Currently Reading...

So I have about 4 books in my currently reading list. That seems pretty ridiculous to me. I can barely read 1 book at a time, why would I try to read 4? Well...it just kind of happend. I was dealing with something, or looking for guidence in some area, and found a book on my shelf that kind of addressed each one. For example, I was feeling very overwhelmed and stretched with small group and crossroads and worship at all these places, and work, and relationships that I didn't know what to do but pick up Overcoming Overload and give it a read. Unfortunately, the first chapter was just convincing us that we sometimes feel overloaded...which...I didn't need convincing of...I was reading the book. Although it did emphasize a simple yet important truth...you can't do it all. I guess that kind of sums up dealing with overload. Before that I was just struggling with consistency in life with my schedule, which then affected consistency in my spiritual discipline, so of course I pick up the book The Spirit of the Disciplines in hopes of dealing with that. Then at the Easy Street conference there was talk about a view of dating that took out any sort of touch in our relationships. No kissing, no holding hands, no hugging, no dating. And while I know there are other forms of touch...I just felt bad for anybody who's love language was touch. We are basically saying, "You can't feel loved until marriage!" Okay...maybe it's not totally saying that...but...all the boundaries were physical boundaries (besides no dating...not sure what kind of boundary that is), so...how is that person supposed to interpret that? So all their talk really did was to encourage me to express love in other people's love language, particularly touch as it's the one that I suck at. So I read a chapter of The Five Love Languages for Singles. And then the other night at Crossroads we talked about what men and women want in the opposite sex. And character was the basis for most of the guys stuff. Basically just being a man of God. And...I guess lately that has just seemed like a very muddled concept for me, when it used to seem so clear (or more clear). I don't know how else to explain that. So in an effort to regain perspective on what a true man of God is about, I started reading Tender Warrior (or really picked it up again, as I had started it a long time ago), and might even re-read a little Wild at Heart. And so here I am...now reading 4 books. Sadly, I doubt I'll finish any of them. But...what can you do. I guess it's better than reading nothing.

5 Things a man wants in a Godly woman

Is this what we've come to??: Sex, Dating, & Relationships...

5 things a Godly man wants in a woman (see above entry for full outline).

Security: I agree with this one. I'm sure there are some who like to be the one to come in and convince a girl the truth about some sort of insecurity (knight in shining armor complex), and I think they can be attracted to feeling needed, and I say they, though I have caught myself having those thoughts. But I think ultimately, that stuff wears off, and a Godly man truly wants a woman who is secure in who God made her to be.

Support: Agreed.

Acceptance: YES!!! There have been several times when I've been liked by a girl, but I wasn't exactly who they wanted me to be, so they try to change those parts of me into what they wanted. And we're not even talking about inside a relationship. I'm all about having a woman that makes me want to be a better man...but...I don't like feeling like I'm being changed manipulatively (or even just straight out).

Appreciation: Seems to go a lot with support. Don't totally see how they differ.

Respect: Ummm...yeah...I agree. I don't mind the sarcasm as much because I know that I'm going to be dishing it out. But I guess just knowing that there is that underlying respect is good. I think this fuels Support and Appreciation. Well...and Acceptance. But...yeah...I would agree with this one.

I mean...obviously I agree with them because they are things that it would be silly not to want in a woman. I can't think of any other traits that I would have put instead of some of these...although, I would have combined a couple, so...I guess there is a space open. So...maybe perspective? Or...I guess it would go under security. But...just that God would be the most important thing to her...even above us. Again, there is something selfish and desirous about wanting to be the most important thing in someone's life. I mean...hey...that'll make you feel good. But again, ultimately...I know we desire to be placed correctly in the line of succession (if that's the right word). And of course if we are looking for a Godly wife...she must love God!

Now one note on most of this...I don't think Hopper was trying to say that everything we do should be worshipped and followed unequivocally. He of course mentioned that we should earn the right to lead. But...I'm a fallen man. I don't have it all together. I don't always make good decisions. And there are some wise women out there. And while I don't want to fight her on stuff, or feel doubted or undermined. I'm all about some input. I think good leadership is all about using what resources you have, and...well...if she's smarter than me...I'm all about using that. I guess when the decision is made, that this stuff would be applied is good. But I don't think it means that we always want to be the ones to come up with the solutions and don't want input and want to lead by running ahead 20 yards hoping you keep up. Nor do I think Hopper was saying that. Just...thought I'd clarify it.

