text:
Religious freedom & the U.S. Catholic bishops
The Editors April 12, 2012 - 3:31pm
Today, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops Ad Hoc Committee for Religious Liberty released a statement, Our First, Most Cherished Liberty, calling on Catholics and others to resist what the bishops characterize as unprecedented threats to religious freedom. The statement calls for a national campaign of political and legal resistance. It also urges Catholics to participate in a Fortnight for Freedom leading up to this years Fourth of July holiday, during which they are asked to study, pray, and protest against the supposed efforts of government to curtail the free exercise of religion. Among the bishops concerns are the recent HHS contraception mandate, harsh immigration laws, the denial of federal funding to Catholic social-service agencies, and the closing of Catholic adoption services because of the churchs refusal to place children with gay parents.The bishops are right to call for vigilance on behalf of religious liberty. There are influential currents of opinion today that advocate restricting the presence of religion in public life and would reduce religious liberty to the freedom of individuals or congregations to worship as they please. That is not the American way. There should be considerable room for government to cooperate with religious groups as with other non-governmental bodies in serving the common good. Unfortunately, the argument made by the bishops as well as their proposed tactics for public action undermine their case. Worse, the tenor of the bishops statement runs the risk of making this into a partisan issue during a presidential election in which the leaders of one party have made outlandish claims about a war on religion or a war against the Catholic Church.The USCCBs statement vastly exaggerates the extent to which American freedoms of all sorts and of religious freedom in particular are threatened. Church-state relations are complicated, requiring the careful weighing of competing moral claims. The USCCBs statement fails to acknowledge that fact. Worse, strangely absent from the list of examples provided by the bishops is the best-documented case of growing hostility to religious presence in the United States: hostility to Islam. Unless the bishops correct that oversight, their statement will only feed the impression that this campaign for religious freedom has been politically tailored. This silence is especially striking in view of the parallels between anti-Muslim sentiment today and the prejudice encountered by Catholic immigrants in the nineteenth century. If religious freedom becomes a partisan issue, its future is sure to grow dimmer, not brighter. Religious liberty, absolutely. Partisan politics, no.
Commenting Guidelines
Will the bishops now support the removal of the Mt. Graham Observatory? Here we have a problem -- where Catholics -- even the Vatican -- has worked against religious liberty of Apaches (not only by using their holy ground against their wishes, but by making it so many Apaches are arrested for going to their holy site without "permits.). What we have is, imo, an "ad hoc" committee which doesn't have experts on the field of religion or religious liberty, a committee which seems to know little to nothing about actual problems of religious liberty in US history, and one which makes exaggerated claims due to this ignorance. And yes, it reads this is being done for partisanship when one looks at who is on the committee -- all kinds of GOP politicians -- while one sees who is not on it - experts on the field of religious liberty!
When David Gibson posted a piece at dotCommonweal about a recent Supreme Court decision, he used the headline "Religions Get to be Jerks."The Catholic bishops in the United States want to be jerks in the name of their understanding of freedom of religion.The Catholic bishops are too stubborn to change any of the ridiculous teachings of the Roman Catholic Church such as the church's objection to artificial contraception, the church's objection to legalized abortion in the first trimester, and the church's objection to same-sex marriage. I think these and other church teachings should be changed. So I have no sympathy for the Catholic bishops' campaign regarding their understanding of freedom of religion.
I'm trying to imagine how this plays out on the parish level. I think a lot of pastors will be reluctant to conduct the kind of campaign the bishops call for because they'll fear parishioners will perceive it as politically partisan. Some parishioners will urge their pastor to hold "Fortnight for Freedom" events - the Republican voters, most likely - and others, the Democrats, will be ready to walk out of church if too much is made of it during a presidential election year. The pastors are in a difficult spot.
"Worse, the tenor of the bishops statement runs the risk of making this into a partisan issue during a presidential election in which the leaders of one party have made outlandish claims about a war on religion or a war against the Catholic Church."Let's see:1. Blame the bishops? Check.2. Blame the GOP? Check.3. Ignore the Obama administration's actions with respect to religious liberties such as the removal of funding for the DC School Vouchers, the rejection of the CRS grant, the Hosanna-Tabor decision, the HHS Mandate? Check.Who's playing partisan politics again?
This so-called "religious liberty" campaign by Catholic hierarchs was something that was thought up by the political consultants they hired with all that unaccountable money they have salted away in their investment portfolios. Obviously, the "religious liberty" coded label test marketed well among a broad group of Catholics. However, the hierarchs and their political consultants failed to remember that most Catholics in this country do know how to read and write. We know when we being sold a bill of goods.The hierarchs also forgot that there are other Constitutional amendments besides the religious liberty guarantees in the First Amendment that must be balanced with other competing rights: Such as, the equal protection and due process guarantees of the 14th Amendment. The hierarchs should stick to the politics of the all-male, feudal oligarchy variety at which they are particularly adept and leave the civil politics to us folks in the pews.
Frankly, after reading the bishops statement I didnt see any partisan politics. But, now through the commonweal political lens, all is clear.
ThomasIn reality, it doesn't require changing of religious beliefs, but basic recognition of Catholic tradition in engaging political entities which do not agree with Catholic beliefs. The Church has a long tradition of working with and even giving monetary support to those who disagree with its teachings. The Church, in the states, have had all kinds of cooperation with rules similar to the HHS. The problem is that basic moral categories are out, and remote cooperation is being treated as if one is being forced to act in a certain way. The talk is about how Catholics can't use contraceptives - but then switches to discussion of buying insurance which pays for contraceptives. That's a big bait and switch -- treating as if the first is being done and debating policies as if such force is being done, while all that is being done is paying for insurance the kind of which rich Catholics pay for already with no demands of action. As I have pointed out before, if the bishops really wanted us to believe that Catholic teaching is more than "don't use contraceptives" but "you can't even have remote material cooperation with insurance that pays for contraceptives" they better FIRST make demands on all Catholics who already have such insurance (rich people who have insurance). That this isn't done says a great deal.
Paul Moses hits it on the mark. He worries for the Church that Democrats will walk away. I am pleased for the sake of the President's re-election campaign that the "Fortnight for Freedom" is sure be a stage and spotlight for the most unattractive elements of right-wing Catholics. One can only smile at pastors unsuccessfully trying to control events that morph into questions of the President's birth certificate, unkind words toward Trayvon and just for history's sake, they can bring back their dislike for Captain Dreyfus.
The American Catholic Bishops: you never know where their fear will lead them next.
Re: "the denial of federal funding to Catholic social-service agencies, and the closing of Catholic adoption services because of the churchs refusal to place children with gay parents..."Apparently, bishops have not read the March 23, 2012 federal court decision of ACLU-MA v Sebelius on the government's violation of the Establishment Clause by awarding HHS contracts to the USCCB for those trafficked for prostitution:"It is therefore ADJUDGED and DECLARED that the government defendants violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, insofar as they delegated authority to a religious organization to impose religiously based restrictions on the expenditure of taxpayer funds, and thereby impliedly endorsed the religious beliefs of the USCCB and the Catholic Church."
Freedom of Religion derives from the right of conscience. If the Church wants to interfere with its employees' right to conscientious access to contraception i8n the name of its own right of conscience, it would seem to me that our American (and Aquinian) support of the supremacy of [well-formed, or not well-formed, for that matter] personal or individual conscience would trump collective conscience in a free society, (That's our problem with Communism, isn't it?)I realize this plays havoc with the whole Pro-Choice debate, but I can't see the Church claiming an institutional prerogative to freedom of conscience without conceding the right of individuals to as strong a prerogative -- leading naturally to abortion on demand, if citizens, as Churches believe things that allow harmful consequences to third parties, e.g., the unborn or employees.
Apart from the problems with the USCCB document cited in the Commonweal editorial, another problem is the call for civil disobedience. Lawyers say you should know the answer to a question before you ask it in the courtroom, and similarly I think the bishops need to know how such a call would play out before making it. In reality, a lot of Catholics are not going to buy into their arguments, no matter how drastically it is cast. So if you call for civil disobedience and no one obeys, you look sort of foolish. But above all, what would civil disobedience mean in this case? The ones affected are not churches or the dioceses or the bishops. And bishops in the main don't control the Catholic institutions that would be potentially affected, like hospitals and universities -- and those institutions don't seem inclined to agree with the bishops on the threat posed, nor are they likely to walk out on patients and students in an act of civil disobedience. Also, those institutions won't have anything to do with the contraception coverage under the accommodation, so what would they actually do in order to show civil disobedience? I just can't picture what this looks like.
There is serious need for an organized lay effort to counter the voice of the bishops who presume to speak for "the church". The U. S. laity's well-documented position on contraception expresses the sensus fidei of the People of God. I would find it hard to charge the battlements as the bishops are calling the faithful to do over this particular issue!! Now, if there was a strong call to laity to take to the streets in opposition to Republican efforts to reduce or even do away with all social supports for the poor, or for us to demand an end to the Afghanistan war, or call for an end to discrimination of all kinds, I would have to listen.
Kurt, I believe that this is what some of the bishops want in their heart of hearts, that should pastors try to facilitate a Fortnight of Prayer or other such exercise, that Democratic Catholics will walk out of Church. I think some bishops and conservative Catholic lay people actually want liberal Catholics to leave the Church, that only the most rigid adherents of some aspects of Catholic teaching will remain, and the "faithful remnant" will be preserved/restored. They can't outright order them to leave, but they can make the atmosphere so stifling and uncomfortable for them that they will get the hint and leave, which will be to the grave detriment of the People of God in the US. The bishops should be careful what they wish for, they may just get it.
I agree that the timing of the Bishop's Ad Hoc Committee statement is unfortunate. As far as I can tell from reading their statement, they have only two complaints at the Federal level: (1) the contraception mandate and (2) the fact that specifications for anti-human trafficking contracts require flexibility in referring for contraception or abortion services, when required. The remainder of the complaints were against actions taken at state or municipal levels. But beginning a campaign such as this in the summer of the Presidential election season makes it appear as a broad attack against the incumbent Presidential administration regarding a long list of grievances, for which the administration is only partially responsible.Addressing the only two Federal issues, the contraception mandate has been argued extensively. I won't add anything else, at this point. The specification relating to the anti-human trafficking contracts strike me as being entirely reasonable. A great many human trafficking cases involve what's known as the "sex trade." This brings up issues such as exposure to STDs, pregnancy prevention, pregnancies resulting from rape, and other issues. When the Federal government invites bids for contracts to provide services or products, there are always specifications -- ranging from a few specifications to literally thousands. If they wanted a new fighter plane, it would have to be able to fly so fast and fly so high and fly for so long. If they wanted a clinical trial to test a new drug, the institution would have to meet requirements for patient accrual and monitoring; if they wanted a defense contractor to protect a foreign embassy, the contractor would have to provide suitable personnel, weapons, and a willingness and capability to use deadly force in a controlled fashion.The point is that a contract to provide services to victims of human trafficking requires the contractor to deal with issues such as STD prevention, pregnancy prevention, and rape-related pregnancies. If a potential contractor isn't prepared to use the full range of available tools to deal with these serious problems, then the solution is simply not to bid for the contract.- Larry Weisenthal/Huntington Beach CA
By lumping everything some municipal, state or federal agency may have done that conflicts with how they want things done, the bishops make it sound if they're in a head-to-head fight with the Obama administration. How convenient for the Republican party in this election year. The last Bush administration did everything humanly possible to woo Church officials, from soliciting their opinions on policy issues to paying them large sums of patronage money and calling it support for "faith-based initiatives." Now, we see how well it worked. I'm afraid it's as simple as that. They've been had.
Thank you, Commonweal, for your thoughtfulness on this topic. And thanks to those who have contributed additional insights on this blog. This has troubled me for several weeks. Yes, the Obama administration made serious mistakes and missteps in its first ruling on coverage for contraception. It then correctly changed its position to justly and correctly accommodate the views and religious freedom of the Church. Yet, the bishops refuse to accept that, but have yet to make any reasonable argument that the revised provisions actually do impinge on their religious freedom, and persist in this new "campaign." What adds to my serious doubt on their actions is the fact that similar benefits were already required in, I believe, 28 states, yet I do not recall any similar Church protest against those rules. Why, then, have the bishops come close to derailing the initial passage of health care reform, and continue to fight its implementation? This is the same U.S. Catholic Church that HAD favored health care reform for almost a century, yet by their stance they help those who would use fear and distortion to help overturn that legislative achievement. They are losing what once was a strong position of moral leadership.
Thank you so much. I was appalled when I read about the bishops' statement this morning. Thank you for your quick response. I sent it to all my colleagues with a note, that as an RC, I wanted people to know that the bishops do not represent the views of all or even of most Catholics. What are these bishops thinking of to take a blatantly partisan stance in the midst of an election year.
We should thank the editors of Commonweal for standing up to the bishops. The bishops' position appears to be that of partisan Republicans, and dare I say, perhaps, racist. Sadly, the bishops refuse to recognize that the Church is all of us---the community of believers. Instead they prefer to dictate to the laity, and never listen to the laity. I have seen nothing anti-Catholic, or even anti-religion, in the Obama Administration's policies. Most Catholic women ignore the bishops heavy-handed posturing on abortion and contraceptives. Why don't the bishops speak out against unnecessary, unjust wars, the torture of prisoners, , income inequality, the erosion of our rights as U.S. citizens under the so-called "Patriot Act", and the need for a nuclear weapons-free world?
"Authority has simply been abused for too long in the Catholic Church and for many people it just becomes utterly stupid and intolerable to have to put up with the kind of jackassing around that is imposed in God's name. It is an insult to God Himself and in the end it can only discredit all idea of authority and obedience. There comes a time when they simply forfeit their right to be listen to" ~ Thomas Merton, 1/19/67 (from a letter to W. H. Ferry)
It was different in days of yore.A great book, imho, is The Irish Americans, by Jay P. Dolan. Try the search term "bishops" to see what it was like when there were bishops and priests who fought for social justice, labor unions, etc.
I am old enough to remember a time when the word "conservative" carried with it a great of well deserved admiration bordering on genuine affection and gratitude. It seemed a very challenging and worthy goal. Whether that memory is largely a result of my perceptions or reality at that time I obviously cannot say with any certainity. My remarks carry my recognition of that fact.Conservatism found neither unbearable fear nor condemnation in the realities of ignorance. It was quite simply an understandable challenge requiring patience and useful advice served in gratitude to those who had wisely assisted them out of theirs. Whether the desired goal was reached or not was not the sole issue. There was the responsiblity to repay the gifts they had received. The ones that helped them find awe in their lives.What it did not tolerate well was contrived ignorance. As an example, I propose the Pope's recent use of the word "schizophrenia" in an attempt, I suppose, to dramatize what he perceived as confusion. I feel quite comfortable assuming the Pope has more than adequate access to individuals who can quite easily and clearly define for him the significant difference between the confusion resulting from human limitations and a tragic illness.So many of those who now cleverly find shelter in notions we rightly ascribe to "conservatism" quite simply do not grasp the level of responsibilty that term carries.I am unable to convince myself that an ability to read another's "mind" would a move us forward. Best I can tell thoughts can not only move quickly they can change direction quickly. But I am certain that until that time arrives words matter. Conservatism requires one accept the reality of the fact the more one learns the less one knows. Otherwise one can simply assume they have nothing left to learn. That ain't conservative. It is boring.
