text:
Can a Muslim prove to an atheist or an infidel that God actually exists?
As far as I know most atheists will argue that since they can't hear, see or feel God then He doesn't exist.
Can a Muslim prove to an atheist or an infidel that God actually exists?
As far as I know most atheists will argue that since they can't hear, see or feel God then He doesn't exist.
If there was a clearcut incontrovertible proof that was acceptable to everybody (like say a mathematical proof) then this life wouldn't be a test. It wouldn't be a test of someone's submission to God, it would be a test of whether they have the brains to accept logic or not. And the whole point of this life is to test whether we are humble and accepting of God's Lordship over us, or whether we are arrogant and reject and deny Him. So my contention is that such a proof cannot exist. God says that if He had wanted, everyone would have believed. This is one such way of having everyone believe - but then what's the point?
Then the question becomes - what kind of proof does exist? And before we get into that, we have to take a step back and define the parameters of what constitutes proof. In the scientific world (and this is perfectly fine) it requires physically proving something. It requires a hypothesis and then an experiment to falsifiably prove something (vastly oversimplifying here). So the only evidence considered in scientific experiments is somewhat restricted.
The problem comes when one tries to take the scientific method and apply it to things it wasn't meant for, like philosophy or religion. In Islam we accept divine revelation as a source of proof as well because we believe in the truthfulness of the Messenger (saws) to deliver the message of God.
Even if you don't believe in divine revelation, the Qur'an itself commands humans to ponder over Creation and to reflect over it, and to let that guide them to Allah. It even provides arguments against atheists. For example, in Surat Toor and other places. There is another place where Allah offers 4 possibilities for the provenance of Creation - will update the answer if I find it.
Lastly, if you apply Bayes Rule to find the probability that everything came into being just on its own and try to find the posterior probability of every single coincidence and complexity and start multiplying them together, you have a vanishing probability of everything just happening on its own. You can make it as small as you like when you keep adding events to the chain. This is a probabilistic proof so it doesn't count as an absolute proof.
The best thing you can do is to convey Allah's message and stay back.
This is not directly a continuation of my previous post, hence, a new post:
First. Can an atheist proves that God doesn't exist? No! How can then they conclude "if there is no proof for existence of God so there is no God"? At least they should consider both the probabilities that God exists and God doesn't exist. Even this much honesty will change their ways of living entirely.
Second. See if these two proofs suffice:
Also there are other reasonings in Shia literature, but the two above should suffice God Willing, specifically the first one I guess.
As others have stated the Quran's perspective seems to be that even the Prophet himself (let alone an ordinary Muslim) cannot guide another person independent of how much effort he puts into it and this includes providing a "proof" (verse 28:56):
Or in verses 2:6 2:7 it says:
(It is very interesting to me since this seems to be very similar to what you described in the question, i.e. "they can't hear, see or feel God" though Quran doesn't mean the usual senses by these.)
On the other hand, Quran says that there is no doubt that God exists, e.g. verse 14:10 says:
(The following verses contains the reply given by the prophets to them.)
So from Quran's perspective there is no doubt about the existence of the God who has created the earth and the skies.
(Usually people don't have much problem with accepting some force that has caused the universe to exist as long as it is something abstract. I should add that the recent forms of atheism might be a little bit different from the old ones since the new atheists feel they have reasonable ways of explaining how universe become to exist without anything before it but this will go beyond what is asked in the question.)
Firstly all who reject existence of God do not know what is God. God is not a man in sky. God is not material at all. Using "he" for God does not mean he is a man. But it is only to we can communicate and talk about God. Maybe reading sermon 1 here is a good start to know what is God.
Here is a wonderful debate Imam Sadiq S.A. taught to Mufaddal to he can argue with Atheists.
This article containing interesting debates about God with some of who reject God is also useful for atheists:
Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq's [a] contribution to the sciences
There are many different methods for finding God. Some find God by philosophy. But the better way is seeing and meeting God which in by Irfan method (here and here). This method is very hard but you can spritual things like angels and meet God. Such people have power of miracle and controlling the universe. in fact by this method a human becomes like God and dissolves in God like a drop of water fallen in ocean. They can die whenever they want and go (by their soul) and see what they want like paradise, hell, angels, future, God ,.. Then back to their body in this world. They have servants from Jinn who work for them. Jinns are not limited in time and place and can quickly go from one side of earth to other side and bring news or deliver a letter or do other works. They can go from one place to other place in one moment (by their physical body) using Tay al-Arz power granted by God. Nature is under their control. They can convert a stone to gold only by looking it.
When you meet God then you will not need proof for its existence.
Method of Irfan is very difficult and in fact few can practice it to final steps. although many claim to practices this method successfully to collect some followers like most of sufi people.
Mulla Sadra is the great scholar who combined Islamic Philosophy and Islamic Irfan to find and know and meet God. His method is known as "the four travels" which is the name of his book in this subject. Most of current twelver shia scholars use this method to meet God. also many of scholars can not understand what he says and accuse him and who teach his works to apostasy because who finds powers of Intuition in Irfan can see spiritual things like angels, other universes, can see future or other things never seen in our physical universe and so who have not seen such things think he is saying nonsense.
Greater than Mulla Sadra is Mir Damad who rare people can understand his books. When Imam Khomeini wanted to teach works of him in Hawzeh for scholars and who study in Hawzeh of Qum saw Mir Damad in dram (maybe Intuition because they usually keep their Intuition power secret and call it only dream) that said: "do not teach my works". Imam Khomeini said I think it was because no one could understand what he says and they will call him and me apostate and will lead in insulting Mir Damad. So I decided teach the "the four travels" (Asfar Arba'e) of Mulla Sadra instead.
In Islamic philosophy only logic and reasoning is used.
These translated book are useful for who is interested:
The Revealer, The Messenger, The Message
A History of Muslim Philosophy
however God has promised in Quran:
This means if an atheist is a real truth seeker and do his strive for finding truth then God will show him some miracles and proofs and evidences to he be guided. But most of atheists I have talked do not have to do ENOUGH research and strive. Internet is full of anti Islam and anti shia websites full of propaganda and claims of refuting everything Islam says. But claim of refute is different of really refuting. All of such so called refute are answered by Islamic scholars but they jump to Google and search and believe the first site they find. Unfortunately websites refuting such refutes have not good SEO!
Anyway finding truth is not easy and needs real strive for it. in fact they are mostly lazy in research and prefer having an enjoyable life and when see a truth do not accept it and find a justification to avoid accepting it and continue their enjoying life.
Let me answer this from the position of an atheist, and scientific rationalist that I am.
No, Muslim cannot "prove" to an atheist that the God exists.
The reasons are the following:
There are many things that we cannot hear (we do not hear ultrasound, yet we use it to examine the baby in mother's womb), see (we do not see the x-rays and yet we use it to diagnose a fractured limb) or feel (we do not feel magnetism, yet we use it in MRI to diagnose a cancer or brain aneurism) and yet they exist and are the products of science, not religion.
(Please note that the atheism is not a worldview. It is a label given by religious people to the opposed group. However, most atheists are scientific rationalists, and that is in most cases our position. That means that we do not accept anything that cannot be scientifically proven.)
Of course, the rationalist knows that not everything is or can be proven, and yet we do not see any alternative because we are more interested in material facts then in our eternal soul.
If a scientist cannot explain some phenomenon he will not jump to conclusion that the phenomenon is supernatural. He will try to explain it scientifically again, and again and again until he succeeds. If the scientist fails to explain the phenomenon, it is still OK for him to say "I don't know", when he does not, in contrast with various religious authorities who usually claim to know all.
The science is a world view incompatible to religion and it is governed by diametrically different set of rules.
It is possible that an atheist becomes a believer. Has happened numerous times before. That does not mean that someone proved to that atheist that the god exists by exposing him to Quran or the Bible.
Scientist does not just accept. For believing something to be the truth, he requires objective evidence.
As I said before, Quran, in the scientific eyes, is not considered as objective evidence in favor to God's existence, let alone the definitive proof.
Actually there are some proofs for the existence of God, Allah. But as anything to be proved should first be defined so let me define Allah as follows: God is the perfect existence. Note that although it's right that we can never fully understand Allah but we can always judge if something/someone else can be God or not, and such judgments implicitly imply we have a definition for God based on which we can study who can and who cannot be a God, can He have a body or be incarnated in flesh or not, can he begotten or be a father or not, and many other judgments that we have committed before and would commit here after. The definition is so easy, but also very functional, it can be used to prove both His existence and uniqueness.
