"What do you mean you don't eat no meat!?"

Well, this guy really showed her. I mean...she'll never not cook HIM meat for dinner again. His plan was fool-proof!

Fun at the Beach

Seriously now. This is a little crazy. Read the article, but in summary, there is a prison in Norway that is located on an Island that is pretty much a resort for convicts. They have horseback riding, skiing, tennis, and a beach. Now I respect their methodology. They try to teach the prisoners respect and dealing with responsibility. It's more rehabilitation less punishment. Which you'd think we as Christians would be more about, but I think we like to see people get what we think they deserve as much as anyone. An interesting view given our own redemption from sin.

I think the most startling thing was this:

Inmates have included Norway's most notorious serial killer, Arnfinn Nesset, convicted of murdering 22 elderly people when he was manager of a nursing home in the 1970s. He was freed for good behavior after serving two-thirds of a 21-year sentence.

21 years for killing 22 people. 7 of which he didn't even serve! Man. You can get the death penalty for killing 2 people in this country (Not totally up on the rules on when you can get put to death). That's quite a difference. Not that I'm saying our system is any better. Infact, stats may say otherwise. But...something just seems weird when a guy can kill 22 people, and only serve 14 years in prison. If that's what you want to call Bastoy prison. And the sentencing was more a Norway thing than something this particular prison did. But...yeah...just thought it was interesting. Makes me want to have a death penalty discussion...but...maybe some other time.

Rather than watching and guarding, the 69 prison employees at Bastoy work alongside the inmates until it is time to go home and from 3 p.m. every day only five remain on the island.

The onus is on the prisoners not to escape

Just wouldn't work in America.

I Can Do All Things...

We used to have what we called "the homecoming verse" in high school. Every year during homecoming season, they would issue pamphlets with all of the candidates and bio information about them (usually 6 to 8 per year). I kid you not...without fail...I would say 7 out of 8 (or 5 out of 6) of them would have this verse as their favorite verse. Philippians 4:13. Which hey...it's a great verse. But it was comical. Why was it so popular? What did it mean to them? What about it gave them hope or edified their faith?

Pat Linnel gave a talk at Crossroads several weeks ago that encompassed the verse. And I appreciated what he had to say because he recognized the verse for it's context, and even mentioned it's common usage outside of it's original context (talked about jumping out a plane, hence the picture). While there may be Biblical truth to the statement I can do everything through him who gives me strength as a statement by itself...it wasn't given by itself. And I wonder how many of those homecoming candidates thought of the verse in the context of I have found the secret to being content in having much and having little, and that secret is that I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me? Knowing several of them...I am sad to say that I predict it was pretty low. In fact, I wonder if it wasn't more common to take it as I will do much (therefore I will have much) because I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me.

Now you may think I'm here bashing high-schoolers who put a verse for the entire school to see on their bio, and how that kind of thing should be praised not belittled. And I agree. But also know that this was the Bible belt. FCA was "the cool place to be". It was not uncool to be a "Christian". The mission field was in the church as much as in the streets. And I'm not saying they were all bad Christians (as it's something we all do), or expect them to be Biblical scholars. It's just an example of how the verse is not only used, but taught in a way that does not retain it's original sentiment or intention.

There are a couple of verses in particular that I see this kind of thing done to. The biggest one being Proverbs 4:23 which I talked about in a previous post about Guarding Your Heart. Matthew 19:26 is similar to Philippians 4:13. By itself, it holds what may be a truth, but is not hermeneutically sound without it being referred specifically to the salvation of men as that is what is impossible for men but possible for God. Matthew 18:19-20 is another one I think people take without even wondering what verses might be around it. Now...even when they don't, it may not be in the wrong way. But it's just interesting that the verse comes right after Matthew 18:15-17 which is all about church discipline and confronting a sinning brother. And you have to wonder if it's not referring to two or more people coming together in truth, as you are to do when you bring one or two other brothers with you if he does not listen to just you. But I'll be honest and say that I'm still not convinced what exactly is being referred to by the verse, and why it is where it is. But...it's also something I never hear talked about. And you hear the verse thrown around in worship settings and the like.

