Do we choose our friends?

It is interesting what circumstances will do to your life that you don't expect. For example, who would imagine that going through a hard break up would make me take stock of my friends? Perhaps the universe decided that it was simply a great opportunity to address this issue, or it could be- as my friend informed me- a bi-product of turning 30 this year. Regardless, I have looked at the people in my life, and those that are noticeably missing, and more than anything I have to wonder how much we really choose our friends.

We have all had experiences where someone we are close to has friends that no one around them can understand. What do they see in that person? What is the basis for their friendship? The scary answer might be that for many "friends" that we have, the answer to the latter is "nothing."A long time ago, a friend told me that often times those we call friends are more often than not "friends of convenience." He said that only those rarest of friends are actually what one might consider a "true" friend. Do we really just end up with people we call our friends because they are around all the time? Doing so takes away the depth of our friendships as well as the choice that we have, leading us to look around at the people in our life and asking "How did I end up with these friends?"

I am a friendly guy. I make friends quickly. I also am social enough that many of my friends meet one another. Lately I have looked at some of the friendships that have spawned from that and wondered "Why?" The sad fact may simply be that many of them become friends simply because they are at the same bar with the same people. How can you not be friends with someone you see all the time? I am just as guilty of the "friend by association" phenomenon. When you make friends with in a circle, it's hard not to take on all the others too. Sometimes this can be a great thing. Adding to your circle of friends can make everyone happy, and enhance all of your lives. The problem comes when it just happens because it happens, not because we're making a conscious decision to hold these people in our lives.

There is of course nothing wrong with making a lot of friends and being friendly. The problem comes when we fail to separate those whom we can enjoy and be friendly with and those who are the true friends in our lives. The most important distinction that should appear is time. One thing I realized is that often I would end up spending times with a bunch of random acquaintances and not near as much with those who are truly good friends. This has led me to miss out on some great friendships, and from deepening the ones that I have. If we look at someone we call a friend and we can't figure out a reason for us to be friends, chances are we should be looking at them as an acquaintance and give each other the attention that title deserves. Forgetting this can become a serious problem, and also lead to sort of a revolving door of friends constantly passing in and out of our lives.

The other negative side to this coin is in people that we should be friends with. There are a few people in particular that I knew the moment I met them and talked to them that we would make great friends. The fact of the matter is that often I never deepened our relationship, completely due to circumstances. If I were to compare that to a romantic interest, it is the exact opposite of what I would do. Seems silly to have such a dichotomy about things that are truly very similar. We wouldn't simply be in a relationship with someone because they were there. Why would we do the same with friendships?

When we meet people, there is always some sort of chemistry. We talk about this a lot when we look at romantic relationships, but friendships are really no different. One friend of mine called me his intellectual soul mate. He and I will never share a bed, but in the meeting of minds we connect on an incredibly deep level. By ignoring these connections and allowing ourselves to hang out with whomever is around, we in effect are doing no more for ourselves than we would if all we did was go on casual dates with everyone we met.

Friendships are a form of relationships. Unlike those we have with our families, and those we fall in love with, we truly have complete choice in who we are friends with. We need to remember this and allow ourselves to have truly powerful relationships in this area of our life as well. Convenient friends are... well... convenient. The fact of the matter is that when it comes down to it, they will rarely bring anything to your life, nor you to theirs. They are filler space, and that makes us filler space to them as well. Much like empty calories, they are fine in moderation, but if that's all we're partaking in, we are never going to be very healthy.

Are we our future selves?

Last night I went to the reading of a play called "Billy Redden." While the reading itself went really well and was very entertaining, the thoughts that the play invokes run far deeper than the average performance, and its themes were vastly different than what one can normally see. I also saw "Falling for Eve" this weekend which was a new twist on the Adam and Eve story. Interestingly enough, both these plays touch upon the choices we make in our lives and in free-will.

While I will try not to ruin everything, I am not sure I can write out all my thoughts without spoilers. If you hate that, you may want to move along.

So the basic premise of the first play is this 13-year-old boy who is visited one night by his future selves from every 13 year interval going forward all the way up to a 78-year-old version. Each of these "selves" of course has also experienced this same night every 13 years, and based upon their current place in their lives have varied opinions on the night itself and what it means to "them."

