jason – Page 25 – These Dirty Colors

Another Reason to Use Mozilla/Firefox

By jason | October 20, 2005

If you’ve ever talked to me about web development, you know I’m a hard core Mozilla/Firefox fanboy. Mozilla and Firefox are faster, safer, and more standards-compliant for starters. Something else I really like about the browsers that has really been climbing the scale for me is useability. From the features builtin to the browsers to the plethora of extensions available, the browsers just can’t be beat (for the curious, I run FireFox). One such feature is the keyword functionality in bookmarks (I don’t know if other browsers have it. I haven’t looked, and really don’t care if they do : ). For example, I’m a pretty big Linux Today fan. Of course, I have the site bookmarked, but I hate switching back and forth between the mouse and the keyboard, so I add the keyword "lt" to the bookmark, and I can noew go to the site completely from the keyboard: I press CTRL-L to switch to the location bar, then type "lt," hit enter, and voila! Linux Today is loaded. While I think that’s a pretty snazzy feature, it gets even cooler. My phone at Hobby Lobby had caller ID on it, which was handy when trying to avoid salesman that kept pestering me. Sometimes, though, a number would come up that I didn’t know, so I’d want to look it up and see who it is before I answered. The problem is, of course, time. It takes too long to go to the site, type in the number, click the button, etc. With Mozilla/FireFox, my aversion to taking unwanted phone calls gets easier. From using the reverse lookup site, I know what the URL for a lookup looks like, so I can take that URL, replace the number I used with "%s" and use that as the bookmark. Now, in my location bar, i can type "phone 123-555-1234" and the browser inserts the number I typed where the "%s" is and loads that page, giving me quick and easy access to the reverse phone lookup.

I will admit that this use of the feature is pretty juvenile, but that doesn’t detract from the utility of it. Since discovering this feature of the browser, I’ve created several more of these types of bookmarks, all of which get used rather frequently. The point of this rambling article is two-fold. The first is to make Mozilla/FireFox users aware of the feature (and perhaps give those still holding on to IE yet another reason to switch). The second is to give you the list of the bookmarks that I’ve created and found helpful. So, without further ado, I present to you my Keyboard Shortcuts Bookmarks.

Shortcut	Description	URL
acroynm	Look up an acronym at AcronymFinder.com	Right click and copy
define	Google Definitions	Right click and copy
groups	Search for a phrase at Google Groups	Right click and copy
local	Find a specific business or type of business using Google Local (be sure to change the URL to use your city)	Right click and copy
dict	Look up a word’s defintion at One Look Online Dictionary	Right click and copy
phone	The afforementioned Reverse Phone Directory Lookup Phone Number	Right click and copy
wiki	Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia	Right click and copy
yp	Find a business’ phone number in the Yellow Pages	Right click and copy

These are some of the bookmarks I have set up that I though might help someone. If you have some good ones or find some to add, please leave a comment and tell us what it is so we can all share. Have fun!

What are we doing about it?

By jason | September 21, 2005

Brian’s a good friend of mine. He and I are a lot a like in many ways. Both politically and theologically, we’re very similar, with only what I consider to be minor differences of opinions. One area in which we are in lock-step agreement is our opposition to the scourge of abortion. We both find it to be a repugnant and repulsive destruction of human life. As such, our conversations often drift to that topic. This morning was such an occasion. Brian related to me a conversation he had with a former college professor, and challenged me with a question with which this professor challenged him: What are we doing about it?

That’s an exceedingly interesting question. As Brian and I discussed, as Christians, we seem to be placing our hopes in Supreme Court justices, lawyers, and/or activists. Our hope is that someday, we’ll have enough justices on that bench to overturn Roe, and that a brave lawyer will step forward to push a case all the way through to the Supreme Court. Someday, someone will step up to the plate and make something happen. That’s all well and good, but the question still stands: What are we doing about it?

More often that not, we prefer to sit back and let someone else do the work. Whether it’s evangelism, discipleship, discipline, or protecting the unborn, most of us are not comfortable with getting our hands dirty. The reasons for that are many, and, in this context, completely irrelevant. Regardless of reason, we as the body of Christ will continue to marginalized and ineffective as long as we’re sitting on the sidelines. If we want the world to take notice and to realize that our Faith does have something authentic to offer the modern world, we actually have to do something.

