one more

This one I am particularly proud of: it is a response to Byron Beck (Willamette Week's Queer Window) branding all Christians homophobic gay bashers.

I'm sure Byron Beck is a very nice man, I've never met him. I am also sure that in his recent article regarding going "back in the closet" he was referring specifically to the intolerant and bigoted Christians and not the entire population. It's just a symptom of the air regarding religion among the hipster, too-cool-for-God population of Portland (not hatin' on PDX, I'm a native). It's gotten so I'm afraid to admit I believe anymore, because I don't want to be lumped in with the bible-thumpers. Now there are quite a few points on which they and I disagree, but as it pertains to Byron Beck, the Defense of Marriage Council does not speak for me, and frankly, I don't think they speak for Jesus. At issue is whether or not Jesus (or God) approves of homosexuality, and if that approval is grounds for crusade for legislation. The visible religious right claim that it is reprehensible in the creator's eyes (although I'm not sure I agree) but EVEN if that were the case, their crusade for prohibitive legislation is entirely contrary to the message Jesus preached, one of tolerance, love, and understanding. The distinguishing factor of Jesus' brand of tolerance as opposed to all the others that have been offered was the unique idea that we show tolerance and patience with what we DON'T understand. I believe that is also, incidentally the foundation of the first amendment, but that's another argument. I'm quite convinced that even if- especially if- Jesus (or God) disapproved of homosexuality (which, again, I'm not sure is the case) he would still support the RIGHT of gays, lesbians, and any consenting adults to live and let live. Jesus supports GAY RIGHTS. PS Can the Blazer's catch an f'ing break?

I’m a nerd and, uh, I’m pretty proud of it.

<br>So this is my desktop<br><img src="http://i143.photobucket.com/albums/r134/aclauer/desktop.jpg">This is much more complicated than a simple nerd's replication of a federation computer interface. A lot of work went into putting this desktop together, as it is not just beautiful, but also functional. The reason I think you might care is that the software that went into it is all free and widely available.<br><br>First, check out the date/time at the bottom of the screen. That is a live calendar and clock embedded into the desktop. The tool I did this with can actually do a whole lot more, but to get this effect the date and time was all I wanted. The program is called <br><br><a href="http://www.msplinks.com/MDFodHRwOi8vd3d3LnNhbXVyaXplLmNvbS9tb2R1bGVzL25ld3Mv" target="_self">Samurize</a><br><br>and it is pretty neat. I have seen people embed media players, pictures, and lots of other stuff. Look around on the website for examples.<br><br>Using a simple registry mod I have removed the recycle bin to make way for everything else.<br><br>Now for what you really want to know about, those menus. They are FULLY functional. Those are actual tabs on the sides, each with full menus of applications.<br><br><img src="http://i143.photobucket.com/albums/r134/aclauer/desktop-1.jpg"><br><br>Now see the flyout menu when I click the folder? It displays the entire contents!<br>This magic was done with a program called <br><br><a href="http://www.msplinks.com/MDFodHRwOi8vd3d3LnN0YXJkb2NrLmNvbS9wcm9kdWN0cy9vYmplY3Rkb2NrLw==" target="_self">Objectdock</a><br><br>It is a program to create 'Mac OsX' like docks. Now admittedly I did this with the pro version, which I stole from www.ddl2.com, but I recommend that if you get software from this website you scan it with your virus software because it is often bad. It took a lot of playing around and downloading themes and such to get this done, and now&nbsp; I don't really know what I've accomplished, but it sure is neat!!!<br><br>

another big idea

When I come across something that I wrote in the past I am often surprised by how articulate and eloquent I can sometimes be. Sometimes I write letters to the editor, sometimes I respond to opinion blogs, etc. When I am able to recover them, I post them on this blog so I'll have a record. Anyway, this one I wrote in response to this:

http://blog.wired.com/biotech/2006/12/do_you_have_a_b.html

an article propigating the ridiculous and dangerous notion that there are genetic- not environmental- sex differences in the brain.:

The idea that there are, in fact, biological differences between male and female brains is almost exclusively American, supported by American data. The global research on the subject ranges from slightly dissonant to completely contradictory, in some cases providing exactly opposite conclusions as to the inherent tendencies and strengths of gendered thinking (verbal and linguistic vs. mathematical and spatial being the major distinction usually applied). Further, much of the data which supports these long held American conclusions is from earlier times when the socialization of activities and occupations was largely delineated down gender lines, a fact which provides more than enough alternative causation for gender differences. It is important to consider the ramifications of any notion that there are differences in the brains of the genders before casually perpetuating these unfounded American myths.