Existence. A requirement of being perfect is being independent, such that nothing can affect its being, no other existence can give it the existence (birth) or draw for it an end (death). Thus from perfectness one can easily conclude God not having a cause for His existence (although we should first prove that He exists!). Now let return to our own universe. We have the causality principle, it is more intellectual than observational and is founded more on logic behind this universe than our epistemic knowledge of the universe (it is logically wrong that some happening be thought as not having a cause), also it is one of the very few cornerstones of any science so that our discussion would remain scientific if we use it! Well, anything and any happening in this universe has its own cause, its cause on its own would be a thing or an event in the same universe, so it will have its own cause, and continue the trend this way. Now there are two possibilities, that the chain just produced would never end, or that it will have an end. Obviously the chain cannot have end in the same universe as everything and every event in this universe has a cause but it is possible that the chain ends out of this universe where the causality principle fails to exist, God can be an existence in that outer universe! But what about the other possibility, that the chain has no end? If the chain has no end, it would be continued to infinity, some state this by its own is impossible but let us assume it still valid, however, if I look at this whole infinite universe still it is universish, I mean in its intrinsic nature, and needs cause for its existence and that's contrary to the assumption that there would be no uppermost cause for the chains. Use something like the Zorn's lemma to put it more precisely and scientifically, if required.
Uniqueness. This Cosmological Argument proved the existence of God but not His uniqueness. For the sake of proving the God's uniqueness we should return to our definition of God, that he is perfect and, thus, independent. If there are Gods instead of one God, then according to the God's definition none of them can prevent the others from what they Will to do, remember that none of them can be affected by any other existence and preventing a will is not possible unless one would affect the other. Therefore, Gods would exist without any inter-relation between them. But then we come to this side and see there are universe(s) created (say, caused) by these Gods, their Wills are independent, so definitely there would arise a chaos and this reasoning is stated by Allah Himself:
Actually the collocation argument about God is more about to prove His uniqueness than His existence.
Note that God as an existence which will never be affected by any other existence would then be uncreated and immortal, so everlasting from both sides (how wouldn't be Him? the Creator, cause, of time). Also according to this He would be one single notion not having parts, as otherwise, He will need His parts to remain existed and this would be contrary to his perfectness. And etc.
Anyway, there is yet some other proofs for Existence of God that I strongly suggest you study them, one is called the "truthfuls argument" (one of the strongest proofs I have ever seen) and others are "the dispensable and dispensable beings argument" and "the poor being argument". Also see this. Sorry for these last references all being in Persian, maybe you can use some translators to be able to read them.
PS. About the trutfuls argument, honestly I didn't find any source in English for further reading. But to say in short, it is much more philosophically and logically precise and detailed than any other argument I have seen for proving the existence of God. Actually it tries to prove the existence of God inspired by these three verses of Quran: "... Is it not sufficient as regards your Lord that He is a witness over all things?"[41:53] and "Allah bears witness that there is no god but He ..." [3:18] and "He is the First and the Last and the Appeared Outside and the Hidden Inside, and He is Cognizant of all things." [57:3]. Indeed, the argument is based on nothing from the sensed world, be it motion or its collocation and etc., but on the very notion of existence, the Being. It starts from the trivial statements that there exists something, that there exists many things, then generate a chain of existences of which the first ring is the one being not owing its being to any other being. To do so it has a rather long algorithm-alike set of logical statements, declared axiomatically. To read more about this I would rather suggest reading this, this and to download this booklet in pdf, again all in Persian. For Arabic sources you may like to study the leading books written by Avicenna, Mulla Sadra and some others.
Also I had been told about another kind of "truthfuls argument" which was totally different from the one cited above, maybe the name is wrong as I didn't find anything about it now. It doesn't proof the existence of God on its own, to be honest, but rather proves why we should believe in God's existence! I have heard and read two different kind of proofs for this:
So to conclude that "believing in God" irrespective of his real existence is an intellectual must, although be a weaker statement compared to the proof of existence of God.
I can break this down pretty simply:
When we refer to scientifically proven evidence, what we're actually talking about is collectively verified observation. E.g. if I make an observation about the acceleration of gravity at sea level, you can verify this observation if you have similar means.
Collectively verified knowledge is considered a superior form of knowledge because it's subjected to the objections of multiple observers.
Religions like Islam typically rely on subjective knowledge. Everything debated in this domain relies on the axiom that factual information was revealed to messenger and proofs have to contort around that assumption.
You cannot collectively verify Islam unless someone has informed the observer what to believe. In the case of the acceleration of gravity at sea level, I can ask you to find a way to measure it before I give my observation in order to increase the weight of the observation. This cannot be done for religions since as far as I know, no one has come to the same conclusions that Islam comes to without some sort of cultural programming.
Some people talk about the misapplication of the scientific method but I think this is flawed logic. Collectively verified knowledge is on a higher order than subjective knowledge because you have multiple actors involved. There is no type of knowledge that is exempt from the rigor that comes with collective verification- least of all philosophical.
We cannot prove to an atheists the existence of Allah. In fact we cannot prove the existence of Allah to anyone. We can at most find evidence to support our claims, but in the end it comes to "belief".
An analogy occurs in mathematics, where people ask, can we prove all the correct statements? The answer is no and it is proven by Godel's incomplete theorem. That an axiomatic system capable of arithmetic is either complete or consistent. In plain words there are always statements that are true but we cannot prove.
To believe in Allah is to take as an axiom the existence and uniqueness of Allah. It is the basis upon which we do rational reasoning, and we do not do reasoning on that, if you already chose your axiom.
But then of course different people choose different axioms. An atheist's axioms are by definition different. Therefore Quran itself is a miracle, but only if you believe so. Just like
If you believe so, then it becomes correct. If you don't, then it becomes incorrect for you, and it is still consistent.
That being said, of course, Muslims believe that Allah alone decides the truth and it is (at least its complete version is) above human understanding.
Therefore we are the people who accept these axioms, and they are the people who reject these axioms. We cannot prove to them, but merely show evidence to them of what we believe, just like they cannot prove us but show evidence to us of what they believe.
And Allah knows the best and may him guide those who go astray like how he guided me.
I will give you a direct answer based on Atheist belief, you said:
None of us have ever seen, nor heard, nor felt, nor smelled, nor tasted our grand, grand, grand, grand parents, yet we believe that they did exist.
Based on the "Atheist" argument, none of us should believe that our grand, grand, grand, grand parents existed since there is no evidence to prove this.
Either the Atheist logic is flawed, or we must believe based on that logic that our ancestors never existed due to lack of evidence.
This bring me to the point of hypocrisy, how can you have such a belief, yet believe that your ancestors did exist, I'm sure most, if not all Atheist believe in the existence of their ancestors.
That being said, just because the Atheist logic is flawed, we can't conclude that therefore god exists.
Science has advanced very rapidly, our understanding of the existence is increasing by the minute. So what has science concluded? Well, simply put, science has concluded that there is no such thing as random. That is a critical piece of evidence pointing to God's existence.
What does it mean when scientists say nothing is random? Definition of random:
Science says that the universe is predetermined, meaning that if we were to restart the universe an infinite number of times, the result will be exactly the same, that quiet clearly points to conscious decision.
Allah (swt) says in the Quran:
Atheism is irrational. One can compare the atheist to a man who is born blind and refuses to acknowledge the existence of light because he cannot perceive light. This blind man's very existence depends on light, yet his inability to perceive it allows him to deny what is so obvious to the sighted. No amount of rational argument, evidence, facts and proof will convince him because he has limited himself to trusting in his faulty perception. To expand on this example, the human being is incapable of perceiving reality in its entirety. For instance, we must rely on the opinions of theoreticians to understand what our limited perceptions cannot perceive as atoms, neutrons, protons, and the mysterious properties of matter and energy which quantum physics explores. The opinions of these theoreticians are often accepted without question, because their theories seem to explain the nature of the universe that we can perceive. So, science divides the universe into the 'seen' (perceptible) and the 'unseen' (imperceptible) in order to account for existence and substance. Islam has stated the case for the imperceptible universe long before Western theoreticians offered their ideas on the subject. Islam explains that both the perceptible and the imperceptible universe were created in one act. Q 21:30: "Have not those who disbelieve known that the heavens and the earth were of one piece, then We parted them, and we made every living thing of water? Will they not then believe?" From Surah ArRahman, we know that the heavens are divided into one perceived universe and 6 imperceptible universes or heavens. In other words the perceptible and the imperceptible are different states of the same substance/essence; the imperceptible being progressively more refined as it moves away from the perceptible. Isn't that what quantum physics is now discovering? In Islam, the ultimate imperception is the uncaused cause or Allah who is totally removed from the creation because He caused creation and, therefore, is not part of it. Allah is the ultimate reality, the ultimate refinement and the ultimate truth. Quran has promoted the information regarding the perceptible and the imperceptible states of existence for 1400 years. If we live long enough and are really patient, maybe the world of science will conclude what Muslims have known for a millennium and a half.
Thank you for your interest in this question.
Because it has attracted low-quality or spam answers that had to be removed, posting an answer now requires 10 reputation on this site (the association bonus does not count).
Would you like to answer one of these unanswered questions instead?


