I work for a medium sized consulting firm in a major metro area. We don't have desks in the office at all. Of course, we're so rarely there that it hardly matters. Our offices are at our homes. We work from there--and at our client sites. Most of our clients don't even have physical security. I have seen servers in kitchens, in copy rooms, even sitting right next to the receptionist desk as you walk in the door.
Security? what's that? That seems to be how its' handled anymore.
Where are you persecuted? You keep saying that Christians are persecuted in this country. And yet, I don't see it. Jacksonville, Florida is full of churches. It's full of schools with prayer groups and Bible studies. It's also full of wide open public spaces where any man can stand and pray or even proselytize (within the rights of others not to be harassed under the definition of statute).
Right now I live in Pennsylvania..my kids live 150 miles north of me, and their school district has the same rules as the two in my town. These are the ones I can document for certain. There have been other cases in this country that echo what my kids have experienced. I also know what the rules are in the school district that I graduated from, because I still have friends who live there who are as fed up as I am.
No, it's not Libetarians, but far worse--secular power elitists with the ACLU and Americans United for Separation of Church and State--who are pretty much causing this problem. Take a good, long hard look at the history of the ACLU-the founder (Roger Baldwin)was a confirmed Communist---and he actually admired Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, who was also a confirmed Eugenicist.They are not the 'defenders of freedom' they would have you believe.
Slowly, ever so slowly our Religious Rights are being trod upon. I was treated to a story recently that comes from an actual case that never went to court but was merely won by the coercive tactics of the ACLU and Americans United.
A school system received a 'generic letter' from the above mentioned groups that they would sue any school systems who did not remove prayer from their graduations. Upon review of their valedictorian (and star athelete) graduation speech, he was informed he would have to remove his reference to thanking God and Jesus Christ for his talents and abilities because of the 'Wall of Separation'. When he gave the speech, he reinserted it but added that he 'couldn't' thank God and Jesus. School Boards and other 'government' agencies are being threatened across the country with lawsuits if they do not cease opening meetings with prayer. An ACLU director in Louisiana acctually said earlier this year that a school board who continued to pray before its' meeting was 'unamerican and immoral', and he actually compared them to al-Qaida on television (KAFB, Baton Rouge). Yet, you say there is no persecution.
I'm pleased you do not suffer it. Let's hope your shining spot continues, but I rather doubt it will.
"No nation has ever yet existed or been governed without religion. Nor can be. The Christian religion is the best religion that has ever been given to man, and I, as chief Magistrate of this nation, am bound to give it the sanction of my example."
1800 Allegedly said {by Thomas Jefferson} to a friend when asked why he was attending church, as per an handwritten history in possession of the Library of Congress, "Washington Parish, Washingon City," by Rev. Ethan Allen
Here's the source..while it's not *documentable totally* as fact, it certainly could be true.
While certain religious activities might be 'allowed' under your Garnet ruling, many school districts bend to pressure from groups like Americans United for Separation of Church and State, or the ACLU and prohibit religious expression expressly. I know my son's school district does for a fact--it's in their handbook they send home to parents. I also know that BOTH school districts in the town where I live also expressly prohibit it. All three districts I know about have banned Young Life and FCA from not only meeting on school grounds but have actually banned them from even advertising.
Many districts, sadly, will bend to the pressure put on them by parents who do not wish their children exposed to religion at all. Groups like the ACLU or Americans United will often band with these parents and merely write a letter threatening legal action, and the school district will capitulate. Regardless of what higher courts have said, the school districts capitulate because they lack the funds to fight a case in court.
...we have experienced the quiet as well as the comfort which results from leaving every one to profess freely and openly those principles of religion which are the inductions of his own reason and the serious convictions of his own inquiries (Thomas Jefferson, in a Letter to the Virginia Baptists, 1808).
Yet, in this day and in this society, those of us who desire to 'profess freely and openly those principles' are frequently forbidden. Prayer is a principle, Fellowship with others who share one's belief is a principle, Reading of the Bible (or other relgious material, be it Christian, Jewish, Muslim, or other) is a principle. Yet time and time again we are denied this simple act. Why? all because of Jefferson's 'Wall'. The First Amendment was intended not to prohibit, but to sanction relgious expression, without fear of repercussion from authority for your beliefs. It was not intended to deny those beliefs to anyone, merely to allow beliefs without official sanction to any one belief alone.
A quick reply to you--I am at work and as such, don't have a lot of time.
While I agree with you--in essence that the founding fathers intended for Government to keep a 'hands off' policy regarding relgion, I don't see it as the reverse being true.