Both the editors and many of the commenters here seem to be living in the 1950's. Anybody who lives in the real world (running a school, or working in health care) knows that ever growing pressure of powerful faceless politiicized bureaucracies, the pressure of suffocating regulations etc. I personally know at least two deans of small Catholic colleges who despair that in a few years they will be forced to choose between shutting down and having their consciences raped by HHS or similar organizations.But no, religious freedom is not at risk, even less individual freedoms in general. The problem is that the bishops are politically partisan. The US bishops! The same organization that for decades has consistently advocated for policies in almost perfect alignment with the Democratic party, such as public healthcare, extended welfare services, free education and so on.Oh well. I don't know. What seems obvious is that the editor of Commonweals are much more willing to give the benefit of the doubt to the administration (who would NEVER violate anybody's conscience to impose an ideological agenda) than to our bishops (who CANNOT be seriously thinking that religious freedom is at risk, and who deep down must actually motivated by by political partisanship).As Jsesus said "For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also." Treasure, of course does not just means money, but also one's cherished political allegiances.
Editors: thank you for a courageous editorial expressing so well what many Of us Catholics think.
"Worse, the tenor of the bishops statement runs the risk of making this into a partisan issue during a presidential election in which the leaders of one party have made outlandish claims about a 'war on religion or a war against the Catholic Church.'"Hmmm, since you agree with so much of what the Bishops say, wouldn't your role include ensuring that their statement is not misinterpreted as simply a "partisan issue during a presidential election" and, in penning this editorial, haven't you failed?
Gee, and here I thought it was the US bishops who are behaving as if it were the 1950's, with the "new" instructions on the Mass, and their willingness to squelch opposing opinions on matters of doubt with ecclesiastical punishments. I would caution against using terms like "conscience rape" when it comes to officials at Catholic universities, because for one, it demeans the actuality of the evil of physical rape, and two, none of these regulations (at least in the mandate, anyway) forces Catholics to abandon their beliefs or participate in actions that contravene their beliefs. In other words, Catholic women are not being forced to take artificial birth control against their will, and priests are not forced to marry gay couples in their churches. Catholic officials who find themselves in situations where they might have to indirectly countenance behaviors that go against their faith are not personally having their consciences manipulated; they still have free will and the ability to exercise it, though that might require making some sad decisions for themselves personally. It's overblown rhetoric like this that is obscuring the attempt to balance one group's rights against another's, and ultimately poisons the well of both civil and religious discourse, and it is a shame that it is deployed to the extent that it is. Your rights might be being infringed upon, but to use rhetoric that deploys the image of forcible rape is both exagggerated and irresponsible.
Not having a place for Islam in this document was a mistake, but why is it a mistake that reveals partisanship? I just don't see it, especially in the context of the document highlighting the following specific issues:1. HHS mandate for contraception, sterilization, and abortion-inducing drugs. Lots of liberal Catholics, including the editors of this magazine, supported the general thrust of this concern.2. State immigration laws. A classic liberal concern on the part of the Bishops here--one from which many conservative Catholics dissent.3. Altering Church structure and governance. Not clearly a liberal or conservative concern.4. Christian students on campus. Not clearly a liberal or conservative concern.5. Catholic foster care and adoption services. Arguably a conservative concern because it involves being against gay adoption, but the consequences of the ending of the ministry affect vulnerable children in a way which should disturb liberals as well.6. Discrimination against small church congregations. Not obviously a liberal or conservative concern, but, interestingly, a concern that the Catholic Church doesn't have. So they whiffed on Islam, but its not as if they are being totally self-obsessed either.7. Discrimination against Catholic humanitarian services. This also angered both liberals and conservatives, and rightly so--it is not obviously a liberal or conservative concern.The last line of this blog post is "partisan politics, no"...agreed. And I agree that at that the Bishops have, at times, too closely identified themselves with the Republican party (and by that I certainly do not mean that they should identify closely with Democrats!), but can folks help me see how THIS particular document is an example of that? I'm just not seeing it.
I have a post up reflecting on the bishops' statement and Commonweal's response and how this all really shows that Richard John Neuhaus is alive and well (for better and for worse).http://debatingobama.blogspot.com/2012/04/bishops-statement-shows-neuhau...
Too much of this USCCB document reads like a call for some sort of crusade. Crusades are hard to square with the Gospel. Recently I've come across Jean Vanier's "Drawn into the Mystery of Jesus through the Gospel of John." The gap between Vanier and this document is enormous. Jesus repeatedly rejected seizing earthly control. Crusades seek to gain such control.
Without the slightest hint of irony, the bishops' statement quotes this paragraph from Benedict XVI's Ad limina address to them on January 19, 2012:"Here once more we see the need for an engaged, articulate and well-formed Catholic laity endowed with a strong critical sense vis--vis the dominant culture and with the courage to counter a reductive secularism which would delegitimize the Church's participation in public debate about the issues which are determining the future of American society."Engaged, articulate, well-formed, courageous men and women for Christ when dealing with the vicissitudes of American public policy.But if desirous of applying those same qualities to the guidance of a Church they both love and fear for, then sheep.
I pray that the tax exempt status of the Church be challenged and hopefully removed. Then we'll see how the bishops will decry "the attacks on religious liberty." On another note, they didn't seem to respond as quickly to the issues of war, our invasion of Iraq. They were silent when John Paul II gave fair warning. They took their good ol' time when it came to the sexual abuse crisis. Some still are reluctant to cooperate with the civil authorities. When it comes to the bedroom, they want to get right in there and dictate what is right and what is wrong. Celibates, adolescents indeed.
JJm Jenkins:Re: follow-up to your comment:"This so-called religious liberty campaign by Catholic hierarchs was something that was thought up by the political consultants they hired with all that unaccountable money they have salted away in their investment portfolios."At the U.S. bishops meeting last November the bishops overwhelmingly approved a 3% increase of diocesan funds to the USCCB. As one bishop in the audience noted the funds were needed for this new venture, namely, the ad hoc committee for religious liberty.
This is clearly the irony of Ironies. The RCC which from Augustine to the 20th century have denied others freedom of religion. The statement of Pius IX that "error has no rights" says it all. The bishops were aware of their lack of objectivity which compelled them to include other issues, like the seriously important one of services to immigrants. The other issues were marginal while the bishops main goal of attacking HHS recurs again and again. How some do not see this here is mysterious and baffling. Originally, I was looking for analternative to Obama. But the bishops, along with others on the far right have made Obama an easy choice. I imagine that the leadership in Washington and the democratic party are thanking God for this killer statement for the Republican party from the bishops. This is a greater gift than any super pac can produce. As Dolan prophesied, he has "helped his opponent." Immeasurably. Fr. Richard O'Brien has accurately called the present crop of bishops the worst in American history. Damnably true. From their sheepish behavior in 2002, to their being called "worst than the Mafia" by a distinguished Catholic governor they appointed to the review board, to their continual proclivity towards political rather than pastoral behavior. This is a sorry, dishonorable bunch. And no contrived bombastic laughter by Tim Dolan can cover up this baldly, political group. A bunch of miscreants giving Catholics terrible witness.
Commonweal's point about Islam is vital. I highlight and expand on it here:http://debatingobama.blogspot.com/2012/04/bishops-and-sharia-law-hysteri...
Tony Green --YOu've made an important point: Respect for the (mistaken) consciences of others is a prerequisite in a democracy. I thought that point was settled by Vatican II. But the bishops apparently haven't put one and one together -- if you are required to respect my conscience, I am going to have to respect yours. The solutions to the inevitable problems following from this can only be persuasion and action at the ballot box, not hysterical, exaggerated accusations of dirty pool.Yes, there are some people who would do away with all religions. But they are few, unorganized, ad rarely have any political clout. So talk of "a religious war" is nonsense, even though a couple of instances the bishops mention should be protested as unAmerican.
Once again, as Jo McGowan so pointedly said, "the church has made a spectacle of itself," thanks to the USCCB. As though the sexual abuse crisis weren't enough. I for one am quite sick of them dishonoring my Church.
Fascinating! Read how Cardinal Cushing in Boston worked for the passage of MA legislation authorizing contraception, and worked behind the scenes with Planned Parenthood to repeal the legislative ban.Catholics and Contraception: Boston, 1965"...Nearly 50 years ago, as a state representative from Brookline, Mass., Dukakis was part of a compromise between opponents and proponents of contraception, a compromise that involved coordination between Planned Parenthood and the church that would be unthinkable now. Dukakis remains convinced that contraception became legal in Massachusetts only with the assistance of the local Catholic leadership....Why did the cardinal remain silent (in an earlier reform effort)? Certainly, he had privately endorsed the repeal effort following his WEEI statement in 1963. With his blessing, a series of meetings had quietly taken place between lay and clerical Catholics and associates of Planned Parenthood to draft a blueprint for repealing the ban through the Legislature. The blueprint appeared as an essay by a young Catholic doctor, Joseph Dorsey, in the Oct. 15, 1964, issue of the New England Journal of Medicine. It acknowledged the need in a pluralistic society for a consensus on a moral principle before it can be expressed as a civil law. Cushing, among others, read and approved the article prior to publication. A close confidant of the cardinal wrote a foreword calling the article a balanced and thoughtful review of a topic that has a history of complexity and bitterness.Cushings silence in the summer of 1965 is best explained by his expectation that the Second Vatican Council, nearing its end, would soon release a long-anticipated statement recognizing that individuals may not be coerced to act against their conscience. Local church officials believed this statement would give the repeal effort in Massachusetts the cover of Vatican acceptability. That support came four months later, on Dec. 7, 1965, when Pope Paul VI promulgated the Declaration on Religious Freedom.When a bill that would allow physicians to prescribe birth control to any married person was introduced in the next legislative session a bill otherwise similar to the one House members had rejected 11997 the year before Cushing endorsed it publicly by praising its safeguards while reaffirming his position that Catholics did not seek to impose by law their moral view on other members of society. This time the bill passed, 13680."http://campaignstops.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/03/15/catholics-and-contrace...
. Worse, the tenor of the bishops statement runs the risk of making this into a partisan issue during a presidential electionThis is a deeply ironic statement, coming from such a group of people who turn everything into a partisan issue. As for this: Church-state relations are complicated, requiring the careful weighing of competing moral claims. The USCCBs statement fails to acknowledge that fact. Fact? My children's elementary school, in about the third grade, has children go through lots and lots of statements to classify them as "fact" or "opinion." Perhaps some adults need remediation on that distinction . . . .
It seems the bishops are not ignoring the plight of Islam, or other faiths, at least according to CNN:"Religious liberty is not only about our ability to go to Mass on Sunday or pray the Rosary at home, the bishops said in a Thursday statement. It is about whether we can make our contribution to the common good of all Americans. Can we do the good works our faith calls us to do, without having to compromise that very same faith?This is not a Catholic issue, the statement said. This is not a Jewish issue. This is not an Orthodox, Mormon or Muslim issue. It is an American issue.Dan Gilgoff - CNN Belief Blog Co-EditorFiled under: Catholic Church
Religious liberty, absolutely. Partisan politics, no.
Unfortunately, it's only one party that's instituted the health-insurance mandate, created a situation in which it's been necessary to close Catholic adoption agencies, and refused to renew a large contract with a Catholic social-services agency because of a religious limitation that was worked around by the previous administration, which was of the other party.The Catholic bishops didn't cause this conflict; they were forced into it. The conflict was created by the Democratic President of the United States. You can't get around that.
@David Smith 12:23AMAgain, re: "refused to renew a large contract with a Catholic social-services agency because of a religious limitation that was worked around by the previous administration"That work around involved a violation of the First Amendment according to a Federal court ruling last month that said:It is therefore ADJUDGED and DECLARED that the government defendants violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, insofar as they delegated authority to a religious organization to impose religiously based restrictions on the expenditure of taxpayer funds, and thereby impliedly endorsed the religious beliefs of the USCCB and the Catholic Church.The judge added a footnote: "This case is not about government forcing a religious institution to act contrary to its most fundamental beliefs. No one is arguing that the USCCB can be mandated by government to provide abortion or contraceptive services or be discriminated against for its refusal to do so. Rather, this case is about the limits of the governments ability to delegate to a religious institution the right to use taxpayer money to impose its beliefs on others (who may or may not share them).
I think the American bishops do not perceive that many people consider the Religious Right to be more of a threat to religious freedom in the. U.S. than the HHS mandate because it seeks to impose its religious values on people of other Christian denominations, non-Christians, and the non-religious by encoding its values into law.
Many people are confusing the ability to accommodate the religious beliefs of others with religious liberty. It's similar to how people confuse whether a newspaper prints something with freedom of speech. Just as the fact that a newspaper can or even has printed something in the past doesn't mean that refusing to print something is a violation of a person's freedom of speech, the fact that an individual, an organization, or even the government could accommodate someone's religiously motivated request doesn't mean that denying the request is an affront to their religious liberty. If a customer requests their food prepared to fit religious requirements, a store or restaurant can either accommodate them or not. If not, the customer can either accept the normal goods or go somewhere else. If an agency wants to contract out some charitable work or provision of services and a religious organization wants to put some restrictions on how they do that, the agency can either accommodate their request or not. If not, the religious organization can either accept the contract without restrictions or not. There are times when religious requests should be accommodated even if they don't have to be. There are also times when a religious request is unreasonable. Regardless of how the two parties decide to interact with each other, this isn't an issue of religious liberty.
Cupcake --I think you're on to something. Both sides are being unreasonable about the HHS thing.
WayneDid you notice Native Americans were absent in the list? Why are their religious liberties violated?
The bishops correctly see government directed hostility to religion in general and Catholicism in particular and are more than justified in resisting it. The editors complain that the bishops' statement is wongheaded because " strangely absent from the list of examples provided by the bishops is the best-documented case of growing hostility to religious presence in the United States: hostility to Islam." Government directed hostility to Islam? What in Hades are the editors talking about? The Obama administration even refuses to identify the principal source for most terrorist acts over the last few decades - "Islamic extremism." It is that extremism that is the source of hostility to Islam on the part of the public, but there has been no government directed hostility to Islam that I am aware of. I see this lame editorial as an effort to get noticed by the White House so that the next time the bishops meet with White House people, they will quote Commonweal to them instead of America.
Thanks to Charles Camosy for his measured reflection on the bishops' statement to which the editors' hasty post did scant justice.I second the concerns of some that the editors risk indulging the very partisanship they claim to decry.Four years ago I cautioned that the involvement of one of the editors in the 2008 Obama campaign threatened to undermine "Commonweal's" credibility. I thought it far more prudent to avoid any semblance of partisanship in the matter. My view was dismissed as without merit. Perhaps that dismissal was also too hastily rendered.
RobertWhen the exaggerated polemics reads as if it were a WND striving for conflict against the president than it does an examination of religious liberty in ALL of its dimensions, with people highly involved with the GOP connected to the statement, it will be difficult for one not to question the agenda. I don't think all involved are with such an agenda, however, I think many are not being given the full picture, and have no sense of the long history of religious liberty disputes in the US. If you want an eye-opening book to read, get Smith's "A Seat At the Table," which is all about religious liberty in the US in relation to Native Americans. You will see many of those involved in the dialogues in the book constantly pointing to the Catholic hierarchy in ways they hindered Native American religious liberty - because the hierarchy thought something (like a telescope for science) was more important. In many ways, if there is any religious liberty issue at hand, it must be seen in connection with the society which Catholics have helped form. Unless we are willing to address our own contribution to this problem instead of focusing on the other, the problem will only get worse.
HenryWho are those highly involved with the GOP connected to the statement? Since the statement does not match the mindset of Commonweal and yours, then it must have the involvement of the GOP?
It's interesting that the US bishops' opinions on politics still carry enough weight and have enough credibility that people here take the time to read them and think about them, even if it's to disagree with them and discuss them heatedly.


