Eric, Prince of Cats

Ummmm, errr, hmmmmm.......

Mon, 25 May 2009 19:31:01 GMT

You are a
Social Liberal
(63% permissive)

and an...
Economic Conservative
(68% permissive)

You are best described as a:

Libertarian

Link: The Politics Test on Ok Cupid
Also: The OkCupid Dating Persona Test

Hmmmm....

Sun, 02 Sep 2007 04:43:31 GMT

A long time since I've updated this LJ. I wonder if I have anything intelligent to say...

Errr.

Ummm.

Hmmm.

Glad I have the answer to that one. I can now sleep easy tonight.

The big switch

Sat, 28 Apr 2007 18:30:44 GMT

I've worked with PCs since 1988 and cut my teeth on DOS 3.3. And while I used to run an Apple II+ and a IIgs back in the day, I've always looked at the Macintosh as the pretty computer that couldn't do much.

Well, with these last few years of Windows incarnations (beginning with Windows ME), I've been wondering what life is like on the other side of the fence. You see all these hipsters at Starbucks pounding away on their MacBooks, and you wonder if they know something you don't.

So, this year, I really took a good, hard look at the Mac and at my own computer needs. What was it that I did most and what would be the best platform to do it on. I did a lot word processing, some spreadsheet, audio extraction and editing, and, of course, Internet. I didn't do programming any more and I hadn't launched the DOS emulator in Windows in years, something I used to always do in the 90s.

So, I read and read and read, especially stories from people who had always used Windows and switched. Then, I went down to the local Apple store and played and played and played. I was surprised at the differences more than the similarities. It was so ingrained to do things a certain way on Windows, that it was odd having to retrain myself. But, I soon discovered the shortcuts, and the advances on the Mac, like Expose, like the task bar, like Spotlight. And, I knew it was only a matter of time.

So, what clinched the deal for me? Parallels. A friend of mine bought an iMac a month before I did and when I saw how he had Windows XP in it's own "window" on his iMac, and how you could drag and drop between windows, I knew my last barrier was gone. If I truly needed to, I could always launch XP on the iMac. Then, the last straw occurred when my dad got a new computer with Vista, and I was sold. I remember the night he got it, I was helping him out and was trying to copy and paste a non-system file from one directory to another and I got not one, but two security warnings in which I had to either "cancel or allow." No way was I going to go down that road.

So, in early March, I bought my 24" iMac from Amazon. $1999 with a $100 rebate. No sales tax. Free shipping. Seemed like a slam dunk.

So, what are my thoughts after two months of using a computer "designed for the rest of us"? There is a learning curve. It can be aggravating trying to figure out the logic of the iMac. But, I realized that I spent two decades learning about PCs. I couldn't expect to have the same level of knowledge in one day. Other than that, it's been a great purchase and I definitely would not go back. Everything you can do on Windows you can do on a Mac, but the opposite is not true. I've found that there is less to "tinker with" on the iMac than Windows. It's not a customizable. But, I've also found that I actually LIKE the way Apple designed the interface, so there's really not anything I want to change. I find myself a lot less time trying to make my computer work and more time actually working on my computer. I also forget what it's like to have applications freeze up on you, and continually having to press control-alt-delete to kill a program. It just doesn't seem to happen on the iMac. I also love how easy it is to set up user accounts on the iMac. My 11-year old son has his own account and it is mindlessly easy to set up the security restrictions, that is, determining which web sites he can visit, and so on.

Oh, and finally, I was simply amazed a week ago. A friend came over with his MacBook and he had Microsoft Office on it. I had been using Open Office (since it's free) but really wasn't happy with it. He suggested he load Office onto my machine to try it out, and if I liked it, I could go out and get it. I said, "Oh, you have the installation CD?" He said no, took out his USB drive, copied the 500 meg Office folder from his laptop and stuck the USB drive in my iMac, and pasted the file onto my machine. And, it worked. You do not need to "install" software on the iMac.

Things just work, indeed.

As God as my witness, that Mac will be mine!

