I am a student of Jesus, and I am convinced of his claims. I am not a "christian" in the current sense of the word, because of the great confusion surrounding it. I am not catholic, baptist, or otherwise though I do attend a protestant place of worship and learning. I do not write to commend you on your article, though I think that what you have to say has merit. I write to ask you to contrast what you read and hear from people of various backgrounds and philosophical points of view. The majority of responses to your article are negative, some very much so. The majority of the responses (that make any statement of faith) are from people that are not followers of Jesus or God. I do not agree with many things that you have to say, yet I have never written to attack your character, intelligence, or sincerity. And, though I have read your various articles and the responses that follow, I have not seen in this forum readers of a similar persuasion doing this either. When you think about the virtues of various world views, philosophies, spiritual systems, and beliefs, please remember this. I have heard from secular luminaries that followers of a certain teacher are very narrow minded. In practice, I find just the opposite to be true. Those that follow the inventions and fantasies of nothing more than their own limited experience are generally terrified of and violently oppose any idea that may expose their extremely fragile bubble to even the faintest breeze.

Merry Christmas,

Poco

"Cops under Giuliani and Safir enforced, with excessive gusto, a heavy-handed crackdown on graffiti, subway turnstile jumping, street artists, jaywalking, public drinking, public urination, peaceful protest demonstrations and the squeegee men who washed windshields at stoplights."

The author seems to think that there is something wrong with this... As a matter of fact, the author seems to think that there is something wrong with most of the the things that Giuliani did that made New York a better place. Thanks to this article, now we know. Is he an egomaniacal totalitarian? Yes, but what's new? Aren't they all? At least he isn't PC, coddling criminals, and promoting decadence. Wha.. Did I say something wrong? Sorry to all you self loathing types. I personally do not think that petty crime and profanity should be applauded.

The funniest thing about this article is that it goes "then he did this horrible thing, and I go "right on, dude!" What a yuk. I guess Giuliani is OK, as politicians go. Yep, "He's an authoritarian narcissist", kind of like "spineless narcissist", "disgusting narcissist", "opportunistic narcissist", "criminal narcissist", i.e. all the other politicians. At least there aren't any more of those creepy dudes leaving ugly streaks on the windshield, threatening to beat the crap out of your car with their squeegee if you don't give them money for doing something you didn't want them to do in the first place.

Poco

Another government "genius" telling me what I can and cannot do. Yaaaaay! Are you aware that the government has an entire agency devoted to telling people things like "salt causes high blood pressure"? This has been proven patently untrue. It is recommended that individuals that already have hypertension limit their salt intake. I have moderate/severe hypertension and my physisican has never told to me to limit my salt intake, because the medication I take controls it, and because even totally eliminating extra salt in my diet would not control it. But for the rest of you, there is no reason to limit salt whatsoever. Just remember, once "conventional governmental wisdom" is established, it is nearly impossible to alter it even if it is disproven because most of the time altering it would cost some bureaucrat their job.

To demonstrate just how much confusion surrounds government intrusion into our lives take this conceptual error: "People have to wear seat belts. You can't smoke on airplanes. This is in the same category"

This is absolutely NOT in the same category. Smoking in airplanes bothers and endangers the health of OTHER PEOPLE. Wearing or not wearing a seat belt only affects the person wearing or not wearing the seat belt. Do you see how insidious their logic is? "We are protecting you from yourself" Don't worry. Don't think. We will think for you, cradle to grave!

Also, notice the pervasive use of words such as "may", "indications", "perhaps", "suggests", etc. These are used because there is no conclusive, concrete evidence that anything they say is true. Remember when margarine was supposed to be better for you than real butter? Who do you suppose made millions off that venture down the "protect me from myself, I'm too stupid to figure this out on my own" road? Anybody that would eat axle grease and think it was better for them than butter can't be too smart.

Don't be duped, people. Take control of your own life, think for yourself and resist government intrusion into your lives. And, if you think it is bad now, think of how truly horrendous it would be if socialized medicine is forced upon us. With the government actually being responsible for and paying for your health, what kind of restrictions on what and how much you eat do you think they will impose?

Before one more "ban", helmet law, seat belt law, or other "self protection measure" is invoked, let's get serious and ban alcohol. After all there is no "maybe" about it. Alcohol is the direct cause of thousands of deaths in this country each year. Waaaaaay more than "trans fats".

Anybody nervous now?

Poco

Are you some kind of fundamentalist?

"Must everything, from Halloween to aerobics, be an occasion for tarting up?"

Welcome to the society that you (along with Clinton, et al) built.

Poco

If anyone hasn't already noticed, there's a book out that states men are from Mars.

is a monstrosity.