Sunday - December 12, 2004
Sunday Sermon
It’s Sunday and like a lot of Christians, my thoughts turn to God while I recover from my hangover (and pray to God that if he will help me get over this hangover, I will try not to do it again). Seriously, I was recently made privy to an e-mail from one of my friends as well as the heated reply he received from a member of our military. My friend asked me to help him reply to this heathen and, after three days of pondering, I finally put it all together and just e-mailed it back to him. I will now share this exchange with you in lieu of today’s sermon ....
Subject: THE LAW IS THE LAW
This is one of the better e-mails I have received in a long time!
I hope this makes its way around the USA several times over!!!! So Be It!
THE LAW IS THE LAW So if the US government determines that it is against the law for the words “under God” to be on our money, then, so be it.
And if that same government decides that the “Ten Commandments” are not to be used in or on a government installation, then, so be it.
And since they already have prohibited any prayer in the schools, on which they deem their authority, then so be it
I say, “so be it,” because I would like to be a law abiding US citizen.
I say, “so be it,” because I would like to think that smarter people than I are in positions to make good decisions.
I would like to think that those people have the American Publics’ best interests at heart.
BUT, YOU KNOW WHAT ELSE I’D LIKE?
Since we can’t pray to God, can’t Trust in God and cannot Post His Commandments in Government buildings, I don’t believe the Government and it’s employees should participate in the Easter and Christmas celebrations which honor the God that our government is eliminating from many facets of American life.
I’d like my mail delivered on Christmas, Good Friday, Thanksgiving & Easter. After all, it’s just another day.
I’d like the US Supreme Court to be in session on Christmas, Good Friday, Thanksgiving & Easter as well as Sundays. After all, it’s just another day.
I’d like the Senate and the House of Representatives to not have to worry about getting home for the “Christmas Break.” After all ~ it’s just another day
I’m thinking that a lot of my taxpayer dollars could be saved, if all government offices & services would work on Christmas, Good Friday & Easter.
It shouldn’t cost any overtime since those would be just like any other day of the week to a government that is trying to be “politically correct”.
In fact .... I think that our government should work on Sundays (initially set aside for worshipping God...) because, after all, our government says that it should be just another day....
What do you all think????
If this idea gets to enough people, maybe our elected officials will stop giving in to the minority opinions and begin, once again, to represent the ‘majority’ of ALL of the American people.
SO BE IT...........
Please Dear Lord, Give us the help needed to keep you in our country!
‘Amen’ and ‘Amen’ Touché!
These are definitely things I never thought about but from now on, I will! and I will be sure to questions those, in government, who support these changes I am one who is tired of these atheists and bleeding heart liberals who want nothing to do with our God, BUT WANT EVERY MINUTE OFF, FROM THEIR GOVERNMENT JOB, ETC. DURING OUR “PRECIOUS HOLIDAY” TIMES. I usually do not like to “forward” allot of stuff around in email, but this one is way to good to bury with the “delete” key. Let’s keep it alive. Pass it on! Please!
David H--------
Subject: RE: THE LAW IS THE LAW
1) The last time I checked, “under God” was never on U.S money. I believe the phrase is “In God We Trust”. Check your new bills you’ll find that the phrase “In God We Trust” is still on it.
2) The Ten Commandments were removed from a government installation because that installation was paid for by tax payers who are comprised of people of different faiths. Is it too much to ask to respect their feelings as well? Or maybe the answer is to keep the Ten Commandments and allow people of Islam, Judaism, Buddhism, and Hinduism to install their religious statues and icons in government buildings too?
3) Prayers are not prohibited in schools. In fact I know lots of kids who pray individually or in groups every day in school - especially just before a test! On the other hand, organized prayers are prohibited out of respect for those children who come from families of different faiths. Or maybe you wouldn’t mind it so much if a Muslim teacher led your children in prayer to Allah, facing Mecca 3 times a day?
4) “..elected officials will stop giving in to the minority opinions and begin, once again, to represent the ‘majority’ of ALL of the American people”
ALL of the American people are made up of ALL different faiths. Secondly, our American government isn’t just about ‘majority’ rule. Our forefathers created a balance between majority rule and minority rights to “protect government from itself and the corrupting potential of power. It is in the enlightened self-interest of the majority to protect the rights of the minority because one day the majority will find itself in the minority.”