Some of you may think I'm anal and need to get a grip, and am just looking to stir the pot. And as I mentioned in my previous post, I am not against using general principles and applying them to our lives in relevant ways. And I've done my fare share of talking about, or teaching, or using some of these in ways that are outside of their context. But...I guess it's just a pet peeve of mine when it is done, and think it can even be dangerous to do so. I don't mind if the speaker acknowledges that it's not exactly from the context, or stating that he is just applying Biblical principle. And then we can test it for truth and apply it accordingly, because there are good applications that can come out of it. I'm not denying that. But I guess if they don't acknowledge it...it sounds like they never even thought about it, or that they are saying it's what the author was particularly thinking about when he wrote it. And if I hear you do it in a sermon or talk...you've usually lost me from there on out.

So...not my best post. But...my thoughts on the topic.

Does God Hurt When We Hurt?

Amy posted a question in my last post, Does God Care, and I was responding, but it got really long, so I thought I'd make a whole post out of it. Her question was, "How do you know that God hurts when we hurt?"

It's a good question. And you definitely caught me using a Christian cliche that I honestly did put in without thinking to much of it, because it seemed to flow with the argument. But I will go ahead and tell you why I would say that God hurts when we hurt. But first, like everything else, it's good to agree on what we mean by God hurting, and what the implications are. And...I guess I would just say that to say God hurts when we hurt doesn't mean that it's all consuming in His mind and is the only emotion that he is feeling, and it doesn't mean that he will automatically work to alleviate that pain (like if we hurt from discipline), or that it moves Him to act in any other way than perfection. And it doesn't take away from any other characteristics of God.

In general, I guess I gather it from the continuous analogy of the Father and Son relationship used in scripture. We are mere images of our perfect God, and in no way could fully understand His ways or love. But I believe there are certain relationships that were put on earth to simulate and reflect it as much as possible. The Family being the biggest. Both parent and offspring, and husband and wife. I'm sure we've all heard the phrase, "This is going to hurt me more than it's going to hurt you" from one of our parents. Whether true or not...the sentiment of a parent hurting for their child when they must punish them, but knowing that it is for their good seems to embody a characteristic that is consistent with our nature and the characteristic of God in the Bible. It can be seen in Luke 19:41-45 just in the anticipation of heartache for His beloved. You can see the problem in many families where they can't handle the "hurt" of discipline, and therefore their children never are. But we have a perfect God. He is not calloused in His discipline. He does not take joy in our hurts, outside of the knowledge that it makes us more like Him. We are His beloved, and He cares deeply for us. It's the same joy and hurt combination that we are called to in 1 Peter, when he tells the church to rejoice in sufferings (which by definition hurt) because of what the future holds. And I cannot help but believe that God embodies the perfect implementation of every emotion we experience (minus maybe guilt...and that's the only exception I can think of right now...if you can even consider it an exception).

If you look at the "heroes" of the past (TV heroes), you see a lot of "loners." Mainly strong, stoic men who were in complete control of their emotions and weren't affected by anything, and could go into danger un-phased. James Bond seemed to always have his wit, and never seemed to panic. But I wonder if we are not seeing a shift in that type a hero. Many on TV now seem to be deeply passionate. They feel and act out of a deep desire to save lives, even of those they know nothing about. They seem to experience their emotions to the fullest and writers are not afraid to let the audience see them crying and overwhelmed. Yet, they are not out of control. And I think of God in this way. His perfection does not draw Him farther from emotion, but allows him to experience them to a degree that is far greater, and more perfect than we ever could. Yes He was angry at the Israelites, but his anger was not void of hurt and disappointment. Much like a Father's anger is not only not void of hurt, but it's usually the fuel behind it.

I think you see it in the imagery from Hosea, where a broken and in love Hosea must seek out his unfaithful bride in a whore house after she leaves him time and time again. The whole purpose of which was for him, and Israel to see what God goes through with us. I think you see it in Hebrews 2:18 where it says that Christ suffered in temptation, so that he might be able to help us in ours. A model lived out in Paul in 2 Corinthians 1 when he talks about suffering to the point of death, and that his comfort was given so that he might also comfort others. To comfort others effectively as humans we must know and sympathize with those who are suffering. And when it happens, there is a natural sense of, putting yourselves in their shoes, or hurting because they are hurting. That is sympathy. And I believe God's perfection perfects sympathy, not takes away the need for it. I think you see it just from looking at the nature of Christ who had compassion on the sick and suffering. A compassion that I can't envision existing outside of some sort of recognition, and sharing of the pain that they are in. I think you see it in the model given to us in Romans 12:15 where we are told to rejoice with those who rejoice and mourn with those who mourn. Again, a principle I think God's nature has perfected, not alleviated the need for.

