Simultaneity

December 8, 2004

Less or More?

It's often thought that it's better to have more then to have less, but that's not always the case. Teri was going to Costco, our local warehouse store, to pick up a few things and I noted I was out of disposable razors and asked her to grab some for me. She came home with the smallest pack they had, 64 razors. Doesn't sound like a lot, but the only time I really use a bunch is in July when I have back to back camps, and I'll use 3 otherwise I use about 1 a month so 64 will last roughly 5 years. In the mean time, I have to store the razors, which will likely dump all over the place more than once and need to be picked up and of course, some will get lost.

I say that because having a bunch isn't necessarily a good thing, in fact, having less will sometimes give you more. When I began reading blogs and other websites, I had a list of about 10 (work related and for pleasure) that I visited each day. Enter RSS or site syndication and Awasu, my feed reader. Basically, my reader visits the site, gets a pared down version of what's on the site - just the content, not the design. I then can look at an even further pared down version, just the titles of new content and decide what I want to read. Less has blossomed into more - I now get content from more than 60 sites each day and it only takes a few moments to scan though and read what is helpful to me.

The reason I bring all of this up is not that 5 years of razors is too much or I want to encourage you to use Awasu, rather one of my favorite sites, blogs4God, is having a "dumping of the razors" problem. They began as a site that collected Christian blogs in an effort to give a focus to our voice in the blogosphere. The problem - as blogging grew, so did the number of entries (over 1300 now) - too many to be useful. Now, they're looking for a solution - a pairing down if you will.

They've offered up suggestions from starting over to shutting down. Personally, as exampled above, I like the thought of developing some sort of aggregated collection of sites, preferably one that's limited to sites that use RSS. This will not only ensure that there is less work to be done by the moderators (in the long run) but also that listed sites will be a more professional quality. I assume this because it'll take a little bit of effort on the part of the writer to make sure that their site uses XML and if they care enough for that, then they'll likely care enough to create decent posts. I believe that paring down will give the same effect for blogs4God that it did for me - more content and higher quality, but in a shorter time.

Of course, it could be over done and become a Christian Technorati. That may not be bad for some, but I find Technorati fairly useless when it comes to discovering emerging bloggers - or anything else useful for that matter.

While thinking about this, I realized this is an example of what I was talking about in "You're Not Lost" when I refered to the simultaneity of extremes. Moving to an XML/feed driven site is one extreme, shutting down is the other. Currently blogs4God is in the middle of the road and things in the middle of the road tend not to live long or look very good.

Lastly, if you happen to visit blogs4God forgive the look, Dean realizes that the site could use some work (it's been in the middle of the road for a while) and I'm sure site redesign will be on the table in conjunction with the data remodeling.

Posted by Jesse at 8:17 PM

November 30, 2004

Most Powerful Man in the Free World

Today's Dilbert (below) reminded me of a pre-election article that I had been working on....

Before the election, there was much talk about economic policies and the like, tying much of it to the President. While he does have a great amount of power in this field, I propose, when it comes to economics he, nor Greenspan is the most powerful man in the world - that would be reserved for Lee Scott.

Who's he? He's the chief executive of a company that is larger than Target, Sears, Kmart, J.C. Penney, Safeway, and Kroger combined. He's in charge of America's leading retailer, a company that, in three months, sells as much as second place retailer, Home Depot, sells each year. Last year, it was $244.5 billion in goods - that's 7.5 cents of every dollar spent in any store in the U.S. (other than auto parts) going to one chain - Wal-Mart.

Yes, they make gobs of money, but it's not just because of sales that I say Scott is so powerful in the world of economics, it's how Wal-Mart conducts business - how they treat their suppliers, their customers, and their workers. You may be thinking that it's only one chain, however, a McKinsey & Co. study concluded that about 12% of the economy's productivity gains in the second half of the 1990s could be traced to Wal-Mart alone. Remember, the second half of the 90's was HUGE. The Dow Jones Industrial Average went from 4,000 to over 11,000 in that 5 year span.

Is being that big a bad thing? How much can one company affect the economy?
Read on...

Before I go further, I'm not trying to paint Wal-Mart, nor Scott as evil overloards. Wal-Mart has a fundamental integrity in its dealings that's unusual in the world or retail (or in the world for that matter). Wal-Mart does not cheat suppliers, it keeps its word, it pays its bills briskly; and it expects the same in return.

The big deal is can be summed up in the big jar of pickles. Simply put, Wal-Mart has a clear mandate for its suppliers: "On basic products that don't change, the price Wal-Mart will pay, and will charge shoppers, must drop year after year." That's hard on most companies since their biggest cost, employees, tends to rise each year. As a solution, many companies move off-shore. From 1998-2003, Wal-Mart doubled its imports from China to close to $12 billion - about 10% of all Chinese exports to the United States. Yes, companies began moving off-shore before Wal-Mart hit the big time, but they have accelerated that pace and are giving non-U.S. companies a huge pipeline to the American market.

In addition to the price drops - delievery is expected to be right and to be on-time. Wal-Mart does such a large volume that a window is scheduled and if you miss your window, your goods are just not put into the warehouse. And that means they don't get to the stores.

Year after year you must find a way to cut costs or you find yourself out in the cold. For many companies, this means slicing to the bone - and sometimes means fatal cuts. Why not just give up selling to Wal-Mart rather than killing the company? The answer comes from Gib Carey, a partner at Bain & Co., who is leading a yearlong study of how to do business with Wal-Mart. "Wal-Mart is the essential retailer, in a way no other retailer is," says Carey, "Our clients cannot grow without finding a way to be successful with Wal-Mart." Dial Corp., for example, does 28% of its business with Wal-Mart. If Dial lost that one account, it would have to double its sales to its next nine customers just to stay even.

So, is it bad that Wal-Mart makes these demands? Shouldn't companies find ways to reduce costs and increase production? Of course, but companies that streamline too quickly are prone to failure - and for those that lose their jobs becuase of price reductions, well, you can't buy anything if you are not employed.

However, I suppose that as jobs are cut to make way for cheaper products from overseas, the unemployed can go work for Wal-Mart. It's an incorrect assumption that Wal-Mart is mostly part time employees; they are almost 80% full time jobs and spent $2bn in health benefits last year.

In summary, Wal-Mart is huge and can make or break any US company that becomes involved with it. They're a huge importer and can set up lines of import with more ease than other companies - so they can make or break any non-US company that becomes involved with them. They also have one of the largest work forces in the US. And, they're one of the most honest companies you could do business with. That makes them a powerhouse - and makes Scott more powerful when it comes to turning the tide. Is that bad? I don't know, go read about the pickles and decide for yourself.

