Trotter332

Yeah, I understand that. Am I correct in saying, "it's not the rules or obligations of the framework, but the behaviour the framework allows"? Thanks for your insight, I've definitely received a lot of useful information. That's a good distinction. I'll be sure to use that example in the future as well. It's got a strong emotional driver as well. I agree, that video was great. I'll be showing it to her when I next talk with her.

I agree that taxation has more problems than being immoral, but the point should stand independently that it's a repetition of the initiation of force and therefore should be avoided if possible. She believes that morals are subjective and therefore there is no one True Morality or True North. To quote, "I don't think any moral framework is strictly immoral. I see them having legitimate differences.". The qualities I find attractive in her include: Intelligence, honesty, empathy, funny, pretty and is able to understand my traumatic experiences and validate them. I think it's fair to say you can appreciate the beauty of some animals before you realise they're going to eat you. Not that I'm comparing her to an animal, but I think my point gets across. I do plan on continuing these discussions with her and I'll feel more comfortable arguing given I don't have the intention of romancing her. She's still useful for exploring my experiences with and I think I can still learn from her. I'll still be cautious around her and if I feel she is more damaging than beneficial, I'll remove myself from the relationship.

Yeah, I've come to the same conclusion. It's like if there was an Atheist father and a Christian mother. Why would you marry someone who believes you are going to hell and why would you marry someone who thinks your belief system is built upon a mythical sky ghost. I had a discussion last night with her and I made the decision to not continue in a romantic relationship with her. She made the statement "I don't apply morality around taxation. It was democratically decided through a majority vote and if you're the minority, you just have to deal with it or leave.". She doesn't see taxation as theft because it's been previously consented. She thinks NAP is a valid critique, but she doesn't agree with it. So it's either I don't have a strong enough argument or any argument won't make a difference. I would like to think that if I were better at arguing or "more", she would agree with me. But I get to learn from this experience and grow from it. We've decided to stay as friends for the time-being. I am upset about it because I envisioned some really nice situations and really enjoyed the idea of growing with someone, but I feel like this is the best decision for me. I'm still interested in her as a person and want to know how her therapy goes for her. In time, as I gain knowledge and assurance in my knowledge I may make the decision to discontinue the relationship altogether. I watched Stefan's "Against Me" video and understand that I may be seen as performing a cowardly action or even a coward, but I'm okay with that. I still gain value from her for now.

In her childhood she received a lot of physical, verbal and mental abuse. She feels that, had the Government stood in to save her, she would've been much better off. I believe she is emotionally attached to the idea of Government being there for good intentions, does make some poor decisions, but ultimately is beneficial. We're living in New Zealand, but most of the actions of the Government are the same. Still has welfare, war on drugs and I know that most people going to therapy receive medication which only handles the symptoms and not the problems. I had wrongly accused people who perform immoral actions to be entirely immoral and hadn't made the distinction that good people can commit immoral actions, but that doesn't make them an immoral person. I was of the mindset that if she disagrees with the NAP and believes tax is "good", then she is immoral. Though I am in a similar position after having this conversation with the members here. If we can't agree on the NAP and I feel like she won't agree, then an intimate relationship with this person isn't possible. I also have come to the conclusion that it is a cop-out and also why I feel more confident in my initial thoughts before I started "buckling" or "thinking my compass was broken". I can't be certain that I've given her the strongest arguments possible. I feel like I don't have the certainty and personal understanding that I can make a strong argument, especially when I already feel like she has the advantage, given her time studying philosophy. I agree that it does seem manipulative and it isn't my intention to be. It's good to have it pointed out though, so thank you. She does have an understanding of the inequality that men suffer as well in society. She also has a strong distrust and is cautious around men given her previous experiences. I need to head to. I'm having a conversation with her tonight regarding the questions and information I've been given here. I just hope that I'll be courageous enough to provide a strong argument while also being empathetic.

I'm moving cities soon so I'll be finding a new one soon enough. Thanks for the advice.

I didn't mean to suggest that we're going to "fix" each other. I'm in therapy, she's just recently started therapy and we reflect on our experiences with each other. I don't plan on fixing her, but I do want to help her heal. I'm also willing to accept that there will be times where we have trouble cooperating due to our experiences, but so far in our conversations we've felt comfortable enough to point out behaviours and indicators that have occurred and explore them. I had a watch of the video and thank you for it. I'll definitely use it in the future. We haven't been talking so much recently but I'll respond with an update when I get some information. Again, thank you for your input everyone. I appreciate the time and effort you're all putting into this conversation. I'm trying to be as transparent as possible and appreciate being asked the "spade is a spade" questions.

