why i currently don't attend "weekly"

this topic came from a comment in another blog concerning the (hopefully only temporary) sepration of the American Episcopal Church and the Anglican Community of Canada from the English Church (only the second such separation in history, the first being at the time of the Episcopal church's founding after the American Revolution; the brits were unsurprisingly unwilling to consecrate Amercan bishops -- but the Scottish Anglican church DID on the grounds that a few minor changes were made to the book of common prayer.  one such change is that there are 4 paragraphs in the Episcopal wedding prayer, the third of which is scottish in origin.  The original Anglican work only has 3.)

one of the reasons i went into self-imposed exile from the episcopal community was that it, like the country itself, was degrading into loud conservatism vs. loud liberalism in ways that had consequences for parishoners that I couldn't respect.  One example on the liberal side of going to far was the female bishop of DC.

( Read More... )

I retain my faith, and I retain my hope (as is my hope for the country) that the loud voices of extremism and rapid change vs. rabit reactionism will spend themselves and die down, and then maybe I'll return.

followup

Its very hard to be a moderate in communities where extremism (on either side) reigns.  Each side claims that to be against their opponents policies you must therefore be in favor of their own, the either-or curse.  Neither side recognizes compromise and can't imagine the middle ground that can lead to the right direction, in spite of its success in doing so for centuries.

But worse still, it makes it impossible to see the middle ground or alternative options yourself.  e.g., social security reform, where I think Bush's plan has problems, but so does saying it sucks without an alternative, but again so does saying an alternative that involve tax increases sucks by fiat.  No side is willing to discuss, but each merely repeats over and over again their now pre-programmed responses.

True creative solutions to problems come from give and take, from breaking the problem down into parts, and letting a new whole reveal itself.

In this, the Episcopal church is merely a microcosm of America as a whole.

my how i've grown...

on my hassles with linux media players...

i also am sick and tired of the "just recompile it" crap. we should be past that now. i lived that life in the 90s when it was the only way to do anything at all, and now, i'm sick of it. i'm not that kind of geek anymore; i've got better things to do with my time. this is what happens to geeks when they cross age 30, get married, and find things outside of computers to actually be involved in.

update -- not quite catching that particular paragraph, he tried to "console" this "poor windows supporter" (HAH!) that compiling from the source isn't all that bad a thing...finally, i had to pull the *real* age trump card just to make it clear to him:

look at my slashdot ID number (hint: it has 2 fewer *digits* than yours).

there are times i *really* love being one of slashdot's first 10,000.

rental car license check not the same as flying without an ID.

slashdot has an article about the EFF's John Gilmore going to court and being effectively grounded because he refused to carry (well, show, whether he carried or not) his ID before boarding a plane.  Turns out the law itself is consider "security secret" info and as such, while legally binding, nobody's technically allowed to reveal it.

this is, of course, a rediculous thing that NEEDS to be sued against.  it is a violation of due process because you simply don't have the ability to prepare a defense against a law you can't read. (to make matters worse, you have to sue the government to see the law, and in one instance, a prosecution was *dropped* against TSA baggage handlers because to have had the case go to court would have required revealing the security process, "protected" by the secrecy standard.)

however, there was a snide comment in the article itself, [other computer geeks] arrived in rental cars that required a valid driver's license and one major credit card.

I'd argue that the rental car contract is not the same thing as flying without an ID.

A rental car company is liable when it gives a vehicle away.  It is required to be postively sure that the individual is fully capable and legally permitted to drive the car, or else it WILL be sued in the event of an accident, insurance be damned.  Similarly, the credit card check is not to verify that the individual is what the ID says it is -- its to avoid having to do their own credit background check (minimum week or more delays and hefty increase in costs) in order to lend the car with the knowledge its going to someone likely to give it back.

they hold the credit card company responsible for dealing with that credit check and that cost, to save themselves the money and keep competitive.

both items are strictly business decisions that have no relation at all to the no flying without an ID law.