5) “I am one who is tired of these atheists and bleeding heart liberals who want nothing to do with our God”
Please don’t pass on this kind of ignorance. Liberals with “bleeding hearts” love God too! Perhaps some people should just consider getting ‘a heart’ and refrain from making such generalized and groundless statements that only incites others to rage.
Lt Chong H. G--------
ACC/DPI
Subject: RE: RE: THE LAW IS THE LAW
1- You’re right. “Under God” does not appear on our money but it is in the Pledge Of Allegiance which is now being bitterly fought over by liberals as against the concept of “separation of church and state”. Isn’t this taking things a little too far? The founding fathers intent with the 1st Amendment was to prohibit the government from literally “establishing” a state religion like had been done in England with the Anglican Church, which was headed by the King, no less.
2- You miss the point. Posting the Ten Commandments in a judicial building is not an attempt to establish religion. It is the spirit of the Judeo-Chirstian religion that is being displayed. Do you have some sort of problem with the concepts of “Thou shalt not kill” or “Thous shalt not steal” or “Thou shalt not bear false witness”? These are good ideas and are the foundation of our legal system. The Ten Commandments are displayed all over the Supreme Court building in Washington, DC and the marble frieze on the front of the building depicts various lawgivers through history .. including Moses. Would you tear that building down also? You confuse respect for Judeo-Chirstian values with so-called “disrepect” of other religions. Au contraire! Most of the world’s other religions have the same guidelines and restrictions (as well as sharing racial memories of a “Great Flood"). How does displaying them in a Judeo-Christian content detract from other religions? And just because taxpayers from various religious groups paid for it doesn’t wash either. In our taxpayer-funded colleges, students are taking courses in Islam and Buddhism. I don’t object to that because it behooves us all to learn about other people’s worldviews.
3- Praying is indeed prohibited in schools unless one is doing it silently and no one else knows what you are doing. Christians believe in the words of Jesus Christ who said “For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.” (Matthew 18:20). Organized prayer is important to Christians, just as praying to Mecca is important to Muslims. I don’t have a problem with a Muslim student excusing him or herself from class to go pray toward Mecca five times daily. The point here is that schools should not be sterile environments where students have to leave their moral and personal beliefs at the door when they enter. Social interaction is a skill that we all develop as we grow up and learning to accomodate other people’s religions comes from being in contact with those people when they are practicing their religion. That is how tolerance is established, not by banning all contact between religious groups just because they are on “public ground”.
4- According to the 2000 Census, approximately 76.5% of the American population is Christian. Only 0.5% is Muslim and other religions are all in single-digits or less. The last time I checked, 76.5% is not just a majority but a quorum. Yes, there are other religions and their followers are neither targeted or prohibited in ANY WAY WHATSOEVER from practicing their religion. I know of no single piece of legislation in our recent history that denied a religious group the right to follow their religion any way they felt (unless you count the Mormon belief in multiple wives which the US legislature said was a “no-no” long ago). So how exactly are the rights of minority religious groups being inhibited? The answer is: they are not. What you are attempting to prohibit is their “exposure” to people with another religion, namely Christians - who by the way are 76.5% of the people in this country. Would you move to Jerusalem and complain that all those Jews worshiping in public offended you? Would you move to India and complain that all those Hindus reading the Bhagvat Gita in public offended you? Both countries are democracies with pretty much the same rules as we have here in the US. The point is that minorities gain absolutely nothing by complaining about groups that are in the majority unless those majority groups are somehow oppressing the minorities and, as I said above, no Christian is espousing any sort of oppression or suppression of Islam, Buddhism, Taoism or even atheism. It would be nice if we all agreed on the same God but if my neighbor down the street feels the need to call God “Allah” or “The Great Spirit”, then so be it. The only time which one of us is right becomes important occurs right after we die .. and no one has yet to find a way to come back and tell the rest of us which is correct.