text:
Moving product data
In most cases, it's not possible to move products from one Google Account to another. However, you can always add new products to an existing account.
Data Move
You can move information from one account to another for the following products.
- AdWords
- Blogger
- Bookmarks (Export and import)
- Contacts (Export and import)
- FeedBurner
- Finance: Export and Import
- Picasa Web Albums
- YouTube
For any other product, transferring product information is currently unavailable. This may change over time, so check back here for updates. You may find that sharing options listed below may be helpful as well.
Sharing Options
You can use sharing options with the following products to share data between accounts you own:
- Analytics
- App Engine
- Calendar
- Drive (For Google Docs, Sheets, Slides, and Forms)
- Sites
- Webmaster Tools
No data move options
The following products have no data move functionality available, but may give some helpful tips on how to manually recreate your data between accounts.
Kaley is on the Accounts support team and author of this help page. Please leave suggestions below on how to improve her article.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Olimpia 2 – Emelec 3 (Goals, Highlights, & Fla reaction)
- April 13, 2012
- Comments0
Latest on Flamengo
- Angry Flamengo player gives ref incredibly hard handshake after 1-0 defeat to Vasco [GIF]
- Assault: Flamengo's Jonas kicked Vasco's Gilberto in the head, ref only giv...
- Former Brazil striker Fred (Fluminense) sent off for diving versus Flamengo [GIF]
- Referee sends off 4 players in 2 seconds during Flamengo 2 – Vasco 1 [GIF & V...
- A water-logged pitch gets a comedy assist as Flamengo's Alecsandro scores v Vasco...
- The ceiling falls in on Flamengo, literally. Thankfully there were no injuries [Picture]
Best Bookies
The 10 best Premier League signings of the summer thus far
Legendary 101 content!!!
- Galatasaray Vs. Bursaspor: A 101 Great Goals special feature on the Turkish Cup final [...
- Join Now: 101 Great Goals launches a brand new WhatsApp broadcast list service
- 101GG compile chronological list of the 20 best goalkeepers in world football [Video]
- Thiago Messi's appearance at Barca celebrations has produced cute Photoshops
- Cristiano Ronaldo comes to the rescue of Japanese child interviewer attempting Portugue...
- What Pep said to Messi