Flipper Wedding

Okay...this is just...

I know God loves diversity and all...but some people are just weird.

Ouch!

I love that you can see the kid running at the bottom in the beginning before contact is made. I've seen better resolution and with sound...so...this isn't the best version...but...it's all I could find.

Guard Your Heart

This is a classic quote from Proverbs chapter 4 verse 23. I hear it most used in terms of relationships. "Remember when you are dating to guard your heart! You only have so much to give away!" I guess I would call it a pet peeve of mine to use this verse to refer to relationships. I just don't like it. I'm not saying there's no truth to it...I'm just saying it's not what scripture was talking about. He was talking about not letting your heart be contaminated by sin. Protect it. Guard it. Get rid of perversity from your mouth, keep your eyes straight ahead, guard your heart! It is the well spring of life. It is where you have put the words of God. It affects your entire being. Don't let sin dirty the well.

So how did this phrase get turned into a relationship staple in Christian thought? And what are people saying when they use it to refer to how we approach relationships? I think mainly it's meant to say, "Don't give too much of your heart away before it's time." You may get hurt (God forbid), or when you get married, you wont have that part of your heart to give. Which I'm not saying is wrong (yet). But I do think it's a misquotation of scripture and is not contextually what it's talking about, and I guess it just worries me when it is applied as such. I see the use of the principle "the heart is the well spring of life" and should therefore be guarded in not just sin, but also in relationships. And I'm all about applying Biblical principles to all areas of our life. Just...don't make it sound like the author was thinking about and referring to the way in which we date when he wrote the verse. So...that's my opinion of the use of the verse outside of context in general. Whether it's for truth or not.

So the next question is...is it truth? What about the principle that they claim is inherent in this verse. That we should guard our heart in dating and be careful not to give too much of ourselves away too quickly. Is this truth? I want to say no because of how it is commonly used to justify an extreme of being guarded and closed off, or of just not loving other people! But...in reality, I think it is a good principle. I loved what Pat said at Crossroads the other night. Him and Kristin were looking at houses, and after visiting one he noticed her looking out the window as he talked to her. And he could tell that she was already moving in, and it wasn't a house they could even afford. That is a great analogy to the unhealthy "moving in" that many people do in relationships. They emotionally go farther than the actual relationship has gone. They give up their independence or their identity too quickly and in inappropriate ways. They share their entire hearts with someone, only to be crushed when it isn't returned and the other person just wasn't on the same page. I get the value and the wisdom in the adage "guard your heart" in these situations, and I think it's probably what most speakers are referring to when they use it. But I guess I have a problem with how it is interpruted and often explained. I've heard it said to guard your heart so you wont get hurt if you break up. Well...I just don't agree with that. Since when did God promise us happiness all of our days? And since when did good things quit coming out of pain? Now, I'm all about not being hurt unnecessarily. I think if you "move in" to a relationship and it ends, you've brought on an unnecessary amount of hurt that could have been avoided had you been practicing healthy relationships. But it's important to note that to avoid all levels of hurt is to avoid life. We live in a fallen world. We will experience hurt. We deal with fallen people. People will dissappoint us and we will find pain sometimes in any relationship that we make ourselves vulnerable to. I hate to sound caloused, but that is life. And we are in it. And while God does not desire pain for us for the sake of pain, His grace enables us to grow out of the experience. And I don't necessarily think that we should look for ways that we will never get hurt...but be intentional about things that help us not be hurt unnecessarily, or harmed in a way that is a lasting pain. A pain that causes a wound and causes problems down the road. A harm that makes us distrust people. But you know...in spite of the almost guaranteed hurt that's involved with dealing with other people, Christ asks us to do it. He is all about relationships and about living life with people and about being vulnerable and open and real and raw. And of course there is a healthy level of it when it comes to dating relationships...I just think that young Christians can often use the "principle" as an excuse not to be vulnerable and real and open in their dating relationships. It leads them to not being able to express themselves physically or emotionally to a partner in fear that it may some day be used against them, or that they will regret doing so if the relationship doesn't work out. And I wonder if most people who are affected by this type of thinking, don't tend to stifle their own love language in the name of "guarding their heart" and withhold expressing the love language of the other person in that same name. And this seems tragic to me. Again...I'm not saying there aren't healthy ammounts. And I'm not saying you can't go overboard. But you just never hear the other side. You never hear people speak about the importance of expressing and relating to the other person in their love language. Guys are taught to not touch girls until marriage regardless of the fact that some girls need that touch in order to feel loved by someone. Not just in marriage, but now. Love is not just meant for marriage. It is meant to be expressed every day in our relationships with our friends and with our interactions with non-christians. Why should it be taken out of our dating relationships.

