text:
Edmund Pettus Bridge
Selma, Alabama
March 8, 2015, 2:17 P.M. CST
AUDIENCE MEMBER: We love you, President Obama!
THE PRESIDENT: Well, you know I love you back. (Applause.)
It is a rare honor in this life to follow one of your heroes. And John Lewis is one of my heroes.
Now, I have to imagine that when a younger John Lewis woke up that morning 50 years ago and made his way to Brown Chapel, heroics were not on his mind. A day like this was not on his mind. Young folks with bedrolls and backpacks were milling about. Veterans of the movement trained newcomers in the tactics of non-violence; the right way to protect yourself when attacked. A doctor described what tear gas does to the body, while marchers scribbled down instructions for contacting their loved ones. The air was thick with doubt, anticipation and fear. And they comforted themselves with the final verse of the final hymn they sung:
"No matter what may be the test, God will take care of you;
Lean, weary one, upon His breast, God will take care of you."
And then, his knapsack stocked with an apple, a toothbrush, and a book on government — all you need for a night behind bars — John Lewis led them out of the church on a mission to change America.
President and Mrs. Bush, Governor Bentley, Mayor Evans, Sewell, Reverend Strong, members of Congress, elected officials, foot soldiers, friends, fellow Americans:
As John noted, there are places and moments in America where this nation's destiny has been decided. Many are sites of war — Concord and Lexington, Appomattox, Gettysburg. Others are sites that symbolize the daring of America's character — Independence Hall and Seneca Falls, Kitty Hawk and Cape Canaveral.
Selma is such a place. In one afternoon 50 years ago, so much of our turbulent history — the stain of slavery and anguish of civil war; the yoke of segregation and tyranny of Jim Crow; the death of four little girls in Birmingham; and the dream of a Baptist preacher — all that history met on this bridge.
It was not a clash of armies, but a clash of wills; a contest to determine the true meaning of America. And because of men and women like John Lewis, Joseph Lowery, Hosea Williams, Amelia Boynton, Diane Nash, Ralph Abernathy, C.T. Vivian, Andrew Young, Fred Shuttlesworth, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., and so many others, the idea of a just America and a fair America, an inclusive America, and a generous America — that idea ultimately triumphed.
As is true across the landscape of American history, we cannot examine this moment in isolation. The march on Selma was part of a broader campaign that spanned generations; the leaders that day part of a long line of heroes.
We gather here to celebrate them. We gather here to honor the courage of ordinary Americans willing to endure billy clubs and the chastening rod; tear gas and the trampling hoof; men and women who despite the gush of blood and splintered bone would stay true to their North Star and keep marching towards justice.
They did as Scripture instructed: "Rejoice in hope, be patient in tribulation, be constant in prayer." And in the days to come, they went back again and again. When the trumpet call sounded for more to join, the people came –- black and white, young and old, Christian and Jew, waving the American flag and singing the same anthems full of faith and hope. A white newsman, Bill Plante, who covered the marches then and who is with us here today, quipped that the growing number of white people lowered the quality of the singing. (Laughter.) To those who marched, though, those old gospel songs must have never sounded so sweet.
In time, their chorus would well up and reach President Johnson. And he would send them protection, and speak to the nation, echoing their call for America and the world to hear: "We shall overcome." (Applause.) What enormous faith these men and women had. Faith in God, but also faith in America.
The Americans who crossed this bridge, they were not physically imposing. But they gave courage to millions. They held no elected office. But they led a nation. They marched as Americans who had endured hundreds of years of brutal violence, countless daily indignities –- but they didn't seek special treatment, just the equal treatment promised to them almost a century before. (Applause.)
What they did here will reverberate through the ages. Not because the change they won was preordained; not because their victory was complete; but because they proved that nonviolent change is possible, that love and hope can conquer hate.
As we commemorate their achievement, we are well-served to remember that at the time of the marches, many in power condemned rather than praised them. Back then, they were called Communists, or half-breeds, or outside agitators, sexual and moral degenerates, and worse –- they were called everything but the name their parents gave them. Their faith was questioned. Their lives were threatened. Their patriotism challenged.
And yet, what could be more American than what happened in this place? (Applause.) What could more profoundly vindicate the idea of America than plain and humble people –- unsung, the downtrodden, the dreamers not of high station, not born to wealth or privilege, not of one religious tradition but many, coming together to shape their country's course?