Tue, 13 Feb 2007 14:25:29 GMT

From the Feb. 10th issue of Forbes:

Security Matters

Why Vista's DRM Is Bad For You
Bruce Schneier 02.12.07, 6:00 AM ET

Windows Vista includes an array of "features" that you don't want. These features will make your computer less reliable and less secure. They'll make your computer less stable and run slower. They will cause technical support problems. They may even require you to upgrade some of your peripheral hardware and existing software. And these features won't do anything useful. In fact, they're working against you. They're digital rights management (DRM) features built into Vista at the behest of the entertainment industry.

And you don't get to refuse them.

The details are pretty geeky, but basically Microsoft (nasdaq: MSFT - news - people ) has reworked a lot of the core operating system to add copy protection technology for new media formats like HD-DVD and Blu-ray disks. Certain high-quality output paths--audio and video--are reserved for protected peripheral devices. Sometimes output quality is artificially degraded; sometimes output is prevented entirely. And Vista continuously spends CPU time monitoring itself, trying to figure out if you're doing something that it thinks you shouldn't. If it does, it limits functionality and in extreme cases restarts just the video subsystem. We still don't know the exact details of all this, and how far-reaching it is, but it doesn't look good.

Microsoft put all those functionality-crippling features into Vista because it wants to own the entertainment industry. This isn't how Microsoft spins it, of course. It maintains that it has no choice, that it's Hollywood that is demanding DRM in Windows in order to allow "premium content"--meaning, new movies that are still earning revenue--onto your computer. If Microsoft didn't play along, it'd be relegated to second-class status as Hollywood pulled its support for the platform.

It's all complete nonsense. Microsoft could have easily told the entertainment industry that it was not going to deliberately cripple its operating system, take it or leave it. With 95% of the operating system market, where else would Hollywood go? Sure, Big Media has been pushing DRM, but recently some--Sony (nyse: SNE - news - people ) after their 2005 debacle and now EMI Group--are having second thoughts.

What the entertainment companies are finally realizing is that DRM just annoys their customers. Like every other DRM system ever invented, Microsoft's won't keep the professional pirates from making copies of whatever they want. The DRM security in Vista was broken the day it was released. Sure, Microsoft will patch it, but the patched system will get broken as well. It's an arms race, and the defenders can't possibly win.

I believe that Microsoft knows this and also knows that it doesn't matter. This isn't about stopping pirates and the small percentage of people who download free movies from the Internet. This isn't even about Microsoft satisfying its Hollywood customers at the expense of those of us paying for the privilege of using Vista. This is about the overwhelming majority of honest users and who owns the distribution channels to them. And while it may have started as a partnership, in the end Microsoft is going to end up locking the movie companies into selling content in its proprietary formats.

We saw this trick before; Apple (nasdaq: AAPL - news - people ) pulled it on the recording industry. First iTunes worked in partnership with the major record labels to distribute content, but soon Warner Music's CEO Edgar Bronfman Jr. found that he wasn't able to dictate a pricing model to Steve Jobs. The same thing will happen here; after Vista is firmly entrenched in the marketplace, Sony's Howard Stringer won't be able to dictate pricing or terms to Bill Gates. This is a war for 21st-century movie distribution and, when the dust settles, Hollywood won't know what hit them.

To be fair, just last week Steve Jobs publicly came out against DRM for music. It's a reasonable business position, now that Apple controls the online music distribution market. But Jobs never mentioned movies, and he is the largest single shareholder in Disney. Talk is cheap. The real question is would he actually allow iTunes Music Store purchases to play on Microsoft or Sony players, or is this just a clever way of deflecting blame to the--already hated--music labels.

Microsoft is reaching for a much bigger prize than Apple: not just Hollywood, but also peripheral hardware vendors. Vista's DRM will require driver developers to comply with all kinds of rules and be certified; otherwise, they won't work. And Microsoft talks about expanding this to independent software vendors as well. It's another war for control of the computer market.

Unfortunately, we users are caught in the crossfire. We are not only stuck with DRM systems that interfere with our legitimate fair-use rights for the content we buy, we're stuck with DRM systems that interfere with all of our computer use--even the uses that have nothing to do with copyright.

