#which is why I grant consent for my content's use on the condition that you CREDIT ME VIA SPECIFIC POST LINK

[guiltyidealist]

been visiting therian spaces lately (kinda vibe) and man when I tell you they have a crediting problem

[queerlymasculine]

this is a really long post and I have yet to discover a way to put a read-more on posts while on mobile. RIP. I'll tag it as a long post, but that's the best I can do. mobile does have filtering, btw, so you can hide tags and content (including usernames btw) that you don't want to see, so blacklist "long post"

anyway

in tonight's edition of "growing up in fundamentalist Christianity was a deeply traumatic experience for me on top of the trauma I was already experiencing at the same time,"

I have realized once again why the way primarily cisgender heterosexual people talk about kink has never vibed with me.

fundamentalist Christianity is all about how pleasure is bad. if you feel pleasure, you are not doing enough. you are not a good person if you are feeling pleasure (or even if you're feeling calm and comfortable). suffering is the point. you should be suffering all the time. you should be uncomfortable. suffering is good. suffering is the right thing to do. if you are struggling and constantly telling yourself you're a bad person and constantly aware that you should be doing more, you're on the right track. but you're never a good person. everyone is fundamentally bad, and the best we can do is work insanely hard to be less-bad.

I'm not kidding. it sounds crazy because it is. it sounds unhealthy because it is.

and that's the narrative people have about submission. maybe suffering isn't the right word because I feel like at least 51% of people in kink understand that if you're playing with any kind of pain, you should be enjoying it at all times. I feel like most people think pain should be a fun time for you if you're going to do it.

maybe sacrifice is the better word. submission seems synonymous with sacrifice. submissives, it seems, give something up, and dominants gain. a submissive lacks, and a dominant has. people talk about it as though that is what submission -- maybe more specifically the type of submission that includes an aspect of service -- entails. that sacrifice is the core of submission.

and honestly I don't fuck with that, given the trauma I experienced. I can see in theory how one might enjoy that, I genuinely do. it's not for me, but that doesn't mean I don't understand what the appeal is.

but I don't fuck with it. I lived with that narrative for years, and it contributed to the other horrible things I was going through, and I'm over it, none for me thanks.

and yet, here I am, in a d/s relationship (intentionally not capitalized because I find the obsession with capitalization exhausting and demeaning), and here I am, with the desire to serve.

it should be noted that this desire to serve is exclusive to my owner and has grown organically in me. I didn't want this before I met hir, and I only want this with hir.

so, how do I make this make sense? how do I align my desire to serve with the fact I refuse to operate under a framework where discomfort, sacrifice, and suffering are expected of me?

because there's no obligation. there are no consequences if I don't want to or am not able to. I will receive the same praise and love, and I will be desired either way. there are no conditions on pleasure. hir pleasure is never more important than mine. pleasure can look different for each of us -- for example, sometimes it's pleasurable to orgasm, sometimes it's pleasurable not to -- but we both deserve and get pleasure from what we do.

when I think about performing acts of service for hir, it's a pleasurable thought and I have every reason to believe the experience in real life would feel the same way. I want to do them because I want to, which seems reductive, I'll grant you that. I want to do them because the idea of doing them brings me pleasure. the fact it will also bring hir pleasure is a beneficial side effect.

(obviously I wouldn't do them if ze didn't want me to. what I'm saying is that I don't feel compelled to do them because I believe I have to in order to please hir.)

i wouldn't want to do these things if I didn't feel safe. my desire to do them is one of the most pure feelings I experience. it's not complicated. I don't feel like I have to. I don't feel like I need to. I don't feel like it will make me a Better Submissive if I do them. I don't think wanting to serve makes me a Better Submissive than people who don't want to. it's just a thing I want to do because it is a way I can express how I feel about hir.

I wouldn't feel this way about someone who wanted me to do it or expected me to. I don't find acts of domestic-flavored service inherently rewarding, most likely because of the way I was raised and the society in which we live. doing these things requires a lot from me, and when it's expected, the emotional payoff is never enough to justify the cost incurred.

ze doesn't expect it. even when I express certain desires, ze never holds me to them, ze never expects me to want to do the same things every time we play. the lack of expectation and concurrent lack of punitive response -- not just lack of discipline play but also that ze never reacts negatively when I express my needs, ze never gets angry or frustrated with me, etc -- makes me feel safe.

ze is a really good person, and I'm not just saying that in the same way that people always say the person they love is a good person. ze is like.......... a really good person. I've only ever met a handful of other people who are good like this. ze is the kind of person who is so good that you kinda can't trust it at first because you're like, "okay nobody is actually that good. nobody is actually that kind and good and patient and smart and loving and genuine."

but like.... ze actually is like that.

and I just, the way I feel about hir, I don't know how to express it in a different way. there aren't other ways to express this facet of it. there certainly aren't words for it. this is the only way that can properly communicate it.

I just want to serve hir because that's the way I feel about hir and because I feel that ze deserves it. I don't think any of the random doms on here deserve it from me because I know I'm better than them. they're not good enough for me.

but ze is good enough for me. that is why ze gets to play under this framework with me. ze is kind and good and loving and gentle and soft, and I deserve that. similarly, I'm kind and gentle and loving and supportive and able to be honest about my needs, and ze deserves a partner and submissive with those qualities.

and I believe ze deserves the kind of devotion I have for hir. I believe ze deserves the way I feel about hir.

so it doesn't feel like a sacrifice. nothing about being hirs feels like I'm giving anything up. I genuinely see everything we do as me getting something. there's no loss or sacrifice at all. other people might look at what we do and view it with that lens, but their interpretation would be wrong.

to me, kink is just an umbrella of different ways to experience pleasure. it's a choose your own adventure thing with a wide range of options. the only two mandatory requirements are enthusiastic consent and safety, both physical and emotional.

kink should just be a nice time that you enjoy with people you like and trust. it shouldn't be boring or a chore. it should be fun and fulfilling. it shouldn't be sacrifice. there shouldn't be a price.

I want to serve because it feels good, that's all. I will only serve when it feels good. that's how it works for me. I might enjoy something right now and do it, but if tomorrow it doesn't feel good, I don't do it tomorrow.

and for me, I don't mess with extra steps. if it doesn't feel uncomplicatedly good, then I'm not going to do it. I don't have anything to prove. if a dominant needs a submissive to Prove™️ they are the dominant's submissive, I am not the partner for them and they are not the dominant for me.

my time is valuable, people. I don't waste it on shit I don't have to. if I choose to share my free time with you, it's because I want to, and I don't respect people who feel entitled to more than what I want to give them.

this is a good example of why I choose to be with my owner -- I have literally said the words "I want you to feel entitled to me" to hir lmao. ze has never acted like ze feels entitled to my time or attention. that tells me ze respects me and that ze believes my time and attention have value because decent people don't just go around expecting valuable things for free.

I know ze respects me. so I want hir to feel entitled to me because I want to be hirs and I want hir to feel that I belong to hir. I want to know ze feels and understands how I feel.

i don't personally see the benefit of living under a narrative of sacrifice. I tried it, and it fucked me up. I work with a narrative of pleasure and wanting to serve my owner is a product of that narrative. it is pleasurable to serve hir. it is exclusively pleasurable. it's healing, too. it is healing to adore someone this way and to be adored in return. it is healing to want to serve someone deserves it and who appreciates the entirety of it. it is healing to be this safe.

idk what the point of this post is, other than lacetop is great and you really can just do the parts of kink that are fun for you and forget the rest.

[theautisticquillholder]

Murderous Love Chapter IV

(WARNING: This fanfiction has themes of Suicidal Ideation, Suicide itself, Self harm, Sexual Assualt, Murder, Extreme Bullying and Humiliation and a lot of Mental Illness related content and is NOT appropriate for children and the faint of heart. If you are under 18 or may be triggered by the content of this fanfiction please do not read this.)

Motochika’s POV

Myself and Mitsuhide were relaxing in our mini studio apartment that his parents made for us so that we can live independently while we are minors.

Tomorrow our fight to get Da Ji charged and convicted of sexual assault and distribution of Child Pornography and Loki and Ares charged and convicted as accomplices to Da Ji begins.

I knew Odin and Zeus would not take us putting those three in jail laying down. Mitsuhide was scared, he knew his life would become worse if those three are acquitted of those charges. Thankfully Dousan, Noh’s father is the best lawyer we have and has given us a no win no fee guarantee because he knew that due to Zeus and Odin being rich bastards, we may not get the outcome we want.

I hugged Mitsuhide tightly while singing to him, hoping that my singing would soothe him. I then noticed that Mitsuhide was not calming down at all, he then looked at me saying

“Hide the blades, medication and long cords. Now.”

When I heard that I let go of Mitsuhide and went to do so. I’m so glad Mitsutsuna taught me what to do when Mitsuhide ends up having a manic episode or a depressive episode. I then looked at Mitsuhide asking “Anything else?”

Mitsuhide nodded “My wallet.”

I nodded and hid his wallet as well. I then walked to my beloved and hugged him “I love you, I won’t leave you, you’re a god amongst men, you’re the strongest guy I know, you’re an absolute badass, you’ve survived so much and you’re still here, I’m so proud of you”

Mitsuhide rested his head on my chest smiling. I wasn’t told to tell Mitsuhide nice things about him, I just added that to combat the intrusive thoughts that might come up as he deals with this episode, such as feeling unworthy of anything great in life. He looked at me smiling

“I’m so sorry for having that episode.” He spoke,

I looked at him weirdly before saying “Don’t be sorry for something that is not in your control.”

Mitsuhide looked down “No one wants to hire me so I can’t get a job and I don’t want to rely on my parents to get my medication…”

I soon became worried. I looked at him before letting go of him “I just need to ask your father when dinner is ready”

I then walked out of our studio apartment and towards Mitsutsuna saying “Hey sooooooo I found out why Mitsuhide is having these episodes. He doesn’t want to rely on you to get his medication, even though he knows that you and your wife are more than happy to help him…”

Mitsutsuna froze “Wh-What? O-Oh my god!”

He then picked up his phone and called Ritsuko (Mitsuhide’s mother).

Mitsutsuna then said “So, Mitsuhide has not been taking his medication for his bipolar and his depression…

He doesn’t want to rely on us to get it for him…

I know we had that conversation with him that we’re his parents and if we can’t get him the medication he needs then we don’t deserve the honour of parenthood…

Please just get the medication for him, I’ll have a chat…

Motochika managed to get him to talk about whether or not he’s getting his medication…

Okay, I’ll do that for you”

He then hung up the phone and looked at me saying “Thank you so much for telling us this.”

I nodded “It’s okay, if we can at least get him on his medication for the duration of the Trial we can manage his condition as the trial goes on.”

I then walked back to our mini apartment, Mitsuhide looked at me saying “You told them didn’t you…”

“I’m sorry honey, I had to, they want to help you, please let them help you.” I replied.

I hugged him tightly before Ritsuko arrived and handed me the medication. “Thank you Motochika, I think you’re the man that my son needed.”

I nodded and accepted the paper bag.

THE NEXT DAY

It was the day the trials of Da Ji, Loki and Ares began.

I stood by Mitsuhide’s side as we made our way into the court room. Da Ji glared at us as the evidence was presented.

Soon it was Dousan’s turn to present evidence. He walked to the whiteboard and projector and turned it on soon revealing the Instagram post made by Da Ji that had the photo of Mitsuhide naked lying on the dingy bathroom floor.

Loki, Ares and Da Ji were held back as Dousan revealed the evidence and explained the statements given by myself, Mitsuhide and the school staff who found us in the bathroom.

The trial lasted for about five days and Judge Orochi sent the Jury out to discuss what the verdict is going to be, as we waited for the verdict Loki looked at Mitsuhide saying

“Now you’ve fucking done it, how much attention do you fucking want you whore!”

I blocked Mitsuhide’s ears when Loki opened his mouth to talk.

We then saw the Jury enter the courtroom again and the jury Forewoman Tamamo was asked if Loki was guilty or not guilty.

Tamamo replied “Loki and Ares had the majority vote of not guilty of all charges. While I have voted guilty I believe there has been some form of bribery going on that I do not know about. As a result for the sake of the members of the jury who are sympathetic towards the victim the least the courts should do is grant him the restraining order.”

“OBJECTION BITCH!” was heard, I looked in the direction the voice came from to find that it was Loki, he then looked at the judge saying

“Your Honour, I do not believe that Akechi Mitsuhide should be applying for a restraining order against myself and Ares, the three of us are all minors and there is no need for a kid to be applying for a restraining order against other kids, I believe he is doing this for attention, he imagined everything, that Instagram post is fake and we will take legal action if you allow the restraining order to go through!”

Orochi slammed the podium saying “ORDER IN THE COURT! Mr Loki Asgardian you have spoken enough, do not argue with our jury members again. Tamamo, my apologies for the interruption. Do you find Da Ji guilty or not guilty of the Sexual Assault charges and Child Pornography Charges?”

Tamamo replied “We have found Da Ji guilty of Sexual Assault and Production and distribution of child pornography, however, the majority recommends mercy.”

I saw Tamamo roll her eyes, I could tell that she has tried to get us the justice we deserve.

Orochi looked at everyone saying “Loki Asgardian and Ares Olympus are acquitted of all charges and I sentence Da Ji to four months in juvenile detention” he then grabbed the hammer and hit the hammer puck to make the sentence final.

Mitsuhide soon started crying but these tears are not happy ones, they’re tears of sadness and anger.

I called out to Orochi saying “THAT IS NOT FAIR! HOW DO YOU SLEEP AT NIGHT KNOWING YOU LET THEM OFF SO LIGHTLY!? THEY DESTROYED MITSUHIDE’S LIFE! AND AN ACQUITTAL FOR THE ACCOMPLICES AND A FOUR MONTH SENTENCE IS ALL YOU GIVE THEM!?  MITSUHIDE WILL NEVER BE ABLE TO LIVE THE CLOSEST POSSIBLE THING TO A NORMAL LIFE WHILE THESE CRIMINALS ARE RUNNING FREE!”

Orochi looked at me with a sullen look saying “I’m sorry, this is the best I can do…”

“FINE IF YOU’RE NOT GOING TO GIVE US THE JUSTICE WE DESERVE THEN I’LL GET IT MYSELF! AND THAT IS NOT A THREAT IT IS A PROMISE!” I shouted as I picked Mitsuhide up and walked out.

Four months for raping Mitsuhide then taking a photograph of him in the nude without his consent and posting it on the internet is unbelievable! What do we get!? Stuck with the trauma and having those assholes smiling like fucking crazy because they got away with it.

“Mr Chosokabe?” I heard that which brought me back to reality, I turned around still carrying Mitsuhide bridal style.

The person calling out to me was Tamamo. She walked to me and handed me a folder “Here. I have made it a rule that any communication between the prosecution or defence and the jury must be screenshot and sent to me. If you do anything rash that could get you in bigger trouble with the law these might help you justify it. These are all of the messages from the defence bribing the majority of the jury to give a not guilty verdict or if it has to be a guilty verdict to prevent suspicion recommendation of mercy.”

Mitsuhide took the folder while I had tears in my eyes said “Thank you so much, you’re so sweet”

Tamamo giggled saying “Don’t thank me, thank Kaguya, another juror for bringing this up. She was suspicious of the defence for a while and was a bit annoyed that she wasn’t the jury forewoman, I told her that if she needed to talk to me about what was happening in the court I am happy to listen. This was what she presented. Good luck taking matters in your own hands, I will be supporting you from afar.”

I nodded as we walked to the car. I placed Mitsuhide in the middle back seat, he put his seatbelt on as I sat next to him.

Hades was driving us as he was given a note by Mitsuhide’s parents stating that they are unable to bring us to the courthouse. When Hades got in the car he then screamed loudly “FUCK YOU ZEUS YOU PIECE OF SHIT! I FUCKING HATE YOUR GUTS! YOU FUCKING ASSHOLE WHY THE FUCK MUST THE WORLD LET YOU BE SO PRIVELEGED THAT YOU COULD JUST FUCK UP A FUCKING TRIAL LIKE THAT YOU FUCKING PERVERTED PLAYBOY ASSHOLE I HOPE YOU FUCKING ROT IN HELL!”

I blocked Mitsuhide’s ears as Hades screamed. When he was finished Hades looked at us with tears in his eyes saying “I’m calling your parents and asking if I can take you two somewhere for icecream and shopping to cheer you up.”

He then did so, explaining the situation, thankfully both my and Mitsuhide’s parents approved of this before we could leave a guy with silver hair and aqua streaks in his hair got in the car and looked at Hades and kissed his forehead saying

“Hey Hades, baby, what’s wrong?”

Hades looked at the guy saying “My younger brother is a privileged asshole Yang Jian… he made my mental health client lose his court case…”

Yang Jian kissed Hades’ forehead again saying “I’m guessing a repeat of us when we were sixteen? Everyone pulled the ‘they didn’t know better they’re only little’ garbage?”

Hades nodded he then said “I have asked my client and his boyfriend’s parents if I could take them out for ice cream and shopping to cheer them up. If you want you can go somewhere else while I do this”

Yang Jian looked at Hades saying “which client is it?”

“Akechi Mitsuhide” Hades replied.

Yang Jian replied “You referred Mitsuhide to the place I work for and they chose me to be his mental health support worker. This is the perfect opportunity to get to know him, even if I spend the entire time with him in silence, building rapport does not require talking at the first instance.”

Hades nodded before turning on the ignition and driving to the next town over. I’m willing to assume to keep us away from Ares and Loki so we can have some time to breathe and be happy before we get thrown through the gauntlet of bullying for trying to throw people in jail.

When we got to the mall Yang Jian looked at us asking Mitsuhide “Hey, is it okay if we just spend time together just you and me? Hades will look after Motochika for you.”

I looked at Mitsuhide who replied “O-Okay b-but if we see those two no ifs, whats or buts, I’m finding Motochika and staying with him.”

Yang Jian nodded “I understand, I want to make sure you’re comfortable and safe.” Mitsuhide put the folder in my satchel, grabbed his Lapras plush doll and his handbag and went with Yang Jian while I stayed with Hades.

I looked at Hades asking “’A repeat of us when we were sixteen’? Are you saying that this has happened before!?”

Hades nodded sadly “Yes. Not to this scale, but my parents never approved of Yang Jian, they acted like Yang Jian was a bad influence on me. I wanted to pursue a career in mental health, so did he.

