A Way to Take Full Responsibility for Our Lives

by melodiccolor Sat Dec 01, 2012 8:56 pm

A friend of mine told me about a concept that he calls "paying the piper", that is that everything we do has both a benefit and a cost. Decision making then becomes a process of evaluating what choice has the greatest benefit and the smallest cost in any situation. Even decidiing not to decide applies here. (What follows after is my insights)

This process can be very influenced by mindset; that is focusing on the price or the benefit and discounting the other. If we focus solely on the cost of doing something we in effect expect a bad outcome, negate what may be gained and decide we are helpless and not responsible for our lives cause it's all bad anyway.

If we focus solely on benefits and never look at cost, we can do a lot of unintended damage that could have been easily avoided.

What is the best approach is to look at both and make a decision accepting the price in order to gain a desired outcome. Sometimes it is easy, a small price paid willingly. Sometimes it is a matter of all bad choices and we seek to pay the smallest of bad prices. But in doing this we take responsibility for our lives and cease to feel we are victims of it.

There is one more point, even the cost of what we do has benefits we often miss. When the cost is failure for example, we gain in learning much and new doors opening that would not have as a direct result. Here's a more obscure example. I decided to make a trip of about 100 miles to meet with my local HSP meetup group a few months ago. The price was while my husband and I were stuck in traffic on the freeway and at a complete stop, a woman not paying attention plowed into our car without breaking, causing some serious injury to us both. Well, what is the benefit of this, I bet you're wondering. The benefit did not show until about a week and a half later. I had plans to fly across the country to meet with friends who are also HSP and empathic. While I was there, one of my friends, whom I am very connected to felt called on to generate energy to try and ease some of my pain. Instead, I started flowing energy with her and it got very intense for both of us, very hot. It flowed through my hands and eyes. Another friend was in that curcuit of energy as well and we sent it to a 4th. Much has opened for us all from this and still is. It's all a result of the injuries I suffered from that accident and it is a huge benefit. Another way of putting this is "the universe provides" or "spirit provides" in unexpected ways.

by melodiccolor Wed Dec 19, 2012 8:40 pm

Here's another way to be responsible for how you live your life; a newsletter blog from Brene Brown:

wishing you love and light

"Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.” - Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

Nothing has been a greater gift to me than the three lessons I learned about joy and light from people I've interviewed who have spent time in sorrow and darkness. Even before Sandy Hook I was reflecting on these learnings as a way to stay centered during the holidays. They're from Daring Greatly (p. 125). They feel very relevant today.

1. Joy comes to us in moments—ordinary moments.

We risk missing out on joy when we get too busy chasing down the extraordinary. Scarcity culture may keep us afraid of living small, ordinary lives but when you talk to people who have survived great losses it is clear that the most profound joy we experience is in those small moments that are so easy to overlook.

My intention: I'm going to slow down enough to recognize the joy in these moments.

2. Practice gratitude for what we have.

When I asked people who had survived tragedy how we can cultivate and show more compassion for people who are suffering, the answer was always the same: Don’t shrink away from the joy of your child because I've lost mine. Don’t take what you have for granted—celebrate it. Don’t apologize for your healthy parents or your great relationship. Be grateful and share your gratitude with others.

One quote that I heard over and over was simply: "When you honor what you have, you’re honoring what I’ve lost.”

My intention: To let the people I love know how grateful I am to have them in my life. I'm also joining the #26Acts movement started by Ann Curry. 26 random acts of kindness to honor the lives lost in Newton.

3. Don’t squander joy.

We can’t prepare for tragedy and loss. When we turn every opportunity to feel joy into "I better not let my guard down and feel too happy - that's inviting disaster" we actually diminish our resilience.

Yes, softening into joy is uncomfortable. Yes, it’s scary. Yes, it’s vulnerable. But every time we allow ourselves to lean into joy and give in to those moments, we build resilience and we cultivate hope. The joy becomes part of who we are, and when bad things happen—and they do happen—we are stronger.

My intention: To lean into joy. To remember that traumatizing myself with too much news or letting my imagination run wild doesn't create empathy - it generates fear and blame. I'll try to remember that joy requires vulnerability and that if I want more joy (and I do) I need to stay openhearted.

by wstein Thu Dec 20, 2012 12:42 am

However we choose to operate, it only works as well as we can 'do the process'. As per this if we are blind, ignorant, mistaken, or unable to evaluate cost or benfit then any cost/benefit evaluation is going to be incorrect.

