This was just sent to me - it's just too good not to spread this word!!! Thanks for sending this to me, W.D.!!!!!
BTW - Don't you just feel that Dr. Laura is just the pillar of morality??? 'Nuff said!
On her radio show recently, Dr. Laura Schlesinger said that, as an
observant Orthodox Jew, homosexuality is an abomination according to
Leviticus 18:22, and cannot be condoned under any circumstance. The
following response is an open letter from Professor James Kauffman
of the University of Virginia to Dr. Laura which was posted on the Internet.
_______________________________________________________
Dear Dr. Laura:
Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. I have learned a great deal from your show, and try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate.
I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some other elements of God's Law and how to follow them.
1. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord - Lev.1:9. The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?
2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?
3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness - Lev.15: 19-24. The problem is how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.
4. Lev. 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?
5. I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2. The passage clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself?
6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination - Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this? Are there 'degrees' of abomination?
7. Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here?
8. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev.19:27. How should they die?
9. I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?
10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev. 19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them?
Lev.24:10-16. Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14) I know you have studied these things extensively and thus enjoy considerable expertise in such matters, so I am confident you can help.
Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging.
Your adoring fan,
James M. Kauffman, Ed.D.
Professor Emeritus
University of Virginia
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh, WOW - I haven't had these in about 20 years! There are 2 things I really, really miss about living in New Jersey... Pork Roll, and Screaming Yellow Zonkers - but they're here now!!! (Zonkers, that is.)
In case you didn't know - Screaming Yellow Zonkers are these Yellow-Glazed popcorn snacks... No Nuts, No Caramel - just sugar, butter and popcorn. These things are great!!!
Not only are Zonkers great tasting - the packaging is just so much fun! It's covered with all of these pieces of trivia, so that you can learn worthless crap while rotting your teeth - life just doesn't get any better than that!!!
For Example - did you know that Little Ersatz, the world's smallest elephant can sit, fetch, roll over and bark like a dog... it's true - you can see the picure of the elephant in the picure that I took of my can (of Zonkers, that is). Now, where else are you gonna find information like this?
Ya know - everybody wants to tell you about how evil Sams Club is - but no matter how much debate, no matter how persuasive you can be - I know that Sams Club isn't evil - because they sell Screaming Yellow Zonkers!
Now if we can only get them to stock pork roll... but it has to be Taylor Brand pork roll - nothing else will do! Oh yeah, you can buy it over the Inernet - but they charge a fortune!! Nope - it's gotta be right there, in my local supermarket.
Then, and ONLY Then - will my life be complete!!!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now that a portion of the source code for the Windows NT platform has managed to escape the tighly clenched fingers of Microsoft - I suspect that it won't be too long before yet a new and exciting flurry of really nasty viruses begin to invade the sanctity of our PCs.
Have you ever wondered why there just doesn't seem to be the quantity of security issues with other operating sysems... I have.
You hardly ever hear about security leaks in OSX, or Linux. I always though that this is bacause Microsoft Windows is so prevelant... it's such a big, tempting target. but I could be wrong here.
Hundreds of millions of computers use Windows worldwide - so by hacking Windows - you can do the most damage to the most computers, with the least amount of effort ...More "bang for he buck", so to speak. Besides, people love to hate Bill Gates, Mr. Microsoft. He's soooo rich, so the pirate spirit in hackers want a piece of that booty. Now that Mr. Gates has done-pulled a Janet Jackson, hackers have a real opporunity to beat-up the big guy.
I had an interesting conversation with a new friend the other day, and he had a really different, and I feel, really interesing take on the "Kill-Bill" attitude towards Windows, with all it's security holes in particular - it really makes a lot of sense.
He's a real fan of open-source programs - his theory is, you'll never see securiy issues with an open-source operating sysem, like Linux, because people (would-be hackers?) actually have a stake in the program, and everybody is watching everybody else anyways, so here's more opportuniy to make a "bullet-proof" operating system, with all those eyes looking... The open source community probably wouldn't accept something as flimsy, and that needs the quantity of patches as Windows needs.
There's a whole lot of really great open source apps out here, also - OpenOffice is a very nice office suite (people complain about the database - but to be honest, I rarely use Access anyways, so the suite is just perfect for me!) 
You'll probably be able to find an open source application for pretty much anything you'd ever need.
Ya know - I kinda like Windows, it's too bad that Bill has so many enemys - the leak could have acually helped improve Windows, had he been better-liked. I have a feeling that the only thing the leak will do is make it a bigger target for hackers... Who knows, maybe the giant can be slain after all.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bet-cha heard this one before..."The constitution (should) specifically state(s) that a marriage shall be between a man and a woman..."