text:
"I have already told Dana, obviously via twitter, not face-to-face, I don't have his cell phone number; I told him I would fight 'GSP' for free if I lost. If I lost, you don't have to pay me anything, that's how confident in my abilities I am. Now, I'll make a new offer to Dana. Obviously, 'GSP' and Hendricks are going to have a rematch, barring 'GSP's' retirement, which I don't think is going to stand. That was in the heat of the moment.
Rory MacDonald is another guy that, he really just bugs me and he irks me. It was really nice to see him get knocked off his pedestal on Saturday night, but, if Dana White were willing, if I lost to him (Rory), I would fight for free and retire from the sport of MMA because that's how confident I am that I will beat Rory MacDonald. I am not completely financially motivated, I obviously want to make a living, but at the same time, I want to beat the best guys in the world."


text:
21st Century Star Wars And NATO's 60th Anniversary
Stop NATO
January 15, 2009
21st Century Star Wars And NATO's 60th Anniversary
By Rick Rozoff
Regular contentions by U.S. civilian and military officials that the installation of projected third position interceptor missile facilities in Poland and the Czech Republic are aimed at so-called rogue states like Iran and North Korea are a geographical, geometrical and geopolitical absurdity.
In fact such plans are entirely aggressive in nature and present the potentially most dangerous threat the world has known.
Missile deployments in Poland and the linked missile radar site in the Czech Republic are an integral, indeed the central, component of a global (and more than global) U.S.-dominated system to neutralize targeted nations' deterrence and retaliation capabilities, both before and after the fact, for uses of blackmail and actual implementation.
It's worthy of note that the two affected countries, Poland and the Czech Republic, are two of the three first nations incorporated into NATO since the end of the Cold War, at the Alliance's 50th anniversary summit in Washington in 1999 in an event that occurred as NATO was launching its first war (in or out of area), against Yugoslavia.
The third member inducted at the same time was Hungary, where protests have halted the construction of a projected NATO radar station.
In fact the American missile shield outposts in Eastern Europe are an overt effort to implement the Reagan era Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI), infamously known as Star Wars.
The X-band radar that is to be installed in the Czech Republic will be shifted from the US Marshall Islands where it is linked with the Reagan Test Site, and the missile center at the Vandenberg Air Force Base from which US (and allied) interceptor tests have been regularly conducted in conjunction with a sea-based X-band radar off the coast of Alaska and more interceptor missiles at Fort Greely in the Alaskan mainland is named the Ronald Reagan Ballistic Missile Defense Site.
The floating X-Band Radar periodically moved off the shores of Alaska for these exercises weighs 2,000 tons and is 30 stories high.
Its permanent base is in Hawaii where a local newspaper wrote, referring to the sea-based Aegis component of the system, in June of 2008:
"The Missile Defense Agency co-manages the Navy's Aegis program, partners with the Army on its ground-based Patriot missiles and has primary responsibility for other, developing anti-ballistic missile technologies. It's an evolution of the Strategic Defense Initiative begun by President Reagan and has an $8.7 billion budget this year."
Similarly, the U.S. Missile Defense Agency (MDA) is based in Huntsville, Alabama, where the Pentagon employed former German missile scientists in the 1950s for its own Cold War programs and where last year the MDA completed its Von Braun III building, a $240-million, 900,000-square-foot facility.
The center is named, of course, after the founder of Nazi Germany's missile program.
Upon completion of the Von Braun III building in April of last year Alabama Senator Richard Shelby said that naming the complex after Dr. Wernher von Braun was "fitting."
"His spirit is with us here today," Shelby said, "and certainly his vision continues because of the work started here."
Despite the regular disclaimers that the current American global missile shield program is not a so-called Son of Star Wars, an Alabama newspaper reported in 2006 upon the completion of the earlier Von Braun II building in Huntsville that:
"On the back wall of the lobby area are five pages, hand-edited with scribbled notes and revisions, in a simple wooden frame. It is the Star Wars speech given by President Ronald Reagan on March 23, 1983…."
And as Reuters reported in the same month, "The Bush administration and Republican allies in Congress are again pushing for seed money to explore options for putting a multibillion-dollar layer of ballistic-missile interceptors in space [which was] first floated in the 1980s as part of then-President Ronald Reagan's Strategic Defense Initiative."
Time magazine echoed that observation in November of last year, stating that "President George W. Bush promised to build a 'Star Wars' missile shield, and he has kept that promise…."
With the above in mind, the extension of revamped U.S. Stars Wars installations to Eastern Europe, in the case of Poland within immediate striking distance of Russia, takes on ominous dimensions.
As the Russian Novosti agency's chief military commentator remarked last November:
"[T]he strategic importance of these interceptor missiles would increase were the U.S. to deliver a first nuclear strike against Russia.
"In this scenario, interceptor missiles would have to take on the limited number of missiles surviving the first strike, which would allow the U.S. to hope for success and, for the first time since the 1950s, for a victory in a nuclear war."
And the official Chinese party newspaper People's Daily reported in May of 2007:
"[T]he U.S. is seeking to deploy bases within [the territory] of its European allies [and], if it succeeds, in building interceptor bases and radar bases.
"Then, its missile defense system takes the shape with its homeland as its center and East Asia and Europe as the two wings. [T]he existing layout is…targeted directly and entirely at both Russia and China, and this is precisely the reason to arouse the strong opposition of Russia."
That is, the missiles in Poland have to be seen as part of a first strike strategy in two respects in which if the threat doesn't work, the actual use remains.
The ground-based missiles themselves can hit Russia's two largest cities, Moscow and St. Petersburg, within minutes.
Whether such missiles contain conventional or nuclear warheads, a fact only the Pentagon would know, is a distinction Russian air defenses and strategic forces wouldn't have the time or luxury to evaluate.
Even to take the U.S. at its word and to assume that missiles with non-nuclear payloads would be used against 'rogue states,' they could produce the following results, in the words of the then Chief of the Russian General Staff Yury Baluyevsky and Ukrainian Defence Minister Anatoly Gritsenko, respectively:
"Within a radius of 500 to 600 kilometers, depending on the size of the interceptor's nuclear charge, an electro-magnetic impulse will be generated and cause a total power blackout, shutting down computers, generating plants, gas works, water-pump stations, radio and television, and dispatcher's offices in airports and at railroad stations.
"A shock wave will destroy many buildings and structures, while radioactive fallout will contaminate the terrain for years. The Chernobyl disaster would look like a child's prank." (December 2005)
"Nobody knows what can be inside these fragments [of intercepted missiles]. If it is not a nuclear bomb or nuclear warhead in a literal sense, it can be a dirty bomb, for example, with radioactive agents that in addition to the effects from the Chernobyl nuclear disaster may pollute our territory much more. It can be also any virus or biological weapon." (March 2007)
The first addition to the missiles in Poland, even before their deployment, is the U.S.'s commitment to station a Patriot battery with 96 warheads to Poland, within striking distance of Russia's Kaliningrad enclave and Belarus now that the Pentagon has developed a Patriot Advanced Capability-3 (PAC-3) system with a range of 120 kilometers.
And all of the above is only a small portion of the integrated full spectrum global and space system the U.S. and its allies have already successfully tested and are preparing to deploy, which include:
-Ground-Based Midcourse Defense (GMD)
-Exoatmospheric Kill Vehicle (EKV)
-Ground Based Interceptor (GBI)
-Forward Based X-Band Radars (FBXB)
-Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD)
These permit the destruction of other nations' missiles in the launch, boost, midcourse and terminal phases and in theory in the silo.
The global missile system also includes – in addition to ground-based interceptor missiles – air, sea and space components.
The sea-based element is the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System, increasingly being deployed on U.S. and allied NATO and what has recently been termed Asian NATO warships. Linked with the Pentagon's plans for a "1,000-ship navy" this would provide Washington and its military allies the ability to patrol all the world's waterways and shipping lanes with missile killer capacities.
The spaced-based components include kinetic-energy weapons, space lasers, space-based conventional weapons space-based interceptors, with the Exoatmospheric Kill Vehicle an intermediate weapon.
Regarding the third leg of the U.S. nuclear triad, not even in theory a defensive one, the B-2 stealth bomber is described by its proponents as being equipped with "sixteen 2,400 lb (1,100 kg) B83 nuclear bombs" that can "pass through extremely dense anti-aircraft defenses."
The Pentagon and the B-2's manufacturer, Northrop Grumman, regularly boast that it can penetrate radar and air defenses and strike "deep in the interior" of a targeted state that possesses "strategic depth."
That description, given today's political reality, can only pertain to Russia and China.
As authors Keir A. Lieber and Daryl G. Press, referring to the general strategy of delivering crippling first strikes, wrote in their paper "The Rise of U.S. Nuclear Primacy" in Foreign Affairs, a publication of the Council of Foreign Relations, in its March/April 2006 edition:
"It will probably soon be possible for the United States to destroy the long-range nuclear arsenals of Russia or China with a first strike.
"The U.S. Air Force has finished equipping its B-52 bombers with nuclear-armed cruise missiles, which are probably invisible to Russian and Chinese air-defense radar. And the air force has also enhanced the avionics on its B-2 stealth bombers to permit them to fly at extremely low altitudes in order to avoid even the most sophisticated radar."
On the general strategy of so-called missile defense, the Russian analyst Yury Rubtsov said late last September:
"The pending deployment of interceptor missiles in Poland is a link in the system of the global anti-missile shield sweeping from Greenland to Alaska created by the United States that does not conceal its plans for setting up a fourth and a fifth position area for its anti-missile shield.
"The system that Americans are forming is to include offshore and on-land elements in Alaska, California, Japan, Greenland and a number of European countries. A naval base in the Aleutian Islands has been put back in service to support sea-based radar mounted on a re-built oil platform.
"The radar in turn will be a component of the integrated system of the anti-missile shield alongside the interceptor missiles deployed in Alaska.
"[M]ore than ten countries are involved in the formation of the US anti-missile shield, including Australia, Britain, Germany, the Czech Republic Denmark, France, Japan, India, Israel, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, Taiwan and Ukraine."
All of the above are NATO members or partners except for India and Taiwan – it would be too overt a challenge to China to formalize partnerships with them – but the latter two are also being progressively integrated into the U.S./NATO international nexus.
This past September the Pentagon began its first-ever permanent military deployment in Israel, to man an X-Band missile radar site with a range of 1,240 miles; that is, able to operate throughout the Middle East and into Southern Russia.
In addition, outgoing U.S. Missile Defense Agency director Lt Gen Henry Obering has over the past eighteen months either alluded to or been accused of laying plans for deploying Star Wars missile and radar bases in Azerbaijan, Georgia, Turkey and Ukraine.
At the last summit of NATO in Bucharest, Romania in April of last year, all 26 member states endorsed American missile system plans in Poland and the Czech Republic.
That support was reiterated at a NATO defense ministers meeting last November (with the attendance of the military chiefs of over sixty nations, over a third of the countries of the world) and the following month at a meeting of NATO foreign ministers, evoking this response from Russian Defense Minister Anatoly Serdyukov:
"The deployment of a U.S. missile shield in central Europe would disrupt the strategic balance among the world's nuclear powers."
With the upcoming NATO sixtieth anniversary summit on April 3-4 of this year, and with the incoming Obama administration naming former Bush administration NATO Supreme Allied Commander James Jones as its National Security Adviser, all indications are that U.S. and allied missile plans for Europe may expand yet further.
While in Prague three weeks ago California Congresswoman Ellen Tauscher, chairwoman of the House of Representatives Strategic Forces Subcommittee, was described by the Czech News Agency as having "long been demanding that the system protecting the USA and its allies against possible hostile missiles be fully included in the NATO complex of defence."
The same agency reported the previous month that "Czech Prime Minister Mirek Topolanek…said the approval of the treaties would crucially influence the defence capability of NATO."
And Polish Minister of Defense Radoslav Sikorski said that the elements of the air defense shield which will be deployed in Poland will become part of the air defense shield of the entire NATO bloc.
A sentiment shared by NATO Spokesman James Appathurai last April in also calling for the integration and expansion of the U.S. interceptor sites into a broader, continent-wide Alliance system.
Even more ominously, last month current NATO Supreme Allied Commander General Bantz John Craddock affirmed:
"[T]he fact is there is strategic need and advantage for nuclear weapons….The alliance has made the decision to have them. There has been no debate to retrograde them out."
And in reference to the 400 U.S. B-61 tactical nuclear bombs stored at bases in several NATO countries, including Britain, Germany, Italy and Turkey, a Pentagon report released on December 8, 2008 stated:
"The presence of U.S. nuclear weapons in Europe remains a pillar of NATO unity."
The combination of American nuclear warheads in Europe and the expansion of the NATO Alliance and U.S. missile interceptor sites to encircle Russia on its eastern, southern and western borders is a far more threatening development than anything that occurred during the Cold War.
Recent surveys show two-thirds of Czech opposed to the U.S. missile radar site, with 71% demanding a referendum on the issue, and 54% of Poles in opposition to having their nation turned into a potential ground zero in a cataclysmic missile war.
Czechs and Poles clearly realize the danger that most of the rest of the world has been oblivious but can no longer remain indifferent to except at its own peril, perhaps at the risk of its very survival.
The half century long stationing of U.S. nuclear warheads throughout Europe and current plans to deploy missiles and missile radar sites on the continent's eastern perimeter would both be impossible, would be inconceivable, if the nations and peoples of Europe were not enchained by an increasingly ambitious and expansive military bloc that places bases, nuclear arms and missiles on their soil and sends their sons and daughters to kill and die in 21st Century colonial wars of conquest and domination.
As self-styled global NATO prepares its 60th anniversary, first bi-national, summit in France and Germany this April, the abolition of this, history's first, attempt at an international aggressive military axis must be brought to an end.