In general i use the cost benefit analysis a lot. Not everyone is able or willing to stick to the 'best' option. Retailers know this and set consumers up for 'impulse buys'. So to be useable an evaluation needs to be within the context of what you can actually do.

Personally I find the hardest part is knowing what all the costs and benefits are. For most people though, being realistic about evaluation gets in their way even more then failure to include hard to see costs or benefits.

Another big factor not introduced above is how the cost changes over time. Take getting gas for the car. obviously if we get gas too often the cost is very high (lots of trips) and the benefit minimal (not much range added). A less aggressive fill-up schedule is more efficient reaping more benefit (lots of miles added to range) for a lot less cost (number of trips). However if we actually run out of gas the cost increases suddenly and dramatically. If one lives in a harsh climate, running out of gas may even be life threatening.

----------------------
Now that we got that out of the way, its all based on a questionable premise. That premise is that there is actually cause and effect and that we are bound to pay the costs. This is more or less true in everyday physical reality. However, once one starts with magic or miracle that no longer applies. Then the 'costs' are immediate based on how we acted aligns with who we are. The benefits are based on our skill or on our knowledge of who were.

by Denmarkguy Sun Dec 23, 2012 9:04 pm

Perhaps this can be distilled down to its simplest form: Choices have consequences.

As humans (HSPs or not) we have an uneasy relationship with "choices." We like to say "But I had no CHOICE!!" But in most cases we DO... the issue isn't "NO choice," but that all the available choices sucked... and we avoid making ourselves... mmm... accountable... for choices we don't like.

For example, we might be in an abusive relationship... but our abuser is also mentally ill and depressive. It may seem like an "easy choice" to leave, but what if we also know that this person will likely try to kill themselves if we DO leave? It's a sucky choice to leave AND a sucky choice to stay.

NON-choices have consequences, too. We reap what we sow... and when we sow nothing, what can we expect to reap?

Just musing out loud...
~Peter

by anarkandi Mon Dec 24, 2012 6:50 am

Denmarkguy wrote:Perhaps this can be distilled down to its simplest form: Choices have consequences.

As humans (HSPs or not) we have an uneasy relationship with "choices." We like to say "But I had no CHOICE!!" But in most cases we DO... the issue isn't "NO choice," but that all the available choices sucked... and we avoid making ourselves... mmm... accountable... for choices we don't like.

For example, we might be in an abusive relationship... but our abuser is also mentally ill and depressive. It may seem like an "easy choice" to leave, but what if we also know that this person will likely try to kill themselves if we DO leave? It's a sucky choice to leave AND a sucky choice to stay.

NON-choices have consequences, too. We reap what we sow... and when we sow nothing, what can we expect to reap?

Just musing out loud...
~Peter

Definitely. Also there is some security in being with someone who is abusive, as they are only hurting us because we're misbehaving, if we don't misbehave, they won't hurt us, and they said they loved us. The fact that the abuser almost never closes the door on you, makes it so that you're the one with the choice to close it or not, and the stress of closing a door can make alot of indecisive people pick the decision "no decision" which is basically having it all remain as it is. The reason we do is propably because of how the other person can fire up so much insecurity in you, maybe your fear of being abandoned, maybe your fear of hurting others.. and that means, if we make up with the ones who hurt us, and adapt to them, they can ease us of that fear. Ofcourse only briefly, the fear will still be there, but for alot of people the cold outside the warm house is scary, the different, the new, what could be is scary.

That's why alot of people, even some on this board are "stuck". Because they do find some comfort in being stuck. Because then they don't have to try out anything new. Even a depressing mindset is a mindset and it allows us not to fear what will happen because it will be bad nontheless. We don't have to feel good about success because it'll suck nontheless. So we can just be losers.

by rombomb Sun Jan 06, 2013 3:20 pm

melodiccolor wrote:A friend of mine told me about a concept that he calls "paying the piper", that is that everything we do has both a benefit and a cost. Decision making then becomes a process of evaluating what choice has the greatest benefit and the smallest cost in any situation. Even decidiing not to decide applies here. (What follows after is my insights)

This process can be very influenced by mindset; that is focusing on the price or the benefit and discounting the other. If we focus solely on the cost of doing something we in effect expect a bad outcome, negate what may be gained and decide we are helpless and not responsible for our lives cause it's all bad anyway.

If we focus solely on benefits and never look at cost, we can do a lot of unintended damage that could have been easily avoided.