I don't see the market righting this wrong, because Microsoft's monopoly position gives it much more power than we consumers can hope to have. It might not be as obvious as Microsoft using its operating system monopoly to kill Netscape and own the browser market, but it's really no different. Microsoft's entertainment market grab might further entrench its monopoly position, but it will cause serious damage to both the computer and entertainment industries. DRM is bad, both for consumers and for the entertainment industry: something the entertainment industry is just starting to realize, but Microsoft is still fighting. Some researchers think that this is the final straw that will drive Windows to the competition, but I think the courts are necessary.

In the meantime, the only advice I can offer you is to not upgrade to Vista. It will be hard. Microsoft's bundling deals with computer manufacturers mean that it will be increasingly hard not to get the new operating system with new computers. And Microsoft has some pretty deep pockets and can wait us all out if it wants to. Yes, some people will shift to Macintosh and some fewer number to Linux, but most of us are stuck on Windows. Still, if enough customers say no to Vista, the company might actually listen.

Ow...ow....ow

Thu, 21 Dec 2006 17:13:28 GMT

My brain hurts. This is exactly why I was an English major...

Okay. It has happened.

Wed, 08 Nov 2006 15:45:11 GMT

I don't really watch TV anymore because I have a lot of extracurricular activities going on. It seems like every night has some baseball, church or social activity so I'm never home.

But, I had heard that the South Park WoW episode was really good, so I d/l it into my iPod.

And, now I'm watching it.

At work.

My world has completely reversed. My work time is now my free time and my free time is now my work time.

Ummmmmmmmmmmmm.......... yeah.

Mon, 06 Nov 2006 20:00:19 GMT

Our race rawks!

From BBC News: Plan to create human-cow embryos

Why I think that Buddhism can lead a person away from what is true.

Sun, 15 Oct 2006 19:22:36 GMT

I was doing some thinking as I was listening to a couple of talks by Dr. Peter Kreeft, who is the theology chair at Boston College. And, it struck me that Buddha, who was definitely a wise man, got it somewhat wrong. But, this statement only can be proven true if one accepts that Jesus Christ is true God and true man.

To come to that conclusion--the divinity of Christ--you must explore the alternatives of who Christ was, which C.S. Lewis sums up nicely: If you believe that Jesus was a real person and what the bible records about his teachings is more or less accurate, then you have three choices:

1) He was a liar.
2) He was insane.
3) He was divine.

He said what he was "sent by the Father," that if "you have seen me, you have seen the Father," that "the Father and I are one," that "before Abraham was, I AM," which was the name God had revealed of himself to the Israelites.

So, if you choose option 1--He was a liar, you have to wrestle with why he would have allowed the Pharisees to put him to death. You could reason that he somehow used trickery to create his miracles in order to gain a following, but if that was his motive, why did he follow the route he did when he knew darned well his death was at the end of it. The Bible records that the Pharisees gave him ample opportunities and warnings to be quiet. He didn't have to go to Jerusalem to die--indeed, he indicates that he knew that his journey to Jerusalem would have led to his death. So, if he was a liar, one has to question what his motive was. And, in choosing this option, you firmly state that he did not rise from the dead, which begs the question. Why then would the 11 remaining Apostles spread the word of a Christian religion? They lived in poverty and discarded any real power. Why would they do this if they had not seen their risen Lord?

Then, if you choose option 2--He was insane, that he believed he was divine but he truly was not, then how do you explain the miracles? If he truly believed he was sent from the Father, it doesn't seem reasonable that at the same time he would use trickery to mimic miracles. And, tradition holds that 10 of the original 12 apostles were martyred. They spent three years with Jesus. Don't you think after that time they would have realized he was a lunatic? But no, even after Jesus' death (and resurrection), they chose martyrdom rather than cast aside the teachings of Christ.

So, if you discard the first two options, you have option three: He was divine. That, he took on mortal flesh to save mankind from sin. That, by attaching ourselves to him, we can share in his sonship and become true sons and daughters of God, and spend eternity with Him.

