think-ing outside the box

 December 23rd 2009

I know of a group of lawyer's, who empower each other unwittingly I suppose, due to the nature of each other as subject to the curious study upon hours investing in law itself. I have never had the grades in school to mention of it myself. However, something tell's me of a difficult nature, somewhat absurd existential condition that polarity creates.

Much of the lawyer's convictions rest on serving the public interest, (or those that seek out the more powerful are. . . not vain. . .) so to speak of the law as critical to a lack of evil. i.e. we speak of evil in terms of moral's. So, it is not hard to pronounce, how unequal we are, for the most part, we abandon ourselves of those moral codes, deciphered beyond a wisdom of my own doing. You see, will a lawyer satisfy that appetite for truth, when I play my own part of a tragic ending, is a question of product.

Lawyer's, are - especially are - the kind of expert experience in shaping almost anything that's out there. Certainly, it takes a special kind of knowledge, which I am unduly unaware of. However, without resorting to minimizing the fact's of life, or evidence as they like to call it, I wonder. I wonder how unpowerful I am, for the most part of my life, that I began running backward toward a much simpler definition of myself. Then, it struck me, that I am even less powerful in terms of what I fear most. No, not lawyer's that I fear. But, lawyers that protect the public interest, fear - is a matter of dignity. That which I admire.

So I began to re-examine the issue of morality, what makes me completely impromptu, shall we say - to purchase a beverage over the starbucks counter. Do I give a sense of admonition, or cause that in any natural respect that changes the outcome over time, which of course should not matter. Now let's say I am a lawyer, doing the same thing, what then happens will happen. Did the purchase go through, did it come as I pleased, did I pay in full. I consider this to be a trademark of fair legal advice, to no greater extent, I am a gratuitous individual.

Now - as law plays a role, statute's and all, what game do we play with fair equal part's of the true nature of morality, a context if you will. Some want to make you, the thought, a spilling of marbles, perhaps the eye's will tell me, from that law abiding expert, how foolish I must be compared to the heart I wear on my sleeve each time we cross path's. There it is, the question of heart, of will, of teasing out the finer qualities I may have.

The solution is made-in-(country), we fill in the blank, then I find out how resourceful most feel without resorting to unconstructive measures. If the law were to find out how guilt presumes innocence, than, we are charged with something provocative. So, the problem is - law - that Law has it's enemies. Law must find a way to deduce if criminal a source. Which makes this problem a very sad thing to write about.

It is unfortunate, that circumstance does not allow one to think in terms of deviant behavior automatically. I have lived in many ways, different, but ordinary in terms of reality in space, time, then some form of resentment disqualifies me. It's been weird to process, but, I feel none of it matters. What matter's is the morality you have, though only that, morality has taken issue without you noticing is the same for laywer's as it is equal to achieve. In thought, I have no use for the most damning thing I think of, when I observe the least moral thing I can think of. The thought's don't ever match. So, it's weird to think of anything pass judgment onto - myself. It's this kind of thinking, that has taken me so long to sort out. It is next to impossible to think in terms of deregulation. So, a pragmatic form of reasoning might be the most crucial thing people neglect at any given time.

I support reconciliation between greater vs. greatest - king-kong vs. godzilla - david vs. goliath, but nothing ever stopped me to consider it has no meaning. So, this leads me to believe the law, is just another thing that stops me. It's nothing more than that, which makes this a reflection of connection to good things I mind.

I may be a leftist thinker, a conservative yet liberal human being, a measure of social success with communist psyche, but I never thought I would apologize for it, even if someone tried to make me. I have practiced to stop, there. I draw a line, the crossing point, and I measure myself first, then the other alienating me. It seems to march on. It is though, an illusion brought about certain trial and error in approach. It work's.

Something told me, from a very early age, that I would be a quite archetype of linear, free-thinking, lover of the moment. The moment - of extraordinary mute experiences. A good story reader, for a fortune told. Not my fortune, but my expense. I choose that level of ingenuity, because I was born with it, nobody could tell me otherwise. Somehow, I survived. I survived that need, even if it was countered with corruption on a moral less congenial attribute. I cared. That was/is my point. I forget what being mislead is about, or as apologetic might resemble human reason. Gullibility, or naive shallow pretension. I never believe what should be happening, I drop the should from everything.