Now I understand that you usually don't hear about it because it's usually not something we struggle with doing. You don't have to tell someone to express themselves in their love language...it's natural for them. That's why it's their love language. And the bigger problem is expressing yourself in healthy ways and limits. So...maybe it's just the principle of teaching the truth in a balanced way, if not for those few who do take it to far and don't know how to express affection or love to their dating partner in ANY ammount.

I'm also still not sold on not giving your heart away because you leave some of it when the relationship ends. I don't totally understand how that works. I understand it when it comes to sex. And I can see there being baggage with loving in unhealthy and inappropriate ways. But...in general, I don't get it. Love is not something we run out of. Our heart is not something we leave with people. Maybe I just haven't fell victim to this that I know of. And maybe it's those things that people are really trying to protect us from. I guess I just wish that was better explained.

Okay...that's all I have. I understand why people say it. I understand the truth behind it. I just hate that it's ever used as an excuse to be on the other extreme.

To Love What You Do...

I remember my sophomore year of college when I just loved what I was studying. I was excited, I enjoyed the projects, I enjoyed learning new things, I enjoyed solving problems and producing something that created a solution. I didn't believe that people shouldn't love what they do. I figured everyone had SOMETHING that they loved, and that they should do it. By my Junior year, I would have beaten up my sophomore self given the opportunity. I lost my passion for computers and school and found it in being involved in the campus ministry I was involved in. Where am I now? I'm probably somewhere in between. I doubt I loathed it like I did my Junior year. But...I would still give my sophomore self a slap across the face.

But I found this article on slashdot (although I didn't read it until Dominic sent it to me and told me to), and it just addresses the whole thing about loving what you do. So...I thought I would post it for you guys to see.

I think he says a lot of good stuff, and he makes good points about where this despising of work comes from. It starts when we are kids. Our childhood is defined by pain for pleasure. "Eat your beans and you can have desert." "Rake the yard or you wont get to watch the movie!" "Do your homework and then you can go out and play." I do wonder how much that mentality lends itself to, "Work hard...and you'll have enough to enjoy yourself when you're done." I'm not saying we can trick kids into enjoying mowing the lawn (or maybe you can). But...I wonder what can be done differently.

The world then was divided into two groups, grownups and kids. Grownups, like some kind of cursed race, had to work. Kids didn't, but they did have to go to school, which was a dilute version of work meant to prepare us for the real thing. Much as we disliked school, the grownups all agreed that grownup work was worse, and that we had it easy.

I remember this! I use that myself. I told my sister to stay in school as long as possible! There's nothing else like it (in my defense, it was more because of the social aspects of college and less of a guarantee hate of what you'll do for a living).

The most dangerous liars can be the kids' own parents. If you take a boring job to give your family a high standard of living, as so many people do, you risk infecting your kids with the idea that work is boring. [2] Maybe it would be better for kids in this one case if parents were not so unselfish. A parent who set an example of loving their work might help their kids more than an expensive house.

Interesting.

The advice of parents will tend to err on the side of money. It seems safe to say there are more undergrads who want to be novelists and whose parents want them to be doctors than who want to be doctors and whose parents want them to be novelists. The kids think their parents are "materialistic." Not necessarily. All parents tend to be more conservative for their kids than they would for themselves, simply because, as parents, they share risks more than rewards. If your eight year old son decides to climb a tall tree, or your teenage daughter decides to date the local bad boy, you won't get a share in the excitement, but if your son falls, or your daughter gets pregnant, you'll have to deal with the consequences.