Now, bringing this back to Buddha, who clearly was a very wise man, he spoke to our heart when he said that "life is full of suffering." He discovered that the way to cease suffering was to cease all desire. He understood that when we desire something in life, we experience suffering when we don't receive it. We have pain from a loved one's death because we desire him to be with us again. We have pain because we are depressed because we want our life to have more meaning. We have pain because someone said something that hurt us deeply because we desire to be loved by that person.

His solution, logically enough, was to remove that desire. No desire, no pain.

So, why does this run counter to Christianity?

Because, if one accepts that Jesus Christ is "the Way, the Truth, and the Life," then one must state that he is the source of all truth and life. In other words, if you want to be a healthy, stable, fulfilled, fully actualized human being, then you must live as Jesus did. And, what did Jesus do? He desired.

He desired all men to be saved. He desired that not one sheep be lost. He desired happiness for his mother at the wedding feast of Cana. He desired to live a simple life of poverty. He desired his friend Lazarus to live. And, he desired to live himself, not to die by the cross.

And, he suffered. We wept. He sweated blood. So must we too, who follow Christ, suffer. We must not cast off both pain and pleasure and accept the middle road that Buddha walked. We must live the highs and the lows. Truly living our lives allows us to grow, to become more human, to become more like Christ. It truly is better to have loved and lost than never to have loved at all.

oh-oh-ohhhhhhh yeaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhh!

Sat, 14 Oct 2006 16:53:28 GMT

Have I mentioned how much I freakin' love Pandora?

My current favs...

All moved in

Fri, 13 Oct 2006 22:48:37 GMT

Moved to central Phoenix last week, around 24th Street and Camelback in a hip 2 bedroom, 2 bath condo. Absolutely, positively love it. I actually feel more at home than I did in my previous home, which I lived in for 4 years, and spent 5 months gutting and fixing up.

Other than that, things are going pretty good. Got a promotion at work and the biggest raise I've ever received in my life. Michael's doing great and I've been able to spend a lot more time with him since I got my Series 7.

...

Yay! :D

One of the most ridculous religious metaphors I've seen in recent history...

Fri, 18 Aug 2006 14:24:14 GMT

From the Aug. 17th issue of the Christian Science Monitor...

The article "Politicos beware: You live in YouTube's world"

For several years, political advisers have been instructing their clients to Google themselves and check their Wikipedia entries. "Now the third station of the cross is you've got to YouTube yourself," says Mr. Cornfield. "You have to know just what you look like and how many people are hitting on and redistributing your video."

The third Station of the Cross is to "YouTube yourself"??? Is it me, or is Christ's passion and death along of the way of the cross not quite the most fitting or apt comparison? Does this mean there are 14 things you have to do as a aspiring politician?

I. Google thyself
II. Check thine Wikipedia entry
III. YouTube thyself.
IV. Pay off the mob for thy underworld dealings.
V. Off that "escort"
...

Hey, for some Friday Fun, try to finish the list!

I gonna change my name to Max Power too.

Sat, 12 Aug 2006 22:07:30 GMT

Max Power doesn't snuggle, you strap yourself in and feel the G's !!

--Homer Simpson

NNNNNNOOOOOOOOoooooOOOOOooooooo!

Wed, 26 Jul 2006 05:00:04 GMT

iTunes has just added Metallica to its collection.

Just when I thought I was doing a good job catching up on bills...

*deep breath*

Let the d/l's begin!!!

Brief update

Thu, 13 Jul 2006 02:49:13 GMT

Ugh. The oppressive heat of the Phoenix summer is weighing me down. 115 degrees today. I got home yesterday (the air conditioning in my house had been off all day), and the thermostat read 91 degrees. It wasn't until nearly 8 p.m. that it was down to a comfortable 78.

But, enough about the heat.

I've spent the past month and a half studying for my Series 7 investment brokerage exam, which I will take next month. Crazy. Absolutely crazy. Had I known then what I know now, I would have never started down this path. 3 to 4 hours of reading and practice test taking every single night. I'm so damn sick and tired of it, but I keep pushing through.