text:
Because email is not a secure medium, confidentiality of email cannot be guaranteed.
Since there are limitations to ensuring client confidentiality through electronic
communications, please consider the information below before sending an email to the
Counseling Center and it's staff.
Do NOT e-mail us:
If you have any concern regarding confidentiality, please contact the Counseling Center by phone at 716-673-3424.
I acknowledge confidentiality of e-mail cannot be guaranteed and wish to continue with my e-mail correspondence. firstname.lastname@example.com

subset: commoncrawl


text:
You are using an outdated browser. Please upgrade your browser to improve your experience.
Today's Apps Gone Free: Suru, Currency, Heart Rate And More
Today's AGF list includes a streaming radio app, a productivity app, and a currency converter.
Tyler Tschida
| May 7
Exchanger Offers An Attractive Alternative Conversion App For iPhone
Exchanger is a brand new currency conversion app for the iPhone and iPod touch.
Joe White
| April 29
Currency Could Be The Conversion App You've Been Waiting For
If you haven't found a currency conversion application that suits you, check out Currency - Made Simple.
Joe White
| April 17
First Look: Currency© by Lifelike Apps
Coming soon from Lifelife Apps, Inc. is Currency©, a new utility app that looks simply dazzling on the iPhone's Retina display. Perfect for business and recreational travelers alike, Currency+ includes three views: calculator, chart and list view. Best of all, the app includes real-time currency conversion with up-to-the-minute exchange rates.
Bryan M. Wolfe
| April 10
Banca: A New, Cool Currency Convertor For iPhone
If you often convert currencies on your iPhone via Safari for iOS, consider purchasing Banca.
Joe White
| August 3
Convert Foreign Currencies with Currency+
Currency+ is a decent conversion app with plenty of additional features to cover the bases for most users. Great for planning finances for travel.
Lynette Sesodia
| May 8
Review: Receipts
It gives you control over your spending so you can chose to follow your budget or not. It's something most people need, especially if you are in credit card debt and are really suffering from the economic climate.
Staff Writer
| August 29


text:
A charter fishing trip turned exciting Thursday morning when those aboard came within five feet of what they believed to be a surfacing great white shark.
Buddy Vanderhoop, captain of the charter boat Tomahawk III, was taking his charter customers out for a morning of fishing when they came upon the nearly 20-foot shark about a mile offshore, between Aquinnah and Noman's Land.
A charter fishing trip turned exciting Thursday morning when those aboard came within five feet of what they believed to be a surfacing great white shark.
Buddy Vanderhoop, captain of the charter boat Tomahawk III, was taking his charter customers out for a morning of fishing when they came upon the nearly-20-foot shark about a mile offshore, between Aquinnah and Noman's Land.
The July 30 shark attack at Ballston Beach in Truro has focused national attention on the seasonal occurrence of white sharks in waters close to Cape Cod and Island beaches. White sharks are no strangers to residents here; I certainly won't forget kayaking with friends to see a female white shark trapped in a coastal pond on Naushon island in September 2004. There seems little doubt that we have witnessed more white sharks in areas frequented by swimmers along the eastern shore of the Cape over the past few years.
Most people think of the shark as the ultimate symbol of dread,
giants with cold lifeless eyes who cruise the ocean looking for swimmers
they can tear from limb to limb. The very word itself is used to
describe people in society who prey on others or who engage in deceptive
There is probably not an animal in the world more despised or feared
then sharks, ranking right down there with snakes and spiders.
Scientists and naturalists working on and near the Vineyard worry that recent reported sightings of great white sharks near the Island will feed fears that get ahead of the facts.
Naturalist Gus Ben David, shark expert Greg Skomal and oceanographer Anthony Wood downplayed the threat to humans from sharks.
A great white shark was reported twice in Vineyard waters this past week, the most recent off Menemsha Beach on Wednesday evening.
Capt. Buddy Vanderhoop of Aquinnah called the Gazette Wednesday night to say a great white shark had been seen 50 feet off the Menemsha beach at about 6:30 p.m. He said the animal was finning and moving up the beach. Later it moved toward the Brickyard.
Capt. Scott McDowell of Chilmark was out fishing on a charter on Sunday afternoon when, he said, a great white shark came out of the water three times near his new boat.
Several people reporting seeing a shark off South Beach in Edgartown on Saturday, prompting swimmers to evacuate the water and giving at least one person a scary close encounter.
Eva Bradford, 22, of Westport, Me., was swimming about 30 feet from shore at about 7 p.m. when she heard her two cousins screaming. At first she couldn't make out what they were shouting about, but soon realized they were yelling "shark."
It's been 35 years since the movie Jaws forever linked great white shark attacks and Martha's Vineyard in the popular imagination of the world, yet in all that time no one has ever been attacked.
Then, long after all thought it was safe to go back in the water, along came the U.S. Coast Guard with last week's holiday boating advice, headed "Shark Advisory" and warning swimmers, kayakers and small boaters of the danger of great white sharks.
Every jittery Vineyard beachgoer is familiar with the iconic image of the restless great white patrolling the shallows, mouth agape, in search of a fleshy excuse to close it. Stacks of shark books celebrating the more lurid aspects of their behavior, particularly their extremely rare propensity to attack humans, already fill library shelves, but in Demon Fish, Washington Post environmental reporter Juliet Eilperin makes the case that the more fearsome animal is in the mirror.
Three Vineyard fishermen had a real-life Jaws moment last Friday morning when they encountered a great white shark circling a dead minke whale that had become tangled in lobster line in the area known as Devil's Bridge off Aquinnah.
© 2016 Vineyard Gazette


text:
Here's the two part video to Riri's new single "Work". Directed by X. Check it out after the jump. (more…)
Here's the two part video to Riri's new single "Work". Directed by X. Check it out after the jump. (more…)
Drake released the video for his hit song "Hotline Bling" in which he shows his dance moves… (more…)
Your favorite rapper's rapper has apparently jumped the tidal ship…
Although it's said that "hell hath no fury like a woman's scorned," the popular quote has yet to encounter the two emo-rappers named Future and Drake.
The unexpected duo dropped a joint mixtape last night called 'What a Time to Be Alive' pouring out their woes and taking shots at their recent targets….
Clearly, Serena Williams does not #blamedrake for her U.S. Open loss, but it's safe to say fashionistas worldwide blame him for stealing her shine at her HSN fashion show.
And that's just the beginning of the drama for this year's NYFW… Thankfully, we have the full rundown of all the entertaining and juicy gossip bits from those highly anticipated shows…
Lil Wayne held his Lil Weezyana Hurricane Katrina Benefit concert in New Orleans and it was streamed on Tidal….. (more…)
Common was recently asked about the pictures of Drake and Serena Williams making out in public that surfaced….. (more…)


text:
Religion Mars Hill's 800 Pound Guerilla Marketing?
posted by March 26 at 9:45 AMon
A Stranger reader writes…
A couple of times in recent months, I have been riding the bus home to Ballard after work. It could be a 15, 17 or an 18. Somewhere along the route a couple of nicely-dressed, usually white males climb on board. They find seats across the aisle from each other and proceed to converse. I catch random snippets of dialog, but for the most part the conversation is at a polite bus level. As we draw closer to the Ballard Bridge, I find myself paying more attention to the conversation and less to my book. Perhaps I am weary of reading. Perhaps their conversation has grown a tad louder? They seem to be going somewhere. But theyre not sure of the exact location. They know their stop is coming up. Is it the next one, or the one after that? They talk more about the great speaker they heard last week. How successful hes been in getting the others engaged. The program tonight should be excellent. More excited jabbering about how to get folks involved. Then as we pass the mid-point on the bridge, the one whos been here before gestures eastward and says, Oh yeah. This is going to be it. See. Look out there. You can see it right . Now. Yep. Thats it. The bus pulls into the stop at Leary and 15th. They get off the bus and proceed to Mars Hill Chuch.
Is this some sort of recruiting technique? Ive heard this skit on more than one occasion. It's becoming annoying.
A Ballard Mom
Anyone else caught this act?


text:
The Riley County Police Department is warning of money scams that involve victims unknowingly depositing bad checks and ultimately giving their own money to scammers in what victims thought was a legitimate business operation.
This page and other exclusive local content require a subscription.
Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | The Manhattan Mercury, 318 North 5th Street, Manhattan, Kansas, 66502 | Copyright 2012
Reproduction of any kind is prohibited without written consent.


