(no subject)
I will take you down on the blackest Sunday morning when the righteous are to rise and drown you under the cold, murky water. I will wash your tear stained cheeks and whisper goodbyes as you choke on my apathy.
All my life I have been told that I should "do something for myself". When I actually make decisions based on a need for my own preservation, I am labeled self-absorbed. How does one walk such fine lines? People love a selfless person unless a person's selflessness impacts their own wishes negatively. Great minds say that there is a virtue in a selfish man, and yet, when one acts for the self they are hated if it lets down others. A part of me must always be sacrificing for others, but there has awakened within me a voice that argues that even I, faulted though I may be, have a right to be happy. It is impossible to exist between these two worlds. . .To do what truly makes one happy, one often has to let down those he or she cares about. All I can gather from that knowledge is that to be selfish is to not care about others; though, that does not ring quite true. Putting the individual first can appear both moral and immoral. If one does not look out for oneself then is he not spitting his creation back into the face of god? If one believes that our goal is to experience and better ourselves, how can we in good conscience neglect ourselves? How can a man appreciate anything around him or the life he has been given if he can not first appreciate himself and determine whether he feels worthy of these things? How can a man ever be aware of anything outside of him if he is not aware of himself? On the other hand, from the other side of the same religious law, how can a man call himself a good man if he does not sacrifice for others? We see a man who seeks to further himself as greedy. We look at a man who appreciates his abilities and call him shallow and a braggart. As a society, we believe that suicide is wrong, but what is a man doing every day that he ignores himself? Is he not allowing himself to die in the name of generosity, of "human decency"?
Maybe one day I will find peace with this issue.
All my life I have been told that I should "do something for myself". When I actually make decisions based on a need for my own preservation, I am labeled self-absorbed. How does one walk such fine lines? People love a selfless person unless a person's selflessness impacts their own wishes negatively. Great minds say that there is a virtue in a selfish man, and yet, when one acts for the self they are hated if it lets down others. A part of me must always be sacrificing for others, but there has awakened within me a voice that argues that even I, faulted though I may be, have a right to be happy. It is impossible to exist between these two worlds. . .To do what truly makes one happy, one often has to let down those he or she cares about. All I can gather from that knowledge is that to be selfish is to not care about others; though, that does not ring quite true. Putting the individual first can appear both moral and immoral. If one does not look out for oneself then is he not spitting his creation back into the face of god? If one believes that our goal is to experience and better ourselves, how can we in good conscience neglect ourselves? How can a man appreciate anything around him or the life he has been given if he can not first appreciate himself and determine whether he feels worthy of these things? How can a man ever be aware of anything outside of him if he is not aware of himself? On the other hand, from the other side of the same religious law, how can a man call himself a good man if he does not sacrifice for others? We see a man who seeks to further himself as greedy. We look at a man who appreciates his abilities and call him shallow and a braggart. As a society, we believe that suicide is wrong, but what is a man doing every day that he ignores himself? Is he not allowing himself to die in the name of generosity, of "human decency"?
Maybe one day I will find peace with this issue.