What greater expression of faith in the American experiment than this, what greater form of patriotism is there than the belief that America is not yet finished, that we are strong enough to be self-critical, that each successive generation can look upon our imperfections and decide that it is in our power to remake this nation to more closely align with our highest ideals? (Applause.)
That's why Selma is not some outlier in the American experience. That's why it's not a museum or a static monument to behold from a distance. It is instead the manifestation of a creed written into our founding documents: "We the People…in order to form a more perfect union." "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal." (Applause.)
These are not just words. They're a living thing, a call to action, a roadmap for citizenship and an insistence in the capacity of free men and women to shape our own destiny. For founders like Franklin and Jefferson, for leaders like Lincoln and FDR, the success of our experiment in self-government rested on engaging all of our citizens in this work. And that's what we celebrate here in Selma. That's what this movement was all about, one leg in our long journey toward freedom. (Applause.)
The American instinct that led these young men and women to pick up the torch and cross this bridge, that's the same instinct that moved patriots to choose revolution over tyranny. It's the same instinct that drew immigrants from across oceans and the Rio Grande; the same instinct that led women to reach for the ballot, workers to organize against an unjust status quo; the same instinct that led us to plant a flag at Iwo Jima and on the surface of the Moon. (Applause.)
It's the idea held by generations of citizens who believed that America is a constant work in progress; who believed that loving this country requires more than singing its praises or avoiding uncomfortable truths. It requires the occasional disruption, the willingness to speak out for what is right, to shake up the status quo. That's America. (Applause.)
That's what makes us unique. That's what cements our reputation as a beacon of opportunity. Young people behind the Iron Curtain would see Selma and eventually tear down that wall. Young people in Soweto would hear Bobby Kennedy talk about ripples of hope and eventually banish the scourge of apartheid. Young people in Burma went to prison rather than submit to military rule. They saw what John Lewis had done.
From the streets of Tunis to the Maidan in Ukraine, this generation of young people can draw strength from this place, where the powerless could change the world's greatest power and push their leaders to expand the boundaries of freedom.
They saw that idea made real right here in Selma, Alabama. They saw that idea manifest itself here in America.
Because of campaigns like this, a Voting Rights Act was passed. Political and economic and social barriers came down. And the change these men and women wrought is visible here today in the presence of African Americans who run boardrooms, who sit on the bench, who serve in elected office from small towns to big cities; from the Congressional Black Caucus all the way to the Oval Office. (Applause.)
Because of what they did, the doors of opportunity swung open not just for black folks, but for every American. Women marched through those doors. Latinos marched through those doors. Asian Americans, gay Americans, Americans with disabilities — they all came through those doors. (Applause.)
Their endeavors gave the entire South the chance to rise again, not by reasserting the past, but by transcending the past.
What a glorious thing, Dr. King might say. And what a solemn debt we owe. Which leads us to ask, just how might we repay that debt?
First and foremost, we have to recognize that one day's commemoration, no matter how special, is not enough. If Selma taught us anything, it's that our work is never done. (Applause.)
The American experiment in self-government gives work and purpose to each generation.
Selma teaches us, as well, that action requires that we shed our cynicism. For when it comes to the pursuit of justice, we can afford neither complacency nor despair.
Just this week, I was asked whether I thought the Department of Justice's Ferguson report shows that, with respect to race, little has changed in this country. And I understood the question; the report's narrative was sadly familiar. It evoked the kind of abuse and disregard for citizens that spawned the Civil Rights Movement. But I rejected the notion that nothing's changed. What happened in Ferguson may not be unique, but it's no longer endemic. It's no longer sanctioned by law or by custom. And before the Civil Rights Movement, it most surely was. (Applause.)
We do a disservice to the cause of justice by intimating that bias and discrimination are immutable, that racial division is inherent to America. If you think nothing's changed in the past 50 years, ask somebody who lived through the Selma or Chicago or Los Angeles of the 1950s. Ask the female CEO who once might have been assigned to the secretarial pool if nothing's changed. Ask your gay friend if it's easier to be out and proud in America now than it was thirty years ago. To deny this progress, this hard-won progress -– our progress –- would be to rob us of our own agency, our own capacity, our responsibility to do what we can to make America better.
Of course, a more common mistake is to suggest that Ferguson is an isolated incident; that racism is banished; that the work that drew men and women to Selma is now complete, and that whatever racial tensions remain are a consequence of those seeking to play the "race card" for their own purposes. We don't need the Ferguson report to know that's not true. We just need to open our eyes, and our ears, and our hearts to know that this nation's racial history still casts its long shadow upon us.