text:
Women DO get the benefit of the doubt to a fault, especially in liberal, feminist heavy cities like Seattle. And sometimes, it can be infuriating to watch mostly rational people throw logic completely out the window and automatically assume that any woman who cries rape or abuse is totally being honest without question.
Don't even get me started on the local divorce laws, which basically bend men over by default and automatically label the woman a victim.
I think perhaps that we are walking the fine, albeit blurred, line in society between protecting those that need it (i.e. abused women)and maintaining the skepticism which is so required in vastly over mediated world.
No matter what stance had been taken on this issue, someone would have been in an uproar. Had you advocated to LIFE that he go ahead and commit murder, I have no doubt the response would have been just as volcanic. In the case of providing advice to an individual contemplating the murder of another, caution is the correct course of action.
You would say that, Kevin, being a man.
Thats possible that my gender reflects my sociological view, however I think it is no less valid to state that in the case of determining whether anyone should live or die, caution should be excercised. It is one of the basic tenets of our legal system, innocent until proven guilty.
Were we to entirely disregard this precept, our system would be left open to abuse.
Kevin, exactly how much more cautious can you be when someone writes in saying one's lover claims her spouse beats her and she wants help to kill him? I can't fault Dan for suggesting the writer have some doubt, especially given the inherent dishonesty of, you know, asking someone to help you KILL SOMEBODY.
Even as a woman, I will admit that women exagerate abuse ALL the time. And entrapment? Don't even get me started on women who purposefully become pregnant...Feminism has even gone to far for my taste and I would consider myself a liberal woman. Now, if a woman does really want to just raise a kick ass family and stay at home with the kids there must be something wrong with her for not wanting to be a CEO for some huge corporation?!
F*ck that!
"A woman who says she's been raped must be believed ..." Unless, of course, she's Juanita Broaddrick, and the rapist is Blue-Dress Bill. That's the only instance in which a rape victim is not to be believed, and all ancillary blame must be shifted to Christofascist Ken Starr.
Amen Dan. If the dude wanted to confirm what she said was true, he could do so as you suggested. It makes no sense to take her claims as gospel. Sadly people do lie about that sort of thing.
In the public debate about accused terrorists, accused pedophiles, and accused rapists, there is the widespread prejudice that if you have been accused of so vile a crime then you don't diserve the benefit of the doubt.
There are a frightening number of people who would be very happy to have dungeons full of the accused, denied the chance to respond to the accusation in an orderly court procedure.
And also a frightening number who would make false accusations in order to make a bothersome individual disappear.
Re comments 1 and 6: It's not the feminism, it's the buttheadedness. Some people just get so attached to their ideology, whatever it is, that they willingly stick their own heads far, far up their butts. We've seen great big examples of this phenomenon from all ends (ha!) of the political and social spectrum recently, from Iraq to Seattle's not-my-school parents groups.
Facts matter, and people make good choices only when they seek out and pay attention to facts.
End of sermon.
You do recognize, of course, that our legal system failed to recognize women as people for a very long time, right? That rape was not considered a crime at all, especially if the victim/perpetrator were married, and still carries the underlying stigma that women who are raped brought it upon themselves? That women still do not experience equal protection under the law or in the judicial system (much less in the workplace, but don't get me started on that one)?
The majority of police, including patrol officers and detectives are men. Most doctors are men. Most lawyers are men. Most judges are men. There is a huge issue with collecting evidence and thoroughly investigating, much less prosecuting rape. And some women do lie. So, what should be done about that? Should our legal system and society ignore all women who are raped because some women lie about it? Or might it be a reasonable expectation that police investigate the crime; if evidence is found, that D.A.'s prosecute; and if found guilty, perhaps the perpetrator should serve a bit more time that someone convicted of grand theft auto?
Frankly, anyone who was cognizent of the Kobe Bryant incident must have recognized that rape accusations are not exactly straight-forward crimes. Yes, the police must immediately arrest the person accused (because the person may have evidence on their physical person). If, however, no further evidence is found to substantiate the accusation, the accused isn't prosecuted. Again, what is the alternative?
Dan gave the best advice in a situation that was wrong on many different levels. Soliciting a person for murder is a crime, even if the person you want dead is a rapist/abuser, hell, even if they're a murderer. A lot of people lie about a lot of things, so it's not really a big deal to do a little fact checking. It is possible to be both supportive and skeptical. Plus, Dan could've faced criminal charges if he had advised the person to do it and they did.
I think that 90% of the time, women are telling the truth about their abuse. I also suspect that a large percentage of abuse goes unreported and that women just live with it because they don't want to be defined as a victim for the rest of their lives and treated weirdly.
Over the years, a few friends and acquaintances of mine have admitted being raped (one at knifepoint at age 13) and they never mentioned it again and never reported it in any way. This scenario is probably more common than women lying to get attention.
Unfortunately, the other ten percent that make shit up for personal gain (?) ruin it for those who tell the truth.
And Dan, your advice was sound. No one should be removing anyone. If the guy thought this woman was seriously being abused, he should urge the woman to press charges, help her find a shelter, or get the hell out of Dodge or some other productive thing. This isn't the Sopranos.
I agree with Dan's initial advice. Asking someone to help kill someone is a big fucking deal and should not be taken lightly.
If LIFE's girlfriend had said to him 'I've been raped by this guy and I'm scared of him,' I would say he should believe her. But when it crosses to the point of asking someone to commit murder... that's a whole different ballgame. When part of this woman's story is so easily verified, why shouldn't LIFE make a couple phone calls to see if the ex had been tried for rape?
As a woman, I would hate to live in a society where all a woman had to do was point at a man and say 'he raped me' and have the man be instantly branded as guilty with no evidence or verification. I would certainly want the police to investigate, but to just declare the guy guilty and throw away the key? No.
I agree that for decades—centuries—women weren't believed when they brought charges of rape, incest, and abuse. In large parts of the Ismlamic world, a woman who brings charges of rape can be stoned for—no shit—adultery. Gotta love that ol' time religion.
But the correction for refusing to believe any woman's claim of rape, incest, or abuse is not believing, 100%, in every woman's claim of rape, incest, or abuse. Again, benefit of the doubt when there's risk, danger, or an imminent harm—remove the woman from harm's way, get her in a shelter, get her a lawyer, and a restraining order. And, knowing how many woman with restraining orders have been murdered, perhaps a gun.
But the moment comes when all claims of abuse have to be, you know, vetted. Assessed. Weighed. Moving back to LIFE's example, his girlfriend claimed her husband had been tried for rape. Pretty easy to go get trial transcipts. If that doesn't check out, well, then the rest of her story requires scrutiny and she has some explaining to do.
Of course, the other half of the equation is situations where white women said black men had raped them, and the guy ended up lynched.
Exactly! Understanding that a crime might have occured in conjunction with a heathy dose of skepticism allows a person to look at the issue rationally. In such serious incidents as rape, police, doctors, social services, should intervene immediately. However, a thorough investigation should be mounted as well. And, yes, rape is notoriously hard to substantiate. It'd be nice if people were sensitive to that fact. Because it is such a traumatic issue, the majority of rape victims, women, children, and men, prefer pretending that it never happened - it is what is referred to as the "dark figure of crime" in criminology.
In interpersonal relationships, it sounds a bit seedy to do a backgound check on a person because, as a society, we have an idealized and romantic idea that the people we love are true. On the other hand, would you buy a house without an inspection?
The alleged cases of white women raped by black men and the black men lynched without trial isn't really an issue of sex, is it? It's one of race, which is not part of this debate.
The deal is that abused women were ignored for so long so some people want to make up for lost time by taking an absolutist stance. (Not that many do, frankly, but anyway). It just makes sense to treat a woman like a person, not some delicate flower, but as a regular person.
Women just want to be taken seriously like anyone else in all aspects of life.
It's much easier to take people seriously when they don't lie to you and make up stories.
"The alleged cases of white women raped by black men and the black men lynched without trial isn't really an issue of sex, is it? It's one of race, which is not part of this debate."
Thank you for attempting to set the terms of the debate for us, but I won't limit myself to fit into your ideology.
My point was that rape (or less) was alleged, but not actually committed, and men died for it.
It is possible to support a woman (or man) who tells you they've been raped or abused or what have you without getting into the verity of the situation. Anyone you love and trust who needs the support that's required if they were ever raped should get your unconditional love and support.
That's totally unrelated to whether what they state happened is true, or whether you should kill someone on their behalf.
The emotional side of it needs to be supported, especially if it turns out that they weren't raped - or that they can't provide any proof to the criminal justice system or it happened back in the mists of tiem. Part of that support can be helping them (gradually or immediately) getting the kind of counseling that lets them sort out what was real and what was not.
Rape is all too real, so the likelihood is that when someone who you love and trust tells you about rape, that they are telling the truth.
I think we're fixating here on the murder part. If anyone asks you to commit murder, and you consider it seriously, then we're outside of the framework in which you can talk about emotion, support, and reality.
It's a very man thing to want to have the proof of something and then take action! At once! But Dan wasn't advising that. He was advising, rather, that facts might be useful in this particular case independent of whether LIFE was providing nurturing support to a woman advocating murder.
I'm against blindly supporting folks you love. The best thing you can do, at times, for folks you love is prevent them from making fools of themselves by making false claims. If my sister came to me and insisted that she had been raped by Russ Feingold on the QE2 and was about to go public, I would not offer her my support because I love her. I would tell her she nuts–-because I love her, and because I don't want her to make a fool of herself.
Sometimes telling someone you love the hard truth IS being supportive.
Er, yes, by all means ... please stay out of my ideology.
My point -- not that I'm imposing it upon you -- is that while I understood your sentiment, in your example, men died because they were black, not because they were men. Rape was involved, but it could have been any crime, any victim (so long as they were white), and any accused (so long as they were black).
The only point I find useful is a longstanding stereotype of black men being sexually beastly, and white women idealized as delicate and submissive; that would have compounded the situation, no doubt.
But yes, perhaps someone else found your example absolutely relevant.
It's much easier to take people seriously when they don't lie to you and make up stories.
Nice. So Gomez says that all, or at least most, women lie and, therefore, can't be taken seriously.
I completely understand people who want to withold judgment when a woman makes an accusation of rape. However, for a lot of men that seems to actually mean demonizing the alleged victim and turning the alleged rapist into a hero. Exhibit A: Fans of opposing teams standing up and cheering Kobe Bryant after he had been accused of rape.
One of the things that makes rape hard to differentiate from other crimes is the dispute over consensuality. It's pretty straightforward if someone is found with your property, which you reported as stolen, to verify that they have acquired it without your consent and are thieves. But in a rape where the victim is forced, but the physical damage is not obvious, it can be VERY difficult to establish nonconsensuality. For centuries, the victim has been disbelieved and blamed, accused of luring, teasing, and lying. In many societies, that is still the default position.
I do not believe, as so many here seem to, that we are erring all that far in the opposite direction now as regards jurisprudence. The cases where alleged rapists are convicted and the conviction later shown to have been based on a lie are familiar to everyone, because they are the exception, not the rule.
Have you ever been involved with a rape case that actually went to trial? Very few do, in large part because most rape victims either cannot present sufficient evidence for a conviction in court - and that should not make us automatically assume that they are lying; a lot of rapists carry condoms, too - or cannot prove nonconsensuality. It is still one of the hardest crimes to convict.
Now, that being said, anyone in an abusive situation who is trying to obtain an illegal solution to their problem is obviously suspect on the basis of that. There ARE resources available other than having your abuser killed or beaten. You can leave. You can have the abuser picked up on a DV charge and you can actually PRESS CHARGES (this is one of the hardest things to get an alleged victim to do in DV cases). But trying to get someone else to commit a crime on your behalf - no, that's no solution and just leads people to the sort of black and white thinking you see in this comments thread.
Assuming you are male Gomez, I'm quite sure you would always be taken seriously (and immediately believed) if you told someone you were raped, no question. How lucky for you.
Or perhaps I should put it this way:
Gomez, I hope you are saying that "people shouldn't lie" (always good advice) rather than "women are mostly liars" (boo!).
I'll assume you are expressing the former rather than the latter, yes?
People are willfully mis-reading Gomez's comment.
I can't really add to the generalities being debated above, but I would like to say that I think Dan's original advice was solid. If you're under the impression a loved one - ESPECIALLY if you're technically the "other" - needs help commiting a murder, then chances are you're letting yourself be manipulated.
Yes, well, Dan, when a person starts out with:
"Women DO get the benefit of the doubt to a fault, especially in liberal, feminist heavy cities like Seattle. And sometimes, it can be infuriating to watch mostly rational people throw logic completely out the window and automatically assume that any woman who cries rape or abuse is totally being honest without question.
Don't even get me started on the local divorce laws, which basically bend men over by default and automatically label the woman a victim."
Then follows it up with:
"It's much easier to take people seriously when they don't lie to you and make up stories."
There appear to be some generalizations that focus on a belief that women are the recipients of legal and social privilege when they accuse a person of rape and in divorce. Since the context of the discussion is women, it's reasonable to assume that the generalization about making up stories and lying also refers to women and that women should not be taken seriously. If it was meant ironically, it missed the mark.
For all of you speculating on how DV trials work, I'd invite you to come down to the KC courthouse and observe the process for yourself. The bullshit is getting a little deep on this thread -- sounds like an awful lot of people watching too much Law & Order.
And Dan, FWIW, it is even harder to prosecute same-sex DV of either gender. You think maybe there might be a societal bias there as well?
I'll admit to watching too much Law & Order.
Are you accusing me of lying, dew? Do I really need to present a bibliography of sources whenever I make a point? I certainly don't see you coming forward with a works cited page to defend any of YOUR points.
And for what it's worth, I figured Kobe was guilty when he was accused.
No bias at work there.
Where exactly did I accuse you of lying, Gomez? Please point that out to me. I said, and will say again, that you made gross generalizations in your assertion that women are given social and legal privileges when they accuse a person of rape and in divorce. You're the only person who knows if you're lying. As to the other part - who in existence can honestly say that they've never made up a story or lied? Does that mean no one should ever be believed?
If you would like some citations about gender inequity and the law, I am happy to oblige. Just to get started, we have the Declaration of Independence which holds forth that all MEN are created equal. It was almost a hundred and fifty years before women were even granted the right to vote. Prior to that time, women were basically denied citizenship, much less equal protection under the law. Women were considered the property of their husbands or fathers. It wasn't until 1981 that Kirchberg vs. Feenstra struck down the existing laws that made husbands the "head and master" with unilateral control of all property owned jointly in a marriage. In 1994 the Violence Against Women Act was passed funding training for police and court officials to learn how to deal with gender-related violent crimes and allowed women to sue their attackers. Better yet, in 2000 the U.S. Supreme court invalidated the parts of the Violence Against Women Act that allowed victims to sue their attackers in court.
If you'd like more information, there is a lot available. Theresa de Lauretis, Angela Davis, Donna Haraway are all on faculty at my university and have done some amazing research. In fact, UW has a Women's Studies program that you could probably check out.
I was raped and accused of lying and I see nothing wrong with what Dan suggests.
Sadly, I know women who have lied about being raped for one reason or another. I always initially believe a woman when she says she was raped but I do think it's a good idea to make sure these things are true when planning on murdering someone.
Comments Closed
In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 45 days old).


