Openings are only one part of game, try exploring with some gambits with e4 like the goring gambit, e4 e5 nf3 nc6 d4 cxd4 c3, that line is fun and enjoyable if you learn the lines. After exploring with some gambits you can try out something more solid.

I agree with that. Gambits are good to start with.
First of all, they teach you chess. Since you can't trade all pieces and go into a lost ending, you'll have to play chess and attack, and find combinations etc.
Second of all, gambits are just way more fun than the boring main openings What's more fun than to crush an opponent in 20 moves with an attacking game with sacks
And third of all, it's easier to play gambits than to be gambited... If you play a gambit, there's no way you'll get in trouble out of the opening. You'll have a lead in development, a strong center etc. and he doesn't. If someone gambits against you however, you have to be very careful, since one slip could mean the end of your game.

And of course, the fact that most gambits are refuted is not really important when you start out in chess... Your opponent is most likely not a grandmaster who knows the refutation, so the best player will win anyway

are there any good web sites for openings?

What sites do you mean? Sites with opening explanations, theory, example games, etc.? I think you'll have to buy books for that.
I only know one site that has what I mentioned above: ChessPublishing.com is a paid website, which has professional writes writing new articles and annotating new games of their openings every month. I've never tried the pay-to-view part, but I think it's a very good site, if you want to learn an opening and also get the latest theory and stay updated. The site had some good reviews from IM Jeremy Silman at JeremySilman.com

That is comforting, I seem to be learning a great deal right now. I was worried that I might not have the aptitude for chess.

I agree that the King's Indian Attack is a great opening for a beginner. Most of the theory is well established and as mentioned before the system is universal and wont be taken "out of the book" by Black on move 2. Also, the system includes a strong protection of the king practically guaranteeing White's survival through the first 15+ moves. The only drawback of this system is that it can be positional in nature and lead to several closed games. The Ruy Lopez might be a better start as its games are a bit more direct and open but I could never tell a neophyte to take on 1.e4 with so many varying responses from Black. Just imagine practicing all the best lines stemming from 1.e4 e5 only to play your first tournament game where Black replied with 1._c5. Oh and since the King's Indian Attack mirrors many lines of the King's Indian Defense, what a newbie learns for White will also help him as Black against 1.d4.

As for the English I cannot recommend this opening for those starting out. To call it linear goes against everything I know about it. The power of the English is in its transpositional possibilities. For example, if Black steers you into a Keres subvariation White can switch to the Queen's Gambit which has better track record against such systems. Kasparov was known for "hiding behind variation trees" so his opponents never knew his plan and the English was one of his primary weapons! Anyone who needs more ammunition for this need only to peek at an MCO. Look at the number of variations of the English compared to the KIA. Its a huge difference. The English also leads to positional systems more often than open attacking games in my experience and its the open and tactical games that are more of a priority for a beginner IMHO. If you are inclined to go with the English despite all of this (as I was LOL) then I recommend the move order 1.c4 followed by 2.g3 over 2.Nc3 as its a bit more forcing (though Black still retains a massive range of replies). Once English students have a grasp on 2.g3 then 2.Nc3 can be explored as well as Reti move orders.

Believe it or not Wikipedia has some good introductions to chess openings. Take a look at this entry on the French Defense:

French Defence - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Also, if you add chessgames.com to any Google search of an opening you will find some quick statistics and game collections to play out as well as who the primary exponents of an opening are and notable games throughout history.

It studies for the encyclopedia of openings or some software that have database.

In my opinion, a complete beginner should not learn lines of opening theory (yet!). They should start with e4, and follow general rules such as, try control the centre, develop all pieces, dont move the same piece more than once, knights on the 'rim are dim', and castle early. Without knowlegde of opening variations, the beginner must think for themselves, rather than rattle of moves according to memory. After all, the moves should have a meaning, a thought behind them (even if the beginners thought is totally off!). i think My System has a chapter on The centre, and controling it in the opening, and to learn the principles, or guidelines set out there is best to start with for beginner. It has meaning! a learning process etc.

Yes they are rigid rules, but only as the player begins to realize that against some systems these rules dont work so well should they begin to learn opening theory. Then these rules can begin to be a little less rigid, for example in some cases, pieces can be moved twice or so in the opening.

