Monday, September 29, 2014
The three things you need to remember when asking this question:
1. The pope is a “dream catcher”; we project our dreams of unity or division on him.
2. The Pope is divisive and uniting because he is above all a pastor.
3. Pope Francis is that guy who challenges our assumptions and stretches our understanding.
I for one am really frustrated with #2. Oh, I understand the need to go running after the lost sheep. But in the mean time, on both the left and right sides of the pen, there's a hungry wolf who has cut a hole in the fence and is stealing sheep while the shepherd is away.
Sunday, September 28, 2014
Saturday, September 27, 2014
Friday, September 26, 2014
Alarmist? yes. Accurate? Yes.
There is a dark side to many liberal organizations. And as the article points out, conservative organizations are not immune to seeking state support.
But I've got a question- How does an "Institute" in the United States, running on a budget of a mere $54,494/year, lobby governments in Moldova, Russia, and Poland and actually accomplish their goals enough to get on a hate crimes report? Or Family Watch International, who has apparently been lobbying the UN on a budget of $26,569/year (maybe Sharon Slater is cleaning their toilets?).
Scott Lively is the one who has been receiving the actual death threats from the Human Rights Campaign, alledgedly for singlhandly being responsible for anti-gay legislation in Uganda, Eastern Europe, Russia, and the United Kingdom. All on a budget of less than $100,000/year (I challenge you to even take a vacation in those four areas in a year on such a budget).
Apparently undercutting the gay bullyboys is worse than cutting the heads off of reporters....
Wednesday, September 24, 2014
Wednesday, September 17, 2014
Tuesday, September 16, 2014
The real problem is that Scientism isn't really a form of atheism. It just replaces the authority of God with the authority of Science (tm) of a form that most people don't understand is really just materialism.
Monday, September 15, 2014
The following story is from This is True dated 17 July 2005. It is Copyright 2005 Randy Cassingham, all rights reserved, and reprinted here with permission:
After more than 100 dead dogs were dumped in a trash dumpster over four weeks, police in Ahoskie, N.C., kept an eye on the trash receptacle behind a supermarket. Sure enough, a van drove up and officers watched the occupants throw in heavy plastic bags. They detained the two people in the van and found 18 dead dogs in plastic bags in the dumpster, including puppies; 13 more dead dogs were still in the van. Police say the van is registered to the headquarters of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, and the two occupants, Andrew B. Cook, 24, and Adria Joy Hinkle, 27, identified themselves as PETA employees. An autopsy performed on one of the dogs found it was healthy before it was killed. Police say PETA has been picking up the animals -- alive -- from North Carolina animal shelters, promising to find them good homes. Cook and Hinkle have been charged with 62 felony counts of animal cruelty. In response to the arrests PETA President Ingrid Newkirk said it's against the group's policy for employees to dump animals in the trash, but "that for some animals in North Carolina, there is no kinder option than euthanasia." (Roanoke-Chowan News-Herald) ...Oops, my mistake: that's "Playing God" Defined.
In his author's notes section, Cassingham had more to say about this story:
The more I learn about PETA, the less I think of them. The story of them killing animals isn't even unusual. According to PETA's own filings, in 2004 PETA killed 86.3 percent of the animals entrusted to its care -- a number that's rising, not falling. Meanwhile, the SPCA in PETA's home town (Norfolk, Va.) was able to find loving homes for 73 percent of the animals put in its care. A shortage of funds? Nope: last year PETA took in $29 million in tax-exempt donations. It simply has other priorities for the funds, like funding terrorism (yes, really). But don't take my word for it: I got my figures from http://www.PETAkillsAnimals.com -- and they have copies of PETA's state and federal filings to back it up. The bottom line: if you donate money to PETA because you think they care for and about animals, you need to think some more. PETA literally yells and screams about how others "kill animals" but this is how they operate? Pathetic.
And you know what I wonder? PETA's official count of animals they kill is 86.3 percent. But if they're going around picking up animals, killing them while they drive around and not even giving them a chance to be adopted, and then destroying the evidence by dumping the bodies in the trash, are those deaths being reported? My guess: no. While 86.3 percent is awful, the actual number is probably much, much higher. How dare they lecture anyone about the "ethical" treatment of animals!
(This is True is a weekly column featuring weird-but-true news stories from around the world, and has been published since 1994. Click the link for info about free subscriptions.)
Friday, September 12, 2014
Friday, September 5, 2014
Back in the 1980's, when all music sucked and men dressed like sissies, a bunch of sissy Europeans got together in a passionate effort to overstandardize computer networking. They created this thing called the Open Systems Interconnection (OSI) networking suite. Anyone who has taken a CS (Computer Science) or CIS (Computer Information Systems) course knows this; they cram this fact down the student's throat from day freaking one. It is only when the student enters the real world do they realise that the OSI seven layer model is a sham.
First off, what the hell is any European organization doing dictating standards that have to do with computers or networking? (Well...besides that paradigm shifting Linux stuff and all that other huge shit) Hello! How many bleeding edge computer or networking innovations have we seen come out of the European continent? Are they even participating in this revolution? Part of this is not really directly their fault; it probably has something to do with the fact that a minimum of venture capital spent in Europe even goes into high tech; most of it goes into high fashion and entertainment instead. No wonder we booger eating Yanks think the Europeans are sissies. Hey, we may be pigs, but at least we are running the Internet. Nah nah na-na nah.
