text:
The wait is over! Download the BeerAdvocate app on iTunes or Google Play now.
Get 12 issues / year of BeerAdvocate magazine for only $9.99!
Dick's Barley Wine - Dick's Brewing Company
Displayed for educational use only; do not reuse.
Ratings: 73 | Reviews: 60 | Display Reviews Only:
3.5/5 rDev -6.2%
07-27-2014 20:06:47 | More by FederalOC
3.75/5 rDev +0.5%
06-14-2014 18:38:50 | More by WynnO
3.75/5 rDev +0.5%
01-30-2014 01:47:12 | More by mdaschaf
New Jersey
3.75/5 rDev +0.5%
09-04-2013 04:12:13 | More by huysmans
3.38/5 rDev -9.4%
Part of a four way blind tasting of barleywine.
Pours a dark copper color with minimal head and decent carbonation.
Smell is spicy, kind of like a winter warmer. Red fruit smell.
Taste is pretty fruity, and more hopped, but it was a pretty one-dimensional barley wine. Weakest of the four.
07-15-2013 04:17:10 | More by Smurf2055
2.75/5 rDev -26.3%
04-01-2013 03:21:22 | More by artoolemomo
3.5/5 rDev -6.2%
03-12-2013 16:08:59 | More by MordorMongo
4.25/5 rDev +13.9%
01-27-2013 22:14:54 | More by powdersoldier
3.75/5 rDev +0.5%
11-19-2012 00:37:11 | More by t0rin0
4.05/5 rDev +8.6%
Poured from 12oz bottle into a pint glass.
Appearance: medium orange hue with a good haze and a moderate effervescence. Head is a finger of frothy ivory foam which dissipates somewhat rapidly: par for the style. Not bad, overall.
Smell: sweet malt aroma with a good, malty character. The overall effect is somewhat fruity, with a light orchardy quality (but not so far as to be cidery). A clean citrusy character is also provided by the hops; altogether it's quite good.
Taste: sweet malt with a good dank barleywine quality. Fruitiness comes in toward the end, along with a dusty character. Bitterness is moderate, but bright, citrusy hop flavors are also present. I rather like this beer.
Mouthfeel: big body with a well-integrated carbonation and very nice, silky smooth creaminess. Wonderful.
Overall: a very good beer indeed. The alcohol is a little hot, which impedes drinkability a little bit, but really this is quite an enjoyable beer.
08-14-2012 05:18:00 | More by flagmantho
1.68/5 rDev -55%
Thick dense head, i have to call it frothy. The body is hazy and a brown with reddish hue.
The aroma is apple, green sour apple. Dark Fruits dont lend much help.
Flavor wise there is tannic pomegranate, dry toffee, all of which gets bowled over by green apple.
Mouthfeel is dry, medium-light body.
Another barleywine Slayed.
06-25-2012 04:09:27 | More by ChadQuest
Manitoba (Canada)
4/5 rDev +7.2%
06-02-2012 07:14:50 | More by ptarmigan98
3.23/5 rDev -13.4%
Poured into straight pint glass. Poured a semi-cloudy, translucent mahogany color with just a thin ring of off-white head that had low retention and lacing.
The aroma was fairly typical, sweet malts and some yeast spice. The alcohol had a noticeable component, it wasn't as hidden as in some other examples. The flavors were pretty much the same, malts, yeast spice and alcohol.
The body was average as well, perhaps even a bit stickier than normal. The beer did go down fairly smooth though. Drinkability was pretty good, for the style, although the sticky-sweet body started to become a bit bothersome. Overall, a fairly nice, although average, example of the style. Worth trying if you see it, but probably not worth any big effort to find.
04-02-2012 23:08:19 | More by beertunes
4/5 rDev +7.2%
02-26-2012 04:25:08 | More by Kevlee722
4/5 rDev +7.2%
02-15-2012 20:39:12 | More by sharpski
2.73/5 rDev -26.8%
Thin, oily mouth; not a very syrupy, heavily malted barleywine like I prefer. Despite its oily mouthfeel, this finishes dry. I taste piney hops, a faint but lingering Belgian yeast taste, and some caramel. Fairly carbonated. Awesome to find a barleywine in a 6 pack, but this is a forgettable example of the style.
This is the third beer I've had from this brewery and I have yet to be impressed. Both their beers and artwork are redolent of a homebrewer who is still trying to figure things out, but is happy to share the product with others in the meantime.
02-11-2012 04:28:36 | More by nsabo
3.6/5 rDev -3.5%
12oz. bottle poured into a tulip.
A: Deep amber with a slight red tint. Maybe a half finger off white head that fades quick and leaves little lacing.
S: Not a lot of aroma. Mostly sweet caramel. Some cardboard aromas. A very deep but light vanilla aroma.
T: Caramel and vanilla upfront. Caramel continues throughout the mouth. Finishes with a nice nutty note and some alcohol.
M: Medium body. Medium carbonation. Light creaminess.
O: It's decent. Nothing special. For a $1.99 I'll give it a try.
01-20-2012 02:17:48 | More by doughanson78
4/5 rDev +7.2%
11-23-2011 19:39:46 | More by beefandbean22
New Hampshire
4/5 rDev +7.2%
11-18-2011 20:10:21 | More by Rochefort10nh
3.53/5 rDev -5.4%
Nice head for a high abv barleywine.
Settles nicely in my chalice. Nice dark appearance.
Taste is good enough but not mindblowing. Rather pedestrian for a barleywine, and given that it's one of my favorite styles, I have high expectations.
This is a good enough beer that is worth drinking when the price is right but I wouldn't go out of my way to seek it out.
07-30-2011 19:27:40 | More by NWer
4/5 rDev +7.2%
Appearance is a dark red ruby color with nill head and lace that holds fairly true to the style. Smell is rich in heavy malts and dark fruits and light alchohol aroma. Taste has sweet rich malts, dark fruits and a good balance of hops with a little alchohol hidding in the background. Mouthfeel is a heavy medium with good viscosity that balances with the carbonation. Not a bad barley wine at all, real enjoyable.
01-10-2011 00:04:44 | More by Bookseeb
1.55/5 rDev -58.4%
Snagged a 6-pack of this at a whole foods here. Nice to see a barleywine in a 6-pack and in smaller bottles. 2nd bottle from the 6-pack. The first I had last night was absolutely terrible.. funky, and wasn't even close to 9.9% alc. by volume. Hope this goes better...
- Nice dark rich clear copper brown with an off-white finger of head quickly down to a creamy thin layer and a large ring of lace. It's pretty at least.
- Grainy, bready.. light alcohol.. smells rather green though.. perhaps not fermented long enough. Light grassy hop, more caramel malt than anything... rather green and weak.
- Tart and green... this beer is infected, green.. pulled too early.. or something.. Aceto infection... it's pretty bad.
- Light to medium bodied.. though my beer is shot.
- Foul, sour, funky.. infected. Like my first homebrew. I had to pour it out, and toss the rest of the 6-pack. I wrote the brewery.,
12-27-2010 23:17:44 | More by Docer
New York
2.8/5 rDev -24.9%
Reviewed on 2/6/2010. Bottle thanks to riversideAK. Pours a clear brown with a small ring of white head. Aroma of sweet malt, booze, molasses, raisins. Flavor of sweet caramel malt and lots of residual sugars. Ugh, so sweet and completely lacking in complexity. This was difficult to drink.
12-23-2010 18:34:55 | More by LilBeerDoctor
4.08/5 rDev +9.4%
Reviewed 06/23/10
Poured from bottle to New Belgium tulip.
Note: I don't know age of beer, but tasted like a barley with 1-2 years under it's belt.
A: very dark for a barley wine. No head, no bubbles. Bing cherry red. Great clarity. Visible sediment at bottom of bottle.
S: Deep, thick, caramel, vanilla, slight port wine aroma, touch of chemical. Smells aged; bottle doesn't indicate bottle date. Hint of praline at end of smell.
T: Good hop balance with low bitterness. Warm, nice burnt caramel flavor. Very appreciatable.
M: medium body, fills mouth with slight burn of carbonation.
D: Very nice beer. Planning for a purchase of more of the beer, and will age it for a couple years. For only $2/bottle, this is a great value!
12-20-2010 09:09:03 | More by harrymel
4.22/5 rDev +13.1%
Dark amber with minimal head.
Smells of roasted malt, fruit cake and hops.
Taste is dominated by malty sweetness but there is a subtle hoppy finish.
Quite a nice beer. The alcohol level is in keeping with the style, but it would be nice if this brew could be made with all the flavor, just with less potency.
08-28-2010 18:54:01 | More by industrialswill
Dick's Barley Wine from Dick's Brewing Company
84 out of 100 based on 73 ratings.