Maybe none of this is enough to make the claim. And I know that "hurt" can be intertwined with so many things. So...I think it's just as tough to say that God doesn't hurt when we hurt. Because in love, there can be hurt. In anger there can be hurt. In compassion there can be hurt. To care for someone deeply means to hurt when they hurt. Mourn when they mourn. Rejoice when they rejoice. And I believe God cares deeply for us, and it's not a one sided feeling, and that when we reject Him and disobey Him, He is not surprised, He is not knocked off His throne, or moved to a point of some sort of depression, or reacts rashly out of pain, or diminishes His glory, or changes His mind, or puts His justice or wrath imperfectly on hold, but hurts because we are not choosing His best for us. So...perhaps I am implying too much to say that God cares in the same way (yet perfected) that we do. But...according to scripture, and the model that is ourselves as the image of God...it drives me to believe that He does.

So...those are my thoughts.

Does God Care?

I was involved (or more listening) to a discussion the other night. The discussion involved someone whose friends, or family members were trying to have a baby, and either weren't able to, or had a miscarriage. And the question was brought up (either from them, or by my friend), "Does God care if they have a baby?" And so we talked about that for awhile. And I thought it was an interesting discussion, probably because I think it took us awhile to reconcile what, in a way, we all felt when we heard it, and that was that it was the wrong question. My first question was, "what are you implying if you say yes or no to the answer?" Because everyone wanted to be careful about saying, "No, God doesn't 'care' about that." But what are we saying if we say He does care? What does "caring" about something mean. I'm sure most people wanted to immediately say "yes...of course He cares. He cares for us deeply." But that didn't answer the right question. He cares deeply for US. Does that imply he cares whether they had their baby? Does that imply he "cares" that I wear socks? Does that imply he "cares" which socks, given a choice, I choose? That is where the conversation went. And so we had to start examining what it means to care. And how it means, or implies different things in different situations. Does God care that you love others? Yes...it "matters" to Him. He desires for us to live a life filled with love for other people. Does God care that I wear red socks instead of green socks? Does it "matter" to God. Well...yes. But no. The decision of which socks to wear is not a moral decision (to steal Steve's phrase). So it does not matter on a moral scale. So what does matter to God regarding our socks? Well...maybe as much as it matters to us. An example given was that of parents who talk to their "off-to-college" child. They will ask him things like, "Are you getting enough to eat," "Did you pick up that detergent you said you needed," "How are your classes," "Do you eat lunch with anyone," "Is that wart creme working out for you?" And they ask, and care about things (we'll assume it's a genuine love and care, and not an attempt at living vicariously through a child) that other people don't "care" about. And they care about the things that matter to their child. If their child is hurt because he failed a test...they hurt and care about his test, and they will likely make a point to ask the next time he takes it, how he did. So how does this translate to the way God cares for us? Well...He loves and cares more deeply for us than a fallen parent ever could. I believe He hurts when we hurt, and rejoices when we rejoice. He did not look down on that couple that lost their baby in apathy or spite, but in love and compassion. So does he care about what socks we wear? Well...He cares intimately about us experiencing His creation and about the state of our hearts in this world. So if which socks we wear affect that...then yes! He does. And I believe there is no line that can be drawn to indicate how "big" things have to be before God begins to care. There are not "small" things and "big" things. There is no line between which on one side Man is in control, and on the other, God takes care of the big stuff. He is intimately involved in every aspect of the universe. I believe he is intimately and compassionately caring about the holding together of every atom. There is no line. And so the initial question just doesn't seem to ask the right question. The question should be, does God care FOR that couple. If yes, then everything that flows from that is true. Through THAT caring, he cares about whether they have the baby. Not in the sense that it means He will give them one. Because the caring is the outflow of His caring for their eternity and what is best for them. God is always and passionately working to bring us into the best that He has for us. Doesn't mean happiness all the time, in fact Hebrews 12 tells us that we should expect pain and discipline, and that if we don't have it...we are illegitimate sons. And it's not something that he will force upon us (getting into some interesting territory there). But it means that it's His desire for us...and He is doing great and mighty things to ensure it (mainly sending His son to the cross). And that if that couples seeks after Him, they will have His best. Whether that is a new life, or just to know what it's like to be held by the Father.