I remember my parents telling me I could do whatever I wanted...but it was stated more like this. "Engineers can do whatever they want." There was a distinct "not happening" attitude when things associated with "the arts" were considered (not bashing my parents...they just wanted the best for us). Not that the arts weren't encouraged. We all took piano, and I got my guitar, my sister was in the nutcracker...but...we were pretty much told flat out that there was no money in those things...so...don't even think about it (I paraphrase of course). And I do think parents feel the pain of their children more than the joy. Not sure if that's what he was saying. But there is something about preparing your children for financial security that is definitely good hearted (if not most of it). I guess the question is, how much is misguided.

the two-job route: to work at things you don't like to get money to work on things you do.

Sounds like having a hobby. You are to work...and develop what you like to do on your own time...and then someday you can do it for money. Well...I guess a hobby doesn't guarantee money later. But this route seems to go against some of the stuff he's said earlier. This is more of a, tolerate it now so you can do things you want to do later. But isn't that what we do anyway in different forms? Tolerate work now so that we can buy that beach house and enjoy ourselves. Or so we can travel when we retire. I know his is more of a transition from one work to another...but...just seems awfully close to the same sentiment.

Closing thoughts...the good book of Ecclesiastes has some interesting things to say about it.
Ecc 2:10-11
Ecc 2:17
Ecc 2:22
Ecc 2:24-26
Ecc 3:13

Awkward Moments...

You know the moments I'm talking about. The moments between strangers when life stops for a moment while you wait to see what the other person is going to do. Most commonly having to do with walking. At work we have about a three person wide hall-way, and in the middle of this hallway is a regular sized doorway, that only fits one. And there is not a door...so I consistently find myself walking towards it and noticing that there is someone walking the other way that is about the same distance away. I hate that door. Without fail you get to a couple of feet away and you wait to see whether the other person will speed up or not. Except...they also slow down to wait...causing an awkward moment.

I had another one today. I was walking from my car to the office and I was probably 3 or 4 steps behind a guy in front of me. The sidewalk is a two-laner. Two people walking side-by-side can get away with it...but...it's intimate. So I'm walking and the guy in front of me stops. He's fixing his gloves or he's putting something in his backpack or something. Not a big deal, there's room to pass...I keep my pace and start walking by. Well...he finishes whatever he's doing at the very moment I'm right next to him. So he starts walking again. So...we are walking side by side in a way...I might even feel weird about with a friend. I might even try to stagger it if I was walking and talking with someone. But we were shoulder to shoulder, elbow to elbow. And we were going at exactly the same speed...and there was no sign of one of us naturally speeding up past the other one. Now...we walked like this for like 4 or 5 paces, which you may not think is a lot. But it was enough for me to think..."What the heck? This is weird...I either need to slow down or speed up." I normally like speeding up in walking encounters because you have more options...if you slow down and they are slow (or just feel slow after walking faster) then you have to walk behind them at their pace. But I was pretty much already walking at max comfortable pace. I mean I could have booked it...but I still had 12 minutes of walking left...I desired a comfortable gait. So we've already gone several steps, and you can't just gradually slow down because...you'd still be walking next to him until he moves forward. So I decide to pretty much just stop and move in behind him. Well...at this moment, I think he finally notices me. He's been wearing a hood, which I can only imagine was impeding his vision. But for some reason, stopping (or almost stopping) caught his eye and he looked up like, "Why are you walking next to me?" But I think he quickly realized the situation, and told me to go ahead, in which I then took the lead and walked at a comfortable pace with little more than the thought of blogging about the experience to occupy my mind. So like most of life's awkward moments, ended anticlimactically...but is torture in the moments during the encounter.

So here's to awkward moments! Feel free to share your own.

Crying for real!

Okay...not for real. But...it is saddening.

Death of West Wing

I'm a West Wing fan. And while I think it appropriate that they end it at the inauguration of a new president, it will be missed! Moment of silence, please.

To Laugh or Cry

I'm not sure how to react to this one. It has a funny headline...but...the story is sad. I'll let you be the judge. (Although you should know that crying was only used to juxtapose laughing...not as an actual reaction I had or thought of having)

Link

And the Truth Shall Set You Free

I have often wondered why I don't like to put my punctuation inside of the parenthesis. It haunted me for years why I always felt wrong adhering to a standard I knew to be accepted, yet felt so wrong! And then I found this. And let me tell you...it's like I was seeing for the first time. Now, I don't claim to be a hacker...but this article described a deep understanding in my soul that I had not found words for. An instinct inside that I could not articulate until this article brought it to life. I feel like a new man! Freed of my bondage of bad use of the English language! Life is finally lining up! All is right with the world!