text:
Updated Aug 2, 2013 - 12:16 pm
Tent City to throw anniversary party for inmates
By KTAR Newsroom
Originally published: Aug 2, 2013 - 12:16 pm
Originally published: Aug 2, 2013 - 12:16 pm
PHOENIX -- Maricopa County's Tent City Jail is turning 20 on Saturday and to mark the occasion there will be a party for the inmates.
Candy cigarettes, magazines, dinner, a movie and cake are on the agenda.
"It's a celebration we all deserve," Sheriff Joe Arpaio said.
The facility at 29th Avenue and Durango Street has been in operation regardless of weather conditions. According to a Sheriff's Office press release, the jail can house just over 2,000.
Attention ArizonaSports.com Comment Users: We have recently changed our comments boards.We would like you to be part of the conversation with all fans of Arizona sports teams by logging in with your Facebook, Twitter, Google+ or Disqus account. Existing Arizona Sports (KTAR) account members will need to create a Disqus account or use one of the aforementioned social media logins. Thank you.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Oceania Cruises offers several "Signature Sailings," which include voyages exploring culinary, wine, music, health & wellness themes.
Oceania Cruises is renowned for offering an exceptional experience at an incredible value. Book early & save on our most popular itineraries.
There's still time! Take advantage of our limited availability offers, including our 2014 Winter voyages to the Caribbean and South Pacific.
Our ships cater to just 684 pampered guests on Regatta, Nautica and Insignia, and 1,250 privileged guests on Marina and Riviera.
As you travel from one destination to the next, you'll dine on the finest cuisine at sea, spend serene days filled with enriching entertainment and retire each evening to your richly appointed suite or stateroom.
Offering more than ever with no compromise in quality.
Oceania Cruises pioneered extensive overnight stays and late evening departures allowing guests to truly experience each destination to it's fullest.
Save up to 40% off à la carte prices when you purchase the Your World Collection or Unlimited Passport Collection value packages.
For even more in-depth exploration and discovery, we have created a special collection of extended land programs that is without equal.
Oceania Cruises painstakingly selects each world-class hotel for its superb location, ambiance, standards of service, cuisine and amenities.
Presented by Mary Hart
Our experts provide turn-key services that will help you select your perfect cruise, customize your air schedule, reserve pre- and post-land programs and help you plan your onboard experience.
Sign in or register for My Oceania.
From the "finest cuisine at sea" to port-intensive itineraries, our points of distinction are what makes us the best value in upscale cruising.
Being a member of the Oceania Cruises family allows you to enjoy the most generous rewards in premium cruising.
Announcing New & Exciting Rewards
Our valued past guests will enjoy exclusive events, special shore excursions and additional surprises.
Socialize with guests, comment on your favorite stories, posts, images and videos!
If you are already booked with us, please sign in to view and manage your current cruise reservation.
Receive maximum pre-cruise savings by purchasing shore excursions online as early as 180 days and up until 72 hours prior to your sail date.
Discover the hotels and land programs available on your voyage, purchase beverage packages and make your dining reservations.
Visit the Before You Go section to complete your guest registration, request air deviations and learn about insurance, visas and more.
Home > Find a Cruise > Caribbean and the Panama Canal > Heart of the Caribbean > Excursions > Gustavia > Yellow Semi-Sub Exploration
May we help you
À La Carte Excursions | General Information
Add To Plan
Tendering to shore from the ship, you will board your semi-submersible craft at the tender pier. Descending into the hull of the vessel, you'll find seating in front of the large underwater windows that provide a colorful vista of the undersea attractions found around St. Bart's harbor area. On your way to the harbor entrance, you may encounter such delightful creatures as the green sea turtles that have made this area their home and will pass over the wreck of the island freighter Marignan, which sank during the height of Hurricane Luis in 1995.
Your vessel makes its way to the southeastern edge of the St. Bart Marine Park, where a delightful parade of colorful tropical fish will make their way past your viewing portal and vibrant coral reefs dot the ocean floor below. Traveling on, a stop will be made at The Saints, a group of 3 small islands. This will no doubt be the highlight of your tour when the crew set about feeding the surrounding fish. Don't be surprised to see hundreds of hungry fish clamoring right outside your window for their share of food. You may even see a local shark or two!
Following your stop at The Saints, your semi-submersible will retrace its path back to the tender pier. You may wish to go topside for the return trip where you can enjoy an excellent view of the breathtaking shoreline of St. Barts and the luxury yachts moored in the harbor.
Please note: There are very steep stairs to negotiate in order to enter the submersible and therefore, it is not suitable for wheelchair guests. Those with mobility concerns are cautioned to evaluate their personal level of ability.
NOTICE: All Oceania Cruises shore excursion fares are listed per person, and are subject to change and availability. Some tours are capacity controlled and may be withdrawn at any time without prior notice. Tour departure times are subject to change so please reference your actual tour ticket for the correct departure time. Minor children under 18 years of age must be accompanied by a an adult parent or guardian on all shore excursions. While Oceania Cruises makes every effort to adhere to the specifics mentioned in each shore excursion description, circumstances may require otherwise. All shore excursion information contained on this website is subject to change without notice at Oceania Cruises' discretion. Oceania Cruises is not responsible or liable for typographical error, omissions or misprints.
*Click here to view complete terms and conditions associated with this special offer.
Click to enlarge map
Book Cruise
Send to a friend
Register for email updates
Click here to register for special offers and itinerary updates.
Cruise Plan
©2014 Oceania Cruises, Inc. Ships' Registry: Marshall Islands. All Rights Reserved.


text:
TEMPE, Ariz. -- The Angels and Rangers gave fans at Tempe Diablo Stadium a demonstration on Tuesday of why the American League West is known for its superlative pitching.With starters Ervin Santana of the Angels and the Rangers' Eric Hurley setting the tone, each delivering three scoreless innings, pitching was the name of the game. A leadoff single by Peter Bourjos and RBI double by Maicer Izturis in the sixth snapped a scoreless duel, and Jeff Mathis squeezed home Mark Trumbo in the seventh, handing the Angels a 2-1 decision. The Angels did not have a hit until Brandon Wood laced a one-out single in the fifth after center fielder Julio Borbon had taken an extra-base hit from Trumbo. Texas had threatened against Santana in the first with Borbon's single and a walk putting runners at the corners with one away, but Santana struck out former batterymate Mike Napoli and retired Mitch Moreland.
2010 Spring Training - Texas Rangers
News & Features
- Borbon makes Rangers' roster -- for now
- Worth noting
- Holland sharp in Rangers' second Alamodome win
- Young relief corps could be key to Rangers' bullpen
- Rangers rally after Ogando's sharp outing
Sights & Sounds
Spring Training Info
"High heat," Santana said, referring to his strikeout of the powerful Napoli. "Everything was good today. I got the ball down when I wanted, mixed it up. For right now, it's good. But there's still a long way to go."Santana departed having struck out two hitters, while Hurley also fanned a pair after walking the first two men he faced. The Angels ran into an inning-ending double play when Izturis was picked off second with Vernon Wells batting. Trumbo singled leading off the seventh and advanced on right fielder Engel Beltre's error. Mathis' squeeze scored Trumbo after Efren Navarro's grounder to the right side moved him to third. An expertly turned double play by Angels second baseman Kevin Melillo and shortstop Jean Segura took Garrett Richards out of a two-on, one-out jam in the eighth. Scott Downs and Hisanori Takahashi (two innings) had shut down Texas before Richards worked a scoreless seventh. Matt Kata's ninth-inning RBI for Texas avoided a shutout.
"They executed twice, and we didn't," Rangers manager Ron Washington said.
The Angels and Rangers are both 6-5 in Cactus League play.
Up next for Angels: The focus once again is on Scott Kazmir as the lefty tries to stretch out to four innings on Wednesday against the Rockies in a 2:05 p.m. CT Cactus League game available on Gameday Audio from Tempe, Ariz. Right-hander Jhoulys Chacin will start for Colorado. Southpaw Trevor Reckling and right-handed relievers Jason Bulger, Kevin Jepsen and Jordan Walden follow Kazmir, who threw three scoreless innings his last time out against the White Sox.Up next for Rangers: Ian Kinsler takes a six-game hitting streak into Wednesday's 2:05 p.m. CT game against the Athletics in Surprise, Ariz. Kinsler has four home runs and seven RBIs in seven games while hitting .444 with a 1.167 slugging percentage. Derek Holland starts for the Rangers while Neftali Feliz is scheduled to pitch three innings out of the bullpen. The game will be available live via a free audio webcast on texasrangers.com.
Lyle Spencer is a reporter for MLB.com. This story was not subject to the approval of Major League Baseball or its clubs.


text:
Notice something wrong, missing, or unsatisfactory? Feel free to edit pages yourself and make use of discussion pages. Wiki content is created, maintained, and administrated by players. See how you can help.
Miniatures (or mini-pets) are downsized versions of creature and NPC models which can be summoned to follow a player around. Summoning or dismissing a miniature does not consume it. They do not fight or add any combat advantage. Many miniatures are acquired through opening Minis 3-Pack (Set 1)s, Minis 3-Pack (Set 2)s, and Minis 3-Pack (Set 3)s, which contain three randomly selected miniatures of which two are common and one is uncommon. These miniatures can also be used in the Mystic Forge by combining any four miniatures of the same rarity to create a random miniature of the same or higher rarity from any set, regardless of the set they came from. Some exceptions exist. Special miniatures are not obtainable through Minis 3-Packs or the Mystic Forge, but can usually be bought from the Gem Store during special events and otherwise require different methods to obtain them.
[edit] List of miniatures
[edit] Set 1
[edit] Set 2
[edit] Set 3
[edit] Special miniatures
[edit] Summoning and dismissing a miniature
To summon your miniature, double click or right click it and select Use.
- Moving the miniature from one spot to another in your bag will dismiss it.
- You can also dismiss the miniature by right clicking it in your bag and selecting Use again or by double clicking it in your bag again.
- Certain miniatures are automatically dismissed when entering or leaving underwater mode.[1]
[edit] Notes
|The Guild Wars Wiki has an article on Miniature.
- Miniatures have your character's guild tag appended to their name while active.
- Though miniatures are considered collectible items by the game they will not be deposited in your Account Vault if you select the "Deposit All Collectibles" option in your Inventory.
- Special miniatures don't count towards the Miniature Collection achievements.


text:
FORT WORTH -- It won't be long now until massive concrete arches form a new gateway linking downtown Fort Worth to the cultural district.
Workers will pour the last of 12 arches for a new Seventh Street bridge next week by laying out the frame. The frame will then be laced with steel cable before it is filled with concrete, like a giant Jell-O mold.
But nothing quite like this has ever been attempted before.
"This is a pre-cast, network arch bridge," said Val Lopez, a spokesperson from the Texas Department of Transportation. "The first one in the world."
The design is even more special, because the government saved taxpayers a bundle by not paying an outside designer, he said. Instead, an in-house TxDOT engineer dreamed it up or doodled it up.
"Scribbled it on napkins, legal pads," Lopez said.
The $26-million project has undergone 10 years of tweaking.
"This is something we're quite proud of," Lopez said, standing amid the upright arches in a lot off West Seventh. "We did it in-house, designed it in-house. It's going to be beautiful."
Each arch is 24 feet tall, more than 50 yards long, and weighs 300 tons. There will be six on each side, with illuminated criss-crossing steel cables, and pedestrian walkways outside the arches.
In late spring, crews will slowly move the huge forms to the bridge site with a vehicle like the one that moved the space shuttle to the launch pad. After the arches are installed, workers will build a new bridge deck.
The goal is to keep the Seventh Street bridge closed for no more than 150 days, and have it open in time for the Thanksgiving and Christmas holidays.
E-mail email@example.com


text:
This weekend in Taipei included the Cosplay event Fancy Frontiers 14. Cosplay, where people dress up like their favourite cartoon/graphic novel/manga characters is always a fun time and a great photographic opportunity. Unfortunately though, this weekend the weather was against the event. Yesterday included a huge rainstorm and when I went back today, it had rained, though it was more or less dry while I visited. Not as many good shots as I would like, but it was a fun event. Here are some quick results from the past two days.Lips are Sealed *
Nervous Blue Eyes * Shocking Pink *
Continue reading


text: Escape to the Country Series 11 - 8. Norfolk Share: About this programme 8/75. Jules Hudson helps a couple who are looking for a period property in Norfolk on a budget of £350,000. Among the homes on offer is a former stable block with an impressive country-chic interior. Cast and crew Cast Presenter Jules Hudson Crew Series Editor Zoe Dobson Series Producer Jo Griffiths Categories Property Share:


text:
Town Square
Original post made on Nov 29, 2012
Read the full story here Web Link posted Thursday, November 29, 2012, 8:31 AM
on Nov 29, 2012 at 9:09 am
Was the attacker wearing a mask? If not, are the cops working on a sketch of the attacker?
on Nov 29, 2012 at 9:34 am
[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]
on Nov 29, 2012 at 10:13 am
How frightening for the woman, and how frustrating that although paople are taking all of the proper precautions,there seems to be a welcome mat down for all criminals in Palo Alto. Suggestions, anyone?