We know the march is not yet over. We know the race is not yet won. We know that reaching that blessed destination where we are judged, all of us, by the content of our character requires admitting as much, facing up to the truth. "We are capable of bearing a great burden," James Baldwin once wrote, "once we discover that the burden is reality and arrive where reality is."
There's nothing America can't handle if we actually look squarely at the problem. And this is work for all Americans, not just some. Not just whites. Not just blacks. If we want to honor the courage of those who marched that day, then all of us are called to possess their moral imagination. All of us will need to feel as they did the fierce urgency of now. All of us need to recognize as they did that change depends on our actions, on our attitudes, the things we teach our children. And if we make such an effort, no matter how hard it may sometimes seem, laws can be passed, and consciences can be stirred, and consensus can be built. (Applause.)
With such an effort, we can make sure our criminal justice system serves all and not just some. Together, we can raise the level of mutual trust that policing is built on –- the idea that police officers are members of the community they risk their lives to protect, and citizens in Ferguson and New York and Cleveland, they just want the same thing young people here marched for 50 years ago -– the protection of the law. (Applause.)
Together, we can address unfair sentencing and overcrowded prisons, and the stunted circumstances that rob too many boys of the chance to become men, and rob the nation of too many men who could be good dads, and good workers, and good neighbors. (Applause.)
With effort, we can roll back poverty and the roadblocks to opportunity. Americans don't accept a free ride for anybody, nor do we believe in equality of outcomes. But we do expect equal opportunity. And if we really mean it, if we're not just giving lip service to it, but if we really mean it and are willing to sacrifice for it, then, yes, we can make sure every child gets an education suitable to this new century, one that expands imaginations and lifts sights and gives those children the skills they need. We can make sure every person willing to work has the dignity of a job, and a fair wage, and a real voice, and sturdier rungs on that ladder into the middle class.
And with effort, we can protect the foundation stone of our democracy for which so many marched across this bridge –- and that is the right to vote. (Applause.)
Right now, in 2015, 50 years after Selma, there are laws across this country designed to make it harder for people to vote. As we speak, more of such laws are being proposed. Meanwhile, the Voting Rights Act, the culmination of so much blood, so much sweat and tears, the product of so much sacrifice in the face of wanton violence, the Voting Rights Act stands weakened, its future subject to political rancor.
How can that be? The Voting Rights Act was one of the crowning achievements of our democracy, the result of Republican and Democratic efforts. (Applause.) President Reagan signed its renewal when he was in office. President George W. Bush signed its renewal when he was in office. (Applause.) One hundred members of Congress have come here today to honor people who were willing to die for the right to protect it. If we want to honor this day, let that hundred go back to Washington and gather four hundred more, and together, pledge to make it their mission to restore that law this year. That's how we honor those on this bridge. (Applause.)
Of course, our democracy is not the task of Congress alone, or the courts alone, or even the President alone.
If every new voter-suppression law was struck down today, we would still have, here in America, one of the lowest voting rates among free peoples. Fifty years ago, registering to vote here in Selma and much of the South meant guessing the number of jellybeans in a jar, the number of bubbles on a bar of soap. It meant risking your dignity, and sometimes, your life.
What's our excuse today for not voting? How do we so casually discard the right for which so many fought? (Applause.)
How do we so fully give away our power, our voice, in shaping America's future?
Why are we pointing to somebody else when we could take the time just to go to the polling places? (Applause.) We give away our power.
Fellow marchers, so much has changed in 50 years. We have endured war and we've fashioned peace. We've seen technological wonders that touch every aspect of our lives. We take for granted conveniences that our parents could have scarcely imagined.
But what has not changed is the imperative of citizenship; that willingness of a 26-year-old deacon, or a Unitarian minister, or a young mother of five to decide they loved this country so much that they'd risk everything to realize its promise.
That's what it means to love America. That's what it means to believe in America. That's what it means when we say America is exceptional.
For we were born of change. We broke the old aristocracies, declaring ourselves entitled not by bloodline, but endowed by our Creator with certain inalienable rights. We secure our rights and responsibilities through a system of self-government, of and by and for the people. That's why we argue and fight with so much passion and conviction — because we know our efforts matter. We know America is what we make of it.
Look at our history. We are Lewis and Clark and Sacajawea, pioneers who braved the unfamiliar, followed by a stampede of farmers and miners, and entrepreneurs and hucksters. That's our spirit. That's who we are.
