| |
| |
| |
| |
Glen: Virginia, I live in one of those communities that's isolated, with a lot of very protected and protective people that are lashing out at anybody that uses a word like “humanism.” And the tendency is to get on their bandwagon. And I found myself asking, “How do I respond to them—without getting into the one-upmanship and the up/down and all of that, things I know I shouldn't do?” The temptation is so heavy to start answering their arguments, and trying to do them just one better, and that kind of thing.
Virginia: Let me take this opportunity to do something. And remember that anything we concoct is only a possibility. However, I have reason to believe that what I'm going to share with you has a lot—many people know this, I think—a lot to offer. Anybody on the outside of me—let's put it like that—is someone whom I can respond to. They are never the definers of me. They can only be the definers of me if I have handed over my charge of myself to them. And you can do that in many ways. “How could I think differently from somebody?” “They will be mad if I don't.” “They will be hurt if I don't.” Blah, blah, blah, you know. Can you fill in the “blah blah's”? OK. All right.
Now there are people around, people who do what you said. They've got certain trigger words, and those words have certain images, and all that kind of stuff. And there's a lot of it going on, because people are scared. And they want—they think they're going to get security in new words.
All right. So now here's your friend. By the way, would you do something? Just role-play with me one of your friends, and I'm going to be somebody who is very clear about the fact that whatever is outside of me I respond to, and it's never a definition of me. So tell me, let's have a little role-play.
| |
| |
| |
| |