text:
GLEN DANIEL (WVVA) - A Raleigh County teacher is now a national champion.
Everett Jeremy Rodriguez of Liberty High School was named the winner of the Great American Teach-Off Wednesday morning.
Thousands of teachers from across the nation were nominated for the competition.
Rodriguez has taught theater and music at Liberty for the past six years.
As winner, Rodriguez receives a $10,000 grant that will go toward a computerized music lab.
View WVVA.com's previous reports on the Teach-Off
The contest was held by GOOD and the University of Phoenix. Following is the full press release on Rodriguez' win:
Glen Daniel, W. Va (April 18, 2013) – GOOD and University of Phoenix® today named Liberty High School teacher Everett Jeremy Rodriguez the winner of the 2013 Great American Teach-Off. Rodriguez will receive a $10,000 grant to build a computerized music laboratory to help expand his students' music opportunities.
Thousands of teachers from across the nation were nominated, and Rodriguez was one of 20 teachers who were named finalists and competed for public votes in the Great American Teach-Off. Rodriguez is the winner for grades 7-12 and one of only two recipients nationwide to receive this honor.
Rodriguez specializes in the fine arts, teaching theatre and music and directing the Liberty High World Percussion Ensemble. Rodriguez aims to provide his students with the equipment and assets they require in order to allow them to collaborate in the production of original music videos, compositions, scripts and full-length stage productions.
Rodriguez hopes to further expand his students' musical opportunities by purchasing a computerized piano laboratory. In doing so, his students will be able to record and publish music with professional grade technology.
Rodriguez received his Bachelor of Arts in Music Education from Glenville State College. He serves as the Fine Arts Department Chairperson and Faculty Senate President at Liberty High School and was recently named Liberty High School Teacher of the Year.
"Teachers play a critical role in shaping the futures of our nation's children," said Dr. Meredith Curley, Dean of the College of Education at University of Phoenix. "The Great American Teach-Off is an opportunity to show our appreciation for teachers and provides a platform to share innovative classroom ideas. Curriculum in K-12 classrooms continues to evolve to be more hands-on and tie learning to real life experiences. This program celebrates teachers who engage students in creative new ways."
"One of our goals at GOOD is to elevate the passionate individuals who break norms when taking on big challenges," said Ben Goldhirsh, co-founder and CEO of GOOD. "It's these individuals' stories that fuel the cycle of inspiration. The Great American Teach-Off was created to give remarkable teachers an opportunity to inspire their colleagues and the broader GOOD community, and be rewarded for their work. The grant program has been an amazing success. We are thrilled to be running this campaign for the third consecutive year with the University of Phoenix, because, like us, they truly believe that education is a crucial component to moving the world forward."
More information about the Great American Teach-Off grant program can be found at GOOD.is/GATO.


text:
Patrick AitchesonCommunications & Logistics Administrator, Diverse Elders Coalition
Patrick Aitcheson is the Communications and Logistics Administrator of the Diverse Elders Coalition (DEC). The DEC advocates for policies and programs that improve aging in our communities as racially and ethnically diverse people; American Indians and Alaska Natives; and lesbian, gay, bisexual and/or transgender (LGBT) people. In this role, Patrick coordinates the DEC's meetings, internal communications and ensures the smooth operations of the coalition. Patrick also monitors coverage and stories of diverse elders and the policies that affect them.
Patrick brings with him expertise around the prevention and awareness of HIV/AIDS. For the past fourteen years, he has worked on the Gay Men's Health Crisis (GMHC) HIV/AIDS hotline as a counselor, peer supervisor and trainer. On the hotline, Patrick counsels people dealing with the health, economic and social isolation issues related both to getting older and to long-term HIV infection and HIV medication usage.
Previously, he has designed, developed and managed a full-service family day care program for Union Settlement Association and supervised a five-classroom day care center. His business experience includes being a plant manager and plant controller for Formica Corporation and a financial analyst at a Boston investment firm. Patrick has his undergraduate degree from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and his MBA from Harvard Business School.
*SAGE is the fiscal sponsor for the Diverse Elders Coalition. The coalition includes: the National Asian Pacific Center on Aging (NAPCA), the National Hispanic Council on Aging (NHCOA), the National Indian Council on Aging (NICOA), Services & Advocacy for GLBT Elders (SAGE) and Southeast Asia Resource Action Center (SEARAC).


text:
"Sunrise on the lake" ***Save$125*** Pea Hill Creek, Beach in Lake Gaston
- bedrooms 3
- baths 2
- sleeps 8
- pool no
- hot tub no
- pets allowed no
- type House
- community Indian Rock
rates (USD)
/ week
vacation rental description
Dear Vacationer - If we don't respond to your e-mail inquiry WITHIN 2 DAYS, please call Chris at the number provided for assistance. If you would like ADDITIONAL PHOTOS, let us know.
The house is located on a cul-de-sac, in Henrico, NC on the NE Quad on beautiful Pea Hill Creek. It takes two hours from Virginia Beach, two hours from Raleigh, NC, one hour and forty five minutes from Richmond and three-four hours from Maryland and Washington, DC. Pea Hill Creek is large, has some of the cleanest water on the lake and is mostly calm. However, if you want rough water, the main lake is an eight minute boat ride away. You can enjoy swimming, fishing, jet-skiing, sunbathing, and boating on the lake. Lake Gaston has 350-miles of shoreline. It is 34 miles in length and 1.3 miles across at its widest point.
At the boat dock, you will find enough cleats to tie up your boat and there is 8 feet of crystal clear water at end of the dock to jump into safely. There is a Sandy Beach where the little ones can play and build sand castles. Bring your food down to the boat dock. You'll find a table and chairs where you can eat and watch all the lake activities up close, or relax and soak up the sun on one of our comfortable lounge chairs. Fishing is excellent at Lake Gaston. Bass, perch, catfish, sunfish and crappie are just a rod and reel cast away. The boat dock is a short walk from the house with a very gentle slope. A Private Boat Ramp is only 4 houses away. There are games for the kids to play in the house in case it rains or for use in the evenings.
Our one-story house is clean and comfortable with excellent views of the lake. The house has Central A/C and heat. There are three bedrooms - (2) Queens, (1) Double, as well as, (2) Pull-out couch Queen beds located in the great room. So the house can actually sleep 10 people if needed for a night. All bedrooms are equipped with ceiling fans. Renters supply their own bath towels and linens.
The Kitchen is equipped with all your needed appliances, dishes, silverware, pots and pans, and a slow cooker. You can also prepare your meals on our Gas Grill or if you prefer, our Charcoal Grill both located on a large deck overlooking the lake. The main dining table inside the house seats six but an extra folding table can seat four more for a total of 10.
Lake Gaston is in a rural area but we are fortunate to have a Food Lion, Hamburgers and Hotdogs, Pizza with delivery and Ace Hardware located only 5 minutes from the house. We'll leave directions to places you may need to find at the house. On the weekends, less than one mile away, is the Lake Gaston Flea Market. Great bargains and produce! Renters supply their own towels and sheets.
Sorry, NO SMOKING NO PETS.
Good Evening Chris,
We had a BLAST! Wish we were there right now!! As I mentioned when we
spoke last Thursday evening, we love your place. The house and location (we
love Pea Hill Creek) are great. We had a great time and hope to spend some
time (perhaps 2 weeks) there next summer. When do you begin booking for next year?
We're attaching a photo of the family so you can "meet" the Stephenson's.
Thanks again.
A and J Stephenson
Hi Chris,
We had a fabulous time at the lake! Your house is at a great location on
the lake, and we liked that we could swim from the dock. This was
probably our most restful vacation.
Denny did go golfing a few times at the local golf course.
Thank you for allowing us to enjoy your home.
Ginny S.
Lake house was AWESOME! We had an amazing time and hope to return sometime maybe even this summer if it's not already rented out. Thanks,
vacation rental location
property availability
- dates with deals
- unavailable dates
Last modified on 07-25-2014 at 4:39 PM.
email owner view full calendar
chris moss (757) 714-4984
house rental amenities
Central A/C and heat
2Baths, 2Showers
Fully equipped kitchen
Slow cooker/Pancake griddle
All small electrical appliances
Pots, pans
Iron and ironing board
Gas grill/Charcoal grill
Deck tables, chairs, umbrellas
5Fans, 2Alarm clocks
Cable TV, 2TV's, CD, VCR, DVD players
Soccer Table
Noodle floats
Cards/Board Games/Puzzles/Coloring books
Boat Dock
Extra chairs, table, umbrella on the dock
Lounge chairs on the dock
activities and attractions in Lake Gaston Heartland
Fishing, swimming, boating, sailing, water-skiing, jet-skiing, tubing, golf, antiquing, annual wake-boarding competition, Fall seafood festival and fishing tournaments. You can rent boats and jet skies nearby from Morningstar Marina. There are nice restaurants nearby.
vacation rental rates
Current Rates: We accept CHECK, DEBIT or CREDIT CARD
April 26 through September 13 - was $1225/week - (SAVE $125.00) Rent for $1100 - all inclusive
$175/night for 3,4 or 5 night stays when available.
September 13 through November 1 - $850/week
$155/night for 2,3 or 4 night stays when available.
November 1 through April 26 - $750/week
$125/night for 2,3 or 4 night stays when available.
($50 cleaning fee applies to all rentals. 7% tax is included in the price)
(Addit $50 for 4th July, Memorial day and Labor day)
Maximum of 8 people. Saturday to Saturday rental.
No Smoking. No Pets.
To Rent: Please e-mail or call with your name, phone and requested dates.
NC Lease Agreement will be e-mailed to you. Simply return with signature and deposit paid by check, debit or credit card.
50% of Rental required at booking. There is a Damage Deposit of $250 that will be refunded to you if no loss or damage to home. Balance is due 14 days prior to arrival date.
Must be 25 yrs or older to rent.
Check in - 4pm or later
Check out - Before 11am
Renters supply their own towels and sheets.
chris moss (757) 714-4984
accepted payment methods
Prior to paying a reservation deposit, always verify payment instructions by calling the phone number displayed on this listing page. By contacting the owner directly and paying by an approved method - credit card, paypal, check or bank transfer - your reservation payment will be protected up to $1,000.Learn more in our Security Center