text:
Drywall and ceiling tile installers hang wallboards to walls and ceilings inside buildings. Tapers prepare the wallboards for painting, using tape and other materials. Many workers do both installing and taping. Show Details
Heating, air conditioning, and refrigeration mechanics and installersoften referred to as HVACR technicianswork on heating, ventilation, cooling, and refrigeration systems that control the air quality in many types of buildings. Show Details


text:
Physics fails to keep pace in the UK
Oct 27, 1998
The UK science budget is set to increase by 24% over the next three years. However, the two bodies that fund the bulk of physics research in British universities - the Particle Physics and Astronomy Research Council (PPARC) and the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) - will have to make do with increases of 5% and 11% respectively. The UK's other four research councils receive increases in the range 9% to 15%. The extra money was available as a result of the government's comprehensive spending review earlier this year.
Most of the extra money - £300m over three years - will go on a £600m Joint Infrastructure Fund that the government is setting up with the Wellcome Trust, the world's largest biomedical research charity. The Wellcome Trust has also promised £110m towards the cost of a synchrotron radiation source called DIAMOND, and the government is chipping in another £35m in the next three years. DIAMOND is also the first central facility to have its own line in the science budget. The government has also earmarked £15m in both 2000 and 2001 to cover currency fluctuations in the cost of the UK's subscription to international organizations such as CERN and the European Space Agency.
"The overall allocation is designed to be a balanced package with particular attention to boosting postgraduate and post-doctoral training and development, plus high priority areas, while still maintaining the underlying scientific disciplines across the sectors, " said Lord Sainsbury, the UK's science minister earlier today.
"The main advantage of today's announcement to the research councils is that we can plan three years ahead, " said Steve Mee, a spokesperson for PPARC. However, today's figures do not include any details on which type of science laboratories will be refurbished first through the new £600 m DTI Welcome Trust infrastructure fund.
Ian Halliday, chief executive of PPARC, said that "compared to the decline we previously faced, we shall be able to maintain in real terms the level of our university research activity." He added that PPARC intended to use some of its money to develop new support programmes for young and mid-career scientists who want to carry out "risky" research.


text:
"A last minute sensation! – She is the real deal" exclaimed The New York Times after rising star Sonya Yoncheva stepped in last-minute at the MET as Mimì in Puccini's La bohème in November 2014.
Her début solo recording was released in early 2015 - a declaration of love to the glamour of 19th-century Paris and the immortal operas it gave to the world. On this album, Sonya Yoncheva pays homage to the city where her vertiginous career took off, highlighting Paris as a source of inspiration and as the world capital of opera at the time. Her personal selection includes both world-famous Italian works set in the city (La traviata and La bohème) as well as operas written or premiered there (Sapho, Le Cid, Les Contes d'Hoffmann, Thaïs, Madame Chrysanthème).


