a) what if resisting suggested "we" (pluralism) would allow one to regain control (govern) of ones mind/memory (ment)?
b) what if suggested "need to be" tempts one to ignore perceivable need for being?
c) to be implies "towards being", yet while alive one is being moved from inception towards death, so not towards being, but within loss of being...unless resisted.
we the people
a) who wrote the "we the people" as the preamble of the constitution...the people or those writing in the name of the people?
b) can a few represent a many without each one of the many ignoring to respond to presented as oneself?
c) why do the few remain "apart" while suggesting the many to come "together"?
become corrupted
What if consenting to suggested "be-come" corrupts one from comprehending perceivable "came-to-be"? Become tempts towards outcome; came to be implies out of origin.
a) what if resisting suggested "we" (pluralism) would allow one to regain control (govern) of ones mind/memory (ment)?
b) what if suggested "need to be" tempts one to ignore perceivable need for being?
c) to be implies "towards being", yet while alive one is being moved from inception towards death, so not towards being, but within loss of being...unless resisted.
a) who wrote the "we the people" as the preamble of the constitution...the people or those writing in the name of the people?
b) can a few represent a many without each one of the many ignoring to respond to presented as oneself?
c) why do the few remain "apart" while suggesting the many to come "together"?
What if consenting to suggested "be-come" corrupts one from comprehending perceivable "came-to-be"? Become tempts towards outcome; came to be implies out of origin.