text:
Sergey Kovalev and Thomas Dulorme scored wins on HBO Boxing After Dark, while Radivoje Kalajdzic, Wilky Campfort, and others were victorious off TV.
Sergey Kovalev is an unlikely emerging star for America's still-number one boxing network, but he has made his way to the HBO main event this coming Saturday by smashing his way into the spot.
Find out what you missed the past week. Countries highlighted in this review include the USA, UK, Argentina, Mexico, Thailand, Japan, Australia, New Zealand, France, Germany, Canada, Azerbaijan,...
Photographer Darryl Cobb Jr was on hand this past Saturday to see the Main Events/NBC Sports card, shooting the fights for BLH. Check out his work.
Last night on NBC Sports, heavyweight Amir Mansour stopped Kelvin Price in seven and Lionell Thompson schooled Ryan Coyne. On the undercard, Steve Cunningham routed Manuel Quezada, Darnell Wilson...
Adrien Broner headlines on Showtime against Marcos Maidana, Juergen Braehmer and David Price return in Germany, and more.
Jamaal Davis was in a must win situation for his career to advance this past Saturday, but came up short. Nonetheless, he left it all in the ring and has nothing to be ashamed of. Patrick Majewski...
Philadelphia's Jamaal Davis will attempt to capture the biggest win of his career on Saturday, Feb. 23rd in Atlantic City against the Polish "Machine" Patrick Majewski. Will the judges be fair to...
Gabriel Rosado stopped Charles Whittaker in another quality NBC Sports show last Friday. Here's what you didn't see on TV, live from press row.
Gabriel Rosado stopped Charles Whittaker to earn an IBF junior middleweight title shot on another successful NBC Sports boxing show.
As part of the new SB Nation launch, prior users will need to choose a permanent username, along with a new password.
Your username will be used to login to SB Nation going forward.
Please login to your Vox Media account. This account will be linked to your previously existing Eater account.
As part of the new SB Nation launch, prior MT authors will need to choose a new username and password.
Your username will be used to login to SB Nation going forward.
We'll email you a reset link.
If you signed up using a 3rd party account like Facebook or Twitter, please login with it instead.
You must be a member of Bad Left Hook to participate.
We have our own Community Guidelines at Bad Left Hook. You should read them.
You must be a member of Bad Left Hook to participate.
We have our own Community Guidelines at Bad Left Hook. You should read them.
Choose an available username to complete sign up.
In order to provide our users with a better overall experience, we ask for more information from Facebook when using it to login so that we can learn more about our audience and provide you with the best possible experience. We do not store specific user data and the sharing of it is not required to login with Facebook.


text:
Email: firstname.lastname@example.com | Twitter: @WWLTV
NEW ORLEANS - It's been said that beauty knows no pain.
But what would you do to keep your youthful appearance?
Recently, Kim Kardashian allowed herself to be shown getting a "vampire facial."
Dermatologist Patricia Farris told us what that is and how it works.


text:
South Carolinians for Responsible Government is a statewide grassroots non-profit organization that supports efforts to make government more efficient and accountable.
In South Carolina, more than half of local and state government tax revenue is spent on K-12 public education. SCRG works to keep parents and community members informed about how that money is being spent and works aggressively to expand options available to parents. We are firmly committed to the belief that every child in South Carolina deserves equal access to a wide range of classrooms -public, charter, magnet, independent and home school- in order to receive the most effective and appropriate instruction possible.


text:
SPOKANE, Wash. - Let's be honest, the reason kids love Christmas so much is because of those wonderful presents under the tree and the magical idea that Santa somehow manages to stop at every house and bring toys to all the good little girls and boys. However, when given the opportunity, kids can love giving just as much.
Santa Express is a holiday store that allows children to share in the joy of giving. The store is meant for children ages 4 through 12 and all the gifts for sale have been donated and range in price from 50 cents to $8.00. Kids are accompanied by one of Santa's Elves who help them pick out little gifts for all their loved ones. Then, children decorate gift bags, wrapping each one individually so that mom and dad can't see what their child has picked out for them until Christmas day.
All the net proceeds are donated to the Vanessa Behan Crisis Nursery. While kids shop, parents can shop as well at Vanessa's Village, a boutique just outside of Santa Express full of reasonably priced gifts.
Santa Express if located in downtown Spokane in the skywalk level of the Crescent Building just across the street from the Riverpark Square Mall. The address is 707 West Main Avenue. Store hours are Monday-Saturday 10 a.m. - 8 p.m. and Sunday 11 a.m. - 6 p.m. Santa Express will be open until December 23, but gifts are limited so shop early for the best selection!


text:
Stuart Russell -- Biography
Stuart Russell was born in Portsmouth, England in 1962. He received his B.A. with first-class honours in physics from Oxford University in 1982, and his Ph.D. in computer science from Stanford in 1986. He then joined the faculty of the University of California at Berkeley, where he is Professor (and formerly Chair) of Electrical Engineering and Computer Sciences and holder of the Smith-Zadeh Chair in Engineering. He is also an Adjunct Professor of Neurological Surgery at UC San Francisco. In 1990, he received the Presidential Young Investigator Award of the National Science Foundation, and in 1995 he was cowinner of the Computers and Thought Award. He was a 1996 Miller Professor of the University of California and was appointed to a Chancellor's Professorship in 2000. In 1998, he gave the Forsythe Memorial Lectures at Stanford University and in 2005 he received the ACM Karlstrom Outstanding Educator Award. He is a Fellow and former Executive Council member of the American Association for Artificial Intelligence and a Fellow of the Association for Computing Machinery. He has published over 150 papers on a wide range of topics in artificial intelligence including machine learning, probabilistic reasoning, knowledge representation, planning, real-time decision making, multitarget tracking, computer vision, computational physiology, and global seismic monitoring. His books include "The Use of Knowledge in Analogy and Induction" (Pitman, 1989), "Do the Right Thing: Studies in Limited Rationality" (with Eric Wefald, MIT Press, 1991), and "Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach" (with Peter Norvig, Prentice Hall, 1995, 2003, 2010).


text:
Gay Marriageby Thaddeus
In case you've been living in a cave on the moon for the past few years, here is a news update: gay rights advocates and social conservatives have lately been sparring over the issue of same-sex marriage in America. It's also no secret that most Mormons support a traditional (heterosexual) definition of marriage.
It's been a hard political position to take. I've wondered myself how to deal with the charges of bigotry laid against us, and how to adequately defend my stance.
The gay rights community has set up the debate as a matter of civil rights. This is misleading, particularly in the California Proposition 8 campaign. All legal rights have been granted same-sex couples for years. If it were just a matter of ensuring hospital visitation rights or filing an extra tax-exemption for a domestic partnership, I would be in favor of providing these civil rights, but they are already available. The real battle is over the marriage license; the right to call each other "husband" or "wife."
Marriage is not, in and of itself, a civil right. Government has a long history of restricting marriages involving siblings, cousins, minors, and bigamists in addition to homosexuals. There is good reason for government to support only heterosexual marriages.
What is being fought for is not civil rights, but legitimacy. Society is being asked to ratify homosexual behavior, and Mormons cannot sanction the behavior in good conscience. Mormons view homosexual behavior as unwise and sinful. It is one thing to tolerate sin in a community, and another for society to endorse the sin officially.
Mormons are not trying to outlaw homosexuality. We are not hoping to deny anyone their legal rights. And we certainly do not support violence or discrimination toward gays or lesbians. Our aim is simply to support the traditional definition of marriage as the ideal way to organize society in families, and keep it as a matter of prudent public policy.
I recognize that this article will likely set off some powder kegs of emotion. Let's discuss the issue, but before you comment, I'd like you to take a few deep breaths, read our comment policy, and keep your tone as polite as you can. I won't respond to name-calling or insults (against me or my Church).
42 Responses to "Gay Marriage"
Great article. I like how you pointed out that government (aka. the people of a nation) have always had the power to restrict and govern marriage unions.
I would also like to point out that in the vast majority of cases, voters have overwhelmingly voted to keep marriage between a man and a woman. (http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/11/02/ballot.samesex.marriage/index.html). Despite what the media says, you are actually in the minority if you believe gay marriage is ok.
I believe that when the family fails, the nation fails. I believe that homosexuality is a sin, and I cannot endorse it as a part of my community. I can tolerate it, but never endorse it.
I will comment more later, but I'd just like to say that there are many faithful, commandment-abiding, temple-going Mormons who support gay marriage. We're definitely a minority group within the LDS Church but we do exist. Other members may be supportive of gay rights but feel that they are obligated to 'follow the prophet' in terms of their actions. Since this site is titled "What Do Mormons Believe?" I would have appreciated a disclaimer of sorts that this is a contentious issue both within and outside of the Church.
Darrell, thanks for your comments. I think you're right; no state that legalized gay marriage did so by vote of the people. It came down as a judge's ruling.
Sunlize, thanks for pointing that out. You're right that members of the Church are not obligated to take the same political stance as Church leaders. There is a broad spectrum of opinion in the Church, and even with my stance I still sympathize with the gay community; I don't want to disenfranchise anyone of basic human rights.
It is a tenet of the Church that homosexual actions are just about as sinful and spiritually damaging as premarital sex and extramarital affairs, so at least all members should have this point in common. Whether that translates into restraining relationships outside the Church is, I think, a matter of personal conscience.
Well, I would disagree with Darrell somewhat.
Homosexuality is not a sin. Homosexual sex is a sin. I person might be biologically predisposed to a lot of things that are sinful. As long as you don't participate in that, everything is fine.
We all have our cross to bear. That's what we're here to overcome.
My opinion only…mileage may vary.
Apologies beforehand for an excessively lengthy reply.
It seems your argument for excluding same-sex couples from marriage is based on two arguments. First, government has a compelling interest in the propagation of society and therefore, marriage, being a financially burdensome affair for the state, should be limited to partnerships that have the ability to produce children (so that those children may grow to be productive, tax paying members of society). Second, society shouldn't be asked to ratify a behavior that, in the opinion held by the LDS church (and others), is sinful.
Let's set religious argument aside for a few paragraphs. In order for the exclusion argument to stand on the assertion that government can and should limit marriage to child producing couples, it must be accepted by the argument's adherents that there cannot and does not exist any OTHER reason for marriage to exist. Therefore, in the absence of children, it is in society's BEST INTEREST to deny marriage on the basis that the "marriage subsidy" is meant to support the raising of children. Further, persons who adhere to this line of reasoning cannot rationally justify their support for "separate but equal" civil unions, domestic partnerships, or any other state recognized union, as these arrangements create a financial burden on the state. This philosophy forces the adherent into an all-or-nothing position.
While this is a favorite argument among marital exclusionists, this argument brings us to conclusions that are not easy for the religious right to swallow. If the state recognizes and provides financial incentives for marriage based on the state's interest in marriages producing children, any state recognition of marriage in the absence of children is unjustifiably costly to the state. Marriages should not be granted UNTIL a child has been conceived. This will ensure that benefits provided by the state as incentives for child rearing are not granted until the qualifying circumstance has been realized.
To your second argument, it is unconstitutional for the government to legislate with a religious slant. Therefore, any argument calling upon religious principles (calling an action sinful, for example), is a dead argument. Further, I don't think any rational person would argue that because law allows, or provides, for the practice of activities that are contrary to the views of a religion, or group of religions, that such allowances are tantamount to societal endorsement of such practices. With your reasoning, society endorses alcoholism, tobacco, pornography, gambling, divorce, and so on.
In short, 1) while a religion should and does have every right to preach against homosexual practices, arguments for or against public policy that call upon religion or religious belief have no place in our legal framework and, 2) marriage has not and cannot be defined to limit it to persons who have the possibility of producing children. ONE of the purposes of marriage is to create the framework for producing and rearing children, but until same-sex marriage debate entered the public consciousness, society at large never viewed marriage as the means to the SINGULAR end of producing children. Marriage can and does serve other meaningful and beneficial purposes that cannot be defined solely in a religious mind set, or limited to one gender or another.
I do not see your words as attacks – I never have. Healthy debate and argument are essential to a healthy civilization. I very highly respect you and your opinion.
We've not had enough deep conversation for you to understand that just because I argue a point doesn't mean I fully agree with the position I am arguing for. This is partly because something inside me won't let an argument in an open forum go unchallenged, and partly because I want to come to an honest conclusion, having navigated the fires of debate. I can honestly, truly, say that I have not fully decided where I stand on this issue.
Society tolerates these indulgences. Responsible government should never actively promote them or give them favored status.
With this I agree. I was illustrating that your argument is poorly constructed. An argument and its implications cannot be viewed and accepted (or rejected) individually. If you truly believe that legalizing gay marriage is the equivalent of endorsing gay marriage, than you must truly believe that legalizing alcohol is the equivalent of endorsing alcoholism. Are you honestly willing to accept that?
I do not believe an individual's view of the purpose of marriage is the crux of the issue. The facts are these: marriage exists as a legal construct. As a legal construct, its application is subject to the bounds, limits and guidelines of the constitution of the United States. Since the constitution does not define marriage, the application of marriage must be derived from other provisions from within the constitution. Within this framework, there are exceedingly strong arguments for granting marriage to same-sex couples. I won't list them here – you can spend 30 seconds on Google.
I'm going to shamelessly sidestep the question of whether or not gay marriage benefits society (even though I think I could mount a decent defense on this front). I think the question is moot when viewed in the light of constitutional law. One of the great and horrible consequences of having an imperfect government (because you know that in this world, there is no other kind), is that what should and should not be legal by virtue of what is "moral" does not always coincide with what should and should not be legal by virtue of the legal construct in which we operate. It just so happens (thankfully) that most of the time, the law and what is generally considered "moral" are the same thing. One might argue that in order to maintain an ordered society, our belief in the rule of law must supersede our belief in what is morally right. Mormons believe in "obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law," but seldom understand what that truly requires of us philosophically.
This, I think, is why same-sex marriages tend to be enacted through court action. I admit that I mentally choke on these words as I type them, but nonetheless: the general population is blinded by their individual "moral" beliefs. This brings me back to the assertion that what is legal, and therefore should be protected by law, should not necessarily be what the majority thinks is "moral".
I would remind you that the courts have often defined or shaped public policy contrary to the "moral" standing of the general populace at the time (see "Civil Rights", during the 1900s). These rulings were wisely based on the rule of law, and blind to the moral convictions of the majority.
By the way, not all states with legal same-sex marriages have done so through court action. Vermont was the first to enact such protections legislatively, and will soon be followed by New Hampshire and New York.
A comment from Steven a while back:
"it is unconstitutional for the government to legislate with a religious slant. Therefore, any argument calling upon religious principles (calling an action sinful, for example), is a dead argument."
This is one statement that I find commonly overemphasized. The constitution says nothing about legislating "with a religious slant", and the only connection involved in the constitution is in the 1st amendment, and I feel obligated to point out that it only says "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof". It takes quite the stretch to take that statement and say that nobody can legislate with a religious slant. In fact, a less abstract interpretation of the 1st amendment actually endorses using one's religious principles to guide rational policy making as it is encompassed as part of the free exercise of religion. Whether or not you think people should legislate with a religious slant, declaring such an action unconstitutional is very much more a "dead argument" than "calling upon religious principles".
I guess I should have blasted "religiously motivated" laws as unconstitutional, instead of using the phrase "religious slant". I hate to borrow directly from Wikipedia, but I think it's well worded.
"The establishment clause has generally been interpreted to prohibit 1) the establishment of a national religion by Congress, or 2) the preference of one religion over another or the support of a religious idea with no identifiable secular purpose." (emphasis added).
This interpretation is where I'm coming from: any law that is founded on religious ideas with no secular purpose is unconstitutional. I do not find this an abstract conclusion in the slightest – in fact I believe the interpretation to be quite pure and literal. Accordingly, the law has not an ounce of understanding of what "sin" is. "Sin" is religious concept. The law does not consider murder, for example, a "sin". Producing public policy based purely on what is thought to be "sinful" is unconstitutional. This is an area where I believe many members of the church are in conflict, holding irrational views. If you agree with the above interpretation of the first amendment, you must also understand why arguments founded on religious principles or ideals have no place in the debate of public policy.
As far as the law is concerned, marriage is a legal construct and not a union defined by religious ideals. Insofar as religious ideals and secular purpose align, by all means, regulate accordingly. But when religious ideals without sufficient secular purpose are presented, they have no place in the debate. It is my opinion that excluding gays from state recognized marriage is a purely religious idea without sufficient secular justification (or at least without sufficient secular justification to outweigh the pro gay marriage arguments). If a court can be convinced that this is the case (assuming there is no specific US constitutional provision banning gay marriage), the court is justified, nay, obligated and bound, to issue a ruling so saying. Since marriage is defined by law, it needs to stand up to the same constitutional standards of law.
I do not judge or blast any person for "voting their conscience". The citizenry can be as religiously motivated as they please in the voting booth. If an appropriately passed amendment to the US constitution banned gay marriage, I'd be disappointed, but would argue that since the law of the land had been duly and unquestionably amended, the rule of law required banning gay marriage. Since such a provision does not exist in the US constitution, I'm trying to illustrate why people shouldn't cry foul when a court rules in favor of gay marriages, and why such rulings are not only justified, but inevitable.
Gay sex is already legitimate. Gay couples already live happy lives together, and much of society (depending on where you live) is okay with that. I think I understand what you are trying to say, though: because marriage is incentivized, legalizing gay marriage would force the government to provide incentives for gay couples to get married, in effect "giving away whiskey shots" that otherwise should be reserved for the child producing, straight folk. This isn't a new or separate argument to be considered in its own right – this is a repackaging of your existing argument that you should have guessed, by now, I don't fully agree with ;).
I'm afraid I may have overstepped my bounds, though. I've thought about what I've said, and while I think I still agree with what I've written, I've realized that this particular forum may not have been the place for such debate, especially since the purpose of this blog isn't necessarily to debate the issues, but to state and discuss the position and beliefs of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. On this topic, the church is very clear. For the purposes of this site, there really should be very little to discuss. If you feel I've hijacked the topic or overstepped a boundary, I sincerely apologize.
Let me begin my comment by saying I am StePHen, with the eternal and true spelling of the name, not SteVen with the (hmph) *other* spelling. So, Dave, thank you for the complement, but I think your comments should be directed elsewhere.
I agree with what Dave said, and continue by saying that the very existence of law is based off of a fundamental assumption of what is good and what is not good. Our nation is founded on this concept. Discussion of any policy centers around basic concepts of right and wrong. Even by arguing that you think religion shouldn't be part of the equation, you admit morality. The whole idea of "should" necessitates the belief on the part of the arguer that something is somehow "good", never mind how it became so. You must realize that by arguing that religion has no place in politics you are arguing that expressing personal beliefs of basic right and wrong is inappropriate in certain situations, which I find very hard to defend. You are also arguing that religious definitions of right and wrong are inferior politically to secular definitions of right and wrong, and I challenge you to devise a good meaning for that last idea.
Your argument depends on the assumption that marriage is a basic human civil right. Why do you believe that?
Having been around longer than the rest of you, what I find interesting is that in the early 80′s when gays started coming "out of the closet" there was a major debate about whether gayness was a natural or a learned condition. Although no conclusion was ever scientifically reached, suddenly the accepted truth was that all gay people are naturally disposed to their appetites and desires. That makes the argument equating their struggle comparable to the civil rights movement more tenable….but I'm still struggling with the basic tenet of the argument. If it is a learned behavior then it's a choice which makes the argument closer to that of an alcoholic or kleptomaniac.
"In order for the exclusion argument to stand on the assertion that government can and should limit marriage to child producing couples, it must be accepted by the argument's adherents that there cannot and does not exist any OTHER reason for marriage to exist."
Sometimes OTHER reasons exist, certainly, but these reasons alone don't always sufficiently add up to actually justifying the cost of marriage.
"If the state recognizes and provides financial incentives for marriage based on the state's interest in marriages producing children, any state recognition of marriage in the absence of children is unjustifiably costly to the state. Marriages should not be granted UNTIL a child has been conceived."
The problem here is the difference between principle and just a particular circumstance. A heterosexual couple can, in principle, procreate. A homosexual couple, in every circumstance, cannot procreate. We create laws in our society based on principles of our reality and less on particulars. I hope this makes sense.
I don't believe at all that separating morality from the notion of sin is splitting a thin hair. One of philosophy's purposes is to reach an understanding of morality, and much, if not most, of defensible philosophical thinking defines morality without the concept of God. I think, also, our lives are filled with such distinctions. What the LDS Church considers sinful is not necessarily what the Catholic Church considers sinful (wine, anyone?). The concept of sin is by no means universal. And while "secular morality" is not universal either, it is infinitely more so than "sin". I maintain that sin and righteousness, and morality, are two, distinct concepts that happen to share the same space a lot of the time.
I agree that my position is a hard sell in this crowd. I don't think I can sway the opinion of anyone here, but I believe one comes to better conclusions if he is forced to publicly defend his. I hope that you, and others here as well, feel that this discussion serves that purpose. If I have not convinced you to take my side, than I hope you've at least understood it.
Learned behavior presupposes the existence of a teacher, or some mechanism for teaching that behavior. I think it is fairly well accepted that straight, religious, "good" families still produce gay children, and gay couples raising children still produce straight kids.
There is no reason why we shouldn't believe gay people have been part of the human race since the "beginning" – some of Christianity's (Judaism's) oldest literature speaks of the existence of gay folk, at least indirectly. Where, when, and how did the alleged teaching of homosexuality take place, and how is it perpetuated?
Having asked this, I am very slow to compare the gay-rights movement to the civil rights struggles the African American community endured. I think on the surface we find some interesting commonalities, but I'm inclined to believe the comparisons end there.
I don't think I've made the argument that marriage is a basic human civil right. My arguments were based on the legal construct of marriage. As it exists (a construct of secular law), I believe it cannot be limited by gender. Marriage in and of itself is not a human right. So far as marriage is a secular institution, it is a right generously (but prejudicially) granted by government.
So far as government grants marriage without children, it recognizes these reasons as sufficient to extend the marriage subsidy. My argument is that if the government recognizes that these other reasons exists, and willingly grants benefits because of these reasons, it cannot choose to grant or withhold these benefits based on gender.
Society in general also acknowledges that other reasons exist. The principle of that matter is that the law doesn't really care whether or not a couple produces children. I argued that in the absence of children, the government shouldn't grant marriage to illustrate the futility of relying on the possibility of procreation as the foundation for the current legal construct of marriage. If the law cared about procreation, it would need to go to the extreme of limiting marriage to couples with a child (doing so would be FAR less costly to the government). If the law didn't care about whether or not a couple could procreate, it couldn't limit marriage to opposite gender couples. I think in the world of law, these would be the two most rational positions.
In the world of religion, however, I am a firm advocate for the rights of churches to deny their institution of marriage to whomever they please. The LDS church should not be forced to recognize, perform or in any way condone same sex couples.
In the end, marriage has always been a religious institution. If it is brought into the realm of public policy and law, this debate is inevitable, and I think in the end, the pro-gay supporters will win.
My questions for you (ceejay) are:
What are these "OTHER" reasons for marriage that you think exist? Are these reasons embedded in sexual identity? That is to say, are these "other" reasons for marriage dependent on the partnership being made of a man and a woman exclusively?
I recognized I've spammed this topic with, now, 5 consecutive posts. I apologize and thank you for your patience, but there were several posts to respond to, and doing so in a single, long post seemed cumbersome.
StePHe (a deliberate misspelling, since "steve" doesn't reflect the "true" spelling – how would it be pronounded? Steef? ).
I guess a good portion of my response to you can be found in my response to Dave (June 15th 1:48 pm). Just a few more notes:
I think my position is very defendable. I think history (and current events) has shown that a government based on religion is unstable, unsafe, and unsustainable.
What is good and what is not good is not what is sinful and what is righteous. Our government's framework for what is "good" is more or less established by the US constitution. I wholeheartedly believe that this framework is superior to any religious notion of right and wrong. If it were not so, rule of law would not exist, mayhem would ensue, and our nation would be wholly ungovernable.
You're free to vote your religious conscience. Do so! But understand that unless the laws you enact are rational and defendable outside the realm of religion, and inside the realm of constitutional law, the system will eventually correct itself and strike them down.
I, for one, do not believe that denying one's sexuality in the name of religion is "living a lie." I admire those who are examples of such devotion. Homosexuals are not the only group of people to be asked to do so. The Catholic Church has long asked its priesthood to live a life of celibacy. If the decision to live a life contrary to his or her desires for compatible companionship truly affords the person more joy and happiness, then I am glad for their choice and support them wholeheartedly.
Interesting that you would bring up the atrocities of the twentieth century as evidence that philosophy absent of God is a recipe for mass murder, genocide, oppression and dictatorship. I think history has shown over and over again, and will continue to show, that mass murder, genocide, oppression and dictatorship happen more often in the name of God and religion (or at least use these ideas as justification) than for any other reason.
It's true that many of the men who had a hand in the creation of the constitution had a belief in a higher power. The wording of the constitution does not necessarily reflect these beliefs. The statement that "all men are created equal" is from the Declaration of Independence. Also, the word "God" or "god" does not appear in the constitution. In fact, virtually all "official" references in our government to God were put in place very much after the fact (the vast majority taking place in the 1900s).
Further, I think you'd have an interesting challenge indeed to show English common law was formed around the basis of religion. It would be much easier to show that the formation of the British Parliament, and its governing rules, to be decidedly ANTI established religion, being a departure from rule under God's chosen king.
"All men created equal" is not an exclusively religious idea by any means. Again, I think you'll find the opposite to be true. Judaism and Christianity are no strangers to the idea of racial entitlement and racial inferiority. Until recent history, religion, specifically Christianity, has been used as much as a justification for racial repression as it was a device for "salvation". Many religions still operate in such a way. Unfortunately, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is not free from this history, but that topic is not a matter for discussion here (and probably is not one I'd ever touch anyway).
The origins of the idea of all men being created equal might be attributed to Thomas Hobbes (refer to the opening paragraph of Chapter 13 of The Leviathan). Interestingly enough, religion was absent in the formation and construction of Hobbes's framework of morality and political governance.
Hobbes spends a good deal of space in the The Leviathan discussing Christianity, but it's amusingly unclear if he was trying to illustrate how his philosophical framework is compatible with Christianity, or if he was just trying undermine the religious belief of his readers ["Hobbes's Moral and Political Philosophy", Feb. 2002, ed. Sharon A. Lloyd and Susanne Sreedhar, http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/hobbes-moral/.
In any case, Hobbes argued that members of a sovereign nation were obligated to submit to the established government, and the establishment was, more or less, superior to God and religion.
Contrary to popular belief among many religious circles, the Constitution was formed much more around the political and social framework of Hobbes and philosophers who expanded on his works (most notably John Locke) than it was around religion.
The funny thing is, I think you would find much of Hobbes's work unpalatable for many reasons, not the least of which he advocated that the state have the power and authority to govern in matters of religion, effectively placing the state above God.
I misread your post regarding the atrocities of the 20th century. My understanding wasn't that you were trying to show that there is no advantage to one philosophy over another. I believed you were stating that a philosophy uninformed by a belief in a higher power was a morally inferior philosophy. I was wrong in my understanding, and I apologize.
I stand by my other remarks, however, particularly regarding your skewed view of the historical statement in question. I believe that your conclusions, based on the sentence in question, are the result of a logical fallacy. This "truth" appears in a list of "truths", albeit a list of only two truths, the other "truth" being that men are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights. Assuming A and B are true, A being a statement of philosophy that may or may not be a religious idea, B being a religious idea, it does not follow that A must be a religious idea, simply because B is. Your argument would have been better served by focusing on the second truth in this list of truths, rather than dragging us through this lengthy tangent discussion. (I accept blame for continuing the lengthy tangent discussion).
In the end, for the purposes of this discussion, the general populace's philosophy can be as informed by religion as much as we may please. This does not change the foundation of this government (the constitution), which is decidedly NOT informed by the belief in a higher power (at the very least, you have failed to provide defendable evidence supporting your position that it is so informed). Precedent has, and will continue to be (if we want to maintain the stability of the state), that laws that lack secular purpose or justification are unconstitutional under the First Amendment.
Therefore, we really have gone off on a useless tangent and I apologize for taking us there. If there are secular reasons why same-sex couples should not be granted state recognized marriages, there is where the debate lies. If there aren't secular reasons why same-sex couples should not be married, there really is no debate. Having placed this issue firmly in the realm of secular discussion and reasoning (being a matter of constitutional law and public policy), I do not feel there really is any reason for me to continue the debate in a religious thread. If you or anyone else wants to discuss the secular reasoning for or against gay marriage, we can move the discussion elsewhere. Thaddeus knows my e-mail address.
I do, however, want to correct two faulty assumptions (or implications) of yours:
1) While I am advocating that we strip legislation that is based purely on religious thinking and lack justifiable secular purposes, I recognize that some laws exist that may have been religiously motivated originally but still have justifiable secular purposes. I support these laws.
2) I stand with Thaddeus in that government need not (and truly should not) be atheistic. I also take slight offense that you imply that my moral philosophy, as laid out in this thread, is atheistic in nature. Just because I'm trying to separate morality as is legislated by the state from morality as is taught by religion doesn't mean that I, or the philosophy that I am advocating, deny the existence of God. A moral philosophy uninformed by a belief in God is not a philosophy that denies the existence of God, even if that philosophy does not match your particular understanding or belief of who God is or what He teaches.
Why do you care so much about other peoples' lives? Gay people don't try and tell you who you can or can't marry, they don't even care. Why do you care if someone wants to marry and start a family with the person they love? Times are changing, you and your church needs to realize that, and get over the fact that things don't always happen the way you want them to.
I would like to point out, that even though you say "marriage in and of itself is not a right" and that is is "a battle of legitimacy", the mormon belief system isn't the oldest religion out there, and cannot claim to be anything more than just another interpretation on the subject of marriage. The main reason I say that, is because the concept of "marriage" has long been in existence before ANY religions were invented, including yours, so it is arrogant to say that because of what you believe, others should be dictated to follow an idea of marriage which you did not invent in the first place.
Quick example: Someone long ago invents the car. People can travel in any direction they want, and everyone is good, until one day a person comes along and says "These cars are very special, and should only be used to travel in this direction" when you want to go a different way. Why should I feel inclined to listen to that person, someone who had nothing to do with the inception of the car in the first place? Would you listen to that person? Is your name really Thaddeus?
I am glad to hear someone who doesn't believe it is an abomination. However, why are they not aloud to have they're rights just like everyone else? The bible shuns adultery more than homosexuality, so you are saying that they should not prevented from being legally married, (really just a handy piece of paper that has been proven to keep couples together, so you are also encouraging remarriage, which the bible shuns as well i think…) and therefor promoting adultery. I do not understand your logic, I'm sorry. Especially if you are saying you don't think gays are evil.
This is a semantics issue. We can seek to change the definition of a word but then what does the word really mean? In this world of "google", "wikipedia" and dozens of other creative terms added to the dictionary each year I wonder why a new word hasn't been created to respectfully describe the union between same gender couples. All "rights" rest on the power of the definition of one word?
I disagree with anyone. Men are not equal to the eyes of God. I am not equal to you or anyone here on earth. I am different than you. We are not the same culture, customs, ideas, level, class, and race. That's it. I am not like anyone here on earth.
I do not care. It is fine. I think gay marriage is okay. It is their freedom of choice.
I am hard of hearing, homosexual who used to be Mormon, where I used to be among distinguished family where some of them are military forces of my native land that is not United States. I am still proud of my background. I am just here in United States for a while.
Hello everyone! It has been a long while since I have posted to anything (raising 9 children takes a lot of my time!) I have a thought. Isn't part of the issue of the LDS church with gay marriage the fact that an LDS person would not be able to enter the temple? Since we believe marriage is eternal and grants the opportunity to enter the Celestial Kingdom our beliefs differ greatly from other Christians on this issue. For non LDS members this is not an issue for them as they believe marriage is only until "death do us part."