What is the best approach is to look at both and make a decision accepting the price in order to gain a desired outcome. Sometimes it is easy, a small price paid willingly. Sometimes it is a matter of all bad choices and we seek to pay the smallest of bad prices. But in doing this we take responsibility for our lives and cease to feel we are victims of it.

There is one more point, even the cost of what we do has benefits we often miss. When the cost is failure for example, we gain in learning much and new doors opening that would not have as a direct result.

Here's an explanation by a friend of mine (with some of my edits);

In general cost/benefit analysis is bad -- because its not explanatory enough. It's only good for specific issues/problems.

It can work when there's already an explanation of why the sum total of some benefits minus some costs should be a determining factor -- e.g. because all the costs and benefits considered are equivalent in some way to money and the goal is to make lots of money, so you can sum everything up in terms of money for several options and see which wins.

In lots of cases, different costs and benefits come in different units, so you can't compare nicely. But a lot of things can be converted into money as a decent approximation so that's a case where it can work better.

You can do this with things that don't look exactly like money, such as software features. For adding some feature you would add money for the extra sales it would generate and subtract money for the cost to hire programmers to make it.

However this actually illustrates that cost/benefit can be dangerous even in pretty favorable circumstances. New features have hidden costs of bloating the software application and annoying existing customers, as well as hidden benefits of pleasing existing customers who may then be inspired to recommend your software to their friends.

And there's other issues too. Maybe 80% of the code for feature Y could be re-used for feature Z. So if you do Y, you get Z cheaper. But maybe you don't know about Z yet while considering Y. But you could still know that the code from Y *might* be useful for something else later, and try to take that into account, but it's hard to put a price on it.

by melodiccolor Sun Jan 06, 2013 4:46 pm

You're missing the point Rombom; the benefits and costs are not tangible financial things, but emotional, physical and/or spiritual tolls in most cases.

For example, deciding to eat an entire gallon of ice cream. The benefit is the enjoyment of the ice cream, perhaps some emotional satisfaction as well. The cost is excess calories to the body, some emotional guilt for overindulging and using the ice cream perhaps to avoid dealing with an issue directly, so the ice cream is used as a distraction. There is also in this example a monetary cost as well.

Lets take a more serious example. Someone does what it takes to get promoted at a large corporation, plays political games, stabs people in the back, in short plays dirty to get ahead. The benefit is obvious, a higher position with more pay. The cost is to that person's personal ethics and ability to like, trust and care about themself or others. It also costs them deeper connections with people as such a person would tend to see people as the enemy to defeat. Such prices are real if less tangible.

by Alethia Sun Jan 06, 2013 7:04 pm

Denmarkguy wrote:Perhaps this can be distilled down to its simplest form: Choices have consequences.

As humans (HSPs or not) we have an uneasy relationship with "choices." We like to say "But I had no CHOICE!!" But in most cases we DO... the issue isn't "NO choice," but that all the available choices sucked... and we avoid making ourselves... mmm... accountable... for choices we don't like.

For example, we might be in an abusive relationship... but our abuser is also mentally ill and depressive. It may seem like an "easy choice" to leave, but what if we also know that this person will likely try to kill themselves if we DO leave? It's a sucky choice to leave AND a sucky choice to stay.

NON-choices have consequences, too. We reap what we sow... and when we sow nothing, what can we expect to reap?

Just musing out loud...
~Peter

Yes I agree Peter..we do have a choice...not always in what is going on outside of us, but from within..and how we accept what is going on outside of us..sometimes the choice is not about action..but just acceptance of what is before us....those that are struck with an incurable disease, may not reach a cure for themselves in their choice to want to live and not die....but the choice to accept that they may die becomes only a choice of acceptance..in what is...handed to them. So this might open up that sometimes choices are not always seen in light of that space..in some seeing.

Sometimes in the space of not reaping or in our own perception of not reaping........we sow elsewhere in the greaters choice....not always in our seeing...where it reaps.

by rombomb Wed Jan 09, 2013 11:21 am

Alethia wrote:Yes I agree Peter..we do have a choice...not always in what is going on outside of us, but from within..and how we accept what is going on outside of us..sometimes the choice is not about action..but just acceptance of what is before us....those that are struck with an incurable disease, may not reach a cure for themselves in their choice to want to live and not die....but the choice to accept that they may die becomes only a choice of acceptance..in what is...handed to them.