I would not recommend Kings Indian Attack as a first opening. Yes, it is an opening system that can be played pretty much against any system but, manouvers such as: (Nb1)-Nbd2-Nf1-Nh2-Ng4, and perhaps even the uncastling (Kg1)-Kh2-Rh1-Kg1. are not ''typical'' beginner moves. And the idea to want to learn opening theory but actually avoid it by learning only one opening seems to baffle me anyway.

I guess then that the student has slightly! discovered the tactics of 1.e4, should they then learn the Colle system. It is a rigid system that seems ok against whatever Black throws back, and there is a basic system for white to achieve. Pawns:c3,d4,e3 Knights:d2 and f3. Bishops:d3 and f1. Then, plan to castle, push the e4 pawn, and develop rook on e1, and later attack the black king where the classic bishop sacrifice is possible, and there other ideas like rook lift with f4, Rf3 Rh3 etc.
These are all just ideas though.
I would then recommend a student if they wanted to improve from just a regular club player to a more advanced player an opening repetoire that would be built gradually and with meaning. By that i mean, having a solid repetoire allowing for transpositions and that sort of thing.

I would definatley avoid 1.c4 and other moves like 1.b4 1.f4 1.b3. for starting off. Yes, they may confuse other weaker opponents but in the long run, i assume actually learning some theory would benefit more, even just for pleasure, as it can be boring playing the same openings over and over.

Thats my view anyway, and im sure there are loads more ideas, great ideas in fact, on openings for beginners.
To summarise: Read Nimzowitch`s ''My System'', while playing 1.e4
Venture into 1.d4 games with Colle
Take step further by playing through Games(Classic games), see which openings you like the look of, or what openings your fav player plays. Then go from there!

Either way, just have fun!

I whole-heartedly agree about your suggestions for a complete beginner. But for someone who has a seasoned knowledge of the basics and is exploring opening systems I think it imperative to choose a system and stick to it; the more forcing the better.

Repitition is the learning process here. It is through a universal move order that repitition grants the weak player a chance to make his mistakes and then get another chance to improve on that same position...gradually refining his game and attuning his independent thought to it's most potent themes. Once the themes of the system are clarified (as you described in the KIA example) through practical experience and with say, a Starting Out book's guidance (or better), the student has achieved a working knowledge (advantages & disadvantages) of that system's theory, whether it appeals to their style, and most importantly why it works. The understanding yielded from the over the board games is facilitated more consistently in this manner and this is what propels the memory of the moves as they will be the ones the player remembers to have worked! (so to speak lol).

As far as having the goal to learn opening theory, being dedicating to one system until its ideas are fully grasped and its execution mastered relies on the proven principle of strength through specialization. By no means is one bound to stick to this opening system alone for the rest of his days. And though only recommended as a place to start, it should be especially mentioned that the roads will grow more complex in the explorations of any opening and they should all be diligently sought out. I think early on anyone playing the KIA will start to wonder about its difference with the Reti opening. Hopefully that spark of curiosity will take them to the mastery of that system next. Or maybe the distinctions between these systems in itself will contribute to the mastery of both respectfully. It is also possible that through practice the player will discover that they do not like the KIA and grow ambitious for a more aggressive system. But as Dvoretsky points out, the KIA player should play the 1.e4 KIA move order bringing them right into the open systems and "direct" territory recommended to complete beginners! Only now the specialized KIA player has a solid platform from which to leap into the maze of the rest of Black's replies.

With all of these positives its easy to think that by omission I am recommending memory take the place of calculation and critical thought. So it is well deserved to be reminded that such essential parts of the game never be abandoned on the board nor in discussions of these types of exploratory topics.

Also, if the audience has a firm grip on the guidelines of the game then they might benefit from Watson's Secrets of Modern Chess Strategy: Advances since Nimzowitsch. Its important to know the rules and when to break them.

I guess in the end its a matter of learning system taste too. Some players may prefer maximum exposure grabbing all the positions, tactics, traps, and themes they can and using them wherever they can fit them. Perhaps this is the open minded way to pursue chess mastery. But the alternative of saturating one's brain with one system allows a level of quality not easily achieved at the cursory and fragmented pace one will encounter without it IMHO. But again, just like the choice of opening repertoire, I think these recommendations themselves are a matter of taste. When it comes to what learning process works best, there may not be a "One System"; only a "My System".

The Colle-Zukertort, definitely