REALLY... I consider myself of relative intelligence... So I decided to "go to the source, and ask the horse", I mean, the National Archives Experience Online. This here's the full Monty - The Declaration Of Independence, The Constitution, and The Bill Of Rights... full, searchable text versions of all of the documents that our forefathers drafted way back in 1776. Well, I searched the documents, and came up with (drum roll please.......) NOTHING ABOUT MARRIAGE! So, I wonder just where that little misconception came from... So I decide to head on over to a document that deals with all of the additions and arguments to these documents... The US Constitution, Analysis and Interpretation - WOW, this sucker is huge, and confusing as hell!! But it is searchable also.
Go ahead - YOU search it and tell me if YOU find anything of relevance to hetro/gay marriage thang! Good Luck!!!!
So, to help his simple-minded person figure just what marriage is - I asked Mr. Google to define it for me...
...Hmmmmm, definition 1a) Legal union of a Man and a Woman... Husband and wife.... inplications of legal force...
Hey wait ... Look at 1d) A union between 2 people... WHAT - customary but no legal force??? THAT'S a "same sex marriage"???
And what's with 1c) A-common-law marriage? You mean to tell me that 2 people can "live in sin" long enough, and it'll be considered a legal marriage... As long as they happen to be a man and a woman? What's wrong with this picture? I know - it's the state trying to decree morality, and regulate who someone is to spend their life with.
WOW - I sure am glad I happen to be straight - because of this, I get state approval of my legal union... the state allows me to live with the one I love!!
Remember when I did my searches on marriage and came up empty-handed? There's a real reason for that - marriage is as much, and probably more a moral issue and less a legal issue - and our country needs to get totally away from the morality side of this. Our forfathers were pretty-darned smart in staying away from it... I bet it was intentional. People who are against gay marriage usually cite the word of god, or the bible - the state has no business dealing with these types of issues. Now, I'm Christian - I do my best to follow the word of (my) God - I want to be a good person and go to heaven, these are MY choices - I choose to believe in Christ, I choose to have a life partner of the opposite sex - this is what's right for me, but I can't imagine imposing my values overtly on anyone else.
"W", in past speeches, claims he wants to protect and preserve the sanctity of marriage... Problem with that, is the definition of sanctity is "The state or quality of being sacred or holy". Does anyone else have a problem with the head of our government talking like a priest?
I lied a the top of his entry (I've SINNED!!!) - I received a very eloquent response VIA email from a great friend, who's name shall remain anonymous (I'm inserting this without their permission... PLEASE don't sue me!) - here's what she, or he said...
Now; some religions; primarily the (edited) Church; consider homosexuality
an abomination, and I guess from their standpoint, they are indeed allowed
to do so.
I don't know that God feels that way, but I haven't personally
heard from him on the subject. In any event, the (edited) Church will do
anything to ensure that their will prevails. But wait a minute; if we
outlaw gay marriage because the "church" says to do so, isn't that a case
of the "state" legalizing a tennent of a particular religion? Isn't that
NOT a separation of church and state?
If there are churches that do not wish to recognize homosexual unions in
what they feel are the eyes of God; that is their religious business, and
it is ONLY religious business!
BRAVO!!!
In a nutshell - our government needs to get off of the pulpit and back to running this great country of ours!
Now - I've already stated my feelings on the actual label we use to call unions of persons of the same sex, that's not what's important here - what IS important, is that all couples of devotion to each other, must be treated with equal respect, and have equal force of law in the eyes of our government.
So There!
//
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well there’s this intrepid dude, One Ted Wright, who sells “personalized” versions of this decal from a pushcart in our local mall. (Yeah, we’re a One-mall town.) Seems that there are some who find Calvin, wearing the logo of one local school, and pissing on the names of rival local schools… well, offensive.
Local educators are in a lather, they feel that it’s wrong for Mr. Wright to be able to sell the offensive decals in the mall, and want to send him a-packing, so they’ve taken it upon themselves to challenge the right for Mr. Wright's right to sell them… and, you know… they’re gonna win!
Plattsburgh City Schools Superintendent Michelle Kavanaugh says "I felt the sign offended our community values and undermines the hard work all schools are doing, and it also undermines our efforts under SAVE legislation to reduce actions of violence and disrespect between students…"
and
"We have no intent to run any vendor out of town as long as they understand there are clear values we are trying to teach our children…”
Compelling points, but I think that Mr. Wright also brings up a valid point, with his response…
"Isn’t freedom of speech taught at schools? Drugs and pornography offend me, but I don’t think this is offensive. It’s all in good fun." He also went on to say that School officials should worry about what is occurring in the classroom, instead of his stickers.
You can read the story - it’s Wright, er, I mean Right Here.
So... does the general public have the right to run any merchant, whose wares they find offensive, out of a (privately-owned) mall?
If Mr. Wright gets booted from the mall, by mall officials, shouldn’t those same mall officials give the boot to other mall favorites – like Spenser Gifts, bastion to such classics as canned farts, bullshit-repellent-in-a-can, candy pants and the ever-popular drinking boardgame Pass-Out??