Posted by Jesse at 6:48 PM

November 25, 2004

You're Dead To Me

It's been a while since I've talked about Awasu, but a recent reading got me to thinking - if you're not using RSS, you're more or less dead to me. RSS is, I believe, slowly changing the face of the Internet. Apps are popping up that use RSS to give you the weather, deliver custom news while you're sleeping, and now even delivering custom TV content.

Awasu is one such program and it's completely changed the way I surf - every site I read on a regular basis is delivered via RSS. Recently I've noticed a trend. Someone's site had taken me to a story at TVGuide.com's entertainment section and I'd like to read that section on a regular basis. However, I didn't find an XML link and I'll likely only visit rarely, if ever. Of course, there's ways around no feed, I can set up a WebScrape, but frankly, that's a pain. For that, you need to know how to use unix type regular expressions - actually, you need to be pretty good at it and most people aren't.

Some, like Tom Tomorrow take this stance:

Much to the dismay of many of you, I deliberately do not have an RSS feed. If you want to read my stuff, you have to come to the site and be exposed to my ads and so on. Sorry, that's just the way it goes.

Of course, this didn't stop LiveJournal from syndicating his site (but that's beside the point).
I understand that ad revenue is how most sites make money and keep content free and that an RSS feed doesn't generate the click-thru that brings in the funds. However, there's a flaw in that view. In making the assumption that you don't have to have an XML feed you also assume that people will want to return to your site - and remember to do it. That's a big assumption and one that is fading into nothingness. Today's world is about customization. I want custom content, that I choose, delivered to me - and RSS lets me do that.

You can bring me to your site in other ways.

1. Don't give me a full feed, just a teaser of what's there, and if I want to read it, I'll visiti your site to read the whole thing. The drawback here is that you need to make sure that the headline and teaser are enough to get my attention. And honestly, I don't care for excerpts, when I travel I don't always have the ability to hop on-line and get the full text and that's annoying.
2. Make your posts something that I want to comment on, or see other peoples comments. This will mean that I have to come to your site.
3. Come up with another way to draw me to your site based on content.

Of course, if you are not dependant on ad revenue, I suggest giving out a full feed that's well formatted, rather than the typical "LiveJournal full-screen-block-text-make-your-eyes-bleed" formatting. Drawing people to your site simply for hit counts is a dead art.

Lastly, why does it matter if you have an RSS feed for me? Really, it doesn't. Whether I read your site or not is pretty irrelevant to everyone, however, I'm not at the bleeding edge of RSS technology. There's a large and growing host of people that use feeds to read websites and like most of the culture, they want to customize their content - RSS feeds will let them, don't be dead to them as well.

Current feeds being received: 62

Posted by Jesse at 11:49 AM

November 15, 2004

Family Meals

I just read somewhere that the 27th (of September or October) was set aside as Family Day, a day where families should take the time to have dinner together - what a shame. It's sad that we, as a country, are to a point where someone felt the need to say, "Hey, let's specify a time for family meals."

Growing up, it was an odd thing not to have dinner at home with mom & dad. In fact, as I recall, missing dinner was not something that was easy to request - and I did have to ask. Looking back, I'm glad we had those times, even if some of them were a bit tense.

Occasionally, my job takes me away at dinner times, but when it does I try to be sure I am at home for a different meal. Of course, when I am at a retreat or camp, I can't do that, but I want to make sure that Kevin goes up understanding the importance of family meals. Not just because I want him there or to force the same situation I had, but because it's a great opportunity to share the day, learn from each other and build a sense of family.

Recent studies have shown that teens that eat dinner with their parents at least 5 times a week are less likely to abuse alcohol, drugs and tobacco. Further, family dinners were found to correlate with good grades. Other studies have shown that regular family dinners result in kids that are less likely to have eating disorders as well.

I'm not so sure that this is the meal time itself. To make family dinners happen, parents have to take a pro-active position and lead the family. Their interests need to be on the health of the family unit, not on themselves. I think that is what makes the difference, the results of leadership and caring just happen to include family dinners.

So, what benefits have you notice when you share meals with your family?

Posted by Jesse at 10:12 PM

November 7, 2004

Seeking...

"Search me, O God, and know my heart; Try me... and see if there is any wicked way in me, and lead me in the way everlasting."
-Psalm 139:23

Tonight I found myself wondering why there are more 'Christians' at a football game on Sunday then you find in church.
It's a funny thing about people, when you offer a glimpse of God, they turn away just as the Israelites did, preferring instead to have someone act as a 'go between.' Yet, we all have a deep need to worship something, and when we will not connect with God, we turn to money, jobs, other people, or even golden calves. Then, eventually finding those to not be what we were seeking get mad at God - who we turned away from in the first place.

Posted by Jesse at 8:49 PM | Comments (1)

June 16, 2004

A New Evil

So there I am happily surfing along. I do a Google search and notice that the taskbar redirects to lunasearch.com, then back to google. Odd, maybe google has another server to even the flow of things, but I decide to check it out anyhow. I open a new browser and Google isn't my homepage any longer.....

I'd been Hijacked.

Now, in addition to putting up with Spam, advertisers have found a whole new way to annoy. Spyware is becoming well known, but now instead of going away, it's changing tactics and coming on stronger.

I ran the antivirus and nothing came up other than a few cookies that it said were adware. I then ran AdAware and a number of things came up. Considering I don't download much I was a little surprised at the number of things, but it had been a while since ran AdAware so I wasn't that surprised.

Everything seemed back to normal, lunasearch was now gone. Then I looked in my Add/Remove programs and found several items that shouldn't be there. Cleared those out as well and deleted their directories. Again, seemed clear, but despite the GoogleBar pop-up blocker, I was still getting a number of pop-ups.

After scanning the web, I found a few new tools to help in my battle. HiJackThis lists all the add-ins to your browser and your startups and allows you to remove them (and undo if you find you've made a mistake)...the problem is knowing what it all means, but there are plenty of sites that can help you with that. The other item that I found was Spybot - Search & Destroy. After I had run AdAware, Spybot S&D found 98 more things that needed to be removed. It also has the ability to block some items (or warn you) that are downloaded when you read an ad.

Be on the lookout for more and more spyware, adware, and who knows what. The ad companies are getting smarter so you have to keep up on what can block the new things they come up with.

So that's how I spent a majority of my Monday off....

Posted by Jesse at 11:15 PM

June 7, 2004

Blog Reading Request

If you read this blog often then you know that I use an RSS reader. I'm a big fan of Awasu, it's allowed me to speed up my reading of various blogs and sites and not I can skim through most of the sites I read in a very short time.

