Drug addiction is one of the few things people can get involved in that is still considered a problem — something that needs to be repented of. Still, there are efforts to normalize even this behavior despite the fact that it’s obviously self-destructive and destructive of others. The consequences can be rather overt. Drug addicts rarely claim to be happy people. The high doesn’t last. The withdrawal is crushing, and it almost always requires debasing yourself to finance it.
And yet, there are always people who equate unconditional love with unconditional support of the addiction. And it’s true that the addict believes the codependent enabler is the person who loves them the most while they are in the throes of the addiction. But in actuality, it is the person willing to risk losing the relationship if the person doesn’t repent who truly loves the addict. And if the addict repents, they almost always see that.
The same is true for other addictions as well, including the addiction to sin in general. Love is wanting to see a person freed from the addiction from the high — free to reconcile themselves with God.
Using a person’s addiction to gain control and influence over them, so you can artificially become their “special person” isn’t love. In other words, encouraging or enabling them to sin, so they’ll need you and, therefore, make you feel special isn’t love.
Two categories of people who tend to be picked on are people who underperform the group and those who outperform the group. People who are bullied can be nice people, but they can also be people who would have been bullies themselves if circumstances had broken their way.
There are plenty of well-performing narcissists in the world, but it appears as though there are even more underperforming ones. But then, with narcissists even being perceived of as average is considered by them to be a form of bullying since it means they won’t be getting the praise and attention they covet.
Wokeism is basically a movement of narcissists, so one of its features is a preoccupation with making these underperforming narcissists into some kind of victim class. What I have been seeing is contests rigged in favor of narcissists from a woke-created victim class. It is clear the contest is unfair in the eyes of the non-woke audience and participants. The chosen “winner” is not the best and/or isn’t even qualified to participate. But their winning achieves a victory for the narcissistic woke movement. It gives the narcissist their narcissistic supply of attention and praise — something they feel they have been unjustly deprived of. It also gives them the credibility of being declared the winner by people with the power and authority to bequeath the recognition — even if it obviously isn’t true. Those same power people can even punish the people who object to the unfairness of the narcissist’s adoration bash and refuse to participate.
Yes, you can’t be allowed to refuse to participate. You certainly aren’t allowed to have a contest where one of their own can’t be declared by them to be the winner. And the reason they can’t be declared the winner is because they simply are not qualified to win. No, all eyes must be on the narcissist — even if they’re scornful eyes. And the narcissist must also be able to revel in the defeated look on the rightful winner’s face as the narcissist gets their revenge for their own mediocrity by stealing the winner’s reward for themselves.
One of the things I’ve noticed lately is that about the only people you can’t deny having a relationship with are psychopaths. If they want you or want what you have, that’s it apparently. And really, it’s counterintuitive but it seems as though the worse a person treats you, the more you’re obligated to relate to them. Part of it is people’s warped idea of the concept of forgiveness — which in this case is more like masochism. You can forgive people from afar. You don’t have to have or start a relationship with them. Not only are there a lot of unrepentant people in the world who have no intention of changing their behavior, who continue to feel entitled to having their will at other people’s expense and are all too willing to use violence or the threat of violence in order to have their way, there’s also the loss of trust and post-traumatic stress to consider. Sometimes the damage to a relationship is far too great to recover from.
But the sympathy rarely goes to the victim of abuse. The perpetrator is allowed to be angry. But as the victim, if you’re angry you’re the problem. You’re a worse person than the perpetrator because you won’t forgive — which really has been redefined by our society to be the same as reconcile. And if you have to be angry as a self-defense mechanism, people take for granted that you have other feelings, too. You are hurt; you are grieving; you possibly loved this person. You’re afraid.
But in a way it makes sense. Psychopaths and malignant narcissists would rather just be themselves without having to put on a show. They want to treat people however they please without those people running away from them. And what better way to get someone to keep taking their abuse than to convince them that they don’t have the right to reject them?
In the end, you’re not supposed to focus on how your abuser treats you but rather how they feel. And how they feel is apparently a justification for whatever they do.
One of the fallouts from people’s discretionary income being taken away from them due to inflation is that things regular people used to do to support society through charity and responsible pet ownership also goes away. Back in the time of Henry VIII, Henry VIII declared himself the head of the church then raided the monasteries. The monasteries supported the poor; Henry VIII and elites who profited from the money seized did not.