text:
- Home
- Racing & Wagering
- News / Videos / Photos
- Calendar
- Plan Your Visit
- Parking / Maps / Directions
- Entering Churchill Downs
- General Information
- Guest Services
- Hotel Partner
- Group Sales
- Tours
No Speed No Problem for Stephen Foster Favorite Revolutionary
Fresh off a most impressive win in the Pimlico Special (Grade III), WinStar Farm LLC's Revolutionary is seeking his first Grade I victory in Saturday night's $500,000-added Stephen Foster Handicap Presented by Abu Dhabi (GI) and has been made the 2-1 favorite in a talented field of nine older horses.
McPeek Dreaming of All-Stakes Pick 4 at Saturday's Downs After Dark
The exhilarating Downs After Dark Presented by Stella Artois and Finlandia Vodka night racing program features four graded stakes for Thoroughbreds, highlighted by the $500,000-added Stephen Foster Handicap Presented by Abu Dhabi (Grade I), and Churchill Downs-based trainer Kenny McPeek is shooting for the "All-Stakes Pick 4" with a starter in each graded event
Tapiture Faces Almost Famous In First Outing Since Derby; A Little Bit Sassy, Istanford Head Wide-Open Regret; Champion Arabian Valiant Boy SBFAR Heads President of UAE Cup
After finishing 15th in the Kentucky Derby Presented by Yum! Brands (Grade I), Winchell Thoroughbreds' Tapiture looks to bounce back in the $100,000-added Matt Winn (Grade III) on Saturday night at Churchill Downs.
Two-Time Grade I Winner, Local Favorite On Fire Baby Bids for Fourth Churchill Downs Stakes Win in Fleur De Lis
Anita Cauley's homebred On Fire Baby, a local favorite who won the Grade I La Troienne at Churchill Downs on Kentucky Oaks Day, will seek her fourth career stakes victory at her home track when she faces a strong group of five rivals in the 39th running of the $200,000-added Fleur De Lis Handicap (Grade II), one of five major stakes
Champion Will Take Charge, Revolutionary, Departing Head Grade I Stephen Foster Under 'Downs After Dark' Lights
A talented and accomplished field of nine older horses headed by Will Take Charge, winner of Churchill Downs' Clark Handicap Presented by Norton Healthcare (Grade I) and the champion 3-year-old of 2013, and multiple graded stakes-winners Revolutionary and Departing has been entered to compete in Saturday's...
Godolphin's Long River Bids for First Graded Win in Stephen Foster; Romans Could Have Foster Pair
Seeking his first graded stakes victory, Godolphin's Long River is scheduled to arrive at Churchill Downs on Wednesday morning for the Stephen Foster Handicap Presented by Abu Dhabi (GI), according to his New York-based trainer Kiaran McLaughlin.
Departing Works Half-Mile for Stephen Foster; Tapiture Returns In Matt Winn
Claiborne Farm and Adele Dilschneider's Departing, whose strong 3-year-old campaign included a run in the Preakness Stakes (Grade I) and wins in three derbies, completed his serious preparation Monday for his bid for Saturday night's 33rd running of the $500,000-added Stephen Foster Handicap Presented by Abu Dhabi (Grade I) <
Churchill Downs Announces Six 2014 Downs After Dark Racing Dates
The Fourth Annual White Party fashions the Stephen Foster Handicap
into a night of casual elegance and entertainment
Will Take Charge Assigned High Weight for Saturday's Stephen Foster 'Cap
Reigning 3-year-old champion Will Take Charge looms as the starting high weight in Saturday's 33rd running of the $500,000-added Stephen Foster Handicap presented by Abu Dhabi (Grade I) after being assigned a 123-pound impost for the race by Churchill Downs Racing Secretary Ben Huffman.
Honey Hues Takes Inside Route to Early Times Mint Julep Upset
Honey Hues, a 13-1 longshot ridden by Jesus Castanon, tracked the pace set by Maid On a Mission before she moved to the front on the far turn and then held off a late charge by I'm Already Sexy to score a three-quarter length victory in Saturday's 38th running of the Grade III, $110,400 Early Times Mint Julep Handica
Johnson Celebrates 1000th Win; Will Take Charge, Golden Ticket Work Toward Foster
The northwestern Kentucky town of Spottsville, located on the Green River with Owensboro to the East and Henderson to the West, is so small that it does not currently have a post office.
Watch California Chrome's Belmont Stakes, Triple Crown Bid on Churchill Downs' Big Board
Churchill Downs fans who hope to see Kentucky Derby winner California Chrome become racing's first Triple Crown winner in 36 years will cheer the final jewel of the three-race series while watching the race on the track's spectacular Big Board during Saturday's celebration of Belmont Stakes Day at the home of the Kentucky Derby
Napravnik Says General A Rod Could Run Big With Clean Belmont Trip; Will Take Charge, Revolutionary Top Foster Noms
Of those attempting to deny California Chrome's Triple Crown bid in Saturday's Belmont Stakes (Grade I) is General a Rod for trainer Mike Maker, who will be ridden by Churchill Downs based jockey Rosie Napravnik.
Miz Ida Seeks Repeat Win in Early Times Mint Julep Handicap
The lime and black racing colors of one of the first families of Churchill Downs' racing community will be prominent Saturday at the Louisville track when Richard and Bertram Klein's Miz Ida bids for a second consecutive victory in the $100,000-added Early Times Mint Julep (Grade III), the featured live racing event on a program that also celeb
Collmus Ready for Career Call in Saturday's Belmont Stakes
The connections of Kentucky Derby Presented by Yum! Brands (Grade I) and Preakness (GI) winner California Chrome aren't the only ones who are anticipating the June 7 Belmont Stakes to be the biggest day of their careers.
Delaunay Back to Winning Ways, Prevails in Aristides by 3 1/2 Lengths
Maggi Moss' Delaunay took the lead on the far turn and widened the margin in the stretch to win Saturday's 26th running of the $112,900 Aristides (Grade III) at Churchill Downs by 3 ½ lengths over defending champ Scatman.
Medal Count Breezes; General a Rod Confirmed for Belmont Stakes
Spendthrift Farm's Medal Count, eighth-place finisher in the Kentucky Derby Presented by Yum! Brands (GI), breezed six furlongs in 1:10.60 on Saturday morning at Churchill Downs in preparation for next Saturday's $1.5 million Belmont Stakes (GI).
Fiftyshadesofgold Clocks Final Work Before Grade I Acorn
The Estate of Clarence Scharbauer Jr.'s Fiftyshadesofgold, winner of the Eight Belles (Grade III) at Churchill Downs on Kentucky Oaks Day, breezed a half mile in :49.60 Friday morning in her final workout before shipping to Belmont Park for the $750,000 Acorn (Grade I) on June 7.
Medal Count to Work Saturday Before Shipping to Belmont Stakes
Spendthrift Farm's Medal Count, eighth-place finisher in the Kentucky Derby Presented by Yum! Brands (Grade I), will work Saturday under the Twin Spires before shipping to Belmont Park next Thursday where he will try to spoil the Triple Crown hopes of California Chrome in the Belmont Stakes (GI) on June 7.
Mico Margarita Faces Stiffer Test in Saturday's Grade III Aristides
J. Kirk and Judy Robison's Mico Margarita, the romping 8 ¾-length winner of the $60,000 Oak Hall at Evangeline Downs in his last start, headlines a field of nine 3-year-olds and up that were entered for Saturday's 26th running of the $100,000 Aristides (Grade III) at Churchill Downs.