We are Sojourner Truth and Fannie Lou Hamer, women who could do as much as any man and then some. And we're Susan B. Anthony, who shook the system until the law reflected that truth. That is our character.
We're the immigrants who stowed away on ships to reach these shores, the huddled masses yearning to breathe free –- Holocaust survivors, Soviet defectors, the Lost Boys of Sudan. We're the hopeful strivers who cross the Rio Grande because we want our kids to know a better life. That's how we came to be. (Applause.)
We're the slaves who built the White House and the economy of the South. (Applause.)
We're the ranch hands and cowboys who opened up the West, and countless laborers who laid rail, and raised skyscrapers, and organized for workers' rights.
We're the fresh-faced GIs who fought to liberate a continent. And we're the Tuskeegee Airmen, and the Navajo code-talkers, and the Japanese Americans who fought for this country even as their own liberty had been denied.
We're the firefighters who rushed into those buildings on 9/11, the volunteers who signed up to fight in Afghanistan and Iraq. We're the gay Americans whose blood ran in the streets of San Francisco and New York, just as blood ran down this bridge. (Applause.)
We are storytellers, writers, poets, artists who abhor unfairness, and despise hypocrisy, and give voice to the voiceless, and tell truths that need to be told.
We're the inventors of gospel and jazz and blues, bluegrass and country, and hip-hop and rock and roll, and our very own sound with all the sweet sorrow and reckless joy of freedom.
We are Jackie Robinson, enduring scorn and spiked cleats and pitches coming straight to his head, and stealing home in the World Series anyway. (Applause.)
We are the people Langston Hughes wrote of who "build our temples for tomorrow, strong as we know how." We are the people Emerson wrote of, "who for truth and honor's sake stand fast and suffer long;" who are "never tired, so long as we can see far enough."
That's what America is. Not stock photos or airbrushed history, or feeble attempts to define some of us as more American than others. (Applause.) We respect the past, but we don't pine for the past.
We don't fear the future; we grab for it. America is not some fragile thing. We are large, in the words of Whitman, containing multitudes.
We are boisterous and diverse and full of energy, perpetually young in spirit. That's why someone like John Lewis at the ripe old age of 25 could lead a mighty march.
And that's what the young people here today and listening all across the country must take away from this day. You are America. Unconstrained by habit and convention. Unencumbered by what is, because you're ready to seize what ought to be.
For everywhere in this country, there are first steps to be taken, there's new ground to cover, there are more bridges to be crossed. And it is you, the young and fearless at heart, the most diverse and educated generation in our history, who the nation is waiting to follow.
Because Selma shows us that America is not the project of any one person.
Because the single-most powerful word in our democracy is the word "We." "We The People." "We Shall Overcome." "Yes We Can." (Applause.)
That word is owned by no one. It belongs to everyone. Oh, what a glorious task we are given, to continually try to improve this great nation of ours.
Fifty years from Bloody Sunday, our march is not yet finished, but we're getting closer. Two hundred and thirty-nine years after this nation's founding our union is not yet perfect, but we are getting closer.
Our job's easier because somebody already got us through that first mile. Somebody already got us over that bridge. When it feels the road is too hard, when the torch we've been passed feels too heavy, we will remember these early travelers, and draw strength from their example, and hold firmly the words of the prophet Isaiah: "Those who hope in the Lord will renew their strength. They will soar on [the] wings like eagles. They will run and not grow weary. They will walk and not be faint." (Applause.)
We honor those who walked so we could run. We must run so our children soar. And we will not grow weary. For we believe in the power of an awesome God, and we believe in this country's sacred promise.
May He bless those warriors of justice no longer with us, and bless the United States of America. Thank you, everybody. (Applause.)


text:
When Ugly Turns to Beautiful: Ugly Christmas Sweater [infographic]
Until reading this infographic put together by UglyChristmasSweater.com, I was not aware of just how popular the ugly Christmas sweater is. I, like Canada, wanted to believe that my friends and I had thrown the first ugly Christmas sweater party in history. In other words, I was certain that I was the first ever to wrap myself in itchy wool and ironic jingle bells while drinking warm cider in the dead of winter with my friends.
This year I think I will be the first to wear them genuinely. No ulterior motive, just a celebration of all things merry and bright written all over my sweater. When people ask me why I wear them all the time, I will respond by saying, "Because I love Christmas." Then I will wink in the direction of the North Pole. Or is that already a thing too?