Below are the parts of the article that I am referring to specifically.

Hackers tend to use quotes as balanced delimiters like parentheses, much to the dismay of American editors. Thus, if “Jim is going” is a phrase, and so are “Bill runs” and “Spock groks”, then hackers generally prefer to write: “Jim is going”, “Bill runs”, and “Spock groks”. This is incorrect according to standard American usage (which would put the continuation commas and the final period inside the string quotes); however, it is counter-intuitive to hackers to mutilate literal strings with characters that don't belong in them. Given the sorts of examples that can come up in discussions of programming, American-style quoting can even be grossly misleading. When communicating command lines or small pieces of code, extra characters can be a real pain in the neck.

Consider, for example, a sentence in a vi tutorial that looks like this:

Then delete a line from the file by typing “dd”.

Standard usage would make this

Then delete a line from the file by typing “dd.”

but that would be very bad — because the reader would be prone to type the string d-d-dot, and it happens that in vi(1), dot repeats the last command accepted. The net result would be to delete two lines!

The Jargon File follows hackish usage throughout.

Interestingly, a similar style is now preferred practice in Great Britain, though the older style (which became established for typographical reasons having to do with the aesthetics of comma and quotes in typeset text) is still accepted there. Hart's Rules and the Oxford Dictionary for Writers and Editors call the hacker-like style ‘new’ or ‘logical’ quoting. This returns British English to the style many other languages (including Spanish, French, Italian, Catalan, and German) have been using all along.

Better out than in I always say

Obviously I have been on Google Video...and found some things I thought were funny. This guy...sigh...this guy...that's all I can say.

Not the brightest K-9 in the alphanumeric character set

Okay...I'll try not to make all my posts just links to other stuff...but...this was just kind of funny.

Grandma got ran over by a...

Poor Grandma! But honestly...what was she thinking?

Watch Your Fingers

This lady needs a hobby. I hear knitting is good!

The "I knew it" Syndrome

If you ever watch a movie with my Mom you may hear the words, "I knew he was a bad guy!" come out of her mouth. Obviously it's most prevalent when a movie has a twist, and the real bad guy isn't revealed until the end. Of course after a while you ignore it, but it started out with a rolling of the eyes and a "Sure you did Mom." My mom actually does this a lot with things. If they catch someone stealing in their store, about 70% of the time, "As soon as I saw them, I knew they were stealing from us" is part of the story. (Side note...my mom followed a lady into the bathroom who was going to flush the stuff she stole down the toilet after she was confronted about it so...don't steal from my mom! It's futile!)

But alas...the apple tree that is my family does not have many over-hanging branches, and I must not have rolled much after dropping because I find myself doing very similar things. In one way it's validated it for me. Before I had wondered how many people she thought was stealing from her that really weren't. I mean if you think everyone is stealing from you, you're bound to be right about someone. Or how many people did she think were bad guys in that movie. If you consider them all at one point in time, of course you're going to be able to say, "I knew he was the bad guy." But I've also begun to see what she means, and the feelings that she is commenting on, and I have definitely had my fair share of, "I knew that's what you wanted to talk about" moments. Now, I have come to realize that my mom is a very spiritually aware person, and I believe has picked shop-lifters out of a crowd and been right about them. But Looking at my own tendencies...I'm more of the, I'll consider everything, so when one of them comes about, I can say that I knew it was going to be that, kind of guy. If you are in a relationship, and the other person says, "We need to talk." It is not impressive to be able to think of the 2 maybe 3 things that she could want to talk about (and we're definitely talking about the "I need to talk about us" kind of statement). And since you are in the relationship, and know where the problems are...you can probably narrow it down to one. Recently, I could tell someone wanted to talk to me about something (which was the only impressive part of it all, if there was one), and I had in my mind the 3 possible reasons why. And one was even the "Something I'm not considering" option. Now, I did have a favorite, and I probably would have put money on it had there been a bookie present. But it felt weird telling myself "I KNEW that's what she was going to say" when I had considered everything else. Yet...I did. But I guess that's what it means to "know" something was going to happen. To have considered all the options (they are shop-lifter, they are not) but to have a favorite and one that you would predict as truth if asked. I'm not sure why I mention it all except that I was thinking about a pastor friend of mine who has recently been caught in a sexual scandal that has cost him his position. And of course I look back and think, "Did I see that one coming?" Obviously there was never a point where I was like, "Oh he's going to fall to this particular sin someday." But...I've been wondering how surprised I am. There was a church I was going to in High school that I thought was awesome, and the pastor was amazing, and I had talked him up a lot to my family. And once he spoke at my school and my parents got to see him. A couple of months later it came out that he had been having an on going affair for the past 10 months. And my mom had said, "I knew something was wrong when we saw him," (I had written off the talk as just not his best one) "I told your dad that, and I realize now that it's because the Spirit had left him." (meaning whatever anointing he had had as a good, spirit lead preacher, not as in salvation) And when I heard her say that I did the rolling my eyes thing again. "Sure you did mom." But looking at this latest situation...I wonder if I knew something was wrong with my current friend.