text:
Thanksgiving is probably my favorite holiday. Don't get me wrong, I like the other holidays, but on a purely superficial level, it's the best. (Some of our most important holidays are based in religion, and I'm not about to get into that here.) I like Halloween OK, but I'm really not too enthusiastic about giving kids candy, knowing it's not doing their health any good at all. And don't say I should give away apples. A neighbor of ours did that when I was a kid, and the poor guy's house got hammered with Red Delicious — or maybe it was MacIntosh, as I grew up in Connecticut — projectiles. I can still hear him shouting in some sort of European accent: "Don't use apples as missiles."
As for Christmas, the holiday itself is wonderful. It's the shopping I loathe. In fact, I do it only three times a year: for Mother's Day, my wife's birthday, and Christmas. (And yes, I have done so on Dec. 24th. Hey, as we say in my business, the important thing is to make deadline.) You don't have to shop for Thanksgiving. (I don't count grocery shopping as shopping-shopping.) You eat. That's something I can stand behind 100%. That, and you give thanks.
This being the season, I'd like to list a few things I'm thankful for regarding the tree fruit industry.
Giving Thanks
First and foremost, I'm thankful to you growers for welcoming me into your orchards, your vineyards, your homes, and your lives. You are a refreshing, independent breed. Not to mention tough. It's not an easy business. In fact, I just saw the other day that Chiquita will be exiting the deciduous fruit business this year. It reminded me that another banana industry giant, Dole, made a foray into the Pacific Northwest years ago, and they too made an exit. Not everyone can be a fruit grower.
I'm thankful that you growers out here in the West had an especially good year. From apple growers up in Washington to the nut growers down here in California, just outstanding. In fact, it was recently announced that even though California grape growers had a banner year, almonds surpassed grapes as the Golden State's second biggest agricultural commodity. (Dairy remained No. 1.)
I'm thankful to be associated with an industry that does so much good for so many people, and could do even more if people would only consume more fruit. Consider the recent report, published online in the Journal of Food and Chemical Toxicology, which found an estimated 20,000 cancers could be prevented if half of all Americans simply increased their consumption of fruits and vegetables by a single serving.
I'm thankful to all the researchers, mainly the Extension people, who share their findings with me — and, in turn, with you. Because of that, I'm thankful for all the Specialty Crop Research Initiative grants contained in the last Farm Bill. And I will be even more thankful if we ever get another Farm Bill that actually recognizes fruit growers' existence.
Lastly, I'm thankful to live in a time when there are so many means of communication at my disposal. Consider that just a decade ago, Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, and Wikipedia didn't even exist. Yes, I'm a little disturbed about the attendant loss of privacy, but would you want to give back your iPhones, iPads, Androids, apps, or Kindles? I can't imagine what the next 10 years will bring us, but looking at that list of new technologies, you'd be wise to stay abreast of the business. So please keep reading, and Happy Thanksgiving.


