The Journal

What really annoys me at the moment is this stupid idea that you like either PCs or Macs, not both (according to my friend Michel). OK this article is a waste of data but i have to write this down somewhere. Now, I’m going to be honest, I prefer macs, have less problems, work faster, don’t blow up very often and don’t come up with pop-ups saying ‘Unspecified Error’. But I have no problems with a PC…that works properly.

At work experience, I had more than work experience, I had computer experience (yes this was in August, but I still remember it). On the first two days, I was working in the Inside-Out Magazine area with these honking great hunks of Apple handiwork, the Mac Pro. Brand new, 10.5.x (can’t remember exactly), soft-touch keyboards, large screen, fast as. Great to work with, I could type like a rocket transcribing and not have to wait for the computer to catch up and I could access my .Mac account.

This all ended on the other three days when lovely Klaudyna introduced me to the ‘Printing Computer’. Ooo-boy. Seriously, this thing takes three minutes LITERALLY just to load the printing preferences, plus the other three to load the PDF file for printing then another three to actually send to the printer. I spent the whole first half of the third day printing out a 20-page magazine, then the rest printing out A5 minis for the cork-board.

But of course, their is a downside to everything, even to wonderful Macs. Macs can’t handle stupid file types that only work on PCs and causes me great heartache when I’m trying to use something I did on Publisher on PC, or use a program that uses .exe files (correct me if I’m wrong Michel) so I can’t use my games on my PowerPC iBook G4. A whole 72GBs going to waste on some crappy programs (save for Pac Man, LimeWire and Firefox) and documents.

Well that’s my rant for today (I was bothered to write something…), leave a message!

Yeah, weird title, I know, but there’s always something hypocritical to whinge about. Part one of our series on hypocrisy is fundamentalist Christians, and I will use the examples of exclusion and over-ceremony.

It was leaving the Papal Mass on the Sunday of World Youth Day that I experienced my first ultra-conservative Catholic. Yes, I had SEEN them, MET one or two, but not actually had a conversation with one. Didn’t even realise there was one with us until I opened my big mouth about one of the more conservative members of the Mt. Carmel World Youth Day pilgrimage group, and comparing myself (the liberal, new Catholic) with him. Not wanting to draw attention to myself, I just mentioned I disagree with some of what the Church says (I disagree with a lot of stuff, this is what the article is about) like contraception and rejection of gays, because some of my friends are gay and lesbian.
Me: “I just think that there’s nothing wrong with them, they can’t choose who they are attracted to, from what my friends tell me.”
Gal: “I see, a case of hate the sin, not the sinner?”
*Slight pause*
Me: “Yeah, totally…” *BA-BOW*

Now, from what I remember, Jesus welcomed the outcasts, from lepers to tax collectors to his friend Peter’s mother-in-law, not said “Hate the sin, not the sinner.” One of his closest friends was Mary Magdalene, a supposed prostitute. Also, the Church (well most of it) acknowledges that non-heterosexuals can’t decide who they like, or want to be. So for a supposed Christian to reject someone for their differences is definitely hypocritical in my books. To be honest, it wouldn’t surprise me if one of the apostles was gay or another of Jesus’ good friends. Knowing Jesus, he would have sought him or her out and had dinner with them, talking to them, keeping them company. And if God is a God of love, why is everyone who isn’t fundamentalist damned? Is it only if you are exclusive that you are included? Please show me the logic, anybody.

Now to my other point of over-ceremony. At my church, we have an order of monks, the Carmelites, running the show. They are lovely people, but couldn’t stand up for themselves against a wet newspaper. There is some lovely person on the liturgy committee that thinks because he has a masters degree in some religious hoo-haa, has the authority to be making decisions about how mass is run at church. In one month, I saw at least 5 changes to the way we do things at mass, and really stupid, unnecessary ones too. If you don’t follow them you get humphed at by the resident humphers. Seriously, if God (or anyone sane for that matter) cared how we did mass, then I think it would be part of the Bible.

Well I’ve finished my whinge session, leave a comment.

I thought it would be good for my readers to know my opinions on every controversial/normal/trivial/etc. topic I could think of before 8.30 (that’s when my brain says “F*ck this, put something better on!”). So here goes…

• Animals rights: Yes, animals have rights, but so do humans. We should worry more about the dignity of humans before we worry too much about ‘liberating’ animals. I believe in animal conservation, but we should not go so far as to harm each other, mainly because it’s hypocritical.
• Religion, God, etc.: I going to admit, I’m a bit churchy, but not because I’m in love with the Pope or anything like that. I pray and go to church and such because I love God and Jesus and Mary (Jesus’ mother). My philosophy is that if it’s hurting others and it’s hurting you, then you shouldn’t do it. If religion gets to a point where it harms rather than helps, then it becomes political, not faith. Also, religion should never be an excuse to not do something which will help others or just needs to be done. I have nothing against other religions, actually, I think I use the most beautiful parts of every religion in the way I live.
• The Environment: I believe that global warming is happening, and that we should do what we can to help slow it, without harming people’s livelihoods. I think that we should conserve important parts of the environment for our future generations as much as we can too. Like I said about animal rights though, we should not harm others to help the environment.
• Government: I’m an avid newspaper reader and I enjoy getting up to date with what the Australian governments are getting up to, and world governments as well. I have my own philosophy on government; that governments are governing bodies, not moral guiders. They should focus more on running the country and keeping us from our right to freedom of life being violated than making sure that we do what they decide is normal.
• Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transsexual (a.k.a LGBT) rights: Being gay myself, I’m all for AT THE VERY LEAST same-sex civil unions, and same-sex couples having children. Religion should not influence how a country is run, unless the religion is a very important part of people’s lives. In Australia, there are too many religions to please, so please none, and anyway, only 37% of Aussies oppose same-sex marriage.

Well, that’s all I can really think of now but if you ask about anything, I will answer in time.