Shotgun

Oh, sorry.... It's from Drs. Michael Edelstein and David Steele, in their book "Three Minute Therapy." Which is a sort of summarization of Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy (REBT), developed by Albert Ellis (which I am a big fan of, since it has helped me a lot).

"Anger is not an involuntary emotional response to a specific situation. Anger arises from a philosophy--a way of viewing the world. At its core, anger represents an outlook of grandiosity, self-righteousness, commanding, and condemning." Perhaps it is better to externalize rather than internalize anger, but even better to learn to change irrational beliefs that lead to anger in the first place. Expressing anger does not rid oneself of anger, any more than expressing love rids oneself of love.

Organic milk does taste better (to me), but I believe the taste is due to the "ultra-pasteurization" process it typically goes through, which regular milk does not. This also increases the shelf life, which is a plus for me since we don't go through milk very fast. The regular milk always went bad before we could finish it, so we probably make up the $ by actually using the whole carton of organic. (Not sure why they don't usually treat regular milk with the same process.)

I think to many people, "atheist" refers to "someone who doesn't believe in my god(s)." In older times, I think that is what it most often meant. Even Christians were referred to as "atheists" by certain others. For a long time, I thought it had a pretty simple definition. But over the years, I've realized it means a lot of different things to a lot of different people. And I keep coming back to realizing that it's not very useful as a label for myself, but I still tend to use it out of habit or something.

Yes, but for legal purposes, an "interracial marriage" is just considered a "marriage." Eventually, this will probably be true for same-sex marriage as well.

I added Charlie Wilson to my queue. Actually, after looking them up, I realized I had already seen the other two. But it was so long ago that I hadn't remembered them from the names. I remember A Few Good Men being pretty good, but the other one might have been too, umm.... romantic-comedyish or something.

It looks like I would have to get an actual dvd to watch either of those, so I don't know if that's gonna happen. (30 Rock's my one "tv" show that I watch regularly, partially because it's readily available online.)

I had not heard of Aaron Sorkin before this thread, but I just watched the latest episode of 30 Rock (on hulu), and he was on it.

Easy to do coke and leave your crazy ass... Oh, OK. Well, cocaine is probably better for your health than I am. Sorry to hear you're having relationship problems.

Ummmm - Do a Bump? Freud would have agreed with you on that one. Ya, well you crazy women make it easy... Seriously...give me a fuggin' break! *seriously- edit* I haven't seen my "soul mate" in 7 years and already we're arguing...there is nobody else for me...just leave me my son and get the f**k outta my way... As I post this, metallica's wherever I may roam is playing in the background... Ummm..... What??? What do we make easy?

Ummmm - Do a Bump? Freud would have agreed with you on that one.

Just smile at yourself in the mirror for 30 minutes.

To the best of my knowledge, he's not trying to force any new word definition on anybody. However, I don't read "People" magazine or watch TV, so I don't really know what he's up to. Funny, I just came across several recent posts you've made about Charlie Sheen. I guess you get information about him from somewhere.

Yeah, I got invited to be on his show once. I suppose it was a compliment , though I didn't accept.

Neither do I.

I'm pretty sure Prop 8 (here in CA) was started by the "other" side wanting to enforce the definition by legislation. And again, whether legally recognized or not, the dictionaries have already changed. But I won't try to talk you out of being pissed off about it, since it seems rather important to you. So, are you also pissed off that Charlie Sheen managed to single-handedly change the definition of "winning" in less than a week?

To some degree I understand the rest of your argument. However, I don't think you can compare the two products. Tobacco is seen as a hazardous substance, even one cigarette. Alcohol is still promoted as being healthy. One glass of red wine per day is supposed to be good for you. Alcohol may have some health benefits, in moderation. But beyond moderation, it is probably the most dangerous drug in our society (mostly because of its widespread use, compared to the other hard drugs). I agree that comparing the two is not an exact analogy, but in discussing measures to reduce drug abuse (both of them being drugs), I think it makes sense to look at how tobacco use was curtailed in order to see what might reduce the alcohol problem. And, just for the record, I'm not necessarily suggesting that we do any of the things that have been mentioned. I tend to be in favor of less laws rather than more. I was just joining the discussion of what could be done if we wanted to reduce drunk driving/alcohol abuse problems. But "more safety" generally seems to equal "less freedom," so, hmm . . .

It probably encourages a lot of people to think before getting so wasted next time. For those who continue (or worsen) the behavior anyway, perhaps they do need help. And here in CA, tickets and arrests will get someone into help a lot quicker than just leaving them alone will.

The pressure applied is in the direction of not being drunk in public. This would include drunk driving. (Are you really trying to blame the cop here if rehmwa's buddy ends up driving drunk "because" of this incident?)

I was questioning you because your response to me about "Maya" seemed like you had the concept backwards. I still haven't figured out if that was the case because you seem to be avoiding my questions about it. Oh well, not important.

Who among us here, SC, would you consider enlightened? No one. Mostly because I don't typically think in those terms. Enlightenment is highly subjective, and therefore somewhat meaningless. (Those who are enlightened will agree with me here. )

You are on the right track. OK, so.... Why would the enlightened people (those who realize that there is only one reality) have any "difficulty with spiritual, supernatural, metaphysical thinking"? Seems like they would just see all of that stuff as part of reality.

Everyone thinks in a different context than the general population. That is true, the Eastern term is "Maya." It means the illusion of reality. That is why those that claim there is only one reality yet to be discovered have so much difficulty with spiritual, supernatural, metaphysical thinking. Sorry, I'm a little confused by what you're trying to say here. My understanding of "Maya" is that it has to do with the illusion that there is more than one reality. That those who are enlightened realize that everything - the spriritual, supernatural, metaphysical, etc. is all part of the singular reality. Which seems to be the opposite of what you're saying. (???)

I haven't seen any of his other stuff that you listed. I'll have to check some of it out. And, man, if Zuckerberg speaks that way in real life, someone needs to slap him. I found his character to be rather annoying. But then I guess most of the characters were sort of annoying, in an entertaining way (if that makes any sense?). If I were any one of the real people in the story, I don't think I would appreciate this movie too much.

Everyone thinks in a different context than the general population.