Unfortunately, this 'hands off' policy has not been faithfully followed. Examples are: Students are not permitted to pray in schools because schools are fearful that some parent might sue. Benedictions removed from graduation ceremonies because a court decides they are 'inappropriate in a public setting' because of the 'Wall of Separation'. Schools are only allowed to teach one 'theory' on the origins of life. Students not allowed to have after-school gatherings to discuss/celebrate their religions.. The list goes on and on. My son is a personal example. His mother (I am divorced) is raising him Reformed Judaism, and he is not permitted to wear his Yarmulke in school--both because it promotes a religion, and because they have a 'no hats' policy in keeping with 'anti gang' symbolism. He is not excused for absences for Temple activities on Holy Days, on the grounds that they have no control over absences that way, due to many differing beliefs. They even go so far as to ban crosses/crucifixes/other religious material on a 'no jewelry' ban (using the gang excuse again). How are his 'religious freedoms' being protected by the 'Wall of Separation' there?
By erecting the 'Wall' to protect relgion, we have actually created what is rapidly becoming an unsurmountable barrier to the practice of religion.
We are heading down a path where it could be MUCH worse. We are rapidly getting to a point where believers in this country (of which I am one) could be forced to take their beliefs underground.
It is exceptionally difficult for members of religious groups to be allowed to gather and proclaim their faith openly--especially aspects of their faith that may be 'offensive' to others. For example--there is a Supreme Court case pending that would make it illegal for anyone (Christians included) to publicly denounce homosexual behavior ---even though most Christians believe it to be sin. Notice I said behavior. This is NOT denouncing homosexual orientation--many who are oriented to be sexually attracted to the same sex live their lives without giving in to the urge to behave this way---just as many heterosexuals resist the urge to behave as their orientation compels them to. One law that is being considered for this case is the current Canadian legislation that has caused more than one pastor to be arrested for the crime of 'hate speech' even though they are merely reflecting their belief in the Word of God which condmens homosexual behavior.
There are simply volumes of opinions by many founders on the meaning of the first amendment. And it's consistantly stressed that religion (not just church, as the oft-quoted phrase says) and government should never have anything to do with one another, even in minor matters.
While I believe that the intent of the founding fathers was to avoid the problems they had in Europe, and it's 'relgious wars', I do NOT see that they intended to remove relgion from either the Government, nor civilian life. One quote I mentioned in my original posting was given by Jefferson when he was President--the one in which he so eloquently stated that 'No nation has ever yet existed or been governed without religion. Nor can be. The Christian religion is the best religion that has been given to man and I as chief Magistrate of this nation am bound to give it the sanction of my example. Good morning Sir.. This quote glaringly shows that he certainly did not intend for their to be this 'Wall of Separation'. I would interject here that his comment could even be interpreted to mean that HE (at least) openly supported Christianity, and rejected other faiths--even Islam and Judaism.
Personally, I would prefer that the literal interpretation be applied--that congress shall make NO LAW regarding an establishment of relgion. This means stop making laws that interfere with the practice of my faith. My faith compels me to witness and testify---both to believers and non-believers alike. It also compels me to respect your privacy and not pursue you, if you choose not to hear, except in my own private prayer for you to turn toward God and Salvation. Sadly, many Christians do not realize that this is all part of 'loving your neighbor as yourself'---Christ gave us this as part of the 'Greatest Commandment' (often called 'The Golden Rule') and we need to understand exactly what is being said.
There is a fatal flaw in your logic--you are trying to define a term using 20th century definitions for terms written in the 18th century.
If you look at the essays concerning the 1st Amendment, you will find that it is *generally* agreed that this does not mean anything other than the government (federal, state or local) will not make any law that favors any ONE religion (or religious denomination) over another--and further that it will keep from making laws that aid any religion or denomination over another.
The so-called 'wall of separation' that was derived in the 1940's from a Supreme Court decision. The problem with this is that it comes from a LETTER written by then President Jefferson to a baptist group in CT when they wrote him to ask for intervention by the government in a religious matter. Basing a court decision on the constitutionality of a religious matter has caused the greatest rift in the US between believers and non-belivers that has ever been seen.
It cannot be said that our Founding Fathers were NOT religious--in fact they were. Jefferson was accosted on his way to church after being elected president and told that he should NOT be going . His response to the person was "No nation has ever yet existed or been governed without religion. Nor can be. The Christian religion is the best religion that has been given to man and I as chief Magistrate of this nation am bound to give it the sanction of my example. Good morning Sir." Jefferson himself wrote many essays on his beliefs---as did Franklin, Madison, and many of the others who framed the Constitution. It is often argued that they weren't Christians, but they were Deists--acknowledging God in many differing ways. That may be true--in the sense of being Christian as we see it today--that is, one who acknowledges Jesus Christ as the Son of God, and the instrument of our Salvation---the Final Sacrifice demanded by God. I won't argue that point.
I live in Pennsylvania, near the town of Dover. They are currently embroiled in a bitter court case over Intelligent Design. In their case, it is a mere 4 line addendum read by the teacher telling students that evolution is only ONE theory of the origins of life; that there is documentable proof that it may be a flawed theory, and that another is explored in a textbook (Of Pandas and People) that may be found in the school library. That's it..they're not *teaching* creationism, nor advocating relgion. They're not even *forcing* anyone to read the other theory, merely pointing out the fact that it exists and pointing out that evolution may be a flawed theory. Intelligent Design is a valid theory---as valid as Evolution, because the Evolutionary Origin of Man requires as much of a 'leap of faith' to believe that we came from single-celled organisms.