text:
David L. Blustein
counseling, developmental, and educational psychology department
counseling, developmental, and educational psychology department
Campion Hall
Curriculum Vitae (PDF)
Ph.D., Columbia University
Psychology of working; work-based transitions; interface of mental health and work/poverty; school to work transition; career development; relational and communitarian perspectives; immigration, race, culture, and working.
Extended Research Award, American Counseling Association, 2011.
The 2009 Outstanding Career Development Quarterly article, 2009.
Presidential Recognition Award: National Career Development Association, 2008.
Fellow: American Educational Research Association, 2008; National Career Development Association; American Psychological Association.
Outstanding Achievement Award from the Society of Counseling Psychology and Sage Publications for the following article published in The Counseling Psychologist, 2005: An emancipatory communitarian approach ot vocational development theory, research, and practice.
John Holland Award for Outstanding Achievement in Career and Personality Research-- Division of Counseling Psychology (Division 17), American Psychological Association (August 1998).
Selected Publications
Blustein, D.L. (Ed.)(2013). The Oxford Handbook of the psychology of working. NY: Oxford University Press.
Blustein, D.L., Kozan, S., & Connors-Kellgren, A. (2013). Unemployment and underemployment: A narrative analysis about loss. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 82, 256-265.
Blustein, D.L., Barnett, M., Mark, S., Depot, M., Lovering, M., Lee, Y., Hu, Q., Kim, J., Backus, F., Dillon-Lieberman, K., & DeBay, D.(2013). Examining urban students' constructions of a STEM/career development intervention over time. Journal of Career Development, 40, 40-67.
Blustein, D.L., (2011). A relational theory of working. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 79, 1-17.
Marfleet, P., & Blustein, D.L. (2011). 'Needed not wanted': Irregular migrants and the world of work. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 78, 381-389.
Blustein, D.L, Murphy, K.A., Kenny, M.E., Jernigan, M., Gualdron, L., Connolly, M., Catraio, C., Backus, F., Sullivan, M., Urbano, A., Land, M. & Davis, O. (2010). Exploring urban students' constructions about school, work, race and ethnicity. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 57, 248-254.
Blustein, D.L. (2008). The role of work in psychological health and well-being: A conceptual, historical, and public policy perspective. American Psychologist, 63, 228-240.
Blustein, D.L. (2006). The psychology of working: A new perspective for counseling, career development, and public policy. NY: Routledge.
Blustein, D. L., McWhirter, E.H., & Perry, J. C. (2005). Toward an emancipatory communitarian approach to vocational development theory. The Counseling Psychologist, 33, 141-179.
Blustein, D.L., Schultheiss, D.E.P., & Flum, H. (2004). Toward a relational perspective of the psychology of careers and working: A social constructionist analysis. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 64, 423-440.
Blustein, D. L., Schultheiss, D. E. P., & Flum, H. (2004). Toward a relational perspective of the psychology of careers and working: A social constructionist analysis. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 64, 423-440.
Chaves, A., Diemer, M., Blustein, D. L., Gallagher, L., Casares, M., DeVoy, J., & Perry, J. (2004). Conceptions of work: The view from urban youth. Journal of Counseling Psychology. 51, 275-286.
Kenny, M. E., Blustein, D. L., Chaves, A., Grossman, J. M., & Gallagher, L. A. (2003). The role of perceived barriers and relational support in the educational and vocational lives of urban high school students. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 50, 142-155.
This page links to PDF files. Use this link to download Adobe Reader if needed.


text:
items (
) Checkout
Read Reviews | Write a Review
The fixed display shelf wine rack features interlocking solid panels for displaying wine bottles in 15 discreet compartments.
Commercial Fixed Display Shelf (P/N FPR-FDS). Each compartment holds 4 display bottles and 16 stored bottles. Wall displays commonly are grouped together in rows along the walls of wine retail stores.Shown in unstained premium redwood. Options like other woods, stains, vinyl base and/or casters are available at additional cost. Professional assembly required. Please allow up to 2 weeks lead time before your order is shipped (lacquer finish will increase lead times by 2-3 weeks.)
Let us design your retail space! For more information, click here to use our free wine rack design service - we'll create a set of drawings and a quote based on your specifications - free!
RRP: $1,262.99 You Save: $
Our Price: $722.00 $2,562.00
Sale Price: $721.80
You must be logged in to add items to your Wishlist, Click here to login.
New customer? Click here to register
About Us
Privacy Policy
Wholesale Pricing Program
Request Catalog / View Online
Request a Wine Rack Design
Request Thermal Load Calc
How to Build a Wine Cellar
Cancel / Return Policies
Shipping Information
Satisfaction Guarantee
Contact Us
Sign up and receive the latest news and special offers.


text:
Characters in The Ballad of Gay TonyTalk0
9,771pages on
this wiki
this wiki
Category page
A list of characters that appear in The Ballad of Gay Tony, some of the characters make an appearances in both Grand Theft Auto IV and The Lost and Damned.
Pages in category "Characters in The Ballad of Gay Tony"
" Bruce Spade is the biggest movie star in America in the HD Universe of the Grand Theft Auto...
Bruce Spade
" Leta Lopez-Wilkinson is the daughter of Adriana and Mr. Lopez, and the youngest sister of Luis...
Leta Lopez-Wilkinson
" Domino is a member of the Maisonette 9 club and comes here regularly. In The Ballad of Gay Tony...
" Clay Jackson, also known as "The Pain Giver" or even "PG", is a celebrity and a famous gangsta...
Clay Jackson
Media in category "Characters in The Ballad of Gay Tony"
Posted in: Al Di Napoli
Posted in: Alfonso Vasquez Jr.
Posted in: Characters by Surname (Number-B)
Posted in: Jacob
Posted in: Malcolm Forthright
Posted in: Maurice (TBOGT)
Posted in: Monique
Posted in: Mr. Santo
Posted in: Oscar Gomez


text:
Simply confirm your registered email address below and click "Reset Password." We will immediately email you a link back to the site where you can enter a new password for this account.
We've found your existing Atlanta magazine account. Please login below to complete the Facebook login process.
The comedian-actor, best known for The Hangover, brings his stand-up act to the Civic Center. Event Site