I have expressed my feelings regarding this and she did reply with "I won't be in a relationship with someone who thinks I am immoral.". In reply I said "I don't think your immoral, but amoral. I feel like you're not understanding something or have a bias and I want to help reveal that.". I do feel it's contradictory to be in a relationship with someone who doesn't share the same values and that's why I find it difficult to make a decision when I ask my therapist and check various sources on the internet which all say "You can have moral differences.". I have thought of the implications of when the child has to understand that if their father is an atheist and their mother is a christian. If they agree with atheism, he has to acknowledge that the mother is some form of crazy or misguided and at least lose respect for the father for being in a relationship with this woman. I have thoughts like "When will anything like her initiating force on me ever occur in a practical situation" and I fail to think of instances where that could happen other than her theoretically advocating it. I'm not sure if this is because I choose not to acknowledge possible situations or because I don't think she would actually do anything herself or hire the government to do it for me. I agree that there is a difference between intellectually agreeing to it and it being in sync with your present values. I'm not sure if "viscerally disgusted" is how I should feel. I feel sad that she doesn't agree with me, but I still think there's an ability for people to learn and grow. This including people that don't agree. I'm not saying I'm going to pursue the relationship to wait and see if she does change. One motif I have noticed with my past relationships is that all of them have suffered a great deal of abuse from their parents. I do feel a desire to help them, because I can recognise the pain and I want to help resolve it and because she sees it in me, she shares the same desire. I feel a strong connection with her in this sense and feel it's something we can build on. Do you have any thoughts on this? I didn't intend to suggest that morality is ever not in some way related to a conversation. I meant that you can discuss a grocery list without morality being the forefront of thought. What I was referring to was when we share our traumatic experiences with each other. Yes, we are thinking of the immoral nature actions inflicted upon us and how they affected us, but we also share how that made us feel, how we reacted or what we did with the trauma.

Okay, I see the line of thinking now. Something I want to get better at is taking the written language as it as and to not be quick to interpret it. Thank you for pointing it out for me.

This has been really the only thing I've disagreed with her on. Otherwise she has helped me a lot to know more about myself, explained Ego-State Theory, Kartman triangles and helping me understand the magnitude of my experiences. I never considered if a child would believe that. My initial argument would be "it's the initiation of force, therefore immoral.", but I see what would happen. "I believe it is moral because it benefits me." No, that proposition hasn't come up, nor any suggestion of it. She's in university studying law, biology and has studied some psych and philosophy. She's come to the conclusion, given her childhood experiences, that the state has the power to save abused kids and believes that the government can be improved to act morally. She disagrees with NAP but she believes, for instance, that taxation is a justified use of the extension of self defence for someone else e.g. If you don't realise a train is about to hit you, I may use force to move you out of harms way. NAP also allows for for minor harms for great benefit and feels tax also is classified here. No, I haven't slept with her due to distance and other reasons. Both of us believe that sex (if in the interest of developing a strong relationship for parenthood) should be for developing the relationship and making babies. So because we're still figuring each other out, it's off the cards, which I'm more than fine with. Something witty about Stefan and Crazy/Pussy Town here.

There is still an outcome that results in the woman becoming pregnant. It is madness to assume 99% = 100%.

Thank you for your input everyone. Currently I'm surrounded by people that support the state and advocate the use of force against me. My flatmates advocate, she advocates and both claim it's "justified given the benefits it provides.". I brought it up with my therapist and she used terms along the lines of "It's not about being the perfect parent, but the good enough parent.", "couples can have differences in morals and in the end it is the child's choice to choose what's right for them.". When hearing those I immediately cringed because my thoughts were "That's the excuse poor parents make", "Good enough" infers "I did the best with what I had.". It's been hard being surrounded by people following the same compass when mine points another direction while they say "Your compass is broken." She hasn't been so literal as to say so, I've been scared to "call the spade a spade" because I have been enjoying my time with her. Yes she is somewhat physically attractive. But I'm more interested in her because she is really intelligent and we share similar past experiences. When morality isn't part of the discussion, we have a great time and I don't want to lose that.

Hey everyone. I'm not a parent or in a relationship, but I have a strong interest in someone. I stick with NAP as a basis for my morality and she doesn't agree with it and believes a state is required. My question is, if either of us don't change our thoughts and we begin raising children, what implications would there be for the children?

This was part of a discussion Kanith and I were having. The example we were using was "Say a man dying of thirst meets a vendor who has a bottle of water. He wants to sell that bottle of water to you for $1'000'000. He's not aggressing against you so NAP is technically followed, but you're a dick".

Firstly thank you for your input. Yeah, I think honesty is really important. How do you plan for your therapist to help you if you're just going to lie to them. Journaling was something I was doing and stopped when I felt I didn't have the energy to keep going. Funnily enough when I stopped journaling my dreaming stopped as well, or at least awareness of them. I'm really hoping I don't have to change therapists because the one I'm meeting with has a particular method that looks very good. I think it's called Hakomi.

Hey FDRians, I'm going to be starting therapy soon. I'm pretty nervous about it and have been reluctant to go in the past, but it's time to strengthen my relationship with my inner child. I would like to get some insight into other people's first experiences, advice or recommendations for the first time and, if any, advice for ongoing therapy that you've experienced were helpful to you. I want to clarify that I don't need to know why you went to therapy or specifics of what was discussed. If you're comfortable sharing and think it would be helpful then feel free. I'm looking for methods of attack and ways that you found helped you get through. Thank you in advance for any and all contributions. I look forward to hearing from you.