Month: April 2016

Pere on ühiskonna jätkumise alustala. Ilma perekonnata pole jätkusuutlikku ühiskonda.

Kui inimene on vallaline, siis ta otsustab enda eest ja ainult enda eest. Eraeluliselt ei pea ta kellegagi arvestama. Kui inimene abiellub, siis ta peab arvestama enda abikaasaga ja kooskõlastama otsused. Kõik otsused ja teod mõjutavad nüüd kahte inimest: meest ja naist. Abielu toimib siis, kui esimeseks pannakse teise inimese soovid ja tahted ning seda peavad tegema mõlemad, nii mees kui naine. Kui perre sünnivad lapsed, siis mehe ja naise kooselu on ööpäevaringse jälgimise all. Sellest, kuidas mees ja naine käituvad, tehakse järeldusi, kuidas ise käituda. Vaadatakse, kuidas olukordi tekitatakse ja lahendatakse. Kas ollakse suunanäitajad või sabassörkijad. Kas kästakse või palutakse. Kõik, mida ja kuidas tehakse, talletub lapses ning laps otsustab, mida korrata, mida kordamata jätta ja mida hoopis teisiti teha.

Kui laps saab täiskasvanuks ning alustab iseseisvat elu, siis kõik see, mida ta on kogenud enda peres, saab olema tema elu suunanäitajaks. Kõik see: kuidas tema suhtleb oma vanematega, oma sõpradega, võõrastega, oma abikaasaga, oma lastega – rajaneb sellele, millises peres ta on kasvanud.

Selline ühiskond on jätkusuutlik, kuna sellel on sisseehitatud mehhanism, mis tagab traditsioonide, kombestiku, ellusuhtumise kandumise ühelt põlvkonnalt teisele. Selliselt elab ühiskond edasi.

Kui perekond ei rajane teise soovide täitmisel, vaid enda tahte täitmisel, siis see pärandatakse edasi ka lastele. Ühiskond, kus kõik ajavad taga enda tahtmist ja õigusi, ei ole jätkusuutlik, sest teistega ei arvestata. See ei olegi enam ühiskond, see on üksikkond. Üksikkonna tekkega on ühiskond surnud.

Üksikkonna tekkimiseks on soodne pinnas siis, kui huvigrupid hakkavad nõudma õigusi, mis loomulikus elukeskonnas on eriõiguste nime all,  kui inimeste väljendusvõimalusi ei korralda kombed, vaid seadusepügalad – kui kaine mõistus asendub seaduse paragrahvides näpuga järje ajamisega.

Ka Eesti ühiskond on saamas väga kiiresti üksikkonnaks.

Abortion is a very controversy subject. Sides that take part in the decision making are more than one.  Usually they are the mother and abortionist, sometimes the father is involved. But there are people left aside who also need to have a say. The most important of them – the child. The child must have the biggest say, because it is his life that is at stake. It is the child’s body that is being destroyed during abortion. It is not the mothers body, it is the child’s body. When  the egg got fertilized a new DNA code got created and from that point onward there is a new body inside the mother, new life, new human being. That DNA is different from the mother and father, thus it is a new human being. A new human being that has its own will, a right to decide what is done with his body. That person is not asked what does he choose. His father and mother decided at conception what they wanted. They choose their choice and decided their decision.  It is out of their hands now. Now there is new life and its continuation nor termination isn’t up for the parents to decide. If the life is terminated then they are deciding over the child’s body and not the mothers body. It doesn’t matter how long the child has been growing inside the mother – was it one day or twelve weeks – the decision is made over a new life and nobody asks from the child what does he want.

To live a human being doesn’t need two arms, two legs and internal organs. If you take a finger he will still live. If you take his hand he’ll still live. If you take all his limbs, eyes, nose, ears and hairs he will still live on. He is even capable to survive without some internal organs. It is clear that a human doesn’t need his body in all its perfection. Thus, when DNA is created in the fertilized egg then he is human then too. Since if he is not human then who is he?

Thus, if you terminate a human life even when he is still inside the mother, doesn’t matter how old of a life, then it is the same if you would terminate a human life when his is outside the mother, doesn’t matter how old of a life. There is one piece of information that is there when the egg is fertilized, when the life reaches its peak and when the life becomes to an end: it is DNA. It is always inside the body and it begun after the fertilization.

Bachelor  and bachelorette nights are rituals. Rituals that mark an end of a chapter.

For some reason this night is looked through a broken mirror. An evening that should be the last night where friends get together to do things as they have done. One last time friends together. Because the next time it will be with the friend and the spouse. It’ll be fun but it will not be the same as it was before. The evening when it is looked back to the past and looked to the future has become a night that is passed pressing the lucky one through a meat grinder.

It should be a night that is waited with great anticipation, but it is something that is rather avoided.

Those who organize the evening can be divided in to two: single and married.

Single ones can for the last time do the things that where done until now. The married friends can share experiences and help the friend to the right track, so he shouldn’t reinvent the wheel. All of this can be done with good manners and respect.

My personal opinion is that the friends who don’t know what I want and what I think don’t really know me. Thus they aren’t really my friends…

Men communicate with one another through conversation. In that conversation men listen to the word that are being said and only those words that word that are being said.

Women on the other hand communicate with words that are being said and also with those words that are not being said.

When you mix these to forms of communications there will be casualties on both sides.

Here can be a problem: when a man asks from a woman “What did I do wrong?” and the answer is “It’s not what you did but it’s what you didn’t do!” Mans brain goes into meltdown since it is trying to figure out all the things he didn’t do and the things he should have done and those things that he didn’t do and he shouldn’t have done.

Innovation is combining two and/or more existing services and/or products to one and/or more services and/or products.

Good examples are internet banking and mobile parking. In both cases already existing resources were used to improve an existing service. Nothing new was created. Nothing new wasn’t invented, innovation happened.

Law is behavioral code that is accepted collectively.

Art is means to express oneself and the goal of that expression is to stimulate the observes brain functions and/or to express ones state of mind.

One can base their knowledge on two things: experience and faith. It’s easy to say “I know it because I saw it!” Why is it so indescribably hard to say “I know, because I believe!” One can’t say he has experienced everything he knows. There is knowledge that has no other proof than the belief in them. Those peaces of knowledge are based on faith. Easiest example is learning a foreign language. Thatcher teaches a new expression and the student has to believe that what the teacher has just said means just that what the teacher said it means. If the student would learn the language by double of triple checking everything, it would take considerably longer to learn the new language.

It is not possible to experience everything. Even if someone would base all their knowledge on their experience and things that they have seen, then that persons knowledge will be very limited.

If all knowledge would be based on tests and experiences and some more tests then the development of that society would stop.

Thus we need faith to progress faster in our lives.

The question what has been asked from the beginning of time. The answer to this question is sought out by men all over the planet. Surprisingly women want to know the wording of this answer. I have been married for over six years. Only a few days I have been away from my wife. We have sailed quiet seas and we have sailed the stormy seas. I have got to know her. Now after these years and what we have gone through I can make a generalizing deduction.

Women want that men would know what women want.

Simple as that. That is what women want. But it gets more complicated on the mens side. Men must know their wives well enough that he would know what his wife wants and he must act accordingly. Man must not say to the woman what she wants nor ask her what she wants, but the man must know it and must be brave enough to go out and act on it. All or nothing. That’s the material that makes a man. Not playing lottery with his family but well-considered decision what will make the family stronger.

Women need security. Not only financial but also physical. Women need some one to lean on some one who would be there at any time. Men are supposed to be strong but this should not be expected from women. Women are gentle and that should not be changed.