5- Fact: “atheists” and “bleeding heart liberals” have been responsible for most of the recent attacks on Christians. We are not enraged (yet) at these attacks because as Christians we think we can reason with these people and teach them to “live and let live”. This is not “ignorance” as you so kindly state. It is a wish for tolerance of the majority by the minority. You develop rage at our insistence on dialogue to sort this problem out in a reasonable manner. If “liberals with bleeding hearts” love God so much, why be afraid to show it? If atheists love the thought of believing in nothing, why are they offended by my belief in a loving and caring God?
Your whole argument stems from many misconceptions but mainly from a desire to sterilize society of religion. Religion practiced in secret creates an environment where faith and belief are considered “bad things”. This is totally wrong. Religion, faith and belief are what gets us all through the dark times of life. HOW we practice those beliefs is not as important as the fact that we do practice them at all. Religion is part of our social fabric and serves to bind us together in a common belief that there is something better than all of us in charge of things. To order the people’s government to turn its back on the religion of the majority of “the people” is disingenuous at best. There is nothing wrong with the “government of the people, by the people and for the people” incorporating a religious group’s beliefs in its laws as long as they apply to all of its “people” fairly. Oppression of the minorities is not and never has been the issue when it comes to religion. It’s really all about twisting the meaning of the Constitution and our laws to suit the wishes of a small minority, isn’t it?
I have a better solution to our “problem”. Instead of tearing down all references to Judeo-Christian beliefs like the Ten Commandments, why not display them .. alongside similar tenets and beliefs from other religions. There are many very good life lessons and guidelines in the Koran, the teachings of Buddha and other religious works. They all share one thing in common though: the desire for all the peoples of the Earth to just get along with each other .. peacefully. So quieten your rage and learn a little tolerance, my friend. God (whoever he or she is) requires nothing less from all of us.
Peace. Love.
Allan
Posted by The Skipper
on 12/12/2004 at 05:45 PM
Filed Under: • Religion •
• Comments (5)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Saturday - December 04, 2004
News of Religious Tolerance
In India some tribal members converted to Christianity. Local rebels tortured them and forced them from their homes.
When I saw that the rebels were Naxalites I said to myself, “Self, who the FUCK are Naxalites?”
So I looked it up. Go here to read about them.
OBTW, they are funded by Communists. I’ve yet to figure out how Christianity has anything to do with their cause---the waging of a violent struggle on behalf of landless labourers and tribal people against landlords and others. Last I checked, Christians worked and helped those same people.
And Americans are the ones who are intolerant, eh?
We need to go back 2000 years for this instance of religious persecution but in Mexico they’ve found a tomb where people were decapitated and animals were sacrificed. Sounds like our buddies, the terrorists, in Iraq, huh?
Oh, and the place? It’s called the “city of the Gods!” That’s rich!
But still you will find no lack of assholes in this country who will blame the white man for bringing death and destruction to the “peaceful” native population. What BULLSHIT!!! These Indian assholes were as violent as anything we have today. Humanity does not change this quickly.
Plus, if we had not invaded America would be nothing more than another “deep Amazon” society of people gathering nuts and berries with the occasional human sacrifice thrown in to appease some stupid god of theirs because the moon got dark or the sun got dark or lightning struck twice or some such nonsense.
I was surprised to read this in the article:
“It also firmly contradicts earlier theories that Mexican civilizations were relatively peaceful and theocratic during this period.”
My point is made. Case closed.
If you like short skirts or you are homosexual, you better not go to Marawi City in the Philippines.
I found this to be disturbing:
“Since Marawi City is the only Islamic city in the country and a part of the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM), we have to comply with the culture, religion and tradition of the Muslims but without going against the country’s Constitution”
One need only see the disturbances caused by Islamic groups and the agenda of CAIR in the US to understand that it won’t be long before Muslims in the US will also be demanding autonomous regions, like Indian reservations, where they can do what they want.
It may be better to prove to the world we are as intolerant as they say we are by kicking all Muslims out now, huh?
Meanwhile, in Europe little girls are still being sexually mutilated in the name of Islam.
However, Europeans are more interested in calling the US a violent and oppressive imperialist power acting unilaterally to take out a peaceful man who never harmed any of them.