On a better note, I applied and was promoted to a new position at work. It's a Quality Assurance position. Essentially, I pull the transfers that other representatives worked on and critique them. Making loads 'o friends, I can tell you. :P

Last month, I had a long, heart-to-heart conversation with Tammy. Really blew me away. Now, one would think that when speaking to an "ex" you hadn't seen for more than a year, it would someone stilted... Not the case. We had this deep and illuminating conversation. We talked about what had gone wrong when we were together. Where we were at right now. And, what we were looking forward to in the future. Very cool. We are very different people, though, with very different priorities, but it was ... nice. I didn't know how much I missed having her in my life.

This afternoon, I had a few pints with my good friend, Dan. Dan is a first year seminarian, which means he should be ordained a priest in 2012. He was relating his experiences he had during a 30-day Ignatius retreat. He could talk for one (and only one) hour each day--with his spiritual director. The rest of the day were filled with spiritual exercises and work and meditations. All I know is that after hearing him, I totally want to experience it myself. He's a different person from the man I knew last year, and his experiences on the retreat--the images of Heaven and Hell and God and Satan were simply amazing... However, I know that I mustn't desire it for simply the "experience." God will lead me to whatever He wants me to undergo.

Speaking of God. ... ......... ................. What a challenge. Trying so damn hard to live a good life, and continually, coming up short. I have such deeply ingrained longings for ... stuff that is hard to block out. It seems like one week that I'm doing great. That I feel God so powerfully in my life, and I have a real sense of personal holiness. Then, the next week, I fall, and I feel like I wallowing in a pit of filth. But, I know the secret lies in getting back up. Forever getting back up. Every day, dying to myself and picking up the cross. The difference between a sinner and a saint? The saint picked himself up 1000 times. The sinner picked himself up 999 times.

Okay, the books are calling. Hope everyone's doing well!

Sat, 22 Apr 2006 00:45:20 GMT

"Behold this creature that walks like a man. It wants ketchup on its hot dog."

--Cecil Adams

Mel Brooks said it best...

Wed, 29 Mar 2006 00:49:50 GMT

The Who Would You Be in 1400 AD Test

The Lord
You scored 18% Cardinal, 56% Monk, 44% Lady, and 51% Knight!

You are of the intellectual breed and yet you are also very interested
in war. You are of the aristocracy and head the cavalry a safe distance
from the carnage of the front lines. You believe in defeating your
enemy with not only might, but also wit.

You scored high as both the Monk and the Knight. You can try again to
get a more precise description of either the Monk or the Knight, or you
can be happy that you're an individual.

My test tracked 4 variables How you compared to other people your age and gender:

You scored higher than 12% on Cardinal
You scored higher than 78% on Monk
You scored higher than 54% on Lady
You scored higher than 55% on Knight

Link: The Who Would You Be in 1400 AD Test written by KnightlyKnave on Ok Cupid, home of the 32-Type Dating Test

Attention United States Department of the Treasury:

Thu, 23 Mar 2006 22:44:21 GMT

Will you kindly stop screwing around with the money?

My $20 looks like it was run through the wash and my $10 looks like it had some orange kool-aid spilled on it! And, what's with the nickels? I'm mean, sure, the state quarters are cool and all, but don't you think the buffalo is a bit much? And, I don't even want to mention his ... schlong.

Sincerely,

Eric

Totally yanked from a friend's page...

Wed, 01 Mar 2006 04:56:20 GMT

"If I must be faithful to someone or something, then I have, first of all, to be faithful to myself."

What I don't get is that I know, at least for me, that I struggle....I mean really struggle to be a good person. And, I fall. Ohhhhhh, how I fall. It seems to me that if I were to give in to my most immediate inclinations, I'd be in pretty sorry shape.

I mean, let's just take women, for example. For a good chunk of my 20s, I, like a lot of guys, wanted to sleep with nearly every woman I saw. It really didn't matter who she was or how pretty she was or if she happened to be with someone else. If I saw an opening, I would go for the brass ring, as it were...