text:
Following the âGreen Lantern: The Future is Brightâ panel, a significant number of attendees vacated the hall designated for Saturday afternoonâs âIrredeemable One-Year Anniversary Panelâ at the Emerald City Comicon. When the exodus subsided, the massive room was left with an anemic smattering of fans. Mark Waid, who led the panelâand was similarly the center of attention at a much better-attended âInside the Writerâs Studioâ panel last yearâhad a sense of humor about the sparse crowd. âHi, those of you who couldnât get into [the] âCup Oâ Joeâ [panel]â, he joked.
Admittedly, Waid and co-panelists BOOM! Studios Managing EditorMatt Gagnon and Ross Richie, BOOM!'s co-founder and Chief Executive, didnât have a presentation prepared for the panel, which was ostensibly designed as a look back at the first year of Waidâs successful âIrredeemableâ ongoing series. âItâs been a year of hard work,â Waid said of the series, which was originally conceived as following the adventures of a Superman analogue gone evil. The acclaimed comics veteran, however, ultimately spent more time discussing the âIrredeemableâ spin-off series âIncorruptible,â which inverts the premise of the former. â[âIncorruptableâ] couldnât be the kind of stuff weâve seen before,â Waid said. He confessed to struggling to find an interesting take on the villain-turned-hero trope, and said that âit didnât coalesce at all in my head until I decided that he [had] a 16-year-old sidekick named Jailbait.â
He said of âIncorruptibleâ protagonist Max Damage that âheâs learning from scratch how to be a superhero. He doesnât know where the grey area is.â He alluded to the character being a Randian, Objectivist figure like Rorschach from âWatchmen,â saying, âIn his mind there are no moral choices to be made, there is only right or wrong.â Apparently exploring moral dilemmas is what Waid most enjoys about writing comics. He cited the famous author Ernest Hemingway: âThe human heart in conflict is the only thing worth writing about.â
From there, the freewheeling, casual panel soon veered into extraordinarily off-topic territory, but before Waid moved on to topics as diverse as his favorite comics supervillains and who he thinks DC Comicsâ best writer is (spoiler: itâs Grant Morrison, who he called âa geniusâ), he offered some parting thoughts on âIrredeemableâ and related projects. âIâve got more layers of that onion to peel back for a couple of years to come,â he said in reference to âIrredeemableâ protagonist Plutonian. He also stated that readers can expect a confrontation between âIncorruptibleâ protagonist Max Damage and the Plutonian soon, as âMax has an anti-Plutonian plan.â Waid also revealed that he has an idea for another BOOM! comic, which will also start with the letter âI.â Waid and Richie playfully argued over whether or not it would fit in with âIrredeemableâ continuityâWaid, apparently, remains undecided on the matter.
A fan dressed as âSkymanââa hero of his own inventionâhad a rather surreal interaction with Waid during the panelâs anything-goes second half. Waid asked him what âSkymanâ desired, and the fan laughed and said âpower!â Needless to say, it was oddly redolent of the Plutonian.
Soon after, Ross Richie floated Superman as a discussion topic, and requested that Waid retell a story he told at last yearâs con (which is also available on his website in essay form) about the first time he saw âSuperman: The Movie.â Waid passed on recounting his highly-emotional story, but he did share his thoughts on how his Plutonian character differs from Superman in crucial ways. âPlutonian doesnât have the inner strength to do what he does just to make the world a better place,â Waid said. Superman, the writer suggested, doesnât need to be loved and does what he does simply because itâs right, and because heâs compelled to.
Another topic from last yearâs âInside the Writerâs Studioâ panel which cropped up once again was the ill-fated CrossGen Comics publishing house and its founder Mark Alessi, whom Waid referred to last year as a âbully.â For this yearâs ECCC, he stepped up his invective, comparing Alessi to megalomaniacal supervillains like Dr. Doom, whose ambitions are to rule the world. Like Doom, Waid intimated that âinside [Alessi] was this insecure guy.â
In all fairness, Waid took some shots at himself once or twice, as well. âThor, Wonder Woman, and the Joker I canât write,â he admitted. He also expressed that writing a book as dark and relentless as âIrredeembleâ has been a challenge for the longtime optimist. That said, Waid doesnât expect the tone of the book to be making any dramatic shifts in the near future.
Richie backed this up, saying, âItâs not called âForgiven.ââ
âNothing will ever bring closure to [the Plutonian]â Waid said.
One final tidbit Waid shared with the panelâs loyal attendees involved the motivation behind the death of âIrredeemableâ character Scylla. Waid was eager to use âCarrieâ as a nickname for Scyllaâs twin Charybdis (now âSurvivorâ), and so Scyllaâwhose name Waid was âtired of typingââhad to go.
Despite the diminutive crowd, Waid stepped up and led a geeky, laid back conversation. While âIrredeemableâ might be a hit in terms of sales, few of its fans turned out for Waidâs panel, but those who did expressed their admiration for the title and its philosophical undertones. Waid seemed grateful, and hopeful about the future of his doomy BOOM! books.


text:
By MILO MILES
Published: November 10, 1991
Kid Creole and the Coconuts: 'You Shoulda Told Me You Were . . . ' Columbia 47121; all three formats.
The singer and songwriter August Darnell has led the charming and eclectic Kid Creole and the Coconuts for more than 15 years, yet his mixtures of limber beats and acerbic social commentary are more popular in France than in the United States. Perhaps that will change with the group's new album.
Kid Creole persistently crusades for the impure and the impulsive of all creeds and classes; the bustle of ethnicity flourishes in songs like "Oh Marie" and the anti-Columbus "Consequently." In "It's Automatic!" the fancy-free singer proclaims, "I got the mandate/ To set a jailbreak/ I want the radicals/ To get a fair break." Time and again, however, one of the Coconuts chimes in with "But what does it mean?"
Indeed, the temperament of American pop has narrowed, and it's hard to judge what room remains for the Kid Creole notion of a combined dance party and Broadway show. It would be a shame if Mr. Darnell's lighthearted but hard-nosed revue finally had to sail off into the sunset for good.
Photo: Kid Creole - a combined dance party and Broadway show (Larry Busacca/Retna)


text:
Press Releases
|Back to List of Press Releases
Carrie Motamedi
(415) 244-2204
|Guy Kawasaki Visits TechShop
MENLO PARK, Calif.
, August 3, 2007 --
Guy Kawasaki visited TechShop today by invitation of TechShop's founder Jim Newton. Guy took a lot of photographs for his blog. Guy will return soon to use TechShop's plasma cutter to make a steel sign of the Truemors logo. About TechShop, Inc.
Founded in October 2006, TechShop is a membership-based, do-it-yourself (DIY) workshop and fabrication studio that provides access to a vibrant community of creative makers, millions of dollars' worth of facilities, equipment, tools and software in each location. Based in San Jose, Calif., with locations globally, TechShop offers classes, workshops, instruction and training for people of all ages and skill levels to build whatever they can dream.
For information on memberships and course listings, visit www.techshop.com, email email@example.com or call 855-TECHSHOP. You can follow TechShop on Twitter at @TechShop and on Facebook as TechShop Incorporated.
# # #


text:
Nicholas Wolfinger will share all data and coding for replication purposes. Earlier versions of this article were presented at the 2007 Annual Meeting of the Population Association of America and at the 2008 National Survey of Family Growth Research Conference. We thank Alta Williams for research assistance.
Original Article
Broken Boundaries or Broken Marriages? Racial Intermarriage and Divorce in the United States†
Version of Record online: 14 OCT 2011
DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-6237.2011.00809.x
© 2011 by the Southwestern Social Science Association
Social Science Quarterly
Volume 92, Issue 4, pages 1096–1117, December 2011
Additional Information
How to Cite
Fu, V. K. and Wolfinger, N. H. (2011), Broken Boundaries or Broken Marriages? Racial Intermarriage and Divorce in the United States. Social Science Quarterly, 92: 1096–1117. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6237.2011.00809.x
- †
Publication History
- Issue online: 14 OCT 2011
- Version of Record online: 14 OCT 2011
- Abstract
- Article
- References
- Cited By
Several recent studies have investigated the consequences of racial intermarriage for marital stability. None of these studies properly control for first-order racial differences in divorce risk, therefore failing to appropriately identify the effect of intermarriage. Our article builds on an earlier generation of studies to develop a model that appropriately identifies the consequences of crossing racial boundaries in matrimony.
We analyze the 1995 and 2002 National Survey of Family Growth using a parametric event-history model called a sickle model. To appropriately identify the effect of interracial marriage we use the interaction of wife's race and husband's race.
We find elevated divorce rates for Latino/white intermarriages but not for black/white intermarriages. Seventy-two percent of endogamous Latino marriages remain intact at 15 years, but only 58 percent of Latino husband/white wife and 64 percent of white husband/Latina wife marriages are still intact.
We have identified an important deficiency in previous studies and provide a straightforward resolution. Although higher rates of Latino/white intermarriage may indicate more porous group boundaries, the greater instability of these marriages suggests that these boundaries remain resilient.


text:
Every Sunday night from 10pm on ABC Local Radio across Australia, join John Cleary for an evening of reflection and spirituality as he examines the issues driving the values and beliefs that shape our community.
The veteran ABC broadcaster is one of Australia's best-known commentators on religion.
The Turkish Government is blaming the recent coup attempt on the Gulen Movement. Who are they?
School students get into interfaith dialogue.
Frank Baum - theosophist, feminist and author of The Wizard of Oz.
The oracle at Delphi


text:
I don't want to use the only logged in users function, but i need something like this.
I mean, when the user click on a download link i'd like he fill a simple form with name and a valid email.
How can i do this?
Thanks a lot and sorry for my bad english. :)


text:
Beauty in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance Seminar Series - Beauty, Memory and Morality in Late-Medieval Allegory
19th June 2012, 17:30 to 18:30, Birley Room, Hatfield College, Dr Catherine Batt
This is the fourteenth seminar in the IMRS Beauty in the Middle Ages and Renaissance Seminar Series.
Further details to follow.
Contact email@example.com for more information about this event.
Download this event in iCalendar format
2015-16 Annual Programme: Evidence
A number of additional events have been added to this year's programme. There are also a small number of date or time changes. Please review the comprehensive Events Calendar for all current details.