Yes, I'm a Christian..but I also believe the evolution has a *place* in our creation. We certainly have 'evolved' to live longer, be taller, and other things than even our RECENT ancestors. In that respect, evolution is a truth to me. Also, as a Christian, I don't want a teacher in the public school indoctrinating my child into a particular belief system. That's my job. BUT...I do want them to present *all* of the evidence and let my child decide.
"Because the user paradigm of "you must use Outlook in X fashion" with Exchange is completely thrown away in OpenXchange and the web GUI is brilliant."
Sorry, but you're not *forced* to use Outlook at all. You *can* use OWA--you simply lose the functionality of 'Public Folders', or you can even give a go at POP Clients (like Thunderbird) if you so desire.
I so agree with you about Lotus Notes. I support the local offices of a fairly large client for my company. Recently, I had to deliver the bad news to a Senior VP that I would be unable to recover the 2000+ names in his Lotus Notes Address book from his failed hard drive. Granted you can teach your users to copy the names.nsf file to their home directory periodically to avoid this, but that's a hassle for most end users--even if you give them the tools to do it.
That is the one place where Exchange does shine--it's all on the Server and if the backup is good, you won't lose your data. Of course, if you are using those pesky.pst files, then you are in the same boat. Personally, I avoid.pst files like the plague, execpt for archiving old email, and go with Offline Storage/OWA. If you get REALLY daring, you can go for RPC over HTTP. Or, you could settle for Citrix/Terminal Services, and then not have to worry about OWA for remote users .
Actually, one of the best definitions I have heard of how God is Omniscient was given by Dr. Tony Evans--a minister. He prefaced this comment by saying we should not study too long on it because it will make our heads spin. I know that's a funny statement, but after pondering a while, I did get a headache.
You see, we humans are trying to apply 3-dimensional thinking to an omnidimensional subject. God *is* omniscient because He exists at teh beginning of time and at the End of Time. His consciosness extends across the universes and time itself.
If we see it that way, we would realize that God already knows the result of any decisions he or we make because to Him, it is about to happen, is happening, and has already happened all at the same time. His demenses extend outside of our 3-dimensional physical universe, so applying 3-dimensional linear thinking does not apply.
Linux does everything it says it will do--it is ROCK stable, supports a wide variety of hardware (provided drivers exist--either from the manufacturer or from the community at large), and does a lot of what Windows can do. Open Office is an adequate solution for working with documents, spreadsheets and presentations, albeit slow. Other applications aren't bad--Evolution needs some work yet, though.
HOWEVER...... There isn't a good replacement for Access, you can't work with documents or spreadsheets with embedded macros/VB Code without Microsoft Office..(and how many of your Power Users just LOVE to show off and use it.). IE is a necessary evil for some web applications. So..what do we do? We use Windows.. Lock down the desktops using Group Policies..don't let the users have too much power (if you can avoid it..some poorly written software requires admin rights..*sigh*. Make the users user Mozilla for anything that doesn't require IE.
All in all..you can make windows WORK. In the ensuing years since the release of Windows 2000, and supporting several hundred clients for different companies, I can count on one hand the number of problems that have NOT been caused by poorly written software. Yes, some of our clients happen to have software that requires Administrator rights (ugh..)..Those are the ones that are problem children--mostly with spyware and the end-users having the unfathomable desire to answer 'Yes' to every question that pops up on their desktop.
I don't have a lot of experience with OSX---only one of our clients uses it, but it looks ok, and never gives us any problems. In Summation--use what works best in your environment. It's all up to the Admins.
Re:Mod parent up: "remembrance" means "participati
on
Atlantis Found. Again.
·
· Score: 1
Yup...that's it..
Depends on what you are talking about with reference to 'midrash'
Re:Er, doesn't this claim require external evidenc
on
Atlantis Found. Again.
·
· Score: 4, Informative
I love Exodus 17:14:
Then the LORD said to Moses, 'Write this as a reminder in a book and recite it in the hearing of Joshua: I will utterly blot out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven.
The Hebrew word for "remembrance" is zikaron; it connotates a participation in an event of the past rather than simply a mental recollection of that event.
When material is written by a culture, understanding of the language of the culture, rather than simply reading translations, leads to greater understanding of the intention of the writer.
Outlook eats itself randomly? really?? I've never seen that--and I've been supporting it for years.Outlook.pst files--pre-2000--yes, they had a 2GB limit,and quite frankly it was much less..But Outlook..used with either pop mail or exchange..has NEVER been a problem for me--unless the clueless user forgets how to use it or deletes their.pst file because they don't think they need it.
Popups--that's a problem everywhere, even at home, but between SP2 and the google toolbar, it's minimal.
Reinstall the OS? Only when some other software decides to corrupt it--but used with pure MS products..no problems.