My parents wanted an accountant. But because of the fact that my parents hated Yang Jian, Zeus gets to be a dick to me and not get in trouble for it.

Which sucked… and it also sucks knowing that he gets to get away with letting his son and his friends do what they want with light consequences…”

I nodded and we went to a musical instrument store because I wanted to get a new shamisen.

[lairofsentinel]

I love your BG3 analysis posts and wanted to get your insight into one of Gale's lines. On point 21 you discuss his 'doubt' lines. There's another line that I find similar / fitting: if the main char tells Gale they think their night together was a mistake then he says something like "Let me clear your mind of doubts: it absolutely wasn't." He doesn't discuss the 'why' of it - or express he's disappointed but accepts their choice. He tries to discourage that line of thinking outright. Thoughts?

Hey, hello! Thanks for reading those big posts. :D

[Baldur’s Gate 3 Early Access Spoilers]

For those who don't know what those numbers mean: [Gale in 27 points or more]

Yeah, in (21) I found curious that he just says "doubt is a spoilsport" in another desperate attempt to make the MC stop thinking about it, and go for him already. Yes, you are right. The other line afterwards, when the MC shows doubts again about the whole night, he desperately tries to cast them aside. Again! They are like attempts of "no, no, dear, stop thinking right there. We are not a mistake, we are just we. Stop thinking. I don't care if I encourage questioning in general. On this matter, question not" XD

Which I found hilarious in comparison with his personality which is ALL the time in his mode "we need to doubt about everything", because well, that's a scholar. Scholars tend to be better at questioning than knowing things most of the time. This shows once more that he is desperate to stay with the MC, so far. I want to believe that there are not more hidden secrets, or ill-intended motives coming from him.

His mental state by the time he meets the MC is quite a mess. If you think that since too young he was abandoned by Mystra with that orb of Netherese devastation stuck in his chest... we can assume that there is a high chance for him to have been alone ever since. The quest in saving himself from that bomb probably prevented him to use time and energy in relationships (like I say in (15)), and by (12) we know he feels deadly alone. Especially if we take his description of how the bomb makes him feel, which is an increasing terror the longer he stays without consuming artefacts.

If you fail in that conversation of the Loss scene, when you insist about what he lost, he will push the MC away and will say something like "I'm strong enough to keep on". But we know that by the end of that night (or after the party in case MC did not romance him), he will say it anyway. He will talk about Mystra abandonment.  He can't hold it anymore. He needs to share the burden and find someone to trust. Which will be the MC, as a friend or a lover.

I still think about the mind-shocking impact that the Weave scene caused him. It's not only what he states, his mindset has been focused on solving his bomb condition for too long. Relationships have been out of question for a while (15).  And then, he has this Weave moment with the MC showing him their romantic interest; it not only took him by surprise, it caught him quite vulnerable too (too much feeling of loneliness and fear and despair plus the tadpoles looming danger), so the event had a stronger effect than he lets show in that moment. We know he thinks about that event the following days in between the Weave scene and the party, and apparently, that makes a click in him.

As I said, he is desperate for the MC who shared that magic moment of the Weave. Magic is his life, as he said, and sharing it with someone who has supported him and giving him their trust, it moves the ground he is walking on.

He is a char that, when a chance appears, he doesn't want to let is waste. And that romantic scene in the weave was a completely unexpected chance happening in front of him. Serendipity, as he said. (I don't know if by choosing the last option, the one in which you imagine nothing, Gale will want something anyway. I have to explore that.) (** I already explored this [here] **)

In sum, the concept here is that, as a scholar, he is into doubts and questioning all what you want. He will encourage such attitude in the MC. Except when it comes to question his emotions for the MC and their night together. Because questioning them, may cause abandon him. We also need to remember he was abandoned. Abandonment issues must to be added to his psychological profile. It was probably this issue the one that made him wait to the last moment before saying the truth. Because he is all about consent and let people know the truth, but he freaked out at the thought that maybe that truth could mean a second abandonment. That fear is there even if the MC did not romance him. He reached to a point in his life where loneliness, the bomb, and the tadpole became too heavy to deal with alone anymore. He needs the MC. And needs to be sure that they won't abandon him. That's why Gale ends up doing that rotten move of saying the truth only after sleeping with the romanced MC and after all that speech of the book of Anm: through intimacy he wanted to have a deeper link with the MC in order to prevent the abandonment. This is why he says “after all what we passed through, after the night we spent together”. He wants the MC baaaadly. And he  wants not to be abandoned again. You see him bending and breaking his usual philosophy just to avoid abandonment. That's... a bit dangerous.

Once more it gives me the feeling that Gale is a nice mature character, who knows where he walks as long as we are not in the emotional ground. Emotional-wise... seems that Gale has pretty bad experiences, filled with over-idealised situations (Mystra) or over-darkened by misery (his bomb condition and now the tadpole) and in the back of all that there is a constant abandonment issue that may make some situations quite... complicated.

Asking for middle reactions to Gale on these matters seems to be a bit too much for his char. XD This is why I like to joke that he is basically proposing the MC right there... I mean, the book of Anm speech? If you choose “hey Gale, we are not newlywed (stressing that fact), but newly acquainted”, he gives a shit to the definitions of the words (the scholar, uh), he says “let's write the prequel”. One can interpret it like... he is assuming he and the MC are walking that path through and through. He is riiight heading into marriage. Lol. I personally would not like this kind of chars, but I make my exception here because, at least, Gale has a solid reason to be this way: he may die at any moment.

This kind of soft emotional instability char may be a dangerous compound in Larian's hands. You see, Larian in DOS2 offered romances that clearly were not going to last after the ending of the game; and you had hints of that pretty early in the game: one companion was married looking for their spouse, and another was betrothed, and had a fling with the MC meanwhile, if you want to. Another companion you can romance, simply disappears later by the end of the game. So... Larian... is not Bioware. Having a man like Gale that can break or bend his usual philosophy and his morals to a certain degree when it comes to matters of the heart.... well... it's dangerous, to say the least.

I fear Mystra appearing, and telling him that she abandoned him not because she wanted to, but because the netherese orb put her in danger (a logical reason that Gale could accept without problems no matter how much he suffered because of it, check (4),(14) and (20) ). And if Gale gets rid of that orb, and Mystra asks him to be his Chosen One “with benefits” once more (lol)... I'm not so sure if he will not abandon the MC. Unless the MC accepts a polyamory relationship (with a goddess? XD), because I totally see Gale has no issues with Mystra or MC having lovers besides him. 

Magic is his life, and he longs a lot the powers granted by the title of the Chosen One. And Mystra's affections are where the true magical power lays (Gale's own words). So.... yes. Dangerous.

Ah, damn... I derailed again. Sorry.

More content of bg3 in general [here]

[princessmadafu]

Summary of Warby’s Judgment, 5th August 2020

For those of you who don’t have time to read all 65 paragraphs in full:

Introduction

(1) MM's "Five Friends" only spoke to People if they could remain anonymous.

(2) The 5F are not sources for anything published by DM/ANL, just the People article of 18th Feb 2019.

(3) Warby grants MM protection of the 5F, "which at this stage is necessary in the interests of the administration of justice. This is an interim  decision." In other words, witness protection; it will prevent the tabloids hounding the 5F and publishing things that may prejudice the case. He also notes that the case has been going on 10 months, is going slowly, and is still far from trial, and his judgment may change with circumstances, "if and when there is a trial at which one or more of the sources gives evidence." (I like the "if and when" here!)

(4) Warby tells MM's team to get a move on. He wants witness statements and a Costs and Case Management Conference so further pre-trial steps can be taken.

The Procedural Background

(5) MM is suing ANL over The Letter on the grounds of "misuse of private information, breach of duty under the GDPR [General Data Protection Regulation], and copyright infringement." Further details as per his judgment on 1st May 2020, the Strike-Out Judgment.

The relevant issues:

(6) In the S-OJ, ANL says the contents of The Letter were not private or confidential, MM had no resonable expectation that they would be, and their publication was a defence of the right of freedom of expression of ANL, readers and Thomas Markle.

(7) ANL claims MM's own conduct forfeited or weakened any expectation of privacy, and she had knowingly allowed The Letter and contents to enter the public domain.

(8) Six pages of details submitted by ANL; the publication of the People article was "sought and intended", "caused or permitted" and "acquiesced in" by MM. This is inferred because (i) the article contained detailed personal information that could only have come from MM herself (ii) the silence of Kensington Palace and MM on whether MM had consented to the 5F talking to People (iii) MM has not complained to People about publishing the article.

(9) This is the bit where MM claims she didn't authorise the article, didn't know what the 5F were doing, only later discovered it, didn't know they'd talk about The Letter or its contents, only 1F made a passing reference to The Letter and that the summary of the contents of The Letter was wrong anyway.

(10) Since the S-OJ, MM's case has been amended, and more information has been provided by her team. More relevantly, ANL has requested further information:

(11) ANL requested that MM identify the 1F who made the passing reference to the Letter and the other 4F who spoke to People.

The Response and attendant publicity:

(12) "The Response": MM's lawyers responded in a Confidential Schedule, and the 1F is now Friend A, and the others are Friends B to E. The 5F "deliberately chose to speak anonymously."

(13) The bit where she claims her wedding generated £1billion, which far outweighed the public funds spent on security.

(14) At one minute to midnight on 30th June 2020 MM's lawyers emailed a letter and attached documents to ANL's lawyers, received at midnight, claiming the docs had been filed at court. They had not. These docs were The Response, an Appendix of press articles, and the Confidential Schedule.

(15) ANL's solicitors immediately forwarded the email to ANL.

(16) At 4.58pm UK time 1st July 2020, the Mail Online published an article headed "Meghan Markle names the five friends behind People article". Brief description of the article, and we first hear of the "long-time friend, former co-star, a friend from LA, a one-time colleague and a close confidante."

(17) At 5.09pm 1st July, Mail Online publishes another article about the £1billion tourism windfall, according to "documents released as part of her High Court battle against the Mail on Sunday".

(18) Around 11pm 1st July, there followed another article about how MM was left "unprotected" by the monarchy, according to "leaked court documents". It also referred to docs seen by the Press Association news agency about the identification of the 5F.

(19) On 2nd July 2020, the paper-version DM ran with "Meghan: The Palace Hung Me Out To Dry" on the front page, plus pp 2-3; MM says she did discuss The Letter with close friends but never authorised them to talk, and more on the £1billion.

(20) All these articles were clearly based on The Response, but not on copies obtained from the court. A non-party can obtain copies, but only after the docs have been submitted, processed and accepted for filing. Which these weren't. They weren't accepted for filing until 11am on 2nd July 2020.

(21) The docs were submitted for filing as confidential and not for third parties without permission of the court, as they contained private information. They were accepted for filing on this basis. Only The Response is available to third parties, but it wasn't available until 11am on 2nd July, after the articles had already been published.

(22) Widespread international coverage before 11am on 2nd July. ANL's suggested third party seems improbable, whereas MM suggests all third party reporting comes from ANL. Warby did a little digging himself, eg Newsweek, and concludes that all third party reporting came from ANL.

(23) MM says ANL "had been astute to publicise its own case" even before this; cites article from 16th Jan 2020 about MM's private texts with the now ex-BFF JM.

(24) On 6th July 2020, ANL lawyers assert that using a Confidential Schedule as part of The Response is illegitimate, and the Schedule should be fully reportable. If no application for an injunction was made by 9th July, they would presume that MM accepted that the Schedule was not confidential.

The Application and attendant publicity:

(25) On 9th July, MM's lawyers made the application now being ruled on about the confidential nature of the Schedule and the privacy of the 5F: no publishing, communicating or disclosing anything in the Schedule or anything that might identify the 5F; no third party applications without permission of the court; and MM must be allowed in proceedings to refer to the 5F as ABCDE, not by their names.

(26) The application comes with two witness statements, one from MM's solicitor containing evidence about Friend C, the other from MM herself containing the bit about each of these women being a private citizen, young mother, etc blah blah clickbait, emotional and mental well-being...

(27) ANL lawyers suggest MM briefed the press about this application before they had received their own copy. Application filed at 8.32am, served on ANL at 8.30am; 8.45am Sky News already asking ANL for a comment; 9.30am title page of MM's witness statement "posted on the Twitter feed of someone called Omid Scobie" who quoted a "close source"... (I love the "someone called Omid Scobie"!) and the quote about the five innocent women, young mother blah blah... (I can imagine the pages of word salad poor Warby had to go through to condense all this politely; the blah blahs are purely my own.)

(28) Evidence supports ANL that MM's team "have been energetically briefing the media about these proceedings from the outset." Warby quotes emails to media representatives from James Holt, Sussex Royal's Head of Engagement and Communication, including a confidential summary note and a "crib sheet".

Relevant Procedural Law

(29) This is mostly technical stuff that Legal Anons will explain much better, but very basically, it starts with a list of who is allowed to see what, who needs the court's permission to see it, and who can be prevented from seeing it.

(30) "The records of the court": The Court has broad powers beyond those noted under (29) supra, and can provide access to the records of the court under the common law principle of open justice. (This is Warby telling MM that he's in charge, not her!)

(31) Parties may request further information, the Court may order information to be handed over; provision is made whereby information may not be used for any other purpose than court proceedings.

The evidence

(32) On 23rd July 2020, a third witness statement was submitted by MM's lawyers, this from Friend B. Three statements from ANL lawyers were followed on 27th July by a further statement from Friend B in reply.

(33) MM's evidence:

(1) B says she and the other 4F spoke on condition of anonymity, and it was B who organised the interviews after speaking with Jess Cagle (editor of People). She gave two reasons for anonymity (i) to avoid media intrusion into their privacy and (ii) to avoid the appearance of seeking publicity for themselves. MM played no part in this, wasn't aware of it and didn't know until after publication. B and the other 4F want to remain anonymous and refer to how media intrusion will impact on their kids.

(2) MM's lawyers say evidence and hearsay evidence from Friend C (as per (26) supra)

(3) MM's statement is short on facts and gives no good reason why her 5F's anonymity should be preserved.

(4) MM's lawyers give four reasons for anonymity: (i) to protect MM's privacy (ii) to protect the 5F's reasonable expectation of confidentiality (iii) none of 5F have been identified or confirmed as talking to People (iv) none of 5F is a party to the action and none is a witness. They are concerned 5F will be intimidated by the publicity and will not agree to be witnesses in support of MM at trial.

(5) MM's lawyers say ANL is exploiting its position as a major media presence, running MM articles to whip up interest in the case, boost revenue and gain litigation advantage.

(34) ANL's evidence:

(1) MM did not impose restrictions on what could be done with The Response, there was no commercial advantage, publishers are allowed to publish stories about any litigation they're involved in, there is no litigation advantage, and no need for ANL to whip up interest in the case as MM is doing it already, all by herself.

(2) MM's concerns and criticisms have no evidential support, there is "scant evidence" for her privacy concerns for the 5F, the 5F were always going to be drawn into the court case, and there's no justification for giving evidence anonymously.

(3) Press cuttings show that Friend B has previously publicised her friendship with MM, the inference being it was to raise her public profile.

(35) Friend B's second witness statement in response to the press cuttings, puts the cuttings in context and denies that it undermines her first statement.

Some matters that are not in dispute

(36) Three matters:

(1) The importance of the common law principle of open justice. Anonymity must only be granted if justified and necessary for the administration of justice.

(2) 5F only gave interviews on the promise of confidentiality from People.

(3) None of 5F has yet been publicly named, and it is not part of ANL's case that knowledge of their identities is already in the public domain.

(37) ANL has not put forward any justification of it being in the public interest to know who 5F are at this stage.

The rival contentions

(38) MM claims the Confidential Schedule is justified to protect 5F anonymity.

(39) Legalese paragraph citing previous cases where breach of confidence has occurred.

(40) More legalese about who should be allowed use of disclosed documents, ANL are trying to maximise publicity and make money from revealing 5F, and the Schedule is part of the statement of case and therefore only available to MM, ANL and their legal teams.

(41) ANL says in this particular case, anonymity is "a derogation from the open justice principle", and the need for anonymity has not been established by "clear and cogent evidence".

(42) Legalese from ANL lawyers about hearings held in private and the  limited circumstances that this is allowed; three paragraphs citing previous cases.

(43) Legalese about when a private individual can expect privacy, even if the private individual at the same time has a public persona.

(44) ANL's lawyers insist that the Schedule is part of the Response, not part of the statement of case, and should therefore be available to anyone, without the need to request permission from the court.

Assessment

CPR 5.4C

(45) (I'm presuming this means rule 5.4C of the Civil Procedure Rules.) Warby questions why 5.4C distinguishes between a "statement of case" and "documents filed with or attached to the statement of case". He says the "procedural archeology has not been carried out", meaning that it's a bit in the rules that no-one knows why it's there.

(46) Not persuaded that the issue of anonymity is decided by the definition of "statement of case", and Warby sides with MM lawyers that the rule was probably there to exclude from automatic inspection any documents that didn't form part of the body of the case.

(47) "The definition seems to me designed simply to make clear for the avoidance of doubt that "statement of case" does not just cover the main pleadings (particulars of Claim, Defence and Reply) but also Further Information about any of those documents." So in other words, MM technically can separate from the main body of the statement of case anything, Appendix, Schedule or other doc, that she doesn't want a third party to see; an application by a third party will have to have a valid reason before the court will give permission to make it available.

(48) "It is true that a party might abuse the process by placing information in a Schedule or Appendix without any justification for doing so. But such abuse is open to scrutiny and could quite easily be controlled and put right by the Court." In other words, Warby is warning MM - if she's abusing the process, he'll put his foot down and squash her hard. Cites a previous case where the judge decided to "revisit the appropriateness of maintaining confidentiality."

(49) The Schedule, by virtue of it being a "document filed with or attached to the statement of case" was already inaccessible to a third party without permission, and there was no need to make it a Confidential Schedule. It remains closed to public inspection without permission.

(50) This case has two other Confidential Schedules attached, to which no objection has been made so far.

(51) Is the factual and legal status of the Schedule justified? Warby thinks so, and approaches it "through the prism of confidentiality":

(1) ANL does not dispute that the information is confidential in nature, just that MM cannot rely on privacy rights, given her public behaviour. ANL is aware of the need to preserve the confidentiality of sources.

(2) ANL has information that requires an obligation of confidence, "subject only to any public interest that overrides that obligation."

(3) The information is not in the public domain, therefore the obligation remains.

