Battleground God...
Sep. 28th, 2003 08:53 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
skkyechanWow, this is really interesting! Unfortunately, I think I took more damage than I should have. Here are my points of contention-- and the logic that supports my decision!
[LJ-CUT text="Ouch..."]
You're under fire!
You don't think that it is justifiable to base one's beliefs about the external world on a firm, inner conviction, paying no regard to the external evidence, or lack of it, for the truth or falsity of this conviction. But in the previous question you rejected evolutionary theory when the vast majority of scientists think both that the evidence points to its truth and that there is no evidence which falsifies it. Of course, many creationists claim that the evidential case for evolution is by no means conclusive. But in doing so, they go against scientific orthodoxy. So you've got to make a choice:
Bite the bullet and say there is evidence that evolution is not true, despite what the scientists say.
Take a direct hit and say that this is an area where your beliefs are just in contradiction.
Needless to say, I bit the bullet on that one. Didn't affect my health any-- which it shouldn't, darn it!
Question 11
People who die of horrible, painful diseases need to die in such a way for some higher purpose.
My answer: True. I really don't like the way they word this question, as it has the potentiallity to really skew someones answer-- as we soon see.
You've just bitten a bullet!
Many people cannot accept what you have just accepted; namely, that a loving God - a God who possesses great power and insight - has created the world in such a way that people need to suffer horribly for some higher purpose.
Well, just because people cannot accept what I have just accepted doesn't mean I'm in the logistical wrong, so to speak. And, correction-- He didn't create the world in a way where pain, suffering, and death, is required. That's Evolution's tale. God created a perfect world, and we screwed it up. And continue to screw it up. So, hardly fair to claim that it's okay under one auspice (evolution) but not under another (Creation)-- but that's probably because it would be our fault in the latter.
There is no logical contradiction in your position, but some would argue that it is obscene. Could you really look someone dying of a horrible flesh-eating disease in the eye, and tell them that their suffering is for the greater good of themselves or the world?
Oh, and telling them that their suffering is completely for naught, and it doesn't matter anyway because their genetic/lucky lottery just happened to fail them? I mean, that's what Evolution would say. Sorry, you're a genetic dead-end. No consolation prize, either. Aaaand, God doesn't want His creation to suffer. Aaaaaaaand, He gives us the ultimate way out-- through Him, into Heaven. So, whatever suffering we happen to go through in this world will be nothing compared to an eternity of joy. I could go on in more detail, but it would take more theological and philosophical work than I have the mental capacity for at the moment.
No fair, since I took slight damage on that one.
Question 12
If God exists she could make it so that everything now considered sinful becomes morally acceptable and everything that is now considered morally good becomes sinful.
My answer: False-- however, only if we're talking about my God, the God of the Bible.
You've just taken a direct hit!
You claimed earlier that there is no basis for morality if God does not exist.
And I stand by that claim!
But now you say that if God does exist, she cannot make what is sinful good and vice-versa. But if this is true, it means that God cannot be the basis of morality. If God were the basis of morality, then she could decide what is good and what is bad. The fact that you think that God cannot do this shows that things must be right or wrong independently of what God decides. In other words, God chooses what is right because it is right; things are not right just because God chooses them.
I would argue that this goes against the very nature of God, and all He stands for. If the Bible says that God is perfect, just, loving, and a God of Order-- not chaos-- (among other things) then He would not make murdering good and worshipping bad. That would go against His nature, and therefore be a contradiction-- something that could not happen if He was perfect.
Question 13
It is foolish to believe in God without certain, irrevocable proof that God exists.
Oh, that is such a loaded question. It depends on what proof one is willing to accept.
Question 16
If God exists she would have the freedom and power to create square circles and make 1 + 1 = 72.
Another tricky one. I really don't like the question-- there's really no logical answer when you consider reality. It's just a big 'What If' question meant to trip you up.
You've just taken a direct hit!
You say that God does not have the freedom and power to do impossible things such as create square circles, but in an earlier answer you said that any being which it is right to call God must be free and have the power to do anything. So, on your view, God is not free and does not have the power to do what is impossible. This requires that you accept - in common with most theologians, but contrary to your earlier answer - that God's freedom and power are not unbounded. He does not have the freedom and power to do literally anything.
