Not from across the room, from apparently nowhere, and people just like Lillith there: I'm having an issue in my life and the first thing that comes out of someone else's being is an idea and notion of a mental illness on my part instead of taking any heed to the idea of responsibility on someone else's part. That is NOT a healthy relationship in the first place to have people in my life that are willing to place misdiagnosis on me like that.

For someone to have schizophrenia, they have to have relationships that need maintained in the first place, and the lack of taking care of that type of social business needs to be the sole proprietary concern of the individual being diagnosed, not a team effort. I don't have any of those to upkeep in the first place. I live in the rural countryside, and I am single.
I keep my home at a steady room temperature of above 70 F and below 95 F, and eat healthily enough to sustain my life, and have energy to think and be physically active. Those are all signs of a person who DOES NOT have schizophrenia. A person with schizophrenia could be bleeding out their feet until their socks are bloodstained and stuck to their feet from scabbing onto the material and they wouldn't even notice because they're SCHIZOPHRENIC, meaning they'd be barely aware, if at all, that there is a problem going on with their feet.

So in a way I'm glad that Lillith decided to put her input on this topic forthright, because it proves my point. I don't even know this person and I'm sure she doesn't really know me at all. Maybe a few facts here and there that she probably heard from someone else, which isn't reliable because that's just hearsay, yet, instead of anybody else's lives and activities being factored in to why this was happening, the blame is immediately placed on me somehow instead.

I was given a certificate of Competency, meaning that I actually am not schizophrenic and that I can in fact handle my own mind and it's thoughts on my own, without extra input, advice, consul, or conversing otherwise to "let off steam." etc.

What I was pointing out is actually this exact same type of conversation.. I mention what I believe is a problem, someone else just declares that I have an even more serious problem than what was real in the first place right before that, then things escalate to the point where I start to believe that I should actually sue someone *cough cough, people like Lillith* because that's a VERY SERIOUS ACCUSATION that could potentially ruin someone's life completely if they just stay silent and don't agree with it.

This is perfectly conducive to the idea I was just mentioning to myself last night:
When someone just declares at a whim a statement such as, "You don't care about ______________.."
You'd be left with two options:
i) Hold your ground on the idea, and therefor be 'contradictory' or 'argumentative' with the accuser, even though they, being the aggressor at one's persona in the first place would be the attacker,
proving what they said about you not caring about what they're talking about...
or
ii) Go along with they say, be a yes-man, perfectly agreeing, and therefor not care about what they're saying in that case either.


THAT is why I was attempting to communicate the idea of how pointless it is to talk with someone like me to that degree or effect. It really doesn't mean anything to me. My brain used to compute things like that.. Either just go along with this, or not, either way I'm already disagreeing with this guy/gal, or they are with me, rather... and my conscious mind was smart enough to know that right away so the conversation became completely pointless and I attempted to sever all communications, which would seem to be an easy thing to do, seeming how I lived 99.99% of my life without talking to said individuals who were accusing me of things like this in the first place.

Then, of course, there's always the Biblical teaching of things on this manner:
If someone is so corrupted that a person would run the risk of becoming worse than they currently are by associating with said person, the other person is supposed to avoid contact and company with the person they believe is too corrupt to be with.
THAT being said, it's impossible to reason it out with someone about a conversation entailing communal judgement of some kind without EVERY party in the community in this situation being held just as guilty as the person they are making out to be the pariah... Else they are making the mistake of continuing to keep company with the pariah, even though they don't like him or her.
The Bible, to my knowledge, did NOT state anything to the effect of "unless you're going to play some kind of hero role and go in there evangelizing people to righteousness, then it's okay to hang out with bad folk." It says not do that, period, end of discussion.