(4) "It is clear enough that ANL is threatening to disclose the information, unless restrained. It invited this application, making it plain that it would consider itself free to publish the names if no application was made." (This strikes me as ANL covering its own back, forcing the principle of confidentiality so that they can't be accused of witness intimidation of 5F. ANL's lawyers have thought this through very carefully.)

(52) This is a procedural application for the protection of witnesses, not an injunction. Cites other similar legal cases.

(53) ANL criticises the lack of evidence that 5F need anonymity. Warby disagrees, as B and C have both made statements; B that she coordinated interviews subject to confidentiality, and C that she would suffer if the evidence and hearsay were to be made public. Warby states that the evidence supplied by and about MM and 5F is "credible and persuasive".

(54) How to reconcile anonymity with open justice.

(55) Open justice has two strands: (i) Human Rights Act`confers the right to a "fair and public hearing". This is concerned with trials at which final decisions are made, not interim or pre-trial processes. ANL has not invoked this. Rather ANL lawyers have chosen (ii) the established common law principle of open justice, which goes beyond the Human Rights Act, in that it does apply to interim processes. Cites other previous cases.

(56) "Open justice tends to foster public confidence in the impartial and fair administration of justice, to deter inappropriate behaviour by the Court, to ensure that evidence becomes available, and to limit the risk of ininformed and inaccurate comment about the proceedings." Not all these factors apply here. Cites similar cases.

(57) Open justice exists to "allow the public to scutinise the workings of the Law." However the Court needs to scrutinise applications for the disclosure of information and weed out anything that does not advance public understanding of the legal process.

(58) Warby slates both parties. In full:

"It is in this context that the parties’ tit-for-tat criticisms of one another for publicising details of this case in and through the media are of some relevance. Each side has overstated its case about the conduct of the other. The defendant has not made good, for present purposes, Mr Mathieson’s contention that the “real motivation” of the claimant and her husband is “to afford them an opportunity to wage their own campaign against the press rather than to obtain the remedies at which the proceedings are ostensibly directed”. Nor does the evidence persuade me that the similarly hyperbolic assertions in the claimant’s witness statement are soundly based. It is however tolerably clear that neither side has, so far, been willing to confine the presentation of its case to the courtroom. Both sides have demonstrated an eagerness to play out the merits of their dispute in public, outside the courtroom, and primarily in media reports."

(59) Ditto:

"This approach to litigation has little to do with enabling public scrutiny of the legal process, or enhancing the due administration of justice. Indeed, in some respects it tends to impede both fairness and transparency. This will be a judge-alone trial, not a trial by jury. But to fight proceedings in court and through litigation PR or sensational reporting at one and the same time is not designed to enhance understanding of the legal process. For a party to file and immediately publicise prejudicial and partisan characterisations of the other’s litigation conduct in the media before a hearing certainly does not assist. Equally, the defendant’s coverage of this litigation has provided readers with a good deal of information about the claimant, her views and her attitudes towards the Royal family, which is no doubt interesting to the public, but it has done relatively little to provide insight into the “workings of the law”.  The coverage has selectively highlighted aspects of the defendant’s case and features of the claimant’s case that are novel and interesting to the public. The focus is on sensational reporting of information that happens to be contained in the claimant’s statements of case. There are references to to the proceedings, but some of these involve speculation about what disclosure might be given, and who might or might not be a witness."

(60) ANL haven't explained convincingly why it is necessary to name 5F. In Warby's judgment "at this stage", public disclosure would have little value as there is no guarantee that any of 5F will be winesses.

(61) Confidentiality can enhance freedom of expression or protect a whistle-blower from attack. In this case 5F sought to defend MM from hostile media coverage, and their anonymity not only protected them from adverse consequences but also increased the information available to the public about MM. (LOL, try disinformation! It was mostly lies and we all knew it!)

(62) "At this stage", continued anonymity is fine by Warby, as it upholds the agreement made with People and shields 5F from the "glare of publicity". However, "at trial, that is a price that may have to be paid in the interests of transparency." Disclosure could "undermine fairness and due process". Press articles can be misleading and inaccurate, citing a press article about JM and whether a "named individual" will still back MM in court after their recent falling out; this is the sort of pressure 5F would be under were their identities revealed.

(63) For these reasons Warby grants the application.

(64) Other things Warby is not prepared to address at this time.

The form of order

(65) These orders will remain in place until trial or further order. They will be kept under review, and re-considered at the Pre-Trial Review. Changes will be made as required in the light of changing circumstances.

[live4thelord]

St. Benedict’s Preface on Humility

St. Benedict begins by noting that Whoever exalts himself shall be humbled, and whoever humbles himself shall be exalted (literally Luke 14:11, fragment of Luke 18:14) and that those who want to reach the highest summit of humility must shun pride and exaltation, and just as well that our actions will be like a ladder to heaven which Jacob saw in his dream in Genesis 28 where the angels ascended and descended. St. Benedict writes that to ascend the ladder of humility to Heaven one must lower himself and to descend the ladder away from Heaven one would have to exalt himself. This is the principle figure then in regarding for St. Benedict that to ascend the ladder of humility the soul must travel through different stages and levels of humility.

The First Step of Humility: The fear of God

St. Benedict writes, “The first step of humility, then, is that a man keeps the fear of God always before his eyes (Psalm 36:2) and to never forget what God has commanded of us. Bearing before our minds the notion that those who despise God in their sinfulness will burn in Hell on account of their lack of love and on their turning away from Him is how man is to understand and fear God’s judgment. Though we must just as well say that the fear of God is that reverence we are to have of offending God who is the very principle of life and existence for all things. To offend Him ought to offend us, and so we must keep sure to guard our vices of thought or hold our tongue. Hence in order to hold ourselves true to God we must have the humility to withhold our own will in every act, but instead look to God Who’s will we pray in the Our Father to be done on Earth as it is in Heaven. All of our desires, our thoughts, our willful actions must be on guard and willing to lovingly offer up our entire selves up to God for Him to lead us and guide us to keep His commandments. And so we must be vigilant every hour as if our guardian angel came down to have us report to God how we have spent our day and night every single day of our lives.

Hence to summarize this step it is to consider the commandments of God and fear trespassing against God in our day to day actions.

The Second Step of Humility: Not my will, But Yours O Lord

“The second step of humility is that a man loves not his own will nor takes pleasure in the satisfaction of his desires; rather he shall imitate by his actions that saying of the Lord: I have come not to do My own will, but the will of Him Who sent Me.” (John 6:38) says St. Benedict. In addition he writes of a motto, of an unknown source to me, “Consent merits punishment; constraint wins a crown” meaning that to consent to temptation is to deserve a punishment and to restrict yourself from giving in to a constraint we can win a crown. Briefly said then, St. Benedict’s second step of humility is to everywhere hold restraint from our own temptations and desires but rather to seek the will of God. Thus taking into mind the commandments of God in step one, we progress further by seeking to fulfill that commandment and not our own ways in the second step of humility.

2

The Third Step of Humility: He was obedient even unto death (Philippians 2:8)

The third step of humility regards obedience to our superiors. In the case of us lay people this means to be obedient to our priest, our bishop, our parents, lawful authorities, etc. all for the love of God. In this step we must submit ourselves to the yoke of Christ which He Himself bore in humility and obedience, even obedience unto death, death on a cross. And so then we must submit ourselves to God’s care, especially to the care of those who are our superiors.

The Fourth Step of Humility: Embrace Suffering Patiently and Obediently

“The fourth step of humility is that in this obedience under difficult, unfavorable, or even unjust conditions, his heart quietly embrace suffering and endures it without weakening or seeking escape.” To which St. Benedict adds from Scripture, Anyone who perseveres to the end will be saved (Matt 10:22) and to which we might add “24 Then Jesus said to his disciples: If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me. 25 For he that will save his life, shall lose it: and he that shall lose his life for my sake, shall find it.” (Matthew 16:24-25) that is to say that to take up your cross and follow Christ is to save your life by choosing to give it away in servility and difficulty, but to spare ourselves from humility is to miss the entire point of our creatureliness which is the glorification of God and the honor to which we enjoy by being part of His Creation and of His holy image. Those who do not understand their place and the great benefit to have and keep a righteous and just place in God’s Creation is to throw their lives away and to lose it. Those who lose and give their life for His sake shall find it, eternally present in Him. This is the great blessing of the monastic life or those who get up and follow Him, for they have Him present in their hearts and maintain Him there by His great love in life everlasting. The saints then say, St. Benedict writes, “But in all this we overcome because of Him who so greatly loved us” (Romans 8:37) and “O God, you have tested us , you have tried us as silver is tried by fire; you have led us into a snare, you have placed afflictions on our backs” (Psalm 66:10-11) and this is greatly praised just as those who when stricken turn the other cheek to be stricken again, or when deprived of their coat offer their cloak as well, or when required to go one mile, offer to go two miles. To undergo these humiliations or sufferings patiently is to understand the depth of love of Christ’s love for us and to willingly embrace and reciprocate this love for His sake.

The Fifth Step of Humility: Confess thy Sins and Faults

The fifth step of humility is to regularly confess one’s sins, and in St. Benedict’s rule it is clear that he writes that monks confess directly to their abbot any sinful thoughts that they have in their hearts or any secret wrongdoings that they have committed against him or others. For us, this step of humility is to regularly enter into the Sacrament of Penance to confess our sins to the Lord and to the Church so that the Body of Christ, the Church, might through its ministry and binding and loosing, bring us ever close into communion with the Body of Christ so that we might one day have life everlasting with Him, the Head, Jesus. Of the same account, those seeking to fulfill this step of humility ought regularly to confess to others where they have thought poorly and unjustly of others, and in no way offer back- biting, snarky comments, or flared tempers against others. Simply thus one must avoid judging others for their sins and recognize their own sinfulness all the more strongly when

3

witnessing a brother or sister in Christ fall into temptation. Their humility will reach out to these fallen sinners, relating to them their own faults and encouraging them by their own example to take up the Cross once again and walk the path of humility and love.

The Sixth Step of Humility: Content Yourself with Lowliness

The litany of humility reads, That I should not desire to be approved, Jesus grant me the grace to desire it, and so the sixth step of humility is to content ourselves with lowliness and to accept the lowest ranks and treatment that others have to offer. We recognize our sinfulness and our frailty and in such a manner recognize that of our own selves, left to our own devices, we are of little value, and yet not of no value because God saw in us a precious value so as to atone for our sins and bring us into His life. We are of little value because of our sins but of great value on account of the image we behold of Him. Thus we must sing with the Psalmist, “I am insignificant and ignorant, no better than a beast before You, yet I am with You always.” (Psalm 73:22-23)

The Seventh Step of Humility: Interior Mediocrity

The seventh step of humility is that we recognize and admit not only with our voice but with the fullness of our heart that we are inferior to all because of how we have been given specific, unique, and beloved gifts of God which we have squandered. They were specific to us and beautifully made for us specifically, but we spoiled God’s gifts and abused them. For this, we ought to consider ourselves inferior to others on account of how we abused ourselves through our sins and how we abused God’s gifts. To this we sin as in Psalm 22, “I am truly a worm, not a man, scorned by men and despised by the people.” And just as well “I was exalted, then I was humbled and overwhelmed with confusion.” (Psalm 88:16) or also “It is a blessing that you have humbled me so that I can learn Your commandments” (Psalm 119:71, 73). This then is to understand the fullness of why God humbles us, to learn His commandments and to join ourselves to His own nature of Self- Giving, Self-Abandoning, Self-Emptying Love. Let humility pierce our very hearts as we seek after His own Meek and Humble Heart.

The Eighth Step of Humility: To Keep the Rule

St. Benedict writes that the eighth step of humility is for a Benedictine monk to uphold the common rule of the monastery and to follow the example of his superiors. So too is it with us that we seek to keep peace in the Church, following the common example and good-will of our parish priests and bishops and this ought to be our interpretation of how to keep the rule of our parish community and of the Church as a whole.

The Ninth Step of Humility: Silence and Solitude

A monk, St. Benedict writes, ought only speak when questioned by his superiors or by others, and in all other matters hold his tongue. Do we avoid speaking ill of others, or embrace silence and solitude whenever God provides for us? Do we avoid listening to too much music or videos so as to keep our internal tongue (our mind’s tongue) silent and awaiting the contemplation of God in every moment? Remain silent in the heart and in the tongue, for God’s first language, St. John of the Cross says, is silence. So too then embrace

4

a calm and peaceful desire for solitude, only seeking to speak when spoken too, or of pressing manners, not wasting our tongue on things that do not need to be said or saying things that ought not be said. All of St. James’ 3rd chapter in his epistle ought to be read on this matter:

1 Be not many masters, my brethren, knowing that you receive the greater judgment. 2 For in many things we all offend. If any man offend not in word, the same is a perfect man. He is able also with a bridle to lead about the whole body. 3 For if we put bits into the mouths of horses, that they may obey us: and we turn about their whole body. 4 Behold also ships, whereas they are great and are driven by strong winds, yet are they turned about with a small helm, wherever the force of the governor wills. 5 Even so the tongue is indeed a little member and boasts great things. Behold how small a fire kindles a great wood. 6 And the tongue is a fire, a world of iniquity. The tongue is placed among our members, which defiles the whole body and inflames the wheel of our nativity, being set on fire by hell. 7 For every nature of beasts and of birds and of serpents and of the rest is tamed and has been tamed, by the nature of man. 8 But the tongue no man can tame, an unquiet evil, full of deadly poison. 9 By it we bless God and the Father: and by it we curse men who are made after the likeness of God. 10 Out of the same mouth proceeds blessing and cursing. My brethren, these things ought not so to be. 11 Does a fountain send forth, out of the same hole, sweet and bitter water? 12 Can the fig tree, my brethren, bear grapes? Or the vine, figs? So neither can the salt water yield sweet.

13 Who is a wise man and endued with knowledge, among you? Let him show, by a good contestation, his work in the meekness of wisdom. 14 But if you have bitter zeal, and there be contention in your hearts: glory not and be not liars against the truth. 15 For this is not wisdom, descending from above: but earthly, sensual, devilish. 16 For where envying and contention is: there is inconstancy and every evil work. 17 But the wisdom that is from above, first indeed is chaste, then peaceable, modest, easy to be persuaded, consenting to the good, full of mercy and good fruits, without judging, without dissimulation. 18 And the fruit of justice is sown in peace, to them that make peace.

And just as well St. Benedict quotes, Psalm 140:12, “A talkative man goes about aimlessly on earth and also “In a flood of words you will not avoid sinning” (Proverbs 10:19)

The Tenth Step of Humility: Keep Your Peace in Times of Laughter

The tenth step of humility is to avoid excessive laughter. This may sound excessive, but there is a certain extent to which jocularity, that is joking around too much, or acting a fool can be a major distraction and even arise to use making fun of holy things. Laughing at people or things which are not humorous or good-natured is to show a sort of superiority over a thing, to point to the silliness of a thing and to place one above it. So then for the lay person we must be careful not to laugh at things such as people falling down, or to put people down in our astonishment of their failures. One is entitled to joy and laughter, but

5

6

not a condescending laughter which ruins humility and meekness. This is why St. Benedict enjoins, “Only a fool raises his voice in laughter” (Sirach 21:23) noting that those who are given to laughter easily often are the ones who take too lightly to the world, when their mission is divine and holy perfection.

The Eleventh Step of Humility: Speak Calmly and Modestly

As the tongue is difficult to control and lends us over to quick decisions, so we must train the heart and the tongue to speak modestly, without laughter, gently, lovingly, endearingly, and forever to be conscious of our divine destination. A wise man is known by his few words says St. Benedict. There was a Desert Father, if I recall correctly, to whom a certain bishop was coming and one monk asked him if he was not going to say something to the bishop for spiritual advice, but the Desert Father replied that if he could not teach the bishop by his own silence and contemplation that there would be nothing for him to teach the bishop with words and by speaking. This then is the model life of becoming a living word, like the Word, shining forth through example and speaking very little so as to embrace God and to show others the extent and depth to which God can occupy our minds and hearts. Desire more solitude and quietness so that you might embrace God more readily and more fully.

The Twelfth Step of Humility: Everlasting Humility and Meekness

The final step of humility is to bear all these things in one’s heart at all manners of the night and day. And in this manner the work of God will be manifest to others, and though the monk prays secretly in his closet and not publicly or does pricks his face so as to not appear to be fasting to others, his deeds and holiness will shine forth as a bright fabric and bright white shirt might readily appear to us. His holiness will shine forth, and his contrition for his sins will forever be on his mind, though he will be mindful of the great gifts God has given him, taking care not to squander them. No matter what ordinary or small deed the humble man does it will all be done with the greatest care and offering up to the Lord. In this manner then, perfect love is bloomed, says St. Benedict, a love that casts out all fear, that is to say that what was once toil and suffering has been transformed in Christ to become great joy and comfort to do the will of God. This then is the life of the soul who’s heart is united to God.

Concluding Remarks

And so we might see that the humility of the heart is the foundation of love for the Christian, and in being humble we compare ourselves not only to what we ought to have been with what God gave us, but also look to Jesus, the prime example of life lived for God, for in His taking on our human nature, in all things except sin, He showed us the Way, that is His Sacred Heart held the way of humility. Thus we must take up our crosses and follow Him, for only in humility can we embrace Christ’s Incarnation for our own sakes, walk His loving Passion, and in the hope of our union to Him, rise up with Him to life everlasting. Take hold of the humble life, ask for God’s help. May the Lord guide us into the secret chambers of His Sacred Heart, where we will be enlightened in virtue, in love, in mercy, and in the splendor of the contemplation of His very Self.

St. Benedict pray for us!

[cripthevoteuk-blog]

Disabled in Theresa May’s Britain #44: Jennifer

From London   My disability occurred after an accident in 1996 where I fell down the stairs. This happened a few weeks after my 21st birthday and at the time, I didn't have a clue about how significantly this one act would impact upon my life. 

Initially my attitude was that I could be fixed through medical intervention however it soon became apparent that this was not the case. I felt that I was being pushed into having an operation that had a 33-45% success rate, where I would still be in pain and need pain killers for the rest of my life. I declined the operation and decided to manage my condition myself. 

For the most of the last twenty years, I have just adapted how I do things and I didn't really understand how my disability affected me. In fact, I wouldn't even have said that I was disabled. However, in 2015 I had a major deterioration in my health condition. I'd been in constant pain since the accident but it just seemed to amplify overnight and I had no idea why. This massively reduced my mobility and my capacity to cope with situations that I had just taken for granted.