And, man oh man, did I suffer for it. I remembered writing this post a few weeks after I had my breakdown. This happened when I was 30, and it essentially closed the book on the way I used to live my life. It's funny how if I go a few posts earlier, I can kind of see the writing on the wall. I knew what I was doing, what it was doing to me, but I was unable to stop the train wreck that was to come.

So, back to the original point: How does one remain faithful to oneself? I mean, surely, you can choose a list of qualities and then strive to live up to them, but are those qualities inherent to you? It seems to me that if I remained "faithful to myself" someone's husband would have eventually put a slug between my eyes...

But, I have to strive to be good. It's a lot of work. And, the qualities I strive for are separate from me. They come from an outside source.

So, I guess my question is, how can I, Eric, possibly remain true to myself, when my innate desires would only serve to damn me?

My grandmother passed away today...

Sat, 07 Jan 2006 04:34:02 GMT

While her passing was expected at any time, I was still unprepared for the sadness that followed. We were never very close, but she was my grandmother...

I did an indulgence for her tonight. I hope she is in a better place now.

Musings

Fri, 02 Dec 2005 04:15:19 GMT

I had a really bad anxiety attack last Saturday. It was like the ones I had in January/February of 2004, when I lost my job at BofA. No real problems with anxiety in a good year and a half, then bam!

I had gone with several friends to see George Bernard Shaw's Arm and the Man and we were at this pub afterwards having a drink when it happened. No cause that I could see. Nothing out of the ordinary happened. I was a having a great time with some friends. It just ... came upon me.

It was just terrible--I felt like I was dying. And, it was more than a little unnerving how this feeling instantly returned me to all those crazy times of last year. You know how certain smells remind you of childhood memories? It was like that for me, except it was just ... awful.

However, this time, it turned out differently. I prayed. I mean, I prayed my little butt off. Said every good Catholic prayer I could think of, and it helped--it really did.

But, although the severity reduced somewhat, it was still pretty bad. I thought, "Oh, no. Is it all going to happen again? Now that I'm finally hired at my new job, and I going to do something stupid and get fired again? Am I not going to be so lucky as I was last time?" Images of hospitals and meds and sleepless nights filled my head.

Then, I did something different. I surrendered.

I said to myself, "Lord, if this is your will, so be it. I trust in You. I've seen doctors and tried various meds. I've taken all the paths I can take. I've done all that I can do, so I just offer it up to you."

The anxiety melted away. Like smoke. I could have laughed. I couldn't believe it. It suddenly became clear that this is my cross.

We're all given crosses that we have to carry in life. And, this is mine. Crosses are a blessing from God because they separate us from the world. They teach us truth about reality. They make us rely on Him and Him alone, because in the end, only He can save us, only our Father can bring us the lasting peace and joy that we all seek.

I was reading C.S. Lewis' The Problem Of Pain, and it touches on the same themes. Of how suffering is a gift from God, in a sense. Because, through suffering, we learn the truths about life and we grow. Now, we can reject this gift and medicate ourselves silly (not to say that medication doesn't have an indispensable part to play in healing our minds and bodies, but I think we can all agree that we are an overmedicated society...) or we can rebel--lashing out at the world around us, or we can submit. And, this is the truth that I learned last Saturday. When I submitted, this suffering lost all its power over me.

I haven't felt a peace like this in a long time. I'm sure I'll go through similar bouts in the future, but it's like my eyes have been opened to a view of the world I've never seen.

Peace and God bless,

Eric

Anybody have a can opener I can borrow?

Mon, 07 Nov 2005 15:11:12 GMT

I seem to have problem opening a can of whup-ass today...

Ummm....errrrrrrrr....yeah.

Tue, 27 Sep 2005 04:22:38 GMT

I was hired last Friday.

:o)

Thu, 22 Sep 2005 00:01:54 GMT

If we're made for union with God, if our "hearts our restless until they rest in thee" as St. Augustine puts it, if we are made live in Heaven and not on Earth, is it any wonder we're not happy, content, and fulfilled much of the time?

