prisonchaplain

Totally unbiased open source advocate here voting for option number 2 . But on an old XP machine I wouldn't recommend Ubuntu. Perhaps Lubuntu or Xubuntu. These are both Ubuntu under the hood but use a lighter desktop environment (think of that as the look and feel of the operating system) to run better on low spec machines. Lubuntu uses LXDE, Xubuntu uses XFCE, and Ubuntu uses Unity. They all have vastly different looks and different suites of default applications. The learning curve of learning a new operating system is admittedly steep and will probably be frustrating at first, Ubuntu has a dang good community at their forums for helping with that transition.

Xubuntu: http://xubuntu.org/    (I would recomend the most)
Lubuntu: http://lubuntu.net/     (Super light, but not as purty as Xubuntu)

I have an "invisible" disease.  Mitochondrial disease is another invisible disease.  What that means is some doctors believe and some don't.  Those who don't believe diagnose a psych disorder and then all symptoms are ignored.  I was lucky.  I had good doctors who understood a patient could be in pain without a visible cause.  I have been active in online chronic pain communities for over 15 years.  I found the communities while looking for anything and everything I could about what I'm dealing with.  I have talked to scores of men and women who suffer for years with no relief because their doctor/s has decided he doesn't believe them.  Needless suffering.  
 
Twenty years ago JACHO (accreditation for hospitals) came out with new rules regarding the treatment of pain.  Attitudes started to change.  Pain is now considered a separate illness when it becomes chronic, but some doctors still don't believe.  If they can't see it, if they can't run a test, if they can't change it, then of course its all in the patient's head.
 
The fact that Justina's condition has deteriorated so significantly since being in State custody says a lot about the naysaying doctors and hospital.  
 
Its wrong to take a sick child from their parents.  Even if its the parents making the child sick.  I say that because the correct course of treatment is Education.  IF there really is neglect or abuse time will show it.  Medical abuse is rare because doctors usually don't buy into the diagnoses used to abuse.  In Justina's case the State and Hospital have been the abusers.
 
P.S. what bothers me most about psychiatric care is how much its grown in the last 30 years.  We now have ICD-9 codes for behaviors that aren't really a psychiatric illness.  Creating the ICD-9 codes is how psychiatrist and psychologists get paid when they can't find anything to get paid for.  This growth in psychiatric disorders (some of which aren't disorders) is a result of greed.   I realize that some of the "progress" is psychiatric care was needed, but in my opinion, we've swung too far the other way.

Well sure, not everyone is an extremist.  However, this view--that tradtional marriage activists are haters and bigots who should be astrocized--is gaining traction.  It's becoming less extreme. 
 
Nobody has said that most LBGT folk want to bankrupt us.  Yet, this statement puts us on the defense--as if we had made that accusation.  Even Bill Maher, who is much more sympathetic to the LBGT cause than to that of religious folk, states that there is a 'gay mafia.' 