So...that's my opinion on it. The question itself seems wrong, almost in the way the questions, "Can God create a mountain so big that He can't move it" or "Does your Mom know you wet the bed" are wrong, yet...not so obvious.

Anyway...had fun listening to that conversation. And it was definitely thought provoking.

How do you stop loving someone?

I am sure we've all experienced this issue to one degree or another. Whether you've liked someone who doesn't like you back (or doesn't even know you exists), or you've broken up with someone that you know isn't right for you, but you can't stop loving that person. And in your gut your cry to God is one of desire for the pain to be taken away. "Take away the feelings, or make something happen!" (Side note...how silly we must sound giving ultimatums to God) I think this probably happens more than we'd like it to. So what can/do we do about it?

In giving my answer to a friend experiencing this very thing, I realized, like most things, that there's no cookie cutter answer (or at least a practical one). I found myself going through situations in my head, "well if this is the case, than this, otherwise maybe this..." And of course the more situations I thought of, the more exceptions and alternatives I began to think of, leading to more situations. So I kind of abandoned that approach pretty quickly thinking I could be there all day. I think there are some common threads of time and separation that can play a role practically in most situations. But I guess I began thinking, what do we struggle with when we go through these times? I mean...no surprise...it hurts! It's painful! And I think we can feel inadequate and weak for feeling these feelings. "We are strong human beings, we should be able to overcome silly emotions!" "There must be something broken with me!" "I must not be trusting God enough!"

Hopper talked about emotional and spiritual health on his Blog. And during the weekend he referred to, we discussed the concept of "embracing our grief" (or something like that). Basically it was the acknowledgement that we are beings that are wired to experience grief. Christ Himself experienced it. We are not broken when we do. We are not necessarily outside His will. It is a part of our growth and sanctification. It can be the mark of compassion. Or it could increase our own compassion (I might have just butchered what they talked about...but...it's what I remember). The question is, what do we do with it. How do we experience it. Do we bottle it, and deny that it exists in order to look more spiritual or together? Do we revel in it and live in it, and experience the perverted pleasure of self-pity that we get from feeling like a victim? Or do we "embrace it" and deal with it righteously. I'll admit, that when I heard them talking about "embracing your grief", I had trouble with it. I didn't get it. They were talking theory, I wanted application. But I wonder how much of that understanding is step one. You are not broken! I mean, we are broken. We are fallen beings. But that is not part of it. It's how we deal with it. You may argue (and I think I did at first) that if you are hurt because your pride has been bruised, then that is a fallen condition. Our response to when someone insults us should be one of, "God determines my value. Not you." And so to feel hurt by comments, I think we feel like we fail that. But I wonder if Donald Miller wouldn't argue that the emotion at the heart of why we feel the need to defend our selves and to feel accepted and to feel validated is the very need and emotion that should draw us to God. Henry Cloud talked about in one of his books that loneliness isn't a bad thing. It's what drives us to community and to fellowship. It's the longing to be whole that feeds the desire to be made complete by our savior! It's the depression and self loathing that contaminates loneliness that is part of our fallen nature.

So what the heck does that mean for us? I guess it just means that we recognize things for what they are. That we use times of trial and pain as an opportunity to examine what it is about something that is hurting us, and how it has been perverted from what it was intended to be. In the heat of the moment, I think this can seem impossible at times. When I had to implement this for myself recently, I thought it was a bunch of crap! My anger produced something closer to hate than love. My emotions felt driven by a selfishness and a feeling that I wasn't getting what I deserved. My hurt was turning to bitterness and my anxiety produced a flurry of ideas for impulsive action and revenge that were not righteous. And my way of dealing with it in the past was always a mantra similar to, "you don't feel this way...you are a new creation...you don't feel this way." But I decided this time to try this "theory" out. Instead of denying it, I told God what I was feeling. (It's always good to be honest with God) I told Him how I felt hurt and angry and entitled and anxious, and I experienced them and allowed myself not to feel inadequate for feeling them. And one by one began thinking about the root of each. Why I was letting hurt yield bitterness, and why I felt entitled, and why I was entertaining the thoughts of revenge, and why I was anxious. Most of it came down to my lack of trust in God and His timing. Some of it came down to what I realized had been a long standing omittence of the fact that I am not my own. That I am entitled to nothing and that my happiness and fulfillment is only promised in the glorification and obedience of my God! And the pain did not go immediately away (infact seemed more intense and painful when initially embraced). And even while figuring out where my reactions to these feelings were going awry, I wasn't pain free. But I began to be at peace. And I began to actually address and grow in areas that needed changing underneath instead of convincing myself that my feelings were a lie from Satan and that a follower of Christ feels no pain! And I was able to address the problem of anxiety whenever the temptation arose on the level of re-affirming my trust in God in the area of which I was anxious, as that's where the root was.