I currently subscribe to 32 channels, which are 95% blogs, a few article collections, and two lists of free stuff. Out of those, I can breeze through the updates on all but 3 or 4 - on those I often have to visit their site. The problem is that they send only an exerpt of the post (40 or so words), which is usually not enough to figure out what they are talking about.

Many blog packages have the feature to send out XML excerpts rather than the full posts and a few send excerpts by default - it's annoying. The only reason to send an excerpt is to MAKE people come to your site. Unless you are selling something there really is no reason to draw someone there. Sure, you worked hard on your design, but blogs are about what you say, not how your page looks - send out the entire message. If you don't want to send your message out, then disable the RSS feed.

I realize that there are probably more than a few that don't realize this is the default and would consider correcting it, but don't know what they're doing.....I think I'll drop some e-mails suggesting they fix the ones I read.

There is, however a place for excerpts. When your post begins to be too much to read in one sitting, it's not really something to be syndicated. A few of my San Diego posts are of that nature. Additionally, HealYourChurchWebsite does a very good job of knowing when to make the break between what should be sent (the body) and what should be on just the web site (the extra text). In those cases, you're really not using the excerpt feature of the blogging software so in all, I still say...

Get rid of the excerpt feature or make it something you have to pay for.

Posted by Jesse at 12:15 AM | Comments (2)

May 14, 2004

Lessons Learned: Uproar of the MT Community

There are a few things to be learned by the pricing structure that was released yesterday by Six Apart.

First, know your user base.

Like I said yesterday, I completely understand the fact that 6A needs to make money, as do all companies, but it's important to understand your market. The pricing structure that they set up are clearly geared toward corporations, but it seems that they failed to understand that the people that work for those companies are the same people that they are upsetting with the news release - and upset people don't recommend the products that upset them.

Second, don't jump the gun.

Lots of people are spouting off in response to the message about the new prices, but they may be under false ideas. The version that was released yesterday was MT 3.0 Developer Edition - that last part was missed by most - Developer Edition. According to PC World:

"We'll still have a fully functional free version for personal use," adds Chief Executive Officer Mena Trott. A personal version that includes technical support from Six Apart costs $45.

The article is a tad confusing since it also list other pricing structures. I've been to the web site and there is no $45 version, but the article does say:

Six Apart plans to offer a general release of Movable Type within two months, when it will also announce winners of its add-on development contest.

Additionally the CEOs post says:

With the new licenses going in effect today we will continue our tradition of offering a fully functional free version, there will also be a large variety of paid licenses that come with the structured support that we never felt that we could give our donors enough of. We're bringing in a help ticket system for paid licensees as well a company maintained knowledge base.

It seems that the "Developer" release may be just that and a general release will come later...we'll see come July.

Next, integrity is still important.

I was rather please to find out that there is another outcry coming from the MT community. In her post, the CEO said:

We're big on honor at Six Apart. We haven't built in any nagware for license violations or phone home mechanisms. We trust our users' good judgment and intentions. We intend to use our good judgment in being flexible about enforcing these limits.

Many have taken this as an implication that while there are license agreements there will not be any policing of general users. Go ahead and violate, we'll let you know if you go to far. The good news: People are upset by this. The users do not want to violate the agreement, they'd rather pay. I don't think that's what they intended to say, but I'm glad to see that honesty is still out there somewhere.

Further, less is more.

When communicating to a group about your product, you need to assume that the group WILL NOT read what you've written, they'll skim it; write accordingly. I've reread the post - well, scanned again - that talks about the pricing structure. I've also read other people's thoughts and it's apparent that either the original post was changed or not read, I'm going to assume not read. In addition to the pricing/general release issue above, some have said that 6A should have taken some surveys of the community or asked for feedback from the community. In her post Mena says:

You'll see from the pricing chart that the cost of offered licenses vary based on the number of authors and weblogs people plan to have. Based on surveys and user feedback, we are fairly comfortable these licenses will meet the needs of over 85% percent of our current users.

Rather than writing 17 paragraphs about the new pricing, 6A would have been better off breaking that post into sections with sub-headings. That way people could find the information that they are looking for rather than having their assumptions fill in the blanks of their skimming efforts.

Finally, be clear about your intentions.

I've written this post with the assumption that there will be a general release version coming in July, but I'm still not clear if that will happen. The MovableType web site looks as though they are completely committed to everyone upgrading to 3.0D, but some of the posts don't appear to say that. The front page was redone in such a way that the the support forums and the general release download (2.661) are next to impossible to find for a new user. That's fine if the intention is for new users to start using the developer edition, but that doesn't seem to be the message that they're sending out. Their words say one thing, their web site implies another. All I know for sure is that I am not the only one that is confused.

I think that 6A could have benefited by working with a marketing firm for the release of this pricing structure and I think that the user community (especially those that have already made a change based on yesterdays announcement) could benefit by having some patience. Hopefully this post will help some learn from the mistakes in the MT world, I know it's reinforced some things that I've learned and will help me keep these ideas at the forefront when marketing anything to anyone.

Posted by Jesse at 5:25 PM | Comments (1)

March 23, 2004

Elmo goes to court

Mr. Newdow (not to be confused with Mr. Noodle) goes before the Supreme Court tomorrow to begin the hearing of United States and Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow.

Rather than getting into how ridicules the case is, I'd like to point out that he should never have been able to bring the case in the first place. While I would really like to hear the outcome from the court I think it would be a better serve of justice for them to vacate all the prior rulings and find that Mr. Newdow has no standing.

He brought the case on behalf of his daughter because he was offended that she had to use the words "under God." While I disagree with the idea that the pledge is unconstitutional I don't have a problem with someone trying to bring the case. Mr. Newdow, however, has no parental rights. They were given up during a custody case and the court papers of that case state that any case involving the girl cannot be brought by him. (In addition, he may have no standing because psychological injury is not sufficient reason to being a lawsuit under Article III of the Constitution.)

Posted by Jesse at 6:38 PM

March 21, 2004

Overruled

Last October I mentioned that the FCC didn't site Bono for saying the F-word during the Golden Globes. The Commission has overruled it's staff.

FCC cites Stern, Bono for indecency
Federal regulators opened a new front in their crackdown on offensive broadcasts Thursday, saying that almost any use of the f-word on over-the-air radio and television would be considered indecent.
The Federal Communications Commission overruled its staff and said an expletive uttered by rock singer Bono on NBC was both indecent and profane. It marked the first time that the FCC cited a four-letter word as profane; the commission previously equated profanity with language challenging God's divinity.

Posted by Jesse at 11:28 PM

March 13, 2004

A minor shift in views

By this point, I am sure that Teri is fairly tired of the topic of gay marriage and to be honest, I'm glad to see that it's dying down a bit on the blogs I frequent.

