Bad, Bad Military" of my youth, which, I saw, was then and is now made up of those men and women who actually risk their lives to protect the rest of us from a very hostile world. Is the military always right? No. Neither is government, nor are the corporations—they are just different signposts for the particular amalgamation of our country into separate working groups, if you will. Are these groups infallible, free from the possibility of mismanagement, corruption, or crime? No, and neither are you or I. So, taking the tragic view, the question was not "Is everything perfect?" but "How could it be better, at what cost, and according to whose definition?" Put into which form, things appeared to me to be unfolding pretty well.

    Do I speak as a member of the "privileged class"? If you will—but classes in the United States are mobile, not static, which is the Marxist view. That is: Immigrants came and continue to come here penniless and can (and do) become rich; the nerd makes a trillion dollars; the single mother, penniless and ignorant of English, sends her two sons to college (my grandmother). On the other hand, the rich and the children of the rich can go belly-up; the hegemony of the railroads is appropriated by the airlines, that of the networks by the Internet; and the individual may and probably will change status more than once within his lifetime.

    What about the role of government? Well, in the abstract, coming from my time and background, I thought it was a rather good thing, but tallying up the ledger in those things which affect me and in those things I observe, I am hard-pressed to see an instance where the intervention of the government led to much beyond sorrow.

    But if the government is not to intervene, how will we, mere human beings, work it all out?

    I wondered and read, and it occurred to me that I knew the answer, and here it is: We just seem to. How do I know? From experience. I referred to my own—take away the director from the staged play and what do you get? Usually a diminution of strife, a shorter rehearsal period, and a better production.

    The director, generally, does not cause strife, but his or her presence impels the actors to direct (and manufacture) claims designed to appeal to Authority—that is, to set aside the original goal (staging a play for the audience) and indulge in politics, the purpose of which may be to gain status and influence outside the ostensible goal of the endeavor.

    Strand unacquainted bus travelers in the middle of the night, and what do you get? A lot of bad drama, and a shake-and-bake Mayflower Compact. Each, instantly, adds what he or she can to the solution. Why? Each wants, and in fact needs, to contribute—to throw into the pot what gifts each has in order to achieve the overall goal, as well as status in the new-formed community. And so they work it out.

    See also that most magnificent of schools, the jury system, where, again, each brings nothing into the room save his or her own prejudices, and, through the course of deliberation, comes not to a perfect solution, but a solution acceptable to the community—a solution the community can live with.

    Prior to the midterm elections, my rabbi was taking a lot of flack. The congregation is exclusively liberal, he is a self-described independent (read "conservative"), and he was driving the flock wild. Why? Because a) he never discussed politics; and b) he taught that the quality of political discourse must be addressed first—that Jewish law teaches that it is incumbent upon each person to hear the other fellow out.

    And so I, like many of the liberal congregation, began, teeth grinding, to attempt to do so. And in doing so, I recognized that I held those two views of America (politics, government, corporations, the military). One was of a state where everything was magically wrong and must be immediately corrected at any cost; and the other—the world in which I actually functioned day to day—was made up of people, most of whom were reasonably trying to maximize their comfort by getting along with each other (in the workplace, the marketplace, the jury room, on the freeway, even at the school-board meeting).

    And I realized that the time had come for me to avow my participation in that America in which I chose to live, and that that country was not a schoolroom teaching values, but a marketplace.

    "Aha," you will say, and you are right. I began reading not only the economics of Thomas Sowell (our greatest contemporary philosopher) but Milton Friedman, Paul Johnson, and Shelby Steele, and a host of conservative writers, and found that I agreed with them: a free-market understanding of the world meshes more perfectly with my experience than that idealistic vision I called liberalism.

    At the same time, I was writing my play about a president, corrupt, venal, cunning, and vengeful (as I assume all of them are), and two turkeys. And I gave this fictional president a speechwriter who, in his view, is a "brain-dead liberal," much like my earlier self; and in the course of the play, they have to work it out. And they eventually do come to a human understanding of the political process. As I believe I am trying to do, and in which I believe I may be succeeding, and I will try to summarize it in the words of William Allen White.

    White was for 40 years the editor of the Emporia Gazette in rural Kansas, and a prominent and powerful political commentator. He was a great friend of Theodore Roosevelt and wrote the best book I’ve ever read about the presidency. It’s called Masks in a Pageant, and it profiles presidents from McKinley to Wilson, and I recommend it unreservedly.

    White was a pretty clear-headed man, and he’d seen human nature as few can. (As Twain wrote, you want to understand men, run a country paper.) White knew that people need both to get ahead and to get along, and that they’re always working at one or the other, and that government should most probably stay out of the way and let them get on with it. But, he added, there is such a thing as liberalism, and it may be reduced to these saddest of words: " . . . and yet . . . "

    The right is mooing about faith, the left is mooing about change, and many are incensed about the fools on the other side—but, at the end of the day, they are the same folks we meet at the water cooler. Happy election season.
    "That rifle hanging on the wall of the working-class flat or labourer's cottage is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there."
    -Eric "George Orwell" Blair

    "If the policy of the government, upon vital questions affecting the whole people, is to be irrevocably fixed by decisions of the Supreme Court...the people will have ceased to be their own rulers, having to that extent practically resigned the government into the hands of that eminent tribunal."
    (Lincoln's First Inaugural Address, 1861).
    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

  13. #13
    A very, very Senior Member Adrian II's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    9,748

    Default Re: My minimal beliefs

    Quote Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff
    For the Constitution, rather than suggesting that all behave in a godlike manner, recognizes that, to the contrary, people are swine and will take any opportunity to subvert any agreement in order to pursue what they consider to be their proper interests.
    I don't agree that people are swine. Most conflicts (of interest or arms) result from opposing views, fears and misunderstandings, even miscommunication. They are seldom the result of outright evil on both sides (the Third Reich being a prime example where evil was thwarted by morally and militarily superior forces).