text:
The Sandman, Volume 1: Preludes and Nocturnesby Neil Gaiman, DC Comics, Mike Drigenberg, Sam Kieth
View All Available Formats & Editions
A wizard attempting to capture Death to bargain for eternal life traps her younger brother Dream instead. Fearful for his safety, the wizard kept him imprisoned in a glass bottle for decades. After his escape, Dream, also known as Morpheus, goes on a quest for his lost objects of power. On the way, Morpheus encounters Lucifer and demons from Hell, the Justice League,
A wizard attempting to capture Death to bargain for eternal life traps her younger brother Dream instead. Fearful for his safety, the wizard kept him imprisoned in a glass bottle for decades. After his escape, Dream, also known as Morpheus, goes on a quest for his lost objects of power. On the way, Morpheus encounters Lucifer and demons from Hell, the Justice League, and John Constantine, the Hellblazer. This book also includes the story "The Sound of Her Wings" which introduces us to the pragmatic and perky goth girl, Death.
Product Details
- 9781563890116
- Publisher:
- DC Comics
- Publication date:
- 12/28/1993
- Series:
- Sandman Series, #1
- Edition description:
- Pages:
- 240
- Product dimensions:
- 6.64(w) x 10.16(h) x 0.38(d)
- Age Range:
- 17 - 18 Years
Customer Reviews
Average Review:
Write a Review
and post it to your social network
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
See all customer reviews >
Sandman, Volume 1: Preludes and Nocturnes (New Edition) based on 0 ratings. 53 reviews.
I've been a fan of comic books for years, as well as other areas of literature. However I have never been able to be captivated by fantasy stories...until I read this first volume of Sandman. I still cannot believe just how GREAT THIS BOOK IS! The stories are outstanding, and the ART is beyond Outstanding! I reccomend this book for anyone who was like I was...always being told how good this series was, but for whatever reason kept waiting to read it. Believe me, after reading this first volume YOU WILL want to read more!
Interesting volume.
Neil Gaiman is at his best. A MUST BUY
I just finished my first graphic novel, Preludes and Nocturnes. It is the first volume in the Sandman series by Neil Gaiman. There are several reasons why I decided to try this book. One of my groups is doing a seasonal challenge where we are asked to read books outside of our normal genres. One of the genres I chose was graphic novels, and since the last few books I have read were not that good, I thought a short one would help get me back into reading. Finally, I have a friend who LOVES graphic novels and she recommended this series as one of the best. Since I like Neil Gaiman's books, I thought I would give it a chance. The reason that I don't usually read graphic novels is because, for some reason, I find the "comic book" style format very hard to read. That still held true for this book, especially since the page flow was not consistent from page to page. At times the pages were configured in columns, some of them in rows, and still others in more creative formats. To me, that interferes with the flow of the story. Another interesting aspect of this book was the different fonts used for each character. At first that took some getting used to, just like the page formats, but in the end, I actually liked this. The separate fonts seemed to give each character their own voice. Negating the above, though, my difficulty with the format was more than overcome by the story. The beginning novel deals with the story of Dream and how he is trying to rebuild his life after being held captive for decades. I found the references to old comic book heroes, mythology and religion, and magic really helped the story develop. In addition, the characters were interesting, and just enough was revealed about them to leave you wanting more. One of the most fun things, too, was the inclusion of all of the Dream/Sandman themed songs from through out the years. What does it say about me that I was familiar with most of them? All in all, I am putting this one in the win column, and plan to continue the series and see how the story develops
I had heard of the Sandman comics before, but I had never heard enough of them to go out and buy them. I stumbled across this Volume One when I was surfing the B&N page and thought, since it contains several episodes from the comic, why not buy it and see what all the fuss was about? I didn't know what to think of it at first because the art was strange and felt more than a little old, but it seemed to get better as I read (or I just got used to it). The art work is erratic, at any rate, and always keeps you on edge with its shifting styles. As for the plot, it changes from volume to volume and, though some subjects may be a bit overused, the delivery is always original. There is nudity, violence, sexuality and "drug" use throughout the series -I would rate it at a light 'R'. It may also be offensive to Christians (the fourth volume deals almost exclusively with Lucifer evacuating Hell, Morpheus delegating over a meeting between people who want to buy Hell from him, and God sentencing two good angels to be lords of Hell in place of Lucifer, besides some other handling of Biblical "characters" in other volumes). This first volume is by far my favorite of the series.


text:
Standard Boat Glove Box, Black - Attwood
This item is found in the following Product Families
Attwood Standard Glove Box
The Attwood Standard Glove Box offers a simple and reliable solution to store and organize your valuables inside your boat. The box and door of this …
- Plastic box and door are light-weight, yet sturdy.
- Door opens and closes easily on a stainless steel hinge pin and locks with a marine locking latch.
- The door measures 13-3/4" long x 5-1/2" wide.
- Inside box dimensions: 11-3/4" long x 4" wide x 6-5/8" deep.
- Installation hole size: 12" x 4-1/4".
What are the dimension?
Door dimensions: 13-3/4" L x 5-1/2" H. Inside dimension: 11-3/4" L x 4" H x 6-5/8" D. Installation hole size: 12" x 4-1/4" H.
This product ships in 1 business day.
Add to Cart and enter your Postal Code to determine the shipping charges and estimated delivery date.
Most products and orders leave our warehouse in 1 business day. However, select items may take more processing time. Alaska and Hawaii orders please add 1 additional warehouse processing day.
Standard Shipping Policies


text:
Greek Tzatziki
Total Time
Prep 10 mins
Cook 0 mins
The well-known yogurt/cucumber/garlic Greek appetizer! Make sure you use some kind of soft, smooth tasting yogurt, like drained "Total" yogurt. You can adjust the quantity of the garlic according to taste. Enjoy!
Ingredients Nutrition
- 3 cups smooth-tasting yogurt (like "Total")
- 1 large cucumber, grated
- 2 -3 garlic cloves
- 4 -5 tablespoons olive oil
- salt and pepper
- sliced cucumbers or olive, to decorate
- Place the yogurt in a bowl.
- Squeeze cucumber with your hands so that it can be drained from its juice and add to the bowl with the yogurt.
- Smash garlic cloves in a press and add to bowl.
- Add olive oil, salt and pepper and stir everything really well.
- Decorate your tzatziki with sliced cucumber or olives on top. Enjoy!
Most Helpful
Great recipe, really decicious. I used Balkan Yougart and loved it. I stuck to two cloves and it was strong, three woud have overdone it for me. I left out the oil too. Still fabulous.
Try it with mint instead of garlic or in addition to a smaller amount of garlic - it makes a great salad dressing and is diet freindly if you use low-fat or nonfat yogurt - it also works well with tuna salad instead of mayo - actually anywhere you use mayo or salad dressing


text:
My wife and I have never experienced more comfortable nor caring accomodations than we found at this quiet riad deep in Marrakesh's medina. The French couple who own and run the Riad Dar Ibelin seem utterly committed to seeing to their guests' every needs, walking them to locations of interest, arranging tour guides, and booking whatever additional arrangements their guests need.
The rooms are large, beautifully appointed and perfectly well kept in a superb building deep in the maze of the medina.
Best of all are the terraces on two levels where you can sip mint tea, have breakfast, lunch or dinner looking out over the rooftops in this remarkable sanctuary in what is perhaps one of the world's the busiest and noisiest cities.
Go in confidence, rest in peace.


