If I had anything brilliant to say, I would say it.

As per my random habits, I tripped onto YoungLDS one day. I'm a predominate lurker there. Can't quite break entirely the habit of venturing there every once in a while. As some of the Old Timers say, you don't have to be single to be there. Besides, I'm still young, right?

Perusing the "recent posts", I came across one titled Engaged before a mission? Trust me, the topic had turned from that to something different and I didn't read the whole thing. A few people were discussing how their parents behaved towards the people they dated, the questions they asked, and what they seemed concerned with.

Someone has a 2 month old girl. She said " I trust her judgment, yes. But sometimes people get caught up in lust and fall for the wrong type of people. That's all." To which someone, let's call him Sam, replied with this post about... "if you do insist in still asking a bunch of questions, please know that it's imperative that you NEVER ask them in an accusatory way and know that it IS possible your child may feel like you don't trust their judgment."

I stated my opinion of that I like to think that my children will have a good relationship with me and that they'd feel comfortable coming to me. Since the first person has a girl, I specifically used the phrase "giggly girls" to represent being really good friends. Sam took it pretty literally. To paraphrase, there's nothing giggly about serious questions. Some questions might be giggly, but the more serious ones could turn into a trust issue. The first girl agreed with me that she hopes to be really good friends with her daughter.

I clarified my point by expressing how I would hope to know my kids well enough that I could tell if something was going on based on their actions when dating someone. There is value in serious questions, but there are some questions to which the answers are acceptable or unacceptable or would just be a nicety.

Sam ripped me open for having such a high ideal. He made it sound like I should lower my ideal because reality would most likely be much different. He tried to hit on some raw nerves to make his point (he missed). He said you can hope, but it just won't happen.

I dislike people who live in a pessimistic realistic world. Optimistic realistic is much, much better, geez. There is nothing wrong with having an ideal. Things may not always turn out the way you would like, but try like it will. Let me give you some classic examples that can all be titled rationalization. "I need to lose 50 pounds." "Never gonna happen. When are you gonna exercise? You're probably not going to change how you eat either." "You're right... okay, maybe 10 pounds?" Or try this one. "I'm not going to lie." "You're human, of course you'll lie." All of a sudden, it's less important to not lie and you feel like a little lie every now and again is okay.

Can you explain it? I don't get it. Let's let pessimism rule our life and tell us that we can't do it and come up with reasons why not to do something. Or we can be optimism, set our sights high, and reach for it. Just be aware of the reality around you and not let other things fail because of what you're doing. Let's just not lower ourselves because "it probably won't turn out that way."

Dave's saying applies anywhere, not just to Ramseyites. If you will live like no one else now, then you can live like no one else later.