In this matter, European authorities (except the French--surprise!) are:
operating according to the progressive Party Line that disallows any criticism of Third World cultures in general—and Islamic culture in particular. Police officers, social workers, teachers, doctors and nurses operate under the social obligation not to report this crime.
And the ACLU? Instead of developing an international branch to condemn these actions, would rather sue to have the Boy Scouts accept homosexuals in their ranks. I guess it wasn’t bad enough that so many homosexuals made it into the Catholic Church and molested thousands of young boys. We gotta have them go after our scouts, too?
Posted by Ranting Right Wing Howler
on 12/04/2004 at 12:46 PM
Filed Under: • Religion •
• Comments (3)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Saturday - October 23, 2004
The Toilet as a Source of Religious Inspiration
This is just too freaky. Archaeologists think they’ve discovered the shitter Martin Luther sat on when he was:
inspired to argue that salvation is granted because of faith, not deeds.
I guess he spent a bunch of time on the throne since he suffered from constipation. Too bad Kerry and Edwards weren’t around then. Their health insurance plan would have guaranteed him tons of Metamucil, ex-lax, castor oil, etc.
Hell, the religious experience from taking all of those would have been something to see---if not smell!
Posted by Ranting Right Wing Howler
on 10/23/2004 at 07:26 PM
Filed Under: • Religion •
• Comments (0)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Friday - October 01, 2004
Anecdotal Proof That Republicans May Be On To Something
Maybe you’ve seen this. Seems a couple of senators have their panties in a wad about a mailing made in West Virginia and Arkansas implying liberals would ban the Bible if elected.
They are demanding apologies. They are fit to be tied. They call it ridiculous.
The question that begs asking is, “why didn’t the DNC apologize for all those ads put out by MoveOn.org or the fallacious movie by Michael, “Shithead Fatass” Moore?”
But that’s not really the point of this post.
Dummycraps scream about the Republican mailing yet when you read about a man ARRESTED for reading a Bible, then you will have no doubt that those mailings were on to something.
(note: I will concede that maybe the forum he chose may not have been the best but............ to ARREST him?)
Posted by Ranting Right Wing Howler
on 10/01/2004 at 12:02 PM
Filed Under: • Democrats-Liberals-Moonbat Leftists • Religion •
• Comments (1)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Thursday - July 15, 2004
Freedom Of Religion
OK, everyone. Buckle on your crash helmets and strap on the body armor. I am about to boldly go where I probably shouldn't go but I can't just let certain comments ride anymore. Today we are going to examine the First Amendment to the Constitution and how it applies to religion.Amendment IThere you have it. This amendment actually covers three topics: religion, speech and assembly. I propose to examine only the first of these .... through the eyes of the men who wrote it.
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.
But first, let me ask you to do a little research. I want you to examine the Declaration of Independence, the US Constitution, our currency, our laws and our public buildings. Tell me, how many times do you see a reference to "Jesus" or "Christ"? To the best of my knowledge there are none. I have checked everywhere, including The Federalist Papers, The Anti-Federalist Papers and every document associated with the Founding Fathers of our country. Yet they were all Christians, weren't they? Men who, without exception, believed in their personal salvation through Jesus Christ. So why this omission on their part?
It wasn't an oversight. It was intentional. Yet on the other hand, if you look at the above documents, laws, buildings and papers you find numerous references to "God". Most often referred to simply as "The Creator". Why did they do that? They did it out of a sense of humility and the understanding that there has to be a greater power than man or else this whole silly business of "life" is just a joke. However, with that said, nowhere did they say that everyone must worship God. They were merely acknowledging the presence of some kind of supreme being and other people could either acknowledge that fact or not and could call that supreme being whatever name they wished.
You have to keep in mind also the times the Founding Fathers lived in. This was a period known in the history of western civilization as the "Reformation". Sixteen hundred years after the birth of Christ, countless wars had been fought as first the Catholic Church and later the Anglican Church struggled with the political leaders for dominance.
The first revolt against the Catholic Church and its constant interference in political matters was by Martin Luther in 1517. The Catholic Church was rife with corruption and bribes, and meddling in the affairs of kingdoms was commonplace. The Pope could and did order Crusades and depose Kings and Queens at will.