text:
There are so many inappropriate, ill timed jokes about Seattle's attitude toward urban planning that are on the tip of my tongue right now. What is wrong with me?!
A lot, apparently.
I had precisely the same response and am equally ashamed. What crummy news to kick off the week.
My first thought was that someone must be REALLY pissed off about that viaduct vote.
Yes, that makes me a very bad man.
I'm so ashamed.
My first thought was, "is Jeremy Stevens still enrolled at UW?" I'll see you all in hell, sigh.
Any details? Disgruntled student? Nutcase with a grudge against his ex?
This is on the front page of Yahoo! news right now. Is it just me, or is that a bit odd?
It's kind of surreal to have just read that while sitting on the UW campus, having been two blocks from that building at 8:40.
The PI article is more complete now.
"Police believe the victims are middle-aged, in their 30s or 40s.
UW Assistant Police Chief Ray Wittmier said officers recovered a gun, which likely belonged to one of the victims, and added that the incident could have been a murder-suicide.
Wittmier said that one of the victims is likely a staff member."
"From court records, it appears the deceased woman had a domestic violence protection order against the deceased man, although police have not confirmed it. It's not clear if the victims are staff members or student"
Why cant these jealous tools just shoot themselves?
kind of not funny in that i, my wife, and about 50 of my co-workers were educated in that building, and my daughter lives in a dorm 2 blocks from there.
so yeah, the jokes aren't really funny at this point, so give them a rest until we find out who what where when.
@8 - no kidding. I walked right past there earlier this morning en route to work, and didn't notice a thing.
What is it with some people who can not move on after a relationship ends? Earlier poster had it right, why can't these losers just shoot themselves? Why always the ex, the kids and possible the pets?
And what is it with a-holes who's first shallow instinct is too make light of tragedy?
I believe David Schmader's line is "remember, if you're going to do a murder-suicide, always do the suicide part first."
There are some very unhappy people around the UW today. My thoughts are with you.
Rumor has it that the woman had a "protection order" against the shooter.
I don't think that it was a matter of the shooter not being able to move on. He was probably a batterer (physical, verbal or otherwise.) Domestic violence is all about control. The abuser escalates the violence only when he thinks he is losing control. The most dangerous time is when the woman feels the safest (protection order, supportive friends, new, safe place to live.)
When I came out of my class in Denny Hall around 10:15am, there were helicopters circling around the campus... They might still be there. Hovering helicopters are always unnerving. What a shame this had to happen.
I wasn't expecting this guy to do this. She was very worried that he'd turn violent, and she took all of the steps that she was told to take as a woman trying to deal within the law with a cokeheaded, fucked up, abusive ex-boyfriend that wouldn't leave her alone.
And while she had a protection order, they couldn't find him to serve him with the papers, so they didn't apply yet. How fucked up is that.
And btw... fuck you @1.
Domestic violence has nothing to do with a "jealous" ex, or someone who's just hung up on their SO. This is probably, most likely, a classic case of DV. A shining example of why the most dangerous thing a woman can do is attempt to reclaim her life-- and the answer for all of the people who always ask the question, "Well, why doesn't she just leave?!"
Thank you, 15.
For the rest of you:
Learn something.
And... Why do people always make shit about them?... "OMG, I was educated in that building! This is so not funny! It really, like is hard for me to even think about this!" -- "Oh, I know someone who lives three blocks away from there! OMGZ!!!1!!! I need to leave work early to process this traumatic event." What-the-fuck-ever. If this shit outrages you, upsets you, makes you fucking sad... Call your reps. Because a Protection Order doesn't mean shit. It's a piece of paper and doesn't stop anyone. What we need is more funding for DV services, more education, and, well, MORE FUCKING MONEY.
And, on a final note, people get murdered all the time. Women get murdered by their abusers all the time. The only reason this shit is splashed all over Yahoo! and CNN and shit is because it happened in the privileged universe that is academia.
Call me when the poor-single-mother-of-color-getting-stabbed-to-death-by-her-abusive-ex-husband-in-front-of-her-children makes headlines. 'Cause that shit happens every day and no one cares.
Racist/classist assholes.
I don't get why it is so hard for someone to get a reasonable amount of protection from a stalker. Reasonable arguments can be made that it is too easy to ruin someone's life with a rape accusation, but AFAIK, an order of protection just means that some dude can't follow you to work and show up at your house. Is there some right to follow an exgirlfriend to work that is being violated here?
I spent thousands of dollars protecting my mother in law from a crazy exboyfriend (in chicago) _after_ he'd shot himself in the head with a nail gun. He tried (and failed) to poison her dog, threatened her friends and the chicago police did basically nothing. It was only when his family finally decided that he was crazy (I guess the nail gun thing didn't quite convince them) and locked him up for a year that we got any rest.
If you tell someone to leave you alone and they don't, the police should get immediately involved. Is that really such a hard thing to do?
And thanks @19
I should have noted the obvious: that things would likely have been much worse if my wife and I didn't happen to be lucky enough to have thousands of dollars available to protect her mother for that jackass. When the police can't protect people, it is usually the poor that get the shaft.
@ 19:
i was merely attempting to clear some space before the snark machine closed in on a real, everyday tragedy. i have a sister who lives under the threat of DV from her crazy ex every day. i don't have to go home to "process" it.
your belittling of my comments, followed with the pathetically ineffective solution of "If this shit outrages you, upsets you, makes you fucking sad... Call your reps." (like more laws will stop guns), makes me unsympathetic to your outrage.
Domestic violence is about power and control. We should all be outraged that this man killed this woman, however, we should be outraged any time we see a man belittle his wife in public or call a woman a bitch, a whore or a slut. This is not a governmental problem, it is a societal problem and people's cavalier attitude about the terror that this woman (and all victims of DV) is disgusting. What if this was your mother or sister? When one woman is victimized, we are all, as a society, to blame.
Calling your reps is "pathetically ineffective." Wow. So, what do you suggest people do?
Sit idly by while another woman is killed, wondering how our society got so fucked up? How do we fund the necessary services, short of paying for them ourselves?
Calling your reps is by no means the end of the story-- people should be working to break the cycle of violence, as so much of DV (both being the abuser and the victim) is learned behavior. We need a better, more proactive foster care and CPS system to remove children from abusive homes so as to end the cycle. We need to better treat children already exposed to violence in the home. We need to educate our daughters to recognize red flags; we need to raise our sons to be feminists and to respect women. We need to destigmatize abuse so that women aren't ashamed, aren't afraid to tell people about it. We need to quit blaming the fucking victim. We need to have more in place within our legal system to recognize and advocate for the victim-defendant. We need to have immediate and long-term sentences and rehabilitation for those perpetrating the abuse.
There are a million things that need to be done to end domestic violence, but calling your rep should be one of the first things that any person does.
I'd just add outrage and call for help would be better voiced in civil manner - both out of respect of the loss of human life and to actually aid your cause. Swearing at people like an over-caffeinated teenager is far less effective than a clearly stated summary of DV statistics along with links to legitimate outreach organizations that people can donate to. This is a time to reach out to the community, utilize this press to gain moneys and press for your cause, not to call it a class war because it's not a socioeconomically challenged case.
I'm pretty sure that somehow this could have been prevented if only more people had guns.
Why don't all of you assholes talking all big about what a terrible socio-economic problem DV is *do* something about it? Organizations like New Beginnings need your money, not your fucking blog bullshit.
I agree with 25. Although Jealous Schmealous has a point, I have learned that when you rant and rave about your cause, no matter how noble, people stop listening (reading) especially if you are a woman (you are labled as hysterical.) Most people are ill-informed about domestic violence. I would love it if people would take the time to learn, but they won't until it hits close to home. Oh, and domestic violence doesn't just occur in the financially challenged portions of our society. It crosses all racial and economic barriers. Ironically, the media reports on violence in more economically-disadvantaged areas on regular basis. The DV support group I belong to has women from all walks of life. What we have in common is we trusted the wrong people and felt we did not deserve better. If you thing DV only occurs in the "hood" it is not only naive, but insulting.
@27 I am confused? Why is it that you assume that we AREN'T doing something about it? Or is it that you just want to shut up and open our wallets? Support requires not only money, but educating those around you, which includes "blog bullshit." I don't understand why it bothers you so much. Why aren't you scolding the ones who were making inappropriate jokes?
Thanks so much for "educating" all of us Steffany. I guess it bothers me because as some have said here -- and I'm assuming a few like @25 have probably put her money where her mouth is -- this is a tragically familiar scenario for anyone who has been involved in DV prevention and advocacy. A high profile incident occurs and everyone comes out of the woodwork talking about what a horrible epidemic DV has become and how we really should do something about it. At the same time, laws rarely change (though there was a small victory this year in Olympia that seems to have slipped through the cracks of the Stranger media machine) and there is never enough shelter space.
I'm tired of being civil. If you have enough time in your busy day to waste on the Slog, you certainly have $1000 or $100 or $10 to help victims get out of their situations. So thanks for your education, Steffany; now it's time to put up.
OK F*cking do something about it, I would put up. I work nights. I'm a waitress. I make less than 20 grand a year. I am still living with my abuser. If I had the money to donate - I would.
Steffany, I am sorry about your situation and I very much hope that you can find a way to leave your abuser. There is help for you out there. Just not enough of it.
However, I'm still not willing to cede ground on this. If the Stranger editorial staff and the majority of the slogging community put half the effort into DV issues as the monorail, smoking in bars, allowing wheelchairs on express buses, a court system that is too harsh on teenage prostitutes, or a guy who is pretending to be an anti-gay Christian rocker then we might start making headway on the problem. Instead, they do things like publishing the name of the victim prior to official release. Because they wanted a scoop.
So Steffany, I really do hope you make it. And Dan, I know *you* can do better.
Steffany: you need to get the hell out of there. Think about it: no matter how much worse whatever happens to you if you leave gets, it's better than what's going to happen to you there. Staying with your abuser is HOPELESS.
Call DAWN in Tukwila at 425-656-7867. That's a 24-hour line. Or the YMCA -- they offer emergency shelter too: 206-461-4888. Call from work or wherever. If you have friends call from there. Lean on them if you have to. And call 9-1-1 if you see the bastard anywhere. There are services out there to help you: USE THEM. Today would not be too soon. Tomorrow might be too late.
What really pisses me off is that it these kind of fucked-up people find ways to procure a gun. This guy could've taken out more people if he wanted to, so jealous @ 19, it's not just that this happened in academia - it happened in a public place where people shouldn't have to think about this kind of shit (call me a NIMBY, but isn't this a fair statement?!). Of course, we need to do more to combat DV, but we also have to do more to keep guns away from the wrong people.
Comments Closed
In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 45 days old).


text:
About this Business
- HoursSun-Tue10:00 AM - 8:00 PMWedClosedThu-Sat10:00 AM - 8:00 PM
From Our Editors
Skincare is J&S Beauty Inc.'s specialty. Owner and trilingual beauty guru Susie Yu helms a staff of eight, including licensed aestheticians and massage therapists who relax and rejuvenate by blending an all-natural philosophy with the latest in safe cosmetic technologies. Classic facials keep pores clean and healthy, whereas other treatments—such as microdermabrasion, derma-therapeutic sessions, or LHE laser whitening—focus specifically on reducing wrinkles, acne, or pigmentation. Body treatments, on the other hand, such as Thermo Cool help slim waistlines by toning muscle, burning fat, and smoothing cellulite.
Soft, neutral colors permeate a decor that marries tranquil tones with clinical sensibilities. Private treatment rooms remain clean and orderly while enticing patrons with a warm and welcoming atmosphere, and some even boast showers to rinse away sweat built up in the steam room and the remnants of pre-appointment food fights.


text:
My Brother's Keeper: Father McGivney's Knights
In honor of #FoundersDay, we'll be sharing short videos all week that highlight the history of #KofC and the life of the extraordinary parish priest who founded us, Venerable Father McGivney. Here's the first installment:Posted by Knights of Columbus on Tuesday, March 29, 2016
Knights of Columbus 9184 is a Catholic men's fraternal organization in Taylors, S.C. at Prince of Peace Catholic Church. Its principles are Charity, Unity, Fraternity and Patriotism.
Current and upcoming events
Craft and Gift Fair - April 23, 2016
Current and upcoming events
Craft and Gift Fair - April 23, 2016