I will also be buying each and every one of my siblings one. What better way to ring in the holiday cheer than with all four siblings wearing red "Merry Christmas You Filthy Animal" sweaters while Home Alone (as per Christmas usual) plays in the background? The answer is, nothing. There is nothing that would make my siblings and I happier than that! So do what you must, but know, that no good Christmas without ugly Christmas sweaters goes unpunished. Let UglyChistmasSweater.com take care of you. [via]
© Lindsey Lawrence for Daily Infographic, 2013. |
Permalink |
No comment |
Post tags: christmas, gifts, holiday, Holiday Gifts, holiday shopping, Home Alone, shopping, sweater, ugly christmas sweater

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Our program prepares leaders who help adults improve the way they live and work through more effective instrumental learning, but we do not stop there. A hallmark of our programs is the fostering of transformative learning. Through transformative learning:
- Adults are helped to identify, probe and change assumptions, values, and beliefs that shape how they think, act, and learn;
- Adult educators are helped to transform organizations, institutions, learning communities and other settings that influence learning and change.
The mission of the program is to empower graduates as facilitators of learning across the lifespan – in and outside of classrooms and virtual learning spaces. We emphasize leadership for reflective, proactive and transformational learning. Our students help individual adults learn, and they help organizations, institutions, and communities learn from and with those adults. Hence, our focus on adult education and organizational learning that shapes, and is shaped by diverse views and cultures through societal learning.
Graduates from our programs lead, manage, design, deliver, or evaluate learning initiatives. They can be scholars, researchers, evaluators, executives, and learning and development professionals. They work in a wide range of settings: schools, second-chance adult basic education, health care organizations, not-for-profits, government agencies, learning communities, businesses, continuing professional education, and special programs for adults in post-secondary education.
Our mission fits with the mission of the College because we support learning across the life-span with an eye to how adult learning shapes, and is shaped by, societal learning and change. We train students in the use of collaborative action technologies – action research, action learning, action science and collaborative inquiry – to engage adults, organizations and institutions in co-inquiry and change in programs, organizations, institutions, and other learning communities.
Graduates help adults to participate more fully, democratically, and successfully in organizations, institutions, communities and society – as well as to help these social and organizational units to rethink issues of social equity and valuing of diversity.
The focus of the Adult Learning and Leadership Program is Adult Education and Organizational Learning. The intellectual framework of the program examines the relationship of adult learning to organizational, management, and leadership issues. The framework prepares individuals as leaders, managers, and facilitators of learning in relation to lifelong learning, continuing education, and learning from experience at work. The curriculum is designed around levels of learning, development, and change for individuals, groups, and organizations as a whole. Also in focus are the ways in which individual learning can be supported, nurtured, shared, and utilized by larger social units in today's knowledge society.
The Adult Learning and Leadership Program appeals to professionals who design, develop, and evaluate programs that meet the learning needs of adults in both face-to-face and online formats. They include educators of adults who learn in the following settings:
- Organizations in the profit, and not-for-profit, or public sectors;
- Religious and community-based organizations;
- Basic education classes (literacy, General Education Diploma);
- Returning adult students with specialized needs in post-secondary education; and
- Continuing professional education.
The 36-point M.A. program is most appropriate for educators who are involved in the design, management, and delivery of learning. The 60-point Ed.M. and 90-point Ed.D. options are appropriate for professionals who are involved in policy development, strategy, change management, and systems-level learning. The program prepares educators who work with the following groups:
- Leaders who shape adult education policy and program development, as well as those who act as trainers and coaches to these leaders;
- Designers, planners, managers, and developers who are innovating with new delivery models; and
- Researchers and evaluators of cutting-edge adult education practices.


text:
LatestJesse Bering's latest Scientific American column asks, "Is it really possible for an otherwise normal, healthy person to develop a genuine sexual preference for a nonhuman species?" And if so, should their love be legal?
We haven't always seen eye-to-eye with Bering in the past, but today he delivers a pretty interesting analysis of zoophilia — the term bestiality aficionados prefer. Though sex with animals is often considered "something teenaged boys try for a lark and see how far it goes" (as a psychiatric nurse who treats sex offenders put it), Bering writes, "for some people, having sex with their animal 'lovers' may amount to more than just substituting human sex with the next best thing. Rather, for them, sex with nonhuman animals is the best thing." Nor do all zoophiles fit the stereotype of the "woman-deprived, down-on-the-farm, and poorly educated male" — some are learned, city-raised, even married. Bering quotes from a case study of a "forty-seven-year-old, high-functioning (he earned his M.D. at age twenty-eight) and seemingly well-adjusted male" who also happened to love horses:
As I grew into adolescence my sexual ideation was different from what it was supposed to be. I looked at horses the same as other boys looked at girls. I watched cowboy movies to catch glimpses of horses. I furtively looked at pictures of horses in the library. This was before the Internet and I felt totally isolated. I was a city boy. I had never seen a horse up close, never touched or smelled one. No one in my family had any contact with horses, but for me, they held a powerful, wonderful, and, yes even-well primarily-sexual attraction.
