text:
Saturday, December 27, 2008
Fighting the leftist nominalists every step of the way
In this post, my co-blogger Zippy Catholic suggested that the re-definition of "parent" by the U.S. Census Bureau (to make illegitimacy rates in the black community appear lower than they really are) is an example of nominalism. One commentator questioned this diagnosis, arguing that someone could believe that there really is an essence to being a parent but that traditional definitions don't cut it. Naturally, this led directly to a discussion of homosexual pretend "marriage."
I'm more than a bit worried about what is going to happen to all of my good Christian friends if and when homosexual "marriage" is put into place (with or without the will of the people) in their parts of the country. It seems to me not implausible that some of them will simply start referring to same-sex couples as "married," to the partners in such so-called "marriages" as each others' "husbands" or "spouses" or "wives" and excuse doing so by saying, "Well, no matter what you think, it really is the law that they are married." They might even think in some confused way that they, even in private conversation, are obligated to "obey the law" by using this terminology. In fact, I suspect that any employer in such a state or any businessman who sells any goods or services to the public and refuses to go along in conversation with the "marital" status of a homosexual employee or customer will face lawsuit. And the comments of this hard-core leftist commentator suggest that conservatives will be told exactly this: "Shut up. Homosexual marriage is now a legal fact. That is what you are being asked to acknowledge. Whatever you may think about the matter, you cannot deny the legal facts now in place. Just refer to those and keep the rest of your opinions to yourself." (Notice, among other things, his reference to "refusing to accept a plain legal fact.") (See also this story about the ostensibly Christian Condoleeza Rice, though some might well question whether Rice is a conservative in any sense worth mentioning. The homosexual pair did not even have any pretense of legal "marriage," but Rice went out of her way to call the one man's mother the other man's "mother-in-law" nonetheless.)
Whether or not arguments about the homosexual agenda usually involve nominalism, that argument (about our using the word in this way because "now that's true legally") is nominalism pure and simple. The idea is that a positive law can simply create a legal reality regarding marriage--however crazy that new "reality" is--and that we can and should now refer to this new reality in our own usage, regardless of "what we think," as though the fact that a man literally cannot be married to another man is a mere matter of opinion. This is all very bad indeed.
I say that all conservatives, Christian and otherwise, who know perfectly well that two men or two women literally cannot be married must resist this usage to their last gasp. Fight it every step of the way. Do not give in to this specious argument about a legal reality. In using this terminology without some qualifier such as "so-called" or scare quotes, you are, whether you like it or not, both caving in to and furthering the homosexual agenda and the erosion of marriage. Just say no.
It's hard to know what arguments would convince a conservative friend who says he's "just referring to the legal facts." Perhaps you could try a few reductios: If the courts or the legislature were to declare that Barack Obama is a god, would we then be merely referring to a legal reality and doing nothing objectionable and contrary to our Christian faith if we went about saying, "Our god, Barack Obama"? If the courts declared that a man could be legally married to a dog, would we not be promoting insanity if we went about referring to his dog as his husband? If the courts declared that a gorilla is a person, would we then merely be referring to a legal reality and doing nothing to further an anti-human agenda if we spoke of "gorillas and other people"?
But I don't know. People get scared. And people adapt with frightening swiftness. I predict, but hope I'm wrong, that when homosexual "marriage" comes to your town, you will find a solid majority of your conservative, Christian friends going about referring to the people involved as "spouses" or "husbands" or "wives" and telling you, "There is nothing I can do about it. Whatever we may think, it's the law now. I'm just telling the truth about their legal status."
But I stand with Jeff. And I hope some others do, too, and never, never, never give in.
P.S. I am not interested in debating "same-sex marriage" here. This is my personal blog, and I'm more draconian here than elsewhere. I welcome comments on the specific issue raised in this post but have no intention of debating the larger issues with homosexual or homosexual-sympathizing commentators. I would love to hear from my conservative readers as to what they think, predict, and intend to do about the terminological matter I raise here.
36 comments:
Good post. I enjoyed reading it. I often write about similar things on my own blog.
I agree with you that terminology is important. They never will be married and the language we use should reflect that.
When referring to people who are gay I usually refer to them as people with a "same sex attraction" as opposed to the term "homosexual". I see the word "homosexual" as meaning people who take part in homosexual acts while people with "same sex attraction" merely experience an internal desire. The internal desire is a disorder which needs to be treated and controlled. Homosexual acts are choices that people make to their own destruction.
As a teacher at the college level in a public, state and federally-funded institution, what would yous suggest I do?
- Lydia McGrew said...
Thanks, S.H. I have wondered myself whether I am caving in somehow by using the word "homosexual" as though it defined the person. I've excused myself in doing so by the fact that we do occasionally in other contexts use a term for a person that describes his disordered desires: e.g., "alcoholic" or "kleptomaniac." But it does worry me a bit as to whether I've already moved in the wrong direction.
Bill, I would say that as a college professor, even at a publically funded school, you can probably avoid the worst of the storm. There are all those pesky notions like tenure and academic freedom that may protect you. Plus you aren't dealing with minors as your students. If two students, Joe and Jim, think they are "married," and if Joe drops off Jim's paper for him at your office when Jim is sick, and if you have to talk about this, you can just refer to them as "Joe" and "Jim." They may try various ways in conversation to pressure you into agreeing with them in calling each other "husbands" or "spouses," but you can refuse to be drawn. I suppose a real witch-hunting chairman or a student looking for a grievance might try to manufacture one out of your refusal to go along with the fiction, but he probably can't get very far.
The type of person in a far more difficult position would be a K-12 public school teacher. In those grades the push to incorporate the agenda right into the curriculum is going to be very strong, and academic freedom is pretty much non-existent. If the principal tells Mrs. Jones, the kindergarten teacher, to send students home with a "diversity bag" containing the charming little book _Who's in the Family_ (about two men who live together with the little girl who is the daughter of one of the men), or to read the new Fairy Tale "King and King," Mrs. Jones may lose her job if she refuses. Even more difficult will be situations where little Johnny insists that he has two daddies and that they are married to each other. Kids can be very insistent and very quick to pick up hesitation, and if Mrs. Jones lets slip the fact that she does _not_ think that he has two daddies who are married to each other, the axe will probably fall. Moreover, the two men will probably legally both have to be (or demand to be) treated as parents, even if only one of them has adopted the child, as far as matters like parent-teacher conferences, permission for going on field trips and for shots, and the like.
Medical personnel will face these same issues, and in medical contexts concerning a child the pressure to refer to both men as "your father" will be almost unbearable and the situations in which it comes up very difficult to avoid.
You're relatively lucky to be "only" a professor at a public college, Bill! :-)
I'm a teacher myself. If it was a one off lesson I would probably gloss over the topic quickly set it aside and forget about it. If it was a larger unit of work I would introduce both sides of the issue and then set tasks focussing on persuasive writing. That way at least they hear the truth and I get away with it because the topic becomes how to write an argument using "families" as the topic.
With uni students I would go along with what ever they wanted to be called and then go about my business quietly dismantling the "gay" agenda in stealth. Sometimes you need to wear the enemies uniform to go undetected. You can't publicly oppose the homosexual agenda at your work place and still keep your job.
- Lydia McGrew said...
I can't agree with you, S.H. As you said in your first post, "They will never be married and the language we use should reflect that." It's a serious form of giving in to say, "Okay, these guys want me to refer to the other guy as 'your husband', so I'll call them whatever they want to be called." That's really furthering their agenda. If it costs you your job not actively to further their agenda in that way, then that's just a sign of what's wrong with the world. But I do think it's a matter of integrity for a person who knows better--a conservative person--not to say shibboleth in that way.
To me, almost the only question on which I'm still not fully decided is whether it's legitimate to keep silence. Though the maxim is that silence gives consent, I'm not sure that's always true, depending on other social signals one sends. If some guy looks you right in the eye and refers to some other guy as "my husband" or "my spouse," I'm currently inclined to think that if you turn the subject aside completely or refer to the other guy simply by his name or as "your friend," you are sending a message, and not all that subtly, either: "I won't be pressured into calling this guy your husband." In face-to-face contexts, such signals are pretty easy to pick up. But I have to say that I really admired Jeff in the thread I linked for speaking up outright and saying, "He isn't your husband."
You raise some good points there. In my own mind I am not convinced either way what a correct response should be.
Is there an objectively correct moral response? I don't know.
I suspect it has to do with the individuals personality. Some would be happy to be confrontational while others would not.
I don't think we should ever be silent when evil is occurring but we should be prudent in how we go about speaking up.
Evil prospers when good men do nothing.
- Lydia McGrew said...
I'm convinced that it is objectively morally wrong for a person who knows that two men cannot be married to refer to them as married, as spouses, etc. But as I've pointed out, it is in most cases possible not to be confrontational while also refusing actively to endorse their vicious fantasy. Of course, they will be working to try to close even that loophole. But I'm especially speaking against the idea of "calling them whatever they want to be called" or "calling them whatever the law says they are," because that really is endorsing their agenda. There are lots of ways to try at a minimum to find other ways to refer to them--by just their names, for example. Even in working with a child, one could say "Mr. A" and "Mr. B" rather than saying, "Your father" and "your other father" if neither man were really the child's father.
The way around it is to just use first names like you said. People usually refer to each other by their name rather than their relationship to each other.
- The Social Pathologist said...
In my dealings with these type of people, I have always referred to the other party as "their partner".
A very strict Catholic would probably think that remarried divorcees, adulterers and couples "living in sin" are persons to whom spousal titles do not apply. The push for "homosexual marriage" does not really create any new situation except exposing "civil union" for the absurdity that it is.
- Lydia McGrew said...
I think I should respond to your point about other couples, SP. Of the three types of couples you name, only remarried divorcees claim, themselves, to be married. A young man and woman who are living together will say, "We're living together" and will refer to the other partner as "my boyfriend." Part of the whole point of the relationship is that they _don't_ want to be married. This fact even causes tension between them, if the woman wants to get married and the man doesn't. They aren't being unmarried and trying to make you say that they are married.
The same is true of an adulterer. He might divorce his wife for the girlfriend, but until he does, the wife is the wife and the girlfriend is the girlfriend, and he and everybody else knows it, and nobody is trying to sue you for refusing to treat the girlfriend as his wife!
There might be exceptions to this in certain cultural contexts. I have heard that in some black inner-city situations, a woman will refer to each of a series of live-in boyfriends as "my husband." But here it's important to note that the person talking to her might not know that the person is not really her husband. It is at least metaphysically possible that he should be. It would be the kind of fiction you would find out about only with additional data. Whereas if some male refers to another male as his "husband," you know right up front that this is not true and not even possible.
A similar point applies to remarried divorcees. From a Catholic perspective, the first marriage _might_ not have been valid, and there are plenty of Catholic remarried divorcees who got their first marriage annulled. Therefore, a Catholic who speaks to a person who is divorced and remarried a) may not in the initial contact even know that this wife is not the person's first wife, and b) if he learns about the early divorce, cannot be certain that the first marriage was valid.
Some Protestants believe that there can be valid grounds for divorce, so, similarly, a Protestant who learns that he is talking to a divorced and remarried person can often not be sure that he is talking to a person who is not validly married.
None of this applies in any degree to homosexual pairs, who _cannot_ be married, period, under any circumstances whatsoever. When they put their relationship in your face and ask you to refer to it by the terminology of marriage, you can know beyond a shadow of a doubt that they are asking you to participate in a vicious fiction.
(I can, by the way, think of one case of divorce and "remarriage" where I believe that I know enough of the circumstances in enough detail that I would in all likelihood refuse to refer to the present partners as married. But no one is asking me to do so. And people dealing in simple business relationships with the couple will likely not have my detailed knowledge.)
...there are plenty of Catholic remarried divorcees...
There's no such thing, unless "divorcee" refers to the civil severance. If the first "marriage" was anulled, there was none to begin with (supposedly - people tend to justify their behavior and marriage tribunals are notoriously lax). But I take your meaning, and your dissection of the comparison is, as so often, "elegant".
I'd quibble somewhat with SP's "homosexual marriage" does not really create any new situation except exposing "civil union" for the absurdity that it is.
Isn't 'civil union' a term invented specifically for the convenience of homosexuals who wish to see their faux unions legally and morally normalized? Perhaps it was around before; I just don't remember it. In any case, of the examples given, all at the very least mimic the form of true marriage by virtue of their sexual complementarity, while, as you say, the homosexual variety cannot claim even that much.
- Lydia McGrew said...
The only people I've ever heard advocating "civil unions for everyone" are pro-homosexual activists who think that this abolition of the term "marriage" altogether would be some sort of weird compromise with the conservatives. I've never heard of any heterosexual couple getting a "civil union," and the whole concept of "civil union" was certainly invented, at least here in the U.S., as marriage lite for homosexuals. It softened up the culture and was the camel's nose in the tent. It gave them all the legal status of being "married" without riling the natives too soon by using the name. In fact, one of the most notorious cases involving child custody where a lesbian mother converted to Christianity and repented, fled her state with her daughter (who really was biologically her daughter) and is after a long battle being court ordered to allow her former lesbian lover to visit the child (to whom that other woman is not related in any way), arose from a civil union in Vermont.
I did mean the civil divorce, Bill. My understanding is that annulment tribunals actually require a civil divorce before they will grant an annulment.
My understanding is that annulment tribunals actually require a civil divorce before they will grant an annulment.
Apparently this is correct in the USA.
- The Social Pathologist said...
For the record, I want to point out that:
1)I agree that homosexuals can't marry.
2)Agreeing to use the terms, husband or wife, with regard to homosexuals is wrong.
But I want to play Devil's advocate, and please remember that I do not intend any disrespect to anyone in the following comments.
Now from a Catholic's perspective, does he also acquiesce to a moral fiction when he refers to a validly remarried--from a Protestant perspective--couple, as husband and wife? It would appear that he is.
Some Protestants believe that there can be valid grounds for divorce
And some Protestants--and some Catholics for that matter--think that there are valid grounds for gay marriage.
Where do we draw the line?
Homosexual marriage is clearly beyond the pale, as it adds sexual perversion to metaphysical falsehood, but metaphysically the union is just as invalid as a union of divorcees. So is the dividing line sexual perversion? Is any type of union OK provided it does not involve sexual perversion? If a Muslim husband comes to see me with two "wives" how do I refer to them? In practice, my respect for their religious beliefs would lead me to refer to the parties with their spousal titles, but am I practicing a fraud? Which religions do I show respect to and which do I not?
From my perspective, the rot starts with the acceptance of divorce, something our society has been doing for years. Homosexual acts are bad morals, but divorce is bad metaphysics. Gay marriage is what happens when newly established bad morals combine with traditionally accepted bad metaphysics. We have been undermining marriage for years.
As for civil unions, they cannot be marriages since they are devoid of a metaphysical dimension. Likewise a civil union has no limit on whom it can co-join, expect more of that sort of rubbish in the future.
Finally after having worked with so many troubled couples I would just like to make the following comments People are stupid, and you would be surprised how many people marry for the wrong reason and without what I would consider "free consent". I'd be a bit more liberal on the annulments but a lot harder on the divorces.
- Lydia McGrew said...
SP, I'm not sure if I was completely clear, so let me try to clarify. Suppose that you had the following principle: Never refer to anyone as married if you know beyond all shadow of a doubt that the person is metaphysically speaking not married.
I say that in a very large number of cases you could refer even to people who are civilly divorced and civilly remarried as married, because given your own Catholic principles you could not know for sure that their first marriages had been valid nor that their second marriages were invalid. Hence *for all you knew for sure*, they might indeed be married, metaphysically speaking. You could just give the situation the benefit of the doubt and refer to the couple as married.
But this is not even remotely possible in the case of the homosexual pair, because there you know from the start that it is literally impossible for them to be married. You don't have to know details about the validity of this marriage or that to know that these two men cannot be married. There is no doubt, so you can't give them the benefit of it.
This isn't a matter of "drawing a line." You could follow the above principle with absolute consistency.
That would mean that you couldn't refer to both of the Muslim man's "wives" as his wives, no scare quotes. Such is life.
But it wouldn't be a matter of just drawing some sort of arbitrary line and participating in some falsehoods but not in others.
On the whole I don't see much to argue with, although I suspect, based on this - but metaphysically the union is just as invalid as a union of divorcees - that you haven't quite accepted Lydia's distinction that parallels between homosexual unions and even defective heterosexual ones are not valid. Even polygamy enjoys the sexual complementarity that I think any definition of marriage must start with. I don't think the dividing line ought to be sexual perversion, because even heterosexuals can indulge it. It is true that when society approves a form of marriage, it approves also the sexual relations to follow, and that when the Massachussetts Supreme Court set its imprimatur on homosexual marriage, it also gave such approval to a sexual perversion that most people find revolting. But that's a consequence, not a cause. First they had to ignore the importance of gender to the health and good order of society.
You seem to want to locate the cause in divorce. I haven't actually thought about it that way before. I've always tended to place the blame for the rather sudden increase in the divorce rate over the past thirty (forty?) years on the widespread acceptance of sterile sex via contraception. When the morality of its use first became debatable in Catholic circles, Anscombe's prophetic caution was that "you might as well accept any sexual goings-on if you accepted contraceptive intercourse." That, in other words, if intentionally sterile sex is morally permissible, on what grounds might we claim to have any purpose for sex that homosexuals don't? And now we find ourselves in the astounding situation that homosexual 'marriage' is a respectable subject for debate. Yet even with the virtually unanimous acceptance of sterile sex in our society, a vast majority still sees the homosexual variety as abnormal and not worthy of legal or moral recognition, and this can only be attributed to that absolutely necessary first condition of a real marriage: male and female.
On the other hand, the increasing acceptance of divorce over time may have paved the way for the contraceptive culture. I don't know. I can certainly see how the transient nature of so many relationships today might incline one toward leniency in defining what a real relationship is. But your worry over whether to refer to the Muslim man's spouses both as 'wives' is more a matter of delicacy than of division between true and false unions. Lydia would not so refer. Ordinary mortals like you and me might in order to avoid giving offense on a personal level, while at the same time fighting to see that our society never approves such a union. But the bigamist Muslim's marriage is a defective variation on the real thing, while the homosexual kind is (to use your word) 'metaphysically' of a different sort altogther.
You would have an ally in Zippy, btw, who once described divorce as "evil, iniquitous, wicked, diabolical," etc. He didn't have much good to say about it.
- Lydia McGrew said...
I chiefly see myself as pushing in the discussion with SP the epistemic point. Heterosexual couples who have been civilly divorced and remarried may, from the Catholic perspective, really be married. Epistemically, even the strictest Catholic cannot absolutely rule out that possibility unless he knows circumstances and details (the kind a conscientious annulment tribunal would consider) which one normally doesn't know about people one meets casually or professionally and even not about some of one's friends. One may think it probable that the couple is not truly married, but one can't be sure. So there is the possibility for the Catholic of giving the heterosexual, civilly married, couple the benefit of the doubt. There is no such epistemic doubt in the case of a homosexual pair.
- Pearl said...
Thank you for these thoughts. They are very interesting; as are the comments. It is so refreshing to read people who are not afraid to just come out and say that they do not believe in same-sex "marriage" or even civil unions. The effort to normalize same-sex attraction (thank you for that distinction, Secular Heretic) began during the Hippie era and has steadily gained steam through media, language, culture, and now politics. I find this push for "equal" vocabulary very transparent. Gay rights activist do not wish for equality; they want complete and total acceptance of their lifestyle. And what better way to achieve that than to acquire the same language assigned to heterosexual marriage, thus making it politically incorrect to call it anything else?
Thank you. You have inspired me to renewed determination. I absolutely appreciate your dedication to upholding the truth of traditional marriage and family, no matter the personal sacrifice. History, whether ancient or modern, shows that the righteous will always be persecuted by the wicked; though the same is not true in reverse. I think we'll just have to dig in our heels and prepare for the long haul, supporting each other along the way as livelihoods are threatened and jobs are lost. United we will succeed, divided we will fail.
It is true that my thinking has been largely similar to SP's on the matter, at least to the extent of seeing (roughly) contraception as the camel's nose in the tent, divorce and cohabitation as its body, and homosexual 'marriage' as its, um, hindquarters. (And as we know, once the hindquarters are in the tent there is no end to the, um, stuff which will get spread around).
Lydia's distinction is something that hadn't occurred to me before she first said it in a combox a while back, though, and I think it is obviously valid. That doesn't in any way excuse the intentional sterility and divorce of heterosexuals, mind you. But it is true that some things are metaphysically impossible as a public matter to even the most casual observer, whereas other things are not. A 'marriage' of two men is one of those things which is metaphysically impossible as a public matter to all observers; 'remarriage' of two divorced people and use of contraception within marriage are not publicly manifest to all observers in this same way.
- Lydia McGrew said...
Thanks, Pearl. I'm one of the lucky ones. I don't run a business, and my husband has the job out in the big, bad world. So in a sense, it's easy for me to talk. But talking has its value, too. And the liberals are on to something when they are so fanatical about terminology. They know that winning on the speech front is winning more than half the battle.
Re. Zippy's comment, I'm glad if the distinction is useful. It seems to me that it has obvious practical implications as far as what one can accurately be said to be endorsing when one acts and speaks in society. The perspective that one is being _arbitrary_ to refuse to refer to homosexuals as "married" if one, e.g., also believes that there is no such thing as true divorce but does not inquire into the divorce status of heterosexual couples and consequently refuse to refer to them as married, is one that will be used mercilessly by the homosexual lobby to argue that their agenda is "no big deal" in the present context. On W4 Step2 has tried to argue that anyone who objects to endorsing homosexual "marriage" by selling his services for the "wedding" (e.g., a photographer) is being inconsistent and arbitrary if he doesn't also ask every heterosexual couple who tries to hire him questions about their intentions re. contraception, etc., after marriage. (He has also tried to argue that adoption, all adoption, is just as "unnatural" and "fictional" as homosexual "marriage"--meant to be an argument for homosexual "marriage," of course, not against adoption.)
- pomegranate apple said...
Thank you so much for this post. I go back and forth. I try to refer to civil unions even as same-sex couples. If I use the word marriage I put it in quotations. But after reading your post and your friends post--I don't think its right to normalize the situation even in quotations.
Thank you!
- Lydia McGrew said...
Thanks, Pomegranate. As you can see in the main post, sometimes I do put the word "marriage" in scare quotes. I think that sometimes that is actually a way of registering protest, and sometimes one needs to use the word in scare quotes in the course of talking about what one is opposing. Certainly, you could get yourself in trouble that way in PC contexts, which probably means it's a legitimate way to register protest. But of course if there are ways around even that in some given contexts, so much the better.
- Jeff Culbreath said...
Thank you for this post, Lydia. Great discussion too. As to how far one should stick his neck out over this, professionally, I think that's a difficult question. Is one obligated to risk losing his livelihood? I think probably not in most cases - though I can't help but wish some people would, for conscience's sake, in order to rally the troops.
There is one sense in which drawing the line here is "arbitrary", in that we've already accepted other compromises. The way I see it, I'm drawing my line here because this is where the present skirmish is happening: it's a strategic act. We've got to win this one before we can even dream about rolling back other compromises.
- The Social Pathologist said...
But this is not even remotely possible in the case of the homosexual pair, because there you know from the start that it is literally impossible for them to be married.
The impossibility really depends on your metaphysics and theology. The impossibility is more conceptual than practical.Let's say that a religion developed a theology of homosexual marriage, with supporting metaphysical arguments. Homosexual marriage then becomes possible. It's only impossible if your religious beliefs think it so. Do we therefore accept such a religion out of respect for religious tolerance?
Suppose that you had the following principle: Never refer to anyone as married if you know beyond all shadow of a doubt that the person is metaphysically speaking not married.
Good idea, but it wouldn't work in real life and would cause more problems than you think. It would also probably contribute to bigotry amongst Christians. In my line of work you get to know people quite intimately, the "not sure and therefore presume" proposition does not really work. I know plenty of good Anglicans and Orthodox who have remarried, and I imagine I'd cause offence in refusing to refer to their partners with their appropriate spousal titles. I could see more trouble arising from this position that what it is worth.
Till fairly recently, men may have disagreed on the metaphysical dimension of marriage but there was common agreement that marriage, in its instantiated form, involved a union of man and woman.
I will still refer to the remarried spouse of an Anglican as husband or wife, because I am religiously tolerant. I can accept the fact that people can legitimately disagree on nature of the metaphysical conception of marriage. What I am intolerant of, is disagreements with regard to the physical nature of marriage.
The issue here is not really of theology, epistemology or metaphysics. It's an issue of intolerance, of where one draws the line. The line is drawn at a prudential point, and in that sense it's arbitrary. A strict Catholic may draw the line at divorce, a Muslim may draw the line at five wives, but as Conservatives the line has to be drawn at a point at which we can all agree and which would have been consistent with our traditions. Our tradition and Our God teaches that marriage is the union of man and woman. That has to be positively asserted by Conservatives.
Practically this means that one can't be conservative and approve of non-heterosexual marriage. A person who approves of gay marriage is immediately excluded from the fold, whatever their other credentials. Furthermore we must be intolerant of homosexual unions and express that intolerance in a way that is prudentially applicable. Not referring to the partners in such a situation with spousal titles seems most appropriate, come what may.
Happy New Year to all.
- Lydia McGrew said...
I certainly think that Jeff Culbreath is on to something when he talks about "where the present skirmish is happening."
As far as sticking one's neck out, I'm naturally not actually all about sticking my neck out (appearances to the contrary notwithstanding). And I definitely think men with families to support have to think twice and three times before being quixotic. Where I would be inclined to draw an important line is between just keeping one's head down and not being confrontational, on the one hand (which seems perfectly legitimate), and giving in to outright demands that one get with the program, on the other hand. When I imagine an employer saying, "Wiggins, you will either refer to that man as that other man's husband, or you will not be working here anymore," it sounds to my ear like a call to battle, like just the place where Wiggins has to dig his heels in. But this does reflect *in part* my own stubbornness of personality and instinctive response to bullying of any kind.
SP, you ended up somewhere different from where I expected you to go when I read the beginning of the comment. I'm of course heartily with you on being intolerant of homosexual "marriage." I think your distinction between physics and metaphysics is an interesting one, but it's not at all clear to me that you can separate those two sharply in this context. I mean, obviously, the homosexual activists think that the physical facts don't matter to right and wrong or to marriage. From their perspective the function of a thing doesn't _tell_ you anything. A particular use of the body is just its function in the sense that it happens to work that way if you want to use it that way. I don't think something at least akin to metaphysics can be entirely avoided here. I certainly think that the natural light casts light on this subject, light which the homosexual activists refuse to see. But I think that light shows us something about metaphysics by way of the physical facts. If not, then the physical facts are just brute facts and get us nowhere.
- Lydia McGrew said...
And happy New Year to y'all, too!
- The Social Pathologist said...
A particular use of the body is just its function in the sense that it happens to work that way if you want to use it that way.
Ah, the thorny issue of final causes. One of the problems with final cause type of arguments, is the major disagreements that invariably arise on what a thing is for. Both sides usually have pretty reasonable arguments for their case. Ultimately the issue of final causes is settled by asking the instantiator what the thing is for, since final cause is obviously dependent on the intentionality of the creator.
I mean imagine that we have found some sort of object on the ground, and we ask ourselves, what's this thing for? We may find many practical uses for the thing and infer the purpose of the object from its practical application, but until we ask the designer, we cannot be sure of what thing purpose is.
That's why I tend to be more a "Divine Command" sort of guy. As Woody Allen once said, "God said it, I believe it and that settles it." My objection to gay marriage is not that it is irrational, rather that it's Divinely prohibited.
The homosexuals recognise this as well; they don't attack the logic classes in universities, they attack the Religions. Even a very broad but objective reading of the bible, will pretty much convince the average reasonable man that God isn't too keen on homosexuality. Those who think otherwise are deceiving themselves.The Bible reveals to us the intention of the designer so to speak, so their can be no quibble with the sexual act's form.
As for sticking One's neck out, sometimes a man's gotta do what a man's gotta do.
- Lydia McGrew said...
I certainly agree that the final cause of the body is _causally_ dependent on the intent of the Creator. I don't agree that one cannot _discover_ the proper function of a part of the body without _believing_ in the Creator.
My problem with Divine Command is that it is at bottom just a kind of fideism: a rejection of the natural law specifically and of the validity of reason more generally. Furthermore, it does not at all solve the problem of disagreement: it just attempts to relegate it to some other place, so that substantive disagreements can be treated as matters of mere opinion or personal preference.
Ironically enough, as a matter of authority, rejection of the natural law and of the validity of reason are not options for faithful Catholics.
- Lydia McGrew said...
Zippy is spot-on that Divine command theory merely backs up the epistemic problem to "how do we know what commands are given by God."
I think, too, that it raises certain issues of culpability. For example, I want to say that people are culpable for, say, burning children with cigarettes, even though the Bible never addresses this specific issue. I would say that if someone says, "I don't believe in the Bible," he is still culpable for engaging in homosexual acts, and that _not_ because if he really examined all the evidence he would accept that the Bible conveys correctly the commands of God against homosexual acts but rather because he ought to be able to see by the natural light that these acts are wrong. Romans 1 more or less teaches as much.
- The Social Pathologist said...
I don't agree that one cannot _discover_ the proper function of a part of the body without _believing_ in the Creator.
That's not what I'm saying. One can find the proper use of a thing through reason alone, the problem is proving to others its final cause.
Suppose A and B find a tool on the ground. After studying the tool, A precedes to use it one way, B another. Both have vehement arguments about the use of the tool, but are successfully able to use the tool in the way in which they have envisaged. How do we determine what is the correct use of the tool? I don't see any way out of this conundrum without an appeal to C, the designer of the tool.
C then pronounces that A has been using the tool correctly. C then asks A how he was able to determine the correct use of the tool. A replied that he was able to infer its function through the use of reason and empirical data. B is quite perplexed, since he used reason and empirical data and came to the wrong conclusion.
Reason has enabled us to come to both the right and wrong determination as to the things final cause.(assuming good faith)
This sort of stuff happens all the time in science, where the same data is interpreted differently.
Now, no scientist when faced with this conundrum says reason is invalid, rather one of the interpretations is wrong, one is right: reason has lead to the correct conclusion in one instance. What I'm trying to say is that we can through reason determine what a thing is for, but we cannot demonstrably prove it.
I get the feeling that propositions regarding final causes, may be similar to the category of propositions in mathematics which Kurt Godel showed were true but unprovable.
(I'm about to get stuck into a book about this subject and so may be wrong)
Furthermore, why invoke Church authority if reason is manifestly self-evident? Not all the people who disagree with me are doing so in bad faith. It would appear that reason needs to be "guided" in order avoid reaching the wrong conclusion, otherwise why invoke Church Authority? The schisms of Christianity are based on different interpretations of the same text. All parties claiming to have truth on their side. Who can demonstrably be proven right?
Also, I think it was St Thomas who said, that there are limits to what we can know about God with unaided reason, and that in order to know more about God and his intentions he needs to reveal it to us. Belief in these essentially unprovable statements requires faith; this is not Fideism, it just a recognition of the limits of sense data and rationality: some things may only be settled on faith alone.
the epistemic problem to "how do we know what commands are given by God."
The commands are non-contradictory within themselves and they are congruent with reason and empirical data. St Thomas says as much.
- Lydia McGrew said...
I would be willing to bet dollars to donuts that St. Thomas was _not_ referring to anything like the wrongness of homosexual acts when he talks about the need for revelation rather than pure reason. Stuff like the Trinity, sure, we require revelation to know. (Though I would add that the determination of when something purporting to be a revelation from God really is a revelation from God must itself be determined by evidence. But that's a discussion for another day, probably.) Basic ethical matters don't require revelation to know, and I doubt that Thomas would have said that they do.
I think what you're saying, SP, is that reason _underdetermines_ the correct answers to these questions. That may be true in some cases (though I have my doubts, especially if we're to be held morally culpable for doing the wrong thing). I don't think it's true in the case of the wrongness of homosexual acts.
I would be willing to bet dollars to donuts that St. Thomas was _not_ referring to anything like the wrongness of homosexual acts when he talks about the need for revelation rather than pure reason.
I would too. Reason may be aided by grace, but such private gifts of the Spirit do not amount to a public revelation of what all must believe.
- The Social Pathologist said...
I would be willing to bet dollars to donuts that St. Thomas was _not_ referring to anything like the wrongness of homosexual acts when he talks about the need for revelation rather than pure reason.
I think he did. Perhaps not revelation, but grace, reason is not enough. Moral corruption is indeed a wicked thing.
(The essay is a treasure of good stuff, it's worth the read)
- Lydia McGrew said...
SP, it's a long essay, and it was a bit difficult for me to find the part that I think you have in mind. Having found it (the quotation about "not without divine assistance") at the end, I disagree with an interpretation of it that takes it to support divine command theory or to imply that man cannot know that homosexual acts are wrong by the natural light. I think that Thomas (and Jay Budz) are referring to the inclination of mankind to rationalize his wrong acts. Divine assistance is required to help us to act in accordance with right reason rather than perverting our own minds by rationalizations of those acts we know to be wrong. None of this impugns the sufficiency of the natural light for seeing that homosexuality is unnatural.
It helps a lot for people to have a Christian background to keep them on the right path, because the heart of man is evil. Divine command theory, however, is still false.
- The Social Pathologist said...
None of this impugns the sufficiency of the natural light for seeing that homosexuality is unnatural.
Well, I think once the corruption has set in, one can't see the natural light. The wicked do not rationalise like the just. I'm afraid I'm going to have to disagree with you on the matter. (In a polite way)


text:
Follow RFF News on your cell phone. Text follow rff to 40404 you will receive txt messages with RFF News
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Amanda: Yeah, well first of all we missed the flights. In Russia apparently it takes three hours to go through customs and we weren't expecting that. We had an hour-and-a-half gap to go through customs and we thought that would be plenty of time, and it wasn't. However as you noticed we weren't the only team to make that mistake. Everyone except for three teams missed the flight. So that was the first thing that put us behind. Kris: When we were in Transylvania we were at the airport and there was tons of different flights to choose from, and it was kinda our job to pick and choose which flight we wanted, and we decided to connect through Frankfurt because we thought it was kind of a busier airport. We thought we'd get through it a lot quicker and not get held up, but it turns out that we didn't time the timing in Russia right, so it put us in the back of the pack. Reality TV World: You said that the delay on the flight was caused by customs? Amanda: Yes. Kris: Yeah, in Russia. Reality TV World: Did you even come close to making the connecting flight out of Moscow? Kris: Well we were sitting in this little waiting room for hours on end just looking at our clocks, because we were there an hour-and-a-half before our flight was supposed to leave so we thought we were gonna be okay. It just ended up taking a really long time. And we ended up seeing all the other teams there and we were all bummed out, we were like "Oh gosh, this sucks we kinda got screwed." Reality TV World: How far behind that first 5:40AM arrival flight was the one that you and the other four teams ended up flying on? Kris: It was about four hours difference. Amanda: Yeah, three or four hours difference. We knew that the three teams would be the first ones were in good shape.
Reality TV World: Do you know how far behind [Mark and Michael Munoz] you finished? Kris: Like 10 minutes. Amanda: Yeah, the production said 10 minutes.
Congradulations on the 500th, Neobie. As usual, your analysis is spot on!!!!
It's time to discover how teams are going to get from Delhi Airport to those camels. In a separate post I presented the choice of Jaisalmer and Bikaner as the major camel centers in India. That does not mean that camels could not have been staged anywhere in India that has sand (quite a bit), but it is logical to expect that either Jaisalmer or Bikaner was chosen. So how do you get there from Delhi. It is going to take a while since neither place is large enough to warrant an airport. They are the end of separate major train lines, but will take a while to reach there.So let's start out of Delhi and see how we do. We can take a through train from Delhi all the way to Jaisalmer:dep. Delhi main train station 1740 arrive Jaisalmer 1100 (total time of 17 1/4 hours).You can take a train from Delhi to Jodhpur , dep. 2045 arr. 0800, and then switch to a train from Jodhpur to Bikaner dep. 1005 1600 (total time of 19 1/4 hours).Or you can take the daily nonstop flight from Delhi to Jodhpur DEL JDH 1210 1330 and switch to a train to get to Bikaner dep. 1345 arr. 2120 (total time of 9 hours) or to Jaisalmer dep. 1520 arr. 0940 (total time of 21.5 hours).Those are the major options. There are flights that get into Jodhpur slightly earlier if you leave a lot earlier, but why bother? You can't get to Jodhpur or Jaisalmer any faster.Now, the arrival into Delhi flying from Novosibirsk, Moscow and Almaty is at 2115. That means that both evening trains to Jodhpur are missed. That makes it likely that teams would fly from Delhi to Jodphpur as shown above.To get from Jodhpur to Phuket, here is the basic combination(there are several variants of it):9W3312 JDH DEL 1405 1535TG316 DEL BKK 0005+1 0535+1TG203 Bkk HKT 0730+1 0850+1
Fly to "the Pink City" in India!
Thanks for the love! So... Krasnoyarsk was a 20 to 24 hour Pit Stop? At the train station, Mel/Mike talk about Mark/Michael using up all their money "yesterday", so Krasnoyarsk probably didn't get extended by more than a day.Can anyone find the correct train this episode? Even when I look at old schedules (the schedule just changed the day before our train) there doesn't seem to be a train departing at 10.26pm. There's a 011U (2336-1238) though. I'm also seeing other trains leaving throughout the day - what's up with that?Quote from: CBS PreviewFly to "the Pink City" in India!Sounds like Jaipur's the first (and probably only) stop in India, huh? Haven't seen any night shots yet, so I'd say the entire leg takes place on the 13th? That would give us an extended Pit Stop in Novosibirsk that we should look out for, presumably because it's difficult to get Phil ahead otherwise...I think it'd be a pretty straight-forward route if teams leave on the 12th after a 36h Pit Stop. Expect complete bunching.SU1440 to Moscow SVO: 1055-1210, or any earlier flightsSU533 to Delhi: 1620-00509W709 to Jaipur: 0545-0630, or the other flights Apskip also has
15/novBangkok- phuketthai airwaysflight TG203- 0730
The flight which T/V and Mel/Mike were on is supposed to be:Quote15/novBangkok- phuketthai airwaysflight TG203- 0730perhaps the time from the source is not correct?
On November 13(we don't know that for sure but I believe it is correct)
Page created in 0.149 seconds with 32 queries.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
What's New
Orotund Font by Canada Type
Orotund is a digitization and considerable expansion of the cheeky and enormously popular 1970s/1980s film type called Eight Ball.
Round and happy like a bouncy ball, these are letters after a signmaker's own heart. Seen everywhere in its film version, from bingo and pool hall parlor signs to comic books, now this computer version opens the door for the happy roundness to be used on a much larger scale by anyone who designs layouts on a computer.
Orotund is great for a variety of applications, including signage, rubber stamps, poster design, titling, cartoons, comics, and pretty much anything where happy and round fit in.
Tags: 1960s, 1970s, Font, Fun, Groovy, Wacky


text:
PIC-WEB-BOX is a board that adds additional features over the design of the popular Olimex PIC-WEB board. PIC-WEB-BOX adds a protective plastic cover and a microSD card connector. The included microSD card provides enough memory space for almost any web content.
The board comes pre-installed with a custom bootloader. The bootloader allows programming via a web interface. You also can use a PIC-compatible programmer/debugger to upload programs to the board (you'd have to open the box to get access to the mini-ICSP connector).
The front side of the box exposes an RS232 DB9F serial port interface, an Ethernet RJ45 interface, and LEDs. The back side exposes the power jack and three expansion interfaces: one 2×7-pin male box header, one 20-pin female single-row socket, and one UEXT connector. Please see the UEXT Boards Category for a full list of peripheral modules that can plug into the UEXT port. The PIC-WEB-BOX's firmware lets you control UART and I2C devices via the internet, e.g. relays, sensors, LCDs, etc.


text:
Fabulous Quality Designer Scottish Jewellery. Height: 36mm (1.4″) Width: 13mm (0.5″) Chain length: 45.7cm (18″)
- Sterling silver with additional Cairn TM "Rhodium" tarnish resistance treatment so your product will remain bright and fresh and you won't have to spend time doing the tedious job of cleaning and polishing.
Dedicated jewellery presentation box included. Delivered fast from stock.
Cairn stands behind its products with an unconditional manufacturer's defect full one year guarantee by repairing or replacing any product with no cost to the customer. With its unique style and quality, Charles Rennie Mackintosh Jewellery by Cairn celebrates natural form today as in days gone by. The leaders in their field, it is this legacy that has inspired Cairn's gorgeous range of fine sterling silver and gold jewellery.


text:
The high school football season kicked off on Aug. 17 with seven teams and it�s now down to three.
The high school football season kicked off on Aug. 17 with seven teams and it�s now down to three.
Ayden-Grifton, Jones Senior and Kinston � three that played for their respective state titles a season ago � are the only teams left standing. Parrott Academy�s season ended prematurely last week in the first round of the NCISAA 8-man playoffs. Greene Central, North Lenoir and South Lenoir also had their seasons end last week, each one with a loss.
Since the seasons for those four teams are over, I will offer their grades for 2012 based their performances against expectations.
Grade: C
One word could sum up the Patriots� season: inconsistent. Early on they were a handful of conversions and PATs away from being unbeaten at 4-0. Then, when it looked as if Parrott was about to turn the corner, it dropped four of its last five games with only one being close (a 52-40 loss at Southampton Academy in Virginia). Seniors Andrew Davenport and Nate Staskelunas had big years offensively, but an ankle injury hampered Davenport in the final two games of the season.
Grade: D+
Rams coach Ken Grantham knew his team would be good and it kicked off the season with a dramatic come-from-behind win against North Lenoir. But the Rams didn�t win again. Youth was the name of the game for Greene Central this season, with 19 juniors listed on the opening night roster a year removed from graduating a dozen seniors. Still, Grantham expected his team to win more than one game.
Grade: C-
The Hawks had Greene Central beat but lost. They had Clayton Cleveland beat but lost. They also had C.B. Aycock beat but lost. They did, however, finally get a conference victory after going nearly six years in between league wins. But the high of that win couldn�t help them at Eastern Wayne, where they ended the season with a thud. Coach Calvin Sutton now has a base with which to work with. I�d expect next season to be about finishing the task at hand.
Grade: C
First-year coach Tim Jenkins� only expectation for this season was for his players to give it their all, and for the most part they did. Turnovers really plagued the Blue Devils this season, and it�s something I�m sure Jenkins will address for next season.
Sports Editor Ryan Herman is in his fifth season covering local high school football. Reach him at 252-559-1073 or firstname.lastname@example.com. Follow him on Twitter: @KFPSports.


text:
Indiana Distributor to Represent Italian Supplier of Custom Rollforming Equipment
There are 0 comments | Post a comment
Tuesday, February 1, 2011
S Tech, LLC, Chesterton, IN, has been named the exclusive distributor in the United States and Canada for Gasparini S.p.A., Mirano, Italy. Gasparini manufactures custom rollforming and fabricating lines equipped for punching, drilling, folding, welding, cutting and packaging. It's also been named the exclusive distributor in North America for Cemsa S.p.A., Milano, Italy, a manufacturer of resistance-welding machines and automation systems.
See also: S Tech LLC
Related Enterprise Zones: Other Processes
Reader Comments
There are no comments posted at this time.


text:
Follow RFF News on your cell phone. Text follow rff to 40404 you will receive txt messages with RFF News
0 Members and 6 Guests are viewing this topic.
Actually, I thought it was blatantly obvious that they didn't win with all their fighting cancer campaigns for Jaymes's dad. It was like common sense and I did not dare to voice my concerns for fear that their many many fans will flame me for being negative and saying that their favourite team will not win.I mean, if you win a million dollars already, would you be asking for me?
Page created in 0.121 seconds with 32 queries.


text:
It takes 90 players to fill a training camp roster.
The Chargers grew a few names closer Monday.
Wide receiver Deon Butler and cornerback Cornelius Brown signed a one-year contract while wide receiver Dan DePalma inked a two-year deal. They'll compete for Week 1 roster spots, a process that begins Tuesday when they're expected to join the team's ongoing voluntary workout program.
To watch the trio's 2012 game film is a quick review.
Butler ran one route in seven snaps, and that is the extent of last year's regular-season experience from the group. All were cut Aug. 31 after the preseason and took a different road back to the NFL.
From his Seahawks release, Butler trained until he rejoined them in December. Seattle is the only club the 5-foot-10, 182-pound veteran has previously known, as it drafted him in the 2009 third round out of Penn State.
Butler, 27, has 57 career receptions for 611 yards and four touchdowns. He started eight of 13 games in 2010 when setting career highs with 36 catches for 385 yards and the four scores.
From his Bears release, Brown didn't catch on elsewhere. The 5-foot-11 corner was tabling interest from the CFL before the Chargers called. He reunites with GM Tom Telesco after playing 10 games for the Colts in 2010, logging 16 tackles with three passes defensed and five kickoff returns for 102 yards. Brown is 25.
From his Giants release, DePalma went unsigned before spending the final six weeks of the season on their practice squad. He spent all of 2011 there following his career at West Chester, a Division II school in Pennsylvania. Last month, DePalma worked out before NFL scouts at Temple's pro day and had a separate workout for the Eagles.
Yet to appear in an NFL game, DePalma, 23, has one year remaining in practice squad eligibility. At 5-foot-11 and 192 pounds, he is considered capable of returning kickoffs and punts.
The three new Chargers haven't missed much.
San Diego just began the second week of offseason workouts. A voluntary minicamp runs from April 16 to 18.


text:
Roadster Harness
Roadster Harness
Sign In or Create Account to rate.
- Vegan, up-cycled rubber innertubes
- Fits up to 60" hips (152cm)
- Converts from jock to g-string style
- Naturally anti-bacterial
- Handmade in the USA
Stretch the bounds of your sensual imagination with the Roadster Harness by Cherry Bombin'! Expertly crafted from recycled and re-purposed bicycle inner tubes, this unique strap-on harness is fully adjustable, easily converting from a one strap g-string style harness to a two-strap jock-strap style and back again! The thigh straps are attached to loops that slide into different positions on the waist strap, accommodating a wide range of body sizes and shapes. The metal hardware is highly durable, and the snap-front ring loops anchor the included O-ring securely, holding your dildo firmly in place during use. Use the snaps to easily swap different sized O-rings to accommodate dildos of all sizes! (Additional rings sold separately.) As sexy as it is sturdy, the Roadster lets you harness the power of earth-conscious erotic play.
Roadster Harness
Re-purposed Rubber and metal hardware
Metal D-rings on waist and thigh straps
Fits up to 60" hips (152cm)
Adjustable thigh straps
Convertible between two-strap and g-string style strap-on harness
Note: metal hardware is NOT nickel-free
Please refer to our Returns Policy for this item.
Body-safe -- Sex toys are made from many different materials, with varying amounts of information available about them, and many have not been tested for safety. We always choose better-quality items, and we give special attention to those we know to be safer.
Animal product-free -- You might be surprised at how many products contain animal products. You can be sure that items that earn this leaf aren't made with any.
Recyclable Packaging -- When the package your toy comes in can be recycled, you can reduce the impact of your purchase on the environment.
Made in the USA -- Many sex toy and products are produced overseas. Choosing one that's manufactured and assembled in the United States reduces shipping and has a lower carbon footprint.
Learn about our Ecorotic® Rating Criteria.
Brand: Cherry Bombin Wear
Product Details
Color: Black
Style: Two-Strap OR G-string
Dimensions: up to 60"
- Made in USA
- Waterproof
- Vegan
- double compatible
Reviews & RatingsRate and Review It
Customer Reviews
I have only used leather harnesses in the past but wanted to try something different and one that would be easier to clean.
The rubber doesn't pull on my skin like I thought it might and it has 4 o-ring stabilizers which means I have a lot of control over my dildo, which is always important.
It is a bit difficult to size quickly b/c the rubber is grippy and sticks to the D-rings where you pull to tighten the harness. However, the leg straps come with clasps that you can unhook from the waist which makes it easier once you've got those sized just the way you want them; no need to loosen them up to take it off, just unhook it!
I'm super happy with this harness and probably won't go back to leather again.
Sign In or Create Account to save favorites.
You have reached the favorite limit. You will need to delete some to save favorites.


text:
0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.
Unsworth off to Oxford
Funes mori getting 45 mins. Going off recent history hes close to returning to action then.
Get him in with mangala.Be a laugh that.
Police Academy level stuff that
Haha.I actually like Mori me. Maybe a bit blind to his faults though. Out of the centre halves we have, I'd say he's probably one of the better ones.
Page created in 0.054 seconds with 26 queries.


text:
My first summer job was working at a Little Caesar's in Torrington, CT. Here's a quick pro-tip for all you college kids out there who need a way to pay for beer next semester: NEVER take a restaurant job where cheese is highly prevalent. Pizza, Mexican food, some artisanal fondue joint, etc. I had to spend hours scraping cheese off of pans and blasting doughy mixer parts with a steaming sink sprayer. By the end of the night, my hands looked like they had been submerged in formaldehyde for eight hours. So do not work with cheese. There are better ways to build character.
A while back, we asked you to submit your own summer job horror stories. Here now are a few choice examples:
At 16, I worked at a grocery store. It was a little neighborhood store for rich moms. One of the managers was a bizarre, mostly dirty 30-year-old who seemed more like a 45-year-old, had yellow teeth, and was insanely crass. A hero to all of us.
One day I was down in the basement running out the clock on my shift while pretending to count or stack boxes or something. The manager comes walking by to use the only restroom in the building, which had only one toilet in it. There is no way he sees me, as I'm buried in the dark recesses behind endless stacks of boxes. But I see him moving purposefully towards the bathroom. I didn't think anything of it until 30 seconds later, when I heard him scream from the bathroom, "God, my dick is huge!" There is no fucking way he knew anyone was in that basement. He was oblivious. He just saw his dick, said that, and went on with his day. I laughed for the next two months straight, at which point I quit my job and went to work at Panera.
I worked at a country club in a suburb of Buffalo, NY, and Paul Maguire (he of the punting and broadcasting fame) was a club member. I first became aware of Mr. Maguire's presence in the summer of 2000 when I was working as a dishwasher in the kitchen, and from time to time I could hear his drunken directives and putdowns being slurred from the bar, which was right next to the kitchen doors. On multiple occasions, young female waitstaff would walk into the kitchen with tears in their eyes after having a brief encounter with Mr. Maguire; the one direct quote I can still remember him barking out one day was, "Honey, where is my GODDAMNED GRILLED CHEESE?!?!?"
The following summer, I was working at the same country club, but as a member of the grounds crew, and one day Maguire—as part of a foursome that included Tom Flores—was playing a round while I was weedwhacking around a bunker, and I noticed that balls were being hit incredibly close to me. I shut off the weedwhacker and watched as another ball came out of the sky towards me and was able to move before it hit me. "Awww ya missed him too!!!" I could hear one of the players yell as the whole foursome laughed. I went on to some other holes and a little later I saw a ball veer off course and end up in some brush. This being common I waited for the player to approach so I could tell him where to locate his ball, but it turned out to be Maguire. He walked up and asked if I'd seen his ball, to which I lied and told him that I hadn't. "Well then fucking help me find it!" he ordered, so he started rooting around one area and i went to where I had seen his ball drop and stood on top of the ball. He came by and asked, "Any luck?" to which I said, "No, sir, I'm sorry." "Then what fucking good are you?!?!?" he retorted and walked back to his posse.
The point of the story is that Paul Maguire is an asshole. That's what I learned on my summer break.
This was not our regular summer job, but something we had the pleasure of doing a few times each summer while working for the city as a student.
Our small town was on a pretty big river. As with any town with a nice waterfront, there were parks all along the river. One of the parks was close to a couple small islands. On two of these small islands was a seagull hatchery. Home to not just any old seagull population, but thousands of these screaming beasts. The problem is these shit-hawks would torment the visitors of the parks. Our job was to go out to the island and control the population by picking up their eggs, placing them in a big garbage bag, and then getting these bags to the local dump.
It was a gruesome experience.
The island was small. There are thousands of angry seagulls who are not impressed with you abducting and murdering their unborn. Thousands of angry seagulls make lots and lots of earsplitting noise, squawking and screeching. They also like to divebomb your head as vengeance for you taking their eggs. Add in the putrid smell of the shit and stench of seagulls, and you have a recipe for a horrible day. To protect our bodies from the shit raining down upon us by thousands of angry gulls, our small crew wore complete yellow rain suits. Did I mention this these excursions took place in the early months of summer? Meaning it was warm out. Maybe not stifling hot, but when you are wearing a rubber suit with the sun beating down on you, you tend to sweat... quite a bit.
Add to this the joy of being stranded on this island. The only way on and off the island was by boat. There was no dock, so we would get dropped off on the shore and watch our only link out of the hell hole float away, leaving eight students and 5,000 seagulls to do battle.
Topping off the day was the inevitable situation where you would bend over to pick up an egg (gulls nest on the ground—who knew?), avoiding the flying shit and dive-bombing adults, only to have the egg explode in your hand. If you were lucky, it was a rotten egg, and you'd be left dealing with the stench wafting up to your nose. Unlucky, and you were holding a partially formed gull fetus in your hands, resulting in vomiting by the lucky lad who was left holding the remnants of a baby dump duck.
The only way to describe the job was as a total assault on your senses. You saw dead birds and fetuses, were deafened by the shrieks of the birds, gagged at the smell of rotten eggs and gull stench. got splattered with gull shit, felt a gull fetus, and has your taste buds ruined as the stink got imbedded in your sinuses. At the end of the day, all you could do is go home and sleep, hoping to forget the atrocities you experienced that day. It was like a real live scene from The Birds—only worse.
To this day, I despise seagulls and will kill them on sight.
I worked retail at a regional sporting-goods chain after my senior year of high school to get some extra money before college. As an entry-level position, I was responsible for selling shoes. The store I worked for never carried top-of-the-line products, either: It was mostly cheap knock-offs or prior season models (three to four years later. I was never taught how to sell shoes, so I used whatever clichés I saw as a customer: "How does it feel? Lift your big toe. Good. Now, walk to the end. Does your heel come up?" I wasn't paid commission, so I didn't care if people bought anything. I would disappear into the bowels of the store and "look" for shoes for 10 minutes. I would emerge as an ancient explorer searching in vain for the Fountain of Youth. "Sorry. We're all out of your size. Want to try them in brown?"
We were also responsible for roaming the store and helping any customer that needed help. The expectation was that we could help each customer with our vast expanse of all sporting goods. Someone asked me why one pair of roller blades was more expensive. My response: "The quality of the ball bearings."
I constantly made shit up. "These L.A. Gear shoes have great flex support." "This Wilson racket is stretched to a pressure of 25 psi to give optimal bounce." Most of the things I said were just regurgitations of what was printed on the packaging, which I stole a peek at as the person asked me about the product. I only worked night shifts (5-10) and every night I sat in the parking lot before my shift and tried to pump myself up to quit. I just couldn't. The job was so boring I didn't even have the passion to quit it.
One evening, John Madden and his wife came in. It was about 15 minutes before closing and the store was empty. Madden's wife was busy buying fishing equipment while he wandered aimlessly through the store. He was staring at the football cleats (most of which were the molded rubber kind). I asked him if needed help with anything. He said no in the quietest way imaginable with a subtle shake of his head. Even John Madden's booming personality was no match for the soulless vacuum of mid-level sports-equipment retail.
I had a job one summer that has still not been beaten for sheer tedium. I was working for a utility company, which used summer students to take care of all the appalling jobs they didn't want to pay actual skilled employees to do. So, I dug ditches, flagged cars, copied new gas lines onto the main maps (surprisingly dull!), and all kinds of horrible grunt work. It was terrible, but mundane terrible. But then the company topped itself.
A law was passed making it illegal to staple fliers to telephone poles, since they made climbing them hazardous for service folks. So, the company sent out a crew of us to pull staples from telephone poles. Eight hours a day, with just a screwdriver. The same repetitive motion over and over. The screwdriver would periodically slip and I'd scape my knuckles on the pole, giving me a lovely collection of tiny splinters all over my hand by the end of the day. At night, I'd close my eyes, and then I could feel my arm making the staple-pulling motion. Just horrifying.
I spent my teenage summers working as a staffer at Boy Scout camp, usually in the Nature Area where the disruptive kids would never jack around too much because they knew we could put snakes in their sleeping bags. For several years, our council hosted "Sheriff's Camp" for underprivileged urban kids. They weren't Scouts; most had never camped before, and in fact I would be surprised if any of them had seen more than three trees all together at one time. Significant numbers of them also had disciplinary issues, and so the staffers had to be wary at all times, because we were never sure who might be ready to cause problems.
There are numerous stories I could tell about these weeks, but the worst probably revolves around the bathroom situation. These kids were sleeping in our standard two-man canvas tents. The campsites were cleared, but were back in the woods, and there was no plumbing at the sites except for water faucets. The campsite latrines were two-holers with metal seats in a shelter, open to the air, and cold showers. We had hot water in the staff area, but that's only because we were out there for six to eight weeks at a time. Primitive, yes, but this was summer camp, and what kid cares if he has to shit and shower outside?
The one accessible "modern" latrine was the central showers. It was a big building near the center of the camp with hot water and flushing toilets. At the end of every week, staff members had to clean it to get ready for the next week of campers. In previous years, we had problems with the Sheriff's Camp kids not wanting to use their campsite latrines, but the central showers gave them a chance to avoid that. So this Saturday morning, after the kids had piled back into their buses to go home, we were taking care of our end-of-week jobs before we got Saturday night off, and the camp director came to every area and told us all to report to the dining hall. We all got detailed to go help out at the central showers to get them cleaned, which was odd, because four or five people could usually take care of that.
Turned out that late the previous night, a big group of the kids had decided that they wanted to wreck shit up as much as they could. And when I say "wreck shit up," perhaps I should say "wreck the camp up with their shit." The entire central shower building, top to bottom, men's and women's, looked like it had been the scene of the largest monkey-cage shit-flinging rampage in history. There were piles of turds overflowing all the toilets, sinks, and urinals. The walls were smeared with vile brown streaks like finger paints. The floors were coated with filth; giant splatters of feces were all over the roof where they had been hurled; even the shower stalls had piles of shit in them. The drains were clogged with streaked t-shirts they used to wipe. We couldn't get within ten yards of the place without gagging. The only way to get inside was to cover our noses and mouths with bandanas soaked in the unfortunate bottle of Polo cologne that one of our staffers had in his trunk.
Eight hours, 10 gallons of bleach, and a hastily rented pressure washer later, and we couldn't get the building presentable again. The director had to hire an emergency contractor to come out and sanitize the place. We had a bonfire to rid ourselves of the clothes we ruined trying to clean that quagmire of poop.
Needless to say, there was no Sheriff's Camp the next year.
Drew Magary writes for Deadspin. He's also a correspondent for GQ. Follow him on Twitter@drewmagary and email him at email@example.com. You can also order Drew's book,Someone Could Get Hurt, through his homepage.
Illustration by Tara Jacoby.
The Concourse is Deadspin's home for culture/food/whatever coverage. Follow us on Twitter:@DSconcourse.