The LDS concept of the end of days or the last days as I understand is as follows:
#1. The Restoration. I believe that this is a somewhat fluid term because there is a beginning of the restoration that will reach its climax or conclusion with Christ being restored and recognized as King and the G-d of this world. However, the restoration will signal the beginning of the last days:
Dan. 2:44 – G-d will restore his kingdom (which will never be destroyed) at the time when the Roman Empire will be divided first into two kingdoms (the two legs) and then weakened (clay mixed with stone) resulting in 10 weaker kingdoms. Shortly after the Kingdom of G-d is established (small stone) the kingdoms that remain of the Roman Empire will all fall and the reign of kings in the fallen empire will end forever.
Isaiah 2:2 & Micah 4:2 – G-d will move his people to Utah. The translation from scripture is “Top of the Mountains” The word Utah comes from the native tongue of the Ute people which literally means “Top of the Mountains”.
Matt 17:11 - John the Baptist will come before all things are restored
Eph 1:10 All things will be gathered together
#2. The Return of Israel to the Promised Land and the restoration of Israel. The scripture is vast but often given through symbolism. Two important books of Ancient Scripture are the Book of Isaiah and the Book of Ezekiel. Part of the symbolism deals with the “Sons of Zadok” in association to the temple and the particular roles of two particular tribes of Israel – The Jews and Ephraim. Ephraim being the house of Joseph that will be separated from the Jews and among the Gentiles. Ephraim will be the means by which the Jews will gain control of Jerusalem.
#3. Matt 24:14 - Missionaries sent to all the world to testify of the restoration and the coming of Christ. It is the LDS concept that this is taking place. Many LDS believe that the dramatic change in the number of Missionaries by lowering the age requirements is an indication that events are accelerating. It is believed that the last nations and peoples to hear will only have a very short time to listen then all missionaries will be called home. It is my speculation that when this occurs that the time of Jesus’ return will be in less than two years (closer to one year).
#4. The Rise of Babylon – there is much in scripture and in LDS doctrine (restored scriptures) concerning Babylon – we may want to discuss this separately. But as I understand Babylon was the ancient symbol of banking and the evils of worldly living and specifically creating debt. It is my understanding that one of the indications that Jesus will soon return (perhaps within a few years or months) is the collapse of nations to dept. It is interesting to me that is Islam the prime symbolism of Satan and his influence was the institutionalization of debt. This is why Islamist terrorist attached the twin towers of New York as a symbol that they intended to destroy the institutionalization of debt in the world.
#5 Revelation chapter 11. LDS believe that two prophets of the LDS faith will be called on a mission to Jerusalem for about 3 and ½ years. The will protect Jerusalem with divine power and will testify of Christ. They will eventually be killed in the streets of Jerusalem where they will remain for 2 and ½ days (the exact time may be problematic because the ancients did not know how to use the number 0).
#6 – The sign of Christ (Matt 24). I speculate that this sign spoken of was that same as the sign of his birth. In other words a new star. This speculation of a new star – I have wondered to be a super nova. At the time of Christ the star the super novaed was about 600 light years from earth and caused half of the earth to experience the ozone fluorescing causing light to continue (without shadows) when the sun set over the entire western hemisphere. When Jesus returns I speculate that again there will be a super nova within 400 light years which will cause the earth to catch on fire and melt stone. This will destroy all that do not come under Christ’s immediate protection. This I believe will be the event the many Christians call the rapture except it will happen when Jesus comes and not years before. Anyone that is not caught up and protected by Christ will be destroyed.
The Traveler
PS - I am sure you all understand that this is a thumb nail summary and not a detailed description of my LDS understanding.

Well sure, not everyone is an extremist.  However, this view--that tradtional marriage activists are haters and bigots who should be astrocized--is gaining traction.  It's becoming less extreme. 
 
Nobody has said that most LBGT folk want to bankrupt us.  Yet, this statement puts us on the defense--as if we had made that accusation.  Even Bill Maher, who is much more sympathetic to the LBGT cause than to that of religious folk, states that there is a 'gay mafia.' 

"Genocidal" may be too strong.  However, their litany of alleged crimes against them is lengthy.  The article I read lamented that government leaders regularly compare them (LBGT) with pedophiles.  That same writer said he fears that even a meaningless glance he might make could be misconstrued, leading to an angry--possibly violent--encounter. Additionaly, they are quick to tie the rhetoric of some ministers with acts of violence and murder committed against them.  Bottom-line:  traditional marriage advocates are like the KKK to them.  We are in the wrong and must be re-educated. 
 
My concern then--what is the agenda now?

Communication is interesting to me.  I make my living as a consulting engineer in the field of robotics and automation.  I am never contacted when a company is happy and successful in moving their products within their facilities.   What is interesting is that many times companies are not ready to solve their problems – I think people are like that.  One of my best customers after my first week with them had me escorted from their facilities by security.  6 months later they wanted me back.  But by then their problems were so bad that they were losing over 2 million dollars a day.
 
What I have discovered is that civility is more a reflection of internal turmoil and instability than it is external injustice (of course there are always exceptions) and many of us with difficult anger issues will not change our failing methods, if ever, until things get so bad that are no other possibilities.  Anger is often an emotion that results when there is frustration and a fear of being recognized for failure. 
 