Again, I stand by the observation that God is a God of order and logic-- not chaos. While He certainly would be able to create a universe and have it function under those principles-- that is not how He chose to do it. Entertaining the idea of God creating illogical circumstances--as far as we can see it--goes against logic itself. This quiz is full of anti-Christian umbrella statements. ;p
In short, I survived with the TPM service medal.
"You have been awarded the TPM service medal! This is our third highest award for outstanding service on the intellectual battleground.
The fact that you have progressed through this activity without suffering many hits suggests that whilst there are inconsistencies in your beliefs about God, on the whole they are well thought-out.
The direct hits you suffered occurred where your answers implied logical contradictions. You did bite a number of bullets. These occurred because you responded in ways that required that you held views that most people would have found strange, incredible or unpalatable. At the bottom of this page, we have reproduced the analyses of your direct hits and bitten bullets.
The fact that you did not suffer many hits means that you qualify for our third highest award. Well done!"
So, yeah. While it's a very interesting quiz, it's too heavily biased against those who actually believe in the God of the Bible for my liking. One of the stats was that "46.71% of the people who have completed this activity took very little damage and were awarded the TPM Medal of Distinction." I'd be willing to bet money that most of those people are atheist.
[LJ-CUT text="Ouch..."]
You're under fire!
You don't think that it is justifiable to base one's beliefs about the external world on a firm, inner conviction, paying no regard to the external evidence, or lack of it, for the truth or falsity of this conviction. But in the previous question you rejected evolutionary theory when the vast majority of scientists think both that the evidence points to its truth and that there is no evidence which falsifies it. Of course, many creationists claim that the evidential case for evolution is by no means conclusive. But in doing so, they go against scientific orthodoxy. So you've got to make a choice:
Bite the bullet and say there is evidence that evolution is not true, despite what the scientists say.
Take a direct hit and say that this is an area where your beliefs are just in contradiction.
Needless to say, I bit the bullet on that one. Didn't affect my health any-- which it shouldn't, darn it!
Question 11
People who die of horrible, painful diseases need to die in such a way for some higher purpose.
My answer: True. I really don't like the way they word this question, as it has the potentiallity to really skew someones answer-- as we soon see.
You've just bitten a bullet!
Many people cannot accept what you have just accepted; namely, that a loving God - a God who possesses great power and insight - has created the world in such a way that people need to suffer horribly for some higher purpose.
Well, just because people cannot accept what I have just accepted doesn't mean I'm in the logistical wrong, so to speak. And, correction-- He didn't create the world in a way where pain, suffering, and death, is required. That's Evolution's tale. God created a perfect world, and we screwed it up. And continue to screw it up. So, hardly fair to claim that it's okay under one auspice (evolution) but not under another (Creation)-- but that's probably because it would be our fault in the latter.
There is no logical contradiction in your position, but some would argue that it is obscene. Could you really look someone dying of a horrible flesh-eating disease in the eye, and tell them that their suffering is for the greater good of themselves or the world?
Oh, and telling them that their suffering is completely for naught, and it doesn't matter anyway because their genetic/lucky lottery just happened to fail them? I mean, that's what Evolution would say. Sorry, you're a genetic dead-end. No consolation prize, either. Aaaand, God doesn't want His creation to suffer. Aaaaaaaand, He gives us the ultimate way out-- through Him, into Heaven. So, whatever suffering we happen to go through in this world will be nothing compared to an eternity of joy. I could go on in more detail, but it would take more theological and philosophical work than I have the mental capacity for at the moment.
No fair, since I took slight damage on that one.
Question 12
If God exists she could make it so that everything now considered sinful becomes morally acceptable and everything that is now considered morally good becomes sinful.
My answer: False-- however, only if we're talking about my God, the God of the Bible.
You've just taken a direct hit!
You claimed earlier that there is no basis for morality if God does not exist.
And I stand by that claim!
But now you say that if God does exist, she cannot make what is sinful good and vice-versa. But if this is true, it means that God cannot be the basis of morality. If God were the basis of morality, then she could decide what is good and what is bad. The fact that you think that God cannot do this shows that things must be right or wrong independently of what God decides. In other words, God chooses what is right because it is right; things are not right just because God chooses them.
I would argue that this goes against the very nature of God, and all He stands for. If the Bible says that God is perfect, just, loving, and a God of Order-- not chaos-- (among other things) then He would not make murdering good and worshipping bad. That would go against His nature, and therefore be a contradiction-- something that could not happen if He was perfect.