If some humans are, indeed, sexually oriented toward horses, dogs, or other nonhuman animals (as Bering points out, we're animals too), should they be allowed to consummate their desires? Bering cops to some queasiness on this score, as will I. But he's also open to the zoophile's point of view. He writes,
If some unscrupulous zoophile were to lure away my beloved dog, Uma, with a bacon strip into the back of his van, well, hell hath no fury-even if she did come back wagging her tail. But this is mostly just the reflexive moralizer in me. Words like "pervert" and "unnatural" have all the theoretical depth of a thimble. Rationally, [ethicist Peter Singer] is right to question our visceral aversion to interspecies sex. And having had an orangutan rudely thrust his penis into my ear, a chimpanzee in estrus forcibly back her swollen anogenital region into my midsection ("Darling," I said, "not only are you the wrong species, but the wrong sex"), and more dogs than I care to mention mount my leg, I know that it's not only humans who are at risk of misreading sexual interest in other species.
This last part, though, is key. Disgust isn't a good argument for banning a sexual practice (philosopher Martha Nussbaum recently argued that unreasoning disgust is at the root of much homophobia), but lack of consent is. And the argument that zoophiles can tell when animals are willing feels a little like the excuse of a pedophile who says his victims really love him. It doesn't necessarily make sense to compare animals to children — descriptors like "as smart as a four-year-old" ignore the complex differences between the brains of different species — but in both cases, it's in the sexual aggressor's interest to interpret all sorts of behavior as consent when it might not be intended as such. And since nonhuman animals don't speak human languages, it's pretty impossible to determine their actual intentions. As the fatal mauling of bear activist Timothy Treadwell (chronicled in Werner Herzog's Grizzly Man) attests, humans who claim to understand the thought processes of animals often suffer from great hubris. And while zoophiles may claim that those who would deny them their sexual pleasure are "speciesist," perhaps they are committing the ultimate in human exceptionalism — assuming that they, in their infinite wisdom, know what other animals want.
Animal Lovers: Zoophiles Make Scientists Rethink Human Sexuality [Scientific American]


text:
Welcome, entrepreneurs of Parker, Denver, Colorado Springs, CO.! Embarking on a business journey is thrilling yet uncertain. With The Storie Insurance Agency, gain the right insurance coverage to navigate these uncertainties with confidence. Explore our affordable and comprehensive plans tailored for your business needs.
Imagine securing your dream business, only to face unforeseen challenges like natural disasters or employee errors. These can disrupt your peace and financial stability. With The Storie Insurance Agency's business insurance, you're not just buying a policy; you're securing your business's future. Reach out to us at 303-841-6458 for personalized support.
Unsure what business insurance covers? Let's explore:
Comprehensive coverage for damages to your physical assets, from fires to natural calamities.
Covering legal fees and medical expenses for injuries or damages caused by your products or services.
Ensuring workplace safety with policies that cover unexpected employee injuries and related expenses.
At The Storie Insurance Agency, we understand the unique insurance needs of every Parker, Denver, Colorado Springs, CO. business. We offer customized solutions and a personal touch. Talk to us at 303-841-6458, and experience our commitment to your success.
Addressing common queries from Parker, Denver, Colorado Springs, CO. entrepreneurs:
An affordable investment for your peace of mind with flexible plans to meet your budget.
Varying by state and industry, insurance is essential for protecting against unforeseen losses.
Tailor your policy to match the unique needs of your business. We're here to help you customize!
Understanding business insurance is simpler than you think. Join The Storie Insurance Agency in Parker, Denver, Colorado Springs, CO. to build a robust safety net for your business. Contact us at 303-841-6458, or fill out our online quote request form to get started.