PC for example is very comfortable with his religious understanding and so he has no fear about his religion failing to achieve for him what he desires of it.  Most of us however, are not as stable in knowing what we really believe and desire instead to be recognized and validated – otherwise there is no metric of intelligent progress.   Perhaps the most important aspect of open discussion that I have realized is that I do not learn much in discussing things with those with whom I agree.  I seem to learn much more from those that disagree with me.  Except those that will stand in the direct light of the noon day sun and declare it night.  For such I am convinced that any intelligent conversation is such a threat to everything they believe that anger, name calling and all other such things are absolute necessities to in order to think themselves sane and thus rhetorical logic is impossible.

Yeah...me too...for the same reason--Anatess told me I had to be happy. 

One trick I use is to discern the overall meaning of a post.  If I get caught up in particular phrases, or single sentences, I may find a weakness I can exploit.  However, will I persuade or influence?  Doubtful.  Instead, at minimum I will appear a winner, but offend the very one I'm trying to win over.  Sure, I beat them at the battle of words.  But I lost any hope at influence.  Worse, I failed to do any learning or teaching.  Far better to ask myself:  What did s/he mean?  What was the main idea?  How are they understanding me?  Have I communicated clearly and respectfully?

I am quite happy and content.  This doesn't mean my life is perfect.  It just means I feel truly blessed by all God has done for me and given me. We aren't rich.  Our home is small.  Our cars are old.  I am frequently sick, thanks to lupus.  But, I have a husband who loves me, wonderful children (two grown, one almost grown) a darling doggy, good friends, peace in our home and most of all the complete assurance of God's love for me as an individual.

This is why you "win" the most civil award. :)
 
I find myself ashamed. I am so often caught up in winning with words. Thank you for the advice.

One trick I use is to discern the overall meaning of a post.  If I get caught up in particular phrases, or single sentences, I may find a weakness I can exploit.  However, will I persuade or influence?  Doubtful.  Instead, at minimum I will appear a winner, but offend the very one I'm trying to win over.  Sure, I beat them at the battle of words.  But I lost any hope at influence.  Worse, I failed to do any learning or teaching.  Far better to ask myself:  What did s/he mean?  What was the main idea?  How are they understanding me?  Have I communicated clearly and respectfully?

"Genocidal" may be too strong.  However, their litany of alleged crimes against them is lengthy.  The article I read lamented that government leaders regularly compare them (LBGT) with pedophiles.  That same writer said he fears that even a meaningless glance he might make could be misconstrued, leading to an angry--possibly violent--encounter. Additionaly, they are quick to tie the rhetoric of some ministers with acts of violence and murder committed against them.  Bottom-line:  traditional marriage advocates are like the KKK to them.  We are in the wrong and must be re-educated. 
 
My concern then--what is the agenda now?

What concerns me is the number of articles doubling-down on the Mozilla approach.  Boundaries are being drawn.  The most adament of the LBGTQI folk have come to believe that they were/are an oppressed minority, and that those who disagree with them are genocidal.  Thus, they may indeed call for tolerance and accommodation, while affording no mercy to traditional marriage advocates.  They see no hypocrisy, because they are defending a weak minority.  The evil bully majority deserves no support.  They must be isolated, astrocized, and even 'disappeared.'  I've seen this argued. 
 
Lord Acton was right.  Power does corrupt.

You are the paramount example of civility in these forums PC. 

Anatess is so right.  We assume way to much on these forums.  Sometimes, strings degenerate when one phrase, often meant as an introductory transition into the subject, gets taken out of context, and debated.  So, I try to keep the main thing the main thing, and yes, to assume that posters mean well.  When I'm pretty sure they do not, I tend to disengage.

The Folk Prophet may have stumbled upon an aspect of what happens after conversion that even Evangelicals disagree about:  the possibility of "falling from grace."  If the grace we receive is 100% Christ-dependent than can we lose it, neglect it, or otherwise let go of the salvation it brings?  Some--myself included--say that yes, it is possible.  We can give it up.  We can neglect it to the point of losing it.  We can reject it in favor of sin.  We can even renounce our grace and our salvation.  Our position begins to look similar to the LDS view, then.  The one aspect I would strain at is that Evangelicals argue that the one who obeys the Lord in baptism is doing so as one who is already saved.  The Christian who "endures to the end," was saved the entire time.  He doesn't gain assurance of his salvation at the end.  He's had it all along the way.  The good works are signals of a salvation already gained, not some kind of installment payments that assure that I get the salvation when the mortgage is paid off.
 