    The real dilemma is that people can be (re)united and reconciled only in the face of a common enemy. As soon as one war is over, they seem to want to look forward to the next one, if only as a pretext.
    The bloody trouble is we are only alive when we’re half dead trying to get a paragraph right. - Paul Scott

  14. #14
    Clan Silent Assassins Member Faust|'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    US
    Posts
    361

    Default Re: My minimal beliefs

    Quote Originally Posted by Vladimir
    Thank you! Whenever some brainless minion talks about wanting world peace all I can think is: "How boring."

    But no, srsly. Peace is the dream of the wise, war is the way of man. Dream big but you have to wake up eventually.

    Conflict and competition are good things, however war is the ultimate conflict and competition.
    If you want conflict with the risk of death and or mutilation, you can get it! But instead it appears you're just sitting behind a keyboard...

    You can get conflict, with the exception that you can't get a war that is waged for your* (edit: or your countrymen's) benefit. So, that particular violence will also come with you being completely and utterly manipulated. Again, you're talking about video games or movies, I think.
    Last edited by Faust|; 03-19-2008 at 23:34.

  15. #15
    Hǫrðar Member Viking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Hordaland, Norway
    Posts
    6,449

    Default Re: My minimal beliefs

    Quote Originally Posted by Vladimir
    Peace is the dream of the wise, war is the way of man. Dream big but you have to wake up eventually.
    What bollocks. War is just the silliest way men like to compete; glorified in these "modern" days when few know what war actually is.

    How many backroomers have experienced war and can honestly say that they're longing for it?

    Yes competetition drives man; a good competition is typically one where you do not risk your life and can compete another day too.


    Quote Originally Posted by Faust|
    If you want conflict with the risk of death and or mutilation, you can get it! But instead it appears you're just sitting behind a keyboard...

    You can get conflict, with the exception that you can't get a war that is waged for your benefit. So, that particular violence will also come with you being completely and utterly manipulated. Again, you're talking about video games or movies, I think.
    He is probably home on R&R and can't wait to get back to Iraq.


    As for the glorious thing that war is; a certain sniper scene in Full Metal Jacket springs to mind.
    Runes for good luck:

    [1 - exp(i*2π)]^-1

  16. #16
    Liar and Trickster Senior Member Andres's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    In my own skin.
    Posts
    13,208

    Default Re: My minimal beliefs

    Quote Originally Posted by Adrian II
    Conflict or injustice don't bother me anymore, stupidity does.
    One could argue that conflict and injustice are forms of stupidity.
    Andres is our Lord and Master and could strike us down with thunderbolts or beer cans at any time. ~Askthepizzaguy

    Ja mata, TosaInu

  17. #17
    Silent Ruler Member Dîn-Heru's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Bergen
    Posts
    1,200

    Default Re: My minimal beliefs

    I agree with the general gist of the OP. That it is the intellectual journey through life that is important. But I would like to adress the notion that this excludes hoping for world peace and and justice.

    From the OP I get the feeling that you think world peace is synonomus with everybody holding hands singing "koomba ya" (sp?) around a campfire.

    Conflict and disagreement is an integral and necessary part of life, if everybody got things the way they wanted they would be spoilt and we'd end up with conflict anyway. But do we have to let conflict and disagreement descend into war?

    Considering that most conflicts are about limited resources, of which human labour and intelligence is part, do we honestly desire to throw lives away needlessly?

    If we had proper bargaining channels, (or simply a will not to turn to killing eachother to get what we want) could we not reach agreements that benefit both/all parties?

    Like you said Adrian:
    Most conflicts (of interest or arms) result from opposing views, fears and misunderstandings, even miscommunication. They are seldom the result of outright evil on both sides
    If governments could talk and make deals and not bicker like little children then there would be justice as well because the parties freely entered an agreement.

    The point is that war is no longer, if it ever were, a good way to solve conflict, so why should we not hope for a world where people do not have to fear getting killed over dissagreements that stem from fear, misunderstandings and miscommunication.

    Conflict bring it on, war no thanks..
    Patience is the companion of wisdom.
    --St. Augustine

  18. #18
    Mystic Bard Member Soulforged's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Another Skald
    Posts
    2,138

    Default Re: My minimal beliefs

    Quote Originally Posted by Adrian II
    What makes me tick is aesthetic and intellectual gratification. Art, good books, theatre, film, anything that explores the human condition in an honest way. And that isn't stupid. Conflict or injustice don't bother me anymore, stupidity does.

    I see life as an intellectual adventure, more than a physical adventure. The true quest is inside your head (and heart). I guess such insights come with age. I am ready for the Zimmer frame. Yes Doctor, I have taken my yellow pills this morning, thank you.
    In other words... You're Dorian Grey, nice to meet you. Can I see your picture?
    Last edited by Soulforged; 03-21-2008 at 14:57.
    Born On The Flames

  19. #19
    A very, very Senior Member Adrian II's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    9,748

    Default Re: My minimal beliefs

    Quote Originally Posted by Soulforged
    In other words... You're Dorian Grey, nice to meet you.
    Chertkov, rather.
    The bloody trouble is we are only alive when we’re half dead trying to get a paragraph right. - Paul Scott

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO