text:
Men's Golf Slated to Compete at SAC ChampionshipApril 12, 2014
ANDERSON, S.C. – After finishing ninth at the Tennessee River Rumble Intercollegiate earlier this week, the Anderson University men's golf team returns to the Volunteer State for the three-day Food Lion South Atlantic Conference Championship, beginning on Sunday at the Sevierville Country Club in Sevierville, Tenn.
Shelton closed the two-day Tennessee River Rumble in 21st, while fellow senior Arran Setro finished 45th. Sophomore David Wachter earned a share of 46th, with freshman Rob Warren finishing in 49th. Junior CJ Messana placed 56th.
The Trojans finished ninth a year ago in Sevierville, with Shelton sharing the 15th spot, while Setro tied for 24th. Warren and Payden Parrish shared the 45th spot.


text:
MB on OC 308:110 says that if bones were separated from their meat on Shabbos they can be carried (are not muktze), and then certainly if they were separated before Shabbos.
MB on OC 308:121, on Rm"a saying that bones that were separated before Shabbos can be carried, adds that then certainly if they were separated on Shabbos.
OK, what's the lenient case and what's the strict? Sort of mixed me up... looks like a contradiction.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Post men rally for win over Goldey
Not a subscriber? You can purchase a single-day subscription for only $0.75 to read this and access all of our content and our E-Edition. CLICK HERE purchase a single day subscription.
Become an electronic subscriber to the Republican-American for only $8 a month. CLICK HERE.


text:
I took Jenn's advice and used the leftover chickpea cutlets I made the other day to make a parmigiana. It was very, very tasty. Thanks Jenn! I took the leftover marinara sauce from the weekend (about 6-7 cups worth), blended it with an immersion blender, added 1 can of tomato paste, 1/2 cup of nutritional yeast, and simmered the cutlets for about 15 mins. You could bread and fry the cutlets, like I did with the seitan parmigiania, but you don't have to. Serve with pasta.
Friday, February 29, 2008
Chickpea Cutlet Parmigiana
3 comments:
- Jenn said...
Glad you liked it - I just happened to have it for dinner tonight... craving it since I mentioned it to you. I'm eagerly anticipating the lemon pudding cake recipe. Since I have VWaV - would you mind posting the recipe for pudding part and any alterations to the cake part if you made any?
- March 1, 2008 at 1:04 AM
- Kumquat Peekapoo said...
This looks wonderful! Are your cutlets the same recipe as in the Veganomicon? I really like the idea of simmering them.
- March 4, 2008 at 9:03 AM
- Vegan Dad said...
I reduced the vital wheat gluten flour to 1/3 cup to make a thinner cutlet, but the regular recipe would work just as well.
- March 4, 2008 at 11:07 AM
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)


text:
Wifey Gotten The Bug... Big Time
Posted 18 August 2012 - 04:24 PM
Just to be fair with other club member, who were waiting to use the back range, we concluded our shoot at the 500 and moved to the 100 yard range.
I told my wife that I want her to work on her trigger and breathing control. She haven't done any serious shooting for the past 20 years. In spite of that, she was able to shoot several respectable 5 shot group at 110 yards. I think I just found a new shooting buddy. The only drawback was, I lost one of my rifle.
Several more trip to the range and I think my wife will be ready for the next 600 yards shoot next month.
Posted 18 August 2012 - 04:29 PM
Posted 18 August 2012 - 06:02 PM
Posted 18 August 2012 - 07:57 PM
Posted 18 August 2012 - 08:27 PM
Posted 19 August 2012 - 06:09 AM
Thanks ED.
DF now you have an excuse to get a new rifle lol. It is great when the wife is interested in what hubby likes, of course that works both ways. Congrats, Ed
Now that she is getting into it, I will have my smith build her a 6BR so that I can get my rifle back LOL.
Its great that your wife likes shooting. Looks like She is doing great too!
Yep! not bad considering that she'd been to range with me no more than 4 or 5 times since we got married 29 years ago. She is however not new to firearms. Her mom's boyfriend used to take them shooting.
Posted 19 August 2012 - 06:48 AM
Posted 19 August 2012 - 07:22 AM
Posted 19 August 2012 - 04:06 PM
Posted 29 August 2012 - 06:08 PM
She also improved her 5 shot group at 525 yards from 4.4" to 2.1"
Posted 29 August 2012 - 07:54 PM
Now she might want you to take her hunting and want her own mounts on the wall !
So when will you introduce her to Nathan Dagley?
Posted 31 August 2012 - 04:27 AM
Posted 03 September 2012 - 01:52 PM
That's some truly outstanding shooting. Let's see the equipment.
Sx, My wife is shooting my 6.5-47 Lapua.
Posted 04 September 2012 - 11:50 AM
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users


text:
Meet and Communicate with Fun Singles Near You on BBW Personals Plus
Register now to search thousands of members and post your FREE profile!
I'm a 25 year old woman who is currently working on my Master's degree. I would describe myself as easy going and independent. I love...
laynabs is a 26yr-old single woman in White Sulphur Springs, West VirginiaView Profile


text: Caryn Davies '13 won her third Olympic medal this past summer as a member of the U.S. women's rowing team. Davies competed in the women's eight event along with eight teammates, and the group finished a half-length ahead of the Canadian team to earn a gold medal. Davies also earned a gold medal in the women's eight at the 2008 Beijing Olympics, and she won a silver in the same event at the 2004 Games in Athens.


text:
On the subject of not eating Matzah before פסח, may one eat products containing Matzah meal in that time?
Sign up
- Anybody can ask a question
- Anybody can answer
- The best answers are voted up and rise to the top
It is prohibited to eat Matzah on Erev Pesach, however cooked or boiled matzah-meal products are permitted according to all the Poskim. Fried Matzah-meal products, however, should be avoided (see Sha'ar ha-Tziyun 444:1). Baked Matzah-meal products, such as cakes or cookies, are prohibited; Harav S.Z. Auerbach (Erev Pesach Shechal b'Shabbos, pg. 207); Shevet ha-Levi 8:117.
The Mishna Berura (OC 471 sk 10) points out that one may eat Matza Ashira (eg. Egg Matza) on Erev Pesach because one cannot fulfill his obligation to eat matza on seder night with it. Seemingly the only things that are forbidden to eat are those with which one can fulfill his obligation to eat matza.
Products using matza meal which are cooked in liquid certainly cannot be used for the mitzva. (Shulchan Aruch OC 461:4)
Hacham Ovadia Yosef, in Yabia Omer (O"C 6:39), permits cooked and fried Matza on Erev Pesach.
He concludes:
AFAIR, I've heard on a lecture of R. Gidon Ben-Moshe that this is not forbidden.
Possibly you can find it on this site among other his lectures.


text:
Venus Williams diagnosed with Sjögren's
September 2, 2011
The New York Times article: Williams Says She Struggled with Fatigue for Years
Tennis star Venus Williams just recently withdrew from the US Open tournament announcing that she has Sjogren's Syndrome, which is an arthritis-related auto-immune disease. I heard the news on the radio when I was driving home from work last night and I immediately felt surprised and really sad. If she has been having any joint pain and fatigue similar to RA, I can't imagine how she can continue to play tennis. Hopefully she will get on a good treatment regimen right away and that she won't have to give it up.
In 2004 I was diagnosed with Sjögren's myself after waking up one morning with extremely dry and inflamed eyes. It was horrible and probably the worst pain I have ever experienced in my life. My vision became blurred and I felt like I had shards of glass cutting into my eyes. The only relief I got was when I was asleep; my time awake was torture. After waiting a month to see a dry eye specialist (I fault my former rheumatologist for this), I finally got in and had tests done to try to determine what was really going on. I was scared to death that the inflammation was attacking my tear glands and that my eyes would never be normal again. Luckily, my tear glands were fine and were producing enough tears. It was my tear quality that was bad resulting from inflammation of my eyelids, also known as blepharitis. After using steroid eye drops and other drops and tedious home remedies, my eyes finally returned to "normal" after about a year of dealing with this. I have little flare-ups from time to time but thankfully my eyes have never gone back to being as bad as they once were. However, I still can't wear contact lenses (which makes me really mad and depressed because I hate glasses).
My heart really goes out to anybody who suffers from Sjögren's Syndrome because I know how incredibly painful and frustrating it can be, emotionally as well as physically. I hope Venus will get the care and support that she needs having this chronic disease.
4 Responses to "Venus Williams diagnosed with Sjögren's"
September 2, 2011 at 6:21 pm
I feel for Venus and you as well. I found out I had Sjogren's a few months ago. The eye specialist tried putting plugs in my lids but that was the most intense pain I had ever felt! They were disolvable in three days so wait was like glass in my eyes (it was the weekend so I could not get them taken out.) The dryness is not easy to explain to people. I have to carry water with me everywhere because I never know when I going to be parched. It was great reading your blog. Mine is youdontlooksick-livingwithra.blogspot.com
September 11, 2011 at 2:25 am
A sufferer whose precise cause has not been diagnosed for one year since doctors (including eye specialist) don't generally understand this. I'm going to try my second eye specialist soon. I maintain a record of my symptoms and research at: http://eyestrain.sabhlokcity.com/.
I'm trying steroids once again for a week as I write this.


text:
It seems to me that vector bundles are useful because they allow us to bring to bear all of the linear algebra we know to aid in the study of topological spaces. Now, I've read somewhere that it is an important and difficult problem to classify all of the vector bundles of a space. I'm willing to accept that the problem is difficult, but why is it important? What are some applications of such a classification?
If your space is a manifold, knowing the vector bundles over that space amounts to knowing all of its tubular neighbourhoods when you embed the space in another manifold. This frequently allows you to find many relationships between the two manifolds.
One classical application would be the proof that all smooth embeddings $S^n \to S^{n+2}$ (co-dimension two embedding of a sphere in a sphere) has a Seifert surface -- meaning there is an embedded, orientable $n+1$-manifold $M \to S^{n+2}$ whose boundary is the $n$-sphere. One of the main steps is showing that the $n$-sphere in $S^{n+2}$ has a trivial tubular neighbourhood.
I would say that the importance of the classification of vector bundles comes first from the fact that it leads naturally to the "characteristic classes" and their complete description. Characteristic classes are computable and powerful invariants of vector bundles. Look at the book Milnor-Stasheff "Characteristic classes" which is the wonderful classic in the domain. There you find first applications of the classification of vector bundles, the fundamental classification theorem being that isomorphism classes of rank n vector bundle E-->X over a space X are in 1-1 correspondance with homotopy classes of maps g:X-->BO(n) where BO(n) is an explicit topological space, namely it is the grasmannian of n-vector spaces inside Rinifinity. The usage of this theorem is then that, using the cohomology of BO(n), you can build and classify very interesting and computable invariants of vector bundles (the more famous being the Euler class, the Stiefel-Whitney classes, the Pontrjagin classes and (for complex vector bundles) the Chern classes.) This is whar are called characteristic classes of vector bundles.
Among applications of this given in Milnor-Stasheff are the following:
While not specific to vector bundles as such, classifying any kind of structure usually gives some sort of deeper understanding of the structure, and more importantly, tends to yield good and often compact descriptors.
For instance, the classification of modules over (nice enough) algebras gives us all sorts of interesting invariants and decompositions: the classification of modules over PIDs gives us the Jordan normal form, with all the power it brings to linear algebra; and the classification of modules over quiver algebras (tame modules exist over a few families of Dynkin diagrams; all others admit wild modules) is what forms the basis for persistence diagrams - a formalization (and visualization) of the idea that classes in the homology of a filtered simplicial complex carry lifetimes that end up telling us much about the topology of the things we used to construct the simplicial complex in the first place.
These ideas, again, are currently being applied in data analysis, in group cohomology and in computer graphics.
All of which is to say that classification in general is good, and vector bundles are interesting, thus classifying vector bundles is good.
Topological K-theory is quite useful: for example, it played a key role in understanding the index theorem.
This is a variation on Ryan's answer.
I am not sure why you think the classification of vector bundles is a difficult problem. It quickly reduces to homotopy theoretic issues that are quite well understood (as well as anything in homotopy theory can be understood).
Vector bundles are important because they give natural invariants of manifolds (tangent bundle and its characteristic classes), and embeddings (normal bundle), as well as a natural place where various structures attached to a manifold live (e.g. metrics, connections, tensors).
Whether the classification of bundles matters depends on what you do. To make an analogy if you are studying PDE on $\mathbb R^n$, which is a huge subject, then you might not care about classifications of manifolds at all; except that PDE do come in handy in classifying 3-manifolds. As such classification of vector bundles isn't used in most of the mathematics, rather it represents a basic result in topology.
In fact I am curious how often do you use classification of vector bundles (be that identification of $\mathbb R^k$-bundles over $X$ with $[X, BO(k)]$ or the fact that complex line bundles are classified by first Chern class, or classification of bundles over complexes of dimension $\le 4$ in terms of characteristic classes)? In my own research I have used all this extensively but my impression that this is quite rare.
I suppose a simpler answer to your question is that the classification of vector bundles is to vector bundles as Whitney's embedding theorem is to manifolds.
Specifically, Whitney's weak embedding theorem says that all n-manifolds embed in $\mathbb R^{2n+1}$ and that any two embeddings of an $n$-manifold in $\mathbb R^{2n+2}$ are isotopic. So studying the "abstract" problem of $n$-manifolds up to diffeomorphism is equivalent to the "less abstract" problem of studying $n$-dimensional submanifolds of $\mathbb R^{2n+2}$ up to isotopy.
Whitney's proof of the above fact is almost exactly how the proof of the classification of vector bundles works. Moreover, they're philosophically almost identical proofs, as the Whitney theorem says abstract manifolds are submanifolds. The classification theorem says abstract vector bundles can be thought of as having their fibres in Euclidean space.


text:
Bishop Lori is not happy with 'America.'
From the Could Have Seen This Coming a Mile Away Department: Bishop Lori of Bridgeport -- chairman of the USCCB Ad Hoc Committee on Religious Freedom -- has sent a strongly worded letter to America magazine in response to their strong editorial on the contraception-coverage mandate, "Policy, Not Liberty."The bishop writes:
The March 5th America editorial takes the United States Bishops to task for entering too deeply into the finer points of health care policy as they ponder what the slightly revised Obama Administration mandate might mean for the Catholic Church in the United States. These details, we are told, do not impinge on religious liberty. We are also told that our recent forthright language borders on incivility.
At which point he crosses that border, delivering a thoroughly uncivil scolding to the editors of America.
Ignoring the substantive theological critique made by the editors, Lori rehearses the points you've probably memorized by now. Here's one:
What details are we talking about? For one thing, a government mandate to insure, one way or another, for an abortifacient drug called Ella. Here the details would seem to be fertilized ova, small defenseless human beings, who will likely suffer abortion within the purview of a church-run health insurance program.
Never mind that Ella is not designed to act on existing pregnancies, that its primary function is to delay ovulation, that the science on its abortifacient properties in the human body remains inconclusive, and that it is only in animal studies where it's been shown that very high doses of the drug terminated pregnancies. (An overdose of aspirin would have the same effect.) The bishop would rather score rhetorical points by making it seem as though the editors of America believe the bishops should not concern themselves with innocent human life. Nonsense.Has Bishop Lori forgotten his 2007 decision to allow Catholic hospitals to comply with Connecticut state law requiring hospitals to provide emergency contraception to rape victims? The law held that patients must have a pregnancy test before receiving such drugs, but not an ovulation test, as the bishops wanted. (At the time, Plan B [levonorgestrel]was the only FDA-approved emergency-contraception drug. The statute doesn't specify which drug should be provided, only those deemed safe by the FDA. Perhaps Ella is now provided to rape victims -- trying to run that down.) Arguing that Plan B can act as an abortifacient, the bishops sent a letter to the governor pleading with her not to sign the bill. Cooperating with the law, the bishops wrote, would force Catholic institutions to act in "direct opposition to our religious belief that life begins at the moment of conception and as such is a serious violation of a basic tenet of the Catholic faith."That was May 2007. Just four moths later, the bishops experienced "an evolution in thinking," according to a spokesman for the Connecticut Catholic Conference, owing to "the state of existing science and the lack of definitive teaching by the church and the fact that there are many who are affiliated with the church that believe the ovulation test isnt necessary. Or, as the Connecticut bishops put it in their statement explaining their reversal: "The administration of Plan B pills in this instance cannot be judged to be the commission of an abortion because of such doubt about how Plan B pills and similar drugs work and because of the current impossibility of knowing from the ovulation test whether a new life is present."In other words, five years ago the bishops of Connecticut made a prudential judgment to allow Catholic hospitals to provide rape victims with pharmaceutical agents the USCCB now routinely refers to as "abortion-causing drugs." That would be the same sort of judgment Bishop Morlino of Madison made when he decided to comply with Wisconsin law and provide contraception coverage to diocesan employees.If the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops was planning to make an actual moral-theological argument at some point -- one that goes beyond repeating that Catholic institutions will be "forced to provide for" services inimical to church teaching -- now would be a good time. While they're at it, maybe someone could point out to the chairman of the Ad Hoc Committee on Religious Freedom that not all women can tolerate the outmoded pills offered at Walmart for $9 a month.
About the Author
65 comments
- All
- Editor Featured
That was a pretty snippy letter, but as I recall, it was a pretty snippy editorial.
David. that's a pretty snippy post.The coments at America tend to fall into the usual kind of divide.So it goes.....
Thanks - had simultaneously posted this below on your Kaveny blog:Jean to your excellent point about style read John OMalleys wonderful book about Vatican II in which he highlights the complete and deliberate decision to change the tone and style of concilar language no anathemas; no condemnations. Statements were almost always put in the affirmative to be supportive and induce discussion.Here is a written response from Bishop William Lori to America magazine editorial:The tone is whinny and petulant almost sophomoric in its statements. Lori states: .abortifacient drug called Ella. Here the details would seem to be fertilized ova, small defenseless human beings, who will likely suffer abortion within the purview of a church-run health insurance program. (natural law & HV as Kaveny says there isnt just one interpretation and HV is really discredited); IOM disputes this conclusion about the drug Ella- tubal ligations have been a part of most insurance plans for years (catholic hospitals deal with this in another manner does he have a clue?)- Lori states: bishops should regard it not as a matter of religious liberty but merely policy that, as providers they teach one thing but as employers they are made to teach something else. In other words, we are forced to be a countersign to Church teaching and to give people plenty of reason not to follow it. The detail in question here is called scandal. (very narrow definition in fact, catholic hospitals, universities, agencies have been a sign of church teaching within the public arena that, obviously, includes birth control, abortion, etc. His way of defining this could actually impact these ministries as a countersign HHS compromise does not create scandal?)Catholic insurance companies and catholic self-insured comapnies well, that is being negotiated and there is a period of time to do this in. Lori makes a statement that refuses to acknowledge this and, in effect, skews his accuracy.His easy dismissal and quote about $10 bc at Walmart ignores the reality of millions of very poor women, immigrants, non-insured, etc. He is disingenous at best.Like his congressional committee hearings and talks, Lori is not a very good advocate for what Prof. Kaveny said in less than 10 minutes. He reminds me of a scolding Southern Baptist minister in my youth.
Grant, I agree that Bishop Lori encountered a teaching moment and fed us sarcasm instead of wisdom. Maybe some other bishop will write the response to the America editorial that it deserves - the original piece much completely miscasts the nature of the dispute, thus making a number of its major points null and void. Lori's letter tries to make that critique, but the tone is all wrong.
Lori asks: "Have I forgotten any other details we bishops shouldnt be attending to?" Indeed, while he works in pre-implantation embryos, incorrect pharmacology, Pope Paul VI, Moses, Pharoah, and even the TV detective Colombo, there's not a word about women and their thoughts on this question. Access to comprehensive health care that includes contraception is very important to most American women. His previous comment comparing contraceptive coverage to whether or not a goy can get a ham sandwich in a Kosher deli showed a similar insensitivity to the importance of this question in women's lives.Yes there are women who agree with the bishops on this. (Women are not monolithic.) But this stance of the bishops appears to reveal them as out of touch with the experience of most of those whose health care they would micro-manage. They should beware scandal--if it's not too late already.
Jim: I'm curious about your perception of the 'America' editorial as confused about the nature of the dispute. How do you think the editors got it wrong?
those whose health care they would micro-manage. You can buy your own contraceptives anywhere; no one is stopping you or micro-managing you just because they won't humor your wish to get it for free.
Lisa,Although your point about the bishops' seemingly not listening to women is well taken, you seem to be avoiding the substance of his arguments. I would like to see some debate on them. I myself am very conflicted on this. I do think his tone is inappropriate. We will get no where on this if we don't presume the good faith of others, especially when they are fellow members of the same church.AA
Bishop Lori must feel much better after getting that load off his chest. It is too bad that, as Chairman of the Ad Hoc Committee, he can't find professional help in the office to tell him where such letters should be filed. To the extent that he had some facts and principles to make a coherently argued critique tearing apart the America editorial, he managed to bury them all in a juvenile-sounding whine. If, as Jim P. suggests, some other bishop comes along to "write the response to the America editorial that it deserves", which wouldn't be too hard to compose, he will be greeted by the Lori letter already hanging on the door, online and in print. The USCCB appears incapable of functioning effectively in the multi-sided interactive world in which we women and men all live.
I think Bishop Lori's references to $10 co-pays at Walmart and the Columbo mention are just perfect! Pefect in demonstrating the primal scream that the hierarachy is making at this time as so many of the sexuality related issues aren't breaking their way... and they may still have to deal with the Philadephia fallout and the episode of the priest refusing Communion...and to quote Kurt Vonnegut.. "and so it goes..."
@AA, In addition to Grant's good point in the original post, I'd refer you to the other threads on this topic to deal with the details. I don't think he raises anything we haven't already tossed around here on dotCommonweal somewhere. (It's been a really thorough discussion that way.) I'm not ducking your question, I just don't want to be repetitive.
Jack Barry said: "The USCCB appears incapable of functioning effectively in the multi-sided interactive world in which we women and men all live."Years ago, Tim Unsworth of blessed memory said:" Bishops break out in shingles in the face of ambiguity; laity live with it each day in their homes, jobs and social life. "" Chancery offices constantly view the faithful as so befuddled that, without unctuous instruction, they would confuse the holy water fountain with a birdbath. "As for me and my family, we will listen to Tim Unsworth any day.
Evidence Matters - per the manufacturer of Ella the mode of action is "... ella postpones follicular rupture. The likely primary mechanism of action of ulipristal acetate for emergency contraception is therefore inhibition or delay of ovulation; however, alterations to the endometrium that may affect implantation may also contribute to efficacy." The manufacturer considers it a potential abortafacient. The teaching moment missed here is that tu quoque is a logical fallacy (what Lori thought/did in 2007 has no bearing on the accuracy of his statements today and if his statement/acts in 2007 is in error Lori should change his mind). This also blurs post rape protocols (which properly are not considered to be the sin of contraception) and a "morning after pill" which is properly considered contraception which has always been a sin. It also fails to identify the Administration as a bully - using the force of law to compel a Church or a person of good will who considers contraception a sin to fund it. It dilutes healthcare and for every $1000 per year contraceptive patient, there is a $1000 not spent on ADHD, vaccinations, breast cancer or HIV. Healthcare is a zero sum game. Also ignored is a person's social decision to have a sexual encounter with prescription contraception should not be funded by the totality of the insured population it is simply unjust.
"using the force of law to compel a Church or a person of good will who considers contraception a sin to fund it." Nope--that was exactly the point of the Obama revision/compromise. That person/institution will NOT have to fund contraception. It's really as simple as that. Not a single precious dollar will be spent."It dilutes healthcare and for every $1000 per year contraceptive patient, there is a $1000 not spent on ADHD, vaccinations, breast cancer or HIV." Nope again. Contraception saves money or is AT WORST cost neutral. So for every $ spent there, MORE money is available for the conditions you list, or AT WORST no less. And as to uses of drugs--do you really want your doctor or your health care provider to determine your health care options based on what your employer's particular religious group considers sinful, as in your example? Really? What if your employer is of a religion whose tenets YOU find objectionable? Do you still want your employer to call the shots?
Daniel Kane, the Prescribing information or Plan B, which Bishop Lori and the other Connecticut bishops approved says:There are many misconceptions about emergency contraception, so its important for your patients to know that Plan B One-Step works similar to regular birth control pills; it simply contains a larger dose of the hormone levonorgestrel. Plan B One-Step works primarily by:- Preventing ovulation- Possibly preventing fertilization by altering tubal transport of sperm and/or egg- Altering the endometrium, which may inhibit implantationhttp://planbonestep.com/plan-b-prescribers/how-plan-b-works.aspxThe Prescribing information for Ella says:12.1 Mechanism of ActionWhen taken immediately before ovulation is to occur, ella postpones follicular rupture. The likely primary mechanism of action of ulipristal acetate for emergency contraception is therefore inhibition or delay of ovulation; however, alterations to the endometrium that may affect implantation may also contribute to efficacy. It appears that they both say that they "may" inhibit implantation if the other mechanisms don't work.Regarding Plan B, Bishop Lori said in 2007::Last spring, the Connecticut Bishops worked hard to defeat the so-called Plan B legislation. Its not that the Church opposes administering Plan B to victims of rape; these women have suffered a gravely unjust assault. Last year, nearly 75 rape victims were treated in the four Connecticut Catholic hospitals; no one was denied Plan B as the result of the Catholic hospital protocols which required both a pregnancy test and an ovulation test prior to the administration of that drug.Whats really at issue here is how much testing is appropriate to ensure that Plan B does not induce the chemical abortion of a fertilized ovum. There is uncertainty about how Plan B works. Its effect is to prevent fertilization of the ovum. Some believe, however, that in rare instances Plan B can render the lining of the uterus inhospitable to the fertilized ovum which must implant in it in order to survive and grow; many other experts dispute this. For their part, the Bishops of Connecticut felt it was best not only to administer the standard FDA-approved pregnancy test, but also an ovulation test. However, this course of action was only a prudential judgment, not a matter of settled Church teaching and practice. Other bishops and moral theologians hold that a pregnancy test alone suffices. Indeed, the Church does not teach that it is intrinsically evil to administer Plan B without first giving an ovulation test or that those who do so are committing an abortionhttp://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/1905953/postsNote also that, in 2007, the issue was not simply proving insurance coverage or Plan B but actually administering th drug in a Catholic Hospital.
That person/institution will NOT have to fund contraception. Its really as simple as that. Not a single precious dollar will be spent.Lisa, this shows a failure to understand basic economics. Money is being paid to an insurance company. The insurance company is then supposed to provide something that does cost money for "free." Even if the insurance company supposedly saves money in the long run, it still has to expend dollars paying for the thing that supposedly helps it save money. And the insurance company therefore has to include the price of that thing in the premium. Grant, here's just one way that America magazine is confused:
Then, on Feb. 10, President Obama announced a compromise solution by which religious institutions would be exempt from paying the objectionable premiums but women would not be denied contraceptive coverage. A confrontation that should never have happened was over.
There is no truthful depiction of events by which the confrontation was "over" as of Feb. 10. The original rule went into effect as planned. It doesn't apply to church organizations for the first year, but there is as yet no actual or even proposed "compromise" rule that would displace the original rule. Another point of confusion:
The campaign fails to acknowledge that in the present instance, claims of religious liberty may collide with the right to health care, or that the religious rights of other denominations are in tension with those of Catholics.
There is no plausible claim that anyone has a "religious right" to obtain contraceptives for free. No one has ever suggested such a thing except when the purpose is to create a false equivalence, as if there are religious rights at issue on both sides.
Lisa -- an analogy might help you understand. If I spend $300 every year to have a wooden deck treated with a special chemical that prevents rot, I may be saving lots of money in the long run by not having to replace the entire deck. Still, it's a complete falsehood to say that "not a single precious dollar will be spent" on the deck treatment. Obviously, I'm spending money on the deck treatment -- I may be able to avoid spending money on something else down the road, but I'm still writing out a check for $300 here and now. And guess what: if my wife says, "I hate buying this deck treatment, because it's tested on animals in horribly painful conditions, and I am morally opposed to that," I'm not going to get very far if I respond, "But we're not actually spending any money, because we're saving money in the long run." That is both a falsehood (as I really am writing out a check) and a complete evasion of the issue (the issue isn't how many net dollars are spent over a lifetime, but being involved in buying something here and now).
Studebaker Here is a shorter more accurate analogy. Your city passes an ordinance that every contractor must treat all his new decks with with the special chemical. The ordinance says decks will last longer and be safe from collapse and will save everyone down the line. Contractor will not give a damn about your wife's animal concerns if you hire him to do the deck.. he will follow the city ordnance.
The bishops' "religious liberty" mantra is such a sham.Want to know about so-called "religious liberty", bishops?Talk to your counterparts in China and other places that make it difficult if not impossible to be truly free in exercising episcopal duties.Then you'll know something about (quote)religious liberty(endquote).I hope our bishops end up becoming the worst kind of friends any Republican candidate might ever hope of having in a presidential election.
"There is no plausible claim that anyone has a religious right to obtain contraceptives for free. No one has ever suggested such a thing except when the purpose is to create a false equivalence, as if there are religious rights at issue on both sides."Studebaker --I'm with you here. But your contention that the insurance company's decision to buy the contraceptives and take a slight immediate loss, implies that it is the bishops who are responsible for the act of buying them is just nonsense. If the bishops were buying them, then money would have to pass between the bishops and the insurers *for the contraceptives*. But that is not what the revised plan calls for. What is it you mainly object to? You seem to be confusing remote cooperation with immediate cooperation, or maybe you don't permit *either* remote or immediate cooperation You seem to think that the bishops are somehow sending money to pay for the contraceptives.But ALL the bishops are doing is contracting for a policy which in fact does NOT include contraceptive coverage. Since the policy doesn't cover them, I can't see how you can claim that the bishops are paying for them. They're paying ONLY for what they've contracted for.
Cardinal Dolan remarks on an administration tactic that, to my knowledge, has never been used before and which has deeply disturbing implications:"And a recent meeting between staff of the bishops conference and the White House staff ended with the Presidents people informing us that the broader concerns of religious freedom that is, revisiting the straight-jacketing mandates, or broadening the maligned exemptionare all off the table. Instead, they advised the bishops conference that we should listen to the 'enlightened' voices of accommodation, such as the recent hardly-surprising but terribly unfortunate editorial in America. The White House seems to think we bishops are hopelessly out of touch with our people, and with those whom the White House now has nominated as official Catholic teachers."http://blog.archny.org/?p=2291
Leave it to the bishops to complicate the uncomplicated in order to suit their political (and obviously partisan political) agenda. The administration has granted a reasonable and good faith accommodation. The Church will not be buying contraceptives. Insurance companies will be saving monies that would otherwise be going for pregnancy-related expenses. "The White House seems to think we bishops are hopelessly out of touch with our people, and with those whom the White House now has nominated as official Catholic teachers.I've got news for Dolan: The White House folks are not the only people who believe the bishops are hopelessly out of touch with Catholics, and most Catholics would likely agree that the hierarchs --- as "official Catholic teachers" --- have not demonstrated the competence to teach in any authoritative way. They simply lack any moral or other credibility. Perhaps we're seeing a role-reversal here: The laity are teaching the bishops, and the bishops are having a hard time accepting this new reality.
I say bishop Lori picked up support from Rush Limbaugh but lost the Georgetown Law school. If you walk into the political arena/ring to play the political game it's always been ' you win some and lose some'.
You seem to think that the bishops are somehow sending money to pay for the contraceptives. But ALL the bishops are doing is contracting for a policy which in fact does NOT include contraceptive coverage.Ann -- you're using the present tense about a rule that doesn't even exist yet. Leaving that aside, the point has been made by several commenters (and never refuted) that it's a mere matter of semantics to say the policy wouldn't include contraceptive coverage, when every policy is automatically accompanied by an offer of "free" contraceptive coverage (while such an offer is never made without the underlying policy). If someone said we should make every health insurance policy come with a monthly package of marijuana, and objections were raised, would it really fool so many people if the "compromise" were this: "every single health insurance policy has to come with a 'separate' offer of a 'free' monthly package of marijuana." It would obviously be silly to describe that as a "compromise" at all -- the insurance policy would still be covering the marijuana the same as before. Another analogy: suppose someone said, "I want it to be illegal to sell a hamburger without a large French fries along with it." (French fries, after all, are more expensive than most contraceptives on a monthly basis.) Would anyone be fooled as to what was going on if a "compromise" were that with every purchase of a hamburger, a third drive-through window handed out "free" sacks of French fries? Would anyone be gullible enough to believe, "Oh, gee, I guess the French fries really are free, and have nothing to do with the hamburger purchase at all."
To supplement my 9:56 pm comment last night which quoted Bishop Lori's blog on administering Plan B in Catholic hospitals in CT, the official announcement by the bishops as a group pointed out that it was the doubt about how Plan B worked that allowed Catholic hospitals to administer it - but that if it became clear that Plan B did cause an abortion, the matter would have to be reopened. Since the teaching authority of the Church has not definitively resolved this matter and since there is serious doubt about how Plan B pills work, the Catholic Bishops of Connecticut have stated that Catholic hospitals in the State may follow protocols that do not require an ovulation test in the treatment of victims of rape. A pregnancy test approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration suffices. If it becomes clear that Plan B pills would lead to an early chemical abortion in some instances, this matter would have to be reopened. I have no personal knowledge of Plan B (or Ella) other than the prescribing information I quoted that says they both "may" inhibit implantation. If there is new information that has become available since 2007, the bishops would certainly be justified in reopening the question of whether Catholic hospitals can administer Plan B or Ella. It's not clear from the statements I have read whether the bishops are saying that new information has become available since 2007 which makes clear that Plan B does result in an abortion - and that information available for Ella makes clear that it does as well.
Cdl. Dolan in his blog to which Patrick M. linked proudly mentions Fidelis Care New York, a Medicare/Medicaid insurance provider owned by the Church. ( http://blog.archny.org/?p=2291 ). It limits its provision of Family Planning Services benefits and notifies doctors accordingly. It is interesting to note the detailed efforts Fidelis appears to make (2007 Manual) to ensure that patients who are Fidelis members and their doctors will be informed of the identity and telephone number of other sources of the services that Fidelis elects not to provide. http://www.fideliscare.org/downloads/prov_manual/pm_16.pdf It is difficult for me to see how this situation differs substantially from the HHS grant contract issue in which Cdl. Dolan in his blog refers to "their exclusion from contracts just because they will not refer victims of human trafficking, immigrants and refugees, and the hungry of the world, for abortions, sterilization, or contraception."
Lori's comments are no more snippy than posts from regular contributors here. Give me a break. Some seem downright incensed that the bishops are daring to talk back to those tut-tittering their decidedly inappropriate fetishizing (in their view) of this issue. But "uncivil?" Come on.
A suggestion: Both here and elsewhere I think it would help the conversation if we men refrained (abstained?) from using analogies to make our points (whatever they may be) about contraception. So far, just in this thread, I've read analogies to ham sandwiches, house decks, marijuana and french fries. None of them (in my opinion) has clarified, elevated or illuminated the issues involved. All of them (again, in my opinion) are befuddling, unfortunate and/or insensitive to varying degrees.As for what Lisa Fullam said at 3/2, 5:08 pm regarding the importance of listening to women's voices on this issue---yes, yes, a thousand times yes.
Luke, I don't think I agree that this is a "women's issue". What the pill does to an individual woman is that woman's issue, but what it does to society is everyone's concern.
Luke Hill,What a bizarre, illiberal, infantilizing suggestion! I presume you don't think men should forever not use analogies. I trust that you will inform us when in your view the time is appropriate so that we can make use of analogies once again.
Luke, I think you don't quite understand what an analogy even is. The point of an analogy isn't to compare birth control itself to French fries, but to think about the (ridiculous) things that are said about how birth control is going to be "free" under some new system. If it helps, feel free to replace any analogy with the abstract terms X and Y. Here's an example: Suppose someone said, I want it to be illegal to sell X without Y along with it. But suppose a small segment of the population believed that buying Y is immoral. Would anyone be fooled as to what was going on if a compromise were that with every purchase of X, the provider of X had to make Y available for "free"? (Note: even here, one has to avoid getting distracted by the thought that birth control isn't literally the letter "X.")
" Leaving that aside, the point has been made by several commenters (and never refuted) that its a mere matter of semantics to say the policy wouldnt include contraceptive coverage, when every policy is automatically accompanied by an offer of free contraceptive coverage (while such an offer is never made without the underlying policy)."Studebaker --Yes, the point was made, and I disagreed with it. You think it wsan't refuted, I think it was. (It's those apodictic pronouncements that turn people off, Stu, "It was refuted" -- as if all that needs doing is for Studebaker to decide who won the argument.)Your post here goes off into "iffy" situaions which might be relevant as illustrative of your points. But we already know your points. Now the thing to do is to present your "sed contras", your arguments against criticism of your view. You don't win any converts until they see that you position holds up under criticism.
Ann, it's not my decision. As far as I can tell (amidst hundreds and hundreds of comments, some of which I admittedly might have missed), no one has even tried to refute the following point: If (1) The sale of X is automatically accompanied by an offer of "Free Y!", and (2) "Free Y" itself isn't ever offered outside of a particular sale of X, then obviously the sale of X and the offer of "Free Y" are being tied together. And just as obviously, since Y isn't literally free here and now (drug companies make Y, and someone has to pay them), the average cost of Y will be built into the average price of X. The difference is only cosmetic. What the Obama administration has done is exactly like this: "We'll sell you a value meal that includes a hamburger, fries, and Coke for $5.00. Never mind, actually what we'll do is sell you a hamburger for $5.00, and you can get the fries and Coke for 'free.'" Why would anyone think that the second economic transaction is so different?
Studebaker ==Your argument misses the point of the other side. You keep saying that because the insurance company pays for the contraceptives (somhow at the instigation of the bishops), qnd because other buyers of ins. will have to make up for the ins. co.'s outlay for the contraceptives that the cooperation of the bishops is so close to the buying of contraceptives that they are guilty of proximate material cooperation.Your problem seems to be you don't accept the notion of remote material cooperation as qualifyung a moral situation.
On rereading Lori's letter, I looked in vain for his strong, stage-setting statement to the effect of "Religious freedom in the United States in 2012 is ..". Instead, he leaves it to the patient reader to induce his and, presumably, the USCCB's concept from a laundry list of sore points. Is he unable to define it? Or, is it a vague, flexible, general-purpose umbrella over several challenges the Church authorities hope to settle in the public square, given their difficulties in doing so internally amongst the Catholic faithful? And, in conclusion (his), it is difficult to identify the constructive alternative he would propose that offers an ending for Church and State better than the one that is coming. The American editors tried to do that. What are the bishops interested in achieving?
Sorry, I thought I'd made a relatively innocuous comment, and then went off to do my usual Saturday errands and chores. It appears I've partially derailed the thread, for which I apologize to all. By way of quick response to those kind enough to reply to my comment at 3/3, 12:11 pm:@David Smith (3/3, 1:12 pm) I didn't state, or mean to imply, that contraception is a "women's issue" (so I perhaps we actually agree?). @Patrick Molloy (3/3, 1:43 pm) Sorry, I thought it was a liberal do-gooding, how-can-we-all-work-together-to-improve-the-quality-and-value-of-our-conversation-type suggestion. Analogize away.@Studebaker (3/3, 2:14 pm) With all due respect, I think I do know something about what an analogy is, and is used for. Again, analogize away. My experience so far in this conversation over the past few weeks is that analogies have generated more heat than light. However, I recognize that other folks may well have had a different, even opposite experience.And now (hopefully), back to the main topic.
Ann -- You keep saying that because the insurance company pays for the contraceptives (somhow at the instigation of the bishops), qnd because other buyers of ins. will have to make up for the ins. co.s outlay for the contraceptives that the cooperation of the bishops is so close to the buying of contraceptives that they are guilty of proximate material cooperation.No, I say the bishops themselves would be paying for contraception. More specifically, any insurance policy that is accompanied by an offer of "free" anything will incorporate the price of that "free anything" into the price of the policy. Therefore, whoever buys the policy is THEMSELVES actually paying money for the "free anything," just as much as you're really paying something for the "free ginsu knife if you order in the next 20 minutes" on a late night info-mercial.Another analogy: suppose that a home warranty company offers you a warranty for all structural repairs for 5 years, for $5,000. Suppose the warranty company tells you, "Look, we used to have to charge $6,000 for this policy, but we're saving money because we now supply a 'free' service that maintains your A/C and heating units every year, so that we don't have to replace them as often. This service really does cost us $500, but we're throwing it in for 'free.'" Even if all of those figures really are true (not just sales pitches), and even if you accept that the warranty company is indeed saving money in the long run by offering A/C and heating maintenance, would anyone really think that the $5,000 cost of the warranty literally included nothing whatsoever that went towards the $500 cost of the maintenance? Would anyone really contend that people who buy the warranty are not spending "one precious dollar" for the maintenance?
"Access to comprehensive health care that includes contraception is very important to most American women."Lisa - shouldn't the government devise a way to distribute contraception to women that doesn't impinge on religious liberty? Why set the two in opposition to one another?
I hold out hope that this whole brouhaha might open up a discussion on the real issue - which is not, I think, the government's intrusion on our religious liberty but rather the absurdity of the Catholic bishops' insistence that contraception - one of the most important advances in women's health - is still morally unacceptable. We Catholics came close once - until Paul VI quashed it. Are there no members of the Catholic hierarchy who are unafraid to speak on behalf of - and with - women?
Jim Pauwels, to avoid the arguments about the accomodation for Catholic Hopitals, Universities, etc, let me limit my comment to just the Catholic Taco Bell stand owner wih 50 or more employees.He will ask insurance brokers for quotes on health insurance policies that meet the government minimum standard to avoid the tax penalty for not providing adequate health insurance for your employees. All of he policies for which he receives quotes will include coverage of contraception. It is not a decision over which he has any control other than to just not buy insurance - and not provide health insurance for his employees.That issue has been discussed many times here and (I believe) most people see it as, at most, remote cooperation with evil which is allowable.You may say that, even if it is remote and allowable, he shouldn't haves to be involved in cooperation in evil at all. That is essentially the position of the person who doesn't want to pay income taxes that will, in part, be used to support an unjust war.As the editor of "America" said in their recent editorial "The campaign also risks ignoring two fundamental principles of Catholic political theology. Official Catholic rights theory proposes that people should be willing to adjust their rights claims to one another. It also assigns to government the responsibility to coordinate contending rights and interests for the sake of the common good"When Bishop Hunthausen withheld some of his income tax, the IRS garnished his salary from the diocese. I honor him for holding to his moral principles but I also believe that the IRS did what is necessary to deal with competing claims in a diverse society.
"Are there no members of the Catholic hierarchy who are unafraid to speak on behalf of and with women?"Noreen, the American bishops were once men of conscience who would warn the Vatican when they believed it was wrong. Then the Vatican started to insist that the American bishops obey Rome. Bishop Bernardin, a bishop of conscience, complained that the Vatican was treating them like altar boys. Then Cardinal Law, O'connor and the rest started to ridicule bishops like Bernardine. As a result, the bishops have become....altar boys. They complain of maltreatment from the laity. Dolan complains that the Pew study shows the laity love Jesus but not the hierarchy. Nor realizing that what the laity wants is leadership. Not altar boys.
@noreen connolly (3/3, 7:04 pm) No. Apparently there aren't. (This has been another edition of Simple Answers to Simple Questions.)@Bill Mazzella (3/3, 7:51 pm) (There's no reason to drag altar boys into this and start insulting them.)
Lisa shouldnt the government devise a way to distribute contraception to women that doesnt impinge on religious liberty?Exactly. For example, if you've determined that an extra $50 a month is just too much for all of the women-working-at-Catholic-institutions-who-have-no-significant-other-who-can-help-out, then why not have a universal redistribution program that gives more women an extra $50 a month? That way, you'd be helping the women like my wife, who is infertile due to cancer treatment and whose life would be endangered by birth control. Giving her birth control coverage is useless, and it's puzzling that the putatively women-friendly commenters/bloggers don't seem to care about people like her.
Daniel Kane "It also fails to identify the Administration as a bully using the force of law to compel a Church or a person of good will who considers contraception a sin to fund it."Studebaker and Ann have been going back and forth over this very issue, which I would think might at least prove it's NOT a given. Even before the President expanded (or proposed to expand) the religious exemption to include hospitals and universities, etc., churches weren't "compelled" to fund contraceptives. As I recall, way back then (before Feb. 10) the bishops said the Issue was how insulting it was that the Obama administration didn't "get" that the Church's mission covers far more than mere worship and that hospitals, social welfare agencies, etc., should clearly be exempted too since anybody who knows anything about Christianity knows they're part and parcel of the Church's work. Once Obama extended the exemption, they immediately changed focus to claim that the exemption isn't really an exemption, and then settled on the assertion that NO employer should have to pay for an insurance plan that covers something he considers morally objectionable. The only constant has been the hostile tone. Really, if Obama's the bully, he's been muffling his message with civility. The bishops, on the other hand, have been doing a darn good job of mimicking what bullies sound like. All of which just goes to show...I'm not sure what.
Beverly, I'm afraid you're falling for the misinformation some people have been peddling. You say, "Once Obama extended the exemption . . . ." But Obama did no such thing. The original rule went into effect, and today is the law. Obama merely says that there might be a change in the policy at some future date, but as I explained at great length above, the change that Obama has so far suggested cannot possibly make any difference, and it certainly isn't "extending" anything, as you say.
Actually, even if we assume that the promised accommodation is delivered, it is not an extension of the religious exemption.
In our local Sunday paper this morning out here in Dakota land, a letter writer used an expression I hadn't seen before in reading many online articles and columns: "the Republican bishops." This captures it very succinctly. I'm sure others have said or written this, maybe above in the comments. But it's worth stating again. It sure feels like Republican bishops more than Catholic (diversity-within-unity) bishops. As far as diversity of perspective (or gifts of the Holy Spirit), it seems the Church's large tent has shrunk to a pup tent.
Another report from very conservative and very Republican North Dakota. Our local paper this morning also has yesterday's results from the Online Poll: "Is discussion about who should pay for contraceptives a political diversion or a legitimate presidential campaign issue? Diversion 62%, Real issue 15%, A bit of both 23%"
Please God, no! Violent language leads to violence. It's past time to tamp down the rhetoric. Whatever happened to "Blessed are the peacemakers"?Where are the Carrolls, the Englands, the (Francis Patrick) Kenricks, the (Martin and John Lancaster) Spaldings, the Gibbonses, the Irelands, the Hayeses, the Mundeleins, the Spellmans, the Cushings, the Hallinans, the Deardens, the Bernardins?Why not send a delegation made up of Bishop Kicanas (the almost USCCB president), Archbishop Aymond, Bishop Cupich to the White House for quiet talks with principal White House aides? Or is the only end the defeat of President Obama?It won't be, I fear, just denying Communion to politicians this time round, but every Catholic who works for, or volunteers for, or contributes to Democratic presidential, senatorial, congressional campaigns will be said to be co-operating in evil. To say nothing of voting.There has to be some way forward other than crying "fire" in a crowded hall.
Men not being able to use analogies is like...oops, guess I can't.
"Im curious about your perception of the America editorial as confused about the nature of the dispute. How do you think the editors got it wrong?"Hi, Grant - there are a lot of things that I find objectionable about the America editorial, and to catalog all of them would be time-consuming for me and really tedious for anyone who was to read the result. But in making the comment to which you responded, here is what I had in mind: the editorial says this:"The religious liberty campaign seems to have abandoned a moral distinction that undergirded the conferences public advocacy in past decades: the contrast between authoritative teaching on matters of principle and debatable applications of principle to public policy. The natural law tradition assigned application to the prudent judgment of public officials. Writing of policy differences in 1983, the bishops wrote, The Church expects a certain diversity of views even though all hold the same universal moral principles. Contemporary Catholic social teaching has spoken of policy in terms of a legitimate variety of possible options for the faithful and the wider public; it has urged that differences over policy be tempered by charity and civility."America's editors misapply the principle they've cited from 1983; had they applied it correctly, the editorial would read quite differently - and presumably would not have provoked Bishop Lori's acid response. The point of the current dispute is that the Obama Administration has not presented the polity with "a legitimate variety of possible options". In point of fact, the Administration presented us with only a single option (the mandate); and then subsequently stated an intent to substitute for the mandate a slightly different mandate; and both mandates, in the opinion of those who possess Catholic teaching authority, are *not morally legitimate*. This is not a case in which Americans are asked to choose from a variety of more or less morally equal and acceptable policy options.What is at stake here, what this controversy has brought into relief, is precisely that it is simply not true that "all hold the same universal moral principles." Perhaps it was true, three or four generations ago, that there was a consensus in the US around the importance of religious liberty, and a consensus regarding the immorality of contraception. But surely the consensus on the latter vanished some time ago. The morality that undergirds the mandate and the suggested revised mandate is deeply flawed. Contraception is gravely immoral in marriage, and contraception enables serious immorality outside of marriage. Forcing employers to subsidize it is highly objectionable. The bishops couldn't but speak up against it, even if the church itself were not so directly affected by it.The editorial also states:"The bishops have been most effective in influencing public policy when they have acted as pastors, trying to build consensus in church and society, as they did in their pastorals on nuclear war and the economy. The American public is uncomfortable with an overt exercise of political muscle by the hierarchy. Catholics, too, have proved more responsive to pastoral approaches. "What do the editors mean by "effective" in this instance? I take it to mean, "successful in convincing American Catholics to think as the bishops do." But is that really the measure of effectiveness in heralding moral truth? Isn't the real measure of a bishop's effectiveness the clarity and love with which truth is proclaimed? Whether people respond positively, or not, to a clear and charitable proclamation of truth is a different matter and, to a large extent, beyond the bishops' control. There have been a number of times and places in the history of the church in which clear and loving proclamation of the truth has been popularly rejected, from the Acts of the Apostles and the letters of Paul on down to today. America's editors seem squeamish that the bishops had, for a glimmering instant, galvanized Catholic opinion across the political spectrum; but then 'squandered' the moment by ... proclaiming the truth. The truth must be proclaimed, in and out of season. It seemed for a few days that it was in season; but then the winds turned.
"Jim Pauwels, to avoid the arguments about the accomodation for Catholic Hopitals, Universities, etc, let me limit my comment to just the Catholic Taco Bell stand owner wih 50 or more employees."Per the analysis by those Providence College moral theologians, it's not clear that the Taco Bell franchisee isn't still immediately cooperating in evil.And the proposed new mandate creates new classes of problems, for any Catholic employer who self-insures, and for any Catholic health insurance company.There already exist a number of government subsidies of birth control, starting with Medicare and Medicaid, and including subsidies to Planned Parenthood, that don't require employers or insurers to directly subsidize birth control. The government *already knows how to do this*.
"why not have a universal redistribution program that gives more women an extra $50 a month?"The government could implement an across-the-board $50 a month tax credit, or send out tax rebate checks in the amount of $50 a month. Recent political history is that proposals like this are almost impossible for Congress and Presidents to resist, particularly when elections are pending.
Setting aside the details of the debate between Bishop Lori and America, it is worth noting that there IS a debate. Not so long ago, America's practice of allowing varied points of view within its pages on religious issues prompted the ouster of a respected editor. It would be a bit awkward for church authorities to silence a magazine that wants to speak out in conscience on the bishops' campaign to protect freedom of conscience. So it's heartening to see a detailed exchange on the issues rather than the blunt use of authority to prevent dissent. Religious liberty means that those who have a dissenting viewpoint within the church should be able to speak out - and it means those who disagree with them should be able to, also.
Paul, Moses, America has gone though a reorganization, including the appointment of a new "President and Publisher" a few months ago - Fr. John Schlegel, S.J.http://www.americamagazine.org/blog/entry.cfm?blog_id=2&entry_id=4603App..., the two possible assignments for Fr. Schlegel were either to New York or to Zimbabwe. He may wish he had been sent to Zimbabwe by the time this uproar is over, but I'm glad that he is supporting America's tradition of taking independent editorial positions while also providing a forum for opposing views.
Did someone recently say there is more pressure on Catholic journals and journalists?The removal of Fr. Reese in its day was a disgrace!We may see more from the right OMP who want to demonize al lwho disagre e politically or religiously from them.
According to some who argue here, even if distribution of contraceptives through an insurance plan was demonstrably free, it would still be immoral for Catholic institutions to procure such a policy for its employees. But some institutions, and many Catholics, including presumably Bishops already profit from the manufacture and sale of contraceptives -- Johnson and Johnson, Pfizer and WalMart anyone? If the 'one drop contaminates the soup' argument works for insurance, why not investments?
You have a point, jbruns, you have a point. Must all the dioceses divest themselves of the big pharmos? And other companies whose products they find morally objectionable? The German bishops right now are trying to unload their investment in a publisher of porn. They own it 100%.
"But some institutions, and many Catholics, including presumably Bishops already profit from the manufacture and sale of contraceptives"Well then we should all rally round, because an economic effect of the HHS mandates is likely to be an increase in the cost of contraceptives."http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/03/the-biggest-benefici..."Obama really is a genius (and I mean that): in one move he has managed to split Catholics AND give a big boost to Pharma profits, ensuring their political support.
Mr. Landry, I've occasionally wondered if this whole scenario was not thought out ahead of time by the White House to make the bishops end up looking like Republican partisan shills --- by taking the bait!Makes ya' wonder...
I have no inside knowledge, but I have wondered at times if the WH realized that whatever they proposed first would be rejected as inadequate by the bishops so they held off on the accomodation until round 2 (February 10).
My sense is that whatever the WH proposes, the bishops will not consider the matter closed until the Becket Fund cases get to the Supreme Court and are either refused by it or heard and decided. In sequence, their milestones are probably:1. Get a bill passed by this Congress. FIrst try didn't get through the Senate and it's unlikely that they will ever get the 2/3 majority of the present Congress needed to override a veto2. In November, elect a Republican president and Republican majorities in both Houses so that a bill could be passed in early 2013 This raises the question of how much pressure they will put on Catholics to vote that way. 3. Wait for action by the Supreme Court - Since the cases have to be heard by District Courts and Appeals Courts first, this probably wouldn't produce a decision before the end of 2013, even if the Supreme Court accepts a case.
Moderator, sorry, my last comment was intended for another post. Please feel free to delete it here.
I recently saw an unusual adjective used to describe Bishop Lori. "Ubiquitous." The more visible you become, as political candidates discover to their cost (Santorum on torture?), the greater the danger that people will scrutinize your words and find them lacking. And the more you opine, the greater the possibility that you will wander into areas where you are not competent. Which is why I am keeping this particular comment short.


text:
I used to have this awesome Lego set.
It sat on my bottom shelf for many happy years. But this story does not have a happy beginning. One Christmas morning in the early 1990s, something went terribly wrong.
Perhaps in the previous month of screaming at toy commercials I had forgotten to actually write a Christmas list. Perhaps I had misplaced my faith in the psychic powers of Santa Claus. But whatever happened, the present I opened on Christmas was not the one I wanted.
Knowing it would be a full year before I got another toy anywhere near as good, I drowned my sorrows in some hot cocoa and probably took down a gingerbread house.
By the time I remembered the Lego, the entire set had been put together by my nerdiest cousin.
Suddenly jealous of MY toy, I carried the whole thing into my room and started playing out of pure stubbornness.
There was much to be done in this little Lego universe. The first thing I did was depose their leader with a ritualistic beheading. Then I replaced him with an interim leader of my own choosing.
The set had some kind of vague underwater mining theme, the long-forgotten Aquaraiders. I'd never had a Lego set as big or complex as this. The ladyfig's head had come from a windsurfing set whose accessories were an umbrella and a tea table.
Despite my pessimism, I soon discovered all sorts of wonders.
Yes, My Little Undersea Mine (TM) was not the idyllic paradise it first appeared to be. Soon a scout returned from a recon mission, and things took a turn for the worse.
And with that, Lego had made itself a lifelong fan. Hell, I bought a Lego VW Bus yesterday.
Which brings me to this:
By now, a lot of people have weighed in on the "Lego for Girls" thing better than me. But as a little girl who unknowingly played with "Boy Lego," I just have a couple of observations about the new 'Lego Friends.'
1) The minifigs look totally different and probably couldn't actually be friends.
2) The pieces are a different color palette and wouldn't mix that well with other sets.
3) Some of the sets have a lot of pieces, but where's the room for creativity?
My point is this: There are no shortage of plastic, barely-poseable dress-up dolls aimed at young girls. But Lego always had the promise of letting you create something totally original using only what was in front of you.
Countless young girls will play with these "girls only" sets and not ever know what they're missing.
And as a former sea captain and occasional shark whisperer, I'm glad I was a kid in 1993 and not today. Otherwise things may have turned out differently.
It's probably the difference between "Best Friends 4 Life!" and "Lifelong Fan." Just sayin.'
Follow the rest of my nonsense on Twitter. Or check out my upcoming video game here.
Edit: I just found out Mom kept my Lego. Here's Captain Erin, back at the helm. And holding a knife.


text:
Top 10 Tips for Paying for College
3 of 11
The Federal Work-Study program offers jobs to undergraduate and graduate students in need of financial assistance. Students are usually able to work in their field of interest while earning money to help pay for their college tuition. Salary and hours worked are determined by class schedule and academic progress.
Visit the U.S. Department of Education for more information on the federal work-study program.
Next: On-Campus Job


text:
I've been running the
useradd {user} command to add users to my system, though I plan on running this in an automated environment, and it might end up being run again, even though the user already exists.
Is there a way that I can run this, only if it doesn't already exist? The user doesn't have a home folder.
Thanks! Tom.


text:
A Jefferson County constable indicted after shooting a shoplifting suspect in a Walmart parking lot has resigned as part of a plea deal.
David Whitlock was charged with assault and wanton endangerment after approaching Tammie Ortiz last November to question her about shoplifting and shot her has she drove away. Whitlock has said he accidently fired the gun.
He entered an Alford plea, which means he did not admit guilt, but conceded there was enough evidence for a conviction. The Courier-Journal reports that a judge on Friday sentenced him to diversion. Terms of the deal also forbid him from seeking another law enforcement position.
Constables are constitutional officers endowed with peace officer powers, but are not required to be screened or trained before or after taking office.


text:
This past weekend after our brisket class I had various briskets in stages of completion. I also have had a case of bacon and I felt like doing a bit of playing …..
I took a fully smoked flat of brisket (at room temperature) and cut it into 11/2 inch cubes. It was already moist and delicious but I wanted to take it up a notch.
I wrapped each brisket cube with slices of bacon to form a bacon wrapped brisket bomb. Then I placed the brisket bombs in my Traeger on a frogmat for 1 hour at 225F then I turned them and smoked them for another hour at 225 F. I used Oak and hickory pellets.
I glazed them with a homemade BBQ sauce that I use for competition. Oh my flip. These things are awesome. Seriously awesome.
**Please note they are not nearly as dark as the picture shows. Thats just my horrible picture taking.
Juicy moist smoked brisket wrapped in a layer of crispy double smoked bacon and topped with a sweet and spicy BBQ sauce. They are cubes of awesome yummy goodness.
The brisket was re-seasoned with Smoky Mountain Smokers Chipotle BBQ Rub, & Plowboys Bovine Bold for a power packed flavor combination. It was injected using Butchers BBQ Brisket Marinade. There were a few other ingredients as well…. but those are some competition secrets I would rather not share :0)


text:
Insider: Craving Japanese?
Published: Saturday, May 25, 2013 at 7:58 a.m.
Last Modified: Saturday, May 25, 2013 at 7:58 a.m.
Maybe we can start calling Winter Haven "Little Tokyo." The Sakura Japanese Steakhouse and Sushi Bar opened Thursday at 787 Third St. SW, the fifth restaurant in the city featuring a Japanese/sushi menu. Manager Ken Zheng said Sakura can seat more than 150 people around 10 Hibachi grills, a sushi bar and just plain tables for unadventurous Americans. It's the second Sakura restaurant in the "chain," he said, with the original in Riverview two years ago. Hey, maybe we can persuade the Japanese to nickname Tokyo "Big Winter Haven."
— Kevin Bouffard
Reader comments posted to this article may be published in our print edition. All rights reserved. This copyrighted material may not be re-published without permission. Links are encouraged.


text:
Are any such things available to help me build my Android game?
closed as not constructive by Tetrad♦ Jun 21 '12 at 12:51
As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
EDIT: PSA: Keep in mind this answer was written in 2012, and 3 years later, a lot more of engines exists, and lots of them are made purely for mobile devices. Don't take this answer for granted and search google for more recent engines.
I port Irrlicht on Android and use it for 2D games. It is not the best solution but I have strong performances. I tried many Java Frameworks but the Garbage Collector can lag your games during 0.2s on G1 phone... So the framework should do allocation very carefully.
Commercial C++ frameworks:
Open Source C++ frameworks:
Java Open Source Frameworks:
Physics Engine:
Warning, with Froyo and JIT, Java libraries perform much better. But the Garbage Collector problems are always valid. With Gingerbread, the garbage collector is continous so no problem.
I am surprised that nobody mentioned libgdx. http://code.google.com/p/libgdx/
AndEngine is pretty new, but it is open source and looks promising.
I think you could use the game Replica Island from Chris Pruett as an example of a 2d game. I think it is supposed to be a base for other games as it is explained in this video from the Google I/O 2010. You could watch the game here.
Unity3D (which can technically be used to make 2D games) is "coming soon" for Android: http://unity3d.com/
cocos2d for Android is based on the iPhone cocos2d library. I'm not sure how usable it is at the moment but it's worth checking out.
Rokon looks pretty good, haven't tried it myself but it seems pretty active.
androidbox2d is the android port of Box2D. Box2D is a feature rich 2d rigid body physics engine.
There's an Android port of SDL currently underway, and SDL is probably the best 2D graphics framework out there. It was designed by one of the leads at Blizzard, so you know some real expertise in game building has gone into it.
I'm working on an open source 2d game engine called YoghurtGum which is supposed to be for both Windows Mobile and Android. However, porting the whole thing to Android C++ has proven extremely hard.
This is most unhelpful answer ever, I'm well aware.
If you fancy developing in AIR for Android then you could use Flash. Flash itself doesn't have any game specific features, really, but thanks to Flash's success on the web there are a huge amount of 3rd party libraries for it especially designed for games.
Some of the more popular 3rd party frameworks for games in Flash include Flixel (http://flixel.org/) and PushButtonEngine (http://pushbuttonengine.com/), which are fully designed for game development. Flash also has a version of Box2D (physics engine mentioned above - http://box2dflash.sourceforge.net/) and there are various 3D libraries, such as Papervision (http://code.google.com/p/papervision3d/) if you want to go down that road in the future.
The main disadvantage of developing in AIR, though, is that I'm pretty sure that you'll need to target Froyo 2.2 or later, though, so older handsets will get left out.
SIO2 Game Engine. Just released a new version with full Android Support. You can build 2D and 3D games using it and port between different platforms. http://sio2interactive.com
Cocos2D-x is a port of Cocos2D for iPhone written in C++ targeting the Android NDK and is actively being developed to achieve feature parity with the iPhone version. It won't have garbage collection issues, and you will get a relatively easy port to iOS, Win32, and probably eventually OSX in the near future.
PlayN is a multiplatform 2D game framework that targets Android in addition to HTML5, Flash and JVM. It is somewhat new, but was used to write the HTML5 implementation of Angry Birds, and has a reasonably active community.


text:
Let's say you have a single-lane road (single in this case meaning single lane in each direction, or what you could also call two-lane). Let's say you have a random number of vehicles on a given 10-mile stretch of road. The speed limit is 45 mph, but some people go faster and some go slower.
Is there any math that describes the likelihood that faster vehicles will overtake slower vehicles at "choke points" (points where oncoming traffic makes passing impossible)? (Assume a straight, flat road where safe passing is always allowed.) EDIT: Choke points are points where oncoming cars make it impossible to pass without the overtaking vehicle having to slow down and wait for the oncoming car (or cars) to pass.
Obviously, the answer has to be some kind of curve, because if there is only one vehicle on the road the probability is 0 that a choke point will be encountered, and if the road is completely filled with vehicles in both directions (or even one) the probability is 1 that a choke point will be encountered at any given time.
Sorry if this is a stupid question. But it seems like there should be a way to express this mathematically.
EDIT 2: Limiting the scope of the problem
Thanks to Mike Spivey, and I hope this helps narrow the problem so that may be in some way answerable. If not, I'll just declare defeat and retire from the field.
Let's say that we have two cars going in one direction: a slow vehicle (Vehicle A) traveling at 30mph and a faster vehicle (Vehicle B) traveling at 60mph. At the start of the problem the A is somewhere between mile 2 and mile 4 on the 10-mile road, and B is at mile 0. Additionally, there will be four oncoming vehicles randomly distributed, and these vehicles are randomly traveling at 30 or 60mph. The overtaking vehicle requires .5 miles of "clear" space to pass safely if the oncoming vehicle is traveling at 60mph, and .25 if it is traveling at 30mph.
Assume further that the car lengths do not matter, but that a "choke point" (or bottleneck, if you prefer) is not reached until B gets within .05 miles of the rear bumper of A, at which point B has to pass A or decelerate. We will call the latter condition a "deceleration event," (DE) and I would like to be able to calculate the probability that at least one DE will occur for Vehicle A along the 10-mile route.
Perhaps this clarification is still insufficient to render the problem solvable, but I appreciate anyone taking the time to consider it.


text:
12 Dec 2011 9:15 AM #1
Answered: Add icon to textfield like useClearIcon
Can I add a button or icon to an inputfield to fire an Event ? Or can I override the useClearIcon function and change the icon ?
I load a form to show some information and want to add for special textfields a more button. My textfield is read only.
for example
{ xtype: 'textfield', id: 'resultcard_textfield_etd_atd_dp', name : 'etd_atd_dp', label: 'ETD*-ATD', listeners: { afterrender: function(ele) { ele.fieldEl.dom.readOnly = true; ele.labelEl.update('ETD*-ATD'); } } }
It's all in the render tpl... look at the source for the text field
12 Dec 2011 9:26 AM #2
- Join Date
- Mar 2007
- Location
- Gainesville, FL
- Posts
- 39,166
- Vote Rating
- 1253
- Answers
- 3853
It's all in the render tpl... look at the source for the text fieldMitchell Simoens @LikelyMitch
Sencha Inc, Senior Software Engineer
Check out my GitHub, lots of nice things for Ext JS 4 and Sencha Touch 2
Think my support is good? Get more personalized support via a support subscription. https://www.sencha.com/store/
Need more help with your app? Hire Sencha Services email@example.com
Want to learn Sencha Touch 2? Check out Sencha Touch in Action that is in print!
When posting code, please use BBCode's CODE tags.
24 Dec 2012 10:04 AM #3
is there an example how this can be done.
I am able to overide the label but not the textfield or clearicon
thx in advance


text:
Maybe it's just me, but I keep mixing up As in
I've completely forgot
I haven't the faintest idea / I really don't know
are there other expressions to use them?
Note: This is not a direct answer to your request for further usage examples of the two terms in different verbs. I rather try to explain the nuance with the help of a diagram and a pair of contrasting examples for each of the verb you gave.
As you state in the question, both すっかり and さっぱり is about the completeness of something. The difference is that they deal with different kinds of completeness:
すっかり is interested in the degree, or progress regarding completeness.
さっぱり's interest, on the other hand, is how completely clean it is of something.
For example:
As for すっかり忘れた - すっかり is an adverb that simply means "completely, without leaving anything left out". Though すっかり忘れた is probably the most common usage, here are other examples: 「宿題はすっかり終わった」 "I completely finished my homework." 「すっかり春になった」 "It's completely become Spring."
As for さっぱり分からない - さっぱり is an adverb that means clean or refreshed/refreshing, and can also by extension mean "completely (not)" (hence さっぱり分からない). さっぱりした would mean basically, "to feel refreshed". Other examples are: 「風呂に入ってさっぱりする」 "I feel refreshed after entering the bath.", 「さっぱり売れない」 "I can't sell anything.", 「さっぱりと諦める」 "I've completely given up." etc. If you come across a construction such as ~はさっぱりだ. It's usually a bad connotation meaning "nothing good". 「成績はさっぱりだ」 "There's nothing good at all about my grades."


text:
It started out as doomslayer666 and battlecock telling me about this amazing game that was on Kongregate.com. I decided to check it out and I was instantly addicted. I played with doom, battlecock,dthdealer, and agozira, tankilla, abusan, gummysnacks, n4rb, oblivian113, chinablue888, supergoat, zerostarzero,icetiger1914, pwntbyagirl, hooligan1102, xDeta, anycoluor,and Janthepolish. All these great umagers played there hearts out to fight for the top spot on the leader board. Then umag gold was realesed. All stats were reset and everyone had to start over. First agozira and abusan janthepolish gummysnacks and xDeta had quit permanently. Then we had an upcoming allstar, chinablue888 she fought hard until she had became victorious above Dthdealer. Suddenly we saw no more movement of level on her account and she had began to fade from the leaderboards. Thats when I had read on her account she had died that year. Umag was still raging with gamers and full of life though. Thats when the great rivalery of Kong VS. Candy started. That went on for several months until the clans started breaking up when Dth went to candystand, and so did all the other pros. Sir Dth was finally the first to become a three star on umag. He had became the ultamite gamer. He had also said he was leaving umag later on. Then battlecock was left the leader of KONG and he had to become our next three star he worked hard until he had emerged victorious. Finally the rest of the slots on the leaderboards were setting in and everyone on there was three stars. Then Umag started to fade.. Doom quit and so did everyone else including me. Beside Battlecock and a few pros. Now the people on the leader boards are not worthy of being on there! Karson2016, then thiago, Then the greatest of them all Sir DthDealer, neogernman, gusman778, smokster, and lemure. It should be Dthdealer, battlecock, doomslayer666, ZeroStarZero, doomslayer111, and Tankilla.
I love the way umag used to be when it was full of life and everyone got along.
umag is dead and will always be………………………
[Unnamed Multiplayer Artillery Game, Open Alpha Test] In memory of UMAG.
7 posts


text:
Million Dollar QuartetTue, September 24, 2013 - 7:30 PMKennedy Center Eisenhower Theater in Washington, DC
We are sorry, the date for this event has already passed. This event took place on 9/24/2013. Click here to view upcoming events for Million Dollar Quartet.
Still unsure? Check out our user reviews for:
Have a question? Need help? Call us at 800.477.5285


text:
Hi all,
First post here and have only shot a few cityscape panos, but I'm hooked. It seems I like sunset shots from pretty extreme locations. I rented a NN5 from BorrowLenses but it came in with some pieces missing, so I had to rig it to work. I'm not sure I got a true evaluation of its stability. The shots turned out well (http://carrollmorganphoto.com/category/skylines/) but I was very concerned about the wind shake in spite of weighting down the tripod and blocking the camera with my body.
It seems like the Ultimate M1-L might be more solid, and I like the Arca Swiss mounting. I understand there is another Ultimate in the works...is that even sturdier?
I have a shoot this week, and rather than rent again I would rather purchase. I shoot Nikon D3s with 14-24 and 70-200. Is it possible to purchase something that will work by Thursday? Obviously, I need input on what to buy.
Carroll Morgan
Atlanta, GA
http://carrollmorganphoto.com (blog)


text:
Passion PitFri, November 1, 2013 - 8:00 PMHouse of Blues Atlantic City in Atlantic City, NJ
We are sorry, the date for this event has already passed. This event took place on 11/1/2013. Click here to view upcoming events for Passion Pit.
Still unsure? Check out our user reviews for:
Have a question? Need help? Call us at 800.477.5285


text:
14 Jul 2013 5:34 AM #1
anyone using coffeescript with this product ?
Any plan to officially support coffeescript with sencha ?
16 Jul 2013 4:01 AM #2
- Join Date
- Mar 2007
- Location
- Gainesville, FL
- Posts
- 39,174
- Vote Rating
- 1258
There is no plans to add such support for Ext JS 3.x, we are mainly working on bugs and supporting the new browser versions that come out.Mitchell Simoens @LikelyMitch
Sencha Inc, Senior Software Engineer
Check out my GitHub, lots of nice things for Ext JS 4 and Sencha Touch 2
Think my support is good? Get more personalized support via a support subscription. https://www.sencha.com/store/
Need more help with your app? Hire Sencha Services firstname.lastname@example.com
Want to learn Sencha Touch 2? Check out Sencha Touch in Action that is in print!
When posting code, please use BBCode's CODE tags.


text:
Barbara E. Wild, age 90, of Adrian went to be with the Lord on Friday, Nov. 15, 2013.
Funeral services will be held at 11 a.m. Friday, Nov. 22, 2013, at St. Stephen Evangelical Lutheran Church with the Rev. Brian Keller officiating. Burial will follow at Oakwood Cemetery. Visitation will take place from 4 to 8 p.m. Thursday at the Wagley Funeral Home in Adrian.
Those planning on an expression of sympathy may wish to consider a memorial to St. Stephen Evangelical Lutheran Church or the charity of their choice. Online condolences and memories may be shared at www.WagleyFuneralHome.com.
Location, ST | website.com


text:
Home > Mercedes > Mercedes Benz GL350 2013
Below you will find the high resolution car image for Mercedes Benz GL350 2013. You may use the car image for any of the following standard screen resolutions:
1600x1200 | 1400x1050 | 1280x1024 | 1280x960 | 1152x864 | 1024x768 (iPad) | 800x600 Full Car Details
Mercedes Benz GL350 2013
Mercedes GL-Class SUV received a brand new trim level this year with the introduction of the GL350 BlueTEC. As expected from Mercedes, this year's GL brings lots of improvements to the table both inside out and aims to deliver a more powerful yet efficient powertrain. Spaciousness is also one key element on which the German manufacturer focused to improve so it all seems quite promising so far.


text:
Custom Validation Schemas in Visual Studio 2005
- Posted: May 10, 2006 at 1:38PM
- 23,090 views
- 1 comment
Loading user information from Channel 9
Something went wrong getting user information from Channel 9
Loading user information from MSDN
Something went wrong getting user information from MSDN
Loading Visual Studio Achievements
Something went wrong getting the Visual Studio Achievements
Right click "Save as…"
One cool new feature available in Visual Studio 2005 is the ability to take advantage of Intellisense statement completion in the Source view of an ASP.NET Web Form. In addition, Visual Studio 2005 provides validation of your markup.
Both of these features are driven by XSD schemas that are installed with Visual Studio 2005, so you can change the schema on the fly, to test your markup for compatibility with a variety of browsers.
Thanks to Mikhail Arkhipov from the ASP.NET team, I was able to put together a demonstration of this feature, including creating and using your own custom XSD schema to drive Intellisense and validation.
In this DevNugget, .net Developer Evangelist G. Andrew Duthie (aka .net DEvHammer), shows you how you can quickly and easily create and register a custom XSD schema that allows get Intellisense and validation of your schema within the Web Form source view window.
Oops, something didn't work.
Comments have been closed since this content was published more than 30 days ago, but if you'd like to continue the conversation, please create a new thread in our Forums, or Contact Us and let us know.


text:
Not sure if there are other alternatives to Amazon SES...I have tried google but most I got are "Email Marketing or Campaign" services, but what I am trying to look for is something similar to Amazon SES, which just handles email sending...
closed as off topic by Eight Days of Malaise, phwd♦ Feb 10 '12 at 17:43
Questions on Web Applications Stack Exchange are expected to relate to web applications within the scope defined by the community. Consider editing the question or leaving comments for improvement if you believe the question can be reworded to fit within the scope. Read more about reopening questions here.If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
You have plenty of alternatives for email delivery services:
And these are just five of these services off the top of my head. All of the above services should have free accounts, so kick the tires a bit and see which you like best.
(FULL DISCLOSURE: I am the Product Manager of PostageApp. Happy to answer questions!)


text:
24 Sep 2007 11:23 AM #1
TChat application - powered by ExtJS
If you want to try it out:
Any bug, idea or comment welcome!
Here are the first screenshots...
24 Sep 2007 11:56 AM #2
24 Sep 2007 12:39 PM #3
the shots looking very nice.
I tried to join, but register dialog never accept the captcha.
24 Sep 2007 2:40 PM #4
Ive been kicking around the idea of making an irc client with Ext, glad to see someone else had a similar idea
24 Sep 2007 8:52 PM #5
This app is not IRC client. It's simple JS (simple? rotfl) and PHP5 code. It's a webchat with many plugable module. Today, only the mysql driver is reachable, but, I'll working on the Memcached version too.
I do not know, what's your problem, because, for me, it's working... Try for code 'aaa' in the development time. Could you make screenshot about this bug?
24 Sep 2007 11:28 PM #6
i made the screenshot, but it doesn't help more than saying it doesn't work for me
24 Sep 2007 11:36 PM #7
- Join Date
- Mar 2007
- Location
- Notts/Redwood City
- Posts
- 30,604
- Vote Rating
- 58
OK, I'm registering, but it doesn't return from the register Ajax call to http://chat.theba.hu/doRegister/
24 Sep 2007 11:38 PM #8
steffenk: you're in the database. You have been registered at 2007-09-24 22:01:51.
Are you sure, that 'wrong security code' is the error message on the top of the page with red background?
The another possible problem: You must turn on cookies!
BTW, I think you have mistyped your mail address, 'cos of this is in the database 'steffen@[...]'. instead of steffenk. Is it true?
I have been deleted you from the database, try it again, please!
I think, I will make 'email again' input field in the registration...
24 Sep 2007 11:44 PM #9
24 Sep 2007 11:46 PM #10


text:
Can a body be limitlessly charged? Suppose a sphere of radius $R$. Can it be charged limitlessly?
A complement to Jerry's answer:
A real body (a metallic sphere) will discharge in vacuum much earlier than at $Q$ sufficient to produce electron-positron pairs. If the body is charged negatively, the excess of electrons will be emitted due to cold emission. If the body is charged positively, the excess of positively charged nuclei will also leave the body due to strong repulsion. The barrier that holds charges together in a neutral body is overcome if the body is charged. The electric field strength on the surface should be of the order of the intra-atomic electric field $E\propto e^2/a_0^2$ or even less. So my estimation is $Q_{max}<e\frac{R^2}{a_0^2}.$
Factually it is the same mechanism as a discharge due to ionization of the air - the ions are always present in the body.
Any inhomogeneity of the surface will essentially decrease the maximum $Q$.
If it is in air (or any other substance), there is a limit where the electric field of the object is going to be enough to ionize the surrounding medium, and the resulting current will drain the object of its charge.
Similarly, if the object is immersed in vacuum, you will eventually have an electric field sufficient to "polarize the vacuum" by creating electron-positron pairs that will do the same thing. So a spherical object will definitely have a maximum charge that it can hold.


text:
GENESEO, N.Y. - The "Fountain of Youth" will be the Geneseo Wind Ensemble's theme when it performs a joint concert with the college's Jazz Ensemble April 23 at 8 p.m. in Wadsworth Auditorium on campus. The concert is free and open to the public.
The Wind Ensemble will be conducted by James Walker, distinguished service professor of music. Student conductors Jesses Kinne and Louis Lohraseb also will participate in the concert. The group will feature works such as the Overture for Band by Felix Mendelssohn, written when the composer was 14; the Finale to the Symphony No. 1 in E-flat by Camille Saint Saens, written when he was 16; and the premiere of James Walker's L'Homme Armé march based on an early cantus firmus from the Renaissance.
The Monday Night Jazz Ensemble, with guest conductor Jonathan Kruger, will feature music in the Big Band Style, featuring works by some of America's top jazz ensemble composers.
For more information on the concert, call 585-245-5824.
Media Contact:
David Irwin
Media Relations Manager
(585) 245-5516


text:
NY man hopes to make world's fastest pizza
By the AP
Not a subscriber? You can purchase a single-day subscription for only $0.75 to read this and access all of our content and our E-Edition. CLICK HERE purchase a single day subscription.
Become an electronic subscriber to the Republican-American for only $8 a month. CLICK HERE.


text:
This is an example code http://verycreative.info/fb_example.php The share window in the iframe worked fine for some time now, just today when I looked it didn't display anything.
Some browsers display this message(IE,Opera)
"The website does not permit its content to be displayed in a frame. It must be displayed in a separate window.
Could facebook changed its policy on this over night?
The url is correct, I tried it in a new window and displays ok. Does anybody had the same issue and if so is there a solution?
PS:I'm using iframe because I need to enable this functionality on multiple domains. Also tried on multiple browsers, same thing.