It seems every time the government volunteers to replace the philanthropy of the people and do the job itself, it fails. They don’t want to use the money for the people it was allocated for — they want to use it on themselves and for their own agendas. Very quickly it becomes their money. The intended recipients become a burden they can’t afford to support. Soon, like a corrupt person who takes money in the form of a loan from a third party, they begin to think if that person weren’t around they wouldn’t need to repay. You can see that in healthcare and in Social Security. In health care, there are the POST (POLST) and MOST (MOLST) forms in most states all over the country, which encourage the chronically ill or those not anticipated to live past a set period of time to forgo things like antibiotics, food, and water. For example, New York’s MOLST form states, “This Medical Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (MOLST) form is generally for patients with advanced illness who require long-term care services
and/or who might die within 1-2 years.* The MOLST may also be used for individuals who wish to avoid and/or receive specific life-sustaining treatments.”
Criteria differs per state. Many require some sort of signature from the patient, even if it’s just an e-signature. Some states like Alaska and Tennessee only require the physician (or in some cases certain other health care professionals) to sign the form. In Tennessee, the criteria for signing away a patient’s life by a health care professional is that the professional wouldn’t be surprised if the patient died within a set period of time. The Tennessee POST form reads: “POST is not for everyone, but is designed for seriously ill or frail patients who wish to limit treatment in some way. To determine whether a POST should be considered, clinicians should ask themselves: “Would I be surprised if this patient died or lost decision-making capacity in the next year”? If the answer is, “No I would not be surprised,” then a goals-of-care discussion and advance care planning with POST is appropriate to consider. Each treatment on the form should be evaluated and discussed based on what, if any, benefit it has for the patient.”
Some of the forms, even those that insist on a patient’s signature, nevertheless allow the frail or the chronically ill to opt for euthanasia on the basis that basically their lives are just not worth living. Needless to say, I expect pressure is applied to these people to opt for death. It really was a macabre experience when I stumbled across this information. These forms managed to make it through state legislatures through most of the states in the county without my being aware of them. I personally would never want to live in a state where the patient’s signature is not required. But I’m dubious of e-signatures as well. If a signature doesn’t have to be witnessed and/or can’t be verified then what good is it?
The Tennessee form includes the following:
“The POST form is not intended to replace an advance directive, but can be used for seriously ill patients, even if they do not have an advance directive. It is recommended that patients with a life-limiting illness have two (2) documents: Advance directive that includes appointment of a health care agent (also called a power of attorney for health care (3) and scenario-based treatment directives POST (Physician Orders for Scope of Treatment)”
Notice the words are intended and recommended not required.
Tennessee POST form reads: “The POST from may be prepared by any health care professional. To be valid, the form
must be signed by a physician, or at discharge from a hospital or long term care facility by a nurse practitioner (NP), clinical nurse specialist (CNS), or physician assistant (PA). Verbal orders are acceptable with follow-up signature by the physician in accordance with facility/community policy. The preparer should fill out the health care professional information on the front of the form. The professional who signs the POST form is assuming full responsibility for the medical orders and attests that these orders are an accurate reflection of the patient’s current treatment preferences.”
Tennessee POST form reads: “Patient or Surrogate Signature
Tennessee is one of a few states that does not require the patient or surrogate to sign the POST form. However providers are strongly encouraged to have the patient or surrogate, as appropriate, sign it, due to increasing concerns about Tennessee POST forms not being honored in states requiring patient signatures.”
“Health care facilities are also required to honor specific orders contained in the POST. The POST form itself can serve as the order set, or new orders consistent with those on the POST form can be written, per facility policy.
Specifically for first responders, the Board for Licensing Health Care Facilities has defined the Emergency Medical Technicians (EMT) and Para-Medic Scope of Practice so that Tennessee-certified First Responder or EMT are required to comply with POST forms appropriately executed if signed on discharge from a hospital or long term care facility (by a physician, nurse practitioner, clinical nurse specialist, or physician assistant).”
You can read more about the Tennessee POLST form here:
Meanwhile, people are abandoning their dogs in dog parks. And the number of strays is increasing. The shelter system is overwhelmed. People increasingly can’t afford their own pets, can’t afford to adopt pets, and I suspect can’t afford to fix their pets. Eventually, they will begin rounding up these cats and dogs and putting them to death — if they haven’t already. Death is the solution that is their ultimate answer to everything. Let the problem get so bad that the public just wants the problem to go away. Then, they introduce death as the solution. Increasingly, it’s becoming a solution people are willing to live with.
jenniferalicechandler 