text: THE TARGET IS ROYAL. THE GAME IS REVENGE . She is an iconic member of the British Royal Family, beloved for her beauty and charitable works, resented by her former husband and his mother, the Queen of England. But when a bomb explodes aboard her holiday yacht, British intelligence turns to one man to track down her killer: legendary spy and assassin Gabriel Allon.Gabrielג€™s target is Eamon Quinn, a master bomb maker and mercenary of death who sells his services to the highest bidder. Fortunately, Gabriel does not pursue him alone; at his side is Christopher Keller, a British commando turned professional assassin who knows Quinnג€™s murderous handiwork all too well.And though Gabriel does not realize it, he is stalking an old enemyג€"a cabal of evil that wants nothing more than to see him dead. Gabriel will find it necessary to oblige them, for when a man is out for vengeance, death has its distinct advantagesג€¦


text:
On the QaFoo.com blog they've made a recommendation in their latest post - they suggest that you never use null.
When doing code reviews together with our customers we see a pattern regularly which I consider problematic in multiple regards – the usage of null as a valid property or return value. We can do better than this.Let's go into common use cases first and then discuss how we can improve the code to make it more resilient against errors and make it simpler to use. Most issues highlighted are especially problematic when others are using your source code. As long as you are the only user (which hopefully is not the case) those patterns might be fine.
They talk about some of the most common uses they see for using null
in PHP applications including setters for class properties (injection). They point out that in PHP 7 a missing value on a property would result in a Fatal error and make the functionality harder to test overall. They suggest that all required dependencies be injected on object construction instead, making it easier to know the current state of the object on testing. They also talk some about using null
as a return value, how it could make debugging difficult and a solution that could make more sense - throwing an exception instead.


text:
Mejna osebnostna motnja
Healing from borderline personality disorder
A. R. (47), Wetzikon (Switzerland)
From my childhood on I suffered from extreme terror, often accompanied by fits of screaming. At the age of 22 I took a trip to Asia, during which a fear of flying and death anxiety arose. The terror panic attacks of my childhood returned as well.
When I was 15 I began to suffer from severe depression. Sometimes I had to stay in bed in a darkened room for days. When I was 38 years old I was diagnosed with breast cancer. The lumps were surgically removed, followed by radiotherapy daily for three months. I coped with this quite well physically, but during this time my depression worsened. Nine months of therapy with a psychologist was unsuccessful. And three years spent in a psychiatric clinic where I was medicated with various medications such as lithium, anti-psychotics (Prazine, Nozinan) benzodiazepine and antidepressants (Fluktrine, Seropram, Tolvon) also brought no success.
Healing from borderline personality syndrome with severe medication dependence
U. K. (47), Waidhofen an der Thaya (Austria)
1. Borderline personality syndrome
I grew up as an overprotected only child trained for success and accomplishment. I had hardly any contact with other children. Except for when I went to school, I almost always only left the house when accompanied by my parents. They kept a strict eye on me. The first thoughts of suicide came when I was 13 or 14. I intended to take an overdose of medication if I ever got a bad grade at school.
Probably out of protest to this pressure to perform, I was very lazy at school and was consequently also very afraid of examinations. At 16 or 17 I would sometimes take tranquillizers to be calmer when doing homework. There were in packets in a cupboard in our living room because my mother worked in a pharmacy. I took 20 tranquillizers at once for the first time when I was 17 because I wasn't allowed to go out at least once like other teenagers.


text:
Today, I want to address ADHR's comments:
It's not incoherent to insist that some x is intrinsically valuable (people should want to pursue or promote x) and yet people may not want to pursue or promote x. The simplest case of this is when people fail to recognize that x is intrinsically valuable; more complex cases may involve some sort of akrasia (weakness of the will).
I think this line of argument would have more punch if you turned it squarely against the internalism, arguing that there's something strange about the idea that normative reasons must motivate us to act.
Taking the first item first.
There is a distinction between two different families of claims that is important here.
There is the question of whether it is coherent to say that X is intrinsically valuable, but A is not motivated to bring about or preserve X. ADHR says that it is coherent, as when X is intrinsically valuable but A is not aware of this value.
I agree with this.
ADHR brings up another example of 'akrasia' or 'weakness of will'. This is when a person realizes that something has intrinsic merit, but is not sufficiently motivated by this intrinsic value to overcome basic desires. For example, an alcoholic may realize the virtue of sobriety but not sufficiently to give up the habit of drinking.
In light of this, ADHR thinks that I should argue that there is something strange about the idea that normative reasons must motivate us to act.
As if I agree with him on this statement.
Which, I do.
Agree with him, that is.
Sort of.
Okay, let's look at the details.