So...how do we stop loving someone? I have no stinkin' clue. But I wonder if it starts with realizing that God has created us to be intimate with other beings. And I wonder if we dig deep, if we could not begin to identify what desires we are trying to fill through that other person, and concentrate on fulfilling them in a righteous way. And by digging deep, also figure out what things we are hanging on to, and not allowing God to have control over. Close examination is definitely more, not less painful. But I like the sentiment of the beginning of Hebrews 12. That discipline, though painful in the beginning, yields fruit of righteousness. And if we had that longer term mentality...it may make it just as bearable as we need to get through those hard times.

K...this was written over the span of many days (even weeks)...so...forgive my incoherence. And your thoughts are welcome!

3 Day Waiting Period

I got this from my main man, my brotha from anotha motha, Chris's Blog. He claimed it was the funniest google video he'd ever seen. And while I wouldn't go that far...it did not dissappoint! Quite funny. The sound of the ball hitting the bird...hilarious! So is the bird moving at the end? It looks like it's head's moving...but...it's a quick shot, and low resolution...and might actually be the tail. I can't tell. My eyes suck. Anyway...funny stuff. Well done Chris!

If you're going to do something...might as well go all out

To continue the Worth Fighting For discussion...I'm not sure if this is such a good implementation. The last quote from the article cracks me up.

Espinosa told reporters he was glad his wife had suffered burns, while Contreras said she was only sorry she had not "hacked off his manhood" during the fight.

Wet your appetite? Read the rest.

Got some free time?

Incase you had an extra 5 hours and 39 minutes, you check out this video. It's called Google's factory tour. I guess it's something they provided for their employees. And seems to be 5 hours of presentations and commercials and such. Now I know what your thinking. "Zach...good grief man! Get a life!" But you have me all wrong on this one. I am posting this so that I might make the observation of saying...Who in there right stinkin mind is going to sit down for 5 hours to watch this!?! Now I did go and skip around it to see if I could find anything interesting. But...really...just wanted to comment...that yeah...that's a long video.

It's a guy thing...

What is it about guys and gadgets? I mean, I've had girls get in and push as many buttons as guys (well...maybe not quite as many, but Brett kind of curved the stat on that one). And I've seen girls go crazy over other gadgets. I think they just get over it more quickly than guys. Girls are like, "Oh this is nifty" and then they are done. Guys are like, "Oh this is nifty, and I could use it for everything, and it would change my life as I know it, and I must have it!" Okay...maybe an exaggeration and a generalization. I'm really just trying to get enough text next to the picture so that it doesn't look silly. That should do it.

* There is an article associated with this post. It might not make sense otherwise.

The Search Experiment

The results are interesting, but not surprising. However I encourage you to take the test. I did...and I WAS surprised at the results. I picked Yahoo, but I was torn between two, the other happening to be Google. MSN obviously was the one that had nothing to do with what I was searching for.

This is just a great story!

I really like this story. You can google his name for other stuff on him.

Anyway...makes you wish you had been there. Even if you don't know the kid.

Google Calender

So I should have a whole check box for Google. You know...combing through my posts over the last 2 months I find that I really only write about 2 things. Google and relationships. And instead of breaking up with Google on Valentine's day, I actually got a Valentine's from them! Some day I'm just going to break down and start a relationship with Google so that I don't have to separate between relationship and Google posts. They'll be one and the same!

So anyway...Google calendar, hopefully coming soon. I've needed one for awhile. I've had to use Yahoo and have it send me reminders to my gmail account. I'll be interested in how they integrate it with everything else.

**Title is a link

I feel ya dogg...I feel ya...

This man is just expressing himself in a way we've all wanted to express ourselves at one time or another.




Under closer inspection, it doesn't look like the monitor is plugged in. But hey...still funny.

