The Christian Vanguard

On the right hand of this blog, I say that I am single and ready to mingle. Indeed, I am, but I grow weary of it. Recently, I had become attached to this woman, and I thought about dating her. We had a few conversations about it, but I stopped when she said, "I am not attracted to you. You are everything I want in a man, but I just am not attracted to you." And, you know, that's definitely not easy to hear. It's had me up a few nights, and I've been thinking, so this here is just what I have so far. Nothing too organized, but some ideas for fodder.  It is true, I am not an attractive man. I can't deny that. I'm not fit, I have a porous nose, and I have a round face. She has said that she can't be compatible with someone she isn't attracted to, but I've already written about such slogans before. So, that part is nonsense. I mean, in her view, I am a virtuous man, a faithful man, and a son of the Church, which, in my opinion, is really all ...

It is pretty standard to say that love is unitive. Unity seems to require consent. It wouldn't sound right to say that you and I are united in this goal when I will the goal while you will we don't meet our goal. If we happen to reach that goal through force or by accident, our unity doesn't seem genuine.  So, what happens if you love a person but that person does not love you? Can it be said that real love is happening? You will not be united, so, what gives?  The issue came up recently when my I was expressing my, oh I don't know what to call it, my inner conflict on attending a friends wedding. Because things had been tense and our last few conversations (with the bride to be) were pretty much us arguing, I was kind of in doubt about the status of our friendship. Things weren't resolved and were up in the air. So, I was expressing all the anger and confusion to my friend, and I said to her, 'You know, if I don't go to the wedding, I don't think we (...

The following is a post I made on my Facebook when I was following and commenting on the last Republican debate.  I've never understood this, "Oh, but minorities are disproportionately affected [by this law] because they get caught breaking the law more often than non-minorities." Okay and? Look, say 100 people run a red light. Say that 50 are black and 50 are white. All fifty black people are caught and arrested. 25 white people are caught and arrested. Why would you be upset that all black people were caught? That is just. What is unjust is that 25 people were not caught, who happened to be white. That 25 white people were not caught does not mean black people suffered an injustice.