রবিবার, ২ জুন, ২০১৩

Exclusive: Beyonce sits down with Savannah Guthrie

9 hours ago

In a TODAY exclusive airing Monday, superstar Beyonce Knowles sits down with Savannah Guthrie, whom she invited to join her backstage at the Women?s Concert for Change in London.

Beyonce explains why she helped organize the event, which also features such talented women as Jennifer Lopez and Ellie Goulding. She also talks about why it?s important to empower girls, and much more. Tune in Monday!

Source: http://www.today.com/entertainment/exclusive-beyonce-sits-down-savannah-guthrie-6C10160770

Fireworks 2012 4th Of July independence day BET Awards 2012 declaration of independence 4th Of July 2012 Zach Parise Spain Vs Italy Euro 2012

Does Infinity Really Exist? [Live Stream, Friday 8 - 9:30 PM ET]

Watch an interdisciplinary group of thinkers grapple with the meaning of infinity in this World Science Festival event from New York University


abstract art infinity symbol over tree, pi

Image: Courtesy of World Science Festival

The infinite! No other question has ever moved so profoundly the spirit of man,? said David Hilbert, one of the most influential mathematicians of the 19th century. A subject extensively studied by philosophers, mathematicians, and more recently, physicists and cosmologists, infinity still stands as an enigma of the intellectual world. Thinkers clash over questions such as: Does infinity exist? Can it be found in the physical world? What types of infinity are there? Through an interdisciplinary discussion with some of the world?s leading thinkers, this program will delve into the many facets of infinity and address some of the deepest questions and controversies that mention of the infinite continues to inspire.

Moderator: Keith Devlin

Panelists: Raphael Bousso, Philip Clayton, Steven Strogatz, W. Hugh Woodin

?

Source: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=does-infinity-really-exist

bill maher seabiscuit dingo nba all star weekend malin akerman jeff carter chomp

শনিবার, ১ জুন, ২০১৩

8 awful things that well meaning Christians say about gay people ...

The 4 points in the previous post are perhaps better described as misguided than simply awful, although the effect they have on the hearer may well be detrimental no matter how well meant the comment. But the top 4 on the list in this post are genuinely awful and have done a lot of damage, particularly to gay, lesbian and bisexual people in the church who have trusted what those in positions of authority have to say.

So here we go: the top 4 most awful things that Christians say about gay people. For those who have expressed incredulity about whether people still say these things in the 21st century, let me assure you they do say them and they do believe them.

2

#4 ?But the Bible clearly says??

Whenever I hear someone talking about any issue and coming out with the phrase ?But the Bible clearly says?? I wonder whether they?ve actually read the same book that I have. There is hardly anything that the Bible says clearly. It?s a collection of writings emerging from various authors, editors and communities over hundreds of years. It contains myth, poetry, letters, aphorisms and history written from a particular community?s perspective. The writing is often ambiguous, at times contradictory and sometimes down right obscene. For one particularly bloodthirsty example see 1 Samuel 15v3 where God commands King Saul to kill every infant and nursing child of Amalek. This isn?t to say that I don?t believe the Bible is Holy Scripture, I do, but as Karl Barth is claimed to have said: ?I take the Bible too seriously to take it literally?.

It would be nice to be able to claim that the only thing the Bible does say clearly is that ?God is love? but try telling that to the children of Amalek, I suspect they?d disagree.

So when someone comes out with the well worn phrase ?The Bible clearly condemns same sex relationships? they have plucked out the small handful of verses in Scripture that mention same sex activity and used them to conclude that every loving, mutually life-giving relationship between two men or two women is abhorrent to God.

There are plenty of writers who have dealt in depth with why the few verses in scripture that appear to condemn sexual activity between people of the same gender are not quite as clear cut as they may appear. I?d simply like to explain why I think this is such an awful phrase.

It is certainly awful to hear such an unambiguously anti-gay message preached that claims the authority of the Bible behind it, without at least giving alternative views from the many Christians who would have a more inclusive perspective on scripture. In fact, that was my experience coming into the Church as a teenager, knowing nothing about Christianity or the Bible and being told by people I loved and respected that this was clearly what the Bible said. It was only when I went to theological college that I began to discover there are other perspectives on scripture.

However, it seems to me that the most awful consequences of this phrase are for the people who utter it. Jesus reserved some of his harshest words and actions for those whose religion lacked grace. When his disciples are chastised by religious leaders for picking some grain on the Sabbath because they were hungry he effectively says to the leaders, ?You don?t get it do you, God?s not bothered about nit-picking over rules. God wants us to live with an attitude of grace not condemnation.? (Matthew 12 v1-8).

So, when we read scripture, the way to do it if we?re seeking to follow Christ is to read it through a lens of grace and mercy. I have come across plenty of people who encounter couples in loving same sex relationships and would love to be able to believe that God is present with them and would bless that relationship but because of the way they have been taught to view the Bible they are trapped by restrictive views of scripture and unable to respond positively to love when they encounter it.

This seems to be the position taken by the Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby, who seems a decent guy and a wise appointment by the Anglican Church in my view. In conversation with human rights campaigner Peter Tatchell, Welby said that he has come across same sex relationships ?of stunning quality? and yet he still feels constrained and unable to offer blessings and wholehearted acceptance of those relationships from the Church.

So: ?the Bible clearly says that same sex relationships are wrong? it?s not too awful to hear if you don?t read the Bible in that framework, but it is awful for the person who believes it because their vision of the expansiveness of the love of God is too small, boxed in by one narrow interpretation of a few verses of scripture.

?

#3 This isn?t homophobic?

One of the basic rules of thumb for life is that if we have to qualify one of our statements with ?I?m not racist but?? or ?This isn?t homophobic?? or any variations on this theme then we need to think very carefully about the wisdom of what we?re about to say.

Recently I was excluded from contributing to an event that I was due to be a part of and the opening remark from the organisers just before they uninvited me was ?You?ll probably think this is homophobic but it isn?t??. And whether it was or wasn?t is beside the point, it was for me to conclude whether this was homophobic or whether there was another more legitimate reason for excluding me.

This crops up a lot in the discussions around equal marriage with people insisting that just because they oppose the blessing of same sex relationships it doesn?t mean that they hate gay people. I have some sympathy for this. Some people genuinely want the best for gay people but, as we have seen above, feel constrained by scripture and hence feel unable to support same sex relationships.

Fair enough, they may not be homophobic but they do need to take responsibility for the detrimental effect that their stance has on gay people and own the fact that their point of view supports inequality and is far from an inclusive world view. In addition, these same arguments from scripture are used in some parts of the world where the consequences for gay people are far worse than being denied the right to get married. I?m not for a moment suggesting that most people who believe scripture is against same sex relationships also condone violence against gay people. Nevertheless, anti-gay rhetoric seeps out of churches into the wider community where it has been used to justify serious, at times violent, oppression and persecution of gay people.

Now, from the tragic to the ridiculous; sometimes a discussion about homophobia becomes farcical: ?I?m not homophobic because I?m not scared of gay people and that?s what the word means? (sadly I?m not joking ? I?ve heard this said by otherwise intelligent and responsible people).

Leaving aside any discussion about whether or not a deep seated hatred of gay people has its roots in fear, it?s obvious that the etymology of a word doesn?t limit its contemporary usage; no one complains about the word ?starfish? because the creature is technically an echinoderm rather than a fish. This blustering is invariably a smokescreen to distract from getting to the uncomfortable heart of the matter in a conversation.

When someone protests too much that they?re not being homophobic I do wonder whether sometimes a bit more self awareness is called for and that underlying their principled stance is simply a gut feeling that the thought of two men* having sex is a bit icky. And whilst I would hesitate even to call this homophobia it is, at the very least, disingenuous to construct an elaborate theology to back up your own prior prejudice.

* I do mean ?men? rather than ?men and women? here. As local radio presenter and self proclaimed ?homo-sceptic? Alan Partridge once said: ?it?s different with lesbians isn?t it, it?s more light-hearted?

71794-dscf3088

#2 ?Same sex relationships fall short of God?s best?