The biggest problem I have found, in supporting Microsoft's OS's over the years have been the end users screwing with things they shouldn't. Now, with the advent of group policy and being able to lock things down much tighter than I could even in NT Workstation, I don't worry about all of that.
All-in all---I have more problems with the one Oracle server I support than I do with all of the other Microsoft ones--and that's about 45 servers..
I've installed it and Terminal services works perfectly fine. There are caveats about installing on Terminal Services for NT 4.0, but nothing indicating that it breaks terminal services at all.
No, they should be fired because they didn't keep up with the patches necessary. All software is 'faulty' and requires patches and updates. For as much hue and cry there is for Unix or Open source software, even these systems need patching from time to time, and some of the software used there has had HUGE problems if it wasn't patched.
Sendmail anyone?? BIND??? and wasn't there an Apache Chunk Handling Vulnerabilty a couple of years ago?
Microsoft software is used heavily in the world, but the problem is that for years, no training existed that *focused* on WHY we patch our software..there was no emphasis on patching. Add to that the fact that with the economy being the way it is, companies are doing more work with less people.
No one wants to work 12-14 hours a day; least of all sysadmins. We all have our own lives..families...other obligations too. Yet all too frequently, we're expected to patch and update the servers and desktops, the anti-virus software (don't deploy things without testing them first, of course), ancilliary software and etc. while keeping up with upgrade projects, daily problems, and keeping on top of technological advances as well. Yet, the boss goes home at 5. We're like residents in a med program--overworked, but unlike them, we never get to stop being that way.
No, to my knowledge, they didn't take even 1 car--Indiana doesn't have confiscation laws for alcohol related offenses. However, the point is that stricter laws don't discourage everyone. They took his license, but he still drove--he drove his car, a car he just bought from a friend; or even one he borrowed. The point is that he DROVE..whether licensed or not. Stricter laws do not stop people; they will just find means of circumventing the law.
However, you need to read my sig--it sums up my attitude.
(from 2003)ANDERSON, Ind. -- He has been arrested at least 400 times, and on Tuesday, he was sentenced to 17 years in prison on drunken driving charges.
Virldeen Redmon, 74, of Anderson, Ind., was arrested in July while driving even though his license had been suspended for life, according to authorities.
Redmon's license was originally suspended after scores of alcohol-related offenses. Redmon has apparently had his license suspended for life five times.
Police have been arresting Redmon since 1947.
I grew up in Anderson, and I know Virldeen Redmon--or rather, know who he is by sight. He's a rather sad, lonely old man--but he was always a dedicated and diligent worker. He just is addicted to alcohol. While I moved away some time ago, I do believe he never hurt anyone--except his brothers because they like to fight when they're drinking. This doesn't excuse his behavior, but stiff penalties don't help. He's done 8 years in prison, and on this one, I think he got 30 years. The man is nearly 70, he will die in prison, on our tax money. sad..but true..
People who say they don't know anything about computers usually have pencil and paper and a typewriter. They use the US Postal Service to send mail--licking (or using those plastic/sponge 'stamp lickers') their stamps rather then buying the pre-glued kind.
They don't own a computer because:
1. They don't need one.
2. Computers cause cancer.
3. They're technophobes.
I once knew a CEO of a Fortune 1000 company who didn't like computers. His Admin Assistant had the only PC in the place. The internet access was dial-up, with a single pop e-mail account. She would read and print his e-mails, to which he hand wrote his replies, she then replied via e-mail. The only other computers they had in the entire company were the ones that actually ran the assembly lines. We worked on their assembly line computers, so they also used us to fix the one PC they had. All of accounting used ledger books--no accounting software anywhere.
.
Needless to say, the company no longer exists in it's original form--they were purchased in 2001, and parted out for profit.
Sigh...I wish people would stop saying that there were NO WMD's in Iraq... The whole scenario adds up to one or two factors (or a combination of both).
1. Bad Intelligence--but I fail to see how *every* major Intel group in the world had the same intelliegence--and it was all bad.
The more likely scenario is:
2. Everything is over in Syria.
It's a well documented FACT that after we announced we were going after Iraq, there were massive movements of trucks, cars, trains--anything that could move--over to Syria.
Saddam's stuff is most likely all over there. While I doubt he had an enormous stockpile, I'm sure there was enough to wipe out Israel. In effect, he would have probably started the real 'War to End All Wars' because too many Nuclear-Capable countries would have had their noses in it.
nawww..Jobs is using the 23" displays..We just got one and a G5 for one of our Graphic Artists. My only beef about Mac's is the fact that everything is proprietary. Sure, it's easier to develop software for it, but it tends to make things more pricey than I like.
And of the 69% of Adults who use the Internet, probably 80% of them use AOheLl from home to access the Internet. This means that 55% of all adults use AOL when accessing the Internet (especially from Home). This explains why over 80% of the Internet is filled with inane, vapid and hollow content.
Not really..most pharmacies have one or two acutal (and maybe a weekend only one) pharmacists who work shifts and supervise the myriad of Pharmacy Technicians (who make around 30K where I live) who dispense the meds..