I engaged with GP services and was referred back to orthopaedic services. I was reluctant due to the only option presented to me 12 years earlier was the surgery with the low success rate. The GP assured me that medical science had moved on in 12 years so I reluctantly allowed the referral. I went dutifully for scans and tests to discover once again the operation that I had declined was what they wanted to perform. (For context, I should state that if I had this surgery there would be no other medical intervention as it would be the last thing they could do). When I told the consultant that I wouldn't consent to this operation and explained that I had allowed the referral to see if there were any more options however I wasn't foolish enough to accept an op with such low outcomes, his response was that then there was nothing he could do for me... "I'm a surgeon... I cut!" 

I went back to my GP and this time I was being encouraged to engage in talking therapies as my GP stated that I had low mood. After my initial assessment I was referred to an NHS pain management programme. I had to wait five months for a place.

At this time a trainee GP joined my practice. She was excellent. For the first time. I saw someone who actually listened to me. She also picked up on another health problem that I had just by taking the time to investigate and being thorough. After seeing another GP for a checkup and again experiencing someone who didn't seem to care or take me seriously, I made it known that I would only see the trainee GP. 

The pain management programme was somewhat helpful but more than the session content I appreciated the opportunity to sit in a room with 13 other people who were in a similar situation who just got what was being said. It was my first realisation that it's very tiring having to constantly explain or justify how you are feeling to people who just don't get it. 

In 2015, I was in a job where I was contracted to work a 45 hour week. The stress of managing my condition and my employers (who couldn't have been less supportive if they tried) was immense. I applied for PIP, which I was granted standard rate for both care and mobility. 

My mobility continued to deteriorate to the point where my two hour commute was impossible. I applied for access to work and was awarded taxis to work. I live in West London and worked in East London. A one way taxi journey was £55. As a tax payer I was horrified. 

I used the service short term but soon found that this was not a solution. There were a number of occasions where taxis wouldn't turn up and I wait anywhere up to 3 hours to be collected. I had been given a manual wheelchair by NHS wheelchair services, I can't even count how many taxis I had to send back as the couldn't transport the wheelchair. 

I decided to inform PIP that my condition had deteriorated and to my horror despite it being less that a year since I had my last assessment, I was told that I would need to start the whole process again from scratch. (Side note: again I was sent to an assessment centre miles away despite the fact that there is an assessment centre less than two miles from where I live). In early 2016 after months of waiting I was awarded the higher mobility rate of PIP. 

I decided that I was not able to manage working a 45 hour week on the other side of London and was lucky enough to find a part time job closer to home. However luck was not to be on my side... not only had my health continued to deteriorate but I was made redundant in March 2017. 

I applied to my local authority to be put onto the housing list as I live in shared accommodation where I live upstairs and cannot manage the bathroom nor kitchen facilities. They initially turned me down but after a long and protracted appeal I have been granted non emergency medical priority. My housing issues mean that I spend majority of the time sleeping on my elderly parents sofa and using an under the stairs WC handbasin to try and keep myself clean. 

I have found the housing situation the most difficult thing to deal with thus far. Finding an affordable accessible place to rent in London is nigh on impossible. I believe that the local authority make it as difficult as possible on purpose. I also have applied to housing associations and have been knocked back for two available properties as I'm not old enough! 

I now find myself preparing for another battle as my GP had stated that I'm not well enough to work so I have applied for ESA. I've heard all the horror stories and I'm hoping that it won't be the case for me. I feel very anxious about the next few weeks especially as I discovered last week that the GP that I see will be leaving the practice at the end of the month.

[seekfirstme]

The following reflection is courtesy of Don Schwager © 2019. Don's website is located at Dailyscripture.ServantsOfTheWord.org

Meditation: Why does the Lord Jesus say we must 'hate' our families and even ourselves (Luke 14:26)? In Biblical times the expression 'to hate' often meant to 'prefer less'. Jesus used strong language to make clear that nothing should take precedence or first place over God. God our heavenly Father created us in his image and likeness to be his beloved sons and daughters. He has put us first in his love and concern for our well-being and happiness. Our love for him is a response to his exceeding love and kindness towards us. True love is costly because it holds nothing back from the beloved - it is ready to give all and sacrifice all for the beloved. God the Father gave us his only begotten Son, the Lord Jesus Christ, who freely offered up his life for us on the cross as the atoning sacrifice for our sins. His sacrificial death brought us pardon and healing, new life in the Spirit and peace with God.

The cost of following Jesus as his disciples

Jesus willingly embraced the cross, not only out of obedience to his Father's will, but out of a merciful love for each one of us in order to set us free from slavery to sin, Satan, and everything that would keep us from his love, truth, and goodness. Jesus knew that the cross was the Father's way for him to achieve victory over sin and death - and glory for our sake as well. He counted the cost and said 'yes' to his Father's will. If we want to share in his glory and victory, then we, too, must 'count the cost' and say 'yes" to his call to "take up our cross and follow him" as our Lord and Savior.

What is the 'way of the cross' for you and me? It means that when my will crosses with God's will, then his will must be done. The way of the cross involves sacrifice, the sacrifice of laying down my life each and every day for Jesus' sake. What makes such sacrifice possible and "sweet" for us is the love of God poured out for us in the blood of Christ who cleanses us and makes us a new creation in him. Paul the Apostle tells us that "God's love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit who has been given to us" (Romans 5:5). We can never outmatch God in his merciful love and kindness towards us. He always gives us more than we can expect or imagine. Do you allow the Holy Spirit to fill your heart and transform your life with the overflowing love and mercy of God?

The wise plan ahead to avert failure and shame

What do the twin parables of the tower builder and a ruler on a war campaign have in common (Luke 14:28-32)? Both the tower builder and the ruler risked serious loss if they did not carefully plan ahead to make sure they could finish what they had begun. In a shame and honor culture people want at all costs to avoid being mocked by their community for failing to complete a task which they had begun in earnest. This double set of parables echoes the instruction given in the Old Testament Book of Proverbs: "By wisdom a house is built" and "by wise guidance you can wage a war" to ensure victory (Proverbs 24:3-6).

In Jesus' time every landowner who could afford it built a wall around his orchard or vineyard as a protection from intruders who might steal or destroy his produce. A tower was usually built in a corner of the wall and a guard posted especially during harvest time when thieves would likely try to make off with the goods. Starting a building-project, like a watchtower, and leaving it unfinished because of poor planning or insufficient funds would invite the scorn of the whole village. Likewise a king who decided to wage a war against an opponent who was much stronger, would be considered foolish if he did not come up with a plan that had a decent chance of success. Counting the cost and investing wisely are necessary conditions for securing a good return on the investment.

The great exchange

If you prize something of great value and want to possess it, it's natural to ask what it will cost you before you make a commitment to invest in it. Jesus was utterly honest and spared no words to tell his disciples that it would cost them dearly to be his disciples - it would cost them their whole lives and all they possessed in exchange for the new life and treasure of God's kingdom. The Lord Jesus leaves no room for compromise or concession. We either give our lives over to him entirely or we keep them for ourselves. Paul the Apostle reminds us, "We are not our own. We were bought with a price" ( 1 Corinthians 6:19b,20). We were once slaves to sin and a kingdom of darkness and oppression, but we have now been purchased with the precious blood of Jesus Christ who has ransomed us from a life of darkness and destruction so we could enter his kingdom of light and truth. Christ has set us free to choose whom we will serve in this present life as well as in the age to come - God's kingdom of light, truth, and goodness or Satan's kingdom of darkness, lies, and deception. There are no neutral parties - we are either for God's kingdom or against it.

Who do you love first - above all else?

The love of God compels us to choose who or what will be first in our lives. To place any relationship or any possession above God is a form of idolatry - worshiping the creature in place of the Creator and Ruler over all he has made. Jesus challenges his disciples to examine who and what they love first and foremost. We can be ruled and mastered by many different things - money, drugs, success, power or fame. Only one Master, the Lord Jesus Christ, can truly set us free from the power of sin, greed, and destruction. The choice is ours - who will we serve and follow - the path and destiny the Lord Jesus offers us or the path we choose in opposition to God's will and purpose for our lives. It boils down to choosing between life and death, truth and falsehood, goodness and evil. If we choose for the Lord Jesus and put our trust in him, he will show us the path that leads to true joy and happiness with our Father in heaven.

"Lord Jesus, you are my Treasure, my Life, and my All. There is nothing in this life that can outweigh the joy of knowing, loving, and serving you all the days of my life. Take my life and all that I have and make it yours for your glory now and forever."

The following reflection is from One Bread, One Body courtesy of Presentation Ministries © 2019.

 

THE CONSEQUENCES OF LUKEWARM CHRISTIANITY

  "If one of you decides to build a tower, will he not first sit down and calculate the outlay to see if he has enough money to complete the project?" —Luke 14:28  

To be disciples of Christ, we must make the radical decision of totally giving ourselves to the Lord. If we decide to do anything less, our Christian lives will be unfinished, and we will be ridiculed and defeated (Lk 14:29ff).

Some Christians in the USA have not made a total commitment to Christ. So they, especially Catholic Christians, are repeatedly portrayed as fools by the media. Moreover, one of the most important works of most Christians is to make disciples of their children. Countless Christian parents have not finished this work, for their adult children are not committed to the Lord. They have been defeated by the world, the flesh, and the devil, and their children are the major casualties of this war.

We have ample evidence of the dire consequences of making less than a total commitment to the Lord. Yet "the deliberations of mortals are timid, and unsure are our plans" (Wis 9:14). We need the "Holy Spirit from on high" (Wis 9:17) to confirm us in faith so that we will decide to live for the Lord totally and radically. Come, Holy Spirit!

  Prayer: Father, I repent of giving You anything less than everything. Promise: "I did not want to do anything without your consent, that kindness might not be forced on you but might be freely bestowed." —Phlm 14 Praise: All praise and all thanksgiving be to You, risen Lord Jesus. By your death and resurrection, You have saved the world. Alleluia!   (For a related teaching on Christian Parenting, order, listen to, or download our and or on our website.)  

  Rescript: In accord with the Code of Canon Law, I hereby grant the Nihil Obstat ("Permission to Publish") for One Bread, One Body covering the period from August 1, 2019 through September 30, 2019.

†Most Reverend Joseph R. Binzer, Auxiliary Bishop, Vicar General of the Archdiocese of Cincinnati, February 15, 2019.  

The Nihil Obstat ("Permission to Publish") is a declaration that a book or pamphlet is considered to be free of doctrinal or moral error. It is not implied that those who have granted the Nihil Obstat agree with the contents, opinions, or statements

[marymosley]

Fooey on the Draft

Iancu v. Brunetti (Supreme Court 2019) [Oral Arg Transcript]

In this case, the Federal Circuit held that the prohibition on registering “immoral” or “scandalous” marks is a facial violation of a registrant’s First Amendment free speech rights.  Here, Brunetti is seeking to register the mark “FUCT,” which the solicitor identified as a close homonym of “the paradigmatic word of profanity in our language.” Oral arguments were held on April 15 before the nine Supreme Court justices.

In the case before the Supreme Court, the Government has conceded that the USPTO’s historic application of the test has been hit-or-miss, but that going forward the agency can be trusted to to draw the line against “marks that are offensive [or] shocking to a substantial segment of the public because of their mode of expression, independent of any views that they may express.”  This would include words like FUCT, as well as certain sexually explicit images, for instance.

Although the prohibition is content based, the government argues that its approach would be viewpoint neutral – just like many of the other conditions for obtaining trademark rights.  This should lead to a lower level of scrutiny than that faced in Tam v. Matal (2017).  In addition, my view is that Tam itself was decided on thin grounds because trademark denial does not actually limit anyone’s speech.  The difficulty with merging speech issues with trademark law is – as Chief Justice Roberts stated at oral arguements – The whole point of this program [i.e., trademark law] is to regulate content.”

Here, it is clear that some regulations would be allowable — such as prohibiting registration of “obscene” marks.  However, the statute goes to far by broadly prohibiting registration of both “immoral” and “scandalous” marks.  The question is whether the Supreme Court is willing to effectively rewrite the statute to fit within the constitutional limits.  Justice Gorsuch got to the point: “We can fix your [overbroad statute] problem for you, I got that. . . [But] how is a person who wants to get a mark supposed to tell what the PTO is going to do? Is it a flip of the coin?”  As an example, this case focuses on FUCT, but FCUK and FVCK are already registered marks.

Justice Alito sees the case as potentially reinvigorating manifest destiny – “There’s going to be a mad scramble by people to register these marks . . . whatever lists of really dirty words . . . and all their variations.”

Brunetti’s attorney John Sommer started off well with his two points:

There are two important points to be made. First, the government does not defend the plain language of the statute. Nor does it defend how it’s been consistently interpreted for the last 70 years. Rather, it asks this Court to validate a hypothetical statute not enacted.

The second point is that a substantial number of Americans think that gambling, drinking, eating some types of meat, eating meat at all is immoral. A substantial number of Americans, as to abortion, gun control, immigration, our two political parties, a substantial number think that those are — the con is immoral, and a substantial number think that the pro is immoral. There’s no — simply no way to make a — a sensible determination between those that come in and those must stay out.

In a classic line, Sommer also discussed the Supreme Court’s 1971 decision in Cohen v. California:

Mr. SOMMER: Cohen could have said fooey on the draft, and that’s what the government says he should have done, and if he said something else, he should have been arrested and his conviction should have been affirmed, but we know his conviction was reversed. . . . You know, if the government had a list of seven dirty words [that cannot be registered], would that be constitutional?

JUSTICE ALITO: Oh, come on. You know, come on.

JUSTICE GORSUCH: Cohen can have his T-shirt, but we are not going to trademark them, and we’ve held just last year that a patent is a public benefit that can be withdrawn without a judge. Why isn’t this also similarly a public benefit rather than a private right?

JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: Why can’t the government say, no, we’re not going to give you space on our public registry for words that we find are not acceptable?

MR. SOMMER: Would the government be allowed to refuse registration of ownership of property because it’s bought by a church with a name that’s considered offensive? Could the Coast Guard refuse to register a boat because they think the name of the boat is a little bit salacious?

JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: Actually, you’re right.

. . .

MR. SOMMER: We have a facial challenge here, so the question is, is it overbroad? And it doesn’t matter if Mr. Brunetti’s mark should be granted or not. It’s the statute as written and as applied, without exception, covers a fair amount of clearly core speech, of high-value speech.

. . .

[the risk of regulation here is that it can] take our level of discussion in our diverse society . . . to, you know, the lowest common denominator, the most squeamish among us.

Sommer made his point here, but where he faltered was on his additional argument that many of the scandalous restrictions are viewpoint based — the justices did not appear to follow that line of thinking.

JUSTICE BREYER: No, I don’t agree with it’s viewpoint. I think that very often the word involved in your case and the racial slur is not viewpoint. It is used to insult somebody, rather like fighting words, or it’s used to call attention to yourself. That’s the purpose of the slur. That isn’t viewpoint. Fighting words isn’t viewpoint. Or, if it is, it’s overcome.

MR. SOMMER: I don’t think the profanity always expresses viewpoint.

JUSTICE KAVANAUGH: When does it not?

MR. SOMMER: Well, fleeting expletives and I think when it’s used without any relevance to the subject matter, such as in high school speech, and, of course, there still can be – –

JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: Some — some of us would say that a vulgar word with relationship to selling clothes is sort of irrelevant?

MR. SOMMER: Well, it’s not irrelevant because, as Justice Ginsburg pointed out, the audience that Mr. Brunetti is appealing to is young men who want to be rebels. And this is how they do it.

Some interesting points of the discussion: does the “scandalous” nature of the mark apply to the public as a whole or only potential consumers (gov says “public as a whole”); if the statute is struck down, can the PTO still reject obscene marks (ans: yes, if not used in commerce).

In the rebuttal, the Government offered what appeared to be something of a veiled threat of dire consequences if the statute is invalidated — noting that the PTO already views TAM as prohibiting denial of registration for racial slurs

But with respect to the single-most offensive racial slur, the PTO is currently holding in abeyance applications that incorporate that word, pending this Court’s decision on — leave open the possibility that that word might be viewed as scandalous.

Section 2 of the Lanham Act includes a host of reasons for refusing to register a trademark.  The PTO may not register immoral or scandalous marks; marks that are deceptive; marks that disparage, falsely suggest a connection with, bring into contempt, or disrepute “persons, living or dead, institutions, beliefs, or national symbols;” governmental flags or coats of arms; “name, portrait, or signature” of a living person (without consent) or of a dead President “during the life of his widow;” marks likely to cause confusion or mistake because of their resemblance to other registered marks; marks that are merely descriptive or deceptively misdescriptive of the goods; etc.  If the Federal Circuit is affirmed here, it will be interesting to see what comes next.

Fooey on the Draft published first on https://immigrationlawyerto.tumblr.com/

[practicalthings]

Respecting The Source or Professional Who Makes Others Shine!

The preceding content in video form was NOT and is NOT endorsed by the photographers listed below, there services were independently acquires through legal services providing skill, talent, and craftsmanship..

The photographers skill, talent, and craftsmanship has been accessed and provided within the content provided above, and cited sources have been linked inside of the content as the resource is a legally acquired resource.

Thanks for allowing the fruit of your labor to enhance and foster other people success as well as you own. This page is to assist others, the photographers, who have allowed me to appear more professional through the assistance of their skill-sets.

Thomas Collins Jr. believes in unselfishness and feels by sharing the fruits of others people’s passions, when allowed to be co-mingled with his own honorably, the world becomes greater for the overall success of team centered environments.

Please take the time to visit these professionals and if possible remember them if you are unable to support them directly at this time. By having their accomplishments seen there may be more ways which are possible to achieve a healthy team centered marketplace of ideas, craftsmanship, and integrity.

The Microsoft Powerpoint Presentation has every source hyperlinked for the respect the photographers deserve for their employed efforts, the embedded direct links are are not clickable so this is entry is to appropriately display my respect. Please use the contact link if you are aware of how to resolve this,. I have researched to locate no result which adequately resolves the problem.

https://youtu.be/Aln_UOSubGY , Why The Handshake Of Yesterday Matters And What It May Look Like Today. By Thomas Collins Jr.

People from all walks of life suffer from Information Failure! Too much or too little delivers a cause, effect, and repercussion.