Then along came Henry VIII who, in 1529, declared himself head of the English Church and thumbed his nose at the Pope. He later went on to marry, divorce and behead several wives but (and this is important) in 1534 he made a law called the "Act of Succession" in which everyone had to swear allegiance to Henry VIII as head of the English church. Thomas More, his Prime Minister and author of "Utopia", and John Fisher, saintly bishop of Rochester, refused to swear. They were both beheaded for their trouble. All in all, before Henry VIII died in 1547, he had around 60 people executed for religious reasons.
The next two hundred years would see the regency of England shift between Anglicans and Catholics, as well as numerous bloody wars over what the state religion should be and who should control it. In 1569 however, a new religious sect appeared in England. They were called "Puritans" because they wanted to purify the church. In 1593 the Puritans were outlawed and several hanged. The persecution of the Puritans continued into the 17th century when they finally packed up and left the country, going to the New World to found the Massachusetts Bay Colony in 1630. The Plymouth Colony was founded in 1620 by a group called "Separatists" who wanted to break away entirely from the Anglican Church. Meanwhile, in Virginia, the royal colony there was founded as an Anglican community and required to conform to the Church of England (though without a bishop, confirmations, ordinations, etc.).
Are you starting to get the picture yet? You have to understand all of this in order to understand the men who lived in these times and why they made the decisions they did. When they signed the Declaration Of Independence in 1776, two-thirds of the signers were nominal members of the Church of England, but they did not want the colonies to be governed by bishops. Many Anglicans fled to Canada or remained as Tories.
One final point, the framers of the Constitution used several models for their new government, the most noteable of which is the Magna Carta which the Barons of England had forced King John to sign in 1215 to establish some measure of control over the English monarchy. Do you know what the very first article of that document says? Here, read it yourself ....
(1) FIRST, THAT WE HAVE GRANTED TO GOD, and by this present charter have confirmed for us and our heirs in perpetuity, that the English Church shall be free, and shall have its rights undiminished, and its liberties unimpaired. That we wish this so to be observed, appears from the fact that of our own free will, before the outbreak of the present dispute between us and our barons, we granted and confirmed by charter the freedom of the Church's elections - a right reckoned to be of the greatest necessity and importance to it - and caused this to be confirmed by Pope Innocent III. This freedom we shall observe ourselves, and desire to be observed in good faith by our heirs in perpetuity.So here we have the Founding Fathers meeting in Philadelphia in 1787, with the history of church abuses and royal interference in the church fresh in their minds. We're talking about a state-sponsored church with a King or Queen as head of that church. A monarch who absolutely ruled their political and spiritual lives and who could have them beheaded if they practiced any religion other than the state ordained religion.
They decided, and rightly so, that this would be contrary to the new government they were designing so they made sure the First Amendment (first of the so-called "Bill Of Rights") stated quite clearly that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof". Quite plainly they said that Congress was outright denied the ability to establish a state-sponsored religion or to impinge on the rights of any religion the people chose to practice.
In my opinion, our modern secularists such as the ACLU have pushed things way too far and are interpreting the Constitution improperly. Banning Christmas displays from public ground and other such legal opinions are in effect "prohibiting the free exercise" of religion. This was not what the Founding Fathers intended. They simply wanted to keep the government out of the religion business. They did not envision a country where displays of religion would be outlawed. That is the kind of country they had escaped from.
With all that said, I might add that on one side of the equation we have the ACLU and the Socialists who are attempting to force people to practice their religion in seclusion and on the other side we have people like Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson who keep trying to force religion back into government. Both are dead wrong in my opinion and "We, The People" are being caught in the middle of a modern day war over religion that really should not be fought.
I say to all of them, "Leave us alone! If we want to pray, let us pray. If we don't want to pray, leave us in peace. If we want to put up a Christmas tree or celebrate Hannukah or Ramadan, then let us do so without interference. We want freedom of religion, not freedom from religion. That is what Jefferson, Franklin, Madison, Adams, Washington, et al. intended. If Congress tries to pass a law outlawing Islam or declaring the President head of the Baptist Church In America, then we'll call their hand and say "NO-NO!"
Otherwise, just .... let it be.