Right, but there is another option, which is to cause one's own death, instead of waiting for physics to do it. Imagine a 92 yo who just broke his back in a fall. He's in huge pain that the strongest pain medicine does not solve. And his doctor says that back surgery has little chance of success and even with success, there will be chronic pain. In this sort of situation, one should consider the option of ending his suffering.

by rombomb Wed Jan 09, 2013 11:25 am

Denmarkguy wrote:Perhaps this can be distilled down to its simplest form: Choices have consequences.

As humans (HSPs or not) we have an uneasy relationship with "choices." We like to say "But I had no CHOICE!!" But in most cases we DO... the issue isn't "NO choice," but that all the available choices sucked... and we avoid making ourselves... mmm... accountable... for choices we don't like.

For example, we might be in an abusive relationship... but our abuser is also mentally ill and depressive. It may seem like an "easy choice" to leave, but what if we also know that this person will likely try to kill themselves if we DO leave? It's a sucky choice to leave AND a sucky choice to stay.

I don't agree that the option of protecting oneself from an abuser is a "sucky" choice.

If the abuser kills himself afterwards, that is not the victim's responsibility. So why would it be "sucky"?

By "sucky", do you mean feelings of guilt? If so, why does one have feelings of guilt for events that he is not responsible for?

by frmthhrt Wed Jan 09, 2013 5:28 pm

rombomb wrote:
Denmarkguy wrote:Perhaps this can be distilled down to its simplest form: Choices have consequences.

As humans (HSPs or not) we have an uneasy relationship with "choices." We like to say "But I had no CHOICE!!" But in most cases we DO... the issue isn't "NO choice," but that all the available choices sucked... and we avoid making ourselves... mmm... accountable... for choices we don't like.

For example, we might be in an abusive relationship... but our abuser is also mentally ill and depressive. It may seem like an "easy choice" to leave, but what if we also know that this person will likely try to kill themselves if we DO leave? It's a sucky choice to leave AND a sucky choice to stay.
I don't agree that the option of protecting oneself from an abuser is a "sucky" choice.

If the abuser kills himself afterwards, that is not the victim's responsibility. So why would it be "sucky"?

By "sucky", do you mean feelings of guilt? If so, why does one have feelings of guilt for events that he is not responsible for?

Often times the abuser is someone that the victim cares about...in a relationship or whatever, so human compassion says that despite the pain of the abuse, the victim still does not wish them death! Not wanting to contribute in some way to someones else`s suffering or death if you leàve may keep you in a bad situation for far longer than you should stay. You can be trapped by love or compassion. That is sucky.
Compassion. Look it up. It seems to be missing from your response.

by Alethia Wed Jan 09, 2013 5:34 pm

rombomb wrote:
Alethia wrote:Yes I agree Peter..we do have a choice...not always in what is going on outside of us, but from within..and how we accept what is going on outside of us..sometimes the choice is not about action..but just acceptance of what is before us....those that are struck with an incurable disease, may not reach a cure for themselves in their choice to want to live and not die....but the choice to accept that they may die becomes only a choice of acceptance..in what is...handed to them.
Right, but there is another option, which is to cause one's own death, instead of waiting for physics to do it. Imagine a 92 yo who just broke his back in a fall. He's in huge pain that the strongest pain medicine does not solve. And his doctor says that back surgery has little chance of success and even with success, there will be chronic pain. In this sort of situation, one should consider the option of ending his suffering.

Yeah some have a path that might include suicide, if that is their path to end this reality.

Imagine having a brain tumour, that you are told by the medical profession that it is inoperable. You would end up with serious physical impairment if that brain tumour was touched. You then decide to get numerous opinions and all opinions come back with the same verdict. You go home prepare yourself to die a slow and agonizing death, but something inside you says, I am not giving up. You open yourself up to want to live. You open yourself up to want to find someone else. And you do. And this one person says. I can operate on you and help you. You suddenly have another option. You weigh up this option against ten others who convince you it cannot be done. And you weigh up all the information about the consequences of this surgery. You make your chioce to go with the surgeon who says yes. And by taking that direction, you then receive the gift of life, that a professor and various other neurosurgeons adviced otherwise..Of course you only live for twelve years more, but twelve years you were told your didnt have..by so many....it was more than you expected from those who we often place our life in their hands...Oh out of interest you may like to know that the Professor who adviced strongly against the surgery, trained the neurosurgeon who actually did the surgery...now that tells me so much....