Regardless of consumer or professional prowess there is always room to improve the way humans communicate. This will not make your breakfast and take you to work. However themes never expire when trying to win friends and accompany people to a better position of leverage when trying to achieve an excellent quality of life.

Mental intuition, body language distortion, and misinterpreted meanderings of vocabulary traditionally inspire, deflate, or numb the psyche. This video may just do that too.

Thomas Collins Jr. wishes you the best of health, happiness, prosperity, peace, and success.

https://www.amazon.com/Thomas-Collins-Jr./e/B00FARBGA6

http://www.lulu.com/spotlight/thomas_collins_jr

https://www.goodreads.com/author/show/8443660.Thomas_Collins_Jr_

http://thingsofpracticality.squarespace.com/

https://youtu.be/Aln_UOSubGY

There are three images references below. Again these photographers are in no way are involved with content creation and have not endorsed any product, good, material, or resources of Thomas Collins Jr. Please let them know they are appreciated. From Portland, Maine via Colorado Springs, Colorado

References or Resources :

1. https://pixabay.com/users/cleverpix-2508959/ , https://pixabay.com/photos/hot-air-ballons-balloons-flying-1373167/ , Cleverpix, Cindy Lever, Age 54, Melbourne, Australia, Member Since May 4th, 2016

https://pixabay.com/service/terms/#license

Terms of Service

Date of Last Revision: January 09, 2019

The following is a legal agreement between you ("you" or "User/s") and the owners and operators ("we", "us", or "Pixabay") of the site at pixabay.com (the "Website") and all related websites, software, mobile apps, and other services that we provide (together, the "Service"). Your use of the Service, and our provision of the Service to you, constitutes an agreement by you and Pixabay to be bound by the terms and conditions in these Terms of Service ("Terms").

"Content" shall refer collectively to all Images and Videos available under the Pixabay License. "Image/s" includes photographs, vectors, drawings, and illustrations. "Video/s" refers to any moving images, animations, films, or other audio/visual representations.

We reserve the right, at our sole discretion, to change or modify portions of these Terms at any time. If we do this, we will post the changes on this page and will indicate at the top of this page the date these Terms were last revised. Any such changes will become effective immediately. Your continued use of the Service after the date any such changes become effective constitutes your acceptance of the new Terms.

Requirements and Registration

You may use the Service only if you can form a binding contract with Pixabay, and only in compliance with these Terms and all applicable laws, rules, and regulations. The Service is not available to any Users previously removed from the Service by Pixabay. You may be required to register with us in order to access and use certain features of the Service. If you choose to register for the Service, you agree to provide and maintain true, accurate, and current information as prompted by the Service's registration form. Registration data and certain other information about you are governed by our Privacy Policy. If you are under 16 years old, you may use the Service only with the approval of your parent, guardian, or teacher.

Use of the Service

In connection with your use of the Service you will not engage in or use any data mining, robots, scraping or similar data gathering or extraction methods. The technology and software underlying the Service or distributed in connection therewith is the property of Pixabay and our licensors, affiliates and partners and you are granted no license in respect of that Software. You agree not to copy, modify, create a derivative work from, reverse engineer, reverse assemble or otherwise attempt to discover any source code, sell, assign, sublicense, or otherwise transfer any right in such technology or software. Any rights not expressly granted herein are reserved by Pixabay.

Large scale or systematic copying of Content, including using any of the methods referred to above, is prohibited except as expressly authorized by Pixabay. This applies to all Content, including Content made available as part of the public domain. The Service is protected by copyright as a collective work and/or compilation, pursuant to copyright laws, international conventions, and other intellectual property laws.

License for Images and Videos – Pixabay License

Images and Videos on Pixabay are made available under the Pixabay License on the following terms. Under the Pixabay License you are granted an irrevocable, worldwide, non-exclusive and royalty free right to use, download, copy, modify or adapt the Images and Videos for commercial or non-commercial purposes. Attribution of the photographer or Pixabay is not required but is always appreciated.

The Pixabay License does not allow:

sale or distribution of Images or Videos as digital stock photos or as digital wallpapers;

sale or distribution of Images or Videos e.g. as a posters, digital prints or physical products, without adding any additional elements or otherwise adding value;

depiction of identifiable persons in an offensive, pornographic, obscene, immoral, defamatory or libelous way; or

any suggestion that there is an endorsement of products and services by depicted persons, brands, and organisations, unless permission was granted.

Please be aware that while all Images and Videos on Pixabay are free to use for commercial and non-commercial purposes, depicted items in the Images or Videos, such as identifiable people, logos, brands, etc. may be subject to additional copyrights, property rights, privacy rights, trademarks etc. and may require the consent of a third party or the license of these rights - particularly for commercial applications. Pixabay does not represent or warrant that such consents or licenses have been obtained, and expressly disclaims any liability in this respect.

Uploading Content

By uploading Images or Videos to the Website, you grant Pixabay and its users an irrevocable, worldwide, non-exclusive and royaltyfree right to use, download, copy, modify or adapt the Images and Videos for almost any purpose, both commercial and non-commercial. For the avoidance of doubt, this includes the right of Pixabay to distribute the Images or Videos under the Pixabay License or any other license offered by Pixabay from time to time.

You are solely responsible for the Content you upload. You warrant that:

you own all proprietary rights in the Content you upload to the Website and that the Content does not infringe the copyright, property right, trademark or other applicable rights of any third parties; and

you have obtained a non-exclusive, perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, and royalty-free Model and/or Property Release, and/or any other permission necessary concerning the use of this work for any purpose, without any conditions, unless such conditions are required by law.

You accept that even though we do our best to prevent it from happening, Pixabay cannot be held responsible for the acts or omissions of its users, including any misuse or abuse of any Content you upload.

We also reserve the right to remove any Content at any time and for any reason, including if we believe it's defective, of poor quality, or in violation of these Terms.

Termination

We may terminate or suspend your account immediately, without prior notice or liability, for any reason whatsoever, including without limitation if you breach the Terms. Upon termination, your right to use the Website will immediately cease.

Indemnification for breach of Terms

You agree to indemnify and hold harmless Pixabay from and against any and all loss, expenses, damages, and costs, including without limitation reasonable attorneys fees, resulting, whether directly or indirectly, from your violation of the Terms. You also agree to indemnify and hold harmless Pixabay from and against any and all claims brought by third parties arising out of your use of the Website.

Warranty and liability

THE WEBSITE AND ITS CONTENT ARE PROVIDED "AS IS". WE OFFER NO WARRANTY, EXPLICIT OR IMPLIED, REGARDING ANY CONTENT, THE WEBSITE, THE ACCURACY OF ANY INFORMATION, OR ANY RIGHTS OR LICENSES UNDER THIS AGREEMENT INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. PIXABAY DOES NOT REPRESENT OR WARRANT THAT THE WEBSITE OR ITS CONTENT WILL MEET YOUR REQUIREMENTS OR THAT THEIR USE WILL BE UNINTERRUPTED OR ERROR FREE.

PIXABAY SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU OR TO ANY OTHER PERSON OR ENTITY FOR ANY GENERAL, PUNITIVE, SPECIAL, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES, OR LOST PROFITS OR ANY OTHER DAMAGES, COSTS OR LOSSES ARISING OUT OF YOUR USE OF THE WEBSITE OR ITS CONTENT.

2. https://pixabay.com/users/rawpixel-4283981/ , https://pixabay.com/photos/paper-desk-table-break-coffee-3164718/ , Rawpixel, English, Member Since January 17th, 2017

https://pixabay.com/service/terms/

Terms of Service

Date of Last Revision: January 09, 2019

The following is a legal agreement between you ("you" or "User/s") and the owners and operators ("we", "us", or "Pixabay") of the site at pixabay.com (the "Website") and all related websites, software, mobile apps, and other services that we provide (together, the "Service"). Your use of the Service, and our provision of the Service to you, constitutes an agreement by you and Pixabay to be bound by the terms and conditions in these Terms of Service ("Terms").

"Content" shall refer collectively to all Images and Videos available under the Pixabay License. "Image/s" includes photographs, vectors, drawings, and illustrations. "Video/s" refers to any moving images, animations, films, or other audio/visual representations.

We reserve the right, at our sole discretion, to change or modify portions of these Terms at any time. If we do this, we will post the changes on this page and will indicate at the top of this page the date these Terms were last revised. Any such changes will become effective immediately. Your continued use of the Service after the date any such changes become effective constitutes your acceptance of the new Terms.

Requirements and Registration

You may use the Service only if you can form a binding contract with Pixabay, and only in compliance with these Terms and all applicable laws, rules, and regulations. The Service is not available to any Users previously removed from the Service by Pixabay. You may be required to register with us in order to access and use certain features of the Service. If you choose to register for the Service, you agree to provide and maintain true, accurate, and current information as prompted by the Service's registration form. Registration data and certain other information about you are governed by our Privacy Policy. If you are under 16 years old, you may use the Service only with the approval of your parent, guardian, or teacher.

Use of the Service

In connection with your use of the Service you will not engage in or use any data mining, robots, scraping or similar data gathering or extraction methods. The technology and software underlying the Service or distributed in connection therewith is the property of Pixabay and our licensors, affiliates and partners and you are granted no license in respect of that Software. You agree not to copy, modify, create a derivative work from, reverse engineer, reverse assemble or otherwise attempt to discover any source code, sell, assign, sublicense, or otherwise transfer any right in such technology or software. Any rights not expressly granted herein are reserved by Pixabay.

Large scale or systematic copying of Content, including using any of the methods referred to above, is prohibited except as expressly authorized by Pixabay. This applies to all Content, including Content made available as part of the public domain. The Service is protected by copyright as a collective work and/or compilation, pursuant to copyright laws, international conventions, and other intellectual property laws.

License for Images and Videos – Pixabay License

Images and Videos on Pixabay are made available under the Pixabay License on the following terms. Under the Pixabay License you are granted an irrevocable, worldwide, non-exclusive and royalty free right to use, download, copy, modify or adapt the Images and Videos for commercial or non-commercial purposes. Attribution of the photographer or Pixabay is not required but is always appreciated.

The Pixabay License does not allow:

sale or distribution of Images or Videos as digital stock photos or as digital wallpapers;

sale or distribution of Images or Videos e.g. as a posters, digital prints or physical products, without adding any additional elements or otherwise adding value;

depiction of identifiable persons in an offensive, pornographic, obscene, immoral, defamatory or libelous way; or

any suggestion that there is an endorsement of products and services by depicted persons, brands, and organisations, unless permission was granted.

Please be aware that while all Images and Videos on Pixabay are free to use for commercial and non-commercial purposes, depicted items in the Images or Videos, such as identifiable people, logos, brands, etc. may be subject to additional copyrights, property rights, privacy rights, trademarks etc. and may require the consent of a third party or the license of these rights - particularly for commercial applications. Pixabay does not represent or warrant that such consents or licenses have been obtained, and expressly disclaims any liability in this respect.

Uploading Content

By uploading Images or Videos to the Website, you grant Pixabay and its users an irrevocable, worldwide, non-exclusive and royaltyfree right to use, download, copy, modify or adapt the Images and Videos for almost any purpose, both commercial and non-commercial. For the avoidance of doubt, this includes the right of Pixabay to distribute the Images or Videos under the Pixabay License or any other license offered by Pixabay from time to time.

You are solely responsible for the Content you upload. You warrant that:

you own all proprietary rights in the Content you upload to the Website and that the Content does not infringe the copyright, property right, trademark or other applicable rights of any third parties; and

you have obtained a non-exclusive, perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, and royalty-free Model and/or Property Release, and/or any other permission necessary concerning the use of this work for any purpose, without any conditions, unless such conditions are required by law.

You accept that even though we do our best to prevent it from happening, Pixabay cannot be held responsible for the acts or omissions of its users, including any misuse or abuse of any Content you upload.

We also reserve the right to remove any Content at any time and for any reason, including if we believe it's defective, of poor quality, or in violation of these Terms.

Termination

We may terminate or suspend your account immediately, without prior notice or liability, for any reason whatsoever, including without limitation if you breach the Terms. Upon termination, your right to use the Website will immediately cease.

Indemnification for breach of Terms

You agree to indemnify and hold harmless Pixabay from and against any and all loss, expenses, damages, and costs, including without limitation reasonable attorneys fees, resulting, whether directly or indirectly, from your violation of the Terms. You also agree to indemnify and hold harmless Pixabay from and against any and all claims brought by third parties arising out of your use of the Website.

Warranty and liability

THE WEBSITE AND ITS CONTENT ARE PROVIDED "AS IS". WE OFFER NO WARRANTY, EXPLICIT OR IMPLIED, REGARDING ANY CONTENT, THE WEBSITE, THE ACCURACY OF ANY INFORMATION, OR ANY RIGHTS OR LICENSES UNDER THIS AGREEMENT INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. PIXABAY DOES NOT REPRESENT OR WARRANT THAT THE WEBSITE OR ITS CONTENT WILL MEET YOUR REQUIREMENTS OR THAT THEIR USE WILL BE UNINTERRUPTED OR ERROR FREE.

PIXABAY SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU OR TO ANY OTHER PERSON OR ENTITY FOR ANY GENERAL, PUNITIVE, SPECIAL, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES, OR LOST PROFITS OR ANY OTHER DAMAGES, COSTS OR LOSSES ARISING OUT OF YOUR USE OF THE WEBSITE OR ITS CONTENT.

3. https://pixabay.com/users/artbejo-850426/ , https://pixabay.com/photos/grave-sky-cross-old-stone-heaven-674443/ , Artbejo., Gabor Bejo, Age 44, Esztergom, Magyarorszag, Member Since March 15th, 2015

https://pixabay.com/service/terms/

Terms of Service

Date of Last Revision: January 09, 2019

The following is a legal agreement between you ("you" or "User/s") and the owners and operators ("we", "us", or "Pixabay") of the site at pixabay.com (the "Website") and all related websites, software, mobile apps, and other services that we provide (together, the "Service"). Your use of the Service, and our provision of the Service to you, constitutes an agreement by you and Pixabay to be bound by the terms and conditions in these Terms of Service ("Terms").

"Content" shall refer collectively to all Images and Videos available under the Pixabay License. "Image/s" includes photographs, vectors, drawings, and illustrations. "Video/s" refers to any moving images, animations, films, or other audio/visual representations.

We reserve the right, at our sole discretion, to change or modify portions of these Terms at any time. If we do this, we will post the changes on this page and will indicate at the top of this page the date these Terms were last revised. Any such changes will become effective immediately. Your continued use of the Service after the date any such changes become effective constitutes your acceptance of the new Terms.

Requirements and Registration

You may use the Service only if you can form a binding contract with Pixabay, and only in compliance with these Terms and all applicable laws, rules, and regulations. The Service is not available to any Users previously removed from the Service by Pixabay. You may be required to register with us in order to access and use certain features of the Service. If you choose to register for the Service, you agree to provide and maintain true, accurate, and current information as prompted by the Service's registration form. Registration data and certain other information about you are governed by our Privacy Policy. If you are under 16 years old, you may use the Service only with the approval of your parent, guardian, or teacher.

Use of the Service

In connection with your use of the Service you will not engage in or use any data mining, robots, scraping or similar data gathering or extraction methods. The technology and software underlying the Service or distributed in connection therewith is the property of Pixabay and our licensors, affiliates and partners and you are granted no license in respect of that Software. You agree not to copy, modify, create a derivative work from, reverse engineer, reverse assemble or otherwise attempt to discover any source code, sell, assign, sublicense, or otherwise transfer any right in such technology or software. Any rights not expressly granted herein are reserved by Pixabay.

Large scale or systematic copying of Content, including using any of the methods referred to above, is prohibited except as expressly authorized by Pixabay. This applies to all Content, including Content made available as part of the public domain. The Service is protected by copyright as a collective work and/or compilation, pursuant to copyright laws, international conventions, and other intellectual property laws.

License for Images and Videos – Pixabay License

Images and Videos on Pixabay are made available under the Pixabay License on the following terms. Under the Pixabay License you are granted an irrevocable, worldwide, non-exclusive and royalty free right to use, download, copy, modify or adapt the Images and Videos for commercial or non-commercial purposes. Attribution of the photographer or Pixabay is not required but is always appreciated.

The Pixabay License does not allow:

sale or distribution of Images or Videos as digital stock photos or as digital wallpapers;

sale or distribution of Images or Videos e.g. as a posters, digital prints or physical products, without adding any additional elements or otherwise adding value;

depiction of identifiable persons in an offensive, pornographic, obscene, immoral, defamatory or libelous way; or

any suggestion that there is an endorsement of products and services by depicted persons, brands, and organisations, unless permission was granted.

Please be aware that while all Images and Videos on Pixabay are free to use for commercial and non-commercial purposes, depicted items in the Images or Videos, such as identifiable people, logos, brands, etc. may be subject to additional copyrights, property rights, privacy rights, trademarks etc. and may require the consent of a third party or the license of these rights - particularly for commercial applications. Pixabay does not represent or warrant that such consents or licenses have been obtained, and expressly disclaims any liability in this respect.

Uploading Content

By uploading Images or Videos to the Website, you grant Pixabay and its users an irrevocable, worldwide, non-exclusive and royaltyfree right to use, download, copy, modify or adapt the Images and Videos for almost any purpose, both commercial and non-commercial. For the avoidance of doubt, this includes the right of Pixabay to distribute the Images or Videos under the Pixabay License or any other license offered by Pixabay from time to time.

You are solely responsible for the Content you upload. You warrant that:

you own all proprietary rights in the Content you upload to the Website and that the Content does not infringe the copyright, property right, trademark or other applicable rights of any third parties; and

you have obtained a non-exclusive, perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, and royalty-free Model and/or Property Release, and/or any other permission necessary concerning the use of this work for any purpose, without any conditions, unless such conditions are required by law.

You accept that even though we do our best to prevent it from happening, Pixabay cannot be held responsible for the acts or omissions of its users, including any misuse or abuse of any Content you upload.

We also reserve the right to remove any Content at any time and for any reason, including if we believe it's defective, of poor quality, or in violation of these Terms.

Termination

We may terminate or suspend your account immediately, without prior notice or liability, for any reason whatsoever, including without limitation if you breach the Terms. Upon termination, your right to use the Website will immediately cease.

