If you are having private thoughts and ask an intimate friend to listen to them in privacy or on a date will that be considered too intimi-dating? And if the thoughts are proved to be untrue, but your friend still insists on believing in them anyway, would that be considered a cons-piracy?

When national ideals are confined to insignificant issues reflective primarily of a personal choice, there lies a problem of distorted priorities.

Reason, ruling alone, is a force confining; and passion, unattended, is a flame that burns to its own destruction.

My rather arrogant attitude deludes me into believing that my ability to understand something is the criteria for its legitimacy. And if there’s one thing in my life that I don’t understand yet I allow to be legitimate, thinking this way would most certainly be it.

While some consider God's standards as too confining, a true believer sees them as loving and freeing.

Maybe we should remember that logic constructs a box that is far too small for wonder to take up residence in. Therefore, the crucial question is, ‘Will we choose to live there if wonder cannot?