text:
The former Leeds and Everton forward has signed a two-year contract as Wanderers boss Dougie Freedman continues to reshape his squad for the new season.
Freedman knows the 29-year-old well from his own stint at Elland Road, and the Scotsman revealed he has been hoping to secure Beckford's services for some time.
"We have worked very hard in order to bring Jermaine to the club," Freedman said.
"Jermaine is someone I know, and I have previously played alongside him, so I know his character.
"He is a goal scorer."


text:
Natural Standard provides high-quality, evidence-based information about complementary and alternative therapies, diets, exercise and nutrition.
June is National Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Month. Natural Standard celebrates by highlighting the potential health benefits of various fruits and vegetables.
Strawberry: Strawberry (Fragaria spp.) is predominantly known for its bright red, edible fruit covered in small seeds. The fruit is fragrant and high in fiber, vitamin C, folate, potassium and antioxidants. Some studies indicate that eating strawberries may reduce the risk of colorectal cancer. Preliminary research also suggests that strawberry may be useful as an anti-inflammatory and may help enhance iron absorption.
Pomegranate: Pomegranate (Punica granatum) is grown around the world and has a long history of use as food and medicine. In the United States, pomegranate juice and seeds are used as food. One pomegranate delivers about 40% of an adult's daily vitamin C requirement and is high in antioxidants, which are thought to help reduce the risk of certain diseases.
For more fun nutritional information, please visit Natural Standard, a database purchased by UCF Libraries.


text:
+myConnections: Engage your community - connect to news, events and information you care about. View more information...
Iron County Democrats
2 points
Tera Carmack
Jessica Chamberlain
View your community's facilities and features online with the new Facilities Module.
Personalize your online experience to stay up-to-date on news, events and other information.


text:
The B-READY stroller from BRITAX is a versatile, modular stroller that can easily convert to an in-line double stroller. With 14 different configurations the B-READY stroller is adaptable to fit your needs. The integrated Click & Go receivers enable you to position the top seat forward or rear-facing, attach a bassinet, or attach an infant car seat to create a travel system without having to purchase additional adapters. Foam-filled rubber tires help absorb bumps, provide a responsive smooth ride and eliminate the hassles of air. The reversible top seat has a weight capacity of 55 lbs and features a non-rethread, adjustable, 5-point harness system. An extra large canopy, 4-position recline, adjustable leg rest, and full suspension will ensure the travelling comfort of little ones. As an in-line tandem stroller, the second seat is certainly not an afterthought. With 4 recline positions; the second seat is appropriate from birth to 35 lbs. Perhaps most impressive is the fact that the second seat does not need to be removed to fold the stroller. A single step on the brake pedal locks and unlocks both rear wheels and has a red/green indicator. Caregivers will further appreciate the height adjustable handle, included drink holder and over-sized storage basket that is accessible from all four sides.
Features & Benefits:
- CLICK & GO integrated adapter system works with BRITAX infant car seats and bassinet. Also compatible with other major infant car seat brands** when used with BRITAX infant car seat adapter frame (sold separately)
- Converts to in-line double stroller*** to accommodate multiple seat and infant car seat configurations
- Foam-filled rubber tires
- Reversible top seat with 4 recline positions
- Large under seat storage accessible from all sides
- Large canopy with sun-visor and ventilation window
- Simple fold with automatic chassis lock
- Adjustable handle height with comfort grip
- No re-thread, adjustable, 5-point harness and head pad
- One-step, linked parking brake with indicator
- Comfort ride 4-point suspension
- Included accessories: Adult cup-holder
* From birth when using infant car seat, bassinet or second seat (sold separately)
** Other major brands include: Graco Snug-Ride, Chicco Key-Fit and Peg-Perego Primo Viaggio
***With use of second seat (sold separately)
Gift Wrap not available.


text:
- Home
- News
- Sports
- Obituaries
- Place Classified Ad
- Special Sections
- Community Links
- Games
Rev. David E. Boutwell age 74, a longtime Crystal area resident. He was born on June 16, 1938 to Cole M. and Vera (Lucille) Boutwell in Baird, TX. Rev. Boutwell passed on from this life February 25, 2013 at his daughters home surrounded by his girls. He graduated high school in Lake Worth, TX. He also attended the University of Texas for two years in Arlington. Rev. Boutwell preached at the Prison Ministries in Fort Worth for several years and assisted with Benevolence ministries at the Alamo City fellowship. He was the current pastor at the Darwin Baptist Church for 11years. He loved the Lord very much, and was called according to his purpose. Rom. 8:28. He was a career Army pilot and a Vietnam vet. He earned several medals including the Purple Heart. Rev. Boutwell married Dorothy (Dignum) on August 22, 1958 in Fort Worth, TX. He enjoyed playing golf, feeding and clothing the poor, coaching sports and was an avid sports fan. He loved spending time with family and friends. He is survived by his wife Dorothy Boutwell of Crystal. Daughters; Deborah Herman and Husband Pete of Crystal, Donna Jagers of Lane. Grandchildren; Crystal Kemmerer of Edmond, Amanda Horner and Husband Chris of Victoria, TX, Hope Lambert of Edmond, Isaiah McDowell and Wife Chantel of Antlers. Great Grandchildren; Isaac, Myah, Davin, Penelope, Audrey, Colin, Rylan, and one on the way. Along with numerous nephews, other relatives and many friends. He was preceded in death by his parents, Cole M. and Vera (Lucille) Boutwell; Daughter, Darla Gaye; Grandsons, Michael McDowell and Christopher Herman; Great Granddaughter, Bella Herman. Funeral services were held at 2:00 PM Saturday, March 2, 2013 at Crystal Baptist Church Crystal. Officiating was Bro. Raymond Humphrey.
Funeral Services were conducted by: Brown's Funeral Service in Atoka.


