Parents already payed credit (creed; belief; faith) to suggested LGBT; daughter consented by faith to the suggested creed; doctors consented to payment for services rendered, and the chosen ones who suggested money have thereby gained consent by each part involved to be claim as M_ONE_Y aka MY ONE.
The way it basically works is that your being is a walking frequency in itself
- work represents energy (inherent/internal power)
- being represents resistance (life) within way of velocity (inception towards death)
- frequency represents adaptation by choice at short intervals within balance.
- velocity/resistance aka loss/growth represents the internal power of energy in balance.
Frequent adaptation as living within the process of dying HURTS (hertz)...
Edit: try humming until you run out of resistance within sound; then repeat while humming OHM...
...takes no...
a) how could nothing be taken from everything?
b) if everything (perceivable) is given to everyone (perceiving), then what does taking nothing imply? Maybe consenting to suggested, while ignoring perceivable?
transgression
a) TRANSGRESS', verb - "to pass over or beyond any limit"...how could free will of choice transgress limit, if choice implies being within limit (balance)?
Otherwise...how could choice exit outside balance? How could one be free (living) without being dominated by (process of dying)?
b) what if ones consent to the suggested choices of others represent self imposed limits, while giving others ones consent to transgress upon ones free will of choice?
"I of Raw" aka set apart; instead of mixed.
Nature sets itself apart from whole (process of dying) into each partial (living)...others within nature tempt one to mix aka e pluribus unum (out of many, one) aka tikkun olam (healing the world by bringing together) aka equality (same) through diversity (different) aka united states; united nations; european union; universal pictures; uniformity; unilever, unisex etc.
a) NON (suggested nothing) SENSE (everything perceivable)
b) what's the symbol for nothing? What's the symmetry of nothing? What's the meaning of nothing? How could one sense nothing? How could nothing communicate itself? Why do the many suggest "no; non; not; nothing; nothingness" to each other?
Put a father on stage and have him point at the seats filled with his children "this is what healthy sperm looks like", then let him point at the audience "if you came here to see unhealthy sperm, then look at yourselves".
Rumor has it that the audience is still waiting for a father reckless enough to bring his children to watch fear-porn...
a) perceivable symmetry represents predefined meaning; suggested symbolism represents redefined meaning, which tempts whoever consents to ignore predefined meaning.
b) one represents the G (generated) within the balance of upward triangle (male; motion) and downward triangle (female; momentum)...suggesting male (process of dying) without female (momentum) tempts trans (life) to ignore the sustenance of self as choice within balance (momentum of motion).
c) the few corrupt ALL (perceivable) seeing I (perceiving) with suggested eye of providence (foresight), hence suggesting progressivism (towards outcome) as the inversion of adaptation (perceiving) to origin (perceivable).
Having mind/memory allows ones free will of choice to balance in-between hindsight/foresight simultaneously, hence struggling to resist the temptation to want suggested (foresight) or wanting to hold onto suggested (hindsight)...the more one resists both, the more balanced ones choices will be.
can no longer rise
Ongoing loss (process of dying) generates temporary growth (living)...being implies "risen from the grave".
the higher levels of the deep state
a) what if ones state (choice) is within level (balance)?
b) if high (comprehension) and low (ignorance), then one would always have the free will of choice to grow higher or sink lower...
morality comes from...
a) MORAL (manner; behavior; conduct) implies ones reaction to being moved by; within and in response to.
b) Moral-ity implies ones consent to suggested moral-ism aka rules of behavior as suggested by others who are also moved, hence the temptation to ignore origin (motion) for substitute (emotion).
a) DIS- (lack of) EASE (to help, assist)...everything (perceivable) is offered to everyone (perceiving); everything assists everyone who chooses to help oneself.
b) EASE; noun - "physical comfort, undisturbed state of the body; tranquility, peace of mind"...that requires one to resist the physical discomfort; disturbed state of the body; turmoil and chaos of mind; while temporary living within the ongoing process of dying.
- discomfort (living) within comfort (inception towards death)
- disturbed (living) within undisturbed (inception towards death)
- turmoil (living) within tranquility (inception towards death)
- chaos (living) within order (inception towards death)
a) MISSION (act of sending, a dispatching; a release) + SUB (under) aka inception towards death (mission) sending; dispatching and releasing life (sub)....
b) being sub (life) within mission (inception towards death) implies resisting as choice, not consenting to choices.
c) try this...if you ever find yourself in submission to another...notice that you can always choose to go deeper or higher, hence representing free will of choice.
Suggested submission represents a distraction; tempting one to ignore being sub within mission.
d) suggested "of course" tempts one (life) to ignore being within course (inception towards death).
e) suggested "without" represents the inversion of living "within" the process of dying aka center (perceiving) within surrounding (perceivable).
f) CON (against) SENT (Latin sentire; to perceive)...hence consenting to suggested; while ignoring perceivable.
comparing gambling to voting is not the same thing...
a) gamblers are addicted to loss; voters always lose. Both represent shirking of response-ability (free will of choice) onto the suggested choices of others.
b) sameness (process of dying) generates differences (living)...others tempt one to ignore perceivable differences for suggested sameness, like equality (same) through diversity (difference)...
I'm not expecting different results, I'm hoping
a) doesn't every life represent a different result of the same origin?
b) hoping implies wanted outcomes; living implies need to adapt to origin. Try holding your breath while hoping...
a) same objective (process of dying); different results (living)...
b) INSANE (in sanus; within sound) + PERSON (per sonos; by sound)...what if ignoring perceivable sound for suggested words represents "mark my words"?
the civic process
a) suggested CIVIC (city) implies surrounding a center. What if that represents the inversion of being center (perceiving) of surrounding (perceivable)?
b) does one really own a civic DUTY (that which a person owes to another) or does each one (life) need to adapt to being processed (inception towards death)?
cost
What if perceivable represents value and each one perceiving represents evaluation? Can there be a higher value than evaluation? What if the whole (process of dying) represents the cost, and each partial (living) the price? Why is it called PAY (to discharge a debt) MENT (mind; memory)?