Slashdot Mirror
I work for a medium sized consulting firm in a major metro area. We don't have desks in the office at all. Of course, we're so rarely there that it hardly matters. Our offices are at our homes. We work from there--and at our client sites. Most of our clients don't even have physical security. I have seen servers in kitchens, in copy rooms, even sitting right next to the receptionist desk as you walk in the door.
Security? what's that? That seems to be how its' handled anymore.
Where are you persecuted? You keep saying that Christians are persecuted in this country. And yet, I don't see it. Jacksonville, Florida is full of churches. It's full of schools with prayer groups and Bible studies. It's also full of wide open public spaces where any man can stand and pray or even proselytize (within the rights of others not to be harassed under the definition of statute).
Right now I live in Pennsylvania..my kids live 150 miles north of me, and their school district has the same rules as the two in my town. These are the ones I can document for certain. There have been other cases in this country that echo what my kids have experienced. I also know what the rules are in the school district that I graduated from, because I still have friends who live there who are as fed up as I am.
No, it's not Libetarians, but far worse--secular power elitists with the ACLU and Americans United for Separation of Church and State--who are pretty much causing this problem. Take a good, long hard look at the history of the ACLU-the founder (Roger Baldwin)was a confirmed Communist---and he actually admired Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, who was also a confirmed Eugenicist.They are not the 'defenders of freedom' they would have you believe.
Slowly, ever so slowly our Religious Rights are being trod upon. I was treated to a story recently that comes from an actual case that never went to court but was merely won by the coercive tactics of the ACLU and Americans United.
A school system received a 'generic letter' from the above mentioned groups that they would sue any school systems who did not remove prayer from their graduations. Upon review of their valedictorian (and star athelete) graduation speech, he was informed he would have to remove his reference to thanking God and Jesus Christ for his talents and abilities because of the 'Wall of Separation'. When he gave the speech, he reinserted it but added that he 'couldn't' thank God and Jesus. School Boards and other 'government' agencies are being threatened across the country with lawsuits if they do not cease opening meetings with prayer. An ACLU director in Louisiana acctually said earlier this year that a school board who continued to pray before its' meeting was 'unamerican and immoral', and he actually compared them to al-Qaida on television (KAFB, Baton Rouge). Yet, you say there is no persecution.
I'm pleased you do not suffer it. Let's hope your shining spot continues, but I rather doubt it will.
"No nation has ever yet existed or been governed without religion. Nor can be. The Christian religion is the best religion that has ever been given to man, and I, as chief Magistrate of this nation, am bound to give it the sanction of my example."
1800 Allegedly said {by Thomas Jefferson} to a friend when asked why he was attending church, as per an handwritten history in possession of the Library of Congress, "Washington Parish, Washingon City," by Rev. Ethan Allen
Here's the source..while it's not *documentable totally* as fact, it certainly could be true.
While certain religious activities might be 'allowed' under your Garnet ruling, many school districts bend to pressure from groups like Americans United for Separation of Church and State, or the ACLU and prohibit religious expression expressly. I know my son's school district does for a fact--it's in their handbook they send home to parents. I also know that BOTH school districts in the town where I live also expressly prohibit it. All three districts I know about have banned Young Life and FCA from not only meeting on school grounds but have actually banned them from even advertising.
Many districts, sadly, will bend to the pressure put on them by parents who do not wish their children exposed to religion at all. Groups like the ACLU or Americans United will often band with these parents and merely write a letter threatening legal action, and the school district will capitulate. Regardless of what higher courts have said, the school districts capitulate because they lack the funds to fight a case in court.
Yet, in this day and in this society, those of us who desire to 'profess freely and openly those principles' are frequently forbidden. Prayer is a principle, Fellowship with others who share one's belief is a principle, Reading of the Bible (or other relgious material, be it Christian, Jewish, Muslim, or other) is a principle. Yet time and time again we are denied this simple act. Why? all because of Jefferson's 'Wall'. The First Amendment was intended not to prohibit, but to sanction relgious expression, without fear of repercussion from authority for your beliefs. It was not intended to deny those beliefs to anyone, merely to allow beliefs without official sanction to any one belief alone.
A quick reply to you--I am at work and as such, don't have a lot of time.
While I agree with you--in essence that the founding fathers intended for Government to keep a 'hands off' policy regarding relgion, I don't see it as the reverse being true.
Unfortunately, this 'hands off' policy has not been faithfully followed. Examples are: Students are not permitted to pray in schools because schools are fearful that some parent might sue. Benedictions removed from graduation ceremonies because a court decides they are 'inappropriate in a public setting' because of the 'Wall of Separation'. Schools are only allowed to teach one 'theory' on the origins of life. Students not allowed to have after-school gatherings to discuss/celebrate their religions.. The list goes on and on. My son is a personal example. His mother (I am divorced) is raising him Reformed Judaism, and he is not permitted to wear his Yarmulke in school--both because it promotes a religion, and because they have a 'no hats' policy in keeping with 'anti gang' symbolism. He is not excused for absences for Temple activities on Holy Days, on the grounds that they have no control over absences that way, due to many differing beliefs. They even go so far as to ban crosses/crucifixes/other religious material on a 'no jewelry' ban (using the gang excuse again). How are his 'religious freedoms' being protected by the 'Wall of Separation' there?