* The title is a link if the video doesn't appear.

Didn't think about this...

According to the post, spammers can get complete lists of all the pages indexed by Google Pages which can be used to directly infer your email address. Luckily, I registerd my new Mactactics gmail address, for which I don't care what spammers send to it. I think that makes google account number twelve for me. It's an addiction!

Dealing with breakups...

I can't imagine these were real. Maybe I'm just skeptical like that. But...funny none-the-less. I like this guy.

Friends, Some of you may remember my ex-girlfriend Sarah. I recently recieved a letter from her. I would appreciate it if you would take the time to read it and review my response. I hope all of you are well.

May 23, 2005
Dear Davey:

I have had a difficult time, over the past few years, achieving closure of our relationship. It is time for me to seek this. I have gone through the appropriate stages of anger, remorse, sadness. It is now time for me to close this chapter of my life. I am trying to recapture my life and gain a sense of identity back.

In my professional life I have done this, but my personal life struggles. For so long I/We were "Sarah and Davey", that it is hard to gain my own identity back. I am not worried about my career; I will soon succeed even my wildest dreams. I am just stunted by my personal life.

I am ready to release you from my life. I also on a weekly basis encounter people who want to tell me about you or have a discussion about you. I do not want to deal with this anymore. I do have a proposal on how to handle this.

I am ready to no longer be forced to deal with your presence. As to how to deal with it, I propose the following:

1. I've heard you have an apartment on the West side. You need to move out of the West side of Indianapolis, this has always been my side of town, I own a house here, and do not rent like you. I grew up here, and always want to live here. I would prefer if you were to leave Indianapolis all together, but I know this is more than I can ask.I do not want to risk running into you at any store.

2. We should officially divide our friends. Particularly Jim, Jillian, Amy, and Ed. You should write them, thanking them for the opportunity to be their friend and explain why you can no longer be in contact with them. I can provide you with addresses, if you need.

3. I will stay out of Republican politics. I promise not to get involved with any Republican politics, unless my father runs for judge, and than I reserve the right to work on his campaign.

4. I would like you to not have anything to do with all things Cathedral. I feel I should have ownership of the school since my mother works there and my brother and sisters went there. You are more tied to Wabash. This should be where you dedicate your alumni status. I will be involved in Cathedral. When the time of reunions comes up, I am willing to say that you can have the reunions ending in "0" years and I will take the"5" years. So you can have 10 years and I will take 25 years.

5. I will avoid Wabash contacts. The few guys from the house I still speak to on a rare basis, I will not. I will also discourage any male offspring I have from attending Wabash.

I know some of these things seem a bit harsh, but I feel they are for the best. I do not ever really wish to see you again. I know that this will of course happen beyond my control, but I think we should do our best to avoid what we can.

It is my sincere hope that you understand, and do take the time to respond. This is my last request of you.

With fondness,

Sarah
May 31, 2005


Dear Sarah,

Thanks for your letter. We broke up 3 years ago. Knowing that and taking into consideration you believe me to be a cold, career focused, ego-maniac, what on earth makes you think I would take the time to think about you or agree to your proposal? But since I clearly have taken the time to respond, please take a moment to review some comments and counterproposals I have crafted.

1. First, I will have to resist the burning urge to move RIGHT NEXT DOOR TO YOU. After that deep desire subsides, I will vacate the Westside and return to my roots: The Snooty Northside, as you used to call it. However, since I was born on the Northside and I have Northside in my veins you must abdicate all ties to the North. This includes: Living on the Northside, living on the Northeastside, walking down
North Street, being a fan of the Dallas Stars (formerly the Minnesota North Stars), wearing North Face apparel or telling your children that Santa lives at the North Pole.

1 (B). I was born in Indianapolis before you were so I should really get to determine who stays and who goes. In my benevolence I will let you exist here only within the St. Michael's Parish boundary (MLK Dr. to High School Rd. and 56th Street to 10th St.) We will call this the SarahZone. This should be acceptable for you as your family lives across the street and there is a gas station, grocery, convenience store, your place of employment and a fire station. Exceptions can be made with my expressed written consent. You will be required to display a large tag in your windshield giving you permission to travel beyond the SarahZone.

2. I haven't talked to your friends since we broke up. I think they got the message. However since we apparently are still in fourth grade, please have your friends meet me by the playground at recess so that I can tell them they have big fat heads and they aren't my friends anymore.

