When I first moved to Utah, not thinking anything of it, I put my hair up in rag-curls, threw on a sweatshirt and cut-offs and went to WalMart. Good heck - you'd have thought I was the oddest looking thing around! One woman literally almost crashed her nice, new minivan because she was so busy staring - mouth agape! - at me! Sorry, I didn't realize that a trip to the corner department store required jacket and tie! Liberal this town is not!

I honestly think the only reason I survive here is because I moved so much as a kid. You know the old saying "bloom where you're planted"? I usually wasn't in the same dirt long enough to bother. I agree with Nomda on the point of travelling.

By the way, Nomda, thanks for chipping in. I was beginning to wonder....do Survivor and I put off some sort of "vibe" when we get into the same room? We always seem to end up alone.

Have you signed up for a writing group and are still waiting? If so - that's strange, you've been here longer than I have and I'm into one!

Oh, woe is me. Wae is mae! Why don't I have a group?

I'll write Kath again. That's how it's done, right?

She saw my picture and decided not to let me in on the fun, or she's been reading my posts.

She'd better put you in mine. We seem to have opinionation in spades!

It seems to me that it’s a good idea to find out why a person believes what he does.

When I was a youth (back in the early cretaceous according to my kids), I loved to argue about religion. I started to realize that, although it was loads of fun, it was also futile. I got to know another young fellow of a different faith who also liked to argue.

We soon learned that we were each barking up different trees. For instance, we thought we both believed in resurrection. But when one of us insisted that we each ought to define just what we meant by resurrection, it became clear that we each had a much different understanding of resurrection. It was that way with just about every concept. How can you have a descent argument when you don’t have a clue what the other guy is putting forth about, for crying out loud !

We started to explore just why we each believed what we did, and we each discovered that the other guy wasn’t such an imbecile after all. Which thing we never had supposed before. We became pretty good friends and had many a real zinger discussion.

That way of looking at things has forced me to give up a lot of my prejudices. I’m still not real tolerant of some behaviors, mind you, but I have grown more empathetic toward people.

Peoples’ belief systems (religion, code of ethics, what have you) seem to me to be somewhat analogous to math systems. Loosely analogous, to be sure, and people are much more complex than a few silly numbers, but still . . .

In math, you have a set of axioms which you can’t prove. You have to take them on faith. But the whole system grows into a self-consistent discipline that becomes useful to varying degrees and for various things. That’s not to say one math system is consistent with another. Look at plane and solid geometries, for instance. They are both useful, however. Mainly to give students nightmares.

Now, just because I can understand why another believes the things he does, doesn’t mean I have to reject my own beliefs. It’s true, I do take my own axioms on faith. But I must be true to my own feelings --feelings such as peace, serenity, a calm assurance, and things that work. However, I don’t let my beliefs keep me from liking my friends.

One of the things that really torques me off is when people scoff at the old cliché: “Why, some of my best friends are _____.” (Fill in the blank with your favorite “them.”) I don’t know why people scoff at this statement. All of my friends actually are different from me, but I still like them and want to be in their company. That’s because they are my friends.

Of course there are some types of people that are just not likeable – Stalin, Hitler, and yodelers for example.

So maybe, to develop story characters, one must do some research to get to understand another’s belief system. I don’t think one would get very much useful info about Judaism by asking Louis Farrakhan, however. Nor, for that matter, would one get anything useful from Walter Martin who has made a career out of lying about several sects which he calls cults. Or try consulting a disciple of Freud. He’ll just tell you a person does the things he does because he wants to have sex with his own mother. Well, getting at the truth is a crap shoot sometimes. Good luck.

One of the things that I think would be interesting to try, is to invent a whole belief system (alien or human) to use as a background in which to shape characters’ behaviors. I know some SF writers have done just that to great effect. I seem to have read somewhere that you sometimes have to create a whole world and it’s history to act as a framework, even though much of it will never get put into the story. It seems that it would all have to be self-consistent to be workable, though. Unless you happen to be Piers Anthony. (Just kidding. I love his stuff.)

One final point. We fiction writers are liars. I accept that. That’s what we do. But I have a real disdain for the idea that “I lie to get at the bigger Truth.” Get outta here! That sounds too much like Oliver Stoneish tripe to me. (My apologies to menudo lovers everywhere.) No, I’m a liar – pure and simple -- but I’m going to do my best to lie well. And if I can convince you that one of my characters really does enjoy torturing the pet cat of the little girl down the street, then maybe I can sell a story or two. Personally, I like my neighbors’ cats and dogs, even the ones that crap in my yard.

Anyway, in Posting you seem to have taken care of our misdirected tesseract. This is the first time in quite a while that I've seen page two.

I don't think of myself as a liar. I'm an honest person. If I were a liar I would write fiction and try to pass it off as fact. I am an imaginitive person and inventive person who likes to spin tales. I have my audiences permission to do so, therefore I do not qualify as a liar.

I do think that it is implicit in the story, but I also distinctly remember telling you that, when you were asking me about the story. Or maybe I told you that in one of the forums... Hmmm, maybe she did get it from the story. But I'm sure that I helped.

As for the Question of whether I can like people when I happen to know that some of their beliefs are inaccurate, the answer is, of course. After all, some of my beliefs are inaccurate at times. But I do require two things of everyone that I love (which is all of you, so listen up):

1. You have to believe that there is such a thing as Truth.

2. You must be committed to learning the Truth and acting on it.

As for love, I only place one condition on love. When you love someone you have to want the best for them always. It cut's your heart for them to miss out on good things.

Truth is good.

If I were trying to write about him I'm not sure I could write his story completely and unbiasly from his point of view. I could tell it from what I know of him, or what I believe I understand, but how truely could I portray him? Perhaps that is the point you were trying to make in the first place. I guess the question when you are faced with such a dilemma becomes - is it worth trying? I don't know, I wish I did.

But as for trying to pretend that we have different perspectives and beliefs ourselves, well, I just think that makes people look silly.

Read OSC's story HOLY for an example of writing about something that you not only don't believe in, but something you find revolting. (Also 1,000 Deaths and Kings Meat).

I think every writer must at some point in his career write something that is abhorrant to him or her. It need not be published, but it will make them a better writer and better thinker.

Just because something disgusts me doesn't mean the person who believes it and espouses it is wrong. I always try to see it from the other guys point of veiw before I judge their beliefs and actions.

Politics is a good example. I have friends who have drastically different political beliefs than me, who share the same religious beliefs. (LDS) How can that be?! I can justify my political beliefs through my religion as well as they can. So how can we be sitting in the same meeting with such diameterically opposite views?

If their views are grounded in their belief system and they can justify them, whose to say they are wrong. I disagree with them, but that does not indicate that they are stupid or ill informed.

The Anasazi is a good example. From all the reading I have done, I don't come up with the same conclusion as Survivor nor of the general scientific population. And the funny thing is, we are probably all wrong.

Just a question why is everyone spelling Mormon wrong? (Morman instead of Mormon).