I've posted my view and won't rehash - but I think I'm starting to move into this camp, just a bit:

While I agree with alot of what he said, and think that this may be the best option, I don't think it's a viable option. There is to much financially at stake for the government to get rid of marriage.

Posted by Jesse at 11:29 PM | Comments (1)

March 2, 2004

Front Desk, could you turn down my connection?

I was reading Darryl's Blog in which he said that he called the hotel that he would be staying at to see if they had Internet access, he said, "In my mind, this is like asking a hotel if their rooms come with beds and running water."

That reminded me that I shouldn't assume that the hotel I'll be staying in this week will have a connection. I'll be attending a Technilogy & Ministry Conference so it hadn't occured to me that the hotel might not have the technology.

I called this morning and was relived to find that The Founder's Inn does indeed have a broadband connection in each room. Now I just have to remember to bring the wireless router.

Posted by Jesse at 10:56 AM

February 25, 2004

A Few Answers

My post on San Francisco and Massachusetts raised a few questions both publicly and privately that I’ll address here. As always, my blog is open for comment, but if the comments become hateful or attacking in nature, they will be deleted and the comments closed. Remember, it is possible to disagree and still be respectful.

How is Gay Marriage Bad for Society?

First, lets look to Holland, where “gay marriage” has been legal since 2001. HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases are soaring among homosexual men. While the study notes that “partnered” homosexuals have fewer “outside” lovers than the “unpartnered,” the fact is that men in these relationships are still contracting the AIDS virus at alarming rates. Homosexuals, as a group, have more partners than heterosexuals. Studies have proven that having more than three partners increase your risk of disease by 15 times.

Secondly, homosexual households are also more prone to domestic violence. For example: “The incidence of domestic violence among gay men is nearly double that in the heterosexual population,” according to D. Island and P. Letellier in Men Who Beat the Men Who Love Them (New York: Haworth Press, 1991). Further, a study in the Journal of Social Service Research reported that “slightly more than half of the [lesbians surveyed] reported that they had been abused by a female lover/partner.” (G. Lie and S. Gentlewarrior, “Intimate Violence in Lesbian Relationships: Discussion of Survey Findings and Practice Implications,” No. 15, 1991.)

Slightly off topic, but not completely out of line - Studies have also shown that women who are married to men are safer than unmarried women. They are less likely to be abused by the men they love or to become the victims of violent crimes in general.

Traditional marriage is also the best environment for raising happy, healthy children. It is critical, therefore, that men and women not only marry, but that they stay married.

• Research has shown that children raised in a homosexual household become more confused about their own gender identity and tend to be more promiscuous and more prone to other destructive behaviors than children raised in traditional mother/father homes.


• Same-sex relationships tend to be more unstable than traditional couples.


• Sons raised without a father are at greater risk for violence and are two and a half times as likely to serve time in prison


• Children in traditional homes are less prone to depression, school problems and drug use


• Children in traditional homes likely to have sexual relations from age 14 to 17; and their teenage daughters will be less likely to become pregnant.


• Children in traditional homes are less likely to witness the domestic violence, mental illness, life-threatening disease and premature death often found in same-sex unions


• Studies have also shown that children from traditional homes are less likely to have mental health problems in later life

Lastly, same-sex marriage or civil unions that entitle same-sex couples to receive benefits and privileges normally reserved for traditional marriage and family relationships will increase operational costs for both government agencies and private businesses.

In summary, same sex marriages have the following effects on society: The rate of disease increases, operational costs of government is increased, more domestic violence, and a variety of problems with children raised in those households.

Does Gay Marriage de-value Traditional Families?

A very good point was raised that “celebrity marriages” lasting only a short time or done for publicity also make a shame of marriage. I don’t disagree. Marriage is a covenant and should not be entered into lightly. Some of the very things that I’m posting about apply outside of homosexual unions as well.

The assumption by many is that marriage is just two people with a license who have sex and wear rings. Homosexuals do that, why not give them the license? Engaging in sex doesn't equal marriage. Adults involved in incest and bestiality have sex too; but that does not mean that the government should call it marriage and license them. (And don’t think it’s rare – 20% of animals taken to veterinarians have been sexually abused.)

The reason that most can not see how marriage is being devalued by the existence of a counterfeit is because much of the public does not value marriage. Adultery is no big deal. No- fault divorce is tolerated. Absentee fathers and mothers devalue marriage. Unmarried pregnancies are common. Fornication is "normal." Homosexual marriage is not the only issue devaluing marriage, but legalizing homosexual marriage will compound the problems, not solve or lessen them.

A license to marry is a legal document by which government will treat same-sex marriage as if it were equal to the real thing. A license speaks for the government and will tell society that government says the marriages are equal. Any time a lesser thing is made equal to a greater, the greater is devalued. For example:

• If the Smithsonian Museum displays a hunk of polished blue glass next to the Hope Diamond with a sign that says, "These are of equal value," and treats them as if they were, the Hope Diamond is devalued in the public's eye. The government says it's just expensive blue glass. The history and mystery are lost too.


• If the government issues a license to babysitters that grants them the same rights, protections and responsibilities as a child's parents, parenthood is devalued. The government says parents are just babysitters.

Granting a marriage license to homosexuals because they engage in sex is as illogical as granting a medical license to a barber because he wears a white coat or a law license to a salesman because he carries a briefcase. Real doctors, lawyers and the public would suffer as a result of licensing the unqualified and granting them rights, benefits and responsibilities as if they were qualified.
Marriage is a religious covenant, between a man and a woman and God.

Shouldn’t homosexuals have the same rights heterosexuals do?
Homosexuals are seeking a special right. They already have the same right to marry the rest of us have-the right to marry a person of the opposite sex. Limiting marriage to one man and one woman doesn't discriminate on the basis of sex or sexual orientation.
Marriage Law Is Discriminatory, most laws are.

Marriage law discriminates on the basis of age, family relationships, marital status, as well as gender. To eliminate all discrimination in marriage law, the state would not only have to legalize same-sex marriage, it would also have to put its stamp of approval on bigamy, polygamy, incestuous marriage, and early teen marriage. Obviously, this would not be healthy for society. Therefore, "discrimination" is necessary within marriage law for the common good.

Isn’t your opposition the same as the prejudice that kept interracial couples from marrying in years past?