Of course again, I am surprised by the particulars of the sin. But I look back at our interactions, and I've always wondered why I felt reserved about him. Before this, if you had asked me if we were good friends, I would have said..."we were friends." Good just seemed a little too far. But as I think about all of our interactions, I would have to say that we probably were. I've played racquetball with the man, taken two Greek classes from him, lived in the same neighborhood as him, he helped teach me how to drive a stick, we've had lunch on numerous occasions, I drove him about an hour and half away to preach to some youth and back, he had spoken at my church many times, he even officiated my brother's wedding. We had talked about sex, speaking in tongues, predestination, total depravity, and even about that other pastor that I had mentioned who had the pro-longed affair. And yet...through that...I always thought something was wrong there. Not that he was tempted by what he ultimately fell to. But...just that there was something...wrong. There were some good things about him. He was the first Baptist I knew who didn't grimace and snarl at my mentioning of a church I went to that spoke in tongues, but instead reminisced about his own spiritual journey of figuring all of that out and how beautiful it was when they sang in tongues. So I had a lot of respect for his openness about it. Even though he was probably the most Armeniest person I had known while I was going through my Calvinist stage, and we definitely disagreed there...But I never felt judged or belittled, but instead respected that I was thinking it through.

So those were the good things. There were also things that just seemed off. Even though he's in his fifties, he sometimes acts like a little kid. He always asked why I never called him (even though I was a 16 year old, and he was...well...an old man). He seemed very lonely in that. My brother just said he seemed bored. He once told my youth minister that if he ever had the itch (talking about moving churches) he could help him out. His sermons rarely ever did it for me and he often talked about Christianity or Christian things like he was a text book. I had always taken it as a 50 year old man who had a PhD and had been in the ministry most of his life, and it was just how he talked and related to things. While I feel like no minister should be above getting emotional about the gospel, I didn't feel in the position to judge him for his seemingly lack of it. While a good friend, he was never someone I wanted to be my pastor, and I could never totally figure out why I felt that way. And now I wonder. Do I sound like my mother if I say, "I knew something was off." Do I sound like my mother to look back at the other pastor who had spoken at my school and thought about how his sermons did seem noticeably worse during those 10 months?

I think it's natural to go back and think about your interactions with people when you find out something like this. When kids start shooting up schools, the interviews always include people who knew them trying to figure out if they should have seen this coming. And maybe my mom takes that natural tendency as the Spirit speaking to her. Or maybe there is something more. Maybe there was a spiritual pulling of "something just doesn't seem right with this guy." I didn't feel it with the high school pastor. It was a total surprise and even if I had noticed his sermons slacking off...there was no spiritual tugging telling me that it was because something was wrong. But I now wonder if those moments where I just felt something wrong with my friend were more than just disagreeing with a point or not relating to his personality.

I'm not sure what my point is...or if there is one...or if I need one. Just noticed that I was playing the "I knew it" card a lot, wondering when people will start rolling their eyes and say "Sure you did Zach." But the big one being my friend. And it makes me wonder if there is spiritual involvement in letting you know something isn't quite right...and what we are supposed to do about it. Or if I'm correlating to unrelated things and just didn't relate with him well, and therefore thought something was wrong. Who knows.