Indemnification for breach of Terms

You agree to indemnify and hold harmless Pixabay from and against any and all loss, expenses, damages, and costs, including without limitation reasonable attorneys fees, resulting, whether directly or indirectly, from your violation of the Terms. You also agree to indemnify and hold harmless Pixabay from and against any and all claims brought by third parties arising out of your use of the Website.

Warranty and liability

THE WEBSITE AND ITS CONTENT ARE PROVIDED "AS IS". WE OFFER NO WARRANTY, EXPLICIT OR IMPLIED, REGARDING ANY CONTENT, THE WEBSITE, THE ACCURACY OF ANY INFORMATION, OR ANY RIGHTS OR LICENSES UNDER THIS AGREEMENT INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. PIXABAY DOES NOT REPRESENT OR WARRANT THAT THE WEBSITE OR ITS CONTENT WILL MEET YOUR REQUIREMENTS OR THAT THEIR USE WILL BE UNINTERRUPTED OR ERROR FREE.

PIXABAY SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU OR TO ANY OTHER PERSON OR ENTITY FOR ANY GENERAL, PUNITIVE, SPECIAL, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES, OR LOST PROFITS OR ANY OTHER DAMAGES, COSTS OR LOSSES ARISING OUT OF YOUR USE OF THE WEBSITE OR ITS CONTENT.

[pamphletstoinspire]

Our Universal Mother - Part 84 - 5

Mary: God’s Yes to Man - Part 5

***

CHAPTER ONE - MARY IN THE MYSTERY OF CHRIST

2. Blessed is she who believed

12. Immediately after the narration of the Annunciation, the Evangelist Luke guides us in the footsteps of the Virgin of Nazareth toward “a city of Judah” (Lk 1:39). According to scholars this city would be the modern Ain Karim, situated in the mountains, not far from Jerusalem. Mary arrived there “in haste”, to visit Elizabeth her kinswoman. The reason for her visit is also to be found in the fact that at the Annunciation Gabriel had made special mention of Elizabeth, who in her old age had conceived a son by her husband Zechariah, through the power of God: “your kinswoman Elizabeth in her old age has also conceived a son; and this is the sixth month with her who was called barren. For with God nothing will be impossible” (Lk 1:36-37). The divine messenger had spoken of what had been accomplished in Elizabeth in order to answer Mary’s question: “How shall this be, since I have no husband?” (Lk 1:34). It is to come to pass precisely through the “power of the Most High”, just as it happened in the case of Elizabeth, and even more so.

Moved by charity, therefore, Mary goes to the house of her kinswoman. When Mary enters, Elizabeth replies to her greeting and feels the child leap in her womb, and being “filled with the Holy Spirit” she greets Mary with a loud cry: “Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb!” (cf. Lk 1:40-42). Elizabeth’s exclamation or acclamation was subsequently to become part of the Hail Mary, as a continuation of the angel’s greeting, thus becoming one of the Church’s most frequently used prayers. But still more significant are the words of Elizabeth in the question which follows: “And why is this granted me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?” (Lk 1:43). Elizabeth bears witness to Mary: she recognizes and proclaims that before her stands the Mother of the Lord, the Mother of the Messiah. The son whom Elizabeth is carrying in her womb also shares in this witness: “The babe in my womb leaped for joy” (Lk 1:44). This child is the future John the Baptist, who at the Jordan will point out Jesus as the Messiah.

While every word of Elizabeth’s greeting is filled with meaning, her final words would seem to have fundamental importance: “And blessed is she who believed that there would be a fulfillment of what was spoken to her from the Lord” (Lk 1145). These words can be linked with the title “full of grace” of the angel’s greeting. Both of these texts reveal an essential Mariological content, namely the truth about Mary who has become really present in the mystery of Christ precisely because she “has believed”. The fullness of grace announced by the angel means the gift of God himself. Mary’s faith, proclaimed by Elizabeth at the Visitation, indicates how the Virgin of Nazareth responded to this gift.

13. As the Council teaches, “ ‘The obedience of faith’ (Rom 16:26; cf. Rom 1:5; 2 Cor 10:5-6) must be given to God who reveals, an obedience by which man entrusts his whole self freely to God.” This description of faith found perfect realization in Mary. The “decisive” moment was the Annunciation, and the very words of Elizabeth: “And blessed is she who believed” refer primarily to that very moment.

Indeed, at the Annunciation Mary entrusted herself to God completely, with the “full submission of intellect and will”, manifesting “the obedience of faith” to him who spoke to her through his messenger. She responded, therefore, with all her human and feminine “I”, and this response of faith included both perfect cooperation with “the grace of God that precedes and assists” and perfect openness to the action of the Holy Spirit, who “constantly brings faith to completion by his gifts”.

The word of the living God, announced to Mary by the angel, referred to her: “And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son” (Lk 1:31). By accepting this announcement, Mary was to become the “Mother of the Lord”, and the divine mystery of the Incarnation was to be accomplished in her: “The Father of Mercies willed that the consent of the predestined Mother should precede the Incarnation.” And Mary gives this consent, after she has heard everything the messenger has to say. She says: “Behold, I am the I handmaid of the Lord; let it be to me according to your word” (Lk 1:38). This fiat of Mary — “let it be to me” — was decisive, on the human level, for the accomplishment of the divine mystery. There is a complete harmony with the words of the Son, who, according to the Letter to the Hebrews, says to the Father as he comes into the world: “Sacrifices and offering you have not desired, but a body you have prepared for me. . . . Lo, I have come to do your will, O God” (Heb 10:5-7). The mystery of the Incarnation was accomplished when Mary uttered her fiat: “Let it be to me according to your word”, which made possible, as far as it depended upon her in the divine plan, the granting of her Son’s desire.

Mary uttered this fiat in faith. In faith she entrusted herself to God without reserve and “devoted herself totally as the handmaid of the Lord to the person and work of her Son”. And his Son — as the Fathers of the Church teach — she conceived in her mind before she conceived him in her womb: precisely in faith! Rightly therefore does Elizabeth praise Mary: “And blessed is she who believed that there would be a fulfillment of what was spoken to her from the Lord.” These words have already been fulfilled: Mary of Nazareth presents herself at the threshold of Elizabeth and Zechariah’s house as the Mother of the Son of God. This is Elizabeth’s joyful discovery: “The mother of my Lord comes to me!”

14. Mary’s faith can also be compared to that of Abraham, whom Saint Paul calls “our father in faith” (cf. Rom 4:12). In the salvific economy of God’s revelation, Abraham’s faith constitutes the beginning of the Old Covenant; Mary’s faith at the Annunciation inaugurates the New Covenant. Just as Abraham “in hope believed against hope, that he should become the father of many nations” (cf. Rom 4:18), so Mary, at the Annunciation, having professed her virginity (“How shall this be, since I have no husband?”), believed that through the power of the Most High, by the power of the Holy Spirit, she would become the Mother of God’s Son in accordance with the angel’s revelation: “The child to be born will be called holy, the Son of God” (Lk 1:35).

However, Elizabeth’s words “And blessed is she who believed” do not apply only to that particular moment of the Annunciation. Certainly the Annunciation is the culminating moment of Mary’s faith in her awaiting of Christ, but it is also the point of departure from which her whole “journey toward God” begins, her whole pilgrimage of faith. And on this road, in an eminent and truly heroic manner — indeed with an ever greater heroism of faith — the “obedience” which she professes to the word of divine revelation will be fulfilled. Mary’s “obedience of faith” during the whole of her pilgrimage will show surprising similarities to the faith of Abraham. Just like the Patriarch of the People of God, so too Mary, during the pilgrimage of her filial and maternal fiat, “in hope believed against hope”. Especially during certain stages of this journey the blessing granted to her “who believed” will be revealed with particular vividness. To believe means “to abandon oneself” to the truth of the word of the living God, knowing and humbly recognizing “how unsearchable are his judgments and how inscrutable his ways” (Rom 11:33). Mary, who by the eternal will of the Most High stands, one may say, at the very center of those “inscrutable ways” and “unsearchable judgments” of God, conforms herself to them in the dim light of faith, accepting fully and with a ready heart everything that is decreed in the divine plan.

15. When at the Annunciation Mary hears of the Son whose mother she is to become and to whom “she will give the name Jesus” ( = Savior), she also learns that “the Lord God will give to him the throne of his father David”, and that “he will reign over the house of Jacob forever and of his kingdom there will be no end” (Lk 1:32-33). The hope of the whole of Israel was directed toward this. The promised Messiah is to be “great”, and the heavenly messenger also announces that “he will be great” — great both by bearing the name of Son of the Most High and by the fact that he is to assume the inheritance of David. He is therefore to be a king, he is to reign “over the house of Jacob”. Mary had grown up in the midst of these expectations of her people: could she guess, at the moment of the Annunciation, the vital significance of the angel’s words? And how is one to understand that “kingdom” which “will have no end”?

Although through faith she may have perceived in that instant that she was the mother of the “Messiah-King”, nevertheless she replied: “Behold, I am the handmaid of the Lord; let it be to me according to your word” (Lk 1:38). From the first moment Mary possessed above all the “obedience of faith”, abandoning herself to the meaning which was given to the words of the Annunciation by him from whom they proceeded: God himself.

16. Later, a little further along this way of the “obedience of faith” Mary hears other words: those uttered by Simeon in the Temple of Jerusalem. It was now forty days after the birth of Jesus when, in accordance with the precepts of the Law of Moses, Mary and Joseph “brought him up to Jerusalem to present him to the Lord” (Lk 2:22). The birth had taken place in conditions of extreme poverty. We know from Luke that when, on the occasion of the census ordered by the Roman authorities, Mary went with Joseph to Bethlehem, having found “no place in the inn”, she gave birth to her Son in a stable and “laid him in a manger” (cf. Lk 2:7).

A just and God-fearing man, called Simeon, appears at the beginning of Mary’s “journey” of faith. His words, suggested by the Holy Spirit (cf. Lk 2:25-27), confirm the truth of the Annunciation. For we read that he took up in his arms the child to whom—in accordance with the angel’s command — the name Jesus was given (cf. Lk 2:21). Simeon’s words match the meaning of this name, which is Savior: “God is salvation.” Turning to the Lord, he says: “For my eyes have seen your salvation which you have prepared in the presence of all peoples, a light for revelation to the Gentiles, and for glory to your people Israel” (Lk 2:30-32). At the same time, however, Simeon addresses Mary with the following words: “Behold, this child is set for the fall and rising of many in Israel, and for a sign that is spoken against, that thoughts out of many hearts may be revealed”; and he adds with direct reference to her: “and a sword will pierce through your own soul also” (cf. Lk 2:34-35). Simeon’s words cast new light on the announcement which Mary had heard from the angel: Jesus is the Savior, he is “a light for revelation” to mankind. Is not this what was manifested, in a way on Christmas night, when the shepherds came to the stable (cf. Lk 2:8-20)? Is not this what was manifested even more clearly in the coming of the Magi from the East (cf. Mt 2:1-12)? But at the same time, at the very beginning of his life, the Son of Mary, and his Mother with him, will experience in themselves the truth of those other words of Simeon: “a sign that is spoken against” (Lk 2:34). Simeon’s words seem like a second Annunciation to Mary, for they tell her of the actual historical situation in which the Son is to accomplish his mission, namely in misunderstanding and sorrow. While this announcement on the one hand confirms her faith in the accomplishment of the divine promises of salvation, on the other hand it also reveals to her that she will have to live her obedience of faith in suffering, at the side of the suffering Savior, and that her motherhood will be mysterious and sorrowful. Thus, after the visit of the Magi who came from the East, after their homage (“they fell down and worshipped him”) and after they had offered gifts (cf. Mt 2:11), Mary together with the child has to flee into Egypt in the protective care of Joseph, for “Herod is about to search for the child, to destroy him” (cf. Mt 2:13). And until the death of Herod they will have to remain in Egypt (cf. Mt 2:15).

17. When the Holy Family returns to Nazareth after Herod’s death, there begins the long period of the hidden life. She “who believed that there would be a fulfillment of what was spoken to her from the Lord” (Lk 1:45) lives the reality of these words day by day. And daily at her side is the Son to whom “she gave the name Jesus”; therefore in contact with him she certainly uses this name, a fact which would have surprised no one, since the name had long been in use in Israel. Nevertheless, Mary knows that he who bears the name Jesus has been called by the angel “the Son of the Most High” (cf. Lk 1:32). Mary knows she has conceived and given birth to him “without having a husband”, by the power of the Holy Spirit, by the power of the Most High who overshadowed her (cf. Lk 1:35), just as at the time of Moses and the Patriarchs the cloud covered the presence of God (cf. Ex 24:16; 40:34-35; 1 Kings 8:10-12). Therefore Mary knows that the Son to whom she gave birth in a virginal manner is precisely that “Holy One”, the Son of God, of whom the angel spoke to her.

During the years of Jesus’ hidden life in the house at Nazareth, Mary’s life too is “hid with Christ in God” (cf. Col 3:3) through faith. For faith is contact with the mystery of God. Every day Mary is in constant contact with the ineffable mystery of God made man, a mystery that surpasses everything revealed in the Old Covenant. From the moment of the Annunciation, the mind of the-Virgin-Mother has been initiated into the radical “newness” of God’s self-revelation and has been made aware of the mystery. She is the first of those “little ones” of whom Jesus will say one day: “Father,. . . you have hidden these things from the wise and understanding and revealed them to babes” (Mt 11:25). For “no one knows the Son except the Father” (Mt 11:27). If this is the case, how can Mary “know the Son”? Of course she does not know him as the Father does; and yet she is the first of those to whom the Father “has chosen to reveal him” (cf. Mt 11:26-27; 1 Cor 2:11). If though, from the moment of the Annunciation, the Son — whom only the Father knows completely, as the one who begets him in the eternal “today” (cf. Ps 2:7) — was revealed to Mary, she, his Mother, is in contact with the truth about her Son only in faith and through faith! She is therefore blessed, because “she has believed”, and continues to believe day after day amidst all the trials and the adversities of Jesus’ infancy and then during the years of the hidden life at Nazareth, where he “was obedient to them” (Lk 2:51). He was obedient both to Mary and also to Joseph, since Joseph took the place of his father in people’s eyes; for this reason, the son of Mary was regarded by the people as “the carpenter’s son” (Mt 13:55).

The Mother of that Son, therefore, mindful of what has been told her at the Annunciation and in subsequent events, bears within herself the radical “newness” of faith: the beginning of the New Covenant. This is the beginning of the Gospel, the joyful Good News.

However, it is not difficult to see in that beginning a particular heaviness of heart, linked with a sort of “night of faith” — to use the words of Saint John of the Cross — a kind of “veil” through which one has to draw near to the Invisible One and to live in intimacy with the mystery. And this is the way that Mary, for many years, lived in intimacy with the mystery of her Son, and went forward in her “pilgrimage of faith”, while Jesus “increased in wisdom . . . and in favor with God and man” (Lk 2:52). God’s predilection for him was manifested ever more clearly to people’s eyes. The first human creature thus permitted to discover Christ was Mary, who lived with Joseph in the same house at Nazareth.

However, when he had been found in the Temple, and his Mother asked him “Son, why have you treated us so?” the twelve-year-old Jesus answered: “Did you not know that I must be in my Father’s house?” And the Evangelist adds: “And they (Joseph and Mary) did not understand the saying which he spoke to them” (Lk 2:48-50). Jesus was aware that “no one knows the Son except the Father” (cf. Mt 11:27); thus even his Mother, to whom had been revealed most completely the mystery of his divine sonship, lived in intimacy with this mystery only through faith! Living side by side with her Son under the same roof, and faithfully persevering “in her union with her Son”, she “advanced in her pilgrimage of faith”, as the Council emphasizes. And so it was during Christ’s public life too (cf. Mk 3:21-35) that day by day there was fulfilled in her the blessing uttered by Elizabeth at the Visitation: “Blessed is she who believed.”

18. This blessing reaches its full meaning when Mary stands beneath the Cross of her Son (cf. Jn 19:25). The Council says that this happened “not without a divine plan”: by “suffering deeply with her only-begotten Son and joining herself with her maternal spirit to his sacrifice, lovingly consenting to the immolation of the victim to whom she had given birth”, in this way Mary “faithfully preserved her union with her Son even to the Cross”. It is a union through faith—the same faith with which she had received the angel’s revelation at the Annunciation. At that moment she had also heard the words: “He will be great . . . and the Lord God will give to him the throne of his father David, and he will reign over the house of Jacob forever; and of his kingdom there will be no end” (Lk 1:32-33).

And now, standing at the foot of the Cross, Mary is the witness, humanly speaking, of the complete negation of these words. On that wood of the Cross her Son hangs in agony as one condemned. “He was despised and rejected by men; a man of sorrows . . . he was despised, and we esteemed him hot”: as one destroyed (cf. Is 53:3-5). How great, how heroic then is the obedience of faith shown by Mary in the face of God’s “unsearchable judgments”! How completely she “abandons herself to God” without reserve, “offering the full assent of the intellect and the will” to him whose “ways are inscrutable” (cf. Rom 11:33)! And how powerful too is the action of grace in her soul, how all-pervading is the influence of the Holy Spirit and of his light and power!

Through this faith Mary is perfectly united with Christ in his self-emptying. For “Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men”: precisely on Golgotha “he humbled himself and became obedient unto death, even death on a cross” (cf. Phil 2:5-8). At the foot of the Cross Mary shares through faith in the shocking mystery of this self-emptying. This is perhaps the deepest “kenosis” of faith in human history. Through faith the Mother shares in the death of her Son, in his redeeming death; but in contrast with the faith of the disciples who fled, hers was far more enlightened. On Golgotha, Jesus through the Cross definitively confirmed that he was the “sign of contradiction” foretold by Simeon. At the same time, there were also fulfilled on Golgotha the words which Simeon had addressed to Mary: “and a sword will pierce through your own soul also”.

19. Yes, truly “blessed is she who believed”! These words, spoken by Elizabeth after the Annunciation, here at the foot of the Cross seem to re-echo with supreme eloquence, and the power contained within them becomes something penetrating. From the Cross, that is to say from the very heart of the mystery of Redemption, there radiates and spreads out the prospect of that blessing of faith. It goes right back to “the beginning”, and as a sharing in the sacrifice of Christ — the new Adam — it becomes in a certain sense the counterpoise to the disobedience and disbelief embodied in the sin of our first parents. Thus teach the Fathers of the Church and especially Saint Irenaeus, quoted by the Constitution Lumen Gentium: “The knot of Eve’s disobedience was untied by Mary’s obedience; what the virgin Eve bound through her unbelief, Mary loosened by her faith.” In the light of this comparison with Eve, the Fathers of the Church—as the Council also says—call Mary the “mother of the living” and often speak of “death through Eve, life through Mary”.

