I used Mozilla Firebird for quite some time and liked it, though it had problems with some sites. Then I "upgraded" to Firefox. Though I like the RSS feeds in Firefox, it is not a very useful browser as it has a bug that makes it impossible to log in to most sites or to fill in forms - for sites I have to log in to, I have to revert to Firebird or IE. (I have a number of browsers on my computer to check html on my websites).

It is still necessary to have IE, both to update Windows and to log in to certain websites, like my bank, which are so poorly written they only work with IE.

Whatever browser you use, it is still necessary to have a good firewall and antivirus program, plus programs to get rid of spyware. I have ZoneAlarm Pro, Norton Antivirus, AdAware 6, and Spybot and so far have avoided major problems except for a few tracking cookies that get by when I use IE.

(I suppose having dial-up access also helps, as it makes it more difficult for people to hack my computer.)

I never used Messenger and finally disabled it, though my firewall setup blocked it from accessing the internet anyway.

Microsoft HAS been casual about security until fairly recently, but that doesn't mean other OS's are more secure - just that not enough people used them to make them attractive to hackers, virus writers, etc. That may be changing as Linux becomes more popular.

I've observed that some women are smarter than some men, and vice versa.
Women tend to do better than men at conversation, relating to other people, fine detail and are more concerned with feelings. Men are better at things that involve physical activity, projects, machinery and are logical... but this is only a general tendency and some individuals of either sex may excel in areas commonly monopolized by the other sex.
As a mechanic, when my former pastor had car trouble and asked me for help, I always used to talk to his wife, as he had no idea what was going on but she maintained and did minor repairs on the car. On the other hand, I've experienced a lot of "dumb" women who think they can just drive forever without doing any maintenance, like changing the oil. Usually men are better with machinery than women, but not always.
I guess my conclusion is that neither women or men are "smarter" but just have different strengths and weaknesses. God intended them to work together, not copmpete, so the strengths of each sex strengthen the weaknesses of the other.

Reba,
     If I came across as harsh in my last reply to you I apologize. It was not my intention. I should show the love of Christ.
     "The more government fixes things the less they work". This is a popular belief but think what life would be like without government.  Something like Iraq at present, but likely even worse. God instituted government for a reason. While there can be too much government, there can also be too little.
     The "lowest bid" rule was instituted to prevent fraud and government waste of the "Haliburton in Iraq" type. It does lead to substandard work at times, but I believe government rules do not "require" you to take the lowest bid if you can show valid reasons not to, at least around here. This situation could be avoided by requiring "performance guarantees" as they do in Europe for road construction. If a company uses substandard materials and the road doesn't hold up, they are required to redo it at their own expense. Cost overrides should be the contractor's problem, unless the specifications were changed.
     "The more local the government the better". In my experience the most oppressive (and least responsive) governments are the local ones, followed by State governments - (but then I live in NY, which is well named the "Empire" State. It sure isn't democratic). State and local governments are the worst in ignoring and taking away individual rights to please special interest groups, and local governments are usually the most corrupt form of government.
     Moses was dealing with an entire nation of people, so in effect it was a national, not a local government. (Actually Jethro  suggested a national judicial system, not a government). Almost certainly each of the twelve tribes governed itself to a large extent, under the authority of Moses, who was under the authority of God.
                                           Ted


     
     

The more government fixes things the less they work.


 Setting on the board of directors of the 'water district' here we HAD to accept the lowest bid  to install some new pipe. I wanted to take the middle bid because it just looked better all around. Government regulations said we had to take the lowest. the cost overrides were very high. but we took the lowest bid.

The more local the government the better. Local government was the format God gave to Moses to deal with the folks in the dessert.

[GREEDY LAWYERS!!!]

Tom,
     I have to agree with you totally on this issue. We should do what the British do - limit suits to actual damages, no punitive damages unless intent can be proven. And people should be made to take responsibility for themselves, not blame sopmeone else for everything that goes wrong.

                       

Rhys,

There was a time when churches did do a pretty good job of taking care of those in need. However, there is a new ingredient that is breaking the bank.

GREEDY LAWYERS!!!

Nobody can afford to pay for them in the health care arena. We are long past a crisis in the costs they add to every medical procedure. Some doctors are giving up, especially those in fields that are popular for lawyers to wade into. Some parts of the country are much worse than others, but it appears that lawyers are making health care harder and harder for average people to get.

So, the church question might be asked in several different ways:

Do you wish to help the sick people who can't afford medical care?

Same as above but add - prohibitive costs because we will also be lining the fat cat lawyers pockets with gold in the attempt.

This is a fact of life now. Tort reform must be one of the answers if rich and poor receive adequate medical care.

Love In Christ,
Tom

If  government did not spend what they dont have there would be NO deficits.  


It is not governments place to provide jobs or health care. Why ever is it the responcibilty government to support the unemployed, or elderly.

True, but also true that if they raised taxes to cover spending there would be no deficits. The solution is to decide what really needs to be spent and then tax at a level to cover it. Bush cut taxes while increasing spending.

Unfortunately there is no agreement among Americans on what government should be doing and how much it should spend doing it.

Government really can't provide lasting jobs, except by stimulating the private sector, so we have no disagreement there. Health care has simply gotten so enormously expensive that there seems no alternative to government stepping in. If you have a better idea to reduce medical costs to a level affordable to average Americans, advance it!

(The only idea I have come up with in that area is to have the government direct research money to search for cures and preventions, not treatments. The drug companies have no incentive to find cures or preventions, as they make far more money by selling you medicines (treatments) you have to take for the rest of your life!)

It may be a surprise, but government in America has always supported the sick, unemployed and elderly, from the days of original settlement, if their own families couldn't do it. It was local governments that did it, not the Federal Government, and they usually did a very poor job and did it grudgingly, but they were responsible. (Families and relatives did and should bear the primary responsibility, but they do need help even when they are willing).