text:
Do you wish to continue?
Dining out to a new restaurant is always a gamble. Am I going to have a good time? Is the food any good? How does this restaurant rate? Before you base your choice on the menu plastered outside of the restaurant window or from someone you just met off the street, here are some simple tips to guide your stomach to the best restaurants.
The yearly Toronto International Film Festival (September) that used to be held in Yorkville, has gradually transformed this neighbourhood into the trendiest places in town. Wine and dine in style as cuisine ranges from bistro to sushi or hang out at trendy cafes, perfect for celebrity-spotting. Shop like the stars at Chanel, Prada, Louis Vuitton, Versace or Gucci. Enjoy a luxurious lifestyle for a bit or for longer if you can afford it.
Do you wish to continue?


text:
Yale Game Notes | Bryant Game Notes
Yale Statistics | Bryant Statistics
Live Stats | Audio | Video
Yale Basketball On Twitter | Yale Basketball On Facebook
Yale Begins Four-Game Home Stretch On Wednesday
NEW HAVEN, Conn. - Yale returns to the friendly confines of John J. Lee Amphitheater after completing a four-game road swing. The Bulldogs concluded a four-game road swing at Furman on Nov. 27 and will now play four straight home games, beginning with Wednesday night's contest against Bryant. The women's game tips at 5 p.m., with the men's contest against Bryant to follow.
The Bulldogs fell at Furman, 66-61, last time out. Yale rallied from an eight-point deficit to close within a point in the final minute, but the Paladins scored four straight to hold on for the win. Sarah Halejian led the way with 19 points and also had four steals. Janna Graf added 12 points to move to 932 points for her career.
Halejian was named Ivy League Player of the Week on Monday and leads the Bulldogs in scoring at 14.3 points per game. Meredith Boardman is grabbing a team-high 7.9 rebounds per game.
Scouting The Opponent
All-Time Series Record: Yale leads, 2-1, in series dating to 2008-09.
Yale won last season's meeting at Bryant, 78-65.
Mary Burke is in her 23rd year at the helm of the Bulldogs having led the team's transition to Division I and winning over 300 games. Bryant was tabbed 7th in the Northeast Conference Preseason Poll and Ankoma-Mensa was a unanimous pick to the preseason team.
The Bulldogs snapped a four-game skid with a win over New Hampshire on Sunday. Bryant shot 49.0 percent from the field and 46.7 from the arc. Jenniqua Bailey led three Bulldogs in double-figures with 17 points and added eight assists.
Jenniqua Bailey leads the team with 13.2 ppg, while Naana Ankoma-Mensa adds 12.3 ppg and 10.0 rebounds.
What To Watch For
Controlling The Glass: Both teams have enjoyed rebounding advantages over their opponents this season. Yale enters the game with a +2.4 margin in rebounding, while Bryant has posted a +8.8 margin over opponents. In their three wins the Elis have posted a +7.3 margin on the glass, while in four losses the rebounding margin has been a -1.2.
Contest Shots: Bryant has shot 42.6 percent from the field as a team to start the season and has been even better from three-point range where they rank 11th nationally at 41.3 percent. In its losses, Bryant has not shot better than its season average from the field.
Create Turnovers: In its three wins Yale has forced over 18 turnovers per game. Bryant ranks near the bottom of all teams in Division I with a -6.5 turnover margin and have committed at least 20 turnovers in each of its last two games.
Next Up
Yale continues its homestand with a contest against Army on Saturday, Dec. 7. Tip is set for 2:00 p.m.
Head coach Dave Magarity entered the season with a 121-89 mark in seven seasons at Army. He ranks third all-time in wins at West Point and is just 12 shy of all the all-time record.
The Black Knights were picked second in the preseason Patriot League poll. Kelsey Minato, one of four returning starters, was named to the Preseason All-Patriot League team. Army posted a 22-9 record last season and advanced to the WNIT, where it fell to Fordham in the first round.
filed by Jeff Mead, Yale Sports Publicity


text:
Wochenblatt der Union (Galveston, Tex.), Vol. 8, No. 35, Ed. 1 Sunday, June 24, 1866
Description: Weekly German newspaper from Galveston, Texas that includes local, state and national news along with advertising.
Date: June 24, 1866
Item Type: Refine your search to only Newspaper
Partner: The Dolph Briscoe Center for American History


text:
Or: A long list of one user's great expectations when installing an android app on his handset.
Evaluating Apps on the G1
In the first 72 hours of getting my android handset, I installed over 60 applications. I uninstalled about 12. I tried to identify expectation gaps while evaluating apps, and I spun those gaps into personal "proverbs" (perhaps guidelines is a better word), which I list here.
I have yet to find an application which didn't function at its core. I always wonder why people make terse comments like "doesn't work" on the market… In all cases, I uninstalled an application for one of three reasons below.
- The user interface is awkward, cluttered, annoying, or frustrating.
- The application itself runs slowly.
- The application is too aggressive in self-promotion.
Where two applications provided similar functionality, I kept the application which most closely matched my expectations.


text:
Residents on Hemlock Way in Broomfield were on alert Saturday night as police tried to negotiate with an uncooperative man they believed had a weapon.
The man, 46-year-old Arthur Hopping was arrested around midnight, after police obtained an arrest warrant and a search warrant for his house in the 100 block of Hemlock Way, according to Broomfield Sgt. Steve Griebel.
The arrest brought to an end a chain of events set in motion hours earlier, when police first received a request for a welfare check at the home, after Hopping sent unsettling text messages to his estranged wife and his mother, Griebel said. When officers arrived at the house, Hopping was uncooperative.
Officers left, but were back about an hour later after a neighbor reported gunshots at the home, Griebel said. Again, Hopping was uncooperative and would not come out of the home. Because a weapon was believed to have been discharged, the SWAT team was called out around 6:25 p.m., Griebel said.
For several hours, police tried to connect with Hopping, and he finally surrendered without incident when the warrants were issued shortly before midnight, Griebel said.
After the SWAT team was called, officers went door to door to notify neighbors of the situation, and those who live on the street and were trying to return home were prevented from doing so, Griebel said.
Hopping was arrested and taken to the Broomfield County jail. Possible charges will likely will be based on the gunshot or gunshots he fired, but there could be more depending on what detectives determine on Monday, Griebel said.
No one else was in the home at which Hopping was arrested and no one was hurt, Griebel said.


text:
BENET Family Tree and BENET Genealogy Records
Last updated: 2010-04-12 | Researchers: 0 | Journals: 0
YES, I am a BENET researcher
Register yourself as a BENET researcher
Register yourself as a BENET researcher
What is this? This section (in blue) is available for editing to our advanced members, in a Wiki style. If you would like access to edit this surname page wiki, please contact us.
BENET Family History and BENET Family Genealogy Journals
Sort by: Newest | Alphabetical
There are no user journals for BENET. Be the first to contribute to this surname: Create a journal


text:
Possible Duplicate:
Why Does the Transaction Log Keep Growing or Run Out of Space?
I am having trouble with my database, the log files is currently 250GB in size, I need to shrink this down somehow.
I have tried backing up the transactional log files, performing a full backup, running various shrink scripts but to no avail.
What are the correct steps to make this happen?
Can I somehow just truncate the whole log file then perform a full backup?
Thank You, Paul


text:
Art In City 1, Damyang, Gallery
1 2 3 4 5 6
Please send me a message using the form on the right.
thank you!
123 Street Avenue, City Town, 99999
(123) 555-6789
You can set your address, phone number, email and site description in the settings tab.
Link to read me page with more information.