On a practical level, in this context, what does that mean? Do we picket abortion clinics? Do we write letters to politicians? Do we volunteer at pregnancy centers? Do we adopt "unwanted" children? I don’t know. Those are all fine suggestions, and there are likely many more (though I staunchly oppose opposition that involves firearms, thank you very much, Mr. Rudolph). The answer to that question, though, will vary from person to person, so each Christian should carefully think about that question: What are you doing? What does God want you to do? It’s time that we quit sitting on our hands and waiting for someone else to do something, and get involved ourselves, whether the issue is abortion, gambling, or something else entirely. Being a change agent for Christ is not someone else’s responsibility. It’s ours. It’s yours. Now, what are you going to do about it?

Jesus, God’s Name, and Gay People

By jason | June 28, 2005

Every day, there is a set of web comics I read. I even have an application setup on a server at home that aggregates these comics on to one page to make viewing these comics easier and faster. One such comic is Player vs. Player, one I’ve read for years. While the strip is consistently funny, it is occasionally a little off color, and sometimes downright offensive. One example actually spans two days. The first day (warning: this is likely to offend) is where the offense started. For those of you that didn’t click the link (Trust me. You’re not missing anything) the last panel has a talking cat taking The Lord’s name in vain. As can be expected, some PvP readers were offended and wrote in to let the author know, which led to the second and possibly more offensive of the two strips (This one is "safe" and this post depends on your knowledge of it). Over the next few paragraph’s, I’d like to explain why Scott Kurtz is wrong. …

The Wall of Separation Canard

By jason | April 15, 2005

One of the greatest canards in modern public life, in my opinion, is the alleged "wall of separation" between church and state. The idea is that The Framers wanted a government devoid of any religion at all. I think history adequately shows, though, that that’s not the case. What they wanted, rather, was a religion without a state government. That is to say, they didn’t want any one religion to gain the official backing of the government of the land and then be forced upon the populace, as was the case in England.

Everyone now and then, like this case, we see this faulty idea of separation applied at the local level. I think the people that do this are either uninformed with regards to the Constitution, or are being intentionally disingenuous. While these people bow at the altar of the First Amendment, they gloss over the 10th Amendment, which states that any powers not expressly granted to the Federal government are reserved for the states and the people. So how is this relevant to the South Carolina case? The First Amendment says this:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Note the emphasis I added. "Congress shall make no law…" Now, couple that with the Tenth Amendment, and I think you can make a case that the First Amendment does not apply to local governments. If a municipality, acting according to the dictates of its constituents, decide that they wish to acknowledge Jesus Christ in their town hall meetings, I think the Constitution grants them that right. The same goes for Allah, Buddha, or whatever religious figure one might choose. What we have in this case is the tyranny of the minority, where a single person was able to assert her will and overrule what is apparently (from the lack of widespread support of the plaintiff) the will of the local community. If you add in a Supreme Court that seems to have forgotten the Constitution they’ve sworn to interpret and uphold, and you have the federal trampling of states’ rights. Just one more in a long line.

I have turned in my notice…

By jason | December 22, 2004

Well, I finally did it. Last Thursday, I gave my notice to Hobby Lobby. As one might expect, my boss wasn’t too excited about it, but he said he wasn’t too surprised. He’s known that I’ve not been too happy for a while. Part of my discontent was the adoption of .Net. The rest (and maybe the majority) was the installation of Peoplesoft Enterprise 1 (also known as PSE1, JD Edwards One World 8.9, and probably something else as soon as Oracle finished its acquisition of Peoplesoft).

Hobby Lobby made both of these decisions, as it felt that they were the best decisions for the company, which I can understand. Obviously, I disagree with the selection of .Net as the development platform. Peoplesoft, though, I supported and recommended (though it’s not like the whole decision hinged my opinion. They did, though, ask for it, so I gave it). I was led to believe by the salesmen, though, that we would interact with the system, as developers, via a Java API. However, as one might expect from salesmen, that picture wasn’t quite accurate. Not only will we not be using the API, there is no API. All interaction is done by reading from or writing to "Z" files and running programs. Not that the absence of a Java API would matter, though, as we won’t be using Java.