The most moving character throughout most of the play is the 26-year-old (nicknamed "Red"). He is furious most of the night. He feels as though he is forced into areas of his life not by choice, but by the machinations of his older selves. He sees this night for him 13 years ago as a catalyst that took away his choice and he is determined to take it back. He encourages his younger self that he always has a choice, and pushes him to see that he can "break the cycle" and not become what he sees before him.

His anger really sets up the main issue within the play, and the foremost question I think about having left it. What choice do we have in our lives when looking at ourselves in the future. If you were able to meet yourself and see that you become a drunk, would you change it? Could you change it? Many of us believe absolutely in free-will, but when you're faced with yourself it is presumed that these are your choices. Does seeing what you will be allow you to change your future choices? Can you be something other than your current path will allow you to be?

This question often comes up when you wax philosophical about time travel or prophesy. While this may not seem as a pertinent line of thought in today's modern world, it allows us to look at things that have far more to do with who we are and the way we act than it does of the disbelief we may have over why this would ever come about. Religiously the questions are even more pertinent. If God is all-knowing, what choices do you have? Is it possible that you have the ability to make whatever choices you want, but God simply knows what they are? If that's the case, are there times where Divine intervention might not be implemented to encourage a different choice? Is there a such thing as fate? If so, how can you possibly actually have the free-will we seem to cling to so much?

Like many, I believe in free-will completely. I think that every choice I make is my own. That said, I also believe in fate (you could also say Divine plans if you're so inclined). How I reconcile this is that fate provides us with opportunities, and at times in our life may become more active in putting things in our way, or helping us out when we need it. The fact of the matter is that fate will only take us so far, and what we do when we get where we're going is our own choice. I think that history is full of those fated for great things that we will never hear about because they chose to ignore what was presented before them and denied who they could be. Such is the price of choice.

In "Falling for Eve" God realized the moment that He gives Adam and Eve the power of choice, that He can no longer control what they do. Despite this, he intervenes time and time again, testing their choices and putting obstacles in their way or helping them along to try and get what he wants. Time and time again, they surprise him. In one amazingly poignant moment, God sings something to the effect that she (Eve) is too much like God. The ability to make pure choice was something that once given, not even God could control, and only interference in the natural world could He effect His children and their choices.

So given our ability to make these choices, it draws us back again to how this might change if we saw the result of our choices. If you saw your 39-year-old self as a belligerent drunk, would you avoid becoming that? What if, you saw that by the time you were 65, your life would be completely turned around, and that you would have overcome incredible obstacles but end up wealthy and successful? One might assume that you would try to avoid being a drunk and still end up with success, but really, if you go against the first, you couldn't really ensure the latter. What if your experiences as a drunk allowed your future success? It is nearly impossible to tell what cause has what effect, even with hindsight. Would you take the risk of losing it all?

Another interesting thought that develops as one watches "Billy Redden" is how much of his life is the result of this knowledge. It is clear that each "version" of Billy has experienced this same night every 13 years. Given the conversations they have, is it those moments that truly shape his life? Would your life be different if you could talk to your future selves?

Speaking of talking to your future selves, one other interesting thing to ponder is what would you ask? At one point young Billy asks about his parents' deaths. His older selves refuse to answer. The reason? "Waiting is hell." This simple statement says an awful lot. On one hand, if you knew your parents would die at X time, you could live life with them to make it as meaningful as possible, in a way that you might not otherwise. On the other hand could you imagine how you would feel as that date got closer and closer? In some ways we can relate both positively and negatively. How do you feel as you approach an upcoming vacation? With excitement and happiness, mostly. The very thought of what is coming up allows us as humans to create those emotions without the event having happened yet. If we can see something awful coming on the horizon, we equally have the ability to create the sadness and despair long before the event has actually transpired. How much quality could their be in your life and your relationship with those people if you were already seeing their loss in your mind?

The final thing that both these plays bring to mind powerfully is: What would you change if you could?