text:
What's this action game Square Enix is teasing for next week, then?
Square Enix is going to announce a new game next week. Ooh, I hope it's a mobile fantasy MMO, don't you?
Tgs headlines
What it's really like to go to the Tokyo Game Show
The Tokyo Game Show is a dream come true. Maybe the one with the screaming walls.
Yoshida says there will be "No Surprises" at TGS from Sony: The Last Guardian is skipping again
The Last Guardian won't be showing during a Sony press conference at TGS, nor will Monster Hunter make its triumphant return to the Playstation as Shuhei Yoshida, the President of Sony's Worldwide Studios has tweeted the company has "no" surprises in store for TGS on Twitter.
Sony releases a new trailer showing PlayStation hardware line-up
Sony has released a new trailer taking a look at all its Playstation hardware, including PS4, PS Vita and the newly announced PS Vita TV. Watch it after the jump.
Macross 30 debut trailer is suitably strange
Namco Bandai's newly-announced Macross game has gotten a trailer. The title, which is a 30th anniversary addition to the series, was recently revealed at the Tokyo Games Show.
Nintendo pre-TGS event whispers sees stock rise
A report coming out of Japan this morning is claiming that Nintendo is set to hold a pre-Tokyo Game Show event.
CESA: Tokyo Game Show won't be canceled, but could be downsized
Tokyo Game Show organiser CESA has said it has no intention of cancelling this year's event, but has admitted it could be downsized.
Tokyo Game Show 2011 detailed
Details of this year's Tokyo Game Show have been released, and it looks to be a whopper. A couple of entirely new areas, a business summit, and a pretty delightful theme suggest we'll be like kittens in candy land come September.
TGS 2011 formally dated
Organisers of Tokyo Game Show, CESA, have announced dates for next year's event.
TGS 2010 branding revealed
E3 is only two-and-a-half weeks away, and Cologne maybe starting to get into full gear for gamescom and GDC Europe in August, but it's all about Tokyo, obviously.
"GAME time" theme announced for TGS 2008
According to this press release, the theme for this year's Tokyo Game Show is, "Ready for GAME Time!" The show will run from October 9-12 at the Makuhari Messe. New stuff for this year includes: 1) New exhibition areas to ensure full coverage of all form of entertainment, 2) improved environment for doing business and […]
Tgs latest
What's this action game Square Enix is teasing for next week, then?
Yoshida says there will be "No Surprises" at TGS from Sony: The Last Guardian is skipping again
Sony releases a new trailer showing PlayStation hardware line-up
CESA: Tokyo Game Show won't be canceled, but could be downsized


text:
Interested in Language
Dear teachers,
Would you mind checking this short letter for errors?
The intent is to know or ask the prices of equipment for measuring the flow of gases.
To whom it may concern
I would very much appreciate if you sent me the prices of 3 gas flow meters described in the leaflet attached as TG 05, TG 1 and TG 3.
Thank you for your attention
So, does it read well? I actually don't know how to start and end a letter like this. In my opinion I should be a bit more polite, include an introduction or something.
Thank you very much.
Dear Sir/Madam
Please send me the prices of the three gas flow meters described in the leaflet attached - TG05, TG1 and TG3.
Thank you.
[Your name]
You certainly don't need a personal introduction. This is a standard business-type letter. You are not trying to make friends with the recipient.
Remember - if you don't use correct capitalisation, punctuation and spacing, anything you write will be incorrect.


text:
There are a number of opinions about the benefits of juicing. I'm not a dietician so I don't want to provide a point of view on the various pros and cons. However, what is basic fact is that fruits and vegetables are a great source of vitamins, minerals and antioxidants. And, according to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the majority of us aren't eating enough of them. Juicing is simply one way to get more fruits and vegetables into your diet. It's also a way to mix together certain less appetizing fruits and vegetables with those you do like to create flavorful and healthy combinations. What is missing from juicing is fiber, since the pulp is removed when the juice extracted. So, including fiber elsewhere in your diet is also important. That can come from adding back some of the pulp to your juice, using the pulping in other recipes, or eating additional whole fruits and vegetables.
As I put together these three simple recipes, I used the USDA's National Nutrient Database to get an estimate of the nutritional content of these juice combinations. Each recipe yields about 16 ounces of juice, which could be two servings. The nutritional information I've shared is for the full 16 ounces, so if you are limiting yourself to one serving, divide these numbers in half. Also, these numbers are based on the whole fruit or vegetable, not just the juice, since the database doesn't provide information in that form. As a result, these numbers are somwhate higher than what they should be for the juice alone. I've provided a link to the database as well. Should you have quesitons about other fruits and vegetables, you can get search for that information.
As you can see from the numbers below, the fruit based juice combinations are high in sugars. If you have any health issues, like diabetes, be sure to consult with a professional before getting into juicing.
The Salad Bowl
yields about 16 ounces, 1-2 servings
1 cu Spinach
4 Brussels Sprouts
3 Plum Tomatoes
1 Celery Stalk
1/2 Seedless Cucumber
1 lg Carrot
1/2 Lemon, peeled
1/2" piece Fresh Ginger, skin removed
Combine all ingredients in the juice extractor and blend
Nutritional Estimate for 16 ounces*: Calories: 305 ; Protein: 8.41g ; Carbs: 35.18g; Dietary Fiber: 10.7g; Sugars: 15.79g; Calcium: 175mg; Vitamin C: 126.5mg
Cranapple Pear Blast
yields about 16 ounces, 1-2 servings
1 Apple, with skin and seeds
1 cu Fresh Cranberries
1 Pear, peeled and sliced, discard core
1 lg Carrot
1/2 Naval Orange, peeled
Combine all ingredients in the juice extractor and blend
Nutritional Estimate for 16 ounces*: Calories: 463; Protein: 3.74g; Carbs: 102.49g; Dietary Fiber: 22.2g; Sugars: 64.94g; Calcium: 126mg; Vitamin C: 120.4mg
Tropical Fruit Punch
yields about 16 ounces, 1-2 servings
1 Kiwi, peeled
6 lg Strawberries, hulled
1 Clementine, peeled
1 cu Blackberries
1 cu Fresh Pineapple Chunks
1 Lime, peeled
1/2 cu Seedless Grapes, green or red
Combine all ingredients in the juice extractor and blend
Nutritional Estimate for 16 ounces*: Calories: 328; Protein: 6.04g; Carbs: 83.62g; Dietary Fiber: 18.1g; Sugars: 54.37g; Calcium: 155mg; Vitamin C: 294.6mg
If you have any comments or questions, please send me an email at email@example.com or follow me on Facebook or Twitter.
*estimate is based on whole fruits and vegetables, not just juice. Actual numbers for juice alone, especially dietary fiber, are lower because of the removal of the pulp. Source: USDA National Agricultural Database


text: (Sep 2, 2015) The Administration is expanding its Climate Data Initiative (CDI) and Climate Resilience Toolkit (CRT) to include a new "Arctic" theme. The Arctic theme will encompass more than 250 Arctic-related datasets (32 of which are being made available for the first time), and more than 40 maps, tools, and other resources designed to support climate-resilience efforts in Alaska and the Arctic, including seven "Taking Action" case studies in key areas of climate-change risks and vulnerability for Alaska and the Arctic. The Administration also recently expanded the CRT to include a new "Tribal Nations" theme, comprised of more than 40 resources—with more to be added in the future—to assist Tribal nations in climate-change planning, adaptation, and mitigation. Resources include a comprehensive Tribal Climate Change Adaptation Planning Toolkit, and a set of guidelines for considering traditional knowledge in climate change initiatives. These datasets and resources are now cataloged on, respectively,climate.data.gov and toolkit.climate.gov, making them easier for innovators, decision makers, and interested members of the public to find and use. In addition, the Administration is engaging the private sector around the CDI and CRT to help accelerate the development and deployment of products, tools, and applications powered by open Arctic data to help Alaskan and other northern communities better understand their vulnerability to, and prepare for, the impacts of climate change.


text:
The National Association of RV Parks and Campgrounds (ARVC) announced on Wednesday (Feb. 29) a new member benefit program in partnership with Club Car, a leading manufacturer of golf cars and utility vehicles.
According to a press release, ARVC members can now receive 25% off the manufacturers suggested retail price (MSRP) for Club Car's signature 4-passenger golf car, the Precedent i2 Villager 4, as well as 15% to 20% discounts on 28 other types of electric and gasoline-powered vehicles, both new and factory refurbished, within the Club Car product line.
"This program brings tremendous value to campground operators who need golf cars and utility vehicles for guest service, park maintenance and housekeeping activities," said Paul Bambei, ARVC president and CEO, noting that discounts on a single vehicle can be worth the cost of several years' of ARVC membership.
"We are honored to have been selected to join the elite portfolio of partners supporting ARVC and confident that our expansive line of high-quality vehicles will create exceptional value for ARVC members," said Ryan McClellan, manager, Strategic and Government Accounts, Club Car.
Club Car is offering two- and four-year warranties for each vehicle sold through the discount program. Additionally, through the extensive network of local Club Car dealer partners, ARVC members can obtain service and attractive financing terms for both vehicle purchase and lease.
ARVC's discount program with Club Car is the latest in a series of exclusive member benefit programs that ARVC has negotiated with nationally recognized product and service providers to private park operators.
Private park operators can find the closest Club Car dealer by visiting www.arvc.org and clicking the Club Car Member Benefit Announcement, then select the nearest dealer link. ARVC members are required to provide the local dealer with their ARVC ID number along with a copy of their arvc membership certificate. To receive the arvc ID number and your current arvc membership certificate, please contact Derek Dick at 303-681-0401, ext. 116.


text:
How to contact UFP
You will find our contact details here in case you need to ask a question, or get a clarification.Contact us
Entry qualifications accepted:
Título de Bachillerato Diversificado
Grades required:
Minimum of 8 overall, minimum of 6 in all subjects. Expect 7 in Mathematics, English and any other relevant subject to intended degree course (e.g. Physics for Engineering student)
IELTS for UKVI:
Minimum of 5.5 overall, with no less than 5.0 in any discipline (Reading, Writing, Speaking, Listening)
Agents Login | © 2019 The University Foundation Programme | All Rights Reserved.