"Skin color is a benign, non-behavioral characteristic . . . sexual orientation is perhaps the most profound of human behavioral characteristics. Comparison of the two—racial and sexual discrimination—is a convenient but invalid argument."
Gen. Colin Powell, former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

Comparing Race to Homosexuality Is Like Comparing Apples To Oranges.
Homosexual activists are always eager to link themselves to the genuine bigotry and discrimination racial minorities have suffered in America. In doing so, they make their fight out to be a valiant battle for civil rights. But as Reggie White, former defensive end for the Green Bay Packers, said, "Homosexuality is a choice, not a race." The fact is homosexuals do not qualify for special protected class status. In order to do so, they would have to meet three criteria:

They would have to prove that homosexuality is inborn, innate and unchangeable.

- Scientist both hetero and homosexual have concluded that there is no gene that causes sexual orientation. Further the homosexuals that have changed shows that it is changeable.

Homosexuals would have to show that, as a group, they are economically disadvantaged.

- Homosexuals hold various jobs, just like heterosexuals. They are poor, they are rich, they are middle class, as a group, they are not economically disadvantage. Not that stereotypes hold any value, but the stereotype is quite the opposite.

They would have to demonstrate that they are politically powerless.

- GBLT lobbies are among the largest on the hill.

Homosexuals do not meet any of these criteria.

Essentially, homosexuals, bisexuals and lesbians—by their own admission—share only one attribute on which they base their claim to protected class status: They choose to perform sexual acts with members of the same sex. But behavior alone is not a compelling reason to reward protected, minority or ethnic class status with all the attendant entitlements.

The U.S. Supreme Court has declared that not all forms of sexual behavior, even sexual acts between ”consenting adults,“ are immune from legal regulation or penalty. Incest, pedophilia and prostitution are but a few examples of behavior considered criminal acts by legal statutes.

Where’s the love?
I don’t hate gay people, far from it. I have several friends who are gay; our views simply don’t match. None of us are perfect, we all sin and we all need forgiveness.

Posted by Jesse at 9:43 PM | Comments (8)

February 21, 2004

Massachusetts & San Francisco are wrong

First, I'm rather sick of the notion that people who are against gay marriage are bigoted and no better than the KKK. I think that's about as narrow minded as a person can get.

Now, with that out of the way, let me address the Massachusetts judiciary & San Francisco. Both are wrong. Not because they are for gay marriage but for their approach.

We have three branches of government and it works out fairly well. Far better than other countries. Unfortunately, the system seems to be breaking down, and it's the fault of the people, especially people that feel that any gain that they make in their agenda is good, even if it's at the expense of the system.

The Massachusetts judiciary has every right to say that the ban on gay marriage is not legal, however, they overstepped their bounds when they said that the legislature must re-write the bill a certain way. That's not up to them, that's up to the people and the people are represented by the legislature. Last I checked, we were a self governing form of government. However, many on the left would rather see the judges dictating things because the will of the people is not what they want.

On to San Francisco. The gay marriages are illegal, plain and simple. It's what the people originally wanted and what they got. Now San Francisco wants to change the law, that's fine, we have a method of doing that. I'm glad to see that SF is suing California over the matter, it's what they should have done in the first place.

As a member of society, I cannot simply break a law and expect that all will be fine. If I don't agree with a law, I should fight to change it, not just ignore it.

And before anyone goes off with something equating this to slavery, do some research. The laws were not simply broken and that's what caused segregation to end. People started by working to get laws changed, then moved into protesting. Once those avenues were used as best they could, they moved into breaking laws that should not be; but still, they expected repercussions. Besides, slaves didn't have a choice about being slaves.

So, even if SF wins their battle in court, the weddings done prior to that fight should not be honored.

As for my personal view, I'm against gay marriage. This doesn't mean that I hate homosexuals but that I put a higher value on family and I am not alone. Nearly two-thirds of Americans continue to oppose same-sex marriage, and almost half are against civil unions. It seems that nothing is swaying peoples opinions over time. Polls taken following the Massachusetts’s Supreme Judicial Courts ruling and in 1996 showed that the opposition to gay marriage remained virtually the same (65% in 1996, 66% now).

Along party lines, 80% of republicans, 66% of independents, and 55% of democrats oppose same sex marriage. The opposition is also higher in men (72%) than with women (62%) and not surprisingly higher with seniors (80%) than with young adults (54%).

Poll Source: Opinion Dynamics Corporation

Posted by Jesse at 12:19 AM | Comments (3)

February 18, 2004

New Math and a New Phone

Although I've put this in the News I can use category, the truth is, it's news I'd rather not hear.

I have been with AT&T wireless for several years and enjoyed the service. A little over a year ago I upgraded to the GSM network and as a result got even better signal strength. I've always been able to get a signal where other carriers weren't and I enjoy the price structure that allows us to have two phones. I wonder what this will bring...

Ummm....You say your phone service stinks and it's being bought by another that you say sucks and you expect it to get better? Last time I checked two of crap is still crap. This is like the buy one get one free sale at Payless, if you really wanted to screw with me you'd give me three pairs.

Further reading:

While I don't think that it's completely inconcievable that things will get better let's look at what he's saying:

1. Shareholders get $1.20 more per share than it's trading at now. Not to bad and that would be a 52 week high, but far far from the companies high. I can't find Cingular on the market so I don't know if their traded so I can't see if a stock swap would be a good idea.
2. Customers: See my above note on two of crap still being crap. I have yet to see a hugh corprate merger be better for the little guy. More customers, less techs & other support does not mean better service.
3. The workers: I think the biggest oppertunity that they will have that they would not have had with a standalone company will bethe oppertunity to be laid off. Everyone knows that merger usually means people will be losing their jobs.

I suppose it's obvious, but just in case it isn't, I'm not a fan of Cingular and I can't see this buy out as a benifit.

Posted by Jesse at 10:42 AM

Got any ID?

I realize that we've been attacked by terrorist and that it will likely happen again. I believe that the first time was because we were lax in our security and that we needed to tighten things up, but we need to do so without violating the constitution. After all, as Denzel Washington said in "The Siege," once we shred the constitution, even a little bit, they've won.

After watching the video, I think Mr. Hiibel was overly provocative of the police officer, but upon reading the site and the Bill of Rights, he shouldn't have been placed in that position in the first place. Further, the arrest of his daughter is just ridiculous.

I can't believe that this has to go to the Supreme Court.

Posted by Jesse at 10:13 AM

February 14, 2004

Know what I meme?

Several blogs that I read began talking about various memes that they have participated in. At first, I thought the pronunciation was "me me" but upon further investigation I've found that it's pronounced "meem" (rhymes with gene).

This article goes into a little more about where they came from, and it seems that they are far older than these stupid personality tests that are invading everywhere.