By erecting the 'Wall' to protect relgion, we have actually created what is rapidly becoming an unsurmountable barrier to the practice of religion.
We are heading down a path where it could be MUCH worse. We are rapidly getting to a point where believers in this country (of which I am one) could be forced to take their beliefs underground.
It is exceptionally difficult for members of religious groups to be allowed to gather and proclaim their faith openly--especially aspects of their faith that may be 'offensive' to others. For example--there is a Supreme Court case pending that would make it illegal for anyone (Christians included) to publicly denounce homosexual behavior ---even though most Christians believe it to be sin. Notice I said behavior. This is NOT denouncing homosexual orientation--many who are oriented to be sexually attracted to the same sex live their lives without giving in to the urge to behave this way---just as many heterosexuals resist the urge to behave as their orientation compels them to. One law that is being considered for this case is the current Canadian legislation that has caused more than one pastor to be arrested for the crime of 'hate speech' even though they are merely reflecting their belief in the Word of God which condmens homosexual behavior.
There are simply volumes of opinions by many founders on the meaning of the first amendment. And it's consistantly stressed that religion (not just church, as the oft-quoted phrase says) and government should never have anything to do with one another, even in minor matters.
While I believe that the intent of the founding fathers was to avoid the problems they had in Europe, and it's 'relgious wars', I do NOT see that they intended to remove relgion from either the Government, nor civilian life. One quote I mentioned in my original posting was given by Jefferson when he was President--the one in which he so eloquently stated that 'No nation has ever yet existed or been governed without religion. Nor can be. The Christian religion is the best religion that has been given to man and I as chief Magistrate of this nation am bound to give it the sanction of my example. Good morning Sir.. This quote glaringly shows that he certainly did not intend for their to be this 'Wall of Separation'. I would interject here that his comment could even be interpreted to mean that HE (at least) openly supported Christianity, and rejected other faiths--even Islam and Judaism.
Personally, I would prefer that the literal interpretation be applied--that congress shall make NO LAW regarding an establishment of relgion. This means stop making laws that interfere with the practice of my faith. My faith compels me to witness and testify---both to believers and non-believers alike. It also compels me to respect your privacy and not pursue you, if you choose not to hear, except in my own private prayer for you to turn toward God and Salvation. Sadly, many Christians do not realize that this is all part of 'loving your neighbor as yourself'---Christ gave us this as part of the 'Greatest Commandment' (often called 'The Golden Rule') and we need to understand exactly what is being said.
There is a fatal flaw in your logic--you are trying to define a term using 20th century definitions for terms written in the 18th century.
If you look at the essays concerning the 1st Amendment, you will find that it is *generally* agreed that this does not mean anything other than the government (federal, state or local) will not make any law that favors any ONE religion (or religious denomination) over another--and further that it will keep from making laws that aid any religion or denomination over another.
The so-called 'wall of separation' that was derived in the 1940's from a Supreme Court decision. The problem with this is that it comes from a LETTER written by then President Jefferson to a baptist group in CT when they wrote him to ask for intervention by the government in a religious matter. Basing a court decision on the constitutionality of a religious matter has caused the greatest rift in the US between believers and non-belivers that has ever been seen.
It cannot be said that our Founding Fathers were NOT religious--in fact they were. Jefferson was accosted on his way to church after being elected president and told that he should NOT be going . His response to the person was "No nation has ever yet existed or been governed without religion. Nor can be. The Christian religion is the best religion that has been given to man and I as chief Magistrate of this nation am bound to give it the sanction of my example. Good morning Sir." Jefferson himself wrote many essays on his beliefs---as did Franklin, Madison, and many of the others who framed the Constitution. It is often argued that they weren't Christians, but they were Deists--acknowledging God in many differing ways. That may be true--in the sense of being Christian as we see it today--that is, one who acknowledges Jesus Christ as the Son of God, and the instrument of our Salvation---the Final Sacrifice demanded by God. I won't argue that point.
I live in Pennsylvania, near the town of Dover. They are currently embroiled in a bitter court case over Intelligent Design. In their case, it is a mere 4 line addendum read by the teacher telling students that evolution is only ONE theory of the origins of life; that there is documentable proof that it may be a flawed theory, and that another is explored in a textbook (Of Pandas and People) that may be found in the school library. That's it..they're not *teaching* creationism, nor advocating relgion. They're not even *forcing* anyone to read the other theory, merely pointing out the fact that it exists and pointing out that evolution may be a flawed theory. Intelligent Design is a valid theory---as valid as Evolution, because the Evolutionary Origin of Man requires as much of a 'leap of faith' to believe that we came from single-celled organisms.
