jefferiah

Well, having a political belief on gay marriage does not necessarily translate to actively persecuting anyone. So, I think it was certainly wrong of Emanuel and others to say to Chick-Fil-A you aren't welcome here.

Most preachers do not run mega-churches.

I agree with you morally on the issue. I believe that marriage is between a man and a woman. The state cannot change my belief on the matter. Many things are forbidden in the Bible. Idol worship is forbidden. Worshipping another God is certainly a grave sin as well. It is the first commandment. We cannot legislate that however. Ours is not a kingdom of this world.

None, perhaps.

Words like "bigot" get thrown around far too much these days, IMO, and they lose meaning. That's supposed to be the Left's game, not ours.

I would say Bubber makes a fair point in this regard. Whether it is literally "Christ's word" or not, it is fair to use that term because Christians consider the entire Bible to be the Word of the Lord. In any case, the Bible does urge people to accept law of the land, though I would say that is within reason. If the law expects us to reject Christ or restricts our freedom to be Christian and heed our own moral law, it would be wrong not to break it. Daniel did not follow the order to not pray to God. The Bible is clearly opposed to homosexual sex, but Jesus commands us to follow those morals, not legislate them. It is also a sin to take the Lord's name in vain. And likewise to have other Gods. Which is worse, as far as Christianity is concerned, homosexuality or worshiping another God? Can you legislate that? Was it morally right to beat the Son of God and nail him to a cross? What was His reaction? Gay marriage, in and of itself, does not restrict our right to practice Christianity, nor does it mean Christians cannot define marriage on their own terms. However, it would be a much different matter if the state tried to compel Churches which oppose gay marriage to perform the rite. Paul went to countries like Rome and Greece, where homosexuality was not uncommon. He preached his beliefs, he did not start a political party to bring morality reform.

Well, there's an argument in favor of homeschooling, right there.

I have serious doubts that even socialist agrees with socialist.

Can't argue with that. The whole thing is pretty funny sometimes. Geek cults. In the Linux community there are some people who are quite snobby about how Linux is better, or certain distros are better, and in some cases those (like myself) who use the more user-friendly distros like "Crapbuntu" (as some would call it) are somehow less 'nix, and using "windoze" is sacriledge. At the end of the day, as Cybercoma said, you just want what works for you.

Once again, I do not watch Fox news, nor do I get news reports from Shady. But, the quote is "if youve got a business, you didnt build that". I don't think "that" was referring to roads and bridges. If you've got a business you didnt build roads and bridges. Hmmm...

That's a stretch. What he said was, if you've got a business you didn't build that. That's certainly not the same as saying you didn't build roads. Unless by "that" he was referring to roads. If you've got a business, you didn't build roads???? Ah yes, maybe thats what he was saying.

I do not watch Fox news. I have seen the speech. I never suggested that people ought not to be mindful of the good fortune they have received. In fact, I made it a point to say the very opposite of all those things in my posts. What I did say, is that there are things I do not like about the way Obama has put it. That the tone of the argument just rubs me wrong personally. In one breath he mentions people who agree with him, and in the next those who think they are so smart. I may be wrong, but I get the sense he is making some kind of connection there. And that is all I am saying here, that this is what I get from the comments. Who are you to tell me my feelings about Obama's comments are crap? Where in my posts did I ever say that giving credit to others was an insult?

Apple's lawsuit brigade has nothing to do with whether "Apple Fan Boys" are justified in their love of the product. It's a matter of preference. For me personally, iThings seem a bit expensive for my needs, but there is no doubt that Apple builds durable, quality machines. May be overpriced, but if people feel it is worth it to them to pay that price, well that's their business.

Well, I have read it and as a matter of personal opinion I do not like the tone of some of it. I myself am not a business person, and I am no financial genius, but I do think in a lot of cases (certainly not all, some people really are very fortunate) entrepreneurs have made a great deal more sacrifice, took greater risks, and worked harder than I have to get their dreams off the ground. As a matter of personal taste, I would think it is wise for such a man to always acknowledge his circumstances no matter how favorable or not. To say you built some thing is conceited. But I believe that sort of humility is personal. And it is not necessarily my place to judge, because while I believe in humility, I also think it is best for someone else looking on that success to say that someone did not build that, that they did not work harder. In many cases, some people really do. And who are these ones whose minds he has read that think they are smarter or worked harder? Are they the wealthy Americans who do not agree with Obama?