text: Posted 12 Feb 2013 [quote] [b][size=5]Global poll opens for naming two new moons of Pluto[/size][/b] [img]http://tomsastroblog.com/images/2013/02/plutomoonfev.jpg[/img] NEW DELHI: A worldwide poll has been launched inviting people to give names to the two moons of Pluto that were discovered in 2011 and 2012. The moons are currently called P4 and P5. Mark Showalter of the SETI Institute, who discovered the two baby moons using Hubble space telescope's photographs, launched a portal yesterday, called Pluto Rocks, to start a worldwide poll. Pluto has three named moons called Charon, Nix and Hydra. These existing names hold the key to the new names that may be given - they are derived from Greek or Roman mythology, and all are connected to the underworld or Hades. Pluto himself was the king of the underworld, just as Zeus ruled heaven and Poseidon ruled the seas. Charon ferried the souls of the dead across the rivers Styx and Acheron, Nix was the goddess of night and mother of Charon and Hydra was a nine-headed monster who was guardian of the underworld. So the names of P4 and P5 will probably be taken from the underworld. The portal for the poll has 12 names for which votes can be cast online. These are: Acheron, Alecto, Cerberus, Erebus, Eurydice, Hercules, Hypnos, Lethe, Obol, Orpheus, Persephone and Styx. Till last reports came in, Styx and Cerebrus (the three-headed dog that guards Hades) were leading with about 12,000 votes each. A seperate form avaialable on the site also gives you an opportunity to suggest totally different names, only if you are able to justify your choice. The winner of the poll, that closes on 25 February, will be recommended by the SETI Institute to the International Astronomical Union which gives names to astronomical bodies. "We will take into consideration the results of the voting, but they are not binding. The discovery team, in consultation with the Nomenclature Working Groups of the International Astronomical Union, reserves the right to propose the names. Note that the International Astronomical Union has final authority over the naming of Pluto's moons," the Pluto Rocks portal says. Showalter and his team of scientists discovered the new moons while making a detailed study of Pluto, ahead of the first ever human probe to reach Pluto in July 2015. It is called New Horizons and is at present hurtling towards the icy Pluto. Showalter's survey was part of NASA's due diligence before New Horizon comes anywhere near Pluto. They don't want an undiscovered object crashing into the spacecraft which was launched way back in 2006. New Horizons has traveled 3.9 billion kilometers in the past 7 years, and it has to cover another billion kms to reach the Pluto system. After observing the lonely ex-planet and its five moons, New Horizons will likely head towards the Kuiper Belt an eerie zone some 3 billion kilometers wide where debris from the Solar System's formation is whirling around. [/quote] [url="http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/science/Global-poll-opens-for-naming-two-new-moons-of-Pluto/articleshow/18461573.cms"]Source[/url] Share this post Link to post Share on other sites


text:
|69 posts found
Novice Member
Joined: 3/07/04
Please define F2P ... the term doesn't really seem descriptive of current non-sub business model.
Hybrid probably isn't a better term, but that's what most companies are offering.
Box + microtxns, Box + sub / content packs, etc. It's clear if you read the articles and blogs what companies are offering, but the headlines are misleading. Many of the game covered here are not actually free to play + microtxns.
Also, can you fix your comment system to use <br> instead of <p> or add more space after </p>? I have to do a double enter to get the correct space between paragraphs when I post now.
It's a lot like how 4G as a term got watered down and really isn't descriptive of any specific cellular technology anymore. For example, comparing one 4g network to another in many cases is like comparing apples and oranges.
If you don't worry about it, it's not a problem.
Login or Register to never see this panel
Hard Core Member
Joined: 1/25/12
I'm only playing the role chosen for me. Who you supposed to be?
Originally posted by Nephaerius
AMEN! Could not have said it better myself
+1 Rep
Elite Member
Joined: 8/13/09
"It is double pleasure to deceive the deceiver". - Niccolo Machiavelli
Originally posted by GI05
i dont think that would work because publishers will use the different payment tiers just like a freemium hybrid model...... theywill most likely add game limitations to anyone who pays less than $15.... and if i pay to play the game, no matter how much i pay i expect the full game unlocked because i already paid for the box and im also paying the sub.
if the game failed witha sub, let it be F2P.
Apprentice Member
Joined: 8/12/10
F2P is only a superior model for games that lack the basic tools to allow players to have fun after they completed the theme-park content. But even after watching many MMOs fail for the same reasons, companies still insist on the same formula! For example: SWTOR had Mythic developers create PvP content with exactly the same problems WAR had. Those who dont learn from mistakes deserve to fail.
Elite Member
Joined: 2/27/07
Originally posted by BerzerkBlack
Well said.
Elite Member
Joined: 4/29/10
What it means is if you release a game a year too early, it will quickly lose subs and you will need to convert to F2P.
Advanced Member
Joined: 7/27/07
If you think about it logically, the subscription model itself cannot be the issue.
Somewhere around 1.7 to 2.0 million people bought the game KNOWING that they were signing upto a subscription based game.
If it was the case that people quit SWTOR because of the subscription (as opposed to SWTOR not being good enough to deserve their subscription)... then they would have never bought the game in the first place.
If the angle that EA / BW are trying to push were true, then they must have been dissapointed with initial box sales.
in other words:
Lower than expected box sales = problem with the payment model
Lower than expected retention = problem with the quality of game
Novice Member
Joined: 1/12/06
Originally posted by Coolit
Some launch P2P for the first year to make up dev costs and buffer for future expenses before going freemium which does add up to a lot more revenue in the future.
Spotlight Poster
Joined: 5/19/06
Originally posted by noblood
Bingo ^
Low Quality product == bound for F2P.
High Quality product == people have no issues with paying a flat-rate sub for WITHOUT a cash shop included!
The Theory of Conservative Conservation of Ignorant Stupidity:
Elite Member
Joined: 2/12/12
SWTOR is going F2P because its subscription numbers did not add up to what it was assumed they would. It wasn't holding steady and it wasn't trending upwards. It was showing a decline over time. The writing was on the wall and anyone willing could see it plain as day.
The pre-launch hype - from everyone, including EA/Bioware themselves - had all the indication that it was assumed to be inevitable that TOR would rake in millions upon millions of players, rivaling even WoW.
It didn't happen that way. People got through the game, experienced the various flavors of the storyline, found there was nothing more for them to keep playing for and canceled their subs.
TOR failed to maintain the numbers Bioware/EA expected it to and everyone (and I mean 'everyone' almost literally in this case) predicted it would and it was looking worse over time.
So they took the leap and said "okay, let's change to the Cash Shop model, and open an alternate revenue stream".
Does anyone here honestly believe for a moment that if Bioware/EA saw TOR maintaining at least 2 million paying players, with the population either holding steady or increasing, that they'd make that change? Of course they wouldn't. Why would they? That's guaranteed income from every single player, every single month. No need to worry about "converting" a free player to a paying one. They're already paying if they're playing the game.
If you look at every single MMORPG that started out as a subscription-based game and later changed to cash-shop/F2P or some variety of "freemium", you'll find that they were all in a similar situation... populations had stagnated and/or were decreasing.
People keep looking to these events as "proof of the subscription model dying". It isn't. Not even close.
There are subscription-based games that are - to this day - still running and maintaining a viable subscriber base. FFXIV will continue with subscriptions. FFXI continues with subscriptions. DAoC and so on. WoW is an obvious one. Their free trial is up to level 20, but you need to cough up the $$$ if you want to play beyond that. Rift is another.
If "subscriptions" themselves were the problem, then they wouldn't have survived, nevermind thrived for the past decade plus. They wouldn't continue to be effective today. To argue that MMOs are failing due to a flawed revenue model is to completely ignore facts that are staring one right in the face.
No. Subscriptions are just fine and will continue to be just fine. They aren't "dying", as much as some would seem to love to see that happen.
TOR went F2P/Cash Shop because it was the better business model for EA/Bioware's bottom line at this point in time.
Elite Member
Joined: 2/12/12
Originally posted by Fadedbomb
Novice Member
Joined: 8/08/12
What Does SWTOR F2P Mean?
The game wasn't good enough for P2P
It played as a single player RPG, and nobody plays the same single player rpg for years, not even months.
"Dogs are the leaders of the planet. If you see two life forms, one of them's making a poop, the other one's carrying it for him, who would you assume is in charge."
"The idea behind the tuxedo is the woman's point of view that men are all the same; so we might as well dress them that way. That's why a wedding is like the joining together of a beautiful, glowing bride and some guy"
Elite Member
Joined: 1/17/07
I think what SWTOR shows that the business model used has to be right. EA should have re-assessed the market prior to launch.
My view before launch was that SWTOR should have been B2P with no monthly subscription. New content would be paid DLC and - possibly - EA might opt for a small annual fee for the mmo features.
SWTOR strongest asset is the stories. Going forward these are going to be given away and the game will have to rely on people wanting to buy pink light sabres or whatever else they introduce. I so not believe F2P for SWTOR will work well.
Novice Member
Joined: 3/02/12
Originally posted by gervaise1
I completely agree. I will be picking up SW:TOR again once it goes F2P, for no other reason than to play through the class stories I missed the first time around. That was during my FREE month, btw. I cancelled my sub before I ever paid them a dime beyond the box price.
F2P isn't a great idea when you plan on giving away the best part of your game. EA/BioWare are grasping at straws at this point, trying to salvage something from the train wreck that is SW:TOR. As to F2P being here to stay, I agree with that too. But sadly, when done right with a quality game, it can end up costing the player more in the long run then a monthly subscription would have.
I believe that if we see Titan adopt a F2P Cashshop model, that will pretty much spell the end of subscription based MMO's for good. Hate them if you want to, but there is no denying that Activision/Blizzard are the market leaders and trendsetters.
Elite Member
Joined: 6/10/06
I have to agree with many posters here in saying that SWTOR failed because it was a pile of stinking crap and not because of it's payment model. Developers keep thinking they can achieve WoW numbers when they never will. WoW was a freak occurrence and I very much doubt we'll ever see another MMO hit those numbers again. Add to that the idea that EA/Bioware held, that they had to copy the WoW formula to succeed and you end up with yet another clone doomed to fail.
SWTOR is going F2P because they can see no other way to save it.
I actually did a litle research into WoW's pricing in the far east and the average number of hours played by WoW customers. 22 hours a week at 6-7 cents per hour, works out to between $5.60-$6.00 a month per player. Maybe F2P isn't the way forward after all. Maybe more people would be interested in this pay per hour model, or a reduced sub. Let's face it, current prices for subs can't be justified by the running costs when compared to the costs of MMO's released 10 years ago.
More importantly, if you want to retain players, stop making shit games!
Novice Member
Joined: 6/29/12
It means FAKE FREE TO PLAY WITH LOCKED LEVELS ,CONTENT ETC , never trose Sony Online Entertainment, ALL their stuff IS ADVERTISED FAKE,THEY FORCE people to PAY WITH LIES, most of people wasting time downloading their crap wich they mean is free to play, after that they dissapoint.
SOE stop LIE !
Novice Member
Joined: 2/01/06
Can you imagine what I would do if I could do all I can?
- Sun Tsu
While I did not corner that term myself, the Guild Wars 2 effect seems to really influence a lot of games around. Around the same time that GW2 is coming around, a lot of games seem to slowly attempt to get some of that bright sunshine.
A major title with a solid background and proven success is refining its recipe. Like it or not, ArenaNet had it right from the start and now they're making it even better. I think that poses as a menace to other P2P games, especially a title like SWTOR that started to leak subscribtions after the first major patch. Every major title that came out during last the quarter would suddenly empty half the servers for several days. Some didn't recover and eventually, the way to late server merge simply made things far worse.
F2P will probably save that game for a while but I got to admit, Bioware has not performed as expected with an MMO.
Now with a title like GW2 on the horizon, this could suddenly kill off a game like SWTOR.
Let's not forget Planetside 2 and other quite promising MMOs on the verge of release. SWTOR is pretty much forced to run with the crowd. Perhaps the undying Star Wars fans are numerous enough to keep this game going but as a casual fan, I was tired of this game after 3 months.
Novice Member
Joined: 4/26/09
Honestly, I think the subscription model needs to be implemented for games with significantly higher quality than competition. SWTOR thought, for whatever reason, that it was so much different from the rest that it would validate a subscription model. This turned out to be untrue. F2P is the haven for games that don't turn out to be as good as their devs would have liked.
The first game to break the mold from the current WoW model and do it at a high level will be the game that rakes in the subscription fees the way WoW did for the past many years.
And a game like Planetside 2 is perfect for F2P because it really is just CoD except persistent, which isn't necessarily the biggest change for a FPS game. The fact that its free means a huge audience of people willing to pay $15 for map packs will now be buying $2 aesthetic nonsense and funding this game. It's amazing as a business idea but still proves nothing about the state of subscription models.
Elite Member
Joined: 1/17/07
Originally posted by jmcdermottuk
Failing because it was crap - yes and no. As a sub based game clearly the concensus is that it was crap, a failure; if it had been sold as KOTR3 with a bit of mmo on the side - like Assassin's Creed - then I think it would have been OK. Not Skyrim but I doubt people would be calling it crap.
The game has to match the payment model. Get one or the other (or both!) wrong and you have a fail.
The WoW far east numbers are interesting as well as they are very close to what annual pass folks are currently paying ($7.50) if you factor in $60 for a D3 purchase.
At the end of the day it comes down to having the right product and selling it at the right price.
Novice Member
Joined: 4/05/12
The mentality of this market is ridiculous. Most people spend 20 times $15 a month going out to eat. A MMO sub is the best entertainment value in the world. One movie can be $15 in some markets. Don't forget to add the drink and popcorn to double the price.
You can't depend on your eyes when your imagination is out of focus. - Mark Twain