In the expression “Blessed is she who believed”, we can therefore rightly find a kind of “key” which unlocks for us the innermost reality of Mary, whom the angel hailed as “full of grace”. If as “full of grace” she has been eternally present in the mystery of Christ, through faith she became a sharer in that mystery in every extension of her earthly journey. She “advanced in her pilgrimage of faith” and at the same time, in a discreet yet direct and effective way, she made present to humanity the mystery of Christ. And she still continues to do so. Through the mystery of Christ, she too is present within mankind. Thus through the mystery of the Son the mystery of the Mother is also made clear.

[sheminecrafts]

A brief history of Facebook’s privacy hostility ahead of Zuckerberg’s testimony

The Facebook founder will be questioned by the Senate Judiciary and Senate Commerce Committees later today — in a session entitled “Facebook, Social Media Privacy, and the Use and Abuse of Data.”

Mark Zuckerberg is also due to testify before Congress on Wednesday — to be asked about the company’s use and protection of user data.

As we’ve pointed out already, his written testimony is pretty selective and self-serving in terms of what he does and doesn’t include in his version of events.

Indeed, in the face of the snowballing Cambridge Analytica data misuse scandal, the company’s leadership (see also: Sheryl Sandberg) has been quick to try to spin an idea that it was simply too “idealistic and optimistic” — and that ‘bad actors’ exploited its surfeit of goodwill.

This of course is pure fiction.

Facebook’s long history of privacy hostility should make that plain to any thinking person. As former FTC director David Vladeck wrote earlier this month: “Facebook can’t claim to be clueless about how this happened. The FTC consent decree put Facebook on notice.”

To be clear, that’s the 2011 FTC consent decree — ergo, a major regulatory privacy sanction that Facebook incurred well over six years ago.

Every Facebook privacy screw up since is either carelessness or intention.

Vladeck’s view is that Facebook’s actions were indeed calculated. “All of Facebook’s actions were calculated and deliberate, integral to the company’s business model, and at odds with the company’s claims about privacy and its corporate values,” he argues.

So we thought it would be helpful to compile an alternative timeline ahead of Zuckerberg’s verbal testimony, highlighting some curious details related to the Cambridge Analytica data misuse scandal — such as why Facebook hired (and apparently still employs) the co-director of the company that built the personality quiz app that “improperly shared” so much Facebook data with the controversial company — as well as detailing some of its other major privacy missteps over the years.

There are A LOT of these so forgive us if we’ve missed anything — and feel free to put any additions in the comments.

  Facebook: An alternative timeline

February 2004 — Facebook is launched by Harvard College student Mark Zuckerberg

September 2006 — Facebook launches News Feed, broadcasting the personal details of Facebook users — including relationship changes — without their knowledge or consent. Scores of users protest at the sudden privacy intrusion. Facebook goes on to concede: “We really messed this one up… we did a bad job of explaining what the new features were and an even worse job of giving you control of them.”

November 2007 — Facebook launches a program called Beacon, injecting personal information such as users’ online purchases and video rentals on third party sites into the News Feed without their knowledge or consent. There’s another massive outcry — and a class action lawsuit is filed. Facebook eventually pays $9.5M to settle the lawsuit. It finally shutters the controversial program in 2009

May 2008 — a complaint is filed with the Privacy Commissioner of Canada concerning the “unnecessary and non-consensual collection and use of personal information by Facebook”. The following year the company is found to be “in contravention” of the country’s Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act. Facebook is told to make changes to its privacy policy and tools — but the Commissioner is still expressing concerns at the end of 2009

February 2009 — Facebook revises its terms of service to state that users can’t delete their data when they leave the service and there’s another outcry. Backpeddling furiously in a subsequent conference call, Zuckerberg says: “We do not own user data, they own their data. We never intended to give that impression and we feel bad that we did”

November & December 2009 — Facebook again revises its privacy policy and the privacy settings for users and now, in a fell swoop, it makes a range of personal information public by default — available for indexing on the public web. We describe this as a privacy fiasco. Blogging critically about the company’s actions, the EFF also warns: “Major privacy settings are now set to share with everyone by default, in some cases without any user choice”

December 2009 — a complaint (and supplementary complaint) is filed by EPIC with the FTC about Facebook’s privacy settings and privacy policy, with the coalition of privacy groups asserting these are inconsistent with the site’s information sharing practices, and that Facebook is misleading users into believing they can still maintain control over their personal information. The FTC later writes a letter saying the complaint “raises issues of particular interest for us at this time”

April 2010 — four senators call on Facebook to change its policies after it announces a product called Instant Personalization — which automatically hands over some user data to certain third-party sites as soon as a person visits them. The feature has an opt-out but Facebook users are default opted in. “[T]his class of information now includes significant and personal data points that should be kept private unless the user chooses to share them,” the senators warn

May 2010 — following another user backlash against settings changes Facebook makes changes to its privacy controls yet again. “We’re really going to try not to have another backlash,” says Facebook’s VP of product Chris Cox. “If people say they want their stuff to be visible to friends only, it will apply to that stuff going forward”

May 2010 — EPIC complains again to the FTC, requesting an investigation. The watchdog quietly begins an investigation the following year

May 2010 — Facebook along with games developer Zynga is reported to the Norwegian data protection agency. The complaint focuses on app permissions, with the Consumer Council warning about “unreasonable and unbalanced terms and conditions”, and how Facebook users are unwittingly granting permission for personal data and content to be sold on

June 2011 — EPIC files another complaint to the FTC, focused on Facebook’s use of facial recognition technology to automatically tag users in photos uploaded to its platform

August 2011 — lawyer and privacy campaigner Max Schrems files a complaint against Facebook Ireland flagging its app permissions data sinkhole. “Facebook Ireland could not answer me which applications have accessed my personal data and which of my friends have allowed them to do so,” he writes. “Therefore there is practically no way how I could ever find out if a developer of an application has misused data it got from Facebook Ireland in some way”

November 2011 — Facebook settles an eight-count FTC complaint over deceptive privacy practices, agreeing to make changes opt-in going forward and to gain express consent from users to any future changes. It must also submit to privacy audits every two years for the next 20 years; bar access to content on deactivated accounts; and avoid misrepresenting the privacy or security of user data. The settlement with the FTC is finalized the following year. Facebook is not fined

December 2011 — Facebook agrees to make some changes to how it operates internationally following Schrems’ complaint leading to an audit of its operations by the Irish Data Protection Commission

September 2012 — Facebook turns off an automatic facial recognition feature in Europe following another audit by Ireland’s Data Protection Commission. The privacy watchdog also recommends Facebook tightens app permissions on its platform, including to close down developers’ access to friends data

May 2014 — Facebook finally announces at its developer conference that it will be shutting down an API that let developers harvest users’ friends data without their knowledge or consent, initially for new developer users — giving existing developers a year-long window to continue sucking this data

May 2014 — Facebook only now switches off the public default for users’ photos and status updates, setting default visibility to ‘friends’

May 2014 — Cambridge University professor Aleksandr Kogan runs a pilot of a personality test app (called thisisyourdigitallife) on Facebook’s platform with around 10,000 users. His company, GSR, then signs a data-licensing contract with political consultancy Cambridge Analytica, in June 2014, to supply it with psychological profiles linked to US voters. Over the summer of 2014 the app is downloaded by around 270,000 Facebook users and ends up harvesting personal information on as many as 87 million people — the vast majority of whom would have not known or consented to data being passed

June 2014 — Facebook data scientists publish a study detailing the results of an experiment on nearly 700,000 users to determine whether showing them more positive or negative sentiment posts in the News Feed would affect their happiness levels (as deduced by what they posted). Consent had not been obtained from the Facebook users whose emotions were being experimenting on

February 2015 — a highly critical report by Belgium’s data watchdog examining another updated Facebook privacy policy asserts the company is breaching EU privacy law including by failing to obtain valid consent from users for processing their data

May 2015 — Facebook finally shutters its friends API for existing developers such as Kogan — but he has already been able to use this to suck out and pass on a massive cache of Facebook data to Cambridge Analytica

June 2015 — the Belgian privacy watchdog files a lawsuit against Facebook over the tracking of non-users via social plugins. Months later the court agrees. Facebook says it will appeal

November 2015 — Facebook hires Joseph Chancellor, the other founding director of GSR, to work as a quantitative social psychologist. Chancellor is still listed as a UX researcher at Facebook Research

December 2015 — the Guardian publishes a story detailing how the Ted Cruz campaign had paid UK academics to gather psychological profiles about the US electorate using “a massive pool of mainly unwitting US Facebook users built with an online survey”. After the story is published Facebook tells the newspaper it is “carefully investigating this situation” regarding the Cruz campaign

February 2016 — the French data watchdog files a formal order against Facebook, including for tracking web browsing habits and collecting sensitive user data such as political views without explicit consent

August 2016 — Facebook-owned WhatsApp announces a major privacy U-turn, saying it will start sharing user data with its parent company — including for marketing and ad targeting purposes. It offers a time-bound opt-out for the data-sharing but pushes a pre-ticked opt-in consent screen to users

November 2016 — facing the ire of regulators in Europe Facebook agrees to suspend some of the data-sharing between WhatsApp and Facebook (this regional ‘pause’ continues to this day). The following year the French data watchdog also puts the company on formal warning that data transfers it is nonetheless carrying out — for ‘business intelligence’ purposes — still lack a legal basis

November 2016 — Zuckerberg describes the idea that fake news on Facebook’s platform could have influenced the outcome of the US election as “a pretty crazy idea” — a comment he later describes as flippant and a mistake

May 2017 –– Facebook is fined $122M in Europe for providing “incorrect or misleading” information to competition regulators who cleared its 2014 acquisition of WhatsApp. It had told them it could not automatically match user accounts between the two platforms, but two years later announced it would indeed be linking accounts

September 2017 — Facebook is fined $1.4M by Spain’s data watchdog, including for collecting data on users ideology and tracking web browsing habits without obtaining adequate consent. Facebook says it will appeal

October 2017 — Facebook says Russian disinformation distributed via its platform may have reached as many as 126 million Facebook users — upping previous estimates of the reach of ‘fake news’. It also agrees to release the Russian ads to Congress, but refuses to make them public

February 2018 — Belgian courts again rule Facebook’s tracking of non-users is illegal. The company keeps appealing

March 2018 — the Guardian and New York Times publish fresh revelations, based on interviews with former Cambridge Analytica employee Chris Wylie, suggesting as many as 50M Facebook users might have had their information passed to Cambridge Analytica without their knowledge or consent. Facebook confirms 270,000 people downloaded Kogan’s app. It also finally suspends the account of Cambridge Analytica and its affiliate, SCL, as well as the accounts of Kogan and Wylie

March 21, 2018 — Zuckerberg gives his first response to the revelations about how much Facebook user data was passed to Cambridge Analytica — but omits to explain why the company delayed investigating

March 2018 — the FTC confirms it is (re)investigating Facebook’s privacy practices in light of the Cambridge Analytica scandal and the company’s prior settlement. Facebook also faces a growing number of lawsuits

March 2018 — Facebook outs new privacy controls, as part of its compliance with the EU’s incoming GDPR framework, consolidating settings from 20 screens to just one. However it will not confirm whether all privacy changes will apply for all Facebook users — leading to a coalition of consumer groups to call for a firm commitment from the company to make the new standard its baseline for all services

April 2018 — Facebook also reveals that somewhere between 1BN and 2BN users have had their public Facebook information scraped via a now disabled feature which allowed people to look up users by inputting a phone number or email. The company says it discovered the feature was abused by “malicious actors”, writing: “Given the scale and sophistication of the activity we’ve seen, we believe most people on Facebook could have had their public profile scraped in this way”

April 2018 — the UK’s data watchdog confirms Facebook is one of 30 companies it’s investigating as part of an almost year-long probe into the use of personal data and analytics for political targeting

April 2018 — Facebook announces it has shut down a swathe of Russian troll farm accounts

April 2018 — Zuckerberg agrees to give testimony in front of US politicians — but continues to ignore calls to appear before UK politicians to answer questions about the role of fake news on its platform and the potential use of Facebook data in the UK’s Brexit referendum

April 2018 — the Canadian and British Columbian privacy watchdogs announce they are combining existing investigations into Facebook and a local data firm, AggregateIQ, which has been linked to Cambridge Analytica. The next day Facebook reportedly suspends AggregateIQ‘s account on its platform

April 2018 — Facebook says it has started telling affected users whether their information was improperly shared with Cambridge Analytica

from iraidajzsmmwtv https://ift.tt/2GM46Kh via IFTTT

[jenniferramona1]

How to Get Custody of Your Child in Utah

Anyone seeking child custody in Utah needs to understand the local laws and courts. An attorney based in Salt Lake City understands child custody laws and can help you find the best situation for your situation. This page is meant to be a child custody primer. If you have any further questions, do not hesitate to call us.

Custody usually specifies who has authority to make decisions for the child or where the child calls home if the parents live in separate houses. There are two different types of custody.

Physical Custody: This decides where the child lives.

Legal Custody: The parent with legal custody makes important decisions for the child.

These two types of custodies can be shared in three different ways.

Sole Custody: Custody may be granted tone one parent, with visitation rights given to the other parent.

Joint Custody: This arrangement involves both parents. For example, both parent have the right to make decisions for their children. Joint custody requires a good working relationship between the parents. Joint physical custody is a situation where the child lives in both homes for some amount of time decided by a judge or both parents.

Split Custody: Split custody is when there is more than one child. For example, one child may live with the mother while the other child lives with the father.

CHILD CUSTODY PROCESS

The process starts after either parent files a motion for custody of a child or children. The motion can be the result of divorce, in which case the motion is filed in an Utah juvenile court. If the parents are on the same page, they may file a motion together. After the court reviews the motion, he or she will decide if it is in the best interest of the child. If the parents do not agree on the conditions of custody, each parent will submit their own plan. The court will look them both over and decide which is in the best interest of the child.

DEFINING THE BEST INTERESTS OF A CHILD

How does the court decide what is the best interest of the child? The court will generally conduct relevant research, which could include:

Medical, psychiatric and psychological evaluations of the parents and children

Finances of both parents

Family relations

Character

Past conduct

TAX ISSUES

In the case of divorce, who gets to claim the child on their income tax forms? The parent who lives with the child in a sole custody arrangement gets to claim the child for income tax purposes. Of course, there are situations where a judge may issue an order stating otherwise. The tax arrangement could be modified for your specific situations, with options such as alternating years or creating a buyout clause, allowing one parent to reimburse to the other parent the amount that they would receive if they were the parent taking the deduction.

Salt Lake City Estate Planning and Probate Lawyers

Estate Planning is an essential part of making sure that you avoid probate, which is the process of administering and dividing a person’s estate through the courts. Although administering an estate through the probate process is common, it is often a time-consuming, contentious and expensive circumstance that can be avoided through careful estate planning.

Perhaps the most forgotten or underused aspect of trust planning is the ability of a good trust plan to manage your potential incapacity. We have encountered numerous instances where a will and a power of attorney were insufficient to protect a person when they lost the ability to manage their own affairs and costly judicial processes were necessary to provide for the person. A quality trust plan will virtually eliminate this possibility and provides the best mechanism for you to direct how your estate should be managed and how you should be cared for in the event you can’t manage it on your own.

What You Can Expect

Another purpose of estate planning is to help a person ensure that their assets and property are distributed according to their wishes after they pass away. The goal of proper estate planning is to eliminate any uncertainties and to provide the client with peace of mind. Proper estate planning can also reduce taxes and other expenses by ensuring that the estate is distributed according to your wishes.

Most importantly, however, quality estate planning will hopefully reduce the risk that family relationships will be destroyed by contention over your estate. We believe that these relationships and your values are often far more important than the physical assets. That is why our motto is: Estate planning is not about what you own, it’s about what you value!

Our firm handles a variety of issues involved in estate planning, such as:

Wills

Trust Planning

Asset Protection

Charitable Planning

Special Needs Planning

Probate

Probate is the judicial process of administering a decedent’s estate. Someone is appointed by the court to pay the final bills and taxes (if any) and distribute the remainder to those persons named in a will or to the nearest living relatives if no will exists. If you have gone through proper estate planning, this process may be avoided, saving your loved ones time and money by avoiding court.

Free Consultation with Child Custody Lawyer

When you need legal help with child custody, please call Ascent Law at (801) 676-5506. We will help you.

Ascent Law LLC8833 S. Redwood Road, Suite CWest Jordan, Utah 84088 United StatesTelephone: (801) 676-5506

Ascent Law LLC

4.9 stars – based on 67 reviews

Recent Posts

Child Custody Lawyer

Some of the Main Concerns About Child Custody

What is 50 50 custody?

What is the Fastest Way to get out of Debt?

FLP vs LLC

How far back can child support go?

from Michael Anderson http://www.ascentlawfirm.com/how-to-get-custody-of-your-child-in-utah/

from Utah Bankruptcy Law https://utahbankruptcylaw.wordpress.com/2018/03/31/how-to-get-custody-of-your-child-in-utah/

[duaneodavila]

The Meaning Of “Take A Look”

Back in the heyday of the crack epidemic, automotive artists created secret compartments in cars in which uptown drug dealers hid their stash. They were called “clavos,” and could only be opened by some bizarre combination of actions. When the cops figured out that drugs were being secreted in these hidden car voids, it presented a problem.

Not just a problem of finding the clavos, since they were never going to discern the actions needed to pop them open, but doing the search itself, since they were done on the street, on the fly, and there was neither basis nor interest in getting a warrant. But there was the “consent search” exception, whether real or manufactured. They would ask, “mind if I take a look around?” Then they would dismantle a car on the street, ripping off fenders, shrouds and carpeting. Often, body parts were dented when they were tossed to the side.

For years, challenges to these “consent searches” were losers. Courts held that if a person consented, then that was that. The argument was that the consent was to “look around,” not to take apart and destroy. An ordinary person’s understanding of the words “look around” was just that, to look, not touch. Judges shrugged. “Consent,” they muttered, right before “denied.”

Bear in mind, every search didn’t yield contraband, but every car they tore about was left lying in pieces in the road.* Shockingly, the cops didn’t put the car back together when they came up empty. The person consenting was left holding a bumper as the cruiser drove away. And this was just the collateral damage of the Drug War. Couldn’t be helped.