So in your considerations rombom I see other considerations that actually create a new direction....do you see?

by rombomb Wed Jan 09, 2013 10:29 pm

frmthhrt wrote:
rombomb wrote:
Denmarkguy wrote:Perhaps this can be distilled down to its simplest form: Choices have consequences.

As humans (HSPs or not) we have an uneasy relationship with "choices." We like to say "But I had no CHOICE!!" But in most cases we DO... the issue isn't "NO choice," but that all the available choices sucked... and we avoid making ourselves... mmm... accountable... for choices we don't like.

For example, we might be in an abusive relationship... but our abuser is also mentally ill and depressive. It may seem like an "easy choice" to leave, but what if we also know that this person will likely try to kill themselves if we DO leave? It's a sucky choice to leave AND a sucky choice to stay.
I don't agree that the option of protecting oneself from an abuser is a "sucky" choice.

If the abuser kills himself afterwards, that is not the victim's responsibility. So why would it be "sucky"?

By "sucky", do you mean feelings of guilt? If so, why does one have feelings of guilt for events that he is not responsible for?

Often times the abuser is someone that the victim cares about...in a relationship or whatever, so human compassion says that despite the pain of the abuse, the victim still does not wish them death!

I said nothing about the victim wishing death on the abuser. That is immoral.

frmthhrt wrote:
Not wanting to contribute in some way to someones else`s suffering or death if you leàve

Leaving to protect yourself *is not* contributing to the abuser suffering or killing himself. That is 100% the abusers responsibility. The victim has 0% responsibility for that.

frmthhrt wrote:
may keep you in a bad situation for far longer than you should stay. You can be trapped by love or compassion. That is sucky.

Ya thats a mistake to love someone who wants to hurt you.

frmthhrt wrote:
Compassion. Look it up. It seems to be missing from your response.

The original post didn't say that the victim loves the abuser, so its a mistake for you to think that I should have known this.

I've never been abused so I don't have much knowledge about this.

I've spoken to a friend of mine who works as a social worker type job and he explained the following:

Abused children often get into marriages with abusive spouses.

Its common for a child victim to believe that she's at fault for the abusers actions against her.

And in adulthood, the victim uses the same reasoning, leading her to believe that she is at fault for the abusers actions against her.

Also that the victim considers herself as the caregiver of the abuser. So when the abuser abuses, she believes that she caused it because she failed at her caregiving.

by rombomb Wed Jan 09, 2013 10:33 pm

Alethia wrote:
So in your considerations rombom I see other considerations that actually create a new direction....do you see?

But in your hypothetical, he could have decided to do the surgery AND tell the doctors/family that if it fails, to pull the plug.

I don't see any reason to pull the plug before trying all other options (unless the person actually didn't want to live for other reasons).

by frmthhrt Wed Jan 09, 2013 11:00 pm

rombomb wrote:
frmthhrt wrote:
rombomb wrote:
Denmarkguy wrote:Perhaps this can be distilled down to its simplest form: Choices have consequences.

As humans (HSPs or not) we have an uneasy relationship with "choices." We like to say "But I had no CHOICE!!" But in most cases we DO... the issue isn't "NO choice," but that all the available choices sucked... and we avoid making ourselves... mmm... accountable... for choices we don't like.

For example, we might be in an abusive relationship... but our abuser is also mentally ill and depressive. It may seem like an "easy choice" to leave, but what if we also know that this person will likely try to kill themselves if we DO leave? It's a sucky choice to leave AND a sucky choice to stay.
I don't agree that the option of protecting oneself from an abuser is a "sucky" choice.

If the abuser kills himself afterwards, that is not the victim's responsibility. So why would it be "sucky"?

By "sucky", do you mean feelings of guilt? If so, why does one have feelings of guilt for events that he is not responsible for?

Often times the abuser is someone that the victim cares about...in a relationship or whatever, so human compassion says that despite the pain of the abuse, the victim still does not wish them death!
I said nothing about the victim wishing death on the abuser. That is immoral.

okay, not worded carefully enough on my part...when there is a good chance that no longer being there may lead to someone`s death, through no fault of our own, it make`s it very hard to leave with a clear conscience. Why would we want anyone to die? Logical or not, most people are going to carry a lot of guilt if that person does die. We do care.

frmthhrt wrote:
Not wanting to contribute in some way to someones else`s suffering or death if you leàve

rombomb wrote:Leaving to protect yourself *is not* contributing to the abuser suffering or killing himself. That is 100% the abusers responsibility. The victim has 0% responsibility for that.