Posted by The Skipper
on 07/15/2004 at 06:08 PM
Filed Under: • Religion •
• Comments (8)
•
Trackbacks(1)
Permalink • Five Most Recent Trackbacks:
Once Again, The One And Only Post
(4 total trackbacks)
Tracked at iHaan.org
Thｅ advantage to having a guide with you is thɑt an expert will haѵe very first hand experience dealing and navigating the river with гegional wildlife. Tһomas, there are great…
On: 07/29/23 02:37
The Brownshirts: Partie Deux; These aare the Muscle We've Been Waiting For
(3 total trackbacks)
Tracked at head to the Momarms site
The Brownshirts: Partie Deux; These aare the Muscle We’ve Been Waiting For
On: 03/14/23 03:20
Vietnam Homecoming
(1 total trackbacks)
Tracked at 广告专题配音 专业从事中文配音跟外文配音制造，北京名传天下配音公司
专业从事中文配音和外文配音制作，北京名传天下配音公司 北京名传天下专业配音公司成破于2006年12月，是专业从事中 中文配音 文配音跟外文配音的音频制造公司，幻想飞腾配音网领 配音制作 有海内外优良专业配音职员已达500多位，可供给一流的外语配音，长年服务于国内中心级各大媒体、各省市电台电视台，能满意不同客户的各种需要。电话：010-83265555 北京名传天下专业配音公司…
On: 03/20/21 11:00
meaningless marching orders for a thousand travellers ... strife ahead ..
(1 total trackbacks)
Tracked at Casual Blog
[...] RTS. IF ANYTHING ON THIS WEBSITE IS CONSTRUED AS BEING CONTRARY TO THE LAWS APPL [...]
On: 07/17/17 08:28
a small explanation
(1 total trackbacks)
Tracked at yerba mate gourd
Find here top quality how to prepare yerba mate without a gourd that's available in addition at the best price. Get it now!
On: 07/09/17 07:07
DISCLAIMER
THE SERVICES AND MATERIALS ON THIS WEBSITE ARE PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE HOSTS OF THIS SITE EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ANY AND ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF SATISFACTORY QUALITY, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, WITH RESPECT TO THE SERVICE OR ANY MATERIALS.
Not that very many people ever read this far down, but this blog was the creation of Allan Kelly and his friend Vilmar. Vilmar moved on to his own blog some time ago, and Allan ran this place alone until his sudden and unexpected death partway through 2006. We all miss him. A lot. Even though he is gone this site will always still be more than a little bit his. We who are left to carry on the BMEWS tradition owe him a great debt of gratitude, and we hope to be able to pay that back by following his last advice to us all:
It's been a long strange trip without you Skipper, but thanks for pointing us in the right direction and giving us a swift kick in the behind to get us going. Keep lookin' down on us, will ya? Thanks.
- Keep a firm grasp of Right and Wrong
- Stay involved with government on every level and don't let those bastards get away with a thing
- Use every legal means to defend yourself in the event of real internal trouble, and, most importantly:
- Keep talking to each other, whether here or elsewhere
THE INFORMATION AND OTHER CONTENTS OF THIS WEBSITE ARE DESIGNED TO COMPLY WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. THIS WEBSITE SHALL BE GOVERNED BY AND CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND ALL PARTIES IRREVOCABLY SUBMIT TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE AMERICAN COURTS. IF ANYTHING ON THIS WEBSITE IS CONSTRUED AS BEING CONTRARY TO THE LAWS APPLICABLE IN ANY OTHER COUNTRY, THEN THIS WEBSITE IS NOT INTENDED TO BE ACCESSED BY PERSONS FROM THAT COUNTRY AND ANY PERSONS WHO ARE SUBJECT TO SUCH LAWS SHALL NOT BE ENTITLED TO USE OUR SERVICES UNLESS THEY CAN SATISFY US THAT SUCH USE WOULD BE LAWFUL.
Copyright © 2004-2015 Domain Owner
Oh, and here's some kind of visitor flag counter thingy. Hey, all the cool blogs have one, so I should too. The Visitors Online thingy up at the top doesn't count anything, but it looks neat. It had better, since I paid actual money for it.
RSS 2.0 
Atom 