Question 13
It is foolish to believe in God without certain, irrevocable proof that God exists.
Oh, that is such a loaded question. It depends on what proof one is willing to accept.
Question 16
If God exists she would have the freedom and power to create square circles and make 1 + 1 = 72.
Another tricky one. I really don't like the question-- there's really no logical answer when you consider reality. It's just a big 'What If' question meant to trip you up.
You've just taken a direct hit!
You say that God does not have the freedom and power to do impossible things such as create square circles, but in an earlier answer you said that any being which it is right to call God must be free and have the power to do anything. So, on your view, God is not free and does not have the power to do what is impossible. This requires that you accept - in common with most theologians, but contrary to your earlier answer - that God's freedom and power are not unbounded. He does not have the freedom and power to do literally anything.
Again, I stand by the observation that God is a God of order and logic-- not chaos. While He certainly would be able to create a universe and have it function under those principles-- that is not how He chose to do it. Entertaining the idea of God creating illogical circumstances--as far as we can see it--goes against logic itself. This quiz is full of anti-Christian umbrella statements. ;p
In short, I survived with the TPM service medal.
"You have been awarded the TPM service medal! This is our third highest award for outstanding service on the intellectual battleground.
The fact that you have progressed through this activity without suffering many hits suggests that whilst there are inconsistencies in your beliefs about God, on the whole they are well thought-out.
The direct hits you suffered occurred where your answers implied logical contradictions. You did bite a number of bullets. These occurred because you responded in ways that required that you held views that most people would have found strange, incredible or unpalatable. At the bottom of this page, we have reproduced the analyses of your direct hits and bitten bullets.
The fact that you did not suffer many hits means that you qualify for our third highest award. Well done!"
So, yeah. While it's a very interesting quiz, it's too heavily biased against those who actually believe in the God of the Bible for my liking. One of the stats was that "46.71% of the people who have completed this activity took very little damage and were awarded the TPM Medal of Distinction." I'd be willing to bet money that most of those people are atheist.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
View from a sideliner.....
Date: 2003-10-01 08:48 am (UTC)I also find it highly interesting that because of your faith in the Biblical God, you can find no faith in Evolution. I find that interesting because my faith in God is proven to me by evolution.
hmm.. I tend to stray away from conversations like this, because I always feel half armed. Erin's got all the beautiful quotes and statistics, I only have what I feel and find to be true to my best judgement.
Couple points I did want to touch on, that you an Erin went through. I'm gonna ask for your forgiveness in advance, because I'm C&P'ing out of context here...
How can we tell if a man is good or not? We can't-- only God can.
Exactly. So how can any Christian come up to me and tell me I'm bad if they cannot judge me? That is the main bone of contetion that I have with many religions. You cannot see into my heart, I cannot see into yours. So I judge you by your actions, and if your actions are not something I can agree with, I simply leave you alone. Well, okay, I'll also make sure you can't hurt anyone else, but I also do not try to make you change yourself. Trust me on this, I'm the one who lives in the bible belt, Christians are very big about making you change yourself to fit their ideals.
If you take God out of the picture, then morality is relative.
Morality is subjective. Atheists and Agnostics can sometimes be the most moral of people because they have strong believes on social order themselves. You brought up the point about a certain tribe of Eskimos believing that promiscuity and rape were moraly okay. This is a cultural distinction. I'm sure if you brought up the full cultural mores of the tribe, some would match Christianity, some would not. Each societal group comes up with their own mores. But a lot of the basics are the same. Thou shalt not kill, thou shalt not steal, do unto others, as you would have them do unto you.
Cultural mores evolve as well. A mere hundred years ago, there were quite a few devout biblical christians running around, preaching that women had no souls, that other races were sub-human, etc.
Actually, I could go on with this, but I want to sum up to one thing before I run out of room. Religion, morality, and social constraints depend on only one thing. A person's free will to choose. Each person, as they learn throughout life, from their parents, their church, their schools, their experiences, they choose what they will believe in. A lot of it is subconcious, they don't even realize that they've chosen to believe in something until that belief is called into question.