Worth Fighting For

So I just read an article that was recommended by another blogger, and I was struck by the statement:

The truth is I want to be someone worth fighting for—not just for one date, but for a relationship, and someday for a lifetime.

And I started thinking about what it means to fight for someone and what girls want when they say that. I think it's a valid desire, and according to the Eldredge clan (Captivating and Wild and Heart) it is the way we are wired, and I'm not disputing that. And I understand the sentiment. I have definite "white night" tendencies of wanting to "save the day" and "fight for the woman I love" kind of thing. But...there just seems to be some friction between our (or just my own) interpretation of the desire and reality. Because the reality is...there are some guys you just don't want fighting for you, and whom you don't necessarily care if they think you are worth it. Doesn't mean their bad people...but maybe you've just decided already that they are not the man for you. I'm not even talking about being picky. You're open...you've considered it...and it's just not there. But if it helps...think of the guy with no social skills that says things like "I like your armpits" (not even joking...I know a guy who has used that one). You don't want that guy pursuing you. And when you say no...you don't want him fighting for you. Because it's awkward. And of course there are girls that guys don't want to fight for and who we don't want desiring us to fight for them. So I guess I've just been trying to work that into the concept of being fought for and fighting for. Because if I tell a girl, "I enjoy being around you...you are a lot of fun...I'd like to get to know you better." And they say no...what does it mean to fight for them? Do I say...well! I'm going to keep on trying. I'm fighting for you! If a girl you like is dating another guy, does fighting for her mean you keep pursuing them? Is it quitting not to?

So what does it mean to fight for a girl? What did Carla Whitley want when she said she wanted to be worth fighting for. I just remember liking all these girls in high school and college who were so stinkin out of my league that they couldn't really care less if I thought they were worth fighting for or not. It was more of a, "Well of course you think I'm worth fighting for...but I want so-and-so to find me worth fighting for."

So...to fight for a girl. Does it mean you don't take no for an answer? Does it mean that when the girl plays hard to get you try harder? Does it mean that when you like a girl you get over the fear of rejection that surrounds it and tell her? Does it mean when you are in a relationship, and she wants to call it quits, you fight to make it work? Does it mean if some dude talks to "your woman" you mop the floor with his face? Does it mean when 2 guys like a girl that you compete to see who comes out with the her? Does it mean you are willing to risk your friendship? Does it just mean you are willing to put yourself out there? Does it mean that after she says no to a date, you send her flowers the next day and ask again? (again...true story) Or does it mean spending time on your knees before the father interceding for you wife and your family? Does it mean setting up boundaries in a relationship so that you may proceed with honor and purity and not indulge the desires of the flesh? Does it mean communicating when you don't really feel like it? What is fighting for someone?

I'm just curious about the difference between being someone worth fighting for just for one date, and for a lifetime (or relationship to accurately quote her). You gotta start somewhere. Do girls want someone who already has it all figured out and where they're going to live and the names of your first 3 kids? I wonder if the biggest wedge in early relationships isn't one person turned off, or worried about how the other person thinks more of the relationship than they do. And it's not just girls thinking it's more than the guys. It goes both ways. I know that my favorite place to be is in a place where I enjoy a girl's company, she seems cool, I'd like to spend more time with her, but if she doesn't feel the same way, or if it doesn't work out, life doesn't fall apart around me. Does that mean I'm not a fighter? Does it make me apathetic? Does it make me guarded? Shouldn't it be enough that the guy found you worth taking the risk of asking you out, even if it was only for the first date?

I don't mean to sound like I'm coming down on Carla (the author of the article by the way). I understood what she meant. But it's a phrase that I really have wondered what it implies. To fight for someone. I've had 2 situations in life where a girl that I liked started dating one of my best friends at the time. Now, despite there really being nothing I could have done, my mentality was one of wanting them to be happy. And I had taken both men to be better men than I. And I knew that they would be happier with them than with me. One pair is now married to each other, and the other guy is now an agnostic...so...I was 1 and 1. But I had often wondered...am I just not a fighter? Would the "real man" run a muck and raise a voice in protest, and try to steal away the girl, claiming that he was the only one that could make her happy? Pretty attractive wouldn't you say?