Do you agree? _______Yes ________No________Maybe

2 (B). One of the few times you let us do something fun, we visited some of my family friends on Geist. It was about eight years ago. We enjoyed their boat and home for several hours during a pre-500 party. Please jot them a note saying you are going to forget that ever happened. Please also offer to reimburse them for the boat gas, pool chlorine, air conditioning Freon, Dr. Pepper and anything else you consumed while you were there. I don't have their address anymore, you can look it up.

3. Please let me know when your father runs for anything. I'm going to run against him.

3 (B). Thanks for staying out of Republican politics. Your heavyweight presence in the party will be sorely missed. I am very involved in ice hockey. I play recreationally and coach a youth team in the winter. I would prefer it if you could stop being involved in all things related to ice and ice hockey . You can use those instant first aid coldpaks to cool your drinks from now on. Also, my parents have been very involved with the Indianapolis 500 Festival for nearly 20 years. The month of May is really a big month for us. While I am not able to honor your request of moving out of Indianapolis, I would ask that you just leave town during May. With 250,000 fans going to the race and 35,000 runners in the Mini-Marathon, I don't want
to run the risk of bumping into you. I know your birthday is in May, but man, I just don't care.

4. Christ, I don't have the energy for this one.

5. If any of my friends from Wabash actually still talk to you, they are fired as friends.

5 (B). I'm not going to tell my kids anything about you. But speaking of kids, it would be okay with me if my son was a crack addict, just as long as he got your kids hooked on it and became their dealer.

In closing, I will never make decisions about my life or my family based on whether I might run into you at the store. I am now convinced that if we ever do bump into each other, you will spontaneously combust. I wish you the best of luck finding a spouse. Seriously. It won't be easy to find a person who is willing to spend the rest of his life raising children and making decisions based on your crazy-ass proposal to an ex-boyfriend and your inability to act like a rational human being.

All my best,

Davey

When the apple keeps rolling and rolling...

Wow...that's really all I can say about these people. What kind of followers of Christ would ever consider this a viable means of protest, and furthermore, a viable message to send is totally and completely beyond me. And I think these Patriot Guard Riders are studs and a half! Tremendous respect for them, just from reading the article.

Phelps believes American deaths in Iraq are divine punishment for a country that he says harbors homosexuals. His protesters carry signs thanking God for so-called IEDs -- explosives that are a major killer of soldiers in Iraq.

Everyone's entitled to their opinion...unfortunately.

At least 14 states are considering laws aimed at the funeral protesters, who at a recent memorial service at Fort Campbell wrapped themselves in upside-down American flags. They danced and sang impromptu songs peppered with vulgarities that condemned homosexuals and soldiers.

Several months ago my family came in town and we took a day to visit DC. Unfortunately we picked the day of a huge, city-wide, war protest. Not that I have anything against people protesting...it's their constitutional right. I was just sad that when I took my family to see the beauty of DC and it's history, it was filled with picket signs and people yelling and exuding negativity. But...so it goes. But while we were there, some people tried to take signs up into the Lincoln memorial and were stopped saying that it was against the law to protest on "memorial ground." Basically they couldn't bring their signs up on the marble of the memorial. And of course they complained about their rights being suppressed. And I wondered for a minute about the right to protest and whether they should have the right to protest where ever they wanted. And I ultimately decided that I agreed with the legislation prohibiting it. It's a small piece of real-estate in a big city. Go protest somewhere else out of respect for the thing being honored. But if I wasn't convinced then...I am convinced now. However they shouldn't have to make a law for it. Human decency should compel you not to celebrate someone's death at their funeral (and I'm not talking about a good celebration).

"The scriptures are crystal clear that when God sets out to punish a nation, it is with the sword. An IED is just a broken-up sword," Phelps-Roper said. "Since that is his weapon of choice, our forum of choice has got to be a dead soldier's funeral."

mmm...can't argue with that impenetrable logic!

The church, Westboro Baptist Church, is not affiliated with a larger denomination and is made up mostly of Fred Phelps' extended family members.

Some people just shouldn't be allowed to breed. I am of course joking. But seriously...some people shouldn't.

Richard Wilbur, a retired police detective, said his Indiana Patriot Guard group only comes to funerals if invited by family. He said he has no problem with protests against the war but sees no place for objectors at a family's final goodbye to a soldier.