I choose to believe that God lets things happen in this world because he gave us free will. Once he gave us free will, he could no longer step in and say this is right or wrong. He then became a spectator. Right down through history, right down to the evolutionist's single cell organizm becoming a multi celled organizm and thus the basic level of life on earth, each creature has had free will, choice in what was to happen to it. My dog Sadie each night chooses to sleep on the sofa, on the floor, or in the bed with me. She has her reasons to choose each one, or not choose each one. Genetically she is the same species as a wild wolf, at least 98% of her genetics. If there is no such thing as evolution, why is it I have a German Shepherd, a created breed, on my sofa rather than a wolf? Incidentally, the bone structure and jaw alignment is more superior in a wolf than in my bebe. :)
more in the next post.. dang I got wordy.
Re: View from a sideliner.....
Date: 2003-10-01 08:48 am (UTC)My main problem with religeons is that they are man made. Perhaps inspired by God, but written and practiced by man who has proven himself very fallible. Anything I read I take with a grain of salt. I question everything. I do however, believe that people can choose to be good, or to be evil. There are people in this world, that I know personally, that I would recommend as saints over the most holy of priests or preachers. Admitted, most of them are in the canine circles. People who give their time, money, hearts, love, and homes to help rescue dogs out of bad situations and certain deaths and get those same dogs to places they can heal, learn, and find new homes. These people give of themselves to make admends for what other, crueler people have done. Animal Planet is full of people like them. There are also the people who donate their time and money to help other people, like the doctors who do tours in low income areas here in the states, and travel abroad to third world countries to help people there. people who build bridges, donate computers, simply giving of themselves.
And if you say these people do not exist, even in LA, then you're not looking in the right places. If I remember correctly, you're working in a public museum on that backbone? Take a break, walk through the museum. I bet you just might find a teacher taking children through a guided tour. That's humanity at a high point. Walk the other streets, through other neighborhoods. The latinos have a very involved society, built around family rather than jobs and the mainstream society. Volunteer at a soup kitchen and look at the people who are working there with you. Are those the type of people you're looking for? If so, look at where you just found them.
you make fun of your home town sometimes, but I bet socially, it is vastly different from LA. You cannot judge LA by what you grew up with.
Gah.. I got windy and wordy there, sorry. ::hugs:: now I gotta use my free choice in hitting "comment" or closing the window. hmm... guess you figured out what my choice was, huh?
... time to sleep now?
Date: 2003-10-02 04:42 am (UTC)...Which is an excellent way to approach this! I'd just like to suggest a few points for you to mull over, if you're ever pondering about this... Religions are man-made, yes. They're man trying to reach out to god(s). I would propose that Christianity is a) more of a 'relationship,' and b) is God reaching out to man. And, yes-- man is very fallible. That's where you get the 'women have no souls,' 'not all races are equal,' 'Day-Age theory,' 'Gap-theory,' the Crusades, etc. It's when men stray from the Word of God-- which was not only inspired, but edited by God-- that Christianity goes haywire. It's when it's people using Christianity as an umbrella, a banner to wave, instead of actually following it, that things go bad.
There are people in this world, that I know personally, that I would recommend as saints over the most holy of priests or preachers.
Heh, and God sees and acknowledges that, too. Those who serve heap up treasures in Heaven-- but, you have to get to Heaven first! That's where Jesus comes in... 'Cuz since everyone's sinned, we've all fallen short of God. Since God's perfect, He can't be near sin. So, we've got to make propitiation. Jesus was the only man born of a woman who lived a perfect life-- and so, He was the only one perfect enough to pay for all our sins. Therefore, He died, and put His blood in our bank-account, so to speak. So, you can either take that blood and use it to pay off your loans-- or, you can't. 'Cuz nothing you can do can even come close-- not even being so wonderfully kind, to people or animals, as any of the people you mentioned. You can't get into Heaven by good works-- you can't earn your way. And it's a good thing, too! 'Cuz if it was a system of credits and demerits, everyone's demerits would outnumber the credits soooo bad! Everyone, not the preachers nor pastors nor Humane-Society workers nor bridge-builders, not you nor I nor my family I love so much, would be able to earn our way into Heaven. That's why Jesus is so cool. :)
And if you say these people do not exist, even in LA, then you're not looking in the right places.
Well, you're right. I was being dramatic. The people do exist-- it's just there's so many people who fall in the 'other' category, the 'good' people make up a tiny percentage of the populace.