I've heard over and over that Christians and churches should be doing the job, not the government, and many of the current programs government runs were originally started by churches and religious organizations. However, the reason government took over in those areas was that the religious organizations either didn't have or wouldn't provide the resources to meet the needs. As government services to the poor have been cut back, I haven't seen a huge increase in giving by Christians to fill the gap. I've heard a lot of rhetoric and seen very little action.

I'd have to agree with Reba. Animals have bodies and souls, but not the spiritual part that we have that enables us to have a relationship with God.

I've seen nothing in the Bible that indicates animals go to either heaven or hell, though it indicates there MAY be some animals in heaven. (Will a T-Rex meet us at the gate???)

If there is no Scriptural basis either way, I think we will have to wait until we can see for ourselves to know for sure. The important thing is that WE can only get into heaven by putting our faith in Christ.

I voted for Bush in the last election and while I would never vote for Kerry, I have become disillusioned with Bush as well. While it is great to have a Christian in the White House and I applaud his stand on abortion, same-sex marriage, etc. I am greatly disturbed by things like the "Patriot" Act, locking away people without trial or even charges being filed, torture of prisoners, etc., etc. - all tactics of a police state and violations of the Constitution he swore to uphold. I supported the invasion of Afganistan, but saw no need for the Iraq war and believe it was brought about through lies and misrepresentations - not tactics a Christian should be using. It has drained valuable resources from the War on Terrorism and domestic programs and stretched our military too thin.

I am also concerned about the massive deficits we are running, largely due to Bush's income tax cuts combined with war expenses. I am old enough to remember Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon doing the same thing during the Vietnam War and the runaway inflation that resulted a few years later. Furthermore, the Democrats are right that the cuts benefited only the rich - I saw no cut whatever in my income taxes, but as usual when income taxes are cut my property taxes went up, along with fees, to cover the revenue lost by state and local governments. Basically the Republican income tax cuts are always shell games to shift taxes from progressive to regressive forms of taxation. Their "less government" platform is also a shell game that means less regulation of huge corrupt corporations like Enron, but more and more government control over individuals and infringement on individual rights.

The Republicans make no real effort to deal with domestic problems such as health care, employment, etc. We need a thorough overhaul of health care, not the band-aid approach both parties have advocated so far. The complexity alone must add billions to our costs of health care - standardizing and simplifying would help greatly, but that seems to be beyond the ability of Americans, who seem to rejoice in continually making everything more and more complicated.

The Democrats, on the other hand, have long ceased to represent the average working person in any way and are now captives of the "looney left" and the sexual perverts.

Anyway, this year I may well vote for the Constitution Party candidate for president, even though I don't agree with some of their positions on taxes or health care, (as I don't see either of the major parties doing anything about them anyway). At least the Constitution Party seems to stand for Christian values. (http://www.constitutionparty.com/party_platform.php).

When its hot, plain water with a healthy dose of lemon juice. Otherwise, strong coffee!

The UN is a largely toothless tiger that can't even field a respectable peacekeeping force and pulls out of any tough situation when the bullets start flying. I really can't see it as a threat to any nation that has a halfway decent military force or an armed citizenry. It will probably eventually go the way of the League of Nations.
I think it is a futile exercise to try to predict where the antichrist will come from. Not too long ago Christians were absolutely insistent that the Soviet Union and Communism were IT. Now the Soviet Union no longer exists and Communism is largely discredited.
Real threats are usually much more subtle and closer to home, and appeal to many Christians - "if it were possible, even the elect would be deceived".
 

Perhaps because of continual criticism coupled with lack of prayer,  little encouragement when they do take a hard stand,  and poor financial support from their flocks?
Lack of prayer is probably the most important.

Although I have no evidence to back it up, I always figured "Allah" has the same origin as Elohim Yahweh (El-Yah) and is simply the Arabic version of it.

At the same time, the understanding Muslims have of "Allah" is radically different from the Judeo-Christian understanding of God. Although their name for God may have the same origin as ours, they don't worship the same God that Christians do.
 
Most importantly, although they admit Jesus was a prophet, they don't accept him as God come in the flesh - the idea is blasphemy to them. One of the most basic concepts of their faith is that there is only one god, Allah. They can't accept the concept of the Trinity and believe Christians worship three gods. Nor do they believe in Jesus' atoning sacrifice for sins. Islam is a works-based religion. Allah weighs ones' good works against the bad, and you can only hope to get to paradise.

In my opinion, Allah also seems to be a powerless god, demanding his followers sacrifice themselves for him. Islam also only seems to be able obtain and retain followers by force - one wonders how many would desert Islam if they had freedom of religion and could do so without fear of retaliation or being arrested. I suspect the Islamists know this and that fear is the primary reason behind the push for Islamic law and anti-conversion laws.

Our God wants people to come to him out of love and gratitude. It would be meaningless to force anyone to become or remain a Christian, as being a Christian is a heart decision and God knows the heart. God is a God of miracles and power, who doesn't need his followers to defend Him and doesn't demand they do so, though many do of their own free choice.

Hi.
I just joined the forum. My wife and I have been Christians for 30 years now, will have been married 35 this June. We have three daughters and two grandchildren.
We live in Upstate NY and work in Vermont. Both of us grew up here, but have also lived in Nova Scotia, Saskatchewan, and Wisconsin.
My wife works as a teacher's aide, I as an auto mechanic.
We belong to the Hoosick Falls Community Alliance Church. We team teach Sunday School and I run the church website - http://www.geocities.com/hfcac/hfcac1.html. I go out on visitation with one of the church elders fairly regularly.
Our interests include hiking, camping, reading, & computers.