And, this becomes even more apparent during the happiest times in our lives. Children look at the floor littered with wrapping paper on Christmas morning and ask, "Is that it?" Couples meet their soul mate, get married, and are profoundly disappointed that their soul mate "doesn't complete them." Students study and study and study, spend tens of thousands of dollars, get their advanced degree, which unlocks the career of a lifetime, and they wonder, "is this all there is to life?" Alexander wept that there were "no more worlds to conquer."

What secret does this universal feeling unlock? What is our subconscious trying to tell us?

Thought I should cross-post it into my journal...

Thu, 08 Sep 2005 04:54:10 GMT

In response to this post, I offered the following reply...

I like how C.S. Lewis put it. If you believe that Jesus was a real person and what the bible records about his teachings is more or less accurate, then you have three choices:

1) He was a liar.
2) He was insane.
3) He was divine.

He said he was "sent by the Father," that if "you have seen me, you have seen the Father," and "no one comes to the Father, except through me."

So, if you choose option 1--He was a liar, you have to wrestle with why would he have allowed the Pharisees to put him to death. You could reason that he somehow used trickery to create his miracles in order to gain a following, but if that was his motive, why did he follow the route he did when he knew darned well his death was at the end of it. The Bible records that the Pharisees gave him ample opportunities and warnings to be quiet. He didn't have to go to Jerusalem to die--indeed, he indicates that he knew that his journey to Jerusalem would have led to his death. So, if he was a liar, one has to question what his motive was. And, in choosing this option, you firmly state that he did not rise from the dead, which begs the question. Why then would the 11 remaining Apostles spread the word of a Christian religion? They lived in poverty and discarded any real power. Why would they do this if they had not seen their risen Lord?

Then, if you choose option 2--He was insane, that he believed he was divine but he truly was not, then how do you explain the miracles? If he truly believed he was sent from the Father, it doesn't seem reasonable that at the same time he would use trickery to mimic miracles. And, tradition holds that 10 of the original 12 apostles were martyred. They spent three years with Jesus. Don't you think after that time they would have realized he was a lunatic? But no, even after Jesus' death (and resurrection), they chose martyrdom rather than cast aside the teachings of Christ.

So, if you discard the first two options, you have option three: He was divine. That, he took on mortal flesh to save mankind from sin. That, by attaching ourselves to him, we can share in his sonship and become true sons and daughters of God, and spend eternity with Him.

...

As for the Constitution, no, it doesn't mention "God" or "Christianity," but it also doesn't mention any "separation of Church and State." What it says, in the First Amendment is "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" So, Congress can neither establish a national religion, nor can it pass any law restricting the exercise of one's religion. The First Amendment doesn't prohibit religion from affecting national law and politics, it prohibits national law and politics from affecting religion.

Finally, if you don't think this nation was founded on Christianity, may I kindly direct you to the Declaration of Independence which contains the words "God," "Creator," "Supreme Judge" and "Divine Providence." The whole reason why we felt that we needed to be free of those Brits was that God had given us certain rights, and the British were denying us of them.

I would suggest that the reason why you dislike religion is because there have been right scoundrels in positions of power who have caused their followers to suffer horribly. But, it's illogical to then discount religion because of these horrible people. It'd be like disbelieving Geometry and claiming it was false because your Geometry professor embezzled funds from the university. Truth is truth.

I apologize if I have overstepped my bounds. I remain, your friend,

Eric

Two words:

Wed, 07 Sep 2005 22:58:06 GMT

Public Transportation.

Okay, three words.

Public Transportation rocks!

So, with the price of gas hovering right around $3.19 a gallon, I looked into busing it to and from work. Then, I discovered my company provides free bus cards! So, instead of burning two gallons of gas for my commute (and burning $6.38 each and every day), I spend a half hour in the morning and a half hour in the evening being able to read.

'Course, it helps that I live very close to a main route, which is a straight shot into work--no transfers. Park my car at the bus stop and catch the bus at 5:58, and it drops me off right in front of my building at 6:26.

I can't believe I never looked into this before!