So, you see, a meme is very much like a virus, and it's invading our lives and trashing many a blog. It's not that I mind people posting a "personality" test results now and then, but some people are beginning to lose control. I read someone’s blog for one of two reasons - or possibly both, and it's the same reasons other people read each others blogs, which closely follows the two main types of journals:

1. Personal -I know you and I want to keep in touch with what's going on in you life
2. Entertainment - You talk about interesting stuff and I want to read what you write

If you fall into the first category, I already know you and I know your personality. Sure it's fun to see how your results match up with friends, but if that's all you post, your friends have no idea what is going on in your life, you are straying from being a personal blog and that means your site is going to get boring.

If you are trying to have an entertaining site, personality tests have no place what-so-ever. They are not entertaining to people who don't know you.

So, enjoy your personality memes, but don't let them overtake your blogs. Like any virus, they must be controlled or they will destroy the host.

Posted by Jesse at 1:47 PM | Comments (1)

February 12, 2004

The Passion, the controversy

On February 25th, The Passion of the Christ will open nationwide and not without a little bit of criticism. The movie is being labeled as anti-Semitic by several Jewish organizations and I think it's plain silly. Many of these organizations have not viewed the movie and are basing their remarks on the fact that the movie is said to be biblically accurate. Since I have not seen the movie, I can't really defend it, but I can say that if it is based on the gospels of the New Testament, it is not anti-Semitic. I would say that claiming that is like claiming that movies such as Pearl Harbor are anti-Asian.

I wasn't going to blog about the movie until I saw it, but this article in the Washington Times spurred me to write more:

First, the question of anti-Semitism in the movie. I think Gibson went out of his way to not to vilify Jews. I know that at least two references to their guilt in the crucifixion are not in the movie. The words that the crowd cried to Pilate, "Let His blood be on us and our children" were removed (Matthew 27) as was the protest about the sign "King of the Jews."

I also think that the question "Who killed Jesus," has to be answered as well, was it just the Jews?

Pilate and Herod passed Jesus back and forth several times before Pilate bowed to the political pressure to try him. Much, not all, of this pressure came from the Jewish leadership. It was Pilate, who issued the order as only the governor could order him crucified. Both the Bible and historical accounts show this.

So how was to blame?

The Jewish Leadership

Members of the Pharisees, Sadducees and chief priests saw Jesus as dangerous. Publicly they accused Him of blasphemy. So they hired false witnesses and petitioned Roman leaders for His execution.

The Roman Leadership

Pilate knew about the unjust motivation of the charges, received a divine warning, yet let political expediency take priority over justice.
(Like Pilate, whenever we allow expediency to win over justice or side with views solely because they are popular even when we know that someone is suffering unjustly, we are guilty.)

The Jewish followers

The insistent people that blindly followed their leaders are the ones that chose to free Barabas and they embraced the moral responsibility that Pilate was trying to avoid.

The gentile soldiers

The executioners went beyond the requirements in their torture. They mocked Him, beat Him with fists, spit on Him, thrashed Him with barbed whips, pressed thorns into His head, and drove nails into his hands and feet.

Jesus

At several points, Jesus could have gotten out of the crucifixion, but he knew he had to complete His mission.
He warned His disciples on several occasions that He would suffer and die in Jerusalem and never resisted His accusers. During His interrogation before Pilate, at least twice, He was offered a chance to defend Himself, yet He didn't. By Roman law, a defendant who refused to make a defense had to be assumed guilty.

You and Me

The need for Christ’s sacrificial death goes back to the first man and woman in the Garden of Eden. Their sinful rebellion against God sealed our fate, placing all mankind under the sentence of death and separating us from the God who made us (Genesis 3:1-24; Romans 5:12). Christ had to die, because there was no other way to rescue us from the penalty of death (Romans 3:23). Nothing but a perfect sacrifice could have been a worthy substitute for the punishment we deserve (2 Corinthians 5:21). No one but the Judge of the universe could have satisfied the requirements of the law against us (Romans 5:18-19). No one but our own Creator could have offered a sacrifice so infinite in value that it could buy the salvation of anyone who trusts Him.

God’s justice demanded payment of the death penalty for our sin. God’s love moved Him to offer His own Son as the only solution to restoring our broken relationship with Himself. It was Jesus’ love for us that kept Him on the cross more than the nails that pierced His hands and feet. The cross of Christ is a symbol of the depth of God’s sacrificial love.

I've strayed considerably from my original though about the movie, so instead of going on about the movie, I'll refer you to a Washington Times Editorial written by an Orthodox rabbi:

Protesting 'Passion' - The Washington Times: Editorials

As an Orthodox rabbi with a wary eye on Jewish history, I fear that these protests, well-intentioned though some may be, are a mistake. I believe those who publicly protest Mr. Gibson's film lack moral legitimacy. What is more, I believe their actions are not only wrong but even recklessly ill-advised and shockingly imprudent.

Posted by Jesse at 6:08 PM | Comments (1)

February 7, 2004

Overload

I'm a victim of the information age. I suffer from information overload.
Everyday I'm bombarded with tons of information, e-mail, RSS feeds, Television, and on and on. I'm not blaming the various forms of media for my overload, after all, I go looking for it.
I've been looking for tools to help bring the constant barrage of information under control and I've found a few that help.

First, Inboxer sorts out the spam from my e-mail filtering the 200+ messages a day down to 50 or so that I actually want to read and drops some of them of for later review as possible spam. From there, Outlook further filters those 50 or so dropping many of them into folders set up for lists and messages that I'll read at some mysterious "later date" that rarely seems to come along. What's left is usually about 4 messages that get read, responded to and deleted.

Next up is Blogs. Not sure who thought this was a great idea, but it hooked me and I find different folks slant on the news more informative and interesting than major outlets. However, jumping from blog to blog wasted time, especially when they hadn't been updated. Enter Awasu a free RSS reader for windows. RSS readers allow you to "subscribe" to feeds from many blogs (as well as other syndicated feeds like news), the subscription tells the reader which site has new content and what that content is. Depending on the feed, you can either read the full content in Awasu, or at least see enough to know if you want to visit the site. It also keeps track of what you have read, allows searches, and I can keep things for a "later date." This has saved me a lot of time, the only draw back is that it is not able to keep up with LiveJournal Private posts because RSS by nature doesn't "log in".

Finally, I have sites that I like to visit to keep up on Youth Ministry news, TiVo happenings, and other miscellaneous events. It'd be nice if those sites would develop an RSS feed system for their articles, I'd be able to filter though them a bit faster.

In all, the information overload isn't just because I allow to much information to filter my way, it's more to do with the fact that I don't read fast enough or filter well enough. Between that and putting of some listserv messages to a "later date" I think I'll be overloaded for the rest of my life.

Time to go watch TV.