"No one deserves this," he said.

Agreed.

These are some quotes from Fred Phelps' wikipedia page.

Phelps considered the local church to be more than a place of fellowship--for him, membership in the local congregation directly corresponded to membership in the Body of Christ. Phelps may have conceded the point to be ordained, but, for forty years, his family and church members in Topeka have been controlled by his threat that, if they depart his congregation, they must carry a letter of permission from him. In addition, they must join a congregation that he approves. Otherwise...the pastor Phelps draws up the dreaded missive ordering the straying sheep to be "delivered to Satan for the destruction of the flesh."

Nutso!

And just when you thought it couldn't get any worse...

as a means of encouraging the wives and children to "submit to the father's authority in the home," Phelps began encouraging his congregants to beat them if necessary; he was once forced to bail one of his parishioners out of jail after counseling the man to punch his wife in the face until she became "subjugated." Parishioners of Eastside recall one of Phelps' sermons in particular (which ironically references his high-school boxing talent):

A good left hook makes for a right fine wife. Brethren, they can lock us up, but we'll still do what the Bible tells us to do. Either our wives are going to obey, or we're going to beat them!

And off the handle and into the deep end we go.

Christ Denied permission to drive

I got this off Hopper's blog from May, so...it's old. But it had a couple of good quotes.

It started as an expression of his faith,

I don't totally understand what he was trying to express.

Mr. Pishevar, who describes Mr. Christ as a tall, pale-skinned man with long white hair, said his client is "very private."

Similar in everyway.

"Christ is not speaking to the press at this time," Mr. Pishevar said.

Just funny.

Okay...I mainly just wanted something to cover up the last post. It was getting old.

Censorship

Follow up to the noluv4google.com stuff. This was in their FAQ.

Q: I heard Google is legally required to censor some search results in the U.S. and Europe - isn't this the same?

A: While we don't support censorship, we feel it is completely inappropriate to compare legal restrictions on websites containing child pornography (in the U.S) or Neo-Nazi hate speech (in Germany) to the suppression of information about human rights and democracy in China and Tibet. But don't take our word for it... Congressman Tom Lantos says, "in essence, [this] equates the vile language and evil purposes of Neo-Nazi groups and hate speech with content provided by the human rights activists of Falun Gong, by journalists and by democracy activists in China. There simply is no comparison between efforts of the democratically-elected government of the Federal Republic of Germany to move against hate-mongerers, and the Chinese regime cracking down on religious freedom, human rights and democracy."

I don't totally agree. You can't have it both ways. Censorship is censorship. The level of which is decided upon by a government body. To me they ARE comparable. One has decided to make certain content illegal, another has decided to make other content illegal (and a quote from a Congressman or Senator isn't always saying much). I understand the argument that one set of laws was made by a government elected by the people, and the other was made by a government oppressing a people. But it kind of reminds me of pre-civil war. A democratically elected body provided provisions for slavery. Just because it's democratically elected doesn't make it right. Now of course I think what China is doing is wrong, and I think there should be censorship on child porn (not necessarily hate speech...but...*shrug* that's just me). I guess I just don't like their argument. Call it for what it is.

Q: Isn't it better for Google to be engaged in China in this way than not at all?

A: Google was already operating a Chinese-language search portal in China and in fact enjoyed the second-largest market share as well as the highest rating from users. However, the Chinese government's 30,000 internet police and China's "great firewall" were responsible for censoring websites and sanitizing users' search results. Now, Google has custom-built a websearch platform - Google.cn - to the Chinese authorities' specifications, doing their dirty work for them, and more effectively. This will make it harder for people in China and Tibet to access real information, not easier.

Just not true. They still have access to www.google.com and can get to the same information they always could. Nothing has been taken away. Information has only been added. Now they can reach stuff that isn't censored faster and more reliably. There's a lot of information out there that isn't censored. Maybe some people thought it was important to provide those Billion people with that information reliably instead of settling for a sub par access.

Okay...this is a rant that I'm not terribly passionate about, yet obviously do have an opinion about that I realize is just that...an opinion. So...I'm pretty open to arguments from the other side (unless the other side is making dumb "break up with Google" websites). Or...feel free to just glaze over this post like the last one.

Happy Valentine's Day all!

You've got to be joking!!!

Sigh...just breathe...Freedom of Speech...it's a good thing.