System Of A Down - Sugar

a question for the christians...

my knowledge on christianity is rusty (on certain things anyway); so if someone could please refresh my memory; esp. on this ash wednesday.
and since it is ash wednesday, christians are entering lent; which leads to easter, the death and resurrection of jesus.  this is all well and good.
however; my question is more of a logical one.
now...i would like to believe that all christians don't believe that jesus was born on december twenty-fifth.  that you are smart enough to know that he was (provided he was) born in the summer months.  and that the christians of ancient rome, in a sense, hijacked the holiday from the romans.  but no need to get into that here.
now...christmas is the same date every year.  something solid.  i could deal with that.
why is easter a different day each year?  i would think that the death of someone is the same day every year.  it is with the death of the people that i knew.  so why is it a different day each year?
someone help with this....

[amithaba...]

imagination...

in children, and the developing mind.  this was and still is a topic that i am interested about before i officially became a father, and especially now.  now because i am seeing how my daughter's mind is developing, in a sense.  how she is putting the pieces together.  it really is amazing.

but my question comes as i clean up for the night, all the toys and activities throughout the day.  (normally she helps, but she's sick right now.  so she gets a reprieve)  is today's child accessing and using their imagination like we did as children, or our parents?  or even is it too much?

when your child is sick you'll do anything to calm them down.  so yesterday was a lot of tv time.  and it seems like every show pushes the child to 'learn' something or get something out of it.  is it too much?  or is the imagination taken away.

i read an excerpt from a book before lydia was born about the developing mind (i wasn't going to buy it, because i figured that it would be too late for me to get all the information out of it that i could use), but it stated (and i'm sorry i don't remember the name of the book) that human babies are attached and need to stay with their parents for so long (as opposed to other animals), because of the complexity of the mind, and to allow that imagination and creativity to grow.  this is not something that other animals need.  my cat is not concerned with stacking blocks or coloring or making art.

but do we impede this with all these toys, and learning that are constantly in the child's face?  is it really important for my child to learn words in spanish or chinese right now?  i don't think so.  now you may say, 'well, don't let your child watch it.'  and this is an option.  you are correct.  but what else then is there?  meaning it's everywhere.  and then if you say no, i think you then run the risk of not having your child relate to other children, and what they are into.  and then what does that do?

is society pushing too much learn too soon?

[:!:]

[amitabha]

religion...

divides.  let me re-phrase that; most religions divide.  divide people.  separate people.  the only people that it brings together are the ones that share the same ideology.  if you're not part of that community, then your are divided from that community.

i mostly speak of religion as a whole, and not necessarily the individuals of that community.  meaning there are individuals of the community that will not separate themselves from those who are not of their community.

but as far as the religion goes, and depending on the belief then if you don't believe then what would happen?  eternal damnation.  now this concept is mostly in the western tradition.  thinking of the eastern traditions, it is mostly reincarnation in some way.  this is most simply put, and i don't want to make the distinction here.

i don't think that there is much argument here.  religion does divide.  different beliefs.  different places of worship.  different practices.  different world-views.  and then religions take on the 'my god is better than yours' mentality, and then what happens?  and why is this?

power.  political or otherwise.  example; if the pope really wanted to be like christ, then why is the vatican so rich, and so powerful?  the power struggles in the middle east.

thomas hobbes stated (paraphrased here) that religion is a construction of man, and not found anywhere in nature.  religion becoming a creation of man becomes man thirst for power.  hobbes believed that we always thirst for power in some way until our death.  increasing our power increases our preservation. 

let's look at it this way; why has there been so many splits in religion?  often times because someone wanted more power than the last.  so divide, and conquer.  example; martin luther separated himself from the church because of certain ideological differences (some seem valid, like paying to get out of purgatory); however what was his next move?  to try and convert the jewish people to christianity.  the great peace maker was the plan.  didn't work.

now i'm not suggesting that we become so sort of crappy communistic john lennon song.  but can we, in essence, not give a shit?  relinquish the power, and just be.  i believe that religion does need to be discussed, this is how we learn and understand; but do we need to be so attached to it?

[amitabha]

happiness...

some claim is so hard to find.  to find joy in the day.

i would have to disagree with these ideas.  here are a few things that i try to remember in no particular order:
try to see things from a different point of view.  i'm not talking about people's points of view or ideas.  rather what i said...things.  do not take the common objects and experiences so common.  try to expand the view.
next and most important (which may help with the first that i listed), see things from a child's point of view of the world.  the world will become new again.

[amitabha]

new title...

so i changed the title here for some reasons; however mainly because i want to remain more thought based, and i think the last title was more bike based.  expand the title to fit more so to the description...

[amitabha]

so i am now on...

twitter. @hamadphilosophy

i'm keeping my tweets (i never thought i'd use that word) to philosophy only.  i'm trying about once a week to post a philosophy quote.  no rhyme or reason.  just a cool philosophy quote.  so if you're interested look it up.

but, i also searched the word philosophy, and other than kids complaining about their philosophy class; i'm the only one (that i could find) on there strictly putting up/for philosophy.  hopefully i'm ahead of the curve for this.  just because i wouldn't mind bring hamadphilosophy altogether...

[amitabha]

a rose by any...

other name, would still smell the same.  i've been thinking about this topic of a few weeks now, and in this months issue of bike mike ferrentino writes in the column 'grimy handshake' about all the different types of bikes that have come out.  and that it used to be 'easy' to buy a bike.  all you really needed to know was what type of riding you were going to do; which was typically road or mountain.  now if you're going to buy a bike, you really need to know more information to pick up the right bike for what you intend to do.

for road there are now different road bikes depending on their geometry, or bar type.  for mountain, the start is hard tail or full suspension.  then after that there are you have to look at how much travel you want, and geometry.  and this gets too complex that i want to get into here.

my quick point is that we have become too categorized, and in the 'specialty' realm of bikes too snobish.  there are fringe aspects of cycling, and if you don't 'fit' into their (these are just uber snobs who consider themselves experts) then you don't belong. 

let me give you my example.  a few years ago i came across a bike called a monster cross (mx).  the definition of this bike is essentially a cross bike with really fat tires.  so keeping the idea of a cross bike; drop bars, rigid fork, but with fatter tires than 38c has become the definition that i have found.  well...my friend and i have since built one up for ourselves, but we have had to use a 29er mountain frame, 29er tires, still with drop bars, and rigid fork.

but i am about to go outside this definition and put a front shock on my mx.  and this is going against the prevailing definitions out there.  so then my mx will cease being a mx, and just be a mtn bike with drop bars; according to 'them' (conspiracy theory, or king diamond album).

part of my point becomes...do you remember when a bike was a bike?  you either had a ten speed, mtn bike, or bmx; and that was it.

the industry has become too complex, and the fringe aspect of the 'culture' (hate this word, but it works) is too snobish.

just ride a bike.  have fun.  enjoy the ride.  don't get caught up in all the crap.  remember why you got on a bike in the first place.

[amitabha...]