Yes, I'm a Christian..but I also believe the evolution has a *place* in our creation. We certainly have 'evolved' to live longer, be taller, and other things than even our RECENT ancestors. In that respect, evolution is a truth to me. Also, as a Christian, I don't want a teacher in the public school indoctrinating my child into a particular belief system. That's my job. BUT...I do want them to present *all* of the evidence and let my child decide.
"Because the user paradigm of "you must use Outlook in X fashion" with Exchange is completely thrown away in OpenXchange and the web GUI is brilliant."
Sorry, but you're not *forced* to use Outlook at all. You *can* use OWA--you simply lose the functionality of 'Public Folders', or you can even give a go at POP Clients (like Thunderbird) if you so desire.
I so agree with you about Lotus Notes. I support the local offices of a fairly large client for my company. Recently, I had to deliver the bad news to a Senior VP that I would be unable to recover the 2000+ names in his Lotus Notes Address book from his failed hard drive. Granted you can teach your users to copy the names.nsf file to their home directory periodically to avoid this, but that's a hassle for most end users--even if you give them the tools to do it.
That is the one place where Exchange does shine--it's all on the Server and if the backup is good, you won't lose your data. Of course, if you are using those pesky .pst files, then you are in the same boat. Personally, I avoid .pst files like the plague, execpt for archiving old email, and go with Offline Storage/OWA. If you get REALLY daring, you can go for RPC over HTTP. Or, you could settle for Citrix/Terminal Services, and then not have to worry about OWA for remote users .
Just my 2 cents...
What is prayer for? How about asking for God's forgiveness? How about Praise? How about thanking God? How about asking for comfort?
Christ taught us *how* to pray with what we now call 'The Lords Prayer' or the 'Our Father'.
It is a preface and seven petitions.
http://www.healingscripture.com/LordsPrayer.shtmlActually, one of the best definitions I have heard of how God is Omniscient was given by Dr. Tony Evans--a minister. He prefaced this comment by saying we should not study too long on it because it will make our heads spin. I know that's a funny statement, but after pondering a while, I did get a headache.
You see, we humans are trying to apply 3-dimensional thinking to an omnidimensional subject. God *is* omniscient because He exists at teh beginning of time and at the End of Time. His consciosness extends across the universes and time itself.
If we see it that way, we would realize that God already knows the result of any decisions he or we make because to Him, it is about to happen, is happening, and has already happened all at the same time. His demenses extend outside of our 3-dimensional physical universe, so applying 3-dimensional linear thinking does not apply.
Linux does everything it says it will do--it is ROCK stable, supports a wide variety of hardware (provided drivers exist--either from the manufacturer or from the community at large), and does a lot of what Windows can do. Open Office is an adequate solution for working with documents, spreadsheets and presentations, albeit slow. Other applications aren't bad--Evolution needs some work yet, though.
HOWEVER...... There isn't a good replacement for Access, you can't work with documents or spreadsheets with embedded macros/VB Code without Microsoft Office..(and how many of your Power Users just LOVE to show off and use it.). IE is a necessary evil for some web applications. So..what do we do? We use Windows.. Lock down the desktops using Group Policies..don't let the users have too much power (if you can avoid it..some poorly written software requires admin rights..*sigh*. Make the users user Mozilla for anything that doesn't require IE.
All in all..you can make windows WORK. In the ensuing years since the release of Windows 2000, and supporting several hundred clients for different companies, I can count on one hand the number of problems that have NOT been caused by poorly written software. Yes, some of our clients happen to have software that requires Administrator rights (ugh..)..Those are the ones that are problem children--mostly with spyware and the end-users having the unfathomable desire to answer 'Yes' to every question that pops up on their desktop.
I don't have a lot of experience with OSX---only one of our clients uses it, but it looks ok, and never gives us any problems. In Summation--use what works best in your environment. It's all up to the Admins.
Yup...that's it.. Depends on what you are talking about with reference to 'midrash'
I love Exodus 17:14:
Then the LORD said to Moses, 'Write this as a reminder in a book and recite it in the hearing of Joshua: I will utterly blot out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven.
The Hebrew word for "remembrance" is zikaron ; it connotates a participation in an event of the past rather than simply a mental recollection of that event.
When material is written by a culture, understanding of the language of the culture, rather than simply reading translations, leads to greater understanding of the intention of the writer.
Outlook eats itself randomly? really?? I've never seen that--and I've been supporting it for years.Outlook .pst files--pre-2000--yes, they had a 2GB limit,and quite frankly it was much less..But Outlook..used with either pop mail or exchange..has NEVER been a problem for me--unless the clueless user forgets how to use it or deletes their .pst file because they don't think they need it.
Popups--that's a problem everywhere, even at home, but between SP2 and the google toolbar, it's minimal.
Reinstall the OS? Only when some other software decides to corrupt it--but used with pure MS products..no problems.
The biggest problem I have found, in supporting Microsoft's OS's over the years have been the end users screwing with things they shouldn't. Now, with the advent of group policy and being able to lock things down much tighter than I could even in NT Workstation, I don't worry about all of that.