If I remember correctly, you're working in a public museum on that backbone? Take a break, walk through the museum. I bet you just might find a teacher taking children through a guided tour. That's humanity at a high point.
Not all teachers are saints-- however, the ones that are there and truly care for the welfare of the kids-- those are my kind of heroes.
Volunteer at a soup kitchen and look at the people who are working there with you. Are those the type of people you're looking for? If so, look at where you just found them.
n_____________n
you make fun of your home town sometimes, but I bet socially, it is vastly different from LA. You cannot judge LA by what you grew up with.
I do make fun of my town-- but in the same way I make fun of my sister. Sometimes I'm exasperated, sometimes I'm angry-- but I always love her. n__n And it is a lot different than L.A.... A lot less selfish, although you can still see it there.
I got windy and wordy there, sorry. ::hugs::
Yay for hugs! And I like you windy and wordy-- that's the best part of being friends with writers! ;D
now I gotta use my free choice in hitting "comment" or closing the window. hmm... guess you figured out what my choice was, huh?
And I'm so glad you chose 'comment'! I never want you to, out of fear of my response, at least, censor yourself or be afraid to say something. What good does that do anyone? Especially not you or me! n__n Thanks so much for sharing, Bren!
Sorry Erin!
Date: 2003-10-02 04:07 am (UTC)First, I'd like to apologize-- re-reading through some of my posts I realized there's a bit of an arrogant air... I'll really try not to come at this as a "I'm gonna prove you're wrong so I can feel good about myself" thing-- which wasn't really my intention, but it was part of my character so long, and it's hard to get old ghosts to die. I'm really just very curious about what you two have to say, and I get very passionate about my own views. I'll try and keep intellect in the driver's seat more often than passion. ;)
With that said, on to commenting!
just curious, would you happen to have a link to this site? I'm curious enough to take it and see what answer I came up with.
Just in case Erin hasn't given it to you in an AIM/e-mail conversation yet, it's right here (http://www.philosophers.co.uk/games/god.htm).
I tend to stray away from conversations like this, because I always feel half armed. Erin's got all the beautiful quotes and statistics, I only have what I feel and find to be true to my best judgement.
Hee, tell me about it! Erin, you've got me fairly well intimidated! Well, you kind of always have... n__n;;
So how can any Christian come up to me and tell me I'm bad if they cannot judge me?
Well, this brings up two slightly opposite responses in me. On the one hand, no one in the world is wholly good. While people may be partly good, or somewhat good, or pretty-darn-good-at-this-moment-in-time, no one's completely without blame--including the Christian who's telling you you're bad! If they're not coming up to you and talking to you with love in their hearts, they need to be told to take that beam out of their eye first! (Matt 7:3) Sounds like a lot of cultural-Christians (those who believe in 'Churchianity', as my pastor would say) need to actually start living Biblically and begin practicing Jesus-Christianity.
Well, okay, I'll also make sure you can't hurt anyone else, but I also do not try to make you change yourself.
What if you see someone you care about living in a way that hurts themselves? Do you talk to alcoholics? To people addicted to drugs? Don't you want to talk to them, help them out of their own problems?
You brought up the point about a certain tribe of Eskimos believing that promiscuity and rape were moraly okay. This is a cultural distinction.
If you were there and saw it happen, would you stop it? What if you were a woman in that culture? Would that make it any better? What if males could rape any age girl-- even a small child? Or, what about the tendency towards female infanticide in China? That's morally okay by their standards. What about sending Jews (and really, any non-Aryan) to concentration camps in WWII? That was morally permissible in German culture at the time. Things get very tricky, and can very easily start down the slippery-slope when relativism and morality mix.
I'm sure if you brought up the full cultural mores of the tribe, some would match Christianity, some would not. Each societal group comes up with their own mores. But a lot of the basics are the same. Thou shalt not kill, thou shalt not steal, do unto others, as you would have them do unto you.
I would say that any semblance of morality in any culture is due to the fact that there's an unspoken Law written in our hearts by God. But, that's just my explanation. ;)
... to be continued.. :)
Finishing up with this one...