Posted by Jesse at 10:31 AM

January 26, 2004

Fast Food = Fat Kids

I'm not anti-fast food, in fact I ate there alot when I was a teen because I worked at McDonalds. However, as a nation, our kids are getting fatter.

Fast Food Creates Fat Kids

The fats, sugar, and salt in fast food draw kids like a magnet, largely because they appeal to a child's "primordial tastes," explains Bowman. This taste triggers more eating later in the day. And, because fast food doesn't contain much fiber, kids don't feel full afterward -- so they eat more later. Large portion sizes served in fast-food restaurants further contribute to overeating and obesity, she notes. Fast food compromises a child's overall diet because it takes the places of better options, Bowman says. "Children who ate fast food ... consumed more sugar-sweetened beverages, less milk, and fewer fruits and nonstarchy vegetables." These protect against weight gain because they have more fiber, less sugar, and fewer calories.

Fast Food is not the only reason that kids are fater, but they do contribute. As do video games and an environment that promotes a sedentary life style. All in all, it's up to the parents to monitor what their kids eat and do and ensure that they are not over doing anything. Sadly, 10 month olds with size 36 pants and other obese children show that this just isn't happening.

Posted by Jesse at 8:07 PM

January 14, 2004

Little Black Boxes

They are good when you have an accident, but the ones that I've had to deal with are becoming a real pain.

After I installed Inboxer, an anti-Spam program, I began having problems with the icons on my desktop. The icons in the system try turned into black boxes, the ones on the desktop would lose their anti-aliasing and transparency and sometimes I would lose my wallpaper.

After uninstalling it basically went away, but now that I've bought the key and am running it regularly the problem has returned. I've looked for an update to my display driver (GeForce4 420 Go), but didn't find an update for the mobile card. So now I'm spam free but I have to use e-mail near the end of the using the computer, use Outlook and then reboot, or live with the black boxes.

Posted by Jesse at 10:08 PM

December 7, 2003

Prescription Drug Plan - SOLVED

It turns out that I've been spending way too much at the Pharmacy. Lucky for me I can now get any pills I need without a prescription. I'd have to assume from the plethora of mail I get everyday that pills are now dirt cheap and doctors are a thing of the past. Now we can get diagnosed over the net!

And, with the time I can save by not going to the doctors I can finish up my Christmas list by buying Christmas clocks, Santa mugs, R/C Stunt cars and this Christmas Hottest new toy.....

By the way, did I mention that I am sick of spam?

Comments closed due to...SPAM. 3-19-04

Posted by Jesse at 11:24 PM

November 25, 2003

A new way to protest

Although I am pro-life I've never agreed with the extreme measures that activist and protesters have taken to close these places down. The bombings, excessive pictures of aborted babies, and similar measures are the wrong way to go, now it seems that someone has found a better way to go about protesting.

Contractors Refuse to Build Abortion Clinic

Pro-life groups are using a new strategy to stop construction of a Planned Parenthood abortion facility in Austin, Texas. Six weeks after construction began the project's general contractor pulled out when it could find no subcontractors willing to provide concrete, plumbing, and other work. Local concrete contractor Chris Danze organized the boycott, and now Danze says, every concrete supplier within 60 miles of Austin has agreed not to supply materials. Danze sent a letter to 750 executives of construction-related companies asking them not to participate. Calls and more letters followed urging companies not to participate in the construction of the facility, which was scheduled to open next year and provide abortions and other services.

The boycott began when Danze told concrete suppliers that he would not use them if they supplied concrete to the project. And the idea caught on. Austin has a large and quickly growing population of churches. The suppliers and contractors were told that a list would be kept of all the subcontracts that worked on the project and would be given to anyone who wanted it, including all the churches. Since everyone wants a part of the booming growth in Austin, they pulled out.

In a related article...

Alexander Sanger, the grandson of feminist Margaret Sanger and author of the upcoming book ``Beyond Choice,'' said such a coordinated effort to block a building is unprecedented. "It's profoundly threatening to American values," he said.

What? Threatening to American values? It's what America is all about, consumerism at its best. If I don't like your business practices, I don't support your business. If I don't like what your business support, I don't support your business. It's how the system works, sure it sucks for the companies involved, but it isn't anti-American or a threat to our ideals. Indeed, it's exactly what we've become. It's about money.

Posted by Jesse at 12:55 PM | Comments (1)

November 20, 2003

Expired Meat stinks

I'm not sure that it will do any good, but I like the way this guy thinks and I'm glad he's gotten others on board.

Comment Spam Manifesto :: Kalsey Consulting Group

Spammers are hereby put on notice. Your comments are not welcome. If the purpose behind your comment is to advertise yourself, your Web site, or a product that you are affiliated with, that comment is spam and will not be tolerated.

I'm sick of spam, but mostly it's because it costs money to wade through it. Either for filters or for time spent. I currently get over 200 e-mails each and very day, maybe 30 are actually something I want to read. I'd love a free filter tool that does what I need, but so far I haven't found one. I used the free trial of InBoxer and I'm thinking of plunking down the money for it.

E-mail spam is one thing, but Comment Spam? That's worse than newsgroup spam. Not that many people read comments, all it does is waste space for a chance that someone will see that your annoying. Simply put, Comment Spam is asinine.

Thankfully, the folks that use MovableType are constantly working on keeping spam out of their comments. One of which is MT-Blacklist. Whatever your choice, whatever your blog software, fight back.

Posted by Jesse at 10:15 PM

October 18, 2003

Cans of meat like stuff

Teri recently spouted off about SPAM and I have to concur. I need to do something. When we had DSL, our mail was delievered here and I could filter at the server level - and we got a large amount of spam, but we were weeding it down as we went based on rules and the like.

DSL is gone, cable is here and we can't host our own...The host we have now does allow us to build lists, but the add some rules that I can't use. For example, if we type in something that can not be in the subject, then anything with that gets deleted...cool, I can live with that. However, once that rule is set, then ever piece of mail MUST have a subject or it's deleted. I've got to many family and friends that don't 'get' e-mail and regularly don't include a subject. And they have some flakey rules that are added in other areas too.

So, what to do...I'll have to look for a client side filter that doesn't ax real mail, and hopefully is free...although I doubt there is such a thing.

Posted by Jesse at 10:18 PM

October 15, 2003

One Nation Under God

There’s been a lot of chatter about this recently and I thought I would add my thoughts to the mix:

High Court to Decide if Pledge Is Legal

The Supreme Court agreed Tuesday to decide whether it's unconstitutional for children in public schools to pledge their allegiance to "one nation under God."

Sometime next year, the high court will hear the case of a California atheist who objects to the pledge his 9-year-old daughter's teacher leads daily. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco agreed with Michael Newdow last year, and the ruling set off a national uproar.