See above.

frmthhrt wrote:
may keep you in a bad situation for far longer than you should stay. You can be trapped by love or compassion. That is sucky.

rombomb wrote:Ya thats a mistake to love someone who wants to hurt you.

Sometimes the hurt is not intentional, or was not there at the beginning of the relationship, in which case it may not be such a mistake.

frmthhrt wrote:
Compassion. Look it up. It seems to be missing from your response.

rombomb wrote:The original post didn't say that the victim loves the abuser, so its a mistake for you to think that I should have known this.
I've never been abused so I don't have much knowledge about this.
I've spoken to a friend of mine who works as a social worker type job and he explained the following:
Abused children often get into marriages with abusive spouses.
Its common for a child victim to believe that she's at fault for the abusers actions against her.
And in adulthood, the victim uses the same reasoning, leading her to believe that she is at fault for the abusers actions against her.
Also that the victim considers herself as the caregiver of the abuser. So when the abuser abuses, she believes that she caused it because she failed at her caregiving.

Sorry, this is a bit of a sensitive subject with me. I was in a very difficult relationship for a long time, and at times it was abusive, but I stayed . It`s something you would have to live to understand...there are so many shades of grey in these situations that making black and white sweeping judgments will not work.

by rombomb Wed Jan 09, 2013 11:15 pm

frmthhrt wrote:
when there is a good chance that no longer being there may lead to someone`s death, through no fault of our own, it make`s it very hard to leave with a clear conscience. Why would we want anyone to die? Logical or not, most people are going to carry a lot of guilt if that person does die. We do care.

That most people would feel guilty, doesn't make it not a mistake.

Most people feel guilty for things they aren't guilty for. Each time they do it, they are mistaken. Its a soluble problem.

I've helped a few people get over their guilt. Each time, it involved someone close to me having certain negative emotions when they saw a picture of a certain person or heard a certain song. And I asked them leading questions helping them discover the cause of their emotion. Each time we learned that they felt guilty for something that they weren't responsible for. And then they never experienced that emotion again when seeing that picture or heating that song.

I posted one of those discussions here:

http://ramirustom.blogspot.com/2012/09/psychology.html

frmthhrt wrote:
rombomb wrote:Ya thats a mistake to love someone who wants to hurt you.

Sometimes the hurt is not intentional, or was not there at the beginning of the relationship, in which case it may not be such a mistake.

Ya thats more complicated.

by Nucky Sat May 18, 2013 7:39 pm

Watching this movie the other day reminded me of this thread. It is the final scene of the movie Clerks.

by Elfiet Mon May 20, 2013 10:04 pm

I like what Wstein wrote:

wstein wrote:Then the 'costs' are immediate based on how we acted aligns with who we are. The benefits are based on our skill or on our knowledge of who were.

As a very rational person, all my decision thorough reviewed. I am still learning about who I am and try to make choices true to myself (as opposed to society influence). Often, I can rationalize even the costs of any decision can provide a benefit. Costs, in the very least, provide a learning experience. The fact that a decision was taken to move forward is key.

I also want to say we may not understand decisions other may make (i.e. stay with an abuser) but it is never ours to judge but to try to understand and indeed, compassion is in need for both the abuser and the victim.

by Sponsored content

A Way to Take Full Responsibility for Our Lives

A Way to Take Full Responsibility for Our Lives

Re: A Way to Take Full Responsibility for Our Lives

Re: A Way to Take Full Responsibility for Our Lives

Re: A Way to Take Full Responsibility for Our Lives

Re: A Way to Take Full Responsibility for Our Lives

Re: A Way to Take Full Responsibility for Our Lives

Re: A Way to Take Full Responsibility for Our Lives

Re: A Way to Take Full Responsibility for Our Lives

Re: A Way to Take Full Responsibility for Our Lives

Re: A Way to Take Full Responsibility for Our Lives

Re: A Way to Take Full Responsibility for Our Lives

Re: A Way to Take Full Responsibility for Our Lives

Re: A Way to Take Full Responsibility for Our Lives

Re: A Way to Take Full Responsibility for Our Lives

Re: A Way to Take Full Responsibility for Our Lives

Re: A Way to Take Full Responsibility for Our Lives

Re: A Way to Take Full Responsibility for Our Lives

Re: A Way to Take Full Responsibility for Our Lives

Re: A Way to Take Full Responsibility for Our Lives