Date: 2003-10-02 04:22 am (UTC)Well, they may have been devout-- but they couldn't have been *that* Biblical, or else they would have known what they were preachin' was somethin' other than what was taught in the Bible they claimed to follow! The Bible never said that women 'didn't have souls'-- in fact, some of the coolest Biblical figures are women! In the OT and the NT. (It was almost always the guys that were cheeseballs, actually.. Like, it was pretty much only the female followers of Jesus who showed up to the Crucifixion, and they were the ones who went to go annoint and give Him a proper burial afterwards...) Same for racism-- we're all of one blood, and we're all God's children and creation, all equal in His eyes. What those 'Biblical' Christians were preaching were their own add-ons and justifications for the secular ideologies flying about at the time (racism, sexism.)
I choose to believe that God lets things happen in this world because he gave us free will.
Yeah, I'd have to agree with you there.
Once he gave us free will, he could no longer step in and say this is right or wrong. He then became a spectator.
But I can't agree with you here! The OT sets out very clear rules (for the people's own welfare!) about what to do, and not to do. Even about what's good to eat, what's not, and how to stay clean! It's not like He was asking us to do something ridiculous or impossible... They're all reasonable, logical requests, that we would do good to follow! Except sin and temptation usually get in the way, and people start doing what they, in their finite wisdom, think is good-- and not what God, in his infinite wisdom knows is good.
Genetically she is the same species as a wild wolf, at least 98% of her genetics. If there is no such thing as evolution, why is it I have a German Shepherd, a created breed, on my sofa rather than a wolf?
German Shepherds are such cool dogs... I hope I can have one someday! But, back on topic... There's no such thing as macroevolution--goop-to-life, fish-to-reptiles, dinosaurs-to-birds. Microevolution (Darwin's Finches, dog breeds, etc), however, is absolutely real, and in no way contradicts the Bible. God probably didn't Create every single species of mammal, bird, reptile, fish, etc... (The only reason that I say 'probably' and not 'definetely' is I wasn't there, and I don't wanna put words in His mouth!) He Created 'kinds'. So, He Created different 'kinds' of mammals-- like maybe a few generic cats, a few generic dogs, etc, etc. And then those base-body types spread, adapted, and differentiated into the different species that we have. And the term, 'species', has so many problems in and of itself! A 'species' is defined as a group of animals that can't interbreed with any other group... Yet dogs, wolves, and coyotes can all interbreed. Tigers, Lions, and several other big cats can interbreed. Yet we call them all different 'species'. However, you won't get a dog breeding with a cat-- 'cuz they're different 'kinds'. And God said "every animal, after their own 'kind'".
Incidentally, the bone structure and jaw alignment is more superior in a wolf than in my bebe. :)
And that would be an example of how things are going downhill-- which is evidence more suited for Creationism than Evolution.
Allrighty, now onto the next set.. n__n
Re: Finishing up with this one...
Date: 2003-10-02 10:37 pm (UTC)Unlike Erin though, I'm not comfortable with arguing this sort of stuff. it's taken me years of thinking to get to where I'm at, and while it makes sense to me, I can't really articulate it. And tha's pretty much why I'm gonna back my arse out of this after this post and leave it to you and Erin. :)
I'm glad to see that you do question everything. I take Evolution pretty much as a given, because it just makes sense to me. Creationist ideas make all the sense to me that fairy tales do. So it was really a shock to read your previous post where you brought up the contradictions of your beliefs and work. I know you understand that I'm not flaming you for that.. and I thank you for understanding that.
btw, I did take the test and I ended up flat on my back after three hits and a bitten bullet. There are some glaring huge holes in that presentation, as Erin said. A true and false answer test is crap, imho.
Life is contradictions. The most fun one of all is that you have to recognize everyone's differences, and not only accept and appreciate them because of their differences, but also to accept and appreciate them despite their differences. :) And that's where most humans stumble.
I do not believe that all people are inheretantly evil, or even inheratently good. and I hope I'm not being graded on spelling either. :) I believe people make choices on their beliefs and principles and desires. Some choices are obviously wrong. I've done several things that I'm not proud of. The whole situation with Mike being the most obvious one between the three of us. But I don't consider myself a bad person either. All I can do is live my life the best that I can and hope that in the end that I at least batted a .500 game.
again, as I've said, I'm not an argumentative person.. ::hugs:: I figure between Erin and Kyle, you've got two sides to debate with. :) Just figure out what works for you. And overlook us freaks on the sideline who are waiting to be reborn through the reincarnation method. :)