I don?t hear this a lot, but it crops up now and then, were it more prevalent then it would have made the top spot. Nevertheless the ideas behind the phrase often underlie contributions to the conversation in the church. It?s implicit in Justin Welby?s reluctance to bless same sex partnerships mentioned above. And a recent Church of England report advised that same sex relationships are ?forms of human relationships which fall short of marriage in the form God has given us.?

In other words: ?You gays think you?ve got such great relationships, and yes we can see that aspects of them are really good, but bless you, you don?t realise that it?s not as good as the relationships that we straight people have?.

Please don?t patronise us like that.

In my experience and self understanding, that I came to after a very long journey of prayer, meditation and deep pain (not just for me but for a number of people) my identity as a gay man is a gift from God. It may not always be an easy gift to receive, due mainly to attitudes from the church, but it?s certainly no mistake on God?s part. So for me to fully be the person God has made me to be that means celebrating the gay identity that goes to the core of my being. This doesn?t necessarily mean I have to be in a relationship with another man, but it does mean embracing the fact that when I am living fully as the gay man God made me to be I am not in some way deficient or falling short of the straight ideal.

And that?s the unpleasant idea underlying this phrase, if same sex relationships fall short of the best that God has in store then gay people are somehow less than human because they can never achieve the ideal life that God has ordained.

Now finally, the phrase at number one makes it there for its ubiquity and sheer awfulness?

728ca-d6a

#1 ?Love the sinner and hate the sin?

Closely allied with this phrase is the concept of the ?practising homosexual?, which is an equally awful phrase that arises again and again and the same misguided idea underlies them both: That in terms of our sexual identity it is possible to separate out the being and the doing. In all kinds of areas the dualistic idea that being and doing can be pulled apart is unhelpful and, at times destructive but we?ll focus here on the area in hand.

When someone uses the phrase ?practising homosexual? I want to ask them in a manner of faux na?vet? what exactly it is that they mean. When is it that I start practising? Is it enjoying musical theatre? (I don?t by the way) Is it when I start to think about an attractive guy? Or when I give someone a lingering look across the room? When we hold hands, or kiss, or get naked together, or what? All of these actions have a sexual component to them; apart from, perhaps, the musical theatre.

I suspect what they actually mean by ?practising? is ?anal sex? but what an individual who uses this phrase classes as two women ?practising homosexuality? I?m not sure. Maybe by ?practising homosexuality? they mean anything to do with touching genitals but then that?s a terribly impoverished view of what sex actually is because a mere brushing of fingertips together can be deeply erotically charged.

Delving into this tangle serves to demonstrate what a ridiculous phrase ?practising homosexual? really is. I don?t practise being gay I just am gay, right to the core of my being. Being gay affects how I relate to every person because it is a deep aspect of who I am and I relate to the people around me in the way that I do because of who I am. This isn?t to do with sex; it?s about identity and our most fundamental sense of self.

The rhetoric of ?practising homosexual? presupposes that there is a deep sense of self and then, separate from that, is all the stuff that we do. Human beings just aren?t made like that.

It?s because of the inseparability of our being and doing that ?love the sinner, hate the sin? is such an awful phrase; and we hear it all the time. As I?ve talked to other gay people in the church about this list it?s the phrase that comes up the most often. I wonder whether it eases the conscience of those who hold to an anti-gay theology. They can attack same sex marriage or preach on about how the Bible condemns gay relationships but it?s OK because it?s only the activity they hate; they really love the people who they?re beating over the head with their narrow view of scripture. It doesn?t work like that I?m afraid.

3ca88-d8a

Whatever your view on same sex relationships, if you have found yourself uttering any of the 8 phrases on this list, or variations on them, then my intention isn?t to make you feel guilty. If we wanted to live our lives in such a way that our words were never misinterpreted or ever hurt anyone then we would never say anything. And whilst maintaining silence may sometimes be the wisest contribution we can offer into a situation, if we are going to live in community then we need to communicate. So, rather than trying to argue people into silence all I?m doing here is reflecting back into the conversation what it can sometimes feel like as a? gay person to hear these phrases.

By all means come back to me and let me know if my words here seem hurtful to you, or you disagree with me. That?s the path to honest conversation; it?s how we grow together and move on rather than turning our backs on each other and not speaking. There is deeper mutual understanding if we can listen back to how our words have been heard.