KDE is definitely the slickest of the DE's. I am still using Mint 12, because for some reason it just works perfectly with my touchpad. I try to configure the synclient settings in other distros but can't get it right. And for some reason, I have the same issue with Mint 13. I am using the Cinnamon desktop, which I find to be alright. Gnome 3 turned a lot of people off I think. I kinda liked it. I'm a sucker for trying out distros, and most of the time I have no idea what I'm doing. I've tried to use Arch more than once (cuz I wanted to be able to use something advanced) but too much heartache for me. And I need everything explained to me kindergarten style with cartoon pictures and all. I like the idea of Arch Linux, but I just cannot do it. I managed to get it running watching some youtube vids but then an update broke something and bah.... Linux is fun though. I mean, I have only been at it for a couple years, and I can't say I am really all that savvy, but I find myself learning things I never would have been interested in before. You have programming resources fresh out of the box. So, I started learning some python and c++ and java, all of which I suck at royally, but it's still fun. There are some great newer lightweight distros that are very user friendly and can give new life to an older machine. ArchBang, CrunchBang, Macpup, Slitaz, Bodhi, Chakra, etc. I have a 12 year old pc here that was my brother's running Bodhi linux and it runs pretty well, and I think it looks pretty nice.

I am not sure if this is a response to me, but if that is the case, I would urge you to re-read my post, because nowhere did I claim that Obama said either of those things. And I did not slag Obama, or say he is worthless, just that I disagree. And, I suppose you could rightfully ask what do I disagree with here. I conceded that people are not islands. Is that all Obama is saying? If it is, then I perhaps I have no disagreement with him at all. I don't think anyone would disagree with that. But I think that since Americans already do have a system whereby people (including those who are entrepreneurs) pay taxes toward public roads, public schools, and where people who make more money pay greater amounts, it would seem that America has already acknowledged that nothing can survive in vacuum, and to me that says that what Obama is saying is that people who built businesses owe more to the government for that. I don't know if he thinks government is 100 percent responsible, or mostly responsible. But I am guessing he feels that it ought to be given more credit than the status quo, or else why bring it up? And also I think he did put words in the mouths of entrepreneurs somewhat. I mean, you can get semantical about it and point out that he only said "entrepreneurs who say such things", without specifying anyone in particular. But I think for a lot of people, it comes off a bit anti-business. Or at least less pro-business to the degree to which they ascribe. It's all a matter of opinion of course. I am not outraged or offended by it or anything. It is what it is.

I do not agree with Obama's comments. Obviously, one's opinion on the matter depends on their own political views. For someone more to left, these comments are more acceptable obviously, and for those of use towards the right it is not. While I realize that no man is an island, and maybe we all have people and circumstances to thank to some extent for our good fortune or bad fortune, I fail to see how government can reasonably discern to whom someone with any measure of success is indebted and to what degree. What is certain is that people with business already do pay taxes for those roads, just like you and I. And just like you and I, they got to use them, and if they made more money than I have using the same roads I am also free to use, then they have obviously done a better job using those roads to their advantage than I have, at least as far as they apply to making money. Whether that makes them smarter than others is questionable, but it seems Obama is putting those words in their mouths.

Yeah, if Linux distros were cars, I wouldn't want to drive one. Over the last year or so, though, things seems a lot less buggy in the bigger distros (Ubuntu, Mint, OpenSuse, Fedora etc). I am using Mint right now (because it seems to just work better with my current hardware) and I have no issues whatsoever. I dual-boot with Windows though. So, I always have a safety if I screw something up.

Oh ya, I get that. That was just a light-hearted, cheerleading post from me. I don't even own a smartphone. Linux is a pain. But that's why I enjoy it. The elitists who insult you when you ask for help with something are annoying though. I am not all that savvy, and I just manage to figure out what I need to to get by. What distro were you running?

Android = Linux = thumbs up

Well, actually the other day I was thinking, we really need some more comfy alternatives to business/casual office clothing. Like a yoga business suit.

The shirt does not say that. Which one do you find more offensive? PJ's are also comfy. No point. Just sayin'

There used to be a Ruffles commercial with an Alaskan native guy sitting there in the isolated tundra with a bag of Ruffles. The one other guy in this remote terrain asks him for a chip, and he looks around and says, "If I give one to you, I have to give one to everybody else."

Of course not. But in this case her shirt was not offensive, and once you have seen it once you don't have to keep looking if you don't like it. They can tell her not to wear the shirt, but either way it does not change the fact that they have seen it that first time. They are comfy, don't you agree?