Secondly, the seven layers proposed by OSI are completely out of touch with reality. The defacto networking standard is TCP/IP. TCP/IP is the grandaddy of XNS, IPX/SPX, Banyan, AppleTalk, and a host of other protocols and pre-dates that seven layer thing because it was funded by the largest organization in the world devoted to maintaining Eurocentric socioeconomic domination; the US Military. And for some reason, that makes it better. Yeah.
And yet this seven layer curse won't go away. Companies still have staffs of Marketing inspired artists drawing up elaborate maps of how their protocol maps to the OSI Seven Layer Model. Sham! Its a sham I say! To hell with the OSI Seven Layer Model!
To its credit, we have found that there are indeed a few things in this world that actually follow the seven layer model; but none of them have anything relevant to do with today's high tech world. Case in point; the Taco Bell Seven Layer Burrito.
You can currently buy one of these babies for just a buck (well, 99 cents anyway) and experience for yourself a portable example of what happens when pure Hispanic culinary brilliance gets flattened into consistency by the grinding blandness of American commercialization. I should know; I eat there once a week and suggest Taco Bell to all my friends.
To illustrate my point, I have included a table that compares the Taco Bell Seven Layer Burrito to the sham that is the OSI seven layer model.
|Layer 1: The Physical Layer
The Physical Layer describes physical properties of the media, such as the electrical properties and interpretation of exchanged signals.
|Layer 1: Refried Beans|
Refried beans are always the first thing to be placed on any kind of intelligently built burrito. They not only make a great foundation, but also act as a glue to hold the tortilla together. And due to their high levels of sugars, they are also the largest reason you'll get gas after eating one of them. The resulting gas causes electrical exchanges, most often between married couples aproximately 6-8 hours after ingestion.
|Layer 2: The Data Link Layer
The Datalink Layer describes the logical organization of data bits transmitted on a particular medium, for example the logical addressing of Ethernet packets.
|Layer 2: Seasoned Rice|
Rice is logically the second ingredient on a burrito. It is also a filler, just as beans are, but don't qualify as a foundation and cannot hold the tortilla together like beans can. Therefore, rice builds upon the foundation that beans have built, and rightfully deserve to always be the second ingredient.
|Layer 3: The Network Layer
The Network Layer describes how a series of exchanges over various data links can deliver data between any two nodes in a network; basically describing how packets get routed through the 'net.
|Layer 3: Lettuce|
One of the most wonderful properties of Iceberg Lettuce is its almost complete lack of nutritional value and its ability to route itself directly through your digestive tract to your back door. And it, like beans, also gives you gas.
|Layer 4: The Transport Layer
The Transport Layer describes the quality and nature of the data delivery.
|Layer 4: Tomatoes|
Tomatoes are added to the burrito to give the eater the impression that they are eating something healthy and natural.
|Layer 5: The Session Layer
The Session Layer describes the organization of data sequences larger than the packets handled by the lower layers. Basically, its the job of the Session Layer to fix what the other layers have screwed up.
|Layer 5: Guacamole|
Guacamole is added to hide any kind of poor or bland flavor that may have come with the Iceberg Lettuce, the rice, or the beans.
|Layer 6: The Presentation Layer
The Presentation Layer describes the syntax of data being transferred for communication with dissimilar systems.
|Layer 6: Cheese|
There isn't a whole lot of combinations of incompatable foods a bunch of cheese can't gloss over with its unique mixture of fats, cholesterol, and salt. When in doubt, throw in some cheese.
|Layer 7: The Application Layer
The Application Layer describes how real work actually gets done; its the reason we do things in the first place.
|Layer 7: Sour Cream|
Its been said that the purpose of sour cream is to allow white dudes to eat spicy food. Without sour cream, most white folks couldn't bear to eat exotic foods like the kind that Taco Bell are serving up.
Try and see how many things you can find that honestly conform to this sham of a model, and let me know what you find.
Ok, so this is flawed. I spaced that there is an eighth layer; the flour tortilla. No biggy; here's a better one:
- Two all beef patties
- Special sauce
- On a sesame seed bun
[H O M E]
Thursday, September 4, 2014
Wednesday, September 3, 2014
Radical traditionalists are also considered to have some affiliation with the old Jansenist heresy, which was a form of Catholic Calvinism- fierce loyalty to the Pope but hopelessly elitist, they treated the sacraments, especially the Eucharist, more as reward than as Grace, requiring long years of study to be admitted to the sacraments. And certainly, no non-Christian could be saved in their predestined view of the world.
Which leads us to an interesting bit of prooftexting. Could the modern Popes be right about the lack of any need to evangelize the Jews? Romans 11:25-26 seems to indicate so:
25 Lest you be wise in your own sight, I do not want you to be unaware of this mystery, brothers:[a] a partial hardening has come upon Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in. 26 And in this way all Israel will be saved, as it is written,
“The Deliverer will come from Zion,
he will banish ungodliness from Jacob”;
Perhaps the Jews really are our elder brothers in faith. But then again, we know from Luke 15 what elder brothers are like, don't we?