All-in all---I have more problems with the one Oracle server I support than I do with all of the other Microsoft ones--and that's about 45 servers..
Where did you get this information??
I've installed it and Terminal services works perfectly fine. There are caveats about installing on Terminal Services for NT 4.0, but nothing indicating that it breaks terminal services at all.
No, they should be fired because they didn't keep up with the patches necessary. All software is 'faulty' and requires patches and updates. For as much hue and cry there is for Unix or Open source software, even these systems need patching from time to time, and some of the software used there has had HUGE problems if it wasn't patched.
Sendmail anyone?? BIND??? and wasn't there an Apache Chunk Handling Vulnerabilty a couple of years ago?
Microsoft software is used heavily in the world, but the problem is that for years, no training existed that *focused* on WHY we patch our software..there was no emphasis on patching. Add to that the fact that with the economy being the way it is, companies are doing more work with less people.
No one wants to work 12-14 hours a day; least of all sysadmins. We all have our own lives..families...other obligations too. Yet all too frequently, we're expected to patch and update the servers and desktops, the anti-virus software (don't deploy things without testing them first, of course), ancilliary software and etc. while keeping up with upgrade projects, daily problems, and keeping on top of technological advances as well. Yet, the boss goes home at 5. We're like residents in a med program--overworked, but unlike them, we never get to stop being that way.
I bought a box of dehydrated water once, but I didn't know what to add.
No, to my knowledge, they didn't take even 1 car--Indiana doesn't have confiscation laws for alcohol related offenses. However, the point is that stricter laws don't discourage everyone. They took his license, but he still drove--he drove his car, a car he just bought from a friend; or even one he borrowed. The point is that he DROVE..whether licensed or not. Stricter laws do not stop people; they will just find means of circumventing the law.
However, you need to read my sig--it sums up my attitude.
(from 2003)ANDERSON, Ind. -- He has been arrested at least 400 times, and on Tuesday, he was sentenced to 17 years in prison on drunken driving charges.
Virldeen Redmon, 74, of Anderson, Ind., was arrested in July while driving even though his license had been suspended for life, according to authorities.
Redmon's license was originally suspended after scores of alcohol-related offenses. Redmon has apparently had his license suspended for life five times.
Police have been arresting Redmon since 1947.
I grew up in Anderson, and I know Virldeen Redmon--or rather, know who he is by sight. He's a rather sad, lonely old man--but he was always a dedicated and diligent worker. He just is addicted to alcohol. While I moved away some time ago, I do believe he never hurt anyone--except his brothers because they like to fight when they're drinking. This doesn't excuse his behavior, but stiff penalties don't help. He's done 8 years in prison, and on this one, I think he got 30 years. The man is nearly 70, he will die in prison, on our tax money. sad..but true..
People who say they don't know anything about computers usually have pencil and paper and a typewriter. They use the US Postal Service to send mail--licking (or using those plastic/sponge 'stamp lickers') their stamps rather then buying the pre-glued kind.
They don't own a computer because:
1. They don't need one.
2. Computers cause cancer.
3. They're technophobes.
I once knew a CEO of a Fortune 1000 company who didn't like computers. His Admin Assistant had the only PC in the place. The internet access was dial-up, with a single pop e-mail account. She would read and print his e-mails, to which he hand wrote his replies, she then replied via e-mail. The only other computers they had in the entire company were the ones that actually ran the assembly lines. We worked on their assembly line computers, so they also used us to fix the one PC they had. All of accounting used ledger books--no accounting software anywhere.
.Needless to say, the company no longer exists in it's original form--they were purchased in 2001, and parted out for profit.
Sigh...I wish people would stop saying that there were NO WMD's in Iraq... The whole scenario adds up to one or two factors (or a combination of both).
1. Bad Intelligence--but I fail to see how *every* major Intel group in the world had the same intelliegence--and it was all bad.
The more likely scenario is:
2. Everything is over in Syria.
It's a well documented FACT that after we announced we were going after Iraq, there were massive movements of trucks, cars, trains--anything that could move--over to Syria.
Saddam's stuff is most likely all over there. While I doubt he had an enormous stockpile, I'm sure there was enough to wipe out Israel. In effect, he would have probably started the real 'War to End All Wars' because too many Nuclear-Capable countries would have had their noses in it.
nawww..Jobs is using the 23" displays..We just got one and a G5 for one of our Graphic Artists. My only beef about Mac's is the fact that everything is proprietary. Sure, it's easier to develop software for it, but it tends to make things more pricey than I like.
And of the 69% of Adults who use the Internet, probably 80% of them use AOheLl from home to access the Internet. This means that 55% of all adults use AOL when accessing the Internet (especially from Home). This explains why over 80% of the Internet is filled with inane, vapid and hollow content.
You forgot the Rrrorororooroaaaaararr
Not really..most pharmacies have one or two acutal (and maybe a weekend only one) pharmacists who work shifts and supervise the myriad of Pharmacy Technicians (who make around 30K where I live) who dispense the meds..