?

Alright, so I'm 19 years old, and my girlfriend of over two years recently left me for some other guy. The issue is, she left because we had a few little issues she never brought up, so by the time she did, she said she was "tired of trying." So she gradually gave up on something easily fixable and started to gravitate towards one of her friends that she eventually left me for.

Now, when I tell her that they'll never have what we had, and that he'll never love her like I do, or make her as happy as I used to, she actually agrees... but won't come back. You see, they have no real romance, but this guy goes to college with her, lives closer than I do, and is new, so of course they have no issues. It's easier to be with him and be happy about it, even if she admits that they're not really meant to be together. She said she "just wants to be happy right now", and was going through a low point in her life and I guess she found it easier to run to another man rather than work things out.

I love her more than anything, and when I tell her to come back, I can see how much it hurts her to say no, and she says she'll always love me. I know if she came back she would want to stay, but it's like she knows she's making the wrong choice but still wants to make it to buy herself some temporary bliss, even if it means hurting me, herself, and ultimately even the other guy.

How do I show her that she should step up and make the right choice, even when it isn't easy or convenient?

The only reasons anyone ever believes something is either when they see evidence and believe it to make sense, or when they simply want to believe and will do anything, even lie to themselves, to maintain that belief?

So did you guys actually consider that you could be wrong, examine the evidence, and seriously think that the magic man in the sky was the most compelling argument, or did you just never question your belief because you know it's so weak that you're afraid to challenge it?

A lot of people when debating against atheist (I'm an atheist myself) irrationally predicate their entire argument on Christianity. What they fail to understand is that atheists don't particularly disbelieve in Christianity any more than any other religion (belief/disbelief are absolute statements). So since we find flaw with ALL religions of the world, past or present, yet you argue for yours simply because you happened to be born in a Christian-influenced part of the world in this time period, how do you justify that perspective? The only reason you find the aspects of Christianity that defy reason to be acceptable is because that's part of your culture. You hear anything equally irrational from another religion and you'll disbelieve it just as we will.

So, assuming you don't want to believe that the only reason you find Christianity the "valid" religion is because of where and when you were born, how do you justify treating it as such? I think that if you actually looked at it objectively, without your cultural bias, it would sound as ridiculous to you as Hinduism does. What makes Christianity any more "believable" than any other equally illogical religions?

It thoroughly depresses me that most people nowadays don't even know the meaning of "Philosophy," much less can think to that deep of a level. I love philosophy, but this section rarely contains any.

Also; Before anyone comments of the seeming contradiction of this also not being a philosophical question, I'm already aware of that. I'm obviously forced to put it in this section since that's what it applies to.

We live in a time where your only options are choose a polarized ideology and have the thinking mostly done for you. Because the candidates are labeled, this leads to ignorant voters who simply vote based on the (R)'s and (D)'s instead of formulating their own opinions or even knowing basic views of the candidates. These 2 parties are so powerful that no independent will probably ever win the presidency, the system continues, and the vicious circle cycles over. All this does is breed hatred between 2 extremist groups, and NEITHER has all of the answers.

Even on yahoo answers, you see very few actual QUESTIONS in the politics section. They're mostly biased, loaded conversation starters where your answer gets thumbed up by one party and thumbed down by the other.

I believe that the two party system ruined educated voting in America and I would like to have more options at the polls. I'd like to see something I haven't seen a million times before. I'd most of all like the indefinite battle to end. I understand why the founding fathers never intended and openly spoke against political parties.

So what's your opinion? I will listen to all answers open-mindedly and have no party bias. Do you believe that the 2 party system has destroyed American politics? Or do you believe that it is a beneficial system that should be maintained? I'd like to hear both sides, maybe have a few people try to convince me of its usefulness.