If this list gives the impression that my experience of the church has been incredibly negative then I assure you that really isn?t the case. Whilst I know some gay Christians continue to have very painful experiences in the Church, and hearing those stories was one of the things that prompted me to write these posts, the Methodist Church for me has been an overwhelmingly supportive and affirming place to be. In my next post I will explore why I stick with the Church and offer some thoughts as to how we might be able to enter into fruitful dialogue, not only in this area but over any differing views that appear to divide us.

Like this:

Like Loading...

Source: http://iaskforwonder.com/2013/05/31/8-awful-things-that-well-meaning-christians-say-about-gay-people-part-2/

ludwig mies van der rohe jamie lynn sigler mega millions jackpot black panther party frank martin pink slime eagle cam

When Ted Williams didn?t eject (Powerlineblog)

Share With Friends: Share on FacebookTweet ThisPost to Google-BuzzSend on GmailPost to Linked-InSubscribe to This Feed | Rss To Twitter | Politics - Top Stories Stories, News Feeds and News via Feedzilla.

Source: http://news.feedzilla.com/en_us/stories/politics/top-stories/309632813?client_source=feed&format=rss

presidents day mindy mccready mindy mccready downton abbey nba all star game danica patrick Michelle Laxalt

DC's National Theatre gets new start after neglect

The National Theater is seen in Washington, Friday, May 31, 2013. The oldest continuously operating theater in the nation?s capital, once a regular stop for top performers and shows, is getting a fresh start after struggling for years. A new season of Broadway shows announced this week at the National Theatre includes its first world premiere of a new musical bound for Broadway in two decades with ?If/Then? starring Idina Menzel. The season also includes the return of ?West Side Story,? which got its start at the National in the 1950s and the Washington premiere of ?American Idiot? from the music group Green Day.(AP Photo/Charles Dharapak)

The National Theater is seen in Washington, Friday, May 31, 2013. The oldest continuously operating theater in the nation?s capital, once a regular stop for top performers and shows, is getting a fresh start after struggling for years. A new season of Broadway shows announced this week at the National Theatre includes its first world premiere of a new musical bound for Broadway in two decades with ?If/Then? starring Idina Menzel. The season also includes the return of ?West Side Story,? which got its start at the National in the 1950s and the Washington premiere of ?American Idiot? from the music group Green Day.(AP Photo/Charles Dharapak)

The National Theater is seen in Washington, Friday, May 31, 2013. The oldest continuously operating theater in the nation?s capital, once a regular stop for top performers and shows, is getting a fresh start after struggling for years. A new season of Broadway shows announced this week at the National Theatre includes its first world premiere of a new musical bound for Broadway in two decades with ?If/Then? starring Idina Menzel. The season also includes the return of ?West Side Story,? which got its start at the National in the 1950s and the Washington premiere of ?American Idiot? from the music group Green Day.(AP Photo/Charles Dharapak)

(AP) ? The oldest continuously operating theater in the nation's capital that has drawn top performers dating back decades before the Civil War is getting a fresh start and a makeover after years of struggle.

A season of shows announced this week at the National Theatre includes its first world premiere of a new musical bound for Broadway in years ? "If/Then," from the creative team behind the Tony Award-winning "Next to Normal," will star Idina Menzel in November. The season also includes the return of "West Side Story," which got its start at the National in the 1950s, the Tony Award-winning revival of "The Gershwins' Porgy and Bess" and the Washington premiere of "American Idiot" from the punk group Green Day.

Perhaps most importantly, the long-neglected theater is getting some tender, loving care. National Theatre officials told The Associated Press they are planning refurbishments this summer that will include a warmer color scheme to replace the National's outdated aqua interior. Backstage areas, dressing rooms and bathrooms also will get a deep scrubbing and fresh coat of paint.

A new programming team led by Chicago-based JAM Theatricals and Philadelphia's SMG is aiming to revive the National on the nation's entertainment circuit. They want to create a more modern performance space in the historic 1835 theater to host not only Broadway-level shows but also concerts, dance, comedy and other acts to keep the National's marquee lit. Last year, the theater was dark for all but five weeks.