A petition for cert has been filed in the case of Alexis Gonzalez-Badillo, who was waiting to board a bus to Houston when he was asked, and gave consent to a cop to search his bag.

Gonzalez-Badillo commented on how humid it was outside. The officer agreed, and asked where he was headed. Gonzalez-Badillo said he was traveling from California to Houston, but ended up on the wrong bus. That the officer found this “suspicious,” according to the government’s court filing, “as he had never heard of someone taking the wrong bus and ending up in Laredo in the four years that he had been working at the bus station.” He asked Gonzalez-Badillo for permission to search his bag, and Gonzalez-Badillo consented.

Whether or not its suspicious to end up on the wrong bus isn’t really a big deal, but just an explanation for why it wasn’t profiling. Beyond that, he gave consent, and that’s good enough.

Inside the bag were two used work boots wrapped in plastic. The officer later testified that he smelled a chemical “masking agent” used in drug trafficking and that the boots felt “lumpy,” and that he could see plastic through a “quarter-sized slit” in one of the boot’s soles. Without asking Gonzalez-Badillo’s permission, the officer tore the sole of the boot and found a bag of heroin. Gonzalez-Badillo pleaded guilty to conspiracy to possess an illicit substance, but reserved his right to challenge how the officer discovered the heroin.

There is much to smell here, and it’s not a chemical masking agent. But the trick is that there is no way to test what a cop smelled during his search, making the options believe him or not. In the ordinary course of moving drugs, reasonable care is taken to conceal them.

There’s no smell. There’s no slit. There’s no way the cop is going to see anything more than boots in plastic. So they make up a story that can’t be tested and, magically, everything makes complete sense. Or maybe Gonzalez-Badillo was a really lousy mule? That could happen too.

Gonzalez-Badillo v. United States, which is currently before the Supreme Court for potential review, opens a window into the common police practice of consensual searches and could establish a potentially dangerous approach to them.

The Supreme Court has never held that a consent search is limited to the scope of consent, and there have been decades of precedent in the district and circuit courts that no matter how limited consent may be.

Ahead of his trial, Gonzalez-Badillo challenged the legitimacy of the search under the Fourth Amendment. His general acquiescence to a search of his bag, he argued, did not extend to the destruction of his personal property. A magistrate judge and a district court judge disagreed, prompting him to take a conditional guilty plea. Gonzalez-Badillo then asked the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals to intervene and toss out the search, which would almost certainly nullify the case against him.

In a 2-1 decision, the Fifth Circuit panel sided with the government based on existing precedents on searching closed containers during a consensual search. “We are not persuaded that Gonzalez-Badillo’s boot should be considered akin to a locked container simply because Officer Nevarez opened up the boot sole to recover drugs,” the majority argued. The panel also dismissed the idea that the boots were rendered any less usable by the damage inflicted to them, noting that they could be glued together again.

Does consent to search a bag extend to ripping the sole off a boot? Does consent to look around a car extend to taking the fender off on the side of the road? Putting aside the ubiquitous point that no one should ever consent to a search anyway, people still do. All the time.

Between the “nothing to hide” argument and the mistaken belief that refusal to consent will make the cops believe you’re guilty, the coercive submission to the shield remains one of the most effective means of getting people to do what they know they shouldn’t.

While Gonzalez-Badillo’s boot may not be the biggest deal destruction ever, it tees up the issue well. While he may have given consent to search his bag, he did not give consent to destroy his boot. The rationale for a consent search is that permission has been knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently granted. Destruction of property doesn’t merely exceed the consent given, but undermines the nature of consent. Nobody has ever told a cop, “sure, destroy my stuff so you can see I’ve got nothing to hide, and then I can go on my way with my destroyed boot.”

Will the Supremes take on this case? They should, putting an end to this absurd extension of consent searches clearly beyond the scope sought and given, but it will mean that one of the best gimmicks cops have to avoid the warrant clause will be lost.

*Certain cars were favored for this purpose, as they had the right voids in their body for clavos. There were also preferred cars because they were pedestrian in appearance and didn’t draw attention.

The cops new which models these were, such as the Nissan Maxima. The old days were over. Pimpmobiles were for flash; Maximas were for cash. But this gave rise to a secondary issue: there were tons of them on the road, because they were popular cars, but only a small percentage were used for transporting drugs. That meant a lot of innocent people were stopped and had their cars torn apart.

Copyright © 2007-2018 Simple Justice NY, LLC This feed is for personal, non-commercial and Newstex use only. The use of this feed anywhere else violates copyright. If this content is not in your news reader, it means the page you are viewing infringes copyright. (Digital Fingerprint: 51981395c77d7762065ca2c084b63e47) The Meaning Of “Take A Look” republished via Simple Justice

[artingerdesigns]

Canadian designer Shelley Macdonald Discusses Layout, ” The Kate Effect

Canadian designer Shelley MacDonald is imagined in her studio. Handout

What could you do if you woke up one evening and found out among the women in the world?

Designer Shelley MacDonald knows she’d reply that. Why? Well, since it occurred to her.  

The Duchess of Cambridge has been photographed last year wearing a set of MacDonald’s earrings — and immediately, she became a international brand.  

MacDonald Equipped about the encounter, her layouts and whether or not the so-called Kate Impact is a thing that is real.

Q. When and why did you first begin your collection?  

A. I started my boreal collection about five decades ago after I first moved into the Yukon. I moved into a village of 400 people and during the long winter months I needed to sew and make different crafts. I remember wondering what crafters did using the scraps of fur when they completed their projects and found they had been thrown out since the pieces were too little to use. From that point, I decided I wanted to earn a collection featuring all recycled metal and fur.  

Q. Can you have a background in jewelry design? Or could it be more of a fire project?

A. I began making jewelry with my daddy’s fishing line and various organic objects from an early age. I began promoting my jewelry at the local farmers market at Antigonish, Nova Scotia once I was 14. I got a BFA in metalsmithing and jewelry design and moved on NSCAD University in Halifax, Nova Scotia.

Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge. Chris Jackson / Getty Images

Q. For those who aren’t familiar, what can you sell?  

A. I promote handmade, one-of-a-kind jewelry. I make necklaces, earrings, earrings and that I also make custom jewelry, like wedding rings and engagement rings.

Q. Who is your target customer?

A. I’d say I aim a vast array of consumers from 18-65 years old. I try to produce pieces which all people may enjoy.

Q. The Duchess of Cambridge was spotted wearing your earrings while she was in Canada. What was it like when you found out?  

A. About  Sept. 28 I was in Iceland along with my now fiancé. I remember we where both in shock and calling him to tell that the information to him. It was a moment. Due to the time change from Iceland to Canada I was doing interviews at  1 a.m.   

Q. How, if at all, has that changed your company?

A. My company has grown rapidly and that I now have international clients. I’m working seven days per week using a wait-list for custom orders, also I’t had to employ a few workers to help me keep up with orders. I’m happy that I was selected to have the Duchess wear my own jewelry.

Q. How can they make it in the first location to her?  

A. I was within my micro boutique in Carcross, Yukon on Aug. 5. We had been told that the Royals��� officials were arriving through and were requested to have our stores open. I offered a set of the Modern Ulu earrings and some of my Gold Nugget Dangles. I though it was to get a British tourist, however, afterwards found out that it was that the Duchess’ private stylist. She was the person who purchased them in Carcross from my store and that I got confirmation by the Yukon Government.

Q. Are the earrings she wore currently being referred to as “The Kate” or are you happy to stay with the layout’s original name?  

A. Many folks call them the Kate earrings or the princess earrings, but I still call them the original title, that is that the Modern Ulu earrings. It’so funny how people have begun to refer to me!

Q. Where can people check out your creations?

Q. What is the price point of your group?  

A. My fur necklace starts at $295.00 along with the other bits can go around $1,500, based on the design and fur that is included.

Q. And, lastly, what’s next?  

A. I will be covering the MAKEIT Show in Vancouver on Dec. 7 at the PNE. This is my first show beyond the Yukon. I would also like to Discover a shop in Vancouver to sell my selections.    

Terms and Conditions with respect to my own use of the Website and I have read and understand Postmedia’s Privacy Statement. I consent to the collection, use, maintenance, and disclosure of my data in accord with the Postmedia’s Privacy Policy.

* backButton *

* /socialRegistrationForm *

Economy is a division of Postmedia inc..

Please validate your information below. Already have an account? Sign In.

* #registrationForm * * firstName * * lastName * * emailAddress * * displayName * * newPassword * * newPasswordConfirm *

Postmedia wants to increase your reading experience in addition to share promotions and the best deals from our advertisers. The tips below will be utilized to improve the content and make ads throughout the network more applicable for you. You can change by editing your profile, the information that you share with us.

For confirmation of Printing Subscriber offers (e.g. epaper, Digital Access, Subscriber Rewards), please enter your Print Newspaper subscription phone number and postal code.

* phone * * addressPostalCode *

By clicking “Create Account”, I hearby grant consent to Postmedia to use my account data to make my own account.

I also accept and agree to be bound by Postmedia’s Terms and Conditions with respect to my own use of the Website and I have read and understand Postmedia’s Privacy Statement. I consent to the collection, use, maintenance, and disclosure of my data in accord with the Postmedia’s Privacy Policy.

* backButton *

* /registrationForm *

Economy is a division of Postmedia inc..

We have sent you a confirmation email to * emailAddressData *. Please check your inbox and follow the directions to confirm your email address.

Economy is a division of Postmedia inc..

Create a new password

Follow these basic measures to make a new password.

1. Enter your email address below 2. Wait for the directions to get there in your inbox 3. Follow the directions to update your own password

* #forgotPasswordForm * * signInEmailAddress *

* backButton *

* /forgotPasswordForm *

Economy is a division of Postmedia inc..

Create a new password

We’ve sent an email with directions to make a new password. Your existing password has not yet been altered.

Economy is a division of Postmedia inc..

* mergeAccounts “habit”: true *

Blend Your Accounts

rendered_current_photo

.

– existing_provider :

moreInfoText

Produced at

current_provider

Economy is a division of Postmedia inc..

Sign into finish account merge

* #signInForm * * signInEmailAddress * * currentPassword *

* backButton *

* /signInForm *

Economy is a division of Postmedia inc..

Resend Verification Email

Sorry, we couldn’t confirm your address. Please enter your email below, and we’ll resend the directions for email confirmation.

* #resendVerificationForm * * signInEmailAddress * * /resendVerificationForm *

Economy is a division of Postmedia inc..

Verification Email Addresses

Check your email to get a link to confirm your address.

Economy is a division of Postmedia inc..

Thank you to verifiying your e mail address.

Economy is a division of Postmedia inc..

* #changePasswordFormNoAuth * * newPassword * * newPasswordConfirm * * /changePasswordFormNoAuth *

Economy is a division of Postmedia inc..

Your password has been upgraded.

Economy is a division of Postmedia inc..

Create New Password

We did not recognize the reset code. Please enter your email below under, and we’ll send you a code to reset your password.

* #resetPasswordForm * * signInEmailAddress * * /resetPasswordForm *

Economy is a division of Postmedia inc..

Create New Password

We’ve sent you an email with instructions. Your existing password has not yet been altered.

Economy is a division of Postmedia Inc..

from artingerdesigns http://www.artingerdesigns.com/canadian-designer-shelley-macdonald-discusses-layout-the-kate-effect/

[benjamin-vague]

The Madness of Clarity

The fact of the matter is, I never felt saner than when I held a gun in my mouth and pulled the trigger. I never knew such calm or felt such firm resolution as when I upended a bottle of pills into my mouth and gulped them down. That’s what people don’t understand, what they fail to recognize. If you tell people that, you can watch the veil come down over their eyes; they stop truly hearing you. It was only a week ago now and already these moments have taken on a pristine clarity I can’t quite define; they are going to always be with me. 

 I don’t want to glamorize the act or romanticize it. I don’t want to frame it like a sad Victorian poem in which pain is pretty and dressed for dinner and misery is a song you hear always in the background, soothingly soporific. I don’t want to make it sweet or okay; I don’t want you to see it as an option or to feel pity for me. But this is the bare truth: I was never saner than when I made that mad, mad choice, alone in the dark. 

 I believe it’s every person’s right to choose the time and manner of their death. None of us asked to be here, did we? I know I didn’t. We were born without consent and told to fight, not to fail. Not to die. There is a kind of hypocrisy in what I am saying, I know: do not see death as an option, but death is an option. But there it is, really: it is okay for you to choose death. But please don’t do it. Please don’t. Live while you can. But that's not really part of this story…

 The gun failed me. It was old, an antique my grandfather won on some dismal battlefield in World War II that had been passed from hand to hand in my family. A pretty enough killer, I suppose, but I don’t think it had ever really been maintained. I am lucky for that. I know that now. I am lucky that when I sat in the grass listening to the night things move and pulled the trigger, physics or fortune said “No”. You know, it sounds silly to say, but I had the strangest moment after I pulled the trigger and the gun jammed when I wasn’t sure if I was alive or dead. Isn’t that funny? Maybe that isn't the right word.

 Well, anyway. Yeah, the gun jammed and that sense of clarity, of deadly resolution, became sharper, almost a tangible thing. I stood up and walked back to the place I call home and went to bed thinking that it was some special kind of ironic that I had failed even at failing. I remember feeling so pitiful, and so in love with pitying myself, that it was almost sweet in a way. Do you know that feeling? It can be a kind of comfort. When you think you’re pitiful, when you know it down to your bones, failure becomes acceptable, easy, something you deserve.

 That wasn’t the end of course. Not of my self-administered sadness and not of my story. You’re going to be reading this for a while yet; I want so much for you to understand and I think you will by the end. Stay with me, okay? Just stay. Maybe you need to hear this too. Maybe one day it will be relevant. Then again, maybe it will mean nothing at all. That, too, would be good.

I fell asleep thinking those nasty, jaundiced thoughts and I woke again the next day thinking those thoughts. I don’t recall any point at which my commitment faltered or faded. I don't think I had it in me then to doubt or question my choice. There was just this dreary sense of Get It Done Already. That’s when I decided on the pills. They were old pills, intended to save lives. Klonodine--people take them to stabilize their blood pressure. And Gabapentin--I didn't really know what those were for and I don't think I cared. It all seemed a perfect perversion to me at the time. After all, an instrument of murder had failed in its function… perhaps these medicinal measures might serve. Drama, right?

 I don’t recall much after swallowing them. There were perhaps fifteen or twenty minutes left to me of thought, of being aware that I was thinking. Every now and then I can catch snatches of memory here and there, like something out of a dream. Just imagery, really. My mother holding me, crying. Her voice on the telephone. I said something to her; it might have been "I love you" or it might have been nonsense. The ambulance; a handsome paramedic who looked at me with pity or disgust. I know I said to him, "Why are you stealing my choice?" Ah, but my mouth was so dry, my tongue so thick, I don't think he understood. He might not have anyway. He didn't have the madness of clarity.

At the hospital then. I was crowded around with people. There was a beautiful black nurse with soft, dry hands who told me how handsome I was and said I would be okay. Did I laugh or did I drowse? It didn't make sense then, not any of it. Another nurse; forcing black sludge down my throat that made me gag. The contents of my stomach in a blue bag that they took away along with the promise I made to myself.

Sleep was a constant companion for the next few days. They put me in one of those awful, sterile rooms where everything is beige and the sheets smell like stealthily sanitized sickness. I shared the room with another man, a fellow named Willie. He was mad, madder than me by far and in a muddled, shit-smeared kind of way. He spoke often to an invisible person, a woman I think, named Bubblicious. I silently inquired of myself if that was actually on her birth certificate or perhaps just a street alias. By the sound of things, it sounded very much like a torrid love affair between these two, Willie and his invisible Bubblicious. I was torn between envy and despair.

Of course everyone treated me well in a distant and polite sort of way. The way you're supposed to treat crazy people, I suppose. Like broken birds that might peck if you get too close. They weren't terribly important people anyway, though they stole my murder and saved my life. My biggest, clearest memory is of Willie. Shitty, mad Willie and his invisible mistress. Crazy Willie and the pendulum swing of his moods. Witty, funny Willie and his tacit acceptance of his own insanity and the ease with which he showed it to the world. Willie, insistent on life, insistent upon himself despite the miserable condition of his own mind. Willie, winning, having somehow made it into late middle age, alone and on the streets even with his mind like a tangle of barbed wire. I remember him like I remember my finger on the trigger and the taste of the muzzle that must surely have taken lives at some point but wouldn't take mine, like I remember the chalky taste of bad medicine going down, like I remember falling out of the world and suddenly not remembering anything at all. Such clarity.

It was a clarity given by madness, like I said; or maybe a madness granted by clarity. It's sort of a chicken-and-egg thing, you know? But my god, my god, Willie taught me something I don't think I ever really wanted to learn. I'm glad I shared that room with him. I'm glad I smelled his shit for three days. I'm glad I heard his ramblings. I'm glad I pulled that trigger and shot myself into that wretched little room because, you see, I finally understand that we can adapt to anything, absolutely anything at all, if only we try. No. That's not right. I think it's more true to say that we can adapt to anything if we can keep from trying not to.

So… yeah. That's it, really. My friend asked me to write about this, to frame it, and it seemed a good idea. I'm not sure what to make of it all other than what I have already described: the clarity of the crazy, the secret hugeness of will, and some peculiar bravery or wisdom of a sad, mad, mad man in a beige room who is, somehow, surviving. I think that choosing death, really choosing to die, is infinitely hard. It was for me. People call it The Easy Option, but it isn't. Really committing to my own murder was probably the most difficult decision I've ever made. It's the act of doing it that's easy. It's deadly easy, you see, and I mean that more than literally.

But life? Life is hard. Every week, every day, every hour and minute of it, is hard. Even the beautiful bits are hard, because you know as you're living them that they're passing by as well. And because of Willie, I think I understand why it's all so hard, why it is that people go crazy in the first place. It's because of the enormity of it all, this existence, and the fact of your total freedom to be and do anything. There isn't a Golden Rule concerning what to be, what to do, and for many people--certainly for myself--it really is enough to drive you goddamn crazy. It's empty space stretching out infinitely through all the days of your life, and a voice that doesn't truly exist saying, "Fill it how you will." Maybe that’s my Bubblicious.

Honestly, the whole thing just about kills me. But I think I am glad to be living it.