Blog and Law

Pre-Note

This paper is to settle any recent dispute about me.
Section labeled "puzzler" gives my viewpoint.
The final section below "Pause" may help calm the issue. (This paper was written at a speed similar to light jogging. )

Laws

A casual discussion about the nature of good and bad toward law is next.

Good is in harmony with all of life; Bad is in discord or dissatisfied with life, it is the opposite; Dissatisfaction holds opportunities for improvement.
Subcategories of life are 'people' and 'property'. By nature, good people are in harmony with people and property. By nature, bad people want to harm people and destroy property.
The easy illustration is bad people want to hurt good people; Otherwise, bad intentions want to hurt good intentions. Therefore, Law was made for bad people and good people to live together in harmony.

Anarchy reaches toward utter destruction; Law was made by good intentions and dissatisfaction to prevail over destruction. As a result, to preserve life, people, and property, law was made to safeguard everyone and everything.

It's said we are gods or potential gods, and can be called the children of God. We can strive to be a good god or bad god. A god can travel the pursuit for enjoyment of his/her wish.
All of common man-made law are, men are allowed to do what he/she wants to do, as long as it's in agreement with mankind and their basic standards of health and safety.

Safe law includes safeguards from emotional harm. Emotional harm occurs, when the will of a first person executes his will especially with pressure onto a second person, when the will of the second person does not approve or agree.
Law had responded by making a safeguard as follows.

When in progress on the foundation of legality, when 2 people proceed to an effect, if the first person executes his will onto a second person, if that second person agrees then it is legal.
When in progress on the foundation of legality, when 2 people proceed to an effect, if the first person executes his will onto a second person, if that second person does not agree then it is illegal.

Puzzler

For someone I liked, I began to interact with an abstraction. By this, a communicative channel and way was supplied. We both tried it. Here, through the communicating line we conveyed our care. In this interaction, time had passed. Afterwards, their was a second abstract presence I saw from someone else. By traces, for months, I felt an interest from this second source. By willingness of communication from the communicator resulted as my decision to interact with the abstract line. This abstract new individual I thought was a girl from my past, but I wasn't sure.

A confusing riddle I pondered. The person in the abstract communication was interested, yet the girl of actuality did not seem to willingly participate - both I thought were the same someone.

It means the communicator in the abstract line who participated, and the person in reality who did not participate are 2 different beings or persons.

It's puzzling. IF I interacted with 1 person who was interested in the abstraction, how did it hurt a different girl who was not willing in reality?

Pause

*** When I wrote "Times" on Oct 28, I didn't know she was hurt days before. I discovered her sadness about 2 weeks after I wrote it.
If I was involved in hurting the girl of my past I give my apology:
" I didn't mean to hurt anyone. I'm very sorry."
I broke that line of communication and stopped the adventure, about weeks ago.
What's real, and what's not? To this day, I'm not sure.

Before I said goodbye to her last year, I've been acquainted with this girl for years. Because of our history from my present standpoint , if she had any request easy to give I would try to grant it.

Please find strength to heal and to feel well and glad again.

_________________

Posted: Dec 8, 2025, 6:30am PDT

Updated: Dec 9, 2025, 4:30am; 2:50am PDT -- I corrected some big errors.