All 'ought' or 'should' statements make some type of reference to reasons for action. To say that something 'ought' or 'should' be done, while asserting that there is no reason for doing it, is more than strange, it is incoherent.
I hold that the only reasons for action that exist are desires.
In recent discussion we have distinguished between drive-desires and value-desires. On this distinction, the only reasons that exist are drive-desires. What passes for 'value desires' is simply the recognition that some drive-desires are more useful than others, when it comes to fulfilling other drive-desires. Thus, our drive-desires give us reason to promote some drive-desires over others, and even reason to inhibit drive-desires that thwart other desires.
So, desires are the only reasons-for-action that exist. People still believe in other types of reasons for action; intrinsic value, divine essence, whatever. People can make sensible 'ought' or 'should' statements by referring to these reasons for action. However, because these reasons for action do not exist, any argument built on these types of reasons for action is built on false premises. Their conclusion might still be true, but it is only accidentally or coincidentally true.
So, if every true normative claim talks about reasons for action, then does it not follow that normative reasons must motivate us to act? What sense does it make to say that I have a reason for action that I can sensibly ignore and refuse to act on – or refuse to consider, even if my considerations are outweighed by even stronger reasons not to act.
Because . . .
Okay, desires are the only reasons for action that exist. However, the only desires that motivate my actions are my desires. If you want to motivate me to act, then you need to show me how a state of affairs relates to my desires. Telling me how a state of affairs relates to desires that are not mine – to my neighbor's desires, for example – will motivate me to act only insofar that I am motivated to see my neighbor's desires fulfilled. That is to say, I must have a desire that my neighbor's desires are fulfilled, or at least a desire that is fulfilled by a state in which my neighbor's desires are fulfilled. If this is not the case, then I have no reason to act.
If, as it turns out, I hate my neighbor, then your news that X will fulfill my neighbor's desires might motivate me to act so as to make X impossible. This way, I can thwart my neighbor's desires (which I may well have motivation to do based on my own desires).
The thesis that 'normative reasons must always motivate us to act' turns out, in the real world, to mean that 'the only normative reasons that exist, when it comes to my actions, are my own desires'.
I have argued earlier that my actions are only truly mine if they come from my desires. If Tim over there, with his remote control, is able to move my body, rather than me, then the fact that the actions are proximately connected to his desires and not mine means that the actions being performed are his actions and not mine. If he should direct this body to kill his ex-girlfriend, he would be the one guilty of murder, but not me. He might be able to engineer that I be convicted of that murder, but I (meaning this bundle of desires that I have) am not morally responsible for that murder. He is – because his desires were proximately at the helm of those actions.
So, if normative reasons must motivate us to act, then the only normative reasons that exist for or against my actions are my desires – in precisely the strength that I desire them. Other people's desires are relevant only insofar as other people serve as a means to the fulfillment of my own desires.
Objectively, relationships between states of affairs and desires that are not mine are just as real as relationships between states of affairs and desires that are mine. Not only are they real, but they are important. We have a lot of very good reasons to talk about and to think about relationships between states of affairs and desires that are not our own.
These desires that exist that are not my desires are still reasons for action, even if they are not reasons for my action. They still motivate people to act in different ways, even though they do not motivate me to act in those ways. They are reasons that people can talk about that are not their own and may not motivate them, but reasons that are real and that a rational person would be unwise to ignore.
As it turns out, other people's desires are reasons for action for me in a sense in that it is reasons for action for them to do things that affect me. So, if people generally have a reason for action to promote X, then they have a reason for action to change my desires, or to create an environment where I can best fulfill my desires by also promoting X. It means that they have reason to thwart my desires if my desires would get in the way of promoting X. All of these relationships connect the reasons for actions of others with my reasons for action. However, none of them, by their mere existence, necessarily motivate me in any way.
Why would we have invented a language where people were only allowed to talk about relationships between states of affairs and their own desires, but not allowed to talk about relationships between states of affairs and desires not their own? If we are permitted to talk about relationships between states of affairs and desires not our own, what language would we use to do this?
Normative language discusses all reasons for action; mine, yours, ours, theirs, even reasons for action that do not exist. Or, if it isn't, then we are in desperate need to make some significant adjustments to our language.
Specifically, I argue that moral claims have to do with what reasons for action people generally have reasons to act so as to promote and inhibit. If you were to tell me that 'people generally have reason to act so as to promote a love of truth,' this does not imply that I have a reason to act so as to promote love of truth (though, as a part of 'people generally', it is more likely that I also have reason to promote a love of truth than that I do not).