"There's not a theater in the country that has a richer history than the National," said Bob Papke of SMG, who runs the new National Theatre Group with JAM co-founder Steve Traxler. "It's as iconic a theater as Carnegie Hall or the Apollo."

The National is located two blocks from the White House on Pennsylvania Avenue, known as "America's Main Street," frequently hosting presidents and national leaders. According to a history of the theater, President Abraham Lincoln learned of his nomination to a second term while attending a National Theatre performance. From 1882 to 1916, John Philip Sousa conducted the President's Own United States Marine Band in frequent concerts.

In 1927, the musical "Show Boat" made its world premiere at the historic playhouse, followed by "West Side Story" in 1957.

It was a prime venue for shows on their way to Broadway until the opening in 1971 of the Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. The arrival of the larger performance spaces posed stiff competition for the National's 1,670-seat house. For five years, Kennedy Center's founding chairman Roger Stevens, a notable Broadway producer, oversaw the National's programming while also leading the Kennedy Center. The two organizations severed ties by 1980.

Broadway organizations managed the National's bookings over the years with mixed success. Last fall, the Shubert Organization's 30-year contract expired.

The nonprofit theater board and executive director Tom Lee were looking to give the theater a rebirth as a performing arts center that can adapt to changing demands beyond theater. They turned to JAM Theatricals to maintain the theater's tradition of Broadway shows and SMG to expand its programming into concerts.

"If you're not on Broadway and you're only doing Broadway, then you're limiting the possibility of what the theater can be," Papke said. "I think it's a fresh beginning. It's fresh eyes looking at the theater, looking at the market."

The first show under the new management, a Bryan Adams concert in January, was a sellout.

Theater officials have visions of adding educational programs, event spaces and perhaps even a rooftop bar to generate more revenue to support the theater. In coming years, it will need millions in renovations and support from donors.

To foster a loyal audience base amid tough competition in Washington's theater scene, the National has begun selling its first subscription package of shows in years. It has also booked shows that are popular with audiences, including "Stomp," ''Blue Man Group" and "Mama Mia!"

Traxler of JAM Theatricals said it was a coup for Washington to nab the premiere of Tom Kitt and Brian Yorkey's "If/Then." The creative team won the Pulitzer Prize and the Tony Award for "Next to Normal." Their new story follows a 40-year-old woman moving to New York City to make a fresh start. It's directed by Michael Grief, who directed "Rent," reuniting him with Menzel.

Washington is a growing, sophisticated city and a good place to produce new theater, Traxler said.

"For the theater itself, there's great bones to the National Theatre. It feels very much like a Broadway theater does, for both audiences and performers on stage," he said. "The National Theatre is a historic, beautiful, intimate Broadway house, and we hope to keep the marquee lit as often as possible."

___

Online:

National Theatre: http://thenationaldc.com

___

Brett Zongker covers arts and culture for The Associated Press. Follow him online at https://twitter.com/DCArtBeat

Associated Press

Source: http://hosted2.ap.org/APDEFAULT/4e67281c3f754d0696fbfdee0f3f1469/Article_2013-05-31-National%20Theatre-New%20Start/id-9e510cfcd355442d878946c10dca7555

Searching For Sugar Man george clooney Zero Dark Thirty Academy Awards 2013 Django Unchained jennifer hudson jennifer garner

Judge orders Google to give customer data to FBI

(AP) ? A federal judge has ruled that Google Inc. must comply with the FBI's warrantless demands for customer data, rejecting the company's argument that the government's practice of issuing so-called national security letters to telecommunication companies, Internet service providers, banks and others was unconstitutional and unnecessary.

FBI counter-terrorism agents began issuing the secret letters, which don't require a judge's approval, after Congress passed the USA Patriot Act in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

The letters are used to collect unlimited kinds of sensitive, private information, such as financial and phone records and have prompted complaints of government privacy violations in the name of national security. Many of Google's services, including its dominant search engine and the popular Gmail application, have become daily habits for millions of people.

In a ruling written May 20 and obtained Friday, U.S. District Court Judge Susan Illston ordered Google to comply with the FBI's demands.