In "Falling for Eve," Eve is given the option to return permanently to the Garden, and live forever as though she had never stolen the apple. A reset if you will. Would you make it never happen if you could? In "Billy Redden" all the versions of himself are faced with what would they do differently to help themselves, their closest friend, or the one they love. What if you knew that changing your life living for 40 years of sadness and loneliness would allow to to save the one you love? Would you go through with it? What if you knew that saving the life of your friend would lead you to pain, misery and possibly death? Would you still chose to save her?

We often look back at our lives as we look towards our future. Sometimes we say that we would change this that or the other. Knowing where we are in our lives now, sometimes we have to wonder if the bad decisions we made in our past are what led to a great future. Living with regret for the past can belittle the value of human error. We are incredibly powerful creatures, who often take the worst moments and make something incredible out of them. The greatest mistakes we have made my give us the knowledge that makes our lives truly amazing, or even open our eyes to a world we never would have seen without that mistake. I think that a life full of mistakes is a life that is fully lived. To remove our mistakes, no matter how great it seems, would probably destroy our future. It would rob us of our greatest selves, and the person that we can be. Make the mistakes, except the consequences, and your life may just end up exactly how you want it. Just ask Eve.

The OTHER sin of Pride

Given that it's Pride month, many writers have turned their pens towards LGBT issues, and Rev. Patrick Cheng is no exception. In his article, The Spiritual Significance of Pride, he addresses many different issues relating to Gay Pride and it's Spirituality. Being a Christian minister, he of course delves into things that I could care less about, most noticeably the hellish notion of Original Sin. Despite these differences, he makes an incredible point that I had to work with.


One thing that many faiths, but most notably Christians, regard as a high sin is PRIDE. Now if you have read nearly anything I have written or spoken to me for more than 20 minutes, you know that my views on this "sin" are not the same as many. That said, I do think that too much pride- like many things- can be a terrible thing in life. What Cheng mentions is that the LGBT population more often than not suffers from Pride's inverse sin: Self Loathing.

Given the long-standing historical condemnation of pride as the root of all sin in the Christian tradition, how can we understand LGBT pride to be a blessing and not a sin? As an openly-gay theologian, teacher of theology, and ordained minister, I believe that sin is not just limited to pride or inordinate self-love. Rather, sin -- defined as the way in which, despite our best intentions, we inevitably turn our backs on who God has created us to be -- can also take the opposite form of inordinate self-hate or shame, something that many LGBT people experience from a very early age.

Nice point there. Regardless of the religious implications, I believe that anything that makes us hide or turn our backs on who we are is a detriment to ourselves and to society. To think of it as the inverse evil of Pride I believe is perfect. I think that people often feel so good about being humble and self depreciating that they don't realize when they take it to far and make it something terrible in the form of shame or self-hate.


In fact, I would say that shame far more than pride is a serious problem today. Most of the people we see as prideful are exhibiting it in the moment. They may treat people poorly, be over arrogant, etc. While this is bad, I believe that the damage is rarely lasting. Self hate on the other hand has a constant negative effect on yourself and everyone around you. You tear yourself down. You limit your potential, which also means you are bringing less value into the world. You hurt the people around you by closing off, and inflicting unintentional pain both directly, and indirectly when you hurt yourself.


This kind of shame is not exclusively held by the LGBT community, but I would say that in our society, we have a larger portion of our population exhibiting it. No matter the source of your self-hate, I think that a healthy dose of pride and confidence that you truly embrace is mandatory for a successful life. During this month of Pride, we should all take time to be happy for what we have accomplished, and for who we are. Spend some of the great energy we have created to remove some of the shame that we can still carry around with us. The great thing about self-hate, is that like guilt, it is never so heavy that you can't just set it down. Take some of the Pride we are all sharing and do some good for yourself, and maybe even live with less "sin."


If anything I would say that "sin"is anything taken to the point where it excludes all else and/or inflicts pain. For all the publicity that pride gets in that department, I am pleased to see some in the religious community like Rev. Cheng who realize that the original ideas of sin as set down by Christianity are not necessarily the most damaging, nor are the only thing that can take us away from who we are, and if you are a person of faith, take you away from your Creator.