I spent some time doing development in both environments to see if I could enjoy my job. To be honest, though I am opposed to .Net for reasons I’ve discussed elsewhere, I could probably be happy enough doing C#. PSE1 development, however is a bunch of click here, double click there, type in a variable name on this line, drag this over here. Ick. The only way to see everything the program is doing is to print the "code." I just did not enjoy that (beyond learning it. Once the new wore off…)

So, I’m off to another company here in the metro. It’s a bittersweet decision. I’ve made some good friends here at Hobby Lobby over the past 3 1/2 years. It will be hard to say good-bye to them (though I’ll only be a few miles away from them and I go to church one of them). I wasn’t enjoying myself though, and that made me miserable at work, and the quality of my work suffered. That’s not good for them or me, so it’s probably best for everyone that I move on. Only time can tell if I’ve made the right choice. Right now, it feels right, and I expect that it will be…

Jesus and the Democrat

By jason | December 1, 2004

A little political/religious joke. Enjoy! 🙂

A Republican in a wheelchair entered a restaurant one afternoon and asked the waitress for a cup of coffee. The Republican looked across the restaurant and asked, "Is that Jesus sitting over there?"

The waitress nodded "yes," so the Republican requested that she give Jesus a cup of coffee on him.

The next patron to come in was a Libertarian with a hunched back. He shuffled over to a booth, painfully sat down, and asked the waitress for a cup of hot tea. He also glanced across the restaurant and asked, "Is that Jesus over there?"

The waitress nodded, so the Libertarian asked her to give Jesus a cup of hot tea, "My treat."

The third patron to come into the restaurant was a Democrat on crutches. He hobbled over to a booth, sat down and hollered, "Hey there, honey! How’s about gettin’ me a cold glass of Miller Light!" He, too, looked across the restaurant and asked, "Is that God’s boy over there?"

The waitress once more nodded, so the Democrat directed her to give Jesus a cold glass of beer. "On my bill," he said.

As Jesus got up to leave, he passed by the Republican, touched him and said, "For your kindness, you are healed." The Republican felt the strength come back into his legs, got up, and danced a jig out the door.

Jesus also passed by the Libertarian, touched him and said, "For your kindness, you are healed." The Libertarian felt his back straightening up, and he raised his hands, praised the Lord and did a series of back flips out the door.

Then Jesus walked towards the Democrat. The Democrat jumped up and yelled, "Don’t touch me! I’m collecting disability!"

Gambling for Education

By jason | October 28, 2004

Here is a letter I mailed to The Daily Oklahoman concerning the upcoming vote regarding Governor Henry’s Gambling for Education proposition:

Oklahoma voters are being bombarded with commercials admonishing us to vote for SQ 705 and 706 to create a state lottery. According to these spots, this lottery will save our schools, hopefully much better than liquor by the drink and parimutuel gambling. What they don’t tell you is the impact the lottery will have on the local economy. For every dollar spent on the lottery, that’s one less dollar that goes to a local retailer, which pays for such things as salaries and health benefits. For every dollar spent on the lottery in Oklahoma City, that’s 3.875 cents that doesn’t go to the city in sales tax, which pays for such things as policemen, firemen, etc. It’s also 4.5 cents that the state loses in sales tax, which supports a myriad of state programs. A vote for the lottery may be a vote for funding education, but it’s also a vote against funding our local retailers, and our police and fire departments.

Christians are different, right?

By jason | October 4, 2004

One of the things you hear preached is that Christ changes a person from the inside out, and I believe that to be true. In my own life, I can see the change being made, little by little. That change, though, is not wrought solely by the work of the Spirit. There has to be a decision made on the part of the Believer that he *wants* to be different. Sadly, we see many Christians who have either not made that decision, or have long since given up on it. To be fair, it’s a *hard* life. Whoever thinks that Christianity is for the weak needs to take a closer look at the faith, but I digress.

What makes me ask this question, are Christians truly different, is a discussion I was party to after Sunday School one SUnday morning. One of the ladies in my class commented on the length (or lack thereof) of the skirts and shirts in church (how’s that for quasi-assonance? :). Our (some would charge delicate) sensibilities were a little put off by the amout of skin that even Christian teens were showing. As we were lamenting this problem, a perfect example walked by: a skirt so short that bending over in public would not be decent.

While I realize that style of clothing is currently en vogue, we are called to a higher standard, and I need to be completely fair about this. This idea of setting ourselves apart a la Romans 12:1-2 applies to *every* area of our lives, public and private. Just as much as the racy dress of our youth is sending a bad message is the Christian body’s acceptance of smoking, excessive drinking, profane and immoral music and cinema, etc. We should strive to set ourselves apart from the culture’s decadence as part of our surrender of our lives to the high calling of Christ.