I just caught the last post The Folk Prophet published, and want to add that he captures the dilemma quite well.  LDS strive to please God even as they are repenting.  We Evangelicals (and Protestants in general) believe there is no pleasing God until we first repent.  We come empty-handed.  We don't dare try to bring anything that would appear to lessen the reality of our sin.  The agency is in choosing to repent.  Once converted, what will we do for God.  30-fold?  60-fold?  100-fold?  That too is agency.  Those of us who do believe salvation can be lost would add that, whether through renunciation or neglect, the giving up of salvation is also agency.  Without love, and without the direction, approval and yes empowerment of the Holy Spirit, our good works, even after conversion, won't amount to much.  The greatest work is sincerely walking with God--doing his thing in his way and in his time.

The Folk Prophet may have stumbled upon an aspect of what happens after conversion that even Evangelicals disagree about:  the possibility of "falling from grace."  If the grace we receive is 100% Christ-dependent than can we lose it, neglect it, or otherwise let go of the salvation it brings?  Some--myself included--say that yes, it is possible.  We can give it up.  We can neglect it to the point of losing it.  We can reject it in favor of sin.  We can even renounce our grace and our salvation.  Our position begins to look similar to the LDS view, then.  The one aspect I would strain at is that Evangelicals argue that the one who obeys the Lord in baptism is doing so as one who is already saved.  The Christian who "endures to the end," was saved the entire time.  He doesn't gain assurance of his salvation at the end.  He's had it all along the way.  The good works are signals of a salvation already gained, not some kind of installment payments that assure that I get the salvation when the mortgage is paid off.
 
I just caught the last post The Folk Prophet published, and want to add that he captures the dilemma quite well.  LDS strive to please God even as they are repenting.  We Evangelicals (and Protestants in general) believe there is no pleasing God until we first repent.  We come empty-handed.  We don't dare try to bring anything that would appear to lessen the reality of our sin.  The agency is in choosing to repent.  Once converted, what will we do for God.  30-fold?  60-fold?  100-fold?  That too is agency.  Those of us who do believe salvation can be lost would add that, whether through renunciation or neglect, the giving up of salvation is also agency.  Without love, and without the direction, approval and yes empowerment of the Holy Spirit, our good works, even after conversion, won't amount to much.  The greatest work is sincerely walking with God--doing his thing in his way and in his time.

BTW...the chicken was first. 
 
 

Great questions Mordorbund.  First, James1's use of "religion" as a negative (or nuetral) term--one not sufficient to describe how he relates to God--is different from the larger culture's aversion to organized religion.  Probably since the "Jesus People" movement of the 1960s-70s, Evangelical Christians have used "religion" as a contrast to what is really needed to reconcile with God.  "Religion" came to mean rules/regulations/rituals etc. that people do to appease God and earn salvation.  In contrast, as the Billy Graham invitational hymn says, we come "Just as I am, without one plea, but that Thy blood was shed for me."  It is a humble, repentent approach to God that brings salvation.  "God forgive me...a sinner...because of Jesus' crucifixion."
 
The larger culture took the spirit of that approach, combined it with the anti-establishment mood of the time, and started touting phrases like, "I'm not religious--I'm spiritual."  "I believe in 'God,' but I'm not into organized religion."  So, I'll say the Lord's Prayer, read the Psalms, wear a crucifix, put a Buddha statue in my living room, and I'll take the Book of Mormon the missionaries offered me and put it on the shelf next to my box of crystals.  BTW, isn't my pyramid poster cool?
 
20 years ago we worried about losing our men--today it's our young.  Promise Keepers was the largest manifestation of Evangelical efforts to make Christianity relevent to men.  Today, we see many of the larger Evangelical churches led by pastors in the mid-40s, trying desperately to look and act like their in their late 20s. 
 