text: Altered Beige is a warm-toned, pinky beige with a frosted finish and semi-sheer to semi-opaque color. I felt like the frost made it appear more opaque, but a lot of the natural lip color will come through, given that it's a lustre (which is a sheerer formula). It lasted two and a half hours on me. Giorgio Armani Moonlight Beige #4 is similar. MAC Pure Zen is pinker. Giorgio Armani #111 is similar, slightly warmer. MAC Tropical Mist is very sheer on me but the two have a similar effect. MAC Japanese Maple is similar. MAC Marquise d' is pinker. Revlon Creme Brulee is also similar.


text:
KML files are information overlays opened inside Google Earth (or in some cases Google Maps) and feature a placemark, image or polygon. Think of them as the mashup viewing component for Google Earth. This will now allow you to view KML files which have been posted on the web on your Google Maps for Mobile application on your mobile phone or PDA.
To try this out, do the following:
1. Open Google Maps for Mobile on your mobile phone or PDA (Download it here)
2. Select "Find Business"
3. Select "Enter a new search"
4. Type in: http://dev.keyhole.com/trek/StarTrekPlaces.kml
5. Start to view placemarks for the KML file!
..Viewing each placemark on Google Maps for Mobile is cool too since you move from placemark to placemark by just keying in numbers. The viewing experience is very similar to jumping from point to point in a series of turns in a regular street maps directions search on Maps for Mobile.
Google will be making this announcement at a Star Trek convention today attended by an estimated 15,000 people, according to the above-linked article. The page they have set up to launch this feature is intended for Trekkies attending this event and this example KML file I've chosen above shows points of information for the convention. Visit the information page here: http://www.google.com/trekfan. From a marketing perspective, this really shows the possibilities for Google's mapping technology for events or conventions. You could create a KML file that is posted on your event website for Google Earth users to view, and now Maps for Mobile. The file can also be viewed in Google Maps, although you could create a more sophisticated mashup with more detail in the info-windows.
Google Video about
KML on Mobile:
KML integration into Maps (Desktop of Mobile) is not perfect. Not all KML files are viewable in Maps for Mobile. It's a good idea to cut/paste the full URL into Google Maps first, then key it into a business search on your phone. That said, does anyone reading this post know of a list of good KML files that view well in Maps without errors? Typically files with only a few placemarks are best since large numbers of placemarks get truncated when viewing it on Maps.
All in all, this is a great feature that further integrates Google's mapping products (Maps, Earth and Maps for Mobile) with each other. It should spawn further KML development and "unearth" more web-hosted KML files out there that will be useful to view while on the go. For mashup developers out there when creating your Google Maps mashups, don't forget to create a KML file for Earth and Maps for Mobile users to view! This should be the beginning of a new wave of Google Maps mobile mashups by way of KML...
- Download Google Maps for Mobile
- Google Maps for Mobile KML Video (Google Video)
- See how Google Maps for Mobile works (interactive demo)
- Google Maps for Mobile introduces live traffic for 30 cities
- Download Google Earth
[Credit to the Press-Telegram for the tip!]


text:
Lumpkin suffered a wrist injury, a Northwestern spokesperson confirmed to PurpleWildcats. The injury's extent is currently unknown.
Lumpkin missed the Wildcats' first four games of the season with mononucleosis. He returned to action in the South Padre Island Invitational, but has yet to see a heavy dose of playing time.
With senior forward Drew Crawford out for the season with a shoulder injury, Lumpkin was to help fill the void. Now, Northwestern's bench just became thinner.
Northwestern opens the conference schedule with No. 2 Michigan, then travels to play No. 11 Minnesota just three days later.
Facebook | Twitter| E-Mail |


text:
If you're looking for toys for 12-24 month olds, you'll find a array of special gifts at Oompa.com. Between 12 and 24 months, toddlers explode with new skills! Encourage walking with push toys, pull toys, and walker wagons. Colorful peg and chunky puzzles will help with dexterity as well as vocabulary and language development. Stuffed animals and dolls are also favorites that provide comfort as well as encourage emotional awareness. Whether you're looking for a special gift for that first birthday or stocking up on everyday playthings, you are sure to find a vast array of top quality choices at Oompa.com.
No products found in this collection


text: The Nuby Medi-Nurser lets parents and caretakers administer oral medicine or vitamins to your baby neatly and accurately with ease. The uniquely designed nurser features side indentions for easy grasping and a snap-on nipple-ring assembly. Because the Medi-Nurser bypasses most of the taste buds, it reduces your baby's ability to smell the medication. Taking medicine is more pleasant for you and baby!


text:
Find accommodations in Deltona with the hotel list provided below. Search for the cheapest discounted hotel and motel rates in or near Deltona, FL for your upcoming individual or group travel. We show the best Deltona, Florida hotel and motel rooms. Browse the Deltona area hotels to find the perfect lodging! Please use the provided map of the Deltona hotels. Planning a group? Lock in Deltona Group Hotel DiscountsThe Deltona center point is about 5 miles from Central Florida Zoo and 5 miles from Monroe Harbour Marina.
Deltona Hotels/Accommodations
Next 20 Deltona Hotels > [1 - 20 of 50]
Next: See My Deltona Hotels with Pricing >


text:
Bible 101
We Also Recommend
The Bible is by, about, and for the people of Israel from its origins as a single family in Canaan through its partial return as a nation from exile in Babylonia. The Hebrew Bible is traditionally divided into three sections: תורה/ Torah (Teaching), נביאים / Nevi'im (Prophets), and כתובים/ Ketuvim (Writings) from which is derived the name TaNaKh, an acronym denoting the three sections. The Bible, which contains a diversity of voices and messages and yet remains a single book, reflects the ideal of a people that speaks with a diversity of voices and yet is seen as one people engaging in an eternal conversation.
About the Bible
The Bible is a complex book comprised of 24 books written by different authors over a period of around 850 years. It includes narratives, law codes, short stories, etiological tales, prophecies, exhortations, poetry, and wisdom writing. Although scholars have different perspectives on how the Bible came to be, the centrality of the Bible in Jewish culture, in Torah study, and in Jewish worship, is undisputed.
Bible in History
While the rabbis of the Talmudic era assert that the Torah existed before history, the events described in the Bible create a narrative that can be seen against the backdrop of world history. Different historians and archaeologists have various approaches to using the biblical text as a source for history.
Contemporary Issues in Reading the Bible
While the Bible bears the stamp of history in its language and cultural assumptions, its readers in every generation bring their own assumptions and concerns to their reading of the Bible. Various contemporary issues, such as feminist readings of Biblical narratives or computer-assisted analysis of biblical texts, have drawn many people to the study of biblical texts.
The Torah
The Torah, or Five Books of Moses, retells the story of how the family of Abraham and Sarah became the people of Israel, and how they came back from exile in Egypt, under the leadership of Moses, to the border of the land of Israel, on the way stopping at Mt. Sinai for the revelation of what are known as the Ten Commandments. The Torah includes both the narrative of the formation of the people of Israel and the laws which define the covenant that binds the people to God.
Did you like this article? MyJewishLearning is a not-for-profit organization.


text: Buncombe County News This news item expired on 10/17/2013, so the information below could be outdated or incorrect. Fairview Evening Book Club: Spook Thursday, October 17 at 7pm Fairview Library 1 Taylor Road 250-6485 The book to be discussed is "Spook" by Mary Roach. All interested readers are welcome to attend.