Who determines who gets the boot, and who stays???
But first, with regard to the graphic itself…
I just don’t get it.
I admit, I instantly (and probably unjustly) equate people who desire to display the pissing Calvin decal, right along with those who display their sense of “individuality” by displaying mud flaps with the silhouette of the impossibly-endowed naked women, baseball hats put on backward, guys with the way-baggy pants who wear the beltline at-or-near the knee line, and piercings in bizarre places, as all within the same “class” of person.
Without!
Absolutely clueless… But that’s just my opinion, and you won’t find me (publicly and overtly that is) trying to judge these folks for others… although I do tend to shake my head and mutter “whatever” a lot!
I actually feel kinda sorry for them – Man, they’re gonna look back some day and cringe!!
But, you know, these chaps add color to my day – I’d get bored to tears if everybody looked and dressed just like me... I've got that early-American-younger-old-fart look. You’ve seen me: Dockers pants, Stafford shirt, balding, middle-age spread – boring as hell!
Okay, Back to what’s
No, I think it’s wrong to kick Mr. Wright out of the mall – I mean, who’s the most dangerous… the guy who sells the dopey decals, the dope who buys it, or the autocrat who suppresses the right to do either? Anyone who feels that they have the right to (re) move whatever they deem offensive from the public, is well, just plain offensive to me. Yeah, the decals are just plain stupid, and a waste of money (eh-hem, in my humble opinion) – but they're not really hurting anybody here, are they?
At least Mr. Wright is employed – you know, he could be out of work, hanging-around the outside of Ms. Kavanaughs’ schools, relieving his own bladder instead!
//
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FarkleberriesUSA is the brain-child of Lenka, an incredibly creative and wonderful "old friend" who now lives half-way across the country. Lenka has her own blog, called (you guessed it, you're SOOOO clever!)... Farkelberries - check it out, you'll love her creative literary wit!!!
//
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
....Check out the price at the bottom of the article, Oh - the cost of dry pits!!!
//
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I just love to read commentary on "W"'s vision in space exploration, Here's a few of my favorites for today... Dave Barry (I loved his book, Big Trouble - LOL funny stuff!), Wm. Broad, and some more serious words and insights by Yale professor Sabatino Sofia.
I'd like to add my very own insight, with regard to the "W" Mission to Mars...
I was just visiting my nieces' friends house - Now, I live in the frozen north, where once you go into a house, you usually take your shoes off, so not to track any slush onto the carpets.... enaways -
My niece holds up one of her friends shoes and declares "Here's the shoes that I want! - I really need these!!" She's holding a pair of white Etnies, a $50 sneaker (a price that strains my sensibilities - somewhat relevant here, but let's just move on anyways). Now, I look down at the shoes she just took off... White Etnies.
I look at hers again, then her friends again.... Same result.
I believe she at that point, must have seen my bewilderment, so she pointed out this thin band of color around the base of the sole, and the toppled E logo - hers were light blue, her friends - pink.
(Here is a link to the shoe in question - use the links in the upper left to change the colors - as I mentioned earlier, my niece's shoes are light blue/white, not navy/white, so you have to use your imagination here).
So it is With "W" and the space program!!! Don't you see????
Daddy Bush committed the international space station as a launching platform for deep space missions... his mars mission, but I've come to learn that Daddy's just don't know nothin'... so let's just toss that idea out (and to hell with our station committments to the rest of the world) and build us a station on the moon instead!!!
The Hubble Telescope has been making really great science for 14 years now, it's a platform that works - but let's shit-can that also, we need something with prettier (maybe pink?) trim, you know! Besides - to maintain the Hubble requires the space shuttle... and that's old, and sucks also, right???
Why put a machine on mars, when for billions more, we can send a man???
I'm all for the space program, I'd love to see NASA to receive more funding - because great things come from that great program... I just wish we (OK - "W") would allow the people who know the best way to gain the most knowledge using the most cost-effective methods write the game-plan.
I say let's put a man on mars - after we get our shit-together here, on earth!!
//
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Does anyone else find this concept absurd??
Does this mean that every time Domino's delivers a pizza, they should rightfully send a portion of the cash to the people who manufacture the tires (or car, or gas... this could go on forever!!) on the car that delivered the goods, Can you own a patent on the wheel? How about the color blue (I wanna own blue - I like blue!)
Can you patent a concept??
I can almost understand Acacia's gripe, if they have a certain algorithm, or compression scheme they lay claim to - but claiming patent rights to the concept of streaming media seems to me a bit like claiming patent rights to the English language.