Now, don’t get me wrong. Being different for its own sake is pretty foolish (if blue is popular, wearing nothing but red proves nothing), and personal freedom is far too complex to boil down to my miniscule missive completely, so there are many factors to consider when pondering the point I’m trying to make. Take alcohol, for example. Personally, I don’t have much of a problem with it. If a Christian is a recovering or struggling alcoholic, he should probalby avoid it. In the words of Ted Kirkpatrick, "Just because it causes you to fall don’t [sic] mean it tempts me very much at all." However, since there are those who may stumble if they see me imbibing a "potent potable," I choose not too (see Paul’s discussion of meat sacrificed to idols in I Cor 8).

If we are to show that Christ’s indwelling is efficacious, if we are to show that Christianity is not a farce, then we *must* allow Christ to reign in all areas of our life: our clothing, our music, our movies and television, our dietary habits, etc. I don’t want this to sound like a call to legalism; I think legalism is a weed that chokes the life of out of the abundant life that Chirst brings. However, just because we are *free* to do something, does not mean that we *should* do something. The world needs to see that Christ does indeed change a man. Let’s get out of the way and let sanctification have its way.

Dive! Dive!

By jason | September 27, 2004

This weekend, in preparation for our upcoming jaunt to the islands of Hawaii and Kauai, I spent this last weekend doing scuba certification with Adventure Sports. Each day was spent in the class room, studying the minutia of diving, as well as time spent in both a swimming pool, for the closed-water dives, and a private "lake" for the open-water dives. The pool dives weren’t bad on the first day. It was an indoor pool, so the water was warm, and there was no wind. On Sunday, though, we dove in an outdoor pool, so the water was cool, and the wind ripped right through us (I say "us" as Angela came along for a refresher for her five year old certification). The lake dives were cold on both days — really cold — and got even colder as we dropped down to the bottom of the lake at about 20 – 25 feet. After two days of freezing in the water, though, I am now certified to dive up to an absolute maximum of 130 feet, with a recommended maximum of 100 feet. Although the water was really cold, I had a blast just being in the water. I can’t wait for Hawaii. 🙂

Should we pull out of public schools?

By jason | June 15, 2004

Cal Thomas, "America’s most widely syndicated op-ed columnist", recently wrote an article titled Giving ‘exodus’ a new meaning in which he discusses the debate among Southern Baptists about the overwhelmingly humanistic slant of government-run schools. I have heard a couple other authors and speakers discussing the ineffectiveness of the public school system. I’ve long held that there is very little that the government can do that the private sector can’t do better (those that make this short list are such Constitutional things as military defense, regulating commerce, etc). Not until recently have I begun to consider whether or not this idea could and/or should apply to public schools as well.

I’m not a big fan of home schooling, and neither is Angela. I question the capability of Joe and Jane Blow to teach as effectively as someone trained to do so (though there are obvious exceptions), but I’m sure that’s not really fair at all. We’ve always felt that it would better for children to spend time in a classroom with other children, as that would give them more social exposure, as well as giving them access to greater educational resources, especially in science. (Yes, I’m aware of home school groups and even studies that say my argument is not only not well founded, but possibly completely inaccurate. As more information of the sort comes out, I’m certainly open to revising my stance).

Private schools can have their own issues, though. In some schools, a larger portion of the population than I’d like is made up of kids who were kicked out of public schools. The net result is that you pay for the right to subject your kids to what you’re trying to avoid. Obviously, care must be taken in selecting a school.

But the question is this: should we, as Christian parents, pull our kids out of the often anti-Christian public school system? The more I think about it, the more I’m inclined to agree with the idea. Cal Thomas hit the nail on the head:

In an essay published last week at ethicsdaily.com, Shortt wrote, "Government schools are converting our children to alien creeds and infusing them with false and destructive values." Pinckney added, "God gives the responsibility for education of children to the parents, not the government." Indeed. And it has been the decision by too many parents to allow government to shape their children’s worldview and values that is responsible for spiritual and intellectual disorder that now inhabits the souls and minds of too many offspring of Christian parents.

He asserts, and rightly so, that too many parents leave the task of "shap[ing] their children’s worldview and values" to the schools. Whether in a public or a private school, it’s of the utmost importance that parents be heavily involved in the education process of their children, which Angela and I have every intention of doing. The rub for me is that I’m a product of the government school system. I did have, though, parents that were involved, a healthy, well-balanced church, and I grew up in Oklahoma, where the secular influence, while present, still seems to be heavily tempered by the (at least professed) Christian faith of the majority of the state’s residents. Are things bad enough in general and, more specifically, in Oklahoma to warrant the abandonment of the public school systems? I don’t know. If we had a voucher system the question would be much simpler. Since we don’t, I have some hard thinking to do. Luckily, I have a few years to figure it out. Time will tell…