I guess I think about the kind of things that I have to fight against to ask someone out. There is the fear of rejection, the fear of acting like an idiot WHILE being rejected, the fear of losing a friend, the fear of losing friends of that friend, insecurities about not knowing exactly what you want or what you think should happen, etc etc. Not asking a girl out is the easy way out! I used to think I was just waiting for the right girl. But it was really because I was afraid of making the wrong decision. And it was easier to choose the comfortibility (may not be a word) of friendship.

So how do I make a girl feel like she's worth fighting for? Has asking her out not already shown that I think she is?

Just some thoughts and questions.

Chuck Norris Facts

While Brian has already put some of these on his blog, I feel compelled to do the same as they are just stinkin hilarious! And I need stuff to put up here while I decide what to blog about.

1. Chuck Norris' tears cure cancer. Too bad he has never cried.
   
2. Chuck Norris does not sleep. He waits.
   
3. Chuck Norris does not hunt because the word hunting infers the probability of failure. Chuck Norris goes killing.
   
4. Chuck Norris has counted to infinity - twice.
   
5. When the Boogeyman goes to sleep every night he checks his closet for Chuck Norris.
   
6. If you can see Chuck Norris, he can see you. If you can't see Chuck Norris you may be only seconds away from death.
   
7. Chuck Norris is currently suing NBC, claiming Law and Order are trademarked names for his left and right legs.
   
8. The chief export of Chuck Norris is pain.
   
9. Chuck Norris has already been to Mars; that's why there are no signs of life there.
   
10. When Chuck Norris sends in his taxes, he sends blank forms and includes only a picture of himself, crouched and ready to attack. Chuck Norris has not had to pay taxes ever.
    
11. Chuck Norris sleeps with a night light. Not because Chuck Norris is afraid of the dark, but the dark is afraid of Chuck Norris
    
12. Superman owns a pair of Chuck Norris pajamas.
    
13. Chuck Norris doesn't read books. He stares them down until he gets the information he wants.
    
14. In fine print on the last page of the Guinness Book of World Records it notes that all world records are held by Chuck Norris, and those listed in the book are simply the closest anyone else has ever gotten.
    
15. In an average living room there are 1,242 objects Chuck Norris could use to kill you, including the room itself.
    
16. Time waits for no man. Unless that man is Chuck Norris
    
17. The quickest way to a man’s heart is with Chuck Norris’ fist.
    
18. Nagasaki never had a bomb dropped on it. Chuck Norris jumped out of a plane and punched the ground.
    
19. If you ask Chuck Norris what time it is, he always says, “Two seconds ’til.” After you ask, “Two seconds ’til what?” he roundhouse kicks you in the face.
    
20. There is no chin behind Chuck Norris’ beard. There is only another fist.
    
21. The Great Wall of China was originally created to keep Chuck Norris out. It failed misserably.
    
22. Chuck Norris' blood type is only compatible with heavy construction equipment, tanks, and fighter jets.
    
23. There is no theory of evolution, just a list of creatures Chuck Norris allows to live.
    
24. In a fight between Batman and Darth Vader, the winner would be Chuck Norris.
    
25. When Chuck Norris falls in water, Chuck Norris doesn't get wet. Water gets Chuck Norris.
    
26. How much wood would a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could Chuck Norris? ...All of it.
    
27. Chuck Norris can divide by zero.
    
28. Chuck Norris doesnt shave; he kicks himself in the face. The only thing that can cut Chuck Norris is Chuck Norris.
    
29. When you're Chuck Norris, anything + anything is equal to 1. One roundhouse kick to the face.
    
30. Chuck Norris has 12 moons. One of those moons is the Earth.
    
31. If at first you don't succeed, you're not Chuck Norris.
    
32. Chuck Norris destroyed the periodic table, because Chuck Norris only recognizes the element of surprise.
    
33. It is believed dinosaurs are extinct due to a giant meteor. That's true if you want to call Chuck Norris a giant meteor.
    
34. The truth will set you free. Unless Chuck Norris has you, in which case, forget it!
    
35. Chuck Norris doesnt wear a watch, HE decides what time it is.