The real kicker to this whole thing, is that they didn't invent streaming media - they're a holding company who bought... well, this:
"A system of distributing video and/or audio information employs digital signal processing to achieve high rates of data compression. The compressed and encoded audio and/or video information is sent over standard telephone, cable or satellite broadcast channels to a receiver specified by a subscriber of the service, preferably in less than real time, for later playback and optional recording on standard audio and/or video tape."
I'd like to know who the hell sold Acacia this!!! I wonder... Will the estate of Gene Roddenberry be able to get "A piece of the action" should transporter beams ever become a reality? Star Trek fans demand to know!
Personally - I really, really hope Acacia gets stomped on this one... but If they do get away with this - I'm not walking, I'm running to buy Acacia stock!!!
//
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"...we were almost all wrong" (about Iraq's weapons programs.)
"The theory that weapons of mass destruction may not have existed at the start of the war - that's possible but not likely..."
"Knowing what I knew then and knowing what I know today, America did the right thing in Iraq..."
...and just who are the Madmen here?????
Oh, 1 Final News Flash...
Janet Jackson has breasts!!! (well, a least a right one)
//
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here's my take... I think I can equate gay marriage Vs. traditional marriage to minivan brands.
I drive a Dodge Caravan. Now, there's other Minivans out there... you got your Ford Aerostar, and your Chevy Venture, just to name 2 - They all have 4 wheels and hold a lot of kids, or stuff, and do a fine job at "getting it done", right?
I'm not going to tell anyone that they have a second-class minivan because it isn't a Dodge Caravan, my minivan of choice... and I'm not going to call their (non-Caravan) minivan a Caravan - if it isn't... that would be just plain stupid, right??
The point I'm desperately trying to make here is, we (I) have real issues with what the English label called "marriage" is... (I believe that definition is) a union between a man and a woman. I feel that gay unions should be considered as legitimate as heterosexual ones - but I also feel that the English label for that union should be something other then "marriage".
I have the honor of calling several gay-folk acquaintances friends. I haven't asked them, but I'm not so sure that they want to label their relationship with their lifemate a marriage. Can't we come up with a label that holds the same respect, recognition and benefits for gay unions, that "marriage" holds for heterosexual unions???
//
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I Really didn't get any.
...Oh well.
Maybe I'll get reaction here... Anybody out there????
...We'll see!
Bush, and Family, and Education (Oh, MY!!!)
Of late I've been listening to "W", and his ideas on keeping the American family together, and I've just finished reading this Reuters article RE: "Healthy Marriage Plan"
Read the article!
... the more I think about it, the more I believe that government should just stay away (Far, FAR away) from family and morality issues altogether.
So, "W" wants to be a marriage counselor? He wants to spend 1.5 Billion in the next 5 years on prospective bride and grooms to be??
Now, I could be WAAY off base here (please tell me if I am), but it seems to me that there are 2 fundamental reasons why marriages fail... (A) a lack of willingness for couples to want to stay together (children be damned, spouse be damned), and (B) financial difficulties that increase tensions between couples, eventually tearing them apart. Maybe I'm being naive here, but it feels like "W"'s plan will be ineffective to the 1st group (hey, they're not interested in remaining a family - is it logical to assume that they are they going to volunteer for "how to stay a couple classes" together?), and increasing the (financial) tensions (thru added "marriage penalty taxes" to pay for the plan), for the other group, seems to me a bit like throwing gasoline on the fire.
I for one have little sympathy for the first group, above (at least the "adults" in the family - the children always lose here). I'm of the opinion that one has to work at making a family unit successful. Couples classes are a great idea! Wifey and I attended a Marriage Encounter several years ago, I recommend them... I feel they help a person get closer to their mate... but you need to be motivated to take the Encounter in the first place, ya know? A successful marriage (or civil union) is work, man!
According to Bush - the plan "would teach communication skills to couples before and during marriage." - Hey "W", I have an idea... how about giving the 1.5B to the public school system, so that they can more effectively do their job, and teach everyone how to communicate lucidly before the marriage issue even comes up??? I'm personally getting very tired of double-digit land tax increases and school program cuts, because our federal (and state) government doesn't want to invest in it's education system.
Hey - Bush cares for America's children... He passed "No Child Left Behind"
Saying that Bush initiated the "No Child Left Behind" Act is a bit like saying Al Gore invented the internet... Besides - the bi-partisan NCLBA has turned into this huge finger-pointing circle-jerk!!! Now, schools are "teaching to the test" - what I feel (OK - the evil "MiniMe" inside feels) could lead to subtle forms of government-sanctioned brainwashing... "Hey Dude, wanna trade your 4th grade No Child Left Behind textbook for my 3rd grade No Child Left Behind textbook?"... I digress.
Here's an interesting report on where "W" stands with regard to helping the middle-class family out - give it a read...
Where "W" stands...
Ah, the government givith - and the government taketh away!!!
What do you think??? Enquiring minds need to know!!!
//
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