You’re a slave and will...
Does free "will" of choice imply slavery to others? What if will represents ones want to submit to others, while ignoring the need to resist temptations? What if want represents the temptation for need?
voting costs you nothing
Voting implies ones willing consent (want or not want) to the suggestions of others, hence tempting one a) into a conflict of reason (want vs not want) and b) into a choice (consent) to choice (suggestion) contract, hence binding oneself to the will of others.
That being said....everything represents perceivable; nothing represents a suggestion by others to tempt one to ignore perceivable.
chance that you are wrong
a) CHANCE, noun - "effect of an unknown cause"...inception towards death represents the cause; life represents the effect. Those alive cannot perceive "chance"...only ignore perceivable cause for suggested "chances".
b) right vs wrong represents a conflict of reason, shaped by ones consent to the suggested information by another. Nature doesn't communicate right or wrong information; it moves everything, which everyone within perceives as inspiration (moving differences).
your community
What's the difference between your commun-ity and suggested commun-ism by others?
Show me a 'right' and I'll show you ten laws that counter it.'
a) if one consents to suggested rights, then one submits to be at liberty to those suggesting.
b) how those one consent and how do others suggest? By use of "free" will of choice...being implies liberty (liber; free); consenting to the suggested choices by others tempts one to ignore "free" will of choice.
c) nature designates units (Latin unitas; unus, one), hence dividing itself from whole (perceivable) into each partial (perceiving)...others suggest one to count units (plural) which tempts one (singular) to ignore self.
Nature demands adaptation to everything perceivable offered, not counting suggestions by those within nature.
we allow them to screw us
a) consenting to suggested "we" (we the people) and "us" (united states) aka to suggested collectivism (plural) screws one-self (singular).
b) choice (consent) to choice (suggestion) contract law represents the "allowance" for others to "tax" ones ass.
c) as for "them" (plural)....the chosen "ones" (singular).
if...
Implication (if/then) needs to be applied to perceivable (inspiration); not to the suggestions (information by others). Why? Because if one consents to the suggested information by others, then others gain the power of consent to define; redefine and contradict the suggested information at will, hence fucking up ones use of implication.
In short...if consenting to suggested, then no more "ifs" for you. Meanwhile...if adapting to perceivable, then every "if" keeps implying a "then".
Why are Jews pushing these agendas?
If perceiving regent (life) ignores perceivable agent (inception towards death); then others can exploit ignorance with suggested agendas.
In short...the many consent to be pushed by the few.
a) fe (minine) male + wo(mb) man implies a trans-mutation of female out of male.
b) what represents the origin of male and female? What shapes female out of male? What shapes form? Within what can form be shaped?
the key is psychopathic lying
a) what if true (want) vs lie (not want) represents ones consent to suggested information by others?
b) how would suggested lies work if one doesn't consent to suggested truth?
c) if nature offers everything (perceivable) to everyone (perceiving), then who holds the key to open (comprehension) or shut (ignorance) access?
d) inception towards death represents the only PATH; the life within represents each PSYCHE (breath, spirit, soul)...what if consenting to suggested psychoanalysis, while branding others as psychopaths, tempts one to ignore this?
What if life exists in-between FORWARDS GIVING (inception) and FORWARDS GETTING (death)...hence struggling within what it got, while resisting the temptation of what it gets?
a) MOR'AL, adjective [Latin moralis, moris, manner.] - "form; method; way of performing; custom"...flow (inception towards death) defines the morals of form (life)...unless ignored.
b) consenting to suggested moralism gives those suggesting the power of consent to define; redefine and contradict moral behavior.
In short...moral (perceivable) or immoral (suggested) aka need/want (balance) implies ones free will of choice in-between.
- Perceivable morals....life in-between need/want (balance).
- Suggested moralism...life in-between want vs not want (imbalance).
Example: struggling to resist appetite (want) for hunger (need) represents moral; reasoning over hamburger (want) vs cheeseburger (not want) represents immoral...switching sides to cheeseburger (want) vs hamburger (not want) doesn't make falling for the temptation of appetite moral.
Reason (immoral) or Implication (moral)...it's your choice.
Why are you using the term "candidate" when describing their injustices? What if the consent of the many to use the terms suggested by the few represent the foundation to commit injustice right under the nose of those ignoring it?
a) differences (living) are owned by sameness (process of dying)
b) how does nature suggest those within that they can own what they claim?
c) if OWN, adjective - "possession in express exclusion of others", then why all the conflicts with others about ownership? Who is excluded from nature?
Why did the many consent to the suggested revisionism of the 1940 to "homosexual" as the definition for gay? Furthermore; why do so few question the contradiction of HOMO (same; equal) SEX (Latin seco; to divide aka different)?
Why does the marriage vow, formal declaration or contract by which two join in wedlock require a 3rd party? Why does the marriage vow; formal declaration and contract between two to unite (Latin unitas; unus; one) does not constitute a legal marriage?
a) what about the system that just-is (justice) aka free will of choice within the dominance of balance (free-dom)...can that be corrupted?
b) contemplate a central control of all "corrupt injustice systems" (sanhedrin)...could corruption be suggested to distract from the integral system running the show?
Next; contemplate if underneath internet; politics; religion; news; entertainment; education etc. the so called jews have a system (kehillah) to communicate an order faster than all of the others combined? Would that allow them to direct before others can react and to react before others can be directed?