But she put her ruling on hold until the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals could decide the matter. Until then, the Mountain View, Calif.-based company must comply with the letters unless it shows the FBI didn't follow proper procedures in making its demands for customer data in the 19 letters Google is challenging, she said.

After receiving sworn statements from two top-ranking FBI officials, Illston said she was satisfied that 17 of the 19 letters were issued properly. She wanted more information on two other letters.

It was unclear from the judge's ruling what type of information the government sought to obtain with the letters. It was also unclear who the government was targeting.

The decision from the San Francisco-based Illston comes several months after she ruled in a separate case brought by the Electronic Frontier Foundation over the letters. She ruled in March that the FBI's demand that recipients refrain from telling anyone ? including customers ? that they had received the letters was a violation of free speech rights.

Kurt Opsah, an attorney with the foundation, said it could be many more months before the appeals court rules on the constitutionality of the letters in the Google case.

"We are disappointed that the same judge who declared these letters unconstitutional is now requiring compliance with them," Opsah said on Friday.

Illston's May 20 order omits any mention of Google or that the proceedings have been closed to the public. But the judge said "the petitioner" was involved in a similar case filed on April 22 in New York federal court.

Public records show that on that same day, the federal government filed a "petition to enforce National Security Letter" against Google after the company declined to cooperate with government demands.

Google can still appeal Illston's decision. The company declined comment Friday.

In 2007, the Justice Department's inspector general found widespread violations in the FBI's use of the letters, including demands without proper authorization and information obtained in non-emergency circumstances. The FBI has tightened oversight of the system.

The FBI made 16,511 national security letter requests for information regarding 7,201 people in 2011, the latest data available.

Associated Press

Source: http://hosted2.ap.org/APDEFAULT/495d344a0d10421e9baa8ee77029cfbd/Article_2013-05-31-US-Google-National-Security-Letters/id-c7fb95616bb64c82a27b1197f31c6d8b

foster friess new orleans hornets ghost rider spirit of vengeance hornets prince johan friso windows 8 logo anguilla

Rainforests take the heat, paleontologists show

May 30, 2013 ? South American rainforests thrived during three extreme global warming events in the past, say paleontologists at the Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute in a new report published in the Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Science. No tropical forests in South America currently experience average yearly temperatures of more than 84 degrees Fahrenheit (29 degrees Celsius). But by the end of this century, average global temperatures are likely to rise by another 1 F (0.6 C), leading some scientists to predict the demise of the world's most diverse terrestrial ecosystem.

Carlos Jaramillo, Cofrin Chair in Palynology, and Andr?s C?rdenas, post-doctoral fellow, at the Smithsonian in Panama reviewed almost 6,000 published measurements of ancient temperatures to provide a deep-time perspective for the debate.

"To take the temperature of the past we rely on indirect evidence like oxygen isotope ratios in the fossil shells of marine organisms or from bacteria biomarkers," said Jaramillo.

When intense volcanic activity produced huge quantities of carbon dioxide 120 million years ago in the mid-Cretaceous period, yearly temperatures in the South American tropics rose 9 F (5 C). During the Paleocene-Eocene thermal maximum, 55 million years ago, tropical temperatures rose by 5 F (3 C) in less than 10,000 years. About 53 million years ago, temperatures soared again.

According to the fossil record, rainforests prospered under these hothouse conditions. Diversity increased. Because larger areas of forest generally sustain higher diversity than smaller areas do, higher diversity during warming events could be explained by the expansion of tropical forests into temperate areas. "But to our surprise, rainforests never extended much beyond the modern tropical belt, so something other than temperature must have determined where they were growing," said Jaramillo.

Jaramillo and C?rdenas' report also refers to findings by Smithsonian plant physiologist Klaus Winter that leaves of some tropical trees tolerate short-term exposure to temperatures up to 122 F (5 C). When carbon dioxide concentrations double, trees use much less water, which is further evidence that tropical forests may prove resilient to climate change.

Source: http://feeds.sciencedaily.com/~r/sciencedaily/top_news/top_environment/~3/nOoPdihMQC0/130530132435.htm

barbara walters 24 kermit gosnell revenge revenge Chris Hadfield golden state warriors