None of this is necessarily bad.  However, we'd waste less effort if we simply sought the direction and moving of the Holy Spirit, and stuck to preaching/teaching 'the whole counsel of God' (i.e. more than just a few pet 'success passages').
 
I agree with James1 completely--salvation comes only through humble, repentence, and faith in Jesus' sacrifice for my sins.  I cannot prepare for my salvation-encounter by cleaning up, or beefing up my good works account.  In fact, attempting to do so is a sign that I don't get it.
 
On the other hand, once saved good works must needs follow.  Our fervent protection of salvation by faith alone can cause us to err, once we are saved.  We hesitate to do/promote good works, for fear of weakening the salvation doctrine.  The result is that converts don't know what to do next.  How do I mature?  How do I become strong?  How do I go from receiving salvation to becoming a messenger of it for the lost?  We have the answers.  They are the disciplines:  prayer, fasting, Bible study, meditation, sharing our faith in word and deed, etc.  Even as we engage in these activities, we know that it is faith and reliance on the Holy Spirit that brings blessing and success.  Nevertheless, I must cooperate with the Spirit. 
 
Works don't save, yet we honor those who engage in the greatest work of all--martyrdom.  More than once Revelation gives them special recognition.  Some Bible teachers even suggest that it is one of the gifts of the Holy Spirit.
 
So, it's all about faith and grace in getting saved.  Further, it's faith, grace, and Holy Spirit anointing that cause our works--our disciplines--to be effective.  Yet, we are indeed to be about the Father's business.
 
Hope this helps!

Let's see if I can move this discussion along with some of understandings I've gained over the years.  Feel free to agree, disagree, fine tune a nuance, etc.
 
1.  Protestant Christians--especially Martin Luther--tend to insist that salvation (i.e. going to heaven and avoiding hell) is only possible through faith in Jesus Christ.  Our works are "filthy rags," according to Isaiah.  This tenent is so strongly held that if one claims to be a Christian and suggests that his/her good works had any part in appeasing God and earning salvation, we tend to view that person as a heretic.  Indeed most of us would wonder if such a one could be labeled a Christian.
 
2.  Many LDS have said to me that salvation is indeed by grace alone, through Jesus Christ.  However, that salvation is from the outer darkness, or hell.  It gains one entry into the Heavenly Realms--either the Telestial or Terrestial Kingdoms.  I've been led to believe that faith in Jesus is not required to enter these realms.  That faithful followers of almost any religion could enter the 2nd kingdom, and even some fairly immoral people could enter the 3rd one.  It may be that there would have to be some growth in faith in Christ, but that such faith could be gained after death.
 
3.  Protestants--and especially Evangelicals--and LDS tend to talk past each other on this faith/works discussion, because we have such different views of heaven, hell, and the actual meaning of salvation. 
 
4.  LDS believe that entry into the highest heavenly realm (Celestial Kingdom) requires certain levels of faithfulness and obedience.  Further, exaltation, at the highest levels of that realm, comes only after even greater "endurance to the end."
 
5.  In fairness, many Christians of various denominations would accept the idea that within Heaven there may be some who earn special honors for their sacrifices and faithfulness.

I think once anyone starts to recognize sin and it's seriousness (and have any desire to return to God) I think there will always be fear at some point.

Hey! My religion is much more absurd than yours!!!
Wait! Uh...errr...never mind.

I thought the same thing. However according to the article below, this time everything to be known is known. It really is a matter of the hospital disagreed with the diagnosis the parents brought the child in for, knew they would resist the new diagnosis, and so filed a medical negligence charge with Child Protective Services. This article also points out that 80% of anonymous reports received by CPS prove unsubstantiated. 4 out of 5 families they visit are found with no actionable abuse. Nevertheless, those 4 families now have the cloud of accusation hanging over their head. Too many think, \"Where there is smoke there is fire.\"
It also appears that the judge decided to take away custody BECAUSE the parents challenged his gag order. He more or less said, \"Fine, it was unConstitutional. But now I\'ll find against you because you interfered with the placement process by violating my gag order.
My head was exploding more and more as I read the article!
http://articles.courant.com/2014-04-02/health/hc-pelletier-rulling-response-20140402_1_justina-boston-children-linda-pelletier