Democrats and Republicans in Congress criticized the decision and quickly passed a law affirming references to God in the pledge and the national motto, "In God We Trust." President Bush, who signed the measure, called the appeals court decision ridiculous.

The ruling is on hold pending the court challenge.

I’m glad it’s gone to this level, but it pretty much had to since the 9th district and the 4th district gave different rulings on what amounts to the same thing. I can understand the argument (which I address below), but I’m pretty amused (and happy) that people automatically think that the God that is referred to is the God of Christianity. I believe that is the case, but it seems that people are not interested in a separation between government and religion, only government and Christianity.

"As a father, it's important that my child should be able to choose which religious beliefs are most appropriate without the government weighing in," he said.
The Constitution guarantees there will be no government "establishment of religion," wording that has come to mean a general ban on overt government sponsorship of religion in public schools and elsewhere.

Of course, he completely ignores the fact that his daughter is already a professed Christian and is being raised by her mother who is also a Christian.

Anyhow, the first amendment says: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. I realize that the separation argument comes from one of Jefferson’s letters, but I really don’t think it’s an issue in this case. As far as I know, the pledge is not mandated in schools, you can say it, or not. Now, of course, telling people that they cannot say it, or cannot pray, etc. is, in my opinion, prohibiting free exercise.

I also find it amusing, though not very funny, that the “separation” argument only seems to apply to Christianity. Islam studies were taught in California schools, eastern philosophies are discussed, and secular humanism is the basis for much of what is taught in public schools, yet the ACLU and other separations are silent. If we are tossing the God of Christianity out of public schools, then lets toss the beliefs of other religions as well. Of course, if we did that, there’d be very little we could teach.

Posted by Jesse at 4:02 PM | Comments (2)

October 8, 2003

Anything goes?

It used to be that there were a ton of words that you could not say on TV or radio. Slowly those rules were relaxed and it seemed that the only thing that you couldn't say was the F word. Now, it seems that even that may be acceptable.

According to a Reuter story, Bono used the word during the Golden Globes Awards on NBC. The FCC the received complaints, but determined that it "failed to meet the test for indecency."

I knew the day would come, but I'm surprised that it has come so soon. Evidently, as long as you are not referring to sex, dropping the F-bomb (as an adjective) is acceptable.

Posted by Jesse at 3:44 PM

October 6, 2003

Marriage

The week of October 12-18, 2003 has been set aside as Marriage Protection week.
This all stems from the Surpreme Court ruling in Lawrence vs. Texas that overturned the law that made sodomy illegal in Texas. This ruling has started a great deal of talk on Marriage, Civil Unions, and Domestic Partnership and has brought the Federal Marriage Amendment (H.J.Res. 56) to the forfront of the news. This ammendment reads:

Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman. Neither this constitution or the constitution of any state, nor state or federal law, shall be construed to require that marital status or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon unmarried couples or groups.

This means that marriage remains between a man and a woman. It does not outlaw unions nor does it deny states the rights to give these "unions" benifits.

My take...I'm not sure. Marriage should be just between a man and a woman, but it doesn't seem that this ammendment will really change anything.

Posted by Jesse at 11:31 AM

August 13, 2003

Why I don't care

Not to long ago (October 2000), I wrote about some things that I was feeling and ways that my life had been impacted that explained, a little, why my attitude seems to be one of "I don't care." I found that writting just a few days ago....

In life, things can be upsetting. Car accidents, unexpected bills, sudden loses are all painful and stressful. Equally stressful are the good times; it's a different kind of stress, but there's still a great deal of emotionalism that is poured into events like holidays, bonuses, and other pleasant surprises. Everyone reacts differently to these things; I tend to let things go. Some people think that I don't care, a thought that I often perpetuate by telling them that I don't care. But the truth is, I do care, to some degree, but I recognize that it doesn't matter.

Of course I enjoyed my vacations, promotions and bonuses. And of course I am sadden by losses, some even pain me to the core, but it doesn't matter. We were all born, and we will all die, for many, what happens in between is meaningless, just chasing after the wind. A pessimistic view? I don't think so.

You see, I'm taken care of. I'll always have everything I need. No, I don't come from a wealthy family, nor do I really have that much money, but I know all my needs will be met and I don't need to worry about what the future holds.

It's not a pessimistic view, it's an optimistic one. I believe in a risen savior and I believe in what the Bible teaches. Actually it's more than just a belief, it's a lifestyle. God has proven his power to me over and over. So in the things of the world, it's correct to assume that I don't care.

Matthew 6:31-33
31"So don't worry about having enough food or drink or clothing. 32Why be like the pagans who are so deeply concerned about these things? Your heavenly Father already knows all your needs, 33and he will give you all you need from day to day if you live for him and make the Kingdom of God your primary concern.

Ecclesiastes 1:14
Everything under the sun is meaningless, like chasing the wind.

Posted by Jesse at 1:45 PM

July 30, 2003

The Designer

When a designer builds a house, he uses one set of plans, not two. Imagine the confusion that would ensue if he used two sets and each set of plans came from a different source, one that he drew up and one that was vastly different.

Sounds silly, yet we live most of our life this way. God has a plan and so do we. God has a final design in mind, yet we usually have no idea how things will turn out. Still, time and again we try to live our life according to our plan, not his. Never mind that we don't have a final design in mind, that we're incapable of buildign a flawless structure or that we have no idea what tools and materials to use in setting the course for our life.

Seems things would be so much easier if we stood aside and let God do the designing. We do it in other aspecuts of life, but then again, I guess we don't always.

We let home decorators call the shots when we're clueless, but some people try to fix their own cars or pick their own clothes when it's painfully obvious that they don't have a clue.

Maybe it's not as simple as I started to write. I guess the flaws are much deeper than simple giving up control. Perhaps we're just too dumb to realize how poorly our plans are made and what a limited scope of vision we have.

Posted by Jesse at 10:23 PM

June 7, 2003

Circuit City Sucks

About 2 months ago I was shopping for a laptop and found a really good deal on a Toshiba 255 open box...and there was a $100 rebate from Toshiba and a $100 from CC. After telling Teri about the deal, I found another laptop for a similar deal.
When I bought them, the boxes were not included (open box buys). I asked if the rebates would be honored and the clerk gave me a paper with a proof of purchase, and said that they would be honored.

Guess what. I got a letter from Toshiba saying that I needed to send the UPC codes with the Serial Number. I called the number to explain what had happened and they said that they have repeatedly told the stores that they do not honor open box rebates.

We'll see if CC will honor their own rebate.

Posted by Jesse at 12:00 AM | Comments (30)