text:
The wait is over! Download the BeerAdvocate app on iTunes or Google Play now.
Get 12 issues / year of BeerAdvocate magazine for only $9.99!
Altoberfest - Element Brewing Company
Displayed for educational use only; do not reuse.
Ratings: 42 | Reviews: 22 | Display Reviews Only:
3.75/5 rDev -9.9%
08-15-2014 18:42:50 | More by pisano
3.45/5 rDev -17.1%
Pours a dark brown red, scorched earth colour. Bit cloudy. Head is beige, small bubbles but retaining well. Looks pretty nice.
Smells malty; fairly English base but light fruity hops. Somewhat citric, touch of sherbet falls short of piney. Pretty light, nice base though.
Taste is a bit more hoppy. Still very English-seeming malt base, hint of toffee with lightly toasted cereal grain, then some resiny, slightly spicy hops. Dry and peppery with a touch of lemon pith. Falls disappointingly short as there's a potency in the midway that you would expect to last. Dry, bitter, quite malty. Pleasant enough.
Decent body, quite bitty at the back. Silty, even.
Nice sessionable brew. Decent balance.
07-18-2014 01:30:15 | More by laituegonflable
3.75/5 rDev -9.9%
02-03-2014 19:18:12 | More by GraduatedCashew
3.98/5 rDev -4.3%
Bottle number #520, purchased somewhere in Massachusetts by my mum, who brought it back to Australia. Shared with @LaitueGonflable. It's an odd-sized bottle, 25oz, not quite the full three-quarter litre. Caged and corked, and only identified by its accompanying card: the bottle was entirely wrapped in paper. Anyway...
Pours a cloudy amber hue, with a big rocky head of yellowed-white that settles down into a firm crest. Minimal lacing, but the body is pleasantly solid. Very little visible carbonation: it looks as though it's worn itself out just getting that aerated head together in the first place.
Pleasant, slightly earthy hop characters on the nose, balanced with some pleasantly rounded malt notes. These are a bit flat, and not as expressive as they might have been, but they provide a broad sweetness at least. Faint estery tones add a little brightness and a touch of pear. It's all pretty nice stuff, perhaps just a little muted.
Taste is very nice: clean and nutty, with a pleasant sweet-savoury malt providing the bulk of the flavour. Faint, restrained bitterness gives some balance. There are soda tones to it, perhaps cola and a slightly savoury stonefruit note, almost gamey but sweet. There's a hint of a medicinal character on the back; perhaps as the cola character picks up more of the bitterness. Finish has some husky, earthy grain. It's all rather pleasant though.
Feel is very smooth, and very pleasant.
Overall, this is very drinkable and really nicely balanced even as the flavours bounce around off each other. There certainly is plenty of flavour in any case. I liked it a lot.
12-27-2013 21:33:10 | More by lacqueredmouse
2.95/5 rDev -29.1%
A-Mostly clear, darker orange color. Medium sized tan, foamy head. Relatively light lacing.
S-A bit of an acrid aroma. Slightly vegetal 'off' aroma. Besides that, I get a beefed up Marzen with lots of toasty and caramelly maltiness.
T-The flavor is worse than the aroma. It tastes almost tart in a very unpleasant manner. Vegetal hops. A fruity yeast and again some stronger, thick toast and caramel. There is just an undesirable element (no pun intended) to this brew.
M-Light heat. Not too sticky. Soft bubbles. Actually one of the better aspects of this beer.
O/D-A double Marzen sounds cool but this one does not deliver. Also, coming in at about $16.50 for a 750ml is no good either. Have not been impressed with Element.
12-09-2013 23:22:00 | More by VelvetExtract
New Hampshire
3.75/5 rDev -9.9%
11-20-2013 23:19:14 | More by RRC03
New Hampshire
3.5/5 rDev -15.9%
11-10-2013 20:50:12 | More by Prost76
New York
4.5/5 rDev +8.2%
10-26-2013 02:03:24 | More by SkiBum22
New York
4/5 rDev -3.8%
10-22-2013 22:35:12 | More by ncelauro
New York
4.33/5 rDev +4.1%
Served in a tulip glass.
Appearance: Hazy amber with heavy bubbles on the body. White head thick in the beginning riding to about 1/3" settling quick.
Smell: Hard hops with rum type of scent...very yummy.
Taste: Bitter for an octoberfest. Hoppy and a slightly floral. It's simple as far as factors are concerned but ridiculously potent.
Mouth: Medium to heavy and smooth. Sticky bitter notes feels almost like tree bark at the end with a dose of bread.
Overall: Absolute beast of a beer. It is a little pricey considering that 17 bucks for one 750ml but then again we both know we'd spend more at a bar. Hope you all enjoy, Salud!
10-20-2013 03:20:54 | More by BlurryVisi0n
3.75/5 rDev -9.9%
10-07-2013 20:49:30 | More by beer4colin
4.25/5 rDev +2.2%
09-24-2013 00:31:51 | More by ELECTRONICAnonymous
4.25/5 rDev +2.2%
09-21-2013 21:55:42 | More by jwps214
4.75/5 rDev +14.2%
09-19-2013 00:33:35 | More by TripelMark
3.5/5 rDev -15.9%
09-07-2013 20:23:01 | More by tneenan1
4/5 rDev -3.8%
09-06-2013 16:10:51 | More by jmmy3
New York
4.25/5 rDev +2.2%
06-24-2013 02:43:00 | More by Dylanjf
New Hampshire
3.75/5 rDev -9.9%
04-29-2013 06:24:09 | More by Kelp
Rhode Island
4.5/5 rDev +8.2%
12-12-2012 04:38:43 | More by Triglycerides
North Carolina
4.25/5 rDev +2.2%
12-11-2012 20:12:11 | More by SamBzkr
4.25/5 rDev +2.2%
11-13-2012 01:31:39 | More by kaelingirl
4.53/5 rDev +8.9%
I like regular Marzens a lot, it is one of the most drinkable beer styles and it has such great malt character. Element has managed to mix this style with a more bitter Altbier style, hence "Altoberfest". I'd say they did a damn fine job of it too. It's definitely something of it's own. It reminds me of a beligian or a wee heavy in strength of flavor though less estery, but with the flavor profile of a clean well balanced German beer. None of the bubblegum flavor that makes me shy away from many Belgians. It has a set of its own flavors, read on:
A: Pours a deep red amber color, slightly cloudy from the lack of filtration, a fat fingers worth of rocky cream colored head that eventually turns into a thin layer with rings where the bubbles are surfacing. Strong lacing.
S: It smells like malt, vanilla, and caramel but backed by a refreshing hop scent. Pleasant. Not as complex as an IPA for example, but inviting.
T: Big toffee/caramel flavor, figgy flavor up front, giving way to a smooth grainy malty/nutty flavor, all cleaned up with that Altbier hop and ever so slightly bitter on the finish. Really well done. The alcohol doesn't play a big part in the taste, which is great.
M: Medium body, but for a Marzen style I'd say it was heavy. Very smooth. Goes down really easy. Again well balanced. Not sticky like some maltier beers, and not resiny like an Imperial IPA, it's right in between. So good.
Overall: I'd buy this beer next year if they put it out again. 17 bucks for a bottle in my area (I live on the North Shore of MA) but it's worth it. I shared the bottle with a friend, and he loved it too. I don't think I'll be sharing it next time though. It's definitely a once a year kinda beer, but I think I'd pick up another bottle next year and see if putting it in the cellar changes it at all for better or worse.
11-12-2012 00:16:19 | More by Deingeist
4.15/5 rDev -0.2%
Bottle 046 of 1329. Bottled on July 20th, 2012.
A: Pours a deep orange-red. Huge fluffy tan head. Specks of fluffy lacing left behind. Which is more than most element beers, at least. Decent retention.
S: Has a nice toasty aroma and nutty aroma, similar to a lot of brown ales. Some toffee and brown sugar to boot. Mild hoppiness, mostly herbal or grassy I would say.
T: Hops are a lot more prominent here. Grassy and herbal up front. Lots of toasted bread and caramel melds with it nicely. Sweetness fades a bit and the toasted bread gets a little bitter, borderline burnt. Grainy with touches of nuts. Finishes with more herbal, grassy hops.
M: Medium bodied, smooth and a bit grainy.
O: A really intriguing marzen for sure. Much stronger than any I've ever had. This basically craps on any other marzen I've had. Quite complex, nice hoppiness (but not overpowering, don't mistake it for an IPA or anything). Sharp, strong flavors that meld together nicely. Obviously not quite as drinkable at 8.35% but it's still plenty smooth.
10-23-2012 03:08:17 | More by Dope
New Jersey
4.75/5 rDev +14.2%
10-09-2012 23:32:48 | More by muskiesman
4.13/5 rDev -0.7%
I have tried most of the Marzen/Octoberfest type beers available in my area. My previous favorite was Harpoon's.
This Element Altoberfest is a Marzen with the flavor turned up to a 10. I found it to be comparable to some Belgian ales I have tried.
On first pour it created a thick head which subsided somewhat quickly.
The first taste I noted was orange. That subsided as I drank it.
The high ABV was apparent but it did not reduce my enjoyment of the beer.
It was very sweet and malty. No discernible hops at all.
The aroma was a little sour.
As others have noted, the carbonation was light.
I like this a lot and would recommend this beer to others with the caveat that it is $18 per bottle. It is worth a try.
09-30-2012 03:09:23 | More by mrcotter
Altoberfest from Element Brewing Company
91 out of 100 based on 42 ratings.


text:
Your Health Matters: Local News
Local doctor offers advice for families dealing with infertility
Story Updated: Jun 13, 2012
Infertility treatments vary in cost, invasiveness and success in becoming pregnant and having a child. It can also be a very emotional process for those involved.
Dr. Barbara Toohill with the Antioch Group has advice for families on dealing with the stress of infertility.
For more information visit: http://antiochgroup.com/.


text:
In this exhibit, the works of 16 artists reckon with the facts of matter, the nature of photographic imagery and the forces (sometimes invisible) that leave their mark on our surroundings.
Christina Stevens (BA '10) pulls double duty as actor and interpreter with the Little theatre of the Deaf.
Read about how various alumni stepped out of the spotlight and found fulfillment through nonprofit pursuits in the latest issue of DEMO.
Tight Pencils highlights the work of Columbia College students, recent alumni and faculty who are involved in Chicago's vibrant comic book culture.


text:
Has your doctor told you that your weight is harmful to your health?
For over 30 years, Wood County Hospital in Bowling Green, Ohio outside of Toledo has been a pioneer in the field of bariatric (weight loss) surgery. We have helped more than 2,000 patients achieve consistent, permanent weight loss leading to better health, an improved quality of life, and a longer lifespan.
We offer the most surgical options in NW Ohio. Procedures include Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, laparoscopic adjustable gastric band (Lap Band), sleeve gastrectomy, the Biliopancreatic Diversion with Duodenal Switch, and revision surgery.
To learn more about